1999, 2002), Jensen (2009), and Liu and Chiu (2009) are among the few researchers who have done some exploratory empirical work in this direction. Thus, translation difficulty is an important variable in translation process research.Īlthough the expression ‘translation difficulty’ has been mentioned frequently in translation literature (e.g., Nord 2005), few researchers have attempted to measure it. Dragsted (2004) found in her empirical study that professional translators would adopt a more novice-like behavior during translation of a difficult text than during the translation of an easy text. For example, the use of different translation strategies in terms of type and frequency might vary depending on the translation difficulty level of the texts. This makes it hard for one to evaluate the comparability of experimental results between these studies. For instance, in process-oriented research, researchers have no standards to refer to when they choose test passages, and the texts used are diverse in terms of text type, length and, possibly, difficulty (see Krings 2001:74). In translation research, translation difficulty deserves more attention. As the ATA intended the passages to be equally difficult, this finding makes one doubt that their workgroup method for evaluating the translation difficulty level of those texts in 2006 was effective. For instance, this author found that, when studying the American Translators Association (ATA)’s 2006 English–Chinese examinations, among the three test passages A (general), B (in the domain of medicine), and C (in the domain of business), passage C was the most difficult one to comprehend according to the readability test results, and the passing rate for passage C was the lowest among the passages. Unfortunately, because of lack of research in this field, their assessments are not always as effective as intended. Hence, there is a need for properly leveled passages for translation exercises in translation pedagogy.Īssessing the translation difficulty level of testing materials is a must for translation accreditation bodies. The implication for translator education is that translation tasks should be sequenced in an order of increasing complexity for students, and the difficulty level of source texts should be appropriate for them. Level for reading has been suggested to contain 93% to 97% known words, with 3% to 7% new or unknown words (Gickling and Rosenfield 1995). In the field of foreign language teaching, research has demonstrated that providing an appropriate level of challenge (i.e., instructional level) improves academic outcomes (see Burns 2004). Although experts’ intuitions (especially an expert panel’s judgment) is “reasonably reliable” (Campbell and Hale 1999), we still need instruments or established procedures to make the evaluation process more effective and the results more objective. Traditionally, people rely on their holistic intuitions to gain an idea of the level of a text’s translation difficulty. Knowing the difficulty level of a translation assignment is important in translation pedagogy, accreditation and research. Keywords : translation difficulty, mental workload, cognitive load, readability, competence, measurement This article intends to provide a theoretical and methodological overview of translation difficulty and serve as a foundation for this line of inquiry. For measuring mental workload, we can adopt subjective measures (e.g., a multidimensional rating scale), performance measures, or physiological measures. The means for identifying translationspecific difficulty include grading translations, analyzing verbal protocols, and recording and analyzing translation behavior. Readability formulas are often used to measure text difficulty. Accordingly, to measure translation difficulty, we need to measure text difficulty, identify translation-specific difficulty, and assess translation difficulty (i.e., mental workload) for the translator. The potential sources of translation difficulty include translation factors (i.e., text difficulty and translation-specific difficulty) and translator factors. ![]() Then two basic research questions must be answered: what to measure and how to measure it. If the evaluation process is to be more effective and the results more objective, an instrument needs to be developed. ![]() Traditionally, people rely on their general impression to gauge a text’s translation difficulty level. 29–54 (2015)Ībstract : Accurate assessment of a text’s level of translation difficulty is critical for translator training, accreditation and research. SANJUN SUN E-mail: Across Languages and Cultures 16 (1), pp. Theoretical and methodological considerations
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |