In my years teaching translation across departments in the Arab world (Oman, Qatar, Morocco and Saudi Arabia), I keep meeting colleagues from neighbouring disciplines (literature, linguistics, TEFL) who volunteer, or willingly choose, to teach a translation course, or even a course in translation studies. Elsewhere, in Canada for instance, this practice does not exist. It would never happen unless the instructor could show solid evidence of a translation background.
Practising translation is not enough. There must be an epistemological commitment as well, and an up-to-date one. Translation studies is an interdiscipline that keeps gaining pace and weight. Clinging to early approaches, philosophies and conceptions of translation does nothing for the student's learning curve. Yet in the Arab context a great many faculty are still shaped by their original disciplinary orientation (literary studies, linguistics, applied linguistics, TEFL). Some have embraced their new discipline; others still operate within translation and translation studies through the lens of comparative linguistics, literature or even EFL. The result is a misinformed student population who pass those insights on to society, in workplaces and classrooms, with negative consequences for an emerging discipline in both theory and practice. Society's perception matters.
When the syndrome made sense, and why it no longer does
In the early days of translation teaching (the 1950s in Europe and Canada, the 1980s or 1990s in many Arab countries), the syndrome was defensible. The textbooks in use could be understood and taught by instructors from neighbouring disciplines in lecture-based theory courses, and practical courses followed the traditional, teacher-centred apprenticeship model, with ad hoc or read and translate methods. So long as translation teaching and content were closely tied to linguistics and literary studies, "I can teach any course in translation" applied. It has not applied for a couple of decades.
Translation programmes in the Arab world need to revise their practices and approaches to match the interdisciplinary nature of translation. And instead of teaching from a textbook, we need to make the extra effort (workload permitting) to diversify our pedagogies and methods, finding innovative resources and techniques that raise students' motivation and learning. These statements are not intuitive: I have spent the last ten years studying this phenomenon, which produced a PhD and three peer-reviewed articles, two published and one in progress.
Three requirements
Translation studies has taken new shapes and generated concepts foreign to neighbouring disciplines. It began with the linguistic turn of the 1950s and 1960s, then moved through the communicative, cultural, textual, sociological and pedagogical turns to today's technological turn (Austermühl, 2004, 2010; O'Hagan, 2019). Three things follow.
- Only specialists should teach translation. Translation is a professional practice as well as an academic discipline and should be treated like other professions in academia, whether the course is theoretical or practical. (A foreign-language department that uses translation only to improve language competence is a different case.) Expertise should be demonstrated: publications, in-house and freelance work, participation in translation conferences, professional membership, and so on.
- Some instructors and administrators need to reconfigure their view of the multilingual domain through professional development and further training in the knowledge frameworks of recent approaches and schools in translation. The profession changes, and so does academia. Why cling to the old teaching models still found in many undergraduate and postgraduate translation programmes in the Arab context, as my recent doctoral thesis showed (El-Karnichi, 2017)?
- Teaching and learning in translation classrooms should draw on mainstream education studies, adapted to adults and higher education.
Takeaway: the syndrome underestimates and downgrades both the translation profession and the discipline. Teaching is not a simple textbook delivery operation; it is an entire pedagogical design operation that integrates cognitive constructs, situational contexts, real-world realities, codes of ethics and reference frameworks. Translation programmes need faculty development activities, and I suspect this is the case in many higher education contexts.
