Simplification in inter- and intralingual translation – combining corpus linguistics, key logging and eye-tracking

Abstract

<jats:title>Abstract</jats:title><jats:p>As some scholars view inter-and intra-lingual translation as a parallel activity, it is vital to establish to what extent the products of these processes are alike, and whether the processes themselves differ. This paper investigates stylistic simplification, a frequently hypothesised translation universal which involves, among others, breaking up long sentences in the process of translation (</jats:p>

A cognitive inquiry into similarities and differences between translation and paraphrase: Evidence from eye movement data

“…Based on this comparative approach, several empirical-experimental studies have been carried out to reveal how far paraphrase overlaps with translation in terms of process and products. Kajzer-Wietrzny et al [24] combined corpus linguistics, key-logging and eye-tracking to investigate whether stylistic simplification, a frequently hypothesized indicator of translation universal, was equally present in the end products of paraphrase and translation and how this tendency was related to the level of translation expertise. Whyatt et al [25] reported a comparative study of decision-making process in paraphrase and translation by collecting user activity data (UAD) via key-logging, eye-tracking and screen recording.…”

“…First, eye movement measures need be enriched in reflect multiple dimensions of processing. For instance, Kajzer-Wietrzny et al [24] merely used dwell time to indicate the cognitive effort allocated to different textual regions. It is essential to further exploit the advantage of eye-tracking in recording and describing cognitive behaviors by adopting eye movement measures reflective of not only overall cognitive effort but also attention dividing mechanism.…”

“…Second, statistical analysis with greater explanatory power is required to compensate for the generally small sample size and high individual variations in empirical translation studies. Results primarily derived from descriptive statistics (e.g., mean sentence length, mean processing duration) in Kajzer-Wietrzny et al [24] and Whyatt et al [25] may fail to accommodate for differences within participants or STs. Lastly, participants' behavioral data in terms of eye movements or key-logging might be co-determined by multiple factors, thus factors that potentially modulate the cognitive processing of paraphrasing and translation, such as text genres, translation directionality (L1 translation vs. L2 translation), and language mode (paraphrasing in L1 vs. paraphrase in L2) need be considered in experimental design.…”

“…Lastly, participants' behavioral data in terms of eye movements or key-logging might be co-determined by multiple factors, thus factors that potentially modulate the cognitive processing of paraphrasing and translation, such as text genres, translation directionality (L1 translation vs. L2 translation), and language mode (paraphrasing in L1 vs. paraphrase in L2) need be considered in experimental design. These, unfortunately, have not been examined as variables of interest in previous studies [24,25]. Translating in non-native language, also known as inverse translation, has become a widely practiced reality around the world [26], which calls for more systematic research on the effect of directionality during intra-and interlingual translation.…”

Helping the helpers: Evaluating the impact of a controlled language checker on the intralingual and interlingual translation tasks involving volunteer health professionals

“…health domain experts), who are therefore involved in the workflow of intralingual translation (i.e. simplification of content to render it accessible to lay readers) (Muñoz-Miquel 2012;Kajzer-Wietrzny, Whyatt, and Stachowiak 2016). Different sets of written guidelines are available to the authors of PLS, which deal with both content (e.g.…”