Cover not available
Article published In:
Localization and Interculturality
Edited by Maria-Cornelia Wermuth and Priscilla Heynderickx
[The Journal of Internationalization and Localization 3:2] 2016
► pp. 133–151

How to bridge the gap between translators and technical communicators?

The importance of sharing knowledge to improve the localization process

 | KU Leuven, Faculty of Arts, Campus Sint-Andries
 | Gesellschaft für Technische Kommunikation x tekom Deutschland e.V.
In this contribution, it will be shown which tasks within the process of the development of information products in the source language have high relevance for later translation, localization, and interculturality. Put differently, while focusing on intercultural issues we will outline the knowledge areas to be shared by translators/localizers and technical communicators. The overarching aim is to foster the mutual understanding and learning of translators/localizers and technical communicators, hence facilitating the translation and localization workflow. It will further be shown which knowledge competencies are necessary to fulfill the typical tasks within the process of global information development and should therefore be part of academic programs in technical communication and its neighboring disciplines.
Keywords: content creation process, localization process improvement, intercultural competencies, academic competence framework, multilingual information product
Published online: 21 December 2016
DOI logo
https://doi.org/10.1075/jial.3.2.02mee
References (19)
Anderson, Lorin W., and David R Krathwohl. 2001. A taxonomy for learning, teaching, and assessing: A revision of Bloom’s Taxonomy of Educational Objectives. Complete edition. New York: Longman.Google Scholar
Esselink, Bert. 2000. A Practical Guide to Localization. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2006. “The Evolution of Localization.” In Translation Technology and its Teaching (With Much Mention of Localization), by Anthony Pym, Alexander Perekrestenko and Bram Starink, 22–29. Tarragona: Intercultural Studies.Google Scholar
Drugan, Joanna. 2013. Quality in Professional Translation. Assessment and Improvement. London: Bloomsbury.Google Scholar
Fritz, Michael, and Daniela Straub. 2009. “Probleme aus Verbrauchersicht und Lösungsansätze zur Verbesserung Technischer Anleitungen.” Verbraucherrat des DIN. Berlin: Deutsches Institut für Normung e.V.Google Scholar
. 2010. “Bedienungs- und Gebrauchsanleitungen für Verbraucherprodukte: Folgen fehlerhafter Anleitungen am Markt und Lösungsansätze zur Verbesserung technischer Anleitungen.” Verbraucherrat des DIN. Berlin: Deutsches Institut für Normung e.V.Google Scholar
. 2014. “Cross-sectoral Competence Framework for Technical Communication 2014.” Edited by Elisabeth Gräfe and Jörg Michael. Proceedings of the European Academic Colloquium on Technical Communication 31: 51–64.Google Scholar
Hartley, Anthony, and Cécile Paris. 1997. “Multilingual Document Production from Support for Translating to Support for Authoring.” Machine Translation 12 (1): 109–129. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Preparation of instructions for use — Structuring, content and presentation — Part 1: General principles and detailed requirements. IEC 82079-1:2012. Geneva: ISO.
Ramón, José, and Anthony Pym. 2006. “Technology and translation (a pedagogical overview).” In Translation Technology and its Teaching (With Much Mention of Localization), by Anthony Pym, Alexander Perekrestenko and Bram Starink, 5–19. Tarragona: Intercultural Studies Group.Google Scholar
Roturier, Johann. 2015. Localizing Apps: A practical guide for translators and translation students. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
Rychen, Dominique S. 2003. Key Competencies for a Successful Life and a Well-Functioning Society. Bern: Hogrefe Huber.Google Scholar
Schmitz, Klaus-Dirk, and Daniela Straub. 2016. Erfolgreiches Terminologiemanagement im Unternehmen. Praxishilfe und Leitfaden: Grundlagen, Umsetzung, Kosten-Nutzen-Analyse, Systemübersicht. Stuttgart: tcworld.Google Scholar
Schubert, Klaus. 2010. “Technical translation.” In Handbook of Translation Studies, by Yves Gambier and Luc Van Doorslaer, 350–355. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Sun, Huatong. 2012. Cross-cultural Technology Design. Creating Culture-Sensitive Technology for Local Users. Oxford: University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Straub, Daniela. 2012. “tekom Studie Einkauf von Übersetzungsdienstleistungen.“ Presentation held at the tekom Annual Conference 2012 Wiesbaden.
Translation services — Requirements for translation services. ISO 17100: 2015. Geneva: ISO.Google Scholar
tekom’s Competence Framework for Technical Communication. 2015. Accessed October. [URL]Google Scholar
Presseinformation Bundesverband der Dolmetscher und Übersetzer e.V. 2015. Accessed January 2016. [URL]
Cited by (3)

Cited by three other publications

López-Arroyo, Belén, Xiaobo Wang & Suguru Ishizaki
2024. Building Bridges Between Technical and Professional Communication and Translation Studies. IEEE Transactions on Professional Communication 67:3 ► pp. 260 ff. DOI logo
Petts, Ashleigh, Saveena Chakrika Veeramoothoo & Massimo Verzella
2024. Setting Foundations: An Integrative Literature Review at the Intersections of Technical and Professional Communication and Translation Studies. IEEE Transactions on Professional Communication 67:3 ► pp. 285 ff. DOI logo
Cleary, Yvonne, Jan Engberg, Joyce Karreman, Birgitta Meex, Sissi Closs, Zygmunt Drazek, Voichita Ghenghea, Patricia Minacori, Julia Müller & Daniela Straub
2017. TecCOMFrame: Building bridges between technical communication and translation studies through a prototype specialisation curriculum. Lebende Sprachen 62:2 ► pp. 313 ff. DOI logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 14 september 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.