See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/317115643

The translation of economics and the economics of translation

Article  in  Perspectives Studies in Translatology · May 2017

DOI: 10.1080/0907676X.2017.1313281

CITATIONS READS

7 5,567

2 authors:

Lucja Biel Vilelmini Sosoni

University of Warsaw Ionian University
87 PUBLICATIONS   674 CITATIONS    39 PUBLICATIONS   138 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

TraMOOC View project

Eurolect Observatory. Interlingual and Intralingual Analysis of EU Legal Varieties. View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Lucja Biel on 26 March 2019.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

 Perspectives
Studies in Translation Theory and Practice

ISSN: 0907-676X (Print) 1747-6623 (Online) Journal homepage: http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/rmps20

The translation of economics and the economics

of translation

Łucja Biel & Vilelmini Sosoni

To cite this article: Łucja Biel & Vilelmini Sosoni (2017) The translation of economics and the
economics of translation, Perspectives, 25:3, 351-361, DOI: 10.1080/0907676X.2017.1313281

To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/0907676X.2017.1313281

Published online: 22 May 2017.

Submit your article to this journal

Article views: 110

View related articles

View Crossmark data

Full Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at

http://www.tandfonline.com/action/journalInformation?journalCode=rmps20

Download by: [Uniwersytet Warszawski] Date: 05 July 2017, At: 07:42

PERSPECTIVES, 2017
VOL. 25, NO. 3, 351–361
https://doi.org/10.1080/0907676X.2017.1313281

The translation of economics and the economics of translation

Łucja Biela and Vilelmini Sosonib
a
Institute of Applied Linguistics, University of Warsaw, Warsaw, Poland; bDepartment of Foreign Languages,
Translation and Interpreting, Ionian University, Corfu, Greece

ABSTRACT ARTICLE HISTORY

Although central in translation practice, and increasing in volume as Received 24 March 2017
well as impact due to the growing globalisation and explosion of Accepted 27 March 2017
financial transactions and increasing business activity, economic
KEYWORDS
translation –including business and financial translation – has been Economic translation;
little researched and discussed over the years. Yet it constitutes a business translation;
fascinating and robust area that grows hand-in-hand with the translation technology;
evolution of human civilisation and the development of societies or machine translation;
the developing world. In this global village, the concept of crowdsourcing
‘economics’ in translation has become even more relevant lately,
due to the ever-increasing technicalisation of the profession and
the alteration of the translation habitus in Bourdieu’s terms, which
unavoidably affects the translation profession, not least with
respect to the diminishing rates and deteriorating working
conditions. This special issue aims to explore the specificities and
particularities of economic translation as it has been practised over
the years and as it is being currently practised around the globe,
and also investigate new research trends that appear in the field.
At the same time, it wishes to cast some light on the economics of
the profession and the changing habitus of the translator.

1. Introduction
Since the mid-1990s, globalisation has shrunk the world by removing barriers and allow-
ing access to information from anywhere in the world (Cronin, 2003, p. 43), while market
deregulation has led to an explosion of financial transactions and increasing business
activity. In that climate, economic translation has been central in translation practice
and increasing in volume as well as impact, although it has been little researched over
the years. The aim of this special issue is thus twofold: it intends to explore the specificities
of economic translation and to investigate new research trends that appear in the field,
while at the same time it wishes to cast some light on the economics of the profession
and the changing habitus of the translator.

2. The translation of economics

2.1. Mapping the field of economic translation
Economic translation is an interdisciplinary area of research and professional practice that
draws chiefly on translation studies (TS), economics, linguistics and communication

CONTACT Łucja Biel [email protected]

© 2017 Informa UK Limited, trading as Taylor & Francis Group
352 Ł. BIEL AND V. SOSONI

studies. Firstly, it is one of the subfields within specialised translation, alongside legal, tech-
nical and medical translation, to name a few. Secondly, with respect to its knowledge base
and domain, economic translation is related to economics and underlying overlapping
concepts – business, economy, trade and commerce – that lend their name to it.
Thirdly, economic translation draws on business communication, an academic discipline
that grew in the early 1990s to research formal and informal communication within
business organisations and with the outside world, with the practical goal of improving
its effectiveness and efficiency (Nickerson, 2014, p. 50).
Within TS, the name for economic translation has not yet stabilised – it is referred to,
often interchangeably, as economic translation, business translation or commercial trans-
lation. Although the first two terms are often regarded as synonyms, economic translation
is more often found in academic contexts, while business translation tends to be used more
frequently in the context of professional practice. Commercial translation is also used in
the training context as a convenient generic name for translation courses that encompass a
broad variety of texts translated in the world of business (cf. Olohan, 2010, p. 41); in
addition, it appears as a generic name for specialised translation. Economic translation
is subsumed in some curricula under the name ‘institutional translation’. This lack of stab-
ility attests to the emerging status of the field of economic translation.
While academia lags behind, business translation has always been one of translators’
core areas of specialisation, which has intensified since the early 1990s as a result of glo-
balisation and the growth of multinational corporations. Dam and Koskinen (2016, p. 3)
observed that business translators have dethroned literary translators as prototypical
translators and have moved into the very centre of the translator profession.

2.2. Specificity of business discourse

Business discourse covers a broad variety of genres, from highly controlled and regulated
genres, such as annual reports, investor prospectuses, financial statements and articles of
association, to ritualised and relatively fixed genres, such as application letters, earnings
forecasts, corporate social responsibility reporting, performance appraisals, mission state-
ments and press releases, and, finally, to dynamic, much less predictable and creative
genres, such as CEOs’ speeches, advertisements and corporate homepages. Very often
these are hybrid, multimodal and multifunctional genres, the communicative purpose
of which is not only informative but also operative with the persuasive content – for
example, to promote a positive image of the company, to affect consumers’ behaviour
and to drive sales.
As a type of specialised professional communication, one of the dominant features of
business discourse is terminology that facilitates communication within the discourse
community. Since terms are a means of representing and communicating specialised
knowledge, economic terms are units of economic knowledge and points of access to
knowledge structures of the domain, which are internalised and intersubjectively shared
by the discourse community (cf. Biel, 2014, p. 41). Economic terminology is to some
extent culture-specific due to historical and ideological differences between economic
systems. It is also legal-system-bound, which applies particularly to business practices
subject to regulation by law, e.g. company law, contract law and banking or finance
law, which defines the concept systems of the domain and artificially fixes the meaning
 PERSPECTIVES 353

of concepts. On the other hand, due to the globalisation and internationalisation of

business practices, business terminology is subject to a certain degree of harmonisation
and unification and shows a higher degree of universality than does legal terminology.
Business terminology easily ‘travels’ across borders, usually transplanting concepts in a
single direction, as a result of asymmetrical cultural encounters, from developed capitalist
economies to developing, transitioning and emerging ones. Owing to the dominant pos-
ition of English-speaking economies and the status of English as a lingua franca, business
terminology is marked by a large number of borrowings and loans from English, which
have been assimilated throughout the world. Economic terminology is also marked by
high metaphorisation, a high incidence of neologisms, as well as increased variation
across registers and genres.

2.3. Research trends in economic translation

Unlike other types of specialised translation, economic translation has been a relatively
rare topic of monographs, edited volumes or special issues of journals. Although the
last two decades have brought a visibly growing number of publications in this area, the
field of economic translation remains fragmented and largely underresearched, with pub-
lications scattered across a number of sources.
Research into economic translation applies mainly qualitative methods, e.g. discourse
analysis (Chueca Moncayo, 2005), sociolinguistics (Le Poder, 2012), case studies
(Vandal-Sirois, 2016) and game theory (Zhong, 2006); however, increasingly more publi-
cations have recently shifted towards quantitative methods of corpus linguistics (Chueca
Moncayo, 2005; Valdeón, 2016).
Publications on economic translation, quite naturally, focus on terminology. Economic
terms are approached within terminography and lexicography with practice-oriented
goals to ensure adjustment to the translators’ needs (Bergenholtz, 2012; Fraile Vicente,
2008; Fuertes Olivera & Nielsen, 2011). Several publications have studied central
aspects of business terminology, such as terminological neologisms (Kelandrias, 2007;
Mateo, 2014; Resche, 1999), an influx of borrowings and loans from English (Le Poder,
2012), euphemisms (Resche, 1999), vagueness and ambiguity (cf. Stolze, 2003), as well
as their role in building texture through lexical cohesion (Chueca Moncayo, 2005).
Another frequently explored aspect is the increased metaphorisation of business dis-
course, which has been a very productive process within term formation, especially in
finance (Kermas, 2006, p. 110). Business discourse is considered to be marked by hybrid-
ity, with a frequent use of general language metaphors that may be associated with ideol-
ogies and emotive meanings (Fraile Vicente, 2008, pp. 133–134). Metaphors are not only
used to form terms, but also to talk about the behaviour of the economy, mainly by
evoking natural phenomena (Fraile Vicente, 2008; Fuertes Olivera & Nielsen, 2011;
Kermas, 2006, p. 120).
Other areas of research into economic translation are connected with translating
selected genres. These include business correspondence (Fuertes Olivera & Nielsen,
2008), economics textbooks (Buzelin, Dufault, & Foglia, 2015), corporate websites
(Rike, 2013), advertisements (Smith, 2006; Torresi, 2010; Vandal-Sirois, 2016), press
releases (Kaniklidou & House, 2013) and other journalistic genres, e.g. opinion
columns (Valdeón, 2016) and financial statements. One of the recurrent themes is
354 Ł. BIEL AND V. SOSONI

the need for adaptation, rewriting, transcreation and cultural mediation in more crea-
tive genres, such as advertising (Vandal-Sirois, 2016), but also in relation to corporate
websites (Rike, 2013). Some studies have focused on selected discursive aspects, includ-
ing framing (Kaniklidou & House, 2013), rhetorical figures (Smith, 2006), politeness
patterns (Fuertes Olivera & Nielsen, 2008), redefinition of intraorganizational power
through translation (Logemann & Piekkari, 2015) and the translators’ agency
(Buzelin et al., 2015).

3. The economics of translation

3.1. The origins of change
The economics of translation, on the other hand, appears to be moving to the centre of TS
as it is becoming more relevant due to four predominant factors: (a) unprecedented glo-
balisation, (b) increased migration, (c) the global economic crisis of 2007–2008, which led
to pressure on costs and increased productivity and (d) the advances of information com-
munication technologies (ICTs).
Globalisation has been defined as ‘the widening, deepening and speeding up of world-
wide interconnectedness in all aspects of contemporary social life’ (Held, McGrew, Gold-
blatt, & Perraton, 1999, p. 2). Although it is not a new phenomenon, given that it was
already present in world religions and empires of antiquity, we have witnessed its most
intense phase since the 1960s. As Bielsa (2005, p. 131) observed, globalisation results in
the increased mobility of people and objects and very close contact between different lin-
guistic communities, mainly through translation (Schäffner & Dimitriu, 2012, p. 262). In
addition, the globalisation of markets, the digital revolution, the advent of the information
economy and the globalisation of production have transformed translation into a fully
fledged industrial sector (Dunne, 2012).
The mobility of people in the form of global migration has been rising particularly
rapidly in recent decades, exponentially increasing the need for international communi-
cation and translation. Many immigrants and refugees need translation services, from
the actual immigration hearing, to accessing social services, as well as education and train-
ing. In 2015, according to the United Nations,1 the world held 244 million immigrants, i.e.
people living in a country other than where they were born, while the number of refugees
who had been forced out of their birth country – 20 million – was higher than at any time
since World War II. This is not surprising if we consider the fact that in the past 30 years
the world has been shaken by wars, conflicts and persecution, as well as severe economic
crises in different parts of the world.
Perhaps, though, the single most significant factor affecting the economics of trans-
lation has been the digital and ICT revolution, which has deeply changed society – and
by extension translation – with consequences for some similar to those of the Industrial
Revolution. Whole aspects of economic activities, finance, trade, research, education
and leisure have been profoundly transformed by the explosion of electronic networks,
digital technology and multimedia, while the combination of technologies has given rise
to new products, services and modes of work. Accordingly, translation, as a process, a
service and a product, has responded to the new state of affairs by revising its modes of
operation, as discussed briefly below.
 PERSPECTIVES 355

3.2. The implications of change

The rise in the need for translation, coupled with the need to keep costs low and pro-
ductivity high, inevitably led to the creation of big translation companies to manage the
huge volumes of information, and to the opening up of new translation-related activities,
such as software and video game localisation and multilingual publishing. Furthermore,
the rise brought about an extreme technicalisation of the translation profession, especially
with the rapid development of new translation technologies and the use of crowdsourcing
and amateur translation.
Since the development of computer-assisted tools and translation memories, in particu-
lar in the 1960s and the advent of machine translation (MT) in the 1940s, the translation
profession has been undergoing seismic changes. They will continue unpaced as new tech-
nologies keep evolving and improving (cf. O’Brien, 2012; Olohan, 2011; Pym, 2011;
Vashee, 2013). In fact, in a very recent report by KantanMT,2 2017 was noted as expected
to be dominated by the marriage of traditional MT with other technologies – resulting in
hybrid, semi-hybrid and intelligent offspring, including neural machine translation, adap-
tive machine translation and interactive machine translation – while, due to the reduced
costs of deploying MT, wider adoptions and implementations across different industry
sectors are expected.
This acute technologisation of translation has naturally concerned translation scholars
who focus on the ways technology can assist human translators (Alonso & Calvo, 2015;
Melby, 2006), in terms of the place of and interaction between humans and machines
in language translation (Olohan, 2011; O’Brien, 2012), the ethics of MT (Kenny, 2011),
translator training (Doherty & Moorkens, 2013; Kenny & Doherty, 2014) and the post-
editing of MT (Flanagan & Christensen, 2014; O’Brien, 2011). Descriptive studies that
have evaluated or compared translation workstations abound (García & Stevenson,
2009; O’Brien, 2013; Vieira & Specia, 2011), while in the past decade many surveys on
the use of technology in translation have been carried out (Alonso, 2015; Torres Domín-
guez, 2012). Finally, lately there has also been an interest in the ergonomics of translation
(Ehrensberger-Dow & Massey, 2014).
Moreover, TS has been affected by the bidirectionality of Web 2.0, with the prolifer-
ation of crowdsourced translation or open translation projects (Cronin, 2010, p. 3). Nowa-
days, crowdsourcing may refer to online collaborative translation or free translation
crowdsourcing, which assumes the free nature of the contribution and is also known as
volunteer translation, community translation, social translation or, in some cases, fan
translation (fansubbing), where the locus of control is within the community itself
(Boéri & Maier, 2010; Díaz-Cintas & Muñoz Sánchez, 2006; Gambier, 2014; Pérez Gonzá-
lez & Susam-Sarajeva, 2012; Pym, 2011). It can also refer to translation crowdsourcing,
where the locus of control resides firmly within the initiating organisation, institution
or company, and often involves compensation of the crowd – so-called paid crowdsour-
cing (García, 2015). Due to the increasing need for quick, cost-effective and multilingual
translation, large language service providers, such as Lionbridge, are increasingly using
managed crowdsourcing workflows as an innovative labour model, which they call
business process crowdsourcing (Lionbridge, 2013).
Naturally, some researchers have focused on the pros and cons of crowdsourcing, or the
opportunities these raise (Baer, 2010) and the risks they pose (Dodd, 2011), as well as on
356 Ł. BIEL AND V. SOSONI

best practices (Ray & Kelly, 2011). Others have explored translators’ attitudes towards crowd-
sourcing (Flanagan, 2016), their motivation (McDonough Dolmaya, 2012; Mesipuu, 2012;
Olohan, 2014) and the ethics surrounding its use (McDonough Dolmaya, 2011).
As a final note, it is worth pointing out that while some of these developments enhance
the visibility of translation, facilitate the work of translators and help minor languages
become more visible online, others devalue the work involved in the translation
process, which in turn lowers the occupational status of professional translators, and
their remuneration. What is commonly accepted, though, is that they clearly alter what
Bourdieu (1983) calls the translation habitus, while they create new paths for translation
research.

4. About the special issue’s contributions

The special issue starts with a paper by Anthony Pym that sits at the intersection of the two
fields covered and serves as an excellent prelude. Pym contrasts two ways of applying
economic models to translation. The first considers the values, efforts and choices involved
in translation as a communicative act, while the second starts from the economics of
languages and privileges the diversity of natural language systems. Pym reaches the con-
clusion that it might be more fruitful to give ethical priority to the higher value of social
inclusion, and thus pay close attention to the way language users choose between other-
wise incommensurate values.
The five contributions that follow deal with economic translation, engaging in a range
of central research topics and genres, while the final four explore various aspects of the
economics of translation.
Marta García González’s paper addresses a delicate borderland between economic and
legal translation, discussing business entity types in Spain and the USA. Business entity
types are prescribed in domestic law and often show a relatively high degree of incongruity
and, hence, difficulties in identifying a functional equivalent. With a strong focus on the
discursive function of the terminology, García González analyses alternative techniques of
its translation across genres, including administrative websites, court decisions and novels,
concluding with a discussion on the limitations of functional equivalents.
Economic terms are also studied with tools offered by the discipline of terminology.
Panagiotis G. Krimpas’ paper addresses the high rate of neologisms and resulting borrow-
ings from English, a consequence of asymmetrical cultural encounters between English
and the linguistically demanding lesser-used language – Greek. Krimpas tests the ISO
704:2009 principles, proving that they can act as a systematic framework for assessing
the existing Greek equivalents of English financial terms and for proposing more suitable
equivalents.
Yet another aspect of economic terminology – its metaphorisation – is studied by
Luciana Sabina Tcaciuc and Vladislav Mackevic, who conduct a corpus-based study of
the conceptual metaphor THE ECONOMY IS A MACHINE in English into Romanian trans-
lations, supplementing it with ethnographic observations. They demonstrate a broad
range of strategies used by translators in a controlled institutional setting, and interpret
them in the context of agency and norms.
Julieta Alós, Sky Marsen and Noora Alkaabi’s paper shifts attention to the highly crea-
tive genre of luxury advertising. The authors study Arabic translations of advertising
 PERSPECTIVES 357

brochures, demonstrating that translations prefer a low-context communication style with

more explicit and less creative language use. This style is evaluated by the authors as incon-
sistent with the principles of luxury advertising, according to which the style should
remain implicit, indirect and ambiguous.
Nancy Xiuzhi Liu’s paper moves us to another borderland, where economic translation
overlaps with journalistic translation. Using the concept of framing, Liu analyses two
newspapers that publish translated news in Chinese. She discusses framing effects
through translation, evidencing how frames of responsibility, conflict and interest are
used to transform news for ideological purposes.
Joss Moorkens opens the second part of the special issue, looking at the background to
the economic and technological changes to translation and investigating the options that
are available to translators in order to maximise their agency within the ‘global value
chain’. He analyses in detail the vendor model of employment, where translators increas-
ingly work on a freelance basis or as precarious workers, while he also discusses and
explains the impact of translation technology on the translation profession. Moorkens
suggests that in order to maximise their agency, translators must continually acquire
new competences and diversify their portfolio of services, focusing more on areas that
are least likely to be replaced by machines or non-professionals.
Miguel Jiménez-Crespo considers the irruption of crowdsourcing and volunteer online
collaborative translations, discussing their effect on translation quality. He investigates
how economic considerations have led to a reconceptualization of translation quality
from a desirable, static and high-cost commodity to a new dynamic construct in which
the fitness for purpose is negotiated by different actors and through a wide range of
factors that correlate to different translation prices.
Lindsay Bywood, Thierry Etchegoyhen and Panayota Georgakopoulou draw on the
findings of the EU-funded project SUbtitling for MAchine Translation (SUMAT) and
investigate the impetus behind the development of MT for subtitling, and the productivity
gain or loss for subtitlers using MT as opposed to those working in the traditional way.
Their findings point to MT as a promising option for partially automating the subtitling
workflow and thus leading to productivity gains, a fact that further attests to the need for
new competences, since it gives birth to a new job profile – that of the subtitle post-editor.
In the final paper, Hernández-Hernández, drawing mainly on Pierre Bourdieu’s con-
cepts of habitus and capital, studies translation from the perspective of international pro-
duction and circulation of news and analyses how the interplay between economic forces,
on the one hand, and the hybrid nature of the capital offered by translation, on the other
hand, transforms translators’ habitus.

5. Conclusion
This special issue attests to the thematic, methodological and geographical growth of econ-
omic translation as a subfield of specialised translation. Collectively, in showcasing the
multifarious importance of the economy for translation, the 10 contributions help to
establish a connection between translating for businesses and within the world of business
and economics. By focusing on issues that have thus far not been addressed in a suffi-
ciently connected way and from a variety of perspectives, they contribute new ideas
that help to elucidate the increasingly significant role of the economy for translators,
358 Ł. BIEL AND V. SOSONI

both as an area of professional practice and as a factor affecting the translation profession
and the translator’s habitus.

Notes
1. http://www.un.org/sustainabledevelopment/blog/2016/01/244-million-international-
migrants-living-abroad-worldwide-new-un-statistics-reveal/
2. https://machinetranslation.files.wordpress.com/2017/01/7-trends-in-20171.pdf

Disclosure Statement
No potential conflict of interest was reported by the authors.

Notes on contributors
Łucja Biel is an associate professor at the Institute of Applied Linguistics, University of Warsaw. She
was a visiting lecturer on the MA in Legal Translation at City University London (2009–2014). She
is a deputy editor of the Journal of Specialised Translation and a secretary general of the European
Society for Translation Studies. Her research interests focus on legal, business and institutional
translation, translator training and corpus linguistics. She has published over 40 papers in this
area, e.g. in The Translator, Meta, Jostrans, LANS, and Fachsprache, and a book, Lost in the
Eurofog. The Textual Fit of Translated Law (Peter Lang, 2014).
Vilelmini Sosoni is a lecturer in the Department of Foreign Languages, Translation and Interpreting
at Ionian University, Greece. In the past, she has taught specialised translation at the University of
Surrey, the University of Westminster, the National and Kapodistrian University of Athens, the
Institut Français d’Athènes and Roehampton University. She also has extensive industrial experi-
ence, having worked as a freelance translator, editor and subtitler, as well as in-house project
manager. She is a founding member of the research group Language and Politics, and her research
interests lie in the areas of the translation of institutional, legal, political and economic texts, text
linguistics and corpus linguistics, MT and Audiovisual Translation (AVT). She has participated
in H2020, DG Competition and EuropeAid projects, and has published articles in international
journals and edited volumes.

References
Alonso, E. (2015). Analysing translation professionals in the information society and their use and
perceptions of Wikipedia. The Journal of Specialised Translation, 23, 89–116. Retrieved from
http://www.jostrans.org/issue23/art_alonso.pdf
Alonso, E., & Calvo, E. (2015). Developing a blueprint for a technology-mediated approach to
translation studies. Meta: Journal des Traducteurs, 60(1), 135–157. doi:10.7202/1032403ar
Baer, N. (2010). Crowdsourcing: outrage or opportunity? Translorial: Journal of the Northern
California Translators Association, February 10, 2010. Retrieved from http://translorial.com/
2010/02/01/crowdsourcing-outrage-or-opportunity/.
Bergenholtz, H. (2012). Concepts for monofunctional accounting dictionaries. Terminology, 18(2),
243–263. doi:10.1075/term.18.2.05ber
Biel, Ł. (2014). Lost in the Eurofog. The textual fit of translated law. Frankfurt am Main: Peter Lang.
Bielsa, E. (2005). Globalisation and translation: A theoretical approach. Language and Intercultural
Communication, 5(2), 131–144. doi:10.1080/14708470508668889
Boéri, J., & Maier, C. (Eds.). (2010). Translation/Interpreting and social activism. Manchester: St
Jerome.
 PERSPECTIVES 359

Bourdieu, P. (1983). The field of cultural production, or the economic world reversed. (R. Nice,
Trans). Poetics, 12(4–5), 311–356. doi:10.1016/0304-422X(83)90012-8
Buzelin, H., Dufault, M., & Foglia, C. (2015). On translating the ‘Bible of marketing’. The
Translator, 21(1), 24–49. doi:10.1080/13556509.2015.1021561
Chueca Moncayo, F. J. (2005). The textual function of terminology in business and finance dis-
course. The Journal of Specialised Translation, 3, 40–63.
Cronin, M. (2003). Translation and globalization. London: Routledge.
Cronin, M. (2010). The Translation crowd. Tradumática, 8. Retrieved from http://www.fti.uab.es/
tradumatica/revista/num8/articles/04/04art.htm
Dam, H. V., & Koskinen, K. (2016). The translation profession: Centres and peripheries.
Introduction. The Journal of Specialised Translation, 25, 2–14.
Díaz-Cintas, J., & Muñoz Sánchez, P. (2006). Fansubs: Audiovisual translation in an amateur
environment. The Journal of Specialised Translation, 6, 37–52. Retrieved from http://www.
jostrans.org/issue06/art_diaz_munoz.pdf
Dodd, S. M. (2011). Crowdsourcing: social[ism] Media 2.0. Translorial: Journal of the Northern
California Translators Association, January 1, 2011. Retrieved from http://translorial.com/
2011/01/01/crowdsourcing-socialism-media-2-0/
Doherty, S., & Moorkens, J. (2013). Investigating the experience of translation technology labs:
Pedagogical implications. The Journal of Specialised Translation, 19, 122–113. Retrieved from
http://www.jostrans.org/issue19/art_doherty.php
Dunne, K. J. (2012). The industrialization of translation: Causes, consequences and challenges.
Translation Spaces, 1, 143–168. doi:10.1075/ts.1.07dun
Ehrensberger-Dow, M., & Massey, G. (2014). Cognitive ergonomic issues in professional trans-
lation. In J. W. Schwieter & A. Ferreira (Eds.), The development of translation competence:
Theories and methodologies from psycholinguistics and cognitive science (pp. 58–86).
Newcastle: Cambridge Scholar Publishers.
Flanagan, M. (2016). Cause for concern? Attitudes towards translation crowdsourcing in pro-
fessional translators’ blogs. The Journal of Specialised Translation, 26, 149–173. Retrieved
from http://www.jostrans.org/issue25/art_flanagan.pdf
Flanagan, M., & Christensen, T. P. (2014). Testing postediting guidelines: How translation trainees
interpret them and how to tailor them for translator training purposes. The Interpreter and
Translator Trainer, 8(2), 257–275. doi:10.1080/1750399X.2014.936111
Fraile Vicente, E. (2008). The lexicographical treatment of idioms in business dictionaries from the
point of view of the translator as user. Hermes, 40, 133–166.
Fuertes Olivera, P. A., & Nielsen, S. (2008). Translating politeness in bilingual English-Spanish
business correspondence. Meta: Journal des Traducteurs, 53(3), 667–678. doi:10.7202/019246a
Fuertes Olivera, P. A., & Nielsen, S. (2011). The dynamics of terms in accounting: What the con-
struction of the accounting dictionaries reveals about metaphorical terms in culture-bound
subject fields. Terminology. The Dynamics of Terms in Specialized Communication: an
Interdisciplinary Perspective, 17(1), 157–180. doi:10.1075/term.17.1.09fue
Gambier, Y. (2014). Changing landscape in translation. International Journal of Society, Culture &
Language, 22, 1–12. Retrieved from http://ijscl.net/article_4638_
8301154b3bfe303a6e1c541f62c4e18a.pdf
García, I. (2015). Cloud marketplaces: Procurement of translators in the age of social media. The
Journal of Specialised Translation, 23, 18–38. Retrieved from http://www.jostrans.org/issue23/
art_garcia.pdf
García, I., & Stevenson, V. (2009). Reviews-Google translator toolkit. Multilingual, 20, 16–19.
Held, D., McGrew, A., Goldblatt, D., & Perraton, J. (1999). Global transformations. Cambridge:
Polity Press.
Kaniklidou, Th., & House, J. (2013). Framing austerity in Greek translated press headlines: The case
of I Kathimerini. Minor Translating Major (mTm), 5, 60–80.
Kelandrias, P. (2007). Η Μετάϕραση των οικονομικών κειμένων [The translation of economic texts].
Athens: Diavlos.
360 Ł. BIEL AND V. SOSONI

Kenny, D. (2011). The ethics of machine translation. New Zealand society of translators and
interpreters annual conference 2011, 4–5 June 2011, Auckland, New Zealand. Retrieved from
http://doras.dcu.ie/17606/
Kenny, D., & Doherty, S. (2014). Statistical machine translation in the translation curriculum:
Overcoming obstacles and empowering translators. The Interpreter and Translator Trainer, 8
(2), 276–294. doi:10.1080/1750399X.2014.936112
Kermas, S. (2006). Metaphor and ideology in business and economic discourse in British and
American English. In J. Flowerdew & M. Gotti (Eds.), Studies in specialized discourse (pp.
109–130). Bern: Peter Lang.
Le Poder, M.-E. (2012). Perspective sociolinguistique des emprunts de l’anglais dans la section
économique du quotidien espagnol El País. Babel, 58(4), 377–394. doi:10.1075/babel.58.4.01pod
Lionbridge. (2013). The Complete Guide to Business Process Crowdsourcing: Changing the Way
Work Gets Done. Retrieved from http://info.lionbridge.com/Business-Processing-
Crowdsourcing-Guide.html?_ga=1.138089200.1359215512.1475143910
Logemann, M., & Piekkari, R. (2015). Localize or local lies? The power of language and translation
in the multinational corporation. Critical Perspectives on International Business, 11(1), 30–53.
doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/cpoib-02-2014-0011
Mateo, J. (2014). Neonyms for a crisis: Cognitive, terminological and socio-pragmatic aspects in the
translation of new financial terms into Spanish. Babel, 60(4), 405–424. doi:https://doi.org/10.
1075/babel.60.4.01mat
McDonough Dolmaya, J. (2011). The ethics of crowdsourcing. Linguistica Antverpiensia, 10, 97–11.
McDonough Dolmaya, J. (2012). Analyzing the crowdsourcing model and its impact on public per-
ceptions of translation. The Translator, 18(2), 167–191. doi:10.1080/13556509.2012.10799507
Melby, A. (2006). MT+TM+QA: The future is ours. Tradumàtica, 4, 1–6. Retrieved from http://
www.fti.uab.es/tradumatica/revista/num4/articles/04/04.pdf
Mesipuu, M. (2012). Translation crowdsourcing and user-translator motivation at Facebook and
Skype. Translation Spaces, 1, 33–53. doi:10.1075/ts.1.03mes
Nickerson, C. (2014). Business communication. In V. Bhatia & S. Bremner (Eds.), The Routledge
handbook of language and professional communication (pp. 50–67). London: Routledge.
O’Brien, S. (2011). Towards predicting post-editing productivity. Machine Translation, 25(3),
197–215. doi:10.1007/s10590-011-9096-7
O’Brien, S. (2012). Translation as human-computer interaction. Translation Spaces, 1(1), 101–122.
doi:10.1075/ts.1.05obr
O’Brien, S. (2013). The borrowers: Researching the cognitive aspects of translation. Target, 25(1),
5–17. doi:10.1075/target.25.1.02obr
Olohan, M. (2010). Commercial translation. In Y. Gambier & L. van Doorslaer (Eds.), Handbook of
translation studies: Volume 1 (pp. 41–44). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. doi:10.1075/hts.1.
comm1
Olohan, M. (2011). Translators and translation technology: The dance of agency. Translation
Studies, 4(3), 342–357. doi:10.1080/14781700.2011
Olohan, M. (2014). Why do you translate? Motivation to volunteer and TED translation.
Translation Studies, 7(1), 17–33. doi.org/10.1080/14781700.2013.781952
Pérez González, L., & Susam-Sarajeva, Ş. (Eds.). (2012). Special issue: Non-professionals translating
and interpreting. Participatory and engaged perspectives. The Translator, 18(2), 149–165.
Pym, A. (2011). What technology does to translating. The International Journal for Translation and
Interpreting Research, 3(1), 1–9. Retrieved from http://trans-int.org/index.php/transint/article/
viewFile/121/81
Ray, R., & Kelly, N. (2011). Crowdsourced translation: Best practices for implementation. Lowell,
MA: Common Sense Advisory.
Resche, C. (1999). Equivocal economic terms or terminology revisited. Meta: Journal des
Traducteurs, 44(4), 617–632. doi:10.7202/003942ª
Rike, S. (2013). Bilingual corporate websites: From translation to transcreation? The Journal of
Specialised Translation, 20, 68–85.
 PERSPECTIVES 361

Schäffner, Ch., & Dimitriu, R. (2012). Translational encounters in a globalized world. Perspectives:
Studies in Translatology, 20(3), 261–268. doi:/abs/10.1080/0907676X.2012.702396
Smith, K. (2006). Rhetorical figures and the translation of advertising headlines. Language and
Literature, 15(2), 159–182. doi:10.1177/0963947006063745
Stolze, R. (2003). Vagueness in economic texts as a translation problem. Across Languages and
Cultures, 4(2), 187–203. doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.1556/Acr.4.2003.2.2
Torres Domínguez, R. (2012). 2012 Use of translation technologies survey. Mozgorilla. Retrieved
from http://mozgorilla.com/en/texnologii-en-en/translation-technologies-survey-results/
Torresi, I. (2010). Translating promotional and advertising texts. Manchester: St. Jerome.
Valdeón, R. A. (2016). Translating stable sources in times of economic recession. The Paul
Krugman’s column in The New York Times and El País. Babel, 62(1), 1–20. doi:10.1075/babel.
62.1.01va
Vandal-Sirois, H. (2016). Advertising translators as agents of multicultural marketing: A case-
study-based approach. Perspectives. Studies in Translatology, 24(4), 543–556. doi:10.1080/
0907676X.2015.1119863
Vashee, K. (2013). Understanding the economics of machine translation. Translation Spaces, 2,
125–149. doi:10.1075/ts.2.07vas
Vieira, L. N., & Specia, L. (2011). A review of translation tools from a post-editing perspective.
Proceedings of the third joint EM+/CNGL workshop bringing MT to the user: Research
meets translators (JEC 2011). Retrieved from http://rgcl.wlv.ac.uk/papers/NunesSpecia_
Jec2011.pdf
Zhong, Y. (2006). Let’s talk translation economically: A demonstration of re-articulating translation
through economics terms. Across Languages and Cultures, 7(1), 77–92. doi:10.1556/Acr.7.2006.1.5

View publication stats