Segmentation in translation: Differences across levels of expertise and difficulty
Copenhagen Business School
The subject of this article is cognitive segmentation in translation. Based on experiments carried out in Translog, a keyboard logging program, significant differences, and also certain similarities, were observed of cognitive segmentation when data from two different subject groups and text types were compared. In the translation of a relatively easy text, novice and professional translators were found to behave fundamentally differently with respect to the size and nature of cognitive units and the speed with which they were produced. When faced with a difficult text, the behaviour in both groups was clearly affected, but some of the differences observed between novice and professional translators in the translation of the easy text were neutralized in that the professionals took over many of the features characteristic of the novices.
The focus of the present article will be on the extent to which segmentation differences observed between novices and professionals in the translation of a relatively easy text were neutralised when the same subjects were faced with a more difficult text.
1986Working memory. Oxford: Clarendon Press.
Broadbent, Donald E.
1975 “The magic number seven after fifteen years”. Alan, Kennedy eds. Studies in long term memory. London: John Wiley & Sons, 1975 3–18.
1980 “Evidence from pauses in speech”. Brian, Butterworth ed. Language production 1: Speech and talk. London: Academic Press 1980 155–156.
1999 “A cognitive approach to source text diﬃculty in translation”. Target 11: . 33–63.
Crowder, Robert G.
1976Principles of learning and memory. New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
2004Segmentation in translation and translation memory systems. An empirical investigation of cognitive segmentation and effects of integrating a TM system into the translation process. Copenhagen: Samfundslitteratur. [PhD thesis.]
1986 “Second language learners’ reports on the interpretive process: Talkaloud protocols of translation.” House and Blum-Kulka 1986 243–262.
1995Basic concepts and models for interpreter and translator training. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins.
1988 “Bi-text, a new concept in translation theory”. Language monthly 54.
House, JulianeShoshana Blum-Kulka
eds.1986Interlingual and intercultural communication: Discourse and cognition in translation and second language acquisition studies. Tübingen: Gunter Narr 1986
Jääskeläinen, RiittaSonja Tirkkonen-Condit
1991 “Automated processes in professional vs non-professional translation: A Think-aloud protocol study” Sonja Tirkkonen-Condit, ed. Empirical research in translation and intercultural studies. Tübingen: Gunter Narr 1991 89–109.