Abstract

The translation of specialised texts constitutes an integral part of the translation profession. This paper analyses the presence of Languages for Special Purposes and Specialised Translation Training in French, Spanish and Italian within the curricula of the largest universities of Poland. However, the term specialised seems to be used intuitively and inconsistently across the data. Curricula were, therefore, analysed to detect the implicit conceptualisation of specialisation. Moreover, the content was classified within such categories as training in general translation, LSP, basic areas of knowledge and translation for different specialised fields. The conclusion is that the education available in Poland still contains certain deficiencies with regard to well thought-out and consistent planning in Translator Training, although several curricula contain valuable approaches, such as timing: initially LSP, then translation in the same field. Generally speaking, curricula content echoes market demands, with most institutions offering economic and legal translation as the main specialty.

Keywords: curriculum design, LSP training, specialised translation, translator training

Background and aim of the study

Nowadays, in view of the demographic situation, which is causing a decrease in student numbers at pedagogical faculties in Poland, translation training is gaining popularity in Philology Departments. Another increasingly successful course is Applied Linguistics, including Languages for Special Purposes. The result of a convergence of both these courses is specialised translation training, a relatively new component in teaching curricula at Polish universities.

This research aimed to collect data concerning the Polish educational market from the perspective of specialised translation training. Although there are numerous curricula that include specialised translation, this term is ambiguous, as there are also courses entitled legal translation, medical translation, i.e. courses dedicated to training in the translation of professional texts. Our purpose was to determine how specialised translation is conceptualised by the academic staff responsible for curriculum design. Thus, before we look more closely at the curricula of the Polish universities offering translator training, we will review the existing definitions of specialised communication and specialised translation. Then we will conduct a curriculum analysis, as we think that the teaching content can reveal a lot about the different methodologies employed in specialised translation training.

In part 1, we consider two alternative approaches to specialised communication: theoretical Linguistics and teaching methodology, which we will try to relate to specialised translation theory and practice. This will be a good starting point for an analysis of teaching curricula focused on specialised translation teaching, on which we comment in part 2.

1. What is the object of specialised translation?

The phrase specialised translation is commonly used, but its meaning is not entirely clear. If we assume that a ‘German translator’ translates German language, and ‘legal translation’ applies to legal texts, then specialised translation should apply to specialised texts or languages.

Let us consider how the problem of specialised communication is approached in linguistics and Foreign Language Teaching (FLT) methodology.

1.1. Linguistic analysis of specialised aspects of communication

When we look back at the history of Linguistics, it appears that it used to investigate epistemological problems related to the concept of languages (i.e. specialised languages/sublanguages, Languages for Specific Purposes).

In the beginning, specialised communication was studied from the perspective of style. Firth’s category of register was also used (Léon 2007), and later developed by Halliday (Halliday, McIntosh and Strevens 1964). Contemporary Linguistics prefers the term discourse, which is analysed differently in various academic schools. Thus, English language studies focus on genre (Trimble 1985; Swales 1990; 2004; Bhatia 1993), whereas the German school emphasizes text (Kalverkämper 1983).

An additional problem is to verify the status of these terms (discourse, genre and text) in the context of general language. There are two alternative approaches to specialised communication: as a specific lexicon (terminology), or as an independent, separate language. For example, Hoffman (1979: 16) states that LSPs are types of language with proper rules and components, as in the case of sociolects or dialects.

The most common definitions are comprehensive pragmatic definitions, which view LSP as communication in a particular context or in professional situations. According to Gómez de Enterría y Sánchez (2009: 21), the actualisation of an LSP depends on the specific context of communication in which professionals or language users act. This lexical approach makes the distinction between lexicon and vocabulary, which belong to the classical categories of langue and parole, respectively (Saussure 1986). Research on words in context (Pecman 2007; Tutin 2007) show that specialised terminology is not defined in abstracto, but by means of its use in a specific context. This explains the polysemy of terms used in several disciplines. Thus, we should perhaps reject the conception of a lexicon belonging to a certain discipline, and promote the idea of a vocabulary functioning within a discourse (Vincente García 2009). According to this conception, the term LSP (Language for Special Purposes) should definitely be used in the plural.

There is an example that refers to these different theories in the curriculum designed by the Ateneum High School of Gdansk:

The graduate of this speciality receives instruction in basic translation skills in Italian, taking courses of general and specialised translation. The student takes courses aimed at improving general linguistic skills and specialised languages in the range of specialized vocabulary [authors’ emphasis] of different areas. The student knows and is able to use different styles and registers [authors’ emphasis][1].

Additionally, Italian Philology includes ‘lexical areas’ into the teaching content of the specialisation ‘translation and interpreting of specialised terminologies’ at the University of Łódź.

Since ‘general language’ has not yet been defined convincingly (Frandsen 1998: 19), the criteria used to distinguish it from languages for special purposes (discourses, texts) are also not clear. Many definitions were established in relation to users, applying methodologies provided by Sociolinguistics and Dialectology, which brought about terms such as jargon or technolect. An alternative criterion was the area of knowledge, leading to the concept of professional languages. However, neither of these criteria is relevant. Firstly, there is no strict division between areas of knowledge, the proof of which would be the existence of different typologies in business language. Secondly, professionals may use language not only to exchange highly specialised content among themselves, but they may also communicate with each other in informal situations, albeit related to a professional context (small talk or business dinners), or to communicate with lay people (conversations with users, clients, when communication is adapted to a non-specialist level) (Gajewska and Sowa, in press).

The most prolific concept, used in both didactic and translation practice, is that of area of knowledge or profession, i.e. the horizontal criterion (Kocourek 1982: 26). This division is based on usage rather than on well-defined theoretical categories. Several authors reject this idea (Kocourek 1982: 26-28; Eurin Balmet and Henao de Legge 1992: 57; Lerat 1995: 19; Lewandowski 2002) since it produces vague terms named umbrella terms (Frendo 2005: 7; see also Rakotobe-Darricades: 1992; Mamet: 1997, Ćwiklińska and Szadyko: 2005; Daniushina: 2010), such as the popular ‘business language’. An alternative approach treats language as a compound of layers, ranging from research language to popularisation language. This vertical (stylistic) division of language is based on ‘an interesting, but not totally proper metaphor’ (Kocourek 1982: 28), in which the vertical and horizontal axes cross at a certain point. Thus, the language of an area of knowledge has different levels of abstraction, from more or less general language, accessible to lay people, to jargon comprehensible only to specialists. Several scholars tried to approach this indistinct relation between general and specialised language by defining levels of specialisation (see, among others, trattazione specialistica – descrizione specifica – descrizione generica in Freddi 1988; especialización – semidivulgación – divulgación in Cabré 1993; scientific exposition – scientific instruction – scientific journalism in Widdowson 1979b). Although it exceeds the scope of this paper to mention all the grades of specialisation, it is still worth mentioning that the vertical classification of language has been relatively successful as the basis for the creation of a General Theory of LSP.

Thus, we conclude that multiple conceptions have converged in the research on LSP. The inconsistency of terminology, however, does not make a discussion easy. Due to the lack of relevant criteria to delimit the object of the research, it is rather difficult to state what ‘specialised’ actually means.

The functionalist and stylistic theory of the Prague School, particularly influential in English and German Linguistics, contributed to scientific and specialised styles being treated as a uniform system, which can be analysed in contrast to general language. This, on the other hand, blurred the differences between particular LSPs (Dickel 2007). In spite of these efforts, linguists have failed to create a consistent theory of LSP. The only definitions which seem sustainable are those based on context and usage, i.e. those of a pragmatic type. They point to the existence of many LSPs rather than one monolithic LSP.

1.2. Teaching specialised aspects of communication

Just as in the case of linguistics, reaching universal agreement on teaching methodologies proved impossible in spite of all the efforts. For example, attempts to create lexicons of ‘basic vocabulary’ or ‘general professional vocabulary’, using a global-structure method were judged to be ineffective (see Vocabulaire Général d’Orientation Scientifique, Phal 1971, Français Fondamental, Gougenheim and Michéa 1956)[2]. The didactics of LSP dealt with the aforementioned difficulties by abandoning all interest in definitions. ‘Specialised language’ is defined pragmatically, meaning that LSP is an operative, useful concept, seeking to satisfy the communicative needs of a target group.

This being so, the didactics of LSP focuses on teaching methodologies rather than on trying to precisely define the LSPs. A needs analysis procedure allows for an adjustment in the course content to the students’ communicative needs. Paradoxically enough, the popularity of needs analysis puts in doubt the idea of specialised teaching as a particular methodology: should not every course, even those for children or adolescents, satisfy the students’ needs?

In FLT ‘specialised’ is normally identified with ‘professional’ and applies to commonly used concepts such as ‘business language’, ‘legal language’ etc.

At this point we can state that neither Linguistics, nor FLT methodology, provide an appropriate theory or definition of specialised language. Thus, by no longer attempting to define the object of its research, didactics makes methodology its trademark. Operative methodologies of teaching particular LSPs have been created. Summing up, in foreign language didactics, the term ‘specialised’ is associated usually with professional communication teaching in different professional areas: Business English, Français du secrétariat, and so on.

1.3. Specialised translation in Translation Studies

In Translation Studies (TS), the problem of categorisation is even more acute than in Linguistics and LSP theory and teaching.

What are the premises underlying the concept of specialised translation? In the Polish context, it seems to apply to non-literary texts. This is consistent with the idea we find in the editorial of the Journal of Specialised Translation which states:

In today's academic and professional environment, the growth of specialised translation has resulted in the development of a significant area in Translation Studies. JoSTrans aims to create a forum for translators and researchers in specialised translation, to disseminate information, exchange ideas and to provide a dedicated publication outlet for research in specialised, non-literary translation. [url=http://www.jostrans.org/about.php]http://www.jostrans.org/about.php[/url] (accessed 15 September 2013)

On the other hand, literary texts are also highly specific, and they require particular skills to be translated successfully. If we consider specific skills a valid criterion, should conference interpreting or court translation also be considered specialised translation? What is the relation of specialised translation with the translation of user-oriented texts[3], another term found in the bibliography? To what extent can we identify specialised translation with the translation of professional texts?

As we mentioned before, translation is a particular kind of communication, implying a code change. According to Mayoral Asensio (2007) all the terms borrowed from other disciplines should be treated with a certain reservation, as they were conceived for intralingual communication. Moreover, terms and divisions commonly applied in linguistics are arbitrary and subjective. Which of the objects included in a class is prototypic for this class? Who is entitled to decide this? Also, the same specialised text may be perceived as highly specialised by a lay person or quite acceptable by a person whose knowledge in a given field is considerable. Finally, in TS, in addition to analysing specialisation according to the field of knowledge and the grade of specialisation, other terms are also applied. ‘If the criterion is the medium, we speak about translation and interpreting. If the criterion is the situation in which translating is developed, we can speak about audiovisual translation, official translation, court interpreting, translation for publishing companies, etc.’ (Asensio 2007).

However deficient these classifications might be, they are operatively present in translation practice. The most commonly accepted are the terms based on the field of knowledge or genre. ‘Specialised translation and its corollaries – general translation, scientific translation, technical translation, legal translation, medical translation, and so on – are well established denominations in our field, according to which many professional aspects have been organised: professional fees and standing, calls for employment, courses and degrees, academic events, etc.’ (idem). A recent study by Albin (2014), designed on the basis of these terms, confirmed that they are not only recognised by translators but are also fully operative. Again, a pragmatic, operative approach seems to satisfy the professionals, but not the theorists. Thus, the question is: how does the didactics of translation deal with this problem? To what extent is it influenced by a practical approach, based on needs analysis, employability and operational criteria, or by the theorists’ indecisiveness?

Our aim for this study is thus to verify what a student should expect when he or she enrols in a course entitled specialised translation.

2. Specialised translation teaching

2.1. Data and methodology

High quality translator training is offered at Polish universities such as: the Faculty of Applied Linguistics (Warsaw), specialised translation and conference interpreting training in Poznan (UAM) and the UNESCO Chair for Translation Studies and Intercultural Communication in Cracow. They have a long tradition, enjoy a good reputation and, last but not least, enrol candidates with high grades.

However, the majority of FLT and most translation training takes place in philological faculties. This seems to be the result of a decreasing demand for teachers (which used to be the default vocational profile in philology departments). Also, nowadays students seem to prefer well defined professional courses to a more general humanistic education.

In this study, the authors’ professional interests and linguistic competences motivated the choice of curricula from French, Spanish and Italian philology departments as the data source. Moreover, teaching these languages, in relative terms less popular than English or German, requires specific planning. Candidates often start with an intermediate or even zero level of linguistic competence, so the curricula should attempt to compensate for these deficiencies. The starting point is usually A1, reaching C1 within 3 years. Some universities even plan an extra year for zero level students. The MA level intends to start from C1 or C2 and postgraduate studies, B2 or higher. It is another question whether they are able to check the candidates’ competence before admission.

Apart from the philology departments at universities, foreign languages were also taught at Foreign Language Teacher Training Colleges (NKJO) until 2012. These schools were created to supply the necessary teachers of languages other than Russian, when the latter was no longer compulsory at schools.

Our methodology consisted in analysing the curricula available online. The list of schools offering translator training was determined from the data provided by educational websites such as studia.net, uczelnie.info, uczelnie.studentnews.pl and angielski.host.sk. The limitation of this procedure is that public data do not contain all the useful details, such as the type (theoretical or practical) or the duration of the course. Still, the data is sufficient to pinpoint certain trends which should, without doubt, be explored further in future research.

We checked the curricula for the presence of the following:

• a separate translation profile (T) or translation courses within other profiles (for example, a lecture on the theory of translation within a pedagogical specialty: TC);
• an explicit description of the content of the translation courses, especially specialised translation courses;
• training in LSPs (business, law, etc.) and corresponding fields of knowledge.

2. Results

Table 1 presents the overall situation of translation training at Polish universities. The numbers in parentheses refer to the number of universities offering translation training at the BA, MA or postgraduate levels. These differ from the overall number of universities, since each university may offer several specialties at one level or offer translation training at several levels.

Table 1. Translation training at Polish universities

The results confirm that translation training is quite popular at Polish universities. Usually universities offer several specialties at varying levels, one or more of which are specialties in translation and/or interpreting. The data also reveals that Foreign Language Teacher Training Colleges (NKJO) usually remain faithful to their pedagogical vocation and thus translation studies are rare. Universities which have a long tradition of philological studies and offer both BA and MA courses are quite cautious with regard to translation training. They usually offer it as late as at the MA or postgraduate level. On the contrary, universities offering only BA courses organise translation training even for students who start with zero linguistic competence. They seem to be more confident regarding the students’ capacity to achieve the necessary professional skills in a short time.

As for specialised translation, data analysis confirms, in the first place, that universities offer courses labelled as ‘specialised’ (Table 2). Thus, specialised translation exists, at least, as a term.

Table 2. Specialised translation training

Moreover, ‘specialised’ seems to refer to translation and not interpreting. This can be observed most clearly in the many courses where translation and interpreting are offered. Thus, the criterion regarding the field of knowledge refers especially to written texts, in which the key issue seems to be the register or the genre. On the other hand, oral discourse is much less amenable to genre conventions. Interpreting is perceived as a translational medium, focusing on the methodology of message transfer (consecutive, simultaneous, etc.)

When analysing the curricula, we faced a difficulty resulting from terminological inconsistency. ‘Specialised’ is employed as the diploma description, or, less frequently, as the specialty description. The reference to translation training usually appears, if ever, in the name of a specialty. This is due to the official classification of careers by the Polish Ministry of Science and Higher Education, which does not include translation and interpreting. Another problem is posed by the fact that translation training appears at different levels of the curriculum structure: specialty, profile, specialisation, module, optional course, etc.

An additional difficulty in making an overview of the Polish educational system is the existence of parallel terminology, for example, for translation: tłumaczeniowa, przekładoznawcza, translatoryczna. This also applies with respect to the names of the departments. For example, Spanish Philology can be labeled as: filologia hiszpańska, filologia iberyjska, iberystyka or język hiszpański.

Still, our main concern is with the content of such courses or specialties. The available documentation is often incomplete or the description of the courses lacks precision. As an example, we can consider the curriculum available at the University of Silesia:

Specialty: Spanish language. Course name: Specialised translation. Course description: Properties of the Spanish Language for Special Purposes. Lexical and stylistic level. Legal, economic and court vocabulary. Practical application of the vocabulary and structures studied to the translation of Spanish and Polish texts.[6]

Thus, specialised translation can be seen either as 1) an umbrella term, a general term to describe different types of translation or 2) a term describing the methodology common to different types of specialised translation. In the first case the denomination of the course should be understood as a label for the whole programme, containing an introduction to different types of translation. Thus, it may be a conglomerate of independent methodologies, with texts from different professional areas being a common characteristic. This confirms our hypothesis, in which we related specialised translation to professional texts.

Another example curriculum is that from the Higher School of Philology in Wroclaw (WSF Wrocław). In this case the module offers ‘Practical training in translation’ consisting of 96 hours of study.

The aim of this module is to introduce students to the terminology and phraseology of the specialised sublanguage. During the course students will analyse and translate texts from different fields of knowledge. Particular attention will be paid to using correct and adequate linguistic expression.  Students will learn to revise critically their own translations and evaluate them. Thanks to practical exercises, students will improve their linguistic skills, and enrich their terminological background in scientific, technical, medical and literary areas.

Courses:
Introduction to economics
Translation of economic and financial texts
Translation of scientific and technical texts
Translation of medical and pharmaceutical texts
Translation of texts from the areas of arts, media and literature.[7]

The module includes courses in translating different professional texts. In its description, however, we found ‘terminology and phraseology of the specialised sublanguage’. Similarly to the previous example, LSP is treated as one monolithic concept. It is identified with terminology (in the first example, it was vocabulary, which is not quite the same concept) and phraseology (the category is narrower than style).

This is contrary to the results of the theoretical reflection on LSPs. The present state of investigation seems to deny the existence of one universal language (style, register, discourse) for special purposes, as well as of one universal general language. Still, there seems to be an idea behind the curriculum design that is based on a general concept of ‘Spanish for Special Purposes’. Namely, this is the concept of a possible general method for the translation of specialised texts, applicable to the translation of texts from various or even all fields. Does such a method exist? Is it viable? From a pragmatic point of view, different texts, discourses or genres used in a particular area have many characteristics in common. Possibly translation methodology is able to find operative strategies for processing them. Still, since our study has a descriptive and exploratory character, we do not intend to resolve this question or to formulate any recommendations. Further research would be necessary to reflect upon this possibility. The question whether a universal translation method for specialised texts exists or not will remain unanswered for now.

As for the fields of knowledge in which STT is offered, the most popular are business, law, technology, and administration (see Table 3). These have quite a long tradition in the Polish educational system. STT in these areas was obviously stimulated by the demands of the market and although medical translation is hardly ever taught, finance and banking appear occasionally in the content of the curricula. IT appears, surprisingly enough, combined with the media.

Table 3. LSPs in which translation training is offered.

A problem related to specialised translation is that of specialised linguistic competence, both in the foreign and the native language. Table 4 shows the linguistic training available in the LPSs and the number of universities that offer additional training in the LSP and in the specific field of knowledge.

Table 4. LSPs training vs. field of knowledge basic training

To translate efficiently, it is essential to know the discourse conventions and the terminology of a given LSP.  In the case of the languages we discuss here, which are taught at universities from zero or a relatively low level, this problem is particularly acute. Still, universities do seem to be aware of the problem when designing their curricula. Examples of a well thought-out curriculum are, to our view, Spanish and Italian Philology curricula at the Pedagogical University of Cracow (at the BA level) in which a course in one particular LSP (tourism, economy, administration and law) is followed, one semester later, by a course on translation in that field of knowledge.

Another problem is that of poor native language competence, which sometimes prevents students from becoming successful translators. Courses aimed at developing this competence are rarely included in the curricula, or are usually limited to ‘stylistics of the Polish language’. It should be noted, however, that courses developing knowledge in a given field also contribute to an improvement in linguistic skills. As we stated before (Table 3), the two areas most frequently offered in the curricula are law and economics. For philology students, this certainly constitutes a Content and Language Integrated Learning (CLIL) training.

As for the importance of knowledge within a field for linguistic training, LSP researchers have discussed it thoroughly since the 1980s. An important result of this debate, from our perspective, is the conclusion concerning the role of experts and their cooperation with LSP teachers. In translation didactics too, an expert is an important source of knowledge in specialised domains, to which translators can and should resort.  

Ewer (1983), one of the pioneers of teaching English for Science and Technology, argued that it is necessary for a teacher to have at least a lay-person’s competence in a particular field of knowledge. In the same volume of The ESP Journal, Abbot (1983) questioned rhetorically how many areas a teacher should master, or how many sleepless nights it would cost to achieve an understanding of just two such areas. According to Hutchinson and Waters (1984: 163), a teacher should display a positive attitude towards the ESP content, have a basic knowledge in the field and be aware of the limits of his or her own competence. In practice, they believe, this implies the capacity to ask pertinent questions about the topic. These recommendations seem reasonable for LSP teaching, especially when the students themselves are experts in their field of knowledge. Indeed, Genre Analysis applied to specialised texts suggests cooperation with an expert (Bhatia 1993, Askehave and Swales 2000; Swales 2004, Mourlhon-Dallies 2008).

Translation is often perceived as a solitary, reflexive and purely cognitive activity. Translation problems belong to the translator’s professional workbench and must not be revealed to the public, for reasons of prestige, until successfully solved (Albin 2014). To ensure a quality of the highest standard, a translator must meet the requirements of multicomponential competence models, which include extralinguistic or thematic competence (PACTE 2003, Kelly 2002). Still, concerns about the possibility of acquiring expertise in several, or even one, field of knowledge should be highlighted, and not only in the case of LSP teachers and learners. It is even more acute in the case of translators, taking into account the additional factor of time constraints (Faber 2010). However, Faber also argues that the acquisition of the necessary knowledge actually happens, if the translator is competent, during the process of translation. Moreover, several authors recommend enhancing the cognitive capacity of translators by means of pertinent terminological resources (Faber idem), integration into communities of knowledge to learn with and from experts (Kiraly 2000) and developing self-efficacy and self-management skills (Albin 2014).

3. Conclusions

To sum up, we can say that in the Polish context specialised translation is a relatively new term, coming to replace the former translation of user-oriented texts. It is to be found in most Philology departments, including those at BA level, except for the Foreign Language Teacher Training Colleges, with linguistic training often starting from zero level. Along with Computer Assisted Translation, specialised translation is nowadays a fashionable trend. The courses are offered much more frequently than those of literary translation. This means that what is on offer has changed in the last 20 years, as previously translators complained about the lack of STT in philology departments and too much time was being dedicated to literary translation (Albin 2014).

Our analysis leads to the conclusion that the term specialised translation is used quite imprecisely, almost intuitively, according to a colloquial understanding of specialisation. Still, it is used to describe a reality that is developing and diversifying rapidly. Professional communication and translation is necessary in numerous domains across the globalised world. Some areas are new, but these will grow and will probably occupy an important place in our lives. We are sure this change will come soon, stimulated by the demand for high quality courses. Thus, research and didactics should accompany these trends, revising their terminology and methodologies. Students expect clearly defined vocational training profiles and are more and more active in their learning. This means that the content of translational courses needs to be clearly stated and should be linked to the main career goals.

About the author(s)

Joanna Albin:
Since 2006 Joanna Albin is Spanish LSPs teacher and translator trainer at the Pedagogical University of
Cracow. She wrote her PhD on self-directed learning of professional translators. Her research focuses on
translators' affective factors and self-management.
Elzbieta Gajewska:
Elżbieta Gajewska is an Associate Professor in Applied Linguistics at the Pedagogical University of Cracow,
teaching French LSPs and didactics. Her PhD focused on language manuals for adults and her recent research
covers problems of professional communication and new technologies.

Email: [please login or register to view author's email address]

•  Previous article
• Next article