Cover not available

In:Interdisciplinarity in Translation and Interpreting Process Research
Edited by Maureen Ehrensberger-Dow, Susanne Göpferich and Sharon O'Brien
[Benjamins Current Topics 72] 2015
► pp. 109–126

Get fulltext from our e-platform
JBE logo with link
PDF logo with download linkDownload Book PDF
authorization required

Investigating the conceptual-procedural distinction in the translation process

A relevance-theoretic analysis of micro and macro translation units

ORCiD logo with link | Federal University of Minas Gerais, Brazil
 | Federal University of Ouro Preto, Brazil
Published online: 11 June 2015
DOI logo with link
https://doi.org/10.1075/bct.72.09alv
This chapter draws on relevance theory (Sperber and Wilson 1986/1995) and its application to translation (Gutt 2000) to investigate processing effort in translation in relation to two different types of encodings, namely conceptual and procedural encodings (Blakemore 2002; Wilson 2011). Building on the experimental paradigm of data triangulation in translation process research (Alves 2003; Jakobsen 2005), it analyses the translation processes of eight professional translators when performing a direct and an inverse translation task. The analysis focuses on the number and types of encodings found in micro/macro translation units (Alves and Vale 2009; 2011). Results suggest that processing effort in translation is greater in instances of procedural than conceptual encodings.
References (23)
References
Alves, Fabio. 1995. Zwischen Schweigen und Sprechen: Wie bildet sich eine transkulturelle Brücke? Hamburg: Dr. Kovac.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(ed). 2003. Triangulating Translation: Perspectives in Process Oriented Research [Benjamins Translation Library, 41]. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2007. “Cognitive Effort and Contextual Effect in Translation: A Relevance-Theoretic Approach.” Journal of Translation Studies 10 (1): 18–35.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Alves, Fabio, and José Luiz Gonçalves. 2003. “A Relevance Theory Approach to the Investigation of Inferential Processes in Translation.” In Triangulating Translation: Perspectives in Process Oriented Research, ed. by Fabio Alves, 3–24. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Alves, Fabio, Adriana Pagano, and Igor Silva. 2009. “A New Window on Translators’ Cognitive Activity: Methodological Issues in the Combined Use of Eye Tracking, Key Logging and Retrospective Protocols.” In Methodology, Technology and Innovation in Translation Process Research. A Tribute to Arnt Lykke Jakobsen, ed. by Inger Mees, Fabio Alves, and Susanne Göpferich, 267–291. Copenhagen: Samfundslitteratur.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Alves, Fabio, and Daniel Vale. 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. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2011. “On Drafting and Revision in Translation: A Corpus Linguistics Oriented Analysis of Translation Process Data.” TC3. Translation: Corpora, Computation and Cognition 1 (1): 105–122.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Blakemore, Diane. 1987. Semantic Constraints on Relevance. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2002. Relevance and Linguistic Meaning: The Semantics and Pragmatics of Discourse Markers. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Elman, Jeffrey L., Elizabeth A. Bates, Mark H. Johnson, Annette Karmiloff-Smith, Domenico Parisi, and Kim Plunkett. 1996. Rethinking Innateness: A Connectionist Perspective on Development. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Gutt, Ernst-August. 1998. “Relevance and Effort: A Paper for Discussion.” Paper presented at the II Relevance Theory Workshop , 8–10 September 1998, University of Luton.
. 2000. Translation and Relevance: Cognition and Context, 2nd ed. Manchester: St Jerome.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Jakobsen, Arnt. 2005. “Investigating Expert Translators’ Processing Knowledge.” In Knowledge Systems and Translation, ed. by Helle V. Dam, Jan Engberg, and Heidrun Gerzymisch-Arbogast, 173–189. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Jensen, Astrid. 2001. The Effects of Time on Cognitive Processes and Strategies in Translation. Copenhagen: Working Papers in LSP.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Königs, Frank. 1987. “Was beim Übersetzen passiert: theoretische Aspekte, empirische Befunde und praktische Konsequenzen.” Die neueren Sprachen 2: 162–185.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
PACTE. 2008. “First Results of a Translation Competence Experiment: ‘Knowledge of Translation’ and ‘Efficacy of the Translation Process’.” In Translator and Interpreter Training. Issues, Methods and Debates, ed. by John Kearns, 104–126. London: Continuum.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Scardamalia, Marlene, and Carl Bereiter. 1991. “Literate Expertise.” In Toward a General Theory of Expertise, ed. by Karl-Anders Ericsson, and John Smith, 172–194. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Shreve, Gregory. 2006. “The Deliberate Practice: Translation and Expertise.” Journal of Translation Studies 9 (1): 27–42.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Sperber, Dan, and Deirdre Wilson. 1986/1995. Relevance: Communication and Cognition, 2nd ed. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Taboada, Maite, and William C. Mann. 2006. “Rhetorical Structure Theory: Looking Back and Moving Ahead.” Discourse Studies 8 (3): 423–459. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Wilson, Deirdre, and Dan Sperber. 1993. “Linguistic Form and Relevance.” Lingua 90: 1–25. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Wilson, Deirdre. 2011. “The Conceptual-Procedural Distinction: Past, Present, and Future.” In Procedural Meaning: Problems and Perspectives, ed. by Victoria Escandell-Vidal, Manuel Leonetti, and Aoife Ahern, 3–28. London: Emerald Group. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Cited by (4)

Cited by four other publications

Chernovaty, Leonid & Natalia Kovalchuk
2025. Psycholinguistic and Technohumnistic Aspects of Translator and Interpreter Training, DOI logo
Alves, Fabio & Arnt Lykke Jakobsen
2022. The Translation Process. In The Cambridge Handbook of Translation, ► pp. 34 ff. DOI logo
Sasamoto, Ryoko
2021. Onomatopoeia, translation and relevance. Pragmatics & Cognition 28:2 ► pp. 347 ff. DOI logo
Jakobsen, Arnt Lykke
2017. Translation Process Research. In The Handbook of Translation and Cognition, ► pp. 19 ff. DOI logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 11 december 2025. Please note that it may not be complete. Sources presented here have been supplied by the respective publishers. Any errors therein should be reported to them.

Mobile Menu Logo with link to supplementary files background Layer 1 prag Twitter_Logo_Blue