{"title":"对译者教育中使用的书面回溯协议进行评估","authors":"Rui Li","doi":"10.3726/jts022021.5","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract Of all the online and offline methods for probing into the translation processes of student translators, written retrospective protocols are reportedly the earliest, most widely and easily administered didactic and assessment tool used in and outside classrooms.\n Despite their recorded advantages, a close examination of both English and Chinese literature reveals a plethora of approaches to their implementation. They differ with respect to factors that include, but are not limited to, the name, contents, nature and number of problems covered, writing\n guidelines, language of writing, time and frequency of writing, theoretical components, meta-language and theories used, assessors, assessment rubrics, provision and training, uses and follow-ups. Although these differences may be only a matter of trainers’ personal preferences that\n suit particular settings, they do have important didactic implications. This paper, therefore, sets out to capture such diversity, with a view to establishing a framework of reference to inform better use of this instrument of intervention in translator education.","PeriodicalId":51739,"journal":{"name":"Target-International Journal of Translation Studies","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.9000,"publicationDate":"2021-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Taking Stock of Written Retrospective Protocols Used in Translator Education\",\"authors\":\"Rui Li\",\"doi\":\"10.3726/jts022021.5\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Abstract Of all the online and offline methods for probing into the translation processes of student translators, written retrospective protocols are reportedly the earliest, most widely and easily administered didactic and assessment tool used in and outside classrooms.\\n Despite their recorded advantages, a close examination of both English and Chinese literature reveals a plethora of approaches to their implementation. They differ with respect to factors that include, but are not limited to, the name, contents, nature and number of problems covered, writing\\n guidelines, language of writing, time and frequency of writing, theoretical components, meta-language and theories used, assessors, assessment rubrics, provision and training, uses and follow-ups. Although these differences may be only a matter of trainers’ personal preferences that\\n suit particular settings, they do have important didactic implications. This paper, therefore, sets out to capture such diversity, with a view to establishing a framework of reference to inform better use of this instrument of intervention in translator education.\",\"PeriodicalId\":51739,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Target-International Journal of Translation Studies\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.9000,\"publicationDate\":\"2021-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Target-International Journal of Translation Studies\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"98\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.3726/jts022021.5\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"文学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"0\",\"JCRName\":\"LANGUAGE & LINGUISTICS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Target-International Journal of Translation Studies","FirstCategoryId":"98","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3726/jts022021.5","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"文学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"0","JCRName":"LANGUAGE & LINGUISTICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
Taking Stock of Written Retrospective Protocols Used in Translator Education
Abstract Of all the online and offline methods for probing into the translation processes of student translators, written retrospective protocols are reportedly the earliest, most widely and easily administered didactic and assessment tool used in and outside classrooms.
Despite their recorded advantages, a close examination of both English and Chinese literature reveals a plethora of approaches to their implementation. They differ with respect to factors that include, but are not limited to, the name, contents, nature and number of problems covered, writing
guidelines, language of writing, time and frequency of writing, theoretical components, meta-language and theories used, assessors, assessment rubrics, provision and training, uses and follow-ups. Although these differences may be only a matter of trainers’ personal preferences that
suit particular settings, they do have important didactic implications. This paper, therefore, sets out to capture such diversity, with a view to establishing a framework of reference to inform better use of this instrument of intervention in translator education.
期刊介绍:
Target promotes the scholarly study of translational phenomena from any part of the world and welcomes submissions of an interdisciplinary nature. The journal"s focus is on research on the theory, history, culture and sociology of translation and on the description and pedagogy that underpin and interact with these foci. We welcome contributions that report on empirical studies as well as speculative and applied studies. We do not publish papers on purely practical matters, and prospective contributors are advised not to submit masters theses in their raw state.