La revisión de traducciones jurídicas y la evaluación de su calidad en el ámbito profesional

Abstract

This paper presents the results of an empirical study aimed at analysing the revision of a legal translation from Spanish into Italian in a professional setting.Following Künzli (2007)’s methodology, the material under investigation is based on a bilingual, comparative and pragmatic (Parra 2005, 13–26) revisions, commented and justified by means of a questionnaire, of a judgment delivered by a Spanish judicial body.The following groups of professionals, whose mother tongue was Italian, participated in the study: a) lawyer-linguists; b) professional translation with a specialisation in legal translation; c) translators with a solid professional experience, but with a minimum experience in the legal field; d) legal experts.The results consider the following aspects: time, acceptability and quality of the revision; quantity and type of errors; revision interventions; revision actions; resources and tools used; comments on the revision process.

The impact of specialised translator training and professional experience on legal translation quality assurance: an empirical study of revision performance

“…In another study based on the methodology applied by Künzli ( 2007 ), Pontrandolfo ( 2017 ) compared the Spanish-Italian revisions carried out by (1) five lawyer-linguists from the CJEU with 5 to 10 years of translation and revision experience, (2) five translators trained in legal translation but with less experience (1–5 years), and (3) five professional translators with 5–12 years of experience but no legal translation training. The text chosen was a judgement from a Spanish criminal court, which partially relates to the translation of judgements at the CJEU.…”

Two approaches to quality in institutional settings

“…The activity is also expensive, time-consuming and risky, in at least two ways: first, in terms of text quality, which can be compromised, e.g. through the introduction of errors (Brunette, Gagnon & Hine 2005;Künzli 2007;Pontrandolfo 2017;van Rensburg 2017) and second, it can lead to conflict. These two types of risk result from the fact that revision impacts upon both product and process.…”

“…The same applies to the literature on revision, which primarily focuses on the analysis of the quality of revised texts or on the factors that lead to the highest quality, e.g. procedures (Brunette et al 2005;Ipsen & Dam 2016;Robert 2012) or the profile of revisers (Pontrandolfo 2017;van Rensburg 2017). One could however argue that quality should be considered from a broader perspective, with proponents like Kristiina Abdallah's which offers a three-dimensional concept of quality, composed of product, process and social quality (see Jääskeläinen 2016).…”