Hi, I was always taught not to translate, and me myself learned the value of this. The more English you use, the better, explaining English with English, maximum exposure to the language, etc.
Ok, this works for me and in many cases but what about my students?
My students:
-Adults (21-35)
-around 10 hours at work,under pressure.
-two classes a week, when they come
-Spanish speaking
-minimum exposure to English outside the classroom.
-no time for homework, only some little assignments.
-other problems (more courses, family)
-short courses
They tend to translate everything to Spanish, when we work with articles or whatever, they feel an urging need to translate. I always explain them that this is not correct, but... up to what extent?
They need English for work, they need it as a tool, they are not interested in it as an end but as a mere tool.
Should I stop bothering them with no-translation?
Should I let them do what they want? at least they understand what they read and that's what they and their company want.
I'll deeply appreciate your comments!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Alfredo
Is translation wrong but necessary?
Moderators: Dimitris, maneki neko2, Lorikeet, Enrico Palazzo, superpeach, cecil2, Mr. Kalgukshi2
Hmmm you raise an interesting point. I think all of my adult students use some kind of translation to understand what they are doing. I know as a language student, I never really became fluent, and spent a lot of time translating things in my head. The major difficulty with translation in my opinion occurs when students try to translate word for word. This adds a lot of problems when the structure of the languages is different, or when idioms are used, etc. I know I explain everything in English, but I see them writing words in their own language too. If they make the effort to understand what I'm saying before they look up the words, I feel I've made some progress.
Adults do not learn English the same way that preschoolers do. They have acquired all their concepts through their first language, and it is thus very difficult for them to get to grips with a new way of seeing the world.
Speaking is an activity that offers too little time to make the educated decisions and choices a native speaker makes spontaneously and unconsciously. I suggest your students write their thoughts down, using English only in their writing. As they write they can translate, but they must also recognise, or learn to recognise, what is good English and what's substandard English.
The more they write good English the more they get the feel for the lingo and the more fluent they will become.
Besides, recognising written words is easier for them than recognising quasi-familiar aural English. [/img]
Speaking is an activity that offers too little time to make the educated decisions and choices a native speaker makes spontaneously and unconsciously. I suggest your students write their thoughts down, using English only in their writing. As they write they can translate, but they must also recognise, or learn to recognise, what is good English and what's substandard English.
The more they write good English the more they get the feel for the lingo and the more fluent they will become.
Besides, recognising written words is easier for them than recognising quasi-familiar aural English. [/img]
-
jamiehsu590816
- Posts: 1
- Joined: Fri Jun 06, 2003 10:42 am
is translation wrong but necessary?
Using English to think about anything instead of using first language is not an easy job. I think students need some trains, and some good rules to follow.
I like to suggest students to use English in their daily life, talk to their family members and friends, or keep a diary, even though just use simple words in English. Once being accustomed to English, they will not rely much on translation.
In class, I do not like to use translations unless I really have to. I always encourage students to build a picture in their minds but to translate word by word. If they really need to translate, they should analyze English in a comparative way with their mother tongue in the same time. Sometimes I ask students to summarize an article in their own words after digest that is also helpful for them.
I like to suggest students to use English in their daily life, talk to their family members and friends, or keep a diary, even though just use simple words in English. Once being accustomed to English, they will not rely much on translation.
In class, I do not like to use translations unless I really have to. I always encourage students to build a picture in their minds but to translate word by word. If they really need to translate, they should analyze English in a comparative way with their mother tongue in the same time. Sometimes I ask students to summarize an article in their own words after digest that is also helpful for them.
Re: is translation wrong but necessary?
I presume you meant "I always encourage students to build a picture in their minds but *not* to translate word by word."jamiehsu590816 wrote: In class, I do not like to use translations unless I really have to. I always encourage students to build a picture in their minds but to translate word by word.
(I hate when I make typos like that myself
Re: is translation wrong but necessary?
Sorry this post seems to have shown up twice, and I can't figure out how to delete it.
Last edited by Lorikeet on Tue Jun 17, 2003 2:52 pm, edited 1 time in total.
-
Norm Ryder
- Posts: 118
- Joined: Wed Jan 29, 2003 9:10 pm
- Location: Canberra, Australia
Avoiding too much "translation"
I like jamie's suggestion about "trains". Once I'd got to a certain stage in learning a second language I started to use the "mind mapping" method of putting ideas together. I'd used it previously for teaching better English to office workers, and I quickly found that it helped me by-pass a plodding, step-by-step construction of a discourse in which one generallly resorted to excessive translation. Of course, it applies more to written composition than to oral fluency; but I think it can even give the sort of confidence that assists thinking and speaking in the second language.
The mind-mapping method, if you haven't already come across it, consists of taking a large blank page, writing the topic you want to discuss in a circle in the middle, then, without any censorship or hesitation, writing down single words or phrases that you associate with it on arms radiating out from the topic. Each word or phrase can have its own radiations.
Naturally, you need to have built up a bit of vocabulary before you can use the method; but you don't have to be thinking of the grammar at the same time. When you've got everything down you can use coloured pens to link related thoughts. The process starts to develop its own logic, all in the language that's in front of you on the paper. You find yourself more readily using the linking words of the second language, and trying to find the second language solutions to filling in the gaps.
Like everything, of course, it doesn't work for everybody; but I'm sure you'll find that some of your students will find it very liberating.
Good luck.
Norm
The mind-mapping method, if you haven't already come across it, consists of taking a large blank page, writing the topic you want to discuss in a circle in the middle, then, without any censorship or hesitation, writing down single words or phrases that you associate with it on arms radiating out from the topic. Each word or phrase can have its own radiations.
Naturally, you need to have built up a bit of vocabulary before you can use the method; but you don't have to be thinking of the grammar at the same time. When you've got everything down you can use coloured pens to link related thoughts. The process starts to develop its own logic, all in the language that's in front of you on the paper. You find yourself more readily using the linking words of the second language, and trying to find the second language solutions to filling in the gaps.
Like everything, of course, it doesn't work for everybody; but I'm sure you'll find that some of your students will find it very liberating.
Good luck.
Norm
We must not forget how important it is to learn an L 2 the right way, and the right way depends on your age.
A four-year old is still in the process of forming concepts. He is developing his imagination, and his first tongue will be the mirror image of his thought processes.
He does not analyse language yet because he is too young and does not have the mental capability to do that. That has to be trained at a later stage, when he can use the concepts acquired before in school where the teacher and the students communicate in a purely linguistic way, that is through abstraction.
Kids that learn an L2 at kindergarten may have a solid grounding in their L2, being able to conceptualise the world through that medium for the purpose of learning how to analyse it.
But if the students have not had exposure to an L 2 before a relatively advanced age, say age 12, their mind is virtually set in their L 1, visualising things through that language and its mechanisms. Whether you are used to referring to the past or present simply in adverbials rather than in conjugated verbs may now be of decisivie importance. Learning to use a totally new way of thinking will require a lot of patience and guidance. Unfortunately, in some societies memorising is the only way to learning an L 2.
This is not the most effective nor efficient method!
I found that the comparative grammar methodology does help understanda new language. It has come to my attention that L2 speakers often imagine the written forms of tricky parts of their target language. For example, Canadians that have studied French may remember how to spell/write French conjugated verbs. Imagine a French sentence like
- je vais m'acheter une belle maison (I will buy a beautiful house for me)
- tu vas t'acheter une belle maison (you will..)
- nous nous achetons une belle maison (we will...)
Visualising these examples should help express the speaker both with accuracy and pronunciation. Now if the L1 of this speaker happens to be Chinese, a purely translational approach would clearly ruin his or her efforts, which it often does even in English!
Thus, the right teaching method depends on the age of the learners; and at school, you can't ignore the need to study grammar by comparing the two languages. Once you are embarked on this road, translation becomes ever less necessary! You will only need to translate new words!
A four-year old is still in the process of forming concepts. He is developing his imagination, and his first tongue will be the mirror image of his thought processes.
He does not analyse language yet because he is too young and does not have the mental capability to do that. That has to be trained at a later stage, when he can use the concepts acquired before in school where the teacher and the students communicate in a purely linguistic way, that is through abstraction.
Kids that learn an L2 at kindergarten may have a solid grounding in their L2, being able to conceptualise the world through that medium for the purpose of learning how to analyse it.
But if the students have not had exposure to an L 2 before a relatively advanced age, say age 12, their mind is virtually set in their L 1, visualising things through that language and its mechanisms. Whether you are used to referring to the past or present simply in adverbials rather than in conjugated verbs may now be of decisivie importance. Learning to use a totally new way of thinking will require a lot of patience and guidance. Unfortunately, in some societies memorising is the only way to learning an L 2.
This is not the most effective nor efficient method!
I found that the comparative grammar methodology does help understanda new language. It has come to my attention that L2 speakers often imagine the written forms of tricky parts of their target language. For example, Canadians that have studied French may remember how to spell/write French conjugated verbs. Imagine a French sentence like
- je vais m'acheter une belle maison (I will buy a beautiful house for me)
- tu vas t'acheter une belle maison (you will..)
- nous nous achetons une belle maison (we will...)
Visualising these examples should help express the speaker both with accuracy and pronunciation. Now if the L1 of this speaker happens to be Chinese, a purely translational approach would clearly ruin his or her efforts, which it often does even in English!
Thus, the right teaching method depends on the age of the learners; and at school, you can't ignore the need to study grammar by comparing the two languages. Once you are embarked on this road, translation becomes ever less necessary! You will only need to translate new words!
Roger raises an important point.
Young children are like sponges - they absorb languages. Adults in many ways are not. Teaching methodology must, therefore, vary between children and adults. However, a further related point should be made to this. As Roger stated cognition in L1 differs between children and adults. Adults think in abstract terms to a much larger degree than children. However, when tackling a low level EFL class it is necessary to begin with language to tackle concrete concepts (eg. numbers, action verbs) rather than more abstract concepts (eg. adjectives like honesty, reliability, or any of the perfect tenses). This may often be a cause of frustration for low level adult learners, but should language be tackled that is too abstract for the students linguistic level, then this will necessitate an excessive amount of translation, and in the long run, will hinder the development of fluency and accuracy.
Regards
Stephen
Young children are like sponges - they absorb languages. Adults in many ways are not. Teaching methodology must, therefore, vary between children and adults. However, a further related point should be made to this. As Roger stated cognition in L1 differs between children and adults. Adults think in abstract terms to a much larger degree than children. However, when tackling a low level EFL class it is necessary to begin with language to tackle concrete concepts (eg. numbers, action verbs) rather than more abstract concepts (eg. adjectives like honesty, reliability, or any of the perfect tenses). This may often be a cause of frustration for low level adult learners, but should language be tackled that is too abstract for the students linguistic level, then this will necessitate an excessive amount of translation, and in the long run, will hinder the development of fluency and accuracy.
Regards
Stephen
-
Little Algebra
- Posts: 1
- Joined: Tue Jun 17, 2003 4:58 am
Is translation wrong but necessary?
No,
It is both wrong and unnecessary, unless the setting is English as a Foreign Language. If the setting is English as s Second Language, then the student is expected to acquire English, and not simply study it as a foreign language. On the other hand, if students try to examine what is presented by translating among themselves\eachother, then that is ok; but the teacher should not as need not perform translations.
As has been emphasized in ESL training, the student STUDIES to LEARN a Foreign language; but STUDIES to ACQUIRE a SECOND LANGUAGE.
Little Algebra
It is both wrong and unnecessary, unless the setting is English as a Foreign Language. If the setting is English as s Second Language, then the student is expected to acquire English, and not simply study it as a foreign language. On the other hand, if students try to examine what is presented by translating among themselves\eachother, then that is ok; but the teacher should not as need not perform translations.
As has been emphasized in ESL training, the student STUDIES to LEARN a Foreign language; but STUDIES to ACQUIRE a SECOND LANGUAGE.
Little Algebra
Re: Is translation wrong but necessary?
While I agree with you that translation is generally wrong and unnecessary, I must take issue with your interpretation of what EFL is. English as a foriegn language means that the students are expected to acquire a foreign language. It means that you need to look at the student's ability to use the skills. What you have described as EFL is in fact English as a subject as opposed to a language. This is what is taught in most Asian education systems with less than impressive results.Little Algebra wrote:No,
It is both wrong and unnecessary, unless the setting is English as a Foreign Language. If the setting is English as s Second Language, then the student is expected to acquire English, and not simply study it as a foreign language. On the other hand, if students try to examine what is presented by translating among themselves\eachother, then that is ok; but the teacher should not as need not perform translations.
As has been emphasized in ESL training, the student STUDIES to LEARN a Foreign language; but STUDIES to ACQUIRE a SECOND LANGUAGE.
Little Algebra
Regards
Stephen
-
LarryLatham
- Posts: 1195
- Joined: Thu Jan 16, 2003 6:33 pm
- Location: Aguanga, California (near San Diego)
Translation
Hi everyone,
I've been neglecting my time with these boards, and have just come across this thread. I know it's rather late in the game. My apologies for that, but sometimes I just cannot resist the temptation to jump in and, as Norm Ryder would put it, splash about.
It is, of course, an issue every ESL teacher confronts. But I wonder if some of us don't worry about it too much, or perhaps more precisely, worry about certain aspects of it too much. I tend to agree with Lorikeet's assessment that it's word-for-word translation that's the troublemaker. The truth is that in working with adult students, the existence of L1 is an undeniable fact. Moreover, it can be as much an asset as a liability if one wants to see it that way. It is not very difficult to show students how much trouble they can get into with word-for-word translation, even if you have to remind them from time to time about those difficulties. I like to post, in big letters, in front of the classroom: "English is different!" From time to time, as translation causes problems, I merely point to it and shrug my shoulders. But if the teacher is familiar with the student's L1, it can be a great time-saving tool to use it in the classroom occasionally to make points about English. It can also be useful, sometimes, to use it to show some of the contrasts between English and their L1.
We cannot, as teachers, deny that our students have another language that they are much more comfortable with, nor can we ask our students to deny it. We can, however, try to use it to good effect whenever we can, and hope we can gradually wean our students from using it to their detriment in their English acquisition efforts. Don't you agree?
Larry Latham
I've been neglecting my time with these boards, and have just come across this thread. I know it's rather late in the game. My apologies for that, but sometimes I just cannot resist the temptation to jump in and, as Norm Ryder would put it, splash about.
It is, of course, an issue every ESL teacher confronts. But I wonder if some of us don't worry about it too much, or perhaps more precisely, worry about certain aspects of it too much. I tend to agree with Lorikeet's assessment that it's word-for-word translation that's the troublemaker. The truth is that in working with adult students, the existence of L1 is an undeniable fact. Moreover, it can be as much an asset as a liability if one wants to see it that way. It is not very difficult to show students how much trouble they can get into with word-for-word translation, even if you have to remind them from time to time about those difficulties. I like to post, in big letters, in front of the classroom: "English is different!" From time to time, as translation causes problems, I merely point to it and shrug my shoulders. But if the teacher is familiar with the student's L1, it can be a great time-saving tool to use it in the classroom occasionally to make points about English. It can also be useful, sometimes, to use it to show some of the contrasts between English and their L1.
We cannot, as teachers, deny that our students have another language that they are much more comfortable with, nor can we ask our students to deny it. We can, however, try to use it to good effect whenever we can, and hope we can gradually wean our students from using it to their detriment in their English acquisition efforts. Don't you agree?
Larry Latham