FUNDAGAO UNIVERSIDADE DE BRASILIA Reitor Lauro Morhy Vice Reitor Timothy Martin Mulholland Oricina EprroriAL bo INsTiTUTO DE LETRAS Coyseuno EDITORIAL Almir Brunet, Danilo Lébo, Litcia Maria Labato, Mark David Ridd, Henryk Siewierski, Hilda Orquidea H. Lontra Cara Wagner Antonio Rizzo EprroracAo ELETRONICA Jotio Francisco Mondadori de Oliveria Copyright © 2000 by Joao Sedycias (Organizador) ISBN 85-85946-12-1 Impresso no Brasil Todos os direitos reservados. Nenhuma parte desta publicagdo poder ser armazenada ou reproduzida por qualquer meio sem a autorizagao por escrito do Organizador. Ficha catalografica elaborada pela Biblioteca Central da Universidade de Bra Topicos em lingiifstica aplicada I = Issues in applied linguistics I / Joao Sedycias (organizador), — Brasilia : 1674 _Oficina Editorial do Instituto de Letras da Universidade de Brasflia-UnB; Editora Plano, 2000. 204p. ISBN 85-85946-12-1 1. Lingiifstica. 2. Lingiifstica aplicada. 3. Linguas estrangeiras ~ ensino ¢ aprendizagem. I. Sedycias, Jodo. IL. Titulo — Issues in applied linguistics I. CbuUs0L Sumario Prefacio ..... Sobre os Autores ..... Inconsistencies of Reccived Pronunciation Segmental ‘Transcriptions... Gilberto Antunes Chauvet Important Changes in the Development of Applied Linguistics as Evidenced by Emphases in the International/World es Linguistics Congresses over the Yea - Lois Gretchen Fortune Contrastive Analysis Revisited: A Participative Approach to Improving Language Performance .... Graham Howells Out of Exile: A New Role for Translation in the Teaching/ Learning of Foreign Languages Mark David Ridd A evolucao do paradigma de produgao e diésseminagio de informagiio e as implicag6es para o ensino de linguas estrangeiras . Jodo Sedycias Anilise critica do Diciondrio gramatical de verbos do portugués contemporaneo do Brasil ..... 181 Herbert Andreas WelkerOut of Exile: A New Role for Translation in the Teaching/ Learning of Foreign Languages Mark David Ridd Universidade de Brasilia Introduction The position of Translation vis-a-vis Foreign Language Teaching is, to say the least, bizarre. Once a major, even universal language learning technique or tool, translation has since been wiped clean from the slick, up-market FLT slate, where the pleasure principle reigns supreme. Indeed, scorn is often poured upon it in the methodological sanctum by the acolytes of the functional and communicative approaches to the faith. Consequently, translation is now taught and learnt (at a rather late stage in the language-learning game) as a set of discreet skills apparently unrelated to languagelearning or, at most, derivative of it. To add insult to injury, itis hardly acknowledged to be a language skill at all as far as most modern FLT approaches are concerned. This Paper aims to examine the exile to which translation has been subjected in 20th-century FLT methodology and praxis after being tarred with the dreaded Grammar-Translation brush. It is curious that the extraordinary enhancement of the standing of Translation Studies as an independent academic discipline in the second half of the century - one of the most striking phenomena in the sphere of language studies in the past two decades — has had scarce little knock-on effect as regards translation’s pariah st: language teaching. tus in foreign Instead of discarding translation as an inconvenient language teaching component that is outmoded, distractin ig and time-consuming, it will be argued that teachers should view it as a necessary, nay unavoidable language skill — one to which all foreign language users resort willy-nilly. Since those with a command of another tongue are expected to be able to translate from it for the benefit of those unable to penetrate its mysteries, language teachers would serve their clientele better were they to treat translating on a par with writing or reading — a fifth skill involving considerable intellectual challenge, one to be mastered by all foreign language learners if effective intercultural communication (not tantamount to cultural submission) is to occur,! Reviewing translation in an unbiased light and integrating it with other regular classroom activities is the only safe road to rehabilitation. We must heed the tough lessons of the past and Teject the crushingly boring exercises force-fed to learners in the bad old Grammar-Translation days if there is to be any hope of bringing "As early as 1950, Marchand claimed that Translating was the fifth skill to be mastered after listening, speaking, reading and writing. (MARCHAND, L. L Enseignement des langues vivantes par le méthode scientifique. Paris: Bd, Pirie. Vendéme, 1950.) i 23 Issues in Applied Linguistios 1 123 ; ical exile ill translation in from the cold of its futile methodological ald ee se J featherweight, i i a cle to the current ainly contribute intellectual muse : : aay cle, Sega bound scenario if incorporated into a Ree, 3 : ; jor implications for language a as ma tions for lang) ires, tement has major implical , repertoires. Reinstal majo re ona iti a tinction between foreign a ral politics (a clearer dis h Bee for ee a starters) and for the status attributed to the langui Ee ‘a Sra Such implications will be assessed and suggestions made, ; fre ht of advanc chieved in Translation Studies, on ways pee yi f e reli ction 0 t overcant the obstacles currently barring the pace en rranati in the foreign language classroom but also to ee rans : : with the tenets of present-day approaches to language teaching 1. The past role of Translation in FLT Translation today suffers an image roe ere Ee it is inextricably associated with its fellow death’s 2 rs: it is inextricably associate a 1 Gas in that duo of ill repute, the Grammar-Translation method. As Alan Maley puts it: Translation [...] has been denigrated as ‘uncommunicative,’ ‘boring,’ ‘pointless,’ “difficult, irrelevant,’ [...] and has suffered from too close an uD association with its cousin, Grammar. i cial attention for translation has been This deserves special attent apslations! ee stracised owing to a misconception and through its pssociaronaae veined that was put to rout on the battleground of ee aot polit The association, like the name-tag itself, is unfortuna misleading for, as Howatt suggests: n ling in some “grammar-translation” label is: mislead ae Coined by its opponents, it draws attention to fe ager ‘oreword” in DUEF, A. Translation, Oxford: Oxford University 1989, p. 3. wii124 two of the less significant features of the approach. The origins of the method do not lie in an attempt to teach languages by grammar and translation, these were taken for granted anyway. Translation had, of course, already been a key language- learning tool for centuries when the Grammar-Translation method began to take shape in Germany at the beginning of last century. Louis Kelly informs us that: It seems to have been the schoolmasters of the Greek communities of Egypt and Gaul who introduced translation into elementary teaching.“ The first clear indication that translation was used as a teaching method comes from fourteenth-century England.* From then on, its importance and use grew by leaps and bounds. Tt was increasingly viewed as they best way to put comprehension to the test and to improve reading skills. Translation suited the taste for imitation that pervaded study of the Classics, serving to model and hone pupils’ own style. For the Renaissance translation became the basic exercise in forming stylistic consciousness. In his rather offhand way Pace defined the contemporary idea: “... many things escape a person when he is reading, but absolutely nothing if he is doing a thorough translation.® By the end of the 18th century, on the eve of the introduction ?HOWATT, A. P. R. A History of English Language Teaching. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1991, p. 131 “KELLY, L. G. 25 Centuries of Language Teaching. Rowley: Newbury House, 1976, p. 137. * Ibid. *KELLY, op. cit, p. 172. Issues in Applied Linguistics 125 of the Grammar-Translation method, translation enjoyed pride of place among teaching techniques: ... by the last years of the century, translation had ousted composition from the classics curriculum of most schools, and in the few where composition was still taught, even in modern languages, it was approached through translation.’ Translation’s heyday was thus before Grammar-Translation came on the scene, despite current misconceptions. What the German method sought to do was to make translating easier and more exemplary of specific grammatical features chosen for practice. In other words, it introduced the translation of isolated sentences as opposed to model texts: The grammar-translation sentences had a second purpose besides affording opportunities for practice work. They exemplified the grammar in a more concentrated and, it was hoped, clearer way than texts could do. The result was that translating became associated with grammar, no longer with texts, culture or literature, In the pro it shed its cognitive cladding and became a dry, sterile classroom activity divorced from the real world of language use. In the early 1970s, schools. still insisted that learners translate such drivel as: “The carrots are behind the door.” To my knowledge, carrots have only ever been encountered behind doors in exercises of this sort. As the method caught on in the Grammar Schools of 19th century Europe, it acquired a more severe, taxing quality. Its “tyrannical obsession with minutiae” and addiction to exceptions to the rule produced a “total loss of genuine feeling for living language.”° "Ibid., p. 175 *HOWATT, op. cir., p. 132. ° HOWATT, op. cit., pp. 135 and 136.126 Tépicos em lingiiistica aplicada 1 Translating, though, is quite different in nature from grammar (which can virtually be bypassed in language teaching). Halliday, McIntosh and Strevens make the very sound point that: ‘The role of translation in language teaching [...] is neither presupposed by, nor does it presuppose, the teaching of grammar.'* ‘The outright rejection of translation in language teaching was part of the backlash against a method that had utterly distorted translating by wrenching it away from the world of texts. Translation was scorned by virtue of its dull bedfellow Grammar. As Jeremy Harmer observes: “For many years translation went out of fashion and was considered as something of a sin.”!! When reform came and the Direct Method surfaced, the reaction against translation and even the slightest reference to the mother tongue became rabid. Howatt recalls that Maximilian Berlitz issued his teachers the strictest instructions on this matter: no translation under any circumstances (“teachers are cautioned against the slightest compromise on this point”), a strong emphasis on oral work, avoidance of grammatical explanations until late in the course, and the maximum use of question-and-answer techniques. His teachers were all native speakers, a cardinal Berlitz principle... This must ring a somewhat awkward bell with many of today’s foreign language teachers toiling under the dogmas of straitjacket methods. As late as the 1960’s the predicament was virtually unchanged and translation remained utterly taboo: ‘HALLIDAY, M. A. K., MCINTOSH, A. and STREVENS, P. The Linguistic Sciences and Language Teaching. London: Longman, 1964, p. 265. 1 HARMER, J. The Practice of English Language Teaching. London: Longman, 1983, p. 86. “ HOWATT, op. cit., p. 205. | | | | ili iia ti Issues in Applied Linguistics I 127 ‘What the learner must not do may be summarized as follows: (a) he must not speak [his native language], (b) he must not learn lists of English-foreign-language equivalents, and (c) he must not translate (...) All these activities will nullify his efforts to establish within himself co-ordinate system of two languages, and will instead only collapse the structure into a compound system...° What this attitude fails to perceive is that: “Exclusion of the mother tongue is often seen by the learners as a criticism of the mother tongue as a language, thus making it seem like a second-class’ language.”"* One cannot fail to see that this climate persists in the FLT sanctum to this day. Objective reflection would show us that none of this has prevented equally artificial practices creeping into the language classroom: ‘The disconnected sentences of the grammar-translation approach are no sillier than the “scientific” drills of the audiolingual method with which they share many features. Both are the inevitable outcome of two basic principles. The first is that a language teaching course can be based on a sequence of linguistic categories, and the second that these categories can be exemplified in sample sentences for intensive practice.’ In the crossfire of methodological politics, the translation baby got thrown out with the grimy grammar bath-water of the grammar-translation method. A historical perspective would help show that its banishment is both unfounded and counterproductive, for as Kelly puts it: BROOKS, N. Language and Language Learning. New York: Harcourt Brace, 1964, p. 52. “NATION, I. §. P. Teaching and Learning Vocabulary. New York: Newbury House, 1990, p. 63 ‘SHOWATT, op. cit., p. 141.128 Tépicos em lingiiistica aplicada I The history of language teaching is dominated by translation, which, at certain times, has even driven reading and composition from the classroom. [...] The only period from which it is largely absent is the Middle Ages.'® He goes on to mention the fact that translation’s displacement to advanced or specialist levels of study is a 20th- century development: The mid-twentieth century is probably the only period since the Middle Ages in which translation was relegated to an advanced stage in language learning. Translation was used in the initial stages of the foreign language by the schools of Bordeaux and Alexandria in the third century of the Christian era.” Intracing the history of translation in language teaching, Valnir Chagas raises a matter of great consequence for the politics of FLT. In the second century BC, the Romans invaded the Iberian Peninsula and imposed Latin as the language of communication among the local populace. They repeated the procedure at every new conquest, suppressing local languages and making Latin the lingua franca of commerce, communication, culture, schooling and, later on, of the Church’. Translation was mostly eschewed since Latin was taught orally, and it was only when the printing press revolutionised European culture in the 15" century that translation was fully restored in language teaching as nations began to take pride in the vernacular languages KELLY, op. cit., p. 171 " Did. ‘SA grande arma dessa maravilhosa conquista, quigé o mais perfeito proceso de aculturagao organizada de que se tem noticia, foi menos o poder destruidor de suas legides que a sutil ¢ irresistivel mensagem de sua lingua, o latim...” CHAGAS, V. Diddtica especial de linguas modernas. Sao Paulo: Companhia Editora Nacional, 1979, p. 24. Issues in Applied Linguistics I _ 129 they were to export through colonial expansion. Translation was now a means of enhancing the cultural status of local languages which sought to imitate the standards of Greek and Roman classical culture. Unfortunately, little attention is paid in language teaching today to the importance of translation in ascribing value to students’ mother tongues. Its political pertinence is highlighted by Elvira Souto, who sees translation as the one element of language training capable of restoring the Galician language in Spain’. Sadly it was when translation regained lost ground that grammar moved centre-stage and began to distort it? 2. Banishment Methodological reform in the 20" century is well documented and no attempt will be made here to rake over the historical terrain of language teaching in the last century or so. Hard-and-half-boiled reasons abound as to why translation has been “pushed into the methodological lumber room,” to use Alan Maley’s apt phrase.”! Seven arguments are commonly resorted to: a) Translation involves using the mother tongue. Learners are not supposed to remember they have or have ever had any other language than the target language. Mother tongues, after all, contaminate their offspring. So cherish the fledgling and stifle mother in the clothes basket, making sure to keep the lid airtight. Those SOUTO, E. Traducom e ensino lingiifstico. Xullo: EdiciGns Laiovento, 1996. ™ “Qs professores, exagerando o sentido da metodizagiio que se impunha, ativeram- se de preferéneia ao aspecto formal do novo método, de tal sorte [...] que a grama- tica, como antes a traducdo, passou a constituir objetive em si mesma, J4 nao era um método de ensino: era uma espécie de ritual em que as palavras, vertidas isoladamente, deviam ser mais tarde, como num passe de magica, religadas pelo aluno através do conhecimento memorizado de regras totalmente alheias ao contex- to real do idioma, Em vez de uma técnica de ensino, nascera uma liturgia...” [Cha- gas, op. cit., p. 26] 2 “Foreword” in DUFF, op. cit., p. 3.130 Topicos em ling’ ascribing to this belief hold that: ‘Translation tasks artificially increase the L, leamer’s reliance on first language structures, masking processes the learner otherwise uses for natural communication. The fear is that translation feeds a bad habit and produces a foreign language learner over-reliant on the crutch of his native tongue: stronger the hold of the native language on the \s’ speech habits, the more difficult it is for them to learn the new one, and this use of translation can be actually counterproductive.” Contrary to most language teachers’ expectation, however, linguists are divided on this matter. As Halliday, McIntosh and Strevens point out: . there are those who hold the view that, where circumstances permit, the native language has a positive and definable role in foreign language teaching.”* b) Translation is text-bound and activates only two skills: reading and writing. Since it involves no oral work, it is deemed uncommunicative. Perhaps, though, this is merely the upshot of DULAY, H., BURT, M. and KRASHEN, 8. Language Two. New York: Oxford University Press, 1982, p. 110, Note here that the reference is to second, not foreign language. Valid as the argument may be for L,, ithardly serves when for language learning is at issue. Insights that apply to L, are often of little relevan far as foreign language learning is concerned. ‘This is the source of much methodological confusion and short-sightedness in language teaching at a time when L, theory is intensely exported. ® DACANAY, F, R. and BOWEN, J. D. Techniques and Procedures in Second Language Teaching, Quezon City: Alemar-Phoenix, 1963, p. 146. % This stance is fast gaining ground. See, for instance, RINGBOM, H. The Role of the First Language in Foreign Language Learning. Cleredon: Multilingual Matters, 1987, op. cit. p. 111. Issues in Applied Linguistics I 131 unimaginative approaches to it. Indeed, most of the objection to and rejection of translating as a language-learning activity stems from an association with outmoded ways of employing it in language teaching. Besides being boring, the exercises teachers rammed down their pupils" gullets in the past were a constant source of disappointment and even humiliation when the suggested translation failed to coincide with the formula the teacher was expecting. As Wilga Rivers and Mary Temperley state, the translation of isolated sentences «.. has been brought into disrepute by its excesses. Sentences of improbable or infrequent occurrence, constructed so that they positively bristle with problems, have made language learning an ordeal for many student without doing more than convincing them of their inadequac The futility of the misguided utilisation of translation exercises fabricated to elicit artificial performance of features of the language considered pertinent by the grammar-grinding course writer has been justly and forthrightly condemned: The usual class activity of copying homework translation sentences on the blackboard, which were then corrected and explicated by the teacher, is about the most useless waste of time ever inflicted on a student. Linguistically speaking, such stilted practice exercises are mistaken because they present language as an abstract rule system, as grammar in opposition to real use. Pedagogically, they are disastrous because they are bereft of cognitive value: The use of isolated sentences lacking any linguistic or * RIVERS, W. M. and TEMPERLEY, M.S. A Practical Guide to the Teaching of English as a Second or Foreign Language, New York: Oxford University Press, 1978, p. 327. 2° DACANAY, op. cit., p. 146. One wonders what a useful waste of time might be!132 Topicos em lingiitstica aplicada I situational context, other than the artificial situation of the translation exercise, renders the translation process meaningless as linguistic activity and leads to a concentration on formal equivalence at the expense of contextual equivalence. No attention is paid to appropriateness of register, since there is no clue to what use of language is involved...27 One claim that can be made for proper use of translation in FLT is precisely the cognitive potential of the texts students are set to work on. C) Because it involves individual writing tasks most of the time, it is reckoned to be unsuitable for the dynamics of the EFL classroom. This can, of course, be obviated simply by varying the teaching technique or by opting for short texts. d) It is a wasteful activity because it is slow and time- consuming. In a fifty-minute class, there simply is not enough time for the ponderous, painstaking process of translating — that may be fine for the dithery translator but not for the slash-and-burn FLT militant! @) Translation involves either literary or technical/scientific texts. This, of course, is a myth but it has generated a powerful stereotype — one, naturally enough, that the reckless dabblers emulate to the chagrin of those of us whose professional concern is the improvement of practical translating skills among prospective translators. That is why you can bet your bottom dollar that if translation is ever used in the FLT classroom, the students will be asked to translate literary texts. ALG. Weymouth states that: The widespread use of literary-type texts for translation seems to us both an anachronistic and a wasteful activity if the wider objective of work in translation is deemed to 2 HALLIDAY, op. cit., p. 266. Issues in Applied Linguistics 1S be one of informing all other areas of the learners’ communicative repertoire.”* Margherita Ulrych argues in favour of a varied textual menu for language students engaging in translation activities. Her recipe is thi .. translation should be done at text level and the passages chosen should be authentic, topical and include the widest possible variety of text types covering a number of styles and registers. Students will then feel they are engaging in real communication.” f) Translating is boring while correcting translations signals the onset of cerebral paralysis. Worse still, it takes an ungodly amount of time to do. No ticks or crosses will suffice here. One should not forget that the problem of adequate assessment of translations has been a further obstacle to its reinstatement in FLT, Not only is a satisfactory end-product hard to obtain but deciding how Satisfactory it actually is can be complex. Difficulty is apparently a reason for doubting the value of the activity. Q) Translation suffers an image problem among language teachers, a problem compounded by the fact that many of today’s teachers have not themselves been grounded in the basics of translating and so feel out of their depth trying to teach a skill of which they have a shaky command. * WEYMOUTH, A. G. “A learner-centred approach to translation at the post “A” level stage”. THE LINGUIST, Summer 1984, » ULRYCH, M. “Teaching Translation” in ELT Techniques of Teaching: From Theory to Practice. The British Council 1985 Bologna Conference, London: Modern English Publications, 1986, p. 26.134 Tépicos em lingiitstica aplicada I 3. Five reasons for bringing translation in from the cold Widdowson states that, despite the rejection spawned by FLT dogma, there is good reason for insisting that translation be brought back: The use of translation as a teaching technique has long been viewed with suspicion by language teachers and many, of course, proscribe it altogether as a matter of principle. I want to argue that translation [...] can bea very useful pedagogic device and indeed in some circumstances [...] translation of a kind may provide the most ef ive means of learning."” Five main reasons can be given for reinstating translation: a) Contrary to popular belief, having a mother tongue can help you to learn the foreign language, especially if there is a degree of similarity between the two. We mostly avoid letting our pupils use their mother tongue during classes because we want them to try to think it out in the foreign language. Yet our students consistently say “T have eleven years” or “I am living in Brasilia for sixteen years” or “I have no conditions to do that.” Why? Halliday et alia have the answer: Tf one is taught a second language (...) even by something approaching the “direct method,” one usually sets up patterns of translation equivalence. (...) one abstracts translation equivalence for oneself from the observation of the two languages in operation.” By emphasising the contrast, I actually think that translation helps language learners perceive the differences and influence of one language on their production in the other. As translation University Press, 1979, p. 101. HALLIDAY et al., op. cit., p. 125. Issues in Applied Linguistics 1 1 BR inevitably involves contrast and comparison, it makes us see the strengths, weaknesses and peculiarities of both languages. Pupils are thus made aware of “where the genius of the two languages differs.”*? It therefore provides a richer linguistic experience. As Margherita Ulrych explains: .. translation conceived of as intra- and interlingual interpretation leads to a deeper awareness of the complexity of language and enhances students’ ability to develop SL analyzing techniques and SL/TL transfer strategies.” Her view is firmly seconded by Rivers and Temperley who claim that: Genuine translation involves the exploration of the potential of two languages. It not only involves the students in serious consideration of the expressive possibilities of the new language, but also extends their appreciation of the semantic extensions and limitations of their first language and the implications for meaning of its syntactic options. It is, then, an appropriate undertaking in an advanced course, or even at the intermediate level...* So why do we insist on steering clear of it? Fear is the root cause. Fear of the teacher losing control over which language is to be used in class, fear of not having the solution up one’s sleeve, fear that the native speaker teacher may seem less godlike than he or she often appears to be, fear that untying student tongues may unleash obstreperous classroom behaviour, fear that students will not learn to think and so speak fluently in the target language:*° KELLY, op. cit., p. 139. SULRYCH, op. cit., p. 27. ™ RIVERS and TEMPERLEY, op. cit. p. 328. ion for running shy of the challenge. Any * None of these fears is sufficient justifica136 Tépicos em lingiitstica aplicada I The main objection to translation as a teaching device has been that it interposes an intermediate process between the concept and the way it is expressed in the foreign language, thus hindering the development of the ability to think directly in the new language. It may be argued that even when students are taught by direct methods, they often mentally interpose their intermediate translation process themselves in the early stages. Such mental translation usually disappears as a superfluous step when students becomes familiar with the language through continual exposure to it. Teachers will need to decide for themselves which position they will take in this controversy, whether to eschew all translation or use it judiciously for certain purposes.>* b) Translation is a necessary, natural activity, one that everyone expects a person with a command of a foreign language to be able to perform. As a matter of fact, translation is considerably more useful and sensible than a good number of more gimmicky, equally time- consuming fads which, on and off, become the pedagogical rage. We should not forget that “Some of those who learn a foreign language do so mainly in order to put it to one or another of the uses commonly labelled ‘translating.’”*’ Outside the walls of language schools, translation is being done in offices, telephone companies, newsrooms, hotels, universities, airports, police departments, cabinet rooms packed with big-wigs and backrooms crammed with thugs handling the latest weaponry and electronic gadgetry. We should hardly be surprised, then, teacher in full command of the class will have no difficulty ensuring that the target Ianguage is used to discuss the translation process in either direction. As for loss of prestige in the eyes of the students, I firmly believe in Paulo Freire’s approach to teacher-student interaction, which insists that the teacher come down off the pedestal and relate to the student in a co-operative frame, Students come to class with their own linguistic baggage and should be encouraged to explore it to the full. 6 RIVERS and TEMPERLEY, op. cit., p. 326. 3 HALLIDAY et al,, op. cit., p. 129. f } ; Issues in Applied Linguistics I 137 to find that many students are actually keen to acquire crosslingual skills. And, having detected their need and wish, we should certainly not turn a blind eye to it. Stern stresses that: Another important consideration is that as learners we may pursue cross-cultural objectives; that is, translating and interpreting may be skills which we wish to master. The need for exercising these skills arises regularly as soon as we have a reasonable command of an L,. Being able to translate or interpret is a social skill we should cultivate in order to be able to mediate between speakers of different languages. Clearly, a crosslingual strategy would gain greater prominence in situations where L, learners include any form of translation or interpreting among their objectives.** So why is it excluded from the classroom? We all know only too well that our pupils will be asked to translate (on paper or in casual conversation) at one point or another. Can we honestly say they will ever have to write a dialogue in their real-world lives? Yet they are all forced to write a plethora of dialogues as though we were shaping them up to run for a screenplay Oscar. Similarly, can the oral overkill prevalent in many courses to the total detriment of written discourse be justified in the computer age? Why teach translation? Because, in a nutshell, “in one way or another we translate all the time,” says Margherita Ulrych.” C) Similarly, speakers of a foreign language are often required to switch back from the foreign language into their native tongue to relay to colleagues information they have just culled from a phone call, computer screen or text, for instance. The language training they receive makes this an uphill battle. Had they been given the chance to do * STERN, H. H. Issues and Options in Language Teaching. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1992, p. 286. % ULRYCH, op. cit., p. 26138 Tépicos em lingiitstica aplicada 1 translating on a regular basis, they probably would not find it so hard going. Our aim is a degree of bilingualism but, as Dodson states: “... the sign of true bilingualism is not merely the possession of two janguages, but also the ability to jump easily fiom one to another." This can only be achieved and developed by practising translation and! or interpreting. d) Authenticity has for decades now been a buzzword in language teaching. Unfortunately, there is more lip service than genuine effort to expose students to real language use and real texts. Textbooks for language learners still look fake, they still hover around the classroom and the back garden. They never take a dive down a subway, they shy away from all that is lewd and rude, they give the livid taxi driver a cold shoulder and ignore the kerbside beggar. Even when it comes to literature, the repertoire is as chaste and chilly as a snow drift. One of the most frustrating foreign language experiences is being faced with a barrage of abuse and expletives and not having one really venomous four-letter-word to lob back. ‘Translation provides the teacher with an excellent opportunity to employ truly authentic, undoctored materials. This can even apply at lower intermediate level when most teachers are more than ready to Jet their pupils struggle to master the arcane platitudes of the latest heartthrob pop idol. ‘Adults in particular find authentic materials a stimulating relief from the sterile fabrications of course books. Besides raw authenticity, translation affords constant {intellectual challenge. The subject matter in itself can provide welcome mental stimulus. For adult students [translation satisfies} an important need: intellectual content comparable to the interest and = DODSON. L. J. Language Teaching and the Bilingual Method. London: Pitman, 1967, p. 90. Issues in Applied Linguistics I 139 ability the mature student brings to the classroom.* i Mary Finocchiaro hints that translation could even be used at relatively early stages with adults as a learning and teaching aid: With older pupils, who are literate in their native tongue, carefully planned brief“translation” exercises of limited structures may be used by the bilingual teacher since they have certain advantages: (1) they help focus attention ‘on important contrasts between the students’ native tongue and English; and (2) they give the teacher an added measure for judging the students’ comprehension of structures or vocabulary.” Another obvious advantage of using challenging, authentic texts for translation is that it whets the appetite for and improves command of new vocabulary. We profess that one of our aims in teaching another language is to open up to our students the world of language itself, Part of this world is the wonder of words — their multiplicity, their variety, their elasticity, their chameleon-like quality of changing and merging in different environments. We know that different languages view reality from different perspectives and that many of these cultural differences are reflected in words and in their nuances of meaning. Yet frequently we keep our language learners impoverished in this area, depriving them of the opportunity to explore another world of words."* More than almost any other classroom activity, translation © DACANAY and BOWEN, op. cit., p. 151. 2 BINOCCHIARO, M. Teaching Englis . 1g English as a Second Li ° ‘ York: Harper and Row, 1969. igaoeegem wR “RIVERS and 'TEMPERLEY, op. cit., pp. 338-339.140 Toépicos em lingitistica aplicada I presents and demands immediate use of new vocabulary. Not just the words on the page but the process of searching for an apt word or phrase are catalytic in expanding students’ command of the language. More than reading or essay writing, translation obliges students to delve deep in dictionaries and thesauruses, exploring the riches, subtleties, strengths and shortfalls of the target language. It is worth remembering that “Translation is not limited, as are pictures and objects, to nouns, adjectives, and verbs. It can be used to explain many different types of words.” Few techniques can claim to make such penetrating inroads on the virgin territory of the foreign language. Translation not only leads to a deeper awareness of different stylistic and registral variations in both the L, and the L,, but also develops students’ receptive and productive lexical abilities by posing the problem of selecting vocabulary that is appropriate to the discourse type of the text.** ) Finally, translation is in itself a useful mental exercise, akin to arithmetic, chess or puzzle-making, besides being a useful linguistic skill. It always generates speculation and discussion, raising funda- mental issues connected with language. Margherita Ulrych, for instance, is convinced that: ... translation can be viewed as a “hypothesis-testing and problem-solving exercise” which provokes students to think about their two languages. It gives them the opportunity not only to explore but also develop their L, knowledge and competence by analysis, comparison and contrast. “ NATION, IS. P. Teaching and Learning Vocabulary. New York: Newbury House, 1990, p. 62. “ULRYCH, op. cit., p. 27 “Ibid. p. 28. Issues in Applied Linguistics 1 141 Widdowson, meanwhile, stresses the place of translation in a broad cognitive approach to foreign language learning within the greater context of general education. For, unlike most other classroom activities, it taps into the linguistic and non-linguistic knowledge the student has stored up. He claims that: ... the presentation of the foreign language as a relevant and significant communicative activity comparable to the learner’s own language [...] allows for the devising of exercises which involve the solving of communicative problems, problems which require reference to knowledge other than that which is simply linguistic, which make demands on the linguistic skills only to the extent that they are an intrinsic feature of communicative abilities.” Widdowson also refutes the idea that translation distracts the learner’s attention from the ways in which the foreign language ex- presses meaning — a claim commonly made to discard it as a valid technique or tool." Fortunately, there is never one correct answer in translating. There is always room for improvement. Translation develops students’ ability to use language accurately, to express themselves clearly, and to attain greater flexibility and style in their handling of the language. “ WIDDOWSON, H. G. Teaching Language as Communication. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1978, pp. 158-159, ** T think that this may indeed be true when the translation involves relating two languages word for word or sentence for sentence: that is to say, where the translation operates at the level of usage, But in the case of the approach that being proposed, translation would not operate at this level but at the level of use. That is to say, the learner would recognise that acts of communication, like identification, description, instruction and so on, are expressed in the foreign Janguage in one way and in his own language in another, He would, therefore, equate two sentences only with reference to their use in communication and this should help to impress upon him the values that the foreign language sentences can assume, which is precisely the aim we wish to achieve. (Ibid., p. 18).142 Topicos em lingiiistica aplicada I Carefully chosen texts can concentrate their attention on features of the language the teacher is already attempting to focus on: sequences of adjectives, verb tense usage and aspect, the use of articles, and so on. 4. Successful translating in the classroom Most of the arguments presented for not indulging in translation in FLT are easy to refute. Translating does not have to be done on paper: it can be done orally, in pairs, in groups, as a contest or game, it can be coupled with or follow on from dictation, listening or reading comprehension, a song, a composition. The importance of oral work leading up to a translation and in processing translating is underscored by Rivers and Temperley: Translation involves careful analysis of the meaning of the source text. Students consider various aspects of the meaning they have extracted and rethink it in terms of the target language so that as little is added and as little is lost as possible. They learn a great deal as they discover that it is not always possible to attain exact equivalence and as they evaluate possible versions to see which most fully captures all the implications of the original. They will find that they need to look beyond single words, segments of sentences, or even complete sentences to whole stretches of discourse as they make their decisions. Much can be thrashed out in group working sessions as they ask themselves some searching questions about the text they wish to translate.” Indeed, oral production of the translation text should be recommended and constant discussion encouraged to guarantee quality for the product of the translating: * Ibid., p. 329. Issues in Applied Linguistics 143 Many (...) weaknesses (...) can be corrected by asking students to read their translations aloud. As they read, they become conscious of the odd quality of what they have written in their native language and often correct it as they proceed. Group discussion helps to refine the final version. Group discussion before individual writing of the translation is also helpful in impressing on the student that the passage has a sensible, sequential meaning. Part of the translation may be written on the chalkboard or the overhead projector as the group works it over. The students then complete the translation individually, comparing their versions with each other to decide on the best possible translation.” The following suggestions will help ensure that translating is useful, enjoyable and workable from the standpoint of both teacher and class: I Choose texts that are interesting, authentic, short, accessible, non-specialist. Il. Prefer foreign to native language translating, particularly at lower levels, as a confidence-boosting exercise. Ill. Provide preparatory reading matter in the target language on the topic for translation before launching into translating in the other direction. IV. Vary the activities employed: written work, oral work, individu- al, pair or team work; produce rewrites envisaging different uses for the text. Vv. Make the translating dovetail with other learning activities. An ideal combination is reading leading to translating leading to composition. *Ibid., p. 336.144 Tépicos em lingitstica aplicada I VI. Avoid using translation as a language testing device — that counters the pleasure principle. VIL. Let students suggest things they would like to translate (e.g. comic strips). VIII. Try to get the texts to expose them to language they are not usually allowed to see or hear: anything forbidden or taboo is naturally more fun. TX. Avoid excessive reliance on dictionaries by reserving a separate phase for consultation and so allowing them to ite natural- sounding text. X. Prepare your students to use dictionaries appropriately, otherwise they will be hopelessly misled by them. XI. Encourage discussion and controversy to the full. XI. Ensure your attitude to translating is never dull, then your students. will never suspect it could be! 5. Implications and Conclusion Contemporary Translation Studies have shown that translation is essentially associated with textual processing and the handling of information as it crosses cultural frontiers, more than being a matter of pure linguistic processing. Translators therefore need to have good reasoning brains, acute sensibility and an unquenchable thirst for knowledge. They must be subtle operators, not linguistic technicians. Surely these are qualities worth developing in any educational framework. They may, however, not be welcome in the mechanical environment of some beehive language schools where worker-bee teachers are expected merely to follow the script, not to think for themselves or give rein to their creativity. The most alarming implication is that using translation in the Issues in Applied Linguistics 1 145 classroom will likely rock the boat. For translating to be possible, the teacher must have a command of the languages in contact — native- speaker teachers are not in the advantage here. This may undermine prestige. Moreover, translation makes language learners acutely aware of the strengths and weaknesses of both languages and cultures. That may counter the adulation of the foreign often prevalent in the language classroom and in FL textbooks. Teachers experimenting with translation will certainly end up asking themselves why they are using books designed for immigrant second language learners to teach people who are not emigrating and will most likely be using the language in their own country. Eventually, that realisation may erode sales of expensive imported teaching materials that rarely encourage students to use the foreign language to talk about their local environment. By way of conclusion, it should first be said that the taboo must be broken, for .. it seems silly not to translate if by doing so a lot of time can be saved. If the students don’t understand a word and the teacher can’t think how to explain it, he can quickly translate it... The shunning of translation in FLT has been more a matter of methodological infighting than of reasoned analysis. There can, I think, be little doubt that Translation is an activity which has a place in language teaching, if properly designed and used at the right time and with the right students.*? 1am genuinely convinced that foreign language teachers must now stop and take a long, hard look at translation. Howatt gives us cause for thought, raising a pertinent question: >'HARMER, op. cit., p. 86. *DACANAY, op. cit. p. 151146 Tépicos em lingiiistica aplicada The practice of translation has been condemned so strenuously for so long without any really convincing reasons that it is perhaps time the profession took another look at it. Was it really translation that the reformers objected to a hundred years ago or [...] the way in which it was used? Naturally, if translation is to make a successful return, considerable care must be expended on working it into language courses so that it becomes an integral part of the tools and techniques with which we open up new horizons and make a cognitive contribution. This does not mean a return to translation as the main medium because, of course, “The systematic use of [translation of L, texts into L, by teacher or class] implies a sophisticated understanding of the nature of translation which has not generally been provided in pedagogic literature.” Translation can, I feel, avoid language courses becoming skill-perfecting factories. It can help them enhance the experience and education of those attending them and (why not?) of those teaching them. ® HOWATT, op. cit, p. 161. STERN, op. cit., p. 294. Issues in Applied Linguistics I 147 Bibliography BROOKS, N. Language and Language Learning. New York: Harcourt Brace, 1964. CHAGAS, V. Diddtica especial de linguas modernas. Sao Paulo: Companhia Editora Nacional, 1979 DACANAY, F. R. and J. D. Bowen. Techniques and Procedures in Second Language Teaching. Quezon City: Alemar-Phoenix, 1963. DODSON, L. J. Language Teaching and the Bilingual Method. London: Pitman, 1967. DUFF, A. Translation. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1989. DULAY, H., BURT, M., and KRASHEN, S. Language Two. New York: Oxford University Press, 1982. FINOCCHIARO, M. Teaching English as a Second Language. Rey. ed. New York: Harper and Row, 1969. HALLIDAY, M. A. K., MCINTOSH, A., and STREVENS, P. The Linguistic Sciences and Language Teaching. London: Longman, 1964. HARMER, J. The Practice of English Language Teaching. London: Longman, 1983. HOWATT, A. P. R. A History of English Language Teaching. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1991. KELLY, L. G. 25 Centuries of Language Teaching. Rowley: Newbury House, 1976. MARCHAND, L. L’Enseignement des Langues Vivantes par le Méthode Scientifique. Paris: Ed. Paris-Vendéme, 1950. NATION, I. S. P. Teaching and Learning Vocabulary. New York:148 Tépicos em lingiiistica aplicada 1 Newbury House, 1990, RINGBOM, H. The Role of the First Language in Foreign Language Learning. Manchester: Multilingual Matters, 1987. RIVERS, W. M, and TEMPERLEY, M.S. A Practical Guide to the Teaching of English as a Second or Foreign Language. New York: Oxford University Press, 1978, SOUTO, E. Tradugom ¢ Ensino Lingiitstico. Xullo: Edicions Laiovento, 1996, STERN, H. H. Issues and Options in Language Teaching. Oxtord: Oxford University Press, 1992, ULRYCH, M. “Teaching Translation,” in ELT Techniques of Teaching: From Theory to Practice. The British Council 1985 Bologna Conference, London: Modern English Publications, 1986. WEYMOUTH, A. G. “A learner-centred approach to translation at the post “A” level stage,” in The Linguist, Summer, 1984, WIDDOWSON, H. G. Teaching Language as Communication, Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1978, WIDDOWSON, H. G. Explorations in Applied Linguistics. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1979,