Across Languages and Cultures
Volume/Issue:
Volume 22: Issue 2
Broadening the scope of error categories in translation assessment through screen recording
Author:
Erik Angelone Department of Modern and Classical Language Studies, Institute for Applied Linguistics, Kent State University, USA

Search for other papers by Erik Angelone in
Current site
Google Scholar
PubMed Close
https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9854-2355
Pages:
143–157
Online Publication Date:
16 Nov 2021
Publication Date:
16 Nov 2021
Article Category:
Research Article
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.1556/084.2021.00021
Keywords:
process-oriented assessment; corpus-based analysis; think-aloud protocols; screen recording
Restricted access

Abstract

To date, the assessment of student translations has been largely based on configurations of error categories that address some facet of the translation product. Focal points of such product-oriented error annotation include language mechanics (punctuation, grammar, lexis and syntax, for example) and various kinds of transfer errors. In recent years, screen recording technology has opened new doors for empirically informing translation assessment from a more process-oriented perspective (Massey and Ehrensberger-Dow, 2014; Angelone, 2019). Screen recording holds particular promise when tracing errors documented in the product back to potential underlying triggers in the form of processes that co-occur on screen in their presence. Assessor observations made during screen recording analysis can give shape to process-oriented error categories that parallel and complement product-oriented categories. This paper proposes a series of empirically informed, process-oriented error categories that can be used for assessing translations in contexts where screen recordings are applied as a diagnostic tool. The categories are based on lexical and semantic patterns derived from a corpus-based analysis of think-aloud protocols documenting articulations made by assessors when commenting on errors made in student translations while watching screen recordings of their work. It is hoped that these process-oriented error categories will contribute to a more robust means by which to assess and classify errors in translation.

  • Angelone, E. (2010). Uncertainty, uncertainty management, and metacognitive problem solving in the translation task. In G.M. Shreve , & E. Angelone (Eds.), Translation and cognition (pp. 17–40). Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation

  • Angelone, E. (2015). The impact of process protocol self-analysis on errors in the translation product. In M. Ehrensberger-Dow , B. Englund Dimitrova , S. Hubscher-Davidson , & U. Norberg (Eds.), Describing cognitive processes in translation (pp. 195–214). Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation

  • Angelone, E. (2019). Process-oriented assessment of problems and errors in translation: Expanding horizons through screen recording. In S. Vandepitte , E. Huertas Barros , & E. Iglesias Fernandez (Eds.), Quality assurance and assessment practices in translation and interpreting (pp. 179–199). Hershey, PA: IGI Global.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation

  • Angelone, E. (2020). The impact of screen recording as a diagnostic process protocol on inter-rater consistency in translation assessment. The Journal of Specialized Translation, 34, 32–50.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation

  • Angelone, E. , & Shreve, G.M. (2011). Uncertainty management, metacognitive bundling in problem-solving, and translation quality. In S. O’Brien (Ed.), Cognitive explorations of translation (pp. 108–130). London/New York: Continuum.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation

  • Brunette, L. (2000). Towards a terminology for translation quality assessment: A comparison of TQA practices. The Translator, 6(2), 169–182.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation

  • Doherty, S. (2017). Issues in human and automatic translation quality assessment. In D. Kenney (Ed.), Human issues in translation technology. London: Routledge. 131–148.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation

  • Galán-Mañas, A. , & Hurtado Albir, A. (2015). Competence assessment procedures in translator training. The Interpreter and Translator Trainer, 9(1), 63–82.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation

  • Huertas Barros, E. , & Vine, J. (Eds.). (2019). New perspectives on assessment in translator education. London: Routledge.

  • Kornacki, M. (2019). The application of eye-tracking in translator training. In P. Pietrzak (Ed.), inTRAlinea. Special issue: New insights into translator training. Retrieved December 20, 2020 from http://www.intralinea.org/specials/article/2421.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation

  • Mariana, V. , Cox, T. , & Melby, A. (2015). The Multidimensional Quality Metrics (MQM) framework: A new framework for translation quality assessment. The Journal of Specialised Translation, 23, 137–161.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation

  • Massey, G. , & Ehrensberger-Dow, M. (2011). Investigating information literacy: A growing priority in translation studies. Across Languages and Cultures, 12(2), 193–211.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation

  • Massey, G. , & Ehrensberger-Dow, M. (2014). Looking beyond the text: The usefulness of translation process data. In J. Jan Engberg , C. Heine , & D. Knorr (Eds.), Methods in writing process research (pp. 81–98). Frankfurt: Peter Lang.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation

  • Mellinger, C. , & Shreve, G.M. (2016). Match evaluation and over-editing in a translation memory environment. In Martín, Ricardo Muñoz (Ed.), Re-embedding translation process research (pp. 131–148). Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation

  • Moorkens, J. , Castilho, S. , Doherty, S. , & Gaspari, F. (Eds.). (2018). Translation quality assessment: From principles to practice. Berlin: Springer.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation

  • Mossop, B. (2001). Revising and editing for translators. Manchester: St. Jerome.

  • Schäffer, M. , Nitzke, J. , Tardel, A. , Oster, K. , Gutermuth, S. , & Hansen-Schirra, S. (2019). Eye-tracking revision processes of translation students and professional translators. Perspectives: Studies in Translation Theory and Practice, 27(4), 589–603.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation

  • Shreve, G.M. , Angelone, E. , & Lacruz, I. (2014). Efficacy of screen recording in the other-revision of translations: Episodic memory and event models. MonTi: Monografías de traducción e interpretación, 1, 225–245.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation

  • TAUS (2016). TAUS quality dashboard. Retrieved November 18, 2020 from https://www.taus.net/data/dqf.

  • Collapse
  • Expand
Cover Across Languages and Cultures
Across Languages and Cultures
Print ISSN:
1585-1923
Online ISSN:
1588-2519

Editor-in-Chief: Krisztina KÁROLY (Eötvös Loránd University, Hungary)

Consulting Editor: Dániel MÁNY  (Semmelweis University, Hungary)

Managing Editor: Réka ESZENYI (Eötvös Loránd University, Hungary)

Founding Editor-in-Chief: Kinga KLAUDY (Eötvös Loránd University, Hungary)

EDITORIAL BOARD

  • Andrew CHESTERMAN (University of Helsinki, Finland)
  • Kirsten MALMKJÆR (University of Leicester, UK)
  • Christiane NORD (University of Free State, Bloemfontein, South Africa)
  • Anthony PYM (Universitat Rovira i Virgili, Tarragona, Spain, University of Melbourne, Australia)
  • Mary SNELL-HORNBY (University of Vienna, Austria)
  • Sonja TIRKKONEN-CONDIT (University of Eastern Finland, Joensuu, Finland)

ADVISORY BOARD

  • Mona BAKER (Shanghai International Studies University, China, University of Oslo, Norway)
  • Łucja BIEL (University of Warsaw, Poland)
  • Gloria CORPAS PASTOR (University of Malaga, Spain; University of Wolverhampton, UK)
  • Rodica DIMITRIU (Universitatea „Alexandru Ioan Cuza” Iasi, Romania)
  • Birgitta Englund DIMITROVA (Stockholm University, Sweden)
  • Sylvia KALINA (Cologne Technical University, Germany)
  • Haidee KOTZE (Utrecht University, The Netherlands)
  • Sara LAVIOSA (Università degli Studi di Bari Aldo Moro, Italy)
  • Brian MOSSOP (York University, Toronto, Canada)
  • Orero PILAR (Universidad Autónoma de Barcelona, Spain)
  • Gábor PRÓSZÉKY (Hungarian Research Institute for Linguistics, Hungary)
  • Alessandra RICCARDI (University of Trieste, Italy)
  • Edina ROBIN (Eötvös Loránd University, Hungary)
  • Myriam SALAMA-CARR (University of Manchester, UK)
  • Mohammad Saleh SANATIFAR (independent researcher, Iran)
  • Sanjun SUN (Beijing Foreign Studies University, China)
  • Anikó SOHÁR (Pázmány Péter Catholic University,  Hungary)
  • Sonia VANDEPITTE (University of Gent, Belgium)
  • Albert VERMES (Eszterházy Károly University, Hungary)
  • Yifan ZHU (Shanghai Jiao Tong Univeristy, China)

Prof. Dr. Krisztina KÁROLY 
School of English and American Studies, Eötvös Loránd University
H-1088 Budapest, Rákóczi út 5., Hungary 
E-mail: 

  • WoS Arts & Humanities Citation Index
  • Wos Social Sciences Citation Index
  • WoS Essential Science Indicators
  • Scopus
  • Linguistics Abstracts
  • Linguistics and Language Behaviour Abstracts
  • Translation Studies Abstractst
  • CABELLS Journalytics

2024  
Scopus  
CiteScore  
CiteScore rank  
SNIP  
Scimago  
SJR index 0.541
SJR Q rank Q1

2023  
Web of Science  
Journal Impact Factor 1.0
Rank by Impact Factor Q2 (Linguistics)
Journal Citation Indicator 0.76
Scopus  
CiteScore 1.7
CiteScore rank Q1 (Language and Linguistics)
SNIP 1.223
Scimago  
SJR index 0.671
SJR Q rank Q1

Across Languages and Cultures
Publication Model Hybrid
Submission Fee

none
Article Processing Charge 900 EUR/article
Printed Color Illustrations 40 EUR (or 10 000 HUF) + VAT / piece
Regional discounts on country of the funding agency World Bank Lower-middle-income economies: 50%
World Bank Low-income economies: 100%
Further Discounts Editorial Board / Advisory Board members: 50%
Corresponding authors, affiliated to an EISZ member institution subscribing to the journal package of Akadémiai Kiadó: 100%
Subscription fee 2025 Online subsscription: 362 EUR / 398 USD
Print + online subscription: 420 EUR / 462 USD
Subscription Information Online subscribers are entitled access to all back issues published by Akadémiai Kiadó for each title for the duration of the subscription, as well as Online First content for the subscribed content.
Purchase per Title Individual articles are sold on the displayed price.

Across Languages and Cultures
Language English
Size B5
Year of
Foundation		 1999
Volumes
per Year		 1
Issues
per Year		 2
Founder Akadémiai Kiadó
Founder's
Address		 H-1117 Budapest, Hungary 1516 Budapest, PO Box 245.
Publisher Akadémiai Kiadó
Publisher's
Address		 H-1117 Budapest, Hungary 1516 Budapest, PO Box 245.
Responsible
Publisher		 Chief Executive Officer, Akadémiai Kiadó
ISSN 1585-1923 (Print)
ISSN 1588-2519 (Online)

Monthly Content Usage

Abstract Views Full Text Views PDF Downloads
Dec 2024 32 0 0
Jan 2025 69 0 0
Feb 2025 64 2 3
Mar 2025 86 1 2
Apr 2025 30 0 0
May 2025 6 0 0
Jun 2025 0 0 0