We live in the world
where international relations and collaboration in economics, science, culture
and other spheres continuously broaden. Development of information and
communication technologies greatly contributes to this process. International
communication is mainly performed in English. Knowledge of this language is a
basic condition for getting access to the world scientific literature, doing
business with foreign partners and integrating into foreign markets. In this
context, the profession of a translator has started to receive greater
acknowledgement. Demand in highly qualified translators has grown immensely for
the last few decades. Requirements to professional qualifications and
competences of trans lators have changed similarly.
Now translators are
expected to ensure effective interlanguage communication in every sphere of
industry and produce authentic written translations of specialized English
texts of various difficulty levels. In this connection the concept of teaching
translation in higher education institutions has changed. In order to teach
translation effectively educators started developing new teaching
methodologies, which can meet the demand in highly-qualified translators. Still
contemporary education science does not provide a thorough study of this topic.
There are many textbooks on translation techniques and translation theory, but
few books on methodology of teaching translation. Moreover, some scholars
dispute on the content and sustainability of those few existing methods for
teaching translation. The relevance of studying and development of teaching
methodologies is proved by the need in well-trained, qualified translators,
besides, theoretical knowledge and training methods are not well-defined and
studied.
In our research we have
studied works on teaching translation by several scholars. Alekseeva I. in her textbook Professional Training for Translators discusses separately training
of interpreting and written translation. In teaching written translation she
gives an overview of traditional methodologies and proposes complex
methodology that incorporates some traditional methods with new ones [1,
56]. Another scholar, Prof. Gerding-Salas C. proposes cooperative work
procedure as a method for teaching translators at an undergraduate level.
According to this method the educator acts as a facilitator of the translation
task and students accomplish it both collectively and individually with further
discussion of translations made [6, 9]. Mikel Garant in his book Current Trends
in Translation Teaching and Learning discusses Nord’s model of translation-oriented
text analyses, the process-oriented approach to translation teaching and the competence and skill-led approach [5, 27-28]. These authors describe
and analyze traditional methodologies and approaches to teaching translation.
Another author, Alekseeva L.M. raises an issue of inadequacy of traditional
teaching methods in the article Methodology for Teaching Written Specialized
Text Translation. She favors a modern methodology based on the belief
that translation is modeling of the original text meaning by translator [2,
78]. Thus, the literature on the topic discusses mainly traditional methodologies of teaching translation; however some authors criticize them and propose completely
different approaches in teaching translation.
Prior to studying and
analyzing the existing methods of translation teaching, it is necessary to
review the notion of “translation”. There are multiple definitions of this
term. Each definition depends on the research purpose of an author. For example,
the advocates of structural methods to translation propose that it is
“conversion of a text structure from one language to another with the meaning
remaining unchanged” [3, 11]. Scholar and stylist I.R. Galperin defined
translation as “rendering meaning and stylistic peculiarities of an utterance
in one language by the means of another language” [4, 21]. Although many
authors concur that the translation process is transfer of meaning, structure
and stylistic features of a text from the original language to the target
language, some scientists propose a completely different term. According to
Shveitser A.D., translation is “a one-directional two-stage process of
interlingual and intercultural communication when, based on the primary text
that underwent committed analysis, a secondary text is created which can
substitute the primary text in another language and cultural environment” [7,
14]. In term of specific functions of translation in professional
communication, this definition is more complete and appropriate. This definition
also reflects the function of translation as a means of interlingual communication.
Studying translation, it
is essential to distinguish between two types of translation: translation in
foreign language teaching process and professional translation. Vermes A.
called the first type pedagogical translation and defined it as “an instrumental
kind of translation, in which the translated text serves as a tool of improving
the language learner’s foreign language proficiency” [8, 83]. This type of
translation concentrates on language. On the contrary, professional
translation, as Vermes put it, is “aimed at a reader who is fundamentally
interested in the contents of the text” [8, 83]. Professional translation
focuses on the text. This is a more difficult type of translation, because its
primary purpose is to convey information for specific use. When speaking about
methods for teaching translation, we mean professional translation, because in
the first case translation is a method itself used in foreign language
acquisition.
The review of
traditional methodologies for teaching translation made by Alekseeva comprises
4 methods. The first method, the most popular one, is training translation
in a specific field (e.g. technical translation, legal translation, etc.) The
training starts with studying vocabulary of the field and giving equivalents in
the language of translation. Based on this, students proceed with complicated
grammatical structures of specialized written texts. The author notes that this
method concentrates mainly on acquisition of the terms and specialized
vocabulary of a chosen field. However, such vocabulary can be found in
different types of texts: scientific article, manual, official letter or advertisement.
Unaware of stylistic peculiarities of these texts, students may fail
translation of such texts [1, 53-54]. This method of teaching translation
represents an approach of teaching on a particular example; the example here is
translation of texts from a specific field. Obviously such example is too
limited in features and cannot train translation of other completely different
types of text such as literary texts.
The second popular
method for teaching translation is text analysis and translation. Text
analysis is traditionally one of the most significant aspects in training
language and translation in higher education institutions. It results in identifying
peculiarities of the text and some general principles of such type of text. But
out of variety of peculiarities found, in the author’s opinion, translators are
not able to pick out those features that are strictly recommended for
translation and should be distinguished from those that can be neglected. In
other words this method assumes intuitive choice of translation strategy [1, p.
54]. Kashkin V. characterizes conventional practice of text analysis as focused
on grammatical structures, set-expressions, realities and other elements of the
text that can cause difficulties in translation. Text analysis does not give
proper consideration to the features of the text as a complete substance such
as the type of the text, sphere of application and recipients. Although, they
also play an important role for making correct translation. He proposes a
discourse method of making text analysis, which is to analyze a text as an
integral communicative message [9]. Obviously both theorists concur that this
method of teaching translation have certain drawbacks, but text analysis ranks
an important place in translation process.
The third method
consists in finding all existing translation equivalents. The method is
popular in contemporary western education systems. The base for the method lies
in the belief that “form - content” relations do not have only one equivalent.
The same meaning can be expressed by different means. In a class, students have
a task to find as many translation equivalents for a word or phrase as possible
in the text that they translate together. Of course, students discover a lot of
equivalents for a single word, but upon taking into consideration the type of
the text, word compatibility, and meaning shades the variety of equivalents
invariably reduces. Depending on the type of the text, either an emotionally
colored, literal or neutral word shall be selected. Thus students deal with
extensive material practically based on their active vocabulary. Similarly to
the previous method, Alekseeva I. marks, that students make an intuitive choice
when translating the text [1, p. 54]. The method operates with polysemanticity
of vocabulary and involves cooperative learning and the basics of text
analysis.
The last method, which
has a long history, is comprised of the translation training being conducted by
an experienced talented translator. The method can be successfully used alone
or in addition to the first and the second methods and often succeed in
teaching. This is when an experienced translator trains young translators. The
trainer selects texts for translation training which can vary greatly. When
assessing different translation variants, the trainer rarely gives grounds for
the assessment and provides students with own variant of translation. In this
method, the trainer relies on own knowledge and prestige. Likewise this method
can be called the “authoritarian-creative” method [1, p. 54]. This method
relies on the process of sharing experience and teaching translators’
competences of the trainer that were acquired through a long-term translation
practice.
Having studied
traditional methods of teaching translation and concluded that none of them can
ensure proper translation training, Alekseeva I. proposed a complex method. The
method is comprised of 3 stages: preparatory, basic, and training. The
preparatory stage consists in the study of different types of texts in the
language of translation. Subjects like critical reading, text analysis or
writing training can cover objectives of this stage. The author also recommends
practicing not only analysis of texts type in the native language but
synthesis, too [1, p. 62]. Students should find a similar type of text in the
language of translation, observe its characteristic features and write a text
of this type observing its features [1, 56]. Thanks to this method students can
familiarize themselves with the types of texts and acquire skills of
reproducing any peculiarities of different types of texts found.
The basic stage
subdivides into text analysis for translation, analytical search of
translation variants and analysis of translated text. Text analysis
for translation is a necessary step. It should not have scientific or research
character, but concentrate on the needs of consequent translation [1, 56]. Upon
completion of text analysis, students proceed with translation. The search of
translation variants lies in finding an appropriate translation equivalent
subject to the text analysis results. It is essential to formulate and write
down the “ideal” translation for each word and phrase. Alekseeva I. stresses
that the teacher’s status plays significant role in this process, however the
teacher should not impose own variant to students, as it can demotivate them [1,
57].
Ideally, the best
translation equivalent should be chosen from those offered by student. The
search of translation variants can be practiced using other people’s
translation, too. Students comment on the choice of words or phrases and can propose
their own variants of translation [1, 61]. The basic stage ends with analysis
of translated text. The translation is to be compared with the original text:
whether all words and phrases have been translated. Then style integrity of the
translation is assessed without looking into the original text and any required
editing is performed. At the beginning of the teaching process it is the
teacher who should edit students’ translations. Later students are to edit one
another’s translation. Finally, students should edit their own translations and
read it aloud to the audience, which is the most complicated task. In addition,
if possible, the translated texts can be compared with the accomplished translation
of the same text made by a professional translator [1, 62].
The last stage
stipulated in Alekseeva’s complex method is the training stage. Training is conducted
on the materials of one type of texts or texts of a particular professional
field. Since it is impossible to touch upon translation of all existing types
of texts, only a few of them are trained. Their choice is usually determined by
market demands. Sometimes training also provides basics of the spheres in which
texts are translated. Actually, it is very rare when a translator happens to
make translation only in one or two professional fields. Thus translators have
to learn translation of texts from new spheres on their own using basic
knowledge they have acquired [1, 56]. The method proposed by Alekseeva I. represents a more thorough study of the translation teaching process and incorporates
the best techniques used in traditional methods as well as new tools such as analysis
of the types of texts in the language of translation.
The next methodology of
teaching translation applies to translation of specialized texts. Alekseeva L.M
calls it modern methodology and describes in her article “Methods for teaching
specialized written translation”. In her opinion, it is a specific branch of
translation studies, which challenges traditional training methods that treat
text as an objective phenomenon and define translation as work with signs of an
original text [2, 77]. Contemporary view on translation techniques, according
to the author, relies on the following statements: (a) the technique is based
not on the use, but on handling with text; (b) the original text as an object
for translation totally depends on translators; (c) translator adds
comprehension of meaning to translation; (d) translation techniques are
determined by the text integrity [2, 77]. Alekseeva L. understands translation
as modeling and consequent transmission of a complex-structured meaning of the
text. The the researcher singles out four stages of the translation teaching
process. The first stage she calls building space for translation. It
relates to finding conceptual meaning based upon the unity of the old and new
knowledge about the text. The second stage is compression of special
knowledge, whose one form is modeling. The third stage is interpretation
of special meaning. The main aim of this stage is sequential interpretation
of concept-forming language units. The fourth stage consists in identifying
theme and rheme of the text, based on the theory of actual division of the
sentence and principles of logical narration [2, 81-82]. Modern methodology of
teaching written translation of specialized texts completely differs from what
we used to know about translation and translation instruction. The method
differs in views on text, meaning, and role of translators and challenges the
adequacy of traditional methods for teaching translation.
The review of the
available teaching methods shows surprising diversity. However, each teaching
method may be productive in one environment and inconsistent in another. We
studied traditional, complex and modern methods for teaching translation. The
first traditional method, training translation in a specific field, may be good
in teaching translators for working in one particular field, which happens very
rare in real life. So students trained to translate in metallurgy will
experience difficulties when translating texts on electrical engineering, and
even more difficulties in translation legal documents, because, in the first
case they have not studied vocabulary of the topic, and in the second case,
they are not familiar with vocabulary plus peculiarities of new type of texts.
The method is limited by the subject of texts and lacks very important step of
translation: text analysis. In the next teaching method, it ranks high
importance. The method of teaching translation, called text analysis and
translation, enables learners to translate different types of texts. But as
mentioned by Alekseeva I., upon analyzing a text, students may not be aware of
what peculiarities they should render in translation. To learn this, they need
to familiarize themselves with peculiarities of such types of texts in their
native language. So probably, the second method of teaching translation should
be supplemented by studying different types of texts in the native language of
learners in order to have stylistically correct translations.
The method of finding
all existing translation equivalents differs from the above methods by its
cooperative nature. Students make translation together, can exchange ideas and
find the best choice. They not only look for the most suitable word but aim to
preserve the style of the text. The drawback of the method is that it
concentrates on translation of words, and do not regard the text as an integral
communicative act. Sometimes equivalents should be found for a whole sentence,
paragraph or even text in order to preserve their communicative value. Text
analysis can be helpful for identifying such issues in the text. Moreover, the
method of finding translation equivalents requires more time than the other
teaching methods, because words have a lot of synonyms and the process of
choosing an appropriate one takes time. The last of traditional methods for
teaching translation is training by an experienced translator. This method involves
a lot of practice, discussions and advice. The trainer may help in resolving
particular practical tasks and issues based on his or her experience. This
method may be used together with other methods mentioned before and this will
enhance the quality of teaching. Students probably appreciate to be educated by
an acknowledged translator and become therefore more motivated for study.
However, the disadvantage of the method is that it contributes to the
development of professional skills but do not guarantee them. Students are
presented with ready solutions of translation tasks but do not find them
through personal practice, thus they may not fully understand them. Besides,
this way of teaching is quite subjective, because it is the trainer, who
selects training material which may be based upon personal preference.
The complex method,
proposed by Alekseeva I., represents a more comprehensive view on translation
and teaching translation. It addresses not only working with original texts,
but studying the norms of such type of texts in the language of translation. As
a result, the quality of the translated texts improves. Text analysis, as one
of the components of this method, is also a necessary condition for making
translation properly, and works well as united with further training. In
addition, this method recognizes the limitedness of training translation in a
specific field, and therefore suggests that as many of such fields should be
touched upon as possible. But it does not take into account the fact that text
is an integral communicative unit. On the contrary to all the previous methods,
the modern method, suggested by Alekseeva L., emphasizes the role of translators
in translation and challenges the concepts of equivalence of text. Under this
teaching method, translation acquires a cognitive function. Translation process
is recognized as extraction of the meaning and modeling in the language of
translation, not as transfer of meaning. This method stresses the importance of
the text as an integral unit, which is not mentioned in the previous methods.
However, the teaching method proposed by Alekseeva L. concentrates on the theory
and does not provide us with direct instruction how the above features of
translation process can be taught to students, what tasks should be used, and
etc.
The translation teaching
methods cited in this article represent different approaches to translation and
teaching. Traditional methods have obvious disadvantages and do not comply with
the whole set of goals, faced by educators. Some of them even proved to be
insufficient for teaching translation as a complex subject. Therefore
researchers try to study the problem and find the best method for satisfying
all goals and needs in training translation.
The new methods proposed
by some of them cast light upon the topic, but still have some drawbacks or
require further thorough investigation. At the meantime, the demand in
professional, qualified translators enhances the relevance of further
investigation. Thus, teaching translation remains a topical issue and has great
potential for research.
REFERENCES
1.
Alekseeva I. Professional Training for Translators: a textbook on
interpretation and written translation for teachers and translators. -
Sankt-Petersburg, 2000.
2.
Alekseeva L. Methodology for Teaching Written Specialized Text Translation, Perm University Vestnik, 2(8), 2010.
3.
Barkudarov, L. Language and Translation: Issues of General and Specific
Translation Theory. – Moscow, International Relations, 1975.
4.
Galperin I., Translation and Stylistics. Theory and Methods for Teaching
Translation. - Moscow: APN, 1950
5.
Garant M. Current Trends in Translation Teaching and Learning. - Helsinki, University of Helsinki Press, 2010.
6.
Gerding-Salas C. Teaching Translation: Problems and Solutions, Translation
Journal, 4(3), 2000.
7.
Shveitser A. Translation and Linguistics. – Moscow: Voenizdat, 1973.
8.
Vermes A. Translation in Foreign Language Teaching: A Brief Overview of Pros
and Cons. Eger Journal of English Studies 83(93), 2010.