Words on the fly July 13, 2012

A step beyond translation: training multi-skilled GILT specialists

B y: Renate de la Paix, Université de Strasbourg, and Gianna Tarquini, Università di Bologna.

The French version of this article can be downloaded here.

Over the last three decades, thanks to favorable political and economic factors including the multilingual EU policy and the globalization of trade and communication, there has been a dramatic rise in the offer of translator training programs set up by private bodies and by universities at Bachelor or Master level. Translation pedagogy has thus gained ground as a major area of discussion and research, alongside Translation Studies. Beyond the worn out debate over theory versus practice, the heart of the discussion seems to revolve around instructional content, regarding curricula and skill sets, and pedagogical methodology (Baer and Koby, 2003). This point, in particular, has been debated in a vast literature: from the established social constructivist model (Kiraly, 2000) and process-oriented pedagogy, to project-based learning (Mileto and Muzii, 2009) and product-oriented approaches, which raise questions of assessment and evaluation. [1]

More recently, emerging phenomena related to technology and globalization, have challenged traditional approaches to and idées reçues in translation practice and training. While translation pedagogy provides the background framework of the present discussion, we will focus in particular on new industry requirements and specialization areas affecting the mainstream translator competence models as well as the very archetype of the translator. To this purpose, we will firstly discuss the GILT (Globalization, Internationalization, Localization and Translation) paradigm, charting new skills and tasks that cross the boundaries of language transfer. Secondly, by reviewing the program outline and main courses offered by the CAWEB Master’s, we will argue for a full-fledged competence model that responds to competing cross-cultural requirements along the digital information flow.

The GILT business model: why translation is not enough

Thanks to the dramatic expansion of digital media in the last few decades, the localization/translation sector is at the forefront of the entire translation industry. Emerged in the 80s to respond to the specific needs of software adaptation for foreign markets, the term localization broadly refers to the linguistic, cultural and technical transfer of digital content, and the provision of services and technologies for the management of multilingualism across the global digital information flow (Schäler, 2003). These communication processes have deeply affected the status of translation in the digital era, bringing about new techniques and tools and at the same time not so new equivalence models. Despite the flourishing of a specialized literature, the boundaries between localization and translation remain fuzzy especially on the academic level, raising major issues with regard to translation theory, competence models and translator training (Gouadec, 2003; Pym, 2006).

While translation is generally acknowledged to be part of the localization processes, localization is in its turn encapsulated and bound to a wider operational framework, termed GILT (short for Globalization, Internationalization, Localization and Translation) (Schäler, 2003). [2] This acronym encompasses the whole life cycle of a wide range of digital products, from upstream global planning and localization-friendly development, to the management, control and execution of cross-cultural adaptation, translation and testing. While in the early days of the industry, production and cross-cultural rendering tended to be set apart, localization has progressively gained ground and awareness, being integrated into early development through strategic internationalization practices. Therefore, just as it is seems problematic to isolate translation as an independent process, so it is difficult for localization to be singled out as a separate and well-defined set of tasks and skills within the GILT ensemble. Furthermore, as poignantly illustrated by Anthony Pym, the complexity of the activities involved in the whole GILT production chain — especially in large projects and companies — results in the fragmentation of competence, including not only translation (technology), proof-reading and terminology, but also technical writing, desktop publishing, engineering as well as project management (2006). On the other hand, as localization is moving up the value chain, cross-cultural skills tend to inform the whole production line, just like IT skills. It can be safely assumed that both macro-areas underlie and piece together single specialized tasks. Hence, as argued by Gouadec (2003), translators can be trained to become “multimedia and cross-cultural communication engineers” and access new market segments by acquiring ad hoc skills in computing and business. In the specific case of small web projects, for instance, all GILT processes can be wrapped up by one professional figure who is able to develop, manage and update cross-cultural content with the aid of specific tools such as content management systems. This will be shown to be one of the major training goals, and achievements indeed, of the CAWEB Master’s, as illustrated figure 1.

In the next section, we discuss the curriculum offered by the CAWEB program, which aims at covering not only highly specialized skills required by the mainstream localization industry, but also at training all-round “technical communicators” capable of managing complete web projects.

The CAWEB curricular offer: strategic competence areas

Started in 2002 in the public Marc Bloch University of Strasbourg, a strategic area for translation and interpreting services thanks to the historical encounter of German and French cultures, the presence of European institutions and a flourishing trade, the CAWEB Master’s degree offers a two-year training course in the design, management and localization of web sites and other IT products. In combining cross-cultural communication, technology and multimedia, the program is aimed not only at students who have a background in translation and related disciplines, but also at graduates and professionals who have specialized in computing, management, and non-human sciences. These are estimated to represent 25% of applicants to the degree.The heterogeneous background of students and the strong focus on technology represent a first educational hurdle that is bringing together the wide range of disciplines and skills that are relevant to the GILT framework and making them accessible to everybody. The curricular choice has been to impart specialized technical courses pertaining to the creativity of the web, like web design and publishing, multimedia editing and project/content management, without putting off linguists, while at the same time targeting foreign languages and translation training.

In the following table, we provide an overview of the curricular content and the main knowledge areas offered in the second year of the CAWEB program. This will be discussed in relation to interrelated and partly overlapping core competence areas (including technological, linguistic and cross-cultural, interpersonal, and business skills) inspired by mainstream competence models such as the EMT’s. The CAWEB offer, however, stands out for its technical and practical orientation, which has been honed in ten years of close collaboration with the web industry:

Table 1: Curriculum overview of the CAWEB Master’s program, 2^nd year [3]

TU (teaching unit)	Program content (2nd year)	Hours per semester	Coefficient	Credits
First semester
1	Web Design and Management	100h	2	12
	Methodology, design and management of multilingual web sitesCreation of database-driven dynamic web pagesXML/XSL		2 2 1
2	Localization	60h	1	6
	Methodology, tools and intercultural aspects of localization
3	Image Processing	60h	1	6
	Image processing theory and practice
4	Practical Language Exercises	40h	1	6
	Language ALanguage B		1 1
Second semester
5	Project Management Fundamentals and Tutored Hands-on Projects	50h (+ 160h practical project work)	3	9
6	Practical Language Exercises	40h	2	6
7	Internship and Master’s Thesis	(3 months min.)	4	12
8	Master’s Defense	15h	1	3

As illustrated in the curriculum outline above, also listing the credits and the coefficient of each teaching unit, the CAWEB program puts a particular emphasis on technological competence. This applies to the raw material that is processed in the GILT assembly line, that is digital content, as well as to the conveyor and machinery that allows it to be manufactured, transformed and distributed, i.e. electronic tools and techniques. In particular, the main subjects associated with technological competence are (web) design and management, localization tools and image processing. Teaching unit 1, for example, includes specialized courses on web design and publishing (authoring, multilingual and multimedia interface design, accessibility, search engine optimization, community management), markup and other artificial languages (HTML, XML, PHP, SQL), and multilingual content management. This unit, strongly focused on web development and internationalization, is a strategic add-on of the CAWEB program in relation to other localization training courses, which tend to be overbalanced towards localization and translation. In fact, although not strictly required in the curriculum of a translator, this competence area can enable students with different backgrounds to gain a competitive edge both in the execution of localization tasks and in the broader GILT context. The same objective is pursued in the MSc in Multilingual Computing and Localisation at the University of Limerick, which offers introductory modules on imperative programming and language engineering. In this respect, the units in image processing (Photoshop, InDesign and Adobe Première), multimedia (1st year) and the web reflect a partly different orientation of the CAWEB model. However, as the program welcomes both linguists and engineers, the risk is to deter those who have linguistic backgrounds and aptitudes. Technical training should therefore be gradual, adapted to each student, and oriented towards internationalization awareness.

In addition to development and internationalization, technological skills are crucial to the execution of localization and translation tasks. TU 2, for instance, aims at training students to master the localization process of IT products, prepare an electronic file for localization and become familiar with major localization tools (SDL Passolo, among others), while project management tools are mainly covered in TU 5. It is worth noting that, since students are provided with a solid background in IT and multimedia, they are often able to manipulate the localizables without the aid of localization tools. This facilitates them in the usage tools and resources, making them more autonomous than translators who are not able to manage source content. Technological skills are also deeply interwoven with translation technology and “information mining” skills: one of the main modules of the 1^st year program is in fact dedicated to web and CAT tools, in which the Master’s students gain access to the SDL Trados certification and learn to evaluate a variety of electronic resources and information techniques that assist translation.

Linguistic and cross-cultural competence — encompassing language, translation and cultural skills — is the other main pillar of the CAWEB curriculum. Like most localization training programs in Europe and the United States, the CAWEB degree offers high-level training in foreign languages (French first language, English, German, Spanish, Japanese, and also Russian thanks to the cooperation with Herzen State Pedagogical University of Russia, St. Petersburg) with teaching units on oral and written production, linguistics, specialized translation, language transfer, terminology, CAT tools and machine translation, covered mainly in the first year.

Particularly important in the CAWEB curricular offer is the emphasis on interpersonal skills and professionalization. As the GILT assembly line brings about division of labor and negotiation, interpersonal attitudes cannot be underestimated in building a localization training program. In a wider pedagogic perspective, this component reflects the broad “translator education” approach in relation to pure “translator training” tasks (Kiraly, 2000; Bernardini, 2004). The execution of at least three hands-on projects in a team, two of them including localization, plays a central role in the CAWEB cursus studiorum. Furthermore, two first-year units (named “professionalization”) aim at conveying interpersonal and critical skills related to oral expression, academic and business writing, negotiation, job interview preparation and self-assessment of work execution and completion. Also on-the-job training holds a central place in the CAWEB competence model. Students can choose between a “traditional” internship period from three to six months towards the end of the second year, and “integrated learning” by signing an “apprenticeship contract” with a company in France or in the German Land of Baden-Württemberg. This means working 70% of the year in a company and studying the rest of the year on campus or joining the distance learning option. A Master’s thesis is necessary for the successful completion of the program and includes a report on practical experience in a company.

Finally, business and managerial skills are not only required of those who intend to climb the ladder in their office, but are also useful in an interpersonal perspective and in order to acquire a vision d’ensemble of the whole GILT workflow. Project management theory and practice have thus stepped into the curricula of most localization training programs, and hold a central place in the CAWEB Master’s degree. Project management theory is not intended here as a theoretical discipline per se, but as the body of knowledge stemming from the best practices developed by professionals (Project Management Institute, 2004). Teaching unit 5, for instance, taught by a professional project manager, brings together the knowledge, skills, tools and techniques that allow project goals to be satisfied. The module is complemented by a professional assignment consisting in the planning and execution of a team project for an external customer. Overcoming once more translation-related tasks, assignments involve managing multilingual web creation and localization. The business component in the CAWEB program obviously includes marketing, web marketing and business development, which cannot be underestimated in web communication. These are supplemented by related courses, such as digital law and writing for the web.

While this curriculum design underlies a hybrid and comprehensive competence model in web design, management and localization, another fundamental ingredient is represented by pedagogical methodology. The CAWEB program has integrated cutting-edge methods, related in particular to interactivity and teamwork and distance learning. The pedagogic methodologies that are applied and experimented on are rich and heterogeneous, due to the number of subjects, activities and instructors. The disciplinary offer of the degree is so vast that the large majority of trainers are external contributors — currently more than 30 specialists selected over 10 years of operation. Most of them are qualified practitioners in highly technical or niche sectors: from Photoshop and Flash to video game localization, single source publishing and cryptology, and from machine translation and CMSs to video montage and web authoring, not to mention business representatives from Siemens and Actimage. The direct involvement of practitioners represents an added value not only in terms of job opportunities, but for the scope and purposes of localization training in itself. Furthermore, the program offers complete distance learning to students not living in Strasbourg. The modules taught in English such as Web Localization, Software Localization, Video Game Localization, Machine Translation and Localization Project Management, are open to students enrolled in partner universities, mainly Russian at the moment. The program thus confronts the challenge of integrated localization training for more than 30 international students each year, (40 students in 2011/2012, including 14 foreign students with 5 different mother tongues) also offering students multiple opportunities of multilingual and multicultural exchange.

Conclusions

By reflecting the opposing trends towards fragmentation and globality, we have argued for the training of all-round “technical communicators” who can cope with a wide range of cross-cultural demands beyond translation and translation-related tasks. To this purpose, the CAWEB Master’s competence model seeks to extend transfer/linguistic skills into highly technological, interpersonal and business skills, with a particular focus on professionalization and on-the-job practice, as discussed in the previous section. This model has proven to be highly effective for students with different backgrounds. Statistics on the competence areas covered in students internships show in fact that the program opens onto a variety of multi-skilled positions that include but are not limited to translation-related activities:

Figure 1: 2008-9 CAWEB graduates competence areas

Notes

[1] For an insightful overview of translator training history and developments, see Pym, 2009.

[2] In the present discussion, globalization (G11N) is understood as “a business strategy addressing the issues associated with taking a product to the global market, including world-wide marketing, sales and support” (Schäler, 2003). Internationalization (I18N) is instead referred to as “the process of designing (or modifying) software so as to isolate the linguistically and culturally dependent parts of an application and to develop a system that allows linguistic and cultural adaptation that supports users working in different languages and cultures” (ibid.).

[3] The present discussion will be focused especially on the second-year program, offering particularly innovative courses and initiatives. The complete program description can be consulted on the CAWEB Master’s web site.

List of references

Baer, B. G. and Koby, G. (2003). Beyond the Ivory Tower. Rethinking Translation Pedagogy, Amsterdam/Philadelphia, John Benjamins.

Bernardini, S. (2004). “The theory behind the practice. Translator training or translator education?” in K. Malmkjær (ed.) Translation in Undergraduate Degree Programmes, Amsterdam/Philadelphia, John Benjamins, p. 97-111.

Kelly, N., DePalma D. A. and Stewart, R. G. (2012). “The Language Services Market: 2012”, Common Sense Advisory,

Gouadec, D. (2003). “Le bagage spécifique du localiseur/localisateur”, Meta, XLVIII: 4. pp. 526-45.

Kiraly, D. (2000). A Social Constructivist Approach to Translator Education. Empowerment from Theory to Practice, Manchester, St. Jerome.

Mileto, F. and Muzii, L. (2009). “Traduzione assistita e localizzazione. Didattica a progetto” in S. Cavagnoli, E. di Giovanni and R. Merlini (eds.) La ricerca nella comunicazione interlinguistica, modelli teorici e metodologici, Milano, Franco Angeli, p. 269-81.

Project Management Institute (2004). A Guide to the Project Management Body of Knowledge, Third Edition (PMBOK Guides), Project Management Institute Inc., Pennsylvania.

Pym, A. (2006). “Localization, training, and the threat of fragmentation”.

Pym, A. (2009). “Translator training”, Oxford Companion to Translation Studies.

Pym, A. (2012). “Translation skill-sets in a machine-translation age”.

Schäler, R. (2003). “Making a Business Case for Localisation“, Translating and the computer, 25.

Tags: competence models, localization, training