A study of the use of translation in improving non majored english students’ reading comprehension at the faculty of english, university of languages and international studies,

VIETNAM NATIONAL UNIVERSITY, HANOI
UNIVERSITY OF LANGUAGES AND INTERNATIONAL STUDIES
FACULTY OF POST GRADUATE STUDIES
******************************

ĐINH THI THU TRANG

A STUDY OF THE USE OF TRANSLATION IN IMPROVING
NON- ENGLISH MAJORED STUDENTS’ READING
COMPREHENSION ABILITY AT FACULTY OF ENGLISH,
UNIVERSITY OF LANGUAGES AND INTERNATIONAL
STUDIES, VIETNAM NATIONAL UNIVERSITY
(NGHIÊN CỨU VỀ SỬ DỤNG DỊCH TRONG CẢI THIỆN KỸ NĂNG ĐỌC HIỂU
CỦA SINH VIÊN KHÔNG CHUYÊN ANH, KHOA TIẾNG ANH,
TRƯỜNG ĐẠI HỌC NGOẠI NGỮ, ĐẠI HỌC QUỐC GIA HÀ NỘI)

M.A COMBINED PROGRAM THESIS
Field: English Teaching Methodology
Code: 60.14.00111

Hanoi, 2015


VIETNAM NATIONAL UNIVERSITY, HANOI
UNIVERSITY OF LANGUAGES AND INTERNATIONAL STUDIES
FACULTY OF POST GRADUATE STUDIES
******************************

ĐINH THI THU TRANG

A STUDY OF THE USE OF TRANSLATION IN IMPROVING

NON- ENGLISH MAJORED STUDENTS’ READING
COMPREHENSION ABILITY AT FACULTY OF ENGLISH,
UNIVERSITY OF LANGUAGES AND INTERNATIONAL
STUDIES, VIETNAM NATIONAL UNIVERSITY
(NGHIÊN CỨU VỀ SỬ DỤNG DỊCH TRONG CẢI THIỆN KỸ NĂNG ĐỌC HIỂU
CỦA SINH VIÊN KHÔNG CHUYÊN ANH, KHOA TIẾNG ANH,
TRƯỜNG ĐẠI HỌC NGOẠI NGỮ, ĐẠI HỌC QUỐC GIA HÀ NỘI)

M.A COMBINED PROGRAM THESIS
Field: English Teaching Methodology
Code: 60.14.00111
Supervisor: Assoc. Prof. Dr. Tran Xuan Diep

Hanoi, 2015


DECLARATION
I hereby, certify the thesis entitled “ A Study of The Use of Translation
Improving Non-majored English Students’ Reading Comprehension in
Faculty of English, University of Languages and International Studies,
Vietnam National University, Hanoi” is the result of my own research for
the Degree of Master of Arts in English Teaching Methodology at
University of Languages and International Studies, Vietnam National
University, Hanoi. The thesis has not been submitted for any degree at any
other universities or institutions.
I agree that the origin of my thesis deposited in the library can be
accessible for the purpose of study and research, in accordance with the
normal conditions established by the librarian for the care, loan and
reproduction of the paper
Hanoi, January 2015

Signature

Dinh Thi Thu Trang

i


ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
I owe the success of this paper to the following people without whom
this research could not have been completed.
Firstly, I would like to express my deepest sense of gratitude to my
supervisor, Associate Professor. Doctor. Tran Xuan Diep for his
immeasurable help, valuable comments and supportive encouragements
throughout the study and beyond.
My sincere thanks also go to all the staff, teachers and members at
Faculty of Post-Graduate Studies – University of Languages and
International Studies – Vietnam National University, Hanoi - for their work
and services.
I am also obliged to seventy non-majored English students at Faculty
of English who willingly participated in my study, contributed their efforts
to provide me with valuable source of data.
Lastly, I am also thankful for the support and unconditional love and
care I have had from my family, my husband and friends whose
encouragements became my motivation to complete

ii

this study.

ABSTRACT
The idea of using translation as a learning strategy as well as a teaching
technique has received diverse compliments and criticisms during the EFL
history. Although some teaching methods are in complete disagreement with
the use of translation in EFL classes, the fact cannot be neglected that nonmajored English learners, especially in their early stages of language learning,
heavily rely on their mother tongue and deploy it in various skills such as
speaking, listening, writing and reading. In this research attempts have been
made to verify whether there is a positive correlation between the use of
translation as a facilitating strategy and the improvement of non-majored
English students‘ reading comprehension. It was hypothesized that translation
activities organized by the teacher may facilitate the process of
comprehension for learners. Seventy non-majored English learners from
Faculty of English, ULIS, VNU were asked to complete a pilot study in the
form of questionnaires to express their opinions towards translation. In the
experimental phase, they were divided into two groups. The experimental
group was taught reading text through translation activities and the control
group received no translation. After eight weeks of instruction, the obtained
results showed there was a meaningful difference between the performance of
control and experimental groups in reading comprehension pre-test and posttest.

iii


LIST OF TABLES
No. Tables

Page

1.

Summary of contents in New English File Pre-Intermediate

38

2.

Students‘ opinions about the use of translation

42

3.
4.

Students‘ opinions about translation as an enabling strategy to 43
help them increase their reading comprehension
Statistics of pre-test for experimental and control groups
51

5.

Statistics of post-test for experimental and control groups

6.

Paired samples test of the means of the post test of control and 53
experimental groups

iv

53

LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS
1.

L1: First language

2.

L2: Second language

3.

EFL: English as a Foreign Language

4.

CLT: Communicative Language Teaching

5.

ULIS: University of Languages and International Studies

6.

VNU: Vietnam National University, Hanoi

v

TABLE OF CONTENTS
DECRALATION……………………………………………………………..i
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS……………………………………………….....ii
ABSTRACT…………………………………………………………………iii
TABLE OF CONTENTS …………………...................................................iv
LIST OF TABLES……………………………………..................................vi
LIST OF ABREVIATIONS………………………………………………...vii
CHAPTER I: INTRODUCTION……..……………………………………...1
1.1.

Statement of the problem……………………………………………...1

1.2.

Objectives of the study …………………….……… ……………........2

1.3.

Research questions………………………………………………..…...3

1.4.

Significance of the study……………………………………………....3

1.5.

Scope of the study……………………………………………………..4

1.6.

Design of the study…………………………………………………....4

CHAPTER II: THEORETICAL BACKGROUND………………………….6
2.1.

Reading and Reading Comprehension Theories…………………...6

2.1.1. Theories and Approaches to Reading As a Language Skill….....6
2.1.2. Theories on Reading Comprehension…………………………..9
2.2.

The Role of Translation In Teaching EFL…………………….......10

2.2.1. Definition of Translation…………………………… ...............10
2.2.2. Translation in Foreign Language Teaching……… ……….....13
2.2.2.1. Objections and Disadvantages of Using Translation….13
2.2.2.2. Advocacy and Advantages of Using Translation……..15
2.2.3. Approaches to Translations in EFL……………………..…….19
2.2.3.1. Bilingual Immersion……………………………… ..19
2.2.3.2. Co-teaching……………………… …………….. …..20
2.2.3.3. Using Bilingual text………………………………......21
vi


2.2.3.4. Combination Approach……………………………. 23
2.2.4. Translation Activities in EFL classroom………………….….. 23
2.2.4.1. Principles of Designing Translation activities……......23
2.2.4.2. Suggested activities……………………………...……25
2.3.

The Role of Translation in Reading Comprehension…… …... 27

2.4.

Previous studies…………………………………………….…. 30

CHAPTER III: METHODOLOGY………..………………………... .... 34
3.1. Participants……………………….……………………………..... 34
3.2. Research instruments…………………………………………….. 35
3.3. Materials………………………………………………………..... 36
3.4. Procedures…………………………………………………........ . 39
CHAPTER IV: FINDINGS AND DISCUSSION.................................. 41
4.1. Findings from pilot study……………………………….……….. 41
4.2. Research question 1…………………………………… ……….. 45
4.3. Research question 2…………………………………… …….......51
CHAPTER V: CONCLUSION…………………………………………55
5.1. Recapitulation……………………………………………………55
5.2. Pedagogical implications............................................................. 56
5.3. Limitations of the research……………………………………....58
5.4. Suggestions for further research …………………….……….. 59
REFERENCES ............................................................................................ 60
APPENDICES ................................................................................................. I

vii


CHAPTER I: INTRODUCTION
This initial part states the problem and the rationale of the study, together
with the aims, objectives and the scope of the whole paper. Above all, it is in
this part that the research questions are identified to work as clear guidelines

for the whole research.
1.1.

Statement of the problem

With the new framework of learner-centered approach and the advent of
Communicative Language Teaching in the realm of teaching English as a
foreign language, translation has always been the core of the controversies on
whether it can be a valid and effective tool in foreign language learning. Until
recently, translation was out of favour with the language teaching community.
Translation as a language learning activity was considered to be unsuitable
within the context of foreign language learning (Brown, 2002). It was critized
because of the close association with traditional Grammar Translation. Harbord
(cited in Cunningham, 2000) stated: ―A return to Grammar-Translation with all
of its negative connotations; as well, the isolation of lexis from any real context
prevents students from gleaning insight into the multiple uses and meanings of
the word‖.
Even today translation can be regarded as a mechanical linguistic
transfer of meaning from one language to another. It isn‘t considered to be a
useful language learning tool because of being not a communicative activity that
is not suited to the general needs of the language learner.
However, the idea of abandoning the native tongue is too stressful to
many learners, who need a sense of security in the experience of learning a
foreign language (Kavaliauskienë, & Kaminskienë, 2007). In this respect, some
scholars aired different viewpoints concerning the use of translation and opened
new horizons, which showed that not only a judicious use of translation is not
1


debilitating, but also helps learners to establish a better connection between their

own language and the target language. Duff (1994, p.7) strongly supports the
view that translation is an excellent means of improving one's language because
it invites speculation and discussion.
Recently, foreign language teachers have been reviving the use of
translation for different learning purposes. It was observed that translation
activity could be used for pedagogical purposes along with other traditional
language teaching activities. Reading, grammar exercises, translation — ―are in
fact perceived by learners to be conductive to learning‖ (McDonough, 2002,
p.409).
At the Faculty of English, ULIS, VNU, using only English in low-level
language classes can result in misunderstanding the teachers‘ instructions or
misinterpreting the meaning that reading passages convey. Moreover, due to the
teacher‘s focus on developing students‘ four major skills including speaking,
reading, writing and listening, as well as the limited duration of class hours
students‘ thorough comprehension of the reading passages are not guaranteed.
This is when translation may have a place in foreign language classroom.
However, the way teachers are employing translation method in their classes
and its level of effectiveness still remain a scarce subject of investigation.
1.2.

Objectives of the study

This study has been conducted in an attempt to find:
1.

Certain translation activities used in the process of teaching

reading comprehension.
2.

Whether there exists a positive correlation between the use of

translation in EFL context and the improvement of students‘ reading
comprehension or not.

2


First and foremost, the study aims to describe which translation activities were
applied in the classroom to improve students‘ reading comprehension.
Secondly, the researcher also wants to verify whether translation has a positive
influence on the ability of reading comprehension of non-English majored
students at the Faculty of English, Hanoi University of Languages and
International Studies. The results obtained will pave the way for several
implications for teachers to make better decision whether to integrate translation
into their reading activities.
1.3.

Research questions

In order to achieve the purposes stated above, the study revolves around
the following questions:
1. Which translation techniques were employed in the classroom as an
aid to improve non-majored English students?
2. To what extent does the use of translation influence the nonmajored English students' achievement in reading comprehension tests?
1.4.

Significance of the study

The findings of this study can draw the teachers‘ attention towards the use

of translation into their EFL classroom, which is probably out of favor in
Communicative Language Teaching approach. It should be noted that nonmajored English students are the core participants of this study so teachers at the
same context may see the relationship between the proper integration of
translation in reading activities and the improvement of students‘ reading
comprehension. Besides, teachers may have a closer look at how translation
activities can be integrated into teaching reading comprehension. This study
would also serve as a valuable reference for teachers and other researchers alike.
Teachers when having students at same level as participants may have better
3


decision in whether to employ this method or not in their teaching situation.
Finally, future researchers who share the same interest may find helpful
information from this research to conduct further studies.
1.5.

Scope of the study

The researcher has no intention of doing an investigation into the use of
translation in reading comprehension in general but just places a focus on non
majored English students at the Faculty of English, ULIS, VNU.
It should also be noted that the sample of the research is limited to 70
second-year non English majored students at the Faculty of English, ULIS,
VNU who are currently pursuing A2 level according to Common European
Framework of Reference for Languages. They are chosen under non-probability
sampling
Besides, this group of students was chosen instead of English-majored
ones because students in this particular group tend to have lower English
competence and they are supposed to have less learner autonomy, less selfregulation in learning process, and less exposure to English environment.
Consequently, to enhance the validity and reliability, non-majored English

students with a larger population are chosen to participate in the study.
1.6.

Design of the study

This paper has five chapters:
Chapter I is the Introduction which features Rationale, Aims of the
Study and Research Questions, Methods of the Study, Overview of the Study
Chapter II presents theoretical background which lays the theoretical
foundation for the study by discussing Definition of Key Terms and
Frameworks, and Some Related Studies Worldwide and in Vietnam.

4


Chapter III details the methods which have been adopted and the
procedures which have been followed in the study. It also includes detailed
description of participants and materials employed.
Next, chapter IV features the results of analyzing collected data
regarding students‘ performance in both Control and Experimental group.
Chapter V: Conclusion ends the study by summarizing the main points,
giving concluding remarks and revealing the limitations, and suggestions for
further studies.

5


CHAPTER II: THEORETICAL BACKGROUND
This second chapter aims to shed light on the literature of the study,
specifically the theoretical background and a number of studies related to the

research topic. To begin with, an overview of the literature will be presented
starting from the definition of reading and reading comprehension. Then,
several definitions of translation will be provided as an introduction before a
major section of this chapter will be devoted to discussing the advantages and
disadvantages of using translation in EFL context. Some translation activities
will also be addressed. More importantly, the significance of translation in
reading comprehension will be revisited as the key background of the study.
After that, a brief review of the related studies will disclose the research gap
and rationalize the aims and objectives of this paper.
2.1. Reading and reading comprehension theories
2.1.1. Theories and approaches to reading as a language skill
Reading is the most important skill of all skills for language learners in
general and for EFL learners in particular and it is one of the most useful and
necessary skills for people (Farhady, 2005).
Traditional theories approach reading as a process of comprehending
words, then comprehending the relations between the words in a sentence, and
finally uttering them or realizing them in silent speech. Methods like ‗look-say‘,
‗whole word‘ or phonic method are based on the presented view. Such
techniques are very often equated with meaning-emphasis approaches. Words
which are supposed to be new for the reader are displayed on flash cards before
embarking on reading. Such a process is considered to facilitate text
comprehension. But at the same time it is also heavily criticised, as the words on

6


flash cards are devoid of context, which is the key to proper understanding and
then using the words.
Two currently distinguished approaches to the development of reading
comprehension skills are Reading Component Approach and Metaphoric

Approach. The first perspective subdivides reading into six ―component skills
and knowledge areas‖ and pinpoints the cognitive processes involved in reading
as having an influence on comprehension. The six suggested skills and areas
are:
(a) automatic recognition skills;
(b) vocabulary and structural knowledge;
(c) formal discourse structure knowledge;
(d) content/world background knowledge;
(e) synthesis and evaluation skills/strategies;
(f) metacognitive knowledge and skills monitoring
(Chun & Plass, 1997).

The second of the aforementioned current approaches is Metaphoric
Approach, which describes reading in terms of metaphors. The bottom-up
approaches, the top-down approaches, and the interactive approaches are the
most common metaphors found in literature. The first processing model, the
bottom-up one, gives paramount importance to textual decoding which involves
lower-level processes such as recognizing letters and words. The top-down
models, on the other hand, emphasise the reader interpretation and prior
syntactic and semantic knowledge which helps in predicting the content and aids
interpretation. There are also models which incorporate both two models
mentioned above.
Their advocates suggest that linguistic knowledge of orthography,
lexicology, syntax and semantics, interacts in the reading process. As the
interaction involves all the mentioned sources of linguistic knowledge at the
same time, poor knowledge of one of them may be compensated by greater

7

reliance on one of the remaining three. The third metaphor, the interactive
processing, can be interpreted as either the general interaction between the
reader and a text or the interaction of many component skills that work together
simultaneously in the process of reading. In the former interpretation, the reader
makes use of his background knowledge to reconstruct the information
conveyed by the text. The latter interpretation of the interactive model takes into
account the influence of both lower-level (decoding) and higher-level
processing (comprehension and interpretation of the text). ―Simply stated,
reading involves an array of lower-level rapid, automatic identification skills
and an array of higher-level comprehension/interpretation skills‖ as Grabe puts
it (Chun & Plass, 1997, p.62). What should be stressed, however, is the fact that
the two arrays of skills operate simultaneously in the reading process.
The last two hypotheses concerning L2 reading that shall be presented
are the Linguistic Threshold Hypothesis (LTH), also called ―short circuit
hypothesis‖, and the Linguistic Interdependence Hypothesis (LIH). The first one
states that: ―In order to read in a second language, a level of second language
linguistic ability must first be achieved‖. Thus, to be a successful reader, one
must also be a successful learner of a foreign language. According to the LIH,
―reading performance in a second language is largely shared with reading ability
in the first language‖ (Chun & Plass,1997, p.63). It transpires that L1 reading
performance is an indicator of L2 reading performance. Thus, the ability to read
in one‘s mother language could be applied in attempts to read foreign language
texts. Wallace (1986, p.70) also agrees that though specific reading strategies
may vary from language to language the basic processes of deriving meaning
from systematised graphic shapes seems to be the same process.

8


Perceiving reading as a mechanical phenomenon focuses on already

described lower-level processing, while not accounting for such activities as
selecting information relevant to a particular topic, expanding on information
previously provided, following sequence of instructions, identifying answers to
questions concerning a given text, detecting information implied in a passage,
interpreting and evaluating writer‘s intentions, and showing awareness of the
variety of literary genre.
Realising the importance of reading skills development, Kellermann
(1981) proposed four assumptions concerning methods of their teaching.
According to her, ―reading in a foreign language
1. must be taught according to a defined pattern;
2. must be taught in well-defined stages;
3. should occur frequently, regularly, and at first intensively;
4. should be accessible to all pupils literate in the native language‖
(Kellermann, 1981, p.9)

To conclude, as many researches revealed, people have an innate
capacity to understand more than they actually know, and that understanding
increases considerably with practice; put bluntly, with regular and extensive
reading. Lack of practice and stimulation, on the other hand, may result in the
reduction of understanding. Thus, good reading instruction and development of
reading skills should become an educational priority for foreign language
teachers.
2.1.2. Theories on reading comprehension
―The reader rather than the text is at the heart of reading process‖
(Nunan, 1995, p.65). Thus, the focus of all language teachers and linguists
carrying research on reading behaviour should be on the reader‘s mental

9

processes, rather than solely on processes which a text undergoes. What is of
paramount importance here, is the way the reader arrives at the meaning.
Comprehension is the goal of both reading and listening. Successful
comprehension enables readers (or listeners) to acquire information, to
experience and be aware of other worlds (including fictional ones), to
communicate successfully, and to achieve academic success.
Reading comprehension is ―from a technical perspective, a dynamic
mental activity which interacts with the text to extract meaning‖ (Farhady, 2005,
p. 1). It has been pointed out that a model of reading provides an imagined
representation of the reading process. Models of the reading process can be
represented across a continuum of two opposing approaches in understanding
the reading process, namely, bottom-up approaches and top-down approaches
(Barnett, 1988).
Good reading comprehension involves reading the words on the page,
accessing their meanings, computing the sense of each sentence and much else
as well.
Thus, the product of successful comprehension is a representation of the
state of affairs described in the text. This representation includes causal relations
between the events, the goals of the characters (protagonists), and spatial and
temporal information that is relevant to the story line.
2.2. The role of translation in teaching EFL
2.2.1. Definition of translation
Translation plays a very important role in an increasingly globalised
world and in increasingly multilingual Europe where it is used on daily basis
(Leonardi, 2010, p.17).

Translation, by dictionary definition, consists of

changing from one state or form to another, to turn into one‘s own or another‘s
language (The Merriam-Webster Dictionary, 1986, p. 725). Larson (1998)

10


provided a closer and more comprehensive justification as translation is
basically a change of form. When we speak of the form of a language, we are
referring to the actual words, phrases, clauses, sentences, paragraphs, etc., which
are spoken or written. These forms are referred to as the surface structure of a
language. It is the structural part of the language which is actually seen in print
or heard in speech. He also suggested that in translation, the form of the source
language is replaced by the form of the receptor (target) language.
In addition, Munday referred to translation as a connection between the
source and target language. ―The term translation itself has several meanings: it
can refer to the general subject field, the product (the text has been translated) or
the process (the act of producing the translation, otherwise known as
translating). The process of translation between two different written languages
involves the translator changing an original written text (the source text or ST)
in the original verbal language (the source language or SL) into a written text
(the target text TT) in a different verbal language (the target language or TL)‖ (
Munday, 2001, p. 4) .
Nevertheless, Dagilienė (2012) believes that translation is perceived
differently by linguists, methodologists and teachers. Its use in foreign language
teaching provokes a great deal of disagreement and criticism. She also points
that the main reason for this is the fact that throughout the years there have been
a number of studies carried out, which have either favoured or completely
ignored the use of translation as a learning method. Dagilienė concludes that
―translation was considered as inefficient, unreliable and irrelevant‖ (2012, p.2).
Significant limitations led to the idea that the use of translation in language
learning had to be avoided.
On the other hand, the term ―communicative translation‖ is an attempt
―to produce on his readers an effect as close as possible to that obtained by the

readers of the original. Semantic translation attempts to render as close as the
11


semantic and syntactic structures of the second language allow, the exact
contextual meaning of the original‖ (Newmark, 1981, p. 30).
It is argued that all second language learners access their L1 while
processing the L2. ―The L2 user does not effectively switch off the L1 while
processing the L2, but has it constantly available‖ (Cook, 1992, p.571). When
working with second language learners, teachers must not treat the L2 in
isolation from the L1. In fact, one cannot do so, ―the L1 is presented in the L2
learners' minds, whether the teacher wants it to be there or not. The L2
knowledge that is being created in them is connected in all sorts of ways with
their L1 knowledge‖ (Cook, 1992, p. 584).
Despite the observations that L2 learners make of their native language,
at least in the early stages of language acquisition, there has been little research
on the extent to which non-natives' thoughts are in the TL (target language) and
― the effectiveness of thinking in the TL as opposed to thinking in the L1‖
( Cohen, 1995, p. 100). In other words, ―at present it remains unclear precisely
what role the native language plays in L2 reading comprehension‖ (Kern, 1994,
p. 441). A survey was given to bilingual and multilingual university students to
discover factors influencing language of thought. It was explored that not only
do people with access to two or more language shift frequently between them,
these shifts can be either unintentional (e.g., it is easier to think in one language
than another and so the brain automatically shifts language) or intentional (e.g.,
using another language to help understand the grammar or vocabulary of the
target language) (Cohen, 1995).
―Meaning is a communicative and therefore a social phenomenon.
Nothing bears meaning and makes sense unless it occurs in communication,
which by nature is a social activity. Yet, meaning is encoded in and by

language. The construction of meaning is therefore both social and linguistic at
the same time.
12


This is to say that meaning, although signaled by language, does not
totally reside in it, but is created in part between people in every instance of
language use‖ (Farahzad, 2004, p. 79). She further added that L2 language texts
have a static part of meaning, but differ in their interpretations of the source text
and have more interpretations in the target language.
Learners can develop their reading comprehension ability by translating
target language text into their native language. It is quite clear that text is trying
to make sense of its features like sentence structures, context and register. In
other words, there should be a kind of textual analysis, which is very important
in reading comprehension. In fact the difference between translation and reading
is the degree of attention paid by the reader or translator, that is; in translation
attention weighs far more heavily than in mere reading (Chellappan, 1982).
2.2.2. Translation in Foreign Language Teaching
2.2.2.1. Objections and Disadvantages of using translation in EFL
context
A great deal of research has been written on the use of translation in
EFL/ESL classes. When talking about the application of translation or the act of
translation in language teaching, it will be important to make distinction
between two types of translation, which are called pedagogical translation and
real translation. Pedagogical and real translation differ from each other on three
counts: the function, the object, and the addressee of the translation (Klaudy ,
2003, p. 133).The first voice to cry out against the use of translation in foreign
language teaching came from the Reform Movement of the late 19th century,
and it was followed by a wave of renewed attacks by proponents of the AudioLingual, the Direct, the Natural, and the Communicative Language Teaching
throughout the 20th century.

A historical overview of the use of translation shows that after Grammar
Translation Method, which strongly used translation as the major activity for
13


language learning in the classroom, as dissatisfaction towards the grammartranslation method grew and the demand for oral competence became more
evident, the 19th century reformers in Europe believed that, among other things,
―translation should be avoided, although the native language could be used in
order to explain new words or to check comprehension‖ (Richards & Rodgers
2001, as cited in Wharton, 2007, p.3). The use of mother tongue was banned
especially by advent of Direct Method. This method which was established by
the efforts of reformists like Sweet saw no place for the use of the students L1 in
the classroom, however as mentioned in Cook (2010, p.18) Sweet didn‘t reject
translation and explicit grammar teaching and boycotting translation was much
more a matter of practical expediency which was brought about by changes in
learner and teacher demography.
Duff (1994) reveals further reasons why teachers objected to the use of
translation in foreign language classes. His viewpoint stresses that translation is
text-bound and confined only to two skills — reading and writing. Thus, it is not
a communicative activity as it doesn‘t involve oral interaction. Duff also insists
that the use of the mother tongue, then, is required, which is not desirable.
Moreover, it is boring, both to do and to correct.
The wave of attacking translation did not end that as people devoted to
various other methodologies have also protested against school translation.
Newson (1998, p.64) provides a summary of the main objections in the
following way. Translation, he writes, ―does not allow or make easy the
achievement of such generally accepted foreign language teaching aims as‖ (1)
fluency in spoken language, (2) the controlled introduction of selected and
graded structures and lexical items, or (3) the controlled introduction of
communicative strategies. Translation leads to no observable learning effect,

either of new vocabulary or structural items, and does not foster communicative
language use. In the same way, Malmkjær (1998, p.5) lists a number of further
14


general objections to school translation, which are the following. Translation (4)
is independent of the four skills which define language competence: reading,
writing, speaking and listening; (5) it is radically different from the four skills;
(6) it takes up valuable time which could be used to teach these four skills; (7) it
is unnatural; (8) it misleads students into thinking that expressions in two
languages correspond one-to-one; (9) it produces interference; (10) it prevents
students from thinking in the foreign language; and (11) it is a bad test for
language skills.
2.2.2.2. Advocacy and advantages of using translation
In spite of the aforementioned ideas, recently, attempts have been made to
revive translation in EFL/ESL and dedicate some time to it in the process of
language teaching and learning. Translation is sometimes referred to as the fifth
language skill alongside with the other four basic skills (listening, speaking,
reading, and writing). More importantly, there are ―significant and visible signs
of a revival of translation in language teaching according to
recent literature and applied linguistics‖ (Malmkjaer, 1998, p.1). Many theorists,
linguists, teachers agree on the importance of using translation in foreign
language classes.
Scientifically, as Lengyel and Navracsics (1996, p.60) show, there is
some neurolinguistic evidence to suggest that the human brain is predisposed to
acquire more than one language, and in this context the role of translation must
also be re-examined. In their study, Lengyel and Navracsics look at the question
whether translation is as natural a language activity as are speaking, listening,
writing and reading, and whether translation also has inherited elements.
Similarly Ross in Kavaliauskienë&Kaminskienë, (2007, p.133) asserted:

Translation holds a special importance at an intermediate and advanced level: in
the advanced or final stage of language teaching, translation from L1 to L2 and
L2 to L1 is recognized as the fifth skill and the most important social skill since
15


it promotes communication and understanding between strangers‖. Butzkamm
and Caldwell in their book The Bilingual Reform: A Paradigm shift in Foreign
Language Teaching (2009) stated the old taboo on mother tongue will be swept
away. Their advocacy of mother tongue is not just another plea for a flexible
and a less rigid attitude, but a systematic program in which mother-tongue use is
seen as essential (cited in Cook 2010, p.50). As can be seen at Community
Language Teaching, the teacher translates what the students want to say in
chunks (Larsen-Freeman 2000, p.96) but as they go further translation will fade
out. The Communicative Approach was initially hostile to the use of translation
in the classroom, but later it adopted a flexible approach (Bonyadi, 2002).
For instance, Schaffner (1998) claims that the translation and related
exercises could be beneficial to foreign language learning.
1. To improve verbal agility.
2. To expand students‘ vocabulary in L2.
3. To develop their style.
4. To improve their understanding of how languages work.
5. To consolidate L2 structures for active use.
6. To monitor and improve the comprehension of L2.
(Schaffner, 1998).

He also suggests that translation in foreign language classes is in the
process of becoming a form of ―pedagogical translation‖, which is no longer
viewed as an ineffective tool in language learning and is evaluated as a way to
enrich learners‘ competences.

Likewise, according to Howatt (1984), translation is not as terrible as it
appears to be and Duff (1992) gives reasons why he thinks translation is useful:
1. The influence of the mother tongue. People‘s L1 shapes their thinking
and translation helps them to understand better the influences among languages.
2. The naturalness of the activity. It is a natural and necessary activity
that is going on all the time, and that will always be needed.

16