Translating medical texts into a foreign language : some methodological considerations

RESUMEN: Muchos autores, académicos y teóricos han negado teóricamente la posibilidad de traducción a un idioma extranjero (Newmark, 1998, 1995; Van Deth, 1989; Vásquez Ayora, 1977 entre otros), debido a la interferencia causada por el traductor lengua materna, así como la falta de competencia, especialmente en la escritura, y el nivel de intuición al entrar en el idioma extranjero. Los autores confrontan y discuten el diferentes puntos de vista. Argumentos a favor de la traducción a un idioma extranjero. también debe considerarse (Wilss, 1982; Wotjak, 1981; Harris, 1990; Nord, 1992; Cao, 1996; Beeby, 1996; Quiroz y Muñoz, 1996; Zapata y col. 1998). Asimismo, se muestra que los métodos, metodologías y técnicas pueden usarse en ambos sentidos. Esta concluido que el establecimiento correcto de las características de análisis de texto, así como las características lingüísticas en ambos idiomas, hacen posible traducir textos médicos al inglés como idioma extranjero.ABSTRACT: Many authors, scholars, and theorists have theoretically denied the possibility of translating into a foreign language (Newmark, 1998, 1995; Van Deth, 1989; VásquezAyora, 1977 among others), because of the interference caused by the translator’s mother tongue as well as the lack of competence, especially in writing, and level of intuition when going into the foreign language. Authors confront and argue the different points of view. Arguments in favor of translating into a foreign language should also be considered (Wilss, 1982; Wotjak, 1981; Harris, 1990; Nord, 1992; Cao, 1996; Beeby, 1996; Quiroz and Muñoz, 1996; Zapata et al. 1998). Likewise, it is shown that methods, methodologies, and techniques may be used both ways. It is concluded that the correct establishment of text analysis features as well as linguistic characteristics in both languages make it possible to translate medical texts into English as a foreign language. Keywords: Translating, Language, Medical texts, Texts into ednglis

Mortality from gastrointestinal congenital anomalies at 264 hospitals in 74 low-income, middle-income, and high-income countries: a multicentre, international, prospective cohort study

Summary Background Congenital anomalies are the fifth leading cause of mortality in children younger than 5 years globally. Many gastrointestinal congenital anomalies are fatal without timely access to neonatal surgical care, but few studies have been done on these conditions in low-income and middle-income countries (LMICs). We compared outcomes of the seven most common gastrointestinal congenital anomalies in low-income, middle-income, and high-income countries globally, and identified factors associated with mortality. Methods We did a multicentre, international prospective cohort study of patients younger than 16 years, presenting to hospital for the first time with oesophageal atresia, congenital diaphragmatic hernia, intestinal atresia, gastroschisis, exomphalos, anorectal malformation, and Hirschsprung’s disease. Recruitment was of consecutive patients for a minimum of 1 month between October, 2018, and April, 2019. We collected data on patient demographics, clinical status, interventions, and outcomes using the REDCap platform. Patients were followed up for 30 days after primary intervention, or 30 days after admission if they did not receive an intervention. The primary outcome was all-cause, in-hospital mortality for all conditions combined and each condition individually, stratified by country income status. We did a complete case analysis. Findings We included 3849 patients with 3975 study conditions (560 with oesophageal atresia, 448 with congenital diaphragmatic hernia, 681 with intestinal atresia, 453 with gastroschisis, 325 with exomphalos, 991 with anorectal malformation, and 517 with Hirschsprung’s disease) from 264 hospitals (89 in high-income countries, 166 in middleincome countries, and nine in low-income countries) in 74 countries. Of the 3849 patients, 2231 (58·0%) were male. Median gestational age at birth was 38 weeks (IQR 36–39) and median bodyweight at presentation was 2·8 kg (2·3–3·3). Mortality among all patients was 37 (39·8%) of 93 in low-income countries, 583 (20·4%) of 2860 in middle-income countries, and 50 (5·6%) of 896 in high-income countries (p<0·0001 between all country income groups). Gastroschisis had the greatest difference in mortality between country income strata (nine [90·0%] of ten in lowincome countries, 97 [31·9%] of 304 in middle-income countries, and two [1·4%] of 139 in high-income countries; p≤0·0001 between all country income groups). Factors significantly associated with higher mortality for all patients combined included country income status (low-income vs high-income countries, risk ratio 2·78 [95% CI 1·88–4·11], p<0·0001; middle-income vs high-income countries, 2·11 [1·59–2·79], p<0·0001), sepsis at presentation (1·20 [1·04–1·40], p=0·016), higher American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) score at primary intervention (ASA 4–5 vs ASA 1–2, 1·82 [1·40–2·35], p<0·0001; ASA 3 vs ASA 1–2, 1·58, [1·30–1·92], p<0·0001]), surgical safety checklist not used (1·39 [1·02–1·90], p=0·035), and ventilation or parenteral nutrition unavailable when needed (ventilation 1·96, [1·41–2·71], p=0·0001; parenteral nutrition 1·35, [1·05–1·74], p=0·018). Administration of parenteral nutrition (0·61, [0·47–0·79], p=0·0002) and use of a peripherally inserted central catheter (0·65 [0·50–0·86], p=0·0024) or percutaneous central line (0·69 [0·48–1·00], p=0·049) were associated with lower mortality. Interpretation Unacceptable differences in mortality exist for gastrointestinal congenital anomalies between lowincome, middle-income, and high-income countries. Improving access to quality neonatal surgical care in LMICs will be vital to achieve Sustainable Development Goal 3.2 of ending preventable deaths in neonates and children younger than 5 years by 2030

Text Analysis in Teaching Translation

The idea that translators begin to translate once they get a hold of the source language (SL) text is widely spread and controverted. As a cognitive and metacognitive strategy, text analysis is vital in translation training in order to gain a good expertise in translation. A two-phase model is discussed in this paper: an overall text evaluation first and then a deep analysis are undertaken. In the former, students learn to apply and identify background knowledge, document sources, text length, price, and difficulty among other factors. In the latter, students analyse titles, text layout, communication situation, text types, genre, etc. The strategies and methodology to attain these phases in the translation process are explained step-by-step. Additionally, student samples will be shown as further illustrations