Communicative Situations and Scenarios across Socio-technical Contexts of In-house Translation Departments at Industrial Enterprises
https://doi.org/10.24224/2227-1295-2025-14-1-52-76
Abstract
This article presents a descriptive study based on a series of interviews (11 h 37 min) with translators at seven different enterprises located in the Chelyabinsk region, Russia. It focuses on translation decision-making processes in hybrid environments combining face-to-face and mediated interaction. The objective of this study is to identify the differences and similarities in the communicative situations described by the translators, and to establish categories to describe the ways socio-technical contexts affect the translators’ expert actions. A review of studies that apply actor-network theory (ANT) to study translation workflows across diverse production contexts is presented. Drawing on Skopos theory and ANT, the authors identify two types of scenarios in translators’ interactions with a variety of actors, including technologies that influence translation activity during skopos specification, target-text production, and quality control. The authors argue that the principal aim of the translation departments’ individual information infrastructure is to mitigate uncertainty in the decision-making process. This study demonstrates how translators augment their work environment to optimize expert performance using technological and organizational solutions. Possible ways to enhance the efficiency of translation departments at industrial enterprises are discussed.
Supporting agencies: This study was funded by the Russian Science Foundation, Grant № 23-28-10218, https://rscf.ru/en/project/23-28-10218/, and the Chelyabinsk Region of the Russian Federation, and was conducted at Chelyabinsk State University
About the Authors
E. S. Krasnopeyeva
Chelyabinsk State University
Russian Federation
Russian Federation
Ekaterina S. Krasnopeyeva - PhD in Philology, Associate Professor, Department of Translation Theory and Practice; Senior Researcher.
Chelyabinsk
S. S. Kraeva
Chelyabinsk State University
Russian Federation
Russian Federation
Svetlana S. Kraeva - PhD in Philology, Associate Professor, Department of Translation Theory and Practice.
Chelyabinsk
References
1. Abdallah, K. (2011). Quality problems in AVT production networks: reconstructing an actor-network in the subtitling industry. In: Audiovisual Translation in Close-Up: Practical and Theoretical Approaches. Bern, Switzerland: Peter Lang Verlag. 173—186. ISBN 978-3-0343-1151-9.
2. Abdallah, K., Koskinen, K. (2007). Managing trust: translating and the network economy. Meta, 52 (4): 673—687. DOI: 10.7202/017692ar.
3. Atlas of Emerging Jobs 2.0. (2015). In: Agency for Strategic Initiatives. Moscow. Available at: https://asi.ru/reports/43426/ (accessed 07.08.2024). (In Russ.).
4. Basov, N., Minina, V. (2018). Personal communication ties and organizational collaborations in networks of science, education, and business. Journal of Business and Technical Communication, 32 (3): 373—405. DOI: 10.1177/10506519187620.
5. Callon, M. (2017). Some elements of a sociology of translation: Domestication of the scallops and the fishermen of St. Brieuc Bay. “Logos” Russian Journal of Philosophy and Humanities, 27 (2): 49—94. (In Russ.)
6. Calvo, E. (2018). From translation briefs to quality standards: Functionalist theories in today’s translation processes. Translation & Interpreting: The International Journal of Translation and Interpreting Research, 10 (1): 18—32. DOI: 10.12807/ti.110201.2018.a02.
7. Chistova, E. V. (2024). Translation design as a professional cognitive-communicative activity, research method and teaching approach (The case of audiovisual products). Chelovek: obraz i sushchnost. Gumanitarnye aspekty [Human being: image and essence. Humanitarian aspects], 2 (58): 106—122. DOI: 10.31249/chel/2024.02.06. (In Russ.).
8. Dam, H., Zethsen, K. (2014). The translator as expert — a realistic or an idealistic model? How recent empirical findings fit into existing models of translation. Across Languages and Cultures, 15 (2): 261—278. DOI: 10.1556/Acr.15.2014.2.5.
9. Decuypere, M. (2020). Visual Network Analysis: A qualitative method for researching socio-material practice. Qualitative Research, 20 (1): 73—90. DOI: 10.1177/1468794118816613.
10. Dyomochkina, V. V., Gruzdev, D. Yu., Lukyanova, E. V. (2024). Machine translation in hindsight. Research Result. Theoretical and Applied Linguistics, 10 (2): 21—45. DOI: 10.18413/2313-8912-2024-10-2-0-2.
11. Kharkhordin, O. V. (2021). Foreword to the first Russian edition. In: Latour, B. We Have Never Been Modern. St. Petersburg: Publishing House of the European University in St. Petersburg. 9—68. ISBN 978-5-94380-284-3. (In Russ.).
12. Kim, J. Y. (2022). Actors, networks and skopos of mobile game localization: Doctoral dissertation. London: University of Roehampton. 325 p.
13. Kirsh, D. (1995). The intelligent use of space. Artificial intelligence, 73 (1—2): 31—68. DOI: 10.1016/0004-3702(94)00017-U.
14. Krasnopeyeva, E. S., Kraeva, S. S. (2023). Network Nature of Translation Constellations: Translation Department at a Regional Commercial Enterprise. Nauchnyi dialog, 12 (8): 156—178. https://doi.org/10.24224/2227-1295-2023-12-8-156-178 (In Russ.).
15. Latour, B. (2011). Networks, societies, spheres: Reflections of an actor-network theorist. International Journal of Communication, 5: 796—810. DOI: 1932–8036/20110796.
16. Latour, B. (2020). Reassembling the social: An introduction to actor-network-theory. Moscow: Publishing House of the Higher School of Economics. 384 p. ISBN 978-5- 7598-2141-0. (In Russ.).
17. Luo, W. (2018). A literary translation as a translation project: A case study of Arthur Waley’s translation of Journey to the West: Doctoral dissertation. Durham: Durham University. 306 p.
18. Marshman, E. (2014). Taking control: Language professionals and their perception of control when using language technologies. Meta, 59 (2): 380—405. DOI: 10.7202/1027481ar.
19. Mityagina, V. A. (2017). Socio-Pragmatic Measurement of Translatology Paradigm : Communicative Action in Translation. Vestnik Volgogradskogo gosudarstvennogo universiteta. Seriya 2, Yazykoznanie [Science Journal of Volgograd State University. Linguistics], 16 (3): 30—40. DOI: https://doi.org/10.15688/jvolsu2.2017.3. (In Russ.).
20. Nefedova, L. A., Krasnopeyeva, E. S., Kraeva, S. S. (2022). E-politeness in student requests to faculty: A view from a regional Russian university in the midst of a pandemic. Philological Sciences. Scientific Essays of Higher Education, 2: 34—42. DOI: 10.20339/PhS.2-22.034.
21. Nord, C. (2016). Skopos and (un)certainty: how functional translators deal with doubt. Me-ta, 61 (1): 29—41. DOI: 10.7202/1036981ar.
22. O’Brien, S. (2022). Translation technology — the dark horse of translation? In: 50 Years Later. What Have We Learnt after Holmes (1972) and Where Are We Now? Las Palmas de Gran Canaria: Universidad de Las Palmas de Gran Canaria. 93—104. ISBN 978-84-9042-461-2.
23. Pöchhacker, F. (1995). Simultaneous interpreting: A functionalist perspective. HERMES — Journal of Language and Communication in Business, 14: 31—53. DOI: 10.7146/hjlcb.v8i14.25094.
24. Prunč, E. (2015). Lines of development in translation studies from the asymmetries of languages to the asymmetries of power. Moscow: R. Valent. 512 p. ISBN 978-5-93439-488-3. (In Russ.).
25. Remkhe, I. N. (2024). Matrix-Network Modeling of Translation Communication from Perspective of Eco-Translatology. Nauchnyi dialog, 13 (3): 72—88. https://doi.org/10.24224/2227-1295-2024-13-3-72-88 (In Russ.).
26. Risku, H. (2023). Socio-cognitive translation studies. 2023 CETRA Summer School. 11 October 2023. Available at: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v94H_c9cYcU (accessed 1.08.2024).
27. Risku, H., Rogl, R., Pein-Weber, C. (2016). Mutual dependencies: Centrality in translation networks. The Journal of Specialised Translation, 25 (1): 232—253.
28. Risku, H., Windhager, F. (2013). Extended translation: A sociocognitive research agenda. Target. International Journal of Translation Studies, 25 (1): 33—45. DOI: 10.1075/target.25.1.04ris.
29. Schweitzer, A. D. (2019). Theory of translation: status, problems, aspects. 4th ed., ster. Moscow: URSS. 216 p. ISBN 978-5-9710-5650-8. (In Russ.).
30. Sdobnikov, V. V. (2022). Translation and the communicative situation: monograph. Moscow: FLINT. 463 p. ISBN 978-5-9765-2112-4. (In Russ.).
31. Shamilov, R. M. (2023). What is a need-centered translation? LUNN Bulletin, 1 (61): 116—135. DOI: 10.47388/2072-3490/lunn2023-61-1-116-135. (In Russ.).
32. Shamilov, R. M., Sdobnikov, V. V. (2019). Communicative Situation and Linguistic Composition of a Target text in Specialised Translation: Contextual and Conceptual Aspect. Nauchnyi dialog, 1: 165—177. https://doi.org/10.24224/2227-1295-2019-1-165-177 (In Russ.).
33. Snell-Hornby, M. (2006). The turns of Translation Studies. New paradigms or shifting view-points? Amsterdam, Philadelphia: John Benjamin Publishing Company. 219 p. ISBN 978-90-2721-673-1.
34. Vermeer, H. J. (2012). Skopos and commission in translational action (1989). In: The Translation Studies Reader. London, New York: Routledge. 191—202. ISBN 978-0-415-61347-7.
35. Zwilling, M. Ya. (2009). The concept of translation constellation. In: About translation and translators. Collection of scientific articles. Moscow: Vostochnaya kniga. 116—123. ISBN 978-5-7873-0442-8. (In Russ.).
Review
For citations:
Krasnopeyeva E.S., Kraeva S.S. Communicative Situations and Scenarios across Socio-technical Contexts of In-house Translation Departments at Industrial Enterprises. Nauchnyi dialog. 2025;14(1):52-76. (In Russ.) https://doi.org/10.24224/2227-1295-2025-14-1-52-76
Views:
602
Email this article 