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

References

• Allman, S. 2006. Acknowledging and Establishing the Hierarchy of Expertise in Translator-Reviser Scenarios As an Aid to the Process of Revising Translations. Birmingham: University of Birmingham.
   Google Scholar
• Cao, D. 2007. Translating Law. Clevedon: Multilingual Matters.
   Google Scholar
• Gémar, J. C. 1988. “La traduction juridique : art ou technique d’interprétation.” Meta: Translators’ Journal 33 (2): 304–318. https://doi.org/10.7202/002850ar.
   Google Scholar
• Horguelin, P. A., and L. Brunette. 1998. Pratique de la révision. 3rd ed. Québec: Brossard.
   Google Scholar
• ISO (International Organization for Standardization). 2015. ISO 17100:2015. Translation Services — Requirements for Translation Services. Geneva: ISO.
   Google Scholar
• ISO (International Organization for Standardization). 2020. ISO 20771:2020. Legal Translation — Requirements. Geneva: ISO.
   Google Scholar
• Konttinen, K., L. Salmi, and M. Koponen. 2020. “Revision and Post-Editing Competences in Translator Education.” In Translation Revision and Post-Editing. Industry Practices and Cognitive Processes, edited by M. Koponen, B. Mossop, I. S. Robert, and G. Scocchera, 187–202. London: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Künzli, A. 2006. “Translation Revision – a Study of the Performance of ten Professional Translators Revising a Technical Text.” In Insights into Specialized Translation, edited by M. Gotti and S. Šarčević, 195–214. Bern/Frankfurt: Peter Lang.
   Google Scholar
• Künzli, A. 2007. “Translation Revision. A Study of the Performance of Ten Professional Translators Revising a Legal Text.” In Doubts and Directions in Translation Studies. Selected Contributions from the EST Congress. Lisbon 2004, edited by Y. Gambier, M. Schlesinger, and R. Stolze, 115–126. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. https://doi.org/10.1075/btl.72.14kun.
   Google Scholar
• Lavoie, J. 2003. “Faut-il être juriste ou traducteur pour traduire le droit?” Meta: Translators’ Journal 48 (3): 394–395. https://doi.org/10.7202/007599ar.
   Google Scholar
• Orlando, D. 2017. “Calling Translation to the Bar: A Comparative Analysis of the Translation Errors Made by Translators and Lawyers.” Translation and Traslanguaging in Multilingual Contexts 3 (1): 81–96. https://doi.org/10.1075/ttmc.3.1.06orl.
   Google Scholar
• Parra Galiano, S. 2021. “Translators’ and revisers’ Competences in Legal Translation. Revision Foci in Prototypical Scenarios.” Target 33 (2): 228–253. https://doi.org/10.1075/target.21065.gal.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pontrandolfo, G. 2017. “La revisión de traducciones jurídicas y la evaluación de su calidad en el ámbito professional.” Translation and Traslanguaging in Multilingual Contexts 3 (1): 114–144. https://doi.org/10.1075/ttmc.3.1.08pon.
   Google Scholar
• Popiołek, M. 2020. “ISO 20771:2020 Overview and Legal Translator Competence Requirements in the Context of the European Qualifications Framework, ISO 17100:2015 and Relevant Research.” Lingua Legis 28: 7–40.
   Google Scholar
• Prieto Ramos, F. 2011. “Developing Legal Translation Competence: An Integrative Process-Oriented Approach.” Comparative Legilinguistics – International Journal for Legal Communication 5:7–21. https://doi.org/10.14746/cl.2011.5.01.
   Google Scholar
• Prieto Ramos, F. 2015. “Quality Assurance in Legal Translation: Evaluating Process, Competence and Product in the Pursuit of Adequacy.” International Journal for the Semiotics of Law - Revue internationale de Sémiotique juridique 28 (1): 11–30. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11196-014-9390-9.
   Google Scholar
• Prieto Ramos, F. 2024. “Revisiting Translator Competence in the Age of Artificial Intelligence: The Case of Legal and Institutional Translation.” The Interpreter and Translator Trainer 18 (2). https://doi.org/10.1080/1750399X.2024.2344942
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Prieto Ramos, F., and G. Cerutti. 2021. “Terminology As a Source of Difficulty in Translating International Legal Discourses: An Empirical Cross-Genre Study.” International Journal of Legal Discourse 6 (2): 155–179. https://doi.org/10.1515/ijld-2021-2052.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Prieto Ramos, F., and D. Guzmán. 2021. “Examining Institutional Translation Through a Legal Lens: A Comparative Analysis of Multilingual Text Production at International Organizations.” Target 33 (2): 254–281. https://doi.org/10.1075/target.21003.pri.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Prieto Ramos, F., and D. Guzmán. 2022. “Institutional Translation Profiles. A Comparative Analysis of Descriptors and Requirements.” In Institutional Translator Training, edited by T. Svoboda, Ł. Biel, and V. Sosoni, 49–72. New York: Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781003225249-5.
   Google Scholar
• Prieto Ramos, F., and A. Morales Moreno. 2019. “Terminological Innovation and Harmonization in International Organizations: Can Too Many Cooks Spoil the Broth?” In Legal Translation: Current Issues and Challenges in Research, Methods and Applications, edited by I. Simonnæs and M. Kristiansen, 87–110. Berlin: Frank & Timme.
   Google Scholar
• Šarčević, S. 1997. New Approach to Legal Translation. The Hague/Boston: Kluwer Law International.
   Google Scholar
• Scott, J. 2017. “Legal Translation Training – a Way Forward for Aspiring Lawyers in a Clogged Job Market?” Tilburg Law Review 22:215–235. https://doi.org/10.1163/22112596-02201010.
   Google Scholar
• Soriano Barabino, G. 2016. Comparative Law for Legal Translators. Bern: Peter Lang.
   Google Scholar
• Sparer, M. 2002. “Peut-on faire de la traduction juridique ? Comment doit-on l’enseigner ?” Meta: Translators’ Journal 47 (2): 265–278. https://doi.org/10.7202/008014ar.
   Google Scholar