The issue of quality has attracted considerable attention recently in translation and interpreting studies. Few publications, however, seek to explore systematically the theoretical implications of the different notions of quality. The aim of this paper is to explore quality as a social construct and to examine interpretations and definitions of quality in the field of translation and interpreting studies and practice. It is evident that the notion of quality is relative, in that it depends both on the individual who is assessing quality and on the given context or specific situation, but the relativity of quality as an attribute or notion pertaining to an object also extends to the benchmarks set up in order to gauge quality. This paper will focus on the multi-perspectivity of some of the quality benchmarks that have been applied in the context of three systems within which quality discourse has developed over the years: training, professional practice and interpreting research.
2024. The use of automation in the rendition of certain articles of the Saudi Commercial Law into English: a post-editing-based comparison of five machine translation systems. Frontiers in Artificial Intelligence 6
Guo, Wei, Xun Guo, Junkang Huang & Sha Tian
2024. Modeling listeners’ perceptions of quality in consecutive interpreting: a case study of a technology interpreting event. Humanities and Social Sciences Communications 11:1
Melicherčíková, Miroslava & Soňa Hodáková
2023. Prieniky a odlišnosti v kognitívno-osobnostnom profile a tlmočníckom výkone profesionálov a študentov,
Wehrmeyer, Ella
2023. Book review: Remote interpreting in health-care settings. Interpreting and Society 3:2 ► pp. 200 ff.
Zwischenberger, Cornelia, Karin Reithofer & Sylvi Rennert
2022. Interpreters’ roles in a changing environment. The Translator 28:2 ► pp. 139 ff.
Liu, Yanmeng
2021. Exploring a Corpus-Based Approach to Assessing Interpreting Quality. In Testing and Assessment of Interpreting [New Frontiers in Translation Studies, ], ► pp. 159 ff.
Pavez, Pedro
2021. Dialogic education in the interpreting classroom: action research for developing simultaneous interpreting quality assessment tools. The Interpreter and Translator Trainer 15:3 ► pp. 360 ff.
Wang, Weiwei
2021. Introducing China’s Standards of English Language Ability (CSE)—Interpreting Competence Scales. In Testing and Assessment of Interpreting [New Frontiers in Translation Studies, ], ► pp. 15 ff.
Kuo, Arista Szu-Yu
2020. The Tangled Strings of Parameters and Assessment in Subtitling Quality: An Overview. In The Palgrave Handbook of Audiovisual Translation and Media Accessibility [Palgrave Studies in Translating and Interpreting, ], ► pp. 437 ff.
2020. Developing Interpreting Competence Scales in China. Frontiers in Psychology 11
Ďoubalová, Jana
2020. Kvalita v simultánním tlumočení – otázka definice kvality tlumočení a kognitivní přístup ke kvalitě SI jako strategickému rozhodovacímu procesu. AUC PHILOLOGICA 2019:4 ► pp. 45 ff.
2021. Analytic rubric scoring versus comparative judgment: a comparison of two approaches to assessing spoken-language interpreting. Meta 66:2 ► pp. 337 ff.
Kozin, Alexander V.
2018. From Consecutive Interpreting to ‘Translation-in-Talk’. In Consecutive Interpreting, ► pp. 107 ff.
Ouyang, Qianhua
2018. Assessing meaning-dimension quality in consecutive interpreting training. Perspectives 26:2 ► pp. 196 ff.
Chevalier, Lucille & Daniel Gile
2015. Interpreting Quality. FORUM. Revue internationale d’interprétation et de traduction / International Journal of Interpretation and Translation 13:1 ► pp. 1 ff.
Enzenhofer, Edith & Katharina Resch
2013. Unsichtbare Übersetzung?. In Going the Distance, ► pp. 203 ff.
Enzenhofer, Edith & Katharina Resch
2019. Unsichtbare Übersetzung ?. In Interkulturelle Qualitative Sozialforschung, ► pp. 199 ff.
2011. User expectations and evaluation: a case study of a court interpreting event. Perspectives 19:1 ► pp. 1 ff.
Napier, Jemina
2011. “It's not what they say but the way they say it”. A content analysis of interpreter and consumer perceptions towards signed language interpreting in Australia. International Journal of the Sociology of Language 2011:207
This list is based on CrossRef data as of 20 november 2024. Please note that it may not be complete. Sources presented here have been supplied by the respective publishers.
Any errors therein should be reported to them.