The Use of Arabic Translation in the EnglishLanguage Classroom in Sudanese Universities

ByDr. AbdulMahmoud Idrees Ibrahim

1. INTRODUCTIONLanguage is one of the wonderful gifts given by

Allah to humanity. It is with the help of language that

man is able to communicate and solve a number of his

problems and has been able to make many achievements in

life. If there had been no language, it would have been

difficult for man to communicate his ideas to fellow

human beings.

However, it is not easy to learn a language. Every

language is a complex phenomenon, and one has to devote

a number of years to learn a language. Even though,

some are able to learn more than one language.

On the other hand, translation has played a major

role for hundred of years in teaching / learning

process before the invention of both learning theories

and linguistics theories. This teaching method was

called Grammar Translation Method, because translation

was used mainly for teaching grammar and vocabulary.

Nevertheless, such a view takes no account of

individual learning styles. Some learners would need to

be able to relate lexis and structures in the target

language to their equivalents in their mother tongue,

to discover similarities and differences. Simply, they

need the support of their mother tongue in order to

make sense of the way the target language operates.

 The communicative movement focuses on

communicative competence rather than linguistic

competence; there has been a recovery of interest in

traditional methods such as the Translation Method.

Many language teachers find it a valid activity for

language practice and improvement. They consider it as

a valuable teaching technique that they ought to adopt

and combine it with other more innovative ones in order

to help students to improve their language proficiency

to the utmost scope.

  Still, the debate whether to use the learners’

mother tongue or the foreign language only in the EFL

class has not been resolved yet.

1.2. Purpose and Scope of the study

  This study aims at investigating the role of

using the mother tongue in the EFL class.

  The study is restricted to teaching/learning

English as a foreign language to Sudanese learners

whose first language is Arabic. This study is limited

to the Sudanese learners of English; nevertheless, it

does not mean that its applications are restricted only

2

to this context. Teachers of English as a foreign

language in similar context can also make use of it as

well.

1.3. Statement of the Problem

The use translation in English language teaching/

learning as a foreign language is either completely

rejected or practised with hesitation and discomfort.

It was a source of learning and testing in the grammar-

translation method. On the other hand, methods such as

the direct or communicative, etc. seem to have rejected

the use of translation as a learning tool in foreign

language class. However, its role in foreign language

teaching has been open to a great deal of criticism, it

is gradually reestablishing itself as a useful and

legitimate didactic tool, (Ulrych, 1986, Murphy, 1987-

88, Duff, 1989, Rinvolucri, 1990 and Wolff, 1993).

Therefore this study will investigate the use of Arabic

translation in the process of teaching and learning

English as a foreign language as in the case of Sudan.

1.4. The Significance of the study

Despite the widely use and abuse of the mother

toque translation i.e., the use of Arabic in English

class for a long time, there has not been such a study

made to address the problem. Translation in teaching a

3

foreign language is considered either an accepted issue

or a controversial dogma of give and take.

This study is an attempt for both theoretical and

empirical managing for the topic of using Arabic

translation in EFL classes as a teaching technique.

1.5. Hypotheses

1. Foreign language teaching/ learning in a non-

supportive environment as in the case of

Sudan, involves the use of the mother tongue

translation activities in one form or another

by both the teacher and the learner; in other

words, it is not only necessary but also an

inevitable fact.

2. Translation is an effective and facilitative

means in English language teaching/ learning

as a foreign language.

3. The main problems of translation are

linguistic and cultural.

4. The level of the students, the teacher’s

experience, can affect the employment of

translation in ELT/ELL.

2. REVIEW OF RELATED STUDIESCole (1982) at the Institute of Foreign Language

Education, Kurume University, conducted a research on

‘The Use of L1 in Communicative English Classroom’. He

4

found that adult students in monolingual English

language classes could benefit from appropriate use of

L1 despite the fact that CLT methodology does not fully

recognize the value of L1 as a resource. L1 may be used

from introductory to upper-intermediate levels on a

decreasing scale. At lower levels, translating

individual words, explaining grammar use, and

facilitating complex instructions can save time and

anguish, especially for mature students.

Although fluent L1 speaking teachers are better

placed to teach English to monolingual classes at all

levels, non-fluent teachers are significantly poor,

especially at higher levels. Non-fluent L1 speaking

teachers are advised to build a broad list of useful L2

words, phrases, and texts that can be translated into

L1. Habitual concern of when and how to use L1;

teachers' skills will develop. (www.jalt-

publications /98)

Schweers, (1999) teaches English at the University

of Puerto Rico, Bayamon Campus carried out a research

in ‘Using L1 in the L2 Classroom’ in April - June 1999.

He found that a high percentage (88.7%) of the student

participants in his study felt that Spanish should be

used in their English classes. All of the teachers

reported using Spanish to some degree. Approximately

99% of the students responded that they like their

5

teachers to use only English in the classroom. Very

noticeable is the 86 percent of students who would like

Spanish used to explain difficult concepts. Only 22% of

teachers saw this as an appropriate practice. Students

also responded notably higher than teachers did on the

following uses for Spanish: to help students feel more

comfortable and confidant, to check comprehension, and

to define new vocabulary items. Neither students nor

teachers saw a use for the L1 in testing.

A notable percentage of students would like

Spanish to be used in the English class either between

10 or between 39% of the time. A sizeable number of

students like the use of Spanish because it helps them

when they feel lost. About 87% of the students feel

Spanish facilitates their learning of English between

"a little" and "a lot," and about 57% think it helps

from "fairly much" to "a lot."

These results showed that in a Puerto Rican

university, Spanish should be used in English classes

to some extent. Students feel there are clear cases

where Spanish will facilitate their comprehension of

what is happening in class. A majority also agrees that

the use of Spanish helps them to learn English.

Recently the data on a similar study in China is

reported by Tang, (2002:36) ‘Using L1 in the English

Classroom’, have been published. He remarks that ‘the

6

value of using the mother tongue is a neglected topic

in the TEFL methodology literature’ and ‘little

empirical research has been done to find out if it is

an effective teaching and learning tool’. Tang’s

subjects were 98 first-year university students and 18

teachers' respondents. The results on the use of L1

have many similarities to Schweer’s study

results, students and teachers responded positively

toward its use, although there were minor

inconsistencies pertaining to that tasks L1 should be

used for. However, the most important observation in

this study is ‘a supportive and facilitating role of

L1 in the English classroom’ used ‘only as a means of

improving foreign language proficiency’.

In conclusion, it can be said that Language

acquisition is a subconscious process that results in

the knowledge of language for the native speaker, while

language learning is a conscious process that results

only in knowing about the language or explicit learning

in the case of foreign language learners as in the

Sudanese case. In the meantime, translation is a

conscious process of learning as the learning process

for nonnative speakers; therefore, translation

facilitates the learning process and gives the learners

access to English literature and expands their minds.

7

3. METHODOLOGY3.1. Subjects

The sample investigated was selected from four groups

of students who were studying English as major subject

during the academic year 2004 / 2005.

The sample for the study was drawn from students

learning English at:

Group 1: Azhari University undergraduates studying

English as a major subject with another minor subject,

at the Faculty of Education.

Group 2: Nilain University undergraduates studying

English as a major subject at the Faculty of Arts.

Group 3: Islamic University undergraduates studying

English as a major subject with another minor subject,

at the Faculty of Education and

Group 4: Sudan University for Science and Technology,

Department of Languages studying English as a major

subject at the education section.

The sample of students who were investigated was

selected from the four levels at the four universities

(groups).

This study was motivated by low achievement levels

attained by university graduators and the

undergraduates' frequent complains of the difficulty

which faces them in the process of learning English.

Thus, it was` decided to administer a questionnaire to

8

university students studying English as major subject,

to examine their opinions on the use of Arabic in

learning English.

For the same purpose, another questionnaire was

administered to 41 teachers of English as a foreign

language at university level, to find out their points

of view in using Arabic to teach EFL students.

3.2. Instrument

The questionnaire was adopted as a tool for

collecting data for the purpose of the main study. Two

separate questionnaires were designed; one for the

teachers and another one for the students. The items of

both questionnaires were based on the theoretical

discussion of the literature reviewed in (chapters 2).

The items in each questionnaire were grouped in three

sections:

1. The first section (questions 1 - 10) in both

questionnaires is to elicit the’ needs for

translation.

2. The second section (questions 11 - 20) focuses on

the effectiveness of translation.

3. The third section (questions 21 - 30) investigates

the problems of the use of translation in ELT/ELL.

The items, which were listed in each category,

cover the most obvious aspects, which seem to the

9

researcher of close relevance to the current practice

of using Arabic in the field of teaching and learning

English as a foreign language.

4. DATA ANALYSIS, RESULTS, INTERPRETATION, AND DISCUSSION

The responses to the questionnaires of the 159

students and the 41 teachers were tabulated and

computed.

The need for translation statements, which

constitute section one of the questionnaire were, on

the whole, highly rated. The respondents agreed to the

needs for translation in all the statements of this

section except the statement number 9, which received

the lowest scores (M = 2.79), whereas the other

responses rated highly. Generally, this is what is

expected from the students to do. They usually use

Arabic translation when they study English.

As to statement 14 and 16, which is related to

bilingual dictionaries, the students responded

positively. Actually, to use a monolingual dictionary

effectively, learners need to have an effective

receptive vocabulary of 2000 words. Most learners of

English as a foreign language do not achieve this until

they have been studying English from nine to ten years.

10

Therefore, to use a monolingual dictionary effectively,

learners need to have enough large vocabulary (at least

3000 words) and need to be able to interpret

definitions, which are much more difficult than L1

synonyms.

In conclusion, most learners feel secure in using

Arabic. They may be the type of learners that need to

relate concepts in English to equivalents in their L1.

This might be the most useful way of learning

vocabulary. They may also feel that having a mother

tongue equivalent is safer and sounder than a regular

process of working things out through

‘contextualization’.

So far, we have presented and analyzed the

students’ responses to questions 11 – 20, which

constitute section 2. This section was highly rated.

The responses confirm the effectiveness of translation

in English language learning. The responses confirmed

all the statements of this section except statement 20,

which was none significant, whereas the other responses

were statistically significance. It appears from the

results that the students, almost agreed to the

effectiveness of translation in the learning/teaching

English process.

11

Summing up, most learners feel secure in using

Arabic. They seem to be of the type of learners that

need to relate concepts in English to equivalents in

their L1.

The data which have been presented thus far

indicate that the responses about the 10th statements

of section 3 (the problems of translation) confirm the

use of translation. The respondents agreed to

statements number 22, 23, 25 and 28.

On the other hand, the statements that were

disagreed to statements 21 and 27. These results showed

that in English classes, Arabic should be used a

teaching tool to avoid boredom.

This indicates that, some learners feel secure

when they use the mother English concepts to Arabic

equivalents. The students of this type feel that Arabic

facilitates their understanding. This may be their most

effective way of learning. TABLE 4.1

MEANS AND STANDARD DEVIATIONS FOR EACH SECTION OF THESTUDENTS’ QUESTIONNAIRE

Sections Mean

SD % DF Interpretation

The Need forTranslation

1 -10

3.83

1.09

76.6

158

Significant

12

The Effectivenessfor Translation

11 -20

3.86

1.03

77.2

158

Significant

The Problems ofTranslation

21 -30

3.18

1.22

63.3

158

Significant

Table 4.1 above summarizes the subjects’ responses toeach section of the questionnaire.

4.1. Total Percentages of the Students’ Responses

a. Total Percentages of section one (statements 1-10)

In relation to (the Need for Translation), 68 % of

the students confirmed the need for translation in ELT,

but 19.5% did not see the need for it, and 12.5% were

not sure whether it is needed or not.

b. Total Percentages of section two (the Problems of

Translation), 70.6% of the students think that

translation is an effective and facilitative means in

ELT, whereas 15.3% view it as a useless means in ELT. A

portion of 13.1% was uncertain about it.

c. Total Percentages of section three (statements 21-

30)

Regarding the third section, (the Effectiveness of

Translation) shows that 48.8% of the students admit

that the use of translation in their job is rather

problematic, while only 36.8% see there is no problem

13

in employing translation in ELT. Again, 14.2% did not

give a certain opinion about the matter.

The distributions of the percentages of the

students’ responses to all statement of the whole

questionnaire were as follows: Agreement 63.7%

uncertainty 12.3% and disagreement 24%.

4.2. Analysis of Variables (ANOVA) According to

University

When the students’ responses in the four universities

were compared to each group, the comparison revealed no

statistical significance between the mean scores of the

groups, except statement 23. It states that the

students have no opportunity for translation when they

are in authentic conditions.

TABLE 4.2

ANALYSIS OF VARIABLES (ANOVA) ACCORDING TO UNIVERSITYGROUPS

Statem

ent

Source of

variation

Sum of

squares

DF Mean

square

F si

g

23

Between

groups

Within groups

8.966

151.008

159.975

3

15

5

2.989

.974

3.0

68

.0

30

14

Total 15

8

It was found that Nilain University (Faculty of Arts)

received the highest mean scores compared to the other

groups (3.56). While Alza'em Alazhari University

(Faculty of Education) received 3.51, and Sudan

University for Science and Technology received 33.3

while the Islamic University (Faculty of Education)

obtained 2,95.

4.3. Statistical Analysis According to Level

Figure 4.1, below traces these significant

differences of the students’ responses in the thirteen

statements:

It was expected that students' level might affect the

students’ responses to the questionnaire. FIGURE 4.1

THE TOTAL MEANS FOR THE FOUR LEVELS IN THE FOUR UNIVERSITIES

15

The responses that attained the significant

differences between levels are the following:

When I am studying English, I often use Arabic translation.

First level students scored the highest mean score

in comparison with other levels. (M = 4.24) on the

other hand the second level and the third one scored

the identical mean-3.67, but the final students' level

scored 3.73.

This means that the first level students use

Arabic translation in studying English much more. This

confirms the hypothesis, which claims the level of the

students can affect the employment of translation in

ELT/ELL.

The total percentages of disagreement also

affirmed the point that the higher the students’ level,

the more was their disagreement.

16

The results of the undecided responses, however,

did not show this kind of order. Rather, they showed

fluctuating percentages that make it hard to give an

acceptable interpretation if an acceptable

interpretation can really be attained. In contrast to

teachers, the students were more in favor of the use of

translation and the mother tongue in ELL/EFL. TABLE 4.3

ANALYSIS OF VARIABLE (ANOVA) ACCORDING TO GENDERStatement 15

Sig.(2

tailed)

ZMann-Whitney U

Mean OfRank

Sum OfRanks

Gender

0.05-1.9642615.50086.717025.50Male73.035696.50Fema

le

When males and females’ responses were compared in

the four universities, it attained no statistical

significant differences between the mean scores of the

sexes, except on the statement number 15, which claimed

that if the one practised translation from and into

English, it might improve his English a great deal

better.

It was found that males scored higher than

females. Males had 54.5% whereas females scored 45.5%.

Even though, it is not a serious significance to give

indications regarding such situation.

17

4.4. Analysis of Teachers’ Questionnaire

Now, let us turn to analyze the teachers’

questionnaire.

a. Total Percentages of section one (1-10)

As to (the Need for Translation), 48 % of the

teachers agreed to the need for translation in ELT, but

35.2% disagreed, and 16.8% were not sure whether it is

needed or not.

b. Total Percentages of section two (11-20)

As for the second section, 'the Effectiveness of

Translation', 49% of the teachers consider that

translation is effective and facilitates English

language teaching, whereas 35.4% view it as a useless

means in ELT, but 15.6% of teachers were uncertain

about it.

c. Total Percentages of section three (21-30)

Regarding the third section, 55.3% of the teachers

admit that the use of translation in their job is

rather problematic, while only 20.6% see there is no

problem in employing translation in ELT. Again, 24.1%

did not give a decisive opinion about the matter.

TABLE 5.4

ANALYSIS OF VARIABLE (ANOVA) ACCORDING TOTEACHERS’ EXPERIENCE

18

Sig.(2 tailed)

ZMann-Whitney

U

MeanOf

Ranks

Sum OfRanks

Statement 5Experience

0.024

-2.265

125.50017.20387.50-5 Years25.39482.50+5 Years

Sig.(2tailed)

ZMann-Whitney

U

MeanOfRank

Sum OfRanks

Statement 24Experience

0.000

-3.616

75.50014.93328.50-5 Years28.03532.50+ 5 Years

When teachers’ responses were computationally

compared, it attained no statistically significant

differences between the mean scores of the teachers’

experience, except on the statement number 5 and 24.

Statement 5 rated the teachers’ use of translation

in their English classes. It was found that teachers

who have an experience more than five years scored

higher than those who have less than five did. Teachers

who have an experience more than five years rejected

the use of translation in their English classes, while

those who have less than five years experience did.

Males had 54.5% whereas females scored 45.5%. Even

though, it is not a serious significance to give

indications regarding such situation.

Statement 24 inquired the teacher about the use of

translation in the English classes whether it can help

19

improving reading and writing skills, but not listening

and speaking skills. It was found that teachers who

have an experience more than five years scored higher

than those who have less than five did. The teachers

who have an experience more than five years confirmed

the opinion of the role of translation in improving

reading and writing skills, while those who have less

than five years experience disconfirmed the idea.

5. Conclusion

In conclusion, it can be said that the ‘Need for

Translation’ in EFL/ELL was highly rated by the first

level students and the rating dropped successively in

the three other levels.

Consequently, the percentage of subjects who

disagreed was smaller in the first year and gradually

grew bigger along with the third and fourth year. The

undecided responses, however, showed unexplainable rise

and fall of the respondents’ uncertainty in the four

levels.

The results of the second section manifested, more

or less, the same rating, which was found in the first

section, i.e., the translation in EFL/ELL was supported

as an effective means by most of the respondent

students.

20

The percentages of the non-supportive answers,

again, were smaller for the students, but higher for

the teachers.

Both teachers and students agreed to the

statements of the third section “Problems of

Translation”. The undecided responses, however, showed

slight differences.

The majority of the respondent students were in

favor of the need for the use of translation in ELL,

its effectiveness and the problems surrounding its use.

A very large majority of the students agreed on:

The employment of translation in ELT/ELL is still

reasonable as a large majority of the respondent

students and a small majority of the teachers confirmed

the need for it and its effectiveness.

Translation is surrounded by many problems as

perceived by the teachers.

It was found that there is a relationship between

different faculties and different levels of the

students and the use of translation, i.e., the higher

the level of the students was, the lower they rated the

use of translation.

Discussing the findings in the light of the

hypothesis; the first hypothesis tested by this study

is that 'a foreign language teaching/ learning in a

non-supportive environment involves translation

21

activity in one form or another by both the teacher and

the learner'; in other words, it is not only necessary

but also an inevitable fact.

The second hypothesis was the use of Arabic

translation as an effective and facilitating means in

English language teaching/ learning as a foreign

language.

This hypothesis was highly accepted by the

learners who expressed their need for the use of their

mother tongue. Consequently, the effectiveness of

translation facilitating means in foreign language

teaching/ learning for both teachers and students was

rated high.

The third hypothesis tested problems of

translation regarding the absence of the linguistic and

cultural essentials, and untranslatability and the

differences of worldviews. Moreover, inadequate use of

translation, and overuse use of literal translation in

classroom practice, could be a problem and hindrance to

effective English language teaching/learning,

hypothesis 3 is upheld.

The fourth hypothesis was that the level of the

students and the teacher’s experience could affect the

employment of translation in English language

teaching /learning.

22

The statements of the questionnaire were highly

accepted by the first year students and gradually the

distribution decreased in the three other years as the

percentage of the agreement responses (see chart 5.4).

To sum up, that use of translation in foreign

language teaching/ learning can be affected by the

level of the students, and the teacher’s experience was

not statistically significant to be noticed. We can

claim that the findings were supporting hypothesis 4.

6. Pedagogical Implications

Translation may not be a suitable methodology when

used mechanically and exclusively in grammar rules,

vocabulary and foreign language expressions and the

reading of texts. Translation has a variety of roles to

play, therefore, it should, through the proper use, be

included in the discipline of English language

teaching/ learning not only as an aid to improve the

teaching learning process, but also to develop the

ability to translate.

Teachers need not hesitate to think positively of

the use of translation. Rather, they have to be more

practical and identify and give enough attention to the

proper use of translation in their job. In addition,

they should keep familiarizing and equipping themselves

with up-to-date materials concerned with the

23

development of employing translation in the teaching of

English.

Translation should not be used only as a means of

learning and internalizing English words mechanically,

but also as a means of improving skills of textual

analysis particularly of words and structures.

Based on the results of contrastive studies,

errors and inaccuracies, which may be committed by

students and/or teachers of English, should not be

neglected or overlooked. Instead, they should be taken

seriously. Translation, in this case, in addition to

being a necessary part of the L2 learning process,

becomes a tool to contrastive and error analysis. It

can help in identifying the reason(s) for those

inaccuracies and inability of the learner, as well as

the teacher to learn more efficiently by exploiting the

knowledge of his mother tongue.

Teaching English through English is stressed when

we can afford it and when it ensures effective

communication with most of our learners. At the same

time, there is nothing wrong in using the mother tongue

or involving the learners in translation activities

when it can make the study of English clearer and

easier to them as well as acting as a routine breaker.

There is an additional reason, which advises

caution as regards the use of L1. Learners have a

24

tendency to rely on their available language knowledge

(L1 and any other languages they can use) to understand

the logic and organization principles of the target

language. Naive use of L1 in the classroom

(particularly in terms of translation) will strengthen

this tendency. L1 use needs to be handled with care

because it has a powerful influence on the learning

process. 

BibliographyAtkinson, D. (1987). “The Mother Tongue in the Classroom”: A Neglected Resource?” ELT, Vol. 41/4: 241-247. Dagut, M. B. (1986). “The Fact of Translation in Learning English as a Foreign Language”. Papers and Studies in Contrastive Linguistics . 21: 197-207.

Dodson, C. J. (1972). Language Teaching and Bilingual Method. New York: Pitman Publishing.

Duff, A. (1990). Translation. Oxford: Oxford UniversityPress.Ellis, R. (1994). The Study of Second Language Acquisition. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

 Fries, C., C., (1945) Teaching and Learning English asa foreign language. Michigan: Michigan University Press.

25

Kramsch, C. 1993. Context and Culture in Language Teaching. Oxford University Press.

Larsen-F. D. (1986) Techniques and Principles in Language Teaching. London: Oxford University Press.

Murphy, B., (1987-88) “Teaching Translation andTeaching through Translation”, Modern English Teacher,15, 1-4: 12-15.

Rivolucri, M., (1990. “Translation as a Part of Learning a Language Practical English Teaching”, Many Glasgow Publications Magazine for Teachers of English as a Foreign Language, 26-27.

Schweers, C.William. (1999) ‘Using L1 in the L2 Classroom’. English Teaching Forum, 37/2: 6-9.

Tang, J., (2002. ‘Using L1 in the English Classroom’. English Teaching Forum, 40/1: 36-43.

Ulrytch, M., (1984) “Teaching Translation and Translation in Language Teaching”, Modern English Teacher, 12: 45-47.

Wolff, L., Bobb, (1993) “Helping Students Stay inEnglish”. English Teaching Forum, April: 41-43.

Websiteshttp://www.jalt-publications.org/tlt/files/98/dec/cole.htmlhttp://www.eslabout.comhttp://www.tpr-world.com/

26