Suulisest ja kirjalikust tõlkest lõppteksti ja tõlkeprotsessi põhjal

Marju Taukar, Reeli Pärn, Anna Kaplina, Marianne Ots, Gristel Pihlakas


Eestis ei ole suulist ja kirjalikku tõlget seni koos uuritud, kuid nende tõlkevaldkondade üheskoos uurimine võimaldab saada teadmisi mõlema kohta. Viisime läbi empiirilise uuringu tõlkide ja tõlkijatega, kes tõlkisid kõik sama lähteteksti, ning salvestasime nende tõlkimisprotsessi. Tõlkijate tööprotsessi vaatlemiseks kasutasime ekraanipildi salvestamist. See võimaldas juurdepääsu tõlkijate otsestele töömeetoditele, veebiotsingutele ja eneseparandustele. Suulist tõlget uurisime audiosalvestiste abil. Lisaks analüüsisime ka valmistõlkeid. Artiklis käsitleme tõlkeid ja tõlkimisprotsessi üldiselt, vaatleme asesõnade ja võõrsõnade kasutamist ning eneseparandusi tõlkimisprotsessi ajal ja selle järel. Keskseks teemaks on suuliste ja kirjalike tõlkijate erinev lähenemine tõlkimisele, lahendused keerukates kohtades ning tõlkimisprotsess. Selline vaatenurk avab tõlkimise uurimisel uusi võimalusi ning avardab arusaama tõlkimise olemusest.


Some topics in translation and interpreting research

The article describes some findings of a pilot study in the field of translation and interpreting studies. 4 translators and 5 interpreters translated the same source text from English into Estonian. Their translation process was recorded either as an audio recording (for interpreters) or screen recording (for translators) and all texts were collected. As interpreting research is so far basically missing in Estonia and translation process research is also in the beginning stages, the study is to a large extent exploratory and tentative. We looked into the use of pronouns, of which only demonstrative pronouns showed a difference in usage that could not be explained by the nature of the task. We also analysed whether there was any use of literal translation as a strategy, also to understand how the translator’s and interpreter’s mind works to find solutions for certain translation problems. The translation of cultural items being the most difficult part in the translation task used, we studied the problem-solving strategies and decisions translators and interpreters made. The translation process data was most intensively used to study self-corrections in the translator’s work process. This revealed some interesting patterns in the translator’s working habits, which could definitely be elaborated and researched further.

All in all, we find that it makes a lot of sense to study these two areas of translation together and the best way to encourage it would be compiling a proper (longterm) corpus of product and process data. The advances in such research would be most appreciated in the didactic environment but it would also be an important addition to translation studies and translation tools development.


translation of applied texts, simultaneous translation, written translation, translation process, demonstrative pronouns, cultural items, self-repair, Estonian

Full Text:



Anthony, Lawrence 2014. AntConc. Tokyo: Weseda University. (15.3.2018).

Bernardini, Silvia; Ferraresi, Adriano; Miličević, Maja 2016. From EPIC to EPTIC – Exploring simplification in interpreting and translation from an intermodal perspective. – Target, 28 (1), 61–86.

Carl, Michael; Buch-Kromann, Matthias 2010. Correlating translation product and translation process data of professional and student translators. – Proceedings of the 14th Annual Conference of the European Association for Machine Translation, Saint Raphael, France. (15.3.2018).

Dragsted, Barbara; Hansen, Inge 2009. Exploring translation and interpreting hybrids. The case of sight translation. – Meta: Journal des traducteurs / Meta: Translators’ Journal, 54 (3), 588–604.

Englund Dimitrova, Birgitta 2005. Expertise and Explicitation in the Translation Process. John Benjamins Publishing.

Englund Dimitrova, Birgitta; Tiselius, Elisabet 2014. Retrospection in interpreting and translation: Explaining the process? (30.9.2017).

Ferraresi, Adriano; Miličević, Maja 2017. Phraseological patterns in interpreting and translation. Similar or different? – Gert De Sutter, Marie-Aude Lefer, Isabelle Delaere (Eds.), Empirical Translation Studies: New Methodological and Theoretical Traditions. De Gruyter, 157–182.

Gile, Daniel 2004. Translation research vs. interpreting research: Kinship, differences and prospects for partnership. – Christina Schäffner (Ed.), Translation Research and Interpreting Research. Clevedon, Buffalo, Toronto: Multilingual Matters, 10–34.

Gile, Daniel 2015. The contributions of cognitive psychology and psycholinguistics to conference interpreting. – Aline Ferreira, John W. Schwieter (Eds.), Psycholinguistic and Cognitive Inquiries into Translation and Interpreting. Benjamins Translation Library. John Benjamins Publishing Company, 41–64.

Hvelplund, Kristian Tangsgaard 2017. Eye tracking in translation process research. – John W. Schwieter, Aline Ferreira (Eds.), Handbook of Translation and Cognition. Wiley-Blackwell, 248–264.

Immonen, Sini; Mäkisalo, Jukka 2010. Pauses reflecting the processing of syntactic units in monolingual text production and translation. – Hermes: Journal of Language and Communication Studies, 44, 44–61.

Korpal, Paweł 2016. Interpreting as a stressful activity: Physiological measures of stress in simultaneous interpreting. – Poznan Studies in Contemporary Linguistics, 52 (2), 297–316.

Kumar, Krishan 2003. The Making of English National Identity. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Malkiel, Brenda 2009. From Ántonia to My Ántonia: Tracking self-corrections with Translog. – Susanne Göpferich, Arnt Lykke Jakobsen, Inger M. Mees (Eds.), Behind the Mind. Methods, Models and Results in Translation Process Research. Frederiksberg: Samfundslitteratur Press, 149–166.

Oster, Katharina 2017. The influence of self-monitoring on the translation of cognates. – Silvia Hansen-Schirra et al. (Eds.), Empirical Modelling of Translation and Interpreting. Berlin: Language Science Press, 23–39.

Pöchhacker, Franz 2011. Conference Interpreting. – Kirsten Malmkjær, Kevin Windle (Eds.), The Oxford Handbook of Translation Studies. Oxford University Press.

Puusepp, Margus 2013. Suuline tõlge. Tallinn: Eesti Keele Sihtasutus.

Raudvere, Uku; Uiboaed, Kristel 2017. Analüüs EstNLTK-ga. Tartu Ülikooli raamatukogu.

Shlesinger, Miriam; Malkiel, Brenda 2005. Comparing modalities: Cognates as a case in point. – Across Languages and Cultures, 6 (2), 173–193.

Tirkkonen-Condit, Sonja 2002. Translationese – a myth or an empirical fact? A study into the linguistic identifiability of translated language. – Target, 14 (2), 207–220.

Tirkkonen-Condit, Sonja 2005. The Monitor Model revisited: Evidence from process research. – Meta : Journal des traducteurs / Meta : Translators’ Journal, 50 (2), 405–414.



  • There are currently no refbacks.

Copyright (c) 2018 Marju Taukar, Reeli Pärn, Anna Kaplina, Marianne Ots, Gristel Pihlakas

Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.

ISSN 1736-2563 (print)
ISSN 2228-0677 (online)
DOI 10.5128/ERYa.1736-2563