Laura Anael Pérez Abreu
CHAPTER IV
REPORT OF THE RESEARCH DATA
4.1 Report of the quiz
According to Mejía (2005: 30-36) a quiz is an instrument for collecting data in
order to achieve an aim. This quiz has ten items (sentences). The first sentence
was translated by literal translation. All
Second sentence
students
answered
correctly.
Second
Wright
answer
2 people
sentence was translated by adaptation
technique. Just two people answered that
item correctly. The other sixteen people
16 people
Wrong
answer
Graph 4.1 Second sentence answers.
answered adaptation.
Continuing with analysis, third sentence was translated by borrowing technique;
fourteen people answered correctly, but the other four students got confused
and underlined calque. In fourth sentence modulation was used. However, just
Wright answer of third sentence.
Wrong answers of third sentence.
one boy underlined the
correct
answer.
Fourteen
students
underlined
transposition,
underlined
two
15
10
No.
of
students 5
0
Transposition
Literal
translation
Adaptation
Modulation
literal Graph 4.2 Third sentence answers.
translation and one underlined adaptation.
Sentence number five was translated by equivalence technique. But three
students underlined adaptation and one student did not answer.
On sixth sentence transference was used as translation technique, but four
guys underlined calque, two underlined literal translation, two answered
borrowing and one underlined two options (calque and borrowing). Just ten
guys choose the correct procedure. Seventh sentence was translated by
reduction technique. Although this technique is very graphic, four students
answered incorrectly by underlining modulation.
Eighth sentence was translated by Accepted translation. Five seniors
underlined equivalence, just one underlined modulation and one wrote
questions marks. At the end in the comments section, this student wrote that all
translations seemed to be literal translations. On sentence number nine,
synonymy technique was used. Two people underlined modulation, one
underlined adaptation, and two people wrote question marks. The last sentence
Grades
(number ten) was translated
by
explicitation
technique.
8
underlined
6
three
4
equivalence.
2
Students’ grades can be seen
0
Five
people
adaptation
and
underlined
in
graph
4.3.
The
No. Of
students
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
group
Grades over 10.
average was 6.8.
Graph 4.3 Grades.
4.2 Report of the translation
The text was a short part of just 90 words from the
‘The Simpson’ comic. The text was that short in
order to do not tire the students. However, some
subjects did not translate the whole text. Either way,
results were enough to analyze their answers.
Figure 4.1 The Simpson.
‘The Simpson’ comic in English was chosen
because colloquial words are naturally within the text. Translation of audience,
tent, put on, show, smelly, honey, and stupid are the words that are going to be
analyzed. For analyzing this translation, a checklist was needed.
The checklist was a sheet of paper with 10 items. Translation of each student
was inspected by those items. The group average was 7.3 which is not good at
all for seniors. Seven of twelve subjects translated audience as ‘audiencia’
which is not natural into Spanish. Tent was translated as ‘carpa’ ten times which
is the correct word into Spanish. Put on was translated as ‘montar’ which is a
little bit ambiguous. Also, it was
3
translated as ‘colocar’, ‘poner’,
2.5
‘instalar’, and ‘lanzar’. Colocar,
2
1.5
poner, and instalar are good
Student's
translation
1
0.5
options for ‘put on’, but lanzar is
0
Colocar
not a good translation; at least in
Poner
Instalar
Montar
Graph 4.4 Student’s translation for put on.
this context.
The word ‘show’ was seven times translated by borrowing technique. Actually,
this word is often used by Spanish speakers. Just tree people translated as
‘espectáculo’ which is the equivalent. The rest of the people omitted the word by
adapting the rest of the words.
For the word ‘smelly’ as can be seen
7
6
in
graph
4.5,
seven
people
5
4
translated
it
as
apestoso,
four
Student´s
translation
3
2
people omitted the word and just
one person wrote oloroso which is
1
0
Apestoso
Oloroso
Omission
not wrong, but some meaning is missed. Graph 4.5 Student’s translation for smelly.
Other word within the text
6
was honey. As seen in graph
4
4.6, there were so many
2
different versions for ‘honey’.
Student's translation
0
Owing to variety for this
word, it is hard to decide Graph 4.6 Student’s translation for honey.
which one is more accurate. However, according to the used style in Spanish
Simpson’s version, linda is the equivalent more used. Nevertheless, just one
boy used that equivalence. This boy later said is Simpson’s fan; that is why he
knows what kinds of words are commonly used.
The last word was stupid. While
10
stupid has not the same connotation
into Spanish contrasted with English,
ten
people
used
estúpido
for
8
6
Student's
version
4
2
translating this word. According to
0
Estúpido
Tonto
Bobo
cultural equivalence technique, the Graph 4.7 Student’s translation for stupid.
word ridículo would be more accurate. However, in graph 4.6 it can be seen
nobody translated it as that. Anyway, other two versions are okay.
4.3 Report of interview
For this interview, people from another group were needed. But just three girls
accepted to read the made translation and answer five questions. First, each
girl read Spanish version translated by literal translation. After this, the same girl
read another Spanish version, but translated by cultural equivalence procedure.
Later, two more girls repeated the same process.
After reading, girls were interviewed in Spanish because that was the language
of the text they read. First translation version was translated by literal
translation. As can be seen in table 4.1, 4.2, and 4.3 translation was not very
clear.
Interview No. 1
¿La ortografía era correcta?
No, no era correcta.
¿Era fácil de entender el texto?
No.
¿Era natural la forma en la que No, era confuso.
hablaban los personajes?
¿Te hizo reír el texto?
Más o menos.
¿Dirías que es una traducción?
Sí.
Table 4.1 Interview No. 1.
Interview No. 2
¿La ortografía era correcta?
No, le faltaban algunos signos.
¿Era fácil de entender el texto?
No.
¿Era natural la forma en la que No, parecía fingido.
hablaban los personajes?
¿Te hizo reír el texto?
No porque no me gusta el humor de “Los
Simpson”.
¿Dirías que es una traducción?
Sí.
Table 4.2 Interview No. 2.
Interview No. 3
¿La ortografía era correcta?
No.
¿Era fácil de entender el texto?
No.
¿Era natural la forma en la que No, se nota que es traducción.
hablaban los personajes?
¿Te hizo reír el texto?
No, me preocupé más por entender que
decía.
¿Dirías que es una traducción?
Sí.
Table 4.3 Interview No. 3.
After these interviews, girls read second Spanish version. This second version
was translated by cultural equivalence. As it can be seen in table 4.4, 4.5, and
4.6, the text kept its funny content and its naturalness is bigger.
Interview No. 4
¿La ortografía era correcta?
Sí.
¿Era fácil de entender el texto?
Sí.
¿Era natural la forma en la que Sí.
hablaban los personajes?
¿Te hizo reír el texto?
Sí.
¿Dirías que es una traducción?
No.
Table 4.4 Interview No. 4.
Interview No. 5
¿La ortografía era correcta?
Sí.
¿Era fácil de entender el texto?
Sí, éste está mucho mejor.
¿Era natural la forma en la que Yo diría que sí.
hablaban los personajes?
¿Te hizo reír el texto?
Sí.
¿Dirías que es una traducción?
No, para nada.
Table 4.5 Interview No. 5.
Interview No. 6
¿La ortografía era correcta?
Sí.
¿Era fácil de entender el texto?
Sí.
¿Era natural la forma en la que Sí, como en la caricatura.
hablaban los personajes?
¿Te hizo reír el texto?
Sí.
¿Dirías que es una traducción?
Table 4.6 Interview No. 6.
No.