https://orcid.org/0000-0002-4314-2813
Figures & data
Table 1. A comparison of LTC components in recent approaches
Figure 1. Representation of updated translator competence descriptor.
Table 2. Main areas of translation specialisation (distribution across institutions of affiliation of at least five respondents).
Table 3. Distribution of profile groups per institution type and among freelancers.
Figure 2. Relevance of legal or institutional translation training (81 training institutions).
Figure 3. Relevance of legal or institutional translation training (training institutions of at least five respondents).
Figure 4. Years of experience in institutional translation.
Table 4. Average years of translation and revision experience per profile group.
Table 5. Approval of adapted competence descriptor per profile group and years of experience.
Figure 5. Competence relevance to ensure translation quality (overall scores).
Table 6. Competence relevance to ensure translation quality.
Figure 6. Competence relevance to ensure translation quality (scores per profile group).
Table 7. Competence relevance to ensure translation quality (scores per profile group).
Figure 7. Competence relevance to ensure translation quality (scores per years of experience).
Table 8. Competence relevance to ensure translation quality (scores per years of experience).
Table A1. Comparison of original LTC descriptor and the updated descriptor.