Analysing Phraseological Units in Legal Translation: Evaluation of Translation Errors for the English-Spanish Language Pair

This paper describes a contrastive case study carried out with a sample of second-year undergraduate students studying a BA in Translation at the University of Westminster (UoW). The case study analyses the translation strategies used by translation students when dealing with certain phraseological units (PU) in a piece of legal translation coursework involving the English into Spanish language pair. This paper aims to describe the type of errors students tend to make when they translate PU in a semi-specialized legal text and to establish a comparison between the most common errors made by English native speakers (ENS) and Spanish native speakers (SNS). Under the umbrella term of phraseological unit, the stress of this study is mainly put on the analysis of collocations, which can be defined as the combination of two or more words which frequently appear in combination with each other and where each lexical unit retains its meaning (Buendía 2013; Buendía, Montero & Faber 2014). In the light of this analysis and in line with recent case studies undertaken in the field of legal translation (Pontrandolfo 2016), this paper points to some approaches that enhance the phraseological competence required in semi-specialized legal translation courses. These approaches include task-based approaches applied to translator training (e.g. Hurtado Albir 1999/2003, 2015a, 2015b; González Davies 2004; Borja 2007/2015; Huc-Hepher & Huertas Barros 2016), critical discourse analysis (Way 2012), and approaches based on decision making and problem solving (Prieto Ramos 2014; Way 2014)

Optimising resourcing skills to develop phraseological competence in legal translation: tasks and approaches

Based on a previous case study on common translation errors made by trainee translators when dealing with phraseological units in legal translation (Huertas Barros and Buendía 2017), this paper proposes some activities and approaches to minimise these errors and hence enhance students’ phraseological competence in this field. To this end, we first provide a description of the most representative legal resources available for translators, particularly for the English-Spanish language pair. Then we review some of the existing approaches that could develop students’ legal translation competence, particularly phraseological competence. For each type of error identified in our previous case study, we propose a set of research-based activities which could avoid such errors by maximising the use of legal resources. The emphasis is put on preliminary documentary research and effective use of corpora prior to the translation task. In order to mitigate translation errors, we propose an integrated approach combining task-based approaches with approaches based on critical discourse analysis, and problem-solving and decision-making. While these tasks have been designed for a semi-specialised legal text pertaining to a subdomain of Family Law (i.e. adoption), they can be easily applied to any other areas of subdomains of legal translation

Current Trends on MA Translation Courses in the UK: Changing Assessment Practices on Core Translation Modules

Assessment underpins all forms of translator training and is an essential element of any teaching and learning process. By looking at university assessment practices, we can gain an insight into current understandings about the nature of translation practice and what issues are foregrounded in translator education. This paper presents the findings of the second stage of our research into assessment practices on core translation modules of MA Translation courses offered in the UK, and follows on from a preliminary case study conducted at the University of Westminster in 2015 and 2016 with MA Translation tutors and students (n=16; n=53). The research presented in this paper was carried out via documentary research into all universities offering MA Translation courses (n=27) and via a survey which asked a representative of each UK university to fill out a questionnaire. The questionnaire was completed by 55% of universities (n=15). The areas explored include universities' learning outcomes, assessment instruments and criteria. In the light of the data gathered, our study aims to discover if and to what extent current assessment practices on the core translation modules reflect the competence-based understandings of the translation process and have adopted new forms of assessment

Training the Trainers in Embedding Assessment Literacy into Module Design: A Case Study of a Collaborative Transcreation Project

Translator trainers are being asked to respond in their course and module design to a variety of changing requirements, including institutional, professional and pedagogical ones. This paper proposes a way that translator trainers can respond to two sets of these new requirements. The first are those for a widening conception of translation brought about by the rapid globalisation of markets and the needs for intercultural mediators (Katan, 2016; Massey et al., 2017; Massey & Wieder, 2019). Indeed, Katan finishes the paper with the startling statement ‘There is really no question about it: if T/Is are going to survive they must make the transcreational turn’ (ibid.: 378). The second set of requirements comes from the process of articulating what attributes a graduate should possess and how these attributes are developed (Hughes, 2010). As the Higher Education Academy (HEA, 2012; see also Elkington, 2016) state, one way to ensure that the graduate skills are developed is through new assessment practices based on assessment for learning and assessment literacy. New assessment practices mean that assessment ‘does not just contribute to learning at university, but develops learning and evaluative skills essential for employment and lifelong learning’ (ibid.: 10). This paper offers translation trainers an approach to module design which can address both these sets of demands. The module is designed with a collaborative transcreation project at its core and has incorporated assessment literacy into the design. The study is supported with quantitative and qualitative data gained from a survey of participating students. By introducing the case study of our module design and linking the design to the underlying theories which informed it, the paper provides trainers with a set of concepts which could be applied to their own curricula needs in order to future proof their students in the changing employment market

Elective Cancer Surgery in COVID-19-Free Surgical Pathways During the SARS-CoV-2 Pandemic: An International, Multicenter, Comparative Cohort Study.

PURPOSE: As cancer surgery restarts after the first COVID-19 wave, health care providers urgently require data to determine where elective surgery is best performed. This study aimed to determine whether COVID-19-free surgical pathways were associated with lower postoperative pulmonary complication rates compared with hospitals with no defined pathway. PATIENTS AND METHODS: This international, multicenter cohort study included patients who underwent elective surgery for 10 solid cancer types without preoperative suspicion of SARS-CoV-2. Participating hospitals included patients from local emergence of SARS-CoV-2 until April 19, 2020. At the time of surgery, hospitals were defined as having a COVID-19-free surgical pathway (complete segregation of the operating theater, critical care, and inpatient ward areas) or no defined pathway (incomplete or no segregation, areas shared with patients with COVID-19). The primary outcome was 30-day postoperative pulmonary complications (pneumonia, acute respiratory distress syndrome, unexpected ventilation). RESULTS: Of 9,171 patients from 447 hospitals in 55 countries, 2,481 were operated on in COVID-19-free surgical pathways. Patients who underwent surgery within COVID-19-free surgical pathways were younger with fewer comorbidities than those in hospitals with no defined pathway but with similar proportions of major surgery. After adjustment, pulmonary complication rates were lower with COVID-19-free surgical pathways (2.2% v 4.9%; adjusted odds ratio [aOR], 0.62; 95% CI, 0.44 to 0.86). This was consistent in sensitivity analyses for low-risk patients (American Society of Anesthesiologists grade 1/2), propensity score-matched models, and patients with negative SARS-CoV-2 preoperative tests. The postoperative SARS-CoV-2 infection rate was also lower in COVID-19-free surgical pathways (2.1% v 3.6%; aOR, 0.53; 95% CI, 0.36 to 0.76). CONCLUSION: Within available resources, dedicated COVID-19-free surgical pathways should be established to provide safe elective cancer surgery during current and before future SARS-CoV-2 outbreaks

Elective cancer surgery in COVID-19-free surgical pathways during the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic: An international, multicenter, comparative cohort study

PURPOSE As cancer surgery restarts after the first COVID-19 wave, health care providers urgently require data to determine where elective surgery is best performed. This study aimed to determine whether COVID-19–free surgical pathways were associated with lower postoperative pulmonary complication rates compared with hospitals with no defined pathway. PATIENTS AND METHODS This international, multicenter cohort study included patients who underwent elective surgery for 10 solid cancer types without preoperative suspicion of SARS-CoV-2. Participating hospitals included patients from local emergence of SARS-CoV-2 until April 19, 2020. At the time of surgery, hospitals were defined as having a COVID-19–free surgical pathway (complete segregation of the operating theater, critical care, and inpatient ward areas) or no defined pathway (incomplete or no segregation, areas shared with patients with COVID-19). The primary outcome was 30-day postoperative pulmonary complications (pneumonia, acute respiratory distress syndrome, unexpected ventilation). RESULTS Of 9,171 patients from 447 hospitals in 55 countries, 2,481 were operated on in COVID-19–free surgical pathways. Patients who underwent surgery within COVID-19–free surgical pathways were younger with fewer comorbidities than those in hospitals with no defined pathway but with similar proportions of major surgery. After adjustment, pulmonary complication rates were lower with COVID-19–free surgical pathways (2.2% v 4.9%; adjusted odds ratio [aOR], 0.62; 95% CI, 0.44 to 0.86). This was consistent in sensitivity analyses for low-risk patients (American Society of Anesthesiologists grade 1/2), propensity score–matched models, and patients with negative SARS-CoV-2 preoperative tests. The postoperative SARS-CoV-2 infection rate was also lower in COVID-19–free surgical pathways (2.1% v 3.6%; aOR, 0.53; 95% CI, 0.36 to 0.76). CONCLUSION Within available resources, dedicated COVID-19–free surgical pathways should be established to provide safe elective cancer surgery during current and before future SARS-CoV-2 outbreaks