Advanced search
1 file | 1.26 MB

Translation methods and experience : a comparative analysis of human translation and post-editing with students and professional translators

Joke Daems (UGent) , Sonia Vandepitte (UGent) , Robert Hartsuiker (UGent) and Lieve Macken (UGent)
(2017) META. 62(2). p.245-270
Author
Organization
Project
LT3
Abstract
While the benefits of using post-editing for technical texts have been more or less acknowledged, it remains unclear whether post-editing is a viable alternative to human translation for more general text types. In addition, we need a better understanding of both translation methods and how they are performed by students as well as professionals, so that pitfalls can be determined and translator training can be adapted accordingly. In this article, we aim to get a better understanding of the differences between human translation and post-editing for newspaper articles. Processes were registered by means of eye tracking and keystroke logging, which allows us to study translation speed, cognitive load, and the usage of external resources. We also look at the final quality of the product as well as translators' attitude towards both methods of translation.
Keywords
translation process, experience, post-editing, translation quality, translation

Downloads

  • 01-DAEMS-COMPARATIVE-ANALYSIS.pdf
    • full text
    • |
    • open access
    • |
    • PDF
    • |
    • 1.26 MB

Citation

Please use this url to cite or link to this publication:

Chicago
Daems, Joke, Sonia Vandepitte, Robert Hartsuiker, and Lieve Macken. 2017. “Translation Methods and Experience : a Comparative Analysis of Human Translation and Post-editing with Students and Professional Translators.” Meta 62 (2): 245–270.
APA
Daems, Joke, Vandepitte, S., Hartsuiker, R., & Macken, L. (2017). Translation methods and experience : a comparative analysis of human translation and post-editing with students and professional translators. META, 62(2), 245–270.
Vancouver
1.
Daems J, Vandepitte S, Hartsuiker R, Macken L. Translation methods and experience : a comparative analysis of human translation and post-editing with students and professional translators. META. 2017;62(2):245–70.
MLA
Daems, Joke, Sonia Vandepitte, Robert Hartsuiker, et al. “Translation Methods and Experience : a Comparative Analysis of Human Translation and Post-editing with Students and Professional Translators.” META 62.2 (2017): 245–270. Print.
@article{7126161,
  abstract     = {While the benefits of using post-editing for technical texts have been more or less acknowledged, it remains unclear whether post-editing is a viable alternative to human translation for more general text types. In addition, we need a better understanding of both translation methods and how they are performed by students as well as professionals, so that pitfalls can be determined and translator training can be adapted accordingly. In this article, we aim to get a better understanding of the differences between human translation and post-editing for newspaper articles. Processes were registered by means of eye tracking and keystroke logging, which allows us to study translation speed, cognitive load, and the usage of external resources. We also look at the final quality of the product as well as translators' attitude towards both methods of translation.},
  author       = {Daems, Joke and Vandepitte, Sonia and Hartsuiker, Robert and Macken, Lieve},
  issn         = {0026-0452},
  journal      = {META},
  keyword      = {translation process,experience,post-editing,translation quality,translation},
  language     = {eng},
  number       = {2},
  pages        = {245--270},
  title        = {Translation methods and experience : a comparative analysis of human translation and post-editing with students and professional translators},
  url          = {http://dx.doi.org/10.7202/1041023ar},
  volume       = {62},
  year         = {2017},
}

Altmetric
View in Altmetric
Web of Science
Times cited: