Cover not available

Article published In: Babel
Vol. 71:1 (2025) ► pp.44–80

Get fulltext from our e-platform
JBE logo with link
PDF logo with download linkDownload PDF
EPUB logo with download linkDownload EPUB
authorization required

Influence du compte-rendu intégré des problèmes et décisions (CRIPD) sur la qualité de la traduction

Analyse croisée des erreurs et des commentaires d’étudiants en traduction spécialisée

 | Université de Mons

Article language: French

Published online: 28 May 2024
DOI logo with link
https://doi.org/10.1075/babel.00402.mey
Résumé
Cet article a pour objectif de tester la méthode de rapport des problèmes et stratégies de traduction (Compte-rendu intégré des problèmes et décisions abrégé CRIPD) de Gile (. 2004. “Integrated Problem and Decision Reporting as a Translator Training Tool.” JoSTrans, The Journal of Specialised Translation 21: 2–20.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar, . 2005. La traduction. La comprendre, l’apprendre. Paris: Presses universitaires de France. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar) en confrontant les commentaires de traduction rédigés par des étudiants avec les erreurs qu’ils ont commises dans leurs traductions. L’hypothèse formulée est que plus les commentaires sont nombreux, variés et précis, moins les traductions comporteront d’erreurs. Pour vérifier cette hypothèse, nous avons constitué un corpus électronique de 60 traductions commentées dans le cadre du cours de traduction spécialisée du Master en traduction multidisciplinaire de l’Université de Mons. Les résultats montrent qu’il y a effectivement un lien de corrélation entre la quantité et la qualité de commentaires et le nombre et le type d’erreurs relevées : les étudiants ayant fourni des commentaires (i) nombreux (ii) variés et (iii) précis ont tendance à faire globalement moins d’erreurs que ceux qui rédigent peu de commentaires ou des commentaires peu variés et moins précis. Ces résultats ouvrent des pistes d’encadrement individuel ciblé sur les besoins de chaque étudiant en traduction.
Abstract
This article aims at testing the reporting of translation problems and solutions (Integrated Problem and Decision Reporting abbreviated IPDR) proposed by Gile (. 2004. “Integrated Problem and Decision Reporting as a Translator Training Tool.” JoSTrans, The Journal of Specialised Translation 21: 2–20.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar, . 2005. La traduction. La comprendre, l’apprendre. Paris: Presses universitaires de France. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar) by comparing the translation comments written by students with the errors they made in their translations. Our hypothesis is that the more frequent, varied and precise the comments, the fewer the errors in the translations. To verify this hypothesis, we compiled a corpus of 60 commented translations written by students during the specialised translation course of the Master in Multidisciplinary Translation at the University of Mons. The results show that there is indeed a correlation between the quantity and quality of comments and the number and type of errors: students who provide (i) numerous, (ii) varied and (iii) precise comments tend to make fewer errors overall than those who write few comments or comments that are less varied and less precise. The results could be used as a starting point to elaborate pedagogical strategies that could target translation students’ individual needs.
Article outline
  • 1.Introduction
  • 2.Objectifs
  • 3.Méthodologie
    • 3.1Contexte
    • 3.2Annotation des erreurs
    • 3.3Annotations des commentaires
  • 4.Analyse
    • 4.1Analyse des erreurs
    • 4.2Analyse des commentaires
    • 4.3Analyse croisée des erreurs et des commentaires
  • 5.Résultats
    • 5.1Temps d’exécution et note obtenue
    • 5.2Erreurs
      • 5.2.1Analyse des types d’erreurs
      • 5.2.2Analyse des catégories d’erreurs
    • 5.3Commentaires
      • 5.3.1Analyse quantitative
      • 5.3.2Analyse qualitative
    • 5.4Corrélation entre le nombre de commentaires et la note obtenue
    • 5.5Variété des commentaires et note obtenue
    • 5.6Corrélation entre la précision des commentaires et la note obtenue
  • 6.Discussion
    • 6.1Discussion des résultats
    • 6.2Limites et considérations méthodologiques
    • 6.3Pistes d’accompagnement pédagogique
  • 7.Conclusion
  • Remarques
  • Références bibliographiques
References (24)
Références bibliographiques
Adab, Beverly. 2000. “Evaluating Translation Competence”. In Developing Translation Competence, édité par Christina Schäffner et Beverly Adab, 381: 215–28. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Almanna, Ali. 2016. The Routledge Course in Translation Annotation: Arabic-English-Arabic. New York: Routledge. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Anthony, Laurence. 2019. AntConc (3.5.8). [URL]
Galan-Manas, Anabel et Amparo Hurtado Albir. 2015. “Competence Assessment Procedures in Translator Training.” The Interpreter and Translator Trainer 9 (1): 63–82. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Garcia Alvarez, Ana Maria. 2007. “Evaluating Students’ Translation Process in Specialised Translation : Translation commentary.” JoSTrans, The Journal of Specialised Translation 71: 139–163.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2004. “Integrated Problem and Decision Reporting as a Translator Training Tool.” JoSTrans, The Journal of Specialised Translation 21: 2–20.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2005. La traduction. La comprendre, l’apprendre. Paris: Presses universitaires de France. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Hamzelou, Jessica. 2017. “Human Genome Editing Shouldn’t Be Used for Enhancement – Yet.” New Scientist. [URL]
Kearns, John. 2008. “The Academic and the Vocational in Translator Education.” Dans Translator and Interpreter Training: Issues, Methods and Debates, édité par John Kearns, 185–214. Londres: Continuum.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Kelly, Dorothy. 2005. A Handbook for Translator Trainers. Londres: Routledge.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Kim, Daeyoung et Min-Joo Han. 2017. “Autonomie d’apprentissage dans le cours de la traduction universitaire.” Synergies Chine 121: 70–81.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Lahlou, Saadi. 1996. “A Method to Extract Social Representations from Linguistic Corpora.” Japanese Journal of Experimental Social Psychology 35 (3): 278–391. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Loubère, Lucie et Pierre Ratinaud. 2008. Iramuteq (0.6 alpha 3 version 0.1). [URL]
Poudat, Céline et Frederic Landragin. 2017. Explorer des données textuelles : méthodes – pratiques – outils. Paris: De Boeck Supérieur. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Presas, Marisa. 2012. “Training Translators in the European Higher Education Area: A Model for Evaluating Learning Outcomes.” The Interpreter and Translator Trainer 6 (2): 139–169. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
R Core Team. 2019. R: A language and environment for statistical computing (3.6.1). R Foundation for Statistical Computing. [URL]
RStudio Team. 2019. RStudio: Integrated Development for R (2021.09.2). [URL]
Reinert, Max. 1983. “Une méthode de classification descendante hiérarchique : Application à l’analyse lexicale par contexte.” Les cahiers de l’analyse des données, 8 (2): 187–198.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Seabury, Marcia Bundy. 1989. “The Abstraction Ladder in Freshman Composition.” College Composition and Communication 40 (1): 89–92. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Shei, Chris Chi-Chiang. 2005. “Translation commentary : A happy medium between translation curriculum and EAP.” System 33 (2): 309–325. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Shih, Claire Yi-yi. 2018. “Translation commentary re-examined in the eyes of translator educators at British universities.” JoSTrans, The Journal of Specialised Translation 301: 291–311.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Shreve, Gregory. 1997. “Cognition and the Evolution of Translation Competence.” In Cognitive Processes in Translation and Interpreting, édité par Joseph H. Danks, 31: 120–136. Applied psychology. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Cited by (1)

Cited by one other publication

Hong, Wenjie
2025. Verbalisation rétrospective comme outil diagnostique dans la formation en traduction. FORUM. Revue internationale d’interprétation et de traduction / International Journal of Interpretation and Translation DOI logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 2 december 2025. Please note that it may not be complete. Sources presented here have been supplied by the respective publishers. Any errors therein should be reported to them.

Mobile Menu Logo with link to supplementary files background Layer 1 prag Twitter_Logo_Blue