Evaluation for Error in Translation: A Study of Academic Translations of Prospective Undergraduate Students
Keywords:
Evaluation in translation, Error in translation, Academic translation of prospective undergraduate students.Abstract
This study scrutinizes the quality of translation for students who use translation assistance. A new text translated by students is then studied to see how successful students are at translating the text. First, the quality of the translation was analyzed using a scoring rubric in the form of the first, which deals with the perception of the source text message related to the accuracy of the translation, including the translation which has an inaccurate effect on understanding the source text and classified into eight categories: faux sens, nonsense, additions, omissions, unresolved extralinguistic references, loss of meaning, inappropriate linguistic variations (registers, styles, dialects). Second, nonconforming renderings that affect target language (TL) expressions are divided into five categories: spelling, grammar, lexical items, text, and style. Finally, preliminary presentation affects the delivery of the source text's primary or secondary function. The research uses content analysis design and descriptive qualitative methods as the umbrella. The study's results found that there were few grammatical omissions because the target language had absorption from the source language. In table 1, the translator does not make mistakes regarding style and text because, in principle, the language in the news is the standard language. Linguistic problems include grammatical differences, lexical ambiguity, and meaning ambiguity. At the same time, cultural issues refer to different situational features. This classification coincides with, for example, regional languages such as Sundanese, Malay, or Arabic
References
Agrifoglio, M. (2004). Sight translation and interpreting: A comparative analysis of constraints and failures. Interpreting, 6(1), 43-67.
Akbari, (2014). An Overall Perspective of Machine Translation with its Shortcomings. International Journal of Education & Literacy Studies. Vol. 2 No. 1
Albir, A. H., Nistal, P. F., & Gonzalo, J. B. (1995). La didáctica de la traducción: evolución y estado actual. In Perspectivas de la traducción (pp. 49-74).
Arango-Keeth, F., & Koby, G. S. (2003). Assessing assessment. training evaluation and the needs of industry quality assessment. I: Beyond the ivory tower. Rethinking translation pedagogy, 117-134
Baker, M. (1992). A coursebook on translation. London and New York: Routledge.
Bassnett, S. (2002). Translation Studies. London and New York. Routledge.(2005). Bringing the News Back Home: Strategies of Acculturation and Foreignisation. Language and Intercultural Communication, 5(2), 120-130.
Creswell, J. W. (2011). Educational research: Planning conducting, and evaluating quantitative and qualitative research (4th, Kindle ed.).
Crystal, D. (2003). English as a global language. Cambridge university press.
Cuc, P. T. K. (2018). An analysis of translation errors: A case study of Vietnamese EFL students. International Journal of English Linguistics, 8(1), 22-29.
Davies, E. E. (2007). Leaving it out: On some justifications for the use of omission in transla
De Vries, E., Schoonvelde, M., & Schumacher, G. (2018). No longer lost in translation: Evidence that Google Translate works for comparative bag-of-words text applications. Political Analysis, 26(4), 417-430.
Dimitriu, R. (2004). Omission in translation. Perspectives: studies in translatology, 12(3), 163-175.
Dussart, A. (2005). Faux sens, contresens, non-sens… un faux débat?. Meta: journal des traducteurs/Meta: Translators' Journal, 50(1), 107-119.
House, J. (2014). Translation quality assessment: Past and present. In Translation: A multidisciplinary approach (pp. 241-264). Palgrave Macmillan, London.
Lucas, C., Nielsen, R. A., Roberts, M. E., Stewart, B. M., Storer, A., & Tingley, D. (2015). Computer-assisted text analysis for comparative politics. Political Analysis, 23(2), 254-277.
Krippendorff, K. (2018). Content analysis: An introduction to its methodology. Sage publications.
Molina, L., & Hurtado Albir, A. (2002). Translation techniques revisited: A dynamic and functionalist approach. Meta: Journal des Traducteurs/Meta: Translators' Journal, 47(4), 498-512.
Martínez Melis, N., & Hurtado Albir, A. (2001). Assessment in translation studies: Research needs. Meta: journal des traducteurs/Meta: Translators' Journal, 46(2), 272-287.
Nababan, M. R. (1997). Aspek teori penerjemahan dan pengalihbahasaan. Surakarta: PPS-UNS.
Nababan, M., & Nuraeni, A. (2012). Pengembangan model penilaian kualitas terjemahan.
Nasution, D. K. (2022). Machine Translation in Website Localization: Assessing its Translation Quality for Language Learning. AL-ISHLAH: Jurnal Pendidikan, 14(2), 1879-1886.
Pham, N. (2005). Errors in the translation of topic-comment structures of Vietnamese into English. A dissertation. The University of Sydney, Australia.
Røvik, K. A. (2016). Knowledge transfer as translation: Review and elements of an instrumental theory. International Journal of Management Reviews, 18(3), 290-310.
Sharma, V. K. (2015). The relevance of addition, omission and deletion (AOD) in translation. International Journal of Translation, 27(1), 1-12.
STANSFIELD, C.W., SCOTT, M.L. and KENYON, D.M. (1992), The Measurement of Translation Ability. The Modern Language Journal, 76: 455-467
Waddington, C. (2001). Different methods of evaluating student translations: The question of validity. Meta: journal des traducteurs/Meta: Translators' Journal, 46(2), 311-325.
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
Citation Check
License
Copyright (c) 2025 Dewi Kesuma Nasution, Khairun Niswa
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
Authors retain copyright and grant the journal right of first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under an Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International (CC BY-SA 4.0) that allows others to share the work with an acknowledgement of the work's authorship and initial publication in this journal.
Authors are able to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the non-exclusive distribution of the journal's published version of the work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), with an acknowledgement of its initial publication in this journal.
Authors are permitted and encouraged to post their work online (e.g., in institutional repositories or on their website) prior to and during the submission process, as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of published work (See the Effect of Open Access)
