Translating into L2 during Translator Training

Дата канвертавання27.04.2016
Памер59.8 Kb.

Translating into L2 during Translator Training

© Elke St.John 2003

Modern Languages Teaching Centre, University of Sheffield

1. Introduction

During translator training at University translator trainees usually practice to translate into L1 using a range of tools. There are many translation tools available to the trainee, which are also used by the professional translator, all of which have their advantages as well as pitfalls. Dictionaries (mono and bilingual), corpora and Internet are all common translation aids, which are easily available to the translator.

Although normal practice among translators is to translate into their mother tongue, they are frequently required to translate into L2 as part of their professional activity (see Campbell, 1998; Grosman et al, 2000). This is particularly the case with languages that have traditionally been less widely taught e.g. Chinese and Japanese. It is thought when working into their L2, translators are particularly dependent on a range of tools and other information sources. In this respect, the use of a native speaker is not commonly talked of.
This study will investigate the relative merits of using a native speaker during the translation and the post-editing process of translating into L2 in translator training. This seems to be a little rehearsed topic. The study will also look into the effects, advantages and disadvantages that a native speaker informant brings to the translation process. In particular, it will be interesting to find out how dependent trainee translators working into L2 are on native speaker informants and how much help native speakers can actually offer.

2. Literature Review
Le theme n’existe pas. (Ladmiral, 1979: 50)
This radical objection by Ladmiral namely that translation into non-mother tongues does not exist also reflects the invisible assumption in translation literature that translators usually work into L1. As mentioned above under normal circumstances, professional translators work into their mother tongue; there is an unwritten golden rule that translations need ideally be done by native speakers of the TL culture and consequently, the vast majority of professional translation is probably done in this way. In his Approaches to Translation, Newmark indeed explains that the translator should always work into his/her native language as he argues that it is impossible to ever have the same feeling for any other language even if the translator has been living for a long time in a country other than his/her native land. He argues:
A foreigner appears to go on making collocational mistakes however long he lives in his adopted country, possibly because he has never distinguished between grammar and lexicology. An educated native will also make mistakes in collocation, particularly if he is under the influence of interference, but he will correct himself intuitively. Sprachgefühl means awareness of collocations. For the above reasons, translators rightly translate into their own language. (1981: 180)
Cay Dollerup, himself an extremely fluent non-native speaker and writer in English, also affirms this view stating:
However, as non-native speakers, we should not fool ourselves into believing that we shall ever master English as the natives do. Our command of English will never be perfect: there are white spots, uncharted domains in our linguistic and cultural mapping of English and, consequently, there are cases where we are incapable of producing a good translation in the sense that it sounds like an authentic, native text to target language users. (2000: 63)
The native speaker’s natural feel for a language is very useful when translating metaphors and idioms, for example. Mona Baker supports this point by stating that “a person’s competence in actively using the idioms and fixed expressions of a foreign language hardly ever matches that of a native speaker. The majority of translators working into a foreign language cannot hope to achieve the same sensitivity that native speakers seem to have for judging when and how an idiom can be manipulated” (1992: 64). This does not only apply to idioms, but also to collocations and sayings as well as the overall usage of vocabulary and the general style of a text; the non-native speaker cannot realistically, or at least very rarely, have the same grasp for the feel of a foreign language.
Non-mother tongue translations are often deemed as unacceptable and invalid. Professional translators generally tend to translate only into their mother tongue and often only accept jobs, which only involve translating into L1. Indeed, The Code of Professional Ethics of the Translator’s Guild of Great Britain states:
A translator shall only work into the language (in exceptional cases this may include a second language) of which he (sic) has native knowledge. Native knowledge is defined as the ability to speak and write a language so fluently that the expression of thought is structurally, grammatically and idiomatically correct. (art 4.1 of the ITI Code of Conduct).
Although this stipulates that most translation should be done into L1, it leaves open the possibility for the reverse direction.
Grosman (2000: 23) comments, that theories which favour translation into the native or first language tend to neglect the importance of the translator’s comprehension of the source text and culture in his/her second language. It is a question of emphasis and as Grosman points out, whilst it is usually expected that a translation by a non-native speaker should be read and corrected by a native speaker it is not usually expected that “a target language speaker’s reading and comprehension of the source text be submitted to a corresponding checking by a native speaker of the source text.” (2000: 23). Grosman suggests that this could be a reflection of an underlying political reality and that the comparative neglect of the source text and culture merely reflects “the existing asymmetries in power relations between widely disseminated and less widely disseminated languages.” (2000: 24)
However, translation into L2 is a common practice in some countries where TL native speakers are not readily available. Stuart Campbell comments in this respect on the insistence to translate into L1:
In theory this is fine, but in practice it poses some difficulties since the supply of translators into particular languages may not match demand, so that translation sometimes (or perhaps even often) has to be undertaken into the second language. (1998: 57).
Campbell, in his Translation into the Second Language (1998) also stresses that translation into L2 is an inevitable practice in these multicultural and ethnic contexts. Whilst he admits that the primary difficulty of translating into L2 is to produce a natural-sounding target text, he convincingly maintains that the right evaluation of the second language output should be based on the authentic-looking quality and situational appropriateness of the target text.
Directionality can actually be affected by many more factors than language combinations, namely subject specialists, text types, deadlines or availability of translators. It may also be influenced by the status of a language or the amount of translation that already exists in that language and the importance of the particular translation. Moreover, in the world of globalisation translation into the second language has become an economic necessity. Snell Hornby examines the impact of globalisation on language and translation in her study ‘McLanguage: The identity of English in translation today’: “In the global village of today, one could make the categorical statement that every translator needs a working knowledge of English as international lingua franca.” (2000: 37) She argues that the need for global communication in a universally understood language has led to a situation where “translation into English as a non-mother tongue has become a fact of modern life for which we need to train our future professional” (2000: 37)
Campbell (2000: 212) agrees that the international dominance of English has led to a situation where there is a large demand for documentation in English much of which needs to be translated. Acknowledging that the figures are imprecise Campbell (2000: 212) cites Sager’s estimate that in 1989 150-200 million pages of translation were produced by 175,000 employees. Most of the translation into English must have been performed by non-native speakers. Lise (1997: 27) for example notes that a vast amount of translation into English as a second language is carried out in Japan.
It can also be argued that translating into L2 can be the preferable direction in the case of certain text types, for example technical or scientific texts where accuracy is of more importance than style. The same could be said of medical translation where direct equivalents are readily available and a lesser knowledge of both languages is required. Crystal endorses this point:
On the whole, translators work into their mother tongue (or language of habitual use), to ensure a result that sounds as natural as possible – though some translators have argued that, for certain types of text (e.g. scientific material) where translation accuracy is more crucial than naturalness, it makes more sense for translators to be more fluent in the SL. (1987: 344, italics in the original)
Having identified a demand for translation into English as a non-mother tongue, Snell Hornby (2000: 38) also goes on to consider the nature of the text types for which this type of translation is appropriate. She suggests typical LSP texts such as informative texts, which are highly conventionalised in verbal and non-verbal elements e.g. instructions for use, public announcements, commercial correspondence and scientific reports and operative texts such as tourist brochures. Perhaps not surprisingly, Snell Hornby considers expressive texts such as literary or journalistic works to be the least suitable text type for this type of translation. It is logical to assume that the expressive use of language in, for example, poetry or metaphor would pose problems for the translator possessing the more limited linguistic knowledge characteristic of International English or McEnglish.
When translating into International English the question of foreign language competence arises: Snell Hornby (2000: 38) notes that in order to translate informative and operative texts the translator should have a sound grasp of basic grammar and syntax as in the use of tenses and the function of the article. However, she notes that lingua franca English lacks the lexical richness (such as the knowledge of unusual fixed idioms), which is required for the translation of expressive texts. However this precisely makes LSP translation well suitable for the translator translating into L2.
Stuart Campbell refers to the output of translation into English as a second language as a special kind of “Interlanguage, a dynamic individual code potentially moving towards native speaker competence” (2000: 213) He suggests that translation into L2 competence can be approached in stages rather than fixed points which means that competence can be measured in terms of continual progress in improved language processing. This could be considered in translator training where translation into L2 is practiced. Campbell, for example, suggests that translation into L2 competence can be measured by specific grammatical criteria. In contrast to Snell Hornby he assumes that there is a probability of less than full control over the sentence level grammar and of gaps in the lexical repertoire. Moreover, he feels that practise in translation into the second language can lead to increased competence but acknowledges that this competence is restricted by the nature of the texts which need to be translated: in other words certain structures like the agentless passive tend to recur in the type of texts which are translated into English as the second language. (Campbell 2000: 214) Indeed, the use of language is not only more precise and unambiguous but the limited amount of constructions make the task of the translator who translates LSP texts into L2 much easier.
In summary, it has been identified in the literature review above that (professional) translation into L2 is commonly practised despite the taboo of translating into non-mother tongues. Therefore this pilot study can hopefully contribute something to this much disputed topic. It has been acknowledged that translation into English as an L2 is often an inevitable practice in certain countries, e.g. China and Japan because the languages of these countries are not widely spoken. Therefore, it seems appropriate to carry out this study with Japanese and/or Chinese speakers. It has also been suggested that certain text types of LSP texts, for example instructions, might be more suitable than others for translation into L2.

3. Methodology

3.1. Participants
For the purposes of this pilot study, one Japanese student, one Chinese student and two English students were chosen. The two English native speakers were asked to help the Chinese and Japanese students to translate a text into English. The Japanese and Chinese student had an advanced knowledge of English with a 6.5 score each in the IELTS test at the beginning of their course. All four trainees had been 5 months into their practical translation training as part of their postgraduate translation course and had attended a module in translation theory. The two English native speakers had no knowledge of either Japanese or Chinese. This obviously meant that the whole process was conducted in English.

3.2. Text
The text chosen for the translation exercise could be regarded as an LSP text with an informative and operative function. It was a Transportation Guide and full of everyday language but also set phrases. This kind of language can be found in everyday situations in every country, where the processes involved and described are unlikely to change greatly; for example instructions were given for using public transport and guidelines on ticket use which is an everyday task unlikely to vary from country to country. The second section of the text gave ‘Advice for a comfortable Journey’ which contained imperatives that can be found everyday in a number of different places, which are intended for public use.

3.3. Translation Process
The translation process was not discussed in advance, nor was a synopsis of the text given. The translation commenced immediately with no preceding discussion as to how to go about it. The native speakers had no idea of the text type or indeed the content and style. The translators also had the help of an electronic dictionary, which was consulted from time to time for the translator to verify vocabulary and this was discussed with the native speaker. The four participants worked in pairs in two separate rooms.
The experiment was video recorded and a focus group meeting was held afterwards to discuss the process. I had also asked the participants to complete a questionnaire to supplement the focus group. Unfortunately, the answers they provided did not provide any information or ideas that I did not already have from watching the videos. However, it served to back-up my own thoughts on the use of a native speaker informant.

4. Analysis
The analysis is divided into two main areas, namely grammar/accuracy and use of language. These were the main two areas, which I identified where the two native speakers mainly offered their help. Furthermore, considering the text type, these two areas seemed to be the obvious ones to concentrate on. Style is not of primary importance in informative texts (cf. Snell Hornby 2000: 38). In the following analysis, I have not differentiated between the Japanese and Chinese speaker.
4.1. Grammar
The grammatical advice needed was mainly concerned with the use of prepositions, the use of article, changing the word order and grammar shifts, for example, changing active clauses to the passive as the first examples 1-3 show below.

  1. The Japanese text literally said: MAX Drivers will not check your tickets.

Native speaker’s suggestion:

Your ticket will not be inspected by MAX drivers.

In English, the sentence above is more likely to be a passive clause. Although this example is perfectly grammatically correct in English, it is more likely to be in the passive clause in this type of text, and this is the kind of judgement that only a native speaker can give. Moreover in the above example, the native speaker informant not only advised to use the passive mode but also suggested a change in the use of terminology, namely ‘inspect’ instead of ‘check’, which seems to fit better in this particular context. Consider example 2 below with regard to the adverb ‘available’. The passive form and the verb ‘use’ were suggested as alternatives:

  1. The ticket is still available to use

Native speaker’s suggestion:

The ticket can be still used

It can be argued that example 1 and 2 can still be understood correctly without the suggestions for improvements however the learning process the translator is subjected to by these improvements also needs to be considered and can be valuable.
Another area where Japanese and Chinese can benefit from the help of an English native speaker’s input is with the use of articles. As pointed out in the literature review, Snell Hornby actually recommended that L2 translators should have knowledge of the function of articles. However articles are virtually non-existent in Chinese and Japanese and therefore a constant source of errors for Japanese and Chinese speakers when writing in English. In example 3 below, for example, the definite article is necessary from a grammatical point of view and was therefore suggested.
(3) Tri-Met will be the most convenient method of transportation.
The corrections suggested by the native speaker below in examples 4 and 5 were also necessary. Proper names usually do not have to be preceded by an article. Although this is a rather straightforward rule it appears that the input from the native speaker was still needed.
(4) Welcome to the TRI-Met Public Transport Service

Native speaker’s suggestion:

Welcome to TRI-MET …
(5) The best way to travel around N. is using the TRI-MET transport services…

Native speaker’s suggestion:

The best way to travel around N. is using TRI-MET transport services…
The translators agreed with the native speakers’ suggestions in the vast majority of cases. Where problems arose the native speaker endeavoured to give as much help as possible by providing more explanation. This means that a kind of learning has probably also taken place.
Since the Chinese and Japanese language do not use any articles it was particularly difficult for the trainee translators to use the definite and indefinite article correctly as example 6 below exemplifies:
(6) When you pay the fare, a driver gives you a fare ticket

Native speaker’s suggestion:

When you pay the fare, the driver gives you a receipt
The native speaker also changed ‘fare ticket’ to ‘receipt’. The term ‘fare ticket’ came up in the electronic dictionary. The translator did not ask many direct questions, rather the native speaker volunteered information and advice on the basis of the rough translations and explanations offered by the Japanese and Chinese speakers. The questions that were asked of the native speaker tended to concern specific vocabulary. The Japanese or Chinese speakers could offer a general word, which was not the correct choice in the context, but the native speakers could understand the idea and offer the correct word for the context in English. For example, in the next three cases, the native speakers’ feel for the language in pragmatic contexts was needed. In all examples the polite form ‘please’ was quite rightly deleted:
(6) Please do not smoke

Native speaker’s suggestion:

No smoking
‘No smoking’ is obviously the appropriate register, which should be used in these well-defined situations. In Chinese and Japanese polite forms are always used. This is also reflected in their translations below:
(7) Please give up the seats at the front to senior citizens

Native speaker’s suggestion:

Yield front seats to senior citizens
Also typical for English LSP texts is often a telegraphic style as suggested above in Example 7. In English the passive form is often preferred in operative texts because it avoids mentioning the agent and it keeps the more formal style which is appropriate in these contexts. Examples 6,7 and 8 are typical for conventionalised phrases in LSP texts.

  1. Please use headphones while listening to the radio

Native speaker’s suggestion:

Radio can only be used with a handset.

As Viggio Hjørnager Pedersen argues that “the task of the native informant is mainly to produce formulations that are stylistically more acceptable to native speaker than my own.” (2000: 111) The input of the native speaker was much needed in examples 6,7 and 8.
English prepositions can sometimes even cause the English native speaker problems. In example 9 below, the preposition ‘in’ was correctly changed to ‘on’ although ‘at’ would have also been correct:
(9) MAX services differ in Weekends

Native speaker’s suggestion:

MAX services differ on Weekends
For the most part, it seemed that the native speaker anticipated what was going to come next and offered an English translation. In examples 10 and 11, grammar mistakes were corrected.
(10) All the tramcars are called MAX
(11) You can check how long it takes from one stop to the others.
The sound grasp of grammar as recommended by Snell Hornby is not evident here but as noted by Campbell more practice could lead to increased competence and this could be a way forward in translation classes. However the mistakes made in many examples above (with the exception of examples 6,7 and 8) are quite basic. Practising language skills seems to be more essential here than translating skills, which are more used in the following category.

5.2 Use of Language
Advice was also given regarding collocations and use of English as can be seen below in the following examples. There was, of course, the added complication of a different alphabet and a great deal of advice on English spelling was required. In addition to this, due to the Chinese and Japanese characters of the ST encompassing many meanings, this had to be transferred into English using a great many more words. One or two characters in Japanese can hold many different meanings and the translator used the native speaker to transfer those effectively into English and this often required explanation in the English text. Example 12 is a typical example. In Chinese and Japanese there are no separate words for ‘leg’ and ‘foot’:

  1. Please do not put your legs on the seats

Native speaker’s suggestion:

Please do not put your feet on the seats

An explanation was not needed as it was obvious to the native speaker what the meaning was. In the following three examples, the choice of terminology needed adjusting. Although the adjectives ‘right’ and ‘correct’ have probably the same meaning according to their electronic dictionary only ‘correct’ collocates with ‘fare’, ‘day’ and ‘bus number’ in this particular context.

  1. You need to insert the right fare

Native speaker’s suggestion:

You need to insert the correct fare

The native speaker’s feel for the language is obviously invaluable here. The indefinite article was also changed in example 14 below:
(14) Please make sure you check against a right day

Native speaker’s suggestion:

Please make sure you check against the correct day
Interestingly, the verb ‘check’ was used correctly here in contrast to example 1 above. ‘To check’ seems to come up as the first term in their electronic dictionary. From the video and the focus group discussion it actually seems that the Japanese and Chinese speaker heavily relied on their electronic dictionary during the translation process. Surprisingly, in example 15 below in contrast to examples 3 to 6, the definite article was used correctly this time:
(15) Make sure to use the right bus number…

Native speaker’s suggestion:

Make sure to use the correct bus number…
With phrases like ‘No smoking’ in example 6, it can often be more a case of substitution rather than translation, but the translator needs to be aware of this and a translator translating into L1 will obviously have more the intuition for this. A native speaker informant can therefore help to find the correct TL equivalent with such standard formulations. Consider example 16 below in this respect:
(16) Commemoration Day of Martyr

Native speaker’s suggestion:

Memorial Day
Translators translating into L2 do not belong to the L2 cultural group and are therefore dependent on help from a native speaker otherwise their own L1 culture could be projected on to the TT as in example 16 above. It seems in example 16 that something, which was embedded in the Japanese or Chinese culture was transferred literally. Example 17 is similar in this respect:
(17) The station plates of the bus stops use…

Native speaker’s suggestion:

The bus stop signs of the bus stops use…
The noun ‘station plate’ came up in the electronic dictionary. An English parallel text could have actually been very useful to find the appropriate terminology in both examples 17 and 18:

(18) Single zones and double zones

Native speaker’s suggestion:

One zone and two zones
The cultural transfer needs to be carefully analysed when translating into L2. This is certainly an area where the support of a native speaker is needed although parallel texts can also be useful here.
Example 19 below is also an area where the native speaker’s input is important to ensure political correctness:
(19) people who are disabled

Native speaker’s suggestion:

citizens with disabilities
The noun ‘people’ is a very general word and can have negative connotations in certain contexts. Similarly, the noun ‘person’ in example 20 can be regarded as too general for this LSP text and was therefore quite rightly changed to ‘passenger’.
(20) If the person who does not have a ticket or the fare is not correct, they will be charged, or will be sent to a court, or both penalties.

Native speaker’s suggestion:

If a passenger who does not have a ticket or has not paid the correct fare, they will be fined, or sent to a court, or incur both penalties.
The verbs ‘fined’ and ‘incur’ are also more appropriate in this context. These are more conventionalised phrases, which could have also been gleaned from parallel texts. Interesting that the indefinite article was correctly used in example 21 below in contrast to example 6 above. The proper name ‘MAX’ alone seems somewhat not explicit enough. The addition of ‘train’ makes the phrase more complete.
(21) Payment for a MAX

Native speaker’s suggestion:

How to pay for a MAX train
It seemed that in the second category ‘Use of Language’ the Japanese and Chinese speakers are more dependent on the help and discussion of a native speaker. Most corrections in the first category could be avoided if the language competence was improved.
It is evident from the video that the native speaker was somewhat used as a supplement to the dictionary. Both trainee translators roughly translated short segments and waited for a more natural translation from the native speaker or they gave an explanation of the meaning and the native speaker modified it into better English.

5.3. Focus group
The Chinese and Japanese speakers recorded several positive points of using a native speaker. They found the exercise very encouraging and interesting, e.g. the exchange of cultures. They really liked the fact that any queries that the translator has can be immediately answered. The discussion in the translation process proved to be extremely helpful in that the translator and native speaker can discuss different options. They appreciated the interaction that a translator does not find when working in isolation with a dictionary. The main disadvantages both L2 translators mentioned was that they had to give lots of background information of the text and this often resulted in long discussion about cultural issues. They found, for example, that the biggest benefit of using a dictionary was that ‘it is a quick way of finding out what I am looking for’.
5. Conclusion
This study addresses a topic, to which, hitherto, insufficient attention has been paid. Ideally, professional translators work into their L1, but we know that many of the students who undertake translator training in Britain will be called upon to translate texts into their L2, in the course of their careers. And some text types may actually lend themselves to being translated out of – rather than into – L1. This study focuses primarily on the assistance that can be provided by a native speaker during the translation process of an LSP text. All too often, the translator has been envisaged as a more or less solitary individual and there has been a sense in which asking for linguistic advice is an admission of inadequacy. The analysis revealed that when translating into L2 a native speaker could offer help in a variety of ways. The principal help given by the native speaker in this study was to correct grammar and offer a more natural form of English. This is in contrast to what Newmark (1981: 180) argues that the most persistent errors by even the most competent of L2 translators are not so much grammatical or syntactic as collocational. The analysis shows that help with grammar was also provided on several occasions. Despite the errors the language illustrates Snell Hornby’s notion of what happens to the English language when it moves outside the control of English native speakers can be demonstrated with this study:
It is standardised and reduced and could be described as a shadow of the English language. […] It as a prototypical product of a supra-cultural, technological, globalized society. It is language as a product or a commodity and it is dry and functional. (2000: 40)
Considering that the text was an LSP text the native speaker could offer surprisingly a great deal of advice. However a native speaker would probably only be able to offer minimal help if the text was more specialist and contained specific vocabulary and terminology. In this respect, some consideration also needs to be given to the potential limitations of native speaker informants. Their insights are not 100% reliable (e.g. on such matters as negative prosody). They may lack the metalanguage necessary to explain some of their intuitions. They are therefore best dealt with as one of a number of information sources, with some attention being given to what each can best offer the translator.
There are also other issues, which need to be considered for further study. The native speakers had no idea of the text type or indeed the content and style. Perhaps a summary should have been given at the beginning. It was also suggested during the focus group discussion that native speaker and translator should have discussed beforehand how they would work together. From the video one could see that the Japanese and Chinese speaker relied heavily on their electronic dictionary and only ‘used’ the native speaker informants as a last resort.
If students can be encouraged to exploit the fact, by – for example – working collaboratively with native speakers of other languages, this will be a significant step forward in translator training.
6. Bibliography

Baker, Mona (1992) In other words. London, New York: Routledge

Campbell, Stuart (1998) Translation into the second Language. Harlow: Longman

Campbell, Stuart (2000) ‘Critical Structures in the Evaluation of Translations from Arabic into English as a Second Language’. In Carol Maier (2000) ‘Evaluation and Translation’, The Translator, Special Issue, Vol 6, No 2.
Crystal, David (1987) ‘Translating and Interpeting’, in: The Cambridge Encyclopaedia of Language. Cambrdige: Cambridge University Press.
Dollerup, Cay (2000) ‘English: Axes for a target language’ In Grosman, Meta, Mira Kadric, Irena Kovaĉiĉ, Mary Snell Hornby (eds.) (2000) Translation into Non-Mother Tongues in Professional Practise and Training. Tübingen: Stauffenburg Verlag.
Grosman, Meta (2000) ‘Non-mother tongue translation – An open challenge’. In Grosman, Meta, Mira Kadric, Irena Kovaĉiĉ, Mary Snell Hornby (eds.) (2000) Translation into Non-Mother Tongues in Professional Practise and Training. Tübingen: Stauffenburg Verlag.
Grosman, Meta, Mira Kadric, Irena Kovaĉiĉ, Mary Snell Hornby (eds.) (2000) Translation into Non-Mother Tongues in Professional Practise and Training. Tübingen: Stauffenburg Verlag.
Hjørnager Pedersen, Viggo (2000) ‘Translation into L2 – In practice, and in the classroom’. In Grosman, Meta, Mira Kadric, Irena Kovaĉiĉ, Mary Snell Hornby (eds.) (2000) Translation into Non-Mother Tongues in Professional Practise and Training. Tübingen: Stauffenburg Verlag.
Ladmiral, Jean-René (1979) Théorèmes pour la traduction. Paris: Payot.
Lise, W. (1997) ‘Machine translation – is it working in Japan?’ Language International 9 (1): 27-35.
Newmark, Peter (1981) Approaches to Translation. Oxford/New York/Toronto/Sydney/Frankfurt: Pergamon Press.
Sager, Juan C. (1993) Language Engineering and translation: Consequences of Automation. Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins.
Snell-Hornby, Mary (2000) “ ‘McLanguage’: The identity of English as an issue in translation today’ “ In Grosman, Meta, Mira Kadric, Irena Kovaĉiĉ, Mary Snell Hornby (eds.) (2000) Translation into Non-Mother Tongues in Professional Practise and Training. Tübingen: Stauffenburg Verlag.

База данных защищена авторским правом © 2016
звярнуцца да адміністрацыі

    Галоўная старонка