METADATA

Title: Application of translation rubrics in literary translation classes

 

Vol. 2, 2017, pp. 92-100

DOI: 10.46687/SILC.2017.v02.008       

 

Author: Özlem Şahin Soy

About the author: Assistant Professor Dr. at the Department of Translation and Interpretation, Atılım University, Ankara, Turkey

e-mail: ozlem.sahin@atilim.edu.tr

ORCID ID: https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1623-9027

 

Citation (APA style): Soy, Ö. Ş. (2017). Application of translation rubrics in literary translation classes. Studies in Linguistics, Culture, and FLT, 2, 92-100. doi: 10.46687/SILC.2017.v02.008

 

Link: https://silc.fhn-shu.com/images/issues/2017/SILC_2017_2_092_100_9_EN.pdf

 

Abstract: Literary translation, although under different titles, is included in the curricula of most of the education institutions that have Translation studies departments. Assessing the competence of the students in literary translation classes is generally done through codes of practice since most of the rubrics on translation focus on issues such as grasp of information, ease of translation, use of language, grammar rules etc. Apart from this, literary evaluation requires a deeper assessment for each genre depending on its specific properties of form and content. This paper aims to discuss the use of translation assessment rubrics for literary translation courses and investigate whether a more improved style for each genre of literature can be proposed for this purpose. To this end, general approaches to assessment of translation competence and rubrics offered by different institutions are surveyed and their applicability to literary translation courses discussed. In the end, a comprehensive rubric for literary translation courses will be presented.

Key words: translation training, assessment, literary translation, rubric

 

References:

Al-Qinai J. 2000. Translation quality assessment: strategies, parametres and procedures. Meta, 45(3): 497-519.

Baker M. 1992. In other words: a coursebook on translation. Routledge, London, New York.

Broeck R. Van den. 1985. Second thoughts on translation criticism. In: Hermans T. (ed.) The manipulation of literature. Studies in literary translation. St. Martins Press, New York, pp. 54-63.

Catford J. C. 1965. A linguistic theory of translation. Oxford University Press, London.

Garant M. 2009. A case for holistic translation assessment. In: Kalliokoski J., Nikko T., Pyäniemi S. and Shore S. (eds.) A Fin LA-e Soveltavan kielitieen tutkimuksia, 1: 5-17.

Gile D. 1995. Basic concepts and models for interpreters and translator training. Benjamins Translation Library, 8. Benjamins, Amsterdam.

Göpferich S. and Jääskeläinen R.2009. Process research into the development of translation competence: where are we, and where do we need to go? Across Languages and Cultures, 10: 169-191.

Holmes J. S. 1988/2000. The name and nature of translation studies. In: Venuti L. (ed). The translation studies reader. Routledge, London and New York, pp. 172-185.

House J. 1997. Translation quality assessment: a model revisited. Narr, Tubingen.

House J. 2009. Translation. Oxford University Press, Oxford.

House J. 2015. Translation quality assessment: past and present. Routledge, Londres.

Jacobson R. 1959. On linguistic aspects of translation. In: Brower R. A. (ed.). On translation. Harvard University Press, pp. 232-239; repr. In: Venuti L. (ed.). The translation studies reader. Routledge, 2000. pp. 113-118.

Koller W. 1979. Einführung in die Übersetzungswissenschaft (Introduction into the science of translation). Quelle and Meyer, Heidelberg.

Koller W. 1995. The concept of equivalence and the object of translation studies. Target, 7: 191-222.

Kussmaul P. 1995. Training the translator. Benjamins Translation Library, 10. Benjamins, Amsterdam.

McAlester G. 2000. The evaluation of translation into a foreign language. In: Schäffner C. and Adab B. (eds.). Developing translation. Benjamin’s Translation Library. Benjamins, Amsterdam, pp. 229-241.

Melis N. M. and Albir A. H. 2001. Assessment in translation studies: research needs. Meta, 46(2): 272-287.

Munday J. 2002. Introducing translation studies. Routledge, London and New York.

Newmark P. 1981. Approaches to translation. Pergamon Press, New York.

Nida E. and Taber C. R. 1969. The theory and practice of translation. E.J. Brill, Leiden.

Pym A. D. 2010. Exploring translation theories. London & New York.

Schäffner C. 1997. From good to functionally appropriate: assessing translation quality. Current Issues in Language and Society, 4(1): 1-5.

Vinay J. and Jean D. 1958/1989. Translation procedures. Trans. Chesterman A. In: Chesterman A. (ed.). Readings in translation theory. Oy Finn Lectura, Helsinki, pp. 61-69.

Vinay J. and Jean D. 1958/1995. Comparative stylistics of French and English. A methodology for translation. Trans. Sager J. C. and Hamel M.-J. John Benjamins, Amsterdam and Philadelphia.

Waddington C. 2001. Different methods of evaluating translations: the question of validity. Meta, 46(2): 326-344.

Williams M. 2009. Translation quality assessment. University of Ottawa Press, Ottawa.