Assessing assessment: The Authorized Translator’s Examination in Finland

Marja Kivilehto, Leena Salmi


The system for authorizing translators to translate legally valid texts used in Finland was revised in 2008 from a test measuring language skills into an examination containing translation assignments. The examination consists of two translation assignments and a test of the examinees’ knowledge of the professional practices of authorized translators (tested with multiple-choice questions). In the assessment of the translation products, a predefined two-dimensional assessment system is used in which translations are marked for both content and language quality. In this article, we discuss the assessment systems used in Finland, Sweden, Norway and Germany and present the results of a case study on the application of the scoring chart used in the Finnish examination.


translator certification; translation quality assessment; assessment scales; error analysis; translation of official documents; professional translating

Full Text:



A 1232/2007 = Valtioneuvoston asetus auktorisoiduista kääntäjistä [Government Decree on Authorised Translators]. (2016, August 9). Retrieved from

Angelelli, C. V. (2009). Using a rubric to assess translation ability: Defining the construct. In C. V. Angelelli & H. E. Jacobson (Eds.), Testing and assessment in Translation and Interpreting Studies: A call for dialogue between research and practice (pp. 13–47). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.

ATA (2016). Certification exam overview. Retrieved from

Brunette, L. (2000). Towards a terminology for translation quality assessment. The Translator, 6(2), 169–182. doi:10.1080/13556509.2000.10799064

Colina, S. (2011). Evaluation/Assessment. In Y. Gambier & L. van Doorslaer (Eds.), Handbook of Translation Studies (pp. 43–48). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.

Colina, S. (2013). Assessment of translation. In C. A. Chapelle (Ed.), The encyclopedia of Applied Linguistics (pp. 1–7). Chichester: Wiley-Blackwell.

CTTIC (2016). CTTIC Standard Certification Translation Examination Marker’s Guide. Retrieved from

FNBE = Finnish National Board of Education. (2012). Qualification requirements for authorised translators’ examinations 2012. Regulations and Guidelines 22/011/2012.

FNBE = Opetushallitus. (2015). Käsikirja 2015. Auktorisoidun kääntäjän tutkinto. Toimintaohjeet tutkintotehtävien arvioijalle [Finnish National Board of Education. Handbook 2015. Authorised Translator’s Examination. Instructions for Assessors of Translation Assignments]. Helsinki: Opetushallitus.

FNBE = Opetushallitus. (2016a). Ohjeita tutkintoon 12.11.2016 osallistuvalle [Instructions to those participating in the examination on 12 November 2016]. (2016, October 14). Retrieved from

FNBE = Opetushallitus (2016b). Yleistä auktorisoidusta kääntämisestä [About authorised translating in general] Retrieved from

Gouadec, D. (2010). Quality in translation. In Y. Gambier & L. van Doorslaer (Eds.), Handbook of Translation Studies (pp. 270–275). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.

Hale, S. B., Garcia, I., Hlavac, J, Kim, M., Lai, M., Turner, B., & Slatyer, H. (2012). Improvements to NAATI testing: Development of a conceptual overview for a new model for NAATI standards, testing and assessment. The National Accreditation Authority for Translators and Interpreters (NAATI). Retrieved from

Hlavac, J. (2013). A cross-national overview of translator and interpreter certification procedures. Translation & Interpreting: The International Journal for Translation & Interpreting Research, 5(2), 32–65.

House, J. (2015). Translation quality assessment: Past and present. London: Routledge.

Kammarkollegiet. (2013). Kort förklaring till feltyperna [A short explanation of error types]. (2016, August 8). Retrieved from

Kammarkollegiet. (2016). Auktorisationsprovet för översättare [Examination for authorised translator] (2016, August 8). Retrieved from

Koby, G. S., & Champe, G. G. (2013). Welcome to the real world: Professional-level translator certification. Translation and Interpreting, 5(1), 156–173.

L 1231/2007 = Laki auktorisoiduista kääntäjistä [Act on Authorised Translators] (2016, August 9). Retrieved from

Lommel, A., Görög, A., Melby, A., Uszkoreit, H., Burchardt, A. and Popović, M. (2015). Harmonised metric. Project Report, QT21 project (funded by the European Union’s Horizon 2020 program for ICT) Retrieved from

Melby, A. K. (2013). Introduction. Translation & Interpreting. The International Journal for Translation & Interpreting Research 5(1), 1–12.

NHH = NHH Norges Handelshøyskole. (2016a). Autorisasjonsprøve i øversættelse [Examination for Authorised Translator]. (2016, 28 November). Retrieved from

NHH = NHH Norges Handelshøyskole. (2016b). Forskrift for autorisasjonsprøve for å bli statsautorisert translatør (translatøreksamen) ved Norges Handelshøyskole [Regulations of the Examination for Stateauthorised Translator in the NHH Norwegian School of Economics]. (2016, November 28). Retrieved from

Nord, C. (1997). Translating as a purposeful activity: Functionalist approaches explained. Manchester: St. Jerome.

O’Brien, S. (2012). Towards a dynamic quality evaluation model for translation. The Journal of Specialised Translation 17, 55–77.

Pym, A., Grin, F., Sfreddo, C., & Chan, A. (2012). The status of the translation profession in the European Union. Studies on Translation and Multilingualism, DGT/2011/TST. Brussels: European Commission (2016, October 23). Retrieved from

Salmi, L. (2017). Tähänastisten suomalaisten kääntäjätutkintojen vertailua [Comparison of the authorised translator’s examinations in force to date]. In T. Leblay (Ed.), Auktorisoidun kääntäjän tutkinnon historiaa ja nykypäivää [The Authorized Translator’s Examination: Past and present] (pp. 26–34). Opetushallitus. Raportit ja selvitykset 2017:16. Helsinki: Finnish National Board of Education.

Salmi, L., & Kinnunen, T. (2015). Training translators for accreditation in Finland. The Interpreter and Translator Trainer, 9(2), 229–242.

Salmi, L., & Penttilä, A. (2013). The system of authorizing translators in Finland. In D. Tsagari & R. van Deemter (Eds.), Assessment issues in language translation and interpreting (pp. 115–130). Frankfurt am Main: Peter Lang.

Taibi, M., & Ozolins, U. (2016). Community translation. London: Bloomsbury.

TAUS (2016). Harmonized DQF-MQM error typology. Retrieved from

Turner, B., Lai, M., & Huang, N. (2010). Error deduction and descriptors: A comparison of two methods of translation test assessment. Translation & Interpreting: The International Journal for Translation & Interpreting Research, 2(1), 11–23.

ÜDPO = Prüfungsordnung für Übersetzer und Dolmetscher (2016). [Examination regulation for Translator and Interpreter] (2016, October 16). Retrieved from