TRANSLATION REVIEW

METHODS
 Translation review neglected

the need for reviewing translations

grounded on concrete findings
Review in steps

On-going process, starting in the

early stages of translating

Final review
Nidas translation review methods

purposes: adopting readers stance

permanent activity
checking the TLT for readability and
acceptability
detachment from SLT
Nidas translation review methods
1. closing technique:
Delete every 5th word from a 250-word
TLT and have it filled in by a potential
TL reader

The easier / better the recovery, the

better the translation
Nidas review methods
2. omit every 10th word from a text;
read it aloud to qualified readers

count the wrong solutions: the

amount of wrong solutions can be
indicative of the communicative
effectiveness of the translation
Nidas review methods
3. reading the TLT aloud by two/three
target receivers

Focus on similar problems that they

announce
Nidas review methods
4. comprehension check by asking
someone to read silently and explain the
content

Interpretation problems are thus

identified
Nidas review methods
5. reading the TLT and answering open
questions (no answer versions provided)
Nidas review methods
6. preliminary review of a representative
fragment of the book

Translated fragment(s) read by a few

qualified readers who should mark the
problematic spots (clear, natural, fluent,
etc. + suggestions)
Nidas review methods
7. offering alternative translations to
qualified readers for assessment

Comments, arguments

Options
Larsons review methods

Features of TLT (purposes):

Accurate

Clear

Natural
Larsons translation review methods

Comparison with the SL

Back-translation
Comprehension tests
Consistency checks
Naturalness tests
Readability tests
(M. L. Larson, 1997)
1 Comparison with the SLT

Several times during translating

Comparison at several levels
Final comparison: for equivalence of
information content
Comparison = self-check usu. by the
translator
Objective, critical review margin notes
Communicative equivalence
2 Back-translation

Translating back into the SL by

someone not having read the original
= communication equivalence
checking, not naturalness
Checks differences in meaning
A rather literal rendering of the ST in
the TL (lexical items literally
translated)
3 Comprehension tests

Purpose: whether the translation is

correctly understood, what it communicates
= retelling the content of the translation
and answering questions (ideally not done
by the translator, but by someone fluent in
the TL)
Keeping clear records of the testing results
Info about: discourse style, theme, details
4 Consistency checks

Related to content and formatting

Consistent terminology, spelling,
quotations, references, notes,
punctuation, foreign words
5 Naturalness test

checking for whether the form of the translation

is natural and the style appropriate (Larson,
1997: 542)
Detachment from SLT
checking the natural flow of the TL text by
reading through the entire short story/
fragment at one time
marking the deficient spots (sounding
unnatural/ weird/ foreign/ unclear/ incoherent)
without really interrupting the flow of the
reading
Re-reading the marked spots, analysis,
correction
6 Readability test

involves a reviewer reading aloud and the

translator marking the spots where the readers
fluency is affected by hesitations, stops, or re-
reading.

Reviewer: other than the translator, needs to be

by all means a member of the target audience, a
potential user of the translated text.
(Larson, 1997: 544)

Or: translators self-checking for readability

(reading aloud or silently), on condition of the
translators detachment from the original text.
Class review
Students agreeing, in teams, on a
final translation version out of
several individual ones.
Conclusions

deficient translation spots can be

identified by applying review
methods

need for enhanced attention to

translation review to produce FINAL
translations