In this paper I examine the position occupied by “the translator” in translation theory and practice. A synthesis of some general trends in translation theory is summed up before taking a closer look at the translator’s position in practice. Toury (1984) criticised translation theory for assigning the translator a rather parasitic position while intuitively it would seem to make more sense to assume him/her to occupy a rather central role in translation. Since then the translator has received more attention in translation studies. Functional translation theory puts a great deal of emphasis on the translator as the central decision-maker. Empirical studies into the translation process focus on the translator as the processor and producer of texts. Also, research on the sociology of translation concentrates on various aspects of translators’ work, thus highlighting their status. Meanwhile, the language industry, one of the largest employers of translators today, seems to be tempted to push the translator to the margins. Similar developments seem to affect the field of audio-visual translation as well. I will discuss these opposite trends and developments as well as their potential effects. The role of translation researchers and educators in analysing, reporting and influencing these developments will also be touched upon. Finally, more emphasis on translation political research is recommended.

A topical question in the study of bilingualism from a psycholinguistic perspective is how bilinguals manage to produce relatively pure monolingual language output when the communicative setting requires them to do so. Models that account for this behaviour assume subtle control processes that differentially activate and/or inhibit each of the two underlying language sub-systems and that inhibit – prior to articulation – output of the non-target language sub-system that might otherwise seep through. The control operations in simultaneous interpreting are likely to be even more complex due to the fact that this form of language behaviour demands that both of the interpreter’s language sub-systems are activated, but possibly to a different extent. In this paper we will discuss a number of views on bilingual language control in “monolingual” tasks and, especially, in simultaneous interpreting, which presumably is the cognitively most demanding “bilingual” task. A monolingual task (as we define it) is one where, in theory, the (bilingual) participants only have to address one of their language sub-systems and where, ideally, pure output is produced. A bilingual task is one where task performance requires that both language sub-systems are implicated. A number of studies suggest that the control exerted by bilinguals in monolingual and bilingual language tasks is effectuated by a more general cognitive system that takes care of the control of action in general. An attempt will be made to relate simultaneous interpreting to this more general theory of control.

Translation process research has been gaining momentum in recent years. One of the major research methodologies is Think-aloud Protocols (TAPs), with the aim of uncovering the “black box” (the mental activities) of translators. While most TAPs studies on the translation process have had research subjects translate alone and hence verbalise their thinking alone (i.e., monologue verbal reporting), there have also been studies designed in such a way where two research subjects translate together and hence verbalise their thinking together in their discussions (i.e., dialogue verbal reporting). For instance, both House (1988) and Matrat (1992) argued for joint verbal reporting based on their studies. However, others disagreed, pointing out, for example, that “joint translating does not provide access to the solitary translation process” (Jääskeläinen 2000: 78). We therefore would like to join the debate by investigating the perceptions of research subjects: what are their thoughts of the two modes of translating cum verbal reporting. For that purpose, we recently surveyed the research subjects’ views in this regard by administrating two questionnaires with them in our TAPs experiments, and found that: a) different students had different experiences and opinions about the two modes of translation; b) however, students had more positive experiences with joint translating than individual translating; and c) joint translating may be considered more conducive for participants, especially those from more reserved cultures, for instance some Asian countries, to speak out their thoughts. Based on these findings, implications for future TAPs studies are discussed.

This paper looks at the relationship between cognitive effort and contextual effect with respect to the interface between inferential processing, problem-solving and decision-making in translation, within a comprehensive framework of Relevance Theory, connectionist principles and competence-oriented researches of translation (CORT). It draws on the methodological notion of triangulation of previous researches to locate cognitive patterns related to the inferential behaviour of translators. Sample data from Spanish and Brazilian translators working from English into Spanish and Portuguese are examined, with concurrent use of different data elicitation procedures via Translog and retrospective protocols. The performance of novice and expert translators is assessed on the basis of cognitive rhythm, deliberate practice and the relationship between cognitive effort and contextual effect. The tentative outcome of the data analysis appears to support the amalgamation of procedural and conceptual encodings as constitutive instances of inferential processing. It also reveals aspects of a multi-level process mediated by the meta-representation that the translator has of both source and target texts. As a result, the relevance-theoretic approach to translation process seems able to account for how effort and effect may combine in a dynamic synergy to deal with the implicatures and explicatures of source texts and how this combination allows cognitive processing and textual rendering to take shape in different cognitive environments and ultimately in different target texts.

Horizontal translation is a cognitive process where the source text is trans-coded into the target text via memory without any conceptual mediation between the two texts. The ability to exploit trans-coding is considered the signature of a skilled interpreter/translator. However, it is unclear when exactly trans-coding may apply and whether it can apply to a whole grammatical construction. In this paper I investigate a situation where trans-coding appears to have applied to a whole grammatical construction when conceptual mediation between the source and the target representation is blocked by non-interpretable alien source concepts. I argue that such trans-coding at complete grammatical constructions is still memory-based, possibly via pattern-associated memory.

The strategy of foreignising translation is effective for curtailing interference or manipulation so as to allow the target reader to experience the original text somewhat “directly” in its “authentic” form. However, foreignisation is not unconditionally workable, given the constraints of the target language with its linguistic and cultural norms and conventions, which are directly related to the general acceptability of translations. For an eventual resolution of the age-old impasse of foreignisation versus domestication, I propose to introduce the concept of cultural diaspora, and suggest an alternative perception of translation activity, with a proper consideration of the historical and social circumstances of reception regarding translation and foreign otherness. Cultural diaspora in respect to translation means rethinking cultural identity and moving towards a diasporic register as a remedy for insufficient connections between the source and target texts by strategically relocating the cultural home of the target reader into a “third space”, which is supposed to be culturally neutral and thus provides a site for cultural hybridisation so as to avoid reducing the richness and complexity of the original in the created replica that represents not merely salient foreign features but also most of the essential qualities of the source text. Meanwhile, an otherwise utterly alien experience can be avoided, since the target reader will not be forced to abandon their homeland so as to avoid being estranged from their cultural tradition.

This paper is a reflection of the author’s experience in completing his recent publication entitled A Dictionary of Translation Technology. It is shown in this paper that the prevalence of information technology in the present age has brought about three major changes in the field of translation: the emergence of corpus-based translation studies, the coming of a technological turn in translation, and the creation of proactive translation studies. Corpora have provided a solid basis for scientific generalisations to be made, concepts formed, and methods created. The emergence of a technological turn in translation is supported by the growth of the discipline through a number of approaches and turns, by the organisation of conferences on computer translation, and by works on translation technology in the last decade. Looking ahead, proactive translation studies will be a major area of research for translation scholars as this prospective approach will prepare us better for the changes and transformation that will take place on a global scale in the near future. In the last section, Hong Kong is used as an example to illustrate how proactive translation studies in the academic and regional context can contribute to the continued growth of Hong Kong as an international city.

Translation studies as an academic discipline has traditionally devoted a good deal of research effort and output to literary translation. It can, however, be argued that the concentration on literary, religious and philosophical texts and their translation has been disproportionate, given that most professional translation activity involves texts that belong to scientific, technical and commercial domains. Moreover, it is undisputed that translation has had a crucial role in the production and distribution of scientific knowledge through cultures and times. Against that backdrop, this paper investigates the current position of scientific translation within translation studies. Drawing on existing research on scientific communication more generally, and considering both textual and socio-cultural aspects, the paper then proposes some research issues which may be addressed by scholars interested in scientific translation. A range of approaches, frameworks and methodologies may be adopted, depending on the focus of research, and it is argued that there is considerable scope for enhancement of our understanding of the role which translation plays in the dissemination of scientific knowledge.

South Africa is a country of much linguistic diversity. Her present and future require an appreciation of the people and their languages as well as an ability to communicate with them in those languages. For this purpose, the government and the private sector have started to provide a range of services to people in their own languages. The new situation seems to have put translation and interpreting on the pedestal. This paper thus discusses some factors that are in my view closely related to the need of translation and interpreting services in the country, including the country’s historical heritage, the hegemonic position of English, the new constitution, the people and their languages, education and migration. The implications of the paper’s perspectives are open to further scrutiny and discussion.