A study on general notions about translation among students enrolled in the department of Translation and Interpreting

Yıl 2020, Sayı: 19, 833 - 850, 21.06.2020

Duygu İşpınar Akçayoğlu

https://doi.org/10.29000/rumelide.752856

Öz

The purpose of this longitudinal study was to investigate the Translation and Interpreting Department students’ general notions about translation at the beginning, in the middle, and in the final year of their education. The participants were prep year, second year, and fourth-year students who were enrolled in the Department of Translation and Interpreting at Adana Alparslan Türkeş Science and Technology University between 2015 and 2020. The data were collected through the General Notions about Translation Questionnaire developed by Orozco (2000) and interviews conducted with randomly chosen students in the department. The data were analyzed using descriptive statistics and content analysis methods. The data collection tools aimed to explore changes in students’ perceptions about general notions about translation throughout their education. The results showed that the participating students’ general notions about translation indicated changes in several aspects throughout their education in the department. How students defined translation in general, elements that intervene in translation, basic unit of translation, kinds of translation, instruments that can help translators, vocabulary problems, and ideas about a translator’s knowledge and performance were found to have changed according to the class level they were enrolled in. The findings are expected to shed light on the translation education processes and explore changes in students’ notions.

Anahtar Kelimeler

Translation, education, translator, general notions about translation

Mütercim Tercümanlık bölümüne kayıtlı öğrenciler arasında çeviri ile ilgili genel kavramlar üzerine bir çalışma

Öz

Bu boylamsal çalışma, Mütercim Tercümanlık Bölümü öğrencilerinin çeviri ile ilgili genel algılarının eğitimlerinin başlangıcında, ortasında ve son yılında incelenmesini amaçlamaktadır. Katılımcılar, Adana Alparslan Türkeş Bilim ve Teknoloji Üniversitesi Mütercim Tercümanlık bölümüne 2015 ve 2020 yılları arasında kayıtlı olan hazırlık, ikinci sınıf ve dördüncü sınıf öğrencilerinden oluşmuştur. Araştırma verileri Orozco (2000) tarafından geliştirilen Çeviri hakkındaki Genel Görüşler Anketi ve rastgele seçilen öğrencilerle yapılan görüşmeler yolu ile toplanmıştır. Toplanan veriler betimleyici istatistikler ve içerik analizi yöntemleri ile analiz edilmiştir.Kullanılan ölçme araçları öğrencilerin eğitimleri boyunca çeviri ile ilgili görüşlerindeki değişimleri incelemiştir. Çalışmadan elde edilen veriler, öğrencilerin çeviri ile ilgili görüşlerinin bölümdeki eğitimleri boyunca çeşitli açılardan değişime uğradığını göstermiştir. Öğrencilerin çeviriyi genel olarak nasıl tanımladıkları, çeviriye etki eden faktörler, çevirinin temel birimi, çeviri türleri, çevirmene yardımı olabilecek araçlar, kelime sorunları ve çevirmenin bilgi ve performansı konusundaki görüşlerinin kayıt olunan sınıf düzeyine göre değişim gösterdiği tespit edilmiştir. Çalışmadan elde edilen verilerin öğrencilerin çeviri ile ilgili görüşlerini ortaya çıkararak çeviri eğitimi süreçlerine ışık tutması beklenmektedir.

Anahtar Kelimeler

Çeviri, eğitim, çevirmen, çeviri hakkindaki genel görüşler

Kaynakça

• Alves, F. (2005). Bridging the gap between declarative and procedural knowledge in the training of translators: Meta-reflection under scrutiny. Meta: Translators’ Journal. 50(4).
• Arnold, D. J., Balkan, L., Meijer, S., Humphreys, R., & Sadler, L. (1994). Machine translation: an introductory guide. London: Blackwells-NCC.
• Baer, B. J., & Koby, G. (2003). Beyond the ivory tower: Rethinking translation pedagogy. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publishing.
• Bassnett, S. (1980). Translation Studies. London and New York: Routledge.
• Birbili, M. (2000). Translating from one language to another. Social Research Updates, 31.
• Delisle, Jean. 1980. L'Anayse du discours comme métode de traduction. Cahiers de traductologie, 2, Université d'Ottawa.
• Downe-Wamboldt, B. (1992). Content analysis: Method, applications, and issues. Health Care for Women International, (13), 313-321.
• Eruz, S. (2004). Çeviri Bir Sanat Mıdır? Çevirmen Yetiştirme Sürecinde Akademik Çeviri Eğitimi. İlyas Öztürk, Sakarya.
• Gerding-Salas, C. (2000). Translation: problems and solutions. Translation Journal, 4(3).
• House, J. (1997). Translation quality assessment (rev.ed.). Germany: CompArt
• Ivanova, O. (2016). Translation and ICT competence in the globalized world. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 231, 129-134.
• Kim, H. (2006). The influence of background information in translation: Quantity vs. quality or both?. Meta: Translators' Journal, 51(2), 328-342.
• Laufer, B., & Levitzky-Aviad, T. (2006). Examining the effectiveness of Bilingual Dictionary Plus—A dictionary for production in a foreign language. International Journal of Lexicography, 19(2), 135–155.
• Liu, M. (2003). Fanyi Jiaoxue: Shiwu yu Lilun (Translation Teaching: Theory and Practice), Beijing, China Translation Corporation.
• Liu, Y. (2007). A critical review of Translation education in China and South Africa: A proposed guideline (Unpublished M. Tech thesis). Department of Communication Sciences, The Central University of Technology, Free State.
• Lotman, Y. M., Uspensky, B. A., & Mihaychuk, G. (1978). On the semiotic mechanism of culture. New literary history, 211-232.
• Maxwell, J. A. (2005). Qualitative research design (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications, Inc.
• McAlpine, J., & Myles, J. (2003). Capturing phraseology in an online dictionary for advanced users of English as a second language: A response to user needs. System, 31, 71-84.
• Neubert, A. (2000). Competence in language, in languages, and in translation. Benjamins Translation Library, 38, 3-18.
• Nida, E. A., & Taber, C. R. (1982). The theory and practice of translation. Leiden, Netherlands: E. J.Brill.
• Nord, C. (1997). Translating as a purposeful activity. Manchester: St. Jerome Publishing
• Nord, C. (2005). Training functional translators. Training for the new millennium: Pedagogies for translation and interpreting, 209-224.
• Orozco, M. (2000). Building a measuring instrument for the acquisition of translation competence in trainee translators. Benjamins Translation Library, 38, 199-214.
• Orozco, M., & A.H. Albir. (2002). Measuring translation competence acquisition. Meta: Translators' Journal, 47(3), 375-402.
• PACTE (2003). Building a translation competence model. In Fabio Alves (eds.) Triangulating Translation: Perspectives in Process-Oriented Research. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
• Price, C. J., Green, D. W., & Von Studnitz, R. (1999). A functional imaging study of translation and language switching. Brain, 122(12), 2221-2235.
• Pym, A. (2003). Redefining translation competence in an electronic age. In defence of a minimalist approach. Meta: Translators' Journal, 48(4), 481-497.
• Robinson, D. (2012). Becoming a translator: An introduction to the theory and practice of translation. Routledge.
• Schäffner, C., & Adab, B. (Eds.). (2000). Developing translation competence (Vol. 38). John Benjamins Publishing.
• Shapiro, G., & Markoff, J. (1997). ‘A Matter of Definition’ in C.W. Roberts (Ed.). Text Analysis for the Social Sciences: Methods for Drawing Statistical Inferences from Texts and Transcripts. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
• Silverman, D. (2006). Interpreting Qualitative Data. (3rd ed.). London: Sage Publications, Inc.
• Sin, K. K. (2000): “Fanyi jiaoxue de ben yu mo” (The end and the means of translation teaching), in Liu, J., Lin, W. and S. Jin (eds), Proceedings of Conference on Translation Teaching, Hong Kong, Hong Kong Translators’ Association, pp. 13-25.
• Stewart, J., Orbán, W., & Kornelius, J. (2010). Cooperative translation in the paradigm of problem-based learning. T21N, Translation in Transition, 1.
• Sun, S. (2011). Think-aloud-based translation process research: Some methodological considerations. Meta: Translators’ Journal, 56(4), 928-951.
• Tan, Z. (2008). Towards a Whole-Person translator education approach in translation teaching on university degree programmes. Meta: Translators' Journal, 53(3), 589-608.
• Weber, R. P. (1990). Basic Content Analysis, 2nd ed. Newbury Park, CA.
• Wilss, Wolfram. (1982). The science of translation. Stuttgart: Gunter Narr verlag Tubingen.