借助翻译进程图的译者注意资源分配研究
|
摘要
译者注意资源分配是译者认知加工机制研究的重要问题,翻译进程图和可视化呈现翻译过程中译者注意资源的动态分配是近年来有效探究译者注意资源分配的前沿方法。本研究通过实验同步采集译者的眼动追踪数据和键盘记录数据,将这两种译者认知加工活动数据与翻译产品数据匹配整合,生成翻译进程图并探寻译者的注意资源分配模式。研究发现,在翻译过程的熟悉阶段,译者在无时间压力时以大概率表现出系统规划型翻译风格。相较于有时间压力的情况,译者分配到该阶段的注意资源也相对更多。在翻译过程的草拟阶段,同一翻译任务中译者的在线规划活动既可能保持单一风格,又可能呈现出多样性,在多种风格间切换。从窄语境规划切换到宽语境规划和出现回读活动时,通常是译者碰到翻译困难的标志。本研究对翻译进程图的分析还发现,对翻译过程的传统三阶段划分可进一步细化,其中的熟悉阶段可更加细致地划分为两个子阶段。
How translators allocate attention is one of the key topics in our endeavor to understand translators' cognitive mechanism during translation. Translation Progression Graphs(TPGs) and the visual representation of translators' dynamic attention allocation is one of the most recent methods which help bring about a better understanding of translators' attention allocation. The present study run an empirical experiment to collect translators' User Activity Data(i. e. eyetracking and key-logging data) and had the eye-tracking and key-logging data synchronized,then further mapped and integrated with the Translation Product Data to generate TPGs in an attempt to better understand the underlying mechanism of translators' attention allocation. We found that in the Orientation Phase the majority of translators were Systematic-Planners when under no time pressure,and they allocated comparatively more attentional resources to the Orientation Phase than they did under time pressure. In the Drafting Phase,some translators conducted online-planning in one single style throughout the translation process while others were characterized by multiple online-planning styles within one translation task. Shifting of styles from narrow-context planning to broad-context planning and backtracking were usually indicators of translation problems. This study also found that the traditional way of categorizing translation process into three phases could be refined by further dividing the Orientation Phase into two sub-phases.
How translators allocate attention is one of the key topics in our endeavor to understand translators' cognitive mechanism during translation. Translation Progression Graphs(TPGs) and the visual representation of translators' dynamic attention allocation is one of the most recent methods which help bring about a better understanding of translators' attention allocation. The present study run an empirical experiment to collect translators' User Activity Data(i. e. eyetracking and key-logging data) and had the eye-tracking and key-logging data synchronized,then further mapped and integrated with the Translation Product Data to generate TPGs in an attempt to better understand the underlying mechanism of translators' attention allocation. We found that in the Orientation Phase the majority of translators were Systematic-Planners when under no time pressure,and they allocated comparatively more attentional resources to the Orientation Phase than they did under time pressure. In the Drafting Phase,some translators conducted online-planning in one single style throughout the translation process while others were characterized by multiple online-planning styles within one translation task. Shifting of styles from narrow-context planning to broad-context planning and backtracking were usually indicators of translation problems. This study also found that the traditional way of categorizing translation process into three phases could be refined by further dividing the Orientation Phase into two sub-phases.
引文
[1]Anderson,J.2005.Cognitive Psychology and Its Implications(6th Edition)[M].New York:Worth Publishers.
[2]Archibald,L.,T.Levee&T.Olino.2015.Attention allocation:Relationships to general working memory or specific language processing[J].Journal of Experimental Child Psychology,(139):83-98.
[3]Baker,M.2000.Towards a methodology for investigating the style of a literary translator[J].Target,(2):241-266.
[4]Balling,L.,K.Hvelplund&A.Sjrup.2014.Evidence of parallel processing during translation[J].Meta,(2):234-259.
[5]Carl,M.&A.Jakobsen.2009.Towards statistical modelling of translators,activity data[J].International Journal of Speech Technology,(4):125-138.
[6]Carl,M.,B.Dragsted&A.Jakobsen.2011.On the systematicity of human translation processes[R].Tralogy I.Paris.
[7]Carl,M.&M.Kay.2011.Gazing and typing activities during translation:A comparative study of translation units of professional and student translators[J].Meta,(4):952-975.
[8]Carl,M.,B.Srinivas&M.Schaeffer(eds.).2016.New Directions in Empirical Translation Process Research:Exploring the CRITT TPR-DB[C].Sw itzerland:Springer.
[9]Chang,V.2009.Testing Applicability of Eye-tracking and f MRI to Translation and Interpreting Studies:An Investigation into Directionality[D].London:Imperial College London.
[10]Dragsted,B.2010.Coordination of reading and writing processes in translation:An eye on uncharted territory[A].In G.Shreve&E.Angelone(eds.).Translation and Cognition[C].Amsterdam/Philadelphia:John Benjamins Publishing.
[11]Dragsted,B.&M.Carl.2013.Towards a classification of translation styles based on eye-tracking and keylogging data[J].Journal of Writing Research,(1):133-158.
[12]Germann,U.2008.Yawat:Yet another word alignment tool[R].Proceedings of the ACL-08:HLT Demo Session(Companion Volume).
[13]Huang,L.2015.Style in Translation:A Corpus-Based Perspective[M].Shanghai:Shanghai Jiaotong University Press&Springer.
[14]Hvelplund,K.2011.Allocation of Cognitive Resources in Translation:An Eye-tracking and Key-logging Study[D].Copenhagen:Copenhagen Business School.
[15]Hvelplund,K.2014.Eye tracking and the translation process:Reflections on the interpretation and analysis of eye tracking data[J].MonTI.Monografías de Traducción e Interpretación:201-223.
[16]Hvelplund,K.2016.Cognitive efficiency in translation[A].In M.Mu1oz(ed.)Reembedding Translation Process Research[C].John Benjamins Publishing Company.
[17]Jakobsen,A.2002.Translation drafting by professional translators and by translation students[A].In G.Hansen(ed.)Empirical Translation Studies:Process and Product[C].Copenhagen:Samfundslitteratur.
[18]Jakobsen,A.&K.Jensen.2008.Eye movement behaviour across four different types of reading task[A].In S.G9 pferich,A.Jakobsen&I.M ees(eds.).Looking at Eyes:Eye-Tracking Studies of Reading and Translation Processing[C].Copenhagen:Samfundslitteratur.
[19]Jensen,T.2011.Distribution of attention between source text and target text during translation[A].In S.O'Brien(ed.).Cognitive Explorations of Translation[C].London&New York:Continuum.
[20]Just,M.&P.Carpenter.1980.A Theory of reading:From eye fixations to comprehension[J].Psychological Review,(4):329-354.
[21]Kahneman,D.1973.Attention and Effort[M].Englewood Cliffs:Prentice Hall.
[22]Lavie,N.2005.Distracted and confused?Selective attention under load[J].Trends in Cognitive Sciences,(2):75-82.
[23]Lavie,N,A.Hirst,J.de Fockert.2004.Load theory of selective attention and cognitive control[J].Journal of Experimental Psychology:General,(3):339-354.
[24]Martín,R.2014.A blurred snapshot of advances in translation process research[A].In R.Martín(ed.).Minding Translation[C].Publicaciones de la Universidad de Alicante.
[25]Perrin,D.2003.Progression analysis(PA):Investigating writing strategies at the workplace[J].Journal of Pragmatics,(6):907-921.
[26]Perrin,D.2006.Progression analysis:An ethnographic,computer-based multi-method approach to investigate natural writing processes[A].In G.Rijlaarsdam(ed.)Writing and Digital Media[C].London:Elsevier Ltd.
[27]Rayner,K.1998.Eye movements in reading and information processing:20 years of research[J].Psychological Bulletin,(3):372-422.
[28]Schaeffer,M.,M.Carl,I.Lacruz&A.Aizawa.2016.Measuring cognitive translation effort with activity units[J].Baltic Journal of Modern Computing,(2):331-345.
[29]Wengelin,A。.,M.Leijten&L.Van Waes.2010.Studying reading during w riting:New perspectives in research[J].Reading and Writing,(7):735-742.
[30]冯佳王克非.2016.探悉翻译过程的新视窗---键盘记录和眼动追踪[J].中国翻译,(1):12-18.
[31]王蕾.2008.可读性公式的内涵及研究范式---兼议对外汉语可读性公式的研究任务[J].语言教学与研究,(6):46-53.
[32]闫国利熊建萍臧传丽余莉莉崔磊白学军.2013.阅读研究中的主要眼动指标评述[J].心理科学进展,(4):589-605.
[33]左虹朱勇.2014.中级欧美留学生汉语文本可读性公式研究[J].世界汉语教学,(2):263-276.
①本研究借用Chang(2009)的实验文本。该研究通过测量1)阅读该文本所需要的受教育水平,2)文本总字/词数,以及请专家对3)文本的理解难度(comprehensibility),4)易读性(readability)和5)翻译难度(translatability)评分五个方面来保证英译汉和汉译英源文本的可比性。在缺乏中文易读性公式来直接测量文本难度的情况下(左虹朱勇,2014;王蕾,2008),这一方法较为合理。
②根据眼动研究的惯例(如Hvelplund,2011:110;闫国利等,2013:599),本研究只保留眼动样本加权正确识别率(Weighted Gaze Sample)高于75%的数据。
③CRITT TPR-DB数据库是目前国内外唯一的大型翻译过程研究语料库(Translation Process Research Database,简称TPR-DB)。该库已收录时长超过500小时的译者活动数据。语料来自1400多个实验任务、十余种语言,收录的翻译文本达60余万字/词。由丹麦哥本哈根商学院翻译与翻译技术研究和创新中心及其合作团队共同创建。
④本研究中翻译进程图的观察和标注由两位研究人员一起共同完成。两位研究人员先独立进行初步标注。对初步标注的结果不一致的情况,两位研究人员经过反复讨论、共同观察后形成统一意见,最终形成本研究的标注结果。
⑤图2至图5所展示的是基于最新算法生成的翻译进程图。衷心感谢Michael Carl教授无私地分享生成翻译进程图的最新技术和方法。最新的翻译进程图相对早期的翻译进程图(图1)有很大的改善和进步。图1来源于其已见刊的最新发表相关论文(2013年),但近几年来,翻译进程图的相关研究一直在不断地完善中。如图2所示,最新的翻译进程图有以下改进:1) 增加右侧纵轴显示翻译的最终目标文本。目标文本分词后,按照与源文本进行词/短语对齐后的顺序呈现。2)增加句子切分的界限。如图2中,每一条横线代表源文本句子切分的界限。句子在图中以Seg.标示。3)更加清楚地区分源文本注视点和目标文本注视点。图中方块代表注视点,通过不同颜色来区分。蓝色方块反映对源文本的注视活动,绿色方块反映对目标文本的注视活动(因本刊为黑白印刷,故本文图中不区分蓝绿注视点)。
[2]Archibald,L.,T.Levee&T.Olino.2015.Attention allocation:Relationships to general working memory or specific language processing[J].Journal of Experimental Child Psychology,(139):83-98.
[3]Baker,M.2000.Towards a methodology for investigating the style of a literary translator[J].Target,(2):241-266.
[4]Balling,L.,K.Hvelplund&A.Sjrup.2014.Evidence of parallel processing during translation[J].Meta,(2):234-259.
[5]Carl,M.&A.Jakobsen.2009.Towards statistical modelling of translators,activity data[J].International Journal of Speech Technology,(4):125-138.
[6]Carl,M.,B.Dragsted&A.Jakobsen.2011.On the systematicity of human translation processes[R].Tralogy I.Paris.
[7]Carl,M.&M.Kay.2011.Gazing and typing activities during translation:A comparative study of translation units of professional and student translators[J].Meta,(4):952-975.
[8]Carl,M.,B.Srinivas&M.Schaeffer(eds.).2016.New Directions in Empirical Translation Process Research:Exploring the CRITT TPR-DB[C].Sw itzerland:Springer.
[9]Chang,V.2009.Testing Applicability of Eye-tracking and f MRI to Translation and Interpreting Studies:An Investigation into Directionality[D].London:Imperial College London.
[10]Dragsted,B.2010.Coordination of reading and writing processes in translation:An eye on uncharted territory[A].In G.Shreve&E.Angelone(eds.).Translation and Cognition[C].Amsterdam/Philadelphia:John Benjamins Publishing.
[11]Dragsted,B.&M.Carl.2013.Towards a classification of translation styles based on eye-tracking and keylogging data[J].Journal of Writing Research,(1):133-158.
[12]Germann,U.2008.Yawat:Yet another word alignment tool[R].Proceedings of the ACL-08:HLT Demo Session(Companion Volume).
[13]Huang,L.2015.Style in Translation:A Corpus-Based Perspective[M].Shanghai:Shanghai Jiaotong University Press&Springer.
[14]Hvelplund,K.2011.Allocation of Cognitive Resources in Translation:An Eye-tracking and Key-logging Study[D].Copenhagen:Copenhagen Business School.
[15]Hvelplund,K.2014.Eye tracking and the translation process:Reflections on the interpretation and analysis of eye tracking data[J].MonTI.Monografías de Traducción e Interpretación:201-223.
[16]Hvelplund,K.2016.Cognitive efficiency in translation[A].In M.Mu1oz(ed.)Reembedding Translation Process Research[C].John Benjamins Publishing Company.
[17]Jakobsen,A.2002.Translation drafting by professional translators and by translation students[A].In G.Hansen(ed.)Empirical Translation Studies:Process and Product[C].Copenhagen:Samfundslitteratur.
[18]Jakobsen,A.&K.Jensen.2008.Eye movement behaviour across four different types of reading task[A].In S.G9 pferich,A.Jakobsen&I.M ees(eds.).Looking at Eyes:Eye-Tracking Studies of Reading and Translation Processing[C].Copenhagen:Samfundslitteratur.
[19]Jensen,T.2011.Distribution of attention between source text and target text during translation[A].In S.O'Brien(ed.).Cognitive Explorations of Translation[C].London&New York:Continuum.
[20]Just,M.&P.Carpenter.1980.A Theory of reading:From eye fixations to comprehension[J].Psychological Review,(4):329-354.
[21]Kahneman,D.1973.Attention and Effort[M].Englewood Cliffs:Prentice Hall.
[22]Lavie,N.2005.Distracted and confused?Selective attention under load[J].Trends in Cognitive Sciences,(2):75-82.
[23]Lavie,N,A.Hirst,J.de Fockert.2004.Load theory of selective attention and cognitive control[J].Journal of Experimental Psychology:General,(3):339-354.
[24]Martín,R.2014.A blurred snapshot of advances in translation process research[A].In R.Martín(ed.).Minding Translation[C].Publicaciones de la Universidad de Alicante.
[25]Perrin,D.2003.Progression analysis(PA):Investigating writing strategies at the workplace[J].Journal of Pragmatics,(6):907-921.
[26]Perrin,D.2006.Progression analysis:An ethnographic,computer-based multi-method approach to investigate natural writing processes[A].In G.Rijlaarsdam(ed.)Writing and Digital Media[C].London:Elsevier Ltd.
[27]Rayner,K.1998.Eye movements in reading and information processing:20 years of research[J].Psychological Bulletin,(3):372-422.
[28]Schaeffer,M.,M.Carl,I.Lacruz&A.Aizawa.2016.Measuring cognitive translation effort with activity units[J].Baltic Journal of Modern Computing,(2):331-345.
[29]Wengelin,A。.,M.Leijten&L.Van Waes.2010.Studying reading during w riting:New perspectives in research[J].Reading and Writing,(7):735-742.
[30]冯佳王克非.2016.探悉翻译过程的新视窗---键盘记录和眼动追踪[J].中国翻译,(1):12-18.
[31]王蕾.2008.可读性公式的内涵及研究范式---兼议对外汉语可读性公式的研究任务[J].语言教学与研究,(6):46-53.
[32]闫国利熊建萍臧传丽余莉莉崔磊白学军.2013.阅读研究中的主要眼动指标评述[J].心理科学进展,(4):589-605.
[33]左虹朱勇.2014.中级欧美留学生汉语文本可读性公式研究[J].世界汉语教学,(2):263-276.
①本研究借用Chang(2009)的实验文本。该研究通过测量1)阅读该文本所需要的受教育水平,2)文本总字/词数,以及请专家对3)文本的理解难度(comprehensibility),4)易读性(readability)和5)翻译难度(translatability)评分五个方面来保证英译汉和汉译英源文本的可比性。在缺乏中文易读性公式来直接测量文本难度的情况下(左虹朱勇,2014;王蕾,2008),这一方法较为合理。
②根据眼动研究的惯例(如Hvelplund,2011:110;闫国利等,2013:599),本研究只保留眼动样本加权正确识别率(Weighted Gaze Sample)高于75%的数据。
③CRITT TPR-DB数据库是目前国内外唯一的大型翻译过程研究语料库(Translation Process Research Database,简称TPR-DB)。该库已收录时长超过500小时的译者活动数据。语料来自1400多个实验任务、十余种语言,收录的翻译文本达60余万字/词。由丹麦哥本哈根商学院翻译与翻译技术研究和创新中心及其合作团队共同创建。
④本研究中翻译进程图的观察和标注由两位研究人员一起共同完成。两位研究人员先独立进行初步标注。对初步标注的结果不一致的情况,两位研究人员经过反复讨论、共同观察后形成统一意见,最终形成本研究的标注结果。
⑤图2至图5所展示的是基于最新算法生成的翻译进程图。衷心感谢Michael Carl教授无私地分享生成翻译进程图的最新技术和方法。最新的翻译进程图相对早期的翻译进程图(图1)有很大的改善和进步。图1来源于其已见刊的最新发表相关论文(2013年),但近几年来,翻译进程图的相关研究一直在不断地完善中。如图2所示,最新的翻译进程图有以下改进:1) 增加右侧纵轴显示翻译的最终目标文本。目标文本分词后,按照与源文本进行词/短语对齐后的顺序呈现。2)增加句子切分的界限。如图2中,每一条横线代表源文本句子切分的界限。句子在图中以Seg.标示。3)更加清楚地区分源文本注视点和目标文本注视点。图中方块代表注视点,通过不同颜色来区分。蓝色方块反映对源文本的注视活动,绿色方块反映对目标文本的注视活动(因本刊为黑白印刷,故本文图中不区分蓝绿注视点)。