الفهرس 
IntroductionOnly 14 pages are availabe for public view
 |  | from | 150 |  |  |
| | | from | 150 | | |
Abstract
1. Introduction:
The processes of acquiring, learning, and teaching foreign/second languages have become very essential for many people. There are many factors that may facilitate or impede these processes. Some of these factors are related to the role played by translation in the process of second language acquisition. The data of this study is gathered at the Faculty of Women, Ain Shams University, Egypt where EFL Students, together with their teachers of the English language are faced with this challenge of whether or not they should use translation as a tool to acquire English as a foreign language.
2. Statement of the Problem:
Acquiring any foreign language in any country may have many challenges. Some of these challenges may include not having any contact with any native speakers of the foreign language, not having any exposure to practicing the foreign language outside the classroom, and the tools used to enhance acquiring the foreign language itself. Therefore, some applied linguists and EFL teachers in general and at the Faculty of Women in particular support the use of translation as a tool in FL classes. Using translation in FL classes does ensure that the students get high scores in their exams but what about their communicative competence and their conversational interaction?
3. Research Questions:
This study is an attempt to answer the following questions:
7- How much does translation facilitate and/or impede the process of SLA?
8- How are the students’ linguistic skills affected by the use of translation in SLA?
9- How does the language context with/without translation play any role in the process of SLA?
4- How does the students’ conversational interaction affected by the use of translation in SLA?
4. Review of the Literature:
4.1. Theories of Second Language Acquisition:
Larsen-Freeman and Long (1991) assert that “there are at least forty ‘theories’, ‘models’, ‘perspectives’, ‘metaphors’, ‘hypotheses’ and ‘theoretical claims’ in the SLA literature” (p. 288). Theories of second language acquisition vary depending on their focus. Some nativist theories, which got their beliefs from the theory of Universal Grammar by Chomsky (1965), put great emphasis on cognitive notions in acquiring a second language. Krashen developed the Acquisition Learning Hypothesis (1976) in which he believed that people learn second languages in two ways; either in an acquired way or a learned way. According to Krashen, people learn second languages in either ‘learning’ or ‘acquisition’. Concerning learning, Krashen believed that it is a conscious process which occurs in an instructed classroom setting and it focuses mainly on the grammatical form of the language. As for acquisition, Krashen believed that it is a subconscious process which occurs through communication in everyday life.
The interactionist theories, developed by many linguists from the 1990s to present, are considered by Larsen-Freeman and Long (1991) as the most powerful theories in SLA because “they invoke both innate and environmental factors to explain language learning” (p.266). Long (1996) discusses the main claims of the interaction hypothesis by asserting that language proficiency occurs through interaction in communication. The interactionist theorists follow Krashen’s focus on the importance of ‘comprehensible input’ and add to it the importance of ‘comprehensible output’ as well. To do so, Long (1996) discusses the tools that enhance conversational interaction represented in ‘negotiation of meaning’ which results in ‘modified interaction’. ‘Negotiation of meaning’ was defined previously by Pica (1994) as “modification and restructuring that occurs when learners and their interlocutors anticipate, perceive, or experience difficulties in message comprehensibility” (p. 495). ‘Modified interaction’ in its turn may include linguistic simplification, such as the use of simple grammatical structures, and conversational modifications such as repetition, rephrasing, etc.
Based on this premise, the researcher believes that the use of translation in SLA can be considered as a tool used by both teachers and their students for negotiation of meaning in order to achieve both comprehensible input and output.
4.2. Translation & Second Language Acquisition:
The use of the students’ own language and translation in FL learning and teaching has been a controversial issue (Hall and Cook, 2013). Some applied linguists and EFL teachers support using translation as a means and a tool in second/foreign language acquisition, while others are against this procedure (Mogahed, 2011). There are many researches about this issue; even whole books were dedicated to ‘translation in language teaching’ such as Cook (2010). Once Duff (1989) says “translation happens everywhere, all the time, so why not in the classroom?” (p. 6). Liao (2006) adds that the use of translation in language teaching can help students to check their understanding of the L2.
from the psychological and social point of view, Kumaravadivelu (2003, 250) asserts the importance of using the students’ own language in class by saying that it can “offer psychological and social support for minority children and provide a much-needed continuity between the home and school environment”.
On the other hand, Owen (2003) believes that the use of translation in class wastes the precious time of students which should be spent on practicing the L2 not on the L1. Carreres (2006) mentions that those who are against the use of translation in language teaching believe that the use of translation in language teaching restricts the language practice into two skills only; reading and writing, without paying attention to the other two skills; speaking and listening. She believes that students depend on their mother tongue and cannot express themselves freely in the L2. She supports her belief by saying that “translation was banned- in some places, such as in France in 1950, quite literally, banned by legislation- from the languages curriculum in secondary schools and in specialist language schools” (p. 2). Using translation in SLA allows the students to depend mainly on their native language, which in its turn may interfere with the L2 (Pan and Pan, 2012).
4.3. Translation & L2 Teaching Methods:
The method of teaching English in public schools and universities in Egypt is the grammar translation method. In this method, as Cook (2003 & 2010) describes, the teacher uses the first language of the students in teaching grammar rules. Cook adds that the main focus of this method is on writing and translation as there is no speech at all. This makes the students excel in writing and reading skills but they become poor in listening and speaking skills.
Grammar translation method is not an effective method for learning any foreign language for communicative purposes. According to Ellis (2005), grammar instruction is more helpful in test performance like TOEFL but it is useless in producing a spontaneous use of the foreign language. Even students themselves complain from this method especially when they travel abroad and find out that they have spent many years learning the foreign language but cannot communicate easily with its native speakers and that they can only use grammatical rules and writing strategies. This problem exists in every country applying such method of teaching foreign languages.
At some private institutions like the Berlitz, they use the direct method in teaching English (Cook, 2003 & 2010). In this method, the first language of the students is not allowed at all in classes. The main focus of instructors applying such method is to make the language proficiency of the students the same as or equal to that of native speakers.
5. Significance of the Study:
This study focuses on studying the role of translation as a tool in SLA in EFL classes at the Faculty of Women. There is a difference between teaching translation as a separate course or exercise in SLA and using translation as a tool in SLA. The focus of this research is on using translation as a tool in SLA. In 1996, a PhD study by Omura was done on the Role of Translation in Second Language Acquisition: Do Learners Automatically Translate? In its abstract, the researcher states that “this study investigated whether or not second language (L2) learners utilize translation as a natural response to second language acquisition (SLA)”. It focused on students studying Japanese as a FL and whether or not they used translation during the process of SLA and how much. In 2014, a study was made by Fernardez-Guerra about the usefulness of translation in foreign language learning. This study focused on the students’ attitudes towards the use and importance of translation in FL classes but it did not tackle measuring the students’ level of competence in the FL’s four skills, especially their communicative competence. The significance of this study lies in the following reasons. First, it is the first study to focus on the role of translation as a tool in SLA to be done in Egypt, as far as the researcher knows. Second, it is the first study to focus on the role of translation on the linguistic proficiency of the students, not on their reliance of translation during the process of SLA or on their attitudes towards using/not using translation in SLA, as the previous literature focused. Third, the findings of this study will contribute in improving the process of SLA in general and of English as a FL in Egypt in particular.
6. Methodology:
This study focuses on studying the role of translation as a tool in second language acquisition. To do so, the researcher is going to apply a cross-sectional approach of analysis by investigating thirty EFL students at the Faculty of Women, Ain Shams University, Egypt, as subjects. These students are first year students at the university level, BA program. They have been learning English for almost nine years. The researcher is going to give the students listening and speaking tests twice, one without the use of translation, and the second time with the use of translation to measure their oral fluency, their use of vocabulary in communication and their interactional competence within the framework of the interaction approach which combines the input hypothesis by Krashen (1976, 1982, 1985), the interaction hypothesis by Long (1996), and the output hypothesis by Swain (1985, 1995, 2005). The students have been informed about the research they are participating in and they have signed an informed consent. They will be treated anonymously and will not be identified by anyone. The method of data analysis will be both qualitative and quantitative.