Cover not available

Article published In: Revista Española de Lingüística Aplicada/Spanish Journal of Applied Linguistics
Vol. 33:2 (2020) ► pp.536–561

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

Translation unit and quality of translation

Cultural and innovation perspectives

 | Najran University
Published online: 10 February 2021
DOI logo with link
https://doi.org/10.1075/resla.18017.qas
Abstract
This research aims to study segmentation (i.e., translation unit (TU)) in students’ translations of cultural references and assess the translation quality, using Translog software and a translation task. This product and process-oriented research examines the same independent variable, that is, segmentation, from two angles, namely, student production and translation output. Ten female postgraduate students aged between 28 and 30 performed a computer-based translation task on cultural references. Their translations of English cultural references into Arabic revealed process and production problems (i.e., unsystematic management of translation stages, high mean TUs and time, low mean scores, and deviant translations). The study recommended student training in translation process and product management by employing innovation technological tools (e.g., Translog software and eye-tracking device). Moreover, presenting the cultural dimension should go beyond written translation materials and include audio and visual materials. Sound methodology of training should be adopted, one that draws upon the computational model of human translation, linguistic and cultural models, and models of translation quality assessment.
Resumen
Unidad de traducción y calidad de la traducción: Perspectivas culturales y de innovación
Esta investigación tiene como objetivo estudiar la segmentación (esto es, la unidad de traducción (translation unit, TU)) en las traducciones de las referencias culturales que realizan los estudiantes y evaluar la calidad de la traducción, usando el software Translog y una tarea de traducción. Esta investigación orientada al producto y al proceso examina la misma variable independiente, es decir, la segmentación, desde dos ángulos, a saber, la producción de los estudiantes y el resultado de la traducción. Diez estudiantes femeninas de posgrado de entre 28 y 30 años de edad realizaron una tarea informática de traducción sobre referencias culturales. Sus traducciones de las referencias culturales inglesas al árabe revelaron problemas de proceso y producción (es decir, manejo no sistemático de las etapas de la traducción, TUs de gran significado, promedios de puntuaciones bajos, y desviaciones en las traducciones. El estudio recomendaba que los estudiantes se capacitaran en el proceso de traducción y el manejo del producto, utilizando herramientas tecnológicas de innovación (por ejemplo, software Translog y dispositivo de rastreo ocular). Además, presentar la dimensión cultural debe ir más allá de los materiales de traducción escritos e incluir materiales audiovisuales. Debe adoptarse una metodología sensata de capacitación, que haga uso del modelo computacional de traducción humana, los modelos lingüísticos y culturales y los modelos de evaluación de la calidad de la traducción.
Article outline
  • 1.Introduction
    • 1.1Translation unit
    • 1.2Definition of significant pauses in target text production
    • 1.3Models of translation quality assessment
    • 1.4Culture in translation
  • 2.Previous studies
  • 3.Methodology
  • 4.Results
    • 4.1Analysis at the textual level
    • 4.2Analysis at the lexical level
      • 4.2.1Translation unit and time
    • 4.3Translation product quality
  • 5.Discussion
    • 5.1Translation time and management of translation stages
    • 5.2Segmentation of translation units and time
    • 5.3Students’ translations and translation quality
  • 6.Pedagogical implications
  • 7.Conclusion
  • Acknowledgements
  • Notes
  • References
References (62)
References
Aixelá, J. (1996). Culture-specific items in translation. In R. Alvarez & M. Vidal (Eds.), Translation, power, subversion (pp. 52–78). Clevedon: Multilingual Matters.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Alves, F., & Goncalves, J. (2003). A relevance theory approach to the investigation of inferential processes in translation. In F. Alves (Ed.), Triangulating translation: perspectives in process-oriented research (pp. 3–24). Amsterdam/ Philadelphia: John Benjamins. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Alves, F., & Vale, D. (2009). Probing the unit of Translation in time: Aspects of the design and development of a web application for storing, annotating, and querying translation process data”. Across Languages and Cultures, 10(2), 251–273. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Angelone, E. (2010). Uncertainty, uncertainty management, and metacognitive problem solving in the translation task. In M. Shreve & E. Angelone (Eds.), Translation and cognition (pp. 17–39). Philadelphia: John Benjamins. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Baker, M. (1992). In other words: A course book on translation. London & New York: Routledge.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Barkaoui, K. (2016). What and when second-language learners revise when responding to timed writing tasks on the computer: The roles of task type, second language proficiency, and keyboarding skills. The Modern Language Journal, 100(1), 320–340. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Bassenett, S., & Lefevere, A. (1990). Translation, history and culture. London: Pinter.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Brown, D. (1994). Principles of language learning and teaching (1st ed.). New Jersey: Prentice Hall Regents.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Campbell, S., & Hale, S. (2003). Translation and interpreting assessment in the context of educational measurement. In G. Anderman & M. Rogers (Eds.), Translation today: Trends and perspectives (pp. 205–224). UK: Multilingual Matters. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Carl, M., & Buch-Kromann, M. (2010). Correlating translation product and translation process data of professional and student translators. Proceeding of European Association for Machine Translation, 141, 1–8. Retrieved from [URL]
Carl, M., & Jakobsen, A. (2009). Towards statistical modelling of translators’ activity data. International Journal of Speech Technology, 12(4), 125–138. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(2010). Relating production units and alignment units in translation activity data. In B. Sharp & M. Zock (Eds.), Natural language processing and cognitive science (pp. 37–46). Portugal: Scitepress Digital Library.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Carl, M., & Kay, M. (2011). Gazing and typing activities during translation: A comparative study of translation units of professional and student translators. Meta: Journal Des Traducteurs, 56(4), 952–975. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Carl, M., Kay, M., & Jensen, K. (2010). Long distance revisions in drafting and post-editing. Proceeding of CIC Ling 2010, 1–12. Retrieved from [URL]
Carl, M., Dragsted, B., & Jakobsen, A. (2011). A Taxonomy of human translation styles. Translation Journal, 16(2). Retrieved from [URL]
Catford, J. (1965). A linguistic theory of translation. London: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Dragsted, B. (2005). Segmentation in translation: Differences across levels of expertise and difficulty. Target International Journal of Translation Studies, 17,1, 49–70.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(2006). Segmentation in translation: Differences across levels of expertise and difficulty. Target International Journal of Translation Studies, 17(1), 49–70. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(2010). Coordination of reading and writing processes in translation: An eye on uncharted territory. In G. Shreve & E. Angelone (Eds.), Translation and Cognition (pp. 41–62). Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(2012b). Indicators of difficulty in translation – correlating product and process data. Across Languages and Cultures, 13(1), 81–98. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Dragsted, B., & Carl, M. (2013). Towards a classification of translator profiles based on eye-tracking and keylogging data. Journal of Writing Research, 5(1), 133–158. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Fawcett, P. (1987). Putting translation theory to use. In H. Keith & I. Mason (Eds.), Translation in the modern language degree (pp. 31–18). London: CILT.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Gerloff, P. (1986). Second language learners’ reports on the interpretive processes: Talk-aloud protocols of translation. In J. House & S. Blum-Kulla (Eds.), Interlingual and intercultural communication (pp. 243–262). Tubingen: Gunter Narr.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Hansen, G. (2008). The speck in your brother’s eye – the beam in your own. In G. Hansen, A. Chesterman & H. Gerzymisch-Arbogast (Eds.), Efforts and models in interpreting and translation research (pp. 255–280). Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(2009). Some Thoughts about the evaluation of translation products in empirical translation process research. Copenhagen Studies in Language, 381, 389–402.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Jensen, A. (2000). The effects of time on cognitive processes and strategies in translation, Copenhagen (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). Copenhagen Business School, Denmark.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Hatim, B., & Mason, I. (1990). Discourse and the translator (5th ed.). London: Longman.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
House, J. (1997). Translation quality assessment: A model revisited. Tübingen: G. Narr.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(2001). Translation quality assessment: Linguistic description versus social evaluation. Meta: Journal des traducteurs, 46(2), 243–257. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(2014). Translation quality assessment: Past and present. London, United Kingdom: Routledge. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Ivir, V. (1987). Procedures and strategies for the translation of culture. London & New York: Routledge.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Jakobsen, A. (1999). Logging time delay in translation. In G. Hansen (Ed.), LSP texts and the process of translation (pp. 71–101). Copenhagen: Copenhagen Business School.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(2011). Tracking translators’ keystrokes and eye movements with Translog. In C. Alvstad, A. Held & E. Tiselius (Eds.), Methods and strategies of process research. integrative approaches in translation studies (pp. 37–55). Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(2016). Are gaze shifts a key to a translator’s text segmentation? Poznan Studies in Contemporary Linguistics, 52(2), 149–172. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Karoubi, B. (2016). Translation quality assessment demystified. Babel. Revue Internationale de la Traduction / International Journal of Translation, 62(2), 253–277. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Katan, D. (1999). Translating cultures: An introduction for translators, interpreters and mediators. Manchester: St. Jerome.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Krings, H. (1986). Translation problems and translation strategies of advanced German learners of French. In J. House & S. Blum-Kulka (Eds.), Interlingual and intercultural communication (pp. 263–75). Tubingen: Gunter Narr.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Kupulainen, M. (2015). On the operationalisation of pauses in translation process research. The International Journal for Translation & Interpreting, 7 (1), 47–58.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Lindgren, E., & Sullivan, K. (2006a). Analysing online revision. In K. Sullivan & E. Lindgren (Eds.), Computer keystroke logging: Methods and applications (pp. 157–188). Oxford: Elsevier.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Lörscher, W. (1991). Translation performance, translation process, and translation strategies. A psycholinguistic investigation. Tubingen: Gunter Narr.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Mailhac, J. (1996). The formulation of translation strategies for cultural references. In C. Hoffmann (Ed.), Language, culture and communication in contemporary Europe (pp. 132–151). Clevedon: Multilingual Matters.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Mossop, B. (2007a). Editing and revising for translators. Manchester: St. Jerome.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Munday, J. (2008). Introducing translation studies: Theories and applications. London: Routledge.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(2012). Evaluation in translation: Critical points of translator decision making. London: Routledge. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Newmark, P. (1988). A textbook of translation. New York: Prentice Hall.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Nida, E. (1964). Toward a science of translating: With special reference to principles and procedures involved in Bible translating. Leiden: Brill.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Nida, E., & Taber, C. (1974c). The theory and practise of translation. Leiden: Brill.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Nord, C. (1996). Text type and translation method. The Translator, 2(1), 81–88. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
O’Brien, S. (2006). Pauses as indicators of cognitive effort in post-editing machine translation output. Across Languages and Cultures, 7(1), 1–21. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Olk, H. (2013). Cultural references in translation: A framework for quantitative translation analysis. Perspectives, 21(3), 344–357. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
PACTE (2003). Acquiring translation competence: Hypotheses and methodological problems in a research project. In A. Beeby, D. Ensinger & M. Presas (Eds.), Investigating Translation (pp. 99–106). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
PICT (2012b). Promoting intercultural communication in translators. Situational Survey Report. Retrieved from [URL]
Saldanha, G., & O’ Brien, S. (2015). Research methodologies in translation studies. London and New York: Taylor & Francis Group.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Qassem, M. (2016). Culture-based text translation strategy analysis: English to Arabic. (Unpublished doctoral dissertation), Mysore University, India.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Schaeffer, M., Carl, M., Lacruz, I., & Aizawa, A. (2016). Measuring cognitive translation effort with activity units. Baltic Journal of Modern Computing, 4(2), 331–345.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Sharmin, S., Spakov, O., Raiha, K., & Jakobsen, A. (2008). Where on the screen do translation students look while translating, and for how long? In S. Gopferich, A. Jakobsen, & I. Mees (Eds.), Looking at eyes: Eye-Tracking studies of reading and translation processing (pp. 30–51). Copenhagen: Copenhagen Studies in Language.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Tomozeiu, D., & Kumpulainen, M. (2016). Operationalising intercultural competence for translation pedagogy. The Interpreter and Translator Trainer, 10(3), 268–284. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Ulrych, M. (2005). Curricula and syllabi designers and translation practices. In M. Tennent (Ed.), Training for the new millennium: Pedagogies for translation and interpreting (pp. 3–33). Amsterdam / Philadelphia: John Benjamins. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Yarosh, M. (2015). Translator intercultural competence: A model, learning objectives and level Indicators. In Y. Cui & W. Zhao (Eds.), Handbook of research on teaching methods in language translation and interpretation (pp. 160–178). Hershey, PA: IGI Global. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Zhang, M. (2015). Teaching translation with a model of multimodality. Asia Pacific Translation and Intercultural Studies, 2(1), 30–45. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Cited by (9)

Cited by nine other publications

Al Thowaini, Buthainah M. & Mutahar Qassem
2024. The impact of an industry-driven translation training program on the performance of trainee translators. Cogent Arts & Humanities 11:1 DOI logo
Asiri, Eisa, Mutahar Qassem & Yousef Sahari
2024. Navigating Cultural Landscapes: Textual Insights into English–Arabic–English Translation. Open Cultural Studies 8:1 DOI logo
Hazaea, Abduljalil Nasr & Mutahar Qassem
2024. Translation Competence in Translator Training Programs at Saudi Universities: Empirical Study. Open Education Studies 6:1 DOI logo
Jamoussi, Rafik, Aladdin Al Zahran & Kais A. Kadhim
2023. Beliefs on translation speed among students. A case study. Open Linguistics 9:1 DOI logo
Qassem, Mutahar & Buthainah M. Al Thowaini
2023. Cognitive Processes and Translation Quality: Evidence from Keystroke-Logging Software. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research 52:5 ► pp. 1589 ff. DOI logo
Qassem, Mutahar & Buthainah M. Al Thowaini
2024. Translation processes and products in L1-to-L2 and L2-to-L1 translations: Insights from keylogging data. Education and Information Technologies 29:16 ► pp. 21789 ff. DOI logo
Qassem, Mutahar & Buthainah M. Al Thowaini
2024. Effectiveness of an online training course for trainee translators: Analysis of keylogging data. Education and Information Technologies DOI logo
Qassem, Mutahar, Buthainah M. Al Thowaini & Anastassia Zabrodskaja
2023. Bi-directionality in translating culture: Understanding translator trainees’ actual and perceived behaviors. PLOS ONE 18:11 ► pp. e0293541 ff. DOI logo
Qassem, Mutahar
2022. Adequacy, fluency and cognitive processes: evidence from translating English news articles into Arabic. Interactive Learning Environments ► pp. 1 ff. DOI logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 30 november 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