臺灣博碩士論文加值系統

電腦輔助翻譯(computer-aided translation，簡稱CAT)在翻譯產業裡的角色越來越重要。目前針對CAT工具的研究，集中在討論個別功能對於譯者認知有何影響，是否真能如期提升作業效率。尚無研究討論CAT工具的出現，對譯者實際工作過程造成哪些新的挑戰，而公司又該提供哪些訓練協助譯者克服這些挑戰。因此，本論文以目前廣為業界使用的CAT軟體SDL Trados Studio 2014為例，進行放聲思考和半結構式訪談，深入瞭解譯者使用CAT工具翻譯網頁時遇到的問題，以及解決問題的方法。十名受試者均從事廣泛使用CAT技術的本地化產業(localization)，其中五位累積翻譯經驗達三年以上，為資深譯者。
針對實驗和訪談結果，本研究則透過三角檢證(triangulation)，進一步提高研究結果信度。研究發現，譯者在使用CAT工具翻譯網頁時，會遇到五類技術性問題：介面太過複雜，無法查看原文完整上下文和版面，tag妨礙閱讀和產出，concordance檢索耗時，以及翻譯指示過長。遇到不確定的字詞或想要查看上下文時，譯者最常查詢翻譯記憶、翻譯詞庫、原文網頁，也會使用字典和官方網站等線上資源，另外更時常離開翻譯介面去查看翻譯指示。根據這些研究結果，可以發現許多譯者儘管在業界或學界接受過訓練，多數時候仍只會使用基本的查詢功能，忽略了工具其他例如預覽、QA檢查和版面個人化等功能 ，因此在進行譯者訓練時，除了時間不能太短，訓練內容也應該更完整全面，不限縮於基本功能，同時更要提供譯者足夠的自學資源，因應科技的日新月異，如此CAT工具才能真正發揮最大效用。

Recent years have seen the rise of translation technology. Translators nowadays find themselves working with CAT (computer-aided/assisted translation) technology to ensure work efficiency and translation consistency. In response to this trend, some researchers have been looking into how individual CAT features affect the translation process. Their findings suggest that translators need proper training before they can bring translation technology into full play. However, there are few studies examining how translators actually work with CAT tools. The problems translators encounter in a CAT environment and how they solve these problems with tool features or external reference materials may shed light on how to improve CAT-related translator training.
This study aims to partially fill the knowledge gap by examining how translators use SDL Trados Studio 2014 to translate a webpage. Ten translators (five novice and five experienced translators) were recruited for think-aloud tests and semi-structured interviews. A triangulation approach was taken to analyse the difficulties participants faced when working with the CAT tool and the resources they used to come up with solutions. Based on the case study, the researcher puts forward suggestions for CAT-related training.
The case study shows that there are five types of technical problems translators may encounter when translating a webpage in Trados Studio 2014, including complex user interface, decontextualized translation environment, intrusive tags, time-consuming concordance search and lengthy style guides. Translators often search in translation memories, termbases, client’s guidelines as well as source files/webpages when in face of translation problems, and they access many online resources, including bilingual official websites and dictionaries. Despite that CAT tools provide a wide range of features, including preview and contextual cues, to help users with their translation problems, many translators remain unaware of or reluctant to try these features. Therefore, it is necessary for CAT-related training to last longer than just a couple of days, and to provide translators with more comprehensive insights into what translation technologies can do, as well as sufficient self-learning resources, in order to better facilitate human-machine interaction.

Table of Contents
List of Tables vii
List of Figures viii
List of Abbreviations ix
Chapter 1 Introduction 1
1.1 Definition of CAT Tools 1
1.2 Statement of the Problem 4
1.3 Definition of Translation Problems 6
1.4 Definition of Terminologies 6
1.5 Research Questions 8
1.6 Thesis Organization 8
Chapter 2 Literature Review 10
2.1 Problem-solving in Empirical Process-oriented Translation Studies 10
2.1.1 Angelone and Krings: Problem-solving Bundle and Indicators 11
2.1.2 Jääskeläinen and Tirkkonen-Condit: Professional Translation 13
2.1.3 TAP in Empirical Process-oriented Translation Studies 15
2.2 CAT Tools and Translators 17
2.2.1 Influences of CAT Features on the Translation Process 18
2.2.2 How Translators Use CAT Tools 20
2.2.3 Translators’ Perceptions of CAT Tools 22
2.2.4 Translator’s CAT-related Training 23
2.3 Web Localization 25
2.4 Summary 27
Chapter 3 Methodology 30
3.1 Pilot Tests 30
3.2 Participants 31
3.3 CAT Software 33
3.4 Test Materials 38
3.5 Research Design and Procedure 41
3.5.1 Think-aloud Protocol 41
3.5.2 Interview 42
3.5.3 Analysis 45
Chapter 4 Results and Discussions 48
4.1 Types of Technical Problems 48
4.1.1 UI Layout 50
4.1.2 Tags 51
4.1.3 De-contextualization and Segmentation 54
4.1.4 TM/TB: Concordance Search and Pre-translation 57
4.1.5 Format 61
4.1.6 Summary 62
4.2 Types of Solutions 63
4.2.1 TM/TB 64
4.2.2 QuickPlace or Copy Source 66
4.2.3 Online Resources 68
4.2.4 Instructions 71
4.2.4 Summary 72
4.3 Suggestions for Translator’s CAT Training 74
Chapter 5 Conclusions 80
5.1 Summary of Study 80
5.2 Significance 82
5.3 Limitations 83
5.4 Directions for Future Research 84
References 86
Appendices 96
Appendix 1: Consent form 96
Appendix 2: Confidentiality agreement 97
Appendix 3: Instruction for think-aloud experiment 98
Appendix 4: TAP coding scheme 99
Appendix 5: Encoded TAPs 101
Appendix 6: Coding scheme for semi-structured interview 122
Appendix 7: Encoded interview 124
Appendix 8: Table for encoded interview 129
Appendix 9: List of inconsistencies 130

References

Alchemy Software Development Ltd. (2015). Translating XML & HTML content. Retrieved from http://www.alchemysoftware.com/solutions/html_xml.html
Alves, F. (2003). Triangulating translation: Perspectives in process oriented research. Philadelphia, PA: John Benjamins Pub.
Angelone, E. (2010). Uncertainty, uncertainty management and metacognitive problem solving in the translation task. In G. M. Shreve & E. Angelone (Eds), Translation and cognition (pp. 17-40). Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing Company.
Alcina, A., Soler V. & Granell, J. (2007). Translation technology skills acquisition. Perspectives, 15(4), 230-244.
Bernardini, S. (2000). Think-aloud protocols in translation research: Achievements, limits, future prospects. Target, 13(2), 241-263.
Biau Gil, J. R. & Pym, A. (2006). Technology and translation (a pedagogical overview). A. Pym, A. Perekrestenko & B. Starink (Eds.), Translation technology and its teaching (with much mention of localization) (pp. 5-19). Universitat Rovira i Virgili. Retrieved from http://isg.urv.es/library/papers/isgbook.pdf
Bowker, L. & Pearson, J. (2002). Working with specialized language: A practical guide to using corpora. New York: Routledge.
Bowker, L. (2002). Computer-aided translation technology: A practical introduction. Ottawa: University of Ottawa Press.
Bowker, L. (2003). Teaching translation technology: towards an integrated approach. Tradução e comunicação, 12, 65-79.
Bowker, L. (2003). Terminology tools for translators. In H. Somers (Ed.), Computers and translation: A translator''s guide (pp. 49-65). Amsterdam; Philadelphia: John Benjamins Pub. Co.
Bowker, L. (2006). Translation memory and “text.” In L. Bowker (Ed.), Lexicography, terminology and translation (pp. 175-187). Ottawa: University of Ottawa Press.
Bowker, L. & Marshman, E. (2010). Toward a model of active and situated learning in the teaching of computer-aided translation: introducing the CERTT project. Journal of Translation Studies, 13(1 & 2), 199-226.
Bowker, L. (2015). Computer-aided translation: Translator training. In S. Chan (Ed.), The routledge encyclopedia of translation technology (pp. 88-104). London and New York: Routledge.
Chen, T. & Lin, C. (2012)〈2012臺灣翻譯產業調查研究報告〉(2012 Taiwan translation and interpretation industry survey report). Taipei: National Academy for Educational Research.
Christensen, T. P. & Schjoldager, A. (2010). Translation-memory (TM) research: What do we know and how do we know it? Hermes, 44, 89-101.
Christensen, T. P. (2011). Studies on the mental processes in translation memory-assisted translation – the state of the art. Trans-kom, 4 (2), 137-160.
Cooke, L. (2010). Assessing concurrent think-aloud protocol as a usability test method: A technical communication approach. IEEE Transactions on professional communication, 53(3), 202-215.
Cronin, M. (2003). Translation and globalization. New York: Routledge.
DePalma, D. A. (2006). Quantifying the return on localization investment. In K. J. Dunne (Ed.), Perspectives on localization (pp. 15-36). Philadelphia: J. Benjamins Pub. Co.
Désilets, A., Melançon, C., Patenaude, G., & Brunette, L. (2009). How translators use tools and resources to resolve translation problems: an ethnographic study. Paper presented at the Workshop Beyond Translation Memories: New Tools for Translators, Machine Translation Summit XII, Ottawa.
Dragsted, B. (2004). Segmentation in translation and translation memory systems – An empirical investigation of cognitive segmentation and effects of integrating a TM system into the translation process. (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). Copenhagen Business School, Samfundslitteratur.
Dragsted, B. (2006). Computer-aided translation as a distributed cognitive task. Pragmatics & Cognition, 14 (2), 443-464.
EAGLES (1995). Design and function of translation memory. Retrieved from http://www.issco.unige.ch/en/research/projects/ewg95/node152.html
Elling, S., Lentz, L., & de Jong, M. (2012). Combining concurrent think-aloud protocols and eye-tracking observations: An analysis of verbalizations and silences. IEEE transactions on professional communication, 55(3), 206-220.
Ericsson, K. A. & Simon, H. A. (1993). Protocol analysis: Verbal reports as data. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press.
Esselink, B. (2000). A practical guide to localization. Amsterdam; Philadelphia: John Benjamins Pub. Co.
Esselink, B. (2003). Localisation and translation. In H. Somers (Ed.), Computers and translation: A translator''s guide (pp. 67-86). Amsterdam; Philadelphia: John Benjamins Pub. Co.
Fernández Costales, A. (2008). Translation 2.0. The localization of institutional websites under the scope of functionalist approaches. In Dries de Crom (Ed.) Translation and the (trans)formation of identities: Selected papers of the cetra research seminar in translation studies 2008. Retrieved from https://www.arts.kuleuven.be/cetra/papers/files/fernandez-costales.pdf
GALA (2015a). What is Localization? Retrieved from: https://www.gala-global.org/language-industry/intro-language-industry/what-localization
GALA (2015b). Language Technology. Retrieved from: https://www.gala-global.org/language-industry/language-technology
García, I. (2006). Translators on translation memories: A blessing or a curse? In A. Pym, A. Perekrestenko & B. Starink (Eds.), Translation technology and its teaching (with much mention of localization) (pp. 97-105). Universitat Rovira i Virgili. Retrieved from http://isg.urv.es/library/papers/isgbook.pdf
García, I. (2010). Is machine translation ready yet? Target, 22 (1), 7-21.
García, I. (2015). Computer-aided translation: Systems. In S. Chan (Ed.), The routledge encyclopedia of translation technology. (pp. 68-87). London and New York: Routledge.
Gerloff, P. (1988). From French to English: A look at the translation process in students, bilinguals, and professional translators. (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). University Microfilms International, Ann Arbor.
GetApp (2015). Smartling Reviews, Pricing & Comparison of Alternatives. Retrieved from https://www.getapp.com/marketing-software/a/smartling/
Hansen, G. (2006). Time pressure in translation teaching and translation studies. In S. Kasar Öztürk (Ed.), Interdisciplinarité en traduction. Vol. II (pp. 71-80). Istanbul: Isis.
Helpmax Guide Source (2012). Translation editor. Retrieved from http://memoq.helpmax.net/en/reference-guide/translation-editor/
Heyn, M. (1998). Translation memories: Insights and prospects. In L. Bowker, M. Cronin, D. Kenny & J. Pearson (Eds.), Unity in diversity? Current trends in translation studies (pp. 123-136). Manchester: St. Jerome Publishing.
Huang, C.-T. J. (1989). Pro-drop in Chinese: A generalized control theory. In O. Jaeggli and K. Safir (Eds.), The null subject parameter (pp 185-214). Dordrecht, Boston, London: Kluwer Academic Publisher.
Jääskeläinen, R. & Tirkkonen-Condit, S. (1991). Automatised processes in professional vs. non-professional translation: a think-aloud protocol study. In S. Tirkkonen-Condit (Ed.). Empirical research in translation and intercultural studies (pp. 89-109). Tübingen: Gunter Narr Verlag.
Jääskeläinen, R. (1989). Translation assignment in professional vs. non-professional translation: A think-aloud protocol study. In C. Séguinot (Ed.), The translation process (pp. 87-98). New York: H. G. Publications, York University.
Jääskeläinen, R. (1990). Features of successful translation processes: a think-aloud protocol study (Unpublished licentiate thesis). University of Joensuu, Joensuu.
Jääskeläinen, R. (1993). Investigating translation strategies. In S. Tirkkonen-Condit & J. Laffling (Eds.), Recent trends in empirical translation research (pp. 99-120). Joensuu: University of Joensuu Faculty of Arts.
Jääskeläinen, R. (2000). Focus on methodology in think-aloud studies on translation. In S. Tirkkonen-Condit & R. Jääskeläinen (Eds.), Tapping and mapping the processes of translation and interpreting: Outlooks on empirical research (pp. 71-82). Philadelphia: J. Benjamins.
Jääskeläinen, R. (2010). Are all professionals experts? In G. M. Shreve & E. Angelone (Eds), Translation and cognition (pp. 213-227). Philadelphia: John Benjamins Pub. Co.
Jääskeläinen, R. (2011). Studying the translation process. In K. Malmkjaer & K. Windle (Eds.), The oxford handbook of translation studies (pp. 123-135). Oxford University Press.
Jaatinen, H. & Immonen, J. (2004). Finnish university meets needs of translation industry. Multilingual Computing & Technology 15(4), 37-40.
Jaatinen, H. & Jääskeläinen, R. (2006). Introducing IT in translator training: Experiences from the COLC project. In A. Pym, A. Perekrestenko & B. Starink (Eds.), Translation technology and its teaching (with much mention of localization) (pp. 83-88). Universitat Rovira i Virgili. Retrieved from http://isg.urv.es/library/papers/isgbook.pdf
Jakobsen, A. L. (2003). Effects of think aloud on translation speed, revision and segmentation. In F. Alves (Ed.), Triangulating translation: Perspectives in process oriented research (pp. 69-95). Philadelphia, PA: John Benjamins Pub.
Jensen, A. & Jakobsen, A. L. (2000). Translating under time pressure: An empirical investigation of problem-solving activity and translation strategies by non-professional and professional translators. In A. Chesterman, N. Gallardo San Salvador & Y. Gambier (Eds.), Translation in context: selected contributions from the EST congress, Granada, 1998 (pp. 105-116). Philadelphia: J. Benjamins.
Jiménez-Crespo, M. A. (2007). Web genres in localisation: A Spanish corpus study. Localisation Focus - The International Journal of Localisation, 6(1), 4-14.
Jiménez-Crespo, M. A. (2010). The effect of Translation Memory tools in translated Web texts: Evidence from a comparative product-based study. In W. Daelemans and V. Hoste (Eds.) Evaluation of translation technology (pp. 213-232). Antwerp, Belgium: Artesis University College Antwerp Department of Translators & Interpreters.
Jiménez-Crespo, M. A. (2011). To adapt or not to adapt in web localization: A contrastive genre-based study of original and localized legal sections in corporate websites. Jostrans, 15, 2-27. Retrieved from http://www.jostrans.org/issue15/art_jimenez.php
Jiménez-Crespo, M. A. (2012). “Loss” or “lost” in translation: a contrastive genre based study of original and localised US non-profit websites. Jostrans, 17, 136-163. Retrieved from http://www.jostrans.org/issue17/art_jimenez.php
Jiménez-Crespo, M. A. (2013). Translation and web localization. London; New York: Routledge.
Kaiser-Cooke, M. (1994). Translatorial expertise — A cross-cultural phenomenon from an interdisciplinary perspective. In M. Snell-Hornby et al. (Eds.), Translation studies. An interdiscipline (pp. 135-139). Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins.
Kiraly, D. (2000). A social constructivist approach to translator education. Manchester: St. Jerome Publishing.
Krings, Hans P. (1986). Translation problems and translation strategies of advanced German learners of French (L2). In J. House & S. Blum-Kulka (Eds), Interlingual and intercultural communication: Discourse and cognition in translation and second language acquisition studies (pp. 263-76). Tübingen: Gunter Narr Verlag.
Lagoudaki, E. (2006). Translation memory systems: Enlightening user''s perspective. Translation Memories Survey 2006, Imperial College, London. Retrieved from https://www.bk.admin.ch/dokumentation/sprachen/04850/05007/05605/index.html?download=NHzLpZeg7t,lnp6I0NTU042l2Z6ln1ah2oZn4Z2qZpnO2Yuq2Z6gpJCFdoJ9g2ym162epYbg2c_JjKbNoKSn6A--&lang=it
Langewis, C. (2002). What is translation technology? Multilingual, 51 Supplement, 4-10. Retrieved from: https://multilingual.com/wp-content/downloads/screenSupp51.pdf
Leiva, L. A., & Alabau, V. (2014). The impact of visual contextualization on UI localization. Paper presented at The SIGCHI conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI).
Li, D. (2004). Trustworthiness of think-aloud protocols in the study of translation processes. International Journal of Applied Linguistics, 14(3), 301-313.
LISA (2004). 2004 translation memory survey. Retrieved from http://www.lisa.org/products/surveys/tm02survey.html
LISA (2007). The globalization industry primer: An introduction to preparing your business and products for success in international markets. The Localization Industry Standards Association (LISA). Retrieved from: https://www.academia.edu/3179195/The_globalization_industry_primer
Lörscher, W. (1991). Translation performance, translation process, and translation strategies. A psycholinguistic investigation. Tübingen, Narr.
Lörscher, W. (1992). Process-oriented research into translation and implications for translation teaching. Traduction, Terminologie, Rédaction (TTR), 5 (1), 145-161.
Lörscher, W. (2002). A model for the analysis of translation processes within a framework of systemic linguistics. Cadernos de Traducao, 10 (2), 97-112.
Lossner, K. (Oct, 22, 2011). Compatibility workflows with the memoQ Translator Pro edition (Part 1). Retrieved from http://www.translationtribulations.com/2011/10/compatibility-workflows-with-memoq.html
Macklovitch, E. & Russell, G. (2000). What’s been forgotten in translation memory. In J. White (Ed.), Envisioning machine translation in the information future (pp. 137-146). AMTA 2000: Proceedings of the 4th Conference of the Association for Machine Translation in the Americas; Cuernavaca, Mexico, October 10-14, 2000. Berling: Springer.
Mossop, B. (2006). Has computerization changed translation? META, 51(4), 787-793.
Munday, J. (2012). Evaluation in translation: critical points of translator decision-making. Abingdon, Oxon; New York: Routledge.
Neubert, A. & Shreve, G. (1992). Translation as text. Kent, OH: Kent State University Press.
O’Brien, S., O’Hagan M. & Flanagan, M. (2010). Keeping an eye on the UI design of translation memory: How do translators use the ‘concordance’ feature? Paper presented at European Conference on Cognitive Ergonomics.
O''Brien, S. (2008). Processing fuzzy matches in translation memory tools: An eye-tracking analysis. In S. Göpferich, A. L. Jakobsen & I. M. Mees (Eds.), Looking at eyes: Eye-tracking studies of reading & translation processing (pp. 79-102). Copenhagen: Samfundslitteratur.
Pym, A. (2010). Localization. In Exploring translation theories (pp. 117-137). NY; London: Routledge.
Pym, A. (2011a). Website localization. In K. Malmkjær & K. Windle (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of translation studies. (pp. 410-24). New York: Oxford University Press.
Pym, A. (2011c). Democratizing translation technologies - the role of humanistic research. Paper presented at the Luspio Translation Automation Conference, Rome. Retrieved from: http://usuaris.tinet.cat/apym/on-line/research_methods/2011_rome.pdf
Pym, Anthony (2011b): What technology does to translating? Translation & Interpreting, 3(1), 1-9.
Quah, C. K. (2006). Translation and technology. New York: Palgrave Macmillan.
Sager, J.C. (1994). Language engineering and translation: Consequences of automation. Amsterdam: John Benjamin.
Samson, R. (2005). Computer assisted translation. In M. Tennent (Ed.), Training for the new millennium: Pedagogies for translation and interpreting (PP. 101-26). Amsterdam, Philadelphia: John Benjamin.
Sandrini, P. (2005). Website localization and translation. Paper presented at the MuTra: Challenges of Multidimensional Translation, Saarbrücken.
Schmitt, E. (2000). The multilingual site blueprint. Cambridge, MA: Forrester Research.
SDL International (2014). KB #4494 | Know How: Concordance Search in SDL Trados Studio. Retrieved from http://producthelp.sdl.com/kb/Articles/4494.html
SDL plc. (2015). SDL Trados Studio 2015. Retrieved from http://www.sdl.com/cxc/language/translation-productivity/trados-studio/
SDL plc. (Aug. 25, 2010). How to use QuickPlace. Retrieved from http://producthelp.sdl.com/SDL%20Trados%20Studio/client_en/Edit_View/How_to_Use_QuickPlace.htm
Séguinot, C. (1989). The translation process: An experimental study. In C. Séguinot (Ed.), The translation process (pp. 21- 53). Toronto: H. G. Publications.
Séguinot, C. (2000). Management issues in the translation process. In Tirkkonen-Condit, S., & Jääskeläinen, R. (Ed.), Tapping and mapping the processes of translation and interpreting: Outlooks on empirical research (pp. 143-148). Philadelphia: J. Benjamins.
Shih, C. (2015). Translation technology in Taiwan: Track and trend. In S. Chan (Ed.), The routledge encyclopedia of translation technology (pp. 337-351). London and New York: Routledge.
Shih, W. (2008).〈台灣地區筆譯工作者運用翻譯工具之現況〉(Translation tools: A survey of their adoption by Taiwan-based translators) (Unpublished master’s thesis). National Taiwan Normal University. Taipei.
Sikes, R. & Zerfaß, A. (2014). SDL Trados 2014. MultiLingua,l 25(4), 13.
Sinclair, J. M. (1991). Sinclair corpus concordance collocation. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Sirén, S. & Hakkarainen, K. (2002). Expertise in translation, across languages and cultures. A Multidisciplinary Journal for Translation and Interpreting Studies, 3(1), 71-82.
Smartling (2015). Website Translation Tool. Retrieved from https://www.smartling.com/translation-software/website-translation-tool/
Sofer, M. (2009). The translator''s handbook. Rockville: Schreiber Publishing.
Somers, H. (2003). The translator’s workstation. In H. Somers (Ed.), Computers and translation: A translator''s guide (pp. 67-86). Amsterdam; Philadelphia: John Benjamins Pub. Co.
Shuttleworth, M. Teaching localization via e-learning: developing and delivering an e-course on software localization at Imperial College London. Journal of Translation Studies, 13(1 & 2), 3-12.
Tirkkonen-Condit, S & Laukkanen, J. (1996). Evaluations – A Key to understanding the affective dimension of translational decisions. META, 4 (1), 45-59.
Tirkkonen-Condit, S. (1990). Professional vs. non-professional translation: A think-aloud protocol study. In M. A. K. Halliday, J. Gibbons & H. Nicholas (Eds.), Learning, keeping and using language: Selected papers from the Eighth World Congress of Applied Linguistics, Sydney, 16–21 August 1987 (Vol. 2). Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing.
Tirkkonen-Condit, S. (1992). The interaction of world knowledge and linguistic knowledge in the processes of translation. A think-aloud protocol study. In B. Lewandowska-Tomaszczyk & M. Thelen (Eds.), Translation and meaning, Part 2 (pp. 433-440). Maastrict, Rijkshogeschool Maastricht, Faculty of Translation and Interpreting.
Tirkkonen-Condit, S. (2000). Uncertainty in translation processes. In S. Tirkkonen-Condit, & R. Jääskeläinen (Eds.), Tapping and mapping the processes of translation and interpreting: Outlooks on empirical research (pp. 123-142). Philadelphia: J. Benjamins.
Tirkkonen-Condit, S. (2005). The monitor model revisited: Evidence from process research. META, 50 (2), pp. 405-414.
Toudic, D. (2012). The optimal employer survey and consultations. Retrieved from http://www.ressources.univ-rennes2.fr/service-relations-internationales/optimale/attachments/article/52/WP4_Synthesis_report.pdf
University of Helsinki (2011). Translation technology. Retrieved from http://www.helsinki.fi/kaannostiede/english/studies/technology.html
Wilss, W. (1996), Knowledge and skills in translator behavior. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publishing Company.