THEORETICAL CONSIDERATIONS FOR DEVELOPING INTERCULTURAL SENSITIVITY THROUGH TRANSLATION ACTIVITIES: BEYOND THE MONOLINGUAL PREMISE IN FOREIGN LANGUAGE EDUCATION

• Authors: Lankiewcz Hadrian , Wąsikiewicz-Firlej Emilia
• Conference: Interculturality as an area of scientific cognition in glottodidactics
• Languages of publication: EN

Abstracts

EN

The article presents theoretical considerations pertaining to the use of translation in foreign language teaching and argues for the reinstatement of translation activities in language teaching to contribute to the development of intercultural sensitivity among language users. The authors build upon critical-ecological reflections in language education. They posit that a globalized world requires a departure from the monolingual language teaching paradigm, particularly in multicultural and multilingual contexts such as, for example, a united Europe. The argument touches upon the issues of neoliberal skills training, intercultural education, language pedagogy (glottodidactics), language acquisition and translation theories as well as observations of the practicalities imposed on L2 users by the postmodern reality and market forces. The authors present the incorporation of translation practices into foreign language teaching as a means of enhancing intercultural sensitivity and a way of fighting linguistic and cultural colonization. The ultimate goal – the new “paradigm shift” (Butzkamm and Caldwell, 2009) – is to contribute to social justice via foreign language education.

Keywords

EN

translation; foreign language education; language skills; intercultural sensitivity

PL

tłumaczenie; nauczanie języka obcego; sprawności językowe; wrażliwość interkulturowa

• Publisher: Polskie Towarzystwo Neofilologiczne
• Journal: Neofilolog
• Year: 2019
• Issue: 52/2
• Pages: 313-333

Dates

published

2019-06-30

Contributors

author

Lankiewcz Hadrian

• University of Gdańsk

author

Wąsikiewicz-Firlej Emilia

• Adam Mickiewicz University, Poznań

References

• Allport, G. 1986. “The language of prejudice” (w) Language awareness (red. P. Escholz i in.). New York: St. Martin’s Press: 261–270.
• Anderson, M. 1992. Intelligence and Development: A Cognitive Theory. Ox-ford: Blackwell.
• Andrews, S.J. 2008. “Teacher Language awareness” (w) Encyclopedia of Lan-guage and Education, 2nd Edition, volume 6: Knowledge about Lan-guage. Springer Science+Business Media LLC: 287-298.
• Athanasopoulos, P. 2001. L2 acquisition and bilingual conceptual structure. MA thesis, University of Essex.
• Bassnett, S. 1998. “Preface” (w) Constructing cultures: Essays on literary translation. (red. S. Bassnett i A. Lefevere. Clevedon: Multilingual Matters: vii- xxii.
• Bassnett, S. i Lefevere, A (red.). 1990. Translation, history and culture. London: Pinter
• Bassnett, S. i Lefevere, A. 1998. Constructing cultures: Essays on literary translation. Clevedon: Multilingual Matters.
• Bennett, M.J. 1998. “Intercultural communication: a current perspective” (w) Basic Concepts of Intercultural Communication: Selected readings (red. M. J. Bennett), Yarmouth, ME: Intercultural Press Inc.: 1–34.
• Block, D. 2003. The social turn in second language acquisition. Washington, D.C.: Georgetown University Press.
• Brooks-Lewis, K. A. 2009. “Adult learners’ perceptions of the incorporation of their L1 in foreign language teaching and learning”. Applied Linguistics, 30: 216-235.
• Butzkamm, W i Caldwell, J. 2009. The bilingual reform: A paradigm shift in foreign language teaching. Tübingen: Narr Studienbücher.
• Byram, M. 1989. “Intercultural education and foreign language teaching”. World Studies Journal 7(2): 4–7.
• Byram, M. 2012. “Language awareness and (critical) cultural awareness – relationships, comparisons and contrasts”. Language Awareness, 21(1-2): 5-13.
• Canagarajah, A. S. 1999. Resisting linguistic imperialism in English teaching. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
• Canagarajah, S. 2007. “The ecology of global English”. International Multilin-gual Research Journal 1(2): 89–100.
• Canagarajah, S. 2013. Translingual Practice. Global Englishes and cosmopolitan relations. New York: Routledge.
• Cook, G. 2010. Translation in language teaching: An Argument for Reassessment. Oxford, Oxford University Press.
• Cook, G. 2017. “Translation and language teaching” (w) The Routledge en-cyclopedia of language teaching and learning (red. M. Byram i A. Hu).New York: Routledge, 737-740.
• Cook, V. J. 1999. Going beyond the native speaker in language teaching. TESOL Quarterly 33, 2: 185-209.
• Cook, V.J. 1991. “The poverty-of-the-stimulus argument and multi-competence”. Second Language Research, 7, 2: 103-117.
• Cook, V.J. 2002. “Background to the L2 user” (w) Portraits of the L2 user (red. V.J. Cook). Clevedon: Multilingual Matters Ltd.: 1-28.
• Cook, V.J. 2005. “Basing teaching on the L2 user” (w) Non-Native Language Teachers Perceptions, Challenges and Contributions to the Profession (red. E. Llurda). New York: Springer: 47-62.
• Damen, L. 1987. Culture Learning: The fifth dimension in the language class-room. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley Publishing Company.
• Dewaele, J.-M. 2016. “Multi-competence and emotion”. The Cambridge Handbook of Linguistic Multi-competence (red.) V. J. Cook and Li Wei, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press: 461-477.
• Fairclough, N (red.). 1992. Critical language awareness. London and New York: Longman.
• Fairclough, N. 1992. “The appropriacy of appropriateness” (w) Critical lan-guage awareness (red. N. Fairclough). London and New York: Longman.
• Firth, A. i Wagner, J. 1997. “On discourse, communication, and (some) fun-damental concepts in SLA”. Modern Language Journal 81 (3): 285–300.
• Fodor, J. A. 1983. The Modularity of Mind. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press.
• Gile, D. 1995. Basic concepts and models for interpreter and translator train-ing. Amsterdam and Philadelphia: John Benjamins.
• Gozdawa-Gołębiowski, R. 2003. Interlanguage formation: A study of the triggering mechanisms. Warszawa: Instytut Anglistyki Uniwersytetu Warszawskiego.
• Grosjean, F. 1985. “The bilingual as a competent by specific speaker-hearer.” Journal of Multilingual and Multicultural Development 6: 467–477.
• Hall, E. T. 1959/1990. The silent language, New York: Doubleday
• Hermans, H.J.M. 2001. “The Dialogical Self: Toward a Theory of Personal and Cultural Positioning”. Culture & Psychology 7(3): 243–281.
• Holmes, James S. 1972/1988. “The Name and Nature of Translation Studies. In Holmes, Translated! Papers on Literary Translation and Translation Studies”. Amsterdam: Rodopi: 67–80.
• Howatt, A.P.R. 1984. A history of English language teaching. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
• Jameson, F. 1991. Postmodernism, or the cultural logic of late capitalism. New York i London: Verso.
• Johnson, K. 2008. An introduction to foreign language learning and teaching [second edition]. Harlow, England: Pearson.
• Karpińska-Musiał, B. 2015. Międzykulturowość w glottotydaktyce. Gdańsk: Wydawnictwo Uniwersytetu Gdańskiego.
• Katan, D. 2009. “Translation as intercultural communication” (w) The Rout-ledge companion to translation studies (red. J. Munday). London i New York: Routledge: 74-92.
• Klaudy, K. 2003. Languages in Translation. Budapest: Scholastica.
• Kramsch, C. 1993. Context and Culture in Language Teaching. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
• Kramsch, C. 2012. “Authenticity and Legitimacy in Multilingual Second Lan-guage Acquisition (SLA). International Symposium across the disciplines. Multilingual 2.0.” University of Arizona. April 12-15. Online: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VHxxpdc2PoE. [DW 28.01.2019].
• Kramsch, C. 2002. Language acquisition and language socialization: Ecological perspectives. London i New York: Continuum.
• Krashen, S.D and Terrell, T.D. 1995. The natural approach, Language acquisi-tion in the classroom. London and New York: Prentice Hall McMillan.
• Kwieciński. P. 2001. Disturbing Strangeness, Toruń, Poland: Wydawnictwo Edy-tor.
• Lankiewicz, H. 2015. Teacher language awareness in the ecological perspec-tive: A collaborative inquiry based on languaging. Gdańsk: Wydaw-nictwo Uniwersytetu Gdańskiego.
• Lankiewicz, H. 2018. “Is there a place for “sowing” in second language (L2) education at the university level? Neoliberal tenets under scrutiny” (w) Challenges of second and foreign language education in a globalized world. Studies in honor of Krystyna Droździał-Szelest (red. M. Pawlak i A. Mystkowska-Wiertelak). Cham: Springer: 197-213.
• Lankiewicz, H., Wąsikiewicz-Firlej E. i Szczepaniak-Kozak, A. 2016 “Insights into language teacher awareness with reference to the concept of self-marginalization and empowerment in the use of a foreign language”. Porta Linguarum 25: 147-161.
• Lantolf, J.P (red.). 2000. Sociocultural theory and second language learning. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
• Lengyel, Z. i Navracsics, J. 1996. “The Ontogenesis of Translation” (w) Translation Studies in Hungary (red. K. Klaudy, J. Lambert i A. Sohár). Budapest: Scholastica: 60-68.
• Littlewood, W. i Yu, B. 2011. “First language and target language in the foreign languageclassroom”. Language Teaching, 44: 64-77.
• Malakoff, M., i Hakuta, K. 1991. “Translation skill and metalinguistic aware-ness in bilinguals” (w) Language processing in bilingual children (red. E. Bialystok). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press: 141-165.
• Malmkjær, K. (ed.) 1998. Translation and Language Teaching: Language Teaching and Translation. Manchester: St. Jerome Publishing.
• Mazak, C.M. i Carroll, K.S. 2017. Translanguaging in higher education. Beyond monolingual ideologies. Bristol: Multilingual Matters.
• Munday, J. 2001/2016. Introducing translation studies. Theories and applica-tions [fourth edition]. London i New York: Routledge.
• Murahata, G. 2010. “Multi-cognition in L2 users: more evidence from an object categorization task by Japanese elementary school children”. Research Reports of Kochi University 59: 131-146.
• Murahata, G. i Murahata, Y. 2007. “Does L2 learning influence cognition? Evidence from categorical and thematic organization of objects”. Re-search Reports of the Department of International Studies 8: 17-27.
• Nakagawa, A. 2017. “Review of multicompetence”. Journal of Liberal Arts and Sciences at Tokyo City University 10: 185-194.
• Newmark, P. 1981. Approaches to Translation, Oxford and New York: Pergamon.
• Nida, E. A. 1964. Toward a Science of Translating. Leiden: E. J. Brill.
• Ong, W. 1982. Orality and Literacy, the Technologizing of the Word. London and New York: Methuen.
• Panou, D. 2013. “Equivalence in Translation Theories: A Critical Evaluation”. Theory and Practice in Language Studies, Vol. 3/1: 1-6.
• Pavlenko, A. 2005. Emotion and multilingualism. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
• Pym, A. 2013. “Research skills in translation studies: What we need training in”. Across Languages and Cultures, 14(1): 1-14.
• Richards, J.C i Rodgers, T.S. 2001. Approaches and methods in language teaching [second edition]. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
• Savignon, S. 1983. Communicative Competence: Theory and Classroom Prac-tice. Reading, Mass.: Addison-Wesley.
• Schäffner, C. 2003. “Translation and intercultural communication: Similarities and differences”. Studies in Communication Sciences 3/2: 79-107.
• Sheen, R 1993. “An EGTM: What is it?”. The Language Teacher, 17(6): 13-16.
• Steiner, G. 1975. After Babel. London: Routledge.
• Szczepaniak-Kozak, A. i Lankiewicz. H. 2017. „Wybrane aspekty mowy niena-wiści w Polsce”, Lingwistyka Stosowana 21: 135-147.
• Thomas, S. 1998. “Translation as intercultural conflict” (w) Languages at work (red. S. Hunstion). Clevedon: Multulingual Matters, 98-109.
• Todeva, E. and Cenoz J. (2009). “Multilingualism: Emic and etic perspectives” (w) The multiple realities of multilingualism: Personal narratives and researchers’ perspectives (red.E. Todeva i J. Cenoz). The Hague: Mouton de Gruyter, 1-32.
• Tymoczko, M. i Gentzler, E. 2002. Translation and Power. Amherst/Boston: University of Massachusetts Press.
• van Lier, L. 2004. The ecology and semiotics of language learning: a sociocul-tural perspective. Boston: Kluwer Academic Publishers.
• Venuti, L. 1995. The translator’s invisibility. London: Routledge.
• Vermes, A. 2010. “Translation in foreign language teaching: A brief overview of pros and cons”. Eger, Journal of English Studies, 10: 83-93.
• Wach, A. 2017. “Odniesienia do języka ojczystego jako strategia uczenia się gramatyki języka obcego: perspektywa polskich uczniów języka angiel-skiego”. Neofilolog 48/1: 73-88.
• Widła, H. 2016. “Zmierzch bilingwizmu i jego skutki”. Neofilolog 47/1:9-19.
• Wierzbicka, A. 1996. “Japanese cultural scripts: cultural psychology and ‘cul-tural grammar’”. Ethos, 24(3): 527–55.
• Wilczyńska, W. (red.). (2002). “Podmiotowość i autonomia jako wyznaczniki osobistej kompetencji komunikacyjnej.” (w) Autonomizacja w dydaktyce języków obcych. Doskonalenie w komunikacji ustnej (red. W. Wil-czynska). Poznań: Wydawnictwo Naukowe UAM: 51-68.
• Witte, H. 2000. Die Kulturkompetenz des Translators. Begriffliche Grundlegung und Didaktisierung, Tübingen: Stauffenburg.

Identifiers

DOI

n.2019.52.2.8