Module/Course Title: Translation and Interpreting

Module/ Student Credits Semester Frequency Duration

course workload (ECTS)
code 8.5 hours 7th 3 CU x16 = 48 16 meetings
3 CU x 1.5
per week = 4.5 ECTS
SBI 61044
1 Types of courses Contact Independent Class size
hours study
Elective coursework 30 students
3 CU x 50 3 CU x 120
mins = 150 minutes
= 2.5 hours = 360 mins
per week = 6 hours
2 Prerequisites for participation (if applicable)
---

3 Learning Outcomes (PLO + CLO)

Course Description:
Translation and Interpreting is an elective course for both the students concentrating on
Linguistics and Literature. This course encourages an intensive and actual practice of
translating from English to Indonesian and vice versa. To enable the students to
translate various discourses, the texts used in classroom activities comprise authentic
discourses including journal articles and literary work. In addition, this course also aims
at providing the students skills of basic interpreting. The students will be introduced to
different types of interpreting and they will do some practices of interpreting.

Programme Learning Outcomes:

PLO 1 Graduates are expected to be able to play a role as creative industry players
by using competence in the fields of language, literature and culture to
produce innovative and competitive works.
PLO 2 Graduates are expected to be able to act as research assistants, namely
young scholars who have critical thinking to solve problems faced in society.
PLO 3 Graduates are expected to be able to play a role as academicians, namely
activists in the world of education who have intellectuality and professionalism.

Intended Learning Outcomes:

ILO 1 Students are able to show responsibilities in performing academic activities
based on religious values, morals, and ethics.
ILO 2 Students are able to uphold entrepreneurship values in cooperating with the
society and environment.
ILO 3 Students are able to demonstrate language skills by using proper English.
ILO 4 Students are able to analyse the development of linguistic, literary and cultural
phenomena in the global and digital era.
ILO 5 Students are able to elaborate their ideas in both spoken and written forms in
English within academic and non-academic contexts.
ILO 6 Students are able to use media and technology into their learning and
research activities
ILO 7 Students are able to analyse various scientific texts in the fields of language,
literature and culture in English.
ILO 8 Students are able to produce scientific articles or creative writings on
language, literature, and culture independently or collaboratively.

Course Learning Outcomes

On completion of this course, the students will be able to:
1. translate various texts from English into Indonesian and vice versa
 2. perform basic interpreting practices

4 Subject aims/Content

Meeting 1: Overview of Translation

Students are able to have a general overview and understand the basic concepts of
translation from their introductory course

Meeting 2 – 3: Translating short story

Students are able to translate short story from English to Indonesian

Meeting 4 – 5: Translating journal article

a. Students are able to understand the parts of journal articles
b. Students are able to translate a journal article from English to Indonesian
c. Students are able to translate a journal article from Indonesian to English

Meeting 6 – 7: Overview of Interpreting

a. Students are able to identify the difference between translation and interpreting
b. Students are able to identify the modes of interpreting
c. Students are able to understand the types of interpreting

Meeting 8: Mid-term Project: Translation

Meeting 9 – 10: Note-taking

a. Students are able to perform note-taking as a part of skills required for
consecutive interpreting

Meeting 11 – 13: Consecutive Interpreting

a. Students are able to perform consecutive interpreting by doing three steps:
understanding, analysis, and re-expression
b. Students are able to perform consecutive interpreting in a setting-based
environment

Meeting 14 – 15: Simultaneous Interpreting

a. Students are able to practice shadowing as a preliminary step in simultaneous
interpreting

Meeting 16: Final Project: Interpreting

5 Teaching methods
Lectures, discussions, practice, team-based learning
6 Assessment methods

1. Class Participation
To maximize the learning opportunities in this course, students are not only
required to be present for all class sessions, having completed all necessary tasks
but they are also expected to interact with peers and the topics as directed in class
discussions and activities.

2. Translation Practice
Through co-authorship in group translation, the students will be able to improve
their teamwork abilities and collaborative thinking. They can also do peer-checking
on each other’s translation results.

3. Mid-term Project
It is counted as a mid-term test in which students will do translation on selected
materials, and it will be compiled as a portfolio.
 4. Interpreting Practice
Students will perform consecutive interpreting in a setting-based environment, and
they will also practice simultaneous interpreting.

5. Interpreting Project
Students will be involved in interpreting projects by performing consecutive
interpreting and submitting the project in a recorded format.

What follows is summary of the Assessment:

Assessment Task Task Type Due Percentage
Class participation Individual Throughout the 5%
semester (0.35% for each
meeting
Translation practice Group Meeting 3 30%
Meeting 6 (15% for each task)
Mid-term Project Individual Meeting 8 20%
Interpreting practice Individual Meeting 12 20%
Meeting 15 (10% for each task)
Final Project Individual Meeting 16 25%
TOTAL 100%

7 This module/course is used in the following study programme/s as well

NA
8 Teacher

Yana Shanti Manipuspika

9 Resources

Main:
Nolan, J. (2005). Interpretation: Techniques and Exercises. Toronto: Multilingual
Matters Ltd.

UNIVERSITAS BRAWIJAYA
FACULTY OF CULTURAL STUDIES
DEPARTMENT OF LANGUAGES AND LITERATURE
STUDY PROGRAMME OF ENGLISH LITERATURE

STUDENT TASK GUIDELINE

COURSE: Translation and Interpreting
CODE: SBI 61044 CU 3/Semester 7
TEACHER Team
TASK FORM:
Translation Practice

NAME OF TASK:
Translating journal article
COURSE LEARNING OUTCOME:
1. Translate from English to Indonesian

DESCRIPTION
This task is about translating a journal article that students collect themselves. The source text
is English, the target text is Indonesian.
METHOD OF COMPLETION
The students are asked to translate a text from English to Indonesian.
OUTCOMES
Object: journal article
Outcome: the translation result
INDICATORS, CRITERIA, AND PERCENTAGE OF GRADING
The translation assessment rubric

Score Description
range
Accuracy (30%)
25-30 No identifiable problems of comprehension; original message has been
conveyed completely to TL readers; no omissions or additions to information
21-24 Virtually no problems of comprehension except with the most highly specialized
vocabulary with no influence on TL readers’ understanding; some partial
omissions and additions
16-20 Information is conveyed to TL readers with some difficulty due to translator
misunderstanding of some parts of original message; apparent omissions and
additions
11-15 Poor expression of ideas; numerous serious problems in understanding ST
interfere with communication of original message; difficult to understand TT
1-10 Severe problems interfere greatly with communication of original message; TL
reader can’t understand what original writer was trying to say
Finding equivalent (25%)
20-25 All lexical and syntactic elements have been understood; precise vocabulary
usage; words have been chosen so skilfully that the work reads like a good
publishable version
15-19 Full comprehension and good usage of a wide range of vocabulary and
structures; specialized vocabulary presents some problems with unsuitable
equivalents
10-14 General comprehension of a fair range of vocabulary although some gaps
observed; some vocabulary misused; some evidence of plausible attempts to
work around difficulties of finding equivalents, perception, wordplay and other
linguistic features
5-9 Comprehension of vocabulary and structures show quite noticeable gaps which
obscure sense; problems in finding correct vocabularies; unable to cope with
specialized vocabulary
1-4 Inappropriate use of vocabularies; comprehension of original seriously impeded
even with fairly everyday vocabulary and structures; translation as a whole
makes little sense
Register, TL culture (20%)
17-20 Good sensitivity to nuances of meaning, register is precisely and sensitively
captured; there is a sophisticated awareness of the cultural context; translation
shows a sophisticated command of TL lexis, syntax, and register
13-16 There is a fair degree of sensitivity to nuances of meaning, register, and cultural
 context
9-12 There is a lack of sustained attention to nuances of meaning, register, and
cultural context; no awareness of register; TL lexis, syntax, and register are not
always appropriate
4-8 There is scant attention to nuances of meaning, register, and cultural context;
there are serious to severe shortcomings in the use of appropriate lexis, syntax,
and register
1-3 There is no appreciable understanding of nuances of meaning, register, and
cultural context; no concept of register or sentence variety
Grammar and ST style (15%)
13-15 Gives the feeling that the translation needs no improvement from grammatical
and stylistic points though one or two natural failings might be observed; native-
like fluency in grammar
10-12 Shows flair for stylistic manipulation of TL items as if text were written in TL
originally except where the language is placed under severe pressure of
comprehension; maintains advanced proficiency in grammar; some grammatical
problems but with no influence on message
7-9 Tends to have awkward grammatical usage in TL and literality of rendering
though but not impeding sense in a significant manner; some attempts to reflect
stylistic features of the original; some grammatical problems are apparent and
have negative effects on communication
4-6 Clumsy TL; often nonsensical grammatical usages in TL; unnatural sounding;
little attempt to reflect stylistic features of the original; there is evidence of clear
difficulties in following style; grammatical review of some areas is clearly needed
1-3 Little sense of style which often makes poor sense in TL; knowledge of grammar
is inadequate; use of TL grammar is inadequate; severe grammatical problems
interfere greatly with message
Shifts, omissions, additions and inventing equivalents (10%)
9-10 Correct use of relative clauses, verb forms; use of parallel structure; creative
inventions and skilful solutions to equivalents; no fragment or run-on sentence
7-8 Almost all shifts appear with partial trespass, attempts variety; some inventions
for not available equivalents in TL; no fragment or run-on sentence
5-6 Some shifts but not consistency; awkward and odd structure; only few run-on
sentences or fragments present
3-4 Lacks variety of structure due to not preserving necessary shifts except for few
cases; little or no evidence of invention in equivalents
1-2 Unintelligible sentence structure due to completely ignoring necessary shifts; no
skilful handling of equivalents; no trace of invention
(Source: Zakian et.al, 2012)

TIME
Meeting 6
OTHERS

REFERENCES
1. Tabiati, S.E., Manipuspika, Y.S., & Rozin, M. (2017). Translation Theory and Practice.
Malang: UMM Press.
2. Nolan, J. (2005). Interpretation: Techniques and Exercises. Toronto: Multilingual Matters
Ltd.

UNIVERSITAS BRAWIJAYA
FACULTY OF CULTURAL STUDIES
DEPARTMENT OF LANGUAGES AND LITERATURE
STUDY PROGRAMME OF ENGLISH LITERATURE
 STUDENT TASK GUIDELINE
COURSE: Translation and Interpreting
CODE: SBI 61044 CU 3/Semester 7
TEACHER Team
TASK FORM:
Interpreting Practice

NAME OF TASK:
Consecutive Interpreting
COURSE LEARNING OUTCOME:
1. Perform interpreting from English to Indonesian

DESCRIPTION
This task is about practicing interpreting after doing note-taking exercises in the previous weeks.
The SL is English, the TL is Indonesian.
METHOD OF COMPLETION
The students are asked to interpret a speech
OUTCOMES
Object: speech
Outcome: the interpreting result
INDICATORS, CRITERIA, AND PERCENTAGE OF GRADING

Marking criteria for CONSECUTIVE

CONTENT ▪ Was the logic of the original speech clearly

• Coherence/plausibility recognizable?
• Completeness/ Accuracy ▪ Was the message coherent?
• Knowledge of passive ▪ Were the main ideas and the structure rendered?
language? ▪ Were there any significant omissions with an impact
on the coherence of the speech?
▪ Were there any important mistakes (“contresens”)?
▪ Did the interpretation render the original
ideas/information of the speech accurately?
▪ Was the content conveyed in full?
▪ Were there too many details missing?
▪ Were there any misleading or redundant additions
(”embroidery”)?
▪ Overuse of redundant filler phrases?
DELIVERY/FORM ▪ Knowledge of target language (correct grammar,
• Quality of active appropriate register, idiomatic expressions,
language vocabulary, interferences from the source language)?
• Communication skills ▪ Appropriate choice of register?
▪ Terminology?
▪ Diction (mumbling or clear enunciation)?
▪ Accent (if applicable)?
▪ Pace of delivery (fluent or staccato)?
▪ Use of the voice (prosody)? Intonation?
▪ Was the delivery professional? Was it agreeable to
listen to and confident?
▪ Eye contact?
▪ Appropriate body language?
TECHNIQUE ▪ Literal rendition of speech or intelligent processing of
• Interpretation strategies content?
▪ Use of interpretation strategies (paraphrasing, output
monitoring, ability to condense information,
“telescoping”)?
▪ Ability to monitor output?
▪ Note-taking technique?
 ▪ Time of delivery (shorter/longer than original
speech)? Was the overrun excessive?
▪ Finishing sentences?
(Source: https://europa.eu/interpretation/doc/marking_criteria_en.pdf)

TIME
Meeting 12
OTHERS

REFERENCES
1. Nolan, J. (2005). Interpretation: Techniques and Exercises. Toronto: Multilingual Matters
Ltd.