|
The last few decades have seen an increase in schools and university departments which teach translation. However, there are still conflicting views between those who support the formal academic training of translators and those who do not see the need for such training. The latter group argues that “translators are born not made”. In other words, translators are artists whose art cannot be formalized and taught in classes; in fact it is often said that it would “take a poet to translate a poet” (Nida 1979: 214). In this regard, Baker (1992: 2) tells us that she has:
met professional translators who actually argue against formal academic training because, they suggest, translation is an art which requires aptitude, practice and general knowledge – nothing more. The ability to translate is a gift, they say: you either have it or you do not, and theory is therefore irrelevant to the work of the translator.
Moreover, the supporters of this view maintain that in addition to being an art, translation is a skill which is acquired through “repeated practice under supervision, familiarizing oneself with the working environment and rules and widening one’s horizon in life” (Chua 1984: 35). Hence, formal
academic training, they say, cannot be profitably conducted in an academic context where the emphasis is laid on academic subjects and not on applied techniques (Longley 1978: 46 in Chau 1984: 36).
The proponents of the first view, i.e. those in favour of formal academic training, argue that the main goal of translation teaching is “to guide students to understand the principles of good translating and to appreciate the hard work involved” and “not actually to teach them how to translate” (Ibid: 32). Taking up this idea, Baker (1992: 1) draws a distinction between two main types of training, namely, vocational training and theoretical training:
There are two main types of training that a profession can provide for its members: vocational training and academic training. Vocational courses provide training in practical skills but do not include a strong theoretical component. A good example would be a course in plumbing or typing... Like vocational courses, most academic courses set out to teach students how to do a particular job such as curing certain types of illness, building bridges, or writing computer programs. But they do more than that: an academic course always includes a strong theoretical component. The value of this theoretical component is that it encourages students to reflect on what they do, how they do it, and why they do it in one way rather than another.
Baker also suggests that theoretical training is most beneficial to the student because it enables him or her to deal with the unpredictable, acquire self-confidence, and keep abreast of the latest developments in the field, ultimately making his or her own contribution (Ibid: 2).
Gabrian (1986:54), cited by Kiraly (1995: 9), stresses the importance of formal academic training by drawing a distinction between learning at school and at university; she says:
Universities are unlike schools in that it is not their task to spoonfeed knowledge to students to be memorized (but not digested) and regurgitated for exams. Rather, the main task of universities is to encourage students to think and act responsibly and independently.
Similarly, Kussmaul (1995: 1) distinguishes between factual training and procedural training. Thus, he states:
Factual knowledge, i.e. knowledge of special fields, special terminology and foreign languages, is undoubtedly an essential requirement for translators. But it is not enough... translators must know how to translate.
Another point raised by the supporters of formal academic training concerns the element of time. Formal academic training, it is argued,
allows trainees to learn the basic principles of translating within a few years instead of having to wait ages before reaching the required standard. As Launa Castellano claims:
Our profession is based on knowledge and experience. It has the longest apprenticeship of any profession. Not until thirty do you start to be useful as a translator, not until fifty do you start to be in your prime. (Launa Castellano, 1988: 133 in Baker 1992: 3)
Along similar lines, it is argued that formal academic training is the only way to achieve the recognition which the translating profession deserves. Concerning this point, Baker states:
There is no doubt that the low status accorded to translation as a profession is “unjust”, but one has to admit that this is not just the fault of the general public. The translating community itself is guilty of underestimating not so much the value as the complexity of the translation process and hence the need for formal professional training in the field. (Ibid: 2)
In conclusion, it is perhaps safe to assume that formal academic training is not something we can afford to discard. As Chau maintains, translation teaching would be “woefully lacking in vision” if the theoretical principles were not taken into account. (Chau 1984: 38)
Do'stlaringiz bilan baham: |
