Behavioural indicators of translators’ decisional styles in a translation task: A longitudinal study

Main Article Content

Olha Lehka-Paul

Abstract

Translation Process Research defines translation as a decision-making process, but a plethora of studies has demonstrated that there is high individual variation in the translators’ styles of making decisions. The present interdisciplinary empirical study combines the theory of personality types and translation process research in order to identify the behavioural indicators that characterise translators’ decisional styles at the stage of end revision, where final decision-making takes place. As based on previous research, such indicators as the duration of end revision, pause length and number, the number of deleted characters and the types of corrections introduced at the stage of end revision may comprise the behavioural variables that define the translators’ styles of decision-making. The analysis of the data shows that two distinct behavioural styles may be distinguished, and their nature lies in the translators’ individual preferences for one of the two dichotomous psychological functions responsible for decision-making.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

Article Details

How to Cite
Lehka-Paul, O. (2020). Behavioural indicators of translators’ decisional styles in a translation task: A longitudinal study. Yearbook of the Poznań Linguistic Meeting, 6(1), 81-111. https://doi.org/10.2478/yplm-2020-0007
Section
Articles

References

  1. Alamargot, D. & L. Chanquoy. 2001. Through the models of writing. Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers.
  2. Antunović, G. & N. Pavlović. 2011. Moving on, moving back or changing it here and now: Self-revision in student translation processes from L2 and L3. Across Languages and Cultures 12 (2). 213–234.
  3. Asadi, P. & C. Séguinot. 2005. Shortcuts, strategies and general patterns in a process study of nine professionals. META: Translators’ Journal 50(2). 522–547.
  4. Briggs Myers, I. 1962. The Myers-Briggs Type Indicator: Manual. Palo Alto: Con-sulting Psychologists Press.
  5. Carl, M. 2012. Translog-II: A program for recording user activity data for empirical translation process research. IJCLA 3(1). 153–162.
  6. Carl, M., B. Dragsted & A.L. Jakobsen. 2011. A taxonomy of human translation styles. Translation Journal 16(2). 155–168.
  7. Chanquoy, L. 1997. Thinking skills and composing: Examples of text revision. In: J.H.M. Hamers and M. Overtoom (eds.), Inventory of European programmes for teaching thinking, 179-185. Utrecht: Sardes.
  8. Dragsted, B. 2005. Segmentation in translation. Differences across levels of exper-tise and difficulty. Target 17(1). 49–70.
  9. Dragsted, B. 2012. Indicators of difficulty in translation: Correlating product and process data. Across Languages and Cultures 13(1). 81–98.
  10. Dragsted, B. & M. Carl. 2013. Towards a classification of translation styles based on eye-tracking and key-logging data. Journal of Writing Research 5(1). 133–158.
  11. Englund Dimitrova, B. 2005. Expertise and explicitation in the translation process. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
  12. European Master’s in Translation. Competence Framework. 2017.
  13. https://ec.europa.eu/info/sites/info/files/emt_competence_fwk_2017_en_web.pdf (Date of access: 1 Dec 2019.)
  14. Fabio A. & D.C. Vale. 2017. On drafting and revision in translation: A corpus lin-guistics oriented analysis of translation process data. In: S. Hansen-Schirra, S. Neumann & O. Čulo (eds.), Annotation, exploitation and evaluation of parallel corpora, 89–110. Berlin: Language Science Press.
  15. Furnham, A., T. Jensen & J. Crump. 2008. Personality, intelligence and assessment centre expert ratings. International Journal of Selection and Assessment 16(4). 356-365.
  16. Gardner, W.L. and M.J. Martinko. 1996. Using the Myers-Briggs Type Indicator to study managers: A literature review and research agenda. Journal of Manage-ment 22(1). 45–83.
  17. Göpferich, S. & R. Jääskeläinen. 2009. Process research into the development of translation competence: Where are we, and where do we need to go? Across Languages and Cultures 10(2). 169–191.
  18. Hansen, G. 2013. Many tracks lead to the goal. A long-term study on individual translation styles. In C. Way, S. Vandepitte, R. Meylaerts & M. Bartlomiejczyk (eds.), Tracks and treks in translation studies. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 49–62.
  19. Higgs, M. 2001. Is there a relationship between the Myers-Briggs Type Indicator and emotional intelligence? Journal of Managerial Psychology 16(7). 509–533.
  20. Hubscher Davidson, S. 2009. Personal diversities and diverse personalities in transla-tion: A study of individual differences. Perspectives: Studies in Translatology 17(3). 175–192.
  21. Hurtado Albir, A. (ed.). 2017. Researching translation competence by PACTE Group. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
  22. Jakobsen, A.L. 2002. Translation drafting by professional translators and translation students. In G. Hansen (ed.), Empirical translation studies. Process and product (Copenhagen Studies in Language 27), 191–204. Copenhagen: Samfundslittera-tur.
  23. Jakobsen, A.L. 2003. Effects of think aloud on translation speed, revision and seg-mentation. In F. Alves (ed.), Triangulating translation: Perspectives in process oriented research, 69–95. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
  24. Jung, C.G. [1921] 1971. Psychological types. Collected Works of Carl Gustav Jung (volume 6). Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
  25. Kiraly, D. 1995. Pathways to translation: Pedagogy and practice. Kent: The Kent State University Press.
  26. Krings, H. [1995] 2001. Repairing texts: Empirical investigations of machine transla-tion post-editing processes. (Translated by G.S. Koby, G.M. Shreve, K. Mis¬che-rikow, S. Litzer.) Kent: The Kent State University Press.
  27. Lehka-Paul, O. 2018. Between translation process and product: Personality and translator’s behaviour during self-revision. In S. Barschdorf & D. Renna. (eds.), Translating boundaries: Constraints, limits, opportunities, 21–48. Stuttgart: Ibidem.
  28. Lehka-Paul, O. & B. Whyatt. 2016. Does personality matter in translation? Interdis-ciplinary research into the translation process and product. Poznań Studies in Contemporary Linguistics 52 (2). 317–349.
  29. Maugham, W.S. 1988. Sixty-five short stories. London: Heinemann.
  30. Mossop, B. 1982. A procedure for self-revision. Terminology Update 15(3). 6–9.
  31. Mossop, B. 2007. Empirical studies of revision: What we know and need to know. The Journal of Specialised Translation 8. 5–20.
  32. Muñoz Martín, R. 2014. A blurred snapshot of advances in translation process re-search. In R. Muñoz Martín (ed.), MonTI (Special issue 1: Minding translation), 49–85. Publicaciones de la Universidad de Alicante.
  33. Nicholson, N.S. 2005. Personality characteristics of interpreter trainees: The Myers-Briggs Type Indicator (MBTI). The Interpreters’ Newsletter 13. 109–142.
  34. O‘Brien, S. 2006. Eye-tracking and translation memory matches. Perspectives: Stud-ies in Translatology 14(3). 185–205.
  35. Piolat, A. 1990. Vers l’amélioration de la rédaction de texte. Apport des technologies nouvelles pour larecherche et l‘apprentissage. (Synthèse pour l’Habilitation à Diriger des Recherches.) Université de Provence, Aix-en-Provence.
  36. Reiss, K. [1971] 2000. Type, kind and individuality of text: Decision making in trans-lation. (Translated by S. Kitron.) In L. Venuti (ed.), The translation studies reader, 160–171. London: Routledge.
  37. Schaeffer, M., A. Tardel, S. Hofmann & S. Hansen-Schirra. 2019. Cognitive effort and efficiency in translation revision. In E. Huertas-Barros, S. Vandepitte & E. Iglesias-Fernández (eds.), Quality assurance and assessment practices in transla-tion and interpreting, 226–243. Hershey: IGI Global.
  38. Schweda Nicholson, N. 2005. Personality characteristics of interpreter trainees: The Myers-Briggs Type Indicator (MBTI). The Interpreters’ Newsletter 13. 109–142.
  39. Stilwell, N.A., M.M. Wallick, S.E. Thal & J.A. Burleson. 2000. Myers-Briggs Type and Medical Specialty Choice: A New Look at an Old Question. Teaching and Learning in Medicine 12(1). 14–20.
  40. Toury, G. 1995. Studying interim solutions: Possibilities and implications. In G. Toury (ed.), Descriptive translation studies and beyond, 181–193. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
  41. Wilss, W. 1996. Knowledge and skills in translator behaviour. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.