Cover not available
Article published In:
Übersetzen und Dolmetschen im juristischen Bereich / Traduction et interprétation juridiques / Legal Translation and Interpreting: Technologie – Outsourcing – Veränderungen / Technologie – externalisation – transformations / Technology – Outsourcing – Shifts
Edited by Frans De Laet, Reiner Heard and Miodrag Vukčević
[Babel 66:2] 2020
► pp. 226–253

Translation quality gained through the implementation of the iso en 17100:2015 and the usage of the blockchain

The case of sworn translation in Spain

| Woolf University
The iso en 17100:2015 (Translation Services – Requirements for Translation Services) is a quality standard including a set of provisions (requirements and recommendations) for all the core aspects of the translation process, considered as an industrial asset. Its main (or, rather, its only) goal is the implementation of a series of activities deemed as necessary for the delivery of a quality translation end-product, on the assumption that a quality process leads ineluctably to a quality end-product. The standard’s provisions do not refer to what is in Spain known as traducción jurada (sworn translation). This paper addresses what the standard leaves out: a proposal for the implementation of its provisions, combined with the usage of the blockchain
and other disruptive technologies to sworn translation, by focusing on the illustrative case of Spain. It discusses the applicable regulations concerning sworn translation and sworn translation standardization and explores the methods through which the combined application of a functional translation methodological framework, the provisions of the iso en 17100:2015 standard, a standardized macrotextual pattern and a number of security devices and disruptive technologies might contribute to building a quality management system in the domain of sworn translation.
Keywords: sworn translation, traducción jurada , translation quality assurance, quality management system, disruptive technologies and translation, blockchain and translation, smart contracts and translation, digital signature, digital seal, neural machine translation, iso standard en 17100:2015, token, fiat, ledger, record-keeping, trust, consensus algorithm
Article outline
  • 1.Introduction
  • 2.Sworn translation standardized and measured for quality with the aid of technology?
    • 2.1Sworn translation in Spain
    • 2.2Disruptive technologies applied to sworn translation
    • 2.3Translation standards
    • 2.4Translation quality
  • 3.An approach to a sworn translation qms
  • 4.Implications for sworn translation stakeholders
    • 4.1Translation framework implications
    • 4.2Technology-based implications
    • 4.3Translation standard certification implications
    • 4.4Standardized pattern implications
  • 5.Conclusions
  • Notes
  • References
Published online: 6 April 2020
DOI logo
https://doi.org/10.1075/babel.00153.mor
References (59)
References
Abuhav, Itay. 2017. iso 9001:2015 – A Complete Guide to Quality Management Systems. Boca Raton: CRC Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Allen, Jeff. 2015. “Translation Standards: Which One?” Tradumàtica: tecnologies de la traducció 131 [special issue: Normalització en la indústria de la traducció ]: 545–551. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Al-Qinai, Jamal. 2000. “Translation Quality Assessment. Strategies, Parametres and Procedures”. Meta: Translators’ Journal 45 (3): 497–519. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Asimov, Isaac. 1983. “Asimov’s New World”. The Toronto Star. [URL]
Barros, María. 2017. “ iso Standards and Working Processes at the United Nations Language Services: A Comparison”. [URL]
Bower, Joseph L.; and Clayton M. Christensen. 1995. “Disruptive Technologies: Catching the Wave”. Harvard Business Review 73 (1): 43–53.Google Scholar
Cáceres Würsig, Ingrid. 2004. “Breve historia de la secretaría de interpretación de lenguas”. Meta: Translators’ Journal 49 (3): 609–628. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Casey, Michael J.; and Paul Vigna. 2018. The Truth Machine – Blockchain and the Future of Everything. New York: St. Martin’s Press [ebook].Google Scholar
Cayron, Samantha. 2017. Manual de traducción jurada de documentos notariales en materia de sucesiones entre los sistemas jurídicos francés y español. Granada: Comares.Google Scholar
Colina, Sonia. 2008. “Translation Quality Evaluation”. The Translator 14 (1): 97–134. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Chiocchetti, Elena; et al. 2017. “Quality Assurance in Multilingual Legal Terminological Databases”. The Journal of Specialised Translation 271: 164–188.Google Scholar
Dale, Lewis. 2017. “Translation and Blockchain Technology”. [URL]
Declercq, Christophe. 2014. “Crowd, Cloud and Automation in the Translation Education Community”. Cultus, the Journal of Intercultural Mediation and Communication 71: 37–56. [URL]
Drugan, Joanna. 2013. Quality in Professional Translation: Assessment and Improvement. London: Bloomsbury.Google Scholar
Duro Moreno, Miguel. 2008. “La traducción jurada: propuesta de normalización estilística aplicada a (inglés español/español-inglés y francés-español/español francés)”. In La traducción e interpretación jurídicas en la Unión Europea: retos para la Europa de los ciudadanos, ed. by Emilio Ortega Arjonilla, 675–706. Granada: Comares.Google Scholar
. 2012. “Entornos y determinación de la traducción jurídica inglés>español”. In Eugenio Coseriu (1921–2002) en los comienzos del siglo xxi , vol. ii 1, ed. by Jesús Martínez del Castillo, 301–327 [ Analecta malacitana, annex lxxxvi ].Google Scholar
. 2019. “Digital, dinámica, segura, ecológica y sin papeles:propuesta actualizada de normalización de la traducción jurada en España para elaseguramiento de la calidad”. In Introducción a la traducción jurídica y jurada, 3rd ed., ed. by Ana Belén Martínez López; Miguel Duro Moreno; and Pedro San Ginés Aguilar, 212-233. Granada: Comares.Google Scholar
Etches, Robert; and Michael J. Casey. 2019. “What Does Blockchain Have to Do with Localization?” [URL]
European Committee for Standardization. 2015. en 1700:2015 Translation Services – Requirements for translation services. Brussels: cen.Google Scholar
Gallego Hernández, Daniel. 2008. “Pautas para una optimización del proceso de traducción de documentos bajo juramento: explotación de recursos informáticos”. In Actas del iii Congreso Internacional de la Asociación Ibérica de Estudios de Traducción e Interpretación. La traducción del futuro: mediación lingüística y cultural en el siglo xxi. Barcelona, 22–24 de marzo del 2007, vol. 21, ed. by Luis Pegenaute; et al., 309–320. Barcelona: ppu.Google Scholar
García-Medall, Joaquín. 1998. “Informe sobre la traducción e interpretación juradas”. In La traducción: de la teoría a la práctica, ed. by Antonio Bueno García; and Joaquín García Medall, 61–80. Valladolid: Universidad de Valladolid.Google Scholar
González Corcho, Ana. 2018. “Sistema de calidad para traductores: por la parte que te toca”. La linterna del traductor 171: 12–20. [URL]
Gouadec, Daniel. 2010. “Quality in Translation”. In Handbook of Translation Studies, vol. 11, ed. by Yves Gambier; and Luc van Doorslaer, 270–275. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hall, Joseph. 2018. “Isaac Asimov, You Were no Nostradamus”. [URL]
Hatim, Basil; and Ian Mason. 1990. Discourse and the Translator. London: Longman.Google Scholar
House, Juliane. 2009. “Quality”. In Routledge Encyclopedia of Translation Studies, 2nd ed., ed. by Mona Baker; and Gabriela Saldanha, 222–225. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
. 2015. Translation Quality Assessment: Past and Present. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Hurley, Rachel. 2018. “How Blockchain Will Impact Translation”. [URL]
Iansiti, Marco; and Karim R. Lakhani. 2017. “The Truth about Blockchain”. Harvard Business Review 95 (1): 118–127.Google Scholar
Ibáñez Jiménez, Javier W. 2016. “ Blockchain, ¿el nuevo notario?”. Everis ntt Data. [URL]
2017. “Cuestiones jurídicas en torno a la cadena de bloques («blockchain») y a los contratos inteligentes («smart contracts»)”. Icade: revista de las facultades de Derecho y Ciencias Económicas y Empresariales 1011. [URL]
International Organization for Standardization and International Electrotechnical Commission. 2004. Standardization and related activities – Fundamentals and Vocabulary, 8th ed. Geneva: iso/iec.Google Scholar
International Organization for Standardization. 2015. Quality Management Systems – General vocabulary, 4th ed. Geneva: iso.Google Scholar
Joscelyne, Andrew. 2018. “Blockchain: When the Token Economy Meets the Translation Industry”. [URL]
Johnson, Melvin et al. 2017. “Google’s Multilingual Neural Machine Translation System: Enabling Zero-Shot Translation”. Transactions of the Association for Computational Linguistics 5 (1): 339–351. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Koźbiał, Dariusz. 2017. “Two-Tiered Approach to Quality Assurance in Legal Translation at the Court of Justice of the European Union”. In Quality Aspects in Institutional Translation, ed. by Tomáš Svoboda; Łucja Biel; and Krzysztof Łoboda, 155–174. Berlin: Language Science Press.Google Scholar
Krüger, Ralph. 2016. “Contextualising Computer-Assisted Translation Tools and Modelling Their Usability”. trans-kom 9 (1): 114–148. [URL]
Lara Aguado, Ángeles. 2016. “La reforma de la traducción e interpretación oficial en derecho internacional privado español”. Revista electrónica de estudios internacionales 321: 1–36. [URL]
Lauscher, Susanne. 2000. “Translation Quality Assessment”. The Translator 6 (2): 149–168. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Lingua Technologies International. 2017. “Difference between iso 17100 and en 15038”. [URL]
Lobato Patricio; Julia and Adrián Granados Navarro. 2019. “Estado de la cuestión sobre las referencias documentales de la traducción e interpretación juradas”. In Introducción a la traducción jurídica y jurada: orientaciones doctrinales y metodológicas, 3rd ed., ed. by Ana Belén Martínez López, Miguel Duro Moreno; and Pedro San Ginés Aguilar, 262-279. Granada: Comares.Google Scholar
Márquez Villegas, Luis. 1997. “Orientaciones metodológicas para la certificación y legalización de traducciones juradas”. In Introducción a la traducción jurídica y jurada, 2nd ed., ed. by Emilio Ortega Arjonilla; and Pedro San Ginés Aguilar, 115–121. Granada: Comares.Google Scholar
Mayoral Asensio, Roberto. 2003. Translating Official Documents. Manchester: St. Jerome.Google Scholar
Mitchell-Schuitevoerder, Rosemary. 2015. “A Reconsideration of Translation Quality and Standards”. Journal of Siberian Federal University – Humanities & Social Sciences 12 (8): 2908–2919.Google Scholar
Mossop, Brian. 2014. Revising and Editing for Translators, 3rd ed. London: Routledge. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Muzii, Luigi. 2018. “Sink or Swim”. [URL]
. 2019. “Scuds and Flies”. [URL]
Norman, Alan T. 2017. Blockchain Technology Explained: The Ultimate Beginner’s Guide about Blockchain Wallet, Mining, Bitcoin, Ethereum, Litecoin, Zcash, Monero, Ripple, Dash, Iota and Smart Contracts. Los Angeles: Createspace [ebook].Google Scholar
O’Brien, Sharon. 2012. “Towards a Dynamic Quality Evaluation Model for Translation”. The Journal of Specialised Translation 171: 55–77.Google Scholar
Parra-Galiano, Silvia. 2017. “Conceptos teóricos fundamentales en la revisión de traducciones y su reflejo en el Manual de revisión de la dgt y en las normas iso 17100:2015 y en 15038:2006”. Hermēneus. Revista de traducción e interpretación 191: 270–308. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Peñarroja Fa, Josep. 2004. “Historia de los intérpretes jurados”. La linterna del traductor 91: 21–34. [URL] and [URL]
Prieto Ramos, Fernando. 2015. “Quality Assurance in Legal Translation: Evaluating Process, Competence and Product in the Pursuit of Adequacy”. International Journal for the Semiotics of Law/Revue internationale de Sémiotique juridique 28 (1): 11–30. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Popiołek, Monika. 2016. “ iso Standards Framework for qa in Legal Translation”. [URL]
Reback, Gedalyah. 2018. “Blockchain would Be a Useful Way to Streamline Translation”. [URL]
Shoshan, Ofer. 2018. “Using Blockchain to Track a Translation to the Actual Linguists”. [URL]
Transperfect. 2017. “Learning About Quality: What’s the Difference Between qa & qc?” [URL]
Ugray, Gábor L. 2018. “Blockchain as Translation’s New Foundational Technology”. [URL]
Weber, Ingo et al. 2016. “Untrusted Business Process Monitoring and Execution Using Blockchain”. In Business Process Management. 14th International Conference, BPM 2016, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil, September 18–22, 2016. Proceedings, ed. by Marcello La Rosa; Peter Loos; and Oscar Pastor, 329–347. Cham: Springer. DOI logo
Williams, Malcolm. 2004. Translation Quality Assessment: An Argumentation-Centred Approach. Ottawa: University of Ottawa Press.Google Scholar
Cited by (5)

Cited by five other publications

Huang, Lingling, Chengqiang Zhao, Shijie Chen, Jing Yuan & Mingzhe Liu
2023. An Exploration of the Application of Consortium Blockchain in Translation Services Industry. Wireless Personal Communications 132:2 ► pp. 841 ff. DOI logo
Huang, Lingling, Chengqiang Zhao, Shijie Chen & Liujing Zeng
2023. Blockchain: a promising technology for judicial translation services in cases with foreign elements. Aslib Journal of Information Management DOI logo
Zhang, Aiping & Xiaowei Zhu
2023. Analysis of English Translation of Corpus Based on Blockchain. International Journal of Web-Based Learning and Teaching Technologies 18:2 ► pp. 1 ff. DOI logo
Ding, Yanbin & Chia-Huei Wu
2022. Effectiveness Evaluation Model of Students’ English Listening Ability Based on Immersive Computing. Mobile Information Systems 2022 ► pp. 1 ff. DOI logo
Liang, Jing, Minghui Du & Baiyuan Ding
2022. Two-Way Neural Network Chinese-English Machine Translation Model Fused with Attention Mechanism. Scientific Programming 2022 ► pp. 1 ff. DOI logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 30 june 2024. Please note that it may not be complete. Sources presented here have been supplied by the respective publishers. Any errors therein should be reported to them.