46

4 | Translation

UNIT 4: Evaluation of Translation and Editing in Translation

4.0 Intended Learning Outcomes
a. Define, and determine the origin and evolution, types, methods, and other
developments in the art and science of translation.
b. Acknowledge the value of translation in understanding other cultures and
appreciate the significance of translation and the important role of the
translator.
c. Apply principles and strategies in translating texts of various types in Filipino
language to English or English to Filipino language translation.
d. Appreciate and integrate the significance of language translation to students
in a language and literature classroom.

4.1 Introduction
Unit 4 of this module will tackle the
objectives of evaluation, ways of evaluating
translated texts, and the art of translation and
the art of editing. With these topics, it will be
helpful if we look back on the basic
concepts of translation.
In the previous lessons, we get
acquainted with the different definitions
and principles of translation and its purpose
in finding the equivalent meaning of the
source language(SL) expression in the target
language (TL). Furthermore, in the succeeding lessons we learned the concepts of
translation processes and its evolution
Source: https://www.betranslated.com/blog/how-good-is-google-translate/
using the new technology. It is in this
context that what we used to think as a difficult job has been replaced with a ‘hassle-free’
machine and/or online process of translating texts.
However, as a translator, one of the most basic yet important thing to keep in mind is
to transfer the meaning of the message from the source language (SL) to the target language
(TL). Through an evaluation, the effectiveness of the translation process is examined.

4.2 Topics/Discussion (with Assessment/Activities)

4.2.1 Objectives of Evaluation

Online dictionaries generally defines evaluation as a process of judging or calcuating

the quality, importance, amount, or value of something using criteria governed by a set of
standards. In a certain task, evaluation is necessary to check on the effectiveness of the
 47
4 | Translation

processes undertaken to come up with an output.

As for the word ‘translation’, House (2009)
describes it as a process of replacing text in one
language (the source language) with a text in a
different language (the target language). The
first text then is original and independent, and
the second exists as a version derived from the
first. With this description on translation,
obviously the task is simply to come up with a Juliane House is a German linguist and translation
version of the original text. The derived version studies scholar.
(Source: https://philadelphusmagazine.wordpress.com)
stands in for the original, and the texts are said
to be equivalent. The notion of equivalence, however, is by no means a simple one. It means
that translations mediate between languages, societies, and literatures, and it is through
translations that linguistic and cultural barriers may be overcomed.
With the description by Julianne House on ‘transalation’, we may say that a translated
text is evaluated by comparing the source language (SL) and the target langauage (TL); and
incorporating its purpose along the process. Translation studies present variety of ways to
translate in accordance to its purpose. Thus, the objective of evaluating of translated texts
depends on it.
In spite of the fact that scholars, such as Nord (1991) and House (1997) suggest
certain parameters that can be utilized for the purpose of translation assessment, such as
quality of target language, accuracy, register, appearance of target text, situationality, and so on,
there seems to be no parameter on which evaluators may rely to arrive at an overall
quality assessment for the target text (Williams, 2009, p. 7). The features that should
characterize translation quality assessment as a tool used for translation assessment within
academic context may considerably differ from those required for building translation
quality assessment utilized for the purpose of translation quality control by a particular
translation agency (Williams, 2009, p. 7). Along similar lines, Hatim and Mason (1997)
assert that a clear distinction should be made between assessment of translation quality,
translation quality control and translation criticism on one side and assessment of translation
performance on the other. It goes without saying that it is not possible to propose a quality
standard that can meet all requirements and can ipso facto (by the very fact) be employed
for the sake of specific translations evaluation (Williams, 2009).
With the importance of acceptable translation in this globalised world and the
pressing need for specific criteria against which this acceptability can possibly be
determined, the corpus of translation studies patently lacks generally agreed measures that
can be used for the specification of translation acceptability and validity. This made
translation scholars, researchers and translators to exercise independent reasoning in an
attempt to explore specific criteria against which translated texts may be evaluated.
Alwazna (2015) mentioned that evaluation is crucial to translation (Munday, 2012).
According to him, the primary task that should be performed by the evaluator is to
 48
4 | Translation

distinguish and present the worth and importance of certain work. The modern day
translation evaluation undergo validity and reliability tests. Validity deals crucially with
the elements measured by evaluation. For instance, the evaluation is designed to measure
translation skills, translation performance, etc. On the other hand, reliability is mainly
concerned with the evaluation being able to yield the same results when carried out again
on the same type of people and under the same conditions (Williams, 2009).
He added that such tests are of utmost significance and should be passed by
translation evaluation models in order to be approved. The validity test addresses the areas
in translation that should efficiently be assessed by the translation evaluation models and
whether or not such models have effectively managed to assess these areas which are
indicated above. The reliability test, however, examines the consistency of the translation
evaluation models in question. Are the results produced by such translation evaluation
models the same if these models are carried out again and again on the same people and
under the same circumstances?
In his study, Alwazna (2015) proposed for the argument macrostructure as composed
of two sets of parameter, which are the core and field or use-specific. The former is the
argument macrostructure, which can be applied to both academic and professional settings,
whilst the latter represents the area of specialization and the intended use of translation,
whose application is primarily contingent upon the evaluator’s discretion since the
importance thereof differs from a particular field of knowledge to another. His study claims
that in order for the argument macrostructure model to be properly valid as an evaluation
criterion for both the academic as well as professional spheres, it should encompass
numerous standards specific to diverse translation contexts and purposes.
Thus, the objective for evaluating a translated text may vary depending on the
pupose of translation. This implies that the translating job is not just looking for the
equivalent meaning of words in another language, but accurately and appropriately placing
these words in accordance with the purpose of translation.
Furthermore, Williams (2009) have also identified factors that affect translation
evaluation process between and among evaluators. These are:
1. Lack of the linguistic knowledge required and knowledge of the subject-matter.
2. The difference on style. Not all evaluators consider it crucial to achieve acceptable
translation.
3. The difference on the treatment of punctuation errors, spelling mistakes and typos.
While some evaluators ignore this type of errors in their assessment, other evaluators
view them as major errors as they are detectable by the target reader.
4. The difference on the level of accuracy and precision in the transfer of the ST content
into the TL. Some evaluators often overlook slight shifts in meaning particularly if the
message content is precisely transmitted to the target text, while other evaluators
will adhere to the concept of fidelity to the source text, and they will never allow even a
slight change in the place of a particular concept in the target text.
5. Some translation evaluators resort to sampling analysis instead of full-text analysis.
 49
4 | Translation

Sampling analysis may affect the validity of translation evaluation process as it results in
certain negative consequences.
6. Another defect of sampling analysis is that the evaluator may not take into
consideration the whole text, which may lead to the lack of comprehensibility of the
collective meaning of the target text as one unit.
The aforementioned ideas will help us understand the succeeding principles and
concepts of this lesson which may unfold the real truth about translation processes.

4.2.1 Ways of Evaluating Translated Texts

Based on the objectives in evaluation, we look for ways how translated texts may be
evaluated. Let us consider Jacobson (1959) and House (2009) presentation of the different
kinds of translation. This is just one of the many ways we can decide as to how we can
evaluate translated texts.
According to them, translation can be divided into three kinds: inter-lingual
translation, intra-lingual translation and inter-semiotic translation and here are the definitions.
a) Inter-lingual translation is a result of the process whereby the message in the source
language is rendered as a target language in different language, and it is in this sense
that we have referred to translation so far. For example: across language the medical
manual (English to Indonesia)
b) Intra-lingual translation is a result of the process whereby a text in one variety of the
language is reworded into another. For example: rewording, paraphrasing.
c) Inter-semiotic translation is a result of the process when the replacement does not
involve another language but another, non-linguistic, means of expression, in other
words a different semiotic system. For example: a poem is “translated‟ into a dance
or a picture or a novel into an opera or a film.

Moreover, Savory (1957) divides the translation into four types: perfect translation,
adequate translation, composite translation, and scientific translation. Savory theory explains the
following:
a) perfect translation is all purely informative statements. For example: signs on public
places.
b) adequate translation is for mere entertainment. For example: movie subtitles.
c) composite translation is for intellectual exercises and pleasure
d) scientific translation is about the accuracy, clearness, and precision of the concept.

According to Burton Raffel: “There is no perfect translation.” All translations are but
approximations only. Since there is no perfect standard which will serve as a guide to
evaluate a translated text, it is also not necessary to argue if the translation is right or wrong
because every treatment to the product of a translation would always entangle with the
 50
4 | Translation

culture of the original text which needs to be negotiated with the culture of the translated
text. With this, what could possibly be then the basis to determine suitability, or accuracy,
and the significance of translation? (Buban, 2014)

Buban (2014) says, it is just simple. If the text to be translated is a prayer, then the
translation should be a prayer. If the text to be translated is an article for meditation, then
the article needs to help perform a meditation for the reader. If what is to be translated is a
play, the translation must be performed as a play; and if what is to be translated is a
technical text, it must address ‘utalitarian function’ or be of useful value. With this
viewpoint, it is expected that we can avoid looking for ’mistakes’ in translation or what is
called as ‘gotcha criticism’ if we accept the reality when in fact, there is no perfect literary
piece. We should remember that a translator, before he/she translates is a reader. The
production of translation, on the other hand is always under the control of the one who
consumes it or if in the language of translation, of the target readers. We should also be
mindful with the questions rooted in the theories with the motive of the benefit. Will there be
readers of the translation? What is the preference of the reader? If it will match the preference of
the reader with the idealistic purpose of the translator, and if he will be supported by the
publisher, we could say that the translation task has been succesful. But in reality, this is not
always the case. There is a need to consider on the number of pages, time to publish, and
most often, the target market. In short, “Will there be buyers of the book? Will the
publisher get income?”

4.2.3 The Art of Translation and the Art of Editing

Is translating, an art or a science?
According to Eugene Nida, “though no
one will deny the artistic elements in
good traslating, linguists and
philologist are becoming increasingly
https://www.linkedin.com/company/7brands
aware that the process of translation
are amenable to rigorous description”.
He explained that if we are talking about the science of translating, we cannot avoid
the description aspect. He said that if linguistic is classified as “descriptive science”,
translating of message from one language to another language can also be considered as
scientific or scientific description. He further explained that a person who insists that
translation is an art is prabably just examining it superficially. That he does not go deeper
to fully grasp the scientific aspect of translation which is implicitly hidden in the
fundamental principles. However, he also accepts the fact that a person who embraces on
the belief that language translation is a science and nothing more might have not studied
his work well to give importance on the artistic aspect of translation- one which should not
be left out as ingredient in a good translation, especially in a literary piece.
 51
4 | Translation

Those who do not believe that translation is an art even said that if there is art in
writig, in translation there is none because an art piece is just being translated
The contention that translation is an art will be admitted without hesitation by all
who have had much experience of the work of translating; there may be others who will not
readily agree (but) a sound method is to compare the task of translating in all its forms with
the universally acknowledged arts of painting and drawing they will be found to be parallel,
step-by-step.
Then he explains that in painting, a wrong color or line is equivalent to a wrong
choice of word in language translation; that a mistake in dimension, measure or
propportion of any part of the picture is equivalent to a mistake in giving meaning to the
real sense of a phrase.
If a particular poem, according to him, is being translated by a usual translator
in a typical prose, it is like a sketch of a painter who is not loyal to the original picture. The
thought of the poem could be present in translated prose and the view in the sketch could
be the same as in the picture. But with prose translation, it can be said that the “music” felt
by the readers from the original poem may be lost. Same is true with the sketch of the
painter which is modified from its original, where the sketch turned has turned black and
white.
However, a translation expert can make a translated prose where the rhythm and the
“music”from the original is not lost, just like a painting expert who gives life to the image
he is copying even if he uses other tools and other ways. It has been said that the
translation of literature in science and other topics in technical are compared to the picture
taken by a photographer. It is genuine and acccurate because what is important there is the
content or thought and not the style of the author. Likewise, dependent translation can be
compared with the genuine depiction of Michaelangelo’s painting, while independent
translation can be compared with the works of Picasso.
Translation is indeed an art. As an art, it is not an easy thing to do. But the truth is,
even if translation is a hard task, the translator is always hidden in the shadow of the
author, unnoticed. This could be the reason why his name is always attached with the idea
that he is just a translator of a writer whose supposedly the focus of fame and greatness. If
the translation is good, the translator is usually not the one recognized, and the author gets
all the praises; if the translation is bad, the translator is the one gets criticized.
As stated earllier, only those who have experienced language translation can say that
this task is not a joke. Here is what Savory says:
(T)he translator ‘s task is much harder that that of the original author. When the
latter seeks a word which to express a thought or describe an experience, he has
available many words in his own language and can without great difficulty or delay
choose the one that suits him best and pleases hinm most. The translator of the word
thus chosen has to decide on the nearest equivalent, taking intoconsideration the
probable thoughts of the author’s readers and of his own readers, and the period of
history in which the author lived.
 52
4 | Translation

Writers and those who have experienced language translation will surely disagree
on this statement by Savory. They definitely will put emphasis that writers create, while
language translators only translate their creation to another language. Using the phrase
‘only translate’ is a clealy means a narrow and a shallow interpretation or understanding
about language translation.
We have explained in Filipino what we have quoted above that the task of language
translation is even harder than the task of a writer. A writer have the freedom to choose the
words to be used in expressing out thoughts into words. While a translator is said to be
“tied up” with the meaning of of every word chosen by the author. It is necessary to be very
accurate if not to the nearest meaning after weighing and reflecting on what the author
wanted to convey. The translator must also consider that the emotions will be felt by the
readers of the original text will be the emotions to be felt by the readers of the translated
text.
Therefore, a translator decides at all times on what words to use as equivalent, on
what words have the nearest meaning to it so as to properly translate the thought of the
original. This kind of decision-making is done that he unconsciously is giving color in most
instances his personality, experiences, tastes and etc.
It is the duty of of the translator to give the readers the thought that the author
wanted to convey through the use of suitable words and style or the ways it is presented. In
literary works, if the author has been direct, thrifty, careful, happy or sad, rash, or
wandering in his presentation, the translation must have any of these mentioned
characteristics of the author.
Since we sided with the belief of Savory that language transalation is an art, it simply
means that it does not choose as to when. In other words, it can be said that this kind of job
is neverending; it is not that a piece or article translated today may not be translated again.
It could be that a translation is effective because it is suited to its readers at a given time.
But, after many years the next generation readers might need a new translation suited to
thier time.
Let us be clear, however, that it does not mean to modernize the characters and
setting; Maria Clara, for example, of Noli Mi Tangere will be wearing a mini-skirt or her
hairstyle will be portrayed like Demi Moore. What is meant are the choices of words, the
way it was presented. Because if it is true that there is a change or additional in meaning of
the word while langauge is continously in progress, other than the fact that there are words
that fade and die as time goes by and replaced with words that suit in the present time,
there is no end indeed in the translation of a literary piece for as long as it is present in
literature.
Therefore a translator is just like a painter where at present there are more who can
draw an image of a Belen does not mean we no longer need it again. Every year, when
Christmas approaches we can prove that the Belen comes out in various ways of a portrait,
but with single message- the birth of Jesus. The Bible had different translation as time goes
 53
4 | Translation

by for various reasons. And one of the reasons is the kind of language use in the previous
translation could no longer be understood by the current readers. One good example here
is the classic translation of English Bible.
There might come a time that the “Mahal na Pasyon” written by Fr. Mariano Pilapil,
for example, might have a translation suited for today’s generation.
Therefor, if we go back to the question whether language translation is a science or
an art, either which of the two sided by the reader or the leraner is not important in the
principles in langauge translation. Be it a science or an art, what is important for all is the
knowledge for the students on this issue to help in making a translation treated as an art or
science.
How the translator can make it as an art or science in his translation, this can be
compared with the principles in language translation which is usually opposite because
every translator has their own rules or principles.

Activity 4 -Class Participation- Write your answers in a one whole sheet of paper
(35 points)
1. With the concepts presented on the objectives of evaluation, present in a summarized
form your own understanding how the objectives of evaluation are set in the process
translation. (10 points)
2. List down new ideas you learned in Unit 4, comprehensively explain and
categorize it according to the three sub-topics presented. (15 points)
a. Objectives of Evaluation
b. Ways of Translating Texts
c. The Art of Translation and the Art of Editing
3. As a future translator, make your own checklist of evaluating your ouput.
(10 points)

Term Requirement: (50 points)

1. Look for a literary piece or written text in Filipino language with at least 500
words, then translate it to English language. Submit the copies of the SL text and the
TL text nn a piece of paper (encoded/ handwritten).
2. Read and audio record your tranaslated text, listen to it and assess. Once you are
confident with your output, finalize your audio record and translation, then submit.
3. Come up with a criteria/ rubrics in evaluating the text you just have translated.
Have it written in a tabular form on a piece of paper and submit.

Unit 4 Assessment
A link to access a 35-item quiz via google form will be announced a week after
all LP4 are received.
 54
4 | Translation

4.3 References
Almario, V. et al. (2003). Patnubay sa Pagsasalin; Anvil Publishing, Inc.
Alwazna, R. (2015). Translation Evaluation: The Suitability of the Argument
Macrostructure Model for the Assessment of Translated Texts across Different Fields.
Retrieved from: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/285628691
Batnag, A. et al. (2009) Teksbuk sa Pagsasalin. C and E Publishing Inc.
Buban, R. (2014). Ang Pagsasaling Teknikal: Pagsipat sa Praktika at Pagpapahalaga /
Technical Translation: Revisiting the Practice and Essentials. Retrieved from
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/316249602
Larson, M. (1998). Meaning-Based Translation. University Press of America. Inc.
Santiago, A. (2003). Sining ng Pagsasalin. Rex Bookstore, Inc.
Images:
https://www.linkedin.com/company/7brands
https://www.betranslated.com/blog/how-good-is-google-translate/
https://philadelphusmagazine.wordpress.com/2014/11/13/interview-juliane-
house/

4.4 Acknowledgment

The images, tables, figures and information contained in this module were
taken from the references cited above