Studying of Translation Errors in Rendering English Political Texts into Arabic
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.25130/Lang.10.1.P1.18Keywords:
Translation Errors, Translation, Political Texts, Liao ModelAbstract
This paper reviews the translation errors committed by translation students as they render English political texts into Arabic. It also shows to what extent translation errors resulted from students' translations of these text. This study aims at identifying the main problems of translation errors in the final product of ST. It also categorizes the translation errors into different types according to its origin. It also aims at showing the significant strategies employed by the students to render the political text. This study hypothesizes that the students always face problems in rendering the political texts from English into Arabic and not preserving the right meaning. The researchers employ Liao's Model of Translation Errors to identify errors. This model covers three aspects including language errors, rendition errors, and miscellaneous errors and other sub-categories that come under the main ones. The data have been collected as political texts from different sources and the subjects are from third stage/ Department of Translation/ College of Arts/ University of Tikrit the academic year 2024/2025. This study represents a significance in the field of teaching translation because it shows what the drawbacks and what errors committed by the students.
References
Abulhassan, B. (2014). Between English and Arabic: A practical course in translation. Cambridge Scholars Publishing.
Akil, M. (2007). The Profile of Indonesian-English Translation Made by English Department Students of Higher Learning Institutions in Makassar. Unpublished Dissertation. Makassar: Hasanuddin University.
Al-Jubori, G.& Mohammed, A. & Salih, M.(2024). Applicability of Liao's Framework in Assessing Translation Quality of Arabic Scientific Texts into English. Proceedings of the Ninth Scientific International Conference. College of Arts / University of Tikrit. 2024.
Baker, M. (2018). In other words: A coursebook on translation. London and New York: Routledge.
Chan, E. K. Y. (2003). Translation as metaphor: Yan Fu and his translation principles (Doctoral dissertation, University of Warwick).
Dulay, H. (1982). Language two. Oxford University Press, 200 Madison Ave., New York, NY 10016.
Hatim, B., & Mason, I. (1998). The Translator as Communicator London and New York: Routledge, 1997. Quaderns. Revista de traducció, 1, 153-162.
Liao, J. (2010). The impact of interactive discussions on L2 Chinese composition writing. Unpublished doctoral dissertation). The University of Iowa, Iowa.
Neubert, A., & Shreve, G. M. (1992). Translation as text (No. 1). Kent State University Press.
Nord, C. (2005). Text analysis in translation: Theory, methodology, and didactic application of a model for translation-oriented text analysis (No. 94). Rodopi.
Pinker, S., & Prince, A. (1986). On language and connectionism: Analysis of a parallel distributed processing model of language acquisition. Cognition, 28(1-2), 73-193.
Pym, A. (2011). What technology does to translating. Translation & Interpreting: The International Journal of Translation and Interpreting Research, 3(1), 1-9.
Sari, R. M. (2019). The causes of grammatical errors made by EFL students in writing essay. Linguists: Journal of Linguistics and Language Teaching, 5(2), 86-93.
Toury, G. (1995). Descriptive translation studies: And beyond.
Wilss, W. (1982). Knowledge and skills in translator behavior. Rutledge.
Yang, D. L. (2000). Remaking the Chinese leviathan: Market transition and the politics of governance in China. Stanford University Press.
