Development of pragmatic competence in translation students in the light of translation errors and non-correpsondence theory

Statement of the problem. The article analyzes the problem of developing pragmatic competence in the professional education of future translators/interpreters and proposes an appeal to the theory of errors and translation non-correspondences (the so-called Erratology). On the example of assessment of the quality of translations, an educational experiment on editing educational translations by university students and a statistical analysis of the results are demonstrated. This helps to make a transition from subjective to more objective interpretation of the products of translation activities. The purpose of the article is to develop a methodology for teaching students to assess the quality of translations when mastering the features of interlingual transmission of the pragmatics of the original for successful development of pragmatic competence in future specialists. The research methodology consists of the analysis and synthesis of works by Russian and international researchers on translation pragmatics and assessment of translation quality and authors’ experience of developing translation competencies in university students in Translation Studies (45.03.02 Linguistics; Translation and Translation Studies). The method of conducting a training experiment and statistical processing of the results is also applied. Research results. Based on the context-competence-based approach to learning, a professional-activity translation training was developed, consisting of a set of practice-oriented training tasks aimed at developing the professional competencies of translation students in studying the pragmatics of translation and assessing the quality of translation. The results of an educational experiment are presented and statistically processed. They reflect the subjectivity of the assessment of the quality of translation and ways to increase its objectivity either by increasing the number of evaluating reviewers and deriving average results, or by graphically comparing the results between all submitted translations. Conclusion. The authors’ methodology for developing pragmatic competence in future specialists in the field of Translation Studies proposed in the article can help students realize the relative subjectivity of the available methods for assessing the quality of translation, the endless variability of translations of the same source text, and the need for a critical analysis of translation reference resources. This technique can serve as a basis for the development of similar practice-oriented tasks based on texts of the required thematic and linguistic orientation for university students specializing in Translation Studies.