Cover not available

Article published In: From Disruptions to New Beginnings: The evolution of translation (studies) through technologies
Edited by Federico Gaspari and Silvia Bernardini
[Translation and Translanguaging in Multilingual Contexts 11:3] 2025
► pp. 308–333

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

‘Something old, something new, something borrowed’

Past, present, and future applications of Translation Quality Assessment

 | University of Padua
Published online: 19 August 2025
DOI logo with link
https://doi.org/10.1075/ttmc.00170.qui
Abstract
The advancements in computing and artificial intelligence (AI) alongside the growing need for rapid and effective communication on a global scale are reshaping the landscape of translation, impacting the process, the product, and our understanding of translation. This is especially true for hybrid scenarios, which involve flexible equivalence between the source and target texts, e.g., in the translation of news, popularisation of scientific texts, transediting, and transcreation. These changes also affect existing Translation Quality Assessment (TQA) paradigms, whose scope, aims, and applications should evolve alongside these developments.
This paper engages in a reflective analysis of the historical evolution, present state, and potential future professional and didactic applications of TQA. After reviewing past paradigms, the paper looks into its contemporary applications within professional and educational settings. Special attention is given to the ISO 5060:2024 and its role in shaping TQA, as well as to the integration of computer-assisted revision in translator training. The paper then discusses how current TQA approaches can be adapted to hybrid settings and how they can expand their scope and applications to interact with new technologies. This is illustrated through two applied scenarios, one regarding the summary translation of a medical academic paper for non-expert readers, and the other involving the analysis of machine translation (MT) outputs to assess their quality for post-editing purposes, improving them through AI. The paper thus exemplifies how TQA can be adapted to hybrid translation scenarios and shows how error analysis can serve not only to assess MT quality, but also to determine whether and how to improve its output through automation.
Article outline
  • 1.Translation quality and Translation Quality Assessment: happily ever after?
  • 2.Something old: Translation Quality Assessment
  • 3.Something new: The latest professional and educational applications
    • 3.1A new professional standard: ISO 5060:2024
    • 3.2Computer-assisted TQA: Some didactic applications, and beyond
  • 4.Research question and rationale for the study
  • 5.Something borrowed: Existing practices and future scenarios
    • 5.1Application 1: A simulated professional hybrid scenario
    • 5.2Application 2: TQA applied to new technology in a training scenario
  • 6.Conclusions: The marriage of past and future
  • Acknowledgements
  • Notes
  • References
References (61)
References
ASTM. 2023. F2575 “Standard Practice for Language Translation.”
Banerjee, Satanjeev, and Alon Lavie. 2005. “METEOR: An Automatic Metric for MT Evaluation with Improved Correlation with Human Judgments.” In Proceedings of the ACL Workshop on Intrinsic and Extrinsic Evaluation Measures for Machine Translation and/or Summarization, 65–72.
Bastin, Georges L. 2009. “Adaptation.” In Routledge Encyclopedia of Translation Studies, 2nd ed., ed. by Mona Baker, and Gabriela Saldanha, 3–6. Abingdon: Routledge.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Bittner, Hansjörg. 2020. Evaluating the Evaluator: A Novel Perspective on Translation Quality Assessment. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Castilho, Sheila, Stephen Doherty, Federico Gaspari, and Joss Moorkens. 2018. “Approaches to Human and Machine Translation Quality Assessment.” In Translation Quality Assessment: From Principles to Practice, ed. by Joss Moorkens, Sheila Castilho, Federico Gaspari, and Stephen Doherty, 9–38. Cham: Springer. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Chesterman, Andrew, and Emma Wagner. 2002. Can Theory Help Translators? A Dialogue Between the Ivory Tower and the Wordface. Abingdon: Routledge.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Dam, Helle V., Matilde Nisbeth Brøgger, and Karen Korning Zethsen, eds. 2019. Moving Boundaries in Translation Studies. Abingdon: Routledge.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Devlin, Jacob, Ming-Wei Chang, Kenton Lee, and Kristina Toutanova. 2019. “BERT: Pre-Training of Deep Bidirectional Transformers for Language Understanding.” In Proceedings of NAACL-HLT 2019, 4171–4186.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Doherty, Stephen. 2017. “Issues in Human and Automatic Translation Quality Assessment.” In Human Issues in Translation Technology, ed. by Dorothy Kenny, 131–148. Abingdon: Routledge.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
European Union. 2024. “Translation Quality Evaluation: Info Pack for External Contractors.” [URL]
Ferraresi, Adriano, Gaia Aragrande, Alberto Barrón-Cedeño, Silvia Bernardini, and Maja Miličević Petrović. 2021. “Competences, Skills and Tasks in Today’s Jobs for Linguists: Evidence from a Corpus of Job Advertisements.” [URL]
Gambier, Yves. 2006. “Transformations in International News.” In Translation in Global News. Proceedings of the Conference Held at the University of Warwick 23 June 2006, ed. by Kyle Conway, and Susan Bassnett, 9–21. Coventry: University of Warwick.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Gouadec, Daniel. 1981. “Paramètres de l’évaluation des traductions.” Meta 26 (2): 99–116. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2010. “Quality in Translation.” In Handbook of Translation Studies (Volume 1), ed. by Yves Gambier, and Luc van Doorslaer, 270–275. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Halverson, Sandra L. 1999. “Conceptual Work and the ‘Translation’ Concept.” Target 11 (1): 1–31.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Hansen, Gyde. 2010. “Translation ‘Errors.’” In Handbook of Translation Studies (Volume 1), ed. by Yves Gambier, and Luc van Doorslaer, 385–388. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
House, Juliane. 1997. Translation Quality Assessment: A Model Revisited. Tübingen: Gunter Narr Verlag.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Hutchins, John. 2001. “Machine Translation and Human Translation: In Competition or in Complementation?”, special issue of International Journal of Translation 131: 5–20.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
ISO. 2015. 17100 “Translation Services — Requirements for Translation Services.”
. 2024a. 11669 “Translation Projects — General Guidance.”
. 2024b. 5060 “Translation Services — Evaluation of Translation Output — General Guidance.”
Jeyanathan, Mangalakumari, Sam Afkhami, Fiona Smaill, Matthew S. Miller, Brian D. Lichty, and Zhou Xing. 2020. “Immunological Considerations for COVID-19 Vaccine Strategies.” Nature Reviews Immunology 201: 615–632. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Jiménez-Crespo, Miguel A. 2018. “Crowdsourcing and Translation Quality: Novel Approaches in the Language Industry and Translation Studies.” In Translation Quality Assessment: From Principles to Practice, ed. by Joss Moorkens, Sheila Castilho, Federico Gaspari, and Stephen Doherty, 69–93. Cham: Springer. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
2022. “Specialized Practices in Translation Settings.” In Introduction to Translation and Interpreting Studies, ed. by John Schwieter, and Alina Ferreira, 104–130. Hoboken: Wiley-Blackwell.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Katan, David. 2014. “Uncertainty in the Translation Professions: Time to Transcreate?” CULTUS 71: 10–19.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Kenny, Dorothy. 2009. “Equivalence.” In Routledge Encyclopedia of Translation Studies, 2nd ed., ed. by Mona Baker, and Gabriela Saldanha, 77–80. Abingdon: Routledge.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Koby, Geoffrey S., Paul Fields, Daryl Hague, Arle Lommel, and Alan Melby. 2014. “Defining Translation Quality.” Tradumàtica 121: 413–420. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Kocmi, Tom, Christian Federmann, Roman Grundkiewicz, Marcin Junczys-Dowmunt, Hitokazu Matsushita, and Arul Menezes. 2021. “To Ship or Not to Ship: An Extensive Evaluation of Automatic Metrics for Machine Translation.” In Proceedings of the Sixth Conference on Machine Translation, 478–494, Online. Association for Computational Linguistics.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Konttinen, Kalle, Leena Salmi, and Maarit Koponen. 2020. “Revision and Post-Editing Competences in Translator Education.” In Translation Revision and Post-Editing: Industry Practices and Cognitive Processes, ed. by Maarit Koponen, Brian Mossop, Isabelle S. Robert, and Giovanna Scocchera, 187–202. Abingdon: Routledge. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Lommel, Arle. 2018. “Metrics for Translation Quality Assessment: A Case for Standardising Error Typologies.” In Translation Quality Assessment: From Principles to Practice, ed. by Joss Moorkens, Sheila Castilho, Federico Gaspari, and Stephen Doherty, 109–128. Cham: Springer. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Marchetti, Sofia. 2021. Translating the Pandemic for the Layperson: The Popularizing Approach in Medical Translation. MA diss. University of Padua.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Martindale, Marianna J., and Marine Carpuat. 2018. “Fluency Over Adequacy: A Pilot Study in Measuring User Trust in Imperfect MT.” In Proceedings of AMTA 2018, Vol. 1: MT Research Track, 13–25.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Mossop, Brian. 2020. Revising and Editing for Translators. 4th ed. Abingdon: Routledge.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Multidimensional Quality Metrics (MQM). 2024. Accessed October 10, 2024. [URL]
Musacchio, Maria Teresa, and Virginia Zorzi. 2019. “Scientific Controversies and Popular Science in Translation. Rewriting, Transediting or Transcreation?” Lingue e Linguaggi 291: 481–507.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Nitzke, Jean, Carmen Canfora, Silvia Hansen-Schirra, and Dimitrios Kapnas. 2024. “Decisions in Projects Using Machine Translation and Post-Editing.” The Journal of Specialised Translation 41 (January): 127–148. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Nord, Christiane. 2018. Translating as a Purposeful Activity: Functionalist Approaches Explained. 2nd ed. Abingdon: Routledge.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Nyberg, Linnéa. 2023. Transcreation in Translation: A Study of the Use and Importance of Transcreation in the Swedish Translations of English Marketing Slogans. MA diss. University of Stockholm.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
O’Hagan, Minako. 2013. “The Impact of New Technologies on Translation Studies: A Technological Turn?” In The Routledge Handbook of Translation Studies, ed. by Carmen Millán, and Francesca Batrina, 503–518. Abingdon: Routledge.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Palumbo, Giuseppe. 2009. Key Terms in Translation Studies. London: Continuum.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Papineni, Kishore, Salim Roukos, Todd Ward, and Wei-Jing Zhu. 2002. “BLEU: A Method for Automatic Evaluation of Machine Translation.” In Proceedings of the 40th Annual Meeting on Association for Computational Linguistics, 311–18.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Pedersen, Daniel. 2014. “Exploring the Concept of Transcreation — Transcreation as ‘More Than’?” CULTUS 71: 57–71.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Pietrzak, Paulina. 2014. “Towards Effective Feedback to Translation Students: Empowering Through Group Revision and Evaluation.”, special issue of inTRAlinea. [URL]
Pym, Anthony. 1992. “Translation Error Analysis and the Interference with Language Teaching.” In The Teaching of Translation, ed. by Cay Dollerup, and Anne Loddegaard, 279–288. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.10.1075/z.56.42pymGoogle Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Quinci, Carla. 2023. “Using Technology to Investigate Thematic Competence in Specialised Translation: A Follow-Up.” In What’s Special about Specialised Translation? Essays in Honour of Federica Scarpa, ed. by Giuseppe Palumbo, Katia Peruzzo, and Gianluca Pontrandolfo, 217–245. Bern: Peter Lang.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Quinci, Carla, and Maria Teresa Musacchio. 2023. “Analysing, Revising and Teaching LSP Phraseology: An Integrated Approach.” In Alle radici della fraseologia europea, ed. by Geneviève Henrot Sostero, 529–550. Bern: Peter Lang.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Reiss, Katharina. 2000. Translation Criticism: Potentials and Limitations. Categories and Criteria for Translation Quality Assessment. Abingdon: Routledge.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Reiss, Katharina, and Hans J. Vermeer. 2014. Towards a General Theory of Translational Action: Skopos Theory Explained. Abingdon: Routledge. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Robert, Isabelle S., Aline Remael, and Jim J. J. Ureel. 2017. “Towards a Model of Translation Revision Competence.” The Interpreter and Translator Trainer 11 (1): 1–19. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Rodríguez de Céspedes, Begoña. 2020. “Beyond the Margins of Academic Education: Identifying Translation Industry Training Practices through Action Research.” The International Journal of Translation and Interpreting Research 12 (1): 115–126. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Sánchez-Gijón, Pilar, and Dorothy Kenny. 2022. “Selecting and Preparing Texts for Machine Translation: Pre-Editing and Writing for a Global Audience.” In Machine Translation for Everyone: Empowering Users in the Age of Artificial Intelligence, ed. by Dorothy Kenny, 81–103. Berlin: Language Science Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Scansani, Randy. 2020. Machine Translation for Institutional Academic Texts: Output, Quality, Terminology Translation and Post-Editor Trust. PhD diss. University of Bologna.
Scarpa, Federica. 2020. Research and Professional Practice in Specialised Translation. London: Palgrave. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Schäffner, Christina. 2012. “Rethinking Transediting.” Meta 57 (4): 866–883. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Scocchera, Giovanna. 2020. “The Competent Reviser: A Short-Term Empirical Study on Revision Teaching and Revision Competence Acquisition.” The Interpreter and Translator Trainer 14 (1): 19–37. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Toury, Gideon. 2012. Descriptive Translation Studies — and Beyond. Revised ed. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
van Egdom, Gys-Walt. 2021. “Improving Revision Quality in Translator Training with TranslationQ.” In Translation Revision and Post-Editing Industry Practices and Cognitive Processes, ed. by Maarit Koponen, Brian Mossop, Isabelle S. Robert, and Giovanna Scocchera, 203–225. Abingdon: Routledge.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
van Egdom, Gys-Walt, Winibert Segers, Henri Bloemen, Hendrik J. Kockaert, and Bert Wylin. 2018. “Revising and Evaluating with TranslationQ.” Bayt Al-Hikma: Journal for Translation Studies 21: 25–56.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Way, Andy. 2018. “Quality Expectations of Machine Translation.” In Translation Quality Assessment: From Principles to Practice, ed. by Joss Moorkens, Sheila Castlho, Federico Gaspari, and Stephen Doherty, 159–178. Cham: Springer. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Williams, Malcolm. 2009. “Translation Quality Assessment.” Mutatis Mutandis 2 (1): 3–23.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Mobile Menu Logo with link to supplementary files background Layer 1 prag Twitter_Logo_Blue