Should Math Tools and Quantitative Methods be Part of University-based Translator and Interpreter’s Training? Russian Graduates’ Voices in the Focus
More details
Hide details
Peoples’ Friendship University of Russia (RUDN University), Moscow, RUSSIA
Anastasia Atabekova   

Head of the Foreign Languages Department, Law Institute, Peoples’ Friendship University of Russia (RUDN University), Moscow, Russia
Online publish date: 2017-08-16
Publish date: 2017-08-16
EURASIA J. Math., Sci Tech. Ed 2017;13(8):5295–5310
The current importance of the research stems from the fact it identifies the reasons regarding translators’ and interpreters’ attitudes towards math tools and methods in their training program curriculum, and there has been no previous research on the topic. Another point to be mentioned in this regard is that research data and findings contribute to the overall significance of reliability, validity, and objectivity of the measurement and interpretation of the data within the landscape of multifaceted Humanities studies in general, and theoretical and applied aspects of professional activities in the field of Translation and Interpretation, in particular. The goal of the research is to explore the attitudes to the above-mentioned tools and methods as part of academic curriculum regarding Russian graduates of Master’s programs on Translation and Interpretation. The goal was reached through a number of steps, including the analysis of the MA programs on Translation and Interpretation curriculum within the international framework, the identification of general trends regarding graduates’ perception and the study of those components that shape their attitudes. The research methodology combined theoretical studies, qualitative and quantitative types of analysis. The empirical data was collected through the survey of graduates of various Russian universities who were part of Academia or Industry related to Translation and Interpretation. Cluster, factor, discriminant types of analysis were implemented. The SPSS was used for data processing. The research results confirmed the hypothesis that graduates’ attitudes to mathematical tools and methods in general and to the respective module inclusion in the University-based translator and interpreter’ training in particular depend on the two following factors. First, it is quality of MA program students completed in terms of the program module/course on math tools and methods for translation studies and second, graduates’ working requirements. The research significance derives from the confirmed importance of the curriculum that should integrate research, math tools, technology and employers’ requirements. Moreover, the research specified the above curriculum particular requirements regarding translators and interpreters.
ACME (2011). Advisory Committee on Mathematics Education. Mathematical Needs in the Workplace and in Higher Education. London: ACME.
Amparo, H. A., Alves, F., Dimitrova, B. E., & Lacruz, I. (2015). A retrospective and prospective view of translation research from an empirical, experimental, and cognitive perspective: the TREC Network. Translation & Interpreting, 7(1), 5–25.
Baker, M. (1995). Corpora in Translation Studies: An Overview and Some Suggestions for Future Research. Target, 7(2), 223-243.
Basak, D. (2006). Integrating Maintenance Activities and Quality Assurance in a Research and Development (R&D) System. The Quality Assurance Journal, 10(4), 249-254.
Belenkova, N., & Davtyan, V. (2016). Correlation of Translation and Other Language Activities. International Journal of Environmental and Science Education, 11(18), 10951-10959.
Cao, Y., Kurbanova, A. T., & Salikhova, N. R. (2017). Development of Classification Thinking in Future Teachers: Technologies of Reflective Discussion. EURASIA Journal of Mathematics Science and Technology Education, 13(6), 1865–1879.
Carl, M., & Jakobsen, A. L. (2009). Toward Statistical Modelling of Translators’ Activity Data. International Journal of Speech Technology, 12(4), 125–138.
Carl, M., Dragsted, B., Elming, E., Hardt, D., & Jakobsen, A. L. (2011). The process of post-editing: A pilot study. In: Human-Machine Interaction in Translation: Proceedings of the 8th International NLPCS Workshop. Frederiksberg: Samfundslitteratur, 131-142.
Creswell, J. W. (2009). Research Design: Qualitative, Quantitative and Mixed Methods Approaches. 3rd ed. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Danesi, M. (2016). Language and Mathematics. An Interdisciplinary Guide. De Gruyter.
Dehlberg, L., & McCaig, C. (2010). Practical Research and Evaluation: A Start-to-Finish Guide for Practitioners. Singapore: SAGE publications.
Field, H. (1989). Realism, Mathematics and Modality. Oxford: Blackwell.
Fedotova, O., & Chigisheva, O. (2015). Comparative analysis: Methodological optics in the ideological context. International Perspectives on Education and Society, 26, 57-82.
Gile, D. (2016). Experimental research. In: C. V. Angelelli, B. J. Baer (Eds), Researching Translation and Interpreting, New York: Routledge, 220-228.
Gorev, P. M., & Kalimullin, A. M. (2017). Structure and Maintenance of a Mathematical Creative Lesson as a Mean of Pupils’ Meta-Subject Results Achievement. EURASIA Journal of Mathematics Science and Technology Education, 13(6), 2701–2720.
Gries, S. Th., & Wulff, S. (2012). Regression Analysis in Translation Studies. In: M. P. Oakes, & Meng Ji (Eds.), Quantitative Methods in Corpus-Based Translation Studies, Amsterdam: John Benjamins, 35-52.
Jenset, G., & McGillivray, B. (2012). Multivariate analyses of affix productivity in translated English. In: M. P. Oakes, & Meng Ji (Eds.), Quantitative Methods in Corpus-Based Translation Studies. Philadelphia: John Benjamins, 301-324.
Jusoha, R., & Abidinb, Z. Z. (2012). The Teaching-Research Nexus: A Study on the Students’ Awareness, Experiences and Perceptions of Research. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 38, 141-148.
Kenny, D., & Doherty, S. (2014). Statistical machine translation in the translation curriculum: overcoming obstacles and empowering translators. The Interpreter and Translator Trainer, 8(2), 276-294.
Köhler, R., Altmann, G., & Piotrowski, R. G. (Eds.) (2005). Quantitative Linguistik - Quantitative Linguistics. Ein internationales Handbuch – An International Handbook. Berlin/New York: de Gruyter.
Kruger, H. (2012). A corpus-based study of the mediation effect in translated and edited language. Target, 24(2), 355–388.
Lee, S.-B. (2014). An interpreting self-efficacy (ISE) scale for undergraduate students majoring in consecutive interpreting: Construction and preliminary validation. The Interpreter and Translator Trainer, 8(2), 183–203.
Liu, M., & Yu-Hsien Chiu (2009). Assessing source material difficulty for consecutive interpreting: Quantifiable measures and holistic judgment. Interpreting, 11(2), 244–266.
Luneeva, O. L. & Zakirova, V. G. (2017). Integration of Mathematical and Natural-Science Knowledge in School Students’ Project-Based Activity. EURASIA Journal of Mathematics Science and Technology Education, 13(7), 2821-2840.
Masalimova, A. R., Levina, E. Y., Platonova, R. I., Yakubenko, K. Yu., Mamitova, N. V., Arzumanova, L. L., Grebennikov, V. V., & Marchuk, N. N. (2017). Cognitive Simulation as Integrated Innovative Technology in Teaching of Social and Humanitarian Disciplines. EURASIA Journal of Mathematics Science and Technology Education, 13(8), 4915-4928.
Mellinger, C., & Hanson, T. (2017). Quantitative Research Methods in Translation and Interpreting Studies. London and New York: Routledge.
Mickens, R.E. (1990). Mathematics and Science. World Scientific.
Onwuegbuzie, A. J., & Wilson, V. A. (2003). Statistics anxiety: Nature, etiology, antecedents, effects and treatments: A comprehensive review of the literature. Teaching in Higher Education, 8, 195-209.
Papanastasiou, E., & Schumacker, R. (2014). Rasch Rating Scale Analysis of the Attitudes Toward Research. Journal of Applied Measurement, 15(2), 1-11.
Pöchhacker, F. (2009). Conference interpreting: Surveying the profession. Translation and Interpreting Studies, 4(2), 172–186.
Patton, J., & Can, F. (2012). Determining Translation Invariant characteristics of James Joyce’s Dubliners. In: M. P. Oakes, & Meng Ji (Eds). Quantitative Methods in Corpus-Based Translation Studies. Philadelphia: John Benjamins, 209–230.
Russian Federal Standards for Higher Education Program on Linguistics (2016). Retrieved from:
R Core Team (2015). R: A Language and Environment for Statistical Computing. Vienna: R Foundation for Statistical Computing.
Rosiers, A., Eyckmans, J., & Bauwens, D. (2011). A story of attitudes and aptitudes? Investigating individual difference variables within the context of interpreting. Interpreting, 13(1), 53–69.
Rybicki, J. (2012). The Great Mystery of the (Almost) Invisible Translator: Stylometry in Translation. In: M. P. Oakes, & Meng Ji (Eds). Quantitative Methods in Corpus-Based Translation Studies. Philadelphia: John Benjamins, 231-248.
Saldanha, G., & O’Brien, S. (2014). Research Methodologies in Translation Studies. New York: Routledge.
Sarukkai, S. (2001). Mathematics, Language and Translation. Meta: journal des traducteurs / Meta: Translators’ Journal, 46(4), 664-674.
Shih-Wen Ke (2012). Clustering a Translational Corpus. In: M. P. Oakes, & Meng Ji (Eds.) Quantitative Methods in Corpus-Based Translation Studies. Amsterdam: John Benjamins, 149-174.
Smith, B., & Brown, S. (1995). Research, teaching and learning in higher education. London: Kogan.
de Sutter G., Delaere, I., & Plevoets, K. (2012). Lexical lectometry in corpus-based translation studies. In: M. P. Oakes, & Meng Ji (Eds.), Quantitative Methods in Corpus-Based Translation Studies, Amsterdam: John Benjamins, 325-346.
Sun, H., Varankina, V. I., & Sadovaya, V. V. (2017). Didactic Aspects of the Academic Discipline “History and Methodology of Mathematics”. EURASIA Journal of Mathematics Science and Technology Education, 13(7), 2923-2940.
Sun, S., & Shreve, G. M. (2014). Measuring translation difficulty: An empirical study. Target, 26(1), 98–127.
Taylor, A., & Lauren, T. (2015). Humanities Data in R. Netherlands: Springer.
Turner, N., Wuetherick, B., & Healey, M. (2008). International perspectives on student awareness, experiences and perceptions of research: Implications for academic developers in implementing research-based teaching and learning, International Journal for Academic Development, 13(3), 199–211.
Venuti, L. (2016). Teaching Translation: Programs, Courses, Pedagogies. Routledge.
Wilcox, R. (1998). How many discoveries have been lost by ignoring modern statistical methods? American Psychologist, 53(3), 300–314.
Mastersportal. (n.d.). Retrieved from:
The MA Program in Translation at Polytechnic Institute of Bragança, Portugal. (n.d.) Retrieved from:
The MA program in Language Studies at the City University of Hong Kong. (n.d.). Retrieved from:
The MA program in Translation and Interpretation in Global Enterprises at Business, Marketing & Communication School, Spain. (n.d.). Retrieved from:
The MA program in Translation at the university of Melbourne, Australia. (n.d.). Retrieved from:
The MA program in Translation Studies at Hamad bin Khalifa University, Qatar. (n.d.). Retrieved from:
The MA Program in Translation Studies at Bangor University, Wales, UK. (n.d.). Retrieved from:
The MA Program on Business Translation and Interpreting at the University of Surrey (n.d.). Retrieved from:
The MA program on Language Analysis and Processing at the University of Bibao, Spain. (n.d.). Retrieved from: