Defining Translation Quality

Abstract

Many problems in the translation industry revolve around customer dissatisfaction with someone’s translation quality and disputes between translators when one is revising the work of the other. To determine whether someone has attained translation quality, one must be able to measure it. To measure translation quality, one must be able to define it. And to define translation quality, one must be able to define both translation and quality. Our two prior articles have addressed these terms respectively. Those articles do not resolve disagreements about these terms; indeed, we authors have unresolved disagreements among ourselves. However, the articles outline how different definitions can radically affect people’s expectations about translation and quality. This third article builds on the first two and presents two contrasting definitions of translation quality, a narrow one and a broad one. The narrow definition matches with the narrow definition of translation in the first article and an emphasis on the transcendent view of quality in the second article, while the broad definition matches with the broad definition of translation the first article and an integration of the five approaches in quality management from the second article. The authors strongly disagree about which definition of translation quality is better for the translation industry. Rather than pretending to be the end of this discussion, it hopes to encourage a continuation of the debate that has taken place among the authors.

Cite this work

No public copy is stored for this record, so only the metadata is cited.

Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 54 citations exist upstream.

Papers that cite the same references — the relational fallback while embeddings are still backfilling.