In this paper we examine a commonly suggested proof construction strategy from the mathematics education literature--that students first produce an informal argument and then use this as a basis for constructing a formal proof. The work of students who produce such informal arguments during proving activities was analyzed to distill three activities that contribute to students' successful translation of informal arguments into formal proofs. These are elaboration, syntactification, and rewarranting. We analyze how attempting to engage in these activities relates to success with proof construction. Additionally, we discuss how each individual activity contributes to the translation of an informal argument into a formal proof. [For the complete proceedings, see ED597799.]