Major approaches to translator training

The traditional approach
1. General Description
  1. Also called Transmissionist approach or conventional approach or folk pedagogical approach or apedagogical or (performance magistrale or instructional performance) ****
  2. Based on rationalist and empiricist philosophical traditions that objective truth can be found ‘out there’ in the world and either transmitted or ingested **
  3. Criticized by Álvaro Echeverri 2008, Nord 1995 Toury 1974, Ladmiral 1977, House 1980, Röhl 1983, Enns-Connolly 1986, Gabrian 1986 for the demotivating, passive role it allocates to students, the disempowering, domineering role it attributes to teachers [reflected in Ladmiral's colorful term: performance magistrale (Ladmiral 1977: 508)], and the overall lack of embeddedness in and preparation for the actual professional praxis of translation. (Kiraly, 2014)
2. Teacher's role
  1. A teacher can be expected to transmit the knowledge necessary to achieve linguistic equivalence.*
  2. The teacher is seen as a repository of knowledge/truth. ***
  3. Instruction is teacher-centered. ***
3. Student's role
  1. students attempt to accumulate knowledge of proper translation procedure, technique and strategy on the basis of their teachers' intuitive input and correction by the ostensibly more knowledgeable teacher of the students' faulty rough translations **
  2. Student discussion is minimal, and when it occurs it is always via the instructor; that is, a student answers the question posed by the teacher who in tum comments on his/her contribution and then moves on to the next student; students do not normally address each other; interaction is one-sided and usually limited to dialogues in which one of the participants is always the same-the teacher. ***
  3. Students' roles are passive; they are supposed to learn by being exposed to the expert knowledge the teacher possesses. ***
4. Instruction
  1. random text selection at the whim of the teacher *
5. Scholars
  1. there do not seem to be any translation didactic scholars who proudly claim responsibility for having created it **
The Objectives-based instruction approach
1. General Description
  1. The basic educational premise of establishing clear objectives for any teaching/ learning process was probably first applied to translator training by the Canadian scholar Jean Delisle, as late as 1980 ****
  2. the importance of process training as opposed to students' product
2. Teacher's role
  1. trainers need to apply basic teaching principles to their classes, one of the most important being the establishment of clear and achievable objectives ****
3. Student's role
  1. favors the negotiation of knowledge between students and between students and teachers. *
4. Instruction
  1. contrastive-linguistic activities
  2. emphasizes the consistent use of carefully structured syllabi with stated aims and objectives that take into account specific stages of learning. *
5. Scholars
  1. Delisle, 1984; Gonza´lez Davies, 2003, 2004; Hurtado Albir, 1999; Nunan, 1993
Profession-based learner-centred approach
1. General Description
  1. Centred on a translation-orientated and functionalist model for text analysis,
  2. Nord's approach emphasizes the gradual nature of the acquisition of translator competence.
2. Teacher's role
  1. the need for considerable teacher intervention, particularly in the early stages, to ensure that tasks are not only realistic, but also feasible and hence not de-motivating
  2. The teacher is seen as a resource person.
  3. The teacher moderates and resolves conflicts; he/she observes, guides the discussion, and provides an example of expert behavior. The interaction is multisided.
3. Student's role
  1. students answer the following questions borrowed from New Rhetoric in order to facilitate realistic translation tasks designed to develop translator competence: Who, to whom, for what, by what medium, where, when, why, with what function,on what subject matter, what, what not, in which order, in which words, in what kind of sentences, in which tone, to what effect? (Nord, 1991:144)
  2. the need to acquire expert behavior justifies techniques such as discussion of translation solutions in front of peers or in translation teams, e-mail discussions, and a student-centered classroom that moves away from the traditional teacher-centered "performance magistrale" (Kiraly 1995; Ladmiral 1977)
4. Instruction
  1. realistic translation tasks designed to develop translator competence
  2. simulation of professional tasks
  3. The goal of Translation Teaching To facilitate the acquisition of communicative translational competence by providing opportunities for engaging in communicative translation tasks and by working along with the natural process of acquisition.
5. Scholars
  1. (Nord, 1988/1991)****
Process-oriented approach
1. General Description
  1. training should insist on how to go about translating, and not on the actual written product of that complex process.
  2. Gile 1995 understands translating and interpreting as acts of professional communication
  3. The idea is to focus in the classroom not on results, that is, not on the end product of the Translation process, but on the process itself.
2. Teacher's role
  1. to focus in the classroom not on results, that is, not on the end product of the Translation process, but on the process itself
  2. The teacher indicates to the student good Translation principles, methods, and procedures. (Gile, 1995: 10)
  3. Greater flexibility is possible in areas such as linguistic acceptability or fidelity, which is particularly useful in the early stages of training, when comparing students' results with the teacher's or with "ideal" versions can prove de-motivating or even conflictive.
  4. The teacher moderates and resolves conflicts; he/she observes, guides the discussion, and provides an example of expert behavior. The interaction is multisided.
  5. The teacher is seen as a resource person.
3. Student's role
  1. mastering the process that future professionals gradually acquire professional expertise
  2. Greater emphasis is laid on translation strategies, allowing students better to assimilate how to work, rather than whether or not their efforts have borne fruit.
  3. Student discussion is the basis of instruction (with the exception perhaps of brief lectures). Students address students and teacher as other participants in the interaction.
  4. Instruction is student-centered, teacher-guided.
  5. Students' roles are active; they are supposed to learn by interacting with the materials, the participants, and the learning context.
  6. Student discussion is the basis of instruction (with the exception perhaps of brief lectures). Students address students and teacher as other participants in the interaction.
  7. the need to acquire expert behavior justifies techniques such as discussion of translation solutions in front of peers or in translation teams, e-mail discussions, and a student-centered classroom that moves away from the traditional teacher-centered "performance magistrale" (Kiraly 1995; Ladmiral 1977)
4. Instruction
  1. Gile 1995 proposes a series of models and basic concepts, some of which are: communication, quality, fidelity (to the message), comprehension and knowledge acquisition (documentary research); the models are the sequential model of translation, the effort model (for interpreting), the gravitational model (also for interpreting). Some of these are then applied to actual classroom activity, and some interesting and innovative exercises are proposed
  2. The goal of Translation Teaching is to facilitate the acquisition of communicative translational competence by providing opportunities for engaging in communicative translation tasks and by working along with the natural process of acquisition.
5. Scholars
  1. (Gile, 1995)
The Cognitive and psycholinguistic approach
1. General Description
  1. Kiraly, initially one of its major authors, vouches for a "systematic elaboration of the issues underlying a descriptive translation pedagogy, a pedagogy based on the accurate theoretical description of translation practice." (1995: 3).
  2. One of the interesting elements of Kiraly's proposal, is the centrality in the model of what he calls the translator's self-concept; the development of this awareness of their role becomes a key aim of training.
2. Teacher's role
  1. The teacher is seen as a resource person.
  2. The teacher moderates and resolves conflicts; he/she observes, guides the discussion, and provides an example of expert behavior. The interaction is multisided.
3. Student's role
  1. Instruction is student-centered, teacher-guided.
  2. Students' roles are active; they are supposed to learn by interacting with the materials, the participants, and the learning context.
  3. Student discussion is the basis of instruction (with the exception perhaps of brief lectures). Students address students and teacher as other participants in the interaction.
  4. the need to acquire expert behavior justifies techniques such as discussion of translation solutions in front of peers or in translation teams, e-mail discussions, and a student-centered classroom that moves away from the traditional teacher-centered "performance magistrale" (Kiraly 1995; Ladmiral 1977)
4. Instruction
  1. Teaching should emphasize the acquisition of interlingual, intercultural and intertextual associations .
  2. A major objective should be the fostering of a translator self-concept and a functioning translation monitor.
  3. Training should reorganize around a theoretical framework that allows the identification of cognitive resources that translation students should acquire and the pedagogical tools for teaching and testing the acquisition of those skills and knowledge. (1995: 110-2)
  4. The goal of Translation Teaching To facilitate the acquisition of communicative translational competence by providing opportunities for engaging in communicative translation tasks and by working along with the natural process of acquisition.
5. Scholars
  1. (Kiraly, 1991 and others)****
The situational approach
1. General Description
  1. In essence, this proposal is functionalist in its theoretical approach, but differs strongly from Nord's in that Vienne totally rejects the simulation of professional tasks alleging that "it is difficult, indeed sometimes impossible, to carry out a realistic analysis of the situation, and to answer the questions that might arise" (1994: 52). ****
2. Teacher's role
  1. Vienne's methodology consists of a situational analysis of the translation commission (not dissimilar to Nord's textual analysis for translation), in which the teacher, acting as initiator, replies to students' questions, thus giving them a framework within which to carry out the translation.
  2. The teacher is seen as a resource person.
  3. The teacher moderates and resolves conflicts; he/she observes, guides the discussion, and provides an example of expert behavior. The interaction is multi-sided.
  4. they can play the role of initiator in the translation process in a more realistic way
3. Student's role
  1. Instruction is student-centered, teacher-guided.
  2. Students' roles are active; they are supposed to learn by interacting with the materials, the participants, and the learning context.
  3. Student discussion is the basis of instruction (with the exception perhaps of brief lectures). Students address students and teacher as other participants in the interaction.
  4. the need to acquire expert behavior justifies techniques such as discussion of translation solutions in front of peers or in translation teams, e-mail discussions, and a student-centered classroom that moves away from the traditional teacher-centered "performance magistrale" (Kiraly 1995; Ladmiral 1977)
4. Instruction
  1. Gouadec proposed incorporating real translation commissions for real clients into training programmes (1994; see also 2003).
  2. The goal of Translation Teaching To facilitate the acquisition of communicative translational competence by providing opportunities for engaging in communicative translation tasks and by working along with the natural process of acquisition.
  3. It is based on the idea that class activity should be made up of a series of translation tasks already carried out by teachers professionally, which means that they can play the role of initiator in the translation process in a more realistic way ****
5. Scholars
  1. (Vienne 1994, Gouadec 1994)****
The task-based approach
1. General Description
  1. task-based learning, which has for some time been applied to foreign language learning and teaching (see for example Nunan, 1989), has been applied to translator training, particularly by Hurtado ( 1999) and Gonzalez Davies (2003, 2004). ****
  2. advocates an overall curricular design based on learning outcomes ****
  3. This approach is based on designing a series of activities. ****
2. Teacher's role
3. Student's role
4. Instruction
  1. concrete and brief exercises that help to practice specific points [ ... ] leading along the same path towards the same end, or task [understood as] a chain of activities with the same global aim and a final product. On the way, both procedural (know-how) and declarative (know-what) knowledge are practiced and explored. (Gonzalez Davies, 2004: 22-23)****
5. Scholars
  1. Hurtado ( 1999) and Gonzalez Davies (2003, 2004)****
Integrating conscious with subliminal teaching approach
1. General Description
  1. incorporates an interesting balance between slow academic (conscious, analytical, rational, logical and systematic) learning on the one hand, and fast, real-world learning (holistic, subliminal). ****
  2. [T]ranslation is intelligent activity involving complex processes of conscious and unconscious learning; we all learn in different ways, and institutional learning should therefore be as flexible and as complex and rich as possible, so as to activate the channels through which each student learns best. (Robinson, 2003: 49)****
2. Teacher's role
  1. Teachers will have to adapt the exercises to the specific language and to anticipate the specific needs of individual students +
  2. requires more active and creative input from teachers +
3. Student's role
  1. learners need to be able to test and challenge the materials and patterns that they sublimate so quickly and effectively +
  2. Students should be given a chance both to experience the power of subliminal learning and translating and to question the nature and impact of what they are experiencing.+
4. Instruction
  1. hands-on exercises designed to develop subliminal skills +
  2. exercises are designed not only to teach about translation but to help students translate better as well +
5. Scholars
  1. Robinson 1997,2003
The socioconstructive approach
1. General Description
  1. Based on the concept that learners essentially construct their own understandings of the world, rather than ingesting ready-made understandings from others, such as teachers ****
  2. Inspired largely by the work of Vygotsky and Dewey and was focused on the mainstays of learner autonomy, cognitive apprenticeship and authentic collaborative project work in the classroom. Active and interpersonal cognition in an authentic learning environment was the crux of this social constructivist view of learning **
2. Teacher's role
  1. Although the earliest stages in the educational process may closely resemble transmissionist teaching, the teacher gradually proceeds to ‘scaffold’ the instructional process, transferring considerable responsibility for learning to the learners themselves. ****
  2. The teacher moderates and resolves conflicts; he/she observes, guides the discussion, and provides an example of expert behavior. ****
3. Student's role
  1. Students construct knowledge and skills through group interaction. ****
  2. Student discussion is the basis of instruction (with the exception perhaps of brief lectures). ****
  3. Students address students and teacher as other participants in the interaction. ****
  4. Students' roles are active; they are supposed to learn by interacting with the materials, the participants, and the learning context.
4. Instruction
  1. Instruction is student-centered, teacher-guided.
  2. Starting with consciousness raising activities, instruction proceeds to simulated small-project work and then authentic projects carried out by the students collaboratively but quite independently of the teacher, who may serve as a resource person and project coordinator
5. Scholars
  1. (Kiraly, 1995, 2000; Little, 1991)
Emergent post modernist approach
1. General Description
  1. Translation is not done solely by the mind, but by complex systems. These systems include people, the specific social and physical environments and all their cultural artifacts.(Risku 2010: 103)**
  2. personal learning is not about acquisition, processing or storing, but about emergent structuring. (Davis 2004: 101)**
2. Teacher's role
  1. it is of paramount importance that teachers of translation and interpreting integrate authentic or near-authentic translation tasks into their teaching. (Risku 2010: 101)**
  2. Requires teachers to climb down from their pedestals of authority, and it implies an obligatory change in their roles from distillers and transmitters of knowledge to guides and companions on the students’ road to experience
  3. Syllabus design is no longer a task to be accomplished by a teacher alone prior to the start of a course; it becomes a tentative plan that emerges with new challenges and unexpected turns, and one leading to unpredictable goals as a course progresses.
3. Student's role
4. Instruction
  1. Learning does not always have to proceed in sequential steps, but is complex and moves in fits and starts. **
  2. Learning now occurs, not through direct transmission from expert to novice, or from teacher to student, but in a non-linear manner in a class exploring a situation/problem/issue together, and indeed from multiple perspectives. (Doll 2008: 193)**
  3. Learning objectives become far more difficult to specify because they will differ from student to student and will, in the best of cases, evolve in a unique manner for each student throughout each course and throughout the entire programme of studies.
5. Scholars
  1. Davis 2004, Doll 2008, Risku 2010, Kiraly, 2014
Communicative Translation Approaches (Holz-Manttari 1984; Reiss and Vermeer 1984; Nord 1991a, 1997, Colina 2003, Kiraly 1990, Gile 1995) ***