Introduction and Overview

  • Michael CarlEmail author
  • Srinivas Bangalore
  • Moritz Schaeffer
Part of the New Frontiers in Translation Studies book series (NFTS)


New Directions in Empirical Translation Process Research is a continuation of the development which originates in descriptive translation studies as conceived by Holmes (1972) and Toury (1995). This introduction shows how this volume is a documentation of a technological development which makes it possible for translation research to go beyond the description. As the various chapters in this volume argue, the analysis of records from keyloggers and eye-trackers enable us to “explain and predict” (Holmes, 1972:71) translators’ behaviour on various levels of granularity. All contributions are centered around the CRITT TPR-DB, a unique resource of more than 500 h of recorded translation process data augmented with over 200 different annotations. The chapters describe aspects of computational, statistical and psycholinguistic models of the translation process that are facilitated by the TPR-DB. This chapter gives an overview of the contributions and provides a background for the work reported in the volume.


Predictive translation process studies Computational Statistical and psycholinguistic modelling of the translation process 


  1. Alabau, V., Bonk, R., Buck, C., Carl, M., Casacuberta, F., García-Martínez, M., et al. (2013). CASMACAT: An open source workbench for advanced computer aided translation. The Prague Bulletin of Mathematical Linguistics, 100, 101–112.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. ALPAC. (1966). Languages and machines: Computers in translation and linguistics. A report by the Automatic Language Processing Advisory Committee, Division of Behavioral Sciences, National Academy of Sciences, National Research Council (124 pp.). Washington, D.C.: National Academy of Sciences, National Research Council (Publication 1416).Google Scholar
  3. Carl, M. (2012). Translog-II: A program for recording user activity data for empirical reading and writing research. In Proceedings of the 8th international conference on language resources and evaluation (LREC) (pp. 4108–4112), Istanbul, Turkey.Google Scholar
  4. Göpferich, S., & Jakobsen, A. L. (Eds.). (2008). Looking at eyes (Copenhagen studies in language, Vol. 36). Frederiksberg: Samfundslitteratur.Google Scholar
  5. Göpferich, S., Jakobsen, A. L., & Mees, I. M. (Eds.). (2010). Behind the mind (Copenhagen studies in language, Vol. 37). Frederiksberg: Samfundslitteratur.Google Scholar
  6. Hansen, G. (Ed.). (1999). Probing the process in translation: Methods and results (Copenhagen studies in language, Vol. 24). Denmark: Samfundslitteratur.Google Scholar
  7. Hansen, G. (Ed.). (2002). Empirical translation studies: Process and product (Copenhagen studies in language, Vol. 27). Denmark: Samfundslitteratur.Google Scholar
  8. Hardison, O. B., & Golden, L. (1995). Horace for students of literature. The ‘Ars Poetica’ and its tradition. Miami: University Press of Florida.Google Scholar
  9. Holmes, J. S. (1972). The name and nature of translation studies. In Translation section of the third international congress of applied linguistics, August 21–26 (pp. 66–79). Copenhagen.Google Scholar
  10. Jakobsen, A. (2003). Effects of think aloud on translation speed, revision and segmentation. In F. Alves (Ed.), Triangulating translation: Perspectives in process oriented research (pp. 69–95). Amsterdam: Benjamins.Google Scholar
  11. Jakobsen, A., & Schou, L. (1999). Translog documentation. In G. Hansen (Ed.), Probing the process in translation: Methods and results (pp. 1–36). Frederiksberg: Samfundslitteratur.Google Scholar
  12. Jakobsen, A. L. (2011). Tracking translators’ keystrokes and eye movements with Translog. In C.~Alvstad, A. Hild, & E. Tiselius (Eds.), Methods and strategies of process research integrative approaches in translation studies (pp. 37–55). Amsterdam: John Benjamins PublishingGoogle Scholar
  13. Kay, M. (1998). The proper place of men and machines in language translation. In Readings in machine translation (pp. 221–232), MIT Press.Google Scholar
  14. Koehn, P., Carl, M., Casacuberta, F., & Marcos, E. (2013). CASMACAT: Cognitive analysis and statistical methods for advanced computer aided translation. In A. Way, K. Sima’an, M.~L.~Forcada, D.~Grasmick, & H. Depraetere (Eds.), Proceedings of the XIV Machine Translation Summit (p.~411). Allschwil: European Association for Machine Translation.Google Scholar
  15. Krings, H. P. (1986). Was in Den Köpfen von Übersetzern Vorgeht: Eine Empirische Untersuchung Zur Struktur Des Übersetzungsprozesses an Fortgeschrittenen Französischlernern. Tübingen: Günter Narr Verlag.Google Scholar
  16. Lörscher, W. (1991). Translation performance, translation process, and translation strategies. A psycholinguistic investigation. Tübingen: Günter Narr Verlag.Google Scholar
  17. Mauranen, A., & Kujamäki, P. (2004). Translation universals: Do they exist? Amsterdam; Philadelphia: John Benjamins.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Mees, I. M., Alves, F., & Göpferich, S. (Eds.). (2010a). Methodology, technology and innovation in translation process research (Copenhagen studies in language, Vol. 38). Frederiksberg: Samfundslitteratur.Google Scholar
  19. Mees, I., Göpferich, S., & Alves, F. (Eds.). (2010b). New approaches in translation process research (Copenhagen studies in language, Vol. 39). Frederiksberg: Samfundslitteratur.Google Scholar
  20. Pöchhacker, F., Jakobsen, A. L., & Mees, I. M. (Eds.). (2007). Interpreting studies and beyond. A tribute to Miriam Shlesinger (Copenhagen studies in language, Vol. 35). Denmark: Samfundslitteratur.Google Scholar
  21. Robinson, D. (1997). Western translation theory: From Herodotus to Nietzsche. Manchester: St. Jerome Publishing.Google Scholar
  22. Sanchis-Trilles, G., Alabau, V., Buck, C., Carl, M., Casacuberta, F., & Martinez, M. G. (2014). Interactive translation prediction versus conventional post-editing in practice: A study with the CasMaCat workbench. Machine Translation, 28(3-4), 217–235.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Sharp, B., Zock, M., Carl, M., & Jakobsen, A. L. (Eds.). (2011). Human-machine interaction in translation (Copenhagen studies in language, Vol. 41). Frederiksberg: Samfundslitteratur.Google Scholar
  24. Toury, G. (1995). Descriptive translation studies and beyond. Amsterdam; Philadelphia: John Benjamins.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  • Michael Carl
    • 1
    Email author
  • Srinivas Bangalore
    • 2
  • Moritz Schaeffer
    • 1
    • 3
  1. 1.Center for Research and Innovation in Translation and Translation Technology, Department of International Business CommunicationCopenhagen Business SchoolFrederiksbergDenmark
  2. 2.Interactions CorporationNew ProvidenceUSA
  3. 3.Institute for Language, Cognition and ComputationUniversity of EdinburghEdinburghUK

Personalised recommendations