Documenti di Didattica
Documenti di Professioni
Documenti di Cultura
beautifully phrased
May want to just get ideas on paper to begin with
Then rework for clarity of expression and
argument
Writing is a craft, not an inspired act
5
Writing for a Humanities dissertation
Do not just give the outcome of your thinking
i.e. the decisions you have made with respect to
the scope of your topic, the precise research
question, your aims
Process oriented
Need to show your thought and decision
making processes
Demonstrates you ability for critical thinking
and evaluation
6
20/08/2010
2
Thinking
Have phases when we feel we are stagnating,
not doing any writing
Perfectly normal
Process of thinking
Allow it to happen
Crucial part of research and writing
7
The literature review proper
Functions:
1. Describe the body of theoretical work which
exists on your topic
2. Locate yourself within the context of existing
knowledge
3. Develop your methodological approach
8
Describe the body of theoretical work
which exists on your topic
Identify the relationship between your own work to the existing
body of work
WHAT:
how much literature is there?
Is it useful?
What is not useful? And why not?
Why is the useful material relevant to you?:
Does it address the topic in the same way that you want to do it?
Is it in the languages / that are relevant to you?
Is there useful literature in related areas?
What are they, why are they useful?
What can you use and what do you need to disregard?
9
HOW
start off with a paragraph which describes how
much, how little literature there is in general
terms
summarise the literature (all of it) in one
paragraph / sentence which is not useful and give
overarching reason
summarise in one paragraph / sentence the
literature which was useful and give a general
reason why
then you go into detail for your methodological
approach
10
Develop your methodological
approach
What
Identify the aspects / approaches / ideas /
notions from the theoretical literature which
will help you to develop a method of
producing an answer to the question you are
posing with your project
11
HOW
^ideas and then
discuss in detail the bits which are valuable to
you and why; what are you going to do with them
This discussion must ALWAYS be related to your
own topic
/
unless it is considered generally that this idea is
the norm and you have very good reason to
deviate from it
12
20/08/2010
3
What not to do:
Do not list all the literature you have read
Do not describe the content of all the literature
you have read
Do not just describe the content of the literature
you are using you must EVALUATE it
Do not include anything for which you cannot
establish a link to your topic
Do not copy from the literature without
acknowledging your sources even if you are
referring to ideas which you are paraphrasing
13
What to do:
Be transparent i.e. explain why you are using
/ excluding something give the reasons
Explain in simple language but use the
metalanguage
14
What is the methodology?
Literature review and methodology is the
dissertation
Literature review = ingredients
Methodology = instructions what you do
with the ingredients / how you use them
15
Interconnectedness
Introduction, literature review and
methodology are closely linked (may even be
all in one chapter)
Blueprint of your dissertation
Once thought through and written, the rest is
fairly easy
Research question, aims, chapter outline,
literature review and methodology
interconnected
16
Checking and re-drafting
You will redraft your research question, aims and
methodology several times in response to your on-
going research
Check that your
research question links to your aims (and vice versa)
aims link to your chapters which chapter addresses
which aim?
methodology meets the requirements of each of your aims
you may have different methodological approaches to
cover different aims
Literature review covers all relevant aspects and links
appropriately to your methodology
17
Supporting functions of the
literature review
The Literature review can:
suggest ideas for research problems
identify theories that can be applied or tested
suggest methodological approaches
explain data-gathering techniques and instruments
provide typologies and taxonomies for classifying data
illustrate ways of interpreting research results
show ways of presenting the completed research project
(Thomas & Brubaker, 30-4)
See your dissertation handbook for further information on the
literature review
18
8/20/2010
1
Annotated translation
dissertation option
Contents of annotated translation
dissertation
The annotated translation with reflective commentary consists of:
Source text: 5,000 words
Translation (target text)
Reflective commentary in English including research and documentation: 5,000 words
Appendices with research data
This contains all texts referred to, parallel texts (if used, they need to be discussed)
List of References
This must contain all and only the material cited in your essay and be representative of the field.
Please make sure you formulate your Reference list and in-text citations correctly. You will lose
points if you do not. See Pears and Shields (2005) for guidance.
Statement
//
that I did not use any publications other than those cited in the introduction, the research paper
/
18
8/20/2010
4
Transfer
Field land law/conveyancing
Mode written to be read
Tenor formal, impersonal. Evidenced by: -
defined terms, capitalisation, avoidance of
personal pronouns in favour of role
identifiers, avoidance of colloquialisms,
formulaic language, word strings etc
Cohesion
Report
Very little ellipsis or substitution
Lots of repetition, little use of pronouns
Lots of domain specific lexis
Lots of references to other documents
Conjunctions, mixture of simple and
complex, with former predominating
Transfer
Hardly any punctuation
Very little use of pronominals
Significant use of repetition
Very little if any ellipsis or substitution
Word strings strings of near synonyms
D
>
Many complex subordinating conjunctions
21
Syntax and punctuation
Report
Standard sentence length and structure
Transfer
Excessively long sentence structures
Minimal use of punctuation (except
parentheses)
Archaic syntactic structures
Performative
Lexis
Both documents have lots of domain specific
terminology
Both documents avoid colloquial or figurative
language
Transfer has much higher proportion of
archaisms, formulaic language, performative
language
23
Potential translation problems
Different purpose and background knowledge of
recipient in the two texts
Both documents very domain and jurisdiction specific
possible lack of equivalents in TT jurisdiction
Formatting of both documents might be different from
typical format of corresponding documents in TT
Need to break syntax down in transfer document
Problem of word strings
Problem of repetition
Problem of archaisms
24
8/20/2010
5
Overall issues to be aware of with
this dissertation option
Group aspects of the commentary under headings rather than going through each
section of the chosen text and discussing each aspect in turn in relation to each
section
Do not spend time discussing an aspect of the text which is not problematic or of
interest from a translation point of view
Sub headings can be useful, no need to avoid
This is not a research dissertation in the sense of requiring you to carry out a study,
so do not follow typical research dissertation format of abstract, literature review,
research question statement, research methodology etc
Normal academic referencing conventions still apply here . Use in-text short citation
and full referencing in reference list at the end of the dissertation. Only refer to texts
cited in the main body of your work. Ref-works is a useful tool to use.
Proofreading very important. If possible get it proofread by a native English
speaker friend/colleague.
Include parallel texts and texts referred to for illustration purposes in an appendix
Remember to back translate any examples into English
Exercise and checklist
Element of analysis
Comment on texts provided
Context and description
x Subject matter
x Author
x Flexibility
x Jurisdiction
x Purpose
x Presupposed knowledge of
recipient
Brief and costing
x Possible circumstances of
translation/s
x Possible purpose
x Possible end user/s
x Difficulties impacting on
costing?
Format
Exercise and checklist
x Layout
x Headings?
x Optical signals?
x Pictorial elements?
Structure
x Document/s independent or
embedded in larger
document/s?
x Is there a standard format for
this genre? Does this
document comply with this?
Register
x Field?
x Tenor?
x Mode?
Cohesion
x Ellipsis?
x Substitution?
x Reference?
x Conjunctions?
x Lexis?
Punctuation and syntax
Exercise and checklist
x Overuse /underuse of
punctuation?
x Punctuation use typical or
not of genre?
x Sentence structure
x Sentence length
x Word order
x Archaic syntax?
Lexis
x Formulaic language?
x Archaisms?
x Borrowing or words derived
from other languages?
x High degree of domain
specific/technical
terminology?
x Figurative language?
x Degree of formality?
Module 8
Dissertation wor kshop
Option A: Eval uation of data and constr uction of argument
x ppt lecture notes
Option B: constr ucti ng the reflective component / commentary
x ppt lecture notes
x text for translation brief
1
Dissertation workshop:
Evaluation of materials Writing up -
Revision criteria
2
Results
linked to the original question posed
are the outcome of the research conducted
results are produced by the method of
research used and argued for in the
methodology
3
Results -2
discussion of results needs to be closely
linked to what you set out to do
relate back to your aims and your
methodology
what did you say you were going to achieve
and how did you say you were going to go
about it?
4
Evaluation
do the results support your thesis, are they vague /
inconclusive?
if they support:
any statement made must be supported with reference to
your own research results or the literature
you must evaluate your results with respect to your thesis
and aims
Establish relevance to professional translation practice
how do your results support translation work, professional
translators, students
5
Uncertain, inconclusive results
if there are uncertain areas in your results or
they are inconclusive:
do not attempt to hide it / gloss over it or
not address it
you must discuss it and show how you dealt
with it
go back and see whether your methodology
is appropriate
6
Inconclusive results
do you need to do some more reading?
do you need to review your approach?
are there additional questions you can ask?
can you interpret the results with reference
to additional ways of thinking about your
topic?
2
7
Evaluation of inconclusive results
if your results do not at all support your original
thesis:
this is an outcome do not attempt to hide it
you must discuss it and evaluate why the outcome
is completely opposite to what you expected
you may need to go back to the literature and see
whether different approaches would have helped
(evaluate whether your methodology was
inappropriate)
8
Non` - results
it may be that non-results are a positive`
outcome i.e. your study proves that
something is not` signiIicant, marked,
different etc
you must evaluate this outcome with respect
to translation studies
what effects does this have for translation
work?
9
Recursiveness of research
research is like a spiral rarely linear progression
you constantly revisit areas you have worked on
before and reconsider them in the light of your
outcomes
you may need to go back to your reading and find
more approaches
you may need to reconsider / rewrite your
methodology
you may need to reformulate your aims
10
Reformulation / review
if this is the case, write it up: it is an
important part of your research method,
process and outcomes
you will not be penalised for such
reconsiderations but rewarded for it
you will be penalised if you do not address
these issues, if you attempt to slide over
them
11
Relevance for translation profession
in your discussion of results, you must
establish a link to translation,
evaluate what effects the outcome of your
work have for practical translation work
it is a reflection on how theoretical
investigation supports the practical work of
the professional translator
Adds to the resources` in legal translation
12
Revision criteria
1. Focus of research, structure of project,
appropriateness of material, resources
2. Methodology
3. Scientific weight / impact
4. Coherence of argument / relevance of
information /correctness
5. Communication and presentation
3
13
Focus of research, structure of
project
Is this project tightly focused or is it too general?
Does it establish a coherent thesis, develop
appropriate aims?
Is the structure meaningful, coherent, do all parts
follow each other logically or are there jumps?
Are there passages which should have been in a
different chapter?
14
Appropriateness of material,
resources
Is the raw data (texts, translations, parallel texts)
relevant to the topic?
Are there sufficient texts to substantiate the
argument, or to develop a problem/thesis out of?
Is the secondary literature consulted relevant and
appropriate?
Is the literature review complete` or are there
important contributions missing?
Is work included that is not relevant, misleading?
15
Scientific weight / impact
How does the topic relate to research in translation studies?
Does the project address something where there is a
perceived / real gap or is it just another study on an aspect
well covered?
Is the argument, content, thesis derivative or are there
original observations, comments, elements in it?
Is the discussion relevant or entirely descriptive, anecdotal
and/or does not contribute to an understanding of the
chosen aspect of translation studies?
16
Impact - argument
Could existing literature (and to what extent) be
used to develop the argument was it necessary to
transIer`, adapt theories, strategies etc to develop
solutions?
The more original`, the more had to be
developed, the more credit, even if perhaps
comments appear somewhat less polished than
comparable discussions where there is ample
literature available.
Is the discussion entirely descriptive or are there
analytical, evaluative, original elements to it?
17
Methodology
Does the chosen approach make sense with
respect to the topic of research?
Is it described and explained properly (i.e. is
a rationale given for choice of
methodology)?
Is it applied appropriately, thoroughly and
consistently or does the project deviate from
what is outlined at the beginning?
18
Fine-tuning methodology
If there are problems with the methodology, have
they been addressed, evaluated and
recommendations made?
Was it necessary to develop a questionnaire,
survey etc to fulfil the aims outlined for the
project?
Was there awareness of this need, was it carried
out appropriately? If not, was the need addressed
and identified as an area for future research?
4
19
Coherence of argument / relevance
of information /correctness
Does the argument make sense and is it developed in a
logical, meaningful way, making each step transparent and
providing relevant information to substantiate points
made?
Are there digressions, irrelevant points / paragraphs or
does everything relate to the topic of research and the aims
outlined at the beginning?
Are there factual mistakes, misinterpretations of the data,
wrong conclusions drawn? Is the relevant literature used to
develop the argument and support it?
Are there gaps, issues not addressed, inconsistencies?
20
Presentation and communication
Is the language tight, concise, cohesive or is it
loose, digressing, irrelevant?
Is correct and appropriate terminology used?
Does it address the issues using the metalanguage
or is the discussion conducted in general and
descriptive language?
Is it appropriately formal, academic, non-
judgmental, objective` but transparent?
8/20/2010
1
Dissertation workshop
Annotated translation II
Questions
1. Does the annotation have to cover
all the issues of note in the text or
just a sample of the main issues and
if the sample route is correct, do we
have to include an appendix with all
issues of that type?
Q 1 answer
You need to classify the types of key and
representative problems encountered in the
text, and then select prime examples of
each to comment on. Up to you how you do
so and whether you choose to use an
appendix with wider examples YOU ARE
THE AUTHOR OF YOUR OWN DISSERTATION,
AND THESE CHOICES ARE FOR YOU TO MAKE
YOURSELF THERE IS NO PRESCRIPTIVE
RUBRIC ON THIS OCCASION
2. How do we identify problem areas
in the text? There is no line
numbering but do we highlight them
using academic footnote numbering?
Q 2 answer
This is entirely up to your own judgment. There are
various possible options and you can choose from
these or devise your own method. Key is to
explain and justify your selected method. Again,
remember that this is YOUR work, and so
editorial decisions are entirely up to you.
Possible options: -
Line numbering
Highlighting with academic footnote numbering
Colour coding according to problem type
3. Can we see an example of a full
annotated translation and analysis so
we can get an idea of what it should
look like?
8/20/2010
2
Q 3 answer
/
this dissertation on this course. However, they key thing to
note is that you have covered all the individual elements of
the dissertation in your various different assignments: -
terminology research, documentation of resources,
commentary writing on register, cohesion and pre-translation
analysis generally, annotations in relation to translation
problems, and bibliography.
4. In the annotations, are we
supposed to reference theorists as
we have done in the assignments? (ie
conceptual gap (Newmark) Does it
also follow that we would also have
to identify the theorists behind any
translation solutions we use (ie
substitution, transference) or is it
sufficient to identify the solution?
Q 4 answer
As this is an academic piece of writing, it follows that you
need to cite in text and reference at the end all sources
used in accordance with Harvard conventions. Theorists
should therefore be cited and referenced accordingly. As
regards translation solutions, it is not strictly speaking
necessary to reference theorists behind particular
translation solution terminology ( eg transference) BUT it
might be a good idea to do so as different theorists use
terms in different ways, so transference according to
Baker might not apply to the same concept as
transference according to Munday, for example.
5. Do you want us to deal with industry
specific jargon in any specific way? For
example, collocational usage common
within a field that can be derived from
comparable texts how are we to
reference this, or do we need to make any
reference at all?
Q 5 answer
Again, it is largely up to you how you deal with this. Use of parallel
texts is encouraged, and these must of course be attached as
appendices and properly referenced. If you use parallel texts, you
must make it clear in the main body of your text how you have used
them, as the appendices support or act as examples for points
made in the main body of the text. You will need therefore to use
highlighting or colour coding to pick out the sections or terms in the
parallel text that you are using to illustrate your points in your
discussion. They key thing to remember is that it must be
transparent to the reader what you are using the parallel text for, or
to examplify.
6. How do we deal with terminology?
Should we use entry forms? If so is it
better to put them in the main body
of the text or in appendices at the
end? How do entry forms count
towards the word count?
8/20/2010
3
Q 6 answer
It is largely up to you how you deal with terminology and whether you
decide to use entry forms or not. If you do, then it is probably
advisable to insert these as an appendix, as otherwise they will
interrupt the flow of the argument in your discussion; however, if
there are only a few entry forms, then you might want to include
them in the main body of the discussion. If they are in the appendix,
then they are not included in the word count, but equally they are not
deemed part of the main argument and will not therefore be marked
so carefully. If they are in the main body of the text, then the
definitions and comments will be counted as part of the word count,
but not any of the other sections.
7. How are we supposed to structure the
commentary ? Is there a set structure?
Q 7 answer
As you might have guessed, there is no fixed structure to the commentary (for general formatting
instructions, see dissertation handbook) it us up to you how you structure the commentary, and
we looked at various options in the last workshop session. The point to emphasise is that what you
must NOT do is go through the text chronologically, commenting on each problem encountered in
order.
Personally my preferred structure would be: -
1. Contextualisation of the ST
2. Translation brief and costing
3. Pre-translation analysis ( could include contextualisation of ST and translation brief and
costing as first two sections)
4. Identification of translation problems and proposed solutions, categorised according to
nature of problem (eg non equivalence at word level, cultural problem, formatting issues,
register, collocational issues etc)
5. Documentation of research (could be incorporated in section on translation problems and
solutions
6. Bibliography
8. What is the point of the translation
brief and the costing? How specific
do I have to be with the costing?
Q 8 answer
This is the section of the dissertation which most
closely links to professional practice. The costing is
not really important per se, and does not need to
be accurate in terms of a precise figure. Its aim is
to make you think about the relative difficulty of
the text and whether there is anything about it
that would justify you in costing it more highly
than at a standard rate.
9. What should the brief address?
8/20/2010
4
Q 9 answer
Typical brief should address the following issues: -
t
What is the purpose of the translation?
Who is the commissioner?
When will the TT be used?
Who is the target readership/addressees?
What background knowledge do they have?
Will there be cultural difference?
Will there changes to the original text? (i.e. does the
translator have to intervene in order to fit the translation to
the purpose and the reader?)
Now look at the sample text and
accompanying brief
Task 1
In small groups, draft a translation
brief i) either for one of your
dissertation texts, or ii) for the text
you have been given. Make notes
and be prepared to present to the
rest of the class on the visualiser
Task 2
In small groups, discuss the structure of your
commentary. Do you all intend to structure it
in the same way or differently? Does the
nature of your text determine the structure in
any way?
Be prepared to explain your proposed structure
to the class.
23
Argument
Could existing literature (and to what extent) be used
to develop the argument was it necessary to
solutions?
d
the more credit, even if perhaps comments appear
somewhat less polished than comparable discussions
where there is ample literature available.
Is the discussion entirely descriptive or are there
analytical, evaluative, original elements to it?
24
Coherence of argument / relevance of
information /correctness
Does the argument in the commentary make sense and is it
developed in a logical, meaningful way, making each step
transparent and providing relevant information to
substantiate points made?
Are there digressions, irrelevant points / paragraphs or does
everything relate to the key aims of the commentary outlined
at the beginning?
Are there factual mistakes, wrong conclusions drawn? Is the
relevant literature used to develop the argument and support
it? Are all sources appropriately referenced?
Are there gaps, issues not addressed, inconsistencies?
8/20/2010
5
25
Presentation and communication
Is the language tight, concise, cohesive or is it loose,
digressing, irrelevant?
Is correct and appropriate terminology used?
Does it address the issues using the metalanguage or
is the discussion conducted in general and
descriptive language?
Is it appropriately formal, academic, non-judgmental,