Training translators for accreditation in Finland

References

• Álvarez, G., and M. Ana. 2008. “Der translatorische Kommentar als Evaluationsmodell der studentischen Übersetzungsprozesse’.” Lebende Sprachen 53 (1): 26–32.
   Google Scholar
• Biggs, J. B., and K. F. Collis. 1982. Evaluating the Quality of Learning: The SOLO Taxonomy. New York, NY: Academic Press.
   Google Scholar
• Bloxham, S., and P. Boyd. 2007. Developing Effective Assessment in Higher Education: A Practical Guide. Buckingham: Open University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Brunette, L. 2000. “Towards a Terminology for Translation Quality Assessment - A Comparison of TQA Practices.” The Translator 6 (2): 169–182. doi:10.1080/13556509.2000.10799064.
   Google Scholar
• Colina, S. 2009. “Further Evidence for a Functionalist Approach to Translation Quality Evaluation.” Target 21: 235–264. doi:10.1075/target.21.2.02col.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Colina, S. 2011. “Evaluation/Assessment.” In Handbook of Translation Studies Online, Volume 2, edited by Y. Gambier and L. Van Doorslaer, 43–48. Amsterdam, Philadelphia: John Benjamins.
   Google Scholar
• EMT (EMT Expert Group). 2009. Competences for Professional Translators, Experts in Multilingual and Multimedia Communication. Brussels: European Commission. European Commission. Accessed 29 May 2015. http://ec.europa.eu/dgs/translation/programmes/emt/key_documents/emt_competences_translators_en.pdf.
   Google Scholar
• EUATC (European Union of Associations of Translation Companies). 2009. “Practice in parts of Europe on sworn translations, notorisation and apostille.” European Commission. Accessed 29 May 2015. http://ec.europa.eu/translation/LID/index.cfm?fuseaction=main.publicationsearch.
   Google Scholar
• Gile, D., G. Hansen, and N. K. Pokorn, eds. 2010. Why Translation Studies Matter. Amsterdam, Philadelphia: John Benjamins.
   Google Scholar
• Hale, S. B., I. Garcia, J. Hlavac, M. Kim, M. Lai, B. Turner, and H. Slatyer. 2012. “Improvements to NAATI Testing. Development of a Conceptual Overview for a New Model for NAATI Standards, Testing and Assessment.” The National Accreditation Authority for Translators and Interpreters (NAATI). Accessed 29 May 2015. http://www.naati.com.au/PDF/INT/INTFinalReport.pdf.
   Google Scholar
• Hansen, G. 2009. “A Classification of Errors in Translation and Revision.” In CIUTI-Forum 2008: Enhancing Translation Quality: Ways, Means, Methods, edited by M. Forstner, H. Lee-Jahnke, and P. A. Schmitt, 313–326. Bern: Peter Lang.
   Google Scholar
• Hietanen, K. 2005. “Virallinen kääntäjän paljon vartijana. Ammattitoiminnan ja auktorisointimenettelyn yhteensovittamisen haaste.” [The Licenced Translator Safeguarding the Public Interest – The Challenge of Reconciling Professional Practice and Method of Authorisation]. PhD diss., University of Tampere.
   Google Scholar
• Hlavac, J. 2013. “A Cross-National Overview of Translator and Interpreter Certification Procedures.” Translation & Interpreting. The International Journal for Translation & Interpreting Research 5 (2): 32–65.
   Google Scholar
• Kemppanen, H., and L. Salmi. 2008. “Authentic Translation Commissions in Translator Training: The Case of the Guide for Patients.” In Translation and Cultural Diversity. XXIII FIT World Congress, congress proceedings published on a CD. Shanghai: Foreign Language Press.
   Google Scholar
• Kinnunen, T. 2006. “Käännös oikeudenkäyntiaineistona – lakitekstien tulkinta oikeuskäsitteiden kääntämisen näkökulmasta.” [Translation as a source of law – a study of legal concepts an their translation]. PhD diss., University of Tampere.
   Google Scholar
• Martínez Melis, N., and A. Hurtado Albir. 2001. “Assessment in Translation studies: Research Needs.” Meta: Journal des Traducteurs 46 (2): 272–287.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Melby, A. K. 2013. “Introduction.” Translation & Interpreting. The International Journal for Translation & Interpreting Research 5 (1): 1–12.
   Google Scholar
• Nord, C. 1997. “A Functional Typology of Translations.” In Text Typology and Translation, edited by A. Trosborg, 43–66. Amsterdam, Philadelphia: John Benjamins.
   Google Scholar
• Opetushallitus. 2012. Auktorisoidun kääntäjän tutkinnon perusteet. [Criteria for the authorized translator’s examination]. Määräykset ja ohjeet 2012:40. Helsinki: Opetushallitus.
   Google Scholar
• Opetushallitus. 2014. “Tutkintotulokset” [Examination results]. Accessed 29 May 2015. http://oph.fi/koulutus_ja_tutkinnot/auktorisoidut_kaantajat/tutkintoon_osallistuminen.
   Google Scholar
• Presas, M. 2012. “Training Translators in the European Higher Education Area.” The Interpreter and Translator Trainer 6: 139–169. doi:10.1080/13556509.2012.10798834.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pryor, J., and B. Crossouard. 2008. “A Socio-Cultural Theorisation of Formative Assessment.” Oxford Review of Education 34 (1): 1–20. doi:10.1080/03054980701476386.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pym, A., F. Grin, C. Sfreddo, and A. Chan. 2012. The Status of the Translation Profession in the European Union. Studies on Translation and Multilingualism, DGT/2011/TST. Brussels: European Commission. Accessed 29 May 2015. http://ec.europa.eu/dgs/translation/publications/studies/index_en.htm.
   Google Scholar
• Reiß, K. 1971. Möglichkeiten und Grenzen der Übersetzungskritik. Kategorien und Kriterien für eine sachgerechte Beurteilung von Übersetzungen. Hueber Hochschulreihe 12. Munich: Max Hueber.
   Google Scholar
• Sadler, R. 2010. “Assessment in Higher Education.” In International Encyclopedia of Education (3rd. Ed.), edited by P. Peterson, E. Baker, and B. McGaw, 249–255. Amsterdam: Elsevier.
   Google Scholar
• Salmi, L., and A. Penttilä. 2013. “The System of Authorizing Translators in Finland.” In Assessment Issues in Language Translation and Interpreting, edited by D. Tsagari and R. van Deemter, 115–130. Frankfurt am Main: Peter Lang.
   Google Scholar
• Schmitz, D. H., and D. Krenzler-Behm. 2005. “Authentische Übersetzungsaufträge als Teil des translationswissenschaftlichen Curriculums: Grenzen und Möglichkeiten.” In Fachsprachen und Übersetzungstheorie, XXV. Vakki-Symposium, edited by K. Mård-Miettinen and N. Niemelä, 166–175. Vaasa: Vaasa University.
   Google Scholar
• Schopp, J. 2005a. “Is an Authentic Commission a Good Commission for Teaching Translation?” In XVII World Congress of the International Federation of Translators, edited by L. Salmi and K. Koskinen, 221–223. Tampere: International Federation of Translators – Fédération Internationale des Traducteurs.
   Google Scholar
• Schopp, J. 2005b. “Realer Übersetzungsbedarf und authentische Aufträge im Translationsunterricht – Übersetzungsübung und Übersetzungsauftrag.” In XXXII Kielitieteen Päivät Tampereella 19.–20.5.2005, edited by A. Pajunen and H. Tommola, 156–169. Tampere: Tampere University Press. Accessed 29 May 2015. http://urn.fi/urn:isbn:951-44-6622-5.
   Google Scholar
• Stejskal, J. 2009. “Quality Assessment in Translation.” In CIUTI-Forum 2008: Enhancing Translation Quality: Ways, Means, Methods, edited by M. Forstner, H. Lee-Jahnke, and P. A. Schmitt, 291–300. Bern: Peter Lang.
   Google Scholar
• Torrance, H. 2012. “Formative Assessment at the Crossroads: Conformative, Deformative and Transformative Assessment.” Oxford Review of Education 38 (3): 323–342. doi:10.1080/03054985.2012.689693.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Torrance, H., and J. Pryor. 1998. Investigating Formative Assessment. Teaching, Learning and Assessment in the Classroom. Buckingham: Open University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Turner, B., M. Lai, and N. Huang. 2010. “Error Deduction and Descriptors – A Comparison of Two Methods of Translation Test Assessment.” Translation & Interpreting. The International Journal for Translation & Interpreting Research 2 (1): 11–23.
   Google Scholar