Segmentation in translation
Differences across levels of expertise and difficulty
Published online: 23 March 2006
https://doi.org/10.1075/target.17.1.04dra
https://doi.org/10.1075/target.17.1.04dra
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.
Résumé
Le sujet de cet article est la segmentation cognitive dans la traduction. À la base d’expériences faites dans le programme de log de clavier, Translog, des différences importantes ainsi que quelques analogies ont été observées lorsque les données de deux différents groupes de participants et de deux différents genres de texte ont été comparées. Lors de la traduction d’un texte assez facile, on a pu constater que les traducteurs peu expérimentés d’une part et les traducteurs expérimentés de l’autre travaillaient de manières fondamentalement différentes quant à la quantité et au contenu d’unités cognitives ainsi qu’à la rapidité avec laquelle celles-ci ont été produites. Quand les participants du test étaient confrontés à un texte difficile, une influence remarquable sur le comportement des deux groupes a été observée ; mais quelques différences apparues entre les traducteurs peu expérimentés et les traducteurs expérimentés dans la traduction du texte facile ont été neutralisées dans le texte difficile : les traducteurs expérimentés ont repris beaucoup de traits caractérisant normalement les traducteurs moins expérimentés.
Article outline
- 1.Introduction
- 2.Data and methodology
- 2.1Design
- 2.2Texts
- 2.3Pauses as reflections of TU boundaries
- 3.Results and discussion
- 3.1Effects on the size of TUs
- 3.2Effects on production speed
- 3.3Effect on the nature of TUs
- 4.Conclusion
- Acknowledgments
- Notes
References
References (23)
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.
Butterworth, Brian. 1980. “Evidence from pauses in speech”. Brian, Butterworth, ed. Language production 1: Speech and talk. London: Academic Press,. 1980 155–156.
Campbell, Stuart. 1999. “A cognitive approach to source text difficulty in translation”. Target 11: . 33–63.
Crowder, Robert G. 1976. Principles of learning and memory. New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Dragsted, Barbara. 2004. Segmentation 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.]
Ericsson, K. Anders and Walter Kintsch. 1995. “Long-term working memory”. Psychological review. 102: 2. 211–245. Also retrievable (16 May 2001) from [URL]
Gerloff, Pamela. 1986. “Second language learners’ reports on the interpretive process: Talkaloud protocols of translation.” House and Blum-Kulka 1986. 243–262.
Gile, Daniel. 1995. Basic concepts and models for interpreter and translator training. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins.
House, Juliane Shoshana Blum-Kulka, eds. 1986. Interlingual and intercultural communication: Discourse and cognition in translation and second language acquisition studies. Tübingen: Gunter Narr, 1986
Jääskeläinen, Riitta Sonja 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.
Jakobsen, Arnt Lykke and Lasse Schou. 1999. “Translog documentation”. Probing the process in translation Methods and results. Copenhagen: Samfundslitteratur. [Copenhagen Studies in Language 24.]
Kiraly, Donald C.. 1995. Pathways to translation: Pedagogy and process. Kent: Kent State University Press.
1986b. “Translation problems and translation strategies of advanced German learners of French (L2)”. House and Blum-Kulka 1986. 263–276.
Lörscher, Wolfgang. 1986. “Linguistic aspects of translation processes: Towards an analysis of translation performance”. House and Blum-Kulka 1986. 277–292.
. 1991. Translation performance, translation process and translation strategies: A psycholinguistic investigation. Tübingen: Gunter Narr.
Cited by (61)
Cited by 61 other publications
Feltgen, Q. & G. Cislaru
Lang, Yue & Yingying Liu
Martín, Ricardo Muñoz, Sanjun Sun, Zhiqiang Du & Sara Puerini
2025. Keylogging. In Research Methods in Cognitive Translation and Interpreting Studies [Research Methods in Applied Linguistics, 10], ► pp. 157 ff.
Wang, Fuxiang, Qingli Xu & Vijayalakshmi Kakulapati
Wang, Yifang, Saihong Li & Yubo Zhou Rasmussen
Araghi, Sahar & Alfons Palangkaraya
Carl, Michael, Yuxiang Wei, Sheng Lu, Longhui Zou, Takanori Mizowaki & Masaru Yamada
Sermann, Eszter
Wang, Yu & Ali Jalalian Daghigh
Carl, Michael
Carl, Michael
Naranjo Ruiz, Mónica & Diana Lorena Giraldo Ospina
Qassem, Mutahar & Buthainah M. Al Thowaini
Qassem, Mutahar & Buthainah M. Al Thowaini
Qassem, Mutahar, Buthainah M. Al Thowaini & Anastassia Zabrodskaja
Alves, Fabio & Arnt Lykke Jakobsen
Feltgen, Quentin, Georgeta Cislaru, Christophe Benzitoun, F. Neveu, S. Prévost, A. Steuckardt, G. Bergounioux & B. Hamma
Wang, Fuxiang
Alves, Fabio & Igor A. Lourenço da Silva
Vanroy, Bram, Moritz Schaeffer & Lieve Macken
Zheng, Jianwei & Wenjun Fan
Lehka-Paul, Olha
Mitchell-Schuitevoerder, Rosemary
Qassem, Mutahar
2020. Translation unit and quality of translation. Revista Española de Lingüística Aplicada/Spanish Journal of Applied Linguistics 33:2 ► pp. 536 ff.
Scarpa, Federica
Su, Wenchao
Angelone, Erik & Álvaro Marín García
2019. Expertise acquisition through deliberate practice. In Translation Practice in the Field [Benjamins Current Topics, 105], ► pp. 123 ff.
Angelone, Erik & Álvaro Marín García
Baghi, Hoorieh & Masood Khoshsaligheh
Dam-Jensen, Helle, Carmen Heine & Iris Schrijver
Halverson, Sandra L.
Heilmann, Arndt, Tatiana Serbina, Daniel Couto Vale & Stella Neumann
Liparini, Tania & Camila Braga
Muñoz Martín, Ricardo & José Mª. Cardona Guerra
Schaeffer, Moritz, Jean Nitzke & Silvia Hansen-Schirra
Schaeffer, Moritz, Jean Nitzke & Silvia Hansen-Schirra
Sekino, Kyoko
Angelone, Erik
2018. Reconceptualizing problems in translation using triangulated process and product data. In
Innovation and Expansion in Translation Process Research [American Translators Association Scholarly Monograph Series, XVIII], ► pp. 17 ff.
Araghian, Roya, Behzad Ghonsooly & Afsaneh Ghanizadeh
2018. Investigating problem-solving strategies of translation trainees with high and low levels of self-efficacy. Translation, Cognition & Behavior 1:1 ► pp. 74 ff.
Heilmann, Arndt, Tatiana Serbina & Stella Neumann
Mellinger, Christopher D. & Thomas A. Hanson
Alves, Fabio & Amparo Hurtado Albir
Carl, Michael & Moritz J. Schaeffer
Diamond, Bruce J. & Gregory M. Shreve
O'Brien, Sharon
Stupiello, Erika Nogueira de Andrade & Marileide Dias Esqueda
Carl, Michael, Srinivas Bangalore & Moritz J. Schaeffer
2016. Computational linguistics and translation studies. In Border Crossings [Benjamins Translation Library, 126], ► pp. 225 ff.
Jakobsen, Arnt Lykke
Jakobsen, Arnt Lykke
Mellinger, Christopher D. & Gregory M. Shreve
2016. Match evaluation and over-editing in a translation memory environment. In Reembedding Translation Process Research [Benjamins Translation Library, 128], ► pp. 131 ff.
Muñoz Martín, Ricardo
2016. Reembedding translation process research. An introduction. In Reembedding Translation Process Research [Benjamins Translation Library, 128], ► pp. 1 ff.
Alves, Fabio
2015. Translation process research at the interface. In Psycholinguistic and Cognitive Inquiries into Translation and Interpreting [Benjamins Translation Library, 115], ► pp. 17 ff.
da Silva, Igor Antônio Lourenço
2015. On a more robust approach to triangulating retrospective protocols. In Psycholinguistic and Cognitive Inquiries into Translation and Interpreting [Benjamins Translation Library, 115], ► pp. 175 ff.
Alves, Fabio & José Luiz Gonçalves
2013. Investigating the conceptual-procedural distinction in the translation process. Target. International Journal of Translation Studies ► pp. 107 ff.
Alves, Fabio & José Luiz Gonçalves
2015. Investigating the conceptual-procedural distinction in the translation process. In Interdisciplinarity in Translation and Interpreting Process Research [Benjamins Current Topics, 72], ► pp. 109 ff.
Dragsted, Barbara
Jääskeläinen, Riitta, Pekka Kujamäki & Jukka Mäkisalo
Tercedor, Maribel
2010. Cognates as lexical choices in translation. Target. International Journal of Translation Studies 22:2 ► pp. 177 ff.
Alves, Fabio & Daniel Vale
Dragsted, Barbara & Inge Gorm Hansen
[no author supplied]
This list is based on CrossRef data as of 4 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.
