Increasing influence of translation in language acquisition - Ingliz tili - Diplom ishlar

Increasing influence of translation in language acquisition

Yuklangan vaqt:

26.09.2019

Ko'chirishlar soni:

0

Hajmi:

73.615234375 KB

Ko'chirib olish

Increasing influence of translation in language acquisition Contents: I. Introduction II. Main part Chapter 1. Translation as a Learning Method in English language teaching 1.1. The purpose of memory training in translation 1.2. The aim of professional translation and interpretation Chapter 2. Listening techniques in translation 2.1. Translation activities encourage students to be creative and contribute their ideas 2.2. Listening and memory training in translation III. Conclusion. IV. Bibliography.

Introduction The theme of my qualification work sounds as following: “Increasing influence of translation in language acquisition” Our qualification work can be characterized by the following: The actuality of this work caused by several important points. We seem to say that the capacity of translation is one of the main skills that a learner of English can possess so this work will deal with the traditional problems of students caused by difficulties in interpreting and translation. In other words, our qualification work pursues as its major aim to help foreign students avoid the problems connected with the art of translation and interpreting from English into the mother tongue and vice-versa. So the significance of our work can be proved by the following reasons: a) The art of translation is one of the most difficult problems for the learners of English. b) The problem of bad memory and inattentive listening is not a specific problem of the learners of English translation, but for the majority of people. That is why we tried to find optional methods of improving these skills. c) The proposals mentioned in this work were approved by a number of worldwide famous Universities of the USA and Great Britain. d) A number of modern methods and literary sources from Internet were used in our qualification work. Having based upon the actuality of the theme we are able to formulate the general goals of our qualification work. a) To study, analyze, and sum up the modern methods of training of translation. b) To analyze the major results achieved in the studied field. c) To prove the idea of importance of translation and listening training. d) To help students avoid the problems caused by written and simultaneous translation.

If we say about the new information used within our work we may note that the work studies the problem from the modern positions and analyzes the modern trends appeared in this subject for the last ten years. Mainly, the newality is concluded in a wide collecting of internet materials dealing with the translation training. The practical significance of the work can be concluded in the following items: a) The work could serve as a good source of materials for additional reading by students at schools, colleges and lyceums. b) The problem of translation training could be a little bit easier to understand, since our qualification work includes the chapter concerning the question mentioned. c) Those who would like to possess a perfect knowledge of English will find our work useful and practical. d) Our qualification work is a general review of the investigations made earlier. Having said about the scholars who dealt with the same theme earlier we may notion the methods of scientific approaches used in our work we can mention the method of general analysis was used. The newality of the work concludes in including the modern interpretations of the play. The general structure of our qualification work looks as follows:

The work is composed onto four major parts: introduction, main part, conclusion, and bibliography. Each part has its subdivision onto the specific thematic items. There are two points in the introductory part: the first item tells about the general characteristics of the work, while the second paragraph gives us some words about the aims of the work and the general description of the latter. The main part of our qualification work consists of two chapters, which, in their 1 turn, are subdivided into several thematic paragraphs. The first chapter of the main part discusses the translation training as the aspect of learning foreign languages. Here we gave the general description of the translation and analyzed all types of translation. We also studied the modern methods used for improving of translation. The second chapter thoroughly takes into consideration the peculiar features of translation techniques and gives a comparatively large number of practical recommendations for improving translation skills. We also mentioned the scholar’s opinions concerning the investigating subject. The work is meant by itself as a compilation to the previous twos and studies the question of the Russian influence onto the enlarging of the English language and the questions of translation caused with it. We also mentioned here the question connected with the problem of teaching translation skills at schools. In conclusion to our work we notioned some meaningful words concerning the thematic content of the work (the first item) and the concluding results of our investigation (the second item). At the very end of our qualification work we supplied our work with the bibliography list and the internet materials. If we say about the practical wais of applying our qualification work we would like to say that our qualification work can be applied and used by the following: 1) The work can be useful for all the teachers of foreign languages when they teach their students to translate the written sources of information or when the letters are taught to speak and transmit the information in foreign languages. 1 World book Enciclopedia Macmillian Publisher 1996 p143

2) All the students of foreign languages department would be able to use the work for better knowledge of English or when they have practical classes on foreign language. 3) Translators and interpreters might find a lot of useful information for the improvement of their professional activity. 4) The qualification work will be useful for everyone who wants to make perfect in learning foreign languages. This paper also discusses the role of memory training and listening in interpreting. According Gile's Effort Model (a Processing Capacity Account), short-term memory is an essential part in the process of interpreting. This paper analyzes the major characteristics of Short-term Memory (STM) and their implications for interpreters' memory training. We believe that interpreting is an STM-centered activity, which includes encoding of information from the Source Language, storing of information, retrieval of information, and decoding of information into the target language. The training of STM skills is the first step in training a professional interpreter. Tactics for memory training for interpreters like retelling, categorization, generalization, comparison, shadowing exercises, mnemonics are presented in this paper. The key words for our investigation can be the following: Interpreter Training, Memory Training, Short-Term Memory, Effort Model, Listening techniques.

The Main part The present paper focuses on the use of translation in helping learners to acquire, develop and strengthen their knowledge and competence in the English language. Translation integrated into the language learning practice along with generally used learning activities, such as reading, listening, writing, and vocabulary development could be defined as a “pedagogical tool”, considering that its purpose is to teach a language. Translation activities make students communicate both ways: into and from the foreign language. While translating students are incited to notice differences in structure and vocabulary, to strengthen grammatical competence, to shape their own way of thinking and to correct common mistakes that could otherwise remain unnoticed. Students can make the best out of their learning, if they are encouraged to use translation skills properly. Translation activities are used in the advanced English learning programmes at Kaunas University of Technology (KTU). This paper is based on a brief theoretical literature overview, analysis of the activities in the language classroom and analysis of the results of the survey. The findings of the survey suggest that translation is a good tool in the English language learning course aimed at enhancement of students’ foreign language skills. Interpreting is defined as "oral translation of a written text". Mahmoodzadeh gives a more detailed definition of interpreting: Interpreting consists of presenting in the target language, the exact meaning of what is uttered in the source language either simultaneously or consecutively, preserving the tone of the speaker.

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 as being unsuitable within the context of foreign language learning. It was critized because of the close association with traditional grammar translation. Even today translation is often regarded as some kind of mechanical linguistic transfer of meaning from one language to another. It is still ignored as a useful language learning tool because of being not a communicative activity that is not suited to the general needs of the language learner. Translation is considered as time-consuming, boring, and irrelevant. However, in the last few decades there has been an increasing interest in the translation practice in the foreign language classroom. 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”. The present study grew out of a long-term teaching practice and it was observed that translation as a method applied to language teaching practice induces deeper insight into the meaningful contents of the material to be taught. The problem discussed in the paper is the relevance of translation for enhancing foreign language skills. The present article aims to prove that translation is a valid method for language practice and improvement. The objectives of the paper are, firstly, to describe the translation activities which raise students’ awareness of language use and, secondly, to examine the usefulness of translation in learning English. The methods of the study are overview of the theoretical background, analysis of translation activities in the language classroom, and analysis of the results of the survey.

Translation plays a very important role in an increasingly globalised world and in increasingly multilingual Europe where it is used on daily basis.. Nevertheless, translation is perceived differently by linguists, methodologists and teachers. Its use in foreign language teaching provokes a great deal of disagreement and criticism. 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. Translation was considered as inefficient, unreliable and irrelevant. Significant limitations led to the idea that the use of translation in language learning had to be avoided. Malmkjaer briefly summarizes the main reasons why translation fell from favour: 1. Translation is independent and radically different from the four skills which define language competence: reading, writing, speaking and listening. 2. Translation takes up valuable time which could be used to teach these four skills. 3. Translation is unnatural. 4. Translation misleads and prevents students from thinking in the foreign language. 5. Translation is a bad test of language skills. 6. Translation produces interference. 7. Translation is only appropriate for training translators. Duff reveals further reasons why teachers objected to the use of translation in foreign language classes. The researcher stresses that translation is text-bound and 125 confined only to two skills — reading and writing. It is not a communicative activity as it doesn’t involve oral interaction. Then the use of the mother tongue is required, which is not desirable. Moreover, it is boring, both to do and to correct.

Nevertheless, there are “significant and visible signs of a revival of translation in language teaching according to recent literature and applied linguistics”. Many theorists, linguists, teachers agree on the importance of using translation in foreign language classes. For instance, Schaffner 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. 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. Students taught by using pedagogical translation are encouraged to practice reading, writing, vocabulary, grammar, speaking. One of the main aims of foreign language teaching is to develop the student’s ability to communicate in the target language. Researcher Ross states that translation is recognized as the fifth skill and the most important social skill since it promotes communication and understanding. As a form of communication, translation involves interaction and cooperation between people, which makes it a very useful tool in foreign language teaching.

Translation heightens language awareness. While translating students are focused on identifying differences in structure and vocabulary, they have to evolve strategies to deal with them and to negotiate the potential of both languages. The real usefulness of translation in foreign language classes lies in comparison of grammar, vocabulary, word order and other language points in the target language and the student’s mother tongue. Students are directly exposed to contrasting language systems of the target and the native languages. Therefore, the learners should be required to discuss and correct common mistakes. It may be appropriate at this point to mention Perkins’s (1985) observations: In order to develop in the students a linguistic awareness of contrast between L1 and L2 grammatical structures, and thus counteract interlingual interference, the teacher can quit legitimately get students to translate L1 sentences designed to pinpoint and clarify structures and patterns the student still has not assimilated . The material for translation should be interesting and varied, expressive and related to the learners’ knowledge. As students should cover different aspects of the foreign language, the material is required to be authentic, diverse in terms of structure and function. The teacher’s task is to assess students’ needs and select material to illustrate particular aspects of the language and the structure which present difficulties for students in the English language. By working through these difficulties students are able to see the link between the language and its use.

According to Duff , translation happens everywhere and all the time. The students translate in class for other students, interpret signs and notices in the environment, and translate instructions, letters for friends and relatives. Moreover, they mentally translate ideas from their mother tongue into English. Translation might provide a guided practice in reading. Before starting translating a text it “should be readcarefully and analyzed in detail to determine the contents in terms of what, how and why it is said”. Careful text analysis improves students reading comprehension and promotes vocabulary development. Translation can help students improve their writing skills because it is a transfer of a text from one language into another. Leonardi claims that a good translation should flow naturally, re-create both the style and the context of the original text, and follow target language conventions. As translation is regarded a communicative activity, it involves communication between the teacher and the student. Learners are encouraged “to discuss rights and wrongs as well as problems related to the translation task”. On the one hand, students are involved in a conversation on the translation topic, which helps them strengthen their speaking skills. On the other hand, students are requested to talk to both the teacher and other learners, and through listening to both the lecturer and the students improve their listening skills. According to Leonardi, translation as a pedagogical tool can be successfully employed at any level of proficiency, at school or University, as a valuable and creative teaching aid to support, integrate and further strengthen the four traditional language skills: reading, writing, speaking and listening. One of the possible ways to integrate translation in foreign language classes can be through the use of translation activities. Researchers Nolasco and Arthur suggest that translation activities should meet the following criteria:

1. Language is used for a purpose. 2. Translation activities create a desire for communication. 3. Translation activities encourage students to be creative and contribute their ideas. 4. Students are focused on what they are saying, rather than how they are saying it. 5. Students work independently of the teacher. 6. Students determine what to say or write. Moreover, translation activities need not be used in isolation, but should be included in an inherent part of the language learning course . Whether novice or experienced, all interpreters find this profession demanding and challenging. Phelan says that "when an interpreter is working, he or she cannot afford to have a bad day. One bad interpreter can ruin a conference". In discussing the qualifications required for an interpreter, Phelan mentions that: "The interpreter needs a good short-term memory to retain what he or she has just heard and a good long-term memory to put the information into context. Ability to concentrate is a factor as is the ability to analyze and process what is heard". Mahmoodzadeh also emphasizes that a skillful interpreter is expected to "have a powerful memory". Daniel Gile emphasizes the difficulties and efforts involved in interpreting tasks and strategies needed to overcome them, observing that many failures occur in the absence of any visible difficulty. He then proposes his Effort Models for interpreting. He says that " The Effort Models are designed to help them [interpreters] understand these difficulties [of interpreting] and select appropriate strategies and tactics. They are based on the concept of Processing Capacity and on the fact that some mental operations in interpreting require much Processing Capacity." According to Gile, Consecutive Interpreting consists of two phases: a listening and reformulation phrase and a reconstruction phase;

Phase One: I=L+M+N I=Interpreting, L=listening and analyzing the source language speech, M=short-term memory required between the time information is heard and the time it is written down in the notes, and N=note-taking. Phase Two: I= Rem+Read+P In this Phase Two of Consecutive Interpreting, interpreters retrieve messages from their short-term memory and reconstruct the speech (Rem), read the notes (N), and produce the Target Language Speech (P). Gile's Effort Model for Simultaneous Interpreting is: SI=L+M+P SI=Simultaneous Interpreting. L=Listening and Analysis , which includes "all the mental operations between perception of a discourse by auditory mechanisms and the moment at which the interpreter either assigns, or decides not to assign, a meaning (or several potential meanings) to the segment which he has heard." M=Short-term Memory, which includes "all the mental operations related to storage in memory of heard segments of discourse until either their restitution in the target language, their loss if they vanish from memory, or a decision by the interpreter not to interpret them." P=Production, which includes "all the mental operations between the moment at which the interpreter decides to convey a datum or an idea and the moment at which he articulates (overtly produces) the form he has prepared to articulate". 2 Gile emphasizes that the memory effort is assumed to stem form the need to store the words of a proposition until the hearer receives the end of that proposition. The storage of information is claimed to be particularly demanding in SI, since both the volume of information and the pace of storage and retrieval are imposed by the speaker. 2 Anderson, J.R., 1983. The Architecture of Cognition. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. Pp.46-57, 134,139, 212-226

In both models, Gile emphasizes the significance of Short-term Memory. It is actually one of the specific skills which should be imparted to trainees in the first stage of training. Among all the skills and techniques which are required for a good interpreter, memory skill is the first one which should be introduced to trainee interpreters. Psychological studies of human memory make a distinction between Short- Term Memory (STM) and Long-Term Memory (LTM). The idea of short-term memory simply means that you are retaining information for a short period of time without creating the neural mechanisms for later recall. Long-Term Memory occurs when you have created neural pathways for storing ideas and information which can then be recalled weeks, months, or even years later. To create these pathways, you must make a deliberate attempt to encode the information in the way you intend to recall it later. Long-term memory is a learning process. And it is essentially an important part of the interpreter's acquisition of knowledge, because information stored in LTM may last for minutes to weeks, months, or even an entire life. The duration of STM is very short. It is up to 30 seconds. Peterson found it to be 6 - 12 seconds, while Atkinson and Shiffrin and Hebb state it is 30 seconds. Memory in interpreting only lasts for a short time. Once the interpreting assignment is over, the interpreter moves on to another one, often with different context, subject and speakers. Therefore, the memory skills which need to be imparted to trainee interpreters are STM skills. Input of information : It is generally held that information enters the STM as a result of applying attention to the stimulus, which is about a quarter of a second according to the findings of both Sperling and Crowden. However, McKay's findings do not fully support this, asserting that unattended information may enter the STM. As mentioned in the previous section, the capacity of STM is limited and small. Atkinson and Shiffrin propose that it is seven items of information (give or take two). Miller says it is seven "chunks." Another possibility may be that the limiting factor is not the STM's storage capacity, but its processing capacity.

To store information in STM, it must be encoded, and there is a variety of possibilities as to how this operates. There are three main possibilities in STM: (1) Acoustic (Phonemic) coding is rehearsing through sub-vocal sounds . (2) Visual coding is, as implied, storing information as pictures rather than sounds. This applies especially to nonverbal items, particularly if they are difficult to describe using words. In very rare cases some people may have a "photographic memory," but for the vast majority, the visual code is much less effective than this one. (3) Semantic coding is applying meaning to information relating it to something abstract. There are three main theories as to why we forget from our STM: (1) Displacement —existing information is replaced by newly received information when the storage capacity is full (2) Decay —information decays over time. (3) Interference —other information present in the storage at the same time distorts the original information. 3 Retrieval: There are modes of retrieval of information from STM: (1) Serial search —items in STM are examined one at a time until the desired information is retrieved. (2) Activation —dependence on activation of the particular item reaching a critical point. 3 . Atkinson, R.L., and Stiffrin, R.M., 1968. Human memory: A proposed system and its control processes , in K.W. Spence and J.T. Spence (eds.), The psychology of learning and motivation . Vol.2. London: Academic Press. Pp. 19, 65, 78-79

The purpose of memory training in translation is to achieve a better understanding of the source language, which will lead to adequate interpreting. As Lin Yuru et al. put it, "Memory in consecutive interpreting consists of nothing more than understanding the meaning, which is conveyed by the words". Understanding is the first step in successful interpreting; therefore, memory training is to be provided in the early stage of interpreter training. Memory functions differently in consecutive and simultaneous interpreting, because the duration of memory is longer in CI than in SI. There are different methods of training STM for CI and SI respectively. Interpreting starts with the encoding of the information from the original speaker. According to Gile's Effort Model, interpreting is an STM-centered activity; the process of interpreting could be re- postulated into: Encoding of information from the Source Language + Storing Information + Retrieval of Information + Decoding Information into the Target language. In Consecutive Interpreting, there is probably up to 15 minutes (depending on the speaker's segments) for the interpreter to encode and then store the information. This is the first phase of Gile's Effort Model for CI. In the second phase of Gile's Model, the interpreter starts to retrieve information and decode it into the target language. In SI, encoding and decoding of information happen almost at the same time. The duration for storing the information is very limited. Therefore, in the first step of interpreting, encoding (understanding) information uttered in the SL is the key to memory training. According to the previous description, there are three main possibilities of storing information in STM: (1) Acoustic Coding; (2) Visual Coding and (3) Semantic Coding. Visual coding may be used by interpreters in conference situations with multimedia. Notes in interpreting are to assist in such visual coding of information. But in most interpreting contexts, interpreters will depend on acoustic and semantic coding. Therefore, exercises should be designed for this purpose. The following methods are recommended:

Retelling in the Source Language : The instructor either reads or plays a recording of a text of about 200 words for the trainees to retell in the same language. The trainees should not be allowed to take any notes. In the first instance, trainees should be encouraged to retell the text in the same words of the original to the largest possible extent. The following tactics should be used by the trainees after a certain time of training on retelling: Categorization : Grouping items of the same properties; Generalization : Drawing general conclusions from particular examples or message from the provided text; Comparison : Noticing the differences and similarities between different things, facts and events; Description : Describing a scene, a shape, or size of an object, etc. Trainees are encouraged to describe, summarize, and abstract the original to a large extent in their own words in exercises (2) to (5). Shadowing Exercise : Which is defined as "a paced, auditory tracking task which involves the immediate vocalization of auditorily presented stimuli, i.e., word-for-word repetition in the same language, parrot-style, of a message presented through a headphone". This kind of exercise is recommended for training of Simultaneous Interpreting, especially the splitting of attention skills and the short-term memory in SI. 4 There is another tool which is effective in memory training: Mnemonic to Memory . Mnemonic is a device, such as a formula or rhyme, used as an aid in remembering. Mnemonics are methods for remembering information that is otherwise quite difficult to recall. A very simple example of a mnemonic is the '30 days hath September' rhyme. The basic principle of Mnemonics is to use as many of the best functions of the human brain as possible to encode information. The human brain has evolved to encode and interpret complex stimuli— images, color, structure, sounds, smells, tastes, touch, spatial awareness, emotion, and language—using them to make sophisticated interpretations of the environment. Human memory is made up of all these features. 4 Atkinson, R.L., et al., 1993. Introduction to psychology( 11th ed. (s:l): Ted Bucholz. Pp. 46-58

Typically, however, information presented to be remembered is from one source—normally words on a page. While reading words on a page reflects one of the most important aspects of human evolution, it is only one of the many skills and resources available to the human mind. Mnemonics seek to use all of these resources. By encoding language and numbers in sophisticated, striking images which flow into other strong images, we can accurately and reliably encode both information and the structure of information to be easily recalled later. It is also advisable that Exercises with Interference (e.g. noises) be provided in order to prevent information loss in the Short-Term Memory, since the environment and other information present in the storage may reduce the information encoded. Recording speeches with specially 'inserted' noises as a background is a recommended classroom practice, since this is a very effective method to enable the students to concentrate and thus strengthen their STM duration. Notes: Training of professional interpreters has a three-part structure: the first stage is introduction to skills specific to interpreting, for example through memory training and note-taking exercises. This is followed by intensive classroom practice. The third stage involves work experience and observation where the main focus is on task achievement. 5 5 Baddeley, A.D., 1966. "The influence of acoustic and semantic similarity on long term memory for word sequences", in Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 18, pp.302-309.

The aim of professional translation and interpretation is transposition of a message from a source language into a target language, with due attention to what one might call the ambiance of the message in order to create a similar ambiance in the target language. Depending on the content and form of the message, this ambiance may be minimal, as in much scientific and technical translation or purely informational interpretation. It may be as important as the message, as in literary translation or the interpretation of politically or psychologically sensitive speeches. Or it may even be more significant than the message itself, as in some poetry, in advertising, in many diplomatic communiqués, and in most after-dinner speeches. Although every bilingual speaker who is able to express himself with some felicity can usually translate or interpret on the message level, it takes considerable training, or a special sensitivity coupled with years of experience, to become a professional translator or interpreter capable of capturing and communicating the nuances of two or more languages. Ambiance can be created in various ways. It can be the result of a distinctive linguistic or literary style or form: colloquial, educated, biblical, commercial, or legal language; slang, dialect, or regionalisms; dialogue, stream-of-consciousness narrative, or oblique discourse; poetic prose, verse, or such characteristic literary styles as those of romanticism, realism, or even the New Yorker . It can be created through references to certain aspects of a particular cultural or social heritage, such as national holidays, historical or geographic landmarks, or national or local characteristics and beliefs. Ambiance can also involve ethnic or cultural peculiarities and idiosyncrasies—special marriage or burial customs or rites, various superstitions and taboos. Finally, it can utilize the special characteristics of one language that have no (or only imprecise) equivalents in another.

Those who are not translators may not give much thought to the problem of the most appropriate treatment in English of the complex and elaborate sentences of German or Russian, or the flowery styles of Russian or Chinese. Most of us, however, are aware of a number of simpler translation problems: “faux amis,” i.e., words which sound similar in two languages but mean different things; regionalisms, where the same word or phrase has different connotations or even denotations and where the region itself, be it Cockney London or the Deep South, may have unique symbolic values; mixed stylistic levels and metaphors; almost untranslatable terms such as Gemütlichkeit or poshlost ; the need to find English equivalents for the familiar form of address still used by many languages, or for titles, first names, and surnames used in special contexts; the difficulty of finding the appropriate linguistic and social form for expressing or translating wishes, commands, admiration, gratitude, disagreement; translating into the appropriate ambiance references to the Bible, the Koran, the Little Red Book, or Comrade Lenin; quoting Shakespeare to Germans, Goethe and Schiller to Americans. The list is endless. Many of these problems face the language student and teacher long before he confronts them as a translator or interpreter. In general, language students acquire some of this cultural and social ambiance gradually through their readings, from their teachers' explanations, habits, and customs, or, if the student is lucky, during a lengthy stay in a foreign country with exposure to that country's cultural and social values. Nonetheless, it takes a very observant, determined, sensitive, and thoughtful student to absorb enough of the ambiance to become a “near-native.”

If the near-native also has a profound awareness of his primary culture, he can be considered bilingual. (Actually, true bilingualism is rare. Unless both languages and cultures are constantly accessible and in equal measure part of the working and living environment, one of them soon moves into a secondary position.) Finally, in addition to engaging in a comprehensive “contrastive analysis” of his two languages (i.e., a comparison which is attuned to the myriad factors of the respective ambiances) and developing methods for solving at least the more obvious and important problems of linguistic, cultural, or social divergence, the bilingual speaker must attain an educational level sufficiently high for an awareness of aesthetic, philosophical, social, and political factors and innuendos and their possible equivalents in the other language area. Only then will he have the potential for becoming a good translator or interpreter. Such a preparation may well require a lifetime—and in the past “real” translators and interpreters indeed seemed born rather than bred. In fact, however, a far greater number of working translators and interpreters were merely people with some knowledge of a foreign language and an ability to convey the gist of a message, sometimes together with the gist of their own preferences and prejudices. The same was, and often is, true of language teachers. Though we have moved through various methodological revolutions, from Berlitz and total immersion to the aural- oral approach, from the linguist-plus-informant team to the “classroom abroad,” highly motivated students and teachers often fight a losing battle to retain and expand their laboriously and expensively acquired language skills. We have all heard the college student complain that “after a year of studying it I now know less French than when I came back from France,” or “I just can't discuss Don Quixote meaningfully in Spanish”; or the teacher's confession that “I practically rewrite some of my students' master's theses that are written in German,” or the new Ph.D. who admits that he cannot lecture in Russian.

After World War II, several European universities established extensive formal programs for the training of professional translators and interpreters and developed methods for refining the techniques of what I have called contrastive analysis. More recently, similar programs were established at a few American universities, most notably at Georgetown and the Monterey Institute of Foreign Studies. While serving as director of the program at Monterey, I realized that, unlike its European counterparts which are able to draw on a multilingually oriented environment, and perhaps even unlike the Georgetown program which undoubtedly benefits from Washington's sizable international population, the Institute's program had to provide considerable training in advanced language skills as well as in translation and interpretation techniques. Moreover, when seeking teachers qualified both to teach and practice translation or interpretation, I soon discovered that most “bilingual” teachers had either lost or never found that sensitivity to conceptual shadings and equivalences which is so important for a good translator or interpreter (and equally for a good language speaker or teacher). I therefore consider it essential that academic institutions of higher learning provide advanced language training in addition to courses in literature and culture, and that such language training be required throughout the language student's academic residency. This may seem an inauspicious moment for pleading the case of expanded language programs. But as teachers turn in increasing numbers to internationally oriented programs of study such as international studies, comparative politics and institutions, and comparative economics and management, and as the value of foreign language mastery within such training becomes more and more obvious, there is an increasing need for language programs oriented toward bilingualism. 6 6 Baddeley, AD., 1986. Working memory . Oxford: Oxford University Press pp.l7-18, 332

Students (and even teachers) from other programs and schools have occasionally requested permission to participate in the Institute's translation and interpretation courses—not in order to become professional translators or interpreters but to maintain or expand their language skills. This fact confirms my belief that some of the techniques we use to enhance the language facility of our translation and interpretation students could be applied successfully to general language programs at other institutions of higher learning. I am convinced that such language training can be at least as valuable as a stay abroad, with the added advantage that the second cultural environment does not tend to displace the first. Both settings, so necessary for proper contrastive analysis, are thus available simultaneously. Chapter 2. Listening techniques in translation The following three techniques used in the training of translators and interpreters at the Monterey Institute seem especially suitable for advanced language study: 1. Conceptualization . One of the basic premises for successful translation and interpretation is recognition of the principle that the working unit is not a word or word group but the concept, the idea. In contrast to shorthand, which aims at a verbatim reproduction of a text, the various note-taking systems used for consecutive interpretation provide, as it were, “basic training” in conceptualization. They are compression systems, used to record only the essential concepts of a speech and its organizational or linkage pattern. As these concepts are orally translated into the other language, they are again expanded into complete sentences and given the appropriate stylistic and verbal framework. By requiring that the student write down not complete sentences or word groups, but only minimal significant concepts and linkages—and there is no time to do more—such note- taking encourages the conceptualization without which effective consecutive interpretation cannot occur.

There is, of course, no need for every language student to learn interpretative note-taking, though I consider it an extremely beneficial skill. It improves essay planning and writing skills, leads to better note-taking at lectures, increases awareness of parallel or divergent ways of expressing ideas in two languages and thus develops sensitivity toward style, and, most important, it encourages analytical and systematic thinking. Once the principle of conceptualization is understood, there are many ways to employ and practice it: précis-writing; oral and written text summaries; oral enumerations of the salient points of a speech, an essay or a discussion; the selection of appropriate titles and headings for articles and news items; and brief or extensive recapitulation in the same language or another of speeches, lectures, articles, or stories read or heard. Much of the work should be done orally, to increase the student's listening comprehension while at the same time providing an incentive for a critical reception of the presented text. In addition, teachers trained in the use of an interpretative note-taking system may find it rewarding to introduce such a course in their schools for the benefit of students and colleagues. 2. Stylistic transposition . Stylistic transposition is usually practiced in preparation for written translation of stylistically sensitive texts. In an oral adaptation, it is also used to prepare students for simultaneous interpretation. I believe it can also provide a valuable technique for advanced language training. There are many ways to practice stylistic transposition, and I will suggest only a few. Students can write “eyewitness accounts” of an event as seen by a child, an uneducated person, a newspaper reporter, a politician, a poet, a philosopher. They can rewrite a stylistically sophisticated essay in simplified form, or a realistic account poetically. They can be asked to single out and analyze those components of an essay that are responsible for its stylistic coloring. They can study, evaluate, and imitate styles of different writers, or compare different approaches applied to one theme or subject. Finally, they can translate stylistically significant texts and compare their translations with those of their classmates or with published translations.

3. Sight translation . Sight translation is frequently considered an unpardonable sin, an unmentionable outrage against the canons of psychologically sound language teaching methodology. If practiced without supervision, sight translation usually results in clumsy, literal translation with atrocious syntax and abominable style, full of gaps and approximations. If undertaken with the teacher's assistance, it tends to become a tedious, time-consuming process, a laborious and frustrating search for the right word or word order, in the course of which all one's carefully hidden linguistic sins—long forgotten grammatical and syntactical rules or never properly understood words—come to the fore. Despite these handicaps, which are real enough, I have found sight translation into a foreign language to be the most effective vocabulary builder, and sight translation into English the best possible speedy review of grammatical principles and problems. Moreover, if undertaken systematically, sight translation gradually produces a fluency and sophistication of expression in the foreign as well as the native language that is often superior to that of the average resident of a foreign country, or even a native speaker in his own country. 7 The reasons for this are simple. If a language is used primarily for self- expression, a very limited vocabulary, if handled skillfully, may be adequate and thus remain constant. Sight translation, on the other hand, forces the student to work with someone else's vocabulary and terminology, while mustering all of his linguistic and intellectual resources in order to find suitable or possible equivalents. As a result, terms encountered in one language, and improvised in the other only yesterday, may crop up in the second language today and be recognized and assimilated into active vocabulary. Observation and memory improve as the student struggles to convey special expressions in the other language, and he is forced to appreciate their uniqueness and felicity. Finally, if texts on different topics provide the “raw material” for sight translation, vocabulary begins to extend beyond the terminology of the individual's own specialization or interests and brings him closer to a total mastery of the language. 7 Gile, D, 1992, Basic Theoretical Components in Interpreter and Translator Training, in Dollerup, C and Loddegaard, A (eds), pp.185-194

I have found the following method of practicing sight translation most effective, if used in a combination of self-study and supervised performance:  Sight translate aloud for about twenty minutes a day, preferably seven days a week. The time should be subdivided into ten-minute practice sessions to and from the target language.  Use any current newspapers or magazines, preferably different materials each day or week. At first, sight translate only one or two paragraphs of various articles, making sure that they range over a considerable spectrum of topics —politics, economics, brief news items, society gossip, sports, theater or film, book reviews.  Sight translate as evenly as possible, to create the illusion of a read text. Skip, improvise, or simplify as needed, but try to convey the message accurately and in complete sentences.  Do not pause to look up words or phrases, but underline special troublemakers or unknown terms (while guessing at them) in order to check them out and learn them later.  Sit down and learn such terms once you have collected twenty or thirty, and review them on days when there are no new lists to memorize.  Listen to your oral presentation while sight translating, and force yourself to use the foreign language as correctly and as literately as you can, and your native language as elegantly and appropriately as possible.  Avoid, if at all possible, terms or constructions in the foreign language that an educated native speaker would not be likely to use. (You can try such terms in your written translations or compositions where they can be corrected or discussed, and where they can contribute to the development of a style of your own. Here your aim is meaningful and correct communication presented smoothly and clearly.)

 Do not be discouraged if you get hopelessly stuck and have to summarize a paragraph in a short, simplistic, and vague sentence, or not at all. Summarize as best as you can, then skip to another article or essay. 8 Long before the emergence of most academic translation and interpretation programs, sight translation was practiced systematically in the language school in Vienna where I studied English and French. My regular practice of it, coupled with consistent vocabulary memorization, resulted in my arrival in the United States with so extensive an active English vocabulary that it proved embarrassing, and I quickly reduced it to a less conspicuous level. But what better goal could there be for language teachers than that of preparing our students to face similar embarrassments in a country whose language they have learned here at home? H.L. MENCKEN used to tell the story of a state legislator who clinched his argument against a proposed allocation of funds for foreign language instruction by declaring proudly, “If English was good enough for Jesus Christ, it's good enough for me.” Funny perhaps, but it is hard to keep smiling when similar expressions of smug obscurantism continue to crop up with embarrassing frequency and in the most surprising places. The deputy superintendent for instruction in the Washington, D.C. system, James T. Guines, was quoted in the Washington Post as saying that a cut in the school budget meant that such luxuries as foreign language classes in elementary schools would be the first to go. After all, he explained, “Even if you go abroad now, you don't need a language. The dollar speaks louder than anything.” 9 8 Keppelk, G., and Underwood, B., 1962. "Proactive Inhibition in Short-term Retention of Single Items", in J ournal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behaviour, pp. 153-161. 9 Lambert, S & Moser-Mercer,B, 1994, Bridging the Gap: Empirical Research on Simultaneous Interpreting , Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins pp.511-512

A brief trip to Europe might assist Mr. Guines in acquiring a better appreciation of the value of foreign languages—and of the dollar. But before we become too self-righteous, we should remember that there is another side to this question. We may agree that foreign languages have intrinsic value, but that value will remain untapped unless and until it is transmitted correctly. Another Mencken anecdote may clarify the point. He recalled studying French for two years in high school and looking forward to his first visit to France; much to his dismay, he discovered that no one in Paris understood “high school French.” Charity begins at home. We must put our own house in order. Foreign language instruction needs improvement at all levels, but the crux of our problem lies in the elementary and secondary schools. This is where languages should be taught, not in the colleges. I am convinced that the long-range solution to the plight of foreign languages in this country will come with improvement of instruction at the high school level and with coordination of an effective transition from high school to college. However, in the meantime we must face the situation as it is and do the best we can. Our present prospects are, unfortunately, not very happy. There is no need to rehearse the litany of complaints, but it is worth reiterating that the plight of foreign languages reflects a larger problem that threatens the educational system as a whole. I am speaking of the continued decline in verbal and mathematical skills among young people, demonstrated by the drop in SAT scores over the past few years. To no one's surprise, a special commission charged with studying the matter attributed the lower scores to several factors, including too much television. My own feeling is that two important underlying causes are, or have been, a creeping anti-intellectualism in the public at large and a loss of confidence among teachers.

As a result of this fatal combination, many students receive high school diplomas that are not worth the paper they are written on. Large numbers of so- called graduates are functional illiterates, incapable of even balancing a checkbook. They can hardly read and write their own language, so what hope do they have of learning another? The gradual abandonment of the emphasis on the three R's has been encouraged by the “quick fix” mentality and the introduction of “innovative” ideas, whose chief purpose appears to be to persuade children that learning requires little or no effort. No one is suggesting that we return to the bad old days, but surely the pendulum has swung too far from Grad grind to the Good Humor Man. The Good Humor Man approach is intellectually dishonest (children are not fooled, by the way), and it does the children a terrible disservice, as many of them come to realize later in life. Many boys and girls accept tough discipline in sports, and anyone who can learn “plays” in basketball can learn “plays” in English or mathematics. I do not believe that young people who discipline their bodies cannot also discipline their minds. But of course boys and girls have a right to an education; they do not have any right to play for their school in basketball or tennis, so they try harder. Unfortunately, in too many schools sports dominate all other activities. We are drifting away from the Greek ideal, which like so much in the Classical heritage comes down to us in a Latin tag: “Mens sana in corpore sano.” We need to give high school teachers something of the authority enjoyed by the football coach. It might help, too, if we could focus more attention on educators rather than “educationists” or organizers of teaching, and also get school boards and PTA's off the teachers' backs. Perhaps a little “teacher power” would lead to more respect for teachers—and for the learning process—on the part of the students.

I may appear to have drifted from the topic of foreign language instruction, but I am trying to make the point that we share a community of interests with our colleagues in English and mathematics, and indeed with all teachers at the secondary school level. Foreign languages are the most fragile and vulnerable part of the humanities curriculum. All of us man the front line in a constant battle against obscurantism and the Madison Avenue mentality, but high school teachers are in the trenches. Foreign language instruction is bound to suffer if verbal and mathematical skills decline and if the Good Humor Man approach continues to flourish. Anyone involved in FL teaching also has a stake in the maintenance of high standards of oral and written skills in the English language, because the level of those skills determines the quality of the students we see in our own classes. A foreign language can, of course, be taught well or badly, like any other subject, but learning must involve effort, memorization, precision, and a good knowledge of how one's own language works. That is why we should all welcome the “back to basics” movement that appears to be gaining ground in various parts of the country. Both students and parents are beginning to realize that all the fancy talk about innovation and creative freedom does not help much if a graduate cannot read and write beyond the eighth-grade level and therefore cannot get a job. Frustrated by this discovery, some parents have threatened to sue high schools for awarding diplomas under false pretenses—which is precisely what some schools have done. Perhaps those of us in Russian studies are more aware of the shared community of interests and of the need for students to have a solid grounding in basic verbal skills. We certainly have more to gain, first, because Russian is such a late arrival on the American educational scene, and second, because Russian requires a good understanding of grammar and syntax (not that one can do without this understanding in learning other languages).

The University of Virginia Slavic Department draws heavily upon applied linguistics in teaching Russian. The discipline of modern linguistics was largely created by Slavists and hence figures as a subject of central importance in most Slavic departments. At the same time, this approach recognizes the obvious fact that Russian is a highly inflected language having, for example, six cases. A student who cannot distinguish between subject and predicate or accusative and dative is likely to find the going rough. On the other hand, Russian grammar is logical and predictable; students willing to make a reasonable effort usually do very well. Russian classes are anything but dull. Our beginning text is A Russian Course by Alexander Lipson (Slavica Publishers). It is a text with excellent layout, tapes, and an exceptionally good workbook manual. The book offers an ideal combination of liveliness and linguistic sophistication. The first three chapters present a microcosm of the Russian language in practice by use of the question- and-answer technique and frequent repetition. Thereafter the grammar is introduced in stages because the student now has an understanding of how the language works in practice. The instructor speaks Russian from the outset, eliciting correct answers by writing symbols or matchstick drawings on the blackboard; he needs to be on his toes and to be something of a ham in order to create the proper atmosphere of give and take in the repetition of “rituals.” Lipson's text abandons the old-fashioned type of grammar sentence and opts for nonsense phrases which force the student to focus as much on the linguistic nature of the words as on their meaning. Much fun is had at the expense of Socialist Realism and Soviet propaganda claims of breaking cement-mixing records, but it is verbal play rather than social criticism. Students learn a great deal about the fascinating inhabitants of the twin cities of West Blinsk and East Blinsk, the latter being renamed Gubkingrad in honor of Gubkin, the renowned hero of Socialist Labor. There is also the continuing saga of Superman ( Sverxcelovek ) and Superboy ( Sverxmal'cik ).

The point of all this silliness is that students enjoy the pleasures of contrastive grammar, of punning with sounds that exist only in English or only in Russian. Not only do they acquire a useful set of phrases, but they learn to generate their own “rituals.” They begin to understand that language, any language, is a system tending toward, but never quite reaching, perfect balance in its various components and prosodic features. They enjoy being “behind the scenes,” getting an insight into the ways in which the linguist formulates rules for what takes place in a language. They enjoy learning about linguistic universals, about the relationship between front and back vowels and hard and soft consonants. They perceive a parallel between consonantal and pronunciation changes in Russian ( krast'—kradu ) and in English (wit—wisdom; Christ— Christian). I have the impression that many FL instructors lack linguistic sophistication and do not know as much about the theory of language as they could or should in order to employ an up-to-date methodology. It might well be that we need a program of fellowships to enable foreign language instructors at all levels to “retool” and acquire some understanding of linguistics, semiotics, and communication theory. Our students are not abandoned at the end of the first or second year, although Virginia does have a two-year FL requirement. A determined effort is made to coordinate all four levels of the Russian language program so that students who wish to may continue with Russian in a coherent manner; quite a large proportion do decide to go on with the language. As a continuing text we use Genevra Gerhart's The Russian's World: Life and Language (Harcourt Brace Jovanovich). The aim of the book is to tell the American student “what every Russian knows,” and it succeeds admirably. Gerhart gives the connotative as well as the denotative value of Russian words, thus putting cultural flesh on the linguistic bones, breathing life into the frame.

We place particular emphasis on foreign study. Naturally, a summer or semester in Leningrad or Moscow does not fit every student's plans, but we do offer these opportunities to qualified students through our membership in such organizations as the Council for International Educational Exchange and the American Council of Teachers of Russian. Closer to home, students have available the total-immersion summer programs at Indiana and Middlebury, as well as the weekend Russian Language Camp sponsored in the fall by the University of Virginia and James Madison University. Attendance at such domestic programs— or, even better, study in the country itself—provides a target for the student to aim at, a time and place to utilize what he or she has learned. We are fortunate at Virginia in having excellent cooperation among foreign language departments. One immediate result of this cooperation has been the acquisition of a demonstration classroom with excellent video-tape equipment. This superb facility provides both faculty and teaching assistants with an opportunity to observe themselves and others performing, and to correct errors or improve techniques. All foreign language faculty and teaching assistants hold regular meetings to discuss problems and methodology. Each department and each college or university has its own institutional mission, and it is both natural and healthy that there should be a wide variety of approaches and emphases. However, the FL program must remain central to the concerns of the traditional language and literature department. If there are no students with a solid grounding in the foreign language, then there will be no majors, no upper-level courses in which the FL is used, and ultimately no graduates with a true understanding of the life and culture of the country concerned. A department that neglects its language program loses its heart. Every effort should be made, whether the institution has a foreign language requirement or not, to make the language program as successful as possible.

The second major focus is, of course, the study of literature. It can be an enormously civilizing and liberating experience for undergraduates, providing we do not insist on burdening them with an unrelieved diet of close formalist analysis of the sort inflicted on us in graduate school. At the risk of excommunication by adherents to the exclusively intrinsic study of literature, I must say that I believe it is a mistake to insist that undergraduates share our enthusiasm for formalist or structural analysis of texts. A department should make such courses available, but it should also offer courses of a more humane breadth which treat, for example, the relationship between literature and the society from which it emanates, a topic that Harry Levin has written on with his customary wit and elegance. Whatever the approach, FL departments should never allow themselves to be isolated. No one relishes playing the FTE game, least of all those of us involved in the study of literature, concerned as it is with the problematical and contingent in life and the larger questions of the human condition. And yet, if we believe in the value of what we are doing, we ought to have the courage of our convictions and be prepared to defend our discipline in an honorable and intellectually responsible manner. A foreign language department should consider carefully engaging in cooperative joint programs or courses with other FL departments (and English departments), as well as with non-language departments involved in area studies programs. Another useful idea is to offer courses in English translation. Some people frown on such courses as a sort of betrayal, but if they are offered as supplementary courses to the department's core program they can provide a useful service and, if taught well, attract good students. After all, not every student interested in the novels of Dostoevsky or Camus or Thomas Mann or Borges may have the time to study the foreign language to a level where he or she can read them in the original. Quite often a student becomes interested in the language through a literature course in translation.

Team-taught courses provide another useful addition to a department's offerings—for example, a course on civilization and culture, or on contemporary society, taught by an FL faculty member and someone in the history department. Such interdisciplinary courses are by no means easy to put together or to teach but they can be very successful. These are all ideas that have worked quite well for us, but this is certainly not an exclusive or prescriptive list. Nor do I want to suggest that we have no problems, either in the Virginia program or in Russian studies across the country. Enrollments are down in many institutions. If foreign languages are the most vulnerable part of the humanities curriculum as a whole, then Russian is probably the most vulnerable among them, certainly more vulnerable than the more traditional and better established languages. In fact, until about twenty years ago Russian hardly existed at all as a language taught in the colleges, let alone the secondary schools, of this country. It is true that World War II and the Cold War aroused considerable interest in the Soviet Union, but, with very few exceptions, neither war had much impact on the American educational system. Appropriately enough it was the Russians themselves who obliged us to pay more attention to their language. The catalyst, of course, was sputnik , a new word that entered the language to symbolize both awareness of Soviet achievements and anxiety over an apparent failure of American science and technology to keep pace.

One important response to sputnik was the National Defense Education Act (NDEA) of 1958, which resulted in millions of dollars being poured into language and area studies programs. Among the so-called critical or strategic languages, Russian has benefited most from NDEA legislation. Twenty years later we now find that Russian is taught in practically every respectable college and university in the country. Major institutions have Russian departments, or even Slavic departments where not only Russian but other major languages such as Czech, Polish, or Serbo-Croatian are taught. There are now twenty-three doctoral programs in Slavic languages and literatures where only three or four existed prior to 1958. Fourteen Slavic area studies programs continue to receive federal support under NDEA Title VI, which also provides Foreign Language and Area Studies graduate fellowships to major Slavic programs. It should be noted that in awarding these fellowships preference is now given to students in the non-Russian Slavic and East European languages and in disciplines other than literature, history, economics, and political science, which are felt to have come of age at the graduate level. It seems to me entirely proper that the traditional foreign languages should maintain their preeminence. However, long years of neglect of other major world languages can only be remedied in the short run by the sort of federal boost provided by NDEA, which has brought the American educational system more in line with the economic and political realities of the twentieth century. It is worth remembering that many of the so-called “smaller” languages are in fact spoken by hundreds of millions of people: Chinese, Russian, Hindi, Arabic. No one would suggest that what this country needs is a samovar in every kitchen, but clearly it is a matter of national interest that a language such as Russian should be made available in a substantial number of our schools and colleges.

The position of Russian is certainly much better than it was twenty years ago. However, the rather panicky reaction to sputnik brought with it some problems because it created a hothouse growth of Russian and East European programs that could only flourish, or in some cases survive, with constant financial support from outside sources. Some programs put down roots; others have begun to wither. It is obviously unhealthy and impractical for foreign language instruction to depend upon the inscrutable shifts of Soviet policy or the momentary shifts in the climate of international affairs. There still exists the danger under NDEA that some programs are obliged to balance on a seesaw of grant and detente; in other words, good news is bad news and vice versa. We have a habit in this country of throwing money at problems. This leads to a sort of “greening of America” with a difference. What I mean is that federal assistance and private funding increased FL enrollments for a time, but all the while SAT scores were declining. This is a point we would do well to remember as we enter what may be a new era of federal funding for foreign language and area studies. One unexpected result of the Helsinki Accords has been to bring the importance of international studies to the attention of President Carter. Each signatory commits itself to “encourage the study of foreign languages and civilizations as an important means of expanding communication among peoples— for the strengthening of international cooperation.” Having signed the Final Act of the Conference on Security and Cooperation in Europe, the United States finds itself in a rather embarrassing position since it needs to do a great deal more than it is currently doing to “encourage the study of foreign languages and civilizations.” In response chiefly to the actions of Representative Paul Simon of Illinois, the President has ordered the creation of a Presidential Commission on Foreign Languages and International Studies, which should submit its report during 1978.

One encouraging difference between this renewed federal interest in foreign languages and that prompted by sputnik twenty years ago is tone. For example, it was significant that the former National Defense Foreign Language (NDFL) fellowships have been retitled Foreign Language and Area Studies (FLAS) fellowships. In other words, “defense” is being removed from the title, and from the motivation behind offering the awards. It would seem that we feel less threatened militarily and have a more healthy understanding of the importance of foreign languages for our national well-being, even in a world at peace. Whatever the recommendations of the Presidential Commission, it is already clear that foreign language instruction has the support of the recently installed U.S. Commissioner of Education, Ernest L. Boyer. Dr. Boyer, until last year a chancellor in the State University of New York system, has a strong professional background in international studies and a thorough understanding of their importance in the American educational system. His public comments on the problems and objectives of education at all levels have been most encouraging, particularly his speech at the annual meeting of the American Association of State Colleges and Universities last December. He was reported in the Chronicle of Higher Education (12 December 1977) to have stated his intention to “revitalize [federal] support of foreign-language and area-studies programs” and to give “a new priority” to internationalizing American education. We should welcome this increased awareness at the upper levels of the federal government of what has come to be called “global perspectives.” Let us take advantage of the new favorable climate of opinion and the possible increase in federal funding to get “back to basics.” Foreign language instruction and international studies need to be strengthened at all levels, not simply at the college and university levels. We must devote increased attention to the elementary and secondary schools in order to effect a genuine change and improvement in the present situation.

H.L. MENCKEN used to tell the story of a state legislator who clinched his argument against a proposed allocation of funds for foreign language instruction by declaring proudly, “If English was good enough for Jesus Christ, it's good enough for me.” Funny perhaps, but it is hard to keep smiling when similar expressions of smug obscurantism continue to crop up with embarrassing frequency and in the most surprising places. The deputy superintendent for instruction in the Washington, D.C. system, James T. Guines, was quoted in the Washington Post as saying that a cut in the school budget meant that such luxuries as foreign language classes in elementary schools would be the first to go. After all, he explained, “Even if you go abroad now, you don't need a language. The dollar speaks louder than anything.” A brief trip to Europe might assist Mr. Guines in acquiring a better appreciation of the value of foreign languages—and of the dollar. But before we become too self-righteous, we should remember that there is another side to this question. We may agree that foreign languages have intrinsic value, but that value will remain untapped unless and until it is transmitted correctly. Another Mencken anecdote may clarify the point. He recalled studying French for two years in high school and looking forward to his first visit to France; much to his dismay, he discovered that no one in Paris understood “high school French.” Charity begins at home. We must put our own house in order. Foreign language instruction needs improvement at all levels, but the crux of our problem lies in the elementary and secondary schools. This is where languages should be taught, not in the colleges. I am convinced that the long-range solution to the plight of foreign languages in this country will come with improvement of instruction at the high school level and with coordination of an effective transition from high school to college. However, in the meantime we must face the situation as it is and do the best we can.

Our present prospects are, unfortunately, not very happy. There is no need to rehearse the litany of complaints, but it is worth reiterating that the plight of foreign languages reflects a larger problem that threatens the educational system as a whole. I am speaking of the continued decline in verbal and mathematical skills among young people, demonstrated by the drop in SAT scores over the past few years. To no one's surprise, a special commission charged with studying the matter attributed the lower scores to several factors, including too much television. My own feeling is that two important underlying causes are, or have been, a creeping anti-intellectualism in the public at large and a loss of confidence among teachers. As a result of this fatal combination, many students receive high school diplomas that are not worth the paper they are written on. Large numbers of so- called graduates are functional illiterates, incapable of even balancing a checkbook. They can hardly read and write their own language, so what hope do they have of learning another? The gradual abandonment of the emphasis on the three R's has been encouraged by the “quick fix” mentality and the introduction of “innovative” ideas, whose chief purpose appears to be to persuade children that learning requires little or no effort. No one is suggesting that we return to the bad old days, but surely the pendulum has swung too far from Gradgrind to the Good Humor Man. The Good Humor Man approach is intellectually dishonest (children are not fooled, by the way), and it does the children a terrible disservice, as many of them come to realize later in life. Many boys and girls accept tough discipline in sports, and anyone who can learn “plays” in basketball can learn “plays” in English or mathematics. I do not believe that young people who discipline their bodies cannot also discipline their minds. But of course boys and girls have a right to an education; they do not have any right to play for their school in basketball or tennis, so they try harder.

Unfortunately, in too many schools sports dominate all other activities. We are drifting away from the Greek ideal, which like so much in the Classical heritage comes down to us in a Latin tag: “Mens sana in corpore sano.” We need to give high school teachers something of the authority enjoyed by the football coach. It might help, too, if we could focus more attention on educators rather than “educationists” or organizers of teaching, and also get school boards and PTA's off the teachers' backs. Perhaps a little “teacher power” would lead to more respect for teachers—and for the learning process—on the part of the students. I may appear to have drifted from the topic of foreign language instruction, but I am trying to make the point that we share a community of interests with our colleagues in English and mathematics, and indeed with all teachers at the secondary school level. Foreign languages are the most fragile and vulnerable part of the humanities curriculum. All of us man the front line in a constant battle against obscurantism and the Madison Avenue mentality, but high school teachers are in the trenches. Foreign language instruction is bound to suffer if verbal and mathematical skills decline and if the Good Humor Man approach continues to flourish. Anyone involved in FL teaching also has a stake in the maintenance of high standards of oral and written skills in the English language, because the level of those skills determines the quality of the students we see in our own classes. A foreign language can, of course, be taught well or badly, like any other subject, but learning must involve effort, memorization, precision, and a good knowledge of how one's own language works. That is why we should all welcome the “back to basics” movement that appears to be gaining ground in various parts of the country. Both students and parents are beginning to realize that all the fancy talk about innovation and creative freedom does not help much if a graduate cannot read and write beyond the eighth-grade level and therefore cannot get a job. Frustrated by this discovery, some parents have threatened to sue high schools for awarding diplomas under false pretenses—which is precisely what some schools have done.

Perhaps those of us in Russian studies are more aware of the shared community of interests and of the need for students to have a solid grounding in basic verbal skills. We certainly have more to gain, first, because Russian is such a late arrival on the American educational scene, and second, because Russian requires a good understanding of grammar and syntax (not that one can do without this understanding in learning other languages). The University of Virginia Slavic Department draws heavily upon applied linguistics in teaching Russian. The discipline of modern linguistics was largely created by Slavists and hence figures as a subject of central importance in most Slavic departments. At the same time, this approach recognizes the obvious fact that Russian is a highly inflected language having, for example, six cases. A student who cannot distinguish between subject and predicate or accusative and dative is likely to find the going rough. On the other hand, Russian grammar is logical and predictable; students willing to make a reasonable effort usually do very well. Russian classes are anything but dull. Our beginning text is A Russian Course by Alexander Lipson (Slavica Publishers). It is a text with excellent layout, tapes, and an exceptionally good workbook manual. The book offers an ideal combination of liveliness and linguistic sophistication. The first three chapters present a microcosm of the Russian language in practice by use of the question- and-answer technique and frequent repetition. Thereafter the grammar is introduced in stages because the student now has an understanding of how the language works in practice. The instructor speaks Russian from the outset, eliciting correct answers by writing symbols or matchstick drawings on the blackboard; he needs to be on his toes and to be something of a ham in order to create the proper atmosphere of give and take in the repetition of “rituals.”

Lipson's text abandons the old-fashioned type of grammar sentence and opts for nonsense phrases which force the student to focus as much on the linguistic nature of the words as on their meaning. Much fun is had at the expense of Socialist Realism and Soviet propaganda claims of breaking cement-mixing records, but it is verbal play rather than social criticism. Students learn a great deal about the fascinating inhabitants of the twin cities of West Blinsk and East Blinsk, the latter being renamed Gubkingrad in honor of Gubkin, the renowned hero of Socialist Labor. There is also the continuing saga of Superman ( Sverxcelovek ) and Superboy ( Sverxmal'cik ). The point of all this silliness is that students enjoy the pleasures of contrastive grammar, of punning with sounds that exist only in English or only in Russian. Not only do they acquire a useful set of phrases, but they learn to generate their own “rituals.” They begin to understand that language, any language, is a system tending toward, but never quite reaching, perfect balance in its various components and prosodic features. They enjoy being “behind the scenes,” getting an insight into the ways in which the linguist formulates rules for what takes place in a language. They enjoy learning about linguistic universals, about the relationship between front and back vowels and hard and soft consonants. They perceive a parallel between consonantal and pronunciation changes in Russian ( krast'—kradu ) and in English (wit—wisdom; Christ— Christian). I have the impression that many FL instructors lack linguistic sophistication and do not know as much about the theory of language as they could or should in order to employ an up-to-date methodology. It might well be that we need a program of fellowships to enable foreign language instructors at all levels to “retool” and acquire some understanding of linguistics, semiotics, and communication theory.

Our students are not abandoned at the end of the first or second year, although Virginia does have a two-year FL requirement. A determined effort is made to coordinate all four levels of the Russian language program so that students who wish to may continue with Russian in a coherent manner; quite a large proportion do decide to go on with the language. As a continuing text we use Genevra Gerhart's The Russian's World: Life and Language (Harcourt Brace Jovanovich). The aim of the book is to tell the American student “what every Russian knows,” and it succeeds admirably. Gerhart gives the connotative as well as the denotative value of Russian words, thus putting cultural flesh on the linguistic bones, breathing life into the frame. We place particular emphasis on foreign study. Naturally, a summer or semester in Leningrad or Moscow does not fit every student's plans, but we do offer these opportunities to qualified students through our membership in such organizations as the Council for International Educational Exchange and the American Council of Teachers of Russian. Closer to home, students have available the total-immersion summer programs at Indiana and Middlebury, as well as the weekend Russian Language Camp sponsored in the fall by the University of Virginia and James Madison University. Attendance at such domestic programs— or, even better, study in the country itself—provides a target for the student to aim at, a time and place to utilize what he or she has learned. We are fortunate at Virginia in having excellent cooperation among foreign language departments. One immediate result of this cooperation has been the acquisition of a demonstration classroom with excellent video-tape equipment. This superb facility provides both faculty and teaching assistants with an opportunity to observe themselves and others performing, and to correct errors or improve techniques. All foreign language faculty and teaching assistants hold regular meetings to discuss problems and methodology.

Each department and each college or university has its own institutional mission, and it is both natural and healthy that there should be a wide variety of approaches and emphases. However, the FL program must remain central to the concerns of the traditional language and literature department. If there are no students with a solid grounding in the foreign language, then there will be no majors, no upper-level courses in which the FL is used, and ultimately no graduates with a true understanding of the life and culture of the country concerned. A department that neglects its language program loses its heart. Every effort should be made, whether the institution has a foreign language requirement or not, to make the language program as successful as possible. The second major focus is, of course, the study of literature. It can be an enormously civilizing and liberating experience for undergraduates, providing we do not insist on burdening them with an unrelieved diet of close formalist analysis of the sort inflicted on us in graduate school. At the risk of excommunication by adherents to the exclusively intrinsic study of literature, I must say that I believe it is a mistake to insist that undergraduates share our enthusiasm for formalist or structural analysis of texts. A department should make such courses available, but it should also offer courses of a more humane breadth which treat, for example, the relationship between literature and the society from which it emanates, a topic that Harry Levin has written on with his customary wit and elegance.

Whatever the approach, FL departments should never allow themselves to be isolated. No one relishes playing the FTE game, least of all those of us involved in the study of literature, concerned as it is with the problematical and contingent in life and the larger questions of the human condition. And yet, if we believe in the value of what we are doing, we ought to have the courage of our convictions and be prepared to defend our discipline in an honorable and intellectually responsible manner. A foreign language department should consider carefully engaging in cooperative joint programs or courses with other FL departments (and English departments), as well as with non-language departments involved in area studies programs. Another useful idea is to offer courses in English translation. Some people frown on such courses as a sort of betrayal, but if they are offered as supplementary courses to the department's core program they can provide a useful service and, if taught well, attract good students. After all, not every student interested in the novels of Dostoevsky or Camus or Thomas Mann or Borges may have the time to study the foreign language to a level where he or she can read them in the original. Quite often a student becomes interested in the language through a literature course in translation. Team-taught courses provide another useful addition to a department's offerings—for example, a course on civilization and culture, or on contemporary society, taught by an FL faculty member and someone in the history department. Such interdisciplinary courses are by no means easy to put together or to teach but they can be very successful. These are all ideas that have worked quite well for us, but this is certainly not an exclusive or prescriptive list. Nor do I want to suggest that we have no problems, either in the Virginia program or in Russian studies across the country. Enrollments are down in many institutions. If foreign languages are the most vulnerable part of the humanities curriculum as a whole, then Russian is probably the most vulnerable among them, certainly more vulnerable than the more traditional and better established languages.

In fact, until about twenty years ago Russian hardly existed at all as a language taught in the colleges, let alone the secondary schools, of this country. It is true that World War II and the Cold War aroused considerable interest in the Soviet Union, but, with very few exceptions, neither war had much impact on the American educational system. Appropriately enough it was the Russians themselves who obliged us to pay more attention to their language. The catalyst, of course, was sputnik , a new word that entered the language to symbolize both awareness of Soviet achievements and anxiety over an apparent failure of American science and technology to keep pace. One important response to sputnik was the National Defense Education Act (NDEA) of 1958, which resulted in millions of dollars being poured into language and area studies programs. Among the so-called critical or strategic languages, Russian has benefited most from NDEA legislation. Twenty years later we now find that Russian is taught in practically every respectable college and university in the country. Major institutions have Russian departments, or even Slavic departments where not only Russian but other major languages such as Czech, Polish, or Serbo-Croatian are taught. There are now twenty-three doctoral programs in Slavic languages and literatures where only three or four existed prior to 1958. Fourteen Slavic area studies programs continue to receive federal support under NDEA Title VI, which also provides Foreign Language and Area Studies graduate fellowships to major Slavic programs. It should be noted that in awarding these fellowships preference is now given to students in the non-Russian Slavic and East European languages and in disciplines other than literature, history, economics, and political science, which are felt to have come of age at the graduate level.

It seems to me entirely proper that the traditional foreign languages should maintain their preeminence. However, long years of neglect of other major world languages can only be remedied in the short run by the sort of federal boost provided by NDEA, which has brought the American educational system more in line with the economic and political realities of the twentieth century. It is worth remembering that many of the so-called “smaller” languages are in fact spoken by hundreds of millions of people: Chinese, Russian, Hindi, Arabic. No one would suggest that what this country needs is a samovar in every kitchen, but clearly it is a matter of national interest that a language such as Russian should be made available in a substantial number of our schools and colleges. The position of Russian is certainly much better than it was twenty years ago. However, the rather panicky reaction to sputnik brought with it some problems because it created a hothouse growth of Russian and East European programs that could only flourish, or in some cases survive, with constant financial support from outside sources. Some programs put down roots; others have begun to wither. It is obviously unhealthy and impractical for foreign language instruction to depend upon the inscrutable shifts of Soviet policy or the momentary shifts in the climate of international affairs. There still exists the danger under NDEA that some programs are obliged to balance on a seesaw of grant and detente; in other words, good news is bad news and vice versa.

We have a habit in this country of throwing money at problems. This leads to a sort of “greening of America” with a difference. What I mean is that federal assistance and private funding increased FL enrollments for a time, but all the while SAT scores were declining. This is a point we would do well to remember as we enter what may be a new era of federal funding for foreign language and area studies. One unexpected result of the Helsinki Accords has been to bring the importance of international studies to the attention of President Carter. Each signatory commits itself to “encourage the study of foreign languages and civilizations as an important means of expanding communication among peoples— for the strengthening of international cooperation.” Having signed the Final Act of the Conference on Security and Cooperation in Europe, the United States finds itself in a rather embarrassing position since it needs to do a great deal more than it is currently doing to “encourage the study of foreign languages and civilizations.” In response chiefly to the actions of Representative Paul Simon of Illinois, the President has ordered the creation of a Presidential Commission on Foreign Languages and International Studies, which should submit its report during 1978. One encouraging difference between this renewed federal interest in foreign languages and that prompted by sputnik twenty years ago is tone. For example, it was significant that the former National Defense Foreign Language (NDFL) fellowships have been retitled Foreign Language and Area Studies (FLAS) fellowships. In other words, “defense” is being removed from the title, and from the motivation behind offering the awards. It would seem that we feel less threatened militarily and have a more healthy understanding of the importance of foreign languages for our national well-being, even in a world at peace.

Whatever the recommendations of the Presidential Commission, it is already clear that foreign language instruction has the support of the recently installed U.S. Commissioner of Education, Ernest L. Boyer. Dr. Boyer, until last year a chancellor in the State University of New York system, has a strong professional background in international studies and a thorough understanding of their importance in the American educational system. His public comments on the problems and objectives of education at all levels have been most encouraging, particularly his speech at the annual meeting of the American Association of State Colleges and Universities last December. He was reported in the Chronicle of Higher Education to have stated his intention to “revitalize [federal] support of foreign-language and area-studies programs” and to give “a new priority” to internationalizing American education. We should welcome this increased awareness at the upper levels of the federal government of what has come to be called “global perspectives.” Let us take advantage of the new favorable climate of opinion and the possible increase in federal funding to get “back to basics.” Foreign language instruction and international studies need to be strengthened at all levels, not simply at the college and university levels. We must devote increased attention to the elementary and secondary schools in order to effect a genuine change and improvement in the present situation. A paper presented at ADFL Seminar West, 27–30 June 1977, in San Antonio, Texas. The author is Professor of Russian and Director of the Center for Russian and East European Studies at the University of Virginia.

The paper discusses memory training in interpreting. According Gile's Effort Model (a Processing Capacity Account), short-term memory is an essential part in the process of interpreting. This paper analyzes the major characteristics of Short- term Memory (STM) and their implications for interpreters' memory training. The author believes that interpreting is an STM-centered activity, which includes encoding of information from the Source Language, storing of information, retrieval of information, and decoding of information into the target language. The training of STM skills is the first step in training a professional interpreter. Tactics for memory training for interpreters like retelling, categorization, generalization, comparison, shadowing exercises, mnemonics, etc. are presented in this paper. Interpreting is defined as "oral translation of a written text". Mahmoodzadeh gives a more detailed definition of interpreting: Interpreting consists of presenting in the target language, the exact meaning of what is uttered in the source language either simultaneously or consecutively, preserving the tone of the speaker. Whether novice or experienced, all interpreters find this profession demanding and challenging. Phelan says that "when an interpreter is working, he or she cannot afford to have a bad day. One bad interpreter can ruin a conference" . In discussing the qualifications required for an interpreter, Phelan mentions that: "The interpreter needs a good short-term memory to retain what he or she has just heard and a good long-term memory to put the information into context. Ability to concentrate is a factor as is the ability to analyze and process what is heard".

Mahmoodzadeh also emphasizes that a skillful interpreter is expected to "have a powerful memory. Daniel Gile emphasizes the difficulties and efforts involved in interpreting tasks and strategies needed to overcome them, observing that many failures occur in the absence of any visible difficulty. He then proposes his Effort Models for interpreting. He says that " The Effort Models are designed to help them [interpreters] understand these difficulties [of interpreting] and select appropriate strategies and tactics. They are based on the concept of Processing Capacity and on the fact that some mental operations in interpreting require much Processing Capacity." According to Gile, Consecutive Interpreting consists of two phases: a listening and reformulation phrase and a reconstruction phase: Phase One: I=L+M+N I=Interpreting, L=listening and analyzing the source language speech, M=short-term memory required between the time information is heard and the time it is written down in the notes, and N=note-taking. Phase Two: I= Rem+Read+P In this Phase Two of Consecutive Interpreting, interpreters retrieve messages from their short-term memory and reconstruct the speech (Rem), read the notes (N), and produce the Target Language Speech (P). Gile's Effort Model for Simultaneous Interpreting is: SI=L+M+P SI=Simultaneous Interpreting.

L=Listening and Analysis , which includes "all the mental operations between perception of a discourse by auditory mechanisms and the moment at which the interpreter either assigns, or decides not to assign, a meaning (or several potential meanings) to the segment which he has heard." M=Short-term Memory, which includes "all the mental operations related to storage in memory of heard segments of discourse until either their restitution in the target language, their loss if they vanish from memory, or a decision by the interpreter not to interpret them." P=Production, which includes "all the mental operations between the moment at which the interpreter decides to convey a datum or an idea and the moment at which he articulates (overtly produces) the form he has prepared to articulate" (1995a:93). Gile emphasizes that the memory effort is assumed to stem form the need to store the words of a proposition until the hearer receives the end of that proposition. The storage of information is claimed to be particularly demanding in SI, since both the volume of information and the pace of storage and retrieval are imposed by the speaker (1995a:97-98). In both models, Gile emphasizes the significance of Short-term Memory. It is actually one of the specific skills which should be imparted to trainees in the first stage of training. Among all the skills and techniques which are required for a good interpreter, memory skill is the first one which should be introduced to trainee interpreters. III. Conclusion As we tried to prove within our qualification work the problems of good translation and constant training of short-term memory and listening are one of the most difficult and problematic for those who want to make perfect in learning any foreign language. So our qualification work set its task to find out the most appropriate and easy-to-understand ways for improving the mentioned tasks.

Why we named these problems difficult and decided to study it? As we know, there are two kinds of human memory: long- and short-termed. The day-by- day kind of it is a short-termed one. We often forget almost immediately, what has just been said. As a result, we waste a lot of time on looking through the requirable information in the dictionaries. It is especially harmful when we have to use the simultaneous translation. Short-Term Memory is also an essential part of interpreting, but memory training has long been ignored by professional trainers. From the above analysis, we can conclude that memory skills in interpreting could be acquired by effectively designed exercises. With a well-'trained' short-term memory, interpreters are actually equipped with an effective tool for the encoding and decoding information. It is, therefore, advised that institutions of interpreter training include "memory training" in the design of their courses. The second part of the problem is that we cannot listen effectively. The problem caused as a result of it is that we are not able to transmit the received information to the other speakers. As a result, the students of foreign languages possess a bad capacity to retell the textual information without mistakes or more or less adequately. That is why so important for the teachers of foreign languages to know the appropriate methodic of listening. Our qualification work might give such an opportunity for the teachers. We gave a number of methods which are suitable and approved by the collective of educators in the USA and Europe. As a supplementary part to our investigation we included the second chapter where we gave the synchronic light to the Russian influence onto the development of the English language. It helped us to understand some methods used in the theory of translation for translating borrowed words. Vice-versa, it helps us to understand the ways of translation of neologisms borrowed from English in the Russian language. The latter is especially actual for the reason of immediate and constant development of electronic informational technologies and prolonging internationalization of the English language.

One more problem we included into the second chapter is the analysis of teaching the skills of good translation, listening and memory training at schools. It seemed to us actual because of the reason that our qualification work is thought to be applied at schools and colleges previously. In this item we gave the examples of methods used by the American universities. On the whole, we dare to say that our qualification work will be useful for everyone who is interest in the theory of translation. Having analyzed the question studied we could get the following results: 1) The problem of right translation both from receipted and accepted languages can be solved by the applying of the formulae SI=L+M+P. 2) Good listening skills are achieved by means of training exercises. 3) Development of modern informational technologies forces us to pay much attention to studying the problem of listening and memory training in translation. In conclusion to our work we would like to say that our qualification work can be applied and used by the following: 1) The work can be useful for all the teachers of foreign languages when they teach their students to translate the written sources of information or when the latters are taught to speak and transmit the information in foreign languages. 2) All the students of foreign languages department would be able to use the work for better knowledge of English or when they have practical classes on foreign language. 3) Translators and interpreters might find a lot of useful information for the improvement of their professional activity. 4) The qualification work will be useful for everyone who wants to make perfect in learning foreign languages.

Bibliography: 1. Anderson, J.R., 1983. The Architecture of Cognition. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. Pp.46-57, 134,139, 212-226 2. Atkinson, R.L., and Stiffrin, R.M., 1968. Human memory: A proposed system and its control processes , in K.W. Spence and J.T. Spence (eds.), The psychology of learning and motivation . Vol.2. London: Academic Press. Pp. 19, 65, 78-79 3. Atkinson, R.L., et al., 1993. Introduction to psychology( 11th ed. (s:l): Ted Bucholz. Pp. 46-58 4. Baddeley, A.D., 1966. "The influence of acoustic and semantic similarity on long term memory for word sequences", in Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 18, pp.302-309. 5. Baddeley, AD., 1986. Working memory . Oxford: Oxford University Press pp.l7- 18, 332 6. Baddeley, A.D., 1990. Human memory: theory and practice . Hove: Erlbaum Associates pp.142-145 7. Baddeley, A.D., Thompson, N., and Buchanan, M., 1975. "Word Length and the Structure of Memory", in Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behaviour, I , pp.575-589. 8. Barnyard,P., and Graysong, A., 1996. Introducing Psychological Research . London: MacMillan Press. Pp.237-238 9. Conrad, R, 1964. "Acoustic Coriftisions in Immediate Memory", in British Journal of Psychology , pp.55, 75-84. 10. Brown, H. D., 2002. Principles of Language Learning and Teaching. 4 th ed. New York: Longman.

11. Duff, A., 1994. Translation: Resource Books for Teachers. Oxford: Oxford University Press. 12. Leonardi, V., 2009. Teaching Business English through Translation. Journal of Language & Translation [online], 10(1), p. 139–153, available at: http://www.unish.org/unish/DOWN/PDF/5_1_Leonardi_rev_and_finalD.pdf [Accessed13/01/2012]. 13. Leonardi, V., 2010. The Role of Pedagogical Translation in Second Language Acquisition — From Theory to Practice [online]. Bern: International Academic Publishes. 14. Leonardi, V., 2011. Pedagogical Translation as a Naturally Occurring Cognitive and Lingvistic Activity in Foreign Language Learning. Annali Online di Lettere Ferrara [online], vol. 1–2, p.17–28. 15. Mahmoud, A., 2006. Translation and Foreign Language Reading Comprehension: A Neglected Didactic Procedure. English Teaching Forum [online], 44(4), p.28–33. 16. Malmkjaer, K., 1998. Translation and Language Teaching. Manchester:

St Jerome. 17. McDonough, J., 2002. The Teacher as Language Learner: Worlds of Differences? ELT Journal [online], vol.56, no4, available at: http://biblioteca.uqroo.mx/hemeroteca/elt_journal/2002/octubre/560404. [Accessed 07/01/2012]. http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/elt/56.4.404 18. Nolasco, R., Arthur, L., 1995. Large Classes. Hemel Hempstead: Phoenix ELT. 19. Petrocchi, V., 2006. Translation as an Aid in Teaching English as a Second Language. Online Translation Journal [online], 10(4), available at: http://www. translation directory.com/article1199.htm [Accessed 15/01/2012]. 20. Perkins, C., 1985. Sensitizing Advanced Learners to Problems of L1-L2 Translation. In Titford, C. & Hieke, A. E. (eds.), Translation in Foreign Language Teaching and Testing. Tubingen: Narr, pp.51–72. 21. Ross, N. J., 2000. Interference and Intervention: Using Translation in the EFL Classroom. Modern English Teacher, No 9(3). pp.61–66. 22. Schaffner, C., 1998. Qualification for Professional Translators. Translation in Language Teaching Versus Teaching Translation. Manchester. St. Jerome publishing. 23. Crowder, R.G., 1982. "The demise of short-term memory", in Acta Psychologica, 50 , pp. 291-323. 24. Dollerup, G & Lindegaard, A, 1992, Teaching Translation and Interpreting 2: Insights, Aims, Visions, Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins p.442 25. Dollerup, G & Lindegaard, A, 1992, Teaching Translation and Interpreting : Training,Talent and Experience, Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins p.81 26. Gile, D, 1995b, Basic Concepts and Models for Interpreter and Translator Training, Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins.p.59 27. Gile, D, 1992, Basic Theoretical Components in Interpreter and Translator Training, in Dollerup, C and Loddegaard, A (eds), pp.185-194 28. Keppelk, G., and Underwood, B., 1962. "Proactive Inhibition in Short-term Retention of Single Items", in J ournal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behaviour, pp. 153-161.

29. Kurz, I, 1992, "'Shadowing' Exercises In Interpreter Training", in Dollerup,C and Loddegaard,A (eds), pp.245-250 30. Lambert, S & Moser-Mercer,B, 1994, Bridging the Gap: Empirical Research on Simultaneous Interpreting , Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins pp.511-512 31. Lambert, S, 1988, "A Human Infromation Processing and Cognitive Approach to the Training of Simultaneuos Interpreters", in Hammond, D(ed). Languages at Crossroads, Proceedings of the 29 th Annual Conference of the American Translators Association. Medford, New Jersey: Learned Infromation Inc. pp.379- 388 32. Mahmoodzadeh, K, 1992, "Consecutive Interpreting: its principles and techniques", in Dollerup,C and Loddegaard,A (eds), pp.231-236 33. Miller,G., 1956. "The Magic Number Seven, Plus or Minus Two: Some Limits of our Capacity for Processing Information", in Psychological Review, 63, pp.81-97. 34. Monsell, S., 1979. "Recency, Immediate Recognition Memory, and Reaction Time", in Cognitive Psychology, 10 , pp.465-501. 35. Peterson, R.L., and Peterson, M.J., 1959. "Short term retention of individual items", in Journal of Experimental Psychology, 58 , pp. 193 - 198. 36. Posner, M.I., and Keele, S.W., 1967. "Decay of Visual Information From a Single Letter", in. Science, 158 , pp. 137-139. 37. Radforsd, J., and Govier, E., eds., 1991. A textbook of psychology. London:Routledge. P.67 38. Schulman, A., 1974. "Memory for Words Recently Classified", in Memory and Cognition, 2 , pp. 47-52. 39. Setton, R, 1999, Simultaneous Interpretation: A Cognitive-Pragmatic Analysis, Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins pp.84-87 40. Shuttleworth, M & Cowie.M, Dictionary of Translation Studies , Manchester: St Jerome pp.56-58

41. Sternberg, S., 1966. "Highspeed Scanning in Human Memory", in Science, 153 , pp. 652-654. 42. Tulving, E., 1968. "Theoretical Issues in Free Recall", in T. Dixon and D. Horton (eds), Verbal Behaviour and General Behaviour Theory . Englewood Cliffs, N.J.: Prentice-Hall pp.276-279 43.Waughw, N.,and Norman, D.,1965. "Primary Memory", in Psychological Review , 72 , pp.89-104. 44. Zhong, W, 2001, "Interpreting Training: Models and Contents and Methodology", in China Translators' Journal , Vol.19, pp.34-40 45. World Book Encyclopedia Vol. 21 N.Y. 1993 pp.473-47533. Internet: http://www.accurapid.com/journal/index.html Zhong, W, 2001, "Simultaneous Interpreting: Principles and Training", in China Translators' Journal , Vol.22, pp.39-43 46. Internet:http://www2.ntu.ac.uk/bscpsych/memory/goofhead.htm Goodhead, Jared, Difference Between STM and LTM , , 1999 47. Internet: http://www.demon.co.uk/mindtool/memintro.html Manktelow,J Introduction to Memory Techniques , 2003

O'xshashlar

The influence of society to the vocabulary system of the language

The role of a teacher in task-based language teaching

Implementing effective techniques for developing efl learners’ listening skills

The relations of language units

Designing vocabulary tasks for beginners of English as a second language