VOLUNTEER TRANSLATION IN MODERN TRANSLATION ACTIVITY: STUDY OF TED: OPEN TRANSLATION PROJECT
Kuznetsova Irina Aleksandrovna
Udmurt State University
Submitted: 06.06.2019
Abstract. The article discusses volunteer translation place in modern translation studies. The errors made by the TED: Open Translation Project volunteers are identified and analysed. Within the framework of the study, a survey of the volunteers of the project in question was conducted for the first time. It is concluded that the main agent for assessing translation quality is an editor. The editor’s assessment, in the respondents’ opinion, is often associated not with the translation theory, but with a subjective opinion. The author suggests ways to improve the quality of future volunteer translation in this project.
Key words and phrases: волонтерский перевод, оценка качества перевода, критерии оценки, коммуникативно-функциональный подход, переводческая ошибка, TED, Open Translation Project, volunteer translation, translation quality assessment, assessment criteria, communicative and functional approach, translation error, TED, Open Translation Project
Open the whole article in PDF format. Free PDF-files viewer can be downloaded .
References:
Komissarov V. N. Teoriya perevoda (lingvisticheskie aspekty). M.: Vysshaya shkola, 1990. 253 s.
Pavlova A. V. Otsenka kachestva perevoda [Elektronnyi resurs]. URL: https://cyberleninka.ru/article/n/otsenka-kachestva-perevoda (data obrashcheniya: 04.01.2019).
Pevnaya M. V. Volonterstvo kak sotsiologicheskaya problema [Elektronnyi resurs] // Sotsiologicheskie issledovaniya. 2013. № 2. S. 110-119. URL: http://www.isras.ru/files/File/Socis/2013_2/Pevnaya.pdf (data obrashcheniya: 14.11.2018).
Sdobnikov V. V. Perevod i kommunikativnaya situatsiya. M.: Flinta; Nauka, 2015. 464 s.
Bell C. Bring on the Female Superheroes! [Elektronnyi resurs]. URL: https://www.ted.com/talks/christopher_bell_bring_ on_the_female_superheroes (data obrashcheniya: 12.12.2018).
Colina S. Further Evidence for a Functionalist Approach to Translation Quality Evaluation // Target. 2009. № 22 (2). P. 235-264.
Cronin M. Translation and Globalization. L. - N. Y.: Routledge, 2003. 197 p.
Crowdsourcing Translation [Elektronnyi resurs] // Studies on Translation and Multilingualism. 2012. № 5. URL: http://termcoord.eu/wp-content/uploads/2013/08/Crowdsourcing-translation.pdf (data obrashcheniya: 26.01.2019).
House J. Translation Quality Assessment: Linguistic Description versus Social Evaluation // Meta. 2001. № 46 (2). P. 243-257.
Jim?nez-Crespo M. A. From Many One: Novel Approaches to Translation Quality in a Social Network Era // Linguistica Antverpiensia. New Series. 2011. № 10. P. 131-152.
Nida E. Towards a Science of Translation. Leiden: Brill, 1964. 331 p.
Nord C. Translating as a Purposeful Activity: Functionalist Approaches Explained. L.: Routledge, 2018. 166 p.
O’Hagan M. Evolution of User-generated Translation: Fansubs, Translation Hacking and Crowdsourcing // The Journal of Internationalization and Localization. 2009. № 1. P. 94-121.
Olohan M. Why Do You Translate? Motivation to Volunteer and TED Translation // Translation Studies. 2013. № 1 (7). P. 17-33.
Sager J. Quality and Standards: The Evaluation of Translations // The Translator’s Handbook / ed. by C. Picken. L.: ASLIB, 1989. P. 91-102.
Stark K. Why You Should Talk to Strangers [Elektronnyi resurs]. URL: https://www.ted.com/talks/kio_stark_why_you_ should_talk_to_strangers (data obrashcheniya: 13.06.2018).
Veitch J. The Agony of Trying to Unsubscribe [Elektronnyi resurs]. URL: https://www.ted.com/talks/james_veitch_ the_agony_of_trying_to_unsubscribe (data obrashcheniya: 13.06.2018).
Venuti L. The Translator’s Invisibility. L. - N. Y.: Routledge, 1995. 365 p.
Waddington C. Different Methods of Evaluating Student Translation: The Question of Validity // Translator’s Journal. 2001. № 46. P. 312-325.
Русский
