Similar and different: cognitive rhythm and effort in translation and paraphrasing

Abstract

<jats:title>Abstract</jats:title><jats:p>Although Jakobson’s (1959) seminal classification of translation into three kinds: interlingual, intralingual and intersemiotic has been widely accepted in Translation Studies, so far most research interest has focused on interlingual translation, defined as “translation proper”. Intralingual translation, more often understood as rewording, paraphrasing or reformulation within the same language, is a less prototypical kind of translation, yet we believe that the underlying mental operations needed to perform both tasks include similar processing stages. Bearing in mind the lack of research comparing inter-and intralingual translation we designed the ParaTrans project in which we investigate how translators make decisions in both tasks. In this article we present the results of a comparative analysis of processing effort and cognitive rhythm demonstrated by professional translators who were asked to translate and paraphrase similar texts. Having collected three streams of translation process data with such tools as key-logging, eye-tracking and screen-capture software, we are able to draw some tentative conclusions concerning the similarities and differences between language processing for interlingual translation and intralingual paraphrasing. The results confirm a higher processing effort in interlingual translation most likely due to the need to switch between languages.</jats:p>

Paraphrasing in respeaking – comparing linguistic competence of interpreters, translators and bilinguals

“…They found that interlingual translation was more cognitively demanding than paraphrasing. The two tasks displayed similar patterns of text production and pausing, which Whyatt et al (2016) interpreted as evidence that the participants transferred their translation skills into paraphrasing.…”

“…Paraphrasing can be seen as intralingual translation or 'rewording' (Jakobson, 1959), where the same language is used to convey the same message using different phrasing. Paraphrasing has been frequently used as a task to be compared with translation based on the assumption that it involves similar linguistic processing without the interlingual component (Moser, 1983;Russo & Salvador, 2004;Whyatt, Stachowiak, & Kajzer-Wietrzny, 2016).…”

“…Zethsen (2009) compared interlingual and intralingual translations and found little difference between the two activities. Whyatt et al (2016) compared paraphrasing with interlingual translation performed by professional translators by means of eye-tracking and key-logging. They found that interlingual translation was more cognitively demanding than paraphrasing.…”

O metodzie protokołów retrospektywnych w badaniach nad tłumaczeniem symultanicznym

“…Oprócz metod subiektywnych, dzięki gwałtownemu rozwojowi technologii w ostatnich dekadach badacze przekładu mają także do dyspozycji metody wymagające specjalistycznego sprzętu czy oprogramowania, takie jak keylogging, czyli rejestrowanie ruchów na klawiaturze i ruchów kursora (m.in. OʼBrien 2007;Whyatt et al 2016;Hvelplund i Dragsted 2018), analizę zrzutów ekranu (Shreve et al 2014) oraz okulografię, która pozwala na śledzenie ruchów gałek ocznych podczas tłumaczenia (m.in. OʼBrien 2008;Chmiel i Mazur 2013;Płużyczka 2013Płużyczka , 2015.…”

Order effects in the translation process

“…Cognitive rhythm, described by Schilperoord (1996), is related to this temporal aspect of text production, insofar as it describes an attempt to identify pause patterns as the text production process unfolds. This idea has been applied in translation studies by several scholars (e.g., Jakobsen 2002;Alves 2005;Whyatt, Stachowiak, and Kajzer-Wietrzny 2016). tion competence and pedagogical research.…”