Katarzyna Kmieć
Sources of Error in Translation – the Question
of Language Transfer and Individual’s
Language Analytic Abilities
Praca licencjacka napisana
w Instytucie Filologii Angielskiej
Uniwersytetu im. Adama Mickiewicza
pod kierunkiem dr Grzegorza Krynickiego
Poznań, 2010
OŚWIADCZENIE
Ja, niżej podpisany/a
student/ka Wydziału Neofilologii
Uniwersytetu im. Adama Mickiewicza w Poznaniu
oświadczam,
że przedkładaną pracę dyplomową
pt.
napisałem/am samodzielnie.
Oznacza to, że przy pisaniu pracy, poza niezbędnymi konsultacjami, nie korzystałem/am z
pomocy innych osób, a w szczególności nie zlecałem/am opracowania rozprawy lub jej
istotnych części innym osobom, ani nie odpisywałem/am tej rozprawy lub jej istotnych części
od innych osób.
Jednocześnie przyjmuję do wiadomości, że gdyby powyższe oświadczenie okazało się
nieprawdziwe, decyzja o wydaniu mi dyplomu zostanie cofnięta.
(miejscowość, data)
(czytelny podpis)
2
Table of contents
TABLE OF CONTENTS ............................................................................................................... 3
LIST OF TABLES ......................................................................................................................... 5
LIST OF FIGURES ....................................................................................................................... 6
INTRODUCTION .......................................................................................................................... 7
CHAPTER 1: TRANSFER ........................................................................................................... 9
1.1. TRANSFER AS AN AFFECTIVE FACTOR ..................................................................................... 9
1.2. DEFINITION OF TRANSFER ..................................................................................................... 10
1.3. TRANSFER AND TRANSLATION .............................................................................................. 12
CHAPTER 2: LANGUAGE ANALYTIC ABILITIES ............................................................ 14
2.1. LANGUAGE ANALYTIC ABILITIES AS AN AFFECTIVE FACTOR................................................ 14
2.2. THE NOTIONS OF LANGUAGE APTITUDE AND LANGUAGE ANALYTIC ABILITIES................... 15
2.3. LANGUAGE ANALYTIC ABILITIES AND TRANSLATION .......................................................... 15
CHAPTER 3: THE STUDY ........................................................................................................ 18
3.1. AIM ...................................................................................................................................... 18
3.1.1. Research questions ....................................................................................................... 19
3.2. METHODOLOGY .................................................................................................................... 19
3.2.1. Participants .................................................................................................................. 19
3.2.2. Research battery ........................................................................................................... 20
3
3.3. RESEARCH CONDITIONS ........................................................................................................ 24
CHAPTER 4: RESULTS ............................................................................................................. 25
4.1. INTRODUCTION ..................................................................................................................... 25
4.1.1. RQ 1: What is the relationship between transfer errors, being the reflection of the L1
influence and other errors made? .......................................................................................... 25
4.1.2. RQ2: Are the errors of the native speakers of two different language families similar or
different? ................................................................................................................................ 28
4.1.3. RQ 3: Do individual language analytic abilities influence the number and kind of errors
made? ..................................................................................................................................... 30
4.1.4. RQ 4: What is the relationship between the language aptitude components and
the number and kind of errors in translation? ....................................................................... 33
4.1.5. RQ5: Are the errors equally dependant on mother tongue and language aptitude? ... 34
CONCLUSION ............................................................................................................................. 36
REFERENCES ............................................................................................................................. 38
APPENDICES .............................................................................................................................. 40
1.1. FRENCH TRANSLATION ......................................................................................................... 40
1.2. POLISH TRANSLATION ........................................................................................................... 41
1.3. MLAT STUDENTS’ FILE ........................................................................................................ 42
1.4. PERSONAL SURVEY .............................................................................................................. 47
4
List of tables
Table 1 ............................................................................................................................................ 27
Table 2 ............................................................................................................................................ 27
Table 3 ............................................................................................................................................ 29
Table 4 ............................................................................................................................................ 35
5
List of figures
Figure 1 ......................................................................................................................................... 26
Figure 2 ......................................................................................................................................... 28
Figure 3 ......................................................................................................................................... 28
Figure 4 ......................................................................................................................................... 29
Figure 5 ......................................................................................................................................... 31
Figure 6 ......................................................................................................................................... 31
Figure 7 ......................................................................................................................................... 32
Figure 8 ......................................................................................................................................... 32
Figure 9 ......................................................................................................................................... 32
Figure 10 ....................................................................................................................................... 32
Figure 11 ....................................................................................................................................... 33
Figure 12 ....................................................................................................................................... 33
6
Introduction
No matter how hard one might try to avoid it, errors are part of human nature and it is worth to remember that “humans are not only sapiens and loquens, but also homo errans. (…) And if to err and
to speak are each uniquely human, than (…) to commit language errors must mark the very pinnacle
of human uniqueness” (James 1998: 1). Therefore, although it is undeniable that translators and language learners at the university level posses comprehensive L2 knowledge, it is also true to say that
they make errors in their translations.
There has been much research devoted to the question of error and correctness in L2 performance in the area of theoretical linguistics as well as Second Language Acquisition studies (Corder
1992, Gass 1994, Grander 2008, James 1998, Littlewood 1984, Odlin 1989, Ranta 2001, Roehr 2007,
Skehan 1989, Zybert 1999). While both branches recognise that the materials presented by a teacher
are usually reproduced differently by different students, one of the linguistic standpoints concerning
the errors is that “making errors is just a manifestation of one principle of learning, namely: the interaction of previous experience and currently possessed knowledge with present learning event.”
(Zybert 1999: 39). In other words, it was found out that learner’s L1 and L2 interact and this interaction is inevitable. While undeniably true, such research is usually meant to bring the general overview of the problem, rather than to point to the individual differences among the language learners.
The SLA researchers, on the other hand, concentrate more on the inherent difficulty of the learning
material and the unique characteristics of the learners including their language aptitude which is considered the “best predictor of subsequent learning achievement” (Ranta 2001: 320).
It seems therefore, that in order to obtain the full picture of the error source the correlation of
the two branches of linguistics described might prove to be helpful. While in such a search it would
7
be desirable to concentrate on all types of errors, it is not going to be possible , because “establishing
the sources of errors is often extremely difficult as it involves explanations of the processes that underline them” (Zybert 1999: 82). This, although possible, would require more time and data than is
available for this research.
Therefore, the research will focus on
 finding out if the L1 interference plays important role in translation by advanced, university level L2 learners, that is – how many transfer and non-transfer errors are made
respectively
 investigating what is the relationship between the language transfer errors and individual differences in language aptitude of university level learners of English (L2).
 searching for an answer to the question of the extent to which translation errors are
mother tongue dependent, while compared and contrasted with individual’s language
analytic abilities
Two groups of university students taking a course in translation will be examined in order to
obtain the data. The first group is composed of native speakers of Polish being students of department of English and Russian-English studies at Adam Mickiewicz University and the second being
native speakers of French and studying Multilingual Communication and translation in the School of
Translation of Geneva University. At this point, it is important to mention that the examination of
the group of the Swiss students was enabled by Ms. Lucile Pascale Davier, Ph.D. – an assistant and
teacher at Geneva School of Translation. If not for her kindness and support this project would have
never gained the present shape.
8
Chapter 1: Transfer
1.1. Transfer as an affective factor
Language transfer should not be held responsible for all errors in translation. Nevertheless, in
the claims of many linguists there is a strong evidence supporting the claim that it is one of the most
important and influential factors (Corder 1992, Ever-Zohar 1981, James 1998, Gass and Selinker 1994, Odlin 1989, Zybert 1999).
It is argued, for example, that “[a]cquiring a language is a creative process in which learners
are interacting with their environment to produce an internalised representation of the regularities
they discover in the linguistic data to which they are exposed.” (Corder 1992: 20). In other words,
the L2 of a second language user is the mix between the knowledge acquired, believes held on that
basis and L1. Although the reliance on transfer of advanced learners is reduced to a certain extent,
each of them holds their own image of the L2 that they have created in the process of the language
acquisition. As a result, there is a possibility for the incorrect translation to be made by even a highly
advanced translator.
Other arguments for the transfer as an affective factor, are presented by James who holds that
“errors triggered by L1 interference are not the only errors(…) [b]ut they are a significant subset of
all errors”. He also stresses “that L1 transfer (…) is enjoying renewed acceptance as a crucial component in modern L2 learning theories” (James 1998: 181). At the same time he points to the fact that
transfer-based diagnosis is especially useful while determining the group profiles of the L2 learners
and in the attempts to determine the general rules of the L1 influence.
9
Finally, it is worth to mention the viewpoint presented by Zybert, who argues that
the majority of errors made by all L2 speakers, besides the generalisation errors, are the result of
transfer (Zybert 1999: 39).
The arguments provided by the researchers in the filed of linguistics should suffice to back up
the claim that although it is not only transfer that affects L2 users’ performance, it is one of the major
factors responsible for erroneous translations and, therefore, its influence and importance is to be
re-examined in this paper.
1.2. Definition of transfer
From the non-essentialist point of view nothing can ever be clearly defined. There are not, however,
many notions being as problematic and raising as much controversy as the notion of transfer.
The terminological problems the linguists have been struggling with for years, contributed to the fact
that back in the 1970s there were some attempts to prove that “transfer” is of no great importance and
does not fully describe anything. Nonetheless, “[i]n the face of increasing quantities of L2 data, researchers have begun to once again focus their attention on language transfer, realizing that the baby
had been mercilessly thrown out with the bathwater” (Gass 1992: 7). In other words, they realized
that the problem commonly named as “transfer” exists and instead of abandoning it, the closer attention should be paid to its exact and possibly correct definition. It seems reasonable, therefore, to present the most important definitions proposed by different researchers.
First of all, quite a controversial viewpoint on transfer is presented by Corder who claims that
such terms as “transfer” or “interference” should not be used because they are inadequate in what
they are supposed to describe. Moreover, it is also argued by the same author that they should be
replaced by the notion of “the mother tongue influence”, which is the exact reflection of what happens in L2 acquisition and production. Corder also points out to the fact that what strongly influences the speed of an L2 acquisition is the distance between learner’s L1 and L2 (Corder 1992: 1921). According to Corder, one is able to acquire languages on the same basis their mother tongue is
acquired by means of “simple basic code (…) we ourselves have created (…) in the course of acquiring a first language” (Corder 1992: 25). He claims that
10
[i]f anything which can be appropriately called transfer occurs, it is from the mental structure which is
the implicit knowledge of the mother tongue to the separate and independently developing knowledge of
the target language. The evidence for such a process of transfer is presumably the persistent occurrence
on incorrect mother-tongue-like features in the learner’s performance (Corder 1992: 25).
Corder was not the only one to suggest that the terms of transfer or interference are inappropriate. Others tried to redefine these notions as well. An example may be the suggestion to rename
“transfer” to “crosslinguistic influence” made by Sharwood Smith and Kellerman (after Zybert 1999:
41).
Although many linguists agree with the standpoints presented above, the notions of transfer
and interference seem to be strongly ingrained in the field of contrastive analysis. As a result, there
are numerous linguists who try to adopt their definitions to the existing terminology. The most comprehensive definition as far, is the one proposed by Odlin in which he states that “Transfer is
the influence resulting from similarities and differences between the target language and any other
language that has been previously (and perhaps imperfectly) acquired.” (Odlin 1989: 27)
As Odlin further explains, it is important to bear in mind the difference between the notion of
interference and transfer. While the first one suggests only a negative impact of L1 on L2 (negative transfer), the second one can be also facilitating (positive transfer) (Odlin 1989: 26-27).
Finally, in the recent linguistic description two types of transfer can be distinguished, namely,
borrowing and substratum transfer. The first one has an influence on speaker’s L1 and is not usually
considered as a mistake, while the second describes the influence of L1 or other, earlier acquired language on the TL1.The second one can have both positive and negative influence on the language being acquired.
As the numerous definitions suggest, the research into language transfer has been extensive.
On the other hand, however, the controversy it still rises between different linguists suggest that more
investigation is needed. Therefore, the negative substratum transfer will be further investigated for
the use of this research.
1
TL – Target Language
11
1.3. Transfer and translation
The idealised image of a translator held by an average person not involved in the field of translation,
is of the ideal L2 speaker, able to translate fluently anything and facing no problems while performing the task. However, “in practice, the translator, just as other human beings, has some drawbacks
which are a part of his or her own personality, and also often are determined while performing the
task of translation by the adverse circumstances”2 (Lederer, 1994: 111). Therefore, even highly qualified translator has to be cautious while performing the act of translation and should not be considered
flawless.
In order to determine the relationship between the transfer and translation, it is important to
define the notion of translation as such. In words of Gläser
translation is (…) the cognitive and linguistic process the translator performs in decoding a text which
is the result of a communication act in the source language, and in encoding it as a speech product in
the target language by preserving the content and achieving the stylistic quality of the source language
text. (Gläser, 1984: 123)
To make the definition even more clear, it may be further argued after Léderer that it is not the single
word that is treated as a unit of translation (Léderer, 1994: 117) , but in the process of decomposition
of the text and its further re-composition, the translator should bear in mind the internal dynamics of
the text’s plot and translate it as a whole rather than in the detached phrases (Delisle, 1984: 191).
It should be clear, therefore, that the task a translator has to accomplish is a complex one.
Moreover, it is the task that necessarily involves processing of the native language. As a result, it
may be argued that while translating, an individual has to make certain decisions associated with his
L1 and L2 and their structures, and “[t]his activity must (…) be recognized as a fundamental constraint of systemic nature, an integral factor of transfer” (Itman, 1990: 77). If this is true, it may be
further stated that “translational procedures between two systems (…) are in principle analogous,
even homologous, with transfers within the borders of the system” ([no author]?, 1990: 73).
The awareness of the processes described above, may thus be considered inevitable for a good
translator. Although no perfect L2 user exists, a good translator will “edit out unwanted transfers and
carry out the adjustments necessary to make the final text natural” (James, 1998: 179). Those who
2
All the translations from French sources are mine, KK
12
work in the field professionally will also know that the recipient of the text is not likely to know
the original and they will do their best to make the translated version sound as natural in the target
language as possible (Pisarska, 1998: 168).
13
Chapter 2: Language Analytic Abilities
2.1. Language Analytic Abilities as an affective factor
As it was mentioned in the preceding chapter, language transfer plays an important role in the second
language learning as well as in translation. Nevertheless, what is of great importance and should also
be examined, is the question of the degree to which an individual relies on transfer.
“Factors such as schooling, literacy, personality (…) surely account for much of
the individual variation affecting transfer. Yet even if all those factors were better understood, there
would still be the possibility that seemingly idiosyncratic characteristics of learners could affect their
reliance on transfer.” (Odlin, 1989: 136) Moreover, Skehan argues that the relationship between
transfer and individual learner differences is so close that it might be sensible to consider transfer as
an “extended construct of aptitude” (Skehan, 1989: 46). Other features which are often enumerated as
having some influence on an L2 performance, and by the same token on the degree to which one
transfers the features of L1 into L2, are such as L1 – L2 distance, L2 proficiency level, length and
type of individual’s language study (Roehr 2007: 175), attitudes and motivation, anxiety,
lan-
guage-learning strategies (Grander 2008: 38) and finally, and most importantly, language aptitude
(Grander 2008, Ranta and Sawyer 2001, Roehr 2007, Skehan 1989).
Out of the factors mentioned above, the last one will be investigated in this paper for its
being considered as the most affective in the field of Second Language Acquisition (Grander 2008, Littlewood 1986, Ranta and Sawyer 2001, Roehr 2007, Skehan 1989). Furthermore, the
notion of language analytic abilities will be argued to be suitable for the needs of this paper and it
will substitute the more broad and general notion of language aptitude.
14
2.2. The notions of Language Aptitude and Language Analytic Abilities
Probably the most prominent and most widely repeated definition of language aptitude was proposed
by Carroll who described it as “some characteristic of an individual which controls, at a given point
of time, the rate of progress that he [a learner] will make subsequently in learning a foreign language” (after Ranta 2001: 320). It was also said to be “one of the central individual differences in
language learning” (Skehan 1989: 27). Moreover, in more recent times, the notion of aptitude was
used while trying to identify the underlying processes of language acquisition as well as these of language performance (Grander 2008: 30).
In 1959, Carroll and Sapon, the creators of the Modern Language Aptitude Test (MLAT),
suggested that achievement in a second language might be influenced by four abilities, namely: phonetic coding, grammatical sensitivity, rote memory and inductive language-learning ability.
The numerous tests and in-depth research they had conducted, proved their hypothesis acceptable and
the four components of MLAT have been widely accepted as the components of the language aptitude. Irrespectively of the fact that they all constitute to define one notion, the components of
the language aptitude are fairly independent (Skehan 1989: 137). Consequently, it is possible to imply that because different language uses require different language abilities, different components of
aptitude will also constitute to the successful performance in different fields of L2 usage.
The two aptitude components which are considered the most important characteristics of
a good translator and constitute to the general ability to focus on form (Ranta 2001: 344) are grammatical sensitivity and inductive language learning ability. Furthermore, these same two notions may
be “subsumed under a single label (…) language-analytic ability” (Roehr 2007: 176). As a result, the
term language-analytic ability will be used in this paper, because of the research focus on the source
of error in translation.
2.3. Language Analytic Abilities and Translation
Although, the researchers who are interested in examining language aptitude stress the importance of
focusing on individual differences between the learners, “[t]he study of aptitude-treatment interac-
15
tions (…), represents a huge and surprisingly uncharted area of important L2 research” (Ranta 2001:
352). It seems important, therefore, to go into more detailed description of language analytic abilities
and stress its relevance to translation and translation studies.
First of all, defining the notions of grammatical sensitivity and inductive language learning
ability may prove to be useful. As Carroll had it, “grammatical sensitivity is the ability to recognize
the grammatical functions of words (or other linguistic entities) within sentences” while “inductive
language learning ability is the ability to infer or induce the rules governing a set of language materials, given samples of language materials that permit such inferences” (Carroll 1981: 105 after Ranta
2001: 324). In other words, what is described by the notion of grammatical sensitivity is one’s abilities to analyse a given language structure, while the term inductive language learning ability stands
for reasoning and extrapolating (Skehan 1989: 27). Both notions presented reflect the traits, which
are undoubtedly possessed by good translators and may be responsible for the quality of the text
translated.
As it was mentioned in the chapter devoted to transfer and translation, a word as a single
unit without the context does not play an important role in translation. Each translator has to be sensitive to the fact that “the combination of words creates meanings that they do not have in isolation,
and even meanings that are not wholly predictable from the literal senses of the words combined”
(Hervey 2002: 98). Moreover, translators also need to remember that the structures formed by words
differ from language to language and that “the different grammatical structures have different semantic effects” (Hervey 2002: 99). It is clear then, that the reader’s understanding of the text depends to
the great extent on different grammatical arrangements used by a translator who can be described as
“the author without inspiration, who deprived of the responsibility for the text’s plot, is responsible
for its form” (from Delisle 1984: 81-82 after Pisarska 1998: 104). The L2 learners who have the
chance of becoming good translators are most likely those who make their hypothesis on the base of
logic and reason and whose language learning process depends on the rules governing L2 and the
analytical processes (Dzierżanowska 1988: 15). Furthermore, they also know how to “seek out entirely new conceptual or discourse distinctions that were ignored in the first language, but which are
now obligatory grammatical contrasts in the new language” (MacWhinney 2001:82).
As far as the translation is concerned, the link between the L2 and L1 aptitude seems to be
of great importance as well. If translator’s language analytic abilities were strong in only one of
16
the languages spoken, their translations would be likely to be spoiled by poor abilities in the other.
Ranta (1998), however, conducted the research by means of which she found out that the learners
who scored higher on a test of grammatical sensitivity in the L1 reached higher stages of grammatical
development in L2 as well (Ranta 2001:344). It is possible to conclude, therefore, that a good translation is most likely to be provided by a person with strong language analytic abilities.
Finally, it was also found that individual’s language aptitude is at least partly innate, develops through one’s whole life and is difficult, if not impossible, to improve (Carroll 1985, Politzer
and Weiss 1969, Yemi-Komshian 1965, Skehan 1989). “An innate capacity for learning” being a
‘residue’ of L1 development and “ability to handle language in a decontextualised way, which is influenced by family background factors such as parental literacy” (Ranta 2001:331) were found to
influence language aptitude. As a result, it might be implied that those with weak language analytic
abilities may struggle with the translation tasks more and make more mistakes than those who are
naturally gifted translators.
17
Chapter 3: The study
3.1. Aim
Already back in the 4th century St. Jerome said “verbum e verbo, sed sensum exprimere de sensu”,
what means that instead of translating word-by-word, one should try to get the essence of
the meaning of the text and convey it. Although thousands of years have passed since then, his words
are still valid. The translators do their best to make the text they translate grammatically and stylistically correct and possibly close to the original. No matter how hard they try, however, even the qualified translators make mistakes and one of the important questions being raised by the researchers in
the field of translation is of the error and its origin.
Following their discussion, the aim of this study is to investigate the source of an error in
translation and to see how the quality of translation and the number of errors correspond to
the individual differences among translators. The notion of individual differences is to describe here
the differences among the L1 influence and language aptitude. It will be further explained in
the research questions description part. What is important to note at this point, however, is that
the research in the field is as yet scarce. On the other hand, it is being called for by many
(Ranta 2001, Roehr 2007, Skehan 1989) and as Ranta points out “exploration of how different learner traits lead to different learning outcomes needs to be a focus of future research activity” (Ranta
2001:320). This study is therefore the attempt to rise to a challenge of such investigation.
18
3.1.1. Research questions
As it has been mentioned above, what is to be examined in the study are the individual differences
(IDs) between translators. The particular interest is to be paid to two aspects, namely, mother tongue
and language aptitude influences. The methodology of the study of these aspects will be explained in
the next part. The research questions the study is to answer are as following:
(1) RQ1: What is the relationship between transfer errors, being the reflection of the L1 influence
and other errors made?
(2) RQ2: Are the errors of the native speakers of two different language families similar or different?
Is the L1 influence stronger for any of the groups? If so, to what extend?
(3) RQ3: Do individual language analytic abilities influence the number and kind of errors made?
(4) RQ4: What is the relationship between the language aptitude components and errors in translation?
(5) RQ5: Are the errors equally dependant on mother tongue and language aptitude?
3.2. Methodology
Studying the speakers of two or more languages is undoubtedly the task requiring meticulousness.
It is crucial for the researcher to find the experiment–suitable participants as well as to create such
a research battery, so as to get possibly broad and detailed image of each one of the respondents.
If this criterion is met, the chance of achieving the aim of the study and gathering the comprehensive
data is markedly strengthened.
3.2.1. Participants
For the sake of this paper, the investigation meant to help answering the research questions was conducted on over eighty learners of English at the Bachelor of Arts university level. Half of the data
was collected at Adam Mickiewicz University School of English and the other half at The School of
19
Translation and Interpretation of Geneva University (ETI). The L1-L2 combinations examined were
respectively L1 Polish - L2 English for the students of AMU School of English and L1 French –
L2 English for the students of ETI. Before the study was carried out, all the respondents had undergone at least one semester long university training. It is possible, therefore, to imply that, broadly
speaking, the group under investigation was relatively homogeneous in terms of formal training received as well as their language learning environment.
3.2.2. Research battery
As it was mentioned before, the good research battery seems to be of great importance. The majority
of researchers agree that creating a good investigation tool is a hard work and requires a lot of
“pre-research”.
In this study, two works proved to be helpful in creating the research battery. First one was
Grosjean’s
“Studying
bilinguals”
with
its
14th
chapter
“Methodological
issues”
(Grosjean 2008: 240-272) and the second one Ayeomoni’s “Code switching and code-mixing” with
its research description part and “Questionnaire on Language Use” (Ayeomoni 2006: 90-99).
The final data was gathered on the basis of the three sub-tests, namely: the Translation Task,
Modern Language Aptitude Test and finally, the Personal Survey. The Translation task and
the MLAT adapted to the need of the research had been pretested and revised, while the Personal
Survey part had been consulted with a number of professionals working in the field and later adapted
to the needs of the study.
3.2.2.1. Translation Task
The first part of the study, that is the translation task, was adapted to its needs from John Steinbeck’s
novel entitled “Cannery Row”. The choice of the text was motivated by such factors as availability of
translations in both L1s in question, as well as by the fact that the fragment chosen might be considered as problematic in many aspects for the native speakers of both languages under investigation.
20
After the sample questionnaires had been analyzed, the final version was set and made to cover the wide range of error possibilities. Among the problematic fields the translation involved were:
grammar, spelling and semantics. The test was also prepared so as to involve possibly many language
transfer problems. After Zybert’s suggestion (Zybert 1999: 68),one vocabulary item was added to the
original text for its being considered highly problematic to translate. Namely, it was the adjective
“thick” used to the “hair” description.
The participants of the study were asked to translate the Steinbeck’s text fragment from their
L1 into English. The content was the same for Polish and French native speakers and the text was
composed of hundred words approximately. The time each respondent was to devote to this task was
no longer than twenty minutes. Majority of participants managed to finish it before fifteen minutes
was over. Finally, the L2 – L1 direction of translation was meant not considered crucial for the sake
of the study and, therefore, not involved in the research battery.
3.2.2.2. Modern Language Aptitude Test (MLAT)
In order to be able to confront individual’s translation errors with their language aptitude, the Carrolls
Modern Language Aptitude Test was applied. Because of the group examination time constraints, it
was crucial to make the test possibly short but thorough at the same time. In order to apply to this
fact, only the sample version of the test was used and its second part, “Phonetic Sript”, skipped.
While, the pretest phase of the research had proven that such a sample was sufficing to indicate
the differences among language learners, the second part of the original MLAT was not used for its
scarce, if not non-existent, correspondence to translation. As Ranta and Sawyer had it “aspects of
aptitude (…) may not be crucial when they are not challenged” (Ranta 2002: 342). The parts
the MLAT used for the study was composed of were:
(1) Number Learning
(2) Spelling Cues
(3) Words in Sentences
(4) Paired Associates
21
The whole test was recorded and played only once to all of the participants, because the rate
of learning plays an important role in determining one’s aptitude according to Carroll.
The participants of the study were informed about its shortness before the test was played and alsowarned that the high levels of concentration were required in order to complete it correctly.
The first part of this subtest, Number Learning, is a two-step task, where the respondents first
are asked to memorise the numbers in a novel language and after, to apply the newly learnt vocabulary items in practice – that is, to write down the numbers they hear. In the first phase the recorded
lecturer teaches students number names and explains the way they combine. For the sake of this research, the numbers the students were to acquire were one, two and three in a single-digit set, twenty
and thirty in a two-digit set and finally a hundred to represent the three-digit numbers. Having heard
the recorded number, the participants had five seconds to write it down. There were nine combinations of the new language numbers and the participants were expected to understand them. The aim
of this task was to discover individual differences among learners as far as their rote learning and
inductive language learning abilities are concerned. Both of the abilities, inductive language learning
in particular, may be argued to play an important role in translation and constitute to the characteristics of a good translator.
The second part of MLAT is called Spelling Cues. This part consists of a number of words
which are spelled approximately as they are pronounced. The spelling is different from the usual one
and the task for the participants is to rapidly recognize the word and to indicate its meaning. In this
research four words – close, restaurant, presents and garbage - were to be deciphered within fifteen
seconds. Although this part does not correspond directly to the components of language analytic abilities, it may also be considered important and meaningful for translation as for its being
an “indicative of the ability to learn the more advanced lexical aspects of a foreign language (…) and
appears to measure some sort of cognitive flexibility (…) and perhaps also measures a sort of strategic competence” (Ranta 2002:325). Therefore, it was considered important to be included in
the research battery in order to find out how it corresponds with errors and other MLAT parts.
In the third part of the Language Aptitude Test, which is called Words in Sentences, the test
respondents are asked to find the relationship between words in two different sentences and find
the correspondences between the functions these words serve. They are given a number of stimulus
sentences with one word being underlined and following sentences with five different options to
22
choose from. As far as this research is concerned four sentences from the sample MLAT test were
used and the participants were given fifteen seconds to find the corresponding words. This part of the
language aptitude subtest is intended to measure one’s grammatical sensitivity. It is meant to prove
that with no use of grammatical terminology used in formal training, language users differ markedly
in the field. Moreover, it may be argued that the stronger one’s ability to see rapidly the relationship
between grammatical functions is, the easier the translation work may be for such an individual. Such
a person may also make less errors because of their ability to notice words’ different functions.
Finally, the fourth part of this subtest is called Paired Associates. In this section, the test takers have to face the vocabulary learning task. They are provided with a number of Kurdish vocabulary items and asked to memorize them within seconds. In the study being discussed, six vocabulary
items were to be learnt by heart in twenty seconds. After the time was over, the respondents were
asked to move to the next page and within next twenty five seconds choose the right meaning of the
words they had just acquired. No looking back was allowed. This part of test was created in order to
prove that “there are many other types of memory that might be predictive of language achievement”
(Ranta 2002:326). While, just like the Spelling Cues, it does not correspond directly to neither
grammatical sensitivity nor inductive language learning ability, it seems to correlate strongly with
both of the abilities in question and may prove to correspond to translation quality as well.
What may strike about the Modern Language Aptitude Test is its fast pace and impossibility
to spend on the test more time than is given. Nevertheless, one of Carroll’s arguments for such a test
model was that the learners with higher aptitude are usually those who learn and analyse faster than
others. Moreover, it might be suggested that the rate of problem solving and processing of language
material is even more crucial in the translation exercise. Those who are devoid of the traits examined
by MLAT (or at least some of its parts) may prove to face more translation problems, as well as they
may provide weaker translations within the same time limits than those with higher scores in the test
explained above.
3.2.2.3. Personal Survey
23
Because language learners differ markedly and derive from different language and cultural backgrounds, the need of obtaining the personal information associated with each participant filling in the
translation and MLAT forms was considered indispensable. The research battery respondents were
asked to answer eleven questions of “Personal Survey”, which were found important and might influence the quality of translations and number of errors made.
At the beginning, all of the students tested stipulated out to their sex, age and languages spoken.
Next, they specified the way they acquired each language, the languages spoken levels and
the languages they were still the learners of.
The last set of questions corresponded to the usage of the spoken languages. By means of this
set, the research participants were asked about the languages they used in everyday life, when and
where they would use the languages they spoke and finally, the amount of time they spent in both
mono and bi-lingual modes.
3.3. Research conditions
In order to obtain comparable data, the research participants had to have similar conditions while
filling the forms in. In order to reach the goal, before the battery was used it was specified that
the test as a whole should not take longer than thirty minutes. As described above, the research tool
was divided into three parts. As a first task, the participants were asked to translate the text within
fifteen minutes. What followed was the personal survey, which was considered the least demanding
task and meant to help the respondents relax after the difficult task of translation. This part was short
and did not last longer than ten minutes. Finally, the eight-minute long MLAT test was administered.
It was played without interruption and no repetition of any of its parts was possible. All of
the participants were given the ready test sheets. The whole research battery may be found appended
at the end of the thesis.
24
Chapter 4: Results
4.1. Introduction
The aim of the research battery described in the previous chapter was to find the answers to
the research questions which are also stipulated in the previous chapter. Moreover, by this means it
was meant to answer more broad question, whether or not language analytic abilities influence the
quality of translation and if this influence may be compared to the one of language transfer. In order
to achieve the goal and obtain the answers from the data gathered all research questionnaires were
thoroughly analysed and presented in the form of table. Such complied data collection was subject to
the statistical analysis and aided in creating a broader view on the subject. Therefore, before announcing the final hypothesis reached on the basis of the questions, it seems reasonable to present the
research questions and the facts they revealed.
4.1.1. RQ 1: What is the relationship between transfer errors, being the reflection of the L1
influence and other errors made?
The answer to the question above was achievable thanks to the analysis comprising of a number of
steps.
First of all, the general comparison of the number of transfer errors and non-transfer errors
was made. The errors examined were the sum of those made by both groups in question, irrespectively of their mother tongue. The data gathered revealed that the difference in the error type was signifi-
25
cant and that the number of transfer errors (mean = 4,53731, standard deviation = 1,91745) was
smaller than the number of non-transfer errors (mean = 11,0, standard deviation = 4,44495) – as
shown in Figure 1 below.
Box-and-Whisker Plot
Trsf err sum
NonTrsf err sum
0
4
8
12
16
20
24
Figure 1
Next, in order to certify that the unique and distinct characteristics of translations were selected for variables accounting for different transfer errors, the correlation between their number was
examined. The statistics confirmed no significant correlation between the variables. The same thing
was done with the non-transfer error type, and the results obtained revealed, that, overall,
the relationship between the variables was weak.
The next step undertaken was to examine the correlations between transfer and non-transfer
error types, and no significant one was found.
Finally, the two significant sub questions were administered and examined. The first one was
to check the influence of non-transfer errors on the transfer error type and the second of transfer errors on the non-transfer error type. While in the case of the first question the dependence of one factor on another was found, in the other one, no significant correlations were proven. It was noticed
that three factors had significant effect on transfer error sum. Namely, those who failed to distinguish
the difference between the singular and plural markers, as well as those who had trouble with labeling and word choice and finally, those who did not mark the gender correctly, made more transfer
errors. The detailed analysis of the variability of “transfer error sum” and “non transfer error sum”
26
(calculated for each student individually) into contributions due to mentioned factors can be seen in
Tables 1 (transfer error sum) and 2 (non transfer error sum) below.
Table 1
Source
MAIN EFFECTS
A:NonTrsf tense
B:NonTrsf preposition
C:NonTrsf sing vs pl
D:NonTrsf article
E:NonTrsf word formation
F:NonTrsf word choice
G:NonTrsf missing word
H:NonTrsf style
I:NonTrsf spelling
J:NonTrsf word order
K:NonTrsf gender
RESIDUAL
TOTAL (CORRECTED)
Sum of
Squares
Df
Mean
Square
FRatio
P-Value
11,1223
11,1016
18,0103
3,22722
0,181428
3
5
3
5
1
3,70743
2,22033
6,00344
0,645444
0,181428
2,99
1,79
4,84
0,52
0,15
0,0519
0,1547
0,0094
0,7582
0,7056
42,3061
24,7118
4,68621
2,00078
0,00168595
6,14076
28,5258
228,246
9
9
2
2
1
1
23
64
4,70067
2,74576
2,34311
1,00039
0,00168595
6,14076
1,24025
3,79
2,21
1,89
0,81
0,00
4,95
0,0047
0,0600
0,1739
0,4586
0,9709
0,0362
Table 2
Source
MAIN EFFECTS
A:Trsf underdiff
B:Trsf calque
C:Trsf hypercor
D:Trsf substit
RESIDUAL
TOTAL (CORRECTED)
Sum of
Squares
Df
Mean
Square
FRatio
PValue
198,153
112,194
0,0248583
19,2906
895,871
1285,45
5
4
1
2
52
64
39,6306
28,0484
0,0248583
9,64529
17,2283
2,30
1,63
0,00
0,56
0,0581
0,1812
0,9698
0,5747
As a result, it may be implied that the statistical analysis proved that although non-transfer errors may influence the transfer type to a certain degree and one may expect the translator who does
such mistakes as “hair were” or “time looks at himself” to be also more prone to make other errors,
the transfer error usually should not determine any other flows in translation and no such examples
were found.
27
4.1.2. RQ2: Are the errors of the native speakers of two different language families similar or
different?
The research question number two was set in order to achieve broader and possibly full image of
the groups under investigation and their errors. Because of the fact, that numerous and very diverse
errors occurred in the translations, achieving the comprehensive answer to the question was
a complex task.
The first step undertaken in order to achieve the goal was the investigation into the differences in
the number of errors made by both responding groups. What this part of the research revealed was
that the L1 student groups under investigation differ in the degree of different error types made. Out
of the fifteen error categories examined, less than a half (seven) turned out to have similar numbers
for both – Polish and Swiss students. The degree of presence of the rest of the categories in the works
of both groups differed markedly. For example, while on average, the number of words missing for
the French speaking group was 2,9, the Polish students missed only 1,7 statistical word in their translations. The other differences were distinguishable in such categories as: prepositions, word choice,
tense, plurality, word order, spelling, and transfer substitution.
In the next step, the average number of errors (transfer and non-transfer) made by the two
groups under investigation was calculated. The results achieved revealed that the proportion of
the average numbers of transfer errors of Polish (41.10%) and French speakers (58.90%) was very
similar to the proportion the average numbers of non-transfer errors of Polish (40.68%) and French
speakers (59.32%). The results may be seen on the pie-charts in the Figures 2 and 3 below.
Figure
Figure22
Figure 3
28
As a next step, the percentages obtained were compared in the form of a table (Table 3), which revealed that an average Polish student made 0.42% more transfer errors than
his or her Swiss colleague. Consequently, this entails that a Swiss student made 0.42% more
non-transfer errors (-0.42%).
Table 3
Pl
Fr
Total
A
Trsf err
sum / Nr
of students /
Sum*
B
NonTrsf
err sum /
Nr of
students
/ Sum*
A-B
41.10%
58.90%
100%
40.68%
59.32%
100%
0.42%
-0.42%
0
It was considered important to test whether this difference was not a random effect of
e.g. incorrect sampling or imperfect error annotation, a series of statistical test were performed.
In order to answer the RQ a new variable was created the value of which was calculated for
each student as a difference between the number of non-transfer and transfer errors he or she made.
If this valued positive, it indicated that the student made more non-transfer errors than transfer errors.
To see whether the difference between the Polish and French group was significant with respect to this variable, several parametric and non-parametric tests were conducted. The procedure of
one-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) for NonTrsf err sum - Trsf err sum compared mean values
of NonTrsf err sum - Trsf err sum for the two different levels of L1: Pl and Fr.
The F-ratio, which is a ratio of the between-group estimate to the within-group estimate, in
this case equaled 7.19342. The P-value of the F-test was 0.0093, which was less than the assumed
significance level of 0.05, which in turn indicated that there was a statistically significant difference
between the mean NonTrsf err sum - Trsf err sum from one level of L1 to another at the 95.0% confidence level.
After it was discovered that the means were different, the question which mean was higher
emerged. Therefore, it was considered important to compare the means of NonTrsf err sum –
Trsf err sum by L1 on the graph (Figure 4).
29
Box-and-Whisker Plot
Fr
L0
Pl
-1
3
7
11
NonTrsf err sum - Trsf err sum
15
19
Figure
Figure 4
4
The analysis of the graph reveals that the mean of NonTrsf err sum - Trsf err sum is significantly higher for the French group than the mean for the Polish group. This indicates that the number
of non-transfer errors is higher for the French students than for the Polish students. The influence of
the L1 is stronger in the case of Polish students as they made more transfer errors than their French
colleagues. Other non-parametric tests confirm this difference.
Therefore, it is possible to say that the analysis conducted proves that the errors made by
Polish speaking students differ from those made by the French speaking students and the differences
observed seem significant.
4.1.3. RQ 3: Do individual language analytic abilities influence the number and kind of errors
made?
As it has been explained in the second chapter, the notions of language analytic abilities and language aptitude differ from one another. While analytic abilities can be examined only by means of
the first and third part of MLAT, language aptitude is measured by all five parts of the Caroll’s test
(four of which have been used for the sake of this research).
In order to examine the influence of language analytic abilities, it was considered crucial to
try to determine the influence of MLAT’s parts one and three on the errors of the students under investigation.
30
First of all, the grouped statistical research was carried out and proved that when the results
of both MLAT parts are taken into account and the participants of both language groups are under
investigation at the same time none of the dependent variables turns out to be significant. Having
the groups divided, proved however, that some significance may be visible when compared against
first and third parts of the test grouped. For the Polish speaking group language aptitude was found
to influence the transfer errors sum at the 90% significance level. For the French speaking group,
the correlation was found between word order and gender assignment – that is non-transfer errors and
language aptitude test results at the 90% confidence level.
As the next step, the results of the both test parts of language aptitude were separated and
the results of the both language groups individually as well as in total, were compared against
the new variables. Again, at the beginning the grouped statistical research was done and it proved
that the relationship was significant for all of the participants between the “Words in sentences” part
of the Language Aptitude Test and two non-transfer variables, namely: tense (Figure 5) and article
(Figure 6).
Means and 95,0 Percent LSD Intervals
1,32
NonTrsf tense
1,12
0,92
0,72
0,52
0
1
mlat pt 3 GROUPED
Figure 5
Figure 5
Means and 95,0 Percent LSD Intervals
2
NonTrsf article
1,7
1,4
1,1
0,8
0,5
0
1
mlat pt 3 GROUPED
Figure 6
31
No such correlation was found however for the “Number learning” part of the research battery.
As the next step, the correlations within the language groups were investigated. The first part
of the MLAT test also proved insignificant in this case. The correlations were found with the third
part, however, and respectively the errors of the native speakers of Polish were related to the number
of the words missing per translation (Figure 7) and spelling (Figure 8). While, in the case of
the French native speakers four dependent variables proved to be significant. Precisely, the “Words
in sentences” task correlated with the transfer errors of substitution (Figure 9) and underdifferentiation (Figure 10) and the non-transfer: article (Figure 11) and gender assignment (Figure 12).
Interestingly, what has been achieved proved that only one of the aptitude components can be
said to have impact on translation, that is – the third part of the MLAT. Even more interestingly,
though the abilities examined by this test turned out to have an influence on different variables examined by the translation task, the variables correlating to the analytic abilities proved to be different for
the translators of the two language groups.
Means and 95,0 Percent LSD Intervals
0,53
2,5
0,43
NonTrsf spelling
NonTrsf missing word
Means and 95,0 Percent LSD Intervals
3
2
1,5
1
0,33
0,23
0,13
0,5
0,03
0
-0,07
0
1
0
mlat pt 3 GROUPED
1
mlat pt 3 GROUPED
Figure 7
Figure 8
Figure 8
Means and 95,0 Percent LSD Intervals
Means and 95,0 Percent LSD Intervals
4,3
1,6
3,8
Trsf underdiff
Trsf substit
1,2
0,8
3,3
2,8
2,3
0,4
1,8
1,3
0
0
0
1
Figure 9
1
mlat pt 3 GROUPED
mlat pt 3 GROUPED
Figure 10
Figure 10
32
Means and 95,0 Percent LSD Intervals
2,4
0,55
2
0,45
NonTrsf gender
NonTrsf article
Means and 95,0 Percent LSD Intervals
1,6
1,2
0,8
0,35
0,25
0,15
0,4
0,05
0
-0,05
0
1
mlat pt 3 GROUPED
Figure 11
0
1
mlat pt 3 GROUPED
Figure 12
4.1.4. RQ 4: What is the relationship between the language aptitude components and
the number and kind of errors in translation?
In order to see the relationship between language analytic abilities, language aptitude and translation
and which of the components are correlated, it was considered crucial, to examine the influence of all
components of the MLAT test on the errors and compare them against the results achieved in
the RQ3.
The aim was achieved in a number of steps. Before any analysis was conducted the data was
transformed into 1 – 0 system to simplify the calculations and see the results more clearly and each
error was compared with each MLAT component in the following combinations: Polish and French
native speakers’ error sum, Polish native speakers error sum and finally French native speakers error
sum.
Firstly, the grouped analysis, proved that in such a case a week correlation may be found between the third part of the language aptitude test and the wrong choice of word in translations and the
second part of the test in question and the word order error. Secondly, for the Polish native speakers,
however weak, the relationship was found between the “Paired associates” part and the tense errors.
And finally, more correlations were seen in the translations of the French speaking students, whose
works proved moderate positive correlation of the second part of MLAT and word choice as well as
33
word order errors and also moderate negative correlation between the test’s third part and article,
gender and all errors sum as well as transfer errors sum. Also the total number of errors in the MLAT
test was found significant for this group and have an influence on the gender assignment.
As a result it is possible to draw the conclusion that neither all components of language aptitude test, nor of language analytic abilities play more influential part in terms of error determination
in translation. As far as the most influential determinants are concerned, the third part of the MLAT
test, which is also the part of language analytic abilities test, remains the best predictor of the error,
but also the second part of the Modern Language Aptitude Test may be useful in determining certain
errors, especially in the French-speaking environment. Therefore, the conclusion which may be
drawn from this observation is that what constitutes to the good translation is grammatical sensitivity
and cognitive flexibility.
4.1.5. RQ5: Are the errors equally dependant on mother tongue and language aptitude?
In order to find the answer to the question which of the factors examined, mother tongue or language
aptitude, has a stronger influence on the errors in translation, the fifth research question was drafted.
In this case only grouped analysis was conduced and helped to prove the previous statistical
investigation right. Also in this test, the score of the group at the Language Aptitude test proved insignificant, while mother tongue – even in the mixed language group turned out to be influencial. The
results obtained may be seen in the table 10, which decomposes the variability of “All err sum
GROUPED” into contributions due to 2 factors. Since Type III sums of squares (the default) have
been chosen, the contribution of each factor was measured having removed the effects of all other
factors. The P-values tested the statistical significance of each of the factors. Since P-value is less
than 0,05 for NUM_L0, this factor had a statistically significant effect on “All err sum GROUPED”
at the 95,0% confidence level (Table 4).
34
Table 4
Source
MAIN EFFECTS
A:NUM_L0
B:mlat_TOTAL_GROUPED
3
RESIDUAL
TOTAL (CORRECTED)
Sum of
Squares
Df
Mean
Square
FRatio
P-Value
21,1042
3,57962
1
2
21,1042
1,78981
22,16
1,88
0,0000
0,1614
58,0823
82,2154
61
64
0,952168
As far as the group profile is concerned, it is justifiable, therefore, to claim that mother tongue
has much stronger impact on errors in translation than the translator’s language aptitude or language
analytical abilities.
35
Conclusion
As it has been explained in the previous chapters, translation is a very difficult and complex task to
accomplish. In order to become a good and renowned translator it is indispensable to be highly educated in the field and practice the act for years. Moreover, it is crucial for the translator to know his
or her drawbacks which may be the hindrance to the correct reflection of the image presented in the
source text. In order to recognize their weak points, translators are often advised to resort to
the linguistic investigations which point to the problematic areas one should be aware of.
The aim of this work was to find out if translators should beware of the transfer error and
whether their individual language abilities had impact on the number and kind of errors made. Moreover, the research was conducted so as to find out if the differences among the speakers of different
languages are substantial and whether the group profiling in terms of translation error is justifiable.
The hypothesis which triggered the research described in this paper, was that apart from
the already known and wildly discussed impact of mother tongue on the translation performance,
other factors may also come into play. Therefore, the field of the language aptitude which was called
by many researchers “uncharted”, was considered important to be examined in order to find out
the influence of individual’s aptitude and analytical abilities on their translation performance. Furthermore, it seemed also crucial to avoid the L1 as well as territorial and educational (different teaching methods used in different countries) bias and compare the results obtained by means of
the research battery on the basis of the two, independent groups of respondents deriving from
the same L1 and educational backgrounds.
What has been found out was that if the global research was conducted, the mother tongue effect could not be denied while the individual traces disappeared and neither language aptitude nor
36
language analytical abilities seemed to influence error in translations. However, even though it turned
insignificant in the group where the speaker’s L1 was not taken into account, the Modern Language
Aptitude test’s parts examining individual’s language analytic abilities and cognitive flexibility
proved to play a part in determining certain kinds of errors. Furthermore, what was found interesting
and may require further investigation was that the errors of both language groups differed and correlated differently with the parts of the test drafted to determine the types of individual language aptitude. Moreover, more attention in the future could also be paid to the notions of grammatical sensitivity and cognitive flexibility which turned out to be influential to the certain degree while the good
quality translation was concerned.
Therefore, it is possible to conclude that neither mother tongue nor individual language analytic abilities, as well as – quite surprisingly – the components of language aptitude should not be
neglected while determining the influential factors associated with the errors in the works of translators. On the other hand, however, it is also important not to overestimate their significance and bear
in mind that good translation is highly dependent on the training, ability to write and personal determination to accomplish the task.
37
References
Ayeomoni, M. Omoniyi. 2006. “Questionnaire on Language Use”, in: Ayeomoni, M. Omoniyi,
Language use in Yoruba-Speech Comunity , in: Nordic Journal of African Studies.
(http://www.njas.helsinki.fi) (date of access: 3 Feb. 2010)
Corder, S. Pit. 1992. “A Role For The Mother Tongue”, in: Susan M. Gass and Larry Selinker
(eds.), Language Transfer In Language Learning. Amserdam-Philadelphia: John
Benjamin Publishing Co., 18-31.
Delisle, Jean. 1984. L’analyse du discourse comme méthode de traduction. Ottawa: Presses de
l’Université d’Ottawa.
Dzierżanowska Halina. 1988. Przekład Tekstów Nieliterackich: na przykładzie języka
angielskiego. Warszawa: Państwowe Wydawnictwo Naukowe.
Gass, Susan M. and Larry Selinker (eds.), Language Transfer In Language Learning.
Amserdam-Philadelphia: John Benjamin Publishing Co.
Gläser, Rosemarie. 1984. “The translation aspect of phraseological units in English and German”,
in: Jacek Fisiak (ed.), Papers and Studies In Contrastive Linguistics. Poznań:
Wydwanictwo Naukowe Uniwersytetu im. Adama Mickiewicza w
Poznaniu, 123-134.
Grander, Robert C. . 2008. “Individual differences in second and foreign language learning”, in:
Nancy H. Horberger (ed.), Encyclopedia of Language and Education (second
edition)(vol.4), Philadelphia: Springer Science+Business Media, LLC., 29-40
Hervey Sandor and Ian Higgins. 2002. Thinking French Translation: A Course in Translation
Method: French to English. New York: Routledge.
38
Itaman Even-Zohar. In press. “Translation and Transfer”, in: Poetics Today. Duke University
Press. (http://www.jstor.org/stable/1772670) (date of access: 20 Feb. 2010)
James, Carl. 1998. Errors in Language Learning and Use. New York: Longman.
Lederer, Marianne. 1994. La traduction aujourd’hui. Paris: Hachette-Livre.
Littlewood, William T. 1984. Foreign and second language learning : language-acquisition
research and its implications for the classroom. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press
Odlin, Terence. 1989. Language Transfer. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press
Pisarska, Alicja and Teresa Tomaszkiewicz. 1998. Współczesne Tendencje Przekładoznawcze.
Poznań: Wydwanictwo Naukowe Uniwersytetu im. Adama Mickiewicza w
Poznaniu
Ranta, Leila and Mark Sawyer. 2001. “Aptitude, individual differences, and instructional design”,
in: Peter Robinson (ed.), Cognition and Second Language Instruction. Cambridge:
Cambridge University Press, 319-353.
Roehr, Karen. 2007. “Metalinguistic Knowledge and Language Ability in University-Level L2
Learners”, Applied Linguistics, 29/2: 173-199
Skehan, Peter. 1989. Individual Differences in Second-Language Learning. New York:
Routledge
Zybert, Jerzy. 1999. Errors in Foreign Language Learning. Warszawa: Sigillum Universitatis
Varsoviensis.
39
Appendices
1.1. French translation
Year of studies: ……………… department: ………………..
Student’s number/name:………………..
Translate the following text into English :
John Steinbeck, Rue de la Sardine
CHAPITRE XIV
Le lever du jour est un moment magique, dans la rue de la Sardine. Quand le soleil n’a pas encore percé l’horizon gris, la Rue paraît suspendue hors du temps. Les mouettes viennent se poser côte
à côte sur les toits des conserveries. C’est l’heure à mi-chemin de la nuit et du jour, lorsque le temps
s’arrête et s’interroge. Par un de ces matins, sous cette même lumière, deux soldats et deux filles flânaient paresseusement dans la rue. C’étaient deux filles vigoureuses et larges de poitrine, dont les
cheveux blonds et épais voletaient et retombaient en mèches folles. Elles avaient de grosses lèvres,
de gros nez, et elles étaient très fatiguées.
…………………………………………………………………………………………………………
…………………………………………………………………………………………………………
…………………………………………………………………………………………………………
………………………………………………………………………………………………………….
40
1.2. Polish translation
Year of studies: ……………… department: IFA/ RAF / other?…………..
Student’s number:………………..
Translate the following text into English :
John Steinbeck, Ulica Nadbrzeżna
ROZDZIAŁ 14
Wczesny ranek to godzina czarów na ulicy Nadbrzeżnej. O szarówce, kiedy już jest jasno, ale słońce
jeszcze nie wzeszło, Nadbrzeżna wisi (…) poza czasem. (…) Mewy(…) siedzą na krawędzi dachów
jedna przy drugiej.(…) Jest to (…) przerwa między dniem i nocą, gdy czas staje i przygląda się sobie.
Takiego ranka, w takim świetle, dwóch żołnierzy i dwie dziewczyny spacerowało ulicą.(…)
Dziewczyny były tęgawe, wielkopierśne(…) i miały nieco potargane, gęste, jasne włosy. Miały pełne
wargi te szerokonose, biodrzaste dziewczyny i były bardzo zmęczone.
…………………………………………………………………………………………………………
…………………………………………………………………………………………………………
…………………………………………………………………………………………………………
…………………………………………………………………………………………………………
…………………………………………………………………………………………………………
…………………………………………………………………………………………………………
…………………………………………………………………………………………………………
…………………………………………………………………………………………………………
………………………………………………………………………………………………………….
41
1.3. MLAT students’ file
Student’s number:…………..
PART I. NUMBER LEARNING
In this part, you will learn the names of numbers in a new language. Subsequently, you will hear the
names spoken aloud, and you will be asked to write down these numbers. For example, if you heard
someone say the number “seventeen” in English, you would write down 1 7. But in this test, you will
hear the numbers in a new language.
a.
…
b.
…
c.
…
d.
…
e.
…
f.
…
g.
…
h.
…
i.
…
42
PART II. SPELLING CUES
Each question below has a group of words. The word at the top of the group is not spelled in the
usual way. Instead, it is spelled approximately as it is pronounced. Your task is to recognize the disguised word from the spelling. In order to show that you recognize the disguised word, tick one of the
five words beneath it that corresponds most closely in meaning to the disguised word.
1. kloz
A. attire
3. prezns
B. nearby
A. kings
C. stick
B. explanations
D. giant
C. dates
E. relatives
D. gifts
E. forecasts
2. restrnt
A. food
4. grbj
B. self-control
A. car port
C. sleep
B. seize
D. space explorer
C. boat
E. drug
D. boast
E.waste
43
PART III. WORDS IN SENTENCES
In each of the following questions, we will call the first sentence the key sentence.
One word in the key sentence will be underlined and printed in capital letters. Your task
is to select the letter of the word in the second sentence that plays the same role in that
sentence as the underlined word in the key sentence. Look at the following sample
question:
Sample: JOHN took a long walk in the woods.
Children in blue jeans were singing and dancing in the park.
A
B
C
D
E
1. MARY is happy.
From the look on your face, I can tell that you must have had a bad day.
A
B C
D
E
2. We wanted to go out, BUT we were too tired.
Because of our extensive training, we were confident when we were out sailing,
A
B
C
yet we were always aware of the potential dangers of being on the lake.
D
E
3. John said THAT Jill liked chocolate.
In our class, that professor claimed that he knew that girl on the television news
A
B
C
D
E
show.
4. The officer gave me a TICKET!
When she went away to college, the young man’s daughter wrote him the most
A
B
C
beautiful letter that he had ever received.
D
E
44
PART IV. PAIRED ASSOCIATES
Your task here is to MEMORIZE the Maya-English vocabulary below. Take 20 seconds to memorize
this vocabulary. Then go to the questions. Do not look back at the vocabulary until you have finished
responding to the questions.
Vocabulary
Maya -- English
c?on
gun
si?
wood
k?ab
hand
kab
juice
bat
ax
pal
son
45
1. bat
A. animal
B. stick
C. jump
D. ax
E. stone
2. kab
A. juice
B. cart
C. corn
D. tool
E. run
3. c?on
A. story
B. gun
C. eat
D. mix
E. bird
4. k?ab
A. road
B. tree
C. yell
D. fish
E. hand
5. si?
A. look
B. yes
C. forgive
D. cook
E. wood
6. pal
A. chief
B. son
C. friend
D. gold
E. boat
46
1.4. Personal Survey
Student’s number : ……………
PERSONAL SURVEY
Your personal data provided for this experiment are not to be disclosed to anyone. Through filling in this survey you
agree for the processing of your personal data only for the sake of the ongoing research.
1. Sex: female/ male
2. Age:………
3. Which languages do you speak?
4.
a. French b. Polish c. English d. Spanish e. Russian f. German
g. any others? ……………
In what order have you acquired these languages? As L1, please, mark your mother tongue(s).
a. L1………… b. L2 ……………. c. L3…………… d. L4………………
If you speak more than 4 languages, continue in the space provided:
………………………………………………………………………………………………………
……….
5. How did you learn them? (tick the right answer for each language)
a. L1:

at school

at home as a mother tongue of one of your parents

while watching movies, cartoons

any other way?……………………………………….
b. L2:

at school

at home as a mother tongue of one of your parents

while watching movies, cartoons

any other way?……………………………………….
c. L3:

at school

at home as a mother tongue of one of your parents

while watching movies, cartoons

any other way?……………………………………….
d. L4:

at school

at home as a mother tongue of one of your parents

while watching movies, cartoons

any other way?……………………………………….
If you speak more than 4 languages, continue in the space provided:
……………………………………………………………………………………………………………
47
6. Are you still a learner of any of the mentioned languages?(if so, which one(s)?)
…………………………………………………………………………………………………
……………………………………………………………………………………………
7.
How would you describe your language proficiency for each of the languages you speak?
a. L 1
 mother tongue
 highly advanced
 advanced
 upper-intermediate
 intermediate
 pre-intermediate
 elementary (just basis)
b. L 2






highly advanced
advanced
upper-intermediate
intermediate
pre-intermediate
elementary (just basis)
c. L 3






highly advanced
advanced
upper-intermediate
intermediate
pre-intermediate
elementary (just basis)
d. L 4






highly advanced
advanced
upper-intermediate
intermediate
pre-intermediate
elementary (just basis)
48
If you speak more than 4 languages, continue in the space provided:
……………………………………………………………………………………………………
……
8.
Which of the languages mentioned you use in your everyday life? (tick)
a. L1…………. b. L2…………… c. L3……………. d. L4……………..
If you speak more than 4 languages, continue in the space provided:
…………………………………………………………………………………………………………
…………
9.
When and where do you use the languages you speak?
a. L1………………………………………..
b. L2………………………………………..
c. L3………………………………………...
d. L4………………………………………...
If you speak more than 4 languages, continue in the space provided:
…………………………………………………………………………………………………………
…………
10.
11.
How often and for how long are you in the bilingual mode (use 2 or more languages simultaneously)?
a. all the time
b. several hours every day
c. several hours every week
d. several hour per month
e. other?.....................................................................................................................
How often and for how long do you stay in the monolingual mode (use your
mother tongue and think in your mother tongue only)?
a. all the time
b. several hours every day
c. several hours every week
d. several hour per month
e. other?....................................................................................................................
Thank you!