IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/ibn/eltjnl/v10y2017i3p171.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Should Dictionaries be Used in Translation Tests and Examinations?

Author

Listed:
  • Abdulmoneim Mahmoud

Abstract

Motivated by the conflicting views regarding the use of the dictionary in translation tests and examinations this study was intended to verify the dictionary-free vs dictionary-based translation hypotheses. The subjects were 135 Arabic-speaking male and female EFL third-year university students. Agroup consisting of 62 students translated a text from English to Arabic without a dictionary at the beginning of the semester and translated the same text with a dictionary at the end of the semester. Another group of 73 students translated a text from Arabic to English twice in the same way in the same semester. Both groups used electronic mobile dictionaries in the second translation. The lexical errors were detected and statistically analyzed. The t-tests revealed a highly significant difference in favor of dictionary-based translation. The errors committed in the dictionary-based translation were remarkably less than those committed in dictionary-free translation. Further research is needed to settle the dispute.

Suggested Citation

  • Abdulmoneim Mahmoud, 2017. "Should Dictionaries be Used in Translation Tests and Examinations?," English Language Teaching, Canadian Center of Science and Education, vol. 10(3), pages 171-171, March.
    • Handle: RePEc:ibn:eltjnl:v:10:y:2017:i:3:p:171
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://ccsenet.org/journal/index.php/elt/article/download/66490/36026
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://ccsenet.org/journal/index.php/elt/article/view/66490
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    More about this item

    JEL classification:

    • R00 - Urban, Rural, Regional, Real Estate, and Transportation Economics - - General - - - General
    • Z0 - Other Special Topics - - General

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:ibn:eltjnl:v:10:y:2017:i:3:p:171. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Canadian Center of Science and Education (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/cepflch.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.