Training Translators
Do translators need to be educated in the art and science of translation? Is it
possible to train a translator in an academic setting? Is doing so worthwhile, from
the translator's perspective or from that of a potential employer? The current state
of affairs in the translation industry in the United States would suggest that academic
training is valued but hardly considered essential. On the other hand, a translator
with academic training often does find entering the market easier and can command
higher salaries or rates, as well as possibly advance in a corporate setting more
rapidly. Weighed against the time and money involved in getting academic training,
however, the untrained translator may actually do better. So let's take a close
look at the nature of training translators, consider what might make for a quality
academic training environment, and assess the value of such training.
Academic Training in Principle
The basic approach to academic training for translators seems to remain unchanged
from the time of the School of Scribes in ancient Egypt. Student translators are
given short texts to translate, then their translations are evaluated by teachers,
and finally the translations are discussed in great depth and detail among all the
students in the class and the teacher. Variations occur in the length of the assignment,
though 500 to 1000 words per week seems to be average, the subject matter in the
assignment, including but not necessarily limited to business, financial, legal,
medical, computer-related, or political material, and the direction of the translation,
with some programs requiring students to translate both into and out of their native
language, while others choose to have students translate exclusively into their
native language.
Academic training rarely if ever includes any theoretical work, though this could
well be a result of the relative lack of material to present to students; a cogent
theory of translation remains to be developed. Academic training also tends to limit
or exclude entirely matters related to terminology research and development, glossary
or term database design and maintenance, or various computer technologies, running
the gamut from basic word processing to localization of software source code. Academic
training also rarely if ever includes content courses on, for instance, law, medicine,
computer science, or other subjects that translators inevitably translate material
on but almost have extensive, in-depth, formal academic training in. Last, academic
training seems to stay away from the development or writing skills or cultural sensitivity,
two areas which translators have to deal with every day of their working lives.
In essence, translation training then consists of giving students plenty of time
to do very short translation assignments, then analyzing those assignments in every
last detail, and ultimately discussing the nature of their work, often with an extreme
focus on student errors, in great depth. In other words, students get to make mistakes
that have no ramifications in their professional careers, and presumably they learn
from their mistakes, as well as acquiring familiarity with terminology and various
kinds of source material.
This system of education for translators places an extreme emphasis on the teaching
faculty, making them responsible for selecting texts that reflect what the translation
industry is currently asking translators to work on, evaluating student translations
in a manner consistent with what the industry expects a translator to be able to
produce, and discussing all student errors and other textual problems so as to guide
the student toward developing translation skills that will meet with the industry's
demands and expectations.
Faculty must therefore be very proficient translators themselves, as well as capable
educators. Needless to say, not everyone can teach, regardless of how well they
know their subject matter. Merely possessing a mastery of a subject does not qualify
someone to teach it. Teaching is a very difficult task. Imparting knowledge and
experience to another person requires not only mastery of the subject matter, but
also mastery of the communication of knowledge.
Teaching translation is a very labor-intensive process, since each student's weekly
assignments have to be evaluated in great detail and with extreme precision. In
addition, course materials should not be recycled; the translation profession change
too quickly to allow last year's translation texts to be used more than perhaps
a couple of years in a row. Having students work on patents from five years ago
may mean they will not learn the currently accepted format for a patent; having
students work on a hardware or software manual from even three years ago will deny
them much needed current terminology and subject knowledge. The same obviously holds
for all subject areas. And by extension, the same will hold for any tests the students
take.
Translation faculty must as a result have considerable time and enthusiasm for their
subject, as well as intimate familiarity with the current state of affairs in the
industry. This does not mean, however, that faculty should be working professionals
who just happen to teach a few classes here and there. Students require and deserve
full-time attention, meaning that faculty at best should be doing part-time work
as freelance translators. As an aside, I do teach one translation course each spring
(entitled "The Business of Translation"); one of the reasons I do not
teach more than that is my freelance business doesn't allow me to. Covering the
demands of my clients and the needs of the students in that one class pretty much
absorbs all my working time. To teach more than that would, for me at least, be
irresponsible.
Finally, we have the issue of the administration of a translation program. Again,
the people involved in running the program should have experience in the translation
profession, as well as considerable ability to manage and oversee an academic program.
This may seem obvious, but it bears mentioning because the supply of such people
is sufficiently small that some programs do not have such people in their administrative
ranks. While having any administrator is arguably better than canceling a program,
the limitations of someone who does not know the translation profession in a position
of authority in a translation program can lead to misunderstandings about the time,
money, and academic resources (e.g.: dictionaries, glossaries, software, etc.) that
such a program requires.
Is This The Best We Can Do?
The above approach has been in use for thousands of years, give or take a bit of
technology. The Thebes School of Scribes did not have the Internet, word processors,
or MAT to contend with, but their methodology was roughly the same. Though I agree
that practice is an essential element of training translators, I am convinced that
other forms of learning should play an integral role.
First, the volume of translation. Students who spend one or two years translating
a thousand words per week are wholly unprepared for the daily demands of professional
translation. The average translator produces in the neighborhood of two- to three-thousand
words per day, with many doing considerably more. While students should certainly
on occasion study one short text very intently as an exercise in learning how to
analyze and parse a text, then create the best translation possible, they should
also work on translating a normal day's work for a practicing translator.
Students need to acquire the speed and accuracy of a professional. This includes
learning to type quickly, knowing how to work efficiently in current software applications
and on the Web, and understanding what to do when a text does not yield to translation,
whether because the printing is illegible or the writing is unintelligible. Translators
who lack these skills will find the market unwelcoming and uncomfortable.
Translation students also need to become very comfortable in the subject field or
fields they will work in. Because most translators lack a thorough education in
anything other than their languages, part of their education should include subject
knowledge. This cannot come directly from the translation texts themselves, as the
students simply do not generally translate texts of sufficient length or depth.
Developing a thorough understanding of computer science by reading 1,000 words per
week on the subject is just not possible. So content coursework, presented in both
of the student's languages should be integrated into any translation program.
What's more, professional translators specialize. No translator works in every subject
area; it is simply not practical to try to develop that much expertise and linguistic
knowledge in that many subjects. Translators generally focus on a few related subject
areas, depending on their backgrounds and interests, then cultivate their specialized
knowledge and language skills so as to tailor them for translation in those fields.
The same should occur in a translation program. After an introductory period of
basic translation exercises and development of secondary skills like word processing
and terminology management, students should pick a subject area and focus on that.
A translation program should therefore offer academic tracks—such as in medicine,
law, social science, natural science, finance, computers/localization, the specific
breakdown does not matter—then work through both a concerted study of general
material on those subjects, in both of the student translator's languages, of course,
as well as translation exercises based on what the market is having translators
do in those areas. This will not only develop their subject knowledge to a point
at which they can confidently approach a text, but will also provide them with the
terminology and knowledge of writing style necessary to create an accurate, readable
translation.
Subject fields should be selected based on what the market is demanding from translators.
Certain fields, like computers/localization, are strong enough for all major languages
that they should exist for all translation students. It may not be practical, however,
to have certain translation languages working on certain subjects. For instance,
how much medical research or fundamental science is done in Vietnam? Certainly some,
but not enough to justify a Vietnamese-English translation student specializing
in that area. The task of the translation school is to prepare translation students
for the real world, so subject areas should be selected and developed in accordance
with the market in the translation industry.
Therefore, having all students in all language combinations work through the same
set of exercises in broad categories of experience is not practical or fair to the
students. A student with no interest in financial translation who is studying a
language combination with minimal demands for such work will not benefit from such
efforts as much as she might from doing more in an area that interests her and is
in demand. Similarly, the market rarely if ever asks for translators who simply
have a smattering of ability and familiarity with a wide range of texts, so graduating
students who fit that description is less efficient than graduating students who
can handle one subject very well.
Next, technology. Different programs integrate various computer technologies and
translation tools into the curriculum, with each language combination often functioning
as a separate entity, and therefore each student getting a different level of training
with these technologies. All students need to know how to do high-level word processing,
basic DTP and HTML work, as well as deal with terminology and glossary databases,
and MAT/MT tools. These technologies should be introduced through special classes,
of course, but then should be a part of the daily translation curriculum. Students
should be expected to create complex word-processing documents for their translations,
to do database and terminology projects, to deal with HTML files, and even to open
and translate text strings within software code. This will prepare them for the
demands of the translation industry. Anything less will simply give them more to
learn after they graduate, defeating the purpose of the training they have paid
for and worked through.
Finally, theory. I realize there is as yet no well-developed theory of translation,
but there is certainly enough theory within linguistics and psychology on the subjects
of language, terminology, and such that translation students would benefit from
an introduction to this kind of material as a way to ground them in what it is they
are doing and give them some broad, general ideas of how to approach a text and
translate it well. Too much theory is unnecessary, and each program, depending on
its duration, will have to decide how much is sufficient. But no theory at all will
leave translation students without a model to use to unify their knowledge and develop
a deeper understanding and appreciation for their work.
Special Considerations
There are within teaching translators some particular issues that bear mentioning.
First has to do with student background. In other words: what is the proper academic
background for a student of translation to have? At the very least, most translation
students seem to benefit from having had formal training in their foreign languages,
including intensive study of reading and writing. Also, extensive experience writing
in their native languages is very beneficial, whether had through courses such as
a college English class or its equivalent or the study of journalism, such experience
prepares the future translator to write quickly and effectively in a variety of
styles.
The second issue is whether to train translators by having them work into their
native and foreign languages, or just into their native language. Since virtually
no translator actually translates professionally into any language other than their
native language (their A language), formal study by actually translating material
into translators' foreign language or languages (their B languages) seems like a
less than effective use of time, not only for the students but also for the teachers.
Rather than having a translation student struggle to create a good translation in
the B language, the student would be better served by developing more insight and
understanding into the B languages through reading, terminology acquisition, cultural
training, and subject area familiarization. In the same vein, the teachers would
have more time to focus on nurturing in their students translation and writing skills
that the students will use as professionals, rather than merely correcting and explaining
the subtleties of idiom and usage in the students' B language.
Related to this issue is the nature of classroom assignments. Having all the students
work on the same assignment often results in the students collaborating to produce
their individual translations. Non-native speakers may have their work corrected
by native speakers, terminology research becomes a shared endeavor, and background
research is done in teams. While this situation is not inherently bad, it does limit
how well faculty can judge individual student's ability and progress, not to mention
creating problems in grading. So I suggest that at least some translation assignments
be similar to real-world assignments: have the students work on a large document,
with each student translating a portion of it. This way the students can still share
the burdern of terminology and background research but at the same time can meet
the challenge of crafting a good translation on their own.
Third is the faculty itself. Excellent faculty is vital in an academic undertaking
like training translators. The faculty should be experienced translators themselves,
having done work in the subject areas they plan to teach. Since continuity in training
is an essential element for the successful education of translators, the faculty
should make a long-term commitment to their institution and students, and conversely,
the administration should do likewise for its faculty. There are too many stories
of programs whose faculty changes in its entirety every year or two; the amount
of time and effort involved in such a change-over hinders student learning, wastes
limited resources in the translation program, and generally results in a reduction
of quality in the program. Solutions to these problems lie in the administration
of translation programs, a subject beyond the scope of this article. It is merely
my hope that people involved with the administration of these programs will try
to see the effects of their actions from the students' perspective.
Finally comes the issue of graduation testing. Many programs require students to
pass a battery of graduation exams. This process seems a traditional element in
many forms of training, and perhaps is intended to serve as a form of licensure
or accreditation for alumni of the translation programs. I feel, however, that such
exams are a poor use of time and resources. Rather than devoting weeks to preparing
such exams, finding suitable material and testing sites, then implementing the exams,
and evaluating the results, the students should instead spend their time in the
classroom, undergoing nothing more than the routine testing that comprises a natural
part of all formal education. I have already written about the considerably difficulties
associated with creating and carrying out accreditation exams in a separate article
and am convinced that the same basic problems plague graduation exams. By the end
of a year or two of academic training, faculty should know if the students are or
are not ready to enter the profession and then advise the students accordingly.
To deny a student a certificate or diploma based solely on his or her performance
on one graduation exam seems unfair and counter-productive.
As an aside, some programs require translation students to do some form of project
for graduation, perhaps a lengthy translation of material the student is interested
in, research on terminology, the preparation of a glossary, or an investigation
into an important issue in the profession. Such endeavors, if relevant to the students'
overall studies, can enhance the students' understanding and preparation for a career
in translation, not to mention adding to the available resources within the translation
industry itself. So as long as such projects are integrated into the translation
program as a whole and are amply supported by the faculty and administration, precisely
defined in the curriculum, and recognized as a significant stage in the students'
training, such graduation projects will have value and should continue.
Can We Do It?
The basic problem facing any translation training program is money. Training translators
is very labor intensive and offers little in the way of economies of scale. In addition,
implementing some or all of the ideas above would only increase costs. And since
the translation profession does not offer particularly high income potential, tuition
costs must be kept under control. We have, as a result, a not inconsiderable problem,
one for which I have a few suggestions.
First and foremost, get the translation and localization industries involved. Many
translation vendors and agencies seem to want some form of translation accreditation
as a way to verify that a translator can actually translate. Graduation from a credible,
viable training program would serve this purpose. So the industry ought to consider
putting its money where its mouth is and contributing both in time and effort to
the training of translators. This can be done in a number of ways.
One, provide technology. More and more translation vendors, localization firms in
particular, want translators with very specific technical skills, such as facility
with MT and MAT systems, familiarity with programming languages like Java and C++,
skill with software like DTP packages and word-processors. Many of these organizations
have such software and the hardware to run it, often they have left-over systems
that no longer fill any need. These systems could be donated as an educational grant,
contributed as some form of technology transfer, or even sold at very low cost to
translation training programs.
Moreover, translation training programs would make outstanding beta test sites for
localization and MT/MAT products. A clean beta of the next version of Trados or
TM2 could be given a very extensive shake-down in a translation school, where students
would both learn about the systems and help improve them. This would not only provide
the students with training on the forthcoming systems, but would give the manufacturers
of these products a pool of highly capable linguists and translators as testers.
In addition, problems with interface design, the handling of terminology, and the
integration of terminology, translation memory, version control, and so forth would
also be addressed by precisely the people who will be using the systems. Perhaps
there is something about this idea that is not what it seems, but to me this appears
to be a classic case of win-win.
Two, provide educational grants or other support, in the form of scholarships, internships,
and even work-for-hire (that is, you work for us for 2 years after we pay for your
education, or something like that). Internships have so much obvious value, and
are a growing part of the relationship between industry and translation training
programs that little need be said about them here. Scholarships, a form of corporate
charity often discussed but infrequently implemented, represent a logical next step.
And work-for-hire, or whatever you want to call it, is a time-honored tradition
in many fields, so adding this option for the training of translators seems reasonable.
Second, there are the governments, federal and state, as well as various NGOs and
other international organizations. If the United Nations, the WTO, IMF, along with
the U.S. State Dept. and intelligence community, as well as various state governments
want good translators, they should contribute to the process of creating them. Again,
contributions here does not necessarily mean money. It can mean training materials
(what better way for a translation training program to get good study material than
to get it from the people who hire the graduates?); technology (as with industry,
these organizations often have equipment they just don't want or need; it might
as well go to good use rather than taking up space in landfills); and even people
(why not have full-time translators at these organizations be available, at least
occasionally, as advisors, consultants, or guest lecturers?). Again, the idea is
to get all parties involved to cooperate for each other's benefit.
There are undoubtedly many other ways to create mutually-beneficial relationships
between the programs that train translators and the businesses that employ them.
The point here is that both sides stand to benefit from active cooperation with
each other, and any idea that plays to so-called enlightened self-interest stands
a greater probability of being implemented. So if you are a part of a company that
hires or is looking to hire translators, consider contacting one of more of the
translation programs in the U.S. and contributing to the training of translators.
You will after all get what you pay for. And if you are involved in training translators,
I hope you will solicit the active participation of local companies that hire translators.
Thinking About it
Training translators is not an academic endeavor and should not be compared to Ph.D.
study in linguistics or literature. Instead, it is professional training, similar
perhaps to training computer programmers or accountants. While there are many programs
in the United States offering one form or another of such training, and this number
is rising, there are enough disgruntled graduates of such programs and confused
perspective students that a few words on how to choose the right program seems appropriate.
First, talk to the current students and recent graduates. See what they say about
the program. Make certain you are not getting propaganda or the party line by talking
to a few people. Read articles about the profession in general (this series might
be useful in this regard) so that you can ask intelligent questions and understand
the answers you are given. Also talk to potential employers, be they translation
agencies and vendors, localization firms, or the government, to find out what kind
of training you should have.
Second, talk to the faculty and administration. Do not be shy, coy, or cute. You
are interviewing them, and the best way to avoid disappointment and frustration
in the future is to ask the bold questions now. Query them about every aspect of
the program: admissions requirements, graduation requirements, faculty backgrounds,
continuity in the faculty, campus language resources, career placement resources,
and statistics on what graduates are doing. Do not accept vague generalizations
like "our faculty are very committed." You want specific numbers like
"Professor X has taught here for three years after fifteen years in technical
translation" and "All of last year's graduates are now employed, with
an average starting salary of $36,500." If you don't want to make a mistake,
you have to ask these kinds of questions and demand precise, specific, concrete
answers.
Third, consider the structure and nature of the program. How long does it take?
What kind of degree or certification do you receive at the end? Is that degree or
certification respected in the industry? What classes will you take? Does the coursework
reflect your interests while giving you the training you need to succeed in the
translation industry? Coursework should ideally include some formal training in
theory and terminology, practice translating documents into your native language
in subject areas that the industry currently hires people to work in, practice using
current MT/MAT technology and other software tools common in translation work, and
at least one class on the practical side of being a translator, in other words a
class that covers business and other professional issues.
Finally, weigh carefully the benefits of the program against the costs. Try to figure
out if the program truly advances your career enough to justify the investment of
time and money. A translation program prepares you to be a translator, and not a
whole lot else. You should therefore be quite comfortable in your decision to enter
the translation profession and rather convinced that the training program will accelerate
your entry and progress. You can always wait an extra year to start if you are uncertain;
you cannot get back your tuition or the time you spent in the program.
Final Remarks
This article is not meant to be a commentary on existing translation programs or
any individual at any such program. Instead I hope it provides some insight into
the issues surrounding the training of translators, particularly the classroom methodologies
in use and what might be implemented in the future, as well as means to make such
programs affordable and maximally beneficial to the students.
I hope this article is particularly useful to people involved in training translators
and to individuals considering attending a training program. I would welcome comments,
corrections, or suggestions from current students and graduates of the existing
programs, from faculty and administration at such programs, and from employers who
have hired graduates of such programs or have some formal relationship, whether
through internships, technology transfers, or financial support, with such programs.
Finally, I hope this article will spur interest in creating better training programs
for translators and raising the overall level of translation quality in the industry.