Does training in post-editing affect creativity?

This article presents the results of an experiment with eleven students from two universities that translated and post-edited three literary texts distributed on the first and last days of their translation technology modules. The source texts were marked with units of creative potential to assess creativity in the target texts (before and after training). The texts were subsequently reviewed by an independent professional literary translator and translation trainer. The results show that there is no quantitative evidence to conclude that the training significantly affects students’ creativity. However, after the training, a change is observed both in the quantitative data and in the reflective essays, i.e. the students are more willing to try creative shifts and they feel more confident to tackle machine translation (MT) issues, while also showing a higher number of errors. Further, we observe that students have a higher degree of creativity in human translation (HT), but significantly fewer errors in post-editing (PE) overall, especially at the start of the training, than in HT

Chapter 6. Linguistic metaphor identification in German

Herrmann JB, Woll K, Dorst AG. Chapter 6. Linguistic metaphor identification in German. In: Nacey S, Dorst AG, Krennmayr T, Reijnierse WG, eds. Metaphor Identification in Multiple Languages. MIPVU around the world. Converging Evidence in Language and Communication Research. Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing Company; 2019: 114-135

Metaphor identification in multiple languages: MIPVU around the world Converging evidence in language and communication research ;, v. 22./ edited by Susan Nacey, Aletta G. Dorst, Tina Krennmayr, W. Gudrun Reijnierse.

Includes bibliographical references and index."This volume explores linguistic metaphor identification in a wide variety of languages and language families. The book is an essential read for anyone interested in researching language and metaphor, from students to experienced scholars. Its primary goals are to discuss the challenges involved in applying the Metaphor Identification Procedure Vrije Universiteit (MIPVU) to a range of languages across the globe, and to offer theoretically grounded advice and guidelines enabling researchers to identify metaphors in multiple languages in a valid and replicable way. The volume is intended as a practical guidebook that identifies and discusses procedural challenges of metaphor identification across languages, thus better enabling researchers to reliably identify metaphor in a multitude of languages. Although able to be read independently, this volume - written by metaphor researchers from around the world - is the ideal companion volume for the 2010 Benjamins book A method for linguistic metaphor identification: from MIP to MIPVU"--1 online resource

Metaphor in usage

Steen GJ, Dorst AG, Herrmann JB, Kaal AA, Krennmayr T. Metaphor in usage. Cognitive Linguistics. 2010;21(4):765–796 .This paper examines patterns of metaphor in usage. Four samples of text ex-cerpts of on average 47,000 words each were taken from the British National Corpus and annotated for metaphor. The linguistic metaphor data were col-lected by five analysts on the basis of a highly explicit identification procedure that is a variant of the approach developed by the Pragglejaz Group (2007). Part of this paper is a report of the protocol and the reliability of the p rocedure. Data analysis shows that, on average, one in every seven and a half lexical units in the corpus is related to metaphor defined as a potential cross-domain mapping in conceptual structure. It also appears that the bulk of the expression of metaphor in discourse consists of non-signalled metaphorically used words, not similes. The distribution of metaphor-related words, finally, turns out to be quite variable between the four registers examined in this study: academic texts have 18.5%, news 16.4%, fiction 11.7%, and conversation 7.7%. The sys-tematic comparative investigation of these registers raises new questions about the relation between cognitive linguistic and other approaches to metaphor

From MIP to MIPVU

Steen GJ, Dorst AG, Herrmann JB, Kaal A, Krennmayr T, Pasma T. A Method for Linguistic Metaphor Identification. Converging Evidence in Language and Communication Research. Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing Company; 2010.This book presents a complete method for the identification of metaphor in language at the level of word use. It is based on extensive methodological and empirical corpus-linguistic research in two languages, English and Dutch. The method is formulated as an explicit manual of instructions covering one chapter, the method being a development and refinement of the popular MIP procedure presented by the Pragglejaz Group in 2007. The extended version is called MIPVU, as it was developed at VU University Amsterdam. Its application is demonstrated in five case studies addressing metaphor in English news texts, conversations, fiction, and academic texts, and Dutch news texts and conversations. Two methodological chapters follow reporting a series of successful reliability tests and a series of post hoc troubleshooting exercises. The final chapter presents a first empirical analysis of the findings, and shows what this type of methodological attention can mean for research and theory

Personification in discourse: linguistic forms, conceptual structures and communicative functions.

Drawing on examples from a corpus of 14 excerpts from novels, this article aims to present a systematic investigation of the different linguistic forms, conceptual structures and communicative functions of personification in discourse. The Metaphor Identification Procedure (Pragglejaz Group, 2007) and Steen's five-step procedure (1999, 2009) will be used to present an integral model distinguishing between linguistic, conceptual, and communicative levels of analysis. The influence of linguistic realization, conventionality, deliberateness, metonymy, and stylistic effects will be considered and it will be demonstrated that studying personifications in discourse raises different issues at each level of analysis. As a result, the question whether something should count as a personification may yield a different answer for each level. © The Author(s) 2011