Of minds and men – computers and translators

• Authors: Ricardo Muñoz Martín
• Languages of publication: EN

Abstracts

EN

Translation process research (TPR) efforts seem at times unconcerned with the theoretical foundations they need to interpret their results. A pervasive theoretical approach within TPR has been the mind-as-computer view. This approach has fostered both mechanistic and functional explanations of the translation process, including semantic notions of meaning, unrealistic constructs of the mental lexicon, and reified notions of equivalence. Some consequences of the approach are illustrated with discussions in the realm of translation quality assessment (automated and combined metrics, rubrics based on error categorization, and the impact of human variables and factors) and the monitor model hypothesis and its recent developments. Alternative approaches that draw from 4EA cognition are sketched that suggest that meaning is encyclopedic; that it is a process that cannot be measured; that the mental lexicon is only an abstraction of a part of (world-) knowledge; and that the tendency to choose default translations follows from the very structure of the brain/mind and the minimax principle.

Keywords

EN

Cognitive translatology; mind-as-computer metaphor; equivalence; translation quality assessment; monitor model

• Publisher: De Gruyter
• Journal: Poznań Studies in Contemporary Linguistics
• Year: 2016
• Volume: 52
• Issue: 2
• Pages: 351-381

Dates

published

2016-06-01

online

2016-06-13

Contributors

author

Ricardo Muñoz Martín

• Universidad de Las Palmas de Gran Canaria

References

• Atkinson, R.C. and R.M. Shiffrin. 1968. “Human memory: A proposed system and its control processes”. In: Spence, K.W. and J.T. Spence (eds.), The psychology of learning and motivation (vol. 2). New York: Academic Press. 89–195.
• Balling, L.W., K.T. Hvelplund and A.C. Sjørup. 2014. “Evidence of parallel processing during translation”. Meta 59(2). 234–259.
• Berkeley, I.S.N. 2008. “What the <0.70, 1.17, 0.99, 1.07> is a symbol?” Minds and Machines 18(1). 93–105.
• Boksem, M.A.S., T.F. Meijman and M.M. Lorist. 2005. “Effects of mental fatigue on attention: An ERP study”. Cognitive Brain Research 25. 107–116.
• Bringsjord, S. 2015. “The symbol grounding problem… remains unsolved”. Journal of Experimental and Theoretical Artificial Intelligence 27(1). 63–72.
• Broccias, C. 2012. “The syntax-lexicon continuum”. In: Nevalainen, T. and E.C. Traugott (eds.), The Oxford handbook of the history of English. New York: Oxford University Press. 735–747.
• Brysbaert, M. and W. Duyck. 2010. “Is it time to leave behind the revised hierarchical model of bilingual language processing after 15 years of service?” Bilingualism: Language and Cognition 13. 359–371.
• Callison-Burch, C., C. Fordyce, P. Koehn, C. Monz and J. Schroeder. 2007. “(Meta-) evaluation of machine translation”. In: Proceedings of the Second Workshop on Statistical Machine Translation. Prague: Association for Computational Linguistics. 136–158. Available at: <>.
• Campitelli, G. 2015. “Memory behavior requires knowledge structures, not memorystores”. Frontiers in Psychology 6. 1696. Available at: <>>.
• Carl, M. 2012. “The CRITT TPR-DB 1.0: A database for empirical human translation process research”. In: O’Brien, S., M. Simard and L. Specia (eds.), Proceedings of the AMTA 2012 Workshop on Post-Editing Technology and Practice (WPTP 2012). Stroudsburg, PA: AMTA. 9–18.
• Carl, M. and B. Dragsted. 2012. “Inside the monitor model: Processes of default and challenged translation production”. Translation: Corpora, computation, cognition 2(1). 127–145.
• Castro Arce, M. 2008. “Procesos de lectura y traducción al traducir” [Reading and comprehension processes at translating]. In: Fernández, M.M. and R. Muñoz (eds.), Aproximaciones cognitivas al estudio de la traducción y la interpretación. Granada: Comares. 31–54.
• Catford, J. C. 1965. A linguistic theory of translation: An essay in applied linguistics. London: Oxford University Press.
• Christoffels, I.K., A.M.B. de Groot and J.F. Kroll. 2006. “Memory and language skills in simultaneous interpreters: The role of expertise and language proficiency”. The Journal of Memory and Language 54(3). 324–45.
• Conde Ruano, T. 2008. Proceso y resultado de la evaluación de traducciones [Evaluating translations – Processes and results]. (PhD dissertation. University of Granada.)
• Conde Ruano, T. 2012. “The good guys and the bad guys: The behavior of lenient and demanding translation evaluators”. Meta 57(3). 763–786.
• Croft, W. 2001. Radical Construction Grammar. Syntactic theory in typological perspective. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
• De Gregoris, G. 2015. “The limits of expectations vs. assessment questionnaire-based surveys on simultaneous interpreting quality: The need for a gestaltic model of perception”. Rivista internazionale di tecnica della traduzione 16. 57–87.
• De Groot, A.M.B. 2000. “A complex-skill approach to translation and interpreting”. In: Tirkkonen-Condit, S. and R. Jääskeläinen (eds.), Tapping and mapping the processes of translation and interpreting. Amsterdam: Benjamins. 53–68.
• De Groot, A.M.B. and I.K. Christoffels. 2007. “Processes and mechanisms of bilingual control: Insights from monolingual task performance extended to simultaneous interpretation”. Journal of Translation Studies 10(1). 17–42.
• Delaney, P.F. and J. Austin. 1998. “Memory as behavior: The importance of acquisition and remembering strategies”. The Analysis of Verbal Behavior 15. 75–91.
• Dijkstra, T. and W.J.B. van Heuven. 2002. “The architecture of the bilingual word recognition system: From identification to decision”. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition 5. 175–197.
• Doherty, S. and S. O’Brien. 2009. “Can MT output be evaluated through eye tracking?” In: Proceedings of MT Summit XII. 214–221.
• Doherty, S., S. O’Brien and M. Carl. 2010. “Eye tracking as an MT evaluation technique”. Machine translation 24(1). 1–13.
• Dragsted, B. 2008. “Computer-aided translation as a distributed cognitive task”. In: Dror, I.E. and S. Harnad (eds.), Cognition distributed: How cognitive technology extends our minds. Philadelphia: Benjamins. 237–256.
• Dragsted, B. 2010. “Coordination of reading and writing processes in translation: An eye on uncharted territory”. In: Shreve, G.M. and E. Angelone (eds.), Translation and cognition. Amsterdam: Benjamins. 41–62.
• Dragsted, B. 2012. “Indicators of difficulty in translation – Correlating product and process data”. Across Languages and Cultures 13(1). 81–98.
• Elman, J.L. 2004. “An alternative view of the mental lexicon”. Trends in Cognitive Sciences 8(7). 301–306.
• Elman, J.L. 2009. “On the meaning of words and dinosaurbones: Lexical knowledge without a lexicon”. Cognitive Science 33. 1–36.
• Elman, J.L. 2011. “Lexical knowledge without a lexicon?” The Mental Lexicon 6(1). 1–33.
• Foss, D.J. and D.T. Hakes. 1978. Psycholinguistics: An introduction to the psychology of language. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
• García, A.M. 2015. “Psycholinguistic explorations of lexical translation equivalents: Thirty years of research and their implications for cognitive translatology”. Translation Spaces 4(1). 9–28.
• Gibbs Jr., R.W. 1984. “Literal meaning and psychological theory”. Cognitive Science 8. 275–304.
• Gibbs Jr., R.W. 1989. “Understanding and literal meaning”. Cognitive Science 13. 243–251.
• Gigerenzer, G. and D.G. Goldstein. 1996. “Mind as computer – Birth of a metaphor”. Creativity Research Journal 9(2/3). 131–144.
• Graham, Y., T. Baldwin, A. Harwood, A. Moffat and J. Zobel. 2012. “Measurement of progress in machine translation”. In: Proceedings of Australasian Language Technology Association Workshop. 70−78. Available at: >.
• Graham, Y., T. Baldwin, A. Moffat and J. Zobel. 2013. “Continuous measurement scales in human evaluation of machine translation”. In: Proceedings of the 7th Linguistic Annotation Workshop and Interoperability with Discourse. 33–41. Available at: <>.
• Grauer, Christian. 2009. Lesen, Verstehen und Übersetzen Kollokationen als Handlungseinheiten der Übersetzungspraxis. Trier: WVT.
• Haiman, J. 1980. “Dictionaries and encyclopedias”. Lingua 50(4). 329–357.
• Halevy, A., P. Norvig and F. Pereira. 2009. “The unreasonable effectiveness of data”. IEEE Intelligent Systems 24(2). 8–12.
• Halverson, S.L. 1997. “The concept of equivalence in translation studies: Much ado about something”. Target 9(2). 207–233.
• Halverson, S.L. 2015. “Cognitive translation studies and the merging of empirical paradigms: The case of ‘literal translation’”. Translation Spaces 4(2). 310 –340.
• Hambleton, R.K. and A.L. Zenisky. 2010. “Translating and adapting tests for cross-cultural assessments”. In: Matsumoto, D. and F.J.R. van de Vijver (eds.), Cross-cultural research methods in psychology. New York: Cambridge University Press. 46–74.
• Harkness J.A., M. Braun, B. Edwards, T.P. Johnson, L. Lyberg, P.P. Mohler, B.E. Pennell and T.W. Smith. 2010. Survey Methods in Multinational, Multiregional, and Multicultural Contexts. Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley.
• Harnad, S. 1990. “The symbol grounding problem”. Physica D(42). 335–346.
• Hobbes, T. 1655. Elementorum philosophiae sectio prima De corpore. Reprinted by W. Molesworth (ed.) in 1839, The english works of Thomas Hobbes of Malmesbury, vol. 1. London: John Bohn.
• Hofstadter, D. 2001. “Epilogue: Analogy as the core of cognition”. In: Gentner, D., K.J. Holyoak and B.N. Kokinov (eds.), The analogical mind: Perspectives from cognitive science. Cambrige, MA: MIT Press. 499–538.
• Horst, S.W. 2011 [1996]. Symbols, computation, and intentionality: A critique of the computational theory of mind. Charleston, SC: CreateSpace.
• Humphreys, G.F. and S.P. Gennari. 2014. “Competitive mechanisms in sentence processing: Common and distinct production and reading comprehension networks linked to the prefrontal cortex”. NeuroImage 84. 354–366.
• Itkonen, E. 2005. Analogy as structure and process. Amsterdam: Benjamins.
• International Test Commission. 2010. International Test Commission Guidelines for Translating and Adapting Tests. Available at: <>.
• Ivir, V. 1981. “Formal correspondence vs. translation equivalence revisited”. Poetics Today 2(4). 51–59.
• Jakobsen, A.L. and K.T.H. Jensen. 2008. “Eye movement behaviour across four different types of reading task”. In: Göpferich, S., A.L. Jakobsen and I.M. Mees (eds.), Looking at eyes. Eye tracking studies of reading and translation processing. Copenhagen: Samfundslitteratur. 103–124.
• Jakobsen, A.L., K.T.H. Jensen and I.M. Mees. 2007. “Comparing modalities: Idioms as a case in point”. In: Pöchhacker, F., A.L. Jakobsen and I.M. Mees (eds.), Interpreting studies and beyond. A tribute to Miriam Shlesinger. Copenhagen: Samfundslitteratur. 217–249.
• Koby, G.S. 2015. “The ATA flowchart and framework as a differentiated error-marking scale in translation teaching”. In: Cui, Y. and W. Zhao (eds.), Handbook of research on teaching methods in language translation and interpretation. Hershey, PA: IGI Global. 220–253.
• Koponen, M. 2012. “Comparing human perceptions of post-editing effort with post-editing operations”. In: Proceedings of the 7th workshop on statistical machine translation. Montréal: Association for Computational Linguistics. 181–190. Available at: <>.
• Krein-Kühle, M. 2014. “Translation and equivalence”. In: House, J. (ed.), Translation: A multidisciplinary approach. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan. 15–35.
• Krings, H.P. 2001. Repairing texts: Empirical investigations of machine translation post-editing processes. Kent, OH: Kent State University Press.
• Kroll, J.F. and E. Stewart. 1994. “Category interference in translation and picture naming: Evidence for asymmetric connections between bilingual memory representations”. Journal of Memory and Language 33. 149–174.
• Lakoff, G. and M. Johnson. 1980. Metaphors we live by. Chicago: Chicago University Press.
• Lamb, S.M. 1999. Pathways of the brain. The neurocognitive basis of language. Amsterdam: Benjamins.
• Langacker, R.W. 2008. Cognitive Grammar. A basic introduction. New York: Oxford University Press.
• Larson, M.L. 1984. Meaning-based translation. A guide to cross-language equivalence. (2nd ed.) Lanham: University Press of America.
• Lederer, M. [1993] 2014. Translation. The interpretive model. (2nd ed. Trans. by N. Larché.) Abingdon: Routledge.
• Lehr, C. 2014. The influence of emotion on language performance – Study of a neglected determinant of decision-making in professional translators. (PhD dissertation, University of Geneva.)
• Levý, J. 1967. “Translation as a decision process”. In: To honor Roman Jakobson (vol. 2). The Hague: Mouton. 1171−1182.
• Linck, J.A., N. Hoshino and J.F. Kroll. 2008. “Cross-language lexical processes and inhibitory control”. The Mental Lexicon 3(3). 349–374.
• Malkiel, B. 2009. “When idioti (idiotic) becomes “fluffy”: Translation students and the avoidance of target language cognates”. Meta 54(2). 309–325.
• Martín de León, C. 2008. “Skopos and beyond. A critical study of functionalism”. Target 20(1). 1–28.
• Martín de León, C. 2010. “Metaphorical models of translation. Transfer vs. imitation and action”. In: St. André, J. (ed.), Thinking through translation with metaphors. Manchester: St. Jerome. 75–108.
• Martín de León, C. 2011. “Translationsmetaphern – Versuch einer methodologischen Brücke zwischen Glaubens-und Handlungsuntersuchung”. In: Schmitt, P.A., S. Herold and A. Weilandt (eds.), Translationsforschung. Frankfurt: Peter Lang. 541–554.
• McCarthy, M. 2006. Explorations in corpus linguistics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
• McCulloch, W.S. and W.H. Pitts. 1943. “A logical calculus of the ideas immanent in nervous activity”. Bulletin of Mathematical Biophysics 5(4). 115–133.
• Mellinger, C.D. 2014. Computer-assisted translation: An empirical investigation of cognitive effort. (PhD dissertation, Kent State University.) Available at: <>.
• Mellinger, C.D. and G.M. Shreve. In press. “Match evaluation and over-editing in a translation memory environment”. In: Muñoz, R. (ed.), Reembedding translation process resarch.
• Miłkowski, M. 2013. Explaining the computational mind. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
• Moon, J. and N. Jiang. 2012. “Non-selective lexical access in different-script bilinguals”. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition 15(1). 173–180.
• Moorkens, J., S. O’Brien, I.A.L. Silva, N. Fonseca and F. Alves. 2015. “Correlations of perceived post-editing effort with measurements of actual effort”. Machine Translation 29(3–4). 267–284.
• Moser-Mercer, B., E. Künzli and M. Korac. 1998. “Prolonged turns in interpreting: Effects on quality, physiological and psychological stress (Pilot study)”. Interpreting 3(1). 47–64.
• Muñoz Martín, R. 2010a. “On paradigms and cognitive translatology”. In: Shreve, G.M. and E. Angelone (eds.), Translation and cognition. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 169–187.
• Muñoz Martín, R. 2010b. “Leave no stone unturned: On the development of cognitive translatology”. Translation and Interpreting Studies 5(2). 145–162.
• Muñoz Martín, R. 2011. “Nomen mihi Legio est: A cognitive approach to Natural Translation”. In: Blasco, M.J. and A. Jiménez (eds.), Interpreting… naturally. Frankfurt: Peter Lang. 35–66.
• Muñoz Martín, R. In press a. “Looking towards the future of cognitive translation studies”. In: Schwieter, J.H. and A. Ferreira (eds.), Wiley’s handbook of translation and cognition.
• Muñoz Martín, R. In press b. “Reembedding translation process research. An introduction”. In: Muñoz, R. (ed.), Reembedding translation process research.
• Muñoz Martín, R. and T. Conde Ruano. 2007. “Effects of serial translation evaluation”. In: Schmitt, P.A. and H.E. Jüngst (eds.), Translationsqualität. Frankfurt: Peter Lang. 428–444.
• Nenonen, M. and E. Penttilä. 2014. “Constructional continuity: (Where) does lexicon turn into syntax?” The Mental Lexicon 9(2). 316–337.
• Neumann, J. von. [1958] 2012 . The computer and the brain. New Haven: Yale University Press.
• Nida, E.A. and C.R. Taber. [1969] 1982. The theory and practice of translation. Leiden: E. J. Brill.
• O’Brien, S. 2012. “Towards a dynamic quality evaluation model for translation”. Jos-Trans 17: 55–77.
• Paradis, M. 1998, “Aphasia in bilinguals: How atypical is it?” In: Coppens, P. and Y. Lebrun (eds.), Aphasia in atypical populations. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum. 35–66.
• Pavlenko, A. 1999. “New approaches to concepts in bilingual memory”. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition 2(3). 209–230.
• Piccinini, G. 2015. Physical computation: A mechanistic account. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
• Piccinini, G. and S. Bahar. 2013. “Neural computation and the computational theory of cognition”. Cognitive Science 37(3). 453–488.
• Pöchhacker, F. 2005. “Quality research revisited”. The Interpreters’ Newsletter 13. 143–166.
• Poeppel, D. 2012. “The maps problem and the mapping problem: Two challenges for a cognitive neuroscience of speech and language”. Cognitive Neuropsychology 29(1– 2). 34–55.
• Popović, M. and A. Burchardt. 2011. “From human to automatic error classification for machine translation output”. In: Forcada, M. L., H. Depraetere and V. Vandeghiste. Proceedings of the 15th Annual Conference of the European Association for Machine Translation. Leuven: EAMT. 265–272. Available at: <>.
• Popović, M., A. Lommel, A. Burchardt, E. Avramidis and H. Uszkoreit. 2014. “Relations between different types of post-editing operations, cognitive effort and temporal effort”. In: Tadić, M., P. Koehn, J. Roturier and A. Way (eds.), Proceedings of the 17th Annual Conference of the European Association for Machine Translation. Dubrovnik: EAMT. 191–198. Available at: <>.
• Price, C.J., D.W. Green and R. von Studnitz. 1999. “A functional imaging study of translation and language switching”. Brain 122(12). 2221–2235.
• Prior, A., S. Wintner, B. MacWhinney and A. Lavie. 2009. “Translation ambiguity in and out of context”. Applied Psycholinguistics 32. 93–111.
• Pulvermüller, F. 2013. “How neurons make meaning: Brain mechanisms for embodied and abstract-symbolic semantics”. Trends in Cognitive Sciences 17(9). 458–470.
• Putnam, H. [1961] 1983. “Brains and behavior”. Reprinted in: Block, N. (ed.), Readings in philosophy of psychology (vol. 1). Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. 24–36.
• Quian Quiroga, R., L. Reddy, G. Kreiman, C. Koch and I. Fried. 2005. “Invariant visual representation by single-neurons in the human brain”. Nature 435. 1102–1107.
• Rayner, K. and C. Clifton Jr. 2002. “Language processing”. In: Medin, D. (ed.) Stevens handbook of experimental psychology (3rd ed., vol. 2, Memory and cognitive processes.) New York: John Wiley. 261–316.
• Rescorla, M. 2015. “The computational theory of mind”. In: Zalta, E.N. (ed.), The Stanford encyclopedia of philosophy. Available at: <>.
• Risku, H. 2013. “Cognitive approaches to translation”. In: Chapelle, C. (ed.), The encyclopedia of applied linguistics. Oxford: Wiley-Blackwell. 1–10.
• Rodriguez, P. 2006. “Talking brains: A cognitive semantic analysis of an emerging folk neuropsychology”. Public Understanding of Science 15(3). 301–330.
• Rojo López, A.M. and M. Ramos Caro. In press. “Can emotion stir translation skill? Defining the impact of positive and negative emotions on translation performance”. In: Muñoz, R. (ed.), Reembedding translation process resarch.
• Ruiz, C., N. Paredes, P. Macizo and M.T. Bajo. 2008. “Activation of lexical and syntactic target language properties in translation”. Acta Psychologica 128(3). 490–500.
• Samani, R. and F. Sharifian. 1997. “Cross-language hierarchical spreading of activation”. In: Sharifian, F. (ed.), Proc. of the Conference on Language, Cognition, and Interpretation. Isfahan: IAU Press. 11–23.
• Schaeffer, M. and M. Carl. 2014. “Measuring the cognitive effort of literal translation processes”. In: Germann, U., M. Carl, P. Koehn, G. Sanchís, F. Casacuberta, R. Hill and S. O’Brien (eds.), Proceedings of the Workshop on Humans and Computer-assisted Translation. Stroudsburg, PA: ACL. 29–37.
• Schmid, H.J. [2014]. “A framework for understanding linguistic entrenchment and its psychological foundations in memory and automatization”. In: Schmid, H.J. (ed.), Entrenchment, memory and automaticity. The psychology of linguistic knowledge and language learning. Boston: APA and Walter de Gruyter. Draft available at: <>.
• Searle, J. R. 1980. “Minds, brains, and programs”. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 3(3). 417–457.
• Secară, A 2005. “Translation evaluation – A state of the art survey”. In: Proceedings of the eCoLoRe/MeLLANGE Workshop, Leeds, 39–44. Available at: <>.
• Shannon, C.E. and W. Weaver. 1949. The mathematical theory of communication. Chicago: University of Illinois Press.
• Shastri, L.2003. “Spreading-activation networks”. In: Nadel, L. (ed.), Encyclopedia of cognitive science (vol. 4). London: Nature Publishing. 211–218.
• Shlesinger, M. and B. Malkiel. 2005. “Comparing modalities: Cognates as a case in point”. Across Languages and Cultures 6(2). 173–193.
• Shreve, G.M., C. Schäffner, J.H. Danks and J. Griffin. 1993. “Is there a special kind of ‘reading’ for translation? An empirical investigation of reading in the translation process”. Target 5(1). 21–41.
• Slobin, D.I. 1987. “Thinking for speaking”. In: Proceedings of the 13th Annual Meeting of the Berkeley Linguistics Society. Berkeley, CA: The Berkeley Linguistics Society. 435–444.
• Slobin, D.I. 1996. “From ‘thought and language’ to ‘thinking for speaking’”. In: Gumperz, J.J. and S.C. Levinson (eds.), Rethinking linguistic relativity. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 70–96.
• Slobin, D.I. 2003. “Language and thought online: Cognitive consequences of linguistic relativity”. In: Gentner, D. and S. Goldin-Meadow (eds.), Language in mind: Advances in the study of language and thought. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. 157–192.
• Snover, M., B. Dorr, R. Schwartz, L. Micciulla and J. Makhoul. 2006. A study of translation edit rate with targeted human annotation. In: Proceedings of the 7th Conference of AMTA. Cambridge, MA: AMTA. 223–231. Available at: <>.
• Snover, M., N. Madnani, B.J. Dorr and R. Schwartz. 2009. “Fluency, adequacy, or HTER? Exploring different human judgments with a tunable MT metric”. In: Proceedings of the Fourth Workshop on Statistical Machine Translation at the 12th Meeting of the EACL. Athens: Association for Computational Linguistics. 259–268. Available at: <>.
• Spivey, M. 2007. The continuity of mind. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
• Steels, L. 2008. “The symbol grounding problem has been solved. So what’s next”. In: de Vega, M., A.M. Glenberg and A.C. Graesser (eds.), Symbols and embodiment: Debates on meaning and cognition. Oxford: Oxford University Press. 223–244.
• Stymne, S., H. Danielsson, S. Bremin, H. Hu, J. Karlsson, A. Prytz Lillkull and M. Wester. 2012. “Eye tracking as a tool for machine translation error analysis”. In: Calzolari, N. et al. (eds.), Proceedings of the 8th International Conference on Language Resources and Evaluation (LREC’12). 1121–1126. Available at: <>.
• Stymne, S. and L. Ahrenberg. 2012. “On the practice of error analysis for machine translation evaluation”. In: Calzolari, N. et al (eds.). Proceedings of the Eight International Conference on Language Resources and Evaluation (LREC’12). 1786–1790. Available at: >.
• Tabakowska, E. 1993. Cognitive linguistics and poetics of translation. Tübingen: Narr.
• Tirkkonen-Condit, S. 1991. “Relational propositions in text comprehension processes”. In: Sajavaara, K., D. Marsh, and T. Keto (eds.). Communication and discourse across cultures and languages. Jyväskylä: AFinLA. 239–246. Available at: <>.
• Tirkkonen-Condit, S. 2005. “The monitor model revisited: Evidence from process research”. Meta 50(2). 405–414.
• Tulving, E. and D.L. Schacter. 1990. “Priming and human memory systems”. Science 247(4940). 301–306.
• Turing, A.M. 1950. “Computing machinery and intelligence”. Mind 59(236). 433–460.
• van der Linden, D., M. Frese and T.F. Meijman. 2003. “Mental fatigue and the control of cognitive processes: Effects on perseveration and planning”. Acta Psychologica 113. 45–65.
• Vygotsky, L.S. 1986. Thought and language. (Trans. by A. Kozulin.) Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.
• Waddington, C. 2001. “Different methods of evaluating student translations: The question of validity”. Meta 46(2). 311–325.
• Weaver, W. 1949. Translation. Typescript. Rockefeller Foundation Archives. Copy available at: <>.
• Westermann, G. and D. Mareschal. 2014. “From perceptual to language-mediated categorization”. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological Sciences 369. 20120391.
• Wittgenstein, L. 1953/1958. Philosophical investigations. (Trans. by G.E.M. Anscombe.) Oxford: Blackwell.
• Yeigh, D.A. 2012. Inhibition and mental effort: A moderation hypothesis. (PhD dissertation, Southern Cross University, Australia.)
• Zwaan, R.A. 2004. “The immersed experiencer: Toward an embodied theory of language comprehension”. In: Ross, B.H. (ed.), The psychology of learning and motivation: Advances in research and theory (vol. 44). New York: Elsevier. 35–62.

Identifiers

DOI

10.1515/psicl-2016-0013