Translation will take care of itself - or will it? On translation, cognition, and Eco's legacy

This proposal intends to address issues in Translation Studies related to the latest developments in translation technologies, professional practices and popular usages. Rather than focusing on the technical details of Large Language Models and Artificial Intelligence, however, which are best left to scholars specialising in computing aspects, the idea is to reflect on the wider implications of such innovations in terms of significance, both for professionals and for non-professionals. The beginning of the 21st century witnessed a fragmentation of the translating profession, with jobs being outsourced to professionals worldwide who would produce collaborative translations, thus dissolving the notion of translation authorship. The advent of good machine translation tools, preceded by pre-editing and followed by post-editing, begged the question of whether professional translators were needed anymore. The introduction of reliable automatic translation tools, online and free, made translation available to everyone with an Internet connection, raising the question of who is – or can call themselves – a translator anymore. Past the first quarter of the century and well into the 2020s, the definitive establishment of Artificial Intelligence as a tool for the masses now poses yet more doubts, such as: if we envisage Artificial Intelligence as an entity with an independence of its own, can we also envisage Translation as a practice occurring on its own? Far from providing answers, this communication wishes to invite possible ways of interpreting these phenomena, moving from the relationship between translation and cognition, through Umberto Eco’s view of translation as negotiation of meaning, to possibly (re)negotiate the possession of translation with Artificial Intelligence. Back in 2010, I closed a reflection on (specialised) translation, half-jokingly saying that Although some aspects of the traditional translating profession are in danger today and, improbable though possible as it is, it might theoretically even disappear in the long run, it is thought that translation, at least as the transfer of information from one semiotic system to another, is not. Translation is information exchange, and information is life. Life is conceivable even without humans. Translation will take care of itself . This contribution aims to pick up from where the reflection left off and continue it, some fifteen years later and in light of developments that have turned what was meant as a provocation into a status quo. The perspective is still that of a practitioner-turned-scholar, within the tradition of Translation Studies: in spite of its relatively recent and humble origins, this very interdisciplinary approach may prove useful in providing unusual viewpoints and the occasional original insight. After all, when we have to negotiate meaning, “since we always have to negotiate meaning in life” , as Eco invited and inspired us to do, any conceptual tool at our disposal may prove invaluable. Select bibliography Cronin, M. 2013. Translation in the Digital Age. London & New York: Routledge. Eco, U. 2003. Dire quasi la stessa cosa. Milano: Bompiani. Ferreira, A. & Schwieter, J. 2015. Psycholinguistic and Cognitive Inquiries into Translation and Interpreting. Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins. O’Hagan, M. 2019. The Routledge Handbook of Translation and Technology. London & New York: Routledge. Torop, P. 2002). Translation as Translating as Culture. Sign Systems Studies, 30(2), 593-605.