Contrastive evaluation of L1 and L2 translations based on the PIE method (Preselected Items Evaluation) : a case study

Abstract

Translation into the foreign language – L2 translation (Stewart, 1999) – is widely discouraged by translation scholars. Newmark (1988/2001, p. 3) labels it “service translation”, while Beeby Lonsdale (1996, p. 5) calls it “prose translation” and “inverse translation”. International translation bodies also disapprove of the practice. The American Translators Association (ATA), for example, explicitly states that “professional translators work into their native language” (Durban, 2011, p. 16). Nevertheless, L2 translation is common practice among professional translators. A survey conducted in 2014 by the International Association of Professional Translators and Interpreters (IAPTI) shows that more than half of all respondents (over 700 translators in all) translate into a language that is not their first language (IAPTI, 2015). In addition, L2 translation is included in the curricula of most translator training institutions (Pokorn, 2016). While L2 translation in translator training has not been widely researched, most existing studies suggest that generally, the L2 translation output of students is of slightly inferior quality (Castillo Rodríguez, 2006; Pavlovic, 2007; Pokorn et al., 2019). However, it must be stressed that the differences between the translation output into the first language (L1) and the output into the second language (L2) cannot be easily quantified and compared objectively. After all, a major confounding factor is the use of different source texts, possibly of differing difficulty levels This highlights the need for further research into L2 translation in translator training, as well as an objective comparison between L1 and L2 student translations.