Abstract
BackgroundTranslation quality assessment (TQA) suffers from subjectivity in both neighboring disciplines: ‘TEFL’ and ‘Translation Studies, and more empirical studies are required to get closer to objectivity in this domain. The present study evaluated the quality of the written translation of TEFL students through three different approaches to translation quality assessment (TQA) in order to examine the efficiency and reliability of the three methods and ultimately suggest the most reliable one.MethodsThirty BA TEFL university students translated a text from English into Persian, and three raters scored the translated texts through three different methods of assessment.ResultsThe results of statistical analysis indicated that, the error analysis method B was more reliable than holistic method C, but was less reliable than combined method D.ConclusionsThat is, when we combined the results of both error analysis and holistic methods in a proportion of 70/30, the new combined error analysis-holistic method got a better reliability rating, and accurate results than holistic and analytic methods. Therefore, the combined method may be suggested as a reliable method for evaluating and scoring the TEFL students’ translations.
Highlights
Translation quality assessment (TQA) suffers from subjectivity in both neighboring disciplines: ‘teaching English as a foreign language (TEFL)’ and ‘Translation Studies, and more empirical studies are required to get closer to objectivity in this domain
Assessment and evaluation play an important role in teaching English as a foreign language (TEFL), because based on the reliable assessment, one can talk about the degree of the efficiency of the teaching methods and improvement of the language learners
D Method D is the combination of error analysis method B and holistic method C in a proportion of 70/30, that is, method B accounts for 70% of the total result and method C for the remaining 30%
Summary
That is, when we combined the results of both error analysis and holistic methods in a proportion of 70/30, the new combined error analysis-holistic method got a better reliability rating, and accurate results than holistic and analytic methods.
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
