Translation Quality Assessment: Proposing a Linguistic-‎Based Model for Translation Criticism with Considering ‎Ideology and Power Relations

Mehrnoosh Pirhayati

Abstract


In this study, the researcher tried to propose a model of Translation Criticism (TC) by regarding Translation Quality Assessment (TQA). The researcher, with changing the general view on re-writing, as an illegal act, defined a scale for the act of translation and determined the redline of translation with other products. This research attempts to show TC as a related phenomenon to TQA. This study shows that TQA with using the rules and factors of TC as depicted in both product-oriented analysis and process-oriented analysis determines the orientation or the level of the quality of translation. This study also depicts that TC, with regarding TQA’s perspective, reveals the aim of the translation of original text and the root of ideological manipulation, and re-writing. On the other hand, this study stresses on the existence of a direct relationship between the linguistic materials and semiotic codes of a text or book. This study can be fruitful for translators, scholars, translation criticizers, and translation quality assessors, and also it is applicable in the area of pedagogy.


Keywords


A model of translation criticism, A model of translation quality assessment, Critical ‎discourse analysis (CDA), Re-writing, Translation criticism (TC), Translation quality ‎assessment (TQA) ‎

Full Text:

PDF

References


Baker, M. (1992). In other words: A course book on translation. London: Routledge. ‎

Baker, M. (2003). Encyclopedia of translation studies. London: Routledge. ‎

Baker, M., & Saldanha, G. (2009). Routledge encyclopedia of translation studies ‎‎(Extended revised second edition). Abington and New York: Routledge. ‎

Bassnett, S. (2007). Culture and translation. In P. Kuhiwzcak & K. Littau (Eds.), A ‎companion to translation studies (pp. 13-23). Clevedon, England: Multilingual ‎Matters.‎

Bell, R. T. (1991). Translation and translating: Theory and practice. London/New York: ‎Longman.‎

Blouri, M. (2013). Cultural turn in translation studies. Tehran: Nashreghatreh. ‎

Bowker, Lynne. (2000). A corpus-based approach to evaluating student translations. ‎The Translator, 6(2), pp. 183- 210. ISBN: 1-900650-31-2‎

Bühler, H. (1986). Linguistic (semantic) and extra-linguistic (pragmatic) criteria for the

evaluation of conference interpretation and interpreters. Multilingua, 5(4), pp. 231-‎‎235.‎

Catford, J.C. (1965). A linguistic theory of translation: An essay in applied linguistics. ‎London: Longman.‎

Even-Zohar, I. (1990). Polysystem studies. [= Poetics Today 11:1]. Durham: Duke ‎University Press.‎

Farahzad, F. (2011). Translation criticism: A three-dimensional model based on CDA. ‎Translation Studies, 9, pp. 27-43. ISSN: 1735-0212‎

Gavronsky, S. (1977). The translator: From piety to cannibalism. Substance, 6(16), pp. ‎‎53-62.‎

Gutt, E.A. (1991). Translation and relevance: Cognition and context. Oxford: Blackwell. ‎

Halliday, M.A.K. (1978). Meaning and the construction of reality in early childhood. In ‎H.L. Pick & E. Salzman (Eds.), Modes of perceiving and processing of information (pp. ‎‎67-96). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.‎

Hatim, B., & Mason. I. (1990). Discourse and the translator. London: Longman.‎

Hatim, B. & Munday, J. (2004). Translation: An advanced resource book. London: ‎Routledge.‎

House, J. (1997). Translation quality assessment: A model revisited. Gunter Narr Verlag: ‎Tubirgen.‎

House, J. (2001). Translation quality assessment: linguisticdescription versus social ‎evaluation. Translator's Journal, 46(2), pp. 243-257. Retrieved from ‎http://www.erudite.org/documentation/erudite politique utilisation. pdf

Jäger, G. (1973). Kommunikative und funktionelle Äquivalenz. In: Linguistische ‎Arbeitsberichte (LAB), Nr. 7, S. 60-74.‎

Koller, W. (1972). Grundprobleme der übersetzungstheorie, unter besonderer ‎berücksichtigung

Schwedisch-Deutscher übersetzungsfälle. Bern: Francke.‎

Koller, W. (1974). Anmerkungen zu definitionen des übersetzungsvorgangsund der ‎übersetzungskritik. In: W. Wilss & G. Thome (Eds.), Aspekte der theoretischen, ‎sprachenpaarbezogenen und angewandten übersetzungswissenchaft (pp. 35-54). ‎Heidelberg: Groos. ‎

Koller, W. (1995). The concept of equivalence and the object of translation ‎studies.Target, 7(2), pp.191-222. doi: https://doi.org/10.1075/target.7.2.02kol

Kupsch-Losereit, S. (1988). Die übersetzung als soziale praxis, ihre abhängigkeit vom ‎sinn- und bedeutungshorizont des rezipienten. Fremdsprachen Lehren und Lernen, ‎‎17, pp.28-40.‎

Manafi Anari, S. (2004). A functional-based approach to translation quaity assessment. ‎Translation Studies, 1(4), pp. 31-52.‎

Manafi Anari, S. (2004a). Accuracy and natulaness in translation of religious text. ‎Translation Studies, 2(5), pp. 33-51. ‎

Martinez Melis, N., & Hurtado Albir, A. (2001). Assessment in translation studies: ‎Research needs. Meta: Journal des traducteurs, 46 (2), pp. 272-287. Retrieved from ‎https://www.erudit .org/fr/revues/meta/2001-v46-n2-meta159/003624ar.pdf

Mashhady, H., & Pourgalavi, M. (2015). Newmark's procedures in Persian translation of ‎Golding's Lord of the Flies. International Journal of English Language and Translation ‎Studies, 3(1), pp. 57-69. Retrieved from ‎http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s ‎&source=web&cd=1&ved=2ahUKEwjlqpejs6riAhWMKVAKHYKfA3AQFjAAegQIARAC&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.eltsjournal.org%2Farchive%2Fvalue3%2520issue1%2‎F6-3-1-15.pdf&usg=AOvVaw2tECck_cz-9BlJLFHauRag‎

Nedelcheva, S. (2017). Translation strategies in The Lord of the Rings. Paper presented ‎at Twelfth International Scientific Conference, Vrnjacka Banja, Serbia. Retreived ‎from ‎https://www.researchgate.net/publication/321478639_Translation_strategies_in_the_LORD_OF_THE_RINGS ‎

Neubert, A. (1968). Pragmatische aspekte der übersetzung in grundfragen derübersetzun ‎gswissenschaft. Leipzig: VEB Verlag Enzyklopädie.‎

Newmark, P. (1988). A textbook of translation. London: Longman.‎

Nida, E. A. (1964). Towards a science of translating: With special reference to principles ‎and procedures involved in Bible translating. Leiden: Brill. ‎

Reiss, K. (1971). Möglichkeiten und grenzen der übersetzungskritik kategorien und ‎kriterien für eine sachgerechte beurteilung von übersetzungen. Munich: Max Hueber. ‎

Reiss, K. (2000). Translation criticism, the potentials and limitations: Categories and ‎criteria for translation quality assessment. (E. F. Rhodes, Trans.). Manchester: St. ‎Jerome.‎

Reiss, K. & Vermeer, H.J. (2014). Towards a general theory of translational action: ‎Skopos theory explained. UnitedKingdom: Taylor & Francis.‎

Å arÄević, S. (1988). Bilingual and multilingual legal dictionaries: New standards for

the future. Meta, 36 (4), pp. 615- 626. doi: 10.7202/004030ar‎

Å arÄević, S. (2000). New approach to legal translation. London: Kluwer Law ‎International.‎

Simon, S. (1996). Gender in translation: Cultural identity and the politics of transmission. ‎London: Routledge. ‎

Snell-Hornby, M. (1986). Übersetzen, sprache, kultur. In M. Snell-Hornby (Ed.), pp. 9-29. ‎Snell-Hornby, M. (ed.). (1986). Übersetzungswissenschaft- eine neuorientierung: Zur ‎integrierung von theorie und praxis. Tübingen: Francke.‎

Tymoczko, M., & Gentzler, E. (eds.). (2002). Translation and power. Amherst/Boston: ‎University of Massachusetts Press. ‎

Toury, G. (1985). A Rationale for Descriptive Translation Studies. In T. Hermans (Ed.), ‎The Manipulation of Literature: Studies inLiterary Translation (pp. 16- 41). London, ‎Sydney: Croom Helm

Toury, G. (1995). Descriptive translation studies and beyond. Amsterdam: Benjamins.‎

Venuti, L. (ed.). (1992). Rethinking translation, discourse, subjectivity, ideology. London: ‎Routledge.‎

Vermeer, H. J. (1994). Translation today: Old and new problems. In M. Snell-Hornby et ‎al. (Eds.), Translation studies: An interdiscipline (pp. 3–16). Amsterdam: Benjamins.‎

Vinay, J.-P., & Darbelnet, J. (1958/2000). A methodology for translation. [An excerpt

from comparative stylistics of French and English: A methodology for translation,‎

trans. and eds. J. C. Sager & M.-J. Hamel, Amsterdam: John Benjamins, 1995,‎

first published in 1958 as Stylistique comparée du Français et de L’anglais, méthode

de traduction]. In L. Venuti (Ed.), The translations studies reader (pp. 84-93).‎

London: Routledge.‎

Wilss, W., & Thome, G. (eds.). (1974). Aspekte der theoretischen, sprachen-‎paarbezogenen und angewandten übersetzungswissenchaft. Heidelberg: Groos.‎

Wilss, W. (1977). Übersetzungswissenschaft, pobleme und methoden. Stuttgart: Klett.‎

Wilss, W. (1982). The scienceo of translation, problem and methods. Tübingen: Narr. ‎

Yamini, H. & Abdi, F. (2010). The application of House’s Model on William ‎Shakespeare’s 'Macbeth' and its Persian translation by Ala’uddin Pasargadi. ‎Translation Directory. come. Retrieved from ‎https://www.translationdirectory.com/articles/article2182.p hp


Refbacks

  • There are currently no refbacks.


Copyright (c) 2019 Journal of Applied Linguistics and Language Research