GREVIS (Groupe de recherche en révision humaine) aimed to set up an accelerated method of revising while improving the quality of the operation. The project had a three fold objective: to strengthen the place of revision in the field of translation studies, to increase revisers' satisfaction and to help the translation industry. The hypothesis of this study was that monolingual revision was just as effective as bilingual revision, and could be done at a lower cost, because it is less time-consuming. However, the results of the study disproved this hypothesis: bilingual revision was more than twice as effective as monolingual revision. The 19,407-word corpus comprised translations from the E?F pair (translated and revised in Canada) and from the F?E pair (translated and revised in the United States). Each sub-corpus (E?F and F?E) was analyzed by a team of scholars and/or revisers, according to Louise Brunette's (1997) revision criteria: accuracy, readability, appropriateness and linguistic coding. The study looked at the number of corrections, omissions and revisor-injected errors, in relation to these four criteria.

No abstract

No abstract

Il arrive que des théoriciens associent à une forme de censure les interventions des relecteurs ou des réviseurs. C'est peut-être oublier qu'en matière de démarches évaluatives, les recherches sont guidées par le souci de l'objectivité. Le domaine des divers agents d'évaluation, c'est le respect d'une norme professionnelle connue, en même temps qu'évolutive, et garante de l'efficacité de la communication. Cette série de règles intériorisées par la profession garantit aussi la cohésion de cette dernière, et c'est là sa fonction sociale. La relecture et la révision ne sont pas la police de la traduction, mais ses gardiens.Some theoreticians consider the interventions of reviewers and revisers to be a kind of censorship. This may be a failure to consider that as far as the evaluation process is concerned, the research is guided by a preoccupation with objectivity. It is the responsibility of the various TQA agents to respect a known, yet evolving, set of professional norms, that guarantee the efficacy of the communication. This set of rules, internalized by the profession, also guarantees its cohesion, as there lies its social function. Reviewers and revisers are not the policemen of a translation, but rather its guardians

No abstract