20 and 21 September 2012 Celje, Slovenia

The Role of Translation in the ESL/EFL and ESP

Classroom
Melita KOLETNIK KOROEC
University of Maribor/Department of Translation Studies, Maribor, Slovenia
Abstract For much of the 20th century, translation suffered the reputation of being an ill

suited aid in teaching and learning English as a second or foreign language (ESL/EFL). This
was, for the most part, due to the predominant position of communicatively oriented
approaches to teaching, rather than any entirely convincing objective reasons. An almost
complete lack of translation and translating activities is observable in the available ESL/EFL
and ESP textbooks aimed at the primary and secondary school learners. However, some
accounts in scientific literature - primarily by the language teachers of future translators
together with some personal observations of teachers, lead the author to the conclusion that
teaching through translation has, nevertheless, been able to survive and pass the test of
time, and remains most notably present in more advanced levels of education. In this paper
the author attempts to make a case for reviewing the role of translation in language teaching
and, in particular, its educational value for advanced learners of ESL/EFL and ESP.
The article starts by outlining the rationale and exploring the various reasons for the
rejection of translation in ESL/EFL and ESP in the past. Building on the theoretical and
methodological frameworks advanced by the grammatical, communicative and other
established methodologies, the author reassesses the role of translation and proposes
teaching through translation as one of the several possible activities contributing towards the
effective and efficient development of linguistic and communicative skills .
Index Terms English language teaching (ELT), English as a Second Language (ESL), English
as a Foreign Language (EFL), English for Specific Purposes (ESP), translation.

I.

INTRODUCTION

For much of the 20th century, translation suffered the reputation for being an ill suited aid in
the teaching and learning English as a second or foreign language (ESL/EFL). This was, for the
most part, due to the pre-eminence of approaches which postulated a communicative focus and
monolingual teaching. Judging from the available textbooks selected by Slovenian primary and
secondary teachers for classroom use in the 2012/13 academic year, there exists an almost
complete lack of translation and translating activities, both in general and specialised education,
even though translation still seems to be (at least informally) present. There are, however, few
really convincing objective pedagogic reasons for the absence of translation, while empirical
evidence to substantiate the general tendency remains selective.
However, a number of accounts in scientific literature, e.g. by Cook [3] and Malmkjaer [11],
maintain that translation has nevertheless been able to survive the test of time at more
advanced levels of education. According to [3], the use of translation remains the norm at
university-level language teaching, most notably among languages other than English. What is
more, in the second edition of A History English Language Teaching, Howatt and Widdowson [6]
make a plea for reviewing the role of translation in language teaching and particularly its
educational value for advanced learners in schools and universities. This article therefore
endeavours to explore this role and potential, and attempts to draw conclusions as to its
applicability in ESL/EFL and ESP teaching.
Commencing with an outline as to the rationale, this article explores the various reasons for
the past rejection of translation in ESL/EFL and ESP teaching. It looks at different theoretical and
methodological frameworks which have evolved over the past hundred years or so (with a focus
on grammar-translation, audio-lingual as well as communicative methods and approaches) and
reports on the findings of a preliminary analysis of selected textbooks used by primary, general
secondary as well as vocational, technical and specialised educational institutions in Slovenia.
The article supports the view that translation can be beneficial in the effective and efficient
development of linguistic and communicative skills, particularly at more advanced levels of
education. It also defends Cooks perspective that translation can contribute towards the
development of language awareness and use, and could - at the same time - be an effective
answer to learners needs in todays globalised multicultural world.

The International Language Conference on The Importance of Learning Professional Foreign

Languages for Communication between Cultures 2012

20 and 21 September 2012 Celje, Slovenia

II.

COMPETING METHODS

IN

ESL/EFL TEACHING

Monolingual approaches to foreign language teaching, which supported the idea that
languages should be taught through resort to foreign or second language (L2) only, have
importantly (but not exclusively) contributed to the almost complete disappearance of
translation from ELT/FLT and ESP textbooks, as well as to an - at least declarative - absence of
activities involving translation at all levels of institutionalised education in the 20 th century. This
comprehensive dismissal of translation has been in part based on the wholesale rejection of the
grammar-translation method, but also on more economically and politically motivated grounds,
namely, the spread of international language schools such as Berlitz, and the worldwide
marketing of course materials and textbooks by such major publishers as Oxford University
Press (OUP), Cambridge University Press (CUP), MacMillan and others.
Within the context of the grammar-translation method, translation received criticism for its
application of literary, unnatural or artificial texts, which were selected primarily to develop
learners reading and writing skills. In this respect, perhaps the most controversial was the use
and translation of isolated sentences, which were selected or devised from scratch primarily to
serve the purposes of grammatical explicitation, and the postulated 1:1 equivalence between
them, i.e. the belief that for every L1 item there is an L2 match or equivalent on the lexical and
syntactical levels. Activities involving translation of such texts - or rather sentences - were
further believed to be promoting knowledge about a language rather than an ability to use it,
and, as such, they were ill-suited for all learners save those with an inclination towards
literature.
Another important milestone was the development of the audio-lingual method and situational
language teaching, which originated in the USA and Great Britain in the 1960s. Supported by
the latest findings in psychology (behaviourism) and linguistics (structuralism), they
promulgated the idea of foreign language learning as a process of, as Richards and Rodgers [13]
put it, mechanical habit formation, maintaining that language skills (listening, speaking,
reading, and writing) were developed more efficiently if the items to be learned in L2 were
presented in spoken form and with no resort to L1. In this respect, the audio-lingual method
obviously excluded translation, and instead rested heavily on the postulated exclusive use of L2,
both within and beyond the language classroom. As claimed e.g. by Vermes [17], main
objection to translation, which was soon rejected1, was that it would promote interference or
transfer from L1, and that it fails to reinforce correct foreign language behaviour.
The communicative approach to language teaching, which leaned on the audio-lingual
method, gathered increasing attention in the 1970s and has occupied centre stage in foreign
language teaching to the present day. The main argument communicative language teaching
postulates is that learners need to be prepared primarily for communicative situations where
only L2 will be used, thus no resort to L1 (or translation) is required. Linking the language use
with a communicative purpose also gave rise to the teaching of language(s) for special
purposes, which is by default associated with monolingualism and an absence of translation. In
communicative language teaching, a native speaker of L2, sometimes with no active knowledge
of L1, was also deemed to be the best teacher and the ideal narrator, while the best way to
acquire a language was to replicate the language learning process of a child in its acquisition of
a first language [5]. In response to criticism directed at the grammar-translation method in
terms of text and material selection, the communicative approach postulated the use of noncontrived texts and examples, together with learning situations which imitate real life.
The disparate approaches which proposed monolingualism as the only possible solution,
effectively - but for differing reasons - excluded translation from the explicit language learning
curriculum. The evidence suggests that it is safe to claim that such exclusion is contrary to the
intuition of teachers and learners alike, as well as contrary to an innate awareness of possible
and existing connections between two languages. Arguably the most convincing reason of all,
however, is the fact that translation will naturally and inevitably happen during the foreign
language acquisition process [3]. Consequently, translation never actually vanished completely
from the foreign language classroom, and, moreover, patiently awaits reassessment of its latent
potentials by the language teaching community.
III.

TRANSLATION

IN

TEXTBOOKS - ANALYSIS

Interference errors were far less prevalent than those deriving from a universal natural developmental
order... [1]
1

The International Language Conference on The Importance of Learning Professional Foreign

Languages for Communication between Cultures 2012

20 and 21 September 2012 Celje, Slovenia

In order to corroborate the claim that translation and translation activities are almost
completely absent from ESL/EFL primary and secondary school classrooms in Slovenia, a limited
analysis of textbooks used in such settings was undertaken in the early summer of 2012. The
textbooks under scrutiny were those shortlisted on the Approved Textbook List (ATL) 2 for Primary
and Secondary schools issued by Slovenias Ministry of Education. Pursuant to Article 21 of the
Organization and Financing of Education Act RS 3, regulating the use of textbooks in schools, all
textbooks used by Slovenian schools carrying out publicly validated curricula need to be
approved by the competent expert authority at the Ministry of Education and Sport. The
textbooks analysed were further selected based on their representativeness per a given age
group and level of education, as well as their availability in bookshops and libraries.
The following English as a first foreign language primary school textbooks were analysed: My
Sails 1 New used in the 4th grade of primary schools (learners aged 9 and 10 when they start
learning their first foreign language within Slovenias state education system) published by
Slovenias Obzorja publishing house; Touchstone New 1 used in the 6th grade (ages 11-12)
published by Zaloba Obzorja; and Messages 4 used in the 9th grade (ages 14-15) published by
Rokus Klett in conjunction with Cambridge University Press (basically a CUP publication adapted
in accordance with the Slovenian curriculum).
The Secondary-school English textbooks analysed encompassed: Way Up, Intermediate, used
in the 1st and 2nd year (ages15-17) of general upper secondary education 4 published by Rokus
Klett; Matrix, Intermediate, used in the 1st and 2nd year of general upper secondary education
and 3rd and 4th year (ages17-19) of technical and vocational education, published by Mladinska
Knjiga in conjunction with Oxford University Press; New English File, Intermediate, used in the 1st
and 2nd year of general upper secondary, technical and vocational education, and also published
by Mladinska Knjiga - OUP; and finally Straightforward, Intermediate, published by Mladinska
Knjiga - McMillan and used in the 1st and 2nd year of general upper secondary education.
The general aim of analysis was to detect whether the selected textbooks make use of
learners first language, as well as whether or not they include translation activities. For the
purposes of this article, a distinction is made between instrumental pedagogical translation
and real translation as an act of communication. According to Vermes [17], these two types of
translation differ from each other on three counts: the function, the object and the addressee of
translation.
Pedagogical translation serves an instrumental function, in which translation is used as a tool
for improving the language learners foreign language proficiency [14]. The object of real
translation is information about the content and reality of the source text, whereas the object of
pedagogical translation is information about the language. Last, but not least, the addressee of
pedagogic translation is not the target language reader, but the teacher, the examiner or the
learners themselves.
The textbooks used in primary schools were written by Slovene authors, either alone or
adapted for a Slovene audience from international editions produced by such publishing houses
as OUP or CUP. My Sails and Touchstone, two textbooks written by Slovene authors, featured
activity instructions translated into Slovene, while Messages included short Slovene summaries
as introductions to individual modules. The only evidence of the use of translation activities per
se was found in Touchstone, which included the Fun-Tastic, English-Slovenian Computer, a
match-up activity where the learners were asked to match English sentences with their
Slovenian equivalents. Examples of the sentences include:
1.
2.
3.

I understand you want to join our basketball club.

Vidim/sliim, da se eli vpisati v koarkarski klub.
Please sit down.
Sedi/te prosim.
I need to ask you a few questions.
Moram ti zastaviti nekaj vpraanj.

The secondary school textbooks used by learners in general, technical and/or vocational
programmes, were mostly adapted from international publications. In keeping with expectations,
the overwhelming majority did not make any use of learners L1 or include any activities
involving translation, either pedagogical or real. Featuring a Grammar and Vocabulary booklet
2

The Catalogue of Textbooks for Use in Primary Schools (Katalog ubenikov za osnovno olo) and the
Catalogue of Textbooks for Use in Secondary Schools (Katalog ubenikov za srednjo olo) is available from
Trubar Textbook Fund (Trubar, Ubeniki sklad) compiled by Slovenias Ministry for Education and Sport
https://soca1.mss.edus.si/Trubar/Javno/default.aspx (accessed on 10 August 2012).
3
Organization and Financing of Education Act (Zakon o organizaciji in financiranju vzgoje in
izobraevanja), 1996 (2011) Official Gazette RS No. 12/96)
http://www.uradni-list.si/1/objava.jsp?urlid=199612&stevilka=567 (accessed on 7 September 2012).
4
Known as gimnazije in Slovenia.

The International Language Conference on The Importance of Learning Professional Foreign

Languages for Communication between Cultures 2012

20 and 21 September 2012 Celje, Slovenia

attached to the back of the publication, Way Up was the only instance of a textbook aimed at
secondary school learners to offer a complete translation of grammatical rules and
explicitations. The analysis therefore seems to corroborate the fact that ESL/EFL and ESP
textbooks, irrespective of whether they have been written by Slovene authors or adapted for
use in Slovenia from international publications, generally do not make use of translations or
translation exercises.

IV.

THE ROLE

OF

TRANSLATION

IN THE

ESL/EFL

AND

ESP CLASSROOM - DISCUSSION

What conclusions can be drawn from the analysis in terms of the role of translation in the
ESL/EFL and ESP classroom? The translation of individual sentences in Touchstone is basically a
return to the grammar-translation method: the sentences and their translations serve the
purposes of pedagogical illustration, and even though their primary aim is not grammatical
explicitation, they nevertheless offer a cultural correspondent which can help learners master a
particular language item under instruction. Another common fundamental objection to the use
of translation in the EFL/ESL and ESP classroom appears to have been taken account of: because
L1 lexical translation alternatives are offered, a 1:1 equivalent between languages is not
assumed, and, as such, permits the possibility of alternative or more than one translation.
The issue of 1:1 equivalence seems to be of genuine importance as well as possibly
detrimental to communicative language teaching and the use of translation at an early stage.
The study of lexical errors by Heltai [5] has found evidence that learners do indeed have
difficulty mastering one-to-many correspondence between L1 and L2. Also, as reported by
Vermes [17], findings further suggest that language learners at the intermediate level are not
prepared to do translation in the real (communicative) sense. At an early stage, translation is
simply a decoding-encoding process, and learners attention needs to be drawn to the fact that
the proposed translations are just some of the many available which are capable of achieving
the particular communicative purpose. Finally, it should also be added that at an early stage,
learners do not know how to interpret syntactic and semantic information, and focus solely on
lexical items, but at the same time lack proper research skills and training in the use of
dictionaries.
The use of translation in Way Up, on the other hand, seems to be a different case in point:
some recent studies, e.g. Scheffler and Cinciala [14] state that explicit grammar instruction in
L1 (such as translating grammar rules into L1) contributes to the development of explicit
knowledge in secondary school learners. Swan [16] further claims that the existence of crosslanguage equivalents can substantially reduce the teaching need in some areas. Their findings
are in accord with personal observations and reports by some of the fellow ESL/EFL and ESP
teachers who intuitively perceive translation as an activity which will naturally and inevitably
happen during foreign language learning and which is particularly suitable to upper intermediate
and advanced learners. The use of translation therefore seems to benefit language teaching and
learning at an advanced stage into this process.
V.

CONCLUSIONS

Objections to translation as a learning-inducing activity in the ESL/EFL and ESP classroom

seem to be as manifold as there were approaches in the past that sought to claim a preeminent
position in language teaching. In fact, competition among methodologies was so fierce, and the
belief that newer is better so prevalent, that on many an occasion the new technique rejected
absolutely everything that came before, even those methods which enjoyed advantages and
achievements - among which translation undeniably has a place.
The evidence presented, however limited, seems to point to the belief that - for various
reasons - translation activities are not entirely supportive of communicative language teaching
at the early stage of language acquisition. Given the assumption that translation can,
nevertheless, contribute to explicit language learning, such activities are better suited to
advanced language learners in the context of secondary schools, colleges and universities. The
author therefore believes that there is substance to the claims voiced by Howatt and Widdowson
in their History of English Language Teaching, that translation has a role in language teaching
and is of particular educational value for advanced learners. She is further convinced that these
findings will contribute to a narrowing of the gap between language teaching and translation, as
well as at the same time offer an effective answer to learners needs in our increasingly
globalised multicultural world.

REFERENCES

The International Language Conference on The Importance of Learning Professional Foreign

Languages for Communication between Cultures 2012

20 and 21 September 2012 Celje, Slovenia

[1] R. Brown, A First Language. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1993.

[2] J. Collie, Way Up, Intermediate, Ubenik za angleino kot prvi tuji jezik v 1. in 2. letniku in kot drugi tuji jezik v 3.
in 4. letniku gimnazijskega izobraevanja. Ljubljana: Rokus Klett, 2010.
[3] G. Cook, Translation in Language Teaching: An Argument for Reassessment. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2010.
[4] K. Gude, J. Wildman, Matrix, Intermediate, Ubenik za nagleino kot prvi tujik jezik v 1. in 2. letniku gimnazijskega
in 3. in 4. letniku srednjega tehnikega oziroma strokovnega izobraevanja. Oxford: Oxford University Press
[Ljubljana: Mladinska knjiga], 2007.
[5] P. Heltai, Lexical Contrasts in Learners Translations in K. Klaudy, J. Lambert & A. Sohr [eds.], Translation Studies
in Hungary. Budapest: Sholastica, 1996. pp 71-82.
[6] A.P.R. Howatt and H. G. Widdowson, A History of English Language Teaching. 2nd edition. Oxford: Oxford University
Press, 2004.
[7] N. Jesenik, J. Skela, V. avli, My Sails 1 New, Students Book, Ubenik za pouk angleine v 4. razredu osnovne ole.
Maribor: Obzorja, 2011.
[8] P. Kerr, C. Jones, Straightforward, Intermediate, Ubenik za angleino kot prvi tuji jezik v 1. in 2. letniku
gimnazijskega izobraevanja. Oxford: McMillan Education [Ljubljana: Mladinska knjiga], 2008.
[9] D. Larsen-Freeman, Techniques and Principles in Language Teaching. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2003.
[10] M. Levy, N. Goodey, D. Goodey, Messages 4, Uenik za pouk angleine v 9. razredu osnovne ole. Ljubljana:
Rokus Klett, 2011.
[11] K. Malmkjaer [ed.], Translation and Language Teaching, Language Teaching and Translation. Manchester: St.
Jerome, 1998.
[12] C. Oxenden, C. Latham Koenig, New English File, Intermediate, Ubenik za angleino kot prvi tuji jezik v 1. in 2.
letniku gimnazij in srednjih tehnikih ol oziroma strokovnih ol. Oxford: Oxford University Press [Ljubljana:
Mladinska knjiga], 2010.
[13] J. C. Richards and T. S. Rodgers, Approaches and Methods in Language Teaching. 2nd edition. Cambridge:
Cambridge University Press, 2003.
[14] P. Scheffler and M. Cinciala, Explicit Grammar Rules and L2 Acquisition, ELT Journal vol. 65/1 January 2011 pp.
13-23.
[15] J. Skela, D. Margu, A. Gvardjani, Touchstone New 1, ubenik za angleino v 6. razredu osnovne ole.
Maribor:Obzorja, 2007.
[16] M. Swan, Why Is It All Such A Muddle, And What Is The Poor Teacher To Do in M. Pawlak [ed.], Exploring Focus on
Form; in Language Teaching, Kalisz-Poznan, Poland: Faculty of Pedagogy and Fine Arts, 2007.
[17] A. Vermes, Translation in Foreign Language Teaching: A Brief Overview of Pros and Cons Eger Journal of English
Studies, vol. X , 2010, pp. 83-93;
http://anglisztika.ektf.hu/new/content/tudomany/ejes/ejesdokumentumok/2010/Vermes_2010.pdf (accessed 7
September 2012)

AUTHOR
Melita Koletnik Koroec is a teaching assistant at University of Maribors Faculty of Arts,
Slovenia, where she instructs students of English translation. She holds a Masters Degree from
the University of Graz, Austria, and currently studies towards a PhD in translation studies.
(e-mail: melita.koletnik@ um.si).
Manuscript received by 10 September 2012.
Published as submitted by the autho.

The International Language Conference on The Importance of Learning Professional Foreign

Languages for Communication between Cultures 2012