The Linguist is a languages magazine for professional linguists, translators, interpreters, language professionals, language teachers, trainers, students and academics with articles on translation, interpreting, business, government, technology
Issue link: https://thelinguist.uberflip.com/i/552383
FEATURES thelinguist.uberflip.com Translation theory helps to define the criteria needed to assess translation, but there is much debate about how subjective the application of such criteria is. In attempting to provide a more objective methodology, academics have looked to the assessment metrics used by the translation industry, such as TAUS (Translation Automation User Society), Sical (the Canadian Language Quality Measurement System) and LISA (Localisation Industry Standards Association). These error-counting methodologies can be difficult to apply, and focus on the translation at the word and sentence level, losing sight of text-level aspects. Product vs. process The discussion has tended to concentrate on how both the translation industry and Translation Studies have assessed the product of the translation processes (i.e. the translations). However, in the last decade there has been a gradual shift on translation courses to a focus on the processes involved. This shift has had an impact on how translator trainers perceive the role and function of assessment, which has led to an interest in designing new ways of assessing students. There seems to be a general consensus in favour of integrating competence-based translator training as a pedagogical approach for teaching, learning and assessment. The translation processes have been conceived of as a set of competences or sub- competences comprising a combination of knowledge, attitudes, aptitudes and skills. Some of the existing models of translator competence have been used as guides to curricular design and, more specifically, to assessment design. 4 There seems to be a degree of agreement as to the main areas of translator competence, with some models agreeing that the following areas are required in the present market: • Communicative and textual competence in at least two languages and cultures • (Inter)cultural competence (i.e. an understanding of the two cultures and the cultural differences in language use) • Thematic or subject area competence • Interpersonal competence (i.e. teamwork, translator- client relationship and translator's social role) • Professional and instrumental competence (i.e. developing strategies for both documentary and terminological research, providing a translation according to a brief, complying with deadlines and instructions, working under pressure, etc) • Attitudinal or psychophysiological competence (i.e. self- confidence, attention, concentration, memory, etc) • Organisational or strategic competence (i.e. planning, management, decision-making, problem-solving, self-evaluation). Given that most translation courses are geared towards competence-based training, there is a call for more rigorous empirical research on how to evaluate the acquisition of translator competence and how to assess students' performance. Investigating and understanding assessment criteria, practices and instruments at universities can reveal what translation is and which competences are needed and should be tested. This can also illustrate how universities have responded to this shift in focus and the resulting implications in translation training. A complex issue Finding valid assessment criteria and making more objective judgements about what a good or bad translation is remains a complex matter. For this reason, further research on procedures, strategies and criteria IMAGES: © SHUTTERSTOCK