Rethinking Language Competence Related Courses in T&I Departments: A Comparative Curriculum Analysis

Abstract

One of the core skills required of translators is language proficiency in both L1 and L2. By the time students start translation practice classes, many translation programs presume that they already have a solid command of the language. Research, however, seldom looks at how curricula truly close the gap between language proficiency and translational skills. This article examines the relationship between language proficiency and translation and interpreting (T&I) education in some of the top universities in Türkiye and Europe by analyzing and comparing curricula regarding language courses designed to improve translation students’ language competence and proficiency. Through a qualitative curriculum analysis of 10 translator-training programs in Türkiye and Europe, courses will be coded according to competence categories derived from the European Master’s in Translation (EMT) framework, and language proficiency will be conceptualized using the Council of Europe’s Common European Framework of Reference (CEFR). The main aim is to identify the pedagogical transition from general language proficiency to translational competence. By conducting a cross-program comparison and analyzing how translator-training curricula structure the shift from general language proficiency to translational competence, this study contributes to translation studies. It offers empirical insights into the pedagogical development of translation competence in higher education. Overall, translator training cannot be considered distinct from language teaching, as it raises issues related to program identity and adherence to professional norms.

Keywords

• Language proficiency
• translator competence
• translator training
• translation and interpreting curricula
• CEFR
• EMT

Mütercim ve Tercümanlık (Çeviribilim) Bölümlerinde Dil Yeterliliği ile İlgili Derslerin Yeniden Değerlendirilmesi: Karşılaştırmalı Bir Müfredat Analizi

Abstract

Çevirmenlerden beklenen temel becerilerden biri, hem birinci dil (L1) hem de ikinci dil (L2) konusunda dil yeterliliğidir. Öğrenciler çeviri uygulamalı derslerine başladıklarında, birçok çeviri programı onların dil konusunda hâlihazırda güçlü bir hâkimiyete sahip olduklarını varsayar. Ancak araştırmalar, müfredatların dil yeterliliği ile çeviri becerileri arasındaki boşluğu gerçekte ne ölçüde kapattığını nadiren ele almaktadır. Bu makale, Türkiye ve Avrupa’daki bazı önde gelen üniversitelerde dil yeterliliği ile çeviri ve sözlü çeviri (T&I) eğitimi arasındaki ilişkiyi, çeviri öğrencilerinin dil yeterliliğini ve becerilerini geliştirmek için tasarlanmış dil derslerine ilişkin müfredatları analiz edip karşılaştırarak incelemektedir. Türkiye ve Avrupa’daki 10 çevirmenlik eğitim programının nitel müfredat analizi yoluyla, dersler Avrupa Çevirmenlik Yüksek Lisans Programı (EMT) çerçevesinden türetilen yeterlilik kategorilerine göre kodlanacak ve dil yeterliliği Avrupa Konseyi’nin Avrupa Ortak Referans Çerçevesi (CEFR) kullanılarak kavramsallaştırılacaktır. Ana amaç, genel dil yeterliliğinden çeviri yeterliliğine pedagojik geçişi belirlemektir. Programlar arası bir karşılaştırma yaparak ve çevirmenlik eğitimi müfredatlarının genel dil yeterliliğinden çeviri yeterliliğine geçişi nasıl yapılandırdığını analiz ederek, bu çalışma çeviri çalışmalarına katkıda bulunmaktadır. Çalışma, yükseköğretimde çeviri yeterliliğinin pedagojik gelişimine ilişkin ampirik içgörüler sunmaktadır. Genel olarak, çevirmen eğitimi, program kimliği ve mesleki normlara bağlılık gibi konuları gündeme getirdiği için dil öğretiminden ayrı bir alan olarak değerlendirilemez.

Keywords

• Dil yeterliliği
• çevirmen yetkinliği
• çevirmen eğitimi
• çeviri ve sözlü çeviri müfredatları
• CEFR
• EMT

References

1. Alharbi, W. (2024). Future translators’ linguistic and non-linguistic competencies and skills in the age of neural machine translation and artificial intelligence: A content analysis. International Journal of Linguistics, Literature and Translation, 7(4), 124-143. https://doi.org/10.32996/ijllt.2024.7.4.16
2. Albir, A. H. (2007). Competence-based curriculum design for training translators. The Interpreter and Translator Trainer, 1(2), 163–195. https://doi.org/10.1080/1750399X.2007.10798757
3. Anarjanovna, N. M. (2025). Innovative techniques and strategies for educating the next generation of translation and interpreting professionals by developing receptive skills. Shokh Articles Library, 1(1).
4. Beeby, A. (2000). Evaluating the development of translation competence. Benjamins Translation Library, 38, 185–198. https://doi.org/10.1075/btl.38.18bee
5. Beeby, A. (1996). Teaching Translation from Spanish to English: Worlds Beyond Words.  Teaching tran. Ottawa University Press. https://doi.org/10.2307/j.ctt1cn6sgb
6. Bell, R.T. (1991). Translation and translating. London: Longman.
7. Canım, S. (2025). Project-based practices in translation education: An examination of undergraduate programs in Turkey. Söylem Filoloji Dergisi, 10(3), 1763-1787. https://doi.org/10.29110/soylemdergi.1775263
8. Cifuentes-Goodbody, N., & Harding, S. (2016). An integrated approach to the translation studies curriculum. Current Trends in Translation Teaching and Learning E, 3, 1-23.

9. Council of Europe (2020), Common European Framework of Reference for Languages: Learning, teaching, assessment – Companion volume, Council of Europe Publishing, Strasbourg. www.coe.int/lang-cefr.
10. Chomsky, N. (1965). Aspects of the Theory of Syntax. Cambridge, Mass., MIT Press.
11. EMT (European Masters in Translation). (2009). Competences for Professional Translators, Experts in Multilingual and Multimedia Communication. Retrieved March 17, 2026, from http://ec.europa.eu/dgs/translation/programmes/emt/key_documents/emt_competences_translators_en.pdf.
12. Esfandiari, M. R., Sepora, T., & Mahadi, T. (2015). Translation competence: Aging towards modern views. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 192, 44-53. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2015.06.007
13. Göpferich, S. (2019). Competence, translation. In Routledge Encyclopedia of Translation Studies (pp. 89-95). Routledge.
14. Göpferich, S. (2009). Towards a Model of Translational Competence and Its Acquisition: The Longitudinal Study TransComp. In S. Göpferich, A. L. Jakobsen & I. M. Mees (Eds.), Behind the Mind: Methods, Models and Results in Translation Process Research (pp. 11–37). Copenhagen: Samfundslitteratur.
15. Hansen, G. (1997). Success in translation. Perspectives, 5(2), 201–210. https://doi.org/10.1080/0907676X.1997.9961310
16. Harris, B., Sherwood, B. (1978). Translating as an Innate Skill. In: Gerver, D., Sinaiko, H.W. (Eds.) Language Interpretation and Communication. NATO Conference Series (pp.155-170). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4615-9077-4_15
17. Hatim, B. & Mason, I. (1997). The translator as communicator. Routledge.
18. Hurtado Albir, A. (2015). The acquisition of translation competence. Competences, tasks, and assessment in translator training. Meta, 60(2), 256–280. https://doi.org/10.7202/1032857ar
19. Kaş, B. (2023). A curriculum analysis of applied English translation program in the scope of translator competence: The case of Tokat Gaziosmanpasa University. RumeliDE Dil Ve Edebiyat Araştırmaları Dergisi, 35, 1456-1473. https://doi.org/10.29000/rumelide.1342141
20. Kiraly, D. C. (1995). Pathways to translation: pedagogy and process. Kent State University Press.
21. Kiraly, D., & Hofmann, S. (2016). Towards a postpositivist curriculum development model for translator education. Towards authentic experiential learning in translator education, 67-87.
22. Lesznyák, M. (2007). Conceptualizing translation competence. Across Languages and Cultures, 8(2), 167-194. https://doi.org/10.1556/Acr.8.2007.2.2
23. Malmkjær, K. (2009). What is translation competence? Revue française de linguistique appliquée, 14(1), 121-134. https://doi.org/10.3917/rfla.141.0121.
24. Okuyan, S. (2017). Interpreter training curriculum in Turkey: The Case of Sakarya University. International Journal of Languages’ Education and Teaching, 5(1), 618-630. https://izlik.org/JA33TH65DJ
25. Orozco, M. & Hurtado Albir, A. (2002). Measuring translation competence acquisition. Meta, 47(3), 375–402. https://doi.org/10.7202/008022ar
26. PACTE (2000). Acquiring translation competence: Hypotheses and methodological problems in a research project. In A. Beeby, D. Ensinger & M. Presas (Eds.), Investigating Translation (pp. 99-106). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
27. PETRA-E Network: Retrieved March 21, 2026, from https://petra-education.eu/
28. Popescu, T. (2011, May). Linguistic competence vs. Translation competence: A pedagogic approach. In FLTLAL 2011 Proceedings/1st International Conference on Foreign Language Teaching and Applied Linguistics, May (pp. 5-7). Salamah, D. (2021). Translation Competence and Translator Training: A Review. International Journal of Linguistics, Literature and Translation, 4(3), 276-291. https://doi.org/10.32996/ijllt.2021.4.3.29
29. Stachl-Peier, U. (2020). Language mediation, translation/interpreting and the CEFR. Bausteine translationsorientierter Sprachkompetenz und translatorischer Basiskompetenzen, 35-77.
30. Yang, Z., Li, D. (2021). Translation Competence Revisited: Toward a Pedagogical Model of Translation Competence. In: Muñoz Martín, R., Sun, S., Li, D. (eds) Advances in Cognitive Translation Studies. New Frontiers in Translation Studies. Singapore: Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-16-2070-6_6
31. Yılmaz-Gümüş, V. (2017). An overview of undergraduate translator-training curricula in Turkey: What we teach to future translators. Current Trends in Translation Teaching and Learning E, 4, 112–151.