No significant differences were found between HT and PE students concerning the time they spent on producing the TT (3.2.2.1 Time on task).

PE students showed better performance in general (lower total error numbers) and in terms of accuracy (3.2.2.2 The quality of the target texts (error numbers)).

Accuracy errors are the most common types of errors in both the HT and the PE conditions (3.2.2.2 The quality of the target texts (error numbers)).

Translators and post-editors found the task equally challenging (3.2.3 The translation and the post-editing experience (research question 1.6)).

The most challenging aspect of the task was syntactic complexity for both groups (3.2.3 The translation and the post-editing experience (research question 1.6)).

Most of the problem terms students named were related to pragmatics and not to bilingualism (3.2.3 The translation and the post-editing experience (research question 1.6)).

Students in the PE condition had difficulties identifying terminological problems; they seemed to have a more blurred view of what a term and what an ordinary lexical item were in the ST (3.2.3 The translation and the post-editing experience (research question 1.6)).

In the PE condition, SL reading skills emerged as key sub-skills showing a number of significant correlations with performance indices (3.2.4.1 Correlations between sub-competencies and performance measures (time on task and error numbers)).

In the HT condition, awareness of terminological and syntactic difficulties was coupled with a lower number of accuracy errors (3.2.4.2 Correlations between indices of task perception and performance measures).

In the PE group, the (false) belief that PE helps with terminology was associated with higher accuracy errors (3.2.4.2 Correlations between indices of task perception and performance measures).