The Human Translator in The 2020s 1

THE HUMAN TRANSLATOR IN THE 2020s
Edited by Gary Massey, Elsa Huertas‐Barros, and David Katan

The IATIS Yearbook
THE HUMAN TRANSLATOR

IN THE 2020s
Edited by
Gary Massey, Elsa Huertas‐Barros,
and David Katan
an informa business
ISBN 978-1-032-11314-2
www.routledge.com
,!7IB0D2-bbdbec!
Routledge titles are available as eBook editions in a range of digital formats
The Human Translator in the 2020s
Has the language industry of the 21st century been racing ahead of the
translation profession and leaving translators behind? Or are translators
adapting to new sociotechnical realities and societal demands, and if so, how?
The chapters in this volume seek to shed light on the profiles and position of
human translators in the current decade.
This collection draws together the work of leading authors to reflect on the
constantly evolving language industry. The eight chapters present new perspectives
on, and concepts of, translation in a digital world. They highlight the shifts taking
place in the sociotechnical environment of translation and the need to address
changing buyer needs and market demands with new services, profiles and training.
In doing so, they share a common focus on the added value that human translators
can and do bring to bear as adaptive, creative, digitally literate experts.
Addressing an international readership, this volume is of interest to advanced
students and researchers in translation and interpreting studies, and professionals
in the global language industry.
Gary Massey is a Professor of Translation Studies, Director of the Institute of

Translation and Interpreting, and Deputy Dean of the School of Applied
Linguistics at the Zurich University of Applied Sciences. He has published
widely, and his research interests cover translator education, trainer training,
translator profiles and translation process research.
Elsa Huertas-Barros is a Senior Lecturer in Translation in the School of

Humanities at the University of Westminster. Her main research interests in
clude translator education, translator competence and assessment practices. She
has published her work in and with international journals and publishers and is
co-editor of The Interpreter and Translator Trainer (ITT).
David Katan is a Professor of English and Translation at the University of

Salento (Lecce), specialising in intercultural communication. He is editor of
Cultus. Publications include Translating Cultures (3rd edition), contributions for
the Routledge Encyclopaedias of Translation and Conflict and Translation and
Globalisation and for the Benjamins Handbook of Translation Studies.
The IATIS Yearbook
Series editor: Sabine Braun
The International Association for Translation and Intercultural Studies (IATIS) is a

worldwide forum designed to enable scholars from different regional and dis
ciplinary backgrounds to debate issues pertinent to translation and other forms of
intercultural communication.
The series aims to promote and disseminate innovative research, rigorous
scholarship and critical thinking in all areas of Translation Studies and inter
cultural communication.
Authorizing Translation
Edited by Michelle Woods
Human Issues in Translation Technology
Edited by Dorothy Kenny
Interpreting and the Politics of Recognition
Edited by Christopher Stone and Lorraine Leeson
Innovation in Audio Description Research
Edited by Sabine Braun and Kim Starr
Multilingual Mediated Communication and Cognition
Edited by Ricardo Muñoz Martín and Sandra L. Halverson
Exploring the Implications of Complexity Thinking for Translation Studies
Edited by Kobus Marais and Reine Meylaerts
The Human Translator in the 2020s
Edited by Gary Massey, Elsa Huertas-Barros and David Katan
For more information or to order, please go to https://www.routledge.com/The-
IATIS-Yearbook/book-series/IATIS
The Human Translator in
the 2020s
Edited by Gary Massey,

Elsa Huertas‐Barros, and
David Katan
First published 2023
by Routledge
4 Park Square, Milton Park, Abingdon, Oxon OX14 4RN
and by Routledge
605 Third Avenue, New York, NY 10158
Routledge is an imprint of the Taylor & Francis Group, an informa business
© 2023 selection and editorial matter, Gary Massey, Elsa Huertas-Barros
and David Katan; individual chapters, the contributors
The right of Gary Massey, Elsa Huertas-Barros and David Katan to
be identified as the authors of the editorial material, and of the authors
for their individual chapters, has been asserted in accordance with
sections 77 and 78 of the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988.
All rights reserved. No part of this book may be reprinted or
reproduced or utilised in any form or by any electronic, mechanical, or
other means, now known or hereafter invented, including
photocopying and recording, or in any information storage or retrieval
system, without permission in writing from the publishers.
Trademark notice: Product or corporate names may be trademarks or
registered trademarks, and are used only for identification and
explanation without intent to infringe.
British Library Cataloguing-in-Publication Data
A catalogue record for this book is available from the British Library
Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data
Names: Massey, Gary, editor. | Huertas-Barros, Elsa, 1984- editor. |
Katan, David, editor. | EST Congress (9th : 2019 : Stellenbosch, South
Africa)
Title: The human translator in the 2020s / edited by Gary Massey, Elsa
Huertas, David Katan.
Description: Abingdon, Oxon ; New York, NY : Routledge, 2023. |
Series: IATIS yearbook | This volume originated from the panel on
Living Translation in Transition: The Human Translator in the Next
Decade, which took place at the 9th EST Congress: Living Translation -
People, Processes, Products in Stellenbosch, South Africa, on 12
September 2019. | Includes bibliographical references and index.
Identifiers: LCCN 2022027841 | ISBN 9781032113142 (hardback) |
ISBN 9781032121574 (paperback) | ISBN 9781003223344 (ebook)
Subjects: LCSH: Translating and interpreting--Technological
innovations--Congresses. | Translators--Training of--Congresses. |
LCGFT: Conference papers and proceedings.
Classification: LCC P306.97.T73 H86 2023 | DDC 418/.02--dc23/eng/
20220824
LC record available at https://lccn.loc.gov/2022027841
ISBN: 978-1-032-11314-2 (hbk)
ISBN: 978-1-032-12157-4 (pbk)
ISBN: 978-1-003-22334-4 (ebk)
DOI: 10.4324/9781003223344
Typeset in Times New Roman

by MPS Limited, Dehradun
Contents
List of Contributors vii

Acknowledgements ix
The human translator in the 2020s: An introduction 1

GA RY MA SSE Y , E L SA H U E R TAS - B AR RO S , AND DA VID KA T AN
1 Translation’s new high-tech clothes 11

FÉL IX DO CA R M O A N D JO S S MO OR K E NS
2 Teaching translation technologies: An analysis of

a corpus of syllabi for translation and interpreting
undergraduate degrees in Spain 27
R OSER SÁ NCHE Z -C A S TA N Y
3 Translation, translation revision and post-editing

competence models: Where are we now? 44
ISA BELLE R O BER T, J I M J. J. U REE L, A ND I RIS SC HRIJVE R
4 Weaving adaptive expertise into translator training 60

ER IK A NGE LON E
5 Tools for transforming translators into homo narrans

or “what machines can’t do” 74
DA VID KA TAN
6 “Expanding” or “rebranding” the translation concept?

A pedagogical approach to future-proofing the
translation profession in the 2020s 91
JULIE T VI NE A ND EL S A H U E RTA S - BA RR OS
vi Contents
7 Creativity as an added value in translators’ training:
Learning through transcreation 108
M AR IÁN M O R Ó N
8 The translator as a plain text designer for the Public

Administration: A necessary role? 125
ELE NA RUI Z- CO RT É S
Index 146
Contributors
Erik Angelone is an Associate Professor of Translation Studies at Kent State

University. His research interests include process-oriented translator
training and assessment, translation pedagogy and language industry
studies. He recently co-edited the volume Bloomsbury Companion to
Language Industry Studies (2020) with Maureen Ehrensberger-Dow and
Gary Massey.
Félix do Carmo is a Senior Lecturer at the Centre for Translation Studies of
the University of Surrey. He worked for more than 20 years in Porto,
Portugal, as a translator, translation company owner and university
lecturer, and he was awarded a post-doctoral research fellowship to work
at Dublin City University.
Joss Moorkens is an Associate Professor at Dublin City University affiliated
with the ADAPT Centre and Centre for Translation and Textual Studies.
He is a board member of the European Masters in Translation network,
General Co-editor of Translation Spaces, and has written about
translation technology, translator precarity and translation ethics.
Marián Morón is a Full-time Translation Lecturer at the University Pablo de
Olavide in Seville. She is an active researcher with publications in the
most relevant journals in the field. Her main research areas are specialised
translation and, more recently, transcreation, translator training and
employability.
Isabelle S. Robert is a Senior Lecturer at the Department of Applied
Linguistics, Translators and Interpreters at the University of Antwerp.
Her main research interests are translation revision process and competence,
live subtitling, sight translation and simultaneous interpreting with text. She
is the Chief Editor of LANS–TTS and Treasurer and Executive Board
member of the EST.
Elena Ruiz-Cortés (PhD, FHEA) is a Lecturer in Translation at the
University of Granada and a researcher of the AVANTI Research
Group. She is accredited as a Sworn Translator and Interpreter of
viii Contributors
Spanish-English and her main research interests lie in the fields of legal
translation, public service translation and translator training.
Roser Sánchez-Castany is an Associate Professor of Translation Technologies
at the Universitat Jaume I. She is an active member of the research group
GENTT (Textual Genres for Translation) and her main areas of research
are the technologies applied to translation and medico-legal textual genres.
She has also worked as a freelance translator and proofreader since 2012.
Iris Schrijver is a Tenure Track Lecturer at the Department of Applied
Linguistics/Translators & Interpreters at the University of Antwerp,
where she teaches undergraduate and graduate courses on Spanish-
Dutch translation and Translation Studies. She is specialised in
cognitive translation and writing process research, translation
competence acquisition and interlingual (live) subtitling.
Jim Ureel is a Lecturer of Applied Linguistics, Translation Studies and
English at the University of Antwerp. His main research interests include
EFL/ESL, L2 sociolinguistics, translation (revision) and cognitive load
theory in L2 instruction. His current research focuses on the acquisition,
teaching and assessment of linguistic formality in specialised instructional
settings.
Juliet Vine is a Senior Lecturer in Translation and Interpreting at the
University of Westminster. Her research interests include pedagogical
research, with a focus on translator competence and assessment practices.
She has published book chapters in edited volumes and co-edited the ITT
special issue 12(1) on New Perspectives in Assessment in Translator
Training (2018).
Acknowledgements
We would like to thank the series editor, Sabine Braun, and the following
reviewers for providing us and our authors with their expert feedback and
suggestions:
Alejandro Bolanos-García-Escribano
Dragos Ciobanu
Eleanor Cornelius
Christophe Declercq
Maureen Ehrensberger-Dow
Viviana Gaballo
Kaisa Koskinen
Ralph Krüger
Joseph Lambert
Caroline Lehr
Harold Lesch
Brian Mossop
Jean Nitzke
David Orrego-Carmona
Akiko Sakamoto
Boguslawa Whyatt
This volume would have been impossible without their invaluable assistance.
The human translator in the 2020s:
An introduction
Gary Massey, Elsa Huertas Barros, and
David Katan
The original motivation behind the present volume grew out of the suc-
cessful panel on Living Translation in Transition: The Human Translator in
the Next Decade, which took place at the EST Congress 2019: Living
Translation – People, Processes, Products in Stellenbosch, South Africa, on
12 September 2019. The panel was convened by the editors of this volume
and featured contributions by several of the authors who appear here: Félix
do Carmo, Elsa Huertas Barros, David Katan, Joss Moorkens, Isabelle
Robert, Iris Schrijver and Juliet Vine.
This century, the translation profession has been characterised by increas-
ingly diverse jobs, roles and tasks. Gouadec (2010, p. 123) talked some time
ago about re-defining the translator, using the term “multilingual multimedia
communication engineering” to encompass the work which they, in his
experience, were doing upstream and downstream of the core services
traditionally associated with translation per se (Gouadec, 2010, p. 105).
The panel was thus partly conceived in response to the observable shifts in
buyer intentions, demand structures and workflows in the language in-
dustry, and to their resultant effects on the position and roles of human
translators within the sociotechnical environments where they perform
their tasks. However, it was equally intended to address the concerns,
increasingly voiced by many independent translators, in particular, that
technological advances were threatening the very existence of the profes-
sion, at least in its established form. The most recent European Language
Industry Survey (ELIS Research, 2022) confirms how such perceptions
persist to this day. Over 70% of independent language professionals report
using neural machine translation (NMT) but, unlike the 65% of language
industry respondents who see the improved quality of NMT as an op-
portunity, only 35% of independent language professionals share this view,
with 41% feeling threatened (ELIS Research, 2022, p. 25). The fears are
likely to be exacerbated by isolated claims by machine translation (MT)
advocates inside the industry that the days of the human translator in the
translation process are numbered (e.g., van der Meer, 2021, p. 54).
In short, the panel set out to consider the need to reposition – and perhaps
redefine – human translation in the face of digitalisation, evolving socio-ethical
DOI: 10.4324/9781003223344-1
2 Gary Massey et al.
requirements and demographic change. It is something of a truism to say that
the digital transformation of organisations and communities, the demands for
inclusive access to information, and the demographic developments engendered
by globalisation and driven by mounting socio-economic, socio-political
and environmental crises are profoundly affecting the way our societies
and economies function – with concomitant ramifications for the trans-
lation profession and other forms of language mediation.
First and foremost, accelerating technological developments, especially
artificial intelligence, are reshaping the way translators work, fundamentally
changing processes, tasking and practices in the language industry. A prime
example is the way that the advance of MT into the routine cognitive
work hitherto done by human translators has increased demand for MT
post-editing (PEMT) and related technology-led skills (see, for instance, the
chapters in this volume by Félix do Carmo and Joss Moorkens, Roser
Sánchez-Castany and Isabelle Robert, Jim J. J. Ureel and Iris Schrijver).
The Slator 2022 Language Industry Market Report (2022, p. 82) is able to
state that the PEMT workflow is “now firmly embedded across the industry
as the default workflow”. This presents its own kind of challenge to the
industry and its professionals:
Access to high-quality MT is no longer a differentiator between LSPs

[language service providers]. A competitive edge in the market, then,
comes from how effectively LSPs can complete the last mile – the gap
between MT output and enterprise/end-user-grade translation quality.
A key aspect of this dynamic is that, as the size of the gap [between
human and MT output] shrinks, the sophistication required to close the
gap increases.
(Slator, 2022, p. 82)
Identifying the specific features of human expertise needed for PEMT, and
finding ways of developing and implementing it effectively, is of paramount
importance. It is therefore no coincidence that PEMT has been fully and
explicitly integrated into translation competence models (e.g., EMT Board,
2017), has its own dedicated international standard (ISO 18587, 2017, pp. 6–8)
and is the subject of competence modelling in its own right (e.g., Nitzke et al.,
2019, pp. 247–252; Nitzke & Hansen-Schirra, 2021, pp. 69–79).
At the same time, however, the changes taking place in the industry are
also creating spaces for adaptive experts (Holyoak, 1991; Shreve, 2020)
capable of identifying, delivering and advising on the added value of
translation and language service provision beyond the scope of automation
(see, for example, David Katan’s chapter in this volume for a proposal to
nurture added value by becoming a homo narrans translator). Demographic
developments and socio-ethical requirements to provide inclusive, user-
centred access to information and services are also extending the media-
tory roles and responsibilities expected of human translators, supported by
Introduction 3
assistive technologies, in a growing variety of contexts. An example of the
new services and adaptive experts’ roles required by the current language
industry can be seen, for instance, in the chapter by Elena Ruiz-Cortés in
the present volume.
Reviews of current job positions in the language industry demonstrate a
proliferation of job titles and responsibilities over the past few years. The
600 job titles identified by Bond (2018), for instance, had grown to 700 some
two years later (Slator, 2020). Powered by evolving digital resources and
socio-ethical demands, the roles and responsibilities associated with these
new and emerging profiles are rapidly and comprehensively transcending
the traditional bounds of core activities and competences associated
with translation and interpreting, the two key prototypes of language med-
iation. Their diversity is reflected in two recently published handbooks,
The Bloomsbury Companion to Language Industry Studies (Angelone
et al., 2020) and The Routledge Handbook of Translation and Technology
(O‘Hagan, 2020). Localisation, transcreation, multimodal and audiovisual
translation, user-centred translation, accessible barrier-free communication,
revision, pre-editing, post-editing, terminological services, linguistic inter-
cultural mediation, public service translation, language and communication
consultancy are just some of the areas in which the professional group which
we (still) refer to as translators and interpreters work. A major spur can be
found in the way the industry seems to be progressively expanding upstream
(i.e., towards multilingual content creation) and downstream (e.g., towards
compliance, access and accessibility, content, data and quality management,
production, publication and distribution) of hitherto core translation, loca-
lisation and interpreting services.
As translation and other language mediation professions diversify beyond
their core areas of activity, a certain convergence with adjacent professions
also appears to be taking place. This, in turn, is yielding new interprofessional
forms and fields of work with their own distinct orientations and skopoi.
For example, the growing interfaces between translation, technical writing
and accessible communication are augmenting the need for translation to
be deployed in order to enhance user experience, on the one hand, and to
foster social inclusion, on the other. Moreover, those offering language and
translation services are increasingly regarded as strategic partners (van der
Meer, 2020, p. 288; Hickey & Agulló García, 2021). This in turn highlights the
strategic value and agency of language and translation experts that have been
identified in research on SMEs’ and other organisations’ language, translation
and communications needs (Schäffner, 2020, p. 77; Kuznik, 2016; Massey &
Wieder, 2019), though research focusing on organisational and corporate
communications in Switzerland shows that the potential value of that agency
remains in large part untapped (Massey & Wieder, 2019; Massey, 2021a). The
potential role of translators at the strategic level of the organisations they
work for adds a further layer of complexity to the flexibility, adaptivity and
hard skill-sets demanded of professionals in a diversifying language industry.
The form that these take depends very much on the development of
market segments, verticals (i.e., the particular sectors in which buyers offer
their goods and services such as finance, life sciences or technology) and
buyer intentions. Massey and Ehrensberger-Dow (2017) have predicted a
growing shift in demand for human translation and other forms of language
mediation at the higher end of the market towards the added value of (trans-)
creativity as part of upstream service provision, and of risk management and
ethical awareness in handling client requests and data further downstream of
core translation work. The chapters in the current volume by Erik Angelone,
Juliet Vine and Elsa Huertas Barros and Marián Morón, in particular, suggest
ways in which adaptive expertise can be embedded successfully in translator
education and approaches to future-proofing the translation profession, for
instance, exploring what it is meant by creativity in translator training cur-
ricula using transcreation as an example. Massey and Ehrensberger-Dow
(2017) themselves build on insights from Katan’s (2016, pp. 377–378) con-
clusion that, in order to compete with machines and cheaper paraprofessional
or volunteer amateur translators, trained professional translators must “take
advantage of an already assigned professional recognition of their creative
role […] and make the transcreational turn”. Others stress the increasing need
for domain expertise (e.g., Schmitt, 2019; Slator, 2022). In all cases, however,
the prerequisite is consistent professional quality. It is this that prompts
Schmitt (2019, pp. 206–208) to maintain that only untrained translators de-
livering poor-quality work will be forced out of the market.
Schmitt’s point, however, is open to substantial debate, as the concerns over
price pressures recently expressed by a large proportion of independent lan-
guage professionals in Europe amply demonstrate. The 2022 European
Language Industry Survey (ELIS Research, 2022) shows 77% of them to be
worried by pricing, 66% to be “wary about the economic climate” and 54% to
consider MT and machine interpreting (MI) stress factors (ELIS Research,
2022, p. 12). Indeed, 32% of independent professional respondents in Europe
report that they need to supplement their freelance income with another ac-
tivity (ELIS Research, 2022, p. 30), and compensation for PEMT services
remains a serious bone of contention, with a switch to fairer hourly rates
unlikely to occur in the near future (ELIS Research, 2022, p. 26). On the other
hand, the 68% who report that they do earn enough as freelancers show a
distinct improvement of the financial situation of independent language
professionals in 2022 over the previous year (ELIS Research, 2022, p. 32).
In such a dynamic climate of sociotechnical developments, diversifying
job prospects and divergent perspectives, there are self-evident consequences
for those charged with training and educating professional language med-
iators. To remain relevant and market-oriented, translator education must
develop the role-flexibility, adaptive expertise and ability to deliver strategic
added value if graduates are to measure up to changing real-world needs.
Some examples in which adaptive expertise and creativity can be embedded
Introduction 5
into translator education are discussed, for instance, in Erik Angelone’s and
Marián Morón’s chapters in this volume.
A 2018 survey carried out for CIUTI (Massey, 2021b, pp. 113–115) on
current and future challenges to translation and interpreting graduates
showed the greatest perceived challenges of the future, after pricing and
income pressures, competition from abroad and under-qualified competi-
tors, to be technological advances, the range of competences graduates must
possess, the diversity of contexts in which they work and the spectrum of
roles they have to adopt. Unsurprisingly, the technological challenges that
were named focused on NMT, PEMT and MT literacy, while the need for
“softer” evaluative skills, adaptivity, creativity, consultancy and manage-
ment skills was explicitly stressed – which is in keeping with the increased
weight given to personal, interpersonal and service provision competences
by recent translation and PEMT competence models (e.g., EMT Board,
2017; Nitzke et al., 2019). The broadening portfolios of LSPs were also
referred to by the respondents, as was the need to work in more diverse
professional and interprofessional contexts – including the community and
humanitarian settings that have proliferated as a result of migration-related
demographic developments and that have been hitherto dominated by
paraprofessional language mediators with limited or no training. The roles
that were explicitly mentioned in the survey went from data scientist,
computer linguist and MT evaluator to intercultural mediator and language
consultant.
In essence, the dynamism and expansion of the language industry would
seem to augur well for those working within it, at least from the macro-
perspective of the industry itself. The latest Slator Language Industry Market
Report (Slator, 2022, pp. 5–6) puts the size of the global language services
and technology industry in 2021 at USD 26.6 billion, a growth in market
size of 11.75% compared to the previous year. Its base scenario for future
growth stands at 6.0% year-on-year, while the optimistic scenario estimates
as much as 7.5% year-on-year growth by the end of 2026. Nimdzi (Hickey,
2022), whose estimates include a number of ancillary services excluded by
Slator, such as interlingual accessible communication and language training,
puts the industry’s value at USD 60.5 billion in 2021, a 10% increase
compared to 2020, and predicts a compound annual growth rate (CAGR) of
7% up to 2026 – though, as we have already mentioned, translators them-
selves have not necessarily profited.
By any measure we choose to apply, the industry itself therefore seems to be
in the best of health. It would also appear to continue to depend on the expert
language mediators that provide its services, if the testimonies of those inside
the industry are anything to go by. MT systems are making language pro-
fessionals more productive than ever, and the “human-in-the-loop will always
remain the most important link in the chain” (Way, 2020, p. 326). As van der
Meer (2020, p. 308) puts it, the role of language mediators is simply evolving,
as it has always done, through technology. Yet, we have already had evidence
that the translators themselves regard things rather differently. Moreover,
predictions within the industry can also vary over time and according to the
time horizon under consideration. In a later contribution, for example, van
der Meer (2021, p. 54) writes of the 2030s that, however “impressive the
journey has been so far, nothing compares to what is still to come: the
singularity. In this new phase, technology essentially takes over com-
pletely. The human translator is no longer needed in the process”. Such
categorical statements do nothing to lessen the alarm felt by the transla-
tion profession – and they require considerable qualification. Despite the
widespread implementation of MT among Europe-based language com-
panies (58%, with 20% planning to do so), independent language profes-
sionals (70%) and language services in international public agencies and
private enterprises (90%) polled by ELIS, actual usage is much lower:
language companies state that only 22% currently use MT to execute their
projects (30% of total project value when weighted to company size) and
independent professionals report a 23% usage.
This would suggest that human translators retain a major role. But will
they be equipped to meet the challenges of a growing, changing, diversifying
language industry? Past research on status and self-concept (Katan, 2011,
2016; Massey & Wieder, 2019) indicates that some may not be. It suggests
that competence profiles, role awareness and the education that shapes them
should better accommodate the added value of adaptive human translation
expertise to serve the broadening needs of a transitioning industry, and it
squares with recent concerns raised within the industry about that growing
challenge of talent recruitment (e.g., ELIS Research, 2022, p. 12).
The present volume serves to explore the extent to which these differing
perspectives on the situation of human translators hold true in the evolving
language industry of the 2020s. Is the industry racing ahead of the translation
profession and leaving translators behind? Or are what until now have been
called “translators” adapting to new sociotechnical realities and societal de-
mands, and if so, how? Although the jury is clearly still out on the future of the
translation profession, the chapters collected together here seek to shed some
light on the profiles and position of human translators in the current decade.
The eight contributions contained in this volume revolve around new per-
spectives on, and concepts of, translation in a digital world as well as new roles
for human translators, and how institutions can educate for them.
In Chapter 1, Félix do Carmo and Joss Moorkens reflect on the present
and future of Translation Studies following the incorporation of terms and
perspectives from industrial technology discourses and practices into the
discipline. The authors look at the environment surrounding translation,
with an emphasis on the wide-scale changes or disruption that intelligent
technologies have brought to translation. In the light of this analysis, the
authors propose a definition of translation that has as its core the notions of
efficiency, adaptability and effectiveness to help understand the process of
transformation of translation over time.
Introduction 7
In Chapter 2, Roser Sánchez Castany examines the current status of
translation technologies training in translation and interpreting (T&I) curri-
cula in undergraduate degrees in Spain. The author’s analysis is supported
with a mixed-methods approach involving both a qualitative and quantitative
analysis of 994 syllabi of translation modules included in 32 T&I under-
graduate curricula in Spain. The study reveals that, while technology-based
modules often include comprehensive technology-related content addressing
the current professional needs of a translator, there is no apparent integration
of such content into the practical translation modules in line with the rapid
changes occurring in the translation industry over the past decade. This re-
search may help build bridges between academia and professional practice in
order to refine content design for translation education.
In Chapter 3, Isabelle Robert, Jim J. J. Ureel and Iris Schrijver provide a
state-of-the-art review of translation competence (TC), translation revision
competence (TRC) and post-editing competence (PEC) models, analysing
their similarities and differences in the light of recent research on revision and
PE training. The authors support the hypothesis that TC, TRC and PEC are
different but share common ground. Based on Pym’s (2003) minimalist defi-
nition of TC, the authors argue that the main difference between TC and TRC
is that the former mainly involves the ability to generate a series of more than
one viable translation by selecting only one viable translation from this series
with confidence. The authors claim that since a translation already exists in
TR, then translation generation and selection are not required. According to
the authors, the same applies to PE, with the exception that translations are
produced by machines and not by human translators.
In response to the profound changes in the languages industry, including
technological advancement and the diversification of translators’ roles and
responsibilities, Erik Angelone advocates for a paradigm shift that embraces
adaptive expertise in translation education in Chapter 4. The author ex-
plores ways in which adaptive expertise can be intertwined with the existing
TC models and proposes a set of learning activities aiming at fostering its
acquisition.
Stressing creativity and the uniquely human ability to narrate, David
Katan proposes, in Chapter 5, reconceptualising the role of the translator
within the context of a translator as an adaptive expert and suggests a way
to nurture this added value by becoming a homo narrans translator. The
author argues that, while machines may be able to translate text from one
language to another successfully, what distinguishes the human from the
machine is the ability to create texts meaningful for a particular readership
in a particular moment. The author’s approach builds upon some of the
more relevant aspects of narrativity in combination with the mindful use of
the Metamodel (cf. Bandler & Grinder, 1975; Katan & Taibi, 2021) in order
to make the narrative more explicit.
In Chapter 6, Juliet Vine and Elsa Huertas Barros propose a pedagogical
approach to future-proofing the translation profession in the 2020s. The
authors argue that the increasing portfolio of interlingual communication
tasks required from translators in response to the new demands of the
globalised world can be conceptualised as requiring either a “rebranding” or
an “expanding” of the translation concept. The authors contend that while
rebranding translation with other terms undervalues it, leading to a narrow
understanding of the translation process, the “expanded” translation con-
cept approach offers an opportunity to understand these emerging profiles
and tasks as part of the translation process. The authors’ survey of pro-
fessional translator, translator trainer and student perceptions of translation
and creativity supports these arguments.
Using a descriptive approach, Marián Morón, in Chapter 7, showcases a
training initiative involving the implementation of a transcreation project
(the TeCreaTe project) at undergraduate level. The author goes on to
analyse the implications of embedding transcreation, creativity and creative
training in translator education as an added-value service to be offered in
the language industry. The author also contends that translation creativity
should be a core element in the training of transcreators specifically, and
translators in general, and that it creates a positive atmosphere among those
involved in the training process. According to Morón, the TeCreaTe project
has broadened students’ understanding of creative techniques for translation
and how these may differ from traditional translation techniques.
The final chapter, Chapter 8, sheds light on one of the new services and
adaptive expert roles required by the current language industry, that of the
plain text designer for the Public Administration. The author, Elena Ruiz-
Cortés, argues that translators’ skill-sets equip them with the necessary skills
to be able to carry out this new role/service. Using administrative forms as a
case study, the author proposes a methodology to enable translators to fulfil
the role of plain text designer (in terms of both the source and the target
text) in the administrative sphere. According to Ruiz-Cortés, being able to
provide this service is an added value of human translators which machines
are not able to provide.
The various contributions in this volume encompass and reflect the
evolving language industry itself. They highlight the shifts taking place in the
sociotechnical environment of translation and the need to address changing
buyer needs and market demands with new services, profiles and training. In
doing so, they share a common focus on the added value that human
translators can and do bring to bear as adaptive, creative, digitally literate
experts.
References
Angelone, E., Ehrensberger-Dow, M., & Massey, G. (Eds.) (2020). The Bloomsbury
companion to language industry studies. Bloomsbury. 10.5040/9781350024960
Bandler, R., & Grinder, J. (1975). The structure of magic: A book about language and
therapy. (Vol. 1). Science and Behavior Books.
Introduction 9
Bond, E. (2018, June 1). The stunning variety of job titles in the language industry.
Slator news. https://slator.com/features/the-stunning-variety-of-job-titles-in-the-
language-industry/
ELIS Research. (2022). European language industry survey 2022: Trends, expectations
and concerns of the European language industry. https://ec.europa.eu/info/sites/
default/files/about_the_european_commission/service_standards_and_principles/
documents/elis2022-report.pdf
EMT Board. (2017). European master’s in translation. Competence framework 2017.
European Commission. https://ec.europa.eu/info/sites/info/files/emt_competence_
fwk_2017_en_web.pdf
Gouadec, D. (2010). Translation as a profession (Rev. ed.). John Benjamins.
Hickey, S. (2022, February 24). The 2022 Nimdzi 100. https://www.nimdzi.com/
nimdzi-100-top-lsp/
Hickey, S. & Agulló García, B. (2021). The 2021 Nimdzi 100. https://www.nimdzi.
com/nimdzi-100–2021/
Holyoak, K. J. (1991). Symbolic connectionism: Toward third-generation theories of
expertise. In K. A. Ericsson & J. Smith (Eds.), Toward a general theory of ex-
pertise: Prospects and limits (pp. 301–335). Cambridge University Press.
ISO 18587. (2017). Translation services – post-editing of machine translation output –
requirements. International Organization for Standardization.
Katan, D. (2011). Occupation or profession: A survey of the translators’ world. In
R. Sela-Sheffy & M. Shlesinger (Eds.), Profession, identity and status: Translators
and interpreters as an occupational group (pp. 65–88). John Benjamins. 10.1075/
bct.32.06kat
Katan, D. (2016). Translation at the cross-roads: Time for the transcreational turn?
Perspectives, 24(3), 365–381. 10.1080/0907676X.2015.1016049
Katan, D. & Taibi, M. (2021). Translating cultures: An introduction for translators,
interpreters and mediators (3rd ed.). Routledge. 10.4324/9781003178170
Kuznik, A. (2016). Work content of in-house translators in small and medium-sized
industrial enterprises. Observing real work situations. Journal of Specialised
Translation, 25, 213–231. https://www.jostrans.org/issue25/art_kuznik.pdf
Massey, G. (2021a). Exploring and expanding the plus of translator’s power:
Translatorial agency and the communicative constitution of organizations (CCO).
Cultus. The Journal of Intercultural Mediation and Communication, 14, 62–82.
https://www.cultusjournal.com/files/Archives/Cultus_202114.pdf
Massey, G. (2021b). Learning to bridge the divide: Integrating teacher and organi-
zational development in translator education. Journal of Translation Studies, 1,
109–140. 10.3726/JTS012021.7
Massey, G. & Ehrensberger-Dow, M. (2017). Machine learning: Implications for
translator education. Lebende Sprachen, 62(2), 300–312. 10.1515/les-2017-002intro1
Massey, G., & Wieder, R. (2019). Quality assurance in translation and corporate
communications: Exploring an interdisciplinary interface. In E. Huertas Barros,
S. Vandepitte, & E. Iglesias Fernández (Eds.), Quality assurance and assessment
practices in translation and interpreting (pp. 57–87). IGI Global. 2019. 10.4018/
978-1-5225-5225-3.ch003
Nitzke, J., & Hansen-Schirra, S. (2021). A short guide to post-editing (Translation and
Multilingual Natural Language Processing 16). Language Science Press. 10.5281/
zenodo.5646896
Nitzke, J., Hansen-Schirra, S., & Canfora C. (2019). Risk management and post-
editing competence. The Journal of Specialised Translation, 31, 239–259. https://
www.jostrans.org/issue31/art_nitzke.pdf
O‘Hagan, M. (Ed.) (2020). The Routledge handbook of translation and technology.
Routledge. 10.4324/9781315311258
Pym, A. (2003). Redefining translation competence in an electronic age. In defence of
a minimalist approach. Meta, 48(4), 481–497.10.7202/008533ar
Schäffner, C. (2020). Translators’ roles and responsibilities. In E. Angelone,
M. Ehrensberger-Dow, & G. Massey (Eds.), The Bloomsbury companion to
language industry studies (pp. 63–89). Bloomsbury. 10.5040/9781350024960.0008
Schmitt, P. A. (2019). Translation 4.0 – evolution, revolution, innovation or dis-
ruption? Lebende Sprachen, 64(2), 193–229. 10.1515/les-2019-0013
Shreve, G. M. (2020). Professional translator development from an expertise per-
spective. In E. Angelone, M. Ehrensberger-Dow, & G. Massey (Eds.), The
Bloomsbury companion to language industry studies (pp. 153–178). Bloomsbury.
10.5040/9781350024960.0012
Slator. (2020). Slator 2020 language industry market report. https://slator.com/slator-
2020-language-industry-market-report/
Slator. (2022). Slator 2022 language industry market report. https://slator.com/slator-
2022-language-industry-market-report/
van der Meer, J. (2020). Translation technology – past, present and future. In
E. Angelone, M. Ehrensberger-Dow, & G. Massey (Eds.), The Bloomsbury
companion to language industry studies (pp. 285–310). Bloomsbury. 10.5040/
9781350024960
van der Meer, J. (2021). Translation economics of the 2020s. Multilingual, 34(4),
52–61. https://multilingual.com/issues/translation-economics-of-the-2020s/
Way, A. (2020). Machine translation: Where are we today? In E. Angelone,
M. Ehrensberger-Dow, & G. Massey (Eds.), The Bloomsbury companion to lan-
guage industry studies (pp. 311–332). Bloomsbury. 10.5040/9781350024960.0018
1 Translation’s new high-tech clothes
Félix do Carmo and Joss Moorkens
Who makes translation what it is?

Let us start with a simple definition of translation, which encompasses the
activities historically known as such. Translation exists when two people who
do not share a language are helped to communicate by a third person who
knows the languages of both. The communication event may be oral or
written, the translation may be synchronous or asynchronous, it may involve
more than one person on either side, and a team of people translating; and
so the method, purpose and effect of the mediation role played by the
translator(s) can vary. This is a definition that may be discussed in terms of its
scientific rigour, but it describes what is essential in the process we know as
translation, without any of the extra layers that we may put on top to ac-
commodate new realities.
These extra layers can be viewed as pieces of clothing that play different
roles and enable different readings for those that see them. Work uniforms
provide fundamental identification clues for certain professions, they help
signal who is responsible for providing a service or for supporting a client,
and act as lines that separate professionals from non-professionals. Other
pieces of garment may bring with them additional responsibilities, as the
crown, associated with the responsibility to look after others, portrayed in
the moment Shakespeare’s Henry IV proclaims that “uneasy is the head that
wears the crown”. In fact, the well-known folktale “The emperor’s new
clothes”, originally written by Hans Christian Andersen in 1837, is an al-
legory that sums up how we can be led into logical fallacies, believing that
external layers create a new reality which is only too transparent, or even
inexistent, when you observe it with critical and analytical eyes. Robes can
thus help or confound observers of a complex reality.
The changes we see in all professions, strongly determined by the increased
technologisation associated with them, are usually described in a hyped dis-
course that engenders new and loaded meanings, playing this double role of
definers and confounders to the understanding, by both practitioners and
observers, of what lies at the core of those professions. This chapter analyses
DOI: 10.4324/9781003223344-2
12 Félix do Carmo and Joss Moorkens
some of the factors that come into play in the production and interpretation of
the technological and economic robes of translation.
The most natural answer to the question in the title of this section might
be: translators make translation what it is, since what they make and do is
called translation. However, there are other voices that shape translation,
namely the industry which provides it as a service and sells it as a product
and the academic discipline that studies it.
Translation cannot be understood in the 2020s outside of the context of a
globalised world, served by an industry that has evolved to enable commu-
nication across multiple languages and locations, aiming at ubiquity and
permanence. The evolution of this industry has been empowered by tech-
nology. The launch in the 1990s of the first commercial databases of trans-
lations, known as translation memories, was translation’s first industrial
revolution. The industry stretched around the world with the arrival of the
internet, and reached the peak of its promise to “break down language bar-
riers” (Lewis, 2015, p. 1) with the establishment of machine translation (MT)
as having achieved a level of quality, which was classified as “fully-automatic
useful translation (FAUT)” (Nurminen, 2018, para. 2).
The translation industry is perhaps the main producer of modern public
discourse about translation. On the web (the natural place to look for
knowledge in the present) the first results from a search for “translation” in
a search engine such as Google are either related to the provision of services
by the industry (including in promoted paid adverts), or they refer to MT.
The business model of search engines reflects the political and economic
dimensions of MT and technology in general: large technology companies
such as Google have invested heavily in artificial intelligence (AI), of which
MT is one of the most visible and widely used examples, and are thus
motivated to promote it (Larsonneur, 2019). The discourses propagated by
the industry, in its own wide-reaching events, media and news outlets, are
unanimously techno-positivist. This is reflected in the perceptions of users
of MT, who are mostly unaware of the risks of using such technology
(Bowker & Buitrago Ciro, 2019; Canfora & Ottmann, 2020; Vieira, 2020).
Demands for effective automation (which is assumed to yield productivity
and profitability gains) have attached the notion that there is a direct cor-
relation between investment in technology and commercial value. In other
words, the perception of the value of a business has shifted: it is no longer in
what it produces, but in the degree of automation it applies and the degree
of “intelligence” of the technology it uses. This perception has natural effects
along supply chains. Recognition of the value of what is produced should be
reflected in a constant update of the market value (the price) of the products
and services of an industry. What we see in the translation industry instead
is a constant degrading of the value of translated words, as can be testified
by the confirmation from official sources that the average price of transla-
tion has not changed in the last 30 years (do Carmo, 2020). This is both a
consequence and a cause of the lack of investment in the words that the
Translation’s new high-tech clothes 13
industry produces and sells. Since what is produced at translators’ desktops
(the coalface or shopfloor of the translation industry) has a stationary
commercial value, it cannot sustain the business growth required in a
competitive global market.
The General Theory of the Translation Company (Beninatto & Johnson,
2017) is a testament to this view. The book is based on Keynesian economic
ideals, by which the focus of a business should be on three core functions,
none of which are related to production: project management, vendor man-
agement and sales. Translation is only a core function for the translators,
identified in the book as contract language professionals, playing their role
outside of the ideal model of a profitable translation company. While the book
says that they “are the backbone of the language services industry. Without
these unsung heroes, no work would get done” (p. 27), it also clarifies that “at
the bottom [of the value chain], freelancers add value by providing transla-
tion” (p. 22). As for technology, this “is, and will continue to be, the most
influential driving force behind the ongoing evolution of the language services
industry” (p. 13), a “market influencer” factor that “augments” the value of
translation (p. 34).
When analysing different sources of information from the industry, we
come across statements that downplay the contributions of translators and
Translation Studies to the industry, such as the industry news website that
says “to call it translation is short-selling it”.1
Although translators are considered “experts-in-the-loop” (Wyndham,
2021, para. 1) as they alone provide training data from which MT attempts to
replicate their work, their role in the new workflows of the industry is sum-
marised as merely “transforming [machine] output from something useful into
something usable” (Wyndham, 2021, para. 1). The effect of this discourse on
translator communities and translator training cannot be diminished.
When translators, researchers and trainers look for the most reliable in-
dustry data to support their career plans, their research outputs and their
training programmes, they rely on sources such as industry consultants CSA
Research2 or Nimdzi,3 think-tanks such as TAUS,4 which recently rebranded
and redefined its mission from the “Translation Automation User Society”
to “The Language Data Network”, and industry news outlets such as Slator5
and Multilingual (a previously independent magazine recently acquired by
Nimdzi).6 Technology providers publish their own content in commercial,
educational and support websites, and this information is quickly propagated
in the community, often with no critical analysis. An exception to this is Jost
Zetzsche’s regular and critical “Translator’s Tool Box”.7 These sources of
information are increasingly common references in translation training pro-
grammes and Translation Studies literature. The requirement that translation
graduates stay abreast of “language industry demands, new market require-
ments and emerging job profiles” (EMT, 2017, p. 11) may inadvertently en-
courage uncritical adoption of professionally produced industry discourse by
newcomers to the profession.
It is difficult to establish the role of Translation Studies, as a community
of scholars and translation trainers, in defining what modern translation is.
Jemielity refers to a “great divide” proposed by Katan, rooted in the “in-
stitutional ignorance” of academics of specialised premium and niche mar-
kets (Jemielity, 2018, p. 546), which results in “little impact on practice and
practitioners” by translation theorists (p. 551). We counterargue that the
discipline has already taken steps to “realign itself on the realities and needs
of practice” (p. 547), as we can see in redesigned curricula and in the gen-
eralised use in Translation Studies of terms borrowed from the industry.
The issue of who defines translation is, as we have seen, not an easy one.
Industry and academia play a big role in the construction of our shared
perceptions of translation. Industry has been proposing terms and descrip-
tions of renewed professional practices, while academia has developed models
that try to incorporate the changes and effects brought by technology and
business into its body of knowledge. Whether we are achieving realistic de-
scriptions of the evolution of translation is something we discuss next.
Is AI changing what translation is?

AI has entered the world of translation via the development of MT
technologies based on neural networks, known as “neural MT”, or NMT.
Although techno-positivist discourses claim that this has brought major
disruption to translation, this has been challenged (Kenny, 2018), so one
should ask whether these discourses are merely gilding up translation’s
robes, the high-tech wearables placed on the shoulders of those who
produce translation.
It is a given that any profession or human activity is determined by its
tools, and translation is no exception, as demonstrated by Cronin (2013). At
a moment in history in which the tools of trade are reportedly intelligent and
may replace human effort in many professional activities, it is time to revisit
our definitions of what these professions are. A clear effect of this is indeed
the recent need to append “human” to the names of tasks and roles that
never previously required it such as intelligence or translation. This is ne-
cessary to differentiate human-led processes (as in our initial definition of
translation) from other processes, identified on the grounds that these are
performed or led by machines and are thus, at least partially, “non-human”.
In this evolution of concepts, “translation” and “translator(s)”, the words
that describe the core of the activities of the industry and the subject of
the discipline we are analysing, are voided of their specific and specialist
meanings. Translation becomes a set of simple tasks to be performed by
anyone, even by purely technological processes.
As the term “translation” becomes more common, it loses clarity and
transparency, a double effect obtained by a complex mix of factors, some of
which form the basis of the analyses in this section. We start by taking a
look at the novelties in the translator’s toolbox, then analyse new modes of
work such as post-editing (PE; the editing and correction of MT output by a
translator) and augmented translation (translation aided by tools intended
to enhance translators’ skills). The analysis then moves to the professional
sphere, with a short reflection on the names of professional roles, and to the
impact of technology on the translation industry. We close this section with
the impact of technology and business on the academic discipline of
Translation Studies.
Changes in the toolbox

When we look in detail at translators’ desktops, we can see that AI is helping
expand their toolbox, but it is more difficult to find the wide-scale changes or
disruption forecast by various reports of the translation industry (Joscelyne,
2018). As we discuss in the following sections, the incorporation of MT
content into the translator’s desktop has brought virtually no change in how
users interact with technology. The exception to this is interactive or
adaptive modes of working with MT, in which translators see constantly
changing suggestions to complete their translations while they type (Daems
& Macken, 2019; Knowles et al., 2019). There are also promises of a new
generation of “responsive MT” (Lommel, 2021). However, it is yet to be
seen if these modes will be adopted across the industry and by translators as
a whole, not only due to the computational demands of these models, but
also due to their intrusiveness and interference with the cognitive process of
translation (Alabau et al., 2016). Besides, the behavioural data created by
translators may give rise to bespoke personalised work environments
(O’Brien & Conlan, 2018), but the main purpose of these systems seems to
be for the industry to model individual user’s behaviour, for MT and AI
systems to replicate (Góis & Martins, 2019).
Any of these changes in the tools used by translators may in time trans-
form the way they work. However, one cannot say that these tools will
disrupt or redefine translation.
Changes in modes of work: Post-editing

Since MT appeared on translators’ desktops, there have been discussions
about whether PE was to become the new way of translating (García, 2011).
There were also predictions that PE would soon take over traditional
translation as the main service provided by the industry (Lommel &
DePalma, 2016). The reality of the numbers tells a different story: from 2016
to 2019, PE consistently accounted for roughly 4% of the total language
services market turnover, its predicted growth long having stagnated
(DePalma et al, 2019, p. 17).
It has been observed before how the translation industry ISO standards –
but also enterprises such as TAUS – define PE as an apparent simpler form
of revision, when in fact the descriptions of everything this activity requires
encompass a much more complex reality (do Carmo, 2020). This traditional
view that PE is a revision of the translation produced by MT is also chal-
lenged in do Carmo and Moorkens (2020). The proposal we make is that PE
is a form of translation, with MT playing the role of an extra informant
to the translation decision process, beyond translation memories. In this
view, the core purpose of translation, which is ultimately the responsibility
of the translator, does not change: even when working on MT content, the
translator should guarantee that the communication between two parties
happens in an efficient and effective way. In this perspective, the translator’s
role remains unchanged.
Changes in modes of work: Augmented translation

The concept of “augmented translation” (DePalma & Lommel, 2017) rises
from Kay’s original plan for the “Translator’s Amanuensis” (1997), a tool
that maximises the potential of existing technology to support translators.8
In the DePalma & Lommel representation of augmented translation, only
two people appear: the client and the “linguist”, a term discussed below. The
linguist sits inside a circle of technology having lost their only human
connection to the world: the project manager.9 The “augmented translator”
is surrounded by instruments, expanding their capacities to the point we
could imagine evolving into a prosthetic, an exoskeleton, turning the ex-
perience into “cyborg hybridity” (Cronin, 2019, p. 521). But like any heavy
armour intended to protect, or a crown that brings with it the weight of
responsibility, this augmentation becomes an imprisonment, encapsulating a
vision of a life in which all links to an automated supply chain are tech-
nological. The only “human-in-the-loop” is the linguist.
Another element that is augmented in this scenario, because of this “one-
human-only” production workflow, is the responsibility and liability placed
upon the linguist. To be efficient, these systems must incorporate automated,
relentless and presumedly objective measures of what the human needs to
produce and check. The responsibility of the human in the loop is augmented,
as much as their liability for any flaws that were caused by an element in the
process or missed during the various checking stages. The role of the linguist
will mainly be to guarantee the humanity in the communication acts that
derive from the translations produced in this technological scenario.
Linguists in AI-augmented workflows are connected to other humans
when they share work in online collaboration platforms. An illustration of
the individuals in these platforms might show us a crowd in chains, linked
by technology to an automated and swiftly moving supply conveyor belt.
Are these linguists collaborating with each other, sharing and managing
knowledge and responsibilities, or are they simply workers in a production
chain, each with a separate and well-defined task, which begins and ends
when their piecemeal work is taken to another worker? These workers
may well feel just like cogs in a Taylorist machine (Moorkens, 2020). The
new clothes of intelligent technologies become the clothing for enhanced
manual workers.
Changes to the professional roles

The roles played by translators have been subject to proposals of re-
branding, often leaving researchers wondering how and why these changes
come about. See above how Beninatto and Johnson (2017) use “contract
language professionals” to refer to a category of workers that is mostly
composed of translators; and DePalma and Lommel (2017), among many
others, refer to the same category of professionals as “linguists”. The
European Parliament has recently advertised positions for “Intercultural
and Language Professionals” (European Parliament, 2021). If these names
seem to be broad and include other roles beyond translation, elsewhere
the tendency is to over-specify, with the industry creating restrictive and
narrowly defined roles that appear to exist to fill in the gaps between
AI-heightened (in)efficiencies such as “quality rater” or “formatting quality
assurance specialist” (Bond, 2018).
Admittedly, there are many more tasks performed by translators that are
not strictly translation, involving terminology management, quality man-
agement, perhaps some form of consultancy, data curation and other forms
of language mediation or multilingual communication. But by replacing the
term that describes the core competencies and tasks performed by these
professionals, often results in the elimination of all traces of particular
competences or specialised skills related to translation. There is a lack of
published research regarding the extent to which translators’ daily work
changes when their professional titles are rebranded, or if what we are
witnessing is rather a natural transformation of the role of translation,
which adjusts and expands under the pressure of various forces.
Changes in the industry

The discourse of the industry regularly invokes major effects of disruption
brought by technologies, with AI being the main enabler of these trans-
formations. “World-readiness” (van der Meer, 2020), the term used by
TAUS to describe full availability of translation across the globe, is a dif-
ferent conceptualisation of what Cronin (2013; citing Greenfield) calls “ev-
eryware”, a trans-architectural world in which “translation [is] part of a
networked system, a potentially integrated nexus” (2013, p. 98). It is worth
taking a critical view of these descriptions of an inevitable outcome of AI
pushed by the needs of the global market.
We should challenge how these needs are constructed: talk of fanatically
“satisfying the needs of the user – up to and including needs that those users
themselves didn’t even know they had” (Johnson, 2021) is clear evidence of
“supply-side extractivism” (Cronin, 2019, p. 520), with no consideration for
the reasonable interests of the consumer, or the target culture and en-
vironment. To oppose this, we can cite Cronin:
The world may not need more translation but less. Or rather it may need
more of certain kinds of translation (directed at public goods such as
health, education, civic rights) and considerably less of other kinds
(directed at maximizing private profitability) if energy resources are to
be used in a sustainable manner.
(Cronin, 2019, p. 522).
Proposals from academia such as these are predictably unwelcome in an

industry fixated on ever-increasing velocity and throughput, but there are
proposals for modes of work that seem to try to evade the focus on max-
imising profits, and shift it to providing the necessary support to the creators
of the industry’s products and services.
Alternative perspectives of interaction between translators and their
instruments place translators not just in the centre, but also in control of
the process. On these models of work, the role of the instruments is simply
to provide easier access to more, and more targeted, information for the
translator. We can see proposals for this in Alonso and Vieira (2017) and
do Carmo et al. (2016). The distinction as to how much automation you
can or should have in a process can also be contextualised by current
discussions over the terms “human-in-the-loop”, “human-on-the-loop”
and “human-in-command” (European Commission, 2019). Besides these, the
ecological model of translation proposed by Cronin (2016), cooperative
translation (Firat, 2021) and activist forms of translation (Baker, 2006) may
inspire the development of modes of work in which AI and other technologies
play a more effective role of supporting translation.
Changes in Translation Studies

As we have seen in the section “Who makes translation what it is”, the re-
lationship between Translation Studies and the industry is largely unidirec-
tional. In this section, we present a brief critical perspective of some of the
effects of the language of the industry and technology in Translation Studies.
Discussions about the “landscape of translation” (Melby et al., 2014) or the
boundaries of Translation Studies (Dam et al., 2019) provide clear evidence of
an expansion and transformation of the discipline to realms that it did not
previously occupy. The extent of these discussions within Translation Studies
may reveal a deeper or even revolutionary process of transformation, to the
point that they have led to discussions involving rebranding of the disciplinary
environment. The discipline or sub-discipline of “Language Industry Studies”
has been proposed as a necessary aggregator of work in this specialised do-
main (Angelone et al., 2020), but there were also proposals for the discussion
of “Localisation Studies” (Jiménez-Crespo, 2013).
The inter-connection between business and technology has been discussed
in “Has computerization changed translation” (Mossop, 2006), and this
observation was confirmed and expanded in subsequent studies (e.g.,
Kenny, 2017; Kenny et al., 2020). The world of professional practice has
also brought innovations to theoretical models (Olohan, 2021), and semi-
regular proposals for turns of the discipline, but it is mostly visible in the
introduction of terms that describe modes of work, like PE, seen above, but
also transcreation (Katan, 2016), transediting (Schäffner, 2013) and trans-
laboration (Zwischenberger, 2020).
These changes have at least two very positive effects: one is the enhanced
capacity of Translation Studies to understand and evolve in connection with
the reality of practitioners; the other is the increase in inter- and cross-
disciplinarity beyond the confines of Arts and Humanities (O’Brien, 2013).
The downside of this incorporation of terms and practices is a tendency to
separate translation from some of its core defining elements, and to place the
emphasis on those elements that are on the outer layers, thus enabling a
higher connectivity with other disciplines, but slowly emptying translation of
any specialised meaning. These layers can be composed of new socio-
economic elements, as in the case of translaboration, which places the em-
phasis on the modes of work in collaborative platforms; or they remove
elements from translation, such as transcreation, which strips it of its core
element of creativity. This process is very visible in descriptions of locali-
sation (namely by the industry). In these descriptions, translation merely
deals with the transfer of linguistic units, while localisation alone possesses
the element of adaptation, thus being empowered to interface with the
technical, cultural and economic spheres (Jiménez-Crespo, 2013).
These top-level outer layers become the augmentations by which trans-
lation gains visibility but paradoxically loses transparency. Translation ap-
pears as richly covered, but inside those thick robes, it feels uncomfortably
naked, defined only as the part of those processes concerned with trans-
mission of content across languages.
Do we need new definitions of translation?

While translation may be indivisible from technology, we propose that charting
an effective future for the translator will necessitate a critical approach to
technology throughout the translation eco-system, where novelty is trumped by
utility and sustainability (in both a social and environmental sense).
Seeing the complexity of this discussion, we might follow the mainstream
trend to create new terms and leave the old ones to wither. However,
Jakobsen (2018) proposes that if our definition of translation changes as our
tools change, our definition was probably not broad enough. Perhaps then
we just need a definition of translation that is resilient to this environment,
which reveals its core elements as a human activity responding to a human
need, while also allowing for the flexibility required to describe its many
relevant technological and business dimensions.
We propose that the starting point for a definition (a theory, perhaps) of
translation that encompasses the current technological reality should start by
the premises set out in Language engineering and translation: Consequences of
automation (Sager, 1993). This book places translation in an industrial con-
text, in which all communication acts must contribute to the global purpose of
efficiency. As Sager points out, translation, simultaneously an extension and
an interruption of another communication act, would not be accepted in this
context if it was inefficient – if the interruption took longer than considered
reasonable. This requirement of efficiency, together with the notion that
translation is determined by its tools, gives us the ingredients to compose a
definition that may describe translation as it has always existed, and one that
describes translation under the influence of technology and business.
Efficiency, adaptability and effectiveness

For this final discussion, we propose that “efficiency”, a term that brings
with it a corset of millimetric metrics, should be accompanied by adapt-
ability, a term that describes translation’s capacity to transform, and a much
more elusive term: effectiveness.
Effectiveness refers to a difficult-to-measure interpretation of the effect
that the translated text will produce in the target audience. As an author, the
translator works to maximise these effects, but, also as an author, the
translator does not determine the actual effect. This choice of concept that is
virtually impossible to measure (unlike efficiency) and is broader than
“fitness-for-purpose” is at odds with the current obsession with speed and
near-live turnaround times (Georgakopoulou, 2019). However, we should
accept that not even regular geometric figures of measurable factors, such as
the old iron triangle of cost, time and quality (Bowker, 2020), or more
complex representations (Walker, 2022) can describe the whole complexity
of translation.
We propose that translation can be defined as a secondary, efficient and
adaptable communication process which aims to improve the effectiveness
of an original communication act, by transforming the product of that act
into a new product in a different language.
The first implication of this definition is that, as a secondary act, a
translation’s relevance in a globalised world depends on its efficiency,
adaptability and effectiveness in improving the original communication act
(this improvement being simply its extension into a new language and cul-
ture). If the process is not efficient (using the best available methods and
technologies to produce a rapid outcome), and not adaptable (with a
mouldable shape, including creativity and adjustment to different require-
ments), then it may not yield an effective improvement of the original act. In
this case, it does not comply to this definition of translation. We can also say
that when a communication process is totally effective across languages, it
can be considered “untranslatable” (but see endnote10).
The demand for efficiency, adaptability and effectiveness, which are ty-
pical requirements of a globalised industry, appears here as inherent to
translation. New technologies, such as NMT, do not disrupt this notion of
translation, because they are integrated as playing an instrumental role, as a
new tool to help translation fulfil its raison d’être, its ethos: to help com-
munication flow between humans.
Besides the focus on the industry needs, we should also appraise how
compliant our definition is with the perspective that the central element of a
translation act is the translator. This perspective moves in the same direction
as Chesterman’s work (2001, 2009) and Pym’s On translator’s ethics (2012),
and it respects the environment surrounding each communication act as in
Cronin’s Eco-translation (2016, 2019).
Pym’s model of cooperation agency is in some ways similar to ours,
especially if we consider that his notion of effort corresponds to our effi-
ciency, and what he sees as “knowledge-use value”, or “functional value” is
our effectiveness: “a translation has a functional value insofar as it helps
people to produce shared benefits from their interactions” (2012, p. 134). We
can also identify in this work some of the reasons why effectiveness is un-
quantifiable: translation requires negotiation to achieve a level of cooperation
that results from a “composite social effort”. “This composite is the sum of the
investments involved in the creation of the translation situation, the work of
the translator, the work of the end-user, and the funding of the client” (p. 135).
Placing the translator at the centre of translation, as an agent with decisive
power, who determines the effectiveness according to their interpretation of
the communication act, also has an ethical dimension. It is when they commit
to interpreting the effect of the product in the target language that translators
determine the functional or ethical value of a translation. The mismatch be-
tween the definition of this ethical value and the commercial value defined by
the industry is at the basis of some of the conflicts between translators and
technology.
When translators criticise technology, it is mostly because it limits their
scope of decision-making, removing forms of control over their interpretation
of the effectiveness of the target message (LeBlanc, 2017). Researchers may
identify gains in terms of actual efficiency, but communication effectiveness is
determined by the human interpretation of a dynamic communication act.
When translators decide, for example, to delete the MT suggestions and to
write their translation from scratch, this decision is often classified as in-
efficient, especially when measures such as edit distances are used to identify
the extent of changes that were made to these suggestions (do Carmo, 2021).
However, to maximise what they interpret as being the optimal effect of their
translations, translators often need to feel they are writing their own words,
not maximising the use of MT. Objective metrics, based on words edited, for
example, cannot grasp the complexity of the commitment of a translator to
improve the effectiveness of the original communication act
What will the future bring to translation?

This chapter discussed, among other themes, the incorporation of terms and
perspectives from industrial technology discourses and practices into
Translation Studies. We argue that some of these new terms, while serving a
laudable purpose, contribute to obscuring the expansion of translation as a
term that has always described a complex activity. We use the analogy of the
emperor’s new clothes to highlight that the hyperbole about technological
advances can create an obfuscating layer, which at close scrutiny reveals a
complex reality that was always there.
To be adjusted to the evolution of translation practices in the 2020s and
beyond, our definition of translation incorporates notions related to effi-
ciency, adaptability and effectiveness, as the added values that the language of
business and technology require. By emphasising that these concepts were
always part of translation (from our understanding), we aim to give transla-
tion the autonomy and self-esteem that will allow the addition of any clothes
that society may offer or force upon it, without any need for total makeovers.
Of course, translation will keep on changing, so this definition will need to
be revisited, and perhaps not just outer but some core concepts will require
replacement. These changes will require further specialisation from profes-
sionals, as each micro and macro-decision they are called to make is affected
by technology. New systems that provide rich interactivity force translators
to swiftly navigate a wealth of sources of information, requiring agility and
increased confidence from them. And, given that they may well be the only
humans in an otherwise automated environment, translators will be ex-
pected to offer increased professional responsibility and liability.
This futuristic analysis may be very different if the translation community
can create a more collaborative eco-system that is built by translators,
translator training and translation research institutions, professional asso-
ciations, translator and freelancer unions, and an industry that invests in
increasing the commercial value of translation at every link in the value
chain. To reach that stage, we may need to start “thinking of translation as a
scarce resource which needs to be used judiciously in conjunction with basic
social and economic needs in the era of climate change” (Cronin, 2019,
p. 522). This may be the clearest evidence of how much further our defini-
tions of translation still need to adapt and expand.
Notes
1 https://multilingual.com/about/ (Note: all web sources have been consulted in
February 2022).
2 https://csa-research.com/
3 https://www.nimdzi.com/
4 https://www.taus.net/
5 https://slator.com/
6 https://multilingual.com
7 https://www.internationalwriters.com/toolbox/
8 Although proposals for technology augmenting human work outside of trans-
lation begin far earlier. See, for example, Engelbart (1962) on computer-based
augmentation.
9 Contrarily, the importance of human contact is documented in previous research:
“The importance of project managers’ interpersonal skills and actions is also
highlighted by translators, i.e., they affect translators’ motivation and work at-
titude, and eventually quality of their translation” (Sakamoto, 2018: 89. See also
Olohan and Davitti (2015).
10 An example of such an untranslatable “text” could be a manual that only uses
pictures that can be interpreted in any culture, as we find in IKEA or LEGO
manuals. However, even in this case we must allow for the need to translate
images into sound for the visually impaired.
References
Alabau, V., Carl, M., Casacuberta, F., García-Martínez, M., González-Rubio, J.,
Mesa-Lao, B., Ortiz-Martínez, D., Schaeffer, M., & Sanchis-Trilles, G. (2016).
Learning Advanced Post-editing, New Directions in Empirical Translation Process
Research, pp. 95–110. 10.1007/978-3-319-20358-4_5
Alonso, E., & Vieira, L. N. (2017). The translator’s amanuensis 2020. Journal of
Specialised Translation, 28, 345–361.
Angelone, E., Ehrensberger-Dow, M., & Massey, G. (2020). The Bloomsbury com-
panion to language industry studies. Bloomsbury.
Baker, M. (2006). Translation and activism: Emerging patterns of narrative com-
munity. The Massachusetts Review, 47(3), 462–484. https://www.jstor.org/stable/
25091111
Beninatto, R. & Johnson, T. (2017). The general theory of the translation company.
Nimdzi.
Slator news. https://slator.com/features/the-stunning-variety-of-job-titles-in-the-
language-industry/
Bowker, L. (2020). Fit-for-purpose translation. In M. O’Hagan (Ed.), Routledge handbook
of translation and technology (pp. 453–468). Routledge. 10.4324/9781315311258-27
Bowker, L. & Buitrago Ciro, J. (2019). Machine translation and global research:
Towards improved machine translation literacy in the scholarly community. Emerald
Publishing.
Canfora, C. & Ottmann, A. (2020). Risks in neural machine translation. Translation
Spaces, 9(1), 58–77. 10.1075/ts.00021.can
Chesterman, A. (2001). Proposal for a hieronymic oath. Translator, 7(2), 139–154.
10.1080/13556509.2001.10799097
Chesterman, A. (2009). The name and nature of translator studies. HERMES – Journal
of Language and Communication in Business, 42, 13–22. 10.7146/hjlcb.v22i42.96844
Cronin, M. (2013). Translation in the digital age. Routledge. 10.4324/9780203073599
Cronin, M. (2016). Eco-translation: Translation and ecology in the age of the an-
thropocene. Routledge.
Cronin, M. (2019). Translation, technology and climate change. In M. O’Hagan
(Ed.), The Routledge handbook of translation and technology (pp. 516–530).
Routledge. 10.4324/9781315311258-31
Daems, J. & Macken, L. (2019). Interactive adaptive SMT versus interactive adaptive
NMT: A user experience evaluation. Machine Translation, 33, 117–134. 10.1007/
s10590-019-09230-z
Dam, H. V., Nisbeth Brøgger, M., & Korning Zethsen, K. (Eds.). (2019). Moving
boundaries in translation studies. Routledge.
DePalma, D. & Lommel, A. (2017). Augmented translation powers up language ser-
vices. http://www.commonsenseadvisory.com/Blogs.aspx?1=1&moduleID=390&
Contenttype=ArticleDetAD&AId=37907
DePalma, D., Pielmeier, H., O’Mara, P., & Stewart, R. G. (2019). The language
services market: 2019. http://www.commonsenseadvisory.com/AbstractView.aspx?
ArticleID=26590
do Carmo, F. (2018). Does machine translation really produce translations? In J. A.
Pérez-Ortiz, F. Sánchez-Martínez, M. Esplà-Gomis, M. Popović, C. Rico Pérez,
A. Martins, … M. L. Forcada (Eds.), EAMT 2018: Proceedings of the 21st annual
conference of the European Association for Machine Translation (p. 323). http://
eamt2018.dlsi.ua.es/proceedings-eamt2018.pdf#page=343
do Carmo, F. (2021). Editing actions: A missing link between translation process
research and machine translation research. In M. Carl (Ed.), Explorations in em-
pirical translation process research (pp. 3–38). 10.1007/978-3-030-69777-8_1
do Carmo, F. (2020). ‘Time is money’ and the value of translation. Translation
Spaces, 9(1), 35–57. https://doi.org/10.1075/ts.00020.car
do Carmo, F. & Moorkens, J. (2020). Differentiating editing, post-editing and re-
vision. In M. Koponen, B. Mossop, I. S. Robert, & G. Scocchera (Eds.),
Translation revision and post-editing: Industry practices and cognitive processes
(pp. 35–49). Routledge. 10.4324/9781003096962
do Carmo, F., Trigo, L., & Maia, B. (2016). From CATs to KATs. In J. Esteves-
Ferreira, J. Macan, R. Mitkov, & O.-M. Stefanov (Eds.), Proceedings of the 38th
conference translating and the computer (TC38) (pp. 149–158). http://www.asling.
org/tc38/wp-content/uploads/TC38–2016.pdf
EMT. (2017). European master’s in translation – competence framework 2017. https://
ec.europa.eu/info/sites/info/files/emt_competence_fwk_2017_en_web.pdf
Engelbart, D. C. (1962). Augmenting human intellect: A conceptual framework.
Summary report AFOSR‐3223 for Air Force Office of Scientific Research. Stanford
Research Institute.
European Commission. (2019). Building trust in human-centric artificial intelligence.
In Communication from the commission to the European Parliament, the Council,
the European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions:
COM(2019) 168 final 8.4.2019. https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/
PDF/?uri=CELEX:52019DC0168&from=BG
European Parliament. (2021). Intercultural and language professional – Pe/260/2021
(Ad5) M/F. https://apply4ep.gestmax.eu/39/1/pe-260-professionnel-de-langue-h-f/
en_US
Firat, G. (2021). Uberization of translation: Impacts on working conditions. The
Journal of Internationalization and Localization, 8(1), 48–75. 10.1075/jial.20006.fir
García, I. (2011). Translating by post-editing: Is it the way forward? Machine
Translation, 25(3), 217–237. 10.1007/s10590-011-9115-8
Georgakopoulou, P. (2019). The future of localisation is audiovisual. ITI Research e-
book: What’s on the horizon? Trends in translation and interpreting 2019. Institute
of Translation and Interpreting.
Góis, A., & Martins, A. F. T. (2019). Translator2Vec: Understanding and re-
presenting human post-editors. Proceedings of Machine Translation Summit XVII
Volume 1: Research Track, 43–54. https://www.aclweb.org/anthology/W19–6605
Jakobsen, A. L. (2018). Translation process research and the new construction of
meaning: Is there a need for a new methodology? The 5th International Conference
on Cognitive Research on Translation and Interpreting. Renmin University of
China.
Jemielity, D. (2018). Translation in intercultural business and economic environ-
ments. In S.-A. Harding & O. Carbonell Cortés (Eds.), The Routledge handbook of
translation and culture (pp. 533–557). Routledge. 10.4324/9781315670898-30
Jiménez-Crespo, M. (2013). Translation and web localization. Routledge.
Johnson, T. (2021). Experiential localization quality assessment. Multilingual.
https://multilingual.com/issues/september-october-2021/experiential-localization-
quality-assessment-xlqa-and-user-centricity-illustrated/
Joscelyne, A. (2018) Translators in the algorithmic age: Briefing based on the TAUS
industry leaders forum in Amsterdam in June, 2018. TAUS. https://info.taus.net/
translators-in-the-algorithmic-age-full-version
Perspectives, 24(3), 365–381. 10.1080/0907676X.2015.1016049
Kay, M. (1997). The proper place of men and machines in language translation.
Machine Translation, 12(1–2), 3–23.
Kenny, D. (Ed.). (2017). Human issues in translation technology. Abingdon: Routledge.
Kenny, D. (2018). Sustaining disruption? On the transition from statistical to neural
machine translation. Tradumàtica: Tecnologies de La Traducció, 16, 59–70. 10.5565/
rev/tradumatica.221
Kenny, D., Moorkens, J., & do Carmo, F. (Eds.). (2020). Fair MT: Towards ethical,
sustainable machine translation. Translation Spaces, 9(1), 1qa-11. 10.1075/ts.9.1
Knowles, R., Sanchez-Torron, M., & Koehn, P. (2019). A user study of neural in-
teractive translation prediction. Machine Translation, 33(1–2), 135–154.
10.1007/s10590-019-09235-8
Larsonneur, C. (2019). The disruptions of neural machine translation. Spheres, 5,
1–10. https://spheres-journal.org/contribution/the-disruptions-of-neural-machine-
translation/
LeBlanc, M. (2017). “I can’t get no satisfaction!” Should we blame translation
technologies or shifting business practices?. In D. Kenny (Ed.), Human issues in
translation technology (pp. 45–62). Routledge.
Lewis, W. D. (2015). Skype translator: Breaking down language and hearing bar-
riers. In Proceedings of translating and the computer (TC37) (pp. 125–149). https://
www.microsoft.com/en-us/research/wp-content/uploads/2016/04/TC37-Paper-
FINAL.pdf
Lommel, A. (2021). What characterizes responsive MT? https://csa-research.com/
Blogs-Events/Blog/responsive-machine-translation
Lommel, A. R. & DePalma, D. A. (2016). Post-editing goes mainstream: How LSPs
use MT to meet client demands. Common Sense Advisory.
Melby, A. K., Fields, P., Hague, D., Koby, G. S., & Lommel, A. (2014). Defining the
landscape of translation 1. Tradumàtica: Tecnologies de La Traducció, 12, 392–403.
https://revistes.uab.cat/tradumatica/article/view/n12-melby-fields-hague-etal/pdf
Moorkens, J. (2020). “A tiny cog in a large machine”: Digital Taylorism in the
translation industry. Translation Spaces, 9(1), 12–34. 10.1075/ts.00019.moo
Mossop, B. (2006). Has computerization changed translation? Meta: Journal Des
Traducteurs, 51(4), 787–805. 10.7202/014342ar
Nurminen, M. (2018). Machine translation in everyday life: What makes FAUT MT
workable? TAUS blog. https://blog.taus.net/elearning/machine-translation-in-
everyday-life-what-makes-faut-mt-workable
Nurminen, M. & Koponen, M. (2020). Machine translation and fair access to in-
formation. Translation Spaces, 9(1), 150–169. 10.1075/ts.00025.nur
O’Brien, S. (2013) The borrowers. Target. International Journal of Translation
Studies, 25(1), 5–17. doi: 10.1075/target.25.1.02obr
O’Brien, S. & Conlan, O. (2018). Moving towards personalising translation tech-
nology. In H. V. Dam, M. N. Brogger, & K. K. Zethsen (Eds.), Moving boundaries
in translation studies. Routledge.
Olohan, M. (2021). Translation and practice theory. Routledge.
Olohan, M. & Davitti, E. (2015). Dynamics of trusting in translation project man-
agement: Leaps of faith and balancing acts. Journal of Contemporary Ethnography,
46(4), 391–416. 10.1177/0891241615603449
Pym, A. (2012). On translator ethics: Principles for mediation between cultures. John
Benjamins.
Sager, J. (1993). Language engineering and translation: Consequences of automation.
John Benjamins.
Sakamoto, A. (2018). Disruption in translator-client matching: Paid crowdsourcing
platforms vs human project managers. Tradumàtica: Tecnologies de La Traducció,
16, 85. 10.5565/rev/tradumatica.218
Schäffner, C. (2013). Rethinking transediting. Meta, 57(4), 866–883. 10.7202/1021222ar
van der Meer, J. (2020). World-readiness and translation economics. TAUS blog.
https://blog.taus.net/world-readiness-and-translation-economics
Vieira, L. N. (2020). Machine translation in the news: A framing analysis of the
written press. Translation Spaces, 9(1), 98–122. 10.1075/ts.00023.nun
Walker, C. (2022). Translation project management. Routledge.
Wyndham, A. (2021, October 22). 10 areas where translators are (and will remain)
essential experts in the loop. Slator news. https://slator.com/10-areas-translators-
will-remain-essential-experts-in-the-loop/
Zwischenberger, C. (2020). Translaboration: Exploring collaboration in translation
and translation in collaboration. Target, 32(2), 173–190. 10.1075/target.20106.zwi
2 Teaching translation technologies:
An analysis of a corpus of syllabi
for translation and interpreting
undergraduate degrees in Spain
Roser Sánchez-Castany
Introduction
Technology has changed every aspect of today’s world, including the pro
fessional translation sector. Nowadays, the increasing urgency with which
translation services are required very often means that the language industry
has to respond to higher volumes and progressively tighter deadlines that
would be difficult to meet without the help of technology. Technologies play
a crucial role in this process and, for this reason, the translation market is
demanding more and more translators with strong technology-based skills
who can work at an ever-increasing pace (Kenny, 2020, p. 2).
In line with the objectives of the European Higher Education Area
(EHEA),1 Higher Education Institutions (HEI) are committed to ensuring
that translation and interpreting (T&I) graduates achieve an optimum level
of employability and acquire a series of technological skills that the language
market will require in the near future (Astley & Torres Hostench, 2017;
Massey, 2019; O’Brien & Rossetti, 2021). To this end, universities have tried
to adapt to the technological requirements of the market, albeit slowly,
given the considerable time required and the difficulty attached to the im
plementation of changes to degree curricula. In practice, available data
suggests that there is still a significant technological disconnect between the
training offered by Spanish universities and the real demands of the pro
fessional translation market (TAUS, 2019).
This research aims to expand and supplement the existing literature on
this matter and its goal is two-fold: (i) to investigate and define the current
situation with regard to training in translation technologies2 in Spanish
universities, and (ii) to compare the data obtained against the real demands
of the translation industry (Sánchez-Castany, 2022). This chapter focuses on
the first of these objectives and, in particular, on understanding the extent to
which translation technologies are embedded in the T&I3 syllabi in Spain for
the 2019–2020 academic year. It should be noted that the main objective of
this research, and of this chapter in particular, is not to modify the curricula
of T&I degrees in Spain, but to describe the ways in which translation
technologies are taught and their integration into the various translation
DOI: 10.4324/9781003223344-3
28 Roser Sánchez-Castany
modules included in existing degrees. Due to the space limitations, in this
chapter, I will mainly focus on describing the methodology used to analyse
the data and presenting an overview of the preliminary results.
This chapter is structured as follows: Section 2 examines the current status
of translation technologies in the context of T&I curricula with a particular
focus in Spain; Section 3 sets out the main questions and the methodology
adopted; Section 4 describes the sample; Section 5 presents the results of the
study; and Section 6 highlights the main conclusions of the study.
Technologies in T&I curricula

In the main translation competence models (PACTE, 2014; EMT, 2017;
Kiraly, 2013; inter alia) technology competence and technologies, including
both generic ones and those specifically designed for translation, play a
multidisciplinary role and are considered to be just as important as other
competencies. According to the Libro Blanco: título de grado en traducción e
interpretación4 published by the Spanish National Agency for Quality
Assessment and Accreditation in Academia (ANECA), some of the specific
competencies “that would define a good translator” (2004, p. 87) include (1)
mastery of specialised translation terminology and techniques, (2) the use of
computer tools, (3) the command of computer-assisted translation/localisa
tion techniques and (4) information mining5 skills. Bearing this in mind, one
could infer that these competencies should be given a high level of importance
in the design of T&I undergraduate degrees in Spanish universities. However,
in many cases, this recommendation does not appear to be reflected in the
design of T&I studies in Spain (Doherty, 2016, p. 954; Piqué & Colominas,
2013) and is rather addressed in an oversimplified manner. In Rico’s words
(2017, p. 82), this “has resulted in designing didactic methodologies which
focus, for the most part, on instruction in the use of the tool as a device
which produces the end product – that is, the translation – and not on the
process and its relationship with the translator”. In this regard, O’Brien
and Rodríguez Vázquez (2019) point out that theoretical studies of the
matter are frequently found, but empirical approaches are scarce, and that
those that do exist rarely address the relevance of technology content in
T&I curricula.
In their study about machine translation (MT) and post-editing (PE) in
Spanish universities, Cid-Leal et al. (2019) report a very low presence of MT
and PE in translator training, while Krause (2017) compares several leading
studies in the sector and concludes that a future-oriented T&I curriculum
should offer specific modules in MT, pre-editing and PE, automatic quality
control and project management. The author also points out that computer-
assisted translation (CAT) tools are part of the translator’s everyday life, but
this is not yet adequately reflected in T&I curricula.
Indeed, one of the longest-established translation technologies used in
the sector is CAT. Despite the proliferation of these tools, they have not
Teaching translation technologies 29
undergone substantial changes in their performance over the last 25 years
and such innovations have had little impact on the translation process
(Sánchez-Gijón, 2016, p. 154). It is striking that T&I undergraduate and
postgraduate degrees do not always reflect this reality (Austermühl, 2013,
p. 327) and the tendency is for students to acquire only the general principles
of the main types of tools and practising with said tools in the classroom
(Cid-Leal et al., 2019, p. 191; Rodríguez Castro, 2018). The failure to explicitly
embed technology-based contents into translation modules means that very
often students do not understand the advantages of using these tools beyond
the programme-specific compulsory modules (Alcina et al., 2007, p. 232) or
perceive that, as professionals, they will gain little value from them in their
daily work as translators (Mahfouz, 2018, p. 80). In fact, some studies suggest
that CAT projects or tasks should not be set for students as part of a separate
module, but should be integrated into the practical translation modules
themselves (Pym, 2013; Mellinger, 2017).
Methodology
This chapter aims to answer the following three research questions in order
to obtain information (i) on the technological content currently included in
T&I curricula in Spain taken as a whole, and (ii) on the integration of this
content into translation modules:
Q1 What technological content is included in technology-based modules?

Q2 In which practical translation modules is technological content taught?
Q3 What technological content is included in such practical translation
modules?
With a view to exploring the technology-based content of the aforementioned

T&I curricula, I adopted a mixed-methods approach combining the use of
qualitative and quantitative methods (Hernández et al., 2010; Saldanha &
O’Brien, 2014).
Firstly, I decided to carry out an initial qualitative study (phase A)
involving a thematic analysis of the data in order to exploit a textual
corpus of module syllabi. This qualitative phase focused on identifying,
organising and analysing in detail the technology-based content of the
selected syllabi by means of a thematic analysis of the data. The aim was
to discover patterns – or themes – within the corpus by carefully reading
and re-reading them in order to understand and interpret the phenomenon
studied. However, phase A can also be considered inductive, since the aim
of coding the data was to classify them according to the patterns found in the
corpus rather than on the basis of a pre-established framework (Braun &
Clarke, 2006). This was followed by a second quantitative study (phase B) in
which the results obtained in the first phase were quantified.
Table 2.1 Spanish-English equivalents of relevant terms for this study
Spanish term English equivalent
Grado universitario Undergraduate degree

Traducción e Interpretación (TeI) Translation and Interpreting (T&I)
Plan de estudios de grado Undergraduate degree curriculum
Asignatura Module
Guía docente de la asignatura Module syllabus
Before defining in detail the sample analysed, it should be noted that in

line with the aim of the study, purely theoretical modules (e.g., Theory and
Practice of Translation, History of Translation, etc.), as well as interpreting
and language modules were excluded from the study. All other modules
identified in the syllabi and included in the sample were divided into two
blocks:
1 Technology-based modules whose main purpose is to teach technolo

gies. This block comprises modules including terms such as “technol
ogies”, “terminology”, “information mining”, “project management”,
“text editing” or “layout” in their title.
2 Practical translation modules, including both specialised and non-
specialised.
For a better understanding of the sample and the elements under analysis,
the Table 2.1 includes the most relevant Spanish terms for this study and
their equivalent in English:
Criteria for sample selection

In order to select the sample, firstly, all Spanish universities offering a T&I
undergraduate degree during the 2019–2020 academic year were identified. The
dataset presented in this chapter comprises a total of 2931 modules taken from
32 T&I curricula6 from 29 universities. According to Article 26 of Spanish
Royal Decree 1393/2007 of 29 October 2007, which establishes the requirements
of official university education, Spanish universities are obliged to publish their
curricula in the Official State Gazette and in the Official Journal of the au
tonomous region where they are located. However, although all the universities
analysed make their curricula available to the general public on their websites,
the level of detail of the content available varies greatly from one university to
another. The aforementioned Decree makes no reference to the availability of
module syllabi and many universities do not share them publicly. In fact, just
over half (53%) of the syllabi for the 32 undergraduate degrees analysed have
been published on the university websites.
The criteria for the sample selection adopted a purposive approach and
therefore the syllabi selected had to meet the following requirements:
• The syllabus had to belong to one of the curricula identified.
• The syllabus had to be publicly available on the internet.
• As stated above, interpreting, language modules and purely theory-
based modules were excluded from the study.
Ultimately, 994 syllabi were selected as part of the final sample,7 and 1937
syllabi were excluded. In some cases, the syllabi for the 2019–2020 academic
year were not available, but those for the previous or subsequent year were. In
such cases, these modules were included in the sample under the assumption
that the content of the syllabi would be similar to the content covered in the
previous academic. It should also be noted that some syllabi were published in
a language other than Spanish,8 in which case a neural MT engine9 was used
to translate them and obtain the necessary information.
It is important to highlight that this first phase of the research only focuses
on the analysis of documentary evidence. The second phase of the study will
include interviews with some of the tutors teaching on the modules selected for
this study. This second stage will provide a more complete picture of the
teacher’s pedagogical approaches as the published syllabi may not necessarily
include detailed information on certain aspects of the way they are taught in
practice. Besides, some modules include specific technology-based content
under general statements – understood as the terms or text fragments selected
from the module syllabi – in their corresponding descriptions such as “Using
specialist sources and tools efficiently and correctly”, “Mastering basic
translation tools” or “Familiarisation with translation tools”.10
Finally, although many syllabi make explicit reference to the use of cer
tain software programs, they do not always specify which software is being
used. This may be understandable, given that syllabi do not necessarily have
to be updated annually, while the recommended software or the software
licences available to universities or departments may vary more swiftly to
meet industry demands.
Data analysis
As part of phase A (qualitative stage), a preliminary analysis and note-
taking were carried out by screening the corpus in order to identify the
macrostructure of the syllabi and carry out an initial assessment of their
homogeneity and the extent to which they could be compared with each
other. Following this preliminary analysis, a thematic analysis of the data
was conducted. To that end, the corpus was imported into Atlas.ti 8 – a
qualitative analysis software – and all the syllabi were read in detail. In this
process, the statements or fragments considered to be related to technology
were identified in both technology-based modules and practical translation
modules and assigned a code and a group, as shown in the following
sections.11 Given the number of modules selected as part of the sample and
the constraints on the researcher’s time and resources, only the statements
relating to technology contained in the syllabi were selected and coded. The
same software was used for the quantitative phase (B) to convert the coded
statements into quantitative data.
Characteristics of the sample

On the basis of the initial screening, a significant disparity in terms of the
content provided was detected between the different sections of the syllabi
studied across universities. Figure 2.1 shows the sections that were
common to all of them and which informed the comparative analysis
carried out. For the purposes of this study, the coded statements were
considered part of the section of the syllabus in which they appeared, ir
respective of whether they were expressed or placed correctly within these
sections. As can be seen in Figure 2.1, the sections common to all syllabi
are Competencies, Content and Assessment, as well as sections covering
general module information – including, for example, the module title,
degree year, status12 of module or number of credits. In some cases, em
phasis has also been placed on other sections that fall outside these
common elements, such as Methodology, given the relevance of this sec
tion for teaching purposes, as it may have a direct impact on the use (or
lack of use) of technologies in the classroom.
Following this macrostructure, as shown in Figure 2.2, 12 groups of codes
were identified, four of which contain general information on the module:
undergraduate degree year in which the module is taught, number of ECTS
credits assigned to each module, status of module and field of knowledge to
which it relates. Another group of codes identifies the computer programs
referred to and the other seven codes classify the rest of the information
that appears in the syllabi (i.e., learning outcomes, competences, content,
methodology, assessment, further information).
As Figure 2.3 shows, 29 fields were identified, the field containing the
largest number of codes being non-specialised translation (41.45%, n=412).
Of the remainder, the highest number within the sample were found in
Translation in the fields of Law, Economics and Finance (12.58%, n=125),
Specialised translation14 (8.55%, n=85) and Technical and Scientific translation
(7.44%, n=74) modules.
With regard to the year, more modules are taught in the second stage of the
degree – third (38.55%) and fourth (35.91%) year of the degree – than in
the first stage, which comprises the first (7.07%) and second (16.59%) year of
the degree. Elective modules (which in some universities can be chosen by
students in any given year) account for 1.97%. It should be noted that some
modules (5.43%, n=54) can be taught in more than one year, depending on the
student’s choice of specialisation. In terms of the number of ECTS credits,
nine themes were identified (10, 9, 8, 7, 6, 5, 4, 4.5 and 3 credits), modules with
6 ECTS credits visibly being the most common (78.07%). Looking at the
EHU UA UAB UAB UAM UAX UCAM UCM UCO UDL UEM UGR UJI ULPGC UMA UMU UNE UOC UPC UPF UPO URJC USAL USJ UV UVA Uvic Uvigo VIU
General information x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x
about the module
Contextualization or
x x x x x x x x x x x
justification
Teaching languages x x x x x x
Prerequisites x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x
Description or
x x x x x x x x x x x x x x
summary
Competencies x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x
Learning outcomes x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x
Objectives x x x x x x x x x x x x x x
Contents x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x
Methodology x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x
Assessment x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x
Recommendations x x x x x x
Bibliography x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x
Other information x x x
Figure 2.1 Sections of the module syllabi by university (see Appendix 1 13 for the full names of the universities).
General information: year 5

General information: credits 9
General information: status 3
General information: field 22
Software 26
Competencies 51
Content 61
Assessment 43
Methodology 47
Objectives 49
Learning outcomes 51
Other sections 54
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70
Figure 2.2 Code groups and number of codes identified in each group.
Non-specialised translation 412

Legal and economic translation 125
Specialised translation 85
Technical and scientific translation 74
Technology 56
Literary translation 50
Audiovisual translation 32
Terminology 29
Proofreading, editing and layout design 23
Documentation 19
Localisation 14
Editorial non-literary translation 10
Audiovisual translation and localisation 8
Journalistic translation 7
Humanistic and literary translation 7
Tourism translation 6
Marketing translation 5
Post-editing 5
Institutional translation 5
Terminology and documentation 4
Project management 4
Journalistic and editorial non-literary translation 3
Advertising and tourism translation 2
Literary, journalistic and audiovisual translation 2
Literary and editorial non-literary translation 2
Humanistic translation 2
Technical and scientific translation and localisation 1
Audiovisual, journalistic and advertising translation 1
Terminology and project management 1
Number of modules
Figure 2.3 Fields identified and total number of modules per field.
Table 2.2 Macro-classification of technologies in T&I syllabi
Group # Group name
General and common to other 1 Basic non-specific software and

fields hardware
2 Advanced non-specific software
3 Text editing and layout design
4 Information mining, corpora and
databases
5 Undefined
Specific to the translation field 6 Terminology
7 Computer-assisted translation
8 Project management
9 Machine translation
status of module,15 there were far more programme-specific compulsory

modules (65.27%) than elective (28.51%) and core (6.22%) modules.
In order to classify statements referring to technology, the codes were di
vided into nine groups, as shown in Table 2.2. For the purposes of this re
search, groups 6 to 9 were considered specific to the field of translation and
groups 1, 2, 3, 4 and 5 were considered general and common to other domains.
The “Undefined” group includes statements referring to tools or resources
that cannot be clearly defined as technology-based, given the lack of context in
which they appear in the syllabi. In addition to this binary classification,
statements have been classified according to whether they are conceptual (CE;
theoretical) or procedural (PE; skills and software) elements.
Preliminary findings and discussion

Based on the previous classification, the main themes that emerged from the
thematic analysis of the syllabi of T&I undergraduate degrees were estab
lished. The main themes included technological content of technology-based
modules and integration of technologies in translation modules. The classi
fication of the main themes is described in more detail in Appendix 2.16 All the
themes were organised following the sections common to all the syllabi, that is
to say Competencies, Content, Methodology and Assessment. In turn, they
were also organised by type of technology, following the macro-classification
shown in Table 2.2.
Technological content of technology-based modules

For the purpose of this study, technology-based modules (13.68%) are
deemed to be those belonging to the fields of Information mining; Project
management; Proofreading, Editing and Layout design; Technology and
Terminology. The modules covered in the practical translation modules
(86.32%) include those belonging to the fields of Audiovisual translation,
Editorial non-literary translation, Translation in the field of Humanities,
Institutional translation, Journalistic translation, Translation in the fields of
Law, Economics and Finance, Literary translation, Localisation, Marketing
translation, Non-specialised translation, Post-editing, Specialised translation,
Technical and Scientific translation and Tourism translation.
Of the technology-based modules, 24.26% are taught in the first year of
the degree, 21.32% in the second year, 39.71% in the third year, 20.59% in
the fourth year and 0.74% are elective modules that are not taught in a
specific year. Broadly speaking, in the first stage (first and second year of the
degree) the most common modules are those relating to Information mining,
and in the second stage (third and fourth year of the degree) the main focus
is on modules related to Terminology and Proofreading, Editing and Layout
design. Technology-related modules tend to be taught in the first and third
year of the degree, which suggests that technology-based training is con
sidered an important aspect at the first stages of T&I programmes. The
procedural knowledge acquired in these modules takes place long before the
final years, when students really need to master certain technological tools as
they will soon be embarking in a career in the industry. As for the status of
modules, most universities offer technology-based modules as programme-
specific compulsory modules (62.02%) or core (22.48%) modules, and they
are less frequently found as elective modules (15.50%). In addition, 6 credits
must be obtained for most technology-based modules (75.91%).
The technology-related statements analysed within these modules focus
on the sections common to all the syllabi, that is to say Competencies,
Content, Methodology17 and Assessment. Overall, it could be said that
technology-based modules in the T&I undergraduate degrees offered by
Spanish universities include a large number of technology-related elements.
However, as Table 2.3 shows, in the case of procedural elements, statements
relating to Information mining, corpora and databases – which could be
Table 2.3 Technological procedural (PE) and conceptual elements (CE) by syllabus
section per group in technology-based modules
Group # Competencies Content Methodology Assessment
% PE % CE % PE % CE % PE % CE % PE % CE
1 0.25 0.00 12.04 40.00 18.36 15.79 14.29 50.00

2 10.06 18.18 3.64 0.00 1.93 0.00 0.00 0.00
3 7.45 0.00 12.85 0.00 9.18 0.00 12.38 0.00
4 30.06 0.00 26.62 0.00 37.20 0.00 27.62 41.67
5 0.62 0.00 0.30 0.00 11.11 0.00 0.95 0.00
6 11.30 81.82 13.26 0.00 19.81 78.95 20.95 0.00
7 29.32 0.00 22.67 23.08 1.93 0.00 16.19 8.33
8 9.32 0.00 5.77 0.00 0.48 5.26 6.67 0.00
9 1.61 0.00 2.83 36.92 0.00 0.00 0.95 0.00
considered rather more generic – are those that appear most frequently in
the four sections analysed. It should also be noted that statements related to
CAT also are also quite frequent among the procedural elements of the
“Competencies” (29.32%), “Content” (22.67%) and “Assessment” (16.19%)
sections. With regard to the other statements analysed, it could be said that
there is a fair balance in all the sections between the technology-related
statements identified as generic and less specific to the field of translation
(groups 1 to 5) and those that pertain specifically to the field being studied
(groups 6 to 9).
In terms of conceptual elements, there are statements relating to basic
non-specific software and hardware in all sections and no evident and
homogeneous theoretical elements specific to the field of translation, such as
CAT, Machine translation or Terminology, are present.
These data are in line with the conclusions reached by other researchers
who carried out similar studies in Spain (e.g., Cid-Leal et al., 2019; Piqué &
Colominas, 2013) and drew attention to the insufficient presence of certain
translation technologies which are essential for the professional practice of
translation such as MT, PE, quality control and project management. This
study widens those results by contributing with the analysis of all – specific
and non-specific – translation technologies taught in T&I undergraduate
degrees. In this sense, it is worth noting that among the syllabi of techno
logical modules in the corpus analysed, there are modules that include a
wide variety of technological elements, ranging from the most generic – such
as internet and browsers, spreadsheets, OCR or text editing – to the most
specialised, for example, terminology extraction, text alignment, CAT,
quality control or MT.
Finally, although it is true that, today, the set of technology-related tools
that a professional translator needs include both tool types (i.e., generic and
specific), T&I curricula tend to include more generic elements than the
specific tools that are expected in the professional field of translation.
Integration of technologies in translation modules

When considering the extent to which technology-related content has been
integrated into the practical translation modules at Spanish HEI, the sec
tions that were common to all syllabi were also analysed. As stated above,
given that only technology-related statements in the syllabi have been coded,
it is not possible to calculate what percentage of the total content of a
module is technology-based. However, it has been possible to identify the
types of technology-based content and to assess which ones appear more
frequently in the syllabi.
As an advocate for integrating technologies into translation teaching
modules and meeting current industry demands, I would expect the practical
translation modules of T&I undergraduate degrees in Spain to integrate, to a
greater or lesser extent, the technology-related tools and knowledge that
have been studied in the undergraduate degrees’ technology-based modules,
in particular those tools that are specific to the field of translation. In fact, it
can be observed that the vast majority of the practical translation modules in
T&I undergraduate degrees in Spain include technology-based elements.
However, in many cases, the statements identified as relating to technology are
rather generic and not as specific to the field of translation (groups 1 to 5). As
can be seen in Table 2.4, the number of technology-related items that refer to
technologies specifically used in translation is fairly low, and they consist of
rather broad references to CAT, Terminology, Project Management and, to a
lesser extent, MT.
Statements on non-specific technologies are commonly found in all mod
ules. Nevertheless, in comparison with other fields, the specialisations in which
most technology-based statements (both generic and specifically related to the
field of translation) can be found are Localisation, Technical and Scientific
translation and Translation in the fields of Law, Economics and Finance.
From the data obtained, it could be inferred that the modules considered
technology-based and form part of T&I undergraduate degrees focus on
teaching the “how” in a fragmented and sometimes decontextualised way, as
there is usually no emphasis on the “why” learning or using such IT tools.
This suggests the absence of an approach in which these technologies –
especially those relating to translation – would empower students to pursue
a career in technology-based or IT terms, and improve their employability.
Therefore, it could be hypothesised that translation modules do not reflect
the state of the industry accurately enough in terms of the technology used
and thus professional translators might encounter substantial differences
in this sense when they embark in the translation market. Consequently,
the applied IT skills acquired by students taking some of these T&I un
dergraduate degrees cannot be considered to reach adequate or sufficient
Table 2.4 Technological procedural and conceptual elements by syllabus section per
group in practical translation modules
Group # Competencies Content Methodology Assessment
% PE % CE % PE % CE % PE % CE % PE % CE
1 9.44 100.00 2.23 25.00 11.29 100.00 11.88 100.00

2 0.03 0.00 1.08 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
3 7.55 0.00 1.62 0.00 2.36 0.00 0.42 0.00
4 39.42 0.00 60.26 0.00 68.11 0.00 48.12 0.00
5 0.59 0.00 2.30 0.00 0.00 0.00 3.77 0.00
6 7.67 0.00 5.96 0.00 8.92 0.00 21.76 0.00
7 24.02 0.00 21.87 0.00 8.14 0.00 13.39 0.00
8 9.88 0.00 2.64 0.00 0.52 0.00 1.67 0.00
9 1.41 0.00 2.03 75.00 0.66 0.00 0.00 0.00
levels to meet market demands and to acquire specific technology-related
skills, as stated in Massey (2019), TAUS (2019) or O’Brien and Rossetti
(2021), among others.
Conclusions
After rigorously selecting 994 syllabi of modules included in the 32 T&I
curricula sampled and following the qualitative and quantitative thematic
analysis of the data obtained, a comprehensive answer to the research ques
tions posed can be offered. In addition, an ad hoc classification of technologies
has been developed from this study, mapping out systematically all the
technology-based content of T&I undergraduate degrees currently taught in
Spanish HEI.
The empirical results confirm that, despite the fact that technology-based
modules often include exhaustive technology-related content that should meet
the current professional needs of a translator, there is no apparent integration
of such content into the practical translation modules. Furthermore, the
procedural knowledge provided by technology-based modules tends to be
acquired in the early stages of undergraduate degrees and is only touched
upon in the final years of study, when students need to master certain
technology-based tools to be able to meet the requirements of the labour
market. This fact is cause for concern because the time lag after the techno
logical skills are acquired in technology-based modules during the early stages
of undergraduate degrees means students may forget or not master such skills
when they start using them again in their final years at university.
In this respect, most practical translation modules taught in the final years
of undergraduate degrees often include some technology-related elements,
although some are treated in much greater depth than others, depending on
the area of specialisation concerned. In fact, there is a very limited number
of practical translation modules in which technology-related content is
thoroughly embedded into. On the contrary, the technology incorporated
into most of these modules is more general and common in other fields (e.g.,
Information mining, corpora and databases, or Text editing and layout
design) and their application to translation is not as frequently taught.
Nevertheless, this fact may simply reflect those technologies teachers are
comfortable with.
I believe that integrating technologies in the practical translation modules in
undergraduate degrees in a progressive and contextualised manner would
empower students’ technology-related skills and facilitate their entry into the
language and translation industry. In many cases, the failure to integrate
technologies in practical translation modules does not duly reflect the ways in
which professional translators work in the industry. This lack of integration
could explain why many students fail to internalise the habit of using these
technologies in specific translation contexts that emulate the work they will be
commissioned to undertake in the future, which means that, in many cases,
students will have to take additional courses on specific technologies the
translation field in the final years of their studies. This may also be the case
following completion of their undergraduate degree in order for them to learn
how to apply such technologies to the translation workflow. It is important to
state, though, that given the fact that teachers have relative freedom to teach
the software they feel is more appropriate, changing teachers’ attitudes and
work practices remains extremely difficult at the university.
As stated in the introduction, the results of the present study are part of a
larger research project comprising two major studies. This chapter partially
addresses the first study, i.e., investigating and defining the way translation
technologies are currently taught in Spanish universities. As part of future
research, the data will be analysed in further depth in order to determine
whether technology is fully embedded (or not) in the practical translation
modules, and if so at what level this can be observed, i.e., in Competencies,
Content, Methodology or Assessment. It should be borne in mind that a
textual corpus does not fully reflect the human factor, which is one of the
keys to the technology-related changes currently required in T&I under
graduate degrees at Spanish universities. For this reason, it is essential to
gain insight into the perceptions of those who teach practical translation
modules, in order to discover the way in which these modules are taught in
practice. This information will be used to complete the first stage of the
current study. Future studies developed from this current research will in
clude a comparison between the academic offer and the real demands of the
professional translation market. This will help build bridges between aca
demia and professional practice, bringing the reality of the profession as
close as possible to university classrooms.
Data availability statement

The raw data that support the findings of this chapter are available upon
request. Appendixes of this chapter are freely available in Repositori UJI at
https://repositori.uji.es/xmlui/handle/10234/194819.
Acknowledgements
Special thanks are due to Dr Anabel Borja and Dr Silvia Rodríguez-
Vázquez for their suggestions and constant support, as well as to the
anonymous peer reviewers of this chapter for their insightful feedback.
Notes
1 http://www.ehea.info/page-ministerial-conference-budapest-vienna-2010. Last accessed:
17 March 2021.
2 For the purpose of this study, the concept and definition of “Translation
Technologies” is based on O’Brien and Rodríguez Vázquez’s (2019) proposal: “In
its broadest sense translation technology is understood to include a large array of
computer tools that help translators do their jobs, including word processors;
spell, style and grammar checkers; the World Wide Web; corpus compilation and
analysis tools; terminology management tools; translation memory tools (TM);
translation management systems (TMS); and machine translation (MT)”.
3 This study focuses on “translation technologies” only, therefore interpreting
technologies are not under the remit of this research. The references to T&I
programmes throughout the chapter are due to the fact that undergraduate de
grees in Spain generally combine both disciplines of Translation and Interpreting.
4 White Paper: Translation and Interpreting Undergraduate Degrees.
5 In the Spanish T&I curricula analysed, “Information mining” is generally re
ferred to as “Documentación”.
6 See Appendix 1 at Repositori UJI: http://repositori.uji.es/xmlui/handle/10234/
194820
7 This selection does not take into account the addenda to syllabi introduced for
the second semester of the 2019–2020 academic year as a result of the need, in
some cases, to teach and assess modules in blended or online learning due to the
restrictions imposed in response to the Covid-19 health emergency.
8 67 in Catalan, 22 in Galician, 10 in Basque, 64 in English, 7 in German and 6 in
French.
9 Google Translate. Available in: https://translate.google.es/?hl=es. Last accessed:
20 January 2021.
10 As stated in the discussion section, these statements have been included in a
group entitled “Undefined”.
11 All the syllabi have been analysed in Spanish. For the purpose of this study, key
terms, groups and codes have been translated into English. See Appendix 2 (http://
repositori.uji.es/xmlui/handle/10234/194821) for an inductive and detailed classifi
cation of the translation technologies included in the syllabi of T&I courses.
12 Status is categorised according to the compulsory or non-compulsory nature of
the module, with three possible options: core modules, programme-specific
compulsory modules and elective modules.
13 Appendix 1 is freely available at Repositori UJI: http://repositori.uji.es/xmlui/
handle/10234/194820
14 This module is generally an introduction to the specific specialised translation
modules that students generally take in subsequent years.
15 The Universitat Pompeu Fabra (UPF) syllabi do not include information about
the status of module, so this university has not been included in the statistics.
16 Appendix 2 is freely available at Repositori UJI: http://repositori.uji.es/xmlui/
handle/10234/194821
17 University of Alicante syllabi do not include a Methodology section; therefore,
this university has been excluded from the analysis carried out in this section.
References
Alcina, A., Soler, V., & Granell, J. (2007). Translation technology skills acquisition.
Perspectives: Studies in Translatology, 15(4), 230–244. 10.1080/136700508022
80179
ANECA = Agencia Nacional de Evaluación de la Calidad y Acreditación (2004).
Libro blanco. Título de Grado en Traducción e Interpretación. ANECA. http://
www.aneca.es/var/media/150288/libroblanco_traduc_def.pdf
Astley, H., & Torres Hostench, O. (2017). The European graduate placement
scheme: An integrated approach to preparing master’s in translation graduates for
employment. The Interpreter and Translator Trainer, 11(2–3), 204–222. 10.1080/1
750399X.2017.1344813
Austermühl, F. (2013). Future (and not-so-future) trends in the teaching of trans
lation Technology. Revista Tradumàtica, 11, 326–337. 10.5565/rev/tradumatica.46
Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2006). Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative
Research in Psychology, 3(2), 77–101. 10.1191/1478088706qp063oa
Cid-Leal, P., Espín-García, M.-C., & Presas, M. (2019). Traducción automática y
posedición: perfiles y competencias en los programas de formación de traductores.
MonTI. Monografías de Traducción e Interpretación, 11, 187–214. 10.6035/MonTI.
2019.11.7
Doherty, S. (2016). The impact of translation technologies on the process and pro
duct of translation. International Journal of Communication, 10, 947–969. https://
ijoc.org/index.php/ijoc/article/view/3499/1573
EMT. (2017). European master’s in translation competence framework 2017. https://
ec.europa.eu/info/sites/default/files/emt_competence_fwk_2017_en_web.pdf
Hernández, R., Fernández, C., & Baptista, M. del P. (2010). Metodología de la in
vestigación (5th ed.) McGraw-Hill / Interamericana Editores, S.A. de C.V.
Kenny, D. (2020). Technology in translator training. In M. O’Hagan (Ed.), The
Routledge handbook of translation and technology (pp. 498–515). Routledge.
Kiraly, D. (2013). Towards a view of translator competence as an emergent phe
nomenon: Thinking outside the box(es) in translator education. In D. Kiraly,
S., Hansen-Schirra, & K. Maksymski (Eds.), New prospects and perspectives for
educating language mediators (pp. 197–224). Narr Verlag.
Krause, A. (2017). Program designing in translation and interpreting and employ
ability of future degree holders. In C. Valero Garcés & C. Pena Díaz (Eds.), AIEI
8: Superando límites en traducción e interpretación (pp. 147–158). Editions
Tradulex. http://www.tradulex.com/varia/AIETI8.pdf
Mahfouz, I. (2018). Attitudes to CAT tools: Application on Egyptian translation
students and professionals. Arab World English Journal, 4(4), 69–83. 10.24093/
awej/call4.6
Massey, G. (2019). Learning to learn, teach and develop: Co-emergent perspectives
on translator and language-mediator education. InTRAlinea. New insights into
translator training. Special issue. https://www.intralinea.org/index.php/specials/
article/2429
Mellinger, C. D. (2017). Translators and machine translation: Knowledge and skills
gaps in translator pedagogy. The Interpreter and Translator Trainer, 11(4),
280–293. 10.1080/1750399X.2017.1359760
O’Brien, S. & Rodríguez Vázquez, S. (2019). Translation and technology. In
S. Laviosa & M. González-Davies (Eds.), The Routledge handbook of translation
and education. Routledge.
O’Brien, S. & Rossetti, A. (2021). Neural machine translation and evolution of the
localisation sector: Implications for training. Journal of Internationalization and
Localization, 7(1/2), 95–121. 10.1075/jial.20005.obr
PACTE (2014). First results of PACTE group’s experimental research on translation
competence acquisition: The acquisition of declarative knowledge of translation.
MonTI. Monografías de Traducción e Interpretación. Special Issue, 1, 85–115.
10.6035/MonTI.2014.ne1.2
Piqué, R. & Colominas, C. (2013). Les tecnologies de la traducció en la formació de
grau de traductors i intèrprets. Revista Tradumàtica: tecnologies de la traducció,
11, 297–312. 10.5565/rev/tradumatica.43
Pym, A. (2013). Translation skill-sets in a machine-translation age. Meta, 58(3),
487–503. http://dx.doi.org/10.7202/1025047ar
Real Decreto 1393/2007, de 29 de octubre, por el que se establece la ordenación de
las enseñanzas universitarias oficiales. (2007). BOE-A-2007–18770. https://www.
boe.es/eli/es/rd/2007/10/29/1393/con
Rico, C. (2017). La formación de traductores en Traducción Automática. Revista
Tradumàtica, 15, 75–96. 10.5565/rev/tradumatica.200
Rodríguez Castro, M. (2018). An integrated curricular design for computer-assisted
translation tools: Developing technical expertise. The Interpreter and Translator
Trainer, 12(4), 355–374. /10.1080/1750399X.2018.1502007
Saldanha, G. & O’Brien, S. (2014). Research methodologies in translation studies.
Routledge. 10.4324/9781315760100
Sánchez-Castany, R. (2022). La formación en tecnologías: ¿una asignatura pendiente
en los estudios de traducción en la universidad española. In M. C. Balbuena (Ed.),
La traducción y la interpretación en tiempos de pandemia. Peter Lang.
Sánchez-Gijón, P. (2016). La posedición: Hacia una definición competencial del
perfil y una descripción multidimensional del fenómeno. Sendebar, 27, 151–162.
10.30827/sdb.v27i0.4016
TAUS. (2019). Keynotes summer 2019. TAUS Signature Editions. https://www.taus.
net/insights/reports/taus-keynotes-summer-2019
3 Translation, translation revision
and post-editing competence
models: Where are we now?
Isabelle Robert, Jim J. J. Ureel, and
Iris Schrijver
Introduction
Gone are the days where translators “simply translate”. Nowadays translation
proper is rarely the sole activity in the translation process. Translators reg-
ularly also revise, which entails reading a human translation to “find features
of a draft translation that fall short of what is acceptable […] and make or
recommend any needed corrections and needed improvements” (Mossop,
2020, p. 115). However, revising someone else’s translation is not the modern
translator’s only revision task. With the advancement of computer-assisted
translation (CAT) tools, translators now increasingly rely on translation
memories (TMs), allowing them to store previously translated texts (primarily
human translations) for potential reuse. Consequently, translators are in a
sense “revising”, that is, reading human translations1 to identify unacceptable
features and make required corrections and improvements. However, as ex-
plained by Aranberri (2017), TM-based revision is different since “[t]ransla-
tion memory matches are (or should be) correct translations of similar source
segments” (p. 90, our emphasis). In other words, “the translator must first
identify the difference between the stored source segment and the current
source segment, and then replace the differing part in the proposed
translation” (Aranberri, 2017, p. 90). Therefore, TM-based revision (i.e.,
revising TM matches) is slightly different from “revision proper” and is
often called “editing” (e.g., Jakobsen, 2019) or simply CAT. But that is
not all. CAT tools often integrate machine translation (MT) nowadays
when there is no adequate stored translation. In other words, as stated by
Pym (2013), translators become post-editors, with post-editing (PE) referring
to revising machine-generated output.
The reality that translators work less and less from scratch is recognised
by many scholars. For example, Jakobsen (2019) states that “interacting
with a modern translation system introduces new cognitive constraints by
altogether reconfiguring translational writing and revision into a new pro-
duction form with less writing and revision, more editing of TM matches,
and more post-editing of MT suggestions” (p. 66). Similarly, Koponen et al.
(2021) explain that “[a]s more translators are finding themselves checking
DOI: 10.4324/9781003223344-4
Competence models: Where are we now? 45
not only human translation but also machine outputs, traditional boundaries
between the functions of translators, revisers and post-editors are starting to
blur” (p. 3). In view of this evolution, one could expect Translation Studies
scholars to have investigated the competences required for such new working
conditions, and – in particular – the differences (if any) between translation
competence (TC), translation revision competence (TRC) and post-editing
competence (PEC). To our knowledge, this has rarely been the case, although
some scholars interested in PEC have compared it with TC or TRC (see
below, Comparing TC, TRC and PEC).
Scholars have investigated TC for a long time, in particular since the 1990s.
TC models such as PACTE (2003, 2005), Göpferich (2009) or EMT (2009,
2017) are well-established. Research interest in translation revision (TR) and
PE has been gaining momentum only in recent years, yielding a growing
number of publications, of which Koponen et al. (2021) provide an overview
in the introduction to their edited volume on TR and PE. Notwithstanding
this positive evolution, research into TRC and PEC remains limited. The aim
of this chapter is to provide a state-of-the-art review of TC, TRC and PEC
models, focusing on TRC and PEC and their similarities and differences
with TC.
Translation, translation revision and post-editing competences
Translation competence (TC)

Translation Studies has witnessed considerable research on TC and TC ac-
quisition (TAC or ATC). In August 2021, there were more than 1000 references
in the Translation Studies Bibliography (TSB) with “competence = skills” as a
keyword (thus including both translation and interpreting competence or skills)
and more than 240 references with “translation competence” as a term included
in the abstracts. In the open access Bibliography of Interpreting and Translation
(BITRA),2 a search for the term “translation competence” produced more than
1000 hits in the abstracts and more than 370 in the titles.
In TC discussions, scholars generally list existing multicomponential or
cognitive models of TC (or expertise). Examples are the models by Alves and
Gonçalves (2007), EMT (2009, 2017), González Davies (2004), Göpferich
(2009), Kelly (2005), Kiraly (2006), Muñoz Martín (2014), Neubert (2000),
PACTE (2003, 2005; Hurtado Albir, 2017) or Pym (2003), with his minimalist
definition of TC. For overviews, see, for example, Chodkiewicz (2020), Plaza
Lara (2016) and Tiselius and Hild (2017). Consequently, we will not revisit
these models here but focus on a recent model, that of Kumpulainen (2018), in
particular because of its “bottom-up” approach.
According to Kumpulainen (2018), traditional TC models (e.g., PACTE,
Göpferich) focus on “the acquisition of sub-competences that set translators
apart from other language professionals” (p. 148). In other words, these
models also presuppose that novices have only partially acquired various
46 Isabelle Robert et al.
sub-competences, which suggest that “ATC is about strengthening existing
sub-competences and their interplay in the translation process” (p. 148). For
Kumpulainen, these models consequently pay little attention to the first
steps of becoming a translator, such as developing the basic linguistic
competence required for translation. She classifies the existing models as
top-down models (i.e., models designed from the expert translator’s per-
spective). By contrast, Kumpulainen (2018) emphasises the first steps and
proposes a “bottom-up”, situation-based TC framework, which focuses on
the linguistic elements of TC and “refers to any mediation between two
languages, from the simplest everyday situation to a complex professional
scene” (p. 148).
For Kumpulainen (2018), there is no universal set of abilities that
collectively constitute TC, but “different translation situations create
different frames for TC” (p. 151). She distinguishes between (1) knowl-
edge needed (to some degree) in all translation situations and (2)
knowledge needed (to varying degrees) in different types of translation
situations. Therefore, her framework is appropriate for representing
professional and “rudimentary” translation situations. The first type
of knowledge is “interlingual text production competence”, which is at
the core of TC and the “skill that defines translation” (p. 151). In
Kumpulainen’s model, language skills are a precondition for interlingual
text-production competence and are, therefore, not a sub-competence as
they are in other TC models, where language skills seem to be on the same
level as other sub-competences (e.g., extralinguistic competence). For
Kumpulainen, “knowledge about translation” is a knowledge type that
plays a role in all situations. The level of knowledge sophistication is
situation-dependent. Other types of knowledge in Kumpulainen’s TC
model are at the service of interlingual text production and are defined as
“contributory knowledge” required for text production. Contributory
knowledge consists of “task-specific knowledge/skills” and “information
skills”, required to varying degrees according to the situation, but not in
all situations. Task-specific knowledge/skills include extralinguistic
knowledge, field and thematic knowledge, intercultural knowledge and
knowledge related to translation technology. This last knowledge type
has a different function than the others because contrary to subject-field
or intercultural knowledge, it needs “to emerge as a skill in the transla-
tion process” (p. 157). It is not enough for translators to know about
translation tools, they also have to be able to use them in the production
process. Information skills are related to documentary research and in-
formation literacy and also serve the purpose of interlingual text pro-
duction. Similar to knowledge related to translation technology, it is not
enough to know what, translators also have to know how to look for
information. The sub-competences considered contributory knowledge
are well-known from other TC models.
Translation revision competence (TRC)
There is much less research on TRC than on TC, although, almost a decade
ago, it was already considered part of the modern translator’s skill set (Pym,
2013). “Revision” is a keyword in the TSB. Grouped under the label “editing/
revising/revision”, it generates just over 340 references (August 2021). When
“revision competence” (or “editing competence”) is used in BITRA (“all
fields”), we find some 80 references.
For TRC, Robert et al. (2017) designed a model based on well-established
TC models (PACTE, Göpferich, EMT) and on related research on revision
training and competence (Bisaillon, 2007; Hansen, 2009; Horguelin & Brunette,
1998; Kelly, 2005; Künzli, 2006; Mossop, 1992). Their multicomponential TRC
model consists of nine interconnected sub-competences and three contextual
variables. Four sub-competences are known from TC models and are expected
to be the same in TC and TRC models: (1) the bilingual sub-competence,
(2) the extralinguistic sub-competence, (3) the knowledge-about-translation
sub-competence and (4) translation routine activation. Two sub-competences
are inspired by TC models but are considered only partially similar to their TC
counterparts: (1) the tools-and-research sub-competence and (2) the inter-
personal sub-competence. The remaining three sub-competences are revision-
specific: (1) the knowledge-about-revision sub-competence, (2) the revision
routine activation sub-competence and (3) the strategic sub-competence for
revision. Robert et al. (2017) also include three factors that determine and
control the use of all sub-competences: (1) translation and revision norms and
briefs, (2) the translator’s/reviser’s self-concept or professional ethos and (3) the
translator’s/reviser’s psycho-physiological dispositions (see also Rigouts Terryn
et al., 2017). The [institution] researchers (Rigouts Terryn et al., 2017; Robert
et al. 2017; Robert et al., 2018) started validating their TRC model by focusing
on the tools-and-research sub-competence, the knowledge-about-revision sub-
competence, the strategic sub-competence and the fairness-and-tolerance atti-
tudinal component, which is one of the psycho-physiological components of the
model.3 They conducted an experiment with 21 students, assigned to an ex-
perimental group (revision training) or a control group (no revision training).
Results showed that participants in the experimental group used the same
search tools as those in the control group, but did so more frequently. They
conducted more searches to justify changes and searches were more thorough.
In addition, they were also more tolerant of word choice and made fewer
unnecessary changes. However, the experimental group did not revise better,
that is, they did not introduce a higher number of necessary changes (an in-
dicator of the revision strategic sub-competence).
Around the same time, Robin (2016) proposed a TRC model, based on
Horváth (2011) and Robin (2014). Her model consists of seven sub-
competences: (1) ameliorative (improving translations), (2) evaluative
(evaluating translations), (3) translation (remedying translation omissions),
(4) comparative–contrastive (comparing translations with originals),
(5) corrective (correcting errors), (6) linguistic (applying linguistic rules,
norms and strategies) and (7) decision-making (determining if corrections are
necessary). The model is essentially not significantly different from Robert,
Remael and Ureel’s model (2017). However, it rearranges some sub-
competences, while omitting or adding others. In our view, Robin’s model is
more like a process model than a competence model, with all sub-competences
essentially describing the processes or the steps described in Robert, Remael
and Ureel’s strategic revision sub-competence. Robin’s evaluative sub-
competence corresponds with the second step in the description of Robert,
Remael and Ureel’s strategic sub-competence (i.e., “reading for evaluation”).
The comparative sub-competence partly corresponds with the third step (i.e.,
“applying a detection strategy”), the corrective, ameliorative and translation
sub-competences also correspond with the fourth step (i.e., “applying an
immediate solution or problem-solving strategy”). The decision-making sub-
competence corresponds with the last step (i.e., “making only the necessary
changes, taking the main revision principle into account”). Surprisingly,
Robin presents linguistic sub-competence on the same level as the other sub-
competences, whereas it does not seem to be a process sub-competence as
such but rather knowledge and skills required to deploy the different steps
described.
More recently, Scocchera (2017) proposed a multicomponential TRC model.
Like Robert, Remael and Ureel’s model (2017), Scocchera’s model draws on
approximately the same insights from previous research. Consequently, both
TRC models resemble one another to some extent. Scocchera’s TRC model
consists of six (sub)competences: analytical-critical competence, operational
competence, metalinguistic-descriptive competence, interpersonal competence,
instrumental competence and psycho-physiological competence. Scocchera
(2017) describes the analytical-critical competence as “the ability to identify,
analyse, describe, classify and evaluate translation errors or problems” (p. 221,
our translation). In principle, this competence corresponds with the strategic
competence described by Künzli (2006) as the ability “to develop a task
definition for the revision job at hand, to apply relevant evaluative criteria,
and to decide what to do after a problem has been detected” (p. 9). It is
also closely related to the strategic sub-competence in Robert, Remael and
Ureel’s model (2017):
plan and carry out the revision task: selecting the most adequate procedure
in view of the task definition, reading for evaluation, applying a detection
strategy (anticipation and/or comparison), applying an immediate solution or
problem-solving strategy, making only the necessary changes, taking the main
revision principle into account; […] Definition based on PACTE (2003, 59;
2011a), Bisaillon (2007b), Künzli (2006b). (our emphasis) (p. 14)
As far as operational competence is concerned, Scocchera (2017) draws on

Künzli (2006) and Hansen (2009). She describes operational competence as
follows: once translation problems have been identified, analysed, described,
classified and evaluated, revisers must then call upon their own translation
expertise, in particular their text production skills, to make justified revision
interventions. Robert et al. (2017) also include this competence, albeit less
explicitly: “making only the necessary changes, taking the main revision
principle into account” (p. 14). Scocchera (2017) also defines metalinguistic
competence more explicitly as the “ability to describe, explain, motivate, and
justify translation problems and revision interventions using appropriate
concepts and language” (p. 222) (our translation, our emphasis). This is
what Robert et al. (2017) refer to as “meaningful feedback” (p. 14) in
the description of interpersonal competence in their TRC model. The
interpersonal, instrumental and psycho-physiological competences that
Scocchera distinguishes are similar to those described by Robert et al.
(2017), although Scocchera explicitly mentions the use of the main word-
processing programs and their review functionalities for instrumental
competence.
To our knowledge, no other TRC models exist. However, there are studies
in which scholars report on revision training experience (for an overview, see
Koponen et al., 2021; Mossop, 2020; Robert et al., 2018).
Post-editing competence (PEC)

As was the case for TRC, research on PEC is scarce (some 30 references in
BITRA). However, PE has been investigated extensively (for an overview, see
Koponen, 2016; Koponen et al., 2021, pp. 1–17; Nunes Vieira et al., 2019).
One of the first scholars to address the post-editor’s profile from a peda-
gogical perspective is O’Brien (2002). She first lists a series of skills or
knowledge types – previously suggested by other scholars – that are skills
generally expected from translators. Exceptions are the ability to use macros,
code dictionaries for MT and develop a positive attitude towards MT. These
are three skills required of post-editors that are not usually required of
translators. She then suggests several other necessary components for suc-
cessful PE: knowledge of MT technology, terminology-management skills,
pre-editing/controlled language skills, programming skills and text-linguistic
skills. In many ways, “the profile of a good post-editor fits a good translator.
However, there is one significant and very important difference: the ability to
decide – within a few seconds – whether a translation should be discarded.
Many translators tend to spend too much time on this decision process”
(O’Brien, 2002, p. 156). Later, O’Brien (2010) again addresses the post-editor’s
profile and concludes with a series of sub-competences needed to post-edit,
which roughly coincide with those previously identified: (1) knowledge of the
source and target languages, (2) specialised domain knowledge, (3) excellent
keyboarding skills, (4) good revision skills, (4) ability to make quick assess-
ments and to adhere to guidelines, (5) tolerance and (6) a positive attitude to
MT, to which she had previously added MT-related skills (O’Brien et al., 2009)
such as knowledge of MT, term management skills, pre-editing/controlled
language skills and basic programming skills. The same year, de Almeida
and O’Brien (2010) emphasise three features of good PE performance, at
least for localisation: (1) the ability to identify issues – in raw MT output –
that must be addressed and to fix them appropriately, which they call
“essential changes”, (2) the ability to carry out PE tasks with reasonable
speed (on average approximately 5,000 words per day) and (3) the ability
to adhere to guidelines to minimise the number of “preferential changes”,
which are normally outside the scope of PE. These features are interesting,
since they are more at the core of the PE process: to identify and fix issues,
which is similar to the essence of revision.
The first PEC model, introduced by Rico and Torrejón (2012), is a top-
down model, with the set of all necessary sub-competences from the expert’s
point of view. One could argue that Rico and Torrejón (2012) integrate
Offersgaard et al.’s (2008) and O’Brien’s (2002) insights into three groups of
competences. First, the “core competences”, which consist of, on the one
hand, “the attitudinal or psycho-physiological competence that allows the
post-editor to cope with subjectivity issues involved in defining and applying
PE specifications” (Rico & Torrejón, 2012, p. 170) and, on the other hand,
“the strategic competence that helps post-editors reach informed decisions
when choosing among different PE alternatives, following the directions as
mechanically as possible and showing no stylistic concerns, if required, even
when faced with low quality output” (p. 170). Second, the “linguistic skills”,
which are “related to skills usually demanded of a translator, and refer to
excellent knowledge of source and target language, familiarity with post-
editing directions/guidelines, communicative and textual competence in at
least two languages and cultures, along with cultural and intercultural
competence and subject area competence” (p. 170). In other words, although
the authors use the term “linguistic skills”, they combine two well-known
sub-competences from TC models: the linguistic and extra-linguistic sub-
competences (also called communicative competences and domain compe-
tence respectively). Last, “instrumental competence”, which is related to
technical skills: knowledge of MT systems and their capabilities, termi-
nology management skills, MT dictionary maintenance (for rule-based
systems), corpus quality assessment skills (for example-based and statis-
tical engines), controlled language pre-editing skills and programming skills
(for creating macros or scripts for automated correction). Compared with
what others have suggested before, Rico and Torrejón’s model does not
include a new sub-competence, but theirs is, to our knowledge, the first
tentative PEC model. This may explain why subsequent publications on PE
training or competence generally refer to Rico and Torrejón as well as
O’Brien. Examples are Austermühl (2013), Koponen (2015), Sánchez-Gijón
(2016), Aranberri (2017) and Guerberof Arenas and Moorkens (2019).
A more recent PEC model is Nitzke et al.’s (2019). They propose not only
a PEC model, but also a PE decision model, which specifies different criteria
that help to decide if and how to post-edit. In their decision model, Nitzke
et al. (2019) emphasise that a “post-editor must be able to make informed
decisions concerning risk assessment and MT and PE considerations” and
“needs specific competences to be able to fulfil all the requirements of such a
task” (p. 247). Drawing on this model, they adapt translators’ and revisers’
competence criteria to outline a top-down PEC model, based on PACTE’s
(2003) TC model and Robert, Remael and Ureel’s TRC model (2017).
Their PEC model comprises four core competences and eight subsidiary
sub-competences, with PEC surprisingly listed as one of the subsidiary sub-
competences. In contrast, the first core competence is risk assessment com-
petence or the “ability to assess the risk of the text to be translated”, which is
“one of the most important competences a post-editor needs” (Nitzke et al.,
2019, p. 248). The second core competence is strategic competence, which
comprises post-editors’ decisions – based on risk assessment – to apply full or
light PE for the translation task or to use only MT. The third core competence
is consulting competence, which is, depending on risk assessment and strategic
decisions, the ability “to inform the customer or project manager about po-
tential risks as well as problem-solving strategies” (p. 248). The fourth core
competence is service competence, which states that “the post-editor should be
able to calculate prices competently, consciously, and transparently con-
sidering the quality of the MT output and the necessary PE effort” (p. 248).
Furthermore, this competence includes the ability to use state-of-the-art CAT,
revision tools and integrated MT systems.
Nitzke et al. (2019) also list eight subsidiary sub-competences: (1) bilingual
competence, (2) extralinguistic competence, (3) instrumental competence, (4)
research competence, (5) revision competence, (6) TC, (7) MT competence
and (8) PE competence. The first four sub-competences are similar to their
namesakes in TC and TRC models and will not be described here. Nitzke et al.
(2019) describe revision competence as the ability to “develop strategies for
consciously reading a text, not written by him or herself” and to “handle the
trade-off between necessary changes and over-editing” (p. 249). TC implies
metaknowledge about the translation and revision processes, including,
among others, knowledge about text-type conventions, style guides and
controlled languages. Additionally, post-editors must “know how an MT
system works and which possible pitfalls it may generate” (Nitzke et al., 2019,
p. 249), since the problems are generally different from those in human
translations and often related to MT-system architecture. Nitzke et al. (2019)
believe that ideally post-editors should be able to assess the quality of MT
training materials and even improve the training process if necessary. All this
forms MT competence. Finally, PEC is the ability to spot more fine-grained
problems that are produced by neural MT, in comparison to SMT, where
the errors are easier to identify. “[E]rrors triggered by neural MT are harder
to identify since the MT output is more fluent and correct, which leads
to the problem of overlooking mistakes which are not obvious […]”
(Nitzke et al., 2019, p. 249). In addition, as is the case in PACTE’s (2003) and
Robert et al. (2017) models, Nitzke et al. (2019) include factors such as psycho-
physiological components, post-editors’ self-perception, PE briefs including
guidelines for the PE tasks, and an affinity for technology and computers. For
the authors, concentration, sustained attention, stress-resistance, logical rea-
soning, analytical thinking and quick-wittedness are particularly important for
post-editors. It might be surprising that a PEC model includes a sub-
competence called PEC as well and that that particular sub-competence is not
one of the core sub-competences. That may partly explain the revised version
of that model by Nitzke and Hansen-Schirra (2021). In this updated model,
PEC is represented as a “house of PE competences” (p. 69), whose architecture
is grounded on TC (including bilingual, extralinguistic and research compe-
tence). In other words, it is expected that post-editors are skilled translators
since “they need the same basic skill set” (p. 70). The house model further
consists of three pillars, which are three additional competences: error hand-
ling, MT engineering and consulting. Depending on the job profile and the
post-editor’s specialisation, the three additional competences can play a major
or minor role. For example, when practical PE is at the core of the job profile,
the main focus will be on error handling, that is, error spotting (i.e., “problem
detection”), error classification and error correction (i.e., “problem solving”).
Next, the house model also includes a roof representing the soft skills for post-
editors such as risk assessment and service provision. Finally, psycho-
physiological components, such as stress resistance or quick-wittedness, are
also part of the model. In our view, this is a highly relevant, clearly structured
and successful revision of the model, which offers the necessary flexibility to
include different post-editor profiles.
In addition to the three PEC models above, some scholars have discussed
the different skills necessary to post-edit in broader training or professional
contexts (e.g., Blagodarna, 2018; Ginovart Cid et al., 2020; Mellinger, 2017;
Sánchez-Gijón, 2016).
Comparing TC, TRC and PEC

TC, TRC and PEC are sometimes compared without any systematic and
full, comparative analysis. For example, in their paper on TC development,
Mendoza García and Ponce Márquez (2013) conclude that acquiring and
developing “proofreading/correction competence” is key to TC development
in general. In his contribution on future trends in teaching translation
technology, Austermühl (2013) emphasises the importance of revision skills
(in addition to research skills), stating that “revising is the new translating”
(p. 331), although he probably means PE. In an article on language learner
employability in PE settings, Yamada (2015) observes that “students earning
low grades in a traditional translation class are less likely to be high-quality
post-editors; however, this trend does not guarantee that A-students will be
qualified post-editors, implying that PE and HT [human translation] may
require different skill sets and training” (p. 59). More recently, Yamada (2019)
explains that neural MT (NMT) produces human-like errors, which make it
more difficult for students to post-edit. In other words, NMT+PE “requires
almost the same competence as ordinary human translation” (p. 102).
Therefore, Yamada argues that translation training is necessary for students
to be able to shift their attention to the right problems and be effective post-
editors. Finally, in a discussion of a PE course, Koponen (2015) states that
with the increase in the use of MT and PE workflows, PE research and
teaching PE skills have become necessary. She expects these skills to be shared
with traditional human TC. However, since PE has been found to be different
from human translation as well as from the revision of human-translated texts
– in terms of both cognitive processes and practical goals processes – Koponen
argues that there are probably skills that are PE-specific.
To our knowledge, Konttinen et al. (2021) is the only thorough com-
parative discussion of TRC and PEC. They examine commonalities and
differences between TRC and PEC competences to identify “a basis for an
efficient and pedagogically effective model for teaching revision and post-
editing in translator education programmes” (p. 188). They set aside those
sub-competences that are shared with TC and concentrate on TR-specific or
PE-specific sub-competences: the strategic, interpersonal and instrumental
sub-competences. They further distinguish between aspects common to both
activities and specific to TR or PE. Within the strategic sub-competence, the
common aspect is detecting, identifying and evaluating errors, as well as
information seeking, which is, in our view, probably not TRC-/PEC-specific.
Next, they add knowledge about revision and typical human translation
errors as aspects specific to TR, and knowledge about MT systems and
typical MT errors as PE-specific. This view is particularly interesting since it
not only recognises the importance of specific knowledge about TR or PE,
different from the knowledge about translation, but also sets it apart, not on
the same level as other sub-competences (linguistic, extralinguistic, etc.), but
as part of strategic sub-competence. In so doing, the authors’ view aligns
with Kumpulainen’s (2018), who also states that knowledge about (in her
case) translation is necessary in all situations and is not simply a sub-
competence that you might need in some situations. However, in view of the
evolution of NMT and of the fact that errors in NMT become increasingly
difficult to detect (Yamada, 2019), the question is whether specific knowledge
about typical human errors versus typical MT errors will remain necessary.
Conclusion
It is clear that TC, TRC and PEC models share some components or sub-
competences while still being different. This is the result of scholars building
on existing models to design their own, hypothesising that TC, TRC and
PEC are different but share common ground. We support this hypothesis.
However, the question remains how different the three competences are and,
for example, whether two of them are closer to each other than to the third.
First, one could hypothesise that TRC and PEC are more similar to each
other than to TC, since TR and PE, contrary to translation, share the same
starting point: an existing target text. Our rationale is based on Pym’s (2003)
minimalist definition of TC as the ability to generate a series of more than
one viable translation and the ability to select only one viable translation
from this series, quickly and with justified confidence. If translation gen-
eration and selection are at the core of TC, this is where TC differs from
TRC. In TR, translation generation and selection are not required (as least
not initially), since a translation already exists. The same holds for PE,
except that translations are produced by machines and not human trans-
lators. This is also the view of Pym (2013) when he discusses the translator’s
skill sets in the current MT age.
Second, one might consider new voices on the issue, such as do Carmo and
Moorkens’s (2021) plea for “a re-understanding of PE as a translation process
rather than a revision one” (p. 35). They explain that there are indeed strong
arguments in favour of considering PE a form of revision, referring to studies
that have shown that translators, when PE, spend most of their time on pauses
rather than on keyboard actions (Koehn, 2009, Ortiz-Martínez et al., 2016, as
cited in do Carmo & Moorkens, 2021, p. 40). Although this suggests that PE,
like TR, involves more reading than writing, do Carmo and Moorkens (2021)
argue that this is not sufficient to consider PE a form of revision. Their ra-
tionale is the following:
To be a form of revision, the only aim of PE would be to eliminate

errors from a finalised translation, the difference being that this finalised
translation had been produced by an MT system rather than a human
translator. But in a professional translation workflow, this fundamental
condition is not met by PE, because MT does not produce a finalised
translation. MT text is only an “output”, or a set of “suggestions” or
“hypotheses” for the translation of a text. Instead, it is the posteditor –
the translator – who is responsible for the final translation. (p. 40)
In addition, the authors explain that current workflows do sometimes in-

clude full revisions of post-edited texts before delivery to clients. In view of
these recent insights, the question of how different the three competences are
remains open and requires further empirical research. For example, Robert
et al. (2021) collected and analysed translation, TR and PE data from eleven
graduate translation trainees in a pilot study on inverse translation. Results
show that TRC and PEC appear to be different competences, with trainees
performing overall better for TR than PE. However, TRC and PEC appear
to have a common core, which does not differ significantly across tasks:
problem detection. This is in line with Nitzke and Hansen-Schirra’s (2021)
and Yamada’s (2019) statements about NMT errors being more human-like
and thus more difficult to identify. If human translation and NMT errors are
becoming similar, detecting them will increasingly require the same skills or
core competence(s).
To conclude, pilot studies are a start to investigating the intricate and
highly interesting similarities and differences between translation, TR and
PEC. Large-scale studies are necessary and should not only include separate
tasks to measure each competence on its own, but also hybrid tasks in a
CAT-tool environment to increase ecological validity.
Notes
1 Human translations may actually be MT post-edited segments, approved and
stored in TMs. In other words, at a later stage, some segments appearing as human
translations might, in fact, not be “purely” human.
2 Available at https://aplicacionesua.cpd.ua.es/tra_int/usu/buscar.asp
3 Fairness and tolerance is related to the “revising frame of mind” as opposed to
retranslating. The question revisers should ask themselves is whether the text must
be improved and not whether it can be improved.
References
Alves, F. & Gonçalves, J. L. (2007). Modelling translator’s competence: Relevance
and expertise under scrutiny. In Y. Gambier, M. Shlesinger, & R. Stolze (Eds.),
Doubts and directions in Translation Studies (pp. 41–55). John Benjamins. 10.1075/
btl.72.07alv
Aranberri, N. (2017). What do professional translators do when post-editing for the
first time? First insight into the Spanish–Basque language pair. Hermes: Journal of
Language and Communication in Business, 56, 89–110. 10.7146/hjlcb.v0i56.97235
Austermühl, F. (2013). Future (and not-so-future) trends in the teaching of trans-
lation technology. Tradumàtica: Tecnologies de la Traduciò, 11, 326–337. 10.5565/
rev/tradumatica.46
Bisaillon, J. (2007). Professional editing strategies used by six editors. Written
Communication, 24(4), 295–322. 10.1177/0741088307305977
Blagodarna, O. (2018). Enhancement of post-editing performance: Introducing ma-
chine translation post-editing in translator training [Unpublished doctoral dis-
sertation]. Autonomous University of Barcelona.
Chodkiewicz, M. (2020). Understanding the development of translation competence.
Peter Lang. 10.3726/b17378
de Almeida, G., & O’Brien, S. (2010, May 27–28). Analysing post-editing perfor-
mance: Correlations with years of translation experience [Paper presentation]. 14th
Conference of the European Association for Machine Translation, Saint Raphaël,
France.
do Carmo, F. & Moorkens, J. (2021). Differentiating editing, post-editing and re-
vision. In M. Koponen, B. Mossop, I. S. Robert, & G. Scocchera (Eds.),
Translation revision and post-editing: Industry practices and cognitive processes
(pp. 35–49). Routledge. 10.4324/9781003096962-4
EMT Expert Group. (2009). Competences for professional translators, experts in
multilingual and multimedia communication. http://ec.europa.eu/dgs/translation/
programmes/emt/key_documents/emt_competences_translators_en.pdf
EMT Expert Group. (2017). EMT Competence framework 2017. https://ec.europa.
eu/info/sites/info/files/emt_competence_fwk_2017_en_web.pdf
Ginovart Cid, C., Colominas, C., & Oliver, A. (2020). Language industry views on the
profile of the post-editor. Translation Spaces, 9(2), 283–313. 10.1075/ts.19010.cid
González Davies, M. (2004). Multiple voices in the translation classroom: Activities,
tasks and projects. John Benjamins. 10.1075/btl.54
Göpferich, S. (2009). Towards a model of translation competence and its acquisition:
The longitudinal study TransComp. In S. Göpferich, A. L. Jakobsen, & I. M. Mees
(Eds.), Behind the mind: Methods, models and results in translation process research
(pp. 11–37). Samfundslitteratur.
Guerberof Arenas, A., & Moorkens, J. (2019). Machine translation and post-editing
training as part of a master’s programme. JoSTrans: The Journal of Specialised
Translation, 31, 217–238. https://www.jostrans.org/issue31/art_guerberof.pdf
Hansen, G. (2009). The speck in your brother’s eye – the beam in your own: Quality
management in translation and revision. In G. Hansen, A. Chesterman, & H.
Gerzymisch-Arbogast (Eds.), Efforts and models in interpreting and translation
research: A tribute to Daniel Gile (pp. 255–280). John Benjamins. 10.1075/btl.80.
19han
Horguelin, P. A. & Brunette, L. (1998). Pratique de la révision. Linguatech.
Horváth, P. I. (2011). A szakfordítások lektorálása: Elmélet és gyakorlat [Revising
specialised translations: Theory and practice]. Segédkönyvek a nyelvészet
tanulmányozásához 117. Tinta Könyvkiadó.
Hurtado Albir, A. (Ed.). (2017). Researching translation competence by PACTE
group. John Benjamins. 10.1075/btl.127
Jakobsen, A. L. (2019). Moving translation, revision, and post-editing boundaries.
In H. V. Dam, M. Nisbeth Brøgger, & K. Korning Zethsen (Eds.), Moving
boundaries in translation studies (pp. 64–80). Routledge. 10.4324/9781315121871-5
Kelly, D. (2005). A handbook for translator trainers: A guide to reflective practice. St.
Jerome.
Kiraly, D. (2006), Beyond social constructivism: Complexity theory and translator
education. Translation and Interpreting Studies, 6(1), 68–86. 10.1075/tis.1.1.05kir
Koehn, Philipp (2009). A process study of computer-aided translation. Machine
Translation, 23, 241–263.10.1007/s10590-010-9076-3
Konttinen, K., Salmi, L., & Koponen, M. (2021). Revision and post-editing com-
petences in translator education. In M. Koponen, B. Mossop, I. S. Robert, & G.
Scocchera (Eds.), Translation revision and post-editing: Industry practices and
cognitive processes (pp. 187–202). Routledge. 10.4324/9781003096962-15
Koponen, M. (2015, October 30–November 3). How to teach machine translation
post-editing?: Experiences from a post-editing course [Paper presentation]. 4th
Workshop on Post-Editing Technology and Practice (WPTP4), Miami, FL,
United States.
Koponen, M. (2016). Is machine translation post-editing worth the effort?: A survey
of research into post-editing and effort. JoSTrans: The Journal of Specialised
Translation, 25, 131–148. https://www.jostrans.org/issue25/art_koponen.pdf
Koponen, M., Mossop, B., Robert, I. S., & Scocchera, G. (Eds.). (2021). Translation
revision and post-editing: Industry practices and cognitive processes. Routledge.
10.4324/9781003096962
Kumpulainen, M. (2018). Translation competence from the acquisition point of
view: A situation-based approach. Translation, Cognition & Behavior, 1(1),
147–167. 10.1075/tcb.00007.kum
Künzli, A. (2006). Teaching and learning translation revision: Some suggestions
based on evidence from a think-aloud protocol study. In M. Garant (Ed.), Current
trends in translation teaching and learning (pp. 9–24). Helsinki University.
Mellinger, C. D. (2017). Translators and machine translation: Knowledge and skills
gaps in translator pedagogy. The Interpreter and Translation Trainer. 10.1080/175
0399X.2017.1359760
Mendoza García, I., & Ponce Márquez, N. (2013). The relevance of the reviewer’s
role: A methodological proposal for the development of the translation compe-
tence. Skopos, 2, 87–110.
Mossop, B. (1992). Goals of a revision course. In C. Dollerup & A. Loddegaard
(Eds.), Teaching translation and interpreting: Training, talent and experience.
Papers from the first Language International Conference Elsinore, Denmark, 31
May–2 June 1991 (pp. 81–90). John Benjamins. 10.1075/z.56.14mos
Mossop, B. (with J. Hong & C. Teixeira). (2020). Revising and editing for translators
(4th ed.). Routledge. 10.4324/9781315158990
Muñoz Martín, R. (2014). Situating translation expertise: A review with a sketch of a
construct. In J. W. Schwieter & A. Ferreira (Eds.), The development of translation
competence: Theories and methodologies from psycholinguistics and cognitive sci-
ence (pp. 2–57). Cambridge Scholars.
Neubert, A. (2000). Competence in language, in languages, and in translation. In
C. Schäffner & B. Adab (Eds.), Developing translation competence (pp. 3–18).
John Benjamins. 10.1075/btl.38.03neu
Nitzke, J. & Hansen-Schirra, S. (2021). A short guide to post-editing. Language
Science Press. http://langsci-press.org/catalog/book/319
Nitzke, J., Hansen-Schirra, S., & Canfora, C. (2019). Risk management and post-
editing competence. JoSTrans: The Journal of Specialised Translation, 31,
239–259. https://www.jostrans.org/issue31/art_nitzke.pdf
Nunes Vieira, L., Alonso, E., & Bywood, L. (Eds.). (2019). Post-editing in practice:
Process, product and networks [Special issue]. The Journal of Specialised
Translation, 31. https://jostrans.org/archive.php?display=31
O’Brien, S. (2002). Teaching post-editing: A proposal for course content. In
Proceedings of the Sixth EAMT Workshop: Teaching Machine Translation
(pp. 99–106). https://www.aclweb.org/anthology/2002.eamt-1.11.pdf
O’Brien, S. (2010, October 31–November 4). Introduction to post-editing: Who, what,
how and where to next? [Paper presentation]. AMTA 2010: The Ninth Conference
of the Association for Machine Translation in the Americas, Denver, CO, United
States. http://www.mt-archive.info/10/AMTA-2010-OBrien.pdf
O’Brien, S., Roturier, J., & de Almeida, G. (2009). Post-editing MT output: Views
from the researcher, trainer, publisher and practitioner [Paper presentation]. 12th
Machine Translation Summit of the International Association for Machine
Translation, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada.
Offersgaard, L., Povlsen, C., Almsten, L., & Maegaard, B. (2008, September 22–23).
Domain specific MT in use [Paper presentation]. 12th Conference of the European
Association for Machine Translation, Hamburg, Germany.
Ortiz-Martínez, Daniel, González-Rubio, Jesús, Alabau, Vicent, Sanchis-Trilles,
Germán, & Casacuberta, Francisco (2016). Integrating Online and Active
Learning in a Computer-Assisted Translation Workbench, New Directions in
Empirical Translation Process Research,New Frontiers in Translation Studies
(pp. 57–76).Springer International10.1007/978-3-319-20358-4_3
PACTE. (2003). Building a translation competence model. In F. Alves (Ed.),
Triangulating translation: Perspectives in process oriented research (pp. 43–66).
John Benjamins. 10.1075/btl.45.06pac
PACTE. (2005). Investigating translation competence: Conceptual and methodolo-
gical issues. Meta, 50(2), 609–619. http://www.erudit.org/revue/META/2005/v50/
n2/011004ar.html
Plaza Lara, C. (2016). The competence paradigm in education applied to the mul-
ticomponent models of translator competences. Journal of Translator Education
and Translation Studies, 1(2), 4–19.
Pym, A. (2003). Redefining translation competence in an electronic age: In defence of
a minimalist approach. Meta, 48(4), 481–497. 10.7202/008533ar
Pym, A. (2013). Translation skill-sets in a machine-translation age. Meta, 58(3),
487–503. 10.7202/1025047ar
Rico, C., & Torrejón, E. (2012). Skills and profile of the new role of the translator as
MT post-editor. Revista Tradumàtica: Tecnologies de la traducció, 10, 166–178.
Rigouts Terryn, A., Robert, I. S., Ureel, J. J. J., Remael, A., & Hanoulle, S. (2017).
Conceptualizing translation revision competence: A pilot study on the acquisition
of the “knowledge about revision” and “strategic” subcompetences. Across
Languages and Cultures, 18(1), 1–27. 10.1556/084.2017.18.1.1
Robert, I. S., Remael, A., & Ureel, J. J. J. (2017). Towards a model of translation
revision competence. The Interpreter and Translator Trainer, 11(1), 1–19. 10.1080/
1750399X.2016.1198183
Robert, I. S., Rigouts Terryn, A., Ureel, J. J. J., & Remael, A. (2017).
Conceptualizing translation revision competence: A pilot study on the “tools and
research” subcompetence. The Journal of Specialised Translation, 28, 293–316.
https://www.jostrans.org/issue28/art_robert.pdf
Robert, I. S., Ureel, J. J. J., Remael, A., & Rigouts Terryn, A. (2018).
Conceptualizing translation revision competence: A pilot study on the “fairness
and tolerance” attitudinal component. Perspectives: Studies in Translatology,
26(1), 2–23. 10.1080/0907676X.2017.1330894
Robert, I. S., Ureel, J. J. J., & Schrijver, I. (2021, April 8–9). Les compétences en
traduction, en révision et en post-édition des futurs traducteurs sont-elles liées?:
Une étude pilote [Paper presentation]. AFFUMT “Former aux métiers de la
traduction aujourd’hui et demain”, online.
Robin, E. (2014). Explicitation and implicitation in revised translations. In
L. Veselovská (Ed.), Complex visibles out there. Proceedings of the 2014 Olomouc
Linguistic Colloquium (pp. 559–574). Palacký University.
Robin, E. (2016). The translator as reviser. In I. Horváth (Ed.), The modern trans-
lator and interpreter (pp. 45–56). Eötvös University Press.
Sánchez-Gijón, P. (2016). La posedición: Hacia una definición competencial del
perfil y una descripción multidimensional del fenómeno. Sendebar, 27, 151–162.
Scocchera, G. (2017). La revisione nella traduzione editoriale dall’inglese all’italiano
tra ricerca accademica, professione e formazione: stato dell’arte e prospettive future.
Aracne editrice.
Tiselius, E., & Hild, A. (2017). Expertise and competence in translation and inter-
preting. In J. W. Schwieter & A. Ferreira (Eds.), The handbook of translation and
cognition (pp. 423–444). John Wiley & Sons. 10.1002/9781119241485.ch23
Yamada, M. (2015). Can college students be post-editors?: An investigation into
employing language learners in machine translation plus post-editing settings.
Machine Translation, 29(1), 49–67. 10.1007/s10590-014-9167-7
Yamada, M. (2019). The impact of Google neural machine translation on post-
editing by student translators. The Journal of Specialised Translation, 31, 87–106.
https://jostrans.org/issue31/art_yamada.pdf
4 Weaving adaptive expertise into
translator training
Erik Angelone
The diversification of translation tasks and services

Today’s language industry landscape is in an unprecedented state of flux,
brought about by ongoing technological advancement and the now rela-
tively widespread integration of machine translation (MT) and other forms
of artificial intelligence in project workflows. This integration, in turn, has
introduced profound changes in translators’ day-to-day working realities, as
seen, for example, in their roles and responsibilities (Schäffner, 2020), the
kinds of tasks they undertake and the resources and approaches they use to
do so. Interestingly, the literature frames this change both positively and
negatively, with some lauding the opportunities for diversification it brings
and others regarding it as potentially detrimental disruption (see Bawa-
Mason, 2018; Schmitt, 2019). In this chapter, diversification is put forward
not as something inherently positive or negative, but rather as a documented
industry reality that calls for a re-examination of what expertise in trans-
lation implies and how we might best go about fostering its acquisition in
pedagogical contexts. The primary aim of this chapter is to situate adaptive
expertise in the context of translator training, to address a documented and
growing need for diversification of various forms and scopes in the language
industry.
Prior to discussing the implications of diversification on how we might
regard expertise in translation, it is important to briefly outline why di-
versification has, for all intents and purposes, become a necessity for
translators to maintain career viability. In short, MT now enables auto-
mation for a growing number of language pairs, with greater or lesser
success. In those domains and language pairs where MT is relatively suc-
cessful, translators inherently diversify and become post-editors. The ten-
dency for professional translators to diversify their services by post-editing
in addition to translating is not always of their own volition. The LSPs and
clients that commission their work are increasingly integrating MT and
post-editing into their project workflows.1 Successful automation is resulting
in the stagnation or decline of compensation rates for translation alone.
Translators are generally expected to produce more in a shorter period of
DOI: 10.4324/9781003223344-5
Adaptive expertise 61
time and often find themselves with no choice but to take on post-editing or
other work either in or beyond the language industry to make a living. The
2020 European Language Industry Survey found that 40% of respondents
were unable to earn an adequate amount of money through translation or
interpreting alone and had to rely on other sources of income. The 2020
Slator Report on the Language Industry2 suggests that if neural machine
translation (NMT) continues to improve, the translator’s role will primarily
“evolve into that of subject matter experts and/or cultural consultants”
(p. 36). This same report also highlights the demand for translators to serve
as linguists who can “adapt to new paradigms and interact with machine
translation” in capacities beyond post-editing such as training MT engines
and gauging output quality. These emerging roles in response to automation
are part of a broader trend in which the language industry is seeing a tre-
mendous proliferation of job titles (Bond, 2018) that often simply did not
exist prior to the widespread integration of MT and other forms of auto-
mation in project workflows.
Automation is resulting in wider-scale diversification among freelance
translators in particular. To shed further light on this matter, a 2021 survey
of alumni from Kent State University’s MA in Translation program was
conducted (n = 103) by the author. The vast majority of respondents (84%)
was working in the language industry on a freelance basis. Among those
who were translating, they were often simultaneously not only post-editing,
but also interpreting, localising and working as project managers, termi-
nologists and quality assurance specialists. This documented range of ac-
tivities takes diversification to an entirely new level. This same study found
that 43% of the respondents currently had a different line of work in the
language industry in relation to their line of work five years ago. It is im-
portant to note that automation in and of itself is not the sole driver of
diversification. It also stems from changes in the environments (both virtual
and physical) in which translators work, the constellations of stakeholders
involved in project workflows and the kinds of content in need of language
and cultural mediation, among other reasons.
The scope of diversification

For some translators, the inherent need to diversify in response to auto-
mation is likely to be broad in scope and involve expansion in the direction
of multiple, distinct services offered, along the lines presented in the pre-
vious section. Under ideal circumstances, such broad diversification would
be a matter of personal preference and choice. In any event, survey data,
such as those obtained by the author, suggest diversification across ser-
vices offered by a single language industry professional is a definite reality.
In light of this, it would be interesting to see if follow-up surveys shed light
on such facets as whether or not cross-service diversification is, in fact, a
matter of choice.
62 Erik Angelone
It is important to emphasise that diversification need not move beyond
a single form of language service provision such as translation. Scope of
diversification also entails variation in how the translator goes about
completing tasks within a given core domain or line of work. A paradigm
shift in the direction of post-editing, epitomised by the recent advent of
NMT-driven LSPs, is ultimately only the tip of the iceberg in this regard.
The 2020 Slator Language Industry Report highlights that beyond MT,
another paramount technological shift involves the transition from desktop-
based, translation memory-driven translation to cloud-based translation
management system-driven translation. When translators work in the cloud,
diversification is likely to come in the form of variation in the kinds of
content management systems leveraged and the stakeholders with whom
they interact within and across projects. Different projects will coincide with
the need to utilise different assistive technologies and work in a collaborative
fashion with different stakeholder constellations.
An emic perspective on diversification in the language industry

Notions of diversification, particularly as they pertain to interaction with new
technologies and new constellations of stakeholders, have been increasingly
taken up in the literature by translation process researchers in the context
of workplace research on the manifestations of actor-network theory (Risku
et al., 2016) and extended/distributed cognition (Risku & Rogl, 2020).
Interestingly, it was not until recently that a more emic language industry-
based discussion of diversification emerged, when DePalma proposed the idea
of augmented translation (2017). In a nutshell, augmented translation can be
defined as “a technology-centric approach to amplifying the capabilities of
human translators” (Lommel, 2020). Various technologies and artificial in-
telligence move the practice of translation beyond the automation brought
about by translation memories and integrated MT alone. Instead, a broader
range of integrated systems learn and adapt from humans, who firmly remain
in the loop and in charge.
Since its inception, augmented translation has been framed as a vehicle for
enhancing translator performance, particularly in terms of productivity.
Technologies take on mundane tasks, thereby freeing up the translator’s
cognitive resources for higher-order cognitive tasks, highlighting parallels
between the emic concept of augmented translation and the etic concept of
extended/distributed cognition as an area of interest in translation process
research. While augmented translation and the many assistive technologies
that feed into it do, indeed, offer tremendous potential in this regard, they also
bring the expectation that the translator will be able to successfully adapt to
different constellations and scopes of technologies, resources and responsi-
bilities within and across translation tasks. Such factors as the relative efficacy
or inefficacy of MT, budgetary constraints, variation in the scope and roles of
stakeholders involved and client/project manager preferences and aversions
necessitate adaptation.
DePalma (2021) puts forward seven core augmented translation tech-
nologies that automate aspects of the translation process and enhance the
performance of the language industry stakeholders that utilise them. Three
of these seven core technologies are of particular relevance to the roles and
responsibilities of the translator as a prime stakeholder. The first of these
is adaptive NMT. Adaptive NMT systems learn on the fly from changes
being made by the translator in the context of post-editing. For example, if
a problematic term is corrected by the translator early on in a text, the
system will learn from this change and make automated revisions for each
subsequent occurrence so that repeated interventions are no longer ne-
cessary. The machine learns from and is trained by the human. Adaptive
MT is now integrated as an optional feature in many translation mem-
ories, the second core augmented translation technology DePalma puts
forward. This integration creates scenarios where translators are some-
times working with translation memory strings alone, sometimes with
adaptive MT proposals alone and sometimes with a combination of both,
further highlighting the need for diversification as outlined in the pre-
ceding section.
The third core technology consists of the translation management system
platforms in which translators engage in collaborative project workflows
and with other stakeholders who leverage the same central repository. As
mentioned earlier, working in a cloud-based TMS environment can be quite
different from working in stand-alone desktop-based translation memories.
Translators would ideally be comfortable working in both environments,
depending on the size and scope of the project at hand.
The remaining four core augmented translation technologies outlined
by DePalma are terminology management applications, lights-out project
management, quality estimation tools and automated content enrichment
(ACE) tools. Our discussion focuses on the aforementioned three tech-
nologies in that they are most directly tied to the working realities of
professional translators and give shape to the kinds of diversification they
will likely encounter. The additional four are in no way less significant in
the language industry, but rather more applicable to the undertakings of
other stakeholders, for example, project managers in the case of lights-out
project management and quality assurance specialists in the case of quality
estimation tools. Adaptive NMT, translation memories with adaptive MT
functionality and cloud-based translation management systems further
highlight the need for translators to diversify and adapt within a single
form of language service provision, namely translation. This diversifica-
tion and adaptation can be just as complex as what we might see among
language industry professionals who diversify and adapt across multiple
forms of language service provision.
64 Erik Angelone
Routinised and adaptive expertise in translation
The growing need for human translators to diversify raises the question of
how one might best go about fostering expertise in training contexts and of
what expertise enables. In the context of decision-making, Cannon-Bowers
et al. (1995) define expertise as “the ability to gather and integrate in-
formation, use sound judgement, identify alternatives, select the best solu-
tion, and evaluate the consequences” (p. 346). We see how this is very much
at the heart of translation as a higher-order cognitive task driven by
problem-solving. Expertise in translation enables the creation of fit-for-
purpose content in an expeditious fashion. It also guides interaction and
collaboration among stakeholders working on a common project. As
Clancey points out, “expertise is not just all about inference applied to facts
and heuristics, but about being a social actor” (2006, p. 127). These two
fundamental ways of conceptualising expertise parallel two angles of ex-
ploration in translation process research, namely the views that expertise is
routinised or adaptive.
Routinised expertise has its roots in cognitive psychology and is marked by
consistently superior performance (Ericsson & Charness, 1997, p. 3) in a
given, narrowly defined domain, where problems are well-defined and
problem-solving is, as the name suggests, routinised. If the translator engages
in deliberate practice (Shreve, 2006), the potential exists to reach the level
of routinised “expert” within 10 years/10,000 hours. That being said, the
concept of what it means to be an “expert” translator is somewhat nebulous
(Jääskeläinen, 2010), which is why this chapter focuses on expertise rather
than some sort of desirable end state known as “expert”.
One of the key dimensions of routinised expertise is its relevance and
application in a narrowly defined domain. Prior to the era of augmented
translation, a specialised translator would have benefited from routinised
expertise by using the same problem-solving schemata, taking generally the
same approach and using the same constellation of tools and resources
across largely similar tasks and projects within the same domain, thereby
becoming increasingly efficient over time. Domain specialisation is of
paramount importance in a routinised expertise paradigm. Recent language
industry changes brought about by automation do not necessarily imply
that routinised expertise is waning in benefit across the board or that rou-
tinised experts somehow run the risk of fossilisation by default, but rather
that this form of expertise carries limitations that may not have been as
much of an issue before. Routinised expertise may become less of an asset
and, indeed, more of a potential hindrance in situations that call for novelty,
change and creativity or when the parameters of a given task are ill-defined.
Studies have shown that the more individuals practice a narrowly defined
task using the same problem-solving algorithm, the less they will be able to
adapt effectively and meet changing task demands (see Feltovich et al.,
1997). Chi (2006) has found that greater domain knowledge, a hallmark of
routinised expertise, may result in greater difficulty in finding creative so-
lutions and a state of functional fixedness. In such instances, automated
problem-solving processes potentially trigger inefficacious selection of so-
lutions. This brings us to the question of whether or not a specialised
translator who habitually uses the same set of tools and takes the same
general problem-solving approach is subject to such functional fixedness as a
result of accrued routinised expertise when parameters and expectations
start to change across tasks.
Empirical research on the transferability of expertise across translation-
related tasks is still scant. Some TPR researchers suggest it is not (Shreve,
2006, p. 30), while others suggest it is, based on the fact that expertise, at its
very core, involves “the ability to develop new strategies to cope with novel
situations” (Muñoz Martín, 2014, p. 9). In any event, if routinised expertise
is, in fact, not readily transferable, and if augmented translation demands
some level of diversification and involves less routinised tasks, adaptive
expertise may prove to be of equal, if not greater, value to the translator.
Unlike routinised expertise, adaptive expertise involves optimal performance
in contexts where tasks are more ambiguous and when they call for novelty
in problem-solving (Hatano & Inagaki, 1986). It derives from more flexible
problem-solving heuristics, and, at its very core, involves transferring ac-
quired knowledge and skills horizontally across similar domains. Adaptive
experts are fully cognisant of why procedures are appropriate for certain
conditions and not for others, which hearkens back to augmented transla-
tion, given the picking and choosing that translators are increasingly ex-
pected to undertake.
It is interesting to note that in some circles, routinised expertise is still
often regarded as being “the more efficient cousin of adaptive expertise”
(Schwartz et al., 2005). Perhaps this holds true for tasks associated with a
finite set of rules or choices, as we might associate with playing chess.
Hypothetically speaking, one could internalise all possible moves that could
take place in the context of playing chess and engage in routines accordingly.
The fact of the matter is that translation is not associated with a finite set of
rules or approaches. Unlike chess, the end result of any two translation tasks
is rarely, if ever, the same in that the same text generally is not translated in
precisely the same fashion multiple times. This is not to mention the po-
tential need to work in different user interfaces, with different computer-
assisted translation tools, with different constellations of stakeholders and at
different levels of automation. In short, when it comes to translation,
adaptive expertise is just as important, if not more important, than routi-
nised expertise. Chi (2006) regards adaptive expertise as being “exceptional
expertise” (p. 26), or something acquired as an extension on routinised ex-
pertise. Given the roles of translators in today’s language industry, this
chapter embraces the stance taken by Gube and Lajoie (2020) that adaptive
expertise emerges “when experts need to apply their knowledge flexibly
due to a challenging situation” (p. 2), with the challenging situation in this
66 Erik Angelone
case being the sea change brought about by technological advancement and
artificial intelligence in the language industry.
Over the past decade, the central tenets of cognitive ethnology (Muñoz
Martín, 2014, p. 12) have entered the translation process research arena and
found a place alongside central tenets of cognitive psychology. As a result,
adaptability, as it pertains to tasks, tools and agents involved in translation,
will continue to grow in importance as an attribute that gives shape to epis-
temologies of expertise (Risku & Schlager, 2021). It is crucial that translator
training for success in a drastically changing language industry stay abreast of
this trend, particularly with an eye towards adaptive expertise.
The place of adaptive expertise in translation

competence models
Arguably the most influential and widely cited competence model in the
translation process research literature comes from the PACTE Group,
which defines competence as “the underlying system of knowledge required
to translate” (2013, p. 318) and regards this knowledge as being primarily
procedural. Their competence model consists of five interrelated sub-
competences: bilingual sub-competence, extra-linguistic sub-competence,
knowledge of translation, instrumental competence and strategic sub-
competence, with strategic competence being at the core. By definition and
description, strategic competence is utilised to “plan the process and carry
out the translation project” based on the translator’s ability to “identify
translation problems and apply procedures to solve them” and “select the
most appropriate method” (p. 319). From an adaptive expertise perspective,
it is important to note that the strategic sub-competence is also dynamic and
driven by both automatised and non-automatised cognitive resources.
In today’s era of augmented translation, this foundational skill of selecting
the most appropriate method has become increasingly complex and nebulous
for translators, making adaptive expertise a sheer necessity. Firstly, the
number of different types of efficient assistive technologies at the translator’s
disposal has rapidly proliferated. Secondly, while augmented translation
ideally still puts the human translator in the driver’s seat when it comes to
picking and choosing from this wide array of technologies, the truth of the
matter is that translators are also increasingly facing mandates from clients
and project managers in terms of which tools they can use and how they
should be used. This makes adaptive expertise all the more important, given
potential constraints on the translator’s own volition in this regard.
Another important competence model, the European Master’s in Translation
(EMT) Competence Framework,3 takes a more granular approach in putting
forward a total of 35 sub-competences under five overarching competences:
language and culture competence, translation competence, technology
competence, personal and interpersonal competence and service provision
competence. Three competences within the EMT framework and their
respective sub-competences are particularly geared towards adaptive ex-
pertise. A sub-competence under technological competence, “Use the most
relevant IT applications, including the full range of office software, and
adapt rapidly to new tools and IT resources”, applies in this regard. The
relevance of applications will vary within and across tasks, necessitating
the rapid adaptation directly articulated in the sub-competence. Given the
fact that technology will continue to proliferate, training for adaptive
expertise should not necessarily set out to teach a plethora of tools inside
out, but rather the processes underlying tools, which can be applied in an
adaptive fashion to new applications as their use becomes pertinent. For
example, a termbase is a core feature of many translation management
systems. The terminology management that a termbase enables in an
augmented translation era can be applied across language industry tasks
in an adaptive fashion for such varying purposes as populating translation
memories, establishing controlled language to be disseminated to a team
of translators working on the same project or for purposes of quality
control. This represents an example of how training in the use of tech-
nologies can be adapted in line with both existing and emerging industry
demands.
A second sub-competence in the EMT framework listed under technology
competence is the ability to “assess the relevance of MT systems in a
translation workflow and implement the appropriate MT system where re-
levant”. In this sense, adaptive expertise could take the form of the trans-
lator knowing which MT systems work well and which fall short based on
variation in content and task attributes. Questions pertaining to the feasi-
bility of MT integration in project workflows transcend language pair and
domain and also encompass awareness of how deadlines, budget, infra-
structure, quality expectations and client specifications impact decision-
making. In this sense, adaptive expertise, as housed within technology
competence, involves gauging the role of MT through all of these lenses on a
project-by-project basis.
Adaptive expertise can also readily be woven into the EMT framework’s
personal and interpersonal competence, particularly for the sub-competence
that calls for the translator to “take account of and adapt the organisational
and physical ergonomics of the working environment”. The International
Ergonomics Association (IEA)4 defines ergonomics as the science of work.
Ergonomic research on translation workplaces (Ehrensberger-Dow, 2015;
Ehrensberger-Dow & O’Brien, 2015) explores phenomena that contribute to
and hinder efficiency.
Physical ergonomics has to do with the translator’s physical work en-
vironment (both on-screen and off-screen), where adaptation might take the
form of translating on different devices, working with different tools, in dif-
ferent user interfaces and in different locations (for example, as a freelancer or
in-house). Organisational ergonomics focuses on the impact of social struc-
tures and stakeholder organisation on performance. A combination of more
68 Erik Angelone
robust cloud-based translation management systems, offshoring of language
services and newly implemented language industry norms and standards,
such as ISO 17100:2015,5 has yielded diverse and complex actor networks
(Risku et al., 2016). When working across projects and clients, particularly
freelance translators will likely encounter different constellations of sta-
keholders, experience different scopes of tasks depending on these con-
stellations and engage in different levels of collaboration and teamwork.
From an organisational ergonomics perspective, adaptive expertise goes
hand in hand with team expertise. Salas et al. (2006) define an expert team
as one that is able to “adapt, coordinate, and cooperate” (p. 440) based on
shared cognition and “mutual performance monitoring” (p. 443). Aspects
of ergonomics, as conceptualised here, can be regarded as a bridge of sorts
that links adaptive expertise with EMT’s personal and interpersonal
competences.
Finally, adaptive expertise can be seen as having a prominent position in
the EMT’s service provision sub-competence that calls for the translator to
“monitor and take account of new societal and language industry demands,
new market requirements and emerging job profiles”. This might be a ne-
cessity if translators see a need to add on emerging job profiles for purposes
of maintaining career viability. Even those translators who have no real need
or interest to pursue job profiles beyond their established niche need to keep
a close eye on them nonetheless because these changes will have a direct
impact on how and with whom they translate. In an augmented translation
era, changing market needs will inevitably necessitate some degree of
adaptation, whether within or across job profiles. Muñoz-Miquel (2020)
puts forward the notion of entrepreneurial competence in response to the
augmented translation landscape as one which enables students to have a
synthesised understanding of the professional profiles that shape it.
Fostering adaptive expertise in competence-based

translator training
The question remains how we can best go about training future profes-
sional translators for success in an augmented translation era with an eye
towards adaptive expertise. The development of adaptive expertise de-
pends on an adaptive curriculum. Curricular revision should not simply be
a matter of introducing new stand-alone courses, but rather also of syn-
thesising focal points within and across degree programs that play a role in
the language industry. Project-based, experiential learning initiatives (Kiraly,
2005; Kiraly & Massey, 2019) are an ideal point of departure in this regard in
helping acquaint students with various stakeholders and their respective roles
and responsibilities in a learning-by-doing fashion.
Beyond curricular revision and transdisciplinary project-based learning,
adaptive expertise can be fostered by exposing students to authentic lan-
guage industry scenarios that deliberately take them outside of their comfort
zone. This necessitates ill-defined (as opposed to traditionally well-defined)
tasks and changing task attributes on the fly in a fashion that introduces
ambiguity and demands novelty in problem-solving. Such an approach re-
quires trainers to move away from tried-and-true practices and re-envision
such facets as the content with which students work, the constellations in
which they do so and how their work will be assessed. Needless to say, this is
easier said than done and hinges on a firm understanding of industry rea-
lities when it comes to incorporating ill-defined tasks. Furthermore, both
trainers and students need to be willing to embrace discovery-based
learning.
From a technology competence perspective, training for adaptive ex-
pertise should encompass more than exposing students to a number of tools
and having them pick and choose among them based on the task at hand.
For example, as far as MT is concerned, adaptive expertise could initially be
honed by having students familiarise themselves with different tools, both
stand-alone and as integrated in translation memories. However, beyond
that, students should be exposed to translation tasks where MT becomes
essential as a tool that they might not otherwise use. This might take the
form of a seemingly unrealistic request for turn-around, thereby introducing
a time constraint that calls for MT. Alternately, the content to be translated
could be significantly longer than what students could realistically translate
in a typical timeframe without MT integration, or a hypothetical “client”
might provide additional content at the last minute, be willing to pay more
and be satisfied with less-than-perfect grammar as long as meaning is pre-
served. From a content selection perspective, the instructor would want to
make sure that the much longer content would lend itself well to MT and
establish assessment parameters that cater to such a scenario. In this
sense, adaptive expertise and technological competence would focus on not
just which tools to use, but also on when tool use becomes essential and
what impact this tool use has on the translator’s productivity and quality
expectations.
When it comes to training adaptive expertise, technology competence
should transcend direct application. Just as important is developing a skillset
that enables students to articulate how variation in the constraints and af-
fordances of various technologies impacts translation workflows, particu-
larly from perspectives of cost, time and infrastructure. In this sense,
adaptive expertise has a place not only in technology competence, but also in
language service provision competence in a broader sense.
In the spirit of teaching processes as opposed to tools, another activity that
weaves adaptive expertise into technology competence involves introducing a
scenario where a hypothetical client insists on the use of assistive translation
technologies other than the ones students habitually use. Through discovery-
based learning, students would have the task of doing background research by
mapping the features and functions of the tools with which they are proficient
onto the features and functions of the new, mandated tools. The focus of this
70 Erik Angelone
learning activity need not be on direct application of the new tools for the
task at hand, but rather on the articulation of variation in more of a “what
if” sink-or-swim sense.
Given the fact that augmented translation is increasingly collaborative in
nature, adaptive expertise, as it pertains to interpersonal competence, should
also be fostered by introducing students to variation in stakeholder con-
stellations and corresponding inter-dependencies. A good point of departure
for this sake involves using hypothetical clients with varying needs, de-
mands, budgets and levels of understanding of what is required to complete
the project. For some tasks, the individual translator would go it alone and
be responsible for editing their own work. For others, perhaps under a
significant time constraint, they would have the task of producing a “good
enough” translation that would then be edited by other stakeholders (stu-
dents), with the added task of flagging information in need of a second pair
of eyes. In yet other tasks, students would be working in close collaboration
with a terminologist and fellow translators on a large-scale project
management-driven task. As an extension on this, in another scenario, the
terminologist might fall ill or drop out of the project, requiring the team of
translators to negotiate and interact among each other in creating a term-
base to be used in a standardised fashion by the team. Perhaps a translation
project could be set up that would necessitate sub-contracting and a colla-
borative quality control process. Training geared towards interpersonal
competence would benefit from tasks taking place in a cloud-based trans-
lation management system, with open channels of communication to
document and reflect on interaction that takes place among students as
stakeholders.
It is worth noting that many of the ideas put forward here to foster
adaptive expertise in translation take a page from project management
training, where the skills of adapting through contingency planning and
establishing fluid work breakdown structures are foregrounded. With the
many moving parts associated with augmented translation, project man-
agers undoubtedly rely heavily on adaptive expertise. In many ways, training
translators for adaptive expertise involves equipping them with the knowl-
edge and skills to work in collaboration with project managers, but also to
serve as their own project managers for purposes of planning, carrying out
and assessing their own performance.
Conclusion
Given the current state of the language industry, there is little doubt that
translators will increasingly need to diversify their language service provi-
sion in some capacity, either across language strands or within the strand of
translation, making adaptive expertise indispensable. The degree and scope
of the diversification will inevitably vary from one translator to the next,
depending on the translator’s skills and interests against a backdrop of
changing industry needs. That being said, the time seems right for a stronger
focus on adaptive expertise as a focal point in translator training, particu-
larly when revisiting existing competence models.
In order for such an approach to work, trainers need to have a firm un-
derstanding of industry realities, in terms of both emerging career paths as
well as the ill-defined tasks translators face. There also needs to be a firm
commitment to breaking down silos within and across curricula, through co-
teaching and cross-listing courses so that students can see the bigger picture
of the language industry and the many moving parts it entails that call for
adaptive expertise. Perhaps the greatest challenge associated with the in-
corporation of adaptive expertise into competence-based translator training
has to do with timing. If adaptive expertise entails transcending routines,
routines, as such, would seemingly need to be in place before such training
could truly take effect. Given the fact that training programs tend to be
quite packed as it is, it might be most feasible to start with training for
routinised expertise during the early weeks of the semester in a given course
and then gradually move in the direction of training for adaptive expertise.
The exact sequencing of things will vary from one curriculum to the next,
naturally. In any event, adaptive expertise should be regarded as a necessity
for working in the language industry, not intended to necessarily replace
routinised expertise, but rather extend on it to enhance the employability
and success of graduates once they enter a workforce shaped by augmented
translation.
Notes
1 According to the 2020 European Language Industry Survey, 78% of all responding
language service companies plan to ramp up machine translation or post-editing.
2 2020 Slator Language Industry Report: https://slator.com/slator-2020-language-
industry-market-report/
3 European Master’s in Translation (EMT) Competence Framework: https://ec.
europa.eu/info/sites/default/files/emt_competence_fwk_2017_en_web.pdf
4 International Ergonomics Association: https://iea.cc/what-is-ergonomics/
5 ISO 17100:2015: https://www.iso.org/standard/59149.html
References
Alves, F. (2015). Translation process research at the interface: Paradigmatic, theo-
retical, and methodological issues in dialogue with cognitive science, expertise
studies, and psycholinguistics. In A. Ferreira & J. W. Schwieter (Eds.),
Psycholinguistic and cognitive inquiries into translation and interpreting (pp. 17–40).
John Benjamins. 10.1075/btl.115.02alv
Angelone, E. & Marín Garcia, Á. (2019). Expertise acquisition through deliberate
practice: Gauging perceptions and behaviors of translators and project managers.
In H. Risku, R. Rogl & J. Milosevic (Eds.), Translation practice in the field:
Current research on socio-cognitive processes (pp. 123–160). John Benjamins. 10.1
075/bct.105.07ang
72 Erik Angelone
Bawa-Mason, S. (2018). The translation sector of the future: Indications from the
FIT 2017 Conference “Disruption and Diversification”. Revista Tradumàtica.
Tecnologies de la Traducció, 16, 71–84. 10.5565/rev/tradumatica.213
Slator news. https://slator.com/the-stunning-variety-of-job-titles-in-the-language-
industry/
Cannon-Bowers, J. A., Tannenbaum, S. I., Salas, E., & Volpe, C. E. (1995). Defining
competencies and establishing team training requirements. In R. Guzzon &
E. Salas (Eds.), Team effectiveness and decision making in organizations
(pp. 333–380). Jossey-Bass.
Chi, M. T. H. (2006). Two approaches to the study of experts’ characteristics. In
K. A. Ericsson, N. Charness, P. Feltovich, & R. Hoffman (Eds.), The Cambridge
handbook of expertise and expert performance (pp. 21–38). Cambridge University
Press. 10.1017/CBO9780511816796.002
Clancey, W. (2006). Observation of work practices in natural settings. In K. A.
Ericsson, N. Charness, P. Feltovich, & R. Hoffman (Eds.), The Cambridge
handbook of expertise and expert performance (pp. 127–146). Cambridge
University Press. 10.1017/CBO9780511816796.008
DePalma, D. (2017, February 15). Augmented translation powers up language ser-
vices. Common Sense Advisory Research. https://csa-research.com/Blogs-Events/
Blog/ArticleID/140
DePalma, D. (2021, February 10). Augmenting human translator performance.
Common Sense Advisory Research. https://csa-research.com/Blogs-Events/Blog/
Augmenting-Human-Translator-Performance
Ehrensberger-Dow, M. (2015). An ergonomic perspective of professional translation.
Meta, 60(2), 328. 10.7202/1032879ar
Ehrensberger-Dow, M. & O’Brien, S. (2015). Ergonomics of the translation work-
place: Potential for cognitive friction. Translation Spaces, 4(1), 98–118. 10.1075/
ts.4.1.05ehr
Ericsson, K. A. & Charness, N. (1997). Cognitive and developmental factors in
expert performance. In P. Feltovich, K. M. Ford, & R. R. Hoffman (Eds.),
Expertise in context, (pp. 3–41). The MIT Press. (Reprinted in modified form from
“American Psychologist,” 49 (8), 1994, pp. 725–747).
Feltovich, P. J., Ford, K. M., & Hoffman, R. R. (Eds.) (1997). Expertise in context.
The MIT Press.
Gube, M. & Lajoie, S. (2020). Adaptive expertise and creative thinking: A synthetic
review and implications for practice. Thinking Skills and Creativity, 35, 1–14. 10.1
016/j.tsc.2020.100630
Hatano, G. & Inagaki, K. (1986). Two courses of expertise. In H. W. Stevenson,
H. Azuma, & K. Hakuta (Eds.), Child development and education in Japan
(pp. 262–272). W H Freeman/ Times Books/ Henry Holt & Co.
Jääskeläinen, R. (2010). Are all professional experts? Definitions of expertise and re-
interpretation of research evidence in process studies. In G. Shreve & E. Angelone
(Eds.), Translation and cognition (pp. 213–230). John Benjamins. 10.1075/ata.xv.12jaa
Kiraly, D. (2005). Project-based learning: A case for situated translation. Meta,
50(4), 1098–1111. 10.7202/012063ar
Kiraly, D. & Massey, G. (Eds.) (2019). Towards authentic experiential learning in
translator education, 2nd edition. Cambridge Scholars.
Lommel, A. (2020, November 4). Augmented translation: Are we there yet? Common
Sense Advisory Research. https://csa-research.com/Blogs-Events/Blog/augmented-
translation-2020
Muñoz Martín, R. (2014). Situating translation expertise: A review with a sketch of a
construct. In J. Schwieter & A. Ferreira (Eds.), The development of translation
competence: Theories and methodologies from psycholinguistics and cognitive sci-
ence (pp. 2–56). Cambridge Scholars.
Muñoz-Miquel, A. (2020). Translation and interpreting as a profession: Some pro-
posals to boost entrepreneurial competence. Hermes, 60, 29–46. 10.7146/
hjlcb.v60i0.121309
PACTE Group. (2013). Results of the validation of the PACTE translation com-
petence model: Translation problems and translation competence. In C. Alvstad,
A. Hild, & E. Tiselius (Eds.), Methods and strategies of process research
(pp. 317–344). John Benjamins. 10.1075/btl.94.22pac
Risku, H. & Rogl, R. (2020). Translation and situated, embodied, distributed, em-
bedded and extended cognition. In F. Alves & A. Lykke Jakobsen (Eds.), The
Routledge handbook of translation and cognition. Routledge. 10.4324/97813151
78127
Risku, H., Rogl, R., & Pein-Weber, C. (2016). Mutual dependencies: Centrality in
translation networks. The Journal of Specialised Translation, 25, 232–253. https://
www.jostrans.org/issue25/art_risku.pdf
Risku, H. & Schlager, D. (2021). Epistemologies of translation expertise: Notions in
research and practice. In S. Halverson & A. Marín García (Eds.), Contesting
Epistemologies in Cognitive Translation and Interpreting Studies. Routledge.
10.4324/9781003125792
Salas, E., Rosen, M., Shawn Burke, C., Goodwin, G., & Fiore, S. (2006). The
making of a dream team: What expert teams do best. In K. A. Ericsson,
N. Charness, P. Feltovich, & R. Hoffman (Eds.), The Cambridge handbook of
expertise and expert performance (pp. 439–470). Cambridge University Press. 10.1
017/CBO9780511816796.025
Schäffner, C. (2020). Translators’ roles and responsibilities. In E. Angelone,
M. Ehrensberger-Dow & G. Massey (Eds.), The Bloomsbury companion to language
industry studies (pp. 63–90). Bloomsbury. 10.5040/9781350024960.0008
Schmitt, P. (2019). Translation 4.0 – Evolution, revolution, innovation or disrup-
tion? Lebende Sprachen, 64(2), 193–229. 10.1515/les-2019-0013
Schwartz, D. L., Bransford, J. D., & Sears, D. (2005). Efficiency and innovation in
transfer. In J. Mestre (Ed.), Transfer of learning (pp. 1–51). Information Age.
Shreve, G. (2006). The deliberate practice: Translation and expertise. Journal of
Translation Studies, 9(1), 27–42.
5 Tools for transforming translators
into homo narrans or “what
machines can’t do”
David Katan
Introduction
This chapter suggests reconceptualising the role of the translator within the
context of a translator as an adaptive expert, here understood in terms of
creativity and the uniquely human ability to narrate – and proposes a pro-
cedure to foster this ability. Narrativity in translation has long been either
undervalued or problematised (e.g. Baker, 2006). Yet, if we take as a given
that the translation profession is at a crossroad (Katan, 2016a; Massey &
Ehrensberger-Dow, 2017), due in part to the advances in neural machine
translation (NMT), then one way in which the translator may assert their
added value is to focus attention on their uniquely human ability to knowingly
create meaningful texts.
The general thesis developed is that while machines may successfully
translate texts in the sense of copying or transcribing text from one language
to another, the creation of texts meaningful for a particular readership in a
particular moment is a uniquely homo sapiens or rather, as we shall see, a homo
fictus or narrans ability. I will suggest that this ability can be enhanced through
learning elements of the structure of narrativity and also through an adoption
of the Metamodel (cf. Bandler & Grinder, 1975; Katan & Taibi, 2021) – all of
which will help to further distinguish the human from the machine.
Narrativity
Narrativity has traditionally been studied in literary studies. The unique
human ability to “tell a story” was highlighted by E.M. Forster (2005, p. 63),
with his coining of the term homo fictus to talk about the world of fictive
characters produced by story writers. As the writer pointed out, these char-
acters are actually more alive and understandable than their real sapiens
counterparts – thanks to the ability of the writer to narrate and to relate to their
reader. More recently, there has been a growing recognition that the real sa-
piens characters are also understood through how their reality is narrated; and
that the realities we notice (whether through our own eyes or reported verbally
or visually by others) become stories. This premise lies at the heart of cognitive
DOI: 10.4324/9781003223344-6
Tools for transforming translators 75
science, which suggests that humans respond to conceptualisations in the brain
rather than to reality itself, following a theory first formulated by Emmanuel
Kant (Brook, 2004). So, we begin by accepting that there is (probably) an
objective reality, and that there is an internalised idea or subjective model of
that reality, known as a “model of the mind” (see Brook, 2004), “a mental
model” or “a map of reality” (see Katan & Taibi, 2021), created through
narrativity or storytelling (Bruner, 1991; Somers & Gibson, 1994).
Consequently, as many social theorists have suggested (e.g. Barthes, 1977;
Fisher, 1985; Gottschall, 2012; Alleyne, 2015), narrativity or storytelling is
what makes us human. Indeed, Fisher (1985) suggests calling humankind
homo narrans, while Gottschall (2012) suggests Forster’s homo fictus.
Clearly, a machine is not programmed for storytelling, nor for basic sense-
making. As Eagleman and Brandt (2017, p. 99) point out “When you type a
paragraph into Google Translate, the computer does not try to understand
you”. Furthermore, whatever the future of NMT, as Hale and Liddicoat
argue (2015, pp. 22–23):
[T]here are aspects of meaning-making that lie outside the competence of

technology and which will not be the outcome of improved software (…)
[NMT] can create an illusion of comprehension without ensuring the
reality of that comprehension (…) While in many low stakes contexts, this
may not be a problem, in higher stakes contexts it is highly consequential.
Professional translation
The area of professional translation of interest here is that of the higher stakes
contexts. These not only include the premium market but those contexts where
the translation is targeted towards an unforeseen, secondary, communication
situation (Pilar Navarro, 2004, p. 202), in particular where the new commu-
nicative situation includes epistemic and cultural outsiders (Katan, 2016a;
Katan, 2021). Here, I will focus exclusively on tourism translation and will use
mainly my own published translations of heritage museum interpretation
panels and of a guidebook (Ghio & Lelli, 2022) to Salento in southern Italy,
both commissioned by the Jewish Museum, Lecce. In both cases, it was pos-
sible to liaise with the original text writer to discuss both the writer’s model of
the world and that of his presumed reader (see Katan, 2022).
Given that maps of the world are culture-bound (Katan & Taibi, 2021),
what is crucial for the translator (though not for the machine) is to consider
“audience design” and “shift” (Bell, 1984), or, as Péguy (in Steiner, 1998,
p. 318) puts it, “opération de déplacement”. This shift or deplacement will
necessarily test, if not break, the hermeneutic circle of understanding, given
the premise, following Gambier (2018, p. 45) that: “I only understand
something if I already know a part of it”. When this deplacement is to an
outsider reading, the translation will find itself out-of-sync with its new
76 David Katan
audience (Katan, 2021). So, a sapiens translator will consider this new sec-
ondary communication situation, and resynch, to reconstruct the circle.
However, according to prevailing norms, professional translators do not
occupy themselves with ensuring reader comprehension. For example, ac-
cording to the International Federation of Translators’ Charter (FIT, 2021,
Section 1, clause 4):
Every translation shall be faithful and render exactly the idea and form
of the original; this fidelity constituting both a moral and legal
obligation for the translator.
In due respect, the next clause does move away from the original text and
even accepts adaptation: “to make the form, the atmosphere and deeper
meaning of the work felt in another language and country”. That said, both
these clauses focus on rendering the translation either, in Toury’s (1995)
terms, “adequate” to the source-text conventions or “acceptable” to target
language and cultural conventions. The quality of NMT is certainly im-
proving in this area, and a widely quoted Oxford-Yale AI research ques-
tionnaire (Grace et al., 2018, p. 743) even predicts that by 2024 machines will
“Perform translation about as good (sic!) as a human”.
The degree or type of progress is not, however, as clear as it might seem. A
number of scholars have already noted that criteria regarding “quality” are re-
duced when applied to machine translation (e.g. Raído, 2016). Indeed, the
Oxford-Yale report itself adds a number of important caveats that are con-
veniently never quoted, including that AI will be as good as a human “who is
fluent in both languages but unskilled at translation” (ibid). This suggests that the
Oxford-Yale group understood that there is an inherent conceptual gap between
an NMT system operating at its best and a professional human translator.
Empirical research results also need to be checked for the type of quality
assessed. At first sight, for example, a controlled sentence for sentence
comparison between a professional news agency and a deep learning neural
machine translation system, CUBBITT (CUBBITT, 2021), demonstrates
that the machine “outperforms a professional human-translation agency in
adequacy of English to Czech news translation” (Popel et al., 2020, p. 9).
However, this is a test of linguistic adequacy (and acceptability) of and
between sentences. The point that is made here is that the experiment does
not take the narrans into account.
This is a crucial point if we are to agree with Fisher (1985, p. 347), the
originator of the “Narrative Paradigm”, who states: “There is no genre,
including technical communication, that is not an episode in the story of
life”. While the episode may be discernible largely from the text, under-
standing of the story is another matter. As Gambier (2018, p. 46) notes,
“There are things under-explained in a text but the reader can infer them
from the schematic structure”. Of course, when there is a readership shift,
the inferences may easily get lost.
Towards homo narrans
The idea that translation should (and does) occupy itself with more than
linguistic meaning is not new. Scholars have long been advocating that
translation is not only a linguistic activity. It has a more fundamental role
regarding the understanding that ensues as a result of the reading. This may
be framed in terms of facilitating communication to ensure that under-
standing is taking place (e.g. Katan & Taibi, 2021); or alternatively in terms
of activist intervention to challenge the narrative (e.g. Baker, 2006). In both
cases, any focus on reader understanding requires adaptive expertise.
Machines may be beginning to simulate this ability, but as translator
Claudia Benetello (2021, p. 121) points out, “it takes a talented human to
think outside the box and produce a target copy that truly resonates with the
intended audience”.
Mona Baker (2006; see Harding, 2012, p. 287) initiated the application of
narrativity to translation as a cognitive and sociological concern. Baker’s
intent was to highlight the dangers rather than the potentialities of narrativity
in translation. The scholar argued that accounts regarding conflict, such as in
the Middle East, are narrated by dominant regimes to the detriment of more
vulnerable groups; and that translators had a responsibility to carefully
consider whether “to reproduce existing ideologies as encoded in the narrative
elaborated in the text (…) or to disassociate themselves from those ideologies”
(2006, p. 105). This aspect of a translator’s role has been pursued in
Translation Studies by a number of scholars (see Harding, 2012). Narrativity
and translation has also been investigated in terms of stylistics (e.g. Boase-
Beier, 2014) and the translator’s voice, their discursive presence, particularly
in literature (e.g. Munday, 2008; Pillière, 2018). Jones offers a much more
complete overview than offered here, but concludes that the study of narra-
tivity is still “relatively new within translation studies” (2020, p. 360).
The interest in narrativity in this chapter hinges, as suggested, on the
universality of narrativity in making sense of the world; and in agreement
with Baker: “translation is a form of (re)narration that constructs rather
than represents the events and characters it re-narrates in another language”
(2014, p. 159, emphasis in original). However, rather than focussing on the
damage that translation might create in circulating narratives, I will focus on
the damage that machine translation and also human translation create in
not enabling the circulation of narrative.
Narrativity
Before proceeding further, we should enlarge on how narrativity has been
applied to translation. Baker (2006) draws on social theorists, in particular,
Bruner (1991) and Somers and Gibson (1994), organising narrativity into
eight types, with four “core features”: temporality, relationality, causal em-
plotment and selective appropriation. Furthermore, Baker (2006) focusses on
78 David Katan
where narrative (as stories or myths) circulates: at the personal level (within
the individual’s mind) at the institutional and beyond, as well as how narra-
tives vary according to profession. Harding (2012, p. 292), as I will, reduces
the levels to two: personal and the public. These two equate perfectly with the
personal and the shared models of the world described in Katan and Taibi
(2021, pp. 141–142).
For my purposes here, it is the shared model of the world that is of interest
for translation. This model encompasses, first, the cultural filter, the “cultural
and institutional formations larger than the original” (Somers & Gibson,
1994, p. 62), and second, “conceptual narrativity”, which, as Harding notes,
Baker (2006, p. 39) extends to include “disciplinary narratives”. These relate
to the way (culture-bound and professional) genres operate. Thirdly, there are
“meta-narratives”, the myths and ideologies (underlying beliefs and values)
that guide the author’s narrative. In all these cases, as we shall see, there will be
issues of synching. Although Harding (2012, p. 305fn) also distinguishes be-
tween “relating events” (narrative) and text that “merely describes or com-
ments upon those events”, the scholar also accepts that “all material is
ultimately understood through narrative configuration”.
If, as translators, we are to renarrate and reconstruct the events and
characters in another language, we need to understand how the original
narrative operated. The first point to make clear (and which remains a
primary barrier for machine translation in general) is that the text itself does
not contain the story. As Iser suggests (1978), the implied readers engage
with the text and negotiates the “textual gap” between what is written and
what they will be expected to infer. So, what we are interested in is to reveal
what was tacit (Polanyi, 1966) to complete the hermeneutic circle of un-
derstanding.
Boase-Beier (2014, p. 214) discusses exactly this point regarding transla-
tion: “while knowledge of how texts work may not be expressed, it lies
behind everything writers and translators do”. Boarse-Beier continues by
pointing to the importance of “raising awareness of the possible deeper le-
vels of the text, (…) which might not be immediately obvious to the reader,
and therefore to the translator”. We will look now at one procedural tool
that should help in identifying these deeper levels.
Identifying the narrativity

I will propose the use of the Metamodel to make the narrative more explicit.
It was first introduced in the 1970s as a linguistic tool for therapists to use to
expand clients’ (over generalised, distorted and unhelpfully narrow) per-
ceptions of reality (Bandler & Grinder, 1975). Since then, it has been used to
investigate the not “immediately obvious” cultural perceptions of reality
that affect communication and translation (Katan & Taibi, 2021).
The Metamodel functions principally by asking formulaic questions de-
signed “to bring to the surface what is hidden” (Katan & Taibi, 2021, p. 151).
In general, the question flagged-up by a non-specific constituent in a text asks
“who” or “what” (thing, concept or entity) is being referred to exactly in the
narrative (if a content term), or “what” specifically is happening and/or “how”
(if a predicate term). In all cases, the question (known as a challenge) will
check the extent to which this non-specificity is universal and corresponds to a
human understanding of the world, or to which it is grounded in a clearly
subjective (personal, linguistic or cultural) viewpoint – or narrative. The
theory is that this narrative is filtered through language, which at the best of
times is unable to fully express our thoughts.
There are three main filters affecting access to the writer’s world:
a deletion, where language is not deemed necessary because the concept is

tacit or could easily become manifest;
b generalisation, where there is an assumed universality, but which is
actually only applicable to a particular implied readership; and
c distortion, where the language itself may not be understood as intended,
or where the author’s stance leads to negative affect. The latter may
happen, for example, when the author focusses on a sensitive or taboo
area without sufficient cushioning or contextualisation for the unim-
agined reader.
For each of these filters there are a number of linguistic cues that flag ill-
formedness, such as lack of specific referential indices (e.g. they, politicians)
leading to deletion; use of universal quantifiers (e.g. all, everyone) leading to
generalisation; or use of value judgements and lost performatives (e.g. it’s
wrong to say that) that may be distorted from what is effectively a personal
stance to what appears in the text as a public and shared model of reality.
Recreating the narrativity

As mentioned earlier, it is the public or shared narrative that is of interest
here. I will, in the main, follow Baker’s (2006, 2014) framework and will
discuss re-creation in terms of relationality/temporality, characterisation,
causal emplotment and selective appropriation.
Relationality/temporality
All things narrated, as the King notes in Alice in Wonderland (Caroll 1865/
1998, p. 18) should “Begin at the beginning (…) and go on (…) to the end:
then stop”. This temporality and relationality helps anchor the events. Bal
(2017, p. 5) calls this the fabula: “a series of logically and chronologically
related events that are caused or experienced by actors”, suggesting also that
the fabula is the essential base on which the narrative is built on. Using the
analogy of trains, the arrivals/departures board will explicitly detail the es-
sential temporality and direction of our specific train. Once on board, the
80 David Katan
sequencing of stops and the destination itself may well become much more
implicit.
Specifically, in terms of relationality, the train carriages are connected, all
forming a logical connection with the type of journey and train: high speed,
sleeper, suburban, goods and so on. So, temporality and relationality anchor
the narrative into known, or manifestable, contexts delineated by time, place
and type.
With regard to texts, cultural heritage provides a simple example of a
domain heavily reliant on explaining temporality and relationality. The term
“heritage” itself entails a past connected to the present. With regard to
temporality and relationality, we would expect the introduction, like the
arrivals/departures board to give us an overview of the time, place and type.
Let us look then at the first interpretation panel at the entrance to the
museum:
SOTTO IL BAROCCO: INCONTRI NELLA LECCE MEDIEVALE

Nei sotterranei di Palazzo Taurino è allestito un percorso che propone
al visitatore un’esperienza della Lecce medievale, un viaggio nella storia
inesplorata di questa città. La Lecce barocca è nota a tutti,..
“DeepL Translate”, a neural machine translation service, which modestly

suggests that it is “The world’s most accurate translator”, outperforming
Google Translate (DeepL, 2021), gives us the following:
UNDER THE BAROQUE: MEETINGS IN MEDIEVAL LECCE

In the basement of Palazzo Taurino is set up a path that offers visitors
an experience of medieval Lecce, a journey into the unexplored history
of this city. The Baroque Lecce is known to all, (…)
The meaning is clear, and apart from the “meetings” and “is set up a path”,
the text might well have been the fruit of a professional homo sapiens
translator. However, the “Baroque” theme belies a narrative of relationality
and temporality clearly not manifest to “all”. The determiner “all” is a
classic case of a universal quantifier, which would be immediately challenged
with a Metamodel question to identify “who exactly does ‘all’ refer to?”
Although a hyperbole, “all” is a reasonably accurate shorthand for “all
implied readers”. This explicit reference to the readership illustrates nicely
the process of entextualisation (Bauman & Briggs, 1990, p. 73), whereby the
text has been extracted from its original interactional setting (early 21st
century Southern Italian readership) and may or may not “turn or bend
back on itself, (…) to refer to itself”, i.e., back to these particular Italians
and their shared knowledge structures, including scripts, schemas and ste-
reotypes. In fact, in translation, the determiner no longer refers to its ori-
ginal “self” but to a non-Italian readership. Most outsider readers, who may
have some tacit knowledge about “Baroque” are highly unlikely to relate
“Baroque Lecce” to any schemata available. So, the Metamodel has now
helped us identify a distortion of reality which also disconnects the reader
(returning to the analogy) from the train. This loss of relationality and
temporality continues after “La Lecce barocca è nota a tutti/The Baroque
Lecce is known to all”, with the following:
ma questa rappresenta solo la fase più recente di una lunga storia, che
gode dei lasciti di antiche ed importanti civiltà: messapica, greca,
romana, bizantina, normanna, angioina, aragonese.
DeepL: but this represents only the most recent phase of a long history,
which enjoys the legacies of ancient and important civilizations:
Messapian, Greek, Roman, Byzantine, Norman, Angevin, Aragonese.
All readers will intuit that the important civilisations, following generic
conventions, represent the fabula in chronological order; but for those in-
ternational readers who are both epistemic as well as linguacultural out-
siders, there is little idea of where the departure or arrival time periods are to
be located, or what sort of time periods divides them. Once again, the ori-
ginal text writers were membershipping linguacultural and epistemic in-
siders, local Italians who will have been surrounded by Baroque architecture
their whole lives and will have studied most of the important civilisations
listed from middle school onward. So, to ensure narrativity, the new text
should help the new reader with the fabula and mark the departure and
arrivals points more explicitly making at least some of the temporality ac-
cessible.
A simple way of relating the lesser-known cultures is to add their geo-
graphical and temporal location, for example “the French Angevins in the
13th century, the Spanish Aragonese in the 15th century”.1 The result of this
move from machine or homo sapiens translation towards a homo narrans
translation was the following:
Baroque Lecce is well known, but the 17th century is just a recent part
of a long history. The city has been influenced by many ancient and
important cultures. In historical times, the Messapians came and settled
here. Then came the Greeks, the Byzantines, the Normans in the 12th
century, the French Angevins in the 13th century, the Spanish
Aragonese in the 15th century, and so on.
This chronology of events can be anchored in the new implied readers’

shared model of the world, in the sense that the timeline indicating centuries
is shared, and associations with one’s own historical timelines can be made,
which also means that we have begun to reconstruct the hermeneutic circle.
82 David Katan
Characterisation
A second element of narrativity, not taken from Baker’s summary, but from
general narrative theory, is the importance of characterisation or “state-
ments that directly ascribe a trait or property to an individual” (Margolin,
2005, p. 55). This takes relationality one step further. All stories rely on
characters, and narrativity in general relies on the reader being able to
distinguish between the various protagonists. The following information
panel, still at the entrance to the museum, provides a typical example of a
listing of protagonists:
Il visitatore entrerà nelle vie dell’antica città medievale, incontrando le

genti che la popolavano con le loro attività quotidiane: Pugliesi,
Veneziani, Albanesi, Greci e soprattutto ebrei che abitavano nel
quartiere
DEEP L: The visitor will enter the streets of the ancient medieval city,
meeting the people who populated it with their daily activities:
Apulians, Venetians, Albanians, Greeks and especially Jews who lived
in the neighborhood
The NMT is certainly adequate, and although “populate with activities” is

highly unusual, we may deem it acceptable. However, a “narrative does not
merely list what happens”, which a machine might do very well, “but (…) it
brings out or creates meaningful connections between events or experiences,
thereby rendering them (at least partly) intelligible” (Meretoja, 2014, p. 89).
Though, in the original text we do have a list, the implied reader will make
meaningful connections between them due to the shared model of the (local)
world. In translation, the peoples are still connected temporally, and are
clearly neighbours, but at least some of the groups remain characterless.
Employing the Metamodel allows us to investigate the extent that Puglians,2
Venetians and so on could be characterised with some trait or property that
meaningfully connects or distinguishes them as in the original reading. To
return to the train analogy, the carriages may be related as part of the same
train, but each carriage, though carrying a different name (e.g. on Indian
trains: saloon, AC two tier or three tier, AC chair car, Anubhuti, etc.), the
name does not yet allow the outsider to distinguish one carriage from an-
other in any meaningful way.
The Metamodel can help to investigate how these separate groups, as
carriages in a train, relate to the writer’s mental world. The first, generic,
set of questions are in terms of what or how “exactly”. On the left of
Table 5.1 is the text. On the right are typical Metamodel questions that
challenge the extent that inferred or tacit information is presumed to be
shared between author and reader. For the moment, we will include all
“characters”:
Table 5.1 Metamodel challenges
The visitor All visitors?
will enter the streets of the ancient When exactly? How exactly?
medieval city
meeting the people who populated it with Which activities, exactly?
their daily activities
Puglians All … ?
Albanians Which … ?
Greeks Who were […] exactly?
Venetians
and especially Jews who lived in the All/Which Jews who lived in the
neighbourhood neighbourhood?
Who are “Jews” exactly?
The Metamodel in itself is mindless, and at least some of these challenges

will be unnecessary, given that the new implied reader will not always be an
epistemic outsider. Clearly, making explicit in translation all that is tacit
would create a problem for the commissioner (more space would be re-
quired, and costs would increase), and for the reader, who would be over-
whelmed with too much information (TMI). The appropriate degree of
informativity constitutes one of Beaugrande & Dressler’s (1981) standards
of textuality. As they point out, an excess of unknown or unexpected “in-
formativity” will overload the reader. The idea of overload has been de-
veloped by Csikszentmihalyi, 2002) in his theory of “optimal experience” or
“flow”. “Flow” hinges on the translator’s creation of a meaningful text, or in
Csikszentmihalyi’s terms, a dynamic equilibrium of just enough new and
relevant material for the reader’s skill set.
There are various ways of optimising informativity, the first of which is
taking a more mindful approach to using the Metamodel, based on a clear
ideal or implied reader. Here, for example, we can presume that the last
question in Table 5.1, regarding the Jews would lead to the same reply re-
gardless of audience shift – and will need no resynching. Also, we are not so
much interested at this stage in the peoples themselves but in giving meaning
to their presence in the text.
So, we may adapt the Metamodel challenge into one that looks for a
relevant and easily distinguishable similarity or difference (e.g. “Who are, or
what distinguishes, the [Albanians] for the [writer/implied reader] exactly?”).
Ideally, what is manifest for the implied reader should also cohere with the
themes of the narrative as implied in the text: migration, diaspora and
harmony/conflict between ethnic and religious communities. So, one ap-
proach the human translator can adopt is to characterise the peoples
through grouping traits and properties into fewer, but more informative
chunks (Katan & Taibi, 2021, pp. 222–226).
The original implied readers would logically associate strongly with the
local Puglian and would see all the other communities as foreign. So for
84 David Katan
these readers, characteristics such as insider/outsider status and provenance
relative to Puglia would be most manifest. The final translation, imagining
the realities of this shared (local) world focussed on relationality and
characterisation as follows:
You are now about to start your journey through the streets and alleys of
ancient medieval Lecce. And on these streets you will meet the people who
were living there at the time: local Puglians, Venetian merchants and, from
across the sea, Albanians and Greeks, but above all the Jews.
The only intervention I wish to focus on here is the characterisation of the

communities in terms of provenance and permanence. The Puglians are char-
acterised as “local” while the others are clearly non-local either from “across the
sea” or from Venice.3 What also distinguished the Venetians in the original text
is that they are depicted as strong trading partners rather than settlers. We now
have begun to differentiate the communities into three main “types”.
Causal emplotment
A narrative is more than just the sum total of “characters”. A narrative
describes how the characters contribute to the story. This is known as
“causal emplotment”. In Baker’s own words, “emplotment allows us to
weight and explain events rather than simply list them to turn a set of
propositions into an intelligible sequence about which we can form an
opinion” (2006, p. 67, emphasis in original; see also Somers, 1997, p. 82). In
terms of the train analogy, we should be able to form some opinion about
the various carriages based on tacit knowledge or previous experience (such
as 1st class or 2nd class). We should also be able to understand why a fact or
information has been offered in the narrative, and how it fits into the story.
Regarding the train, for example, we know why there is a buffet car on an
intercity train and not on the commuter train.
As Barthes (1977, p. 90) tells us, what makes a narrative “work” is that “no
unit ever goes wasted however long, however loose, however tenuous may be
the thread connecting it to one of the levels of the story”. To understand better
how causal emplotment works in translation, we could illustrate the opposite –
where information is explicitly given in the original text, faithfully translated –
but about which we are unable to form an opinion. The following extract is
from the guidebook, and is a vignette illustrating a 3rd–4th-century CE
tombstone. It begins with the woman it was dedicated to:
… era figlia di un ottimate di Onchismos, l’odierna Saranda nel sud

dell’Albania, di fronte a Corfù.
DEEP-L: She was the daughter of an optimate of Onchismos, today’s
Saranda in southern Albania, opposite Corfu.
The first issue is that “optimate” is a term to describe a member of the
patrician order in ancient Rome. So, a gloss such as “nobleman” would be
more useful. What is more intriguing from the point of view of causal em-
plotment for the homo narrans is that though Corfu is probably better
known than many of the historical populations mentioned earlier, the
Metamodel challenge: “What is Corfu for [the reader/writer] exactly?” is
likely to yield usefully different results. For the writers, the thread linking
the two events was extremely manifest given their own research into the
Corfu community. In fact, Corfu is mentioned earlier, but as an important
Jewish settlement much later on – in the 16th century. For the original
implied reader, the island is well-known as a nearby holiday destination and
does help locate Saranda. But for the international reader, there is little that
can tell us why Corfu has been highlighted.4 So, the final result deleted any
reference to Corfu:
She was the daughter of an “optimate”, an aristocrat or “Good Man”,

from Onchismos, today known as Saranda in southern Albania.
Selective appropriation
The final narrative structure to look at briefly is the way “selective appro-
priation” works. As Baker (2006, p. 71) states: “it is inevitable that some
elements of experience are excluded and others privileged”. In terms of the
train analogy, the departure station may offer a number of trains, each one
taking a different route to the same destination, and each one offering a
different experience. However, the choice is not totally open. We will be
attracted, enticed or even coerced onto one train rather than another,
meaning that the journey will necessarily give us only one view of the world.
A journey that takes in all the views would be exhausting and pointless, in
the sense that we would never arrive at a destination. This requirement for
just a slice of reality, or for a manageable model of the world, is vital for the
reader to remain in the “flow”.
What it is that motivates a particular selective appropriation is at a deeper
level - what Somers and Gibson (1994, p. 61) call a “meta” or “master
narrative level”, mentioned earlier. It is at this level we find which myths or
ideologies lie at the basis of the writer’s model of the world. If the writer
expects the reader to follow and agree with what is written in the text, then
these underlying beliefs about the world will be shared. As narrans trans-
lators we can always reconstruct the narrative, but it may be necessary to
signal to the new readership that the meta narrative, the myths or beliefs
espoused, come from within another model of the world, that of the original
implied reader. The following provides a useful example. It is from a panel
describing the Marble Boat in the Summer Palace in Beijing (in Katan,
2016b, p. 80). The bilingual Chinese/English text in English reads:
86 David Katan
Marble Boat, its Chinese style structure has nothing left,
which silently accused Anglo-French forces of their guilty [sic].
The intent of the text is clear, but it is frustratingly uninformative, leaving

the outsider reader bewildered. Using the Metamodel we notice the lack of
specific references: “which Anglo-French forces specifically?”, “what guilt
exactly?”, and so on. As for selective appropriation, the Metamodel
will flag up the missing performative: “according to whom exactly does the
Marble Boat accuse …?”
The insider translator will be in a position to instantly locate the source of
the performative. The story of the Marble Boat and what it represents is
common knowledge in China, and this performative might be uttered by any
Chinese citizen, given the very strongly felt Chinese belief surrounding what
objectively was a criminal attack on the Palace by Anglo-French forces in
1860. So, the minimum intervention, to resynch the narrative is to add:
“According to the Chinese” or “from a Chinese viewpoint …” (see also
Katan & Taibi, 2021, p. 171).
We should also consider the fact that this text was never destined for
translation. Had the writers known that this interpretation panel were to be
translated into English they would certainly have considered informing and
educating the new audience (as to what actually happened) rather than only
addressing Chinese emotions. At this point, the translator (though of course
not the machine) is faced with more of a dilemma. Other selective appro-
priations tell different stories about the reality. As mentioned in Katan
(2021, p. 342), the Anglophile Rough Guide to China asserts that the
Marble Boat “symbolizes the Empress’ embezzling and profligate spending”.
We now open up the possibility of the homo narrans translator becoming a
full-fledged activist interventionist, undermining the dominating narrative.
As Baker (2006, p. 6) suggests, translators “are uniquely placed to initiate”.
In general, my view would not be to take an activist position. That said, the
Marble Boat example would be a case of important meta-narratives that
when combined, rather than undermined, can only help the new readership
to expand their own model of the world, weight the author’s views within a
wider context, and form their own opinion.
The final example presented here takes us back to machine translation, and is
actually an exception to the thesis presented here: “what machines can’t do”. In
the tourist guide is a discussion of a particular Jewish holiday, which in Italian
is explained, logically from an Italian stance, as “la festa della Pasqua ebraica
(Pesach)”. Translated by a homo sapiens translator into English, we would have
“the Jewish Easter holiday (Pesach)”. There is no translation of Pesach into
Italian, so the inaccurate but pragmatically useful analogy allows the readers
(none of whom would be Jewish) to make some sense of this other reality.
The new audience, on the other hand, would include not only Jews but
English speakers who would know the English translation of Pesach,
“Passover”. With this tacit knowledge, the homo sapiens translation
represents a distortion, synching a new hermeneutic circle of understanding
which suggests that the Christian holiday has been the historical norm while
the Jewish holiday is a variant. DeepL, on the other hand, has been pre-
programmed to render the string “la pasqua ebraica/Jewish Easter” as
“Passover”. This excellent deep neural machine rendition is, of course, still a
case of translating a cultureme at sentence rather than discourse level and
hence cannot be aware of the narrativity created or undermined.
Conclusion
Narrativity, the “understanding of the characters, events and experiences that
are the subject of the discourse” (Alleyne, 2015, p. 62) is a singularly human
ability. It is not what machine translation (however deep learning and neural)
can be programmed to do. Nor is this ability stressed as a competence that the
homo sapiens translator is expected to excel at. Yet, when translation involves
those higher stakes and where there is a clear audience shift to an outsider
readership, the translator could stress their added value actively demon-
strating what machines can’t do by becoming a homo narrans translator.
This means taking account of some of the more salient aspects of nar-
rativity in combination with the mindful use of the Metamodel. Careful use
of the challenges will help locate the textual gap between what is written, the
writer’s model of the world and that of the implied and the new readership.
Once the connections are made explicit, the translator as homo narrans can
begin to translate for the new implied readership and recreate the circle of
understanding that lay between the original writer and her implied reader –
something that machines could not even dream of.
Notes
1 It is also, true, that here I am also distorting reality, given that neither Spain nor
France were nation states at the time.
2 While Apulian is a recognised American variety, Puglian is the preferred UK
translation – and also remains closer to the mother-tongue term.
3 Venice then was an empire, not just the small island – and this is explained in the
English translation later.
4 It is true that Corfu is a popular low-cost holiday destination for other European
countries, but it hardly qualifies as a significant anchor for the vast majority of an
international readership.
References
Alleyne, B. (2015). Narrative Networks: Stories approaches in a digital age. Sage.
Baker, M. (2005). Narratives in and of translation. SKASE, Journal of Translation
and Interpretation, 1(1), 4–13. http://www.skase.sk/Volumes/JTI01/doc_pdf/01.pdf
Baker, M. (2006). Translation and conflict: A narrative account. Routledge. 10.4324/
9780429438240
88 David Katan
Baker, M. (2014). Translation as renarration. In J. House (Ed.), Translation:
A multidisciplinary approach (pp. 158–177). Palgrave. 10.1057/9781137025487
Bal, M. (2017). Narratology: Introduction to the theory of narrative (4th ed.).
University of Toronto Press.
Bandler, R. & Grinder, J. (1975). The structure of magic: A book about language and
therapy (Vol. 1). Science and Behavior Books.
Barthes, R. (1977). Introduction to the structural analysis of narratives. In
R. Barthes (Ed.), Image music rext: Essays selected and translated by Stephen
Heath (pp. 79–124). Fontana Press. 10.4324/9780203459065-7
Bassnett, S. (2014). Translation studies (4th ed.). Routledge.
Bauman, R. & Briggs, C. L. (1990). Poetics and performance as critical perspectives
on language and social life. Annual Review of Anthropology, 19(1), 59–88. https://
www.jstor.org/stable/2155959
Bell, A. (1984). Language style as audience design. Language in Society, 13(2),
145–204. 10.1017/S004740450001037X
Benetello, C. (2021). Hybridisation adds value in translation and interpreting.
Cultus, 14, 100–123.
Boase-Beier, J. (2014). Translation and the representation of thought: The case of
Herta Muller. Language and literature: International Journal of Stylistics, 23(3),
213–226. 10.1177/0963947014536503
Brook, A. (2004, January 1). Kant, cognitive science and contemporary neo-
Kantianism. Journal of Consciousness Studies, 11(10–11), 1–25. https://www.
ingentaconnect.com/contentone/imp/jcs/2004/00000011/f0020010/art00002
Bruner, J. (1991). The narrative construction of reality. Critical Inquiry, 18(1), 1–21.
http://www.jstor.org/stable/1343711
Caroll, L. (1865/1998). Alice in wonderland. Volume one. https://www.adobe.com/
be_en/active-use/pdf/Alice_in_Wonderland.pdf
Csikszentmihalyi, M. (2002). Flow: The classic work on how to achieve happiness. Rider.
CUBBITT (2021, December 8). CUBBITT translation. https://ufal.mff.cuni.cz/cubbitt.
De Beaugrande, R.-A. & Dressler, W. (1981). Introduction to text linguistics.
Longman. 10.4324/9781315835839-14
DeepL. (2021, September 21). https://www.deepl.com/en/translator
Eagleman, D. & Brandt, A. (2017). The runaway species: How human creativity re-
makes the world. Catapult.
Fisher, W. (1985). The narrative paradigm: An elaboration. Communication Monographs,
52(4), 347–367. 10.1080/03637758509376117
Fisher, W. R. (1985). Homo narrans: Story-telling in mass culture and everyday life.
Journal of Communication, 35(4), 74–89. 10.1111/j.1460-2466.1985.tb02973.x
FIT. (2021, September 21). Translator’s Charter. Fédération Internationale des
Traducteurs/ International Federation of Translators. https://www.fit-ift.org/
translators-charter/
Forster, E. (2005). Aspects of the novel. Penguin.
Gambier, Y. (2018). Translation studies, audiovisual translation and reception. In E.
D. Giovanni, & Y. Gambier (Eds.), Reception studies and audiovisual translation
(pp. 43–66). John Benjamins. 10.1075/btl.141.04gam
Ghio, F. & Lelli, F. (2022) The Jewish Salento travel guide (D. Katan, Trans).
Capone Editore.
Gottschall, J. (2012). The storytelling animal: How stories make us human. Houghton
Mifflin Harcourt.
Grace, K., Salvatier, J., Dafoe, A., Zhang, B., & Evans, O. (2018). When will AI
exceed human performance? Evidence from AI experts. Journal of Artificial
Intelligence Research, 62, 729–754. 10.1613/jair.1.11222
Hale, S. & Liddicoat, A. (2015). A conversation between Sandra Hale and Anthony
Liddicoat. Cultus, 8, 14–26. https://www.cultusjournal.com/files/Archives/cultus__
8_2015.pdf
Harding, S.-A. (2012). “How do I apply narrative theory”: Socio-narrative theory in
translation studies. Target, 24(2), 286–309. 10.1075/target.24.2.04har
Jones, H. (2020). Narrative. In M. Baker, & G. Sandanha (Eds.), Routledge en-
cyclopedia of translation studies (3rd ed., pp. 356–360). Routledge.
Katan, D. & Taibi, M. (2021). Translating cultures: An introduction for translators,
interpreters and mediators. Routledge.
Katan, D. (2016a). Translation at the cross-roads: Time for the transcreational turn?
Perspectives, 24(3), 365–381. 10.1080/0907676X.2015.1016049
Katan, D. (2016b). Translating for outsider tourists: Cultural informers do it better.
Cultus, 9(2), 63–90. https://www.cultusjournal.com/files/Archives/Cultus9_2016_2/
cultus%20_9_Volume_2_2016.pdf
Katan, D. (2021). Translating tourism. In Bielsa E. & D. Kapsaskis (Eds), The
Routledge handbook of translation and globalization (pp. 337–350). Routledge.
Katan, D. (2022). Translator traditore? In F. Lelli & F. Ghio (Eds.), Guide to Jewish
Salento (pp. 5–13). Capone.
Margolin, U. (2005). Character. In D. Herman, M. Jahn, & M-L. Ryan (Eds.),
Routledge encyclopedia of narrative theory (pp. 52–57). Routledge. 10.4324/97802
03932896
Massey, G. & Ehrensberger-Dow, M. (2017). Machine learning: Implications for
translator education. Lebende Sprachen, 62(2), 300–312. 10.1515/les-2017-0021
Meretoja, H. (2014). Narrative and Human Existence: Ontology, Epistemology, and
Ethics. New Literary History, 45, 89–109 10.1353/nlh.2014.0001
Munday, J. (2008). Style and ideology in translation: Latin American writing in
English. Routledge. 10.4324/9780203873953
Pilar Navarro, M. (2004). Identification of the right propositional form and the
translator. In M. P. Navarro Errasti, R. Lores Sanz, & M. Ornat (Eds.),
Pragmatics at work: The translation of tourist literature (pp. 199–242). Peter Lang.
Pillière, L. (2018). Style and voice: Lost in translation? Études de stylistique anglaise,
12, 225–252. 10.4000/esa.560
Polanyi, M. (1966). The tacit dimension. Doubleday.
Popel, M., Tomkova, M., Tomek, J., Kaiser, Ł., & Uszkoreit, J. (2020, September).
Transforming machine translation: A deep learning system reaches news transla-
tion quality comparable to human professionals. Nature Communications, 11.
10.1038/s41467-020-18073-9
Raído, E. R. (2016). Translators as adaptive experts in a flat world: From globali-
zation 1.0 to globalization 4.0? International Journal of Communication, 10,
970–988. https://ijoc.org/index.php/ijoc/article/view/3504/1574
Somers, M. (1997). Deconstructing and reconstructing class formation theory.
Narrativity, relational analysis, and social theory. In J. R. Hall (Ed.), Reworking
class (pp. 73–105). Cornell University Press. 10.7591/9781501725449-006
90 David Katan
Somers, M. & Gibson, G. (1994). Reclaiming the epistemological “other”: Narrative
and the social constitution of identity. In C. Calhoun (Ed.), Social theory and the
politics of identity (pp. 37–99). Blackwell.
Steiner, G. (1998). After Babel: Aspects of language and translation (3rd ed.). Oxford
University Press. ISBN: 9780192880932
Toury, G. (1995) Descriptive translation studies and beyond (2nd ed.). John
Benjamins. 10.1075/btl.4
6 “Expanding” or “rebranding” the
translation concept? A pedagogical
approach to future-proofing the
translation profession in the 2020s
Juliet Vine and Elsa Huertas Barros
Introduction
The changing socio-economic environment has placed professional human
translator’s jobs under threat from a variety of sources such as machine
translation, crowd sourcing (Angelone et al., 2020; Katan, 2014, 2016;
McDonough Dolmaya, 2012), and yet at the same time there are increasing
calls for multilingual communication in a globalised world that requires a
growing number of “translation-like” activities (Pedersen, 2014, p. 57). This
chapter investigates whether these “translation-like” activities are in fact
translations and why the distinction between translation-like and translation
is relevant to future-proofing the role of the human translator.
The process of delimiting the concept of translation to meet new demands
is not a new one and began for the nascent Translation Studies discipline
with Holmes’ paper, originally published in 1972 (2008), and his attempt to
define the translation concept. Another early example was Stetting’s (1989)
investigation into whether the translation of news media could be considered
a translation or if we needed the new term “transediting”. This process
continues to the present with Gambier and Kaspere’s (2021) paper on
changing translation practices, which reviews the “new types of translators
[that] are emerging, with a new hierarchy between them, in parallel with a
multiplication of labels created for ‘translation’ ” (p. 37).
In the last 15 years, the growth of a “new” area of translation practice,
transcreation, has come to the attention of Translation Studies (Gaballo,
2012; Gambier & Kaspere, 2021; Pedersen, 2014; Rike, 2013). The term
transcreation in this chapter is defined as “the adaptation of advertising
material for different markets” (Pedersen, 2014, p.57). It is a portmanteau
word combining the terms translation and creation, thus implying that this
form of translation requires translation plus a creativity that is not necessarily
or normally present in other translation tasks.
With Schäffner (2012), we argue that replacing the term translation with
other terms such as transcreation creates a “danger that translation con-
tinues to be understood in a narrower sense of purely word-for-word
transfer process” (p. 880). The narrow understanding of translation implied
DOI: 10.4324/9781003223344-7
92 Juliet Vine and Elsa Huertas-Barros
by the new terms undermines the way translation is perceived by both so-
ciety in general and businesses in particular. This, in turn, impacts on the
status of the profession of translation.
In this chapter, we will explore the emergence of the concept of tran-
screation, how and whether the practice of transcreation differs from
translation, and if translators themselves see the transcreation task as one
which they are professionally equipped to deal with. We will argue that
explicitly introducing these discussions on the nature of transcreation and
translation as part of the translation training pedagogy will help to future-
proof the translation profession by providing future generations of trans-
lator with an expanded understanding of translation that encompasses many
of the new “translation-like” activities.
The first approach to future-proofing the translation profession:

Rebranding
We contend the literature on future-proofing the translation profession can be
analysed by using one of two approaches: to rebrand (e.g., Katan, 2016) or to
expand (e.g., Tymoczko, 2007) the translation concept. The rebranding ap-
proach, that is, finding a new name for the translation-like activities, reflects
the fact that some of the new translation-like activities are seen by various
stakeholders in language service provision as requiring the translator to en-
gage in additional tasks which are not usually associated with translation.
This of itself reveals an underlying assumption that translation is seen as
limited by, amongst other things, its professional requirement to be faithful
(Katan, 2014; Evgeniya, 2018). Katan (2014) points to the code of profes-
sional conduct’s requirement for fidelity. However, in the discussion of
translation being limited by its need to be faithful, the nature of the fidelity is
not investigated in the argument Katan (2014) puts forward and is assumed
to mean that the translator lacks choice and/or creativity. The dichotomy of
faithful and free is apparently understood to mean that being faithful is
uncreative and a mere copy, whereas being free requires more creativity. The
comment by Evgeniya (2018) that a “translators’ task is to strike the right
balance between creativity and faithfulness to the original, keep within the
allowed limits of source’s transformation and sometimes suppress the urge
to be creative and sophisticated” (p. 784), reflects this narrow understanding
of translation and why it is that translation would need to rebrand itself to
account for a more “sophisticated” approach to texts and contexts. Allied to
this sense that a translator is walking a tightrope between creativity and
faithfulness, is what Robinson (1998, p. 92) calls a “hegemonic concern with
making or avoiding, detecting and censuring errors” which the author
claims “has instilled a deficit model of translation in the imaginations both
of the people who do the work and of the people who use it”. And this in
turn leads to translators who are “afraid of censure” fostering “a variety of
timid practices designed to protect the translator from attack”.
“Expanding” or “rebranding” the translation concept? 93
The Fédération Internationale des Traducteurs / International Federation
of Translators’ (FIT, n.d.) code of practice (Translator’s Charter, article 4)
states “Every translation shall be faithful and render exactly the idea and
form of the original. This fidelity constituting both a moral and legal ob-
ligation for the translator” (FIT, n.d.) but, as Katan (2014) points out, the
subsequent article in the FIT code of practice undermines any simple eva-
luation of fidelity by stating that a “faithful translation, however, should not
be confused with a literal translation, the fidelity of a translation not ex-
cluding an adaptation to make the form, the atmosphere and deeper
meaning of the work felt in another language and country” (FIT, n.d.). It is
not clear what “faithful” means in this context, but it is clear that faith-
fulness can be maintained while adapting to allow for differences between
languages and countries. The unexamined use of faithfulness does not allow
for the fact that different translation tasks and/or briefs will expect faith-
fulness to different aspects of the texts and context. Therefore, to interpret
the term “faithful” as used in the FIT code of practice or in a translator’s
response to a question on the importance of faithfulness in their professional
practice as a simple word-for-word equivalence is to ignore the complexity
inherent in the term “faithful” as it is being used.
Rebranding: Translation plus creativity as Transcreation

The unquestioned use of the term “faithful” is reflected not only in the in-
dustry perspective of translation but also the translator’s own self-perception
of their role. It allows not only transcreation companies to advertise them-
selves as providing a service that “recreates” the “text for the target audience
rather than simply translating it from one language to another” (Certified
Translation Services), but has also underpinned a self-perception amongst
translators that their task is not to be creative because remaining faithful is not
a creative process (Gaballo, 2012; Katan, 2014, 2016).
Pedersen (2014) provides an overview of how the language services pro-
viders (LSP) rebranded translation as transcreation by providing quotes
from the companies’ own promotional material. In order to establish if the
sorts of comments that Pedersen found were still relevant, we carried out a
simple short review by looking at the websites of a range of LSPs found in a
Google search of companies which offered translation services including
advertising translation. Of the first ten companies found in the search, four
of them mentioned transcreation. The following quotes were found in our
review of the sites. Transperfect stated that:
The standard translation process aims to produce final text that matches
the source language as closely as possible without changing the meaning.
When advertising copy or other marketing language is involved, the
priority shifts to maintaining the concepts, meaning, and significance of
the source message, regardless of what text changes are required (n.d.).
In their definition of transcreation services, Kwintessential state that “We
don’t stay faithful to the form of words but to the essence of their purpose.
Through our transcreation we ensure your advertisements, slogan, company
name or website copy has maximum impact” (n.d.). Furthermore, the
Textappeal website advises potential customers not to “get lost in transla-
tion. Transcreation moves beyond the direct translation of the words of your
campaign, delving deeper into the ideas and values which give those words
meaning” (n.d.). Pedersen (2014) found that:
A common factor in transcreation when it comes to comparing it to

translation is the assumption that when transcreation takes place, it
involves something more than translation. Phrases like “more than
translation” and “just translation (…) gives the impression that tran-
screation gives an added value to a job that would other be subject to
translation” (p. 62).
This still holds true in our updated review of some LSP websites that provide
transcreation services.
Gaballo (2012), in her discussion of transcreation, gave the perspectives
on major stakeholders in translation training and the industry. The section
“the translator voice” included some statements by translators themselves
about how they see the difference between translation and transcreation.
One respondent is quoted as saying “Translations stick relatively/ very [sic]
closely to the wording and structure of the original without sacrificing
target-language effect. In “transcreation” you have the freedom to add text,
rearrange the order of sentences (…)” (p. 98) and another respondent said of
transcreation that it “is a culturally appropriate transference of a concept
into another language, as opposed to the linguistic transfer that is a trans-
lation” (p. 98). Reporting on some preliminary findings of a survey of
professional translators on transcreation, Katan (2016) found that only a
quarter of the respondents “suggested that translation was, or should be,
transcreation” (p. 377). The author quoted translators saying that “it’s not
my job to provide creative input” (p. 377) and “I might transcreate on oc-
casion, but I’ll feel guilty about it” (p. 377).
Both Ho (2004) and Katan (2016) report how a variety of clients who see
the work of the translator as limited and uncreative use the translator to
produce a draft version which is then “creatively” adapted to suit the re-
quirements of the client by agents other than the original translator. This
creativity often involves adapting to the cultural context of the target text. In
2009, the European Master’s in Translation (EMT) expert group set out a
competence framework (revised in 2017) which explicitly states that being
able to take account of the different cultural environments was a compe-
tence that all translators were expected to have or develop in training. Why,
then, is this expectation of intercultural competence not reflected in either
the LSPs or the professional translators as reported in Gaballo’s (2012),
Katan’s (2016) and Pedersen’s (2014) findings? Is it a failure of the trans-
lators themselves, an “aversion to risk” (Katan, 2016, p. 377), a systemic
problem in the way translations are evaluated, as Robinson (1998) sug-
gested, or is it a problem with the way training programmes have been run?
Although we have seen in their own promotional material that the LSPs
continue to depict translation as a secondary, simplistic process, it is not
clear if the translators themselves continue to see the act of translation as
non-creative. Has an expanded translation concept, one that sees translation
as intrinsically creative (see later), shifted translator’s self-perceptions and is
it something which translator trainers have taken on board?
The second approach to future-proofing translation: Expanding

the translation concept
The second approach follows much of the work of Translation Studies in the
last 50 years in expanding the concept of translation to respond to the work of
Translation Studies theorists and the various “turns” in Translation Studies.
One of the few points of agreement in Translation Studies has been that it is
difficult, if not impossible, to fully delimit the term translation. However,
Translation Studies scholars have continued to attempt this (e.g., Toury, 1995;
Tymoczko, 2007; Vermeer, 1996), and with each new vision of what translation
is, the concept of translation has been expanded. According to Perteghella
and Loffredo (2008), “(t)urn after turn, translation as a concept, practice and
scholarship has thus changed shape, initiating further shapes, and has ac-
customed itself to a position between discourses and across disciplines” (p. 1).
This second approach resists relabelling translation in response to the
increasing diversity of tasks, but instead assesses these tasks and focuses on
how they can be understood as part of the translation process (Perteghella &
Loffredo, 2008; Schäffner, 2012). This expanded understanding of transla-
tion moves beyond discussions of linguistic equivalence and explores the-
ories of meaning which make full equivalence impossible and, as such,
makes phantasmas of the concepts of semantic, syntactic or pragmatic
equivalence. Deconstructing the nature of meaning, understanding how
culturally bound meanings are, and recognising the partial nature of any
translation choice all lead to the conclusion that translations can only be
made if a translator makes creative choices. This situation has been summed
up by Gambier (Gambier & Munday, 2014, p. 21):
“[T]ranslation” is rejected because it implies a formal transfer, a word-

for-word work, in parallel with communication seen as a unidirectional
conduit and with an ethics of neutrality. It is also rejected because it
goes with the traditional image of the translator as a subservient worker.
TS has deconstructed this definition for some time now and this image.
And, I believe, now we have arrived at a concept of translation that
recovers creativity, voice, interpretation and commitment.
O’Sullivan (2013) agrees with Gambier’s assessment, stating that “as the
concepts of translation become enlarged (see e.g., functional, pragmatic and
sociological approaches) and move away from equivalence-based models, it
becomes easier to see translation as inherently creative” (p. 44).
It is interesting that Gambier (Gambier & Munday, 2014, p. 21) speaks of a
translation concept which “recovers creativity” implying that creativity was
once understood as intrinsic to translation and that the idea of translation as
creative has been eroded. It is certainly true that defining translation as
creative is not something which is new in Translation Studies. In 1988, Delisle
said that “(t)he most distinctive trait of human translation is its creativity, for
translation involves choices that are not determined by pre-set rules” (p. 37, as
quoted in Mackenzie, 1998, p. 201). Robinson (2015) gives an historical
perspective on how creativity has increasingly become a focus in Translation
Studies, stating that the mid-1990s were a “watershed for the study of crea-
tivity in translation” (p. 284), and citing with Pommer (2008) the publication
of Gui’s (1995) paper “Das Wesen des Übersetzens is kreativ” [The essence of
translation is creative]. Neubert (2000, pp. 4–5) wrote that open-endedness
and creativity were two of the seven features of translation. Perteghella and
Loffredo (2008), in their introduction of an edited volume on Translation and
Creativity, discuss the coming of a “creative turn” in Translation Studies.
Much of investigation of creativity and translation has followed the
product and process divide reflected in other Translation Studies debates.
The discussion of creative product has been restricted to literary texts and
texts which are considered creative, that is to say, advertising. Much more is
written about the translation process focusing on the fact that translators
are faced with choices that are open-ended and therefore the process of
deciding on the best solution is creative (Mackenzie, 1998; Pommer, 2008;
Kussmaul, 1995). Given that both Gaballo’s (2012) and Katan’s (2014,
2016) surveys were reporting on responses given by translators over 10 years
ago, and given the increasing interest in creativity and translation in re-
sponse to changes in the socio-economic environment of translation and the
increasing focus on creativity in Translation Studies, we decided to under-
take a small-scale survey not only of professional translators, but also of
trainers and students who had completed their training to investigate whe-
ther attitudes have changed.
A survey on creativity and translation

A total of 108 respondents completed the survey1, 45 of whom were pro-
fessional translators, 34 were translation students and 29 were trainers. All
translation students and trainers were from the University of Westminster.
The professional translators were Visiting Lecturers at the University of
Westminster and/or in other institutions in the UK. The same survey, in-
cluding exactly the same set of questions, was provided to all three cohorts.
While the questions were the same, we collected the data in three different
sets in order to investigate if there were any noteworthy differences between
the three cohorts. However, we found a remarkable convergence in the re-
sponses of the three different groups and, therefore, we are referring to the
full sample when reporting our findings. The survey included eight questions
focusing on the way translation is conceptualised by different stakeholders.
The questions were designed to reflect some of the underpinning assump-
tions for both the “rebranding” and “expanding” of the translation concept
approaches described in the previous sections. The survey focused on the
narrow issue of translators’ self-perception of their role with regards to
translation, creativity and transcreation. For the purposes of our survey, we
defined transcreation, as aforementioned, as the process whereby advertising
material is adapted for different markets with different cultural values and
different languages. As suggested by Saldanha and O’Brien (2016, p. 156),
the survey contained both positive and negative statements in order to
minimise any potential bias resulting from the phrasing of the questions.
One of the main findings of the survey is that respondents overwhelmingly
see translation as creative. As can be seen in Table 6.1, over 98% of parti-
cipants disagree, partially or fully (mean 3.692), with the statement that “a)
all translations are copies of original texts and therefore translation cannot
be creative”. This is supported by the fact that nearly 90% of the sample
agree, fully or partially (mean 1.62), that “d) all translation is intrinsically
creative”. For instance, nearly 88% disagree, partially or fully (mean 3.39),
with the statement that “c) literary translation is creative, but non-literary
translation is not creative”.
Whereas Katan (2016) found that the respondents to his survey tended to
not understand their role as creative, quoting one respondent stating “it is
not my job to provide creative input” (Katan, 2016, p. 377), the respondents
in our survey did see the translation as creative. This shift in perspective
could be intrinsic to the cohorts surveyed, but the overwhelming response to
statements “a)” and “d)” in favour of translation being creative do indicate a
shift in perception. This shift in perception accords with the ideas promoted
by the “expanded” translation concept which figures translation as in-
trinsically creative. However, there is less unanimity of response to the
statement “e) some specialisms such as legal and technical translations do
not allow for creativity”, with nearly 51% disagreeing, partially or fully, and
just over 49% agreeing, fully or partially (mean 2.56) with the statement.
This suggests that respondents have an intuitive sense of what creativity is
(O’Sullivan, 2013, p. 45), one that does not link the sort of decision making
involved in legal or technical texts with creativity.
Considering that the respondents overwhelming disagreed with the idea
that all translations are copies of originals and so cannot be creative, and
that 81% disagreed, partially or fully, with the statement “b) (…) the
translator must be faithful not creative” (see Table 6.1), it was interesting to
note that there was less unanimity with the statement that “g) For a
translation to be faithful, it must be creative” (49% agree, fully or partially,
98
Table 6.1 Degree of agreement with the given statements about translation (1 = fully agree, 2 = partially agree, 3 = partially disagree,
4 = disagree completely)
(n = 108) 1 (f. agree) 2 (p. agree) 3 (p. disag.) 4 (f. disag.) Mean Mode
a) All translations are copies of original texts and 0 1.85% 26.85% 71.30% 3.69 4
therefore translation cannot be creative
b) The most important aspect of professional 0.92% 17.59% 59.26% 22.22% 3.03 3
translation is that it is accurate and so the
translator must be faithful not creative.
c) Literary translation is creative, but non-literary 0 12.04% 37.04% 50.92% 3.39 4
Juliet Vine and Elsa Huertas-Barros
translation is not creative

d) All translation is intrinsically creative 52.78% 36.11% 7.41% 3.70% 1.62 1
e) Some specialisms such as legal and technical 10.18% 40.74% 31.48% 17.59% 2.56 2
translation do not allow for creativity
f) A translation can either be faithful or creative, it 0 5.55% 29.63% 64.81% 3.59 4
cannot be both
g) For a translation to be faithful, it must be creative 12.96% 36.11% 37.96% 12.96% 2.51 3
and 51% disagree, partially or fully; mean 2.51). These responses show that
respondents do not have a narrow definition of faithfulness which equates
the concept with sameness. This finding is borne out in the response to the
statement that “f) A translation can either be faithful or creative, but it
cannot be both”, with an overwhelming majority (over 94%) disagreeing,
partially or fully (mean 3.59). However, the 49%-51% split in response to the
question asking if they see the relationship between faithfulness and crea-
tivity as being a necessary one, in other words, it is not possible to be faithful
without having to make creative choices, shows that the conceptualisations
of creativity and faithfulness, which we argue are important to an “ex-
panded” translation concept, have not been as widely accepted.
Another finding of the survey is that respondents overwhelmingly con-
ceive transcreation as a form of translation and not as two different prac-
tices as suggested by previous surveys and by the LSPs quoted in the earlier
section on rebranding. As can be seen in Table 6.2, over 85% of respondents
disagree, partially or fully (mean 3.19), with the statement that “Translation
and transcreation are two completely different practices” and 87% agree,
fully or partially (mean 1.8), that “the process of adapting material to new
target cultures and languages is what translators already do in their work”.
This is a striking difference compared to the findings of Katan’s survey
(2016) in which only a quarter of participants suggested that “translation
was, or should be transcreation”. There is slightly less consensus with re-
gards to “Transcreation [being] a new area of work which translators could
adapt their practice to”, with over 68% agreeing, fully or partially, and over
31% disagreeing, partially or fully (mean 2.19). This may suggest that some
participants do not necessarily see transcreation as a new area of work
(different from translation), but they may wish to highlight the fact that
translators are able to adapt their practice to new areas and challenges.
Given the University of Westminster focus of a substantial part of re-
spondents, further studies will be necessary to confirm if the shift in trend
persists, compared to previous surveys, and if it applies to wider samples
from broader international contexts.
Exploring the nature of creativity

In the conclusion to the entry on creativity in the Handbook of Translation,
O’Sullivan (2013) states:
It is, arguably, unhelpful to define [creativity] too closely. Bearing in

mind that we are talking about its use in scholarly discourse rather than
in general discourse, nevertheless it is clear that evaluations of transla-
tion and creativity tend to be made intuitively (p. 45).
However, we contend that the value of understanding translation as creative

comes precisely from attempting to define what is meant by creativity and
100
Table 6.2 Degree of agreement with the given statements about translation (1 = fully agree, 2 = partially agree, 3 = partially disagree,
4 = disagree completely)
(n = 108) 1 (f. agree) 2 (p. agree) 3 (p. disag.) 4 (f. disag.) Mean Mode
Transcreation is a new area of work which 19.44% 49.07% 24.07% 7.41% 2.19 2
translators could adapt their practice to
The process of adapting material to new target 32.41% 54.63% 12.96% 0 1.8 2
cultures and languages is what translators
already do in their work
Juliet Vine and Elsa Huertas-Barros
Transcreation is a form of translation which 54.63% 36.11% 6.48% 2.78% 1.57 1

requires additional creative input
Transcreation is a form of translation with 53.77% 38.68% 3.77% 3.77% 1.57 1
additional intercultural mediation
Translation and transcreation are two 2.78% 12.04% 48.15% 37.04% 3.19 3
completely different practices
how these definitions can help shape our understanding of translation and
by extension translators themselves. As Kussmaul (1995) states, “(i)f we
want to talk about creativity in translation we must take into account the
results produced by creativity research” (p. 40).
In an overview of definitions of creativity in the fields of philosophy and
psychology, Gaut (2010) claims there is “broad consensus that creativity is
the capacity to produce things that are original and valuable” (p. 1039). In
Translation Studies, the term “original” has been much discussed and is
often contrasted with the idea of copies. However, deconstructed under-
standing of texts and contexts drawing on Derrida have questioned
whether there is a useful distinction to be drawn between an original text
and texts in some sense derived from or influenced by the original, and
Translation Studies scholars have drawn on this questioning in their dis-
cussions of an expanded understanding of translation. In philosophical and
psychological studies on creativity, originality has been defined in terms of
something being novel and surprising, rather than being something created
without precedent. Torrance (1979), in his framework for creative thinking
processes, identified originality, the ability to think of novel ideas, as one of
the traits of creativity; along with fluency, the ability to think of many ideas
rapidly; and flexibility, the ability to use ideas in unusual ways. Novitz
(1999, p. 77) talks of material being “recombined” and creativity being born
of constraints. Boase-Beier & Holman (1997, p. 7, as cited in Perteghella &
Loffredo, 2008, p. 10) link creativity with constraint, claiming that the
greater the constraints surrounding a creative act, the greater the creativity
involved. The concepts derived from definitions of originality such as no-
velty, surprisingness, fluency, flexibility, recombination and constraint, are
all ones which can be used to think about translation. However, linking
these concepts to ideas of creativity would help to embed the idea that
translation is creative because the creative trait of originality is richer and
more complex than simply being an antonym to “copy”.
The second part of Gaut’s (2010, p. 1039) consensus definition of crea-
tivity is the concept of value. The idea of value is linked to an aspect of
creativity which has not been much explored in the Translation Studies
literature on creativity, that is to say, the social constructiveness of crea-
tivity. In an article outlining approaches to defining creativity, Cropley
(2011) explains that the previous understanding of creativity, which focused
on the creative person, process and product, now includes a fourth dimen-
sion: pressure. This dimension relates to “the pressure of the environment,
which can either facilitate or block creativity” (p. 358).
Pressure of the environment highlights creativity as a social phenom-
enon. The social aspect of creativity involves creating a “congenial en-
vironment” (Cropley, 2011, p. 363), one in which “individuals can break
rules without sanctions” (p. 363) and an environment that provides social
validation. Cropley states “without sociocultural validation it is not pos-
sible to speak of ‘creativity’, but only of the ‘production of variability’”
(p. 363). The importance of a congenial environment, one that promotes
confidence in translation choices and does not focus on counting errors,
is highlighted by Kussmaul (1995) when he states that “(t)he emotions
favourable for creative thought suggest that self-confidence is also one
of the prerequisites for creative translation” (p. 51). Mackenzie goes on
to say that “[d]oubt and fear of making mistakes are the enemies of
creativity” (1998, p. 205).
Kussmaul (1995) uses a four-phase model of the creative process based on
Wallace’s model (1926), comprising “preparation, incubation, investigation
(…), and verification” (p. 10), to encourage creative thinking in the trans-
lation process and to critique translation training. The author emphasises
the importance of being able to play with ideas or solutions and not feel the
need to follow socially accepted linguistic norms. Kussmaul attempts to
create a congenial environment for students where they do not fear giving
the wrong answer and thus have the confidence to be creative. This four-
phase model has been adapted by Runco (1997, as cited in Cropley, 2011,
p. 363, 367) to include the phases “communication” and “validation”. These
two additional phases again highlight the social situatedness of creativity.
Adding these two additional phases makes explicit that a product can only
be considered creative if it has been created via a creative process and then
has been validated by society as creative. Translation trainers can investigate
what these phases mean for translators and thus shed light on some of the
socio-economic factors which influence who the gatekeepers of validation
process are and what their motivations are.
Using transcreation to explore expanding the translation

concept
In a previous paper (Huertas-Barros & Vine, 2019) we have argued that it
was important to include transcreation tasks in the translator curricula
because incorporating such explicitly creative translation in the mainstream
curricula would help to embed a self-perception amongst translators that
their task is creative. It would also equip students with the skills necessary to
transcreate advertising copy without having to rebrand themselves as
transcreators. From personal communication via our alumni network, we
found that familiarity with this specialised form of translation was not only
of value to students in equipping them for professional life after their
training, but also within the training itself, since transcreation offers a very
clear model of the key aspects of any translation task (e.g., the very detailed
translation brief and the idea of the voice of the target text). The shared
nature of the tasks of transcreation and translation is evident in the criteria
that we co-created in collaboration with a translator specialising in tran-
screation and the students (Huertas-Barros & Vine, 2019, pp. 290–291). All
these criteria can be clearly mapped to those used to evaluate translations.
For instance, some of the criteria we suggest for the transcreation project
such as “market research”, “transcreation brief”, “persona” or “voice”,
mirror criteria such as “compliance with brief” (including awareness of the
target audience and use of appropriate register), “terminology” (including
effective research skills) and “readability” against which translations are
usually assessed. Therefore, the use of transcreation on translation modules
will help students to “concretise” (Suojanen et al., 2015, p. 18) criteria for
assessing translation per se.
Our survey findings earlier suggest that the expanded translation concept,
which sees translation as intrinsically creative, has already been accepted by
a majority of translators, trainers and students within our survey cohort.
However, we believe that exploring what is meant by creativity in translator
training curricula, using transcreation as an example, can still be of value in
investigating and applying what is involved in expanding the translation
concept. As our survey has shown, only half of respondents understood
there to be a tighter causal link between being faithful and being creative.
Including an investigation into creativity in the translation curricula could
support a wider spread understanding of this. Introducing transcreation
supports the idea set out by Kussmaul (1995) that creativity comes when
we play with language, when translators allow themselves freedom from
constraints of narrow conceptualisations of translation. It also underlines
the importance of creativity as one of the seven cognitive orientations of
translation competence as set out by Neubert (2000, p. 5). Neubert suggests
that these orientations should be introduced early in the students’ training to
ensure that they “remember once and for all that their future profession
demands much, much more than linguistic knowledge” (p. 5). Transcreation
tasks can also help investigate the professional norms of translation. As
Benetello (2018) points out, the transcreation task involves breaking the
norms of linguistic use, but rather than seeing this as a reason for suggesting
transcreation is not translation, we could question why one set of norms are
applied to all translations. Students can be asked in what ways the tran-
screation is faithful to the source text and thus explore this concept, dis-
covering that faithfulness is not sameness. Transcreation provides a clear
example of how translators need to mediate between cultures and make
culturally appropriate and effective target texts. Rather than seeing this is
something unique to this type of text, students can explore how this med-
iation applies to all texts.
Transcreation can also be used to investigate the value dimension of
creativity and ask questions about how this value is attached and for what
reason. Investigating the concept of creativity shows that value is not in-
trinsic in the product of creative processes but is socially constructed. An
investigation into how and why value appears to be attached to the trans-
lation in the advertising industry only when it is rebranded could reveal who
the gatekeepers of this process of communicating and validating the crea-
tivity of transcreation are. This, in turn, could reveal some of the factors
which hinder translation been seen as creative.
Conclusion
In this chapter we have argued that translation professionals have been
encouraged to future-proof themselves by taking on an increasing portfolio
of interlingual communication tasks which reflect the new demands of a
globalised world. We argue that these new tasks can be conceptualised as
requiring either “rebranding” of the translation concept or by “expanding”
it. We have argued that replacing or “rebranding” it with other terms de-
values translation and results in a narrow understanding of what the process
involves. This narrow understanding of translation implied by the need to
find new terms undermines the way translation is perceived by both society
in general and businesses in particular. This, in turn, impacts on the status of
the profession of translation.
We believe that the “expanded” translation concept approach provides an
opportunity to understand these emerging profiles and responsibilities as
part of the translation process rather than reducing it to a mere word-for-
word transfer process. We have used transcreation as a prism to explore the
two approaches and to explain how, if an expanded understanding of
translation is adopted, then transcreation can be understood as a specialised
form of translation rather than a value-added extension to it.
The results of our survey show that there has been a significant shift in
translators’, trainers’ and students’ perceptions of translation and creativity
compared to the findings of previous surveys. However, we argue that if
Translation Studies and translator training courses investigated theories of
creativity developed in the fields of psychology and philosophy in relation to
translation, this could provide fresh insights into how and why translation
should be considered creative and why it is not always seen so. The definitions
of creativity cited in our chapter show that something is only considered
creative if it is seen as both original and of value. This interplay between
creativity and value can shed light on why the narrower sense of translation, one
which defines transcreation as a “translation-like activity” rather than trans-
lation, negatively impacts on the status of the profession of translation.
Translations need to be valued to be considered creative and, conversely,
translations need to be understood as creative as part of their value.
Using transcreation projects in translator education and exploring the
similarities between the transcreation process and a fully developed under-
standing of translation will not only challenge the narrow hegemonic view of
translation cited by Robinson (2015) but, by extension, will also attest to the
creativity inherent in all translation tasks. The use of transcreation projects
in translator education promotes an environment which supports creativity,
an environment where students are not shackled to norms and where they
do not fear censure for translation choices which are deemed incorrect in
terms of narrow faithfulness, Instead, they are encouraged to go beyond
their comfort zone and see translation as a creative process. This environ-
ment will also boost student’s self-confidence in their abilities to translate,
making them feel more comfortable using translation strategies that involve
more risks (Haro Soler, 2018, p. 151). Therefore, we argue that transcreation
can be used to exemplify the expanded translation concept.
These approaches to creativity can help to inform translation trainers and
the wider translation professional environment by focusing on the inter-
connectedness of what translators do individually, how they perceive them-
selves, how others perceive them and how all this connects to the question of
whether translation is creative or not. If we want translators to see themselves,
and also to be seen, as creative, it is important that the social, cultural and
economic environments permit such a view. One way to ensure this can
happen is to nurture an expanded understanding of translation which re-
defines professional faithfulness not as a simplistic word-for-word process,
but as a complex cognitive process.
Notes
1 Due to word count limitations, the survey has not been included as an appendix,
but it is available upon request.
2 The scale used for the survey is as follows: 1 = fully agree; 2 = partially agree; 3 =
partially disagree; 4 = fully disagree. Therefore, the mean and mode range from 1
(fully agree) to 4 (fully disagree).
References
Angelone, E., Ehrensberger-Dow, M., & Massey, G. (Eds.) (2020). The Bloomsbury
companion to language industry studies. Bloomsbury. 10.5040/9781350024960
Benetello, C. (2018). When translation is not enough: Transcreation as a convention
defying practice. A practitioner’s perspective. The Journal of Specialised Translation,
29, 28–44.
Beylard-Ozeroff, A., Jana, K., & Moser-Mercer, B. (1998). Translators’ strategies and
creativity: Selected papers from the 9th International Conference on Translation and
Interpreting, Prague, September 1995. John Benjamins.
Certified Translation Services. (n.d.). What is transcreation? https://www.
certifiedtranslationservices.co.uk/what-is-transcreation/
Cropley, A. J. (2011). Definitions of creativity. In M. A. Runco & S. R. Pritzker
(Eds.), Encyclopedia of creativity (pp. 358–368). Academic Press.
Delisle, J. (1988). Translation and Interpretive approach. University of Ottawa Press.
Evgeniya, D. M. (2018). Creative practices in translation of transmedia projects.
11(5), 775–786. 10.17516/1997-1370-0269
EMT Board. (2017). EMT competence framework 2017. https://ec.europa.eu/info/
sites/default/files/emt_competence_fwk_2017_en_web.pdf
EMT expert group. (2009). Competences for professional translators, experts in multi-
lingual and multimedia communication. https://ec.europa.eu/info/sites/default/files/
emt_competences_translators_en.pdf
Fédération Internationale des Traducteurs /International Federation of Translators
(FIT). (n.d.). Translator’s charter. https://www.fit-ift.org/translators-charter/
Gaballo, V. (2012). Across culture. Exploring the boundaries of transcreation in
specialised translation. 9, 95–113.
Gambier, Y. & Kaspere, R. (2021). Changing translation practices and moving
boundaries in translation studies. Babel, 67(1), 36–53. 10.1075/babel.00204.gam
Gambier, Y. & Munday, J. (2014). A conversation between Yves Gambier and Jeremy
Munday about transcreation and the future of the professions. Cultus, 7, 20–35. http://
www.cultusjournal.com/files/Archives/conversation_gambier_munday_3_p.pdf
Gaut, B. (2010). Philosophy of creativity. Philosophy Compass, 5(12), 1034–1046.
Gui, Q. (1995). Das Wesen des Übersetzens ist kreativ. Babel, 41(3), 129–139.
Haro Soler, M. del M. (2018). Self-confidence and its role in translator training: The
students’ perspective. In I. Lacruz & R. Jääskeläinen (Eds.), Innovation and ex-
pansion in translation process research (pp. 131–160). John Benjamins.
Ho, G. (2004). Translating advertisements across heterogeneous cultures. The Translator,
10(2), 221–243. 10.1080/13556509.2004.10799178
Holmes, J. S. (2008). The name and nature of translation studies. In L. Venuti (Ed.), The
translation studies reader (pp. 180–192). Routledge. (Original work published 1988)
Huertas-Barros, E. & Vine, J. (2019). Training the trainers in embedding assessment
literacy into module design: A case study of a collaborative transcreation project. The
Interpreter and Translator Trainer, 13(3), 271–291. 10.1080/1750399X.2019.1658958
Katan, D. (2014). Introduction: Uncertainty in the translation profession: Time
to transcreate? Cultus, 7, 10–19. http://www.cultusjournal.com/files/Archives/
introduction_katan_2_cover_p.pdf
Perspectives: Studies in Translation Theory and Practice, 24(3), 365–381. 10.1080/
0907676X.2015.1016049
Kussmaul, P. (1995). Training the translator. John Benjamins.
Kwintessential. (n.d). Transcreation services. https://www.kwintessential.co.uk/
localisation-services/transcreation
Mackenzie, R. (1998). Creative problem solving and translator training. In A. Beylard-
Ozeroff, K. Jana, & B. Moser-Mercer (Eds.), Translators’ strategies and creativity.
Selected papers from the 9th International Conference on Translation and Interpreting,
Prague, September 1995 (pp. 201–206). John Benjamins. 10.1075/btl.27.27mac
Malmkjær, K. (2020). Translation and creativity. Routledge.
McDonough Dolmaya, J. (2012). Analyzing the crowdsourcing model and its impact
on public perceptions of translation. The Translator, 18(2), 167–191. 10.1080/1355
6509.2012.10799507
Neubert, A. (2000). Competence in language and translation. In C. Schäffner, &
B. Adab (Eds.), Developing translation competence (pp. 3–18). John Benjamins.
Novitz, D. (1999). Creativity and constraint. Australasian Journal of Philosophy,
77(1), 67–82. 10.1080/00048409912348811
O’Sullivan, C. (2013). Creativity. In Y. Gambier & L. v. Doorslaer (Eds.), Handbook
of translation studies, vol. 4 (pp. 42–47). John Benjamins.
Pedersen, D. (2014). Exploring the concept of transcreation: Transcreation as “more
than translation”? Cultus, 7, 57–71. http://www.cultusjournal.com/files/Archives/
pedersen_5_p.pdf
Perteghella, M. & Loffredo, E. (2008). Introduction. In M. Perteghella, & E. Loffredo
(Eds.), Translation and creativity: Perspectives on creative writing and translation
studies (pp. 1–16). Bloomsbury.
Pommer, S. E. (2008). No creativity in legal translation? Babel, 54(4), 355–368. 10.1
075/babel.54.4.04pom
Pym, A. (2007). On history in formal conceptualizations of translation. Across
Languages and Cultures, 8(2), 153–166. 10.1556/Acr.8.2007.2.1
Rike, S. M. (2013). Bilingual corporate websites – From translation to transcreation.
The Journal of Specialised Translation, 20, 68–85. https://www.jostrans.org/issue20/
art_rike.php
Robinson, D. (1998). Twenty-two theses on the study of translation. Journal of
Translation Studies, 2, 92–117.
Robinson, D. (2015). Creativity and translation. In R. H. Jones (Ed.), Routledge
handbook of language and creativity (pp. 278–289). Routledge.
Saldanha. G. & O’Brien, S. (2016). Research methodologies in translation studies.
Routledge.
Schäffner, C. (2012). Rethinking transediting. Meta, 57(4), 866–883. 10.7202/
1021222ar
Stetting, K. (1989). Transediting – A new term for coping with the gray area between
editing and translating. In J. E. Nielsen, A. L. Jakobsen, K. Haastrup, G. Caie,
J. Sevaldsen, H. Specht, & A. Zettersten (Eds.), Proceedings from the Fourth
Nordic Conference for English Studies (pp. 371–382). University of Copenhagen.
Suojanen, T., Koskinen. K., & Tuominen. T. (2015). User-centred translation. St. Jerome.
Torrance, P. (1979). The search for satori and creativity. Creative Education Foundation.
Textappeal. (n.d). Transcreation services in London. http://textappeal.com/transcreation/
Toury, G. (1995). Descriptive translation studies – and beyond. John Benjamins.
Tymoczko, M. (2007). Enlarging translation, empowering translators. Routledge.
TransPerfect (n.d.). Multicultural marketing. https://www.transperfect.com/services/
multicultural_marketing.html
Vermeer, H. J. (1996). A skopos theory of translation (some arguments for and
against). Textcontext Verlag.
Wallace, G. (1926). The art of thought. Jonathan Cape.
7 Creativity as an added value in
translators’ training: Learning
through transcreation
Marián Morón
Introduction
According to Katan (2016), a new era in Translation Studies was inaugurated
with the emergence of transcreation in what he calls the “transcreational
shift”. Today, transcreation is considered a promising manifestation of
human translation, in response to the rapidly increasing use of technology
globally, especially in the “Digital Era” (Lau 2003, p. 5). This issue is not
exclusive to Translation Studies and translation services. Quite the opposite: it
seems to be a general feature of an evolving system in which machines and
humans are coming together to advance science, technology and our ways of
seeing, experiencing, and analysing the world, and communicating today
(Frazer, 1999; Carr, 2010; Cronin, 2010, p. 4).
Throughout the history of Translation Studies, translation was first con-
sidered an act of communication (Steiner, 1975, p. 49) and the (human)
translator was valued as a central actor in the translating process. Then the
cultural turn (Bassnett & Lefevere, 1990, p. 1) transformed the translator into
an intercultural mediator (Katan, 2008, 2013), empowering the interventions
of translators in the translation process. Undoubtedly, the technological turn
(Hurtado Albir, 1999; Cronin, 2010) is another landmark in Translation
Studies, and technology is proving to be deeply embedded in translation
processes (Carr, 2010; Cronin, 2010, p. 4; Enríquez Raído, 2013). However,
Alonso and Calvo (2015) explored what they termed the “rehumanisation”
process of translation, whereby the more technology plays a paramount role
in the translation process, the more valuable human efforts become. In any
case, it seems that translation stands balanced between the forces of technical,
automatic, easy and free (or cheap) service provision, and the forces of a
human, creative, time-consuming, complex and costly activity.
Information and communication technologies both provoke questions
and provide answers in the translation sector, and transcreation is a crucial
example of the type of original and creative solution that is helping the
Translation sector to reposition itself. Transcreation is a service that has
evolved with the advent of information technologies, where companies and
other entities have realised the need to build human, intuitive and natural
DOI: 10.4324/9781003223344-8
B2B and B2C relations, with the aim of reproducing human communication,
despite the mathematical (and automatic) algorithms lying behind current
digital communication trends. Transcreation also strengthens the vision of
translation as a global concept (Dam et al., 2019). As a commodity, tran-
screation is now envisaged as a particular translation service (Benetello, 2018),
considered as an added value service within the Language Service Provision
(LSP) industry (Calvo, 2017), mainly thanks to its inherent creativity
(Pedersen, 2014; Benetello, 2018; Fernández, 2019) and to its distinctive fea-
tures as an LSP service (Mangell et al., 2019; Morón, 2020).
Content that is to be transcreated can hardly be the object of automated
language transfer (Benetello, 2018). On the contrary, transcreation involves
work on original content designed on an ad-hoc basis, usually for a specific
campaign or brand. Consequently, translation memories and tools are not
widely used in the transcreation process. Moreover, additional direct dia-
logue takes place between the client/initiator and the translator/transcreator,
which tends to be much more constant and intense than in other translation
modalities (Pedersen, 2014; Østegaard, 2015; Benetello, 2018; Carreira,
2020). This is because a number of aspects of the creative brief will be open
to negotiation, and intercultural advice will be accepted if not expected by
the transcreator.
Transcreation projects, undeniably rooted in creativity, tend to require
translation alternatives, which can operate at various levels of subjective
creativity, interpretable only by the human translator, for example: “high,
medium, low”; “at a level from 1 to 10”; or, “from 30 to 90% creativity”)
(Benetello, 2018; Morón & Calvo, 2018). In addition, back-translation
(or literal translation into the source language) is included for validating the
translational strategies, together with explanations regarding the translator’s
interventions (Mangell et al., 2019). None of these tasks can be performed
by the machine alone. All in all, the industry understands that the human
factor is implicit in transcreation, and further explorations are needed from
a theoretical, deontological, educational and methodological point of view.
This chapter aims at reflecting on the human value of translation, through
an innovative experience in creativity and transcreation training, also
pointing to the future of the translation profession and Translation Studies.
Transcreation in translator training: The TeCreaTe project

With this in mind, showing students the different ways human translation
can manifest itself today is paramount in translators’ training. For six years
now, an innovative translation training project has been unfolding at the
University Pablo de Olavide, aimed at training translators (at undergraduate
level) in transcreation practices (Morón & Calvo, 2018).
By introducing transcreation into translator training, the TeCreaTe pro-
ject was designed to be a tool rather than a method, as discussed later. Given
that a Degree in Translation takes four years to complete at the university],
110 Marián Morón
covering legal, commercial, economic, scientific and technical areas, web
localisation and interpreting (amongst other subjects), yet another specia-
lisation in transcreation was simply not feasible at undergraduate level.
What was possible was to integrate an introductory project aimed at raising
awareness of the emerging services in the sector, reinforcing professional-
oriented prospective approaches to translator training (Kelly, 2008, p. 252;
Calvo, 2017). The project main teaching and learning outcomes are:
• Promoting translation skills transferability (Calvo, 2010); that is, the

ability of translation to be applicable beyond traditional disciplinary
boundaries and hence, the ability of trainees to make the most of their
translation competence to develop future professional careers both
“within” and “around” traditional LSP sectors (Koskinen & Dam,
2016). The model proposed by Koskinen & Dam for the translation
profession seems very useful for empowering trainees, especially given
the emergence of new prospective services (Kiraly, 2016; Calvo, 2017;
Way, 2021). Experts and professionals from the fields of translation,
marketing, advertising and communication were involved in the project
as trainers and/or evaluators of the transcreation work undertaken by
trainees, establishing a line of cooperation between academia and the
profession.
• Combining theory and practice, fostering a hermeneutical approach in
translation training (Hansen, 1997; Hönig, 1995; Gile, 2004; Nord 1997,
2005; Calvo, 2015). Theoretical knowledge unfolds when reflecting on the
practical tasks developed by trainees, with students analysing the transla-
tion function (skopos), fidelity and equivalence, and other more instru-
mental concepts, such as the “translation unit” or “segment” (Fernández,
2019) influenced by the practice of transcreation. Here, learners envisage
translation as a continuum. The fact that transcreation is consistent with
the notion of a prototypical instrumental translation (in Nord’s 1997
terms) also favours reflection on translation processes and their complexity
(Morón, 2020).
• In relation to the aforementioned, reflecting on the processes of human
translation, with a focus on creativity, a quintessential human transla-
tion competence (with wide potential for developing further transversal
and translation-specific competencies), also considered an illustration of
the increased complexity of transcreation (Fernández, 2019).
Since transcreation is linked to global communication trends and services,

the TeCreaTe project was launched as part of the training module in eco-
nomic and commercial translation, which tackles the new text-types and
translation demands arising from companies seeking to promote their ser-
vices and products in the international (digital) market. The project was
designed as a set of tasks, carried out in teams conforming to a transcreation
portfolio (Calvo, 2017) in which students reflect both on the resulting
product and on the process developed. Work usually takes place outside the
class, with a set of training materials designed to guide trainees (video, video
interviews), fostering blended and flipped learning approaches and techni-
ques. Trainers developed two specific seminars on the description of tran-
screation as a service and on the project specifications. In addition, specific
conferences and workshops by professional transcreators have taken place
(Morón & Calvo, 2018 and Morón & Lobato, 2019). So far, the project
focus has been on web marketing, corporate advertising and social media.
Table 7.1 presents the different stages and the six editions of the project to
date, including the specific LSP services covered and the training methods
implemented:
Table 7.1 TeCreaTe project editions
Edition LSP services addressed Training methods and tools
Edition 1. Translation Individual and group work

Year 2016–2017 Revision and proofreading Oral presentation of team projects
Teacher-oriented approach
Edition 2. Translation Individual and group work
Year 2017–2018 Revision and proofreading Oral presentation of team projects
Back-translation Teacher and student-oriented
approaches
Edition 3. Translation (with some Individual and group work
Year 2018–2019 restrictions) Oral presentation of team projects
Revision and proofreading Blended learning
Back-translation
Edition 4 Translation (with some Individual and group work
Year 2019–2020 restrictions) Oral presentation of team projects
Revision and proofreading Flipped and blended learning
Back-translation Student-oriented approach
Copywriting
Edition 5 Project design Individual and group work
Year 2020–2021 Translation (with some Oral presentation of team projects
restrictions) Flipped and online learning
Revision and proofreading Student-oriented approach
Back-translation Creativity-oriented module
Copywriting
Edition 6 Similar to Edition 5 Similar to Edition 5
Year 2021–2022
The first edition (2016–2017) combined realistic translation and tran-

screation tasks with the revision of bilingual material available on corporate
webpages. The aims were to explore the nature of the “transcreation pro-
blem”, to understand the added effort transcreation entails, and to discuss
the additional adaptation techniques required to move beyond mere trans-
lation (Benetello, 2018).
During the second and third editions, emphasis was placed on the tran-
screation process, with the introduction of a back-translation stage. Students’
112 Marián Morón
work into their foreign language was coordinated by trainers responsible for
the translation modules into the foreign language (L1-L2). Students welcomed
the opportunity to engage in a project that went beyond the boundaries
of curriculum modules, by simulating real-life working conditions in the
translation industry. This helped students understand the permeability of
translation modalities and reinforced the idea of the translation continuum.
Additionally, trainee groups had to produce up to three different transcrea-
tion alternatives for a given number of short content units (mainly, slogans or
names of sections of corporate webpages). Providing more than one alter-
native output is frequently required as part of this service within the industry
(Morón & Calvo, 2018; Mangell et al., 2019). This particular activity chal-
lenges student creativity. The creative projects became more complex with the
introduction of simulated client specifications through the brief (i.e., the use or
avoidance of certain keywords or images, character restrictions, etc.).
The fourth and fifth editions helped reinforce the creative process behind
transcreation, emphasising the innovative teaching methods at the core of the
initiative. Participants from earlier editions repeatedly requested specific
training to foster their creativity. So, the project trainers integrated creativity
into the scheme, not just as a learning goal, but also as a training method in
itself. Consequently, the fourth edition included the production of an original
piece of work (a social media post) simulating a copywriting task as part of
the final project. Finally, the fifth and sixth edition challenged students to
create their own projects and briefs from scratch. Due to the COVID-19
pandemic, the 2020–2021 edition was adapted to online teaching, learning and
assessment methods, including telework skills and a new and more compre-
hensive creativity assessment method, as will be discussed later.
Since its inception, the project has evolved from a more guided, teacher-
oriented approach to training, to an autonomous, student-centred and
creativity-oriented module, where creativity and the human factor in
training and translation play a central role.
The project work is carried out in groups over seven weeks (of the
14 semester weeks), with the assignment of project manager, translator,
proofreader and copywriter roles, depending on the project, and with an
estimated 3–4 hours of out-of-class work per week, which represents
the student’s entire workload during this period. The directionality of the
projects is from L2 to L1, except for the specific back-translation task,
which favours the integration of foreign students who are assigned specific
tasks (such as research and cultural documentation, source material ana-
lysis, etc.).
Transcreation projects also include the submission of written reports and
an oral presentation for the simulated client (the trainers). Here, students
justify their transcreation decisions and select the main areas where the
student teams considered intercultural intervention necessary (Katan, 2016).
Thus, transcreation training is included into translator training both as a
learning outcome, and as a training instrument in itself, following Way’s
training and assessment model, which favours systematic reflection and the
incorporation of:
TC [translator’s competence], decision-making and industry demands

[…], it also stimulates the ability to identify and solve translation
problems whilst encouraging autonomous, self-regulated learning in
graduates prepared for lifelong learning and Continuous Professional
Development (CPD) in authentic, project-based, learner-centred, colla-
borative translation classes […] (Way, 2021, p. 136–137.)
Transcreation and creativity as a means in translator training

Incorporating transcreation into translator training brings in a whole
array of captivating elements that are worth exploring, both from the
perspective of student development and from a translation teacher/
researcher training point of view. While the acquisition of transcreation
skills was the original purpose of this innovative teaching project, it soon
became clear that this approach could also benefit translators-to-be in a
more significant way.
Creativity as a problematic concept and as a challenge in training

Creativity is a fascinating topic of research from many different angles and
disciplines. Despite Kussmaul’s prolific work on translation creativity
(Kussmaul 1991, 2000a, 2000b, 2005) and Rojo & Meseguer’s proposals
regarding specific tasks to promote creativity in the translation class (2015),
students found it hard to grasp the creative nature of transcreation because
they assumed that creativity is an innate natural talent, one that is difficult
to develop through training. However, research shows that creativity can in
fact be acquired and promoted (see later), so efforts were made to design
activities to foster participants’ creativity. Perhaps the following has been a
fundamental question for the TeCreaTe trainers: What do creative skills
bring to translation and how can they be incorporated and measured from
the point of view of translator/transcreator training?
In answer to this, creativity attributes were described to make creativity
visible and measurable, analysing both creativity as a product and as a
process. Sternberg and Lubart (1999) present a complex “confluence ap-
proach” (Villalba, 2008: 16) according to which “creativity requires six
distinct but interrelated resources: intellectual abilities, knowledge, styles of
thinking, personality, motivation and environment”. The authors break
down the following intellectual abilities associated with creativity, in
1 capacity to analyse for problem detection;

2 capacity to synthesise or the ability to select solutions to respond to a
problem or social need (See complete review in Villalba, 2008); and,
114 Marián Morón
3 capacity to produce ideas that are evocative and convincing, with some
persuasion capacity needed (Simonton, 1990).
When applying creativity evaluation models to the field of marketing, Jerzyk

(2014: p. 105) considers that creativity can be measured through the following
parameters: the originality and novelty of the idea; the communicativeness of
the idea or “the way the concept is presented and the manner in which support
for the concept is gathered”; the value of the idea for the company, i.e., its
suitability for the company’s sales or marketing plans or objectives; and,
finally, the feasibility of materialising the idea, with the product/process in-
terrelated in the proposal. This model matches that developed by Bayer-
Hohenwarter (2010, p. 86) in Translation Studies, who described creativity in
terms of the following dimensions: flexibility, novelty, fluency and accept-
ability. Bayer-Hohenwarter’s dimensions are though more product-oriented,
whilst Jerzy’s dimensions seem more process-oriented.
These models show the potential of creativity, not only as a core part of
transcreation, but also as a crucial element in translation processes. It
should be underlined that the following parameters and attributes of crea-
tivity are fundamental in any translation process:
1 the ability to identify a problematic element in a translation project

(creative or not), which requires analytical capacity and flexibility.
2 the ability to provide solutions; in the case of transcreation, original or
novel solutions.
In all cases, solutions will be geared to a specific project, requiring production

capacity and fluency, and the solutions need to be justified effectively, whether
the work involves translational transfer or content generation (communica-
tiveness of the idea) in line with the brief (synthesis capacity, acceptability).
Clearly, the solutions offered must be pertinent to the objectives and ac-
cording to the resources provided by the client in the brief (value and viability
of the creative solution provided, acceptability). Thus, in translational and
functionalist terms, the brief is once again the central element for validating
transcreation decisions, hence the inclusion of detailed specifications in the
TeCreaTe project brief.
To approach and evaluate creativity academically and objectively is not
a simple task, especially when creativity needs to be approached both as a
product (the result of the creative process) and as a process. As is the case of
translation, this classic dichotomy between product and process is key to the
training process, especially in the measurement of quality and, hence of the
translator’s competence. So, in our training proposal, creativity is explored
from three different angles:
• Creativity as an input (by analysing the characteristics of the source text

[ST] or the creative brief, and introducing some knowledge and analysis of
the marketing and the advertising professional environments and their
traditional workflows): this favours problem detection and analysis;
• Creativity as an output (that is, the creative nature of the target text to
match the creative original function of the original), favouring an in-
depth reflection of transcreation features, techniques and workflow
compared to traditional translation practices, and promoting problem-
solving skills; and
• Creativity from the perspective of the creative process carried out
(focusing on the new creative tasks and processes taken on by translators
and imported from other creative areas, such as in marketing and/or
advertising), fostering trainee employability beyond traditional disci-
plinary boundaries.
The dynamic, complex nature of translation problems (Mayoral, 2002; Calvo

& Morón, 2020) plays a key role in our proposal as it serves to introduce
epistemological debate in class and revisit traditional theoretical concepts in
Translation Studies in the light of transcreation. The existence of a translation
problem according to Kussmaul (1991, 2000a, 2000b, p. 20) is the initial stage
for creative translation. Conversely, Mayoral & Muñoz (1997) argue that
translation issues emerge when is not possible to produce a direct, literal,
automatic translation by default. This idea aligns with studies on the creative
process, which assume that creativity is needed when the “automated” (Levý,
1963 [2011]) or “predictable” solution is not immediately obtainable, and
translators need to consciously activate their creativity to arrive at some other
surprising or unexpected solutions (Hewson, 2016, p. 12).
Thus, new “issues” arise in transcreation: from the very essence of the STs
to the way these texts are processed in the translation/transcreation work-
flow. Our focus is on the ST and the translation brief, and the students’
ability to identify specific problems, and how to solve them in the translation
process. This approach is crucial in our training proposal given that current
communication trends and the value of creativity and creative content
production are pointing to the realisation of new translation problems (and
errors) (Benetello, 2018)1, which are influenced by:
• the revisited concept of “text” and “text genres”, considering for example,
slogans, call to actions (CTAs)2;
• the multimodal nature of these texts (audio, video, images);
• the variety of global dissemination channels (such as video, TV,
webpages, social networks) and other related digital communication
practices (SEO, SEM, UX design or UX writing) and their impact on
transcreation practices;
• the purpose and function motivating the translation process; added to
by the fact that a text may not even exist in the transcreation brief (see
Pedersen, 2014, 2016, 2017; Reilly, 2014, Østegaard, 2015, Benetello,
2018; Morón & Calvo, 2018; Mangell et al., 2019; etc.).
116 Marián Morón
Moreover, as a theoretical translational construct, the concept of creativity
seems to be at odds with some assumed traditional theoretical constructs in
Translation Studies (Gaballo, 2012: 96), such as fidelity and equivalence
(Katan, 2021). The main challenge for trainee participants was negotiating
the margin of action of creativity in transcreation while respecting the
guidelines in the transcreation brief, especially when restrictions were im-
posed as part of the translation tasks. The transcreator’s intervention and
the need to negotiate with the client were viewed with astonishment by many
of the participants who revealed that they felt more confident with trans-
lational modalities in which the translator could remain invisible.
This “back-and-forth” human negotiation (as in Benetello, 2018) between
the transcreator and the transcreation initiator reinforces the idea of the re-
humanisation of translation processes (Alonso & Calvo, 2015). Transcreation
is presented as a creative, human activity, involving person-to-person inter-
actions, promoting a set of transferable skills linked to the interpersonal and
communicative aspects of translation. Negotiating the brief, learning to un-
derstand and construe the client’s brief, proposing and justifying alternatives
illustrate the human dialogue that takes place in transcreation – a process that
machines cannot, at least for the foreseeable future, perform.
Additionally, transcreation allows for a number of different translation
services to be included in the same project, such as proofreading, copy-
writing, intercultural advertising, localisation, web design, together with
non-translation-specific tasks, such as international product branding or
naming, and SEO/SEM or other marketing/advertising-related activities. In
addition, various translation strategies and approaches can be discussed
when practising transcreation, for example Nord’s (1997) documentary vs.
instrumental translation as well as an array of translation techniques (from
free to literal translation), including creative writing or copywriting. All
these elements add to the complexity of these projects, but they also allow
for a global vision of the many facets of translation today and of the role
humans play in this process.
Creativity workflow and learning outcomes

The particularities of the transcreation work process promote creativity, while
simultaneously allowing for an in-depth study of the essential and distinctive
nature of transcreation as a language service. Transcreation generally requires
the production of translation alternatives at different levels, and this implies
additional creativity on the part of the translator. The fact that a number of
translational decisions have to be produced and defended to convince the
client requires additional effort and adds value to the training process. Once
again, the creativity dimensions (as in the models described earlier) guide the
training process, while at the same time help to reinforce the functionalist,
active, reflective and empowering spirit of the trainee translator (Kiraly, 2016)
as well as the unquestionable human nature of translation practice.
Given that for most participants this project represented their first point
of contact with professional transcreation, and in light of the absence of
specific transcreator competence models (Díaz-Millón et al., 2021) and,
consequently, clear quality assessment systems (Morón, 2020; Carreira,
2020), a process-oriented assessment approach is central. In order to reduce
the subjectivity implicit in the evaluation of creativity (see Kussmaul’s
publications), it was necessary to describe the particularities of the creative
process and product to be assessed in the academic context. Consequently,
assessment was carried out taking into account trainees’ awareness of, and
reflection on, the project phases, and the execution of all tasks and specifi-
cations in the brief. A specific rubric was designed to assess project quality,
according to standardised basic quality assessment frameworks in the LSP
industry. The TeCreaTe project learning outcomes closely match the
translator competence model, as described by Kelly (2008):
• L1 Language competence, primarily in copywriting tasks, but also at the

level of linguistic and stylistic correctness in the global translation
project (communicative competence),
• Identification of ST translation problems (basis of translator strategic
competence), especially in relation to cultural elements to be adapted
(intercultural competence) and other creative resources of the text
(puns, metaphors, images, etc.),
• Compliance with brief specifications and the translation skopos (stra-
tegic competence), both at a translational and at a technical level
(professional instrumental competence),
• Explanation of translation decisions (translation knowledge, profes-
sional competence),
• Reflection on the profile of the transcreator in the LSP industry
(psychophysiological competence).
These competences are understood to have a strong transversal potential, as

they activate competence areas centred on: problem detection, problem-
solving decision-making, time and resource planning (material, personal or
otherwise), documentation and research skills, professional communication
and creative work and results (Kelly, 2005). For this reason, creativity
training favours trainees’ employability and their professional empower-
ment, as it opens alternative professional pathways where translator’s skills
clearly become a valuable asset.
Teaching innovation practices in creativity training

Trainers have also increased the complexity of the training module by fully
integrating creativity in the translation-related processes. This has been
a stimulating learning experience for the trainers, who were challenged to
produce innovation practices (a key dimension of creativity, according to
118 Marián Morón
Simonton, 1990) to train transcreators. Thus, the TeCreaTe module evolved
from a more classic and standardised simulated project portfolio, with the
assignment of roles and project management (see the full revision by Calvo,
2017), to a creative competition, inspired by the “game jam” format, in-
corporating gamification techniques into the training (Gutiérrez-Artacho &
Olvera-Lobo, 2017).
Cornish et al. (2017) explain that “game jams” are a commonly used
training tool in technological disciplines such as computing. Rather than
simply solving a set problem-based project, trainees have to design it
themselves and then resolve it on their own. This is a common practice in
video game programming and design. These topic-specific projects develop
during a limited period (for instance, a weekend) of intense work in which
students, usually from different disciplines, work in teams, presenting the
final project to an expert audience who will assesses the result in terms of
quality, creativity and novelty. The final edition aimed to boost creativity by
encouraging student participants to create their own transcreation brief.
They had to locate and select the transcreatable materials and then construct
their own simulated individual transcreation brief. Locating suitable mate-
rial was an effective training task in itself, as students had to analyse whether
the random materials they found were rich enough to conform to a realistic
transcreation commission.
Once students grasped the nature of transcreation, they had to creatively
create “deliverables” (transcreation briefs and their transcreated versions) to
demonstrate the representativeness, originality and communicativeness of the
creative projects presented, following Jerzyk’s (2014) creativity dimensions.
Final remarks
In this chapter, translation creativity has been discussed as a core element in
the training of transcreators in particular and translators in general. In order
to guide the training process, “creativity” was operationalised through a
number of models, both from the translation field (Kussmaul 1991, 2000a/b,
2004, 2005; Rojo & Meseguer, 2015; Bayer-Hohenwarter, 2009, 2010; Rojo,
2019; Díaz-Millón et al., 2021, amongst others) and from other creative
study areas (Simonton, 1990; Sternberg & Lubart, 1999; Runco 2003, 2004,
2007; Villalba, 2008; Jerzyk, 2014, p. 105). This research and training ex-
perience has given rise to new problems and questions to be explored in
Translation Studies and the training (and assessment) of translators.
In the final assessment surveys implemented, most participants from the
TeCreaTe editions were not only satisfied with the training experience but
were also interested in developing their career in transcreation. There was a
general agreement that they had improved their creative skills and also their
ability to deal with creative projects. In addition, they believed they had
improved their ability to decide on the degree of creativity and intervention
translation projects might require. Together with specific knowledge on
transcreation as a service, a set of transversal general competencies and skills
were developed: creativity, teamwork, negotiation (interpersonal, inter-
disciplinary, international and intercultural), critical reflection and justifi-
cation of decisions taken (Gile, 2004; Nord, 2005; Díaz-Millón et al., 2021).
These are also key to the development of translation-specific competence
(Kelly, 2005). This twofold approach, straddling the general and the specific
areas of training, results in a cyclical reflective model of great pedagogical
value. In particular, the generic competencies such as those described earlier
become valuable assets in the translation-specific profile of a transcreator
(Kelly, 2005, 2007; Kearns, 2008; Way, 2019; Morón, 2020).
Over time, the TeCreaTe project has also contributed to an understanding
of valid creativity techniques for transcreation and of the way they can differ
from traditional translation techniques. This is a challenging line of research
to be explored (Benetello, 2018; see also the work of Carreira, who addresses
the idea of transcreation as a technique vs. transcreation as a service, Carreira,
2020; and Bayer-Hohenwarter’s “creative turns”). Conceptualising creativity
within transcreation and designing specific tasks to develop and assess
translators’ creativity has been a major achievement for project developers.
Considering translation as part of the creative industries opens new lines
of research. Models that involve creative practices (as developed in creative
industries) imported to translator training remain scarce. Creativity attri-
butes such as flexibility, divergent thinking, problem detection and solving,
decision-making and communicativeness (see Villalba, 2008) require new
thinking in teaching methodology; especially when the transversal nature of
these skill components presents an obstacle in class (Way, 2019).
Interdisciplinary, innovative teaching practices are paramount when dealing
with these learning objectives in current translation training practice (Kelly,
2014; Way, 2014, 2019).
The incorporation of new services in translation training benefits students’
awareness of the attention trainers give to training. Trainers also need
training; they need access to research to keep up to date with recent industry
developments. Trainers may have had no direct experience, but they can
explain and react to the developments by basing their approach on the core
elements of translation, which do not vary. The prospective approach to
student training adopted (Calvo, 2017) is also a premise for teacher training.
Students value the way trainers innovate, engage and commit to student
training in close cooperation with professionals, investing time and re-
sources to better respond to market and society demands.
Transcreation is a highly creative human activity, “which would authorise
them [students] to take account of the impact of cultural distance when
translating”, as Katan stressed (2013, p. 84). Additionally, transcreation, as
an emerging service which has taken the skopos functionalist theory to heart
(Katan, 2016, p. 374), introduces an added value training element: the em-
powerment of translators to intervene and make creative decisions. At the
120 Marián Morón
same time, it promotes the professional transferability of translation and its
projection beyond traditional assumed disciplinary boundaries.
“So transcreation was the answer, but what was the problem?”: adapting
Frazer’s (1999) question, one may wonder if there are some additional
problems (in the LSP industry, in the labour market, in society) to which
transcreation only provides part of the solution. Undoubtedly, the profes-
sion and discipline need answers pointing to the human nature of transla-
tion. Transcreation is not only an added-value service within the language
industry, but it also symbolises the human nature of translation, an activity
that, due to its complexity and capacity to react, continues to be a profession
for the future.
Notes
1 This is an open line of research, inspired by the work developed by De la Cova
Morillo-Velarde (2017) and her efforts to conceptualise the theoretical construct
“translation problem”.
2 CTAs or “call to actions” is a new digital communication text type which directs
users to a certain action on a screen (click, book, select, register, etc.) as explained
in “CTA” (2022).
References
Alonso, E. & Calvo, E. (2015). Developing a blueprint for a technology-mediated
approach to Translation Studies. Meta, 60(1), 135–157. 10.7202/1032403ar
Bassnett, S. & Lefevere, A. (1990). Translation, history and culture. Printer Publishers.
Bayer-Hohenwarter, G. (2009). Translational creativity: How to measure the un-
measurable. In S. Göpferich et al. (Eds.), Behind the mind: Methods, models and
results in translation process research (pp. 39–59). Samfundslitteratur.
Bayer-Hohenwarter, G. (2010). Comparing translational creativity scores of students
and professionals: Flexible problem-solving and/or fluent routine behaviour? In
S. Göpferich, F. Alves, & I. M. Mees (Eds.), New approaches in translation prrocess
research (pp. 83–111). Samfundslitteratur.
Benetello, C. (2018). When translation is not enough: Transcreation as a convention
defying practice. A practitioner’s perspective. The Journal of Specialised
Translation, 29, 28–44.
Calvo, E. (2010). Análisis curricular de los estudios de traducción e interpretación en
España: experiencia curricular del estudiantado. PhD Dissertation. University of
Granada.
Calvo, E. (2015). Scaffolding translation skills through situated training approaches:
Progressive and reflective methods. The Interpreter and Translator Trainer, 9(3),
306–322. 10.1080/1750399X.2015.1103107
Calvo, E. (2017). Servicios de valor añadido en contextos situacionales en traducción:
De los proyectos al portafolio. Revista Digital de Investigación en Docencia
Universitaria, 11(2), 136–154. 10.19083/ridu.11.576
Calvo, E. & Morón, M. (2020) Investigación con corpus cualitativos en los estudios
de traducción: El problema de los constructos traductológicos complejos. Meta
Journal des traducteurs, 65(1), 237–257. 10.7202/1073644
Carr, N. (2010). The shallows. Atlantic.
Carreira, O. (2020). The transcreation brief: A definition proposal. Transletters.
International Journal of Translation and Interpreting, 4, 21–38.
Cornish, S. et al. (2017). Game Jam Guide. ETC Press.
Cronin, M. (2010). The translation crowd. Revista tradumàtica: tecnologies de la
traducció, 8, 1–7. https://raco.cat/index.php/Tradumatica/article/view/225900
CTA. (2022). Marketing glossary. https://www.marketingglossary.org/cta-call-to-
action/
Dam, H. V., Brøgger, M. N., & Zethsen, K. (2019). Moving boundaries in translation
studies. Routledge.
De la Cova Morillo-Velarde, E. (2017). La localización de la ayuda online:
categorización de problemas para la traducción. PhD dissertation. Universidad de
Sevilla. https://idus.us.es/bitstream/handle/11441/73190/TESIS%20ELENA%20DE
%20LA%20COVA.pdf?sequence=1&isAllowed=y
Díaz-Millón, M., Rivera-Trigueros, I., & Gutiérrez-Artacho, J. (2021). La creatividad
como una competencia básica en la formación en transcreación: un estudio de caso.
In C. Vargas Sierra & A. B. Martínez López (Eds.), Investigación traductológica en la
enseñanza y práctica profesional de la traducción y la interpretación (pp. 125–136).
Comares.
Enríquez Raído, V. (2013). Teaching translation technologies “everyware”: Towards
a self-discovery and lifelong learning approach. Revista Tradumàtica: tecnologies
de la traducció. 11, 275–285. https://ddd.uab.cat/pub/tradumatica/tradumatica_
a2013n11/tradumatica_a2013n11p275.pdf
Fernández, M. A. (2019). Transcreación: Retórica cultural y traducción publicitaria.
Castilla. Estudios De Literatura, 10, 223–250. 10.24197/cel.10.2019.223-250
Frazer, J. (1999). Towards the post-digital era. (pp. 33–36). http://papers.cumincad.
org/data/works/att/180e.content.pdf
Gaballo, V. (2012). Exploring the boundaries of transcreation in specialized trans-
lation. ESP Across Cultures, 9, 95–113. https://edipuglia.it/wp-content/uploads/
ESP%202012/Gaballo.pdf
Gile, D. (2004). Integrated problem and decision reporting as a translator training
tool. The Journal of Specialised Translation, 2, 2–20. https://jostrans.org/issue02/
art_gile.php
Gutiérrez-Artacho, J. & Olvera-Lobo, D. (2017). Gamificacion para la adquisición
de competencias en la Educación Superior: El caso de la Traducción e
Interpretación. In G. Padilla Castillo (Ed.), Aulas virtuales: fórmulas y prácticas
(pp. 203–220). McGraw Hill Education.
Hansen, G. (Ed.) (1997). Success in translation. Perspectives: Studies in Translatology,
5(2), 201–210. https://gydehansen.dk/media/107/success-in-translationperspectives.pdf
Hewson, L. (2016). Creativity in translator training: Between the possible, the im-
probable and the (apparently) impossible. Linguaculture, 7(2), 9–25. 10.1515/lincu-
2016-0010
Hönig, H. G. (1995). Konstruktives Übersetzen. Stauffenburg.
Hurtado Albir, A. (1999). Enseñar a traducir. Metodología en la formación de tra-
ductores e intérpretes. Edelsa.
Jerzyk, E. (2014). Creativity techniques in marketing: Managers’ expertise compared
to its practical application. International Journal of Arts & Sciences, 07(02),
99–106. http://www.universitypublications.net/ijas/0702/pdf/B4R494.pdf
122 Marián Morón
Katan, D. (2008) Translation as intercultural communication. In J. Munday (Ed.),
The Routledge companion to translation studies (pp. 74–92). Routledge.
Katan, D. (2013). Cultural mediation. In Y. Gambier & L. Van Doorslaer (Eds.),
Handbook of translation studies 4 (pp. 84–91). John Benjamins.
Perspectives: Studies in Translation Theory and Practice, 24(3), 365–381. 10.1080/
0907676X.2015.1016049
Katan, D. (2021). Transcreation. In Y. Gambier & L. van Doorslaer (Eds.),
Handbook of translation studies 5 (pp. 221–226). John Benjamins.
Kearns, J. (2008). Translator and interpreter training: Issues, methods and debates.
Continuum.
Kelly, D. (2005). A Handbook for translator trainers: A guide to reflective practice. St.
Jerome.
Kelly, D. (2007). Translator competence contextualized, Translator training in the
framework of higher education reform: In search of alignment in curricular design.
In D. Kenny, & R. Kyongjoo (Eds.), Across boundaries: International perspectives
on translation studies (pp. 128–142). Cambridge Scholars.
Kelly, D. (2008). Realismo profesional y progresión pedagógica: una propuesta de
criterios para la selección de materiales para la formación de traductores. Trans,
12, 247–258. http://www.trans.uma.es/pdf/Trans_12/t12_247-258_DKelly.pdf
Kelly, D. (2014) Training community translators/community translation in translator
training. International Conference on Community Translation, Sydney, Australia,
September 11–13, 2014. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y_nlAaCNrvg
Kiraly, D. (Ed.) (2016). Towards authentic experiential learning in translator educa-
tion. Mainz University Press.
Koskinen, K. & Dam H. V. (Eds.) (2016). Academic boundary work and the translation
profession: Insiders, outsiders and (assumed) boundaries. Journal of Specialised
Translation, 25, 254–267. https://www.jostrans.org/issue25/art_koskinen.pdf
Kussmaul, P. (1991). Creativity in the translation process: Empirical approaches. In
K. M. van Leuwen-Zwart & T. Naaijkens (Eds.), Translation studies: The state of
the art. Proceedings of the 1st James S. Holmes Symposium in Translation Studies
(pp. 91–101). Rodopi.
Kussmaul, P. (2000a). Types of creativity translation. In A. Chesterman et al. (Eds.),
Translation in context: Selected papers from the EST Congress, Granada 1998
(pp. 117–126). John Benjamins.
Kussmaul, P. (2000b). A Cognitive Framework for Looking at Creative Mental
Processes. In Olohan, M. (Ed.). Intercultural Faultlines. Research Models in
Translation Studies I: Textual and Cognitive Aspects (pp. 57–72). St. Jerome.
Kussmaul, P. (2005). Translation through visualization. Meta, 50(2), 378–391. 10.72
02/010943ar
Lau, L. J. (2003). Economic growth in the digital era. https://web.stanford.edu/~ljlau/
Presentations/Presentations/031129.pdf
Levý, J. (1963/2011). The art of translation. John Benjamins. (Translated by Patrick
Corness).
Mangell, P. et al. (Eds.). (2019). TAUS transcreation best practices and guidelines.
TAUS Signature Editions. https://www.taus.net/insights/reports/taus-transcreation-
best-practices-and-guidelines
Mayoral, R. (2002). Cómo se hace la traducción jurídica. http://wpd.ugr.es/~greti/
revista-puentes/pub2/02-articulo.pdf
Mayoral, R. & Muñoz, R. (1997). Estrategias comunicativas en la traducción in-
tercultural. In P. Fernández & J. M. Bravo (Eds.), Aproximaciones a los estudios de
traducción (pp. 143–192). Servicio de Apoyo a la Enseñanza, Universidad de
Valladolid.
Morón, M. (2020). Transcreation as a Way to Promote Employability in Translation
Training: Adding Value to Translation Training. HERMES - Journal of Language
and Communication in Business, 60, 125–139. 10.7146/hjlcb.v60i0.121315
Morón, M. & Calvo, E. (2018). Introducing transcreation skills in translator training
contexts: A situated project-based approach. Jostrans, The Journal of Specialised
Translation, 29, 126–148. https://www.jostrans.org/issue29/art_moron.pdf
Morón, M., & Lobato, J. (2019). La transcreación de la moda à la mode: análisis
de zonas de intervención en proyectos francés-español. Onomazéin, revista de
lingüística, filología y traducción, 5(Extra), V – Número especial, 40–59. 10.7764/
onomazein.tradecneg.06
Nord, C. (1997). Translating as a purposeful activity. Functionalist approaches ex-
plained. St. Jerome.
Nord, C. (2005). Training functional translators. In M. Tennent (Ed.), Training for
the new millennium: Pedagogies for translation and interpreting (pp. 209–223). John
Benjamins.
Østegaard, C. (2015). Exploring the concept of transcreation: A theoretical and empirical
study of transcreation with BMW as an empirical example. PhD Dissertation. Aarhus
University.
Pedersen, D. (2014). Exploring the concept of transcreation-transcreation as “more
than translation”? Cultus. Journal of Intercultural Mediation and Communication,
7, 57–71.
Pedersen, D. (2016). Transcreation in marketing and advertising: An ethnographic
study. PhD Dissertation, Aarhus University.
Pedersen, D. (2017). Managing transcreation projects: An ethnographic study.
Translation Spaces, 6(1), 44–61. http://www.cultusjournal.com/files/Archives/pedersen_
5_p.pdf
Reilly, D. (2014). Transcreation: Intersections of culture and commerce in Japanese
translation and localization. University of Pittsburgh. http://d-scholarship.pitt.edu/
27683/1/reillydb_etd.PDF
Rojo, A. (2019). Investigación de la creatividad en traducción. Resultados del proyecto
TRANSCREA. Comares.
Rojo, A. & Meseguer, P. (2015). Fomentando la creatividad: Una propuesta
didáctica para el aula de traducción. Quaderns. Revista de Traducció, 22, 255–271.
https://raco.cat/index.php/QuadernsTraduccio/article/view/294272
Runco, M. A. (2003). Discretion is the better part of creativity: Personal creativity
and implications for culture. Inquiry: Critical Thinking Across the dDisciplines,
22(3), 9–12. 10.5840/inquiryctnews200322314
Runco, M. A. (2004). Personal creativity and culture. In S. Lau, A. N. N. Hui, &
G. Y. C. Ng (Eds.), Creativity when east meets west (pp. 9–22). World Scientific.
Runco, M. A. (2007). Creativity. Theories and Themes: Research, Development and
Practice. Amsterdam: Elsevier.
124 Marián Morón
Simonton, D. K. (1990). History, chemistry, psychology, and genius: An intellectual
autobiography of historiometry. In M. A. Runco and R. S. Albert (Eds), Theories
of creativity. Sage.
Steiner, G. (1975/1992). After Babel. Aspects of language and translation. Oxford
University Press.
Sternberg, R. J. & Lubart, T. I. (1999). The concept of creativity: Prospects and
paradigms. In R. J. Sternberg (Ed.), Handbook of creativity (pp. 3–15). Cambridge
University Press.
Villalba, E. (2008) On creativity towards an understanding of creativity and its mea-
surements. Publications Office of the European Union. https://publications.jrc.ec.
europa.eu/repository/bitstream/JRC48604/eur_on%20creativity_new_.pdf
Way, C. (2014). Translator competence and beyond: New challenges for translator
training. Paper presented at the 2nd International Conference DIDTRAD, UAB,
Barcelona. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/319261122_Translator_
Competence_and_Beyond_New_Challenges_for_Translator_Training
Way, C. (2019). Fostering translator competence: The importance of effective
feedback and motivation for translator trainees. Intralinea Special Issue: New
Insights into Translator Training, Special Issue, no page. https://www.intralinea.
org/specials/article/2430
Way, C. (2021) Developing manageable individualised formative assessment of
translator trainees through rubrics. Research in Language, 19(2), 135–154. 10.
18778/1731-7533.19.2.03
8 The translator as a plain text
designer for the Public
Administration: A necessary role?
Elena Ruiz-Cortés
Introduction
Over the years several efforts have been made to improve institutional com
munication between the public and the Public Administration. Nonetheless,
administrative documents, considered to be the documentary evidence of an
administrative act issued or received by the authorities (Way, 2016, p. 1013),
seem to reinforce this communication divide (see Ruiz-Cortés 2021a,
pp. 550–555). In Translation Studies, the obscurity of administrative docu
ments has not escaped scholarly debate (Way 2016; Ruiz-Cortés, 2021a),
which is only natural considering that professional translators are ro-
utinely confronted with these “defective” administrative source texts (STs)
(Molnár, 2013). In fact, Molnár (2013, p. 60) argues that even if language
service providers are often legally protected from the consequences of poor ST
quality, it is not them but translators who experience the challenge of con
fronting what the scholar calls their “defects”, which then require “summar
ising, explaining or adapting according to the needs of the employer or reader
concerned”. Furthermore, in the administrative sphere, previous Translation
Studies research has already highlighted administrative text defects, and the
impact on the comprehensibility of subsequent translations (Taibi, 2006;
Molina-Gutiérrez, 2007; Klein, 2015; Toledo-Báez & Conrad, 2017; Felici &
Griebel, 2019; Geldenhuys, 2019).
In light of the above , we introduce “plain text design” as a service that
translators may implement to enhance administrative text comprehensibility
to partially bridge this communicative divide within the public sector (see
section “From plain language to plain text design”). Accordingly, our aim is
twofold. Firstly, we seek to demonstrate how plain text design may assist in
improving communication in the administrative sphere by enhancing ad
ministrative ST comprehensibility -which, in turn, will facilitate subsequent
translation. Secondly, we aim to foreground the added value of the human
translators to provide a service which machines cannot. In order to meet
both aims, we will use administrative forms as a case study, since both
original and translated administrative forms have, as mentioned above,
proven to be defective for their end users. Thus, we will firstly introduce the
DOI: 10.4324/9781003223344-9
126 Elena Ruiz-Cortés
notion of plain text design and the role of translators as plain text designers.
Afterwards, we will outline a methodology to help translators to implement
plain text design in the case of administrative forms. We will then illustrate
the usefulness of the methodology proposed by improving a defective
Spanish form.
From plain language to plain text design

The plain language movement has prompted an invaluable attitudinal change
in both government and citizens concerning the need to break with poorly
drafted and incomprehensible administrative texts. This movement began in
the UK in the 1950s and in the US in the 1960s, where it gained parti-
cular strength with President Carter’s Executive Order 12044-Improving
Government Regulations in the late 1970s, and later with President Clinton’s
Memorandum on Plain Language in Government Writing in the late 1990s1.
Even if the achievements promoted by this movement worldwide today are
undeniable, its advocates have struggled against an array of myths and mis
conceptions concerning what plain language entails. Several experts, such as
Kimble (1996–1997) have supported this struggle, refuting the narratives that
frame plain language as dumbing down the language of the text and sacrificing
precision. They clearly show that plain language actually favours text clarity,
precision and accuracy (see Kimble, 1996–1997).
Recently, the easy language movement (Maaß, 2020) has also emerged
with the aim to emphasise the need to foster effective communication in our
society. Even with overlaps, Maaß (2020, p. 139) contends that the main
difference between the plain language and the easy language movements
stems from the fact that plain language texts “address people for whom the
source texts are too hard to understand; in the case of expert-lay commu
nication” and they “do not primarily address people with communication
impairments” (the main goal of the easy language movement). This division
seem to suggest that “particularist accounts” of accessibility, which frame
access as exclusively or mainly related to some groups of people (Greco,
2018), prevail in Translation Studies research. In our view, it is worth ex
ploring a shift towards “universalist accounts” of accessibility in Translation
Studies, in which access is framed as an issue that concerns all citizens
(Greco, 2018). Unquestionably, plain text design is moving in this direction.
Plain text design and translators as plain text designers

Kimble (1996–1997, p. 2) rightly argues that plain language involves “all the
techniques for clear communication - planning the document, designing it,
organising it, writing clear sentences, using plain words […]”. However,
although plain language goes beyond the language level, the “plain lan
guage” label seems to have brought language-related aspects to the forefront
when addressing clear communication, while pushing text-related aspects2
The translator as a plain text designer 127
into the background both in research (Cornelius, 2010; Klein, 2015; Toledo-
Báez & Conrad, 2017; Felici & Griebel, 2019) and in institutional policies3.
This imbalance is problematic considering that empirical studies show that
both language and text-related aspects should be considered when analysing
(administrative) text incomprehensibility (Molnár, 2013, pp. 64–65). So, any
analysis of comprehensibility should foreground both macrostructure (the
overall semantic information of a text) and microstructure (such as words,
phrases, clauses, sentences, and connections between sentences) (Van Dijk,
1980, p. 29).
Thus, the rationale behind the use of the label “plain text design” here is
twofold: the need to place the focus on the level of the text (and not mainly
on the language) when addressing clear communication, and the need to
consider the impact of the text design process on this clear communication,
especially in the administrative context and with regard to administrative
forms. The enhancement of form comprehensibility will in turn help in
dividuals to communicate effectively with government institutions, and also
to follow the administrative procedures that would allow them to access key
social rights (Ruiz-Cortés, 2021b). Consequently, plain text design would
not only benefit citizens, by fostering a better understanding of the bu
reaucratic text in question, but also the authorities, given the burdens that
miscommunication causes in terms of cost-effectiveness for the state4.
As for why translators are well-suited to be plain text designers, several
reasons may be offered. One key aspect of plain text design is effectiveness
(see also Chapter 1); accordingly, plain text designers seek to design and
write effective texts with the aim to enhance effective communication.
Translators are familiar with the notion of effectiveness, which within the
public services context is measured by:
[…] the extent to which translations are tailored to the varying needs of
their target readers in order to allow them not only to access their key
public information, but also to use this information to become active
participants with control over the communicative act occurring within
the public service context.
(Ruiz-Cortés, 2021b, p. 165)
In our view, the effectiveness that plain text design pursues is exactly the same;
and accordingly, translators should be trained to achieve not only translation
effectiveness, but also ST effectiveness through the implementation of plain
text design. In other words, translators, as intercultural mediators, are in an
ideal position to discern how the problems of the ST may affect not only its
comprehension, but also the comprehension of its subsequent translations into
different languages. Accordingly, translators provide added value for this
specific service, if compared with other language professionals. This is the case,
since they not only identify problems and propose solutions that a qualified
monolingual linguist or a copy editor would identify and propose, but they are
also trained to anticipate textual, linguistic, culture-bound and (subsequent)
translation problems that would go unnoticed by other language professionals.
This is so since translators not only analyse the ST comprehensibility based on
their thorough knowledge of the source language, the source culture and the
source Public Administration, but also by recognising how the asymmetries of
the target languages, target cultures and target Public Administrations in
volved may affect the comprehensibility of the ST and its translations.
Indeed, translators are in an ideal position not only to identify problems
that other language professionals and machines cannot, but also to propose
solutions in the ST particularly those “drafted for translation”; such as at
the EU, where STs are adjusted “in the drafting stage to make them
translatable into other languages and keep translation problems and in
accuracies to a minimum” (Biel, 2014, p. 65). Then, collaborating with ST
producers will allow translators to propose amendments that would facil
itate not only the comprehension of the ST, but also of its subsequent
translations. Accordingly, translators can be an invaluable asset for the
Public Administration “to produce texts (both source and target) that
communicate, empower and do justice to the public service that employs
them” (Katan & Spinzi, 2023). Gaining this collaborative status (Katan &
Spinzi, 2023) also contributes to moving away from the more traditional
servile role of the passive translator, while increasing their visibility and
social capital (Way, 2016, p. 1016). Logically, then, translators as key social
agents are ideally positioned to provide other services for the Public
Administration, beyond translation5.
Furthermore, translators are well-suited to implement plain text design of
STs since it may be regarded as a form of diaphasic intralingual translation6
(Hill-Madsen, 2019, p. 544) in which the translator intervenes to adapt a ST
to the textual and linguistic abilities of the ST audience by clarifying the
complex and specialised texts for the non-expert readers. Labelling this
service as intralingual translation may be controversial, given that a number
of authors argue that “preparing plain-language derived texts for lay read
erships is so different from interlingual work that the word ‘translation’
should not be used” (Mossop, 2016, p. 1). However, other researchers have
used the term “intralingual translation” when reworking defective adminis
trative STs and their translations into plain language (Cornelius, 2010;
Toledo-Báez & Conrad, 2017; Muñoz-Miquel, et al, 2018; Felici & Griebel,
2019; Hill-Madsen, 2019). In our view, although “equivalencing” is central in
translation, and “distinguishes this work from that of all other kinds of
writer” (Mossop, 2016, p. 20), the fact that translators are already performing
other intralingual tasks (Muñoz-Miquel et al, 2018, p. 180) makes it clear that
the range of tasks being performed by trained translators is expanding.
Accordingly, since plain text design requires the implementation of an array of
tasks usually performed during the translation process, including equivalen
cing, we believe that broadening the scope of Translation Studies to regard
plain text design as a type of intralingual translation would be beneficial for
the discipline. This broadening will foreground the fact that translator skills
sets may be used to provide new services in the language industry.
A methodology to implement plain text design

In this section we present plain text design for administrative forms. The
methodology should be considered as a starting point, and should be
modified as needed in the future. The three phases are: (1) identifying the
issues that may hinder form comprehensibility, (2) assessing how these issues
impact on textual communication and (3) solving these issues.
Identifying issues
Following this methodology, translators need to identify ST issues, both at a
macrostructural and at a microstructural level. Here translators will identify
which elements may hinder form comprehensibility. To assist translators,
plain text design presents the main elements that should be considered in the
identification of macrostructural and of microstructural-related issues (al
though some overlaps may occur).
Macrostructural issues
We have drawn upon reception studies (Barnett, 2007; Sarangi &
Slembrouck, 2013; Geldenhuys, 2019) to outline the most problematic
macrostructural issues previously identified:
• Length of texts. Usability studies show that while many form designers
“try to reduce the amount of paper in a form with small captioned
boxes, the lack of sufficient space and the resulting clutter create an even
bigger burden” on the user (Barnett, 2007, p. 9). Thus, short documents
are not necessarily easier than long ones.
• Framing. Framings of forms are crucial to define what the public needs
to read and where they have to participate within the form. Studies have
shown that it is vital that frames function as complete, independent and
clear blocks of questions with enough answering space to elicit the
desired response (Geldenhuys, 2019, p. 77).
• Sequence of information. For the reader to follow the text flow in a form:
“each question has to logically follow the question before it or within
the same sectional grouping or cluster” (Geldenhuys, 2019, p. 95). This
is essential since “the sequence in which the information is provided on
the page layout affects how completely or readily accessible the
information is to the reader” (Geldenhuys, 2019, p. 77).
• Headings. Section headings should be “concise but not cryptic in order
to visually help readers not to skip important sections” (Geldenhuys,
2019, p. 101). This is crucial since reception studies show that users tend
to ignore section headings that they do not understand (Barnett,
2007, p. 12).
• Length of sentences. Long sentences may create confusion by preventing
the reader from following text flow, while the same confusion may be
created by shorter sentences due to false economy that results in
vagueness or ambiguity.
• Questions/placeholders and their answers. Studies on forms have under
lined the need for questions to deal with “one thing at a time” (Barnett,
2007, p. 2) and to be clear enough to elicit the desired response.
Generally, two main techniques are used to achieve this: open-ended or
response-cued questions with “tick-box” options. For open-ended
questions, the literature highlights that the size of the space provided
needs to be sufficient and should be used to cue the length of the
response. In the tick-boxes option, categories need to be wide enough to
include all possible answers to avoid users experiencing difficulties in
fitting their situation into the pre-set response categories provided
(Sarangi & Slembrouck, 2013, p. 30).
• Instructions. Form-filling instructions that are separated from the form
or are included in multiple locations tend to be ignored, given that
“moving back and forth between the form and the instructions causes
some people to miss information and lose the flow of the questions”.
Thus, “the best overall place for instructions is right at the point where
the person needs them” (Barnett, 2007, p. 13).
• Footnotes. Reception studies have shown that footnotes remain unread
and that “the inclusion of footnote indicators such as asterisks (*) just
don’t work. People either ignore them or don’t even understand what
they mean. Notes on the back of the form are generally ignored”
(Barnett, 2007, p. 13).
• Formatting issues. Formatting issues play an important part in guiding
users through the form. However, at times, these features can also
mislead the reader.
• Other issues. To redress any possible shortcomings, this subsection has
been added (see Figure 8.1) to address any other issues that may arise.
This wide ranging list shows the extent that designers of functional forms
should be concerned with the whole document to avoid causing an array
of burdens for the reader (Barnett, 2007, p. 14). So, plain text design
should contribute towards improvement in this area by foregrounding the
need to use an overarching text-based approach when addressing clear
communication.
Microstructural issues
Numerous microstructural-related aspects have been reported as proble
matic in the administrative context in texts written in, for example, English
• Length of texts
• Framing
• Sequence of information
• Headings
• Length of sentences
MACROSTRUCTURE • Questions/placeholders
• Instructions
• Footnotes
• Formatting issues
1. IDENTIFYING
• Other issues
ISSUES
• Syntax
• Lexis
MACROSTRUCTURE • Spelling, punctuation
and factual correctness
• Other issues
PLAIN TEXT DESIGN
• Cohesion
MACROSTRUCTURE • Coherence
2. ASSESSING
THE IMPACT • Intentionality
ON TEXTUAL • Acceptability
COMMUNICATION • Informativity
MACROSTRUCTURE • Situationality
• Intertextuality
• Adaptation
• Linguistic amplification
• Amplification
• Calque
MACROSTRUCTURE • Compensation
• Linguistic compression
• Description
• Reduction
• Established equivalent
3. SOLVING
• Generalisation
ISSUES
• Modulation
• Particularisation
• Borrowing
MACROSTRUCTURE • Literal translation
• Transposition
• Design decisions
• Other techniques
Figure 8.1 A methodology to implement plain text design for administrative forms.
(Cornelius, 2010; Toledo-Báez & Conrad, 2017, p. 565; Geldenhuys, 2019);
Italian (Klein, 2015, pp. 105–106), and also French, German and Italian
(Felici & Griebel, 2019). For simplification purposes, we have grouped all
these elements under four categories: (1) syntax, (2) lexis, (3) spelling,
punctuation and factual correctness and (4) other issues:
• Syntax: Several syntactic aspects need to be considered when examining

administrative texts, such as:
• active voice is preferred to passive voice,
• indicative mood is preferred to subjunctive,
• reduction of noun strings and impersonal forms are advisable and
• the distance between the subject and verb as well as negative
constructions should be avoided.
• Lexis: Archaisms, foreign words, vague terms, acronyms (without
explanations) and technical expressions should be avoided and, when
possible, everyday language and short words should be prioritised.
• Spelling, punctuation and factual correctness: Studies have shown that
administrative texts often present a number of inaccuracies and other
errors that need to be addressed when examining texts through the
lenses of clear communication.
• Other issues: To redress any possible shortcomings, this subsection has
been added (see Figure 8.1) to address any other issues that may arise.
Assessing the impact on textual communication

During this phase the translators assess the impact of the issues identified
earlier on textual communication, or in other words, they will reflect upon
how the communicative purpose of the form is affected by these issues. To
do so, we will draw upon De Beaugrande & Dressler (1981) who define a text
as a communicative occurrence which meets seven principles of textuality.
These principles define textual communication:
Through syntactic relations on the surface (cohesion); through con

ceptual relations in the text (coherence); through the attitudes of the
author and reader to the text (intentionality and acceptability); through
the transfer of the information (informativity); through the setting
(situationality); and through the reciprocal relationship of separate texts
(intertextuality).
(Mikhchi, 2011, p. 50)7
Logically, as De Beaugrande & Dressler (1981, p. 3) point out, those texts

which do not satisfy these principles are considered “non-texts.”
Consequently, the information gathered during the first phase of the metho
dology will be used by translators to assess whether the form in question
satisfies the principles mentioned earlier, and hence, to determine whether the
form analysed is considered a text or a “non-text”. If the latter is confirmed,
some of the techniques discussed later may be used to solve this.
Solving issues (1)

Several translation techniques that translators apply in their daily professional
lives have been used to solve incomprehensibility issues affecting texts in the
context of intralingual translation (Muñoz-Miquel et al, 2018; Toledo-Báez &
Conrad, 2017; Hill-Madsen, 2019). In our methodology, following Molina &
Hurtado-Albir (2002, pp. 509–511), a number of translation techniques are
used to solve the issues identified (as can be seen in Figure 8.1)8. Furthermore,
a technique called “design decisions” has been added, crucial for plain text
design, and an “other techniques” subsection has been included to note extra
techniques (see Figure 8.1). All the techniques discussed so far may assist in
solving both macrostructural and microstructural issues. The methodology
proposed is graphically presented in Figure 8.1.
Implementing plain text design: A case study

In this section the usefulness of the methodology presented earlier will be
showcased using a Spanish administrative form as a case study. It is an
immigration form created by the Spanish Ministry for Migration to allow
third country nationals, who are either family members of the European
Economic Area (EEA) or Swiss nationals, to apply for residence in Spain9.
Undeniably, to successfully perform plain text design, a prior in-depth
analysis of the ST involved is required. In our case, we had already per
formed this analysis on the form studied here in Ruiz-Cortés (2021b), and to
which we will now return.
Identifying the issues 10

The main macrostructural and microstructural issues will be described
below following a top-down approach.
In its header a reference to the Spanish government is found. However, no
reference to the Spanish ministry that produced the form, and which is re
sponsible for guiding the immigration procedure, is provided until the end of
page three. In the header, the title of the form can be found: “Application
form for a residence card as the family member of an EU citizen” (my
translation, and for all other English renditions given in the following text).
This formulation is problematic since the addressees are not only family
members of EU nationals, but also family members of nationals from
Iceland, Liechtenstein and Norway (EEA nationals) as well as family
members of Swiss nationals. Furthermore, this EU-centric terminology -
which manifestly excludes the other nationals - is also used in the heading of
134
Table 8.1 Solving issues (2)
Original Amendment Technique(s) adapted from Explanation

Molina & Hurtado-Albir
(2002, pp. 509–511)
HEADER
The ministry that produces Including the full name of this Amplification Clarifying who the form producer is helps
the form is not clearly ministry under the Spanish users to create an image of the
Elena Ruiz-Cortés
mentioned government logo in the organisation involved as well as to

header. identify it ( Geldenhuys, 2019, p. 21).
Title with EU-centric Expanding this title to include Particularisation Being precise in this case is vital, since
terminology (EU citizen) nationals from Iceland, misunderstandings may result in
Liechtenstein, Norway and applicants not using the form thinking
Switzerland. that it is not applicable to them.
GUIDANCE (DESIGN DECISION) 14
No clear explanation of who Inclusion of who this form is Design decision This inclusion allows for:
this form is addressed to for below the header: • Clarifying the addressees before com
You may use this form if you pleting the form.
are a family member of: • Shortening the title of the form by not
• A European Economic including the acronym of “European
Area national (hereinafter Economic Area” in it, while explaining
EEA) comprising EU the acronym before it is used in the
States, Iceland, sections of the form.
Liechtenstein and Norway. • Including the EU acronym before its use
• A Swiss national. in the sections.
No clear explanation of the Clarification: Design decision to insert this It is necessary to clarify:
identity documents Three types of identity clarification and the • What these documents are.
required nor their documents are required in acronyms in the • The acronyms used to refer to them
acronyms this form: guidance,to use them in the throughout the form.
sections.
• The DNI (documento na Description of the implicit • Obviously, these formatting decisions
cional de identidad), the information concerning (based on usability studies) need to be
personal identity number these documents for negotiated with Spanish authorities, who
assigned to Spanish citizens clarification purposes. may be initially reluctant, by highlighting
in Spain. benefits in terms of comprehensibility.
• The NIE (número de iden
tidad de extranjero), the
national identity number
assigned to foreign citizens
residing in Spain.
• The passport.
SECTION 1 15
PASPORTE/PAS PASAPORTE Design decision With the decision to use the complete
denomination “PASAPORTE”
inconsistencies are eliminated. This is a
short word that may be used throughout
the text. There is no need to use an extra
note to explain an acronym that does not
even officially exist.
N.I.E. NIE Design decision Correction of spelling mistake. The acronym
can be used since it has been previously
clarified in the initial guidance created.
Space in the nationality field Providing more space to Design decision Enough space to reflect non-standard
is insufficient answer answers should be provided.
Marital status Providing more space to write Design decision, The inclusion of these categories in-text and
them in-text. The footnote particularisation for the explanatory note will contribute to
may be used to include the acronyms and avoiding user confusion.
explanatory note for civil amplification for the
partners. footnote.
The translator as a plain text designer
(Continued)
135
Table 8.1 (Continued)
136

(2002, pp. 509–511)
N° N° Design decision Correction of spelling mistake.

Título and its explanation in Replacing título for Modulation for título. The term título does not match the
footnote 4 “relationship with the Reduction for footnote 4. categories provided. Accordingly, we
applicant” believe that a general explanation of what
Elena Ruiz-Cortés
Eliminate from the footnote it entails may facilitate the completion of

the options that are not this field and to avoid the confusion of
applicable in this case. relating this term to titular. Furthermore,
it is necessary to eliminate information
that is not applicable to avoid confusion.
SECTION 2
Heading with EU-centric Replacing it for EEA and Linguistic compression and We have eliminated “European Union
terminology (Union Swiss nationals. particularisation regime”, since it is both a technical and
citizen to whom the imprecise term, and we have replaced it
European Union regime is for the precise terminology already
applicable) explained in the guidance section.
SECTION 3
Explanatory note clarifying Including this information in- Design decision Including this short note where the user
that section three is to be text below this section needs it, i.e. in the section.
completed only if the form heading.
is not personally
submitted by the applicant
SECTION FOUR
Note on communication Design decision Frames help users to know where to
with the authorities in participate and small print makes
small print and outside Including the note inside the information less likely to be noticed. Both
section 4 frame of section 4 and in a arguments justify this decision.
larger print.
Certificado electrónico in Replacing “certificado Particularisation Since it is unviable to explain in the form
footnote 6 electrónico” (e-certificate) what the certificado electrónico is, users
with “certificado digital” will try to look for further information
(digital certificate.) online. When doing so, the term that they
will find on official webpages is certificado
digital 16. Accordingly, we believe that this
replacement will facilitate user
comprehension of the term.
BEGINNING OF PAGE TWO
Titular We have not found who or ------------------- -----------------------------------------
what titular refers to, and
hence, no solution can be
provided.
SECTION 5
Footnote 7 “Tick the Clarifying this ambiguous Amplification Ambiguity may mislead the applicant in this
appropriate box” footnote including an in- pivotal part of the form where the
text explanatory note that immigration procedure applicable must be
clarifies, amongst other ticked.
aspects, whether more than
one category may be ticked.
Footnote three Eliminating this footnote Design decision The need to address factual correctness of
from section 5 since it is not the content.
applicable to this section
“Other family members” Specify the family members Linguistic amplification Ambiguous categories may lead some
included: applicants to think that they are excluded
Other family members from applying.
The translator as a plain text designer
(Continued)
137
Table 8.1 (Continued)
138

(2002, pp. 509–511)
(siblings, grandchildren,
grandparents, aunts,
uncles, nephews, nieces and
cousins).
Elena Ruiz-Cortés
END OF PAGE TWO

Blanks to be completed by To specify which fields are to Design decision Implicit information that needs to be made
the authorities are not be completed by the explicit.
specified authorities.
PAGE THREE
Departments responsible for Specifying the departments. ------------------- -----------------------------------------
processing them No information concerning
this has been found. Thus,
no proposal can be made 17.
section 2 and in categories in section 5. Considering that applicants tend to
skip headings and questions that they think do not apply in their circum
stances (Barnett, 2007, p. 15), the use of this imprecise terminology
throughout the form is unquestionably problematic.
In the first two pages of the form the sections are presented: details of the
applicants and their representatives (sections 1 to 4), and questions re
garding immigration procedures (section 5). Framings are used to establish
boundaries between sections; however, at times not enough room to answer
is provided. For instance, in the “nationality” field the space provided is
insufficient to reflect non-standard answers, such as cases of multiple na
tionalities. Additionally, ambiguous categories may be found in section 5. For
instance, in the “temporary residence” subsection immediate family members
under EU law are clearly included as categories (spouses, parents …), while
extended family members (siblings, grandchildren, grandparents …) fall
under the vague category “other family members”. EU law is complex en
ough, so will these applicants know which family members fall under this
category without further explanation? Furthermore, several assumptions
may be found in the first two pages of the form, such as: (1) not explaining
Spanish bureaucratic references (DNI or NIE)11; (2) creating non-standard
Spanish acronyms with no explanation (PAS instead of pasaporte/passport);
(3) introducing terms with no explanation (such as the highly vague titular at
the beginning of page two of the form), or (4) leaving blanks to be filled
in without specifying that they are to be completed by the authorities only
(the DIR3 code in page two).
Additionally, both spelling mistakes and incongruences can be found: (1)
presenting acronyms, such as NIE, with and without full stops (only the
latter option is correct in Spanish); (2) presenting abbreviations without full
stops (N°); (3) using both PASAPORTE and PAS for passport or (4) re
ferring applicants to footnotes which are not applicable to the field in
question (in section 5, when asked for the date on which their residence in
Spain started, applicants are referred to footnote 3 on marital status).
On its third page this form presents instructions in the form of footnotes;
even though it has been found that applicants tend to avoid footnotes
(Barnett, 2007, p. 13). Besides their location, several content-related pro
blems arise when analysing them. In footnote 3, there is an explanation of
the abbreviations (which do not in reality officially exist) to express marital
status. Furthermore, although this field reflects the five marital statuses re
cognised under Spanish law, it may be confusing for legally registered civil
partners since it fails to clarify that being a civil partner is not a marital
status in Spain. Consequently, those in a civil partnership need to tick the
“single” option.
In footnote 4, the problem stems from the term títulos, which refers to the
capacity in which the applicant representative is submitting the form on
their behalf (such as their lawyer). On the one hand, after analysing the
thirteen possible definitions of título in Spanish, a direct correlation between
its possible definitions and the categories provided in the form is difficult to
establish12. On the other hand, footnote 4 includes employers as possible
representatives. However, under Spanish Law employers cannot be re
presentatives in this form (they can be representatives in other Spanish
immigration forms but not in the one studied here). Furthermore, even if
both the vague term titular (see above) and the vague term título do not refer
to the same concept in this form. Their linguistic similarity, though, may
lead readers to think that they are connected. So, as argued earlier, titulo is
not the best term to be used in this case. This confusion can be avoided by
using a more precise term (see Table 8.1).
In footnote 6, vital information concerning communication with the au
thorities is presented in small print, which makes it less likely to be noticed.
From a content standpoint, the case of the bureaucratic reference certificado
electrónico used in this footnote is problematic, since this term is not com
monly used in Spanish bureaucracy (see Table 8.1). In footnote 7, which
reads marque la opción que proceda or “tick the appropriate box”, the au
thorities seek to assist applicants to choose the immigration procedure ap
plicable to them in section 5. Arguably, this sentence is ambiguous, since it
does not clarify which criteria must be followed to tick the available cate
gories. Lastly, ambiguous terminology is found in the final paragraph spe
cifying that forms are available at the unidades encargadas de su gestión or
the “departments responsible for processing them”. Authorities certainly
know which departments they are referring to, however, if not specified, how
will users know?
Assessing the impact on textual communication

In this phase, drawing on the issues identified earlier, we will assess if the form
studied satisfies the principles of textuality (De Beaugrande & Dressler, 1981).
The first principle, cohesion, syntactically and lexically links the clauses and
sentences in a text to create textual unity and continuity (Mikhchi, 2011,
p. 51). In this form, cohesion is attained by elements such as lexical repetition
within the sections or through syntactic parallelism (using repeatedly Datos
del … or “Details of …” in the section headings). However, other elements
that would enhance cohesion - such as focusing on the users, or highlighting
important information (such as the producer and the addressee of the text)
(Klein, 2015, p. 108) - seem not to have been considered. Furthermore, at
times, lexical items have not been chosen with the user in mind (such as using
the vague term “titular” without providing a definition for users).
As for coherence, conceptual relations are well-established in the text,
since most of the blanks to be completed relate to the applicants and are
logically sequenced. However, the textual continuity that coherence should
guarantee is disrupted by other elements, such as: failing to indicate which
blanks are to be completed by the authorities (such as the Code DIR3 that
can only be completed by the Spanish authorities since it is an internal code
for the Spanish Administration); the constant reliance on footnotes which
break textual flow, or through actual errors. For example, in section 5, when
asked for the date on which their residence in Spain started, applicants are
referred to footnote 3 on marital status.
The underlying intentionality of the authorities as producer of this form is
clear: creating a form that serves as an instrument to gather information that
suits their institutional agenda (Sarangi & Slembrouck, 2013, p. 38). This
may be inferred from the amount of implicit information present in the
form, or by the inclusion of terminology, which is useful for gathering in
formation but is not explained to the user (e.g. titular and PAS).
Consequently, while the form has been created by the authorities to collect
all the necessary data they require, the issues previously identified may
impede applicants from having their form accepted, which, according to
Klein (2015, p. 108), was more than likely the intention of the authorities
when creating the form. This all directly impacts on acceptability, which not
only concerns applicants understanding the information in the form, but
also authorities receiving “the quantity and quality of data” they require
(Klein, 2015, p. 108). Consequently, issues such as vague lexical items,
ambiguous instructions or limited space for answers may not only impact
negatively on user understanding, but also on the quality of information
gathered by the authorities.
Undeniably, all of the above directly impacts on informativity, which in
turn impacts on the ability of the user to self-assess which information to
provide during the completion of the form. Furthermore, some of the ca
tegories included in the form are ambiguous, such as the “other family
members” category. In theory, this category should be for extended family
members, but the form fails to clarify that “extended” includes siblings,
cousins, grandparents, grandchildren … (see Table 8.1). So, although the
form satisfies the situationality principle, since it is generally relevant to the
sociocultural situation at hand, and the intertextuality principle, since it may
be generally understood “on the basis of the knowledge of other texts related
to the one concerned” (Klein, 2015, p. 109), it generally fails to meet the
standards of textuality. Thus, our assessment seems to confirm that this
form is a “non- text” (De Beaugrande & Dressler, 1981, p. 3).
Solving issues (2)

Table 8.113 shows the amendments that need to be made to this ST to en
hance its comprehensibility. These amendments seek to empower users by
unravelling how social control may be exercised through texts by the pow
erful participant in the communicative act (here, the Spanish authorities)
and by (partially) compensating this asymmetry through this consultancy
service. This unquestionably requires what Katan & Spinzi (2023) call
“constrained advocacy”: “to make changes, as any consultant would, con
sonant with the constraints of the original intent of the message and the
empowerment needs of the recipient”. Thus, our initial findings suggest that
plain text design will assist in fostering effective communication by enhan
cing administrative text comprehensibility. This in turn will facilitate any
subsequent translation of these documents (aim one). Furthermore, our
analysis highlights that translators may provide added value for this specific
service, in which their skills are of use to enhance ST effectiveness (aim two).
Conclusions
The language industry requires adaptive experts who are able to perform new
roles and to provide new services. Here we contend that translator skill sets
equip them to provide one of these necessary services: plain text design for the
Public Administration. This user-centred service is vital to foster a just society
in which all can participate and access public information. Although this in
itial study shows neither exhaustive nor definite findings, it provides us with
some important data. Firstly, our findings highlight the pertinence of using a
text-based approach when examining text defects in the TT, as well as the need
to pay more attention to ST quality. Secondly, the methodology proposed,
although it is only a starting point, does show potential benefits not only for
introducing this service into the language industry, but also for exploring how
translator skill sets may expand the roles they play in the industry.
Thus, our study foregrounds the need to further explore plain text design as a
consultancy service that translators can provide as “intercultural, interlingual
[and intralingual] information brokers and consultants” to “transmit an image
which does justice to all the competences they possess and the services they can
provide” (Way, 2020, p. 187). Arguably, community translators are in an ideal
position to perform plain text design (see Katan & Spinzi, 2023). This is the case
since community translators are generally guided by the overarching mission to
empower users during the translation process (Taibi, 2017; Ruiz-Cortés, 2021b,
pp. 164–165) to give them “voice and access to information, services and
participation” (Taibi, 2017, p. 8), and accordingly, they will be able attain the
same goal when performing plain text design of STs.
Finally, we would recommend investigating how plain text design may be
implemented in other public service settings, as well as considering the
benefits of introducing this notion into the translation classroom. In short,
we advocate for a deliberate broadening of scope in research endeavours
concerning the roles that translators may play in the coming years, with the
conviction that exploring them is vital for our discipline to meet the de
mands of a language industry that is rapidly changing.
Notes
1 Executive Order 12044: https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/executive-
order-12044-improving-government-regulations. Memorandum: https://www.
govinfo.gov/content/pkg/WCPD-1998-06-08/pdf/WCPD-1998-06-08-Pg1010.pdf
2 Such as factual correctness of the textual content, incomprehension, ambiguity,
coherence, cohesion or formatting mistakes (see Molnár, 2013).
3 A clear example is the “Fight the Fog campaign”, which mainly focuses on lin
guistic aspects. See: http://www.maldura.unipd.it/buro/manuali/fog.pdf
4 These burdens are connected with the time, effort or financial resources devoted
by the authorities to reinitiating administrative procedures due to a lack of un
derstanding of administrative procedures and/or of administrative texts by citi
zens (Barnett, 2007, pp. 9–10).
5 Other examples of the added value of translators as consultants can be found in
the 2021 issue of the Cultus journal “Translation plus: The added value of the
translator”: http://www.cultusjournal.com/index.php/current-issue
6 Hill-Madsen (2019, p. 542) argues that diaphasic intralingual translation entails a
simplification of the linguistic register of complex and expert sounding texts to
make them easier to read for the non-expert. However, he stresses: “this
‘downward’ transformation from a highly specialized to a non-specialized register
has its counterpart in a converse ‘upward’ movement, namely in cases where non-
expert utterances are translated into the expert’s fields specific terminology”.
7 For a thorough description see Mikhchi (2011, pp. 51–60).
8 Due to space constraints, we will not delve into these techniques here. For a
thorough description see Molina and Hurtado-Albir (2002, pp. 509–511).
9 See: https://extranjeros.inclusion.gob.es/ficheros/Modelos_solicitudes/mod_soli
citudes2/19-Tarjeta_familiar_comunitario.pdf
10 Due to space constraints, only the most relevant issues identified will be high
lighted here. It should be noted that the lexical items included in Spanish are in
italics.
11 The DNI (documento nacional de identidad) is the personal identity number
assigned to Spanish citizens in Spain and the NIE (número de identidad de
extranjero) is the national identity number assigned to foreign citizens residing
in Spain.
12 See: https://dle.rae.es/t%C3%ADtulo
13 In Table 8.1 the footnotes will be presented in the sections where they appear in
the form.
14 Creating this guidance section below the header is a design decision required to
clarify elements that will be later used in the sections.
15 The rationale applied here is valid for all other sections in which the highlighted
elements appear.
16 See: https://www.sede.fnmt.gob.es/certificados/persona-fisica
17 Both the case of titular and this element exemplify the need to collaborate with
the authorities in the process of plain text design to make the most appropriate
decision.
References
Barnett, R. (2007). Designing useable forms: Success guaranteed. https://cdn.ymaws.
com/www.bfma.org/resource/resmgr/Articles/07_46.pdf
Biel, Ł. (2014). Lost in the Eurofog. The textual fit of translated law. Peter Lang.
Cornelius, E. (2010). Plain language as alternative textualisation. Southern African
Linguistics and Applied Language Studies, 28(2), 171–183. 10.2989/16073614.2010.
519106
De Beaugrande, R. A. & Dressler, W. U. (1981). Einführung in die Textlinguistik.
Niemeyer.
Felici, A. & Griebel, C. (2019). The challenge of multilingual “plain language” in
translation-mediated Swiss administrative communication. A preliminary com
parative analysis of insurance leaflets. Translation Spaces, 8(1), 167–191. 10.1075/
ts.00017.fel
Geldenhuys, N. (2019). The language of forms: a discourse analysis of municipal ap
plication forms. [Unpublished Master’s Dissertation, University of Western Cape].
Greco, G. M. (2018). The nature of accessibility studies. Journal of Audiovisual
Translation, 1(1), 205–232.
Hill-Madsen, A. (2019). The heterogeneity of intralingual translation. Meta, 64(2),
537–560. 10.7202/1068206ar
Katan, D. & Spinzi, C. (2023). The battle to intervene: Constrained advocacy for
community translators. In K. Stachoviak-Szymczak, E. Gonzalez, & D. Amanatidou
(Eds.), Community translation: Research and practice. Routledge.
Kimble, J. (1996–1997). Writing for dollars, writing to please. The Scribes Journal of
Legal Writing, 6, 1–38.
Klein, G. B. (2015). Written communication in bureaucratic-institutional contexts. In
M. Zabielska, E. Wasikiewicz-Firlej, & A. Szcezepaniak-Kozak (Eds.), Discourses in
co(n)text: The many faces of specialised discourse (pp. 89–131). Cambridge Scholars.
Maaß, C. (2020). Easy language, plain language, easy language plus: Balancing
comprehensibility and acceptability. Frank & Timme.
Mikhchi, H. H. (2011). Standards of textuality: Rendering English and Persian texts
based on a textual model. Journal of Universal Language, 12(1), 47–74. 10.22425/
jul.2011.12.1.47
Molina-Gutiérrez, M. (2007). Análisis funcionalista del formulario de solicitud del
visado de Schengen. Puentes, 2, 55–65.
Molina, L. & Hurtado-Albir. A. (2002). Translation techniques revisited: A dynamic
and functionalist approach. Meta, 47(4), 498–512. 10.7202/008033ar
Molnár, O. (2013). Source text quality in the translation process. In J. Zehnalová,
O. Molnár, & M. Kubánek (Eds.), Tradition and trends in trans-language com
munication (pp. 59–86). Palacký University Olomouc.
Mossop, B. (2016). “Intralingual translation”: A desirable concept? Across Languages
and Cultures. 17(1), 1–24. 10.1556/084.2016.17.1.1
Muñoz-Miquel, A., Ezpeleta-Piorno P., & Saiz-Hontangas, P. (2018) Intralingual
translation in healthcare settings: Strategies and proposals for medical translator
training. MonTi: Monografías de Traducción e Interpretación, 10, 177–204.
10.6035/MonTI.2018.10.7
Ruiz-Cortés, E. (2021a). La ideología en los textos administrativos: El análisis con
trastivo crítico del léxico como herramienta de reflexión para la traducción jurídica
contrahegemónica. Mutatis Mutandis. Revista Latinoamericana de Traducción,
14(2), 547–570. 10.17533/udea.mut.v14n2a13
Ruiz-Cortés, E. (2021b). A pre-translation framework for public service translation:
A sociological approach to enhance translation effectiveness. Translation &
Interpreting, 13(2), 164–182. 10.12807/ti.113202.2021.a09
Sarangi, S. & Slembrouck, S. (2013). Language, bureaucracy, and social control.
Routledge.
Taibi, M. (2006). Estudio de la utilidad de traducciones para los servicios públicos. In
P. García Blanco & P. Martino (Eds.), Traducción y multiculturalidad (pp. 187–193).
Madrid.
Taibi, M. (2017). Quality assurance in community translation. In M. Taibi (Ed.),
Translating for the community (pp. 7–25). Multilingual Matters.
Toledo-Báez, M. C. & Conrad, C. A. (2017). Informational pamphlets for asylum
seekers in English a proposal for simplification in translation based on the
plain language movement. Revista española de lingüística aplicada, 30(2), 559–591.
10.1075/resla.00007.tol
Van Dijk, T. A. (1980). Macrostructures. Lawrence Erlbaum.
Way, C. (2016). The challenges and opportunities of legal translation and translator
training in the 21st Century. International Journal of Communication, 10, 1009–1029.
Way, C. (2020). Training and pedagogical implications. In E. Angelone,
M. Ehrensberger-Dow, & G. Massey (Eds.). The Bloomsbury companion to
Language Industry Studies (pp. 179–207). Bloomsbury.
Index
Note: Page numbers followed by “n” refer to notes; and page numbers in Bold refer
to tables; and page numbers in italics refer to figures
adaptive expertise: ACE tools 63; Bayer-Hohenwarter, G. 114

augmented translation 62, 63; Benetello, C. 77, 103
competence-based translator training Beninatto, R. 17
68–70; competence model 66–68; Bibliography of Interpreting and
diversification of translation tasks and Translation (BITRA) 45
services 60–61; EMT framework 67; Bisaillon, J. 48
interpersonal competence 70; Boase-Beier, J. 78
necessitates ill-defined 69; notions of Bond, E. 3
diversification 62; scope of Brandt, A. 75
diversification 61–62; training Bruner, J. 77
adaptive expertise 69; in translation
64–66; translation management call to actions (CTAs) 115, 120n2
system 63 Calvo, E. 108
AI translation: augmented translation Canfora, C. 50–52
16–17; changes in modes of work: Cannon-Bowers, J. A. 64
post-editing 15–16; changes in the Chesterman, A. 21
industry 17–18; changes in the toolbox Chi, M. T. H. 64, 65
15; changes in translation studies Chodkiewicz, M. 45
18–19; changes to the professional Cid-Leal, P. 28
roles 17; clear effect 14 comparing TC, TRC and PEC 52–53
Almsten, L. 50 competence-based translator training
Alonso, E. 18, 108 68–70
Alves, F. 45 computer-assisted translation (CAT)
Andersen, H. C. 11 tools 44
Angelone, E. 4, 5, 60–71 Cornish, S. 118
Aranberri, N. 44, 50 Cronin, M. 14, 17, 18, 21
Austermühl, F. 50, 52 Cropley, A. J. 101, 102
automated content enrichment (ACE) CUBBITT 76
tools 63
automation 61 De Beaugrande, R. A. 83, 132
Degree in Translation 109
Baker, M. 77–79, 82, 85, 86 De la Cova Morillo-Velarde, E. 120n1
Bal, M. 79 DePalma, D. 17, 63
Barthes, R. 84 do Carmo, F. 1, 6, 11–23
Index 147
Dressler, W. U. 83 information and communication
technologies 108
Eagleman, D. C. 75 International Ergonomics Association
Eco-translation 21 (IEA) 67
Ehrensberger-Dow, M. 4
Engelbart, D. C. 23n8 Jakobsen, A. L. 19, 44
Espín-García, M.-C. 28 Jerzyk, E. 114, 118
European Higher Education Area Johnson, T. 17
(EHEA) 27 Jones, H. 77
European Master’s in Translation
(EMT) Competence Framework 66, Kant, E. 75
67, 94 Kaspere, R. 91
Evgeniya, D. M. 92 Katan, D. 1–8, 14, 74–87, 92–97, 99, 108,
119, 141
fairness and tolerance 55n3 Kelly, D. 45, 117
Fiore, S. 68 Kimble, J. 126
Fisher, W. R. 75, 76 Kiraly, D. 45
Forster, E.M. 74 Klein, G. B. 141
fully-automatic useful translation Konttinen, K. 53
(FAUT) 12 Koponen, M. 44, 45, 50, 53
future-proofing: expanding translation Krause, A. 28
concept 95–96; rebranding 92–95 Kumpulainen, M. 45, 46, 53
Künzli, A. 48
Gaballo, V. 94, 96 Kussmaul, P. 101–103, 113, 115
Gambier, Y. 75, 76, 91, 95, 96
García, M. 52 Lajoie, S. 65
Gaut, B. 101 Language engineering and translation:
The General Theory of the Translation Consequences of automation 21
Company 13 language services providers (LSP) 2, 5,
Gibson, G. 77, 85 60, 62, 93–95, 99, 110, 111, 117, 120
Gonçalves, J. L. 45 Liddicoat, A. 75
González Davies, M. 45 Loffredo, E. 95, 96
Goodwin, G. 68 Lommel, A. 17
Göpferich, S. 45 Lubart, T. I. 113
Gottschall, J. 75
Gouadec, D. 1 Maaß, C. 126
Gube, M. 65 macrostructural issues: footnotes 130;
Guerberof Arenas, A. 50 formatting issues 130; form-filling
Gui, Q. 96 instructions 130; framing 129; length
of sentences 130; length of texts 129;
Hale, S. 75 questions/placeholders and their
Hansen, G. 48 answers 130; section headings
Hansen-Schirra, S. 50, 51 129–130; sequence of information 129
Harding, S.-A. 78 Maegaard, B. 50
Hild, A. 45 Maia, B. 18
Hill-Madsen, A. 143n6 Márquez, P. 52
Ho, G. 94 Massey, G. 1–8, 39
homo fictus 74, 75 Mayoral, R. 115
homo narrans 2, 7, 77, 81, 85, 86 Meseguer, P. 113
homo sapiens 74, 80, 81, 86 Metamodel 7, 74, 78, 80, 81, 83, 83,
Horváth, P. I. 47 85, 86
Huertas-Barros, E. H. 1–8, 91–105 microstructural issues 130, 132
Hurtado-Albir, A. 45, 143n8 Mikhchi, H. H. 143n7
148 Index
Molina, L. 143n8 Robert, I. S. 1, 7, 44–55
Molnár, O. 125 Robin, E. 47
Moorkens, J. 1, 6, 11–23, 50 Robinson, D. 92, 95, 96
Morón, M. 4, 5, 8, 108–120 Rodríguez Vázquez, S. 28, 40n2
Mossop, B. 44, 45 Rojo, A. 113
Muñoz Martín, R. 45 Rosen, M. 68
Muñoz-Miquel, A. 68 Rossetti, A. 39
Muñoz, R. 115 Ruiz-Cortés, E. 3, 8, 125–143
Runco, M. A. 102
narrativity: causal emplotment 84–85;
characterisation 82–84; identifying Salas, E. 64, 68
78–79; overview 74–75; relationality/ Saldanha, G. 97
temporality 79–81; writer’s world 79 Salmi, L. 53
nature of creativity 99–102 Sánchez-Castany, R. 7, 27–41
Neubert, A. 45, 96, 103 Sánchez-Gijón, P. 50
neural machine translation (NMT) 1, 5, Schäffner, M. 91
21, 53, 54, 61–63, 74–76, 82 Schmitt, P. 4
Nitzke, J. 50–52 Schrijver, I. 1, 7, 44–55
Nord, C. 116 Scocchera, G. 44, 45, 48, 49
Novitz, D. 101 selective appropriation 85–87
Shakespeare’s Henry IV proclaims 11
O’Brien, S. 28, 39, 40n2, 49, 50, 97 Shawn Burke, C. 68
Offersgaard, L. 50 Somers, M. 77, 85
On translator’s ethics 21 Spinzi, C. 141
O’Sullivan 96, 99 Sternberg, R. J. 113
Stetting, K. 91
PACTE 47, 48 survey on creativity 96–99, 98, 100
Pedersen, D. 93–95
Perteghella, M. 95, 96 Taibi, M. 78
plain language to plain text design Tannenbaum, S. I. 64
126–129 teaching translation technologies: code
plain text design 125; administrative groups and number of codes 34; criteria
forms 131; identifying the issues for sample selection 30–31; data
133–140; impact on textual analysis 31–32; fields identified and
communication 132–133; modules 34; integrating technologies in
macrostructural issues 129–130; translation modules 37–39; macro-
microstructural issues 130, 132; from classification of technologies 35;
plain language to 126–129; solving module syllabi 33; procedural and
issues 133, 134–138; textual conceptual elements 36, 38; sample
communication 140–141; translators characteristics 32–35; Spanish-English
as plain text designers 126–129 equivalents 30; technologies in T&I
Plaza Lara, C. 45 curricula 28–29; technology-based
Pommer 96 modules 35–37; translation modules 29
post-editing competence (PEC) model the TeCreaTe project: back-translation
49–52 stage 111; COVID-19 pandemic 112;
Povlsen, C. 50 creativity assessment method 112;
Presas, M. 28 creativity attributes 113; human
professional translation 75–76 negotiation 116; issues 115; project
Pym, A. 21, 44, 45 editions 111; teaching and learning
Pym’s model 21 outcomes 110; teaching innovation
practices 117–118; training proposal
Remael, A. 47–49, 51, 52 114–115; transcreation portfolio 110;
Rico, C. 28, 50 transcreation projects 112; translation
Index 149
process 114; workflow and learning translation and interpreting (T&I) 7,
outcomes 116–117 27–30, 35, 36–38
textual communication: acceptability translation competence (TC) 45–46
141; coherence 140; cohesion 140; translation revision competence (TRC)
informativity 141; intentionality 141; model 47–49
intertextuality 141; situationality 141; Translation Studies Bibliography
syntactic relations 132 (TSB) 45
Tiselius, E. 45 Translation Studies scholars 45
Torrance, P. 101 Translator’s Tool Box 13
Torrejón, E. 50 Trigo, L. 18
Toury, G. 76 2020 Slator Report on the Language
transcreation 91, 102–103; creativity Industry 61
109; in translator training 109–118
translation: adaptability 20–22; adaptive Universitat Pompeu Fabra (UPF)
expertise in 64–66; AI translation syllabi 33, 41n15
14–19; CUBBITT 76; definition of 11, Ureel, J. J. J. 7, 44–55
19–20; degree of agreement 98, 100;
delimiting the concept of 91; effective van der Meer, J. 5, 6
automation 12; effectiveness 20–22; Vieira, L. N. 18
efficiency 20–22; expanding 95–96; Vine, J. 1, 4, 7, 91–105
FAUT 12; future aspects 22; issues of Volpe, C. E. 64
14; plus creativity as transcreation
93–95; professional translation 75–76; Wallace, G. 102
rebranding 92–95; routinised expertise
in 64–66; survey findings 103; Yamada, M. 52
transcreation 91, 102–103;
translators 13

The Human Translator in The 2020s 1

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

The Human Translator in The 2020s 1

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

THE HUMAN TRANSLATOR IN THE 2020s

Edited by Gary Massey, Elsa Huertas‐Barros, and David Katan

THE HUMAN TRANSLATOR

Gary Massey is a Professor of Translation Studies, Director of the Institute of

Elsa Huertas-Barros is a Senior Lecturer in Translation in the School of

David Katan is a Professor of English and Translation at the University of

The International Association for Translation and Intercultural Studies (IATIS) is a

Edited by Gary Massey,

Typeset in Times New Roman

List of Contributors vii

The human translator in the 2020s: An introduction 1

1 Translation’s new high-tech clothes 11

2 Teaching translation technologies: An analysis of

3 Translation, translation revision and post-editing

4 Weaving adaptive expertise into translator training 60

5 Tools for transforming translators into homo narrans

6 “Expanding” or “rebranding” the translation concept?

8 The translator as a plain text designer for the Public

Erik Angelone is an Associate Professor of Translation Studies at Kent State

Access to high-quality MT is no longer a differentiator between LSPs

Who makes translation what it is?

Is AI changing what translation is?

Changes in the toolbox

Changes in modes of work: Post-editing

Changes in modes of work: Augmented translation

Changes to the professional roles

Changes in the industry

Proposals from academia such as these are predictably unwelcome in an

Changes in Translation Studies

Do we need new definitions of translation?

Efficiency, adaptability and effectiveness

What will the future bring to translation?

Technologies in T&I curricula

Q1 What technological content is included in technology-based modules?

With a view to exploring the technology-based content of the aforementioned

Spanish term English equivalent

Grado universitario Undergraduate degree

Before defining in detail the sample analysed, it should be noted that in

1 Technology-based modules whose main purpose is to teach technolo­

Criteria for sample selection

Characteristics of the sample

General information: year 5

Non-specialised translation 412

Group # Group name

General and common to other 1 Basic non-specific software and

status of module,15 there were far more programme-specific compulsory

Preliminary findings and discussion

Technological content of technology-based modules

Group # Competencies Content Methodology Assessment

1 0.25 0.00 12.04 40.00 18.36 15.79 14.29 50.00

Integration of technologies in translation modules

Group # Competencies Content Methodology Assessment

1 9.44 100.00 2.23 25.00 11.29 100.00 11.88 100.00

Data availability statement

Translation, translation revision and post-editing competences

Translation competence (TC)

As far as operational competence is concerned, Scocchera (2017) draws on

Post-editing competence (PEC)

Comparing TC, TRC and PEC

To be a form of revision, the only aim of PE would be to eliminate

In addition, the authors explain that current workflows do sometimes in-

The diversification of translation tasks and services

The scope of diversification

1 Technology-based modules whose main purpose is to teach technolo

Through syntactic relations on the surface (cohesion); through con