 | |
|
| |
|
|
 |
|
|
| |
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
| |
|
Reflections of Prospective Language Teachers on Translationby Adnan Biçer, Ph.D.Çukurova University Faculty of Education English Language Teaching Department Adana, Turkey | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Key words: student perceptions, definitions of translation
However, developing the translation skills of those students has been neglected at language teaching departments due to various reasons. In fact, one reason for such neglect might stem from a kind of reaction to Grammar-Translation approach, which is believed to cause interference errors in language learning. This reaction has led applied linguists to suggest more communicative activities and less mother tongue use in the classroom. As a result, translation courses in the curricula of language teaching departments have been considered synonymous with grammar drills (Jacobsen, 1994), in which instructors often give students a source text and instruct them to translate it for the next class. Over time, this method gives the students an erroneous idea of what translation is about. It also often misleads future translators who, in their careers, are not aware of the type of text, and therefore, they translate every type of text in the same way. The result is ineffective translations full of structural, cohesive, cultural, grammatical, etc. errors (Doğan, 1995; Viaggio, 1994). Sound translation practices involve more than finding the equivalents of unknown words and then transferring them to the TL. It involves developing awareness that understanding the overall meaning, as well as the cultural motives, in the text is crucial before translating the text. Moreover, as Bengi (in Ergun and Kurultay, 1992) adds, interest in the subject matter as well as sufficient knowledge of the world and language are necessary in order for a translation course to be successful. This interest could be achieved by involving students in selecting the texts they are to translate under the guidance of the instructor (Biçer, 2002). In order to achieve unity among the language teaching departments at education faculties of different universities, the Higher Education Council (HEC) has set a curriculum. Translation courses in this curriculum, however, received the least attention with only two courses (one in the fifth and the other in the eighth semester; three hours a week). Besides this time limitation, the aim of the course is not clearly described. That is to say, the objectives written in this curriculum for the translation courses are far from being efficient (Biçer, 2002). This has led to negative attitudes toward translation in these departments (Aslan, 1977; Coşkun, 1996). One solution could be redesigning the objectives proposed in the curricula of HEC. . Many instructors and prospective teachers erroneously believe that any individual with knowledge of a foreign language can translate and that the translating skills cannot be taught. Much effort needs to be spent to erase this misconception. First, these courses must be designed in such a systematic and unique way \ that students can easily follow them. The objectives, methods, strategies, and assessment techniques must be identified and clearly set (Kurultay, 1995; Coşkun, 1996). Second, a new course such as "An Introduction to Translation" should be added into the program. We believe that this will enable instructors to equip their student teachers with practical strategies, techniques, and methods to be utilized in translation. Moreover, in these courses, student-centered approaches need to be applied. In the constructivist view of the 21st century, we, as instructors of translation, should be aware of the fact that learners learn better if they are in control of what they are learning; they need to be encouraged to talk about their aims and set their goals. Thus, instructors should not act as mere knowledge dispensers, but as facilitators and mediators. Learners in these translation classes should be active constructors of their own learning. Their main aim should be to develop cross-cultural insights toward people from different language communities. In order to lead our prospective teachers to be constructors, we should take their opinions into account while preparing our syllabi because, if students see that their opinions are given importance, they will develop a positive attitude and have more interest in the subjects they are about to learn. Taking the perceptions of the learners into consideration is important in that "without learners' participation in the class, there will be no effective and enjoyable teaching" (Bulut and Durak, 2002). For the reasons stated above, this study aimed to identify the problems the student teachers had while translating texts either form the SL into TL or vice versa and the strategies they used to overcome such difficulties. For this purpose, we developed a questionnaire in which the students were asked to reflect on the class atmosphere, the contributions of the translation courses to their knowledge of the foreign language, the necessity of the translation courses at the ELT Department, their attitudes towards translation, whether the weekly hours of translation were enough, and the characteristics of a translation teacher. Then, based on the reflections obtained from these students, we tried to develop a new syllabus and a teaching method for the translation courses of our department. It was assumed that their reflections on their previous experience would provide a basis for the preparation of the translation course to be applied. However, due to the space limitation, in this article, we will only report the findings of the questionnaire. We had the following research questions in mind while preparing the questionnaire:
Participants
In this descriptive study, the entire available population (n=46) was selected as the participants of the study. They were the fourth-year students enrolled in the ELT Department of Çukurova University at the end of the 1999-2000 academic year. The reason for giving the task at the end of the semester was that the students would be more objective while assessing their translation courses. They had already taken the third-year and fourth-year translation courses both from Turkish into English and from English into Turkish (four hours per week each at the time) in the fifth, sixth, and seventh semesters. The mean age of the sample was 21. Since gender was not a relevant variable, it is not included in the report.
In this study, the data were collected by means of a questionnaire adapted from Türeli (1998). It contained 27 items, which consisted of fourteen multiple-choice and thirteen open-ended questions. The questionnaire attempted to explore students' perceptions of and opinions about translation and the translation courses. The students were asked to give a definition of translation and state whether their definitions matched with the courses they had taken. They were also asked to make a list of what types of materials they would have liked to translate and the ones they had translated in the courses with an aim to identify their preferences of text types and the reasons for not including certain texts. We obtained two types of data from the questionnaire. The qualitative data came from the open-ended questions. We analyzed them based on the content of the answers provided by the students. Then we grouped the answers and then tried to find the frequencies. The quantitative data came from the multiple-choice questions. We entered these nominal data into SPSS (version 9.0) to find out whether the differences between the choices were statistically significant. We utilized a non-parametric test (chi-square) for the analysis.
Item 1 in the questionnaire aimed at eliciting how the participants perceived translation. The content analysis of the students' answers allowed us to classify their definitions into five groups (see Table 1). These are as follows: 1) Almost half of the group (f=22) defined translation as finding the equivalent forms of the SL expressions in the TL, or stating SL expressions in the TL without loss of meaning. The answers may indicate that they view translation as finding one-to-one equivalent forms of SL expressions and transferring them into the TL. Those students based their definitions on equivalence. However, they seem to be aware that one should pay attention to the meaning while translating. 2) Sixteen students defined translation as an act of transferring a text or works of art from one language into the other. They seem to have associated translation with either literary or cultural texts. 3) Five students defined translation as either adaptation into TL or as interpretation. We may infer from this definition that those students tended to adapt or interpret the cultural elements while translating since equivalence, as Tack (2000) points out, has cultural connotation. 4) One student defined translation as "being competent in both languages". We believe that s/he is at least aware of the fact that translation requires competence in both languages. 5) For only two students, translation is "to understand a text better." This definition may indicate that they revert to translation to better understand a text in the SL. This may also indicate that students revert to translation even while learning a foreign language no matter how hard we try to banish translation in foreign language learning classrooms.
Table 1: Students' definition of translation
When asked to state whether their definitions were compatible with the translation courses they had taken, and the reason for incompatibility if any, almost all the students (f=44; p £ 0,000) considered the translation courses to be compatible with their definitions. It may be inferred that almost all the students have their own conceptions of what translation is and that the type of training taken has an influence on these conceptions. As to their preferences of texts, students prefer to translate two types of texts mainly (see Table 2): News articles (f=36) and texts on tourism (f=32). Six students wish to translate technical texts. The most frequently translated texts in the classes were news articles (82,6 %) followed by scientific ones, although the latter was not preferred (58,7 %). This is followed by the translation of technical texts (32,6 %), another least-preferred text type. The answers indicate that students' preferences were not given priority, which may explain students' dissatisfaction with the translation courses.
When we ranked the different reasons for not having translated certain texts in the classes, we found out that one third of the fourth-year students did not have any idea (f=14). However, the main reason was the difficulty or lack of knowledge of the subject (f=9). It was also stated that the teacher had decided on the texts to be translated (f=7). In addition, easier and shorter texts were used (f=4) since longer ones required plenty of time and effort (f=4). This is also confirmed by the statement of 38 students, who said that they had no difficulty translating the texts they were assigned. When we examined their strategies, we saw that the students applied two main strategies. They either attempted to express a SL utterance in the TL (f=21) or read the text to look up unknown words (f=20). The majority of the students does not seem to have developed a common strategy. Moreover, 78,3 percent of the students were not able to name the techniques they claimed to have been taught in the courses when they were asked to make a list of the strategies they made use of. Most of the students considered the class atmosphere partly boring and partly enjoyable (f=33; 71,7 %). We may infer that some changes need to be made to create more enjoyable translation courses for the students. One suggestion may be that students could be involved in the text selection. As Lewis and Hill (in Bulut and Durak 2002) state, discussing with students about "their expectations ... in the classroom" also "helps to discuss what students expect to enjoy, and not to enjoy". When asked to rank the contributions of translation, we found out that students benefited in various ways. The most important contributions were that students learned different connotations of words (78,3 %) and understood how an idea could be expressed in different ways (76,1 %). They also understood that translation required competence in languages (76,1 %) as well as time, effort, patience, and skill (76,1 %). Moreover, they explored how to express SL expressions in the TL (60,9 %) and understood the importance of cultural knowledge in translation (60,9 %). The courses also helped them to learn the effect of word choice on meaning (65,2 %) and enlarge their vocabulary (60,9 %). It was also found out that the majority of the students (f=41; 89,1 %) had positive attitudes towards translation. In their comments, they stated that they liked it a lot when they were able to find the TL equivalent of a SL expression that at first seemed difficult to translate. Moreover, they liked it much more when the texts were within the sphere of their interest. They also wrote that the courses should not be limited to four hours a week since the courses contributed to them in various ways. One reason for developing a negative attitude was that some students did not have a sound strategy. When we ranked the difficulties the students had while translating, we found out that they had difficulty in eight areas. The five highest-ranking ones were the following:
The ranking indicates that 36 students complained about the length and complexity of the sentences (R=1) while 29 had difficulty understanding the new concepts in the texts given by the teacher to be translated (R=2). Abundance of figures of speech was another area of difficulty (R=3) followed by finding the meaning of words (R=4). However, the gap between these two is not as wide as the one between the first and second-ranking items. When asked to state how they overcame their difficulties, twenty-one students claimed to have overcome their difficulties by practicing more. Concerning this, however, we should remember Newmark's remark the "translation cannot be learned only by translating." A second strategy was to ask for the teacher's help (f=12). Eight students relied on dictionaries, while two divided long sentences into smaller units. Only one student searched for cultural elements. Two students were unable to overcome their difficulties, while eight gave no answer at all. We may infer that most students did not have a common and sound strategy if any. As to the ranking of the characteristics of a translation teacher, we found out that a translation teacher should:
According to those students, a translation teacher should have to know translation methods and strategies (f=44; R=1) and guide students to overcome their difficulties (f=42; R=2). A translation teacher should also be able to transfer her/his knowledge to students (f=40; R=3). Moreover, the teacher should discuss different versions in class (f=33; R=4) and not insist on her/his own version (f=33; R=4). The teacher should ask for students' opinions in text selection (f=32; R=5) and have the role of a facilitator as well (f=32; R=5). This ranking of the characteristics of a translation teacher indicates that students are really aware of their expectations from a teacher and that they need well-equipped teachers to guide and teach them. Concerning the contributions of other subject areas to students' translations, we fount the first five as follows:
The students' evaluation of class atmosphere showed that they did not agree on the success of the courses. Nearly half of them (f=22) found the courses partly successful and partly unsuccessful, while the other half (f=21 found them successful. Only three found them completely unsuccessful. In addition, most students (61,6 %) found four hours a week sufficient, while some (38,4 %) found it insufficient to achieve the objectives of the course. With regard to students' reflections on the necessity of the translation courses at the English Language Teaching department, the students seem to agree. Forty-five students stated that translation courses were necessary at ELT departments because the courses consolidated their FL knowledge and contributed to their reading and writing skills (f=16; R=1). Students also found a chance to test their FL knowledge (f=12; R=2). They would also use translation when they became teachers (f=7; R=3). Only one student stated that translation was necessary to understand a text better (f=1; R=6). It is obvious that students benefit from translation in different ways. Our aim should be to make the students aware of the various uses of translation by involving them in the learning process. When asked to indicate whether they were given a syllabus and to state the reasons if they were not given one, and whether they would have liked to be given a syllabus, only fifteen students claimed to have been given one. The rest (f=31) stated that they were not given a syllabus. In their comments, they stated that they would have been more planned and more successful if they had been given a syllabus. They would thus know what to do for the next class and start searching information for their assignment. This indicates the importance of a syllabus for the students in order to become organized. When required to freely reflect on the translation courses they had taken, students made different comments. Firstly, they commented mostly on the necessity of translation courses in the department for varying reasons. Secondly, they commented on their satisfaction or dissatisfaction with the courses. Finally, they made some suggestions to improve the translation courses (see Table 3). Concerning the necessity of translation courses in the department, they thought that translation was of great help in many respects. For example, while translating, they not only became aware of the subtleties of both languages but they also learned new words and improved their knowledge of foreign language. Moreover, most of them learned the usage and meaning of most transition words in the translation courses. In addition, being able to translate sentences that at first seemed difficult made them feel happier and more self-confident. They were also able to understand a SL structure better through translation and test their reading comprehension as well. Concerning the success or failure of the courses, some of the fourth-year students blamed the content of the translation courses, the teachers, or themselves. One reason for their dissatisfaction was that the teacher(s) did not ask their opinions in the text selection, which demotivated them. They were given a text and asked to translate it for the next class. During the classes, as they claimed, they were not taught the necessary techniques and the teacher(s) made some minor corrections when needed. Some stated that some other teachers told them that they could easily translate without being taught any translation techniques. They also claimed that they were given simpler texts to translate in classes, whereas; in the exams, ones that are more difficult were asked, which of course caused failure and dissatisfaction among students. Because of the reasons mentioned above, those students suggested that teachers should ask about their opinions in text selection, include translation techniques in the curriculum, and discuss different versions in class through the teachers' guidance. Some suggested that we should include translation courses in the first and second years, too. In such courses, a gradual translation of certain grammatical structures could have been done together with techniques of translation, according to the fourth-year students. They also wanted to have been informed about the importance of translation. In addition, they needed the teacher's encouragement to discuss their versions in class. Teachers should also be fair in assessment, which could be achieved through criteria that could be handed out to students beforehand.
This preliminary study first suggests that students would like a learner-centered approach to teaching translation. They would like to be involved in the learning process by being asked about their opinions in selecting texts they are required to translate. Further, they want their teachers to guide and help them in solving their problems while translating. For this purpose, they would like their teachers to be well equipped with translation methods and to be able to convey her/his knowledge to them in a more enjoyable class atmosphere. They want their teachers to be aware of their likes and dislikes. These findings are in line with those of Bulut and Durak (2002). This study reveals that the most preferred text types to be translated were news articles and tourism texts. However, the latter was the least translated text type. The reasons for not translating certain texts were not explained in class. So, students were uninformed. This is the indication of accepting them as passive learners and they became passive, indeed. The majority of the students did not have any difficulty in translating the texts they were assigned. From this, we can infer that the texts were not challenging enough. The difficulty level seems to be too low for the students to develop further skills such as doing dictionary work or reading different texts for cultural elements. This indicates that students need to be made aware of the translation procedure. If this is achieved, they could develop their own methods and transfer these into the translation of other texts. This study also reveals that the students did not have a common strategy and were not aware of the techniques utilized in the classroom. They, therefore, did not have positive attitudes towards the courses. Their ranking the translation courses as "partly boring and partly enjoying" may indicate that their lack of involvement in class activities led to boredom. Despite this kind of class atmosphere caused by translating texts students did not like or have any idea about, and not having been able to develop necessary strategies, students benefited from the translation courses in various ways. This may indicate that translation courses help them gain insight. We suggest that when students are involved actively, this gain will be more because they have positive attitudes towards this field. We may, therefore, infer from this study that students are aware of the benefits of translation. For this very reason, as teachers we should make the translation courses more beneficial for the students. As Bulut and Durak point out, "we should accept the fact that without learners' participation in the English class, there will be no effective and enjoyable teaching. That is very main reason for taking the perceptions of the learners in the classes into consideration".
Aksoy, B. (2001). Translation as rewriting. The Translation Journal, 5 (3). Retrieved August 18, 2001, from http://www.accurapid.com/journal/17turkey.htm Aslan, O. (1997). Çeviri dersinin sorunları ve çözüm önerileri. In O. B Kula (Ed.), 6. Germanistik sempozyumu: Açılımlar, planlar, erekler (pp. 27-39). Mersin: M.U. Biçer, A. (2002). Teaching translation at English language teaching departments: Process approach vs traditional approach. Unpublished doctorate thesis. Çukurova University, Adana. Bulut, T. and Durak, S. (2002). The difference between the perceptions of the students and their teacher. 1st International symposium on modern approaches, methods, and ELT problems. Süleyman Demirel University: Isparta. Coşkun, M. (1996). Çeviri metinlerinde yüzey yapı - derin yapı hataları, TÖMER Çeviri Dergisi, 3 (10), 43-50. Doğan, G. (1995). Çeviride doğallık ve bağıntı. Çeviribilim 1: Çeviri öğretiminde özgün metni yorumlama, çeviri metni oleşturma sürecine yönelik yöntem önerileri, 111-124. Bursa: TÖMER. Ergun, E., Kurultay, T. (1992). Türkiye'de çeviri eğitimi üzerine: V. Atayman, I. Bengi, T. Yücel'le söyleşi. Metis Çeviri, 19, 11-20. Gerding-Salas, C. (2000). Teaching translation: Problems and solutions. The Translation Journal, 4 (3). Retrieved May 18, 2000, from http://www.accurapid.com/journal/13educ.htm. Gill, S. (1998). Culture matters: Invisible, insane, translating the untranslatable? Modern English Teacher, 7 (3), 63-65. Jacobsen, A. L. (1994). Starting from the other end: Integrating translation and text production. In C. Dolleruıp and A. Lindegaard (Eds.), Teaching translation and interpreting 2: Insights, aims, visions. Papers from the second language international conference (pp. 143-150). Ellsinore: John Benjamins. Kurultay, T. (1995). Çevirmen, çevireceği metni nasıl okursa okumuş olur? Ya da çeviri sürecinde bir ön aşama olarak 'çeviri amaçlı metin çözümlemesi' var mıdır? Çeviribilim 1: Çeviri öğretiminde özgün metni yorumlama, çeviri metni oleşturma sürecine yönelik yöntem önerileri, 111-124. Bursa: TÖMER. Newmark, P. (1988). A textbook of translation. New York: Prentice Hall. Tack, L. (2000). Translation and the dialects of difference and equivalence: some theoretical propositions for a redefinition of the source-target text relation. Meta, 55 (2), 210-227. Türeli, T. (1998). The place of literature in the English language teaching curriculum: A language-based approach. Unpublished doctorate thesis. Viaggio, S. (1994). Theory and professional development: Or admonishing translators to be good. In C. Dolleruıp and A. Lindegaard (Eds.), Teaching translation and interpreting 2: Insights, aims, visions. Papers from the second language international conference (pp. 97-105). Ellsinore: John Benjamins. |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
ranslation, the transfer of a message from one language into the other for communication, has vital importance in introducing people to cultures, civilizations, and societies that are different from their own, as well as to modern ideas and technical/ scientific developments (Aksoy, 2001;Gerding-Salas, 2000). During the language learning process, translation sensitizes language learners to contrasts and induces them to make comparisons between the grammars of the Source Language (SL) and Target Language (TL). In particular, it introduces them to words and expressions that resist translation such as terms related to food and drink, institutions, slang, and the like (Gill, 1998). This naturally brings the necessity of developing sound translation skills of language learners at language teaching departments as they learn the language to communicate and to teach communication skills to their future students.