Degree | Type | Year | Semester |
---|---|---|---|
4315970 Tradumatics: Translation Technologies | OB | 0 | 2 |
Having taken, or taking, the previous MA modules.
The aim of this module is to enable the student to acquire the knowledge and skills needed to prepare a final master's dissertation in the field of translation technologies or technology research.
Redacting the Master's dissertation according to the detailed instructions provided by the coordination.
Title | Hours | ECTS | Learning Outcomes |
---|---|---|---|
Type: Directed | |||
Classroom-based training activities. | 0 | 0 | |
Type: Supervised | |||
Training activities supervised by the teaching staff. | 150 | 6 | 8, 4, 3, 10, 1, 9, 5, 11, 7, 6, 2, 12, 13, 14 |
Type: Autonomous | |||
Training activities carried out by the student on a self-study basis outside the classroom. | 225 | 9 | 8, 4, 3, 10, 1, 9, 5, 11, 7, 6, 2, 12, 13, 14 |
Related matters
The above information on assessment, assessment activities and their weighting is merely a guide. The subject's lecturer will provide full information when teaching begins.
Review
When publishing final marks prior to recording them on students' transcripts, the lecturer will provide written notification of a date and time for reviewing assessment activities. Students must arrange reviews in agreement with the lecturer.
Missed/failed assessment activities
Students may retake assessment activities they have failed or compensate for any they have missed, provided that those they have actually performed account for a minimum of 66.6% (two thirds) of the subject's final mark and that they have a weighted average mark of at least 3.5. Under no circumstances may an assessment activity worth 100% of the final mark be retaken or compensated for.
The lecturer will inform students of the procedure involved, in writing, when publishing final marks prior to recording them on transcripts. The lecturer may set one assignment per failed or missed assessment activity or a single assignment to cover a number of such activities.
Classification as "not assessable"
In the event of the assessment activities a student has performed accounting for just 25% or less of the subject's final mark, their work will be classified as "not assessable" on their transcript.
Misconduct in assessment activities
Students who engage in misconduct (plagiarism, copying, personation, etc.)in an assessment activity will receive a mark of “0” for the activity in question. In the case of misconduct in more than one assessment activity, the students involved will be given a final mark of “0” for the subject.
Students may not retake assessment activities in which they are found to have engaged in misconduct. Plagiarism is considered to mean presenting all or part of an author's work, whether published in print or in digital format, as one's own, i.e. without citing it. Copying is considered to mean reproducing all or a substantial part of another student's work. In cases of copying in which it is impossible to determine which of two students has copied the work of the other, both will be penalised.
Title | Weighting | Hours | ECTS | Learning Outcomes |
---|---|---|---|---|
Master's dissertation defense | 20% | 0 | 0 | 8, 9, 6, 2 |
Written dissertation | 20% | 0 | 0 | 8, 4, 3, 10, 1, 9, 5, 11, 7, 6, 2, 12, 13, 14 |
The bibliography will depend on the scope of the TFM. Below are basic references of the field.
Creswell, J. W. (2014). Research Design. Qualitative, Quantitative and Mixed Methods Approaches. 3ª ed. Thousand Oaks, London, New Delhi: SAGE.
Diaz Fouces, O., García González, M. (eds.) (2008). Traducir (con) software libre. Granada: Comares.
Esselink, B. (2000). A practical guide to localization. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins.
Flick, U. (2007a). Designing qualitative research. London [etc.]: SAGE.
Flick, U. (2007b). Managing quality in qualitative research. Los Angeles: SAGE.
Flick, U. (2009). An Introduction to qualitative research. Londres [etc.]: SAGE.
Jiménez-Crespo, M. A. (2013). Translation and Web Localization. Milton Park, Abingdon, Oxon: Routledge.
Kenny, D. (2009). Corpora. En: Mona Baker y Gabriela Saldanha (eds.), Routledge encyclopedia of translation studies (p. 59-62). Londres: Routledge.
Martín-Mor, A.; Piqué, R.; Sánchez-Gijón, P. (2016). Tradumàtica: Tecnologies de la traducció. Vic: Eumo Editorial.
O’Hagan, M. (2009). "Computer-aided translation (CAT)". En: Mona Baker y Gabriela Saldanha (eds.), Routledge encyclopedia of translation studies (p. 48-51). Londres: Routledge.
Oliver, A. (2016). Herramientas tecnológicas para traductores. Barcelona: UOC.
Oliver, A.; Moré, Q. (2007). Les tecnologies de la traducció. Barcelona: UOC.
Ping, K. (2009). "Machine translation". En: Mona Baker y Gabriela Saldanha (eds.), Routledge encyclopedia of translation studies (p. 162-168). Londres: Routledge.
Saldanha, G. & O'Brien, S. (2013). Research methodologies in translation studies. Manchester: St Jerome.
Somers, H. (ed.) (2003). Computers and translation: A translator’s guide. Amsterdam-Philadelphia: John Benjamins.
RojoLópez, A. M. (2013). Diseños y métodos de investigación en traducción. Madrid: Síntesis.
Saldanha, G., & O’Brien, S. (2013). Research Methodologies in Translation Studies. Manchester, UK : St. Jerome Publishing.
Van Peer, W., Hakemulder, J., & Zyngier, S. (2012). Scientific methods for the humanities. Amsterdam [etc.] : Benjamins.
Williams, J.; Chesterman, A. (2002). The map: a beginner's guide to doing research in translation studies. Manchester: St. Jerome.