Situated cognition

Ricardo Muñoz Martín
University of Bologna
Table of contents

In order to grasp complex wholes (see Complexity thinking in TS), like the solar system, scientists formulate simplified idealizations or models for them. Scientific models represent such complex wholes to different degrees, but they will only work if (we believe that) there is some correspondence with their counterparts in the world. Such correspondence need not be based on physical or structural resemblance. Scientists may strip away everything they do not deem essential for their interests, or even introduce deliberate distortions they can control and correct later on. Models only need to fit empirical data.

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

Adams, Frederick, and Kenneth Aizawa
2007 The Bounds of Cognition. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Arumí Ribas, Marta, and Mireia Vargas-Urpi
2017 “Strategies in Public Service Interpreting.” Interpreting 19 (1): 118–141. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Chen, Sijia
2017 “Note-taking in Consecutive Interpreting: New data from pen recording.” Translation & Interpreting 9 (1): 4–23. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Clark, Andy
2008 Supersizing the Mind: Embodiment, action, and cognitive extension. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Clancey, William J.
1997 Situated Cognition: On human knowledge and computer representations. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Damásio, António
[1994] 2005 Descartes’ Error: Emotion, reason, and the human brain. Revised edition. New York: Penguin.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Gibson, James J.
1979 The Ecological Approach to Visual Perception. Boston: Houghton Mifflin.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Hutchins, Edwin
1994 Cognition in the Wild. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Hutto, Daniel H., and Erik Myin
2017 Evolving Enactivism. Basic minds meet content. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Jeannerod, Marc
2006 Motor Cognition. What actions tell the self. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Jiménez Crespo, Miguel Ángel
2017 Crowdsourcing and Online Collaborative Translations: Expanding the limits of Translation Studies. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Ketola, Anne
2016 “Towards a multimodally oriented theory of translation: A cognitive framework for the translation of illustrated technical texts.” Translation Studies 9 (1): 67–81. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Korpal, Paweł, and Aleksandra Jasielska
2019 “Investigating interpreters’ empathy: Are emotions in simultaneous interpreting contagious?” Target 31 (1): 2–24. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Lakoff, George, and Mark Johnson
1999 Philosophy in the Flesh. New York: Basic Books.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Muñoz Martín, Ricardo
2010 “On Paradigms and Cognitive Translatology”. In Translation and Cognition, ed. by Gregory M. Shreve and Erik Angelone, 169–187. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Noë, Alva
2004 Action in Perception. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Nurminen, Mari
2020 “Raw machine translation use by patent professionals. A case of distributed cognition.” Translation, Cognition & Behavior 3 (1): 100–121. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
O'Hagan, Minako, and Marian Flanagan
2018 “Gamer emotions in laughter: Towards affect-oriented game localisation.” Translation, Cognition & Behavior 1 (2): 299–318. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Port, Robert F., and Timothy Van Gelder
1995 Mind as Motion. Explorations in the dynamics of cognition. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar

Further essential reading

Ehrensberger-Dow, Maureen
2019 “Ergonomics and the translation process.” Slovo.ru: Baltic accent 10 (1): 37–51. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Halverson, Sandra L.
2018 “Metalinguistic Knowledge/Awareness/Ability in Cognitive Translation Studies: Some questions.” Hermes 57: 11–28.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
O’Brien, Sharon
2012 “Translation as Human–Computer Interaction.” Translation Spaces 1 (1): 101–122. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Risku, Hanna, and Regina Rogl
2020 “Translation and Situated, Embodied, Distributed, Embedded and Extended Cognition.” In Routledge Handbook on Translation and Cognition, ed. by Arnt Lykke Jakobsen & Fabio Alves, 478–499. London: Routledge. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Shreve, Gregory M.
2020 “Translation as a Complex Adaptive System. A framework for theory building in cognitive translatology”. In Routledge Handbook on Translation and Cognition. ed. by Arnt Lykke Jakobsen & Fabio Alves, 69–87. London: Routledge. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
 
Mobile Menu Logo with link to supplementary files background Layer 1 prag Twitter_Logo_Blue