THE TEACHING OF TRANSLATION
3. Methodological issues in the teaching of translationof translation
If we intend to discuss methodological issues in translation pedagogy, we must delimit ourselves from translation as it is practised in foreign language teaching (Duff 1989). That could also be regarded as a type of translation, but with a fun
damentally different focus from what is needed in professional translator training.
The two types of translation may be distinguished by the terms “pedagogical translation” versus “real translation”.
3.1. Pedagogical translation - real translation
Pedagogical and real translation can be distinguished on the basis of function, object and addressee. As regards function, in the case of pedagogical transla
tions translation is a tool, whereas it is the goal of real translations. We can speak of pedagogical translation when the aim of teaching is not the development of translation skills, but the improvement of language proficiency. In such cases, translation tasks serve merely as a means of consciousness-raising, practicing, or testing language knowledge. We can speak of real translation only if the aim of translation is to develop translation skills.
The two types of translation can be distinguished on the basis of the object of the translation: while in real translation the translator communicates information about reality, in pedagogical translation the translator provides information about his/her level of proficiency.
And finally, a distinction can be made on the basis of the addressee of the trans
lation: while in real translation the addressee is a reader, who wants information about reality, unsuspecting and well-intended, not set to find mistakes, in peda
gogical translation the addressee is the teacher or examiner, who wants to find out about the language proficiency of the translator and feels compelled to find mis
takes.
From all this it follows that real translator training starts where foreign language teaching ends. In other words, in secondary schools and even in the foreign lan
guage departments of universities and colleges we may only speak of pedagogical translation, while the teaching of real translation remains the task of translator and interpreter training colleges and postgraduate courses, designed specially for this purpose. Note, however, that even in these institutions the “client” or the “con
sumer” of translation is the teacher, so we cannot speak of real translation even in translator training.
3.2. Creating lifelike situations in the teaching of translation
The greatest paradox in the teaching of real translation is that the teaching situa
tion itself makes real translation impossible. The teacher, even if he/she is a highly experienced translator, is not a real customer or consumer. Therefore, a frequently asked question in the literature on translation methodology is how to bring teach
ing closer to life, i.e. how to create lifelike situations in the translation class.
According to Jean Vienne (1994), in translation classes realistic situations should be created, in which the teacher acts as a "requester". If the texts to be translated are real texts translated previously by the teacher, then he/she has already analysed the translation situation, and can thus act as a client and answer questions, like:
"Who wrote the source text? Who are the target group? What is the context of use?
Has the source text been translated into other languages? What is the status of these translations?” etc. etc.
According to Peter A. Schmitt, real translation situations can be created through the selection of texts (1997). In his view, only authentic texts should be used, which should not be adapted or shortened. Only texts satisfying realistic commu
nicative needs should be translated, i.e. texts that are commonly translated in the case of a particular language pair in either direction. The users’ manual of a car is obviously more often translated from German to Portuguese than vice versa. There
fore, the selection of texts should be preceded by market research and by the mapping of frequent topics and discourse types. Since the range of texts translated by freelance translators is wider than that translated by contracted translators, the mapping of translation types should start with freelance translators. Taking the German-English language pair as an example, a typical task would be the transla
tion of a manual in the field of mechanical engineering, electronics, or informa
tion technology (Schmitt 1997: 128).
Adriana Pagano (1994) criticises the teacher-centred practice of traditional translator training classes. In her opinion, it is wrong that the teacher is the only reader of the translations. This practice reinforces the dominance of the source language text and continues to fuel error-oriented thinking. Her suggestion is that translated texts should be exchanged among students and assessed together in groups, preferably without comparing them to the source-language text.
The concept of the teacher as a "repository and dispenser of knowledge” is also criticised by Király (1997). On the basis of a series of experiments in transla
tion pedagogy, conducted in Mainz-Germersheim, he suggests a "constructivist approach” instead, where the teacher "would serve as a project coordinator and an English language advisor - but not as the teacher in the traditional sense of a dispenser of knowledge and truth” (Király 1997: 386).
3.3. Teacher vs. editor or reviser
In our view, neither the imitation of realistic situations, nor the occasional switch between teacher and students can change the fact that if the end-point of the
"translation chain” is the teacher, then we cannot speak of real translation. Unless, of course, the teacher acts as a reader or editor. Readers and editors have a natu
ral role in the "translation chain”; they represent the last stage before the con-134
3. Methodological issues in the teaching of translation
sumer is reached. The difference between editors and teachers lies in their error- correction strategies: the aim of teachers’ error-correction strategies is to develop students’ translation skills, while the aim of editors’ error-correction strategies is to make sure that communication between the source-language writer and the tar- get-language consumer is achieved.
Thus, editors have no choice but to correct all errors and mistakes, whereas teachers may possess various types of error-correction strategies. In fact, they often develop strategies of their own. While editors must always follow a product-oriented approach, teachers can choose between a product- and a process-oriented approach.
3.4. Different approaches to error correction
The process-oriented approach to translation teaching and translation skills development radically denies the importance of error correction. Gile (1994), for instance, disapproves of the “traditional” method of translation teaching, in which the teacher corrects mistakes, accepts or rejects students’ solutions, and shows his/
her solution as the example to follow. He favours a process-oriented model instead, in which teachers do not expect perfect end products from students, but use trans
lations to gain insights into the process of translation and raise questions rather than criticise.
The product-oriented model to translation pedagogy does not reject the idea of error correction, but tries to reform its nature instead. There are three methods to be mentioned: (1) the method of systematic feedback, (2) the method of stu
dent-centred correction, and (3) the humanistic approach to students’ errors.
The method of “systematic feedback” was proposed by Dollerup (1994).
He started out from the idea that teachers’ error corrections should be organised in a way that students benefit from them. His feedback consists of three components:
(1) “corrections in translations which the students have handed in”, (2) “oral dis
cussion in the class covering adequate as well as inadequate renditions”, (3) “feed
back form assessing strenghts and weaknesses with each student” (1994: 125).
Dollerup’s study contains this feedback form (1994: 128), consisting of 42 prob
lem areas, which the teacher has to fill in when evaluating the students’ perform
ance in a given translation assignment by adding positive or negative signs to the particular areas (e.g., ellipses, insertions, word order, sentence structure, colloca
tions, punctuation).
Maria Julia Sainz (1994) recommends the filling in of a similar form. In her
“Correction Card”, it is not problem areas that must be evaluated, but four columns, named “Mistakes”, “Possible correction”, “Source”, and “Type of mistake”, must be filled in by the students themselves.
Sainz also proposes a “student-centred approach” in error correction: which involves two ideas: (1) the human rights of students should not be disregarded in error correction, that is, students have the right to know the criteria according to which their translations are evaluated and also who assessed their translations, etc.
(2) error correction should not be aggressive. In Sainz’s view, “ The traditional method of re-writing the correct version on the student’s sheet is ... very disruptive, frustrating and stressful for students ... (1994: 138). Instead, she recommends a
so-called “Correction Card", which, as mentioned before, must be filled in by the students for self-assessment.
The “humanistic approach” to error correction was proposed by Candace Seguinot (1989). She regards errors committed by translators not as violations of linguistic norm, but rather as valuable pieces of information. In this view, mistakes/
errors are natural consequences of translation, “...the surface manifestations of the phenomena which are the object of study” (1989: 74). Errors “can give inter
esting insights into the normal process of translation, and make possible better predictions about what kind of errors are likely to occur in translation” (1989:
74). She also claims that there are errors which arise because the translator does not understand the source language or cannot manipulate the target language well enough, while other errors “are a normal by-product of the translation process”
and are “normal in learning to translate” (1989: 80).
3.5. Different strategies in error correction
After having reviewed the various error correction strategies, let us return to the assumption that, unlike teachers, revisers and editors have no other choice but to be product-oriented, correct the errors they find, and what is more, must do so in the text itself and not on various types of feedback forms. Therefore, in our view, translation teaching could be made more lifelike by having the teacher do editing rather than error correction. Consequently, the strategies listed below are not for professional translator training:
(1) Teachers should not make corrections in the text; they should write their suggestions on the margin.
(2) Teachers should not make corrections in the text; they should attach their remarks on a separate sheet of paper.
(3) Teachers should make a list of the mistakes and attach it to the translation.
(4) Teachers should not correct errors; they should appreciate good solutions, and disregard incorrect ones.
(5) Teachers should not include their correct solutions in the text, because this would suggest that those are the only correct solutions, and it is well known that all translation problems have several possible good solutions.
The above strategies cannot be used in professional translator training because future translators who are treated so tactfully and whose mistakes are not treated as mistakes but are looked upon as starting points for interesting debates in the classroom will be shocked to see their revised translation corrected by a profes
sional editor.
Thus, in professional translator training it is recommended that the following principles should be followed:
(l)The work of teachers of translation should resemble the work of revisers and editors in publishing houses, which is of course only possible if the teacher has practice and experience in translation, revising and editing.
3. Methodological issues in the teaching of translation
(2) The teacher-student relationship should resemble the relationship between an experienced translator (reviser, editor) and a beginner translator.
(3) Pedagogical corrections should be similar to revisers’ corrections (teachers should use the standard correction symbols and not wavy, dotted or broken lines).
(4) All errors should be corrected, and not only those that are interesting from the pedagogical point of view.
(5) Corrections must be included in the text.
(6) Corrections must be made not only on the sentence level but on the dis
course level as well, the outcome of which should be a coherent, publish
able text.
(7) Each and every text should be of publishable quality.
The latter requirement also contributes to the evaluation of translations. In trans
lator training, the assessment of translations should be based on a single criterion:
how much work (correction, editing) is needed to obtain a publishable translation.
If revising and editing takes more time than the translating itself, then the transla
tion is obviously unusable as a translation.
Translators and translation teachers trained originally as language teachers should be warned that revising and editing is not the same as marking tests. The task of the reviser/editor is not to underline mistakes and indicate them on the margins to prepare a subsequent pedagogical discussion, but to make the text publishable. If the text is translated for publication in a daily newspaper or a pro
fessional journal, then all the corrections necessary to make it publishable should be included. If the translation is not intended for publication (e.g., user’s manual, information leaflet for patients, technical description, documentation, etc.), the reviser/editor’s task is to make all the corrections that will promote the interests of the prospective users.
Edited translations can also be used for purposes other than teaching. Corpora containing edited student translations provide valuable data for research in trans
lation studies. The daily routine of revisers at translation agencies or editors at pub
lishing houses is an interesting form of speech activity, which has not been researched systematically so far (for more detail see Mossop 1994). One could contrast, for instance, the correction strategies of different editors, or the strategies of editors and teachers. If translations are handed in in an electronic format and the editors also correct them on the screen, then computer programmes recording pre-editing solutions should be used (for more details see Klaudy 1996a).
3.6. Types of translation tasks
Translator training differs from language teaching also in that it is very hard to find varied tasks for trainees. In translator and interpreter training, practical work consists in actual translating and interpreting. This can be done in class or assigned as homework. The translator training coursebooks mentioned previously do the same thing: at the end of each chapter they ask the students to translate one or two texts using what they have learnt in class.
The first volume of the new translation coursebook series published by Corvina Publishing House, Budapest entitled Angol fordítóiskola {English Translation School by Bart, Klaudy and Szőllősy 1996), tries to break with this tradition. The various chapters, besides the texts and the comments, also contain varied tasks to develop the different translation skills, and these tasks are not presented at the end of chapters, but as organic parts of the preparatory work for the subsequent transla
tion assignment. These task types will be reviewed below.
3.6.1. Text-preparation tasks
Textual work is aimed at familiarising students with the texts before translating them. It is often voiced in translation classes that before translating, the whole text should be read. However, it is not enough to just say so, the students should be taught to read as translators do. And it is exactly this that the text-preparation tasks are designed to promote by asking questions like the following:
(1) Could you make a guess as to who ordered the translation of the above article and with what purpose?
(2) Is it for internal use or for publication?
(3) Is it for the radio or for the printed media?
(4) To what extent does the supposed use of the translation affect the transla
tor’s solutions?
(5) What is the text about?
(6) Mark the key words of the paragraphs.
(7) On the basis of the key words, summarise briefly (in 5-10 sentences) the main points in the text, etc.
These questions help the students to familiarise themselves with the text before actually translating it. They try to find a communicative situation in which the text would need to be translated. They discuss who the client might be, for whom the original text was written, and assess the consequences of where the text is sup
posed to be published.
It might sound strange to ask them to summarise the text before they translate it, but experience shows that not all novice translators read the text before transla
tion, or even if they read it, they do not read it as translators should.
The marking of the key words of paragraphs is also important. It is crucial to clarify what new information the given paragraphs add to the development of the line of thought, because only in this way can we find the “sign-posting” elements so essential to making the translation.
3.6.2. Lexical preparation
The lexical preparation of texts consists of dictionary research. In every text, one can separate the genre-specific general vocabulary and the topic-specific special vocabulary. Both can give rise to problems.
Dictionary work could, of course, be done parallel to translating the text, but preparatory work has its own pedagogical purposes, such as vocabulary develop
ment, or the demonstration of the difference between context-dependent and con
3. Methodological issues in the teaching of translation
text-independent solutions. An important component of lexical preparation is working with various dictionary types (monolingual, bilingual, specialised, dic
tionaries of synonyms, slang, etc).
3.6.3. Suggested translation with variants
After familiarising themselves with the text and lexical preparation, the students may begin to translate. To help them in translations, they are sometimes given
"multioption" translations, in which several different but possible translation options can be found.
Let us illustrate this type of translation task with an example taken from the Hungarian-English part of the book (Bart, Klaudy and Szőllősy 1996: 149).
THIRTY YEARS OF ROCK