7. Learning dominant linguistic features of the three text types

With regard to the learning of different lexical-pragmatic categories and syntactic structures across text types, more than half of the students agreed that error analysis in the process of post-MT editing helped them to learn the different and similar linguistic features between the informative, evocative/operative and expressive text types. In addition, the data collected from their reflections revealed that students were aware of different types of languages that different text types used to achieve different purposes. For example, students found that the informative text type tended to use verb actions, e.g., "put," "turn" and "leave" and the nouns with straightforward meanings, e.g., "kitchen sink," "soft case," "boards," and "leveling screws." As a contrast to this phenomenon, the expressive text type preferably used metaphorical expressions, e.g., "pouring out" (implying "huge volumes of mails sent out like snow"), "a constant stream of postmen" (referring to "many postmen"), and "a sea of trouble" (indicating "much trouble"). The evocative/operative text type which exists in between these two types was dotted with the lexical items that had straightforward and connotative meanings, e.g., "brides' land package" (meaning "the package trip designed for newlyweds").

Students also found that the three text types had distinctive sentence structures. For example, the user's manual (the informative text type) tended to use imperative sentences, passive voices, and fewer complicated sentences while Shakespeare's drama (the expressive text type) used complicated sentences with a personal creative style. However, the evocative/operative text type combined simple and complicated sentences. Students' reflections in general revealed that students could identify the differences among the three text types at the lexical and syntactic levels after they had received training in post-MT editing coupled with MT error analysis over the three consecutive weeks.

8. Awareness of the relevance of text types to translation

Compared to their responses to questions in the other three parts, only 62% of students agreed that they had acquired the knowledge of the relevance of text types to translation. This indicates that it is more difficult for students to infer or judge how text types are relevant to the translation process. Due to this difficulty, the instructor's explicit instructions are required. The instructor in this project did suggest that awareness of text types was beneficial to translation because only a translator who understands the function of a text-type can use the proper linguistic elements. This suggestion was not adequate for students to realize the close and crucial relationship between text types and translation. Thus, the instructor needs to deliberately discuss, based on students' post-MT editing, how different linguistic factors of text types determine the presentation of different functions of text types and how the different functions of text types determine the overall translation performance. This discussion will help students to understand text-in-translation interaction, relating textual functions or rhetorical purposes (e.g., for aesthetic appreciation or for information acquisition) to the decisions on lexical choice and organizational structures in the translation.

As noted in the questionnaire, an overwhelming majority of students (73.75%) agreed with the effectiveness of cognitively learning the concept of text types in this project. Actually, MT error analysis gave students the opportunity to explore the hidden reasons for the MT system's failure to process the different linguistic features of the three text types. The knowledge of the limitations of MT systems made them aware of the concept of text types in translation when they tried to find solutions in correcting different MT errors. Such an empirical experience in a learning-by-doing environment helped students to develop the concept of text types in a non-stressful way. In addition, noting reflections actively involved students in assessment and analysis, and this contributed to their cognitive learning of text types in translation.

However, we noticed that one student disagreed with Q20, showing that he did not find it helpful and useful to learn by actual participation. We have to investigate whether this response is attributable to his personal learning style or to other factors. This respondent's age was 25, making him the oldest in the class. This revealed that the older student had more difficulty adapting to a new way of teaching and learning. As a result, a mixture of the teacher's lecture and students' practice could be a better way to work out some problems arising from the implementation of this innovative MT-based teaching approach.

The entire MT-based project started with students' actual practice of MT error analysis and post-MT editing to arrive at a conceptual acquisition of text types in translation. Students learned not only the relevance of text types to the translator's decision but also had a clear concept of three text types in translation. More importantly, students stated that they had non-stressfully mastered the different contextual components of the three text types, including organizational patterns, syntactic modes and lexical categories using the method of post-MT editing and MT error analysis. This finding confirmed the effectiveness of teaching text type in translation with MT error analysis and post-MT editing.

We admitted that the sample size in this project is very small (20 undergraduate students), a total of eight texts for post-MT editing (three informative text types, three evocative/operative text types and two expressive text types) and a period of three weeks. Because of these limitations, the conclusion of this project cannot be fully representative. Further research is thus required, using more texts to test more students over a longer period of time to seek more genuine and convincing results. However, since 99% of students, as noted in the student profile of the questionnaire, admitted that they had never learned the concept of text types in translation in other translation or language classes, this study of the pedagogical subject of text types in translation is worth a further try at universities. This study is contributive to the teaching of theory through practice since it leads students from empirical practice to cognitive, conceptual acquisition of text types in translation.

References

Beaugrande, R. de & Dressler, W. (1981). Introduction to Text Linguistics. London: Longman.

Bell, Roger T. (1991). Translation and Translating: Theory and Practice. London and New York: Pearson Education Limited.

Bühler, K. (1934). Sprachtheorie. Jena: Fischer.

Colina, S. (2003). Translation Teaching, From Research to the Classroom, A Handbook for Teachers. Singapore: McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc.

Crystal, D. and Davy, D. (1969). Investigating English Style. London: Longman.

Hatim, Basil & Mason, Ian (1990). Discourse and the Translator. New York: Addison Wesley Longman In.

Hatim, Basil (2001). Teaching and Researching Translation. London and New York: Pearson Education Limited.

Hatim, Basil (1998). Text Linguistics and Translation. In Mona Baker (Ed.). Routledge Encyclopedia of Translation Studies. (pp.262-265). London and New York: Routledge.

Hatim, Basil & Munday, Jeremy (2004). Translation, An Advanced Resource Book. London and New York: Routledge.

Hönig, Hans G. (1986). Übersetzen zwischen Reflex und Reflexion - Ein Modell der übersetzungsrelevanten Textanalyse. In Mary Snell-Hornby (Ed.), Übersetzungswissenschaft. Eine Neuorientierung. (pp. 203-251). Tübingen: Francke.

Kussmaul, Paul. (1995). Training the Translator. Philadelphia and Amsterdam: John Benjamins.

Melby, A. K. (1987). On Human-machine Interaction in Translation. In S. Nirenburg (Ed.), Machine Translation: Theoretical and Methodological Issues (pp.145-154). New York: Cambridge University Press.

Module Specification, University of the West of England (UWE) (2005). Retrieved November 3, 2006, from http://www.uwe.ac.uk/

Neubert, Albrecht (1985). Text and Translation. Leipzig: Verlag Enzyklopdie.

Nord, Christian. (1997). Translating as a Purposeful Activity: Functional approaches explained. Manchester: St. Jerome.

Reiss, K. (1971). Möglichkeiten und Grenzen der Übersetzungskritik: Kategorien und Kriterien für eine sachgerechte Beurteilung von Übersetzungen. [Possibilities and limitations of translation criticism: Categories and criteria for a fair evaluation of translations]. Munich: Hueber.

Reiss, K. (1976). Texttyp und Übersetzsungsmethode. Kronberg: Scriptor.

Sager, J.C. (1994). Language Engineering and Translation: Consequences of Automation. Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publishing Company.

Trosborg, A. (1997). Text Typology: Register, Genre and Text Types. In Anna Trosborg (Ed.). Text Typology and Translation (pp. 3-23). Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing Company.

Lecture 4. How New Technologies Improve Translation Pedagogy

1. Premises

2. Translation competence and its acquisition or concepts and misconceptions about translator training

3. Web-based translator training

4. Questionnaires, Chat, Wiki.

5. Forum, Glossary, Workshop.

6. Learners' assessment

7. Achievements and limits of pedagogic technology

Improving pedagogy is the constant aim of any diligent instructor, and therefore of any translation instructor, too. The requirements and the conditions of modern life, as well as the impact of globalization, are challenges for teaching, as learners need to learn new skills in order to be able to confront them. One of the most important affairs in this framework is the incursion of new technologies, all the more since we have to take into account the Bologna requirements for European higher education. In order to face them, instructors are expected to adopt a change of mind and to design their classes for optimum use of current information technologies and, in consequence, to top-quality professional performance.

The strong shift in learning habits to a more visual culture should lead translation pedagogy to include more visual resources such as videoconferencing and video streaming.

This contribution wants to show how new technologies can improve not only the professional standard of our graduates, which includes the acquisition of skills like the use of translation memories, databases, and the Internet as information sources, but also how they can become a pedagogical tool to achieve crucial skills such as autonomous learner-learning and assessment or collaborative learning and working. In this context, virtual environments become especially important instruments. However, instructors must learn to integrate them adequately into their teaching: it is not enough to put the traditional learning material on a virtual platform for downloading. The great advantages of asynchronicity and the possibility of collaborative learning allow for the development of blended learning models and learner-customized courses. There are also means that help students to control their own learning process.

Our proposals steer towards activities applied to the subjects of general and specialized translation in the virtual environment.