Pauses by Student and Professional Translators in Translation Process

Rusdi Noor Rosa, T. Silvana Sinar, Zubaidah Ibrahim-Bell, Eddy Setia

Abstract


Translation as a process of meaning making activity requires a cognitive process one of which is realized in a pause, a temporary stop or a break indicating doing other than typing activities in a certain period of translation process. Scholars agree that pauses are an indicator of cognitive process without which there will never be any translation practices. Despite such agreement, pauses are debatable as well, either in terms of their length or in terms of the activities managed by a translator while taking pauses. This study, in particular, aims at finding out how student translators and professional translators managed the pauses in a translation process. This was a descriptive research taking two student translators and two professional translators as the participants who were asked to translate a text from English into bahasa Indonesia. The source text (ST) was a historical recount text entitled ‘Early History of Yellowstone National Park’ downloaded from http://www.nezperce.com/yelpark9.html composed of 230-word long from English into bahasa Indonesia. The data were collected using Translog protocols, think aloud protocols (TAPs) and screen recording. Based on the data analysis, it was found that student translators took the longest pauses in the drafting phase spent to solve the problems related to finding out the right equivalent for the ST words or terms and to solve the difficulties encountered in encoding their ST understanding in the TL; meanwhile, professional translators took the longest pauses in the pos-drafting phase spent to ensure whether their TT had been natural and whether their TT had corresponded to the prevailing grammatical rules of the TL. 


Keywords


pauses, professional translators, student translators, translation process

Full Text:

PDF

References


Acar, A. & Işisağ, K. U. (2017). Readability and Comprehensibility in Translation Using Reading Ease and Grade Indices. International Journal of Comparative Literature & Translation Studies, 5(2), 47-53.

Alves, F. (2006). A Relevance-Theoretic Approach to Effort and Effect in Translation: Discussing the Cognitive Interface between Inferential Processing, Problem-Solving and Decision Making. In Proceedings of the International Symposium on New Horizons in Theoretical Translation Studies (pp. 1-12.). Hong Kong: The Chinese University.

Alves, F., & Vale, D. (2009). Probing the unit of translation in time: Aspects of the design and development of a web application for storing, annotating, and querying translation process data. Across Languages and Cultures, 10(2), 251–273.

Angelone, E. (2010). Uncertainty, uncertainty management and metacognitive problem solving in the translation task. In G. Shreve & E. Angelone (Eds.), Translation and Cognition (pp. 17-40). Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins.

Carl, M., Lacruz, I., Yamada, M., & Aizawa, A. (2016). Measuring the Translation Process. Paper presented at The 22nd Annual Meeting of the Association for Natural Language Processing. NLP 2016, Sendai, Japan.

Cenoz, J. (2000). Pauses and hesitation phenomena in second language production. ITL-Review of Applied Linguistics, 127-128, 53-69.

Dimitrova, B. E. (2005). Expertise and explicitation in the translation process. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins.

Dragsted, B. (2010). Coordination of reading and writing processes in translation: An eye on uncharted territory. In G. Shreve & E. Angelone (Eds.), Translation and Cognition (pp.41-62). Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins.

Dragsted, B. (2012). Indicators of difficulty in translation – Correlating product and process data. Across Languages and Cultures, 13(1), 81–98.

Dragsted, B. & Hansen, I. G. (2008). Comprehension and production in translation: A pilot study on segmentation and the coordination of reading and writing processes. In S. Gopferich, A. L. Jakobsen, & I. M. Mees (Eds.), Looking at Eyes. Eye-Tracking Studies of reading and translation processing. Copenhagen Studies in Language 36 (pp. 9-29). Copenhagen: Samfundslitteratur.

Dragsted, B., Hansen, I. G., & Sorensen, H. S. (2009). Experts Exposed. In I. M. Mees, F. Alves, & S. Gopferich (Eds.), Methodology, Technology and Innovation in Translation Process Research (pp. 293-317). Copenhagen: Samfundslitteratur.

Foulin, J-N. (1995). Pauses et débits: Les indicateurs temporels de la production écrite. L’Année Psychologique, 95, 483-504.

Gopferich, S. (2010). The translation of instructive texts from a cognitive perspective: Novices and professionals compared. In S. Gopferich, F. Alves, & I. M. Mees (Eds.), New Approaches in Translation Process Research. Copenhagen Studies in Language 39 (pp. 5-52). Copenhagen: Samfundslitteratur.

Hansen, G. (2002). Zeit und Qualität im Übersetzungsprozess. In G. Hansen (ed.) Empirical Translation Studies: Process and Product. Copenhagen Studies in Language 27 (pp. 29-54). Copenhagen: Samfundslitteratur.

Immonen, S. (2006). Translation as a writing process: Pauses in translation versus monolingual text production. Target, 18(2), 313-336.

Immonen, S. (2011). Unravelling the processing units of translation. Across Languages and Cultures, 12(2), 235-257.

Jaaskelainen, R. (1999). Tapping the process: An explorative study of the cognitive and affective factors involved in translation. Joensuu: University of Joensuu.

Jaaskelainen, R. (2000). Focus on methodology in think-aloud studies on translating. In S. Tirkkonen-Condit & R. Jaaskelainen (Eds.), Tapping and Mapping the Processes of Translation and Interpreting (pp. 71-82.). Amsterdam/ Philadelphia: John Benjamins.

Jakobsen, A. L. (1998). Logging time delay in translation. In G. Hansen (Ed.) LSP texts and the process of translation pp. (73-101). Copenhagen Working Papers in LSP 1/1998.

Jakobsen, A. L. (1999). Logging target text production with translog. In G. Hansen (Ed.), Probing the process in translation: Methods and results (pp. 9-20). Copenhagen: Samfundslitteratur.

Jakobsen, A. L. (2002). Translation Drafting by Professional Translators and by Translation Students. In G. Hansen (Ed.), Empirical Translation Studies. Process and product (pp. 191-204). Copenhagen: Samfundslitteratur.

Jakobsen, A. L. (2011). Tracking translators’ keystrokes and eye movements with Translog. In C. Alvstad, A. Hild, & E. Tiselius (Eds.), Methods and strategies of process research (pp. 37-55). Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins.

Kamalie, S. (2011). Google terjemahan: Apa dan bagaimana?. Ronshua UAI Journal of Japanese Studies, 58-72.

Kapranov, A. (2013). Beginner Students’ Speech Fluency in a Second Language Compared Across Two Contexts of Acquisition. In E. Piechurska-Kuciel & E. Szymańska-Czaplak (Eds.), Language in Cognition and Affect (pp. 81-94). Berlin, Heidelberg: Springer.

Kourouni, K. (2012). Translating under time constraints in an undergraduate context: A study of students’ products, processes and learning styles. Doctoral Thesis. Tarragona: Universitat Rovira I Virgili.

Krings, H. P. (2001). Repairing Texts: Empirical Investigations of Machine Translation Postediting Processes. Kent: Kent State University Press.

Kumpulainen, M. (2015). On the operationalisation of ‘pauses’ in translation process research. Translation & Interpreting, 7(1), 47–58.

Maley, A. (2010). Extensive reading: why it is good for our students… and for us. Online BBC Teaching English Article. Accessed on April 9, 2017 from https://www.teachingenglish.org.uk/article/extensive-reading-why-it-good-our-students%E2%80%A6-us.

O’Brien, S. (2006). Pauses as indicators of cognitive effort in post-editing machine translation output. Across Languages and Cultures, 7(1), 1–21.

O’Brien, S. (2009). Eye tracking in translation process research: Methodological challenges and solutions. In I. M. Mees, F. Alves, & S. Gopferich (Eds.), Methodology, technology and innovation in translation process research: A tribute to Arnt Lykke Jakobsen. Copenhagen studies in language 38 (pp. 251-266). Copenhagen: Samfundslitteratur.

Qian, X. (2017). Novice, Paraprofessional, and Professional Translators’ Strategy Use in Chinese-English Translation Processes: Retrospective Reflections, Concurrent Screen-capturing, and Key-stroke Logging. Dissertation. Victoria: University of Victoria.

Schilperoord, J. (1996). It’s About Time: Temporal Aspects of Cognitive Processes in Text Production. Amsterdam: Rodopi.

Screen, B. (2016). What does Translation Memory do to translation? The effect of Translation Memory output on specific aspects of the translation process. Translation and Interpreting, 8(1), 1-18.

Seguinot, C. (1989). The translation process. Toronto: H.G. Publications.

Sofyan, R. (2016). Translation Process and Translation Quality: A Study of Indonesian Student Translators. Dissertation. Medan: University of Sumatera Utara.

Toury, G. (1995). Descriptive translation studies and beyond. Amsterdam/ Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publishing Company.




DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.7575/aiac.ijclts.v.6n.1p.18

Refbacks

  • There are currently no refbacks.




Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.

2013-2019 (CC-BY) Australian International Academic Centre PTY.LTD.

International Journal of Comparative Literature and Translation Studies

You may require to add the 'aiac.org.au' domain to your e-mail 'safe list’ If you do not receive e-mail in your 'inbox'. Otherwise, you may check your 'Spam mail' or 'junk mail' folders.