Cover not available
Article published In:
Translation and Translanguaging in Multilingual Contexts
Vol. 4:2 (2018) ► pp.282–305

A model solution for English-Arabic-English translation students

A case study from the Lebanese University

| Lebanese University

This paper proposes a model that addresses students’ common errors in English-Arabic-English translation. My study documents an attempt to develop a new interconnectedness between students’ errors and translation theories that may improve their performance when translating different genres. Consistent and repeated errors produced by tens of students working on the same texts were compiled and analyzed. The errors showed lack of knowledge of genre structure, functional analysis, appropriate intervention as well as lack of understanding of the wider context upon which appropriate decisions can be made. The methodology expounded in this study involves describing and categorizing students’ errors. It suggests solutions grounded in translation theory and proposes comparisons with professional translations. This methodology proved to be very successful during my teaching experience at the Lebanese University. [1] 1 The model solution developed in this study draws on genre analysis, text-typology, text-functionality, register analysis, and equivalence. The application of the model solution minimized students’ errors to a large extent and enabled them to provide accurate descriptions of different translation strategies and critically assess professional translations.

Keywords: descriptive translation studies, register analysis, genre, Skopos theory, translation pedagogy
Article outline
  • 1.Introduction
  • 2.The study
  • 3.Building a model solution
    • 3.1Description of common errors in the light of translation theory
    • 3.2Proposed methods in translation pedagogy
  • 4.The model in practice: Illustrative cases
  • 5.Concluding remarks
  • Notes
  • References
Published online: 26 April 2018
DOI logo
https://doi.org/10.1075/ttmc.00013.baz
References
Baker, Mona
2011 In Other Words: A Coursebook on Translation. London: Routledge. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Bazzi, Samia
2009 Arab News and Conflict: A Multidisciplinary Discourse Study. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Bühler, Karl
1934/1965 Sprachtheorie: Die Darstellungsfunktion der Sprache. Stuttgart: Gustav Fischer.Google Scholar
Catford, John
1965 A Linguistic Theory of Translation. London: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Dickins, James, Sandor Hervey, and Ian Higgins
2002 Thinking Arabic Translation: A Course in Translation Method: Arabic to English. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Elmgrab, Ramadan
2013 “Implication for Translation Teaching Pedagogy: A Case of Benghazi University.” Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences 701: 358–369. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Halliday, Michael. A. K.
1994 An Introduction to Functional Grammar. London: Edward Arnold.Google Scholar
Hatim, Basil
1997 English-Arabic/Arabic-English Translation: A Practical Guide. London: Saqi Books.Google Scholar
Hatim, Basil, and Ian Mason
1990 Discourse and the Translator. London and New York: Longman.Google Scholar
1997 The Translator as Communicator. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Hermans, Theo
1999 Translation in Systems: Descriptive and Systemic Approaches Explained. Manchester: St Jerome.Google Scholar
House, Juliane
1997 Translation Quality Assessment. A Model Revisited. Tübingen: Gunter Narr.Google Scholar
Koller, Werner
1979 Einführung in die Übersetzungswissenschaft. Heidelberg: Quelle & Meyer.Google Scholar
1995 The concept of equivalence and the object of translation studies. Target, 7 (2): 191–222.Google Scholar
Malmkjær, Kirsten
1991 The Linguistics Encyclopedia. London: Routledge. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Munday, Jeremy
2012 Introducing Translation Studies: Theories and Applications. London and New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
Newmark, Peter
1981 Approaches to Translation. Oxford: Pergamon.Google Scholar
1988 A Textbook of Translation. London: Prentice Hall.Google Scholar
Nida, Eugene
1964 Toward a Science of Translating: With Special Reference to Principles and Procedures Involved in Bible Translating. Leiden, Holland: Brill.Google Scholar
Nord, Christiane
1997 Translating as a Purposeful Activity: Functionalist Approaches Explained. Manchester: St Jerome.Google Scholar
Reiss, Katharina
2000 Translation Criticism – The Potentials and Limitations: Categories and Criteria for Translation Quality Assessment. Manchester: St Jerome.Google Scholar
Swales, John
1990 Genre Analysis: English in Academic and Research Settings. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Toury, Gideon
2012 Descriptive Translation Studies and Beyond. Revised Edition. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
van Dijk, Teun. A.
1988 News as Discourse. Hillsdale: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar
Venuti, Lawrence
2000 The Translation Studies Reader. London and New York: Routledge. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Vermeer, Hans. J.
2000 “Skopos and Commission in Translational Action.” In The Translation Studies Reader, ed. by Lawrence Venuti, 221–232. London and New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
Vinay, Jean-Paul, and Jean Darbelnet
2000 “A Methodology for Translation.” In The Translation Studies Reader, ed. by Lawrence Venuti, 84–93. London and New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
Cited by

Cited by 1 other publications

Bazzi, Samia & Yuran Shi
2020. The contribution of register analysis to the translation of Red Sorghum . Translation and Translanguaging in Multilingual Contexts 6:3 ► pp. 211 ff. DOI logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 15 april 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.