Conclusions
Translation has played a role in language instruction for hundreds of years.In the nineteenth century，for instance，translation tasks served as a major teaching technique.At other times，however，it was rejected from language classrooms.The main reason for this was the invention of new teaching methods that were supposed to be more effective and practical.The new methods were thought to help students to improve the four major language skills：listening，speaking，reading and writing，while translation was good probably for only the last two.As a result，most language teachers today have been trained to use an approach that avoids translation tasks.
For the past two decades or more，translation has been generally out of favor.Most language teachers seem to prefer theory-based methods，in particular the Communicative Approach（Canale and Swain，1980）.But because this movement focuses on communicative competence and largely ignores linguistic competence，there has been a resurgence of interest in traditional methods such as translation.Many language teachers find it a valid activity for language practice and improvement.They consider that it is a valuable teaching technique that language teachers ought to adopt.They propose that the benefits of translation should be fully exploited by combining this technique with other more innovative ones in order to help students to improve their language proficiency to the fullest extent possible.
In this dissertation，various attitudes of the G-T Methods have been presented and fully discussed.
Many teachers were encouraged to feel negative about grammar，to adopt an emotional anti-grammarian stance，and to regard grammar as inherently‘dull’or‘old-fashioned’.From this point of view，the teaching of grammar，if it had to be done at all，should be done surreptitiously.
The negative views of the G-T Method held by opponents of translation as a teaching technique are mainly in the following：
（a）Thinking in the mother tongue inhibits thinking directly in the target language（where“directly”is the key word）：that is to say，the students cannot fully develop their competence and improve their performance in the second language because of their continued reliance on the mother tongue.
（b）It interposes an intermediate process between the concept and the wav it is expressed in the foreign language，thus hindering the development of the ability to think directly in the new language.This intermediate process，with its occasional misapplication of L1 rules to the L2，is sometimes referred to as interference.
（c）Too much reliance on the first language will result in the fossilization of an interlanguage.
（d）The use of the first language wastes too much valuable class time that would be better spent on the target language.
The G-T Method has been widely criticized：as Richards and Rodgers observe in their summary of the methods and approaches to foreign language teaching：‘It is a method for which there is no theory...there is no literature which offers a rationale or justification for it or that attempts to relate it to issues in linguistics，psychology，or educational theory.’
The opponents of translation as a teaching technique also hold that translation，especially from the native to the target language，is likely to cause the students to think in their first language before expressing themselves in the second language，whether orally or in writing.They claim this learning process prevents students from mastering the new language.
Let's argue whether the above-mentioned negative views of the G-T Method held by opponents of translation as a teaching technique can hold water.
There are many reasons that explain the popularityof the GT Method in the introductory part of my dissertation.
In arguing with the first and the second negative views held by opponents of translation as a teaching technique，reasons are listed in the following：
The topic of“first language interference”or“MTI”has had an unusual history in second language acquisition research and practice.For many years，it had been presumed that the only major source of syntactic errors in adult second language performance was the performer's first language（Lado，1957），and a great deal of material preparations was done with this assumption in mind（Banathy，Trager，and Waddle，1966）.Subsequent empirical studies of errors made by second language students led to the discovery，however，that many errors are not traceable to the structure of the first language，but are common to second language performers of different linguistic backgrounds（e.g.Richards，1971；Buteau，1970）.These findings have led several scholars to question the value of contrastive analysis and to argue error analysis.The first language，it is maintained，is but one of several sources of error，and other sources need to be considered.
Attempts have been made to integrate these findings and fit them into the Monitor Model for performance.First，let us reconsider Newmark's proposal for a mechanism for first language influence.According to Newmark，first language influence is not proactive inhibition，but is simply the result of the performer being“called on to perform before he has learned the new behavior”.The result is“padding”，using old knowledge，supplying what is known to make up for what is not known.Newmark suggests that the“cure for interference is simply the cure for ignorance learning”（in terms of Monitor Theory，this would read“acquisition”）.
From the detailed discussions in Chapter six，it can be concluded that the L1 may“substitute”for the acquired L2 as an utterance initiator when the performer has to produce in the target language but has not acquired enough of the L2 to do this.It may in fact be the case that the domain in L2 performance is the same as those rules that are most prone to L1 influence，while aspects of the target language that may be learned（later acquired，easy to conceptualize；e.g.bound morphology）are relatively free of L1 influence.The MT influence may therefore be an indication of low acquisition.If so，it can be eliminated or at least reduced by natural intake and language use.This is what apparently occurred in Taylor's ESL subjects，who showed less first language influence with more proficiency.
Perhaps the“silent period”observed in natural child second language acquisition（Hakuta，1974；Huang and Hatch，1978）corresponds to the period in which the first language is heavily used in“unnatural”adult second language performance.The children may be building up acquired competence via input，and several recent studies（Gary，1974；Postovsky，1977）imply that less insistence on early oral performance may be profitable for children and adults studying second languages in formal settings.
MTI can thus be considered as unnatural.One could theoretically produce sentences in a second language without any acquisition：the first language surface structure can be used with second language content lexicon inserted.The Monitor may then be used to add some morphology and do its best to repair word order where it differs from the L1.One can only go so far with this mode，as one is limited by the competence of the conscious grammar and one must appeal to it with every utterance.The adult can，however，produce sentences right away in the target language using this mode，and this may help to account for reports of more rapid progress in early stages for adults than for children in second language performance.It is a temporary advantage，however，acquisition may be slow，but it is，in the long run，much more useful when language is used for the purpose of communication.
The author of the present study disagrees with the elimination of the learners'mother tongue from the second language classroom.
（a）L2 users have the L1 permanently present in their minds.Every activity the student carries out visibly in the L2 also involves the invisible L1.The superficial L2 nature of the classroom disguises the presence of the L1 in the minds of the students.From a multi-competence perspective，all teaching activities are‘crosslingual’.In the sense of Stern（1992）：the difference is whether the first language is visible or invisible，not whether it is altogether absent.
（b）The input most students receive in second language learning comes chiefly from a classroom setting.They are rarely exposed to the new language in a natural environment.Because of the great imbalance of input between the first and second languages，no matter how hard one tries to avoid using the learners'mother tongue in class，one can rarely override its influence on second language learning.Learners are limited in their opportunities of listening to examples of the target language tend to form hypothetical rules about the new language on insufficient evidence.Learners need to create new utterances，but they may make errors.A learner's errors providence of the system of the language he is using at a particular point in the course.They are significant in three different ways.First to the teacher，in that they tell him if he undertakes a systematic analysis how far towards the goal the learner has progressed，and consequently，what remains for him to learn.Secondly，they provide the researcher evidence of how language is learned or acquired，what strategies or procedures the learner is employing in his discovery of the language.Thirdly，they are indispensable to the learner himself，because one can regard the making of errors as a device the learner uses in order to learn.The making of errors then is a strategy employed both by children acquiring their mother tongue and by those learning a second language.
Errors in learning are significant.They are not，however，entirely caused by differences between the native language of the learner and the language he is learning.There is some value in analyzing the reasons for errors，since this will lead at least to a greater understanding of the difficulties that learners face，and will perhaps assist in the development of pedagogic strategies.The errors will reveal either where the mother tongue does influence learning or where learners are particularly likely to make incorrect generalizations about the target language.It is not necessary nor desirable that this should be carried out as a purely predictive process.Instead it can be based on the known errors of learners.The errors are still explained in terms of contrast，but contrast on the one hand with the mother-tongue and on the other within the target language.The resulting analysis is predictive in the sense that the linguistic behavior of second language learners in the future is expected to resemble closely the behavior of language learners in the past.That is why it is worth analyzing the errors that learners have made.
（c）Translation material is authentic and can be of a great variety.Since all styles and registers of both spoken and written language are relevant to translation，the students will be exposed to a wide range of language input，not just made-up sentences of the variety normally presented in language textbooks.The reality of the language will help increase both the students'competence and their productive abilities.With carefully prepared materials and clear objectives，teachers can use translation not only to improve the students'second language proficiency but also to investigate，the areas with which the students have difficulty.It's often the case that students learning English tend to pay little attention to their use of modals，auxiliaries and subordinate clauses.They are also very likely to avoid using certain types of structures especially when writing long，complex sentences.Translation tasks，however，impose some control on them and force them to find a solution to their problem.In this active learning process，teachers help explain and clarify all the difficult points，while the students who do most of the translation work，develop their competence.According to Chomsky（1965），there is a clear distinction between competence（the knowledge of a language）and performance（the actual use of language in concrete situation）.In Chomsky's view，the learner's ability to perform is based on his/her competence，which is entirely linguistic.Hymes（1972），on the contrary，proposes a broader notion of competence，but that of communicative competence.He claims that the learner's performance reflects both knowledge of grammatical rules and knowledge of how these rules are used to communicate competence rather than linguistic competence.
Whether the learner's competence is purely linguistic or both linguistic and communicative will not be discussed here.Rather the main concern of the author of the present study is to argue that translation can be used effectively to help learners acquire the most important linguistic ability，that is the ability“to understand and produce utterances which are grammatical as well as appropriate to the context in which they are made”（Campbell，1970：247）.
Certainly，reading comprehension is closely related to translation since before one can do any translation work，one must read the text and thoroughly analyze it for features such as sentence structure，context，and register.The students，learning a second language via translation，also begin their job in a similar way.Because they are trained to do textual analysis as the first step in the translation process，students'reading skills are developed and their comprehension is greatly improved.
As for the students'knowledge of linguistic rules，the translation method can be used very successfully to teach grammar and structural patterns.It helps point out and clarify the differences between the grammatical system and syntactic structures in the target and native languages.As mentioned above，translation，more than other methods of instruction，enables students to understand more clearly how various grammatical features are used.
As Hymes（1972）notes，grammatical rules would be useless without rules of language use.Students need to learn how to use grammatical rules in actual communicative situations.Again，translation can help students to produce utterances that convey the intended message clearly.This is mainly due to the very nature of translation，where the same meaning can be translated in many different ways.Because students are required to select the best way to convey the intended meaning.They are being trained to develop sensitivity to alternative ways of expressing meaning.Second，the students come to see the link between language form and language use.The utterances that the learners produce are not only grammatical but also appropriate to the cultural context or communicative situation in which these utterances are made.
（d）Teachers can use translation as an effective means of explaining particular aspects of language，such as polysemies（words with several different but related meanings），cultural differences，grammatical rules and syntactic structures with which the students have difficulty.Chellapan explains that this way of using translation involves a conscious process of learning.Through translation，a learner can be aware of the distinctiveness of similar structures in the two languages，and also of the different processes used in conveying the same message.“Deliberate translation，”as he calls it，focuses on lexical items，where the contrasts in the two languages vary，but it should be done in a larger context.These items should not be treated individuallyas in the traditional G-T Method.This will help the students learn the different distributions in the two languages and also show that the meaning of any item is part of the total environment of the text in the two languages.Of course，teachers have to prepare materials and exercises carefully.They need to select aspects that can be appropriately illustrated via translation tasks.The materials must be appropriate to the students'level of proficiency as well.
（e）Duff also has a positive view of the role of the learner's mother tongue in second language acquisition.He says that our first language forms our way of thinking and，to some extent，shapes our use of the foreign language（choice of words，word order，sentence structure，etc.）.Translation helps us to understand the influence of one language on the other，e.g.areas of potential errors caused by negative transfer from the first language.Fully aware of the interference，students will try to avoid making such errors when performing in the second language.When errors do occur，the students will be able to explain why and try not to make the same mistakes again.
Therefore，the author of the present study thinks that instead of trying to minimize the role of the students'native language，it is preferable to find a way to use it，via translation tasks，for the maximum benefit of second language learning.
In arguing with the third negative view held by opponents of translation as a teaching technique，here are the following reasons.
‘Interlanguage’，a term that in its various uses can perhaps be best glossed as‘a second language learner's knowledge of target language’.Ellis（1985）regularly replaces it by the admittedly awkward but more accurate term‘language-learner language’.An“interlanguage”may be linguistically described using as data the observable output resulting from a speaker's attempt to produce a foreign norm，i.e.both his errors and his non-errors.It is assumed that such behaviour is highly structured.The implication of this earliest formulation is that‘interlanguage’is a performance phenomenon，to be seen in the behavior of second language learners attempting to emulate the target language speaker's norm or competence：the underlying structure is to be derived from the‘observable output’.
In spite of the large number of studies that have been carried out in Chapter six，there is in fact empirical evidence for only an encouragingly small set of causes of IL variation.These causes reduce to（a）linguistic context；（b）a set of social factors so far seemingly limited to interlocutor，topic and social norms；and（c）the differing functions that a given form performs in communicative discourse.Different theories，considered in this chapter seem to highlight one or another of these four factors as causes of interlanguage variation.But it seems clear，that some if not all of these causal factors may interact in any given languageproduction situation.It seems clear that a learner's focus upon language form，whatever its precise nature，must surely interact with interlocutor，topic and social norm in a fairly complex way.
It's true to say that learners isolated from native speakers of the language tend to develop‘fossilized’systems or pidgins.But judicious attention to grammatical form in the adult classroom is not only helpful，if appropriate techniques are used，but essential to a speedy learning process.Appropriate grammar focusing techniques：it might appear that in the G-T Method，the students play a more active role than teachers because they have to do a lot of translation activities.However，the teachers need to work equally hard，or even harder.All the materials must be carefully selected in order to meet the teaching objectives.Should anything call for clarification，the teachers must be able to explain it.This means the teacher must know both the first and second language very well.Moreover，they need to have enough background in basic linguistic theory in order to give clear explanations of the similarities and differences in meaning，grammatical systems，and syntactic structures between the two languages.They must also explain to their students how different languages perceive and conceptualize external reality so the students can have a good grasp of how these languages work.That is to say，by means of translation，the teachers can illustrate how the same message is conveyed in two separate languages and whether different linguistic expressions are used.
Aside from a basic knowledge of linguistic theory，teachers need to have a clear terminal objective when carrying out a contrastive study between two languages.For instance，if they aim to teach grammar and syntactic structures，they should make a contrastive analysis of the surface structure of the sentence，and translation tasks should be done from the first language to the second language.If they focus on meaning，they cannot just look at the lexical items or the surface structure of the sentences.They have to carry out a contrastive analysis of the semantic aspects of the two languages.Translation tasks in this case can be done from the first language to the second language or vice versa.The translation method used to achieve each separate purpose is also different.For example，literal translation should be used in teaching grammar and sentence structures while free translation should be used in teaching vocabulary and expressions.If a language is taught by means of translation，both the students and the teachers are required to work equally hard.The success of language instruction via translation depends on both partners.
Grammar instruction appears to be very convenient if not absolutely essential for acquiring a good level of proficiency in the target language.This does not mean，however，that grammar can be taught in isolation from the other language aspects and components.If one accepts that the fundamental purpose of learning a foreign language is to be able to communicative framework.
While all the above might be true to some extent，it need not be so.Just as Duff says：“Translation can be introduced purposefully and imaginatively into the language learning program.”（1989：6）It can be seen from above that in spite of all the limitations，translation can have many more benefits than has often been thought.Judgingfrom all the benefits of the G-T Method that have just been mentioned.It may be concluded that if one can find a way to offset the weak points and make the best use of its benefits，translation as a teaching technique can be used to help students learn a second language more thoughtfully and effectively.Through the eclectic use of translation，fossilization in the interlanguage will be greatly reduced.
In arguing with the fourth negative view held by opponents of translation as a teaching technique，the following are the reasons.
The G-T Method enhances interaction both between the teacher and the students and among the students themselves.This is because by the very nature of translation，there is rarely a‘right’answer.Learners normally search for what they think are the most accurate and appropriate words to convey the message in the text.This allows students to contribute their own thoughts to a discussion.More importantly，the students will be trained to justify their own translation or why they have chosen certain words and structures.Anyone with a different opinion should be able to give some explanation.In addition，it is not necessary for all translation work in class to be done individually and in writing.Students can work in groups or participate in oral discussions to get the best translation.It's time-saving.Activities like these make translation interesting and not at all boring since the students are learning the language in an active and inquiring way.The teachers'workload is also reduced since there are fewer student papers to correct.
Most language teachers realize that there is no such thing as“the best teaching method，”and therefore，few professionals in the field today persist in using only one approach or one method.On the contrary，teachersshould try to be as flexible as possible in choosing the teaching techniques that will enable them most effectively to achieve their main goal to give students both grammatical accuracy and communicative proficiency in a foreign language.Translation is an alternative that can contribute to the successful realization of teaching goals and should be used effectively to promote second language learning.
The last point the author of the present study argues here is that：the present author disagrees to Richards and Rodgers saying in their summary of the methods and approaches to foreign language teaching：‘It is a method for which there is no theory...there is no literature which offers a rationale or justification for it or that attempts to relate it to issues in linguistics，psychology，or educational theory.’In the present dissertation，the contents in Chapter Three—Teaching and its adjacent disciplines，Chapter Four—Linguistics：structuralism versus generativism，Chapter five—Psychology：behaviorism vs mentalism，Chapter Six—Mother tongue and learner's errors，Chapter Seven—Bilingual mental lexicon and its implications have served as the solid theoretical bases to support the application of the G-T Method in FLT.