PHD, Kent State University, 2025, College of Arts and Sciences / Department of Modern and Classical Language Studies

Corpus-based approaches have seen substantial growth across different areas of applied translation studies, with translator pedagogy emerging as a key area of focus. This is evident in the broad range of academic literature, alongside the current ongoing projects, dedicated to this field. While considerable research has already examined the role of different corpus types in translator education, relatively little has been done with parallel corpora to empirically validate the underlying assumptions reviewed in the literature, particularly in terms of English-Arabic translation. This study seeks to bridge this gap by conducting a more systematic and empirical investigation of parallel corpus-based translation teaching (PCBT), taking into account two primary areas of enquiry: 1) if and how the incorporation of parallel corpora has an impact on the quality of student translations, and 2) if and how students find this approach conducive to learning to translate. Student translations and survey responses were analyzed to gain insight into the effectiveness of PCBT. The findings reveal that PCBT has led to an improvement in translation quality, as seen in its capacity to mitigate error occurrences in student translations. Furthermore, the findings point to the potential of PCBT in fostering more constructive learning through students' engagement in data-driven learning, a process that included observation, negotiation, evaluation, and critical thinking. Finally, the responses from the survey demonstrate that the students exhibited positive attitudes toward PCBT, recognizing its impact not only in terms of improving their translation accuracy and quality but also in terms of reinforcing positive attitudes toward translation.

Committee: Brian J. Baer (Committee Chair); Richard K. Washbourne (Committee Member); Ryan R. Hediger (Committee Member); Bridget K. Mulvey (Committee Member); Ryan T. Miller (Committee Member) Subjects: Education; English As A Second Language; Foreign Language; Language; Linguistics

PHD, Kent State University, 2016, College of Arts and Sciences / Department of Modern and Classical Language Studies

Previous studies flagged concerns about a communication gap between translator instructors and students in undergraduate translation practice classes without elaborating on the feedback component. Borrowing the notion of feedback culture (London & Smither, 2002), expanding on Hyland and Hyland's conceptualization of feedback (2006), and utilizing the reviewed literature on effective feedback, the researcher developed an analytical framework to investigate how feedback was situated, shaped, and negotiated in translator education. Feedback is situated by its sociocultural context, shaped by the delivery and focus of its content, and negotiated through the interaction and reflection of its participants. In this qualitative multi-case study, a group of advanced translation practice instructors (n=8) and their students (n=58) were selected from two different university translation programs: one in Saudi Arabia (SA-CASE) and one in the United States (US-CASE). The qualitative data, which involved observations, interviews, and document reviews, were collected, analyzed, and reported using the research three-dimensional framework. Findings revealed that participants within and across the two cases differed in their perception and, consequently, in their practice of feedback. Collective and broad verbal discussions were the norm in the SA-CASE, while individualized and points-based written corrections occurred consistently in the US-CASE. Emerging themes included a pattern of error detection and rater variability, technology-facilitated feedback, market-oriented feedback, conflicting attitudes toward peer feedback, vague understanding of self-feedback, scarcity of feedback on feedback, and varying forms of dialogue. To enhance the feedback loop, the researcher proposes a model that gives students a more interactive role in the feedback process.

Committee: Washbourne Richard (Advisor) Subjects: Comparative; Education; Educational Evaluation; Foreign Language; Higher Education; Language; Linguistics; Pedagogy; Teaching