3.8 Article

The quest for the ideal business translator profile in the Romanian context

期刊

OPEN LINGUISTICS
卷 9, 期 1, 页码 -

出版社

DE GRUYTER POLAND SP Z O O
DOI: 10.1515/opli-2022-0267

关键词

translator profile; business translation; translators' training; quality assurance

向作者/读者索取更多资源

An ideal translator profile is important for both translation providers and beneficiaries. This study focuses on the context of Romanian higher education, distinguishing between graduates of Philology and graduates of Economics or Business as translation providers. The research investigates the extent to which these two profiles align with the ideal business translator profile, as well as their respective strengths and weaknesses. Recommendations for university training are also provided based on the findings.
An ideal translator profile is a crucial issue for both translation providers, who want to deliver impeccable performance, and translation beneficiaries, whose purpose is to obtain flawless services. In the context of Romanian higher education, two distinct educational profiles of providers are distinguished in the business translation market: graduates of Philology, who have been trained in translation (3-year BA and 2-year MA programmes in Translation Studies), and graduates of Faculties of Economics or Business who have undertaken 3-year and/or 2-year MA study programmes in a foreign language. Showing the results of a study conducted with groups of third year Bachelor students of the University of Craiova, Romania (students in Translation Studies and students in the Finance and Banking English-taught programme), across a 3-year period (2015-2017), our research aims at providing answers to the following questions: To what extent does each of these two profiles match the ideal one of a business translator? What are the strengths and weaknesses of each of the two training profiles? What specific actions can and should be taken for each of the two target groups in terms of university training?

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

3.8
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据