Revisiting risk management in online collaborative literary translation: ethical insights from the Chinese context

References

• Agar, M. 1980. The Professional Stranger: An Informal Introduction to Ethnography. New York: Academic Press.
   Google Scholar
• Berger, R. 2015. “Now I See It, Now I Don’t: Researcher’s Position and Reflexivity in Qualitative Research.” Qualitative Research 15 (2): 219–234. https://doi.org/10.1177/1468794112468475.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Borg, C. 2022. A Literary Translation in the Making: A Process-Oriented Perspective. New York and London: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Britannica. 2023. “O. Henry.” Encyclopedia Britannica. Accessed September 24, 2023. https://www.britannica.com/biography/O-Henry.
   Google Scholar
• Cadwell, P., S. O’Brien, and C. S. Teixeira. 2018. “Resistance and Accommodation: Factors for the (Non-) Adoption of Machine Translation Among Professional Translators.” Perspectives 26 (3): 301–321. https://doi.org/10.1080/0907676X.2017.1337210.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cerezo, L. 2017. “Always Together or Alone First? Effects of Type of Collaborative Translation on Spanish L2 Development.” Journal of Spanish Language Teaching 4 (2): 152–167. https://doi.org/10.1080/23247797.2017.1411678.
   Google Scholar
• Chen, Y. M. 2022. “An Activity Theory Perspective on the TEP Model Replicated in Translation Crowdsourcing: A Case Study of Global Voices Lingua.” Journal of Specialised Translation 38:320–347. https://jostrans.org/issue38/art_chen.php.
   Google Scholar
• Chesterman, A. 2013. “Models of What Processes?” Translation & Interpreting Studies 8 (2): 155–168. https://doi.org/10.1075/tis.8.2.02che.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Chesterman, A. 2016. Memes of Translation. The Spread of Ideas in Translation Theory. Amsterdam and Philadelphia: John Benjamins.
   Google Scholar
• Creswell, J. W. 2009. “Editorial: Mapping the Field of Mixed Methods Research.” Journal of Mixed Methods Research 3 (2): 95–108. https://doi.org/10.1177/1558689808330883.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dombek, M. 2014. “A Study into the Motivations of Internet Users Contributing to Translation Crowdsourcing: The Case of Polish Facebook User-Translators.” PhD diss., Dublin City University.
   Google Scholar
• Drugan, J. 2013. Quality in Professional Translation: Assessment and Improvement. London: Bloomsbury.
   Google Scholar
• Dutta, U. 2014. “Critical Ethnography.” In Qualitative Methodology: A Practical Guide, edited by J. Mills and M. Birks, 1–19. Thousand Oaks: Sage Publication.
   Google Scholar
• Ehrensberger-Dow, M., and G. Massey. 2019. “Socio-Technical Issues in Professional Translation Practice.” In Translation Practice in the Field: Current Research on Socio-Cognitive Processes, edited by H. Risku, M. Hirvonen, R. Rogl, and J. Milošević, 105–122. Amsterdam and Philadelphia: John Benjamins.
   Google Scholar
• Flanagan, M. 2016. “Cause for Concern? Attitudes Towards Translation Crowdsourcing in Professional Translators’ Blogs.” Journal of Specialised Translation 25 (1): 149–173.
   Google Scholar
• Gigliotti, G. 2017. “The Quality of Mercy: A Corpus-Based Analysis of the Quality of Volunteer Translations for Non-Profit Organizations (NPOs).” New Voices in Translation Studies 17 (1): 52–81.
   Google Scholar
• Gile, D. 2021. “Risk Management in Translation: How Much Does It Really Explain?” International Journal of Interpreter Education 13 (1): 56–65. https://doi.org/10.34068/ijie.13.01.08.
   Google Scholar
• Góngora-Goloubintseff, J. G. 2021. “Translation in Wikipedia: A Praxeological Study of Normativity, Negotiation and Automation across Four Language Communities.” PhD diss., The University of Manchester.
   Google Scholar
• Góngora-Goloubintseff, J. G. 2022. “Assessing the Impact of Translation Guidelines in Wikipedia: A Praxeological Approach to the Study of Documented Standards Across Four Language Communities.” Translation Spaces 11 (2): 254–276. https://doi.org/10.1075/ts.21028.gon.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Halverson, S. L., and H. Kotze. 2021. “Sociocognitive Constructs in Translation and Interpreting Studies (TIS): Do We Really Need Concepts Like Norms and Risk When We Have a Comprehensive Usage-Based Theory of Language?” In Contesting Epistemologies in Cognitive Translation and Interpreting Studies, edited by S. L. Halverson and Á. M. García, 51–79. New York and London: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Hu, B. 2020. “How are Translation Norms Negotiated?” Target International Journal of Translation Studies 32 (1): 83–122. https://doi.org/10.1075/target.19050.hu.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hutchins, E. 1995. Cognition in the Wild. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
   Google Scholar
• Jiménez-Crespo, M. A. 2017. Crowdsourcing and Online Collaborative Translations. Amsterdam and Philadelphia: John Benjamins.
   Google Scholar
• Jiménez-Crespo, M. A. 2021. “The Impact of Crowdsourcing and Online Collaboration in Professional Translation: Charting the Future of Translation?” Babel 67 (4): 395–417. https://doi.org/10.1075/babel.00230.jim.
   Google Scholar
• Jones, H. 2017. “Multilingual Knowledge Production and Dissemination in Wikipedia: A Spatial Narrative Analysis of the Collaborative Construction of City-related Articles Within the User-generated Encyclopaedia.” PhD diss., The University of Manchester.
   Google Scholar
• Jones, H. 2018. “Wikipedia, Translation and the Collaborative Production of Spatial Knowledge(s): A Socio-Narrative Analysis.” Alif: Journal of Comparative Poetics (38): 264–297. https://www.jstor.org/stable/26496377.
   Google Scholar
• Jones, H. 2019. “Wikipedia as a Translation Zone: A Heterotopic Analysis of the Online Encyclopedia and Its Collaborative Volunteer Translator Community.” Target International Journal of Translation Studies 31 (1): 77–97. https://doi.org/10.1075/target.18062.jon.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Karnieli-Miller, O., R. Strier, and L. Pessach. 2009. “Power Relations in Qualitative Research.” Qualitative Health Research 19 (2): 279–289. https://doi.org/10.1177/1049732308329306.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kelly, N., R. Ray, and D. A. DePalma. 2011. “From Crawling to Sprinting: Community Translation Goes Mainstream.” Linguistica Antverpiensia, New Series-Themes in Translation Studies 10:75–94. https://doi.org/10.52034/lanstts.v10i.278.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kolb, W. 2011. “The Making of Literary Translations: Repetition and Ambiguity in a Short Story by Ernest Hemingway.” Across Languages and Cultures 12 (2): 259–274. https://doi.org/10.1556/Acr.12.2011.2.7.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kolb, W. 2017. “‘It Was on My Mind All Day’: Literary Translators Working from Home-Some Implications of Workplace Dynamics.” Translation Spaces 6 (1): 27–43. https://doi.org/10.1075/ts.6.1.02kol.
   Google Scholar
• Lambert, J. 2023. Translation Ethics. London and New York: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Latané, B., K. Williams, and S. Harkins. 1979. “Many Hands Make Light the Work: The Causes and Consequences of Social Loafing.” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 37 (6): 822–832. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.37.6.822.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• McDonough Dolmaya, J. 2011. “The Ethics of Crowdsourcing.” Linguistica Antverpiensia, New Series-Themes in Translation Studies 10:97–110. https://doi.org/10.52034/lanstts.v10i.279.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• O’Hagan, M. 2009. “Evolution of User-Generated Translation: Fansubs, Translation Hacking and Crowdsourcing.” Journal of Internationalization and Localization 1 (1): 94–121. https://doi.org/10.1075/jial.1.04hag.
   Google Scholar
• O’Hagan, M. 2011. “Community Translation: Translation as a Social Activity and Its Possible Consequences in the Advent of Web 2.0 and Beyond.” Linguistica Antverpiensia, New Series-Themes in Translation Studies 10:11–23. https://doi.org/10.52034/lanstts.v10i.275.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Puzio, K., C. S. Keyes, M. W. Cole, and R. T. Jiménez. 2013. “Language Differentiation: Collaborative Translation to Support Bilingual Reading.” Bilingual Research Journal 36 (3): 329–349. https://doi.org/10.1080/15235882.2013.845118.
   Google Scholar
• Pym, A. 2005. “Explaining Explicitation.” In New Trends in Translation Studies. In Honour of Kinga Klaudy, edited by K. Karoly and Á. Fóris, 29–34. Budapest: Akadémia Kiadó.
   Google Scholar
• Pym, A. 2015. “Translating as Risk Management.” Journal of Pragmatics 85:67–80. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2015.06.010.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pym, A. 2020. “Translation, Risk Management and Cognition.” In The Routledge Handbook of Translation and Cognition, edited by F. Alves and A. L. Jakobsen, 445–458. London and New York: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Pym, A., and K. Matsushita. 2018. “Risk Mitigation in Translator Decisions.” Across Languages and Cultures 19 (1): 1–18. https://doi.org/10.1556/084.2018.19.1.1.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Risku, H. (2014). “Translation Process Research as Interaction Research: From Mental to Socio-Cognitive Processes.” MonTI Special Issue 1 – Minding Translation, 331–353. https://doi.org/10.6035/MonTI.2014.ne1.11.
   Google Scholar
• Risku, H., M. Hirvonen, R. Rogl, and J. Milošević. 2022. “Ethnographic Research.” In The Routledge Handbook of Translation and Methodology, edited by F. Zanettin and C. Rundle, 324–339. London and New York: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Risku, H., and R. Rogl. 2020. “Translation and Situated, Embodied, Distributed, Embedded and Extended Cognition.” In The Routledge Handbook of Translation and Cognition, edited by F. Alves and A. Jakobsen, 478–499. London and New York: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Risku, H., R. Rogl, and J. Milosevic. 2017. “Translation Practice in the Field: Current Research on Socio-Cognitive Processes.” Translation Spaces 6 (1): 3–26. https://doi.org/10.1075/ts.6.1.01ris.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Risku, H., F. Windhager, and M. Apfelthaler. 2013. “A Dynamic Network Model of Translatorial Cognition and Action.” Translation Spaces 2 (1): 151–182. https://doi.org/10.1075/ts.2.08ris.
   Google Scholar
• Rogl, R. 2016. “No Work and All Play–The Intersections Between Labour, Fun and Exploitation in Online Translation Communities.” European Journal of Applied Linguistics 4 (1): 117–138. https://doi.org/10.1515/eujal-2015-0022.
   Google Scholar
• Sannholm, R. 2021. Translation, Teamwork, and Technology: The Use of Social and Material Scaffolds in the Translation Process. PhD diss., Stockholm University.
   Google Scholar
• Shaw, W. H. 1999. Contemporary Ethics: Taking Account of Utilitarianism. Oxford, England: Blackwell.
   Google Scholar
• Spradley, J. 1980. Participant Observation. New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston.
   Google Scholar
• Teixeira, C. S., and S. O’Brien. 2019. “Investigating the Cognitive Ergonomic Aspects of Translation Tools in a Workplace Setting.” In Translation Practice in the Field: Current Research on Socio-Cognitive Processes, edited by H. Risku, M. Hirvonen, R. Rogl, and J. Milošević, 79–104. Amsterdam and Philadelphia: John Benjamins.
   Google Scholar
• Thompson, J. 2022. “A Guide to Abductive Thematic Analysis.” The Qualitative Report 27 (5): 1410–1421. https://doi.org/10.46743/2160-3715/2022.5340.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tost, L. P. 2015. “When, Why, and How Do Powerholders ‘Feel the Power’? Examining the Links Between Structural and Psychological Power and Reviving the Connection Between Power and Responsibility.” Research in Organizational Behavior 35:29–56. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.riob.2015.10.004.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wenger, E. 1998. Communities of Practice: Learning, Meaning and Identity. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Williams, R. F. 2006. “Using Cognitive Ethnography to Study Instruction.” In Proceedings of the 7th International Conference on Learning Sciences, Vol. 2, edited by K. Hay and D. Jickey, 838–844. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
   Google Scholar
• Xu, A., M. T. Baysari, S. L. Stocker, L. J. Leow, R. O. Day, and J. E. Carland. 2020. “Researchers’ Views On, and Experiences With, the Requirement to Obtain Informed Consent in Research Involving Human Participants: A Qualitative Study.” BMC Medical Ethics 21 (1): 1–11. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12910-020-00538-7.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Yeeyan. July, 2023. “Yeeyan Gutenberg Project”. http://g.yeeyan.com/.
   Google Scholar
• Yu, C. 2019. “Negotiating Identity Roles During the Process of Online Collaborative Translation: An Ethnographic Approach.” Translation Studies 12 (2): 231–252. https://doi.org/10.1080/14781700.2019.1692062.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Zwischenberger, C. 2022. “Online Collaborative Translation: Its Ethical, Social, and Conceptual Conditions and Consequences.” Perspectives 30 (1): 1–18. https://doi.org/10.1080/0907676X.2021.1872662.
   Google Scholar