Abstract
Translator education, as most scholars agree, requires a detailed comprehension of linguistic rules and practices; hence the reason, why within the departments of translation and interpretation, extra importance is given to the discourse analysis course especially in the first two years of the bachelor’s programme. The view presented in this paper is that the linguistics based ‘discourse analysis’ course plays a significant role in translation and interpretation education by strengthening the curriculum and enabling the development of various skills necessary for the translator. To determine the extent and the impact that learning linguistics has on .translator education, eight courses were selected from upper grades (3rd and 4th years) and their relevance with the discourse analysis course was tested by applying a survey to the corresponding students at the end of the academic year. The findings based on the statistical analysis show that improving linguistic competence throughout translator education at the universities result in success in translation and a better understanding of the source text regardless of its type and context.
Keywords
Translator education translation and interpretation linguistics discourse analysis student attitude
References
- Bassnett, S. (1980). Translation studies. London: Methuen.
- Catford, J. (1965). A linguistic theory of translation. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
- Delisle, J. (1988). Translation: An interpretive approach. Ottawa: University of Ottawa Press.
- Hatim, B. (2001). Teaching and researching translation. Harlow: Pearson Education Limited.
- Gentzer, E. (1993). Contemporary translation theories. London: Routledge.
- Gile, D. (1995). Basic concepts and models for interpreter and translator training. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
- Gonzales Davies, M. (2004). Multiple voices in the translation classroom. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
- Kurz, I. (1988). Conference Interpreters – Can They Afford not to be Generalists? In Hammond, D.L. (ed.) 1988. (pp. 423-4)
- Mellen, D. (1988). Translator: Translator or Editor? In Hammond, D.L. (ed.) 1988. pp. 271-276
- Munday, J. (2001). Introducing translation studies: Theories and Applications. London: Routledge.
- Neubert, A. & Shreve, G. M. (1992). Translation as text. Kent and London: Kent State University Press.
- Nida, E.A. (1964). Towards a science of translating. Leiden: Brill.
- Tyler, S. (1978). The said and the unsaid. New York: Academic Press.
- Van Dijk, T. (ed) (1997). Discourse as process and structure. London: Sage.
- Citation Information Erton, İ. (2014). Discourse analysis in translation education at the university level: an assessment of students’ attitudes. Hacettepe Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi [Hacettepe University Journal of Education], 29(1), 114-125.
Discourse Analysis in Translation Education at the University Level: An Assessment of Students' Attitudes
Abstract
Çeviri eğitimi dilbilim kurallarının ve uygulamalarının ayrıntılı edinimini gerektirmektedir. Bundan dolayı, üniversitelerin Mütercim Tercümanlık bölümlerinde, Lisans eğitiiminin bilhassa ilk iki yılında dilbilim öğretiminine çok büyük önem verilmektedir. Bu araştırmada sunulan görüş, üniversitelerin Mütercim Tercümanlık bölümlerinde verilen söylem çözümlemesi dersinin müfredatı güçlendirerek çevirmen eğitiminde birçok farklı becerinin gelişmesine olanak sağlayarak büyük katkı sağladığıdır. Dilbilim öğrenmenin çevirmen eğitiminde ne derece etkin olduğunu belirleyebilmek için üçüncü ve dördüncü sınıflardan toplam sekiz ders belirlenmiş ve bu derslerin söylem çözümlemesi dersinden ne derece yarar sağladığı yine üçüncü ve dördüncü sınıf öğrencilerine akademik yıl sonunda dağıtılan bir anket ile belirlenmiştir. İstatistiksel açıdan değerlendirilen sonuçlar göz önüne alındığında dilsel edinçin üniversitelerde çeviri eğitimi süresince geliştirilmesi kaynak metin türü ne olursa olsun, daha iyi bir anlama sağlanması ve çeviride başarı ile sonuçlanmaktadır.
References
- Bassnett, S. (1980). Translation studies. London: Methuen.
- Catford, J. (1965). A linguistic theory of translation. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
- Delisle, J. (1988). Translation: An interpretive approach. Ottawa: University of Ottawa Press.
- Hatim, B. (2001). Teaching and researching translation. Harlow: Pearson Education Limited.
- Gentzer, E. (1993). Contemporary translation theories. London: Routledge.
- Gile, D. (1995). Basic concepts and models for interpreter and translator training. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
- Gonzales Davies, M. (2004). Multiple voices in the translation classroom. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
- Kurz, I. (1988). Conference Interpreters – Can They Afford not to be Generalists? In Hammond, D.L. (ed.) 1988. (pp. 423-4)
- Mellen, D. (1988). Translator: Translator or Editor? In Hammond, D.L. (ed.) 1988. pp. 271-276
- Munday, J. (2001). Introducing translation studies: Theories and Applications. London: Routledge.
- Neubert, A. & Shreve, G. M. (1992). Translation as text. Kent and London: Kent State University Press.
- Nida, E.A. (1964). Towards a science of translating. Leiden: Brill.
- Tyler, S. (1978). The said and the unsaid. New York: Academic Press.
- Van Dijk, T. (ed) (1997). Discourse as process and structure. London: Sage.
- Citation Information Erton, İ. (2014). Discourse analysis in translation education at the university level: an assessment of students’ attitudes. Hacettepe Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi [Hacettepe University Journal of Education], 29(1), 114-125.
Details
| Primary Language | Turkish |
|---|---|
| Journal Section | Makaleler |
| Authors | |
| Publication Date | July 23, 2014 |
| Published in Issue | Year 2014 Volume: 29 Issue: 29-1 |