Classifications of Translation Strategies in Scientific Articles and the Naive Method: Results of a Quasi-Experiment
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.18778/1731-8025.23.13Keywords:
translation strategy, naive research method, classification of translation strategiesAbstract
The aim of this article is to explore the concept of the “naive method”, a term not yet widely adopted in academic discourse. The naive method can be defined as a research approach utilized in naive linguistics or “zombie science”, characterized by its simplicity in application and interpretation of results. This study proposes that classifications which are both easy to use and appear methodologically rigorous can serve as the foundation for a naive method in researching translation strategies. Such classifications not only simplify research processes but also create an impression of scholarly rigor by referencing established literature and presenting representative results.
The research draws on E.E. Davies’s classification of translation strategies as its primary material. A quasi-experimental approach was employed, hypothesizing that if adolescents on the “non-linguist-linguist” spectrum ‒ particularly those closer to the non-linguist end ‒ can replicate the findings of scholarly articles using the same classification, then the research method in such articles can be considered naive. Results from the quasi-experiment revealed that participants identified 76‒79% of the same strategies (“techniques”), partially supporting the hypothesis.
This study highlights issues surrounding research methodologies, particularly the theoretical sources and classifications used in translation strategy studies. It also underscores that elements of “zombie science” and naive methods can be observed in articles focused on translation strategies.
References
Милевич, И. (2020b). Стратегия перевода: средство самопрезентации автора научной публикации? Acta Universitatis Lodzensis. Folia Linguistica Rossica, 19, 103–111. https://doi.org/10.18778/1731-8025.19.09
Google Scholar
DOI: https://doi.org/10.18778/1731-8025.19.09
Милевич, И. (2021). Исследования стратегии перевода: к проблеме метода исследования, Мова: Науково-теретический часопис з мовазнавства, 35, 221–224. https://doi.org/10.18524/2307-4558.2021.35.237788
Google Scholar
DOI: https://doi.org/10.18524/2307-4558.2021.35.237788
Albury, N.J. (2014). Introducing the Folk Linguistics of Language Policy, International Journal of Language Studies, 8 (3), 85–106.
Google Scholar
Albury, N.J. (2017). The Power of Folk Linguistic Knowledge in Language Policy, Language Policy, 16 (2), 209–228. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10993-016-9404-4
Google Scholar
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10993-016-9404-4
Barbe, K. (1996). The Dichotomy Free and Literal Translation, Meta, XLI, 3, 328–337. https://doi.org/10.7202/001968ar
Google Scholar
DOI: https://doi.org/10.7202/001968ar
Chesterman, A. (2011). Reflections on the Literal Translation Hypothesis. In: Methods and Strategies of Process Research: Integrative Approaches in Translation Studies (23–35), C. Alvstad, A. Hild, E. Tiselius. (ed.). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. https://doi.org/10.1075/btl.94.05che
Google Scholar
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1075/btl.94.05che
Čestermens, E. (2019). Tulkošanas mēmi: Ideju izplatīšanās tulkošanas teorijā. Rīga: Latvijas Universitāte.
Google Scholar
Davies, E.E. (2003). A Goblin or a Dirty Nose?, The Translator: Studies in Intercultural Communication, 9 (I), 65–100. https://doi.org/10.1080/13556509.2003.10799146
Google Scholar
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/13556509.2003.10799146
Gambier, Y. (2010). Translation Strategies and Tactics, Handbook of Translation Studies, 1, 412–418. https://doi.org/10.1075/hts.1.tra7
Google Scholar
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1075/hts.1.tra7
Heyd, T. (2014). Folk-Linguistic Landscapes: The Visual Semiotics of Digital Enregisterment, Language in Society, 43 (5), 489–514. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0047404514000530
Google Scholar
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/S0047404514000530
Hoenigswald, H. (1985). A Proposal for the Study of Folk-Linguistics, Sociolinguistics: Proceedings of the UCLA Sociolinguistics Conference 1964, 16–26. https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110856507-004
Google Scholar
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110856507-004
Jääskeläinen, R. (2010). Looking for a Working Definition of “Translation Strategies”, Copenhagen Studies in Language, 1, 375–387.
Google Scholar
Khudaybergenova, Z. (2021). About the Concept of “Translation Strategies” in the Translation Studies, Journal of Contemporary Issues in Business and Government, 27, 1, 1369–1385.
Google Scholar
Mārtinsone, K., Pipere, A. (red.). (2011). Ievads pētniecībā: stratēģijas, dizaini, metodes. Rīga: RaKa.
Google Scholar
Milevica, I. (2020a). On Non-existent of Audiovisual Translation Studies in Latvia (According to Material of Scientific Paper Collection). Modernization of Teaching Profession: Approaches, Best Practices, Challenges, Scientific Journal of the Modern Education & Research Institute, 12, 23–26.
Google Scholar
Milevica, I. (2024). Is Scientific Articles about Translation Strategies Zombie Articles? Manuscript.
Google Scholar
Milevich, I. (2020b). Strategiya perevoda: sredstvo samoprezentatsii avtora nauchnoi publikatsii? Acta Universitatis Lodzensis. Folia Linguistica Rossica, 19, 103–111.
Google Scholar
Milevich, I. (2021). Issledovaniya strategii perevoda: k probleme metoda issledovaniya, Mova: Naukovo-tereticheskii chasopis z movaznavstva, 35, 221–224.
Google Scholar
Niedzielsky, N.A., Preston, D.R. (2000). Folk Linguistics. Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton. https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110803389
Google Scholar
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110803389
Owji, Z. (2013). Translation Strategies. Translation Journal, 17 (1), https://translationjournal.net/journal/63theory.htm accessed: 03.12.2024.
Google Scholar
Pasquale, M.D., Preston, D.R. (2013). The Folk Linguistics of Language Teaching and Learning. In: Psycholinguistic and Sociolinguistic Perspectives on Second Language Learning and Teaching: Studies in Honor of Waldemar Marton (163–174), K. Drozdzial-Szelest, M. Pawlak (ed.). Berlin–Heidelberg: Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-23547-4_10
Google Scholar
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-23547-4_10
Paveau, M.A. (2011). Do Non-Linguists Practice Linguistics?: An Anti-Eliminative Approach to Folk Theories, AILA Review, 24 (1), 40–54. https://doi.org/10.1075/aila.24.03pav
Google Scholar
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1075/aila.24.03pav
Preston, D.R. (1993). The Uses of Folk Linguistics, International Journal of Applied Linguistics, 3 (2), 181–259. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1473-4192.1993.tb00049.x
Google Scholar
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1473-4192.1993.tb00049.x
Sandoval, M. (2014). Do We Still Call It “Literal” vs. “Free” Translation? Are These Notions as Important These Days as They Were in the Past?, https://msandovalg.wordpress.com/2014/01/30/do-we-still-call-it-literal-vs-free-translation-are-these-notions-as-important-these-days-as-they-were-in-the-past-2/ accessed: 12.02.2024.
Google Scholar
Sun, S. (2013). Strategies of Translation. In: The Encyclopedia of Applied Linguistics (5408–5412), Vol. 9.
Google Scholar
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.
