This paper investigates the differences in translation approach between translation students and language teaching students. In particular, it discusses differences in the way each group approaches translation and the effect of those approaches on the translation or the final product. Two groups of students attending King Saud University in Saudi Arabia, one the faculty of Languages and Translation and the other the Faculty of Education, participated in the study, which applied qualitative and quantitative methods to answer the research questions.
The findings concluded that there are differences in the way each group approaches translation. However, the observed approaches and patterns are not distinctive; they are shared by both groups in varying intensity. Attributing those differences in approaches to educational background requires further investigation.
Table of Contents
1. Introduction
2. Main Questions and hypothesis
3. Data and methodology
4. Literature Review
4.1 Systemic Functional Linguistics and Translation
4.1.1 Language teaching education
4.1.2 Translation Education
5. Comparison of Language and Translation Education
5.1 Similarities
5.2 Differences
6. Discussion of issues for both groups.
6.1 Minor (a).
6.2 Idiomatic expression (b).
6.3 Addition (c).
6.4 Omission (d).
7. Distinctive translation patterns and features.
7.1 Pattern 1:
7.2 Pattern 2:
7.3 Pattern 3:
7.4 Pattern 4:
7.5 Pattern 5:
7.6 Pattern 6:
7.7 Pattern 7:
7.8 Pattern 8:
7.9 Pattern 9:
8. Conclusion
Research Objectives and Themes
This study investigates the differences in translation approaches between students trained in Translation Studies and those in Language Teaching (TESOL). By analyzing two sets of translated texts, the research aims to determine how educational background influences translation choices and the subsequent delivery of meaning.
- Comparative analysis of translation approaches
- Impact of formal training on translation quality
- Systemic Functional Linguistics (SFL) in translation assessment
- Identification of common translation patterns and errors
- The role of ethics and professional standards in translation
Excerpt from the Book
Distinctive translation patterns and features.
Pattern 1: The first evident pattern that will be discussed here is the pattern of translating the pronunciation of a name. Referring to the discussion on minor issues, we stated that our two groups committed issues with the name of the character in the translated text. Those issues related to transferring the correct pronunciation of his name into Arabic. It is suggested that such name pronunciation issues are common when it comes to translation due to the differences in the phonetic systems of different languages (Krasovec, 2010). Moreover, it is suggested that since some languages have many different dialects which promote different pronunciations of names sometimes pronounced the same, this issue arises frequently, as sometimes translators find it permissible to change the pronunciation and sometimes they find themselves obliged to stick with the pronunciation in the standard dialect regardless of the change in the pronunciation over time (Krasovec, 2010). This is exactly the case with Arabic. Arabic has many different dialects, which promote different pronunciations of the name of the character in the translated text; however, when it comes to translation it is conventional to translate taking into consideration the formalities and pronunciation rules of standard Arabic. It is evident that the group of translation students adhered more to the rule of translating names using standard Arabic pronunciation, as they committed fewer issues in that category than students from the education group.
Summary of Chapters
Introduction: Provides the context of the study, highlighting the need for qualified translators in Saudi Arabia and the lack of formal recruitment standards.
Main Questions and hypothesis: Outlines the research focus on comparing translation approaches between formally trained translation students and TESOL students.
Data and methodology: Describes the study's participant sample and the use of SFL-based quantitative analysis on a biographical source text.
Literature Review: Reviews the theoretical foundations, including Systemic Functional Linguistics and the differences between language teaching and translation education.
Comparison of Language and Translation Education: Explores the conceptual and professional overlaps and distinctions between language learning and the specific discipline of translation.
Discussion of issues for both groups.: Analyzes the specific categories of translation errors found, categorized by minor issues, idiomatic expressions, additions, and omissions.
Distinctive translation patterns and features.: Details nine specific translation patterns observed in the students' work, contrasting their approaches to names, idioms, and meaning-making.
Conclusion: Summarizes the study's findings, noting that while groups share similarities, distinct approaches exist based on educational background.
Keywords
SFL, Arabic Translation, Translators’ Education, Translation Patterns, Translation Approaches, Systemic Functional Linguistics, TESOL, Translation Studies, Linguistic Choices, Translation Errors, Professional Ethics, Language Teaching, Translation Quality, Biographical Translation, Comparative Linguistics.
Frequently Asked Questions
What is the core focus of this research?
The research examines the differences in translation strategies between students enrolled in Translation Studies and those in the Faculty of Education (TESOL) at King Saud University.
What are the primary thematic areas covered?
Key areas include the application of Systemic Functional Linguistics (SFL) to evaluate translations, the impact of formal translation training versus language teaching education, and the identification of error patterns.
What is the main research question?
The study aims to determine if there are significant differences in translation approaches between those formally trained in translation studies and those who are not, and how these impact the meaning of the source text.
Which methodology is applied in this study?
The author uses a qualitative and quantitative research design, applying a Systemic Functional Linguistics (SFL) coding system to analyze a biographical text translated by two distinct student groups.
What topics are discussed in the main body of the work?
The main body covers the theoretical framework of SFL, a comparative analysis of pedagogical approaches in translation versus language teaching, and a detailed discussion of error categories such as omissions and additions.
How would you characterize the keywords of this study?
The keywords highlight the intersection of linguistics, professional translator education, translation pedagogy, and specific linguistic patterns observed in translation practice.
How do the translation students compare to the education students regarding "minor" phonetic issues?
The data indicates that translation students generally adhered more strictly to standard Arabic pronunciation rules when transliterating proper names compared to the education group.
What role does ethics play in the author’s conclusion regarding the two groups?
The author concludes that translation students appeared more adherent to ethical principles of translation, which may correlate with their formal training in the field's professional standards.
Why are idiomatic expressions a significant part of the study?
Idiomatic expressions represent the category with the highest number of issues, revealing fundamental differences in how each group attempts to convey meaning versus literal content.
Does the educational background significantly influence translation patterns?
The study concludes that while the two groups are not entirely different, marked differences exist, with certain patterns being more pronounced in the translation student group due to their specific training.
- Arbeit zitieren
- Abdullah Qabani (Autor:in), 2011, Differences in Translation Approaches between Translation Students and Language Teaching Students, München, GRIN Verlag, https://www.grin.com/document/500623
