Cover not available

Article published In: Translation, Cognition & Behavior
Vol. 2:2 (2019) ► pp.165–185

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

The opportunities of epistemic pluralism for Cognitive Translation Studies

 | University of Essex
Published online: 6 September 2019
DOI logo with link
https://doi.org/10.1075/tcb.00021.mar
Abstract
As the object of study of Cognitive Translation Studies (CTS) expands to encompass social and cultural aspects of multilingual communicative events, scholars face the challenge of combining research methods and analytical perspectives to investigate cognitive phenomena. While plurality has been so far considered transitory, eventually converging on a unified theory of translation, I propose to adopt a functional assessment framework for competing models in order to endorse epistemic pluralism. The development of cognitive translatology as an emergent tradition combining multifarious approaches presents a new epistemological landscape in which epistemic pluralism can be embraced, fostered and practiced for the benefit of producing new knowledge. Far from being a relativist stance defending that all systems of knowledge are equally useful or appropriate, pluralism entails an assessment framework, which I introduce, so that we can improve our empirical designs and streamline our theoretical frameworks.
Article outline
  • 1.Introduction
  • 2.Embracing plurality
    • 2.1Another view of scientific progress
    • 2.2Active normative epistemic pluralism
  • 3.Framework for the assessment of constructs
    • 3.1Criteria for the evaluation of constructs
      • 3.1.1Clarity
      • 3.1.2Adequacy
      • 3.1.3Consistency
      • 3.1.4Effectiveness
    • 3.2The usefulness of the conceptual performance criteria
    • 3.3A comparative analysis of translation competence and expertise
      • 3.3.1Clarity
      • 3.3.2Adequacy
      • 3.3.3Consistency
      • 3.3.4Effectiveness
      • 3.3.5Summary of comparative analysis
  • 4.Final remarks and implications
  • Acknowledgements
  • Notes
  • References
References (67)
References
. 2015. “Translation Process Research at the Interface: Paradigmatic, theoretical, and methodological issues in dialogue with Cognitive Science, Expertise Studies, and Psycholinguistics.” In Psycholinguistic and Cognitive Inquiries into Translation and Interpreting. Edited by A. Ferreira and J. Schwieter, 17–40. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Alves, Fabio, and Amparo Hurtado Albir. 2017. “Evolution, Challenges, and Perspectives for Research on Cognitive Aspects of Translation.” In The Handbook of Translation and Cognition. Edited by J. Schwieter and A. Ferreira, 537–554. Hoboken, NJ: Wiley Blackwell. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Angelone, Erik, Maureen Ehrensberger-Dow and Gary Massey. 2015. “Cognitive processes.” In Researching Translation and Interpreting. Edited by B. Baer and C. Angelelli, 61–75. Manchester: Routledge.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Blackburn, Simon. 2016. Oxford Dictionary of Philosophy. 2nd Ed. Online version. Last accessed 5 October 2018. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Campbell, Stuart. 1991. “Towards a Model of Translation Competence.” Meta 36 (2–3): 329–343. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Chang, Hasok. 2012. Is water H2O? Evidence, Realism and Pluralism. New York: Springer. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Coliva, Annalisa, and Nikolai J. L. L. Pedersen, eds. 2017. Epistemic Pluralism. Palgrave MacMillan. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Dancette, Jeanne, and Nathan Ménard. 1996. “Modèles empiriques et expérimentaux en traductologie: Question d’épistémologie.” Meta 41 (1): 139–156. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Duhem, P. 1954. The Aim and Structure of Physical Theory. Trans. Ph. P. Wiener. Princeton: Princeton University Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Ericsson, Karl Anders. 1996. “The Acquisition of Expert Performance: An Introduction to some of the Issues.” In The Road to Excellence: The Acquisition of Expert Performance in the Arts and Sciences, Sports and Games. Edited by K. A. Ericsson, 1–50. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Gallie, Walter Bryce. 1955. “Essentially Contested Concepts.” Proceedings of the Aristotelian Society 561: 167–198. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Gambier, Yves. 2006. “Pour une socio-traduction.” In Translation Studies at the Interface of Disciplines. Edited by J. F. Duarte, A. A. Rosa and T. Seruya, 29–42. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Halverson, Sandra Louise. 2010. “Cognitive TS: Developments in Theory and Method.” In Translation and Cognition. Edited by G. Shreve and E. Angelone, 349–369. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2013. “Implications of Cognitive Linguistics for TS.” In Cognitive Linguistics and Translation: Advances in some Theoretical Models and Applications. Edited by A. Rojo and I. Ibarretxe, 33–74. Berlin: De Gruyter. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2017. “Multimethod Approaches.” In The Handbook of Translation and Cognition. Edited by J. Schwieter and A. Ferreira, 95–212. Hoboken, NJ: Wiley Blackwell. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Holmes, James. 1988. Translated!: Papers on Literary Translation and Translation Studies. Amsterdam: Rodopi.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Holz-Mänttäri, Justa. 1984. Translatorisches Handeln: Theorie und Methode. Helsinki: Suomalainen Tiedeakatemia.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Horst, Stephen. 2016. Cognitive Pluralism. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Jääskeläinen, Riitta. 2010. “Are All Professionals Experts?” In Translation and Cognition. Edited by G. M. Shreve and E. Angelone, 213–227. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Kellert, Stephen, Helen Longino and Kenneth Waters, eds. 2006. Scientific Pluralism. Minneapolis, MN: University of Minnesota Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Kuhn, Thomas. 1962. The Structure of Scientific Revolutions. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 1970. “Reflections on My Critics.” Criticism and the Growth of Knowledge. Edited by I. Lakatos and A. Musgrave, 231–278. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 1977. The Essential Tension: Selected Studies in Scientific Tradition and Change. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2000. The Road since Structure: Philosophical Essays 1970–1993 with an Autibiographical Interview. Edited by J. Conant and J. Haugeland. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Lakatos, Imre. 1970. “Falsification and the Methodology of Scientific Research Programmes.” In Criticism and the Growth of Knowledge. Edited by I. Lakatos and A. Musgrave, 91–196. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Lakoff, George and Mark Johnson. 1980. Metaphors We Live By. Chicago: University of ChicagoPress.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Laudan, Larry. 1977. Progress and its Problems: Towards a Theory of Scientific Growth. Berkeley: University of California Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 1984. Science and Values: The Aims of Science and Their Role in Scientific Debate. Berkeley: University of California Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Longino, Helen. 2002. The Fate of Knowledge. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Malmkjær, Kirsten. 2000. “Multidisciplinarity in Process Research.” In Triangulating Translation. Edited by F. Alves, 163–169. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Martín Ruano, Rosario. 2006. “Conciliation of Disciplines and Paradigms.” In Translation Studies at the Interface of Disciplines. Edited by J. F. Duarte, A. A. Rosa and T. Seruya, 43–53. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Mayoral Asensio, Roberto. 2001. “Por una renovación en la formación de traductores e intérpretes: Revisión de algunos de los conceptos sobre los que basa el actual sistema su estructura y contenidos.” Sendebar 121: 311–336.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Mees, Inger M., Susanne Göpferich and Fabio Alves, eds. 2009. Methodology, Technology and Innovation in Translation Process Research. Copenhaguen: Samfundslitteratur.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Mill, John Stuart. 1859. On Liberty. London: John W. Parker and Son. Print. Reprint edited by G. Himmelfarb, Harmondsworth: Penguin, 1974, 1982.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Mulkay, Michael. 1975. “Three Models of Scientific Development.” The Sociological Review 23 (3): 509–526. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Muñoz Martín, Ricardo. 2009. “Typos & Co.” In Behind the Mind. Edited by S. Göpferich, A. L. Jakobsen and I. Mees, 1671. Copenhaguen: Samsfundliterattur.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2010. “Leave no Stone Unturned: On the Development of Cognitive Translatology.” Translation and Interpreting Studies 5 (2): 145–162. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2010a. “On Paradigms and Cognitive Translatology.” In Translation and Cognition. Edited by G. M. Shreve and E. Angelone, 169–187. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2013. “Cognitive and psycholinguistic approaches.” In The Routledge Handbook of Translation Studies. Edited by C. Millán & C. Bartrina, 241–256. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2014. “A Blurred Snapshot of Advances in Translation Process Research.” In Minding Translation. Edited by R. Muñoz, 1–14. Alicante: Universidad de Alicante. MonTI special issue 1.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2014b. “Situating Translation Expertise: A Review with a Sketch of a Construct.” In The Development of Translation Competence. Edited by J. Schwieter and A. Ferreira, 2–56.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2016. “Of Minds and Men—Computers and Translators.” Poznań Studies in Contemporary Linguistics 52 (2): 351–381. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2016b. Reembedding Translation Process Research. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2017. “Looking at the Future of Cognitive TS.” In The Handbook of Translation and Cognition. Edited by J. Schwieter and A. Ferreira, 555–572. Hoboken NJ: Wiley Blackwell. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Neunzig, Wilhelm. 2002. “Estudios empíricos en traducción: apuntes metodológicos.” Cadernos de Traduçao 2 (10): 75–96.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
PACTE, 2003. “Building a Translation Competence Model.” In Triangulating Translation. Edited by F. Alves, 43–68. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Peirce, Charles. 1877. “The Fixation of Believe.” Popular Science Monthly 121: 1–15.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Pym, Anthony. 2003. “Redefining Translation Competence in an Electronic Age. In Defence of a Minimalist Approach.” Meta 48 (4): 481–49. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Quine, W. V. O. 1953. From a Logical Point of View. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Risku, Hannah. 2014. “Translation Process Research as Interaction Research: From Mental to Socio-cognitive Processes.” In Minding Translation. Edited by R. Muñoz, 331–353. Alicante: Universidad de Alicante. MonTI special issue 1.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Sellars, Wilfrid. 1963. “Abstract Entities.” The Review of Metaphysics 11: 627–671.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Shreve, Gregory Monroe. 1997. “Cognition and the Evolution of Translation Competence.” In Cognitive Processes in Translation and Interpreting. Edited by J. Danks, G. M. Shreve, S. B. Fountain and M. McBeath, 120–136. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 1997b. “Prolegomenon to an Empirical Translation Studies.” In Modelle der Translation: Festschrift für Albrecht Neubert. Edited by Gerd Wotjak and Heide Schmidt, 41–58. Frankfurt am Main: Vervuert. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2002. “Knowing Translation: Cognitive and Experiential Aspects of Translation Expertise from the Perspective of Expertise Studies.” Translation Studies: Perspectives on an Emerging Discipline. Edited A. Riccardi, 150–171. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2018. “Levels of Explanation and Translation Expertise.” Hermes 571: 97–108.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Shreve, Gregory Monroe, and Erik Angelone. 2010. “Translation and Cognition: Recent Developments.” In Translation and Cognition. Edited by G. Shreve and E. Angelone, 1–13. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Shreve, Gregory Monroe, and Bruce J. Diamond. 2016. “Cognitive Neurosciences and Cognitive Translation Studies.” In Border Crossings: Translation Studies and Other Disciplines. Edited by Y. Gambier and L. Van Doorslaer, 141–168. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Shreve, Gregory Monroe, and Isabel Lacruz. 2017. “Aspects of a Cognitive Model of Translation.” In The Handbook of Translation and Cognition. Edited by J. Schwieter and A. Ferreira, 127–143. Hoboken, NJ: Wiley Blackwell. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Toulmin, Stephen. 1970. “Does the Distinction between Normal and Revolutionary Science Hold Water?” Criticism and the Growth of Knowledge. Edited by I. Lakatos and A. Musgrave, 49–50. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Whewell, William. 1840. History of the Inductive Sciences. London: John W. Parker & Son.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Wilss, Wolfram. 1976. “Perspectives and Limitations of a Didactic Framework for the Teaching of Translation.” In Translation Applications and Research. Edited by R. Brislin, 117–137. New York: Gardner Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Wimsatt, William. 2007. Re-engineering Philosophy for Limited Beings: Piecewise Approximations to Reality. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Cited by (10)

Cited by ten other publications

Yang, Wenting, Ricardo Muñoz Martín & Xiangling Wang
2025. Revisiting Grammatical Metaphor in Translation: New Insights from the English–Chinese Pair. Metaphor and Symbol 40:3 ► pp. 206 ff. DOI logo
Lee, Isabela Braga, Igor A. Lourenço Da Silva & Fabio Alves
2024. Promovendo múltiplas interpretações de narrativas traduzidas. Letras & Letras 40:único DOI logo
Carl, Michael
2023. The Monitor Model and its misconceptions. In Translation in Transition [American Translators Association Scholarly Monograph Series, XX], ► pp. 257 ff. DOI logo
Klimkowski, Konrad
2023. Why is translation relevant today: ideas for future translators. Language Culture Politics International Journal 1:1/2023 ► pp. 39 ff. DOI logo
Marín García, Álvaro & Tamara Pérez Fernández
2023. Task-based L2 skill development for TI trainees. In Instrumentalising Foreign Language Pedagogy in Translator and Interpreter Training [Benjamins Translation Library, 161], ► pp. 177 ff. DOI logo
Mellinger, Christopher D.
2023. Embedding, extending, and distributing interpreter cognition with technology. In Interpreting Technologies – Current and Future Trends [IVITRA Research in Linguistics and Literature, 37], ► pp. 195 ff. DOI logo
Mellinger, Christopher D. & Thomas A. Hanson
2022. Considerations of ecological validity in cognitive translation and interpreting studies. Translation, Cognition & Behavior 5:1 ► pp. 1 ff. DOI logo
Alves, Fabio & Igor A. Lourenço da Silva
2021. Bridging Paradigms to Approach Expertise in Cognitive Translation Studies. In Advances in Cognitive Translation Studies [New Frontiers in Translation Studies, ], ► pp. 89 ff. DOI logo
García, Álvaro Marín
2021. Bridging the epistemological gap. Cognitive Linguistic Studies 8:2 ► pp. 462 ff. DOI logo
Marín García, Álvaro
2025. Finding synergies in Cognitive Translation and Interpreting Studies via task design. Target. International Journal of Translation Studies 37:2 ► pp. 271 ff. DOI logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 5 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