Isabelle S. Robert

Selecting a translation revision procedure: do common sense and statistics agree?

Translators employ a wide variety of revision procedures in their day-to-day working practice. This paper empirically investigates the impact of these revision procedures on both the revision product and the revision process. Sixteen professional revisers revised four comparable translations, each time using a different procedure: (1) monolingual, (2) bilingual, (3) bilingual followed by monolingual, and (4) monolingual followed by bilingual. To analyse the data, a product-based revision analysis was combined with process-based analyses, i.e. using keystroke logs and think aloud protocols. Although common sense and research-based results seem to coincide at first sight with respect to the selection of a suitable revision procedure, some results deviated from the expected outcomes. To conclude, the paper formulates some practical advice on selecting revision procedures, taking quality and time into account.

Towards a model of translation revision competence

ABSTRACT Compared with research into translation competence (TC), which has been on the increase and has seen rapid developments since the 1990s, research into translation revision competence (TRC) is much newer and less developed as a major line of investigation. The aim of this article is (1) to construct a provisional TRC model, and (2) to provide concrete ideas for (empirical) studies into the validation of this model. The underlying hypothesis is that TC and TRC share some characteristics, but differ in several ways. First, the concepts of translation revision and competence are discussed and operationalised. Subsequently, a hypothetical model of TRC is presented using features from three existing models of TC (PACTE, TransComp, EMT expert group) and combining relevant TC insights provided by those models with three TRC-specific features: translation experience, interpersonal attitude and the ability to justify textual changes. The presentation of the TRC model is followed by a brief exploration of the four hypotheses on which it draws. Finally, concrete suggestions for further empirical research into the presented TRC model are discussed, with a view to advancing valid and reliable approaches to investigating the construct of TRC.

Conceptualizing translation revision competence: A pilot study on the acquisition of the knowledge about revision and strategic subcompetences

Translation revision (TR) is an important step in the translation workflow. However, translation revision competence (TRC) remains an ill-defined concept. This article addresses that gap by operationalizing the TR concept and by presenting a theoretical TRC model. Subsequently, the article analyses and interprets the results of an empirical pilot study designed to test the presence of two TR subcompetences hypothesised by the TRC model, in an experimental group and a control group of 21 MA language students. The experimental group was given TR training halfway through the experiment whereas the control group was not. The two subcompetences that were tested by means of a pretest–posttest experimental design were declarative-procedural knowledge about TR and the procedural strategic revision subcompetence. Both groups of participants replied to questionnaires and performed controlled revision tasks, which were subjected to quantitative statistical analyses. The results show that the participants’ TR knowledge was limited in the pretest and that this knowledge improved marginally only in the experimental group in the posttest (i.e., after TR training). This article provides a detailed analysis of the results and the causes of the limited progress. In addition, it discusses the lessons learnt for both TR training and further research.

Conceptualizing translation revision competence: a pilot study on the ‘fairness and tolerance’ attitudinal component

ABSTRACT Although translation revision plays a crucial role in the production of high-quality translations, research into translation revision competence (TRC) is relatively new and underdeveloped compared with research into translation competence. This article addresses that gap by focusing on the validation of the TRC model developed by Robert, Remael, and Ureel. Using questionnaires and revision tasks in a pretest–posttest experimental design, we investigated whether a course on revision and editing affected the degree of fairness and tolerance that participants showed when revising others’ translations. Analyses of the results showed that the participants in the experimental group did not make fewer unnecessary changes after taking a course on revision and editing. In addition, the types and sizes of the unnecessary changes that they made were not influenced by taking the revision and editing course. However, when exposed to a revision task without clear instructions and context, participants who had taken the course on revision and editing were significantly less categorical when providing post-treatment answers, even though this behavior was not reflected in their attitudes in the revision tasks. These findings invite further research into the attitudinal component of TRC.