Cover not available

Article published In: Translation, Cognition & Behavior
Vol. 5:1 (2022) ► pp.144–164

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

How useful? How important? How difficult?

Triangulating factors to determine expertise in English-to-French questionnaire translation difficulty

 | GESIS-Leibniz Institute for the Social Sciences
Published online: 13 September 2022
DOI logo with link
https://doi.org/10.1075/tcb.00065.dor
Abstract
English ‘gradation’ expressions—the interrogative adverb how followed by an adjective or an adverb—are frequent in questionnaires and they are not straightforward to translate into French. A good translation approach is needed, and there are mainly two options: The recommended approach involves the French adverbs à quel point or dans quelle mesure. The second approach uses a direct question, and the gradation occurs by choosing one of several options in the pre-established answer scale. Could there be a link between questionnaire translators’ expertise and the way they handle these translations, both the product and the process? This exploratory project studied six professional questionnaire translators, whose performance was recorded with concurrent think-aloud and keylogging techniques, and then triangulated. Correlations were analysed qualitatively. The results revealed a link between the questionnaire translators’ expertise and their translations. This confirms the importance of relying on expert translators and further briefing and training them to become good questionnaire translators.
Article outline
  • 1.Introduction
    • 1.1Expertise in questionnaire translation
  • 2.Data and methods
    • 2.1Independent variables
    • 2.2Dependent variables
      • 2.2.1Were expressions translated with the gradation or the direct approach? (TAPs and keystroke logs)
      • 2.2.2Was gradation mentioned as problem?
      • 2.2.3Did translators mention having learned to translate this type of question with the gradation approach?
      • 2.2.4Pauses while translating these expressions
      • 2.2.5Did translators search on the Internet how to translate this type of expression?
      • 2.2.6Number of attempts, intermediate versions, and corrections
      • 2.2.7Number of non-letter keystrokes and mouse movements
    • 2.3Data analysis
  • 3.Results
  • 4.Discussion
  • 5.Conclusions and further research
  • Notes
  • References
References (25)
References
Alves, Fabio & José Luiz Gonçalves. 2003. “A relevance theory approach to the investigation of inferential processes in translation” In Triangulating Translation. Edited by Fabio Alves, 3–24. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. [URL].
Behr, Dorothée. 2018. “Translating questionnaires for cross-national surveys: A description of a genre and its particularities based on the ISO 17100 categorization of translator competences”. Translation & Interpreting 10 (2): 5–20. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Behr, Dorothée & Kuniaki Shishido. 2016. “The Translation of Measurement Instruments for CrossCultural Surveys”. In The SAGE Handbook of Survey Methodology. Edited by Christof Wolf, Dominique Joye, Tom W. Smith & Yang-chih Fu, 268–286. London: SAGE. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Chmiel, Agnieszka. 2020. “Translation, psycholinguistics and cognition” In The Routledge Handbook of Translation and Cognition. Edited by Fabio Alves and Arnt Lykke Jakobsen, 219–238. London: Routledge. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Creswell, John W. & J. David Creswell. 2018. Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches. 5th ed. Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Dorer, Brita. 2020. Advance Translation as a Means of Improving Source Questionnaire Translatability? Findings from a think-aloud study for French and German. Berlin: Frank & Timme.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2022. “Advance Translation—The remedy to improve translatability of source questionnaires? Results of a think-aloud study”. Field Methods online first. (retrieved 26 June 2022)Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
European Social Survey. 2018. ESS Round 9 Translation Guidelines. [URL] (retrieved 26 June 2022)
Fonseca, Norma Barbosa de Lima. 2019. “Analysing the impact of TAPs on temporal, technical and cognitive effort in monolingual post-editing”. Perspectives 27 (4): 552–588. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
García García, José María, Victor M. R. Penichet & María Dolores Lozano Pérez. 2018. “Multimodal affective computing to enhance the user experience of educational software applications”. Mobile Information Systems. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Göpferich, Susanne. 2006. “How Successful is the Mediation of Specialized Knowledge?-The use of thinking-aloud protocols and log files of reverbalization processes as a method in comprehensibility research”. HERMES-Journal of Language and Communication in Business (37): 67–93. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2015. “Translation competence: Explaining development and stagnation from a dynamic system perspective”. In Interdisciplinarity in translation and interpreting process research. Edited by Maureen Ehrensberger-Dow, Susanne Göpferich & Sharon O’Brien, 63–78. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Hansen-Schirra, Silvia & Jean Nitzke. 2020. “Translation, the process–product interface and cognition”. In The Routledge Handbook of Translation and Cognition. Edited by Fabio Alves & Arnt Lykke Jakobsen, 415–432. London: Routledge. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
International Test Commission. 2017. The ITC guidelines for translating and adapting tests. [URL] (retrieved 27 June 2022)
Jääskeläinen, Rita. 2017. “Verbal Reports”. In The Handbook of Translation and Cognition. Edited by John W. Schwieter & Aline Ferreira, 213–231. Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Mellinger, Christopher & Thomas Hanson. 2017. Quantitative research methods in translation and interpreting studies. Milton Park: Routledge.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
PACTE Research Group. 2014. “First results of PACTE group’s experimental research on translation competence acquisition: the acquisition of declarative knowledge of translation”. MonTI. Special Issue Minding Translation, 85–115. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Reiss, Katharina. 1981. “Type, kind and individuality of text: Decision making in translation”. Poetics Today, 2 (4): 121–131. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Rey, Jean. 1984. Dictionnaire sélectif et commenté des difficultés de la version anglaise [Selective and commented dictionary of difficulties in English-to-French translation]. Gap: Editions Ophrys.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Saris, Willem E. & Irmtraud N. Gallhofer. 2014. Design, evaluation, and analysis of questionnaires for survey research. Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Scribani, Melissa., Jessica Shelton, David Chapel, Nicole Krupa, Lynae Wyckoff & Paul Jenkins. 2014. “Comparison of bias resulting from two methods of self-reporting height and weight: a validation study”. JRSM open, 5 (6): 1–7. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Smyth, Jolene D. & Kristen Olson. 2019. “The effects of mismatches between survey question stems and response options on data quality and responses”. Journal of Survey Statistics and Methodology, 7 (1): 34–65. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Tiselius, Elisabet & Adelina Hild. 2017. “Expertise and competence in translation and interpreting”. In The Handbook of Translation and Cognition. Edited by John W. Schwieter and Aline Ferreira, 1st edition, 425–444. Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Mobile Menu Logo with link to supplementary files background Layer 1 prag Twitter_Logo_Blue