Table of contents

A translated text is defined here as a text that fulfills and/or attempts to fulfill a specific function in a target culture (in accordance with a set of explicit or implicit instructions, known as the translation brief) and that bears a translation relationship to another text in another language; the specifics of a translation relationship (vs. version, adaptation) can vary from one culture to another. This discussion takes the position that a translated text comes about as the result of the interaction of social participants (minimally, the writer, the target language audience, and the translator) and a purpose.

Full-text access is restricted to subscribers. Log in to obtain additional credentials. For subscription information see Subscription & Price.


Bowker, Lynne
2001“Towards a methodology for a corpus-based approach to translation evaluation.” Meta 46 (2): 345–64. DOI logo  TSBGoogle Scholar
Carroll, John B
1966“An experiment in evaluating the quality of translations.” Mechanical Translation 9 (3–4): 55–66.Google Scholar
Colina, Sonia
2008“Translation quality evaluation: Empirical evidence for a functionalist approach.” The Translator 14 (1): 97–134. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
House, Julianne
1997Translation Quality Assessment: A Model Revisited. Tübingen: Narr.Google Scholar
2001“Translation quality assessment: Linguistic description versus social evaluation.” Meta 46 (2): 243–57. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Lauscher, Susanne
2000“Translation quality-assessment: where can theory and practice meet?” The Translator 6 (2): 149–68. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Nida, Eugene & Charles Taber
1969The Theory and Practice of Translation. Leiden: Brill.  TSBGoogle Scholar
Nord, Christiane
1997Translating as a Purposeful Activity: Functionalist approaches explained. Manchester: St. Jerome.  TSBGoogle Scholar
Reiss, Katharina
1971Möglichkeiten und Grenzen der Übersetungskritik. München: Hüber.  TSBGoogle Scholar
Reiss, Katharina & Vermeer, Hans
1984Grundlegung einer allgemeinen Translations-Theorie. Tübingen: Niemayer. DOI logo  BoPGoogle Scholar
Williams, Malcolm
2001“The application of argumentation theory to translation quality assessment.” Meta 46 (2): 326–44. DOI logo  TSBGoogle Scholar

Further reading

Colina, Sonia
2009“Further evidence for a functionalist approach to translation quality evaluation.” Target 21 (2): 215–244. DOI logo  TSBGoogle Scholar
Schäffner, Christina
(ed.) 1998Translation and Quality. Clevedon: Multilingual Matters.  TSBGoogle Scholar
Maier, Carol
(ed.) 2000Evaluation and translation. Special issue of The Translator 6 (2).. DOI logo  TSBGoogle Scholar
Lee-Jahnke, Hannelore
(ed.) 2001Évaluation: paramètres, méthodes, aspects pédagogiques / Evaluation: Parameters, Methods, Pedagogical Aspects. Special issue of Meta 46 (2).  TSBGoogle Scholar
Williams, Malcolm
2004Translation Quality Assessment: An Argumentation-Centered Approach. Ottawa: University of Ottawa Press.  TSBGoogle Scholar