A
=
=
IS=
SN: 2278-5=
264 (Online) 2321=
-=
93=
19 (Print)
=
=
Im=
pact Factor: 6.=
28 (=
I=
ndex Copernicus
International)
=
=
Volume=
-V, Issue-III,
January 2017, Page No. 23-33
Publish=
ed by Dept.
of Bengali, Karimganj College, Karimganj,
Assam, India<=
span
style=3D'font-family:"Cambria","serif";mso-fareast-font-family:"Times New R=
oman";
mso-bidi-font-family:Cambria;mso-bidi-language:BN-BD'>
Website: http://www.thecho.in
An Analysis on Student Translation Competen=
cy
as a Language Acquisition Evaluation
Azman Che Mat
Academy =
of
Language Study, UiTM Terengganu, Dungun Campus, Malaysia
Azarudin Awang
Academy =
of
Contemporary Islamic Study, UiTM Terengganu, Dungun Campus, Malaysia
Ahmad Zulfadhli Nokman
Academy =
of
Language Study, UiTM Terengganu, Dungun Campus, Malaysia
Nor Shaifura Musilehat
Academy =
of
Language Study, UiTM Terengganu, Kuala Terengganu Campus, Malaysia
Ahmad Fakrulazizi Abu Bakar
Academy =
of
Language Study, UiTM Terengganu, Kuala Terengganu Campus, Malaysia
Abstract
This
article investigates the translation as an Arabic language acquisition stra=
tegy
by students of Arabic as a foreign language. Based on the belief that the
translation may at certain degree help students learn a foreign language if used
correctly. The objective of this study was to examine Arabic learner’s
translation from Malay language as their mother tongue to Arabic language.
Secondly is to analyze common errors faced during translation process.
Mid-semester exam paper in December session 2013 was held in May contains
several parts including comprehension, grammar, vocabulary and translation.=
The
data of the study is Malay-Arabic translation part. The respondents
participated were 105 students, which mean the number of scripts is 105
scripts. The analysis focused on student’s vocabulary, grammatical structur=
e,
the effect of native language and the ability of students to write correctl=
y.
The study found that there are some advantages and disadvantages in the
translation made by a student to obtain a translation of the Arabic languag=
e in
the reality of communication context. Finally, there must have a translation
drilling hence, translation methods can be applied as well in the process of
teaching the Arabic language, especially for students who already have a fi=
rst
language competency.
Keywords: Transla=
tion,
strategy, communication, error, analysis.
Introduction:
Translation is n=
ot a
new activity in the relationship between culture, economy, politics and
education. According to an ancient note, translation activities have already
begun with a stone found in Egypt embodied in two different languages dated
3000 BC (Pogadaev 2005: 72). While aspects of its history, the great human
civilization at one time and now stained and reinforced by a translation
activities. In short, translation activities cannot be separated when two
different language backgrounds met. Hence the need for translation is perce=
ived
primarily to ensure a smooth relationship and mutual understanding.
At this moment, the translation is s=
till
important in communication at the international level. Various forms of
translation required for different purposes. Although sometimes the
remuneration of the translation efforts was being disputed, but translation
efforts are still developing by individuals and respected bodies or
organizations. This proves that the translation is an important approach in=
creating
relationships and strengthens understanding.
In
the practices of teaching and learning of foreign languages, the translation
method is also used in the classroom. According to Kamarudin (1993: 97) this
method involves a second language translation to native language or otherwi=
se.
Such translation may be done by verbatim or in sentence by sentence. The us=
e of
the translation was essential for teaching Greek and Latin in the 18th and =
19th
centuries AD (Adegoriola 2005: 331). Similarly to the case Arabic studies,
especially in traditional Islamic schools in Malaysia. Most religious teach=
ers
use translation methods to conduct their teaching. Apart from the lack of
natural resources in the Malay language, translation methods become so
important to convey the teaching because it is based on religious texts that
requires efficiency and high language skills to understand its content.
Translation
in Language’s Teaching and Learning: Translation method has the educational and scientific impact and
enjoyable cognitive exercise. For those who learn a foreign language, they
cannot avoid the translation practical that helped them to know the differe=
nce
between mother tongue and foreign language learning (Matar et al. 1981: =
Intro).
This implies that, translation is a common phenomenon that occurs when two
languages must meet for a particular purpose, especially the teaching and
learning of languages.
According to al-Khuli (1982), in the
translation method, the mother tongue is fully utilized with regard to the =
laws
of grammar and how to analyze it. This means, first language must first be
mastered by the learner in the process of teaching a second language to
students. Similarly, students must already have a background which they are
well versed in their first language. So the translation method for acquirin=
g a
new language can be applied.
Grammar and Translation methods used=
in
teaching Arabic as well known as the traditional method (al-Tariqa al-Qa=
dima).
Ahmad Kilani (2001: 30) has described this method having the following
characteristics:
=
1. This method emphasizes skills in reading,
writing and translation,
=
2. The use of the mother tongue as a medium of
teaching foreign languages,
=
3. A strong emphasis on grammar aspects as an
important way of teaching foreign languages,
=
4. Teachers used the example of certain verse=
s to
be used as specified by the students in terms of grammar.
While Azman (2012) suggested transla=
tion should be a part of knowledge for
teachers when they are teaching adult learners. However, there are many advantages and
disadvantages in using this method for teaching and learning languages.
Nevertheless, this method is very effective if it is used with regard to the
appropriate context as learning objectives, targets students and language f=
amily
variation.
Study carried out by Uzawa (1996) sh=
owed
that translation tasks may be useful for second language learning because of
the second language learners’ frequent attention to language use during
translating processes. However, if learning a language is intended to
understand scientific texts or literature, so the use of translation method
will be effective. These are because a lot of words or terms used in the so=
urce
language must be understood and homologized in the target language.
While the appropriate students those
recommended to use this method are adults or students who have already mast=
ered
their first language well. Translation method will be able to give an
explanation that can be described and understood through their first langua=
ge.
The advantage is that when students can compare the similarities or differe=
nces
in the source language and the target language. This notion also supported =
by
the finding by Laufer and Girsai (2008) when they found CAT (contrastive
analysis + translation) is helpful for student to acquire vocabulary of for=
eign
language.
If the languages are not similar to =
each
other’s, while the source language is foreign and difficult to be experienc=
ed
in real situations, the translation method is totally necessary. Such as Ar=
abic
(Semitic) to Malay (Austronesian) are two different language families and
backgrounds. Furthermore, to gain experience of the language in Malaysia is
very difficult compared with the English language. Therefore the translatio=
n method
is suitable for the purpose of teaching Arabic as a foreign language. Accor=
ding
to the study by Niño (2009) the use of MT (Machine Translation)[1]<=
![endif]>
and free online MT in foreign language learning was perceived as an innovat=
ive
and positive learning experience both by language tutors and language learn=
ers.
b. Translation Disadvantages <= o:p>
Even the translation method is suita=
ble
for use in language learning, but if the instructional objective is for
communication skills then this method is considered less effective. The main
factor is because the translation method requires time and does not help
students mastering the use of the language being taught. In addition, the
translation method will also slow down the process of acquisition of the st=
yle
and structure of the foreign language when a first language is tied frequen=
tly
in use.
If the target students were the chil=
dren,
then the translation method should not be suggested. The main reason is bec=
ause
the students of this group is still in the process of first language
acquisition with the sense they have yet to master any of the language well.
Therefore, it is better not to use the translation method, but using other
methods is more effective.
If the thought language came from th=
e same
family such as the Malay and Indonesian so there is no need to use translat=
ion
method. Instead the emphases on other aspects need to be considered as a
reference to the style and choice of words or terms used in both languages.
Similarly, such different language backgrounds but are often used widely in=
the
environment sphere. Teaching English, Mandarin and Tamil in Malaysia for
example are inappropriate to use full translation method for teaching and
learning.
Translation
Function in Language Acquisition: As frequently explained, the translation is the process of rewriti=
ng
(Levere, 1992) in a language to another language. During the translation
process, several important things in both languages must be given attention=
as
aspects of morphology, syntax, semantics and symbols (written language).
According to Norhaili and Ramiaida (2=
008:
284), while students perform translation activities, they are not aware that
they are conducting three important processes in learning, namely; analyze,
transfer and rebuild. In the analysis phase, the translator will analyze the
characteristics of morphology, syntax and semantics of the target language.=
At
this stage they learn and know the level of their ability in a second langu=
age.
Indirectly they can fix this by training more often. At this stage of the
removal and reconstruction of the target language sentence structure,
translator again can train their psychomotor skills. As Belam (2003) argued
that post-editing (of translation) can serve as a complement to language tu=
ition
for it makes the students focus on analyzing the source text, thus learning=
new
vocabulary, expressions, grammar points and stylistic aspects.
From the practical aspects in foreign
language classes for communication, quick translation may be used either as=
an
explanation or even in training. As mentioned by Newmark (1995: 283), native
language translations of foreign speech are useful to consolidate and test =
the
language taught or written. In this context it can also be concluded that t=
he
experience in the first language can be used to assist in the acquisition o=
f a
second language as it was called by Lado (1980: 53): “Because of all the
experience left an impression in storage memory, it may be assumed that all
knowledge of the past was a factor in learning a second language.” Base=
d on
this discussion, this study was carried out to achieve two main objectives,
firstly is to examine students of Arabic learner’s translation from Arabic
language to Malay language as their mother tongue and secondly is to analyze
common errors faced during translation process.
Methodology:
This study used
descriptive and inductive methods of analysis. By mid-semester exam paper in
first semester amounted to 105 scripts, researchers have made some analysis=
to
assess strategies and skills that students learn the Arabic language through
translation methods.
While the objective of teaching Arab=
ic at
UiTM intended for communication skills, but the translation method applied =
in
matters that require translation. This means that the translation method is=
not
a merely traditional method and not practical anymore. But it also helps Ar=
abic
students in enrich their understanding to master the Arabic language. This =
is
because the students can be considered as mature students who have mastered=
one
or two languages previously. This study has several limitations as follows:=
a. Respondent: Respondent’s selection was not based on the
entire population of students who took the Arabic language on this semester.
Instead it was the selection that has been determined by the assessment its=
elf
and also compliance with the objective of this study. These students were
taking Arabic at diploma level II only. This selection factors caused by the
respondents already have experience in Arabic at the first stage in the
previous semester.
b. Research Item: Mid-semester exam paper written on the
question of translation of Arabic to Malay which has 5 questions that must =
be
answered without option. However, in this study only one question is select=
ed
for analysis and discussion. (See appendix A).
c. Variable: The aim of this study focused on four main
elements to assess students’ ability to render the verse given in the Malay
language into Arabic, namely:
1. Vocabulary
performance
2. Grammatical
structure
3. First language
interference
4. The use of the
Arabic graphology
Therefore, based on these variables,
researcher has developed a conceptual framework for this study as shown bel=
ow:
Figure
1: Conceptual Framework
Findings
and Discussion: Before
discussing the findings, the researcher would like to exhibit the data
(questions) used for the test. There were 5 questions that used for the
purposes of Arabic Malay translation:
1.
His mother was a housewife=
2.
Fast Nabil oh! Taxi had arrived.
3.
Thanks for the help of the body (L).
4.
Bicycles were worth three hundred dollars.
5.
Fatimah was waiting for his friend (P) at the airport.
However, to meet the needs of this a=
rticle
by looking to the limitation, the researcher only described translation of =
the
first questions; [His mother was a housewife] and in accordance with the
appropriate answer to the Arabic translation is: والدته=
/ أمه ربة
البيت. The general findi=
ngs
have shown this result:
Table 1:
Findings of an Analysis
|
No |
Variable |
Frequency (Correct) |
Frequency (Error) |
|
1 |
Vocabulary performance |
92.4% |
7.6 |
|
2 |
Gr=
ammatical
structure |
66=
.67% |
33=
.33 |
|
3 |
First language interference |
100% |
- |
|
4 |
The
use of the Arabic graphology |
69=
.53% |
30=
.47 |
For further discussion, following paragrap=
hs
will reveal the detail of the findings:
a. Vocabulary: This
weakness is detected when students do not use the right words to translate =
the
words of original text. For such, word ر=
بة
البيت
replaced with بيت
الطلبة
b. Grammatical Structure: Despite
of having appropriate vocabulary, but the drawback correct sentence structu=
re
in accordance with the formula for Arabic grammar is a problem. Grammatical
meaning of the text in the context of this study is the choice of pronouns =
likeـه and ـ=
ها
as well as the other pronouns. It is fem=
inine
and masculine gender conformity.
In
addition, the disadvantages of using a marker alif and lām
identified as a weakness of grammatical sentences. Use markers alif =
and lām
on the meaning of the wordبيت=
; required for housewives, but there are
students who ignore it. Likewise, if the marker is not necessary, no one us=
es
such as الأمه should be grammatically .أمه=
Indeed,
it can be clearly identified that weakness in constructing grammatical
sentences is a major factor that contributed to the failure of students to
translate accurately. Number of students who have this drawback is of 33.33=
%.
This result as well supported previous studies that grammar structure is the
main problem faced by Arabic learners through the years. For instance, stud=
ies
by Mat Taib (2006) and Ismail (2005) demonstrated such important aspects (e=
g.
gender, tenses, number and flexes are the most complicated parts in Arabic
grammar) as posing major barriers to students’ learning or Arabic sentence
structure. While Azman and Goh (2010) have proven that grammatical structur=
e of
both Arabic and Mandarin share a same level of difficulties and their
expectation is very high to have a crucial attention by their instructors.<=
span
style=3D'mso-spacerun:yes'>
c. First Language Interference: Language interference may happen=
at
various levels including phonological, grammatical, lexical and orthographi=
cal
(Berthold, Mangubhai & Batorowicz, 1997). Based
on the finding by (Bhela, 1999), language interference occurs on the
syntactic structure of a written task of a second language learner.
In
this study, researcher has determined two levels, namely lexical and
grammatical. At the lexical level,=
borrowin=
g of
words from one language and converting them to sound more natural in anothe=
r. In the same time, students are expecting them as correct by Malay
grammar.
While
at the grammatical level, the structure is designed in the pattern of Malay
language sentence. However, based on samples that were examined for the fir=
st
question, the researcher did not find any indication that there are students
who are influenced by their native language when translating Malay sentences
into Arabic. But in the remaining questions, the researchers believe there =
are
also students who are affected by the vocabulary and style of the first
language in the Malay translation Arabic.
d. Arabic graphology: There
are students who still have not really mastered the Arabic script even thou=
gh
they had passed the first stage of the Arabic language in the previous seme=
ster.
This factor is also significant because the number of those who have these
drawbacks totaled 30.47% of the overall sample. The researcher does not mean
poor utilization Arab graphology as writing a dirty or not according to the
standard deviation of khat (Islamic fine art). Instead, this weaknes=
s is
considered from every aspect of spelling words. Most of these spelling mist=
akes
occur in the word ربة
البيت.
Most students who have not mastered the Arabic graphology will easily make
mistakes. For example, the word is written as: ربتول
بيت.=
This
could be caused by reason they know the words and their meanings, as well as
pronunciation. But their weakness in Arabic character leads them to be
misspelled. In fact, there are mistakes in using tā’ and alif
lām. For example, there are students who use tā’ maftū=
;hah
for the word ربة <=
/span>as ربت<=
span
dir=3DLTR> and alif lām as =
ول which should be attended by ال.
Conclusion and Recommendation: =
Significantly, the research on students’ answer scripts from
translation section provides some information that can assist in the teachi=
ng
of Arabic language communication. However if students with high levels of
Arabic proficiency from other educational back- grounds are studied, the re=
sult
may get a different picture.
If
we considered the aspects of vocabulary based on the analysis above, not ma=
ny
of the students facing the problems. On average they know the words given a=
re
related with a matter of daily routine. Even if there are problems, it was
because the vocabulary is seemed to be similar with the other words that ha=
ve
the same sound. It was also be found mostly retort students use words والدة and أم
Grammatical
aspects also contribute to the students’ ability to translate accurately. In
the analysis presented, there are still students who do not efficiently use
pronouns agreement to the masculine or feminine gender. This is no doubt du=
e to
differences in the mother tongue of students which does not have such formu=
la.
However, this drawback can be overcome if instructor has continuous training
with practical examples for communication.
The
last issue here is the challenge of using Arabic graphology. Apparently to
researchers, the Arabic graphologies are not as complicated as kanji charac=
ter
Japanese or Chinese language. Even worst was that they did not know the
specific letter. Their weaknesses are to distinguish the phonetic aspect
between the same letters. This matter must be addressed clearly in order to
enhance the students’ abilities in Arabic graphology use along with the oral
skills as their primary objective of learning. From communicative perspecti=
ve,
using transliteration for learners of Arabic may help them to gain confident
especially to acquire a new vocabulary (Azman & Ahmad Nazuki, 2010).
Looking into this weakness, it worth noting here that students need to be
exposed to calligraphy art. Even there is no requirement to hire a
calligrapher, instructors may find it is possible to offer an activities
related to writing skills such as how to connect one alphabet to another. By
giving several goods calligraphy art exposure, students might be taught
implicitly how to construct an appropriate word or words.
Generally,
Malay to Arabic translation skills is important in the process of teaching =
the
Arabic language communication. The purpose of communication is to make stud=
ents
actively produce language to communicate. Translation approach from the ‘in=
to
out’ (Malay to Arabic) is a cognitive activity that requires students to use
their creativity to express something by using a foreign language they are
learning. This idea is supported by Azman et al. (2011: 535) in their study=
on
using translation strategy among 60 samples of student who respond a positi=
ve
feedback.
From
the aspect of the textbooks preparation, one part for translation exercise
should be provided. This translation must provide extensive exercise to
students in terms of respected vocabulary, grammar sturcture and different =
of
the target language grammar apart of first language. Similarly, Arabic
calligraphy skills already are exposed with brief exercises at the end of e=
ach
topic in the last page. Teachers also need to provide incentives for the
students who are proficient in Arabic calligraphy as it is also part of the
visual arts heritage of Islamic civilization.
However, these skills=
must
be constantly monitored by teachers so that students do not only independen=
tly
produce language, even the right way according to the grammar of the langua=
ge
and the rules should be. Adult students for college or higher learning
institution students must have to be exposed to the techniques and skills t=
o train
them to use the foreign language they are learning in a creative way.
Acknowledgement: This work
was part of research project supported by UiTM registered under: 600-IRMI/D=
ANA
5/3ARAS (0105/2016). All the authors are indebted to the UiTM and truly
thankful for the trust and support.
References:
1.&n=
bsp;
Abd. Aziz Abd. Talib. (2000). Pedagogi Bah=
asa
Melayu: Prinsip, Kaedah dan Teknik. Kuala Lumpur: Utusan Publications &
Distributors Sdn. Bhd.
2.<=
span
style=3D'font:7.0pt "Times New Roman"'> Azman Che Mat dan Ahmad Nazuki@Marzuki Yaakub. (2010). Kegunaan
transliterasi dalam pengajaran dan pembelajaran bahasa Arab. GEMA Online=
TM
Journal of Language Studies, 10(2), 19-35.
3.<=
span
style=3D'font:7.0pt "Times New Roman"'> Azman Che Mat, Ahmad Nazuki@Marzuki Yaakub & Ghani Ismail (201=
1). Penerimaan Kaedah Terjemahan
Melayu Arab dalam Pengajaran dan Pembelajaran. In Noor Ida Ramli,
Norizah Ardi and Aini Aziz. Globalisasi Melalui Terjemahan. Kuala
Lumpur: Institut Terjemahan Negara pg, 527-537.
4.&n=
bsp;
Azman Che Mat. (2012). Conceptual
Model of Translation Approach in Foreign Language Teaching and Learning.
5.&n=
bsp;
Belam, J. (2003) Buying up to
falling down: a deductive approach to teaching post-editing. In: Proceeding=
s of
the Workshop on Teaching Translation Technologies and Tools. MT Summit IX. =
New Orleans,
United States, 1–10.
6.&n=
bsp;
Berthold, M., Mangubhai, F., & Batorowicz, K.
(1997). Bilingualism & Multiculturalism: Study Book. Distance Education
Centre, University of Southern Queensland: Toowoomba, QLD.
7.&n=
bsp;
Bhela, B. (1999). Native language
interference in learning a second language: Exploratory case studies of nat=
ive
language interference with target language usage. International Education
Journal, 1(1), 22-31.
8.&n=
bsp;
Ismail, A. H. (2005). Pengajaran Bahasa Ar=
ab
Melalui Kaedah Komunikatif. In Hassan Basri Awang Mat Dahan, Zawawi Ismail
& Muhammad Azhar Zailani. (Eds.), Pendidikan Islam dan Bahasa Arab:
Perspektif Pengajian Tinggi, (pp.137-162). Kuala Lumpur: Penerbit
Universiti Malaya.
9.&n=
bsp;
Kamarudin Hj Husin. (1993). Pedagogi
Bahasa. Selangor: Longman Malaysia.
10.&=
nbsp; Lado, Robert. (=
1980).
Mengajar
Bahasa: Satu Pendekatan Saintifik. Kuala Lumpur: Dewan Bahasa Dan
Pustaka.
11.&=
nbsp; Laufer, =
B.,
& Girsai, N. (2008). Form-focused instruction in second language vocabu=
lary
learning: A case for contrastive analysis and translation. Applied
Linguistics, 29(4), 694-716.
12.&=
nbsp; Levere, A. (1992). Translation, rewriting and the
Manipulation of Literary Fame. London and New York: Routedge.
13.&=
nbsp; Mat Taib, P. (2006). Dasar-Dasar Utama Pengajaran Nahu A=
rab
di Malaysia. In Mohd Rosdi Ismail & Mat Taib Pa. (Eds), Pengajaran d=
an
Pembelajaran Bahasa Arab di Malaysia, (pp.15-26). Kuala Lumpur: Penerbit
Universiti Malaya.
14.&=
nbsp; Mat, A. C., & Soon, G. Y. (2010). Grammar in the
classroom: students’expectations and reality the case of Arabic and Mandari=
n. Novitas-ROYAL
(Research on Youth and Language), 4(1), 51-63.
15.=
Matar, Sāyigh & cAwdah. (1981). Al-Tarjamah al-Hadithah. Vol.1.
16.&=
nbsp; Newmark, Pe=
ter.
( 1994). Pendekatan Perterjemahan. Kuala Lumpur: Dewan Bahasa Dan
Pustaka. (Terj) Zainab Ahmad & Zaiton Ab. Rahman.
17.&=
nbsp; Niño, A. (2009). Machine translation in foreign language
learning: language learners’ and tutors’ perceptions of its advantages and
disadvantages. ReCALL, 21(02), 241-258.
18.&=
nbsp; Norhaili Massari & Ramiaida Darmi. (2008). Points=
Of
Relevence: Translation As An Approach In Promoting Second Language Acquisit=
ion
In Language Classrooms. In Abdullah Hassan & et al. (Comp.). Mem=
bina
Kepustakaan Dalam Bahasa Melayu (Pg. 283-297). Selangor: PTS
Publications & Distributors Sdn. Bhd.
19.=
Pogadaev, A. Vi=
ctor.
(2005). Translation of Literature as a Ciivlizational Dialogue . In
Abdullah Hassan and Low Kok (Ed.). On Terjemahan dan Penglobalan Ilmu. <=
/i>Kuala
Lumpur: PTS Professional.
20.&=
nbsp; Uzawa, K. (1996). Second language learners' processes of=
L1
writing, L2 writing, and translation from L1 into L2. Journal of second
language writing, 5(3), 271-294.
10<= /span> An Analysis on Student Translation Competency………….
An
Analysis on Student Translation… Azman Che Mat, Azarudin Awang , Ahmad
Zulfadhli Nokman, Nor
Shaifura Musilehat, Ahmad Fakrulazizi Abu Bakar