Entry

 

 

SPA Didáctica de la traducción

 

contents
Introduction | Translator training | The evolution of research on the didactics of translation | Approaches to the didactics of translation | Teacher-centred and product-oriented transmissionist approaches | Student-centred and process-oriented approaches | Curriculum design in translation training | Research potential

 

  Introduction 

Translation teaching as training for a specific profession is a relatively recent phenomenon, having begun to appear in the 1930s. Research on the didactics of translation did not emerge until the end of the 1970s and only became firmly established at the start of the new millennium. At present, the didactics of translation is a burgeoning field of research in applied Translation Studies. Given its nature, such research is action research.  

back to top

 Translator training 

Academic institutions have continually incorporated translation into their training (particularly in philological studies and language teaching), although not as an end in itself but rather as an ancillary, fundamentally as a means of honing language skills.

The generalization and independence of translation and interpreting teaching, as training for specific professions, began in the early 20^th century and became very important after World War II. There were various factors in the need for training for professional translators and interpreters at that time:

• increased international relations;
• the technological progress that paved the way for the emergence of new kinds of translation (consecutive and simultaneous interpreting, dubbing, etc.); 
• the growth of the translation market, with specialized translation (scientific translation, technical translation, legal translation, financial translation, administrative translation) taking on particular importance; 
• a substantial rise in demand for translations in all areas.

As a result, numerous university centres for translator and interpreter training were established, including Heidelberg (1930), Geneva (1941), Moscow (1942), Vienna (1943), Graz (1946), Innsbruck (1946), Germersheim (1947), Saarbrücken (1948), Washington (1949), Trieste (1954) and Paris (1949, 1957). As time went by, such centres gradually appeared all over the world. At present, training is available at different levels of education (undergraduate degree, master’s degree and PhD).

Translator training has evolved over the years, with changes being introduced due to factors of various kinds: the progressive consolidation of Translation Studies and the different theoretical approaches that have been developed; the different types of translation that have become an established part of the labour market, as well as the other tasks professional practice involves (revision, post-editing, project management, etc.); and changes in translators’ work methods and the technological resources used.  

back to top

Delisle (1980), a groundbreaking work in the didactics of translation.

The evolution of research on the didactics of translation

Despite the importance translator training progressively acquired after World War II, research into didactic aspects only began in the second half of the 1970s. Such research developed especially as of the mid-1980s and has become firmly established since the year 2000.

 

Beginning

Wilss (1976, 1977) and, in particular, Delisle (1980) are groundbreaking works as regards the didactics of translation. 

Delisle was the first author to propose a didactics of translation centred on the translation process in students and based on learning objectives and an active methodology. Delisle (1980: 15) pointed out that, with general curriculum-related matters (the subjects to be included in training, the duration of studies, etc.) having been the main concern until then, the time had come for progress in reflection on how to teach. He raised a number of questions involving issues of fundamental importance to the didactics of translation: the limitations of focusing solely on the end product of translation and on errors; the lack of systematization in teaching; the need for an active methodology that would vary the roles of teachers and students; the need to identify the skills required (besides language skills); the characteristics of the texts to be used at each level and how to establish their progression; and assessment criteria. Forty years later, some of those issues have yet to be satisfactorily resolved.

Other works that were published in this initial period and stressed the importance of focusing on the translation process are Hurtado (1983) and Seleskovitch & Lederer (1984). From a different perspective, a particularly noteworthy study is that in which Nord (1988) applied functionalist theory to the didactics of translation.

 

Developement

Interest in the didactics of translation grew between the mid-1980s and 2000. Testimony to that is the publication of numerous collective volumes, sets of conference proceedings, and special issues of journals on translation teaching (see Hurtado 2019: 52); and, as of the mid-1990s, the publication of monographs by individual authors (Delisle 1993; Kussmaul 1995; Kiraly 1995; and Robinson 1997).

 

Consolidation

Journal on the didactics of translation and interpreting

Since the year 2000, the didactics of translation has consolidated its status as a specific field of research within applied Translation Studies. Given its nature, such research is action research, i.e. that which practitioners carry out on their own practice to improve it. Evidence of the consolidation in question takes different forms:

• There has been a great increase in publications, including numerous collective works (see Hurtado 2019: 53) and monographs by individual authors, such as those of Kiraly (2000), Colina (2003), González Davies (2004) and Kelly (2005).
• Series of handbooks have been published. Some examples are Routledge’s Thinking Translation series (launched in 1992), which includes handbooks on translating different languages into English; the Interpreter Education series (Gallaudet University Press), on interpreter training (launched in 2000); and the Aprender a traducir series (Universitat Jaume I), comprising handbooks on the subjects that are part of translator and interpreter training (launched in 2004).
• Specific journals have appeared, notably including The Interpreter and Translator Trainer, which has been published since 2007; and Redit, published since 2008.
• Specific international conferences have been organized. Three international conferences on translator and interpreter training were held in Elsinore (Denmark) in 1991, 1993 and 1995, and their proceedings form a trilogy coedited by Dollerup in 1992, 1994 and 1996; a fourth conference in the same series took place in Hong Kong. Elsewhere, the Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona’s PACTE group has been organizing didTRAD since 2012.

A study carried out by Yan, Pan & Wang (2015) clearly shows the importance that research on the didactics of translation has taken on since 2000. The study analyses the articles published in English between 2000 and 2012 in ten Translation Studies journals. Of a total of 2274 articles, it identifies 323 on training, which its authors divide into the categories of teaching (72%), learning (18%) and assessment (10%); 61.61% of them refer to translator training, 26.63% to interpreter training, and 11.76% to both. 

back to top

  Approaches to the didactics of translation

The different approaches that have been developed have evolved from transmissionist and prescriptivist approaches (which are teacher-centred and product-oriented) to approaches that focus on students and the translation process. According to Hurtado (2019: 54) there are different approaches:

Teacher-centred and product-oriented transmissionist approaches

• Traditional translation teaching
• Contrastive approaches
• Focus on theoretical content

Student-centred and process-oriented approaches

• Focus on the translation process
• Objective-based training
• The translation task and project-based approach
• The social constructivist approach
• Competence-based training
• Focus on professional aspects. Situated learning

The former have different kinds of pedagogical shortcomings. The latter, which are in keeping with current pedagogical thinking, give students an active role, promote their autonomy, encourage them to interact with one another (cooperative learning), and emphasize the performance of real or simulated tasks that are part of professional translation.

back to top

Teacher-centred and product-oriented transmissionist approach

Traditional translation teaching

This approach is related to traditional language teaching and the use it makes of translation (grammar-translation methods). It is a teacher-centred approach in which didactic design involves nothing more than bringing texts together.

The main shortcomings of the approach are as follows:

1. Most proposals involve an underlying concept of translation which revolves around transcoding linguistic elements, thus confusing teaching translation with teaching language.
2. In many cases, no distinction is made between the teaching of L1 translation and that of L2 translation, which, owing to their respective characteristics, require different learning objectives and methodological approaches.
3. The focus is on results (the product of translation). Handbooks put forward a translation (just one, in most cases), and classes revolve around the teacher identifying correct solutions and penalizing errors. Consequently, students do not discover the causes of their errors or the process they should follow to find appropriate solutions for themselves when performing other translations.
4. The approach has methodological shortcomings, typified by the traditional instruction “read and translate”. Teaching is organized on the basis of translating texts, without considering learning objectives, text selection criteria, the progression that should be established, or the activities the teacher can plan to enable students to translate the texts.

 

Contrastive approaches

Contrastive studies (of languages and of texts), which are related to linguistic approaches to Translation Studies, have also been considered a translation teaching method in some cases. That applies especially to comparative stylistics, pioneered by Malblanc (1944) and Vinay & Darbelnet (1958), works that were followed by those of Scavée & Intravaia (1979) and Legoux & Valentine (1989), among others. Comparative stylistics applies internal stylistics studies to comparative analysis and, with the idiosyncrasies of each such study in mind, suggests new comparison categories. The translation procedures (or technical procedures) proposed by Vinay & Darbelnet (1958) are of particular note.

Comparative Stylistics of French and English, Vinay & Darbelnet (1958).

However, the procedures in question: (1) are comparisons that focus on results without explaining the process involved in achieving them; (2) are decontextualized comparisons of isolated units; and (3) establish set solutions by proposing a single equivalence.

They are of interest as regards didactics because they offer a framework for distinguishing between two languages, improve language skills, and provide a metalanguage for identifying different types of translation solutions.

The main shortcomings of this approach are as follows:

1. It encourages students to memorize equivalents in two languages rather than to look for context-based solutions.
2. It has pedagogical shortcomings. Objectives are limited to questions of differences between languages, and the methodology is limited to exercises based on using or detecting such differences.

Studies that compare the way in which texts function (e.g., Baker 1992) are of greater interest in the didactics of translation, as they focus on text-related considerations (elements of coherence and cohesion, text typologies, etc.). However, there are drawbacks to such studies too:

• They do not cover all types of translation problems (linguistic, extralinguistic, pragmatic, etc.).
• They focus on results.
• They are not a comprehensive solution as far as designing learning objectives is concerned (owing to them centring on textual objectives).
• They are lacking in methodology.

 

Focus on theoretical content

There are handbooks and syllabuses that prioritize theoretical content and may consequently deal solely with theoretical aspects, combine theory and practice, or include a theoretical part with practical applications (e.g., Tatilon 1986, Newmark 1988).

The main shortcomings of this approach are as follows:

1. It prioritizes the acquisition of declarative knowledge (know-what), failing to take into account that translation competence is basically procedural knowledge (know-how).
2. It fails to define learning objectives. While the approach addresses linguistic and theoretical matters and, in some cases, the work method of translators, it does not establish objectives related to the difficulties involved in learning to translate.
3. It has methodological shortcomings. It lacks proposals regarding text selection criteria, activities for teaching students how to translate texts, the progression teaching should involve, and assessment.

 back to top

Student-centred and process-oriented approaches

Focus on the translation process

Since the 1980s, many authors have recommended placing the translation process at the heart of the didactics of translation.

In relation to interpreting, and drawing on texts they had already presented or published in 1965, 1973 and 1981, Seleskovitch & Lederer (1984) took on a pioneering role by stressing that training should revolve around students learning a method and grasping principles for working through the translation process, rather than around acquiring reusable equivalences (1984: 181).

In the case of translation, in the words of Delisle (1980: 16): “Enseigner à traduire, c’est faire comprendre le processus intellectuel par lequel un message donné est transposé dans une autre langue, en plaçant l’apprenti-traducteur au coeur de l’opération traduisante pour lui en faire saisir la dynamique.”

Similarly, Hurtado (1983: 36) states that the didactics of translation should not be based on the memorization of pairs of equivalents; it should rather encourage students to look for equivalents, with a focus on carrying out the translation process correctly.

Opting for the same perspective, Gile (1995: 10) opines that the objective is to focus not on the end product of the translation process but on the process itself, with a view to students assimilating good principles, methods and procedures.

 

Objective-based training

Delisle (1980) proposed heuristic pedagogy and an active, student-centred methodology which would lead students to discover the principles they should follow to carry out the translation process properly. His proposals (Delisle 1980, 1993) focus on introductory training in written translation, putting forward learning objectives and activities for achieving them. In his 1980 publication, he suggests learning objectives such as establishing the difference between transcoded equivalents and translated equivalents; being able to extract a text’s key notions; performing lexical exegesis; understanding textual organicity; and different objectives related to contrasts between English and French. In his 1993 publication, he establishes the difference between general and specific objectives and then proposes eight general objectives related to the metalanguage of introductory training in translation; basic documentation for translators; the work method; the cognitive process of translation; writing conventions; lexical difficulties; syntactic difficulties; and composition difficulties. Those eight general objectives break down into 56 specific objectives.

Focusing on the teaching of L2 translation from Spanish into English, Beeby (1996) proposes the learning objectives of acquiring the necessary metalanguage; understanding the stages of the translation process; achieving advanced reading skills in the source language; being able to write grammatically correct and pragmatically adequate texts in the target language; using basic documentation techniques; keeping up work habits; acquiring knowledge of the typographical, lexical, syntactic and discourse differences between the source and target languages; achieving familiarity with text types; expanding knowledge of pragmatic and semiotic differences between the source and target cultures; and improving oral communication skills for professional use.

Centring on introductory training in L1 translation, Hurtado (1996) proposes four types of general objectives (which break down into 33 specific objectives): methodological objectives (for grasping basic methodological principles of the translation process), contrastive objectives (for understanding the fundamental contrasting elements of the source and target languages), professional objectives (for assimilating the way in which professional translators work) and textual objectives (for mastering the fundamental strategies for translating different types of texts). In Hurtado (1999), general and specific learning objectives are established for various subjects involved in translator and interpreter training: language teaching for translators; introductory training in L1 translation; translation between mother tongues; technical and scientific translation; legal translation; literary translation; audiovisual translation; and interpreting.

 

The translation task and project-based approach

The task and project-based approach is a methodological framework that arose in language teaching. Its main aim is to allow for the integration of all the different elements of curriculum design (objectives, content, methodology and assessment). It conceives of didactic design as a set of tasks, distinguishing between preparatory tasks and final tasks, with the former laying the groundwork for the latter to be performed.

The task and project-based approach is applied to introductory training in (specialized and general) translation in Hurtado (1992, 1996), and to different subjects involved in translator training in Hurtado (1999). Teaching units are organized on the basis of different types of tasks that prepare students for one or more final tasks (e.g., translation in a particular genre). A range of instruments are used (Hurtado 1996, 2015a, 2015b), including source and target language texts; translations to be analysed, compared, revised or corrected; questionnaires; contrastive exercises, exercises related to documentary sources, etc.; worksheets to be completed; support texts and information sheets for conceptual aspects; and translation process recordings. The tasks involved are varied too, some examples being (Hurtado 2015a, Guía didáctica: 14-15):

• Translations of texts.
• Tasks for preparing to translate texts: pre-translation tasks (analysing the source text), gist translation (summarizing the source text in the target language), extended translation (expanding on the source text’s information in the target language), comparative translation analysis (analysing different translations to identify errors and correct solutions), translation revision, translation correction (identifying errors).
• Tasks for acquiring knowledge: reading support texts and information sheets, debates (in classrooms or online), parallel text analysis.
• Writing different types of reports: on the translation of a text (commented translation), the translation profession, cultural aspects, etc.

The handbooks in the Aprender a traducir series (Universitat Jaume I) follow the approach in question.

González Davies (2003) proposes tasks for teaching the translation of audiovisual, scientific, IT, legal, economic, literary and educational psychology texts. She goes on (González Davies 2004) to distinguish between three types of procedures, namely activities (brief exercises for practising specific points), tasks (sequences of activities with the same overall aim and an end product) and projects (multi-competence assignments that enable students to engage in pedagogical and professional activities and tasks geared to an end product).

Li (2013) proposes six task cycle stages, specifically pre-task, task, reporting, analysis, revising and reflection.

Tasks can vary in length and number. A project encompasses various competences and learning objectives, and includes many tasks. Translation projects (with larger-scale final tasks, such as translating a film) are of particular relevance to specialized subjects. See Kiraly (2000, 2012, 2005), Marco (2004, 2016) and Li, Zhang & He (2015) in relation to working with projects in translator training.

The task and project-based approach allows for the integration of other didactic proposals, such as problem-based learning, case studies, cooperative learning, situated learning and the flipped classroom, as well as for the inclusion of competence-based training.

 

The social constructivist approach

An application of constructivist theories of learning to translator training (Kiraly 2000).

Drawing on constructivist theories of learning, Kiraly (2000) has proposed a social constructivist approach to the didactics of translation, the basis of which is collaboration between students and teachers. He recommends changing their roles, with students taking responsibility for their own learning and teachers acting as guides and generating situations in which students can develop professional skills.

In the framework of situated learning, which entails active participation in authentic, experiential learning, Kiraly puts forward an empowerment model revolving around student autonomy; multi-directional interaction between students and teachers; and real collaborative translation projects that reflect professional translation practice. As an alternative to traditional translation classes, he proposes constructivist workshops.

The premises of the constructivist approach to learning underlie most proposals for student-centred and process-oriented translator training.

 

Competence-based training

Some authors (Kelly 2005, Hurtado 2007, 2015a, 2015b, etc.) have applied competence-based training (CBT) to the didactics of translation.

CBT is an approach based on constructivist learning theories and in which curriculum design revolves around competences. A competence is defined as a combination of knowledge, skills and attitudes, and the approach emphasizes that having a competence is inseparable from exercising it (being able to act).

CBT makes a distinction between specific (or discipline-related) competences, which correspond to a particular discipline, and general (or transversal) competences, which can apply to all disciplines. It is geared to a holistic type of training that combines both kinds of competences.

In CBT, a description of the relevant professional profile is crucial to establishing a university curriculum’s competences. Such a description must be based on labour market studies, with a view to identifying (prevailing and emerging) best professional practices for each profile, along with the knowledge and skills it requires.

CBT applies an integrated model of teaching, learning and assessment, resulting in the operationalization of the competences corresponding to a curriculum.

Hurtado (2007) proposes six categories of specific competences for translator training, which need to be contextualized and defined according to the professional profile and subject involved. They are methodological and strategic competences; contrastive competences; extralinguistic competences; professional competences; instrumental competences; and competences for solving translation problems in different text genres. With a view to curriculum design integrating all the key components of the education process, Hurtado has made a proposal regarding competence operationalization which encompasses: (1) a competence’s definition; (2) a competence’s elements, i.e. observable behaviours that are part of it and can be used as indicators for establishing each level’s learning outcomes and for assessment; (3) associated content; (4) tasks for competence acquisition (methodology); and (5) assessment procedures.

Additionally, experimental research has been conducted on translation competence and its acquisition (e.g., PACTE 2003, Hurtado 2017, PACTE 2020).

 

Focus on professional aspects

Some authors emphasize the importance of professional aspects. A notable example is the situational approach suggested by Vienne (1994), who stresses the need to translate texts in their real communicative situation and according to authentic translation briefs, in such a way that the teacher assumes the role of a client. Gouadec (2003) also endorses such an approach.

Also of note are proposals that take the premises of situated learning (derived from situated cognition theory), according to which knowledge should be presented in an authentic context that would normally involve it, and apply them to the didactics of translation. Such proposals stress the need for translator training to use pedagogical procedures (tasks and projects) that facilitate transition to real professional translation practice (see, for example, Kiraly 2005; and González Davies & Enríquez Raido 2016). 

back to top

Curriculum design in translation training 

Steps in curriculum design. Source Hurtado (2019: 67).

The purpose of research on the didactics of translation is to answer all the questions that curriculum design poses and to make following the steps in the design process possible:

1. who is to be taught and in what circumstances? (learning needs analysis);
2. what is the purpose of the teaching involved? (definition of competences and objectives);
3. what is to be taught? (content selection);
4. how is teaching to be carried out? (methodology design);
5. with what progression? (sequencing);
6. with what result? (assessment procedure design).  

There are currently three types of factors influencing curriculum design for translator training, namely changes in the translation profession; constant academic and professional mobility in present-day society; and the pedagogical and technological advances of recent decades. On that basis, it is necessary to design curriculums that (Hurtado 2019: 65-66):

Meet the social and professional demands of each social context

Each context has its own translation-related needs, and training should primarily focus on satisfying them. Periodic market studies must therefore be carried out in each context to establish the most sought-after professional profiles and language combinations, with the goal of clearly identifying the purpose training is to fulfil and defining the competences it should develop.

Are adapted to the characteristics of today’s society

In our globalized world, curriculum design needs an international outlook, as the translation market has also undergone globalization. Additionally, present-day society is constantly evolving, so training must prepare future translators for lifelong learning by developing their capability to learn to learn.

Are internationally recognizable

Owing to academic and professional mobility, the international recognition of curriculums needs to be a straightforward process. The creation of the European Higher Education Area (EHEA) is a clear example of that need.

Are adapted to new pedagogical models

Current pedagogical models advocate competence-based training; the integration of teaching, learning and assessment; and autonomous, polyvalent, lifelong learning.

Establish a progression in learning

Translation does not have a common description of competence levels, unlike other disciplines (e.g., language teaching, which has the CEFR). Such a description would provide translator training and professional translation with a common framework that could be used as a guide for creating translation syllabuses, managing assessment, issuing official certificates, recognizing and validating academic qualifications, and establishing professional quality control guidelines. For further information on this matter, see the PACTE group’s Establishing Competence Levels in the Acquisition of Translation Competence in Written Translation research project (NACT, based on its initials in Spanish) (PACTE 2018, 2019), and Hurtado & Rodríguez-Inés (in press).

Incorporate translation technologies

Training must prepare future translators to make effective use of translation-oriented technological resources and to be capable of adapting to new technological resources, given how quickly they change.

Incorporate teaching and learning technologies

The didactics of translation must incorporate the use of teaching and learning technologies (e-learning, m-learning) according to their specific needs.

back to top

  Research potential 

Research on the didactics of translation has encompassed different areas; see Hurtado (2019: 64) for bibliographical references related to each area:

• Development of general guidelines for curriculum design in translator training: objectives, competences, subjects involved in training, content, etc.
• Design of specific subjects, e.g., introduction to translation; L2 translation; technical translation; scientific translation; legal translation; business translation; audiovisual translation; literary translation.
• Methodological aspects. This kind of research is cross-cutting and underlies many of the proposals developed in other areas: preparing teaching units, tasks, group dynamics, etc.
• Assessment procedures: instruments and assessment tasks. 
• Technology use in translation teaching and learning: blended learning in translator training; the use of electronic corpora in translator training; online translation teaching, etc.
• Aspects related to translation competence and its acquisition: how translation competence works and is acquired; establishing competence levels; the implications of directionality; and the acquisition of specific competences (e.g., documentation competence, technological competence).

Despite progress over the last few decades, there ought to be further research on the following aspects (Hurtado 2019: 67):

1. The performance of market studies to identify the needs of each context.
2. The description of the characteristics of the different professional profiles (technical translator, legal translator, etc.).
3. Establishing criteria for evaluating training programmes, to guarantee their efficacy and appropriateness to the social needs of each context.
4. The definition of translation teachers’ competences and of needs in terms of training for trainers.
5. Establishing levels of translation competence, so as to improve assessment and the suitability of the progression involved in teaching.
6. The development of summative assessment procedures (instruments, assessment tasks and rubrics), so as to be able to measure competence levels reliably, as well as make progress where diagnostic assessment, formative assessment, self-assessment and co-assessment procedures are concerned.
7. The application of teaching and learning technologies to translator training, with an active methodology that encourages student involvement and cooperative learning.

For that to be the case, it will be necessary to:

• Take into account the research carried out in pedagogy, as well as pedagogical research conducted in similar disciplines.
• Apply the results of empirical research on how the translation process works and on translation competence and its acquisition.
• Advance in the collection of information on the results of didactic proposals, so as to be able to verify their efficacy. That entails making progress in the use of qualitative and quantitative methods that allow for the collection and analysis of data that support the validity of didactic proposals. A range of data collection techniques and instruments can be used, including direct observation; audio, video and computer recordings; interviews; questionnaires; students’ output; diaries (kept by students or teachers); and focus groups.
• Encourage the replication of research, to improve scope for generalizing results.

There are obstacles to research, owing to the didactics of translation not having a tradition of empirical research comparable to that of other disciplines. The main problems are a lack of validated specific data collection and analysis instruments, and a shortage of systemic reviews of studies undertaken, which could otherwise be used to establish the state of research. 

back to top