The Impact of Teaching Methods Applied in Translation Courses on the Translation Proficiency Development of Student Majoring in English Language
الموضوعات : نشریه زبان و ترجمهMohammad Iman Askari 1 , Jahanbakhsh Nikoopour 2
1 - Ph.D. Candidate, Department of English Language Teaching, North Tehran Branch, Islamic Azad University, Tehran, Iran
2 - Department of English Language Teaching, North Tehran Branch, Islamic Azad University, Tehran, Iran
الکلمات المفتاحية: Methods of teaching translation, Translation courses, Translation proficiency development,
ملخص المقالة :
The study was aimed at investigating the effectiveness of methods of teaching Translation Courses (TCs) used by Iranian instructors on English-major students’ translation proficiency development. To this end, 156 homogeneous students were selected as the participants to undergo quantitative and qualitative data collection simultaneously through a convergent parallel mixed methods design. The data were collected using a sample language proficiency test (PET), a translation pre- & posttest, the Waddington TQA Ru- bric, and an interview as the instruments of the study. The quantitative data were analyzed using ANCOVA while the qualitative data were extracted through the procedure of content analysis by pin- pointing and condensing meaning units as well as codifying and sorting the commonalities out of the comments extracted from the responses to the interviews. Finally, the two data banks were reported via SPSS software. It was concluded that the modern methods of teaching TCs had a significant effect on students’ translation proficiency, the results of which were confirmed by the qualitative data analysis of the responses in the interview. The research findings contribute to translation studies via providing guide- lines and solutions for the instructors to apply appropriate methods and deal with the challenging aspects of teaching TCs.
Bekoff, M. (2002).Virtuous nature.New Scientist, 176, 34.
Berger, P. &Luckman, T (2008).Human ability in cultural Context. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Boehm, C. (2000). Conflict and the evolution of social control. In L. Katz (Ed.),
evolutionary origins of morality: Cross-disciplinary perspectives. UK:Thorverton Imprint Academic.
Calvin, W., &Bickerton, D. (2000).Lingua ex machine: Reconciling Darwin andChomsky with the human brain.Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Dawkins, R. (1976). The selfish gene.Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
Dawkins, R. (1982). The extended phenotype: the long reach of the gene. Oxford,UK: Oxford University Press.
Deacon, T. (1997).The symbolic species: The co-evolution of language and thehuman brain. London, UK: Penguin Books.
Eysenck, H. J. &Eysenck, M. W. (1985).Personality and individual differences: A natural Science approach. N. Y: Plenum.
Hamilton, W. (1964).The genetical evolution of social behavior, I and II.Journal ofTheoretical Biology, 7, 1-52.
Howard, R. W (1993). On What intelligence is. British Journal of Psychology, 84, 27-37.
Hurford, J. (1998). The emergence of syntax.In J. Hurford, M. Studdert-Kennedy, & C. Knight (Eds.), Approaches to the evolution of language.Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
Hurford, J., Studdert-Kennedy, M., & Knight, C. (Eds.). (1998). Approaches to the
evolution of language. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press. Jackendoff, R. (2002). Foundations of language: Brain, meaning, grammar, evolution. New York: New York: Oxford University Press.
Jensen, A. R. (2005). Individual differences in social paradigm.In P.A Vernon (Ed.), Speed of information processing and intelligence. Norwood, NJ: Ablex.
Kirby, S. (2000).Syntax without natural selection: How compositionality emerges from vocabulary in a population of learners. In C. Knight, M. Studdert- Kennedy, & J. Hurford (Eds.), The evolutionary emergence of language: social function and the origins of linguistic form. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
Knight, C., Studdert-Kennedy, M., &Hurford, J. (Eds.). (2000). The evolutionary emergence of language: social function and the origins of linguistic form.Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
Macky, A. and Gass, S. M. (2005).Second Language Research, methodology and design.Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc., Publishers.
Maynard-Smith, J., &Szathmary, E. (1999).The origins of life.London: Oxford University Press.
Pinker, S. (1994).The language instinct.London, UK: Penguin Books.
Poulshock, J. W. (2006). Language and morality: Evolution, altruism, and linguistic Moral mechanisms. (Ph.D. Dissertation).
Robinson, S. L., & Bennett, R. J. (1997). Workplace deviance: Its definition,its manifestations, and its causes. Research on Negotiations in Organizations, 6, 3–27.
Sober, E., & Wilson, D. (1998). Unto Others: The Evolution and Psychology of
Sober, E., & Wilson, D. (2000). Summary of unto others:The evolution and psychology of unselfish behavior. In L. Katz (Ed.), Evolutionary origins of morality: Cross-disciplinary perspectives. UK: Thorverton Imprint Academic.
Teachman, J. D. (1980). Analysis of population diversity.Sociological Methods and Research, 8(3), 341-362.
Thierry, B. (2000). Building elements of morality are not elements of morality. In
L. Katz (Ed.), Evolutionary origins of morality: cross-disciplinary perspectives. UK: Thorverton; Imprint cademic.
Trivers, R. (1985). Social evolution.Menlo Park, California: The Benjamin / Cummings Publishing Company.
Wastson, D. (1989). Health complains stress and distress. Psychological Review, 96, 3245-354.
Wray, A. (2002). Dual processing in protolanguage; Performance without competence. In A. Wray (Ed.), The transition to language. London: Oxford University Press
