پایان نامه رشته زبان انگلیسی:THE EFFECT OF CRITICAL THINKING ON TRANSLATION PERFORMANCE OF TRANSLATIONS STUDENTS

1.3. Research question. 12

1.4. Research Hypothesis. 12

1.5. Definition of Key Terms. 12

Critical thinking. 12

Farahzad‘s Model of TQA.. 13

1.6. Significance of the Study. 14

1.7. Limitations and Delimitations of the Study. 15

Delimitation. 16

CHAPTER II 17

Review of the Related Literature. 17

2.1 Introduction. 18

2.2 Thinking. 18

2.3Characteristics of a Critical Thinker. 19

2.4 Critical Thinking Skills. 21

2.5. Teaching Critical Thinking. 22

2.5.1. How to Teach Critical Thinking. 23

2.5.1.1. Critical Thinking and Inferences. 25

2.5.1.2. Critical Thinking about Points of View.. 25

2.5.1.3. Purpose. 26

2.5.1.4. Evidence. 26

2.5.1.5. Beliefs. 26

2.5.1.6. Conclusions and Decisions. 26

2.5.1.7. Assumption. 26

2.6. Evaluation of the Quality of Translation. 27

26.1 The History of Translation and TQA.. 30

2.6.2The Main Approaches toward TQA.. 35

2.6.2.1Mentalist Views. 35

2.6.2.2 Response Based Approaches. 35

1.3. Research question. 12

1.4. Research Hypothesis. 12

1.5. Definition of Key Terms. 12

Critical thinking. 12

Farahzad‘s Model of TQA.. 13

1.6. Significance of the Study. 14

1.7. Limitations and Delimitations of the Study. 15

Delimitation. 16

CHAPTER II 17

Review of the Related Literature. 17

2.1 Introduction. 18

2.2 Thinking. 18

2.3Characteristics of a Critical Thinker. 19

2.4 Critical Thinking Skills. 21

2.5. Teaching Critical Thinking. 22

2.5.1. How to Teach Critical Thinking. 23

2.5.1.1. Critical Thinking and Inferences. 25

2.5.1.2. Critical Thinking about Points of View.. 25

2.5.1.3. Purpose. 26

2.5.1.4. Evidence. 26

2.5.1.5. Beliefs. 26

2.5.1.6. Conclusions and Decisions. 26

2.5.1.7. Assumption. 26

2.6. Evaluation of the Quality of Translation. 27

26.1 The History of Translation and TQA.. 30

2.6.2The Main Approaches toward TQA.. 35

2.6.2.1Mentalist Views. 35

2.6.2.2 Response Based Approaches. 35

2.6.2.2.1 Behaviorist Views. 35

2.6.2.3 Text and Discourse Based Approaches. 36

2.6.2.4 Functionalist Approaches: Skopos Relate Approach. 36

2.6.2.5. Literature-oriented Approaches: 36

2.5.2.5.1 Descriptive Translation Studies. 36

2.6.2.5.2 Post-Modernist and Deconstructionist Thinking. 37

2.6.2.6 Linguistically-Oriented Approaches. 37

2.6.2.6.1 A Functional Pragmatic Model of Translation Evaluation: 38

2.7. Different Models of Evaluating Students’ Translations. 39

27.1 Farahzad‘s Model of TQA.. 39

2.7.2. Waddington‘s Model of TQA.. 40

2.7.3 Al-Qinai‘s Model of TQA.. 43

2.7.4. Sainz’s Model of TQA.. 44

2.8. Conclusion. 45

Chapter III 47

Methodology. 47

3.1. Introduction. 48

3.2. Participants. 48

3.3 Instruments. 49

3.3.1. Instructional Material 49

3.3.2. Preliminary English Test (PET). 49

3.3.3. Pre Translation Production Test. 50

3.3.7. Post Translation Production Test. 50

3.4. Procedure. 51

3.5. Design of the Study. 54

3.6. Statistical Analysis. 54

CHAPTER IV.. 55

Results and Discussion. 55

4.1. Introduction. 56

4.2. Participant Selection. 56

4.3. Discussion. 71

CHAPTER V.. 73

CONCLUSIONS AND PEDAGOGICALIMPLICATIONS. 73

5.1. Introduction. 74

5.2. Conclusion. 74

5.3. Pedagogical Implications. 75

5.4 Suggestions for Further Research. 75

References. 77

References. 78

Abstract

This study was conducted to investigate whether critical thinking had any significant effect on translation performance of translations students. To this end, 75 male and female English translation students at the 7th semester at BA level were chosen from Azad University, Shahr-e-Ghods branch. The participants were non-randomly selected on the basis of the scores they obtained on a pre-piloted Preliminarily English Test (PET) and a translation test before conducting the study. The division of the participants to the experimental and control groups was done randomly..Both experimental and control groups were taught using the same material in translation classes and they received the same amount of instruction .The only difference was some techniques of critical thinking that were taught to the experimental group to be used in their translation. A posttest of translation was given to the participants after the treatment, and the results of the data analyses showed that there was no statistically significant difference between the two groups in terms of their posttest performance

CHAPTER I

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE

1.1. Introduction

Newmark(1998)asserts: “As a means of communication, translation is used for multilingual notices, for tourist publicity; for official documents such as treaties and contracts; for reports, papers, articles, correspondence, and textbooks to convey information, advice and recommendation for every branch of knowledge”(P.7). According to Newmark(1998)“translation is rendering the meaning of a text into another language in the way that the author intended in the text”(p.5). In other words “translation consists of transferring the meaning of the source language (SL) into the receptor language” (RL) (Larson, 1984, p.3). A translator faces some difficulties during translation and may not convey the meaning of the SL to RLappropriately.AsNewmark(1988) puts it“when there is no such thing as a law of translation”(p.113), tohelpconvey the meaning from SL to RL in different texts in different languages what should a translator do? Is it possible to find a way to lesson unpredictable difficulties during a translation?

Scriven and Paul ( 1987), indicatethatcritical thinking(CT) is the intellectually disciplined process of actively and skillfully conceptualizing, applying, analyzing, synthesizing, and/or evaluating information gathered from, or generated by, observation, experience, reflection, reasoning, or communication, as a guide to belief and action.

Facion (2010) also believes that CT includes the following cognitive skills: interpretation, analysis, evaluation, inference, explanation, and self-regulation. So a critical thinker should have especial skills in order to make a good judgment. Critical thinkers observe carefully, rely on