The Application of Functional Linguistic Models for Assessing Quality of Translation: A Descriptive Analytical Study
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
This descriptive analytical study aimed at examining the application of linguistic-based functional approaches in assessing the quality of translation. A number of translation quality assessment models were analyzed to investigate the potential of integrating linguistic theories into translation theories. The problem that the present study tackled was that institutions of translation at higher education, translation organizations, and agencies of translation worldwide face difficulties in evaluating the quality of translation. Using objective criteria, which are based on the variables of quality, is still debated among these shareholders. The rationale of the present study is that adopting functional linguistic approaches can help in understanding the components of the quality of translation in terms of the relationship between translation purposes and functional adequacy. Linguistic functional approaches can determine the relationship between textual adequacy, and translation quality of content. Therefore, the current study followed a nonlinear design, which allowed an intensive description and analysis of three functional models applied in Translation Quality Assessment (TQA), and their effectiveness in assessing the quality of translation. Corpus data was collected from the theories and original works of House, Nord, and Colina, on translation quality assessment. Problems related to discourse analysis, function of the language, text typology, and theories of equivalence were examined. Translation criticism and evaluation including the classification of the functional hierarchy of translation, standards and benchmarks, empirical evidence for the success and limitations of the linguistic functionalist approaches in translation assessment, and competences and performances in translation, were thoroughly investigated. The research recommendations of the current study emphasize a number of issues relevant to translation evaluation. These issues are: (a) the significance of integrating the linguistic functional approaches into the curriculum of translation; (b) the importance of defining the components of solid criteria that can be employed for evaluating the quality of translations; and (c) the necessity of providing an empirical tool that can reveal the strengths and weaknesses of translated works. As such, this research study is a contribution in the field of translation evaluation and criticism as it provides a number of models that can be implemented in translation classrooms or in translation organizations. This study also provides an evaluation matrix, based on the models of TQA that can help translators understand the requirements of translation quality prior to the translation process itself. This research is also among the first studies to illustrate how to implement linguistic functional approaches that can be adopted by translation organizations, academic institutions, and publishing houses, to evaluate professional translations and this will inevitably lead to raising the standards of translation quality.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,001 | 0,013 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».