About this Journal Submit a Manuscript Table of Contents
Education Research International
Volume 2012 (2012), Article ID 503824, 13 pages
http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2012/503824
Review Article

Unwanted Literal Translation: An Underdiscussed Problem in International Achievement Studies

Finnish Institute for Educational Research, University of Jyväskylä, P.O. Box 35, 40014 Jyväskylä, Finland

Received 29 March 2012; Accepted 18 June 2012

Academic Editor: Gwo-Jen Hwang

Copyright © 2012 Inga Arffman. This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

Linked References

  1. R. Hambleton and A. Zenisky, “Translating and adapting tests for cross-cultural assessment,” in Cross-Cultural Research Methods in Psychology, D. Matsumoto and F. van de Vijver, Eds., pp. 46–73, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, Mass, USA, 2011.
  2. J. Sweller, “Cognitive load during problem solving: effects on learning,” Cognitive Science, vol. 12, no. 2, pp. 257–285, 1988. View at Scopus
  3. R. Rueda, “Cultural perspectives in reading: theory and research,” in Handbook of Reading Research IV, M. Kamil, P. D. Pearson, E. B. Moje, and P. Afflerbach, Eds., pp. 84–104, Routledge, New York, NY, USA, 2011.
  4. R. Tourangeau, L. Rips, and K. Rasinski, The Psychology of Survey Response, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, Mass, USA, 2000.
  5. J. Harkness, A. Villar, and B. Edwards, “Translation, adaptation and design,” in Survey Methods in Multinational, Multiregional, and Multicultural Contexts, J. Harkness, M. Braun, B. Edwards et al., Eds., pp. 117–140, John Wiley & Sons, Hoboken, NJ, USA, 2010.
  6. E. Nida, Toward a Science of Translating, Brill, Leiden, The Netherlands, 1964.
  7. E. Nida and C. Taber, The Theory and Practice of Translation, Brill, Leiden, The Netherlands, 1969.
  8. M. Larson, Meaning-Based Translation. A Guide to Cross-Language Equivalence, University Press of America, Lanham, Md, USA, 2nd edition, 1998.
  9. W. Kintsch and T. A. van Dijk, “Toward a model of text comprehension and production,” Psychological Review, vol. 85, no. 5, pp. 363–394, 1978. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  10. T. van Dijk and W. Kintsch, Strategies of Discourse Comprehension, Academic Press, Orlando, Fla, USA, 1983.
  11. E. Angelone, “Uncertainty, uncertainty management and metacognitive problem solving in the translation task,” in Translation and Cognition, G. Shreve and E. Angelone, Eds., American Translators Association Scholarly Monograph Series 15, pp. 17–40, Benjamins, Amsterdam, The Netherlands, 2010.
  12. J. Danks and J. Griffin, “Reading and translation. A psycholinguistic perspective,” in Cognitive Processes in Translation and Interpreting, J. Danks, G. Shreve, S. Fountain, and M. McBeath, Eds., Applied Psychology. Individual, Social, and Community Issues Vol. 3, pp. 161–175, Sage, Thousand Oaks, Calif, USA, 1997.
  13. C. Nord, “Loyalty and fidelity in specialized translation,” Confluéncias—Revista de Tradução Cientifica e Técnica, vol. 4, pp. 29–41, 2006.
  14. W. Frawley, “Prolegomenon to a theory of translation,” in Translation: Literary, Linguistic, and Philosophical Perspectives, W. Frawley, Ed., pp. 159–175, Associated University Press, London, UK, 1984.
  15. G. Toury, “Interlanguage and its manifestation in translation,” Meta, vol. 23, pp. 223–231, 1979.
  16. A. Al-Hassnawi, “Translanguage vs. interlanguage: exploration in translation strategies,” Translation Journal, vol. 14, no. 3, 2010, http://translationjournal.net/journal//53translanguage.htm.
  17. A. Chesterman, “Beyond the particular,” in Translation Universals? Do They Exist, A. Mauranen and P. Kujamäki, Eds., pp. 33–49, Benjamins, Amsterdam, The Netherlands, 2004.
  18. R. Giora, “On the priority of salient meanings: studies of literal and figurative language,” Journal of Pragmatics, vol. 31, no. 7, pp. 919–929, 1999. View at Scopus
  19. B. Englund Dimitrova, Expertise and Explicitation in the Translation Process, Benjamins, Amsterdam, The Netherlands, 2005.
  20. P. Kujamäki, “What happens to “unique items” in learners’ translations? “Theories” and “concepts” as a challenge for novices’ views on ‘good translation’,” in Translation Universals. Do They Exist? A. Mauranen and P. Kujamäki, Eds., pp. 187–204, Benjamins, Amsterdam, The Netherlands, 2004.
  21. S. Tirkkonen-Condit, “Process research: state of the art and where to go next,” Across Languages and Cultures, vol. 3, no. 1, pp. 5–19, 2002.
  22. S. Tirkkonen-Condit, “Unique items—over- or under-represented in translated language?” in Translation Universals. Do They Exist? A. Mauranen and P. Kujamäki, Eds., pp. 177–184, Benjamins, Amsterdam, The Netherlands, 2004.
  23. G. Toury, Descriptive Translation Studies and Beyond, Benjamins, Amsterdam, The Netherlands, 1995.
  24. J. Levý, “Translation as a decision process,” in To Honor Roman Jakobson: Essays on the Occasion of His Seventieth Birthday II, J. Levý, Ed., pp. 1171–1182, Mouton, The Hague, The Netherlands, 1967.
  25. B. Englund Dimitrova, “Literal translation in the translation process of professional translators,” Gothenburg Studies in English, vol. 90, pp. 29–39, 2005.
  26. S. Tirkkonen-Condit, J. Mäkisalo, and S. Immonen, “The translation process—interplay between literal rendering and a search for sense,” Across Languages and Cultures, vol. 9, no. 1, pp. 1–15, 2008. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  27. I. Arffman, In search of equivalence—translation problems in international literacy studies [M.S. thesis], University of Jyväskylä, Jyväskylä, Finland, 2002.
  28. I. Arffman, “Translating international achievement tests: translators’ view,” Finnish Institute For Educational Research Reports 44, University of Jyväskylä, Jyväskylä, Finland, 2012, http://ktl.jyu.fi/img/portal/22708/g044.pdf.
  29. A. Grisay, “Translation and cultural appropriateness of the test and survey material,” in PISA, 2000 Technical Report, R. Adams and M. Wu, Eds., pp. 57–70, OECD, Paris, France, 2002.
  30. R. Hambleton, “Adapting achievement tests into multiple languages for international assessments,” in Methodological Advances in Cross-National Surveys of Educational Achievement, A. Porter and A. Gamoran, Eds., pp. 58–79, National Academy Press, Washington, DC, USA, 2002.
  31. R. Hambleton, “Issues, designs, and technical guidelines for adapting tests into multiple languages and cultures,” in Adapting Educational and Psychological Tests for Cross-Cultural Assessment, R. Hambleton, P. Merenda, and C. Spielberger, Eds., pp. 3–38, Erlbaum, Mahwah, NJ, USA, 2005.
  32. OECD, Country-by-Country Report on the Quality of the National Version(s) of the PISA Material, OECD, Paris, France, 2001.
  33. M. Wu, “A critical comparison of the contents of PISA and TIMSS mathematics assessments,” 2009 https://edsurveys.rti.org/PISA/documents/WuA_Critical_Comparison_of_the_Contents_of_PISA_and_TIMSS_psg_WU_06.1.pdf.
  34. OECD, “PISA, 2009 translation and adaptation guidelines,” in National Project Managers’Meeting, Dubrovnik, Croatia, September 2007.
  35. OECD, National Project Manager’s Manual, OECD, Paris, France, 1999.
  36. K. Reiss and H. Vermeer, Grundlegung Einer Allgemeinen Translations Theorie, Niemeyer, Tübingen, Germany, 1984.
  37. H. J. Vermeer, “Skopos and commission in translational action,” in Readings in Translation Theory, A. Chesterman, Ed., pp. 173–187, Finn Lectura, Helsinki, Finland, 1989.
  38. B. Hatim and I. Mason, The Translator as Communicator, Routledge, London, UK, 1997.
  39. A. Pym, “On Toury’s law of how translators translate,” in Beyond Descriptive Translation Studies: Investigations in Homage to Gideon Toury, A. Pym, M. Schlesinger, and D. Simeoni, Eds., pp. 311–328, Benjamins, Amsterdam, The Netherlands, 2008.
  40. A. Chesterman, “Why study translation universals?” in Kiasm, R. Hartama-Heinonen and P. Kukkonen, Eds., University of Helsinki, Department of Finnish, Finno-Ugrian and Scandinavian Studies, Helsinki, Finland, 2010, Acta Translatologica Helsingiensia, vol. 1, pp. 38–48.
  41. M. Jensen, Professional translators’establishment of skopos—a “brief” study [M.S. thesis], Aarhus School of Business, Aarhus University, Aarhus, Denmark, 2009.
  42. Southern Africa Consortium for Monitoring Educational Quality (SACMEQ), Manual for National Research Co-Ordinators, International Institute for Educational Planning, Paris, France, 1995.
  43. A. Grisay, J. H. A. L. de Jong, E. Gebhardt, A. Berezner, and B. Halleux-Monseur, “Translation equivalence across PISA countries,” Journal of Applied Measurement, vol. 8, no. 3, pp. 249–266, 2007. View at Scopus
  44. S. Dept, A. Ferrari, and L. Wäyrynen, “Developments in translation verification procedures in three multilingual assessments: a plea for an integrated translation and adaptation monitoring tool,” in Survey Methods in Multinational, Multiregional, and Multicultural Contexts, J. Harkness, M. Braun, B. Edwards et al., Eds., pp. 157–173, John Wiley & Sons, Hoboken, NJ, USA, 2010.
  45. A. Jensen, The Effects of Time on Cognitive Processes and Strategies in Translation, Copenhagen Business School, Faculty of Modern Languages, Copenhagen, Denmark, 2000.
  46. A. Jensen and A. Jakobsen, “Translating under time pressure,” in Translation in Context. Selected Contributions From the EST Congress, Granada 1998, A. Chesterman, N. Gallardo San Salvador, and Y. Gambier, Eds., pp. 105–116, Benjamins, Amsterdam, The Netherlands, 2000.
  47. R. Jääskeläinen, “Are all professionals experts?” in Translation and Cognition, G. Shreve and E. Angelone, Eds., American Translators Association Scholarly Monograph Series, 15, pp. 213–227, Benjamins, Amsterdam, The Netherlands, 2010.
  48. R. Kim, “Use of extralinguistic knowledge in translation,” Meta, vol. 51, no. 2, pp. 284–303, 2006. View at Scopus
  49. I. Karg, Mythos PISA. Vermeintliche Vergleichbarkeit und die Wirklichkeit eines Vergleichs, V&R Unipress, Gottingen, Germany, 2005.
  50. European Social Survey, ESS Round 5 Translation Guidelines, European Social Survey GESIS, Mannheim, Germany, 2010.
  51. D. Zakay, “The impact of time perception processes on decision-making under time stress,” in Time Pressure and Stress in Human Judgment and Decision Making, O. Svenson and A. J. Maule, Eds., pp. 59–72, Plenum, New York, NY, USA, 1993.
  52. M. Fontanet, “Time of creativity in translation,” Meta, vol. 50, no. 2, pp. 432–447, 2005. View at Scopus
  53. R. Jääskeläinen, “Hard work will bear fruit? A comparison of two think-aloud protocol studies,” Meta, vol. 16, pp. 60–74, 1996.
  54. R. Mackenzie, “Creative problem-solving and translator training,” in Translator’s Strategies and Creativity, A. Beylard-Ozeroff, J. Králová, and B. Moser-Mercer, Eds., pp. 201–206, Benjamins, Amsterdam, 1998.
  55. H. Krings, Was in den Köpfen von Übersetzern vorgeht. Eine empirische Untersuchung der Struktur des Übersetzungsprozesses an fortgeschrittenen Französischlernern, Narr, Tübingen, Germany, 1986.
  56. B. Mossop, Revising and Editing for Translators, St. Jerome, Manchester, UK, 2007.
  57. R. Hambleton and G. Berberoglu, TIMSS Instrument Adaptation Process: A Formative Evaluation, University of Massachusetts, School of Education, Amherst, Mass, USA, 1997.
  58. A. Künzli, “Translation revision: a study of the performance of ten professional translators revising a legal text,” in Doubts and Directions in Translation Studies, Y. Gambier, M. Schlesinger, and R. Stolze, Eds., pp. 115–126, Benjamins, Amsterdam, The Netherlands, 2007.
  59. F. van de Vijver and K. Leung, Methods and Data Analysis for Cross-Cultural Research, Sage, Thousand Oaks, Calif, USA, 1997.
  60. G. Solano-Flores, L. Contreras-Niño, and E. Backhoff-Escudero, “Translation and adaptation of tests: lessons learned and recommendations for countries participating in TIMSS, PISA and other international comparisons,” Revista Electrónica de Investigación Educativa, vol. 8, no. 2, 2006, http://redie.uabc.mx/vol8no2/contents-solano2.html.
  61. G. Solano-Flores, E. Backhoff, and L. Contreras-Niño, “Theory of test translation error,” International Journal of Testing, vol. 9, pp. 78–91, 2009.
  62. K. Ercikan, R. Arim, D. Law, J. Domene, F. Gagnon, and S. Lacroix, “Application of think aloud protocols for examining and confirming sources of differential item functioning identified by expert reviews,” Educational Measurement: Issues and Practice, vol. 29, no. 2, pp. 24–35, 2010. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  63. G. Bonnet, F. Daems, C. de Clopper et al., Culturally Balanced Assessment of Reading (c-Bar) A European Project, European Network of Policy Makers for the Evaluation of Education Systems, Paris, France, 2003.