Participatory, self-organising, and learning: The patterns and influence of peer communication in online collaborative translation

Jun Yang

Abstract

This article presents a case study on communication in online collaborative translation projects, drawing on a community of amateur Chinese translators called Yeeyan. Centring on the concept of ‘translaboration’, the study explores the collaborative dimension of translation by examining conversational discourse during the translation process. It argues that participants play the role not only of translators, but also of translaborators, who self-organise and resolve various kinds of issues through collaboration. The study uses dialogue act analysis and social network analysis to investigate the features and influence of communication that drive and shape translation and other collaborative activities. The findings show that communication can help mitigate organisational and quality risks in online collaborative translation. A learning process embedded in peer communication is also found. The study enriches existing knowledge of translaboration as a model of transdisciplinary research of collaborative practices in multi-agent relationships, collective problem-solving and knowledge communication.

Keywords
Publication history
Table of contents

Technological connectivity has made engaging online communities in translation production a common and sustainable practice. By exploiting a huge reservoir of skills and competences, this once professional-dominated field now allows amateurs, trainees, fans and activists to work on the content production process. Various terms have been proposed to refer to this type of peer-translation practice, such as user-generated translation (O’Hagan 2009; Perrino 2009), community translation (O’Hagan 2011), open translation (Cronin 2010), volunteer translation (Pym 2011), non-professional translation (Pérez-González and Susam-Saraeva 2012), crowdsourcing translation (McDonough Dolmaya 2012) and online collaborative translation (Jiménez-Crespo 2017). McDonough Dolmaya and Del Mar Sánchez Ramos (2019, 131) suggest “online social translation,” which encompasses the contexts, scope and platforms of the aforementioned terms, to capture the social and collaborative nature of translation in online spheres.

Full-text access is restricted to subscribers. Log in to obtain additional credentials. For subscription information see Subscription & Price. Direct PDF access to this article can be purchased through our e-platform.

References

Abdallah, Kristiina, and Kaisa Koskinen
2007 “Managing Trust: Translating and the Network Economy.” In Buzelin and Folaron, 673–687.Google Scholar
Alfer, Alexa
2017 “Entering the Translab: Translation as Collaboration, Collaboration as Translation, and the Third Space of ‘Translaboration’.” In ‘Translaboration’: Translation as Collaboration, edited by Alexa Alfer, special issue of Translation and Translanguaging in Multilingual Contexts 3 (3): 275–290. Crossref logoGoogle Scholar
Babych, Bogdan, Anthony Hartley, Kyo Kageura, Martin Thomas, and Masao Utiyama
2012 “MNH-TT: A Collaborative Platform for Translator Training.” Translating and the Computer 34: 1–18.Google Scholar
Bruns, Axel
2012 “How Long is a Tweet? Mapping Dynamic Conversation Networks on Twitter using Gawk and Gephi.” Information, Communication & Society 15 (9): 1323–1351. Crossref logoGoogle Scholar
Borgatti, Stephen P., Martin G. Everett, and Jeffrey C. Johnson
2013Analysing Social Networks. London: SAGE.Google Scholar
Buzelin, Hélène, and Deborah Folaron
eds. 2007 Translation and Network Studies, special issue of Meta 52 (4). Crossref logoGoogle Scholar
Carrington, Peter J., and John Scott
2011 “Introduction.” In The SAGE Handbook of Social Network Analysis, edited by John Scott and Peter J. Carrington, 1–8. London: SAGE. Crossref logoGoogle Scholar
Clark, Herbert H., and Edward F. Schaefer
1989 “Contributing to Discourse.” Cognitive Science 13 (2): 259–294. Crossref logoGoogle Scholar
Cordingley, Anthony, and Cèline Frigau Manning
2017 “What is Collaborative Translation?” In Collaborative Translation: From the Renaissance to the Digital Age, edited by Anthony Cordingley and Cèline Frigau Manning, 1–30. London: Bloomsbury.Google Scholar
Cronin, Michael
2010 “The Translation Crowd.” Revista Tradumàtica: Tecnologies de la traducció 8: 1–7.Google Scholar
Degenne, Alain, and Michel Forsé
1999Introducing Social Networks. Translated by Arthur Borges. London: SAGE. Crossref logoGoogle Scholar
Folaron, Deborah, and Hélène Buzelin
2007 “Introduction: Connecting Translation and Network Studies.” In Buzelin and Folaron, 605–642.Google Scholar
Gu, Yueguo
2011 “Modern Chinese Politeness Revisited.” In Politeness Across Cultures, edited by Francesca Bargiela-Chiappini and Dániel Z. Kádár, 128–148. Hampshire: Palgrave Macmillan. Crossref logoGoogle Scholar
Huss, Joanna T.
2018 “Collaborative Translation.” In The Routledge Handbook of Literary Translation, edited by Kelly Washbourne and Ben van Wyke, 389–405. London: Routledge. Crossref logoGoogle Scholar
Jay-Rayon, Laurence
2007 “Traduire les réseaux méphoriques chez Nuruddin Farah.” In Buzelin and Folaron, 839–858.Google Scholar
Jenkins, Henry
2006Fans, Bloggers, and Gamers: Exploring Participatory Culture. New York: New York University Press.Google Scholar
Jiménez-Crespo, Miguel A.
2017Crowdsourcing and Online Collaborative Translations: Expanding the Limits of Translation Studies. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. Crossref logoGoogle Scholar
Marin, Alexandra, and Barry Wellman
2011 “Social Network Analysis: An Introduction.” In The SAGE Handbook of Social Network Analysis, edited by John Scott and Peter J. Carrington, 11–25. London: SAGE.Google Scholar
McDonough, Julie
2007 “How do Language Professionals Organise Themselves? An Overview of Translation Networks.” In Buzelin and Folaron, 793–815.Google Scholar
McDonough Dolmaya, Julie
2012 “Analyzing the Crowdsourcing Model and Its Impact on Public Perceptions of Translation.” In Susam-Saraeva, 167–191.Google Scholar
McDonough Dolmaya, Julie, and María del Mar Sánchez Ramos
2019 “Characterizing Online Social Translation.” In Online Social Translation: New Roles, New Actors? edited by Julie McDonough Dolmaya and María del Mar Sánchez Ramos, special issue of Translation Studies 12 (2): 129–138.Google Scholar
O’Hagan, Minako
2008 “Fan Translation Networks: An Accidental Translator Training Environment?” In Translator and Interpreter Training: Issues, Methods and Debates, edited by John Kearns, 159–183. London: Continuum.Google Scholar
2009 “Evolution of User-generated Translation: Fansubs, Translation Hacking and Crowdsourcing.” The Journal of Internationalisation and Localisation 1: 94–121. Crossref logoGoogle Scholar
2011 “Community Translation: Translation as a Social Activity and Its Possible Consequences in the Advent of Web 2.0 and Beyond.” Linguistica Antverpiensia, New Series – Themes in Translation Studies 10: 11–23.Google Scholar
Perrino, Saverio
2009 “User-Generated Translation: The Future of Translation in a Web 2.0 Environment.” Journal of Specialised Translation 12: 55–78.Google Scholar
Pérez-González, Luis, and Şebnem Susam-Saraeva
2012 “Non-professionals Translating and Interpreting: Participatory and Engaged Perspectives.” In Susam-Saraeva, 149–165.Google Scholar
Plassard, Freddie
2007 “La traduction face aux nouvelles pratiques en réseaux.” In Buzelin and Folaron, 643–657.Google Scholar
Pym, Anthony
2007 “Cross-Cultural Networking: Translators in the French-German Network of Petites Revues at the End of the Nineteenth Century.” In Buzelin and Folaron, 744–762.Google Scholar
2011 “Translation Research Terms: A Tentative Glossary for Moments of Perplexity and Dispute.” In Translation Research Projects, edited by Anthony Pym, 75–99. Tarragona: Intercultural Studies Group.Google Scholar
Risku, Hanna, and Angela Dickinson
2009 “Translators as Networkers: The Role of Virtual Communities.” Hermes: Journal of Language and Communication in Business 42: 49–70.Google Scholar
Risku, Hanna, Regina Rogl, and Christina Pein-Weber
2016 “Mutual Dependencies: Centrality in Translation Networks.” The Journal of Specialised Translation 25: 232–253.Google Scholar
Roschelle, Jeremy, and Stephanie D. Teasley
1995 “The Construction of Shared Knowledge in Collaborative Problem Solving.” In Computer Supported Collaborative Learning, edited by Claire O’Malley, 69–97. Berlin: Springer. Crossref logoGoogle Scholar
Soller, Amy
2001 “Supporting Social Interaction in an Intelligent Collaborative Learning System.” International Journal of Artificial Intelligence in Education 12 (1): 40–62.Google Scholar
Susam-Saraeva, Şebnem
ed. 2012 Non-professionals Translating and Interpreting: Participatory and Engaged Perspectives, special issue of The Translator 18 (2). Crossref logoGoogle Scholar
Tahir-Gürçağlar, Şehnaz
2007 “Chaos Before Order: Network Maps and Research Design in DTS.” In Buzelin and Folaron, 724–743.Google Scholar
Yeeyan
2020 “About Yeeyan.” Accessed April 5, 2020. http://​en​.yeeyan​.org​/#/
Yu, Chuan
2019 “Negotiating Identity Roles During the Process of Online Collaborative Translation: An Ethnographic Approach.” In Online Social Translation: New Roles, New Actors? edited by Julie McDonough Dolmaya and María del Mar Sánchez Ramos, special issue of Translation Studies 12 (2): 231–252.Google Scholar