Introducing Translation Studies

Theories and Applications

Search

Chapter 4

Studying Translation Product and Process

Abstract

This chapter traces key developments in the analysis of translation shifts and translator behavior from the 1950s to the present. It begins with early taxonomies by Vinay and Darbelnet and Catford, which aimed to classify linguistic changes between source and target texts. While influential, these models are limited by their static nature and Eurocentric focus. Alternative approaches, such as Loh’s work on Chinese, expanded the scope to non-European languages. The chapter also highlights the rise of stylistic analysis in former Czechoslovakia, culminating in translatorial stylistics, which links translation choices to the translator’s identity and ideology. These developments were supported by corpus-based methods that reveal patterns in translation behaviour. Additionally, the chapter explores the emergence of cognitive approaches, from the Paris School to recent socio-cognitive models, using methods like think-aloud protocols and eye-tracking. Ultimately, it argues that only a mixed-methods approach can fully account for the complexity of the translation process.

Video Introduction

Flashcards

Test your understanding of the foundational concepts within the chapter by using these flashcards.

Press Enter or Space to flip the card

Quiz

Test your understanding of this chapter with our multiple choice questions.

Research Questions

  1. Where possible, compare the DVD subtitles and dubbed versions of an extract of the same film. List and categorize the different translation procedures using one of the models presented in this chapter. How do the two modes of audiovisual translation differ? Compare also with fansubs of the same or similar text, where they exist.
  2. Look at the work that has been done on translation style (see Further Reading) and note the differences between the various definitions and approaches. Think of ways in which it might be possible to differentiate the translator’s ‘linguistic fingerprint’ from that of the source author.
  3. Examine more closely the interpretive model of translation (Lederer 1994/2003). In what ways does the model differ from Nida’s three-phase model studied in Chapter 3? Which do you feel is more suited for explaining the translation process?
  4. Read up on some of the early corpus studies noted in the chapter. Design a study to investigate the dictionary translations of a problematic term between English and your languages. For instance, investigate the use of the near-synonyms ‘attached’, ‘fond’ and ‘devoted’, and their equivalents in another language.
  5. Read up details of the implementation of think-aloud protocols (e.g. Tirkkonen-Condit and Jääskeläinen 2000, see Further Reading) and make a summary of the findings. Then test out the method:
    1. Write a detailed methodology for your experiment;
    2. Carry out the experiment on another student/translator (with the subject’s permission and following ethical approval procedures!);
    3. Describe your findings;
    4. What advantages and limitations of this kind of research do you note?; 5) How far do your findings correspond to those in Tirkkonen-Condit and Jääskeläinen?; 6) What changes would you make to any follow-up experiment?

Video Summary

Further Reading

Explore the chapter further using our combined reading list and free reading section.

For more on corpus-based translation studies

Mariachiara Russo, Claudio Bendazzoli, Bart Defrancq (2018) Making Way in Corpus-based Interpreting Studies, Springer Singapore          

https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-10-6199-8

For stylistic shifts in translation 

May, R. (1994) The Translator in the Text: On Reading Russian Literature in English, Evanston, IL: Northwestern University Press. 

Parks, T. (2007) Translating Style, 2nd edition, Manchester: St Jerome. 

Saldanha, G. (2010) ‘Translator style: Methodological considerations’, The Translator 17.1: 25–50. 

For more on corpus-based translation studies 

Biber, D., S. Conrad and R. Reppen (1998) Corpus Linguistics: Investigating Language Structure and Use, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 

Kruger, A., K. Wallmach and J. Munday (eds) (2011) Corpus-based Translation Studies: Research and Applications, London and New York: Continuum. 

Laviosa, S. (2002) Corpus-based Translation Studies: Theory, Findings, Applications, Amsterdam: Rodopi. 

Zanettin, F. (2013) ‘Corpus methods for descriptive translation studies’, Procedia 95: 20–32. 

For think-aloud protocols and other methods 

Lee-Jahnke, H. (ed.) (2005) Processus et cheminements en traduction et interpretation [Processes and pathways in translation and interpretation], Special issue of Meta 50.2. 

Tirkkonen-Condit, S. and R. Jääskeläinen (eds) (2000) Tapping and Mapping the Processes of Translation and Interpreting, Amsterdam and Philadelphia: John Benjamins. 

Other Reading

See Exploration box 4.A of textbook.

Anna Gil Bardají, Procedures, techniques, strategies: translation process operators, Perspectives 17(3) 

https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/09076760903249372

See Exploration box 4.C of textbook.

Zhang, Meifang and Pan Li (2009) ‘Introducing a Chinese Perspective on Translation Shifts: A Comparative Study of Shift Models by Loh and Vinay and Darbelnet’, The Translator 15(2): 351–74. 

https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/13556509.2009.10799285

Taylor, C. (2003) ‘Multimodal transcription in the analysis, translation and subtitling of Italian films’, The Translator, 9(2), pp. 191–205. 

https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/13556509.2003.10799153

Hanna Risku and Regina Rogl (2022) ‘Praxis and process meet halfway’, Translation and Interpreting 14.2. https://www.trans-int.org/index.php/transint/article/view/1355

Borodo, M. (2015). Multimodality, translation and comics. Perspectives, 23(1), 22–41. https://doi.org/10.1080/0907676X.2013.876057