(Re)Defining translation in EFL classrooms: Comments on Sakurai (2015)

Abstract

Nobuko Sakurai (2015) presents insightful research results that help us better understand the impact of translation as it limits reading quantity, reading comprehension, and reading rate in an extensive reading (ER) program. Overall, the results of the study encourage educators to restrict translation as a means of obtaining better results when using ER. However, there are two controversial issues raised in this study that are redefining how students should be taught to read in English: (a) the influence of the ever-growing discourse of grammar-translation as an outdated and ineffective method and (b) the role of the first language (L1) in the English-as-a-foreign-language (EFL) classroom. These views are explained by the context of Sakurai's research, where policy is the driving force that is redefining EFL practices in schools throughout Japan, moving toward communicative instruction. To an even greater extent, the study reinforces the notion that the grammar-translation method is ineffective, and consequently, it portrays the debilitating effect of referencing the L1 in the learning process. Nevertheless, what we should not lose sight of is that not all forms of translation imply the practice of the grammar-translation method. Furthermore, use of the L1 can enhance the learning of the target language. Translation or skills-based learning have been found to be as effective as ER, where both have the potential to produce positive results in the incidental learning of English (Lee, Schallert, & Kim, 2015; Robb & Susser, 1989). Sakurai's literature review highlights the various limitations of translation that hinder reading, but it fails to acknowledge the benefits of translation. Rather than envisioning translation as a detrimental activity, one should acknowledge that it is an innate process, a natural tendency among language learners as they begin to negotiate meaning. While restricting translation can help students improve their reading skills at a macro level, focusing on the text as a whole; it does little to reinforce reading skills at the micro level. One could say that is the purpose of ER overall, focusing on the big picture while hoping to catch minute nuances in the process. As a result, one can only invite researchers and educators alike to ponder on the following statement: Does the restriction and ultimate elimination of translation from ER jeopardize other activities that are conducive to language learning and the refinement of reading skills? With the ER method described by Sakurai, a student is expected to comprehend the reading through context, focusing more on the greater picture instead of the details and subsequently, as the amounts of reading increase, comprehension will improve in the long term. Indeed, ER research has come to show that the more students read and engage with vocabulary, the less need students have for dictionaries and translation as they guess meaning from context (Alzu'bi, 2014; Brown, 2000; Koch, 2009). Nevertheless, what is sacrificed through the restriction of translation