Opetussuunnitelmat

Objective

Part A: Interpreting and Translation Studies (8 ECTS; 240 h) :
Building on students’ existing knowledge and in preparation for the research modules 4.2
and 5, the aim of this module is to provide students with an overview and an enhanced
understanding of theoretical issues in Translation and Interpreting Studies (T&IS).
Students will develop an awareness of the development of the field of T&IS and an
advanced knowledge of selected influential studies of the discipline, as well as the ability
to critically reflect on existing research in discussions and written texts. Students will be
expected to express their theoretical understanding and demonstrate their ability to
critique academic theories in the form of a written essay according to appropriate
academic standards. They will be further expected to communicate their ideas and give
constructive feedback in peer groups. Overall, this module will prepare students to have
the theoretical knowledge to produce further work at an academic level.

Part B: Developing Reflective Practice I (2 ECTS; 60 h):
The aim of this strand, Developing Reflective Practice, is for students to improve and
deepen their self-reflection skills. By increasing self-reflection, students will also
improve their self-awareness and the ability to regulate their behaviour in interpreting
practice. This strand is centred on the need for practitioners to maintain professional
integrity in their work decisions that are in line with broader theories from the field of
professional ethics. The particular aim of this course is to introduce students to the
applicable theories both within and outside of interpreting and to begin to apply them
in their current practice as interpreters. This course begins this discussion with a
critique of various ethical codes.

Content

Part A:
This module focuses on theoretical issues in translation and interpreting studies, offering
students the opportunity to discuss, critically reflect upon and further develop theories of
translation and interpreting. A number of pertinent theories in the field will be addressed,
providing an outline of the scholarly history of the discipline as well as introducing
cutting-edge research. The course will cover wider ‘mainstream’ theories focusing on
written/spoken languages as well as those developed particularly with a view to signed
language interpreting. A connection to translating and interpreting involving at least one
signed language and/or translation involving deaf and hearing people, however, will be
maintained throughout.
Classes will cover topics such as the following:
– Overview of Translation Studies
– Functionalist views of translation
– Translation and ideology
– Social and political issues in Translation and Interpreting Studies
– Multimodality and Translation
– Translation and deconstruction
– Overview of Interpreting Studies
– Early views of interpreting: theorie du sssense and cognitive approaches to
interpreting
– The pragmatics of interpreting
– Interpreting as interaction
– Ethics in an interpreting context
– Approaches to performance and the profession

Part B:
In this course, the focus is on the individual’s practice and how theories of ethics and
effective work can be applied to their own work.
Topics include:
Normative & non-normative ethics
Values-based decision making
Cognitive biases and their impact on moral sensitivity and moral motivation
Four component model
Teaching methods
There will be 10hs of contact time during the block seminar. In addition, students will spend 50 hours on self-study before and after the block seminar

Materials

Part A:
Baker, Mona and Saldanha, Gabriela (ed.). 2009 Encyclopedia of Translation Studies.
2
nd edition. London: Routledge.
Baker, Mona. 2006. Translation and Conflict: A Narrative Account. London and New
York: Routledge.
Baker, Mona (ed.). 2010 Critical Readings in Translation Studies. London and New York:
Routledge.
Bassnett, Susan and Lefevere, André (eds). 1990. Translation, History and Culture. London: Pinter
Berk-Seligson, Susan. 1988/2002. “The Impact of Politeness in Witness Testimony: The
influence of the court interpreter.” In The Interpreting Studies Reader, Franz
Pöchhacker and Miriam Shlesinger (eds): 278-292. London: Routledge:
Cokely, Dennis. 1992. Interpretation. A Sociolinguistic Model. Burtonsville, M.D.: Linstok.
Gentzler, Edwin. 2001. Contemporary Translation Theories. London: Routledge.
Grbic, Nadja. 2007. "Where do we come from? What are we? Where are we going?"
The Sign Language Translator and Interpreter (SLTI) 1.1: 15-51.
Harrington, Frank J. and Turner, Graham H. 2001. Interpreting interpreting: Studies and
Reflections on Sign Language Interpreting. Coleford: Douglas McLean.
Hatim, Basil and Mason, Ian. 1990. Discourse and the Translator. London and New
York: Longman.
Hatim, Basil and Mason, Ian. 1997. The Translator as Communicator. London:
Routledge.
Hermans, Theo. 1999. Translation in Systems. Descriptive and System-oriented
Approaches Explained. Manchester: St. Jerome.
Janzen, Terry (ed.). 2005. Topics in Signed Language Interpreting. Amsterdam and
Philadelphia: John Benjamins
Leeson, Lorraine, Wurm, Svenja and Vermeerbergen, Myriam (eds). 2011. Signed
Language Interpreting: Preparation, Practice and Performance. Manchester: St.
Jerome.
Mason, Ian (ed.). 2001. Triadic Exchanges: Studies in Dialogue Interpreting.
Manchester: St. Jerome.
Marschark Mark, Peterson, Rico and Winston, Elizabeth (eds). 2005. Sign Language
Interpreting and Interpreter Training: Directions for Research and Practice. Oxford
and New York: Oxford University Press.
Metzger, Melanie. 1999. Sign Language Interpreting: Deconstructing the Myth of
Neutrality. Washington, D.C.: Gallaudet University Press.
Metzger, Melanie and Fleetwood, Earl (eds). 2005. Attitudes, Innuendo, and Regulators.
Washington, D.C.: Gallaudet University Press.
Munday, Jeremy. 2001. Introducing Translation Studies. London and New York:
Routledge.
Napier, Jemina. 2002. Sign Language Interpreting: Linguistic Coping Strategies.
Coleford, England: Douglas Mc Lean.
Napier, Jemina, McKee, Rachel and Goswell, Della. 2010. Sign Language Interpreting.
Theory & Practice in Australia & New Zealand. 2
nd. ed. Sydney: Federation Press.
Napier, J. & Roy, C. (Eds.). (2015) Signed language interpreting studies reader.
Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Nicodemus, Brenda and Swabey, Laurie (eds). 2011. Advances in Interpreting
Research: Inquiry in Action. Amsterdam and Philadelphia: John Benjamins.
Nida, Eugene A. 1964. Toward a Science of Translating. Leiden: Brill.
Nord, Christiane. 1997. Translating as a Purposeful Activity: Functionalist Theories
Explained. Manchester: St Jerome.
Pöchhacker, Franz. 2004. Introducing Interpreting Studies. London: Routledge.
Pöchhacker, Franz and Shlesinger, Miriam (eds). 2001. The Interpreting Studies
Reader. London: Routledge.
Pym, Anthony. 2010. Exploring Translation Theories. London: Routledge.
Roy, Cynthia B. 1993/2001. “The Problem with definitions, descriptions and the rolemetaphors of Interpreters.” In The Interpreting Studies Reader, Franz Pöchhacker
and Miriam Shlesinger (eds): 344-353. London: Routledge:
Roy, Cynthia. 2000. Interpreting as a Discourse Process. Oxford: Oxford University
Press.
Seleskovitch, Danica. 1978. Interpreting for International Conferences. Washington,
D.C.: Pen and Boot.
Setton, Robin. 1999. Simultaneous Interpreting: A Cognitive-Pragmatic Analysis.
Amsterdam: Benjamins.
Snell-Hornby, Mary. 1988. Translation Studies: An Integrated Approach. Amsterdam:
Rodopi.
Spivak, Gayatri C. 1992/2000. “The Politics of Translation”. In The Translation Studies
Reader, Lawrence Venuti (ed.), 397-416. London: Routledge.
Turner, Graham H. 2004. “Professionalisation of interpreting with the community:
Refining the model.” In The Critical Link 4: Professionalisation of Interpreting in the
Community. Cecilia Wadensjö, Birgitta E. Dimitrova and Anna-Lena Nilsson (eds):
181-192. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Tymoczko, Maria and Gentzler, Edwin. 2002. Translation and Power. Amherst, USA:
University of Massachussetts.
Venuti, Lawrence. 1995. The Translator's Invisibility. London: Routledge.
Venuti, Lawrence, (ed.). 2012. The Translation Studies Reader. 3
rd Edition. London:
Routledge.
Vermeer, Hans J. 1989/2000. “Skopos and Commission in Translational Action.” In The
Translation Studies Reader, Lawrence Venuti (ed.): 221-232. London: Routledge.
Vermeer, Hans J. 1996. A Skopos Theory of Translation. (Some Arguments for and
against). Heidelberg: TEXTconTEXT-Verlag.
Wadensjö, Cecilia. 1998. Interpreting as Interaction. London: Longman.
Wadensjö, Cecilia. 1993/2002. “The Double Role of a Dialogue Interpreter.” In The
Interpreting Studies Reader, Franz Pöchhacker and Miriam Shlesinger (eds.), 355-
370. London: Routledge.
Wolf, Michaela and Fukari, Alexandra (eds). 2007. Constructing a Sociology of
Translation. Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins.

Part B:
Beauchamp, T. L. and Childress, J. F. 2012. Principles of biomedical ethics. 2nd ed.
New York: Oxford University Press.
Dean, R. K. and Pollard JR, R. Q. 2011. ‘Context-based ethical reasoning in interpreting:
A demand control schema perspective’, The Interpreter and Translator Trainer, 5,
155-182.
Kahneman, D. 2011. Thinking, fast and slow, New York: Farrar, Straus, and Giroux.
Napier, J., McKee, R. & Goswell, D. 2010. Sign Language Interpreting: Theory &
Practice in Australia & New Zealand. 2nd ed. Sidney: Federation Press.
Rest, J. R. 1984 ‘Research on moral development: Implications for training counseling
psychologists’, The Counseling Psychologist, 12, 19-29.
Rest, J. R., Narvaez, D., Thoma, S. J. and Bebeau, M. J. 1999b. ‘A neo-Kohlbergian approach: The DIT and schema theory’, Educational Psychology Review, 11, 291-324.
Schön, D. 1983. The Reflective Practitioner New York: Harper and Collins.
Wadensjö, C. 1998. Interpreting as interaction, New York, Routledge.

Evaluation scale

0-5

Further information

Part A:
Coursework (100%; reassessment: resubmission of coursework with changed topic)
For further information, see above, phase C and D. More detailed guidelines and
assessment criteria will be provided during phase B of the module.
Part B:
The Developing Reflective Practice is not assessed.