Article published in:
Babel
Vol. 62:1 (2016) ► pp. 135–149

Applying assessment holistic method to the translation exam in Yemen

This paper is an attempt to guide the teachers how the assessment process should be and it highlights the effectiveness and suitability of adopting the holistic method of assessment. This method was applied to the correction of students’ translations of the final exam containing different texts to be translated in both directions between English and Arabic. The exam was done by 36 female students at the Faculty for Women – Seiyun, Yemen on the undergraduate degree course of Translation (2). The hypothesis regarding the suitability and effectiveness of using the assessment holistic method and the possibility to improve the quality of the assessing the students’ translations in future based on this method has not been verified. This study concluded that the main factor which is clearly identifiable was translation competence and that this method was found out to be too lenient to give impartial translation quality assessment for the students’ translations.
Keywords: assessment, holistic method, students' translations, translation errors
Published online: 19 May 2016
https://doi.org/10.1075/babel.62.1.08bah
References
Beaugrande, R. de
1978 Factors in a Theory of Poetic Translating. Assen: van Gorcum.Google Scholar
Bensoussan, M., and J. Rosenhouse
1994 “Evaluating Student Translations by Discourse Analysis”. Babel, 36 (2): 65–84. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Campbell, S.J
1991 “Towards a Model of Translation Competence”. Meta 36 (2–3): 329–243. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Hatim, B
2001 Teaching and Researching Translation. Edinburgh: Pearson Education Limited.Google Scholar
Hatim, B., and I. Mason
1997 The Translator as Communicator. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Hewson, L
1995 “Detecting Cultural Shifts: Some Notes on Translation Assessment”. In Cross-Words. Issues and Debates in Literary and Non-literary Translating, ed. by I. Mason and C. Pagnoulle, 101–108. Liège: L3 (Liège, Language and Literature).Google Scholar
House, J
1981 A Model for Translation Quality Assessment. Tübingen: Gunter Narr.Google Scholar
Kussmaul, P
1995 Training the Translator. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Newmark, P
1991 About Translation. Clevedon: Multilingual Matters.Google Scholar
Pym, A
1992 “Translation Error Analysis and the Interface with Language Teaching”. In Teaching Translation and Interpreting. Training, Talent and Experience. Papers from the First Language International Conference, Elsinore, Denmark, 31 May–2 June, 1991, ed. by C. Dollerup and A. Loddegaard, 279–288. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Sager, J.C
1989 “Quality and Standards: The Evaluation of Translations”. In The Translator’s Handbook, ed. by C. Picken, 91–102. London: ASLIB. [This is the second edition of The Translator’s Handbook (1983)].Google Scholar
Séguinot, C
1989 “Understanding Why Translators Make Mistakes”. TTR 2 (2): 73–102. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
1990 “Interpreting Errors in Translation.” Meta 25 (1): 68–73. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Snell-Hornby, M
1995 “On Models and Structures and Target Text Cultures: Methods of Assessing Literary Translations”. In La Traducció Literària, ed. by Josep Marco Borillo, 43–58. Castelló de la Plana: Publicacions de la Universitat Jaume I, coll. “Estudis sobre la traducció,” no 2.Google Scholar
Stansfield, C.W., M.L. Scott, and D.M. Kenyon
1992 “The Measurement of Translation Ability.” The Modern Language Journal 76 (IV): 455–467. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Waddington, C
2001 “Different Methods of Evaluating Student Translations: The Question of Validity”. Meta: Translators’ Journal 461: 311–325. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Williams, M
1989 “The Assessment of Professional Translation Quality: Creating Credibility out of Chaos.” TTR 2 (2): 13–33. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Cited by

Cited by 5 other publications

Abdel Latif, Muhammad M. M.
2020.  In Translator and Interpreter Education Research [New Frontiers in Translation Studies, ], ► pp. 61 ff. Crossref logo
Akbari, Alireza
2018. Translation quality research. Babel. Revue internationale de la traduction / International Journal of Translation 64:4 ► pp. 548 ff. Crossref logo
Akbari, Alireza
2019. Logistic calibrated items (LCI) method: does it solve subjectivity in translation evaluation and assessment?. Revista de Lingüística y Lenguas Aplicadas 14:1 ► pp. 1 ff. Crossref logo
Akbari, Alireza & Mohammadtaghi Shahnazari
2019. Calibrated Parsing Items Evaluation: a step towards objectifying the translation assessment. Language Testing in Asia 9:1 Crossref logo
Su, Wei
2022. Understanding rubric use in peer assessment of translation. Perspectives 30:1 ► pp. 71 ff. Crossref logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 07 april 2022. 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.