Being Aware of Difference: Using Translation Theory to help inform teaching in an ESL setting

Andrea Criggs

A tliesis submitted in conformity with the requirements for the degree of Masters of Arts in Education Department of Theory and Policy Stud ies Ontario Institute for Stiidies in Education of the University of Toronto

O Copyright by Andrea Griggs ( 1999)

National Library of Canada Acquisitions and Bibliographie Services

395 Wellington Street Ottawa ON K1A ON4 Canada

Bibliothque nationale du Canada Acquisitions et services bibliographiques

395, rua Wellington OtawaON K1AON4 Canada

The author has granted a nonexclusive licence allowiag the National Library of Canada to reproduce, loan, distribute or sel1 copies of this thesis in microforni, paper or electronic formats.

L'auteur a accord une licence non exclusive permettant a la Bibliotheque nationale du Canada de reproduire, prter, distribuer ou vendre des copies de cette thse sous la forme de microfiche/film, de reproduction sur papier ou sur format lectronique.
L'auteur conserve la proprit du droit d'auteur qui protge cette thse. Ni la thse ni des extraits substantiels de celle-ci ne doivent tre imprims ou autrement reproduits sans son autorisation.

The author retains ownership of the copyright in this thesis. Neither the thesis nor substantial extracts fiom it rnay be printed or otherwise reproduced without the author's permission.

Abstract

Andrea Griggs Being Aware of Difference: Using translation theory to help inform teaching in an ESL setting. Master of Arts in Education, 1999

Department of Theory and Policy Studies

Ontario Institute for Studies in Education of the University of Toronto

In this thesis 1 argue that mainstream English as a second language (ESL) pedagogy, which is
presented as a neutral and scientific field, is not only unhelpful in many situations in the classroom, but can also be detrimental to teachers and students. We risk infantalizing and/or

losing Our students because we have not been able to support them in their learning. In addition.
we risk deskilling our jobs as teachers. Using ideas from the fields of translation theory and moral philosophy, 1 argue that teaching is not a neutral activity and language is a contested place where meaning is constructed. Since teachers share their role as "translater" with their students, their choices must be respected. Finally, teachers need to consider their social location. Teaching ESL is not, 1 argue, simply correctly applying scientific methodology, but is a creative process involving the whole person.

Acknowledgements

Writing this thesis was dificult, but figuring out what it was that 1 wanted to write was extremely difficult. There have been many people who have helped me with this process that 1 would like to thank. My supervisor, Dwight Boyd, helped me shape the focus of the paper and reassured me that everyone goes through the "muddling about" phase and (more importantly) that they also corne out of it! 1 appreciate his support and helpful comments.
1 would like to thank my second reader, David Corson, for his comments, support and

amazingly quick "tum-around" time.

I appreciate my parents' ongoing support through this process. My mom, as always, has
been interested in what 1 have been working on, has read some of my (very) rough drafts, and has been able to empathize with my stniggles to formulate my ideas. My dad, despite his occasionally exhortations to "just sit down and get the damn thing done," has also supportive and loving .
1 would like to thank my grandparents, John and Marie Levitt, for their support and

financial assistance. My colleagues and supervisors at the Intensive ESL program have been understanding

and supportive (especially when 1 had the 'Yhesis blues").

1 have leamed much from my students, past and present. 1 would like to thank my fiends who helped by listening and offering encouragement as 1 tried to find a path through the material 1 had read. They include: Lisa, Mindy, Sue, Anne,

Paula, Trish, Katja, and others who offered long distance support.
Arleen Schenke has shared her ideas, conversation. support and wine. She has helped me to go beyond my initial take on things.

My brother Jason has given me emotional support and has always been "open" when 1
needed to talk.
Gwen, my "second supervisor," has helped tremendously by meeting with me regularly,

asking intelligent and probing questions, reading my drafts, giving me deadlines, and offering
her warmth and support. Finally, 1 would like to thank my partner Afshin for his emotional support, belief in me, and love. Aithough he was sometimes bewildered by how 1 was feeling, he was always willing to listen and care.

Table of Contents

Abstract Acknowledgements Table of Contents

ii
iii
v

Chapter One ESL Centre

Mainstream ESL Pedagogy
Langiiape Laliguagr Learning

Role of Teacher Role of Methodology

The Student
Critical Pedayoyy

Chapter Two

37

Traditional Translation Theory Traditional Translation Theory and ESL Different Translation Theory Languaye Original, Translatioii, and Relationship
v

39

46

48
49

54

Role of Translator

Chapter Three Translation and Teaching Shared Role of Translator Process

Language

Language and tdentity

Language. Identity. and Students

Teachers Concl tision

List of References

As an ESL teacher who has been working in the field for more than eight yean, 1 have

worked at many different kinds of schools.' Most of the places 1 have worked have generally subscibed to a mainstream view of English as a second language (ESL) pedagogy which is a positivistic, mechanistic way of thinking about the teaching of English. Language tends to be seen as a neutral tool. which students need to acquire as quickly and efficiently as possible. Students are encouragrd to express themselves; what they Say isn't as important as simply sayinp something. In the communicative methodology of today, the prime role of the teacher in the classroom is providing sufficient cornprehensible input for students to learn from. The content is unimportant: if messages are sent and received. learning will happen.

The mainstream methodology is presented as neutral and scienti fic. However, there are many, many situations in the classroom where drawing on this methodology is not helpful. Indeed. a reliance on only inainstream ESL pedagogy can be harmful to teachers and students. If teachers are confronted with students who dislike English and find it a threat to their own cultural identity. this theor). can noi Iielp. According to this methodology, leaminp any language is a beneficial or at least neutral process. Al1 a teacher can do. it seems, is sigh and say that those students should change their attitude or they are going to have a hard, if not impossible time learning the language. Despite the fact that ESL textbooks and activity books constantly supgest controvenial topics for students to write or speak about, there is no serious talk about dealing
I have worked ai: private language institutes in Canada, Japan and Colombia, an international Iiih school in New Mexico, a government sponsored ESL class for immigrants in Ontario. and a school run by the continuing studies department o f a large Canadian university.
'

with real conflict or controversy when it arises. ESL classes are meant to be happy places, and the teacher should be friendly, but neutral. There is no space in mainstream ESL pedagogy to consider how the teacher's social location (i.e.. herhis race. ethnicity. gender, sexual orientation.

age. etc.) might influence herhis teaching. There is no space to ask questions Iike the following:

If 1, a Young, white. middle-class. educated English speaking woman talk to immigrant students
about finding a job. how might my experience aiid their perceptions of me influence what 1 do? What does it mean when a student who had a Chinese-Canadian as a teacher cornplained because she did not have a "real" Canadian teacher? And Iiow do 1, as a white English-Canadian. address
that issue? How does mainstrearn rnethodology help us when students refuse to speak or do an

activity which we know will be beneficial io their English? Can we assume we are able to know what is best for al1 of our students al1 of the t h e ?

These kind of questions, 1 would argue. are extremely important for us as ESL teachers. These questions represent everyday situations which occur in the classroom. When we do not consider these questions. 1 believe we risk a number of things. We risk losing students because
we have not been able to support them in their learninp. We risk infantalizing our students

because we ofien do not recognize the knowledge they bring with them (Schenke. 1991). We risk deskilling ourselves and reducing the role of a teacher to mindlessly applying the methods supplied to us from the applied linguists. We risk doing some form of moral harm to our students if we do not recognize the role of our social location.

Ili

this thesis 1 would like to start developing a different pedagogy to addrcss some of these

concerns. 1 believe that it will help students leam the language better. Beficr is. of course, a loaded word. This kind of teacliing focuses more on knowledge of "the culture of power" (Deipit. 1988) and leads to students making more informed choices for themselves. This model empowers the student and assigns them real responsibility . It leads teachen to become more self-reflective because it expands the concept of teaching a second language from a merely technical ski11 to a more holistic approach where issues like the social location of the teacher. conflict. difference and inequalities have to be considered. Finally. this model allows the asking of more and di ffercrnt questions than mainstream ESL pedagogy perniits.

In this thesis. I use V

~ ~ O U S theories and

writings on (primarily literary) translation to help

create a different model for teacliing ESL. Using translation theory to examine second language teaching is an unusual step to take. However. 1 have found the tnany similarities between the two fields ver). helpfitl in thinking about secoiid laiiguage teaching and Irarning. In addition to drawinp on translation theory.' itself a multi-disciplinary field, and on the field of the teaching and learning of second languages, panicularly English, including my own experiences in the classroorn. 1 will also draw on work done by moral philosophers who try and ans& questions about how we understand each other in the context of differences and inequalities.

= It's important to note that the literature on translation is enonous and that translation has been seen many different ways over the centuries. This thesis is not a genealogy of translation; it is not an exhaustive overview of the translation literature. Rather. it is an examination of how various typcs of translation theory can contribute to a different model for ESL teaching.

In the first chapter. 1 explore the beliefs of mainstream ESL pedagogy and demonstrate, with examples mainly from my own experience. how these beliefs are inadequate in working with students in daily life. In addition to being inadequate, these beliefs h a m both teachers and students because they tend to contribute ta s situation where the teacher's roie is deskilled and the student is infantalized. Mainstream ESL pedagogy, rooted in the field of applied linguistics. discourages any questions which challenge tlie "neutral" status of the discipline. One of the main ideas supponing tlie neutrality of second la~iguage teaching and acquisition is a belief in the neutrality of language. Essentially. language has bern viewed as a tool. unconnected to identity or power. Learniny a language is seen only as a beneficial process. with no negative effects. Given the neutrality of language and the origin of second language pedagogy in the field of applied linguistids. ESL teacliers are seen as technicians who need only be concerned with the smooth acquisition of standard English. In mainstream ESL pedagogy, there is a belief that there is a method of teacliing a language whicli is scientifically verifiable and sonieliow apolitical. If teachers work within this method, they need not be overly concemed witli understanding others or thinking about differences and inequalities. The idea that an ESL teacher needn't be concerned with issues of morality and understanding the other is, 1 believe. a consequence of taking up a positivistic approach to teachiiig. Despite tlie scientific rlirtoric of the discipline, inevitably situations arise in tlie classroom where the mainstream pedagogy is of no help. A different approach is necessary.

In the second chapter, I start by brietly sumrnarizing the presumptions of traditional translation theorists in order to show both the similarity with mainstream ESL pedagogy and

from where newer ides of translation have developed. Generally, there is a belief that language is determinate and translation is the transfer of that fixed meaning from one code to another. Mainstream translation theories developed in this century focus prirnarily on the product and make the following assumptions: 1) the original or foreign text is seen as a unified whole with a message that can be understood (by someone with the comct education). 2) language is seen as neutral and as composed of style and content which can be separated unproblematically, 3) a good translation is the sanie as the original, and 4) translators are able to be objective and do not allow their particular social location or ideological beliefs to affect the text. There are many similarities between mainstrem ESL pedagogy and traditional translation theory in that they both see language as a neutral labeling system for universal experiences and the translatorlteacher as an objective technician. Thcy also tend to belirve tliat there is a core meaning or "self' in the trxt or student which can be transferred to another languagr relatively unscathed.

Newer ideas of translation theory wliich chat lenge the ptesuinptions of traditional translation are more helpful in crrating a model for ESL teaching. Essentially, I argue that the traditional theories tend to rely on a belief of universality and seek similarities between different lanyuages and cultures. The danger in assuming univenality and seeking similarities is that differences which appear might be ignored and the more powerful language speakers might end

up conveying their world view as the world view. The translation theory that 1 explore in the
bulk of the second chapter tends to reject many of the assumptions of traditional theory and is in accord with Iris Young's statement that thrre "is niuch that 1 do not understand about the other

person's experience and perspective" (Young. 1997,53). The translation theory 1 explore sees languages not as neutral. but as "site[s] of struggle over meaniny, access, and power" (Pierce in Pennycook. 1989.594). Translation is seen not as simply a method of substitution, but as a transfomiation of the text. These theories cal1 into question notions of identity. both of the idea of the whole, unitary meaning of the original. and the idea that a translation is an isomorphic copy of the text. Rather than hiding or ignoring the position of the translator, tliey seek to expose the position because they assert that knowledge is interested and political. A British translator translating lndian texts during the time of colonialization will have a different interest than a post-colonial traiislating the sanie tests. Tliey srrk to recognize the role that power inequities play in the transfbrniation of the text. The nrwrr views of translation are not as easily described because they are formed more as questions and focus more on the procrss rather than prescnptive mrtliods for people to follow to arrive at a product. This mkes them more difficult to classify
and talk about. yet in tliat also lies tlieir strenptli.

In the third chapter. 1 explore how tliesr ideas from translation tlieory can help inform both how people see teaching and how teachers relate to the cultural and linguistic differences between themselves and their students. 1 explore the link between translation and teaching a second language and argue that there are many similarities. One of the most important points that ESL (or second language) teachers need to recognize is that tliey sliare the role of translator with their students. If tliis is accepted, it leads to a recognition that teaching a second language is a non-neutral and moral activity and that we must respect the choices our students make. The emphasis translation theory places on process and uncovering difference and inequality

encourages teachers to be more open about their choices in the classroom and what effect they might have on students. The view of language as not neutral and as meaning and language being inextricably linked, as well as a belief that ESL teachers need to expose difference and inequality, implies tliat not only do teachers necd to help students leam the standard language, but they also need to help them critique it. Since translating a text implies a transformation of identity, helping a person lean a new language involves negotiating a new identity. As opposed to the traditional view. these tlieories recognize that as well as things being "lost" (because of untranslatability ). tliiiiys are gained. Recogniziny that language is involved with identity and is a site of coiitlict means that wliat we do in tlir clssroon~ a real rffeci oii our students. Finally. has the role of the teacher in this new mode1 is greatly expanded. Teachers share the role of

translater with tlieir students. and they have to consider the impacdeffect of their social location

on tlieir students and in tlie classroom. Finally. teaching is seen not so much as a science, a
niatter of correctly applyinp tlie correct principles. but as a creativr process involving the whole person.

In the conclusion of my thesis. I suggest possible avenues to further explore these

questions. In addition to theoretical suggestions. 1 also consider the dilemma of the teacher workiny within an institution which does not support any of these ideas. Institutional support is necessary for sonie of the other changes to come about.

Chapter One

My goal, in this cliapter. is to explore the beliefs of mainstream second language trachinp
pedagogy and to show tliat they are of limited use to the teacher. I will start off with a description of an imaginary ESL school to set the scene. 1 will then delineate some of the assumptions mainstream

ESL pedagogy, a positivistic model, makes about language. the role of

teacliers, methodology. and the ESL student. lnterspersed with the outline of the assumptions. 1

will describe many situations, mainly from my own teaching experieiice. where the assumptions
and guidelines presented by this model of teaching are contradicted by or of very limited help to teachen in the classroom. Through these examples, a picture of an alternative model for ESL teacliing will begin to enirrge. In the last part of this chapter. 1 will briefly explain why I have not resortrd to the field of critical prdagogy. sonle of which directlu addresses tlir Iield of ESL.

1 will argue tlial traditional ESL pedagogy. based in the positivistic arena of applied
lingiiistics. is structured so that certain questions can not be asked. There is no space. for example to ask: is learning a second language always a beneficial process? How does it affect

my students wlio feel tiiat the predominancr of Enylish has erodrd or threatens to erode their
culture? How does my position as a white. middie-class, Young, educated. able-bodied, heterosexual woman affect my students? Does ESL teaching tend to infantalize students? How am 1 disempowering rny students? In addition. tliis ESL pedagogy has limited use to teachers when they are confronted witli problems in the clnssroom. There is no talk about approaches to take when working in a multicultural classroom where incidents of racism, sexism, or homophobia occur. There is no guidance on how to handle serious topics. The only pidance this pedagogy seenis to offer is one of avoidance. Classes should be fun and "lite." As long as a

Il

message is being exchanged. learninp is happening. The content seems unimportant. Pennycook
(1994) describes the communication which takes place in the communicative language class as
"froth and empty babble."

Before going into a more systematic exploration of rnainstream second language pedagogy. 1 would like to paint a picture of the "ESL Centre." a composite school made up of many of the private schools 1 have workrd at. 1 think this sketch will help illustrate the details that follow.

The ESL Centre

This (cost-recovery) scliool has a variety of different courses: preparation to pass various

ESL exarns. a general course and a course for international students preparing to attend
university. The studeiits are mainly international students who have corne to Canada for a short time (2 maiiths to a year) to learn English (to iinprove their job prospects. to prepare for travel. to get into sclioo13)and. often. to experience living abroad. Somr are iiiiniigrants who are too advanced for the free ESL training offered by the federal government. They range in age from
19-60 with the majority in their twenties. The school has a communicative approach and has

been moving towards becoming accredited. In an effort to achieve this. an emphasis has been placrd on designing standard curricula and evaluntions. The students' evalutions are based

I n addition to geining acceptance at universities in Englisb speaking countries. often studen need a certain degree of English proficiency to be accepted at universities in their own countries.

'

12

heavily on the difference between their score on the entrance and exit Test of English for Intemational Communication (TOEIC).'The cumcula being developed are very heavily skill
and strategy based. and there is not n~uch concem about content. The general lack of concern

about content is illustrated by a draft copy of a standard writing evaluation form written by sevcral teachers. The form is divided into several areas gramrnar, organization and coherency, but mentions nothiiig about the content or the ideas expressed in the text. Although the teachers are puided by the curricula. once they're in their classrooms, they have quite a bit of freedom.'

The classes are divided into di ffereni skills: reading. writing. listening. talking, vocabulary. grarnmar. etc. Textbooks are pre-assigned and teachers are supposed to use them. (The school has even acquired a book of suggested activities which are "teacher-proof.") Teacliers are encouraped to avoid controversial topics. to avoid yiving their owii opinion. to keep the class fun and to be friendly. Along with standard studeiit evaluations. there are standard teacher evaluations which seem to be the main means of appraising teachers. Teachers are evaluated on whether or not they are friendly (along with beiny well-prepared, organized. etc.). Sometimes the focus on receiviny pood evalua~ions seems to divert attention from more serious issues like planning a good class. trying to decide what is pedagogically appropriate. and interacting with

. This test is administered by Educational Testing Service. the same Company that administers the Test o f ' English as a Foreign Langage (TOEFL). They have a very similar format and focus on listening. reading. and grammatical abilities. In various parts o f Asia. both universities and compiinies sometimes demand a certain TOEIC score.

' One teacher at tliis school. after carefully closing his door, uses tlie firsi day of class to teach his students Iiow to ask for a rend!

13

students. Teacliers soiiietimes use TV shows in class not necessarily because they believe they have any pedagogical value. but because it is perceived that they will lead to good evaluations.

Despite the wony over evaluations, the teachers are quite dedicated to their jobs. Unlike many ESL schools wliere low pay, high turnover and distrust of teachers by the administration create an unpleasant atniosphere wliere teachers are simply marking time to eitlier finding a better ESL job or finding a job in their real field. the atmosphere at ESL Centre is fairly good. The teachers are enthusiastic and share materials and ideas with their colleagues. The sharing of ideas is sometimes difticult because there are only two or three tinm during the working year where al1 of the teachers are available to meet. Wiien meetings do take place. they are usually to inform teachers of decisions already made and rare1y a place to discuss pedapogical issues. Every eight weeks. new students arrive. and a iiew session begins.

Mainstream ESL Pedagogy

The description above will Iielp to anchor the following analysis of some of the assumptions underlying mainstream ESL pedagogy. ln addition to drawing from academic material written about ESL. 1 will also be drawing from my professional knowledge from my training and my

experience teaching ESL for the past eight years. First 1 will discuss how mainstream ESL
pedagogy sees both language itself and the learning of language. There are two main assu~nptions: assumption that there is a "standard" language which is politically neutral. and the the assumption that learning another language is nrver harrnful, but tnostly beneficial and

sometimes neutral. 1 will challenge both of these assumptions with examples that contradict them. Nrxt, 1 will examine the role of the teacher and of methodology. Teachers are generally seen as skilled and neutral technicians who use a scientific methodology to teach students English. 1 will dernonstrate how this view of teachers is inadequate. Finally. 1 will explore how the ESL student is constructed by this mode1 as soineone uninterested in any serious or substantive topics.

ESL pedagogy is based fairly strongly in applied linguistics, wliicli has devrloprd From
positivistic and empiricist roots. Scholars developing the field of applied linguistics at the turn of the century, claimed it as a science. partly to establish it as a valid and separate discipline from linguistics (Pennycook. 1994. 135-145). One of the basic ideas of this discipline is that there is a standard languape to study. describe and classify which is neutral. The idea that there is such a thing as "a" langiiage tliai could be described is relatively new. Jill Bourne argues that it started occurring in and around the sixteenth century with the work of John Locke. She describes hou. Locke's beliefs about individuals having the right to decide based on their experience necessitated that language be "the representation of the world in an agreed code" (Bourne, 1988.
90). Alastair Pennycook argues that the relationship between the move to standardize education

and language in the 19th century was crucial to the fixing of language. He also points out that the standardization of language was intluenced greatly by the societal changes that were

happening at the tinie.' During this time, despite a claim fiom linguists to be moving from a prescriptive viewpoint to a descriptive viewpoint. "there was a clear shift r0ward.s...prescription and proscription. Tliat is. a clear discrimination between vanous forms of language und the banishment of certain forms." (Crowley in Pennycook, 1994, 1 14). Saussure's introduction of his linguistic theory which sees a language as a "fixed code shared by a homogeneous speech

community as the guarantor of shared meanings" (Pennycook, 1994. 12 1 ) continued to enforce

the idea of the existence of standard languages.
111

the 196Os, at the same time as the linguistic

variation of English was becoming more and more evident, Noam Chomsky developed his philosophy of languagc and the concept of an innate universal grainmar. Chomsky's ideas were used to re-establish language as a fornial system by arguing that his concept of an innate universal grammar placed language in the mind of individuals, not in social interactions between individuals (Pennycook, 1994. 122). Although tliere are competing ideas of what language is. essentially words are seeii as "coiivrntioiial and arbitrciry. creatcd by Iiuinan institutions and ... not influenc[inpl ideas" (Bouriie. 1 988.89).

Second language pedagogy continues to rely on the unquestionrd existence of a standard

language (both grammatically and rhetorically) in classes and in teacher training courses.
Lanyuaye is usually prrsented as if it were neutral and natural and had notliing to do with socio-

econoniic power relationships. Grammatical iexts tend to organize the language into rules whicli are unassailable. Occasionally. there is a nod of the head to differences. In the teacher training

" Thus in 1850, the use of "they" as a sinsular pronoun was replaced by 'he' (Pennycook, 1994, 1 12).

course 1 took several years ago. we spent 45 niinutes discussing how we would react to "incorrect" sentences such as. "If 1 was you. 1 wouldn't do it." The discussion focused on whether or not that form could now be considered correct because probably more than 50% of' native English speakers7 now used it rather tlian as a spring board for discussing the huge variety

of Englishes that exist, whether we can even talk about the existence of "English," or the socioeconomic reasons why certain forms are deemed correct. Within second language pedagogy. attempts to challenge the idea of a fixed neutral standard language werr incorporated into the pedagogy. The concept of commirnicrrfive cornpetence, for example. was originaliy a radical critique that challenged the idea of language as a fixed static system and pushed for the examination of language tliat people actually use and have available. However, it was incorporated. made apolitical and now tends to mean "the transmission of fixed n o m s of 'appropriacy "' (Bournr. 1988. 92).

Thrre are many esaniples of hout tliis attitude towards language plays out in an actual classroom. Study books for the Test of English as a Foreign Language (TOEFL) teach students that they should use he when they do not know the gender of the person speaking or acting. There is no acknowledpment of the debate around this issue: this is simply presented as correct Englisli. In addition to graminatical rules. students are also tauglit the correct socio-linguistic way ro comrnunicate. For example. students miglit be taught not to say "shut the door," but to

H o w ihat percentagc was arrived m, I don't know. Of coune. the whole issue d w h o counts as a native speaker is also contentious.

'

17

Say "would you niind sliutting the door" witliout an acknowledgment tliat vriled commands are used much more often by whites and the middle-class (Delpit, 1988,288-291).' Vocabulary is often taught without any reference to altemate meanings of words or to contested meanings of words. Corson points out that this view of languge as a fixed medium of expression is reinforced by dictionaries which "routinely proniote an illusion of agreement on lexical usage" (Corson, 1997, 1 76).

As 1 mentioned above. the reasons for teaching this way are panly because of the acceptance

that there is a standard. neutral form of English and panly because of the need to offer an agreed curriculu~i~ definrd subject niatter. Howrurr, thrre are also other reasons. Many second of language schools are corporations as much as schoois and tend to focus on rnrasurable results. They resort to usine standardize tests like the TOEIC, TOEFL,or Michigan Proficiency test. Al1
of these tests nieasure, in a limited way the listening and reading abilities of students. Although

there are tests availableVwhich undenake to examine the students' ability in al1 aspects of English in a more tliorouyh niannrr. thesr tests takr more time and inore money to administer."' The language on the TOEIC and TOEFL tests is standard, therefore teachers sometimes "trach to the test." III addition. students often need a certain score on a TOElC or TOEFL test in order to

Obviously. there is overlap between the two groups.

"

Ttiese include the Cambridge exams, and the Certificate of Proficiency of English (COPE) test.

'O At the University of Toronto, students used to take the COPE test which was designed to test students' abilities to do the sort of tliings they would be required to do at a university. Recently, this text was cut because of the cost of administering it.

gain admission to university or get a good job. Standard tests like the TOEIC and M E F L are often used as gatekeepers. As Delpit points out. "pretending that gatekeeping points don? exist is to ensure that many students will not pass through them" (Delpit. 1988.292). Finally. most

ESL teacliers tend to be well-educated and extreniely tluent in standard English. TheyWe have
participated in the privileges of speaking this language. It is ofien harder for those in a privileged position to recognize tliat privilepe.' '

In addition to my own recognition that grammatically standard language is not neutral. students sometinies cliallenge the assumption of the neiitrality of standard rhetorical language. 1 will describe an example from my experience whicli gave me an opponunity to think about my own assumptions about language. Ji Hae." a student from Korea, was doing a presentation she had been assigned the previous week. To stan her presentation. slie stood up and apologized IO the class sayinp that she hadn't been able to prepare her presentation the niglit before. so her presentation would be poor. She theii continurd witli her presentation whicli. while not excellent. was solid. Afier lier presentation wlien 1 was giving her feedback. 1 said that her apology was not appropriate for two reasons: first, she had obviously worked hard on her presentation. and second. hearing the apology beforehand made me view her presentation more critically. Had slie not apologized. 1 continued. 1 would have become more engaged in her

'' Applebaum & Boyd (in press) describe examples in tlieir own lives where their privileged positions have blinded them (temporarily) from seeing the impact o f their decisions. See also Ford & Peppersmith (in press) for a similar exploration.
l2

All students' names are pseudonyms.

19

presentation. After soine hesitation, she explained that apologizing before a presentation was the polite tliing to do aniong Koreans. In this particular class. more tlian half of the students were Koreans. If Ji Hae had not apolopized. slie would have corne across as very arrogant to her fellow Koreans. We continued the discussion with the whole class on the impressions apologies make on a Nonh American audience versus a Korean audience and discussed how arrogant North American Enplish speakers sometimes appear to Koreans. The main idea in this exarnple is that the standard discourse noms and rhetorical patterns used when giving a presentation are not neutral. The disconifon that Ji Hae felt using this language among primarily Korean speakers was such that she chose not to use it.

Because of tlie idea that there is a standard language and that it is neutral. there is a belief that the acquisition of languages is an entirely beneficial process with no negative effects. Language is seen as simply a tool used to explain the world, and the speaker has complete control of that tool. After all, if language is sren as a code and meaning is seen as transparent (Boume. 1988,89), then acquiring a new language should be a neutral experience. Although there is now some acknowledgment about the affective filters a person might experience when learning another language, the focus is rnainly on fnistration rather than questioning the basic belief in the beneficial process of leaming another language. Additionally, the acquisition of the English language is seen as particularly important and beneficial. ESL teaching has been seen

mainly in a positive light, oftrn as a fomi of developn~ent work and as a service indusiry. both contributiiig to the 'global village' and al!owiny people and countnes develop (Pennycook,
1994). The school where 1 work, like many otliers, is moving toward a corporate mode1 where

Our students are metarnorphasizing into clients. As the effect of corporatization increases. Englisli is increasingly seen as "a commodity that is offered unproblematically to apparently eager and grateful consumen" (Schenke. l W 8 , 3 ) .

1 will refer to three examples which challenge this assumption that leaming another language

is always a beneficial experience. The first two exampies are from encounten with various students who have had feelings of great ambivalence around the learning of English. While it miylit have some bendicial effects for theiii. it is sonietimes undenaken with a mixture of feelings. Joon Sung. a Korean man I befriended in Seoul. told me 11e was studyinp both English and Japanesr. I asked hini if he Iiked the languages and why he had chosen to study tliem. Ratlier than giving the common answer of studying them to get a good job or because he liked to travel. or found Englisli interesting. he replied that he was studying them for self-defence. He felt that tlie United States and Japan were tlie two countries who liad posed and continued to pose a threat to Iiis country's culture. By studying the languages, he hoped to protect himself and his culture against the encroachments of the other two countries. On other occasions, some of my Quebecois students have sometimes talked about the frustration they've felt about the dominance of the English language and North American culture and the reluctance with which they study English. Another example cornes from an article by Giltrow and Collioun (1992) abouttheir experience with a group of Mayan Guatemalans immigrants to Canada who ultimateiy stopped

21

attending their ESL classes. The Mayans do "not see the acquisition of additional languages in itself as a beneficial or evcn neutral experience" (Giltrow and Colhoun, 1992,52). In Guatemala. they explain. Mayans who choose to leam Spanish sometimes consign themselves to the group of outsiders. of non-Indians. This loss of identity is anything but beneficial. Giltrow and Colhoun point out that English enables Mayans access "to low-paying, temporary employment in the Canadian community ....Mastery of English does not necessarily entai1 mastery of their own lives" (Giltrow and Colhoun. 1992.53-54).
"

In the end of the paper, most of Giltrow and

Colhoun's inforrnants had stopped attending their ESL class. and some had established a selfstudy group to read an iiiiportnt test of the Mayan in Quich. a language they were learning (Giltrow and Colhoun. 1992.63). These examples suggest that learning anoiher language is not always a simply beneficial experience.lJ Tliey also suggest that attitudes might be different depending on the language a student is learninp. Second language pedagogy tends to treat al1 langages as intercliangeable. Ho wever. these examples suggest that the language being learned

a can n~ake difference.

As well as questioning the beneticial or neutral process of learning another language, these examples also suggest that learning another language, depending on the circumstances. can also lead to a change of identity. This change in identity, obviously, is not always welcome. For the

'' See Tollerson ( 1 988) for an argument that ESL classes sponsored by the government for refugees are, in fact. designed to create a group of people only able to compete for unskilled and poorly paid jobs.
'.' See also Goldstein (1 997). She argues that recent Chinese immigrant high school students have many reasons to resist learning or using English in a Toronto hi& school.

Mayans in Canada, the challenge to their identity was so strong tliat they decided to stop studying English despite the seemingly obvious advantages to learning the language. In her book
Los/ in Trcinslurion. Eva Hot'fman describes some of the (less traumatic) changes which happen

to her when she immigrates to Canada as a younp teenager and learns English: Englisli kindliness has a whole system of rnorality behind it, a system that makes "kindliness" an entirely positive virtue....I'm begiming to feel the tug of prohibition, in English. against uncharitable words....Yes, in Polish these people might tend toward "silly" and "duIl"- but 1 force myself toward "kindly" and "pleasant." The cultural unconsciousness is beginning to exercise its subliminal influence (Hoffman. 1989. 108). These examples cliallrnge the idra that leaniinp a lanpiiage is esseniiaily a beneficial or neutral process. For many people. learning a language is fraught with ambiguities. ambiguities which are rarely considered in the classroom.

of The lTiew languap as neutral and language learning as neutral or brnrficial has an

enormous impact on how mainstream ESLlSecond language pedagogy sees the role of the teaclier and the role of nirthodoloyy. In general. second language techers, particuiarly those who work outside of the public scliool system. are seen as soniewliat secondary compared to "reyulai' teachers. A hi& school teacher, for example, might be seen as an educator who has to teach content as well as critical thinking skills. In a discussion on an electronic listserver, T. Mason illustrates this feeling that ESL teachers are not "real" teachers. He says, "unlike Our

23
colleagues in other disciplines, who have real subjects to teach- facts and formulae and such likewe have to teach the unteachable. Lt's a hard li fe!" (personal communication. TESL list. Sept.
1996). In addition. the public school teacher might be expected to deal with larger issues in

societyI5 such as racism. sexism. and so on. The ESL teacher, on the other hand. tends to be seen more as a trained. objective technician who should help her/his students reach their goals as quickly as possible. Although s/he sometimes has relative fieedom in the classroom, other times. s/he is trained to siniply follow the methodology of the particular school and does not have much freedoni in creating hedhis own styIe.I6 Pennycook describes this idea: The construction of the teacher within the discourse of English as an International Language is of a technician. development worker or supplier of a product, of someone enpaged in using the latest and most scientific mrthods to convey the much sought-after neutral medium of communication. Engl ish. (Pennycook, 1992. 38 1) There is a strony empliasis on the teacher adopting a neutral position and siiiiply focusing on lier/liis students' language needs and developing material to satisfy those needs.

'' l have to acknowledge that this view o f teaching is under attack in many public schools across Ontario aiid North America. The roles of high school teacliers are also being severely restricted. However, 1 think the gap tht 1 am describing still exists.
'O Although there are quite a few schools where this is the case, perhaps the most controlled environment 1 have taught in was at Berlitz. After a three day training session in the Berlitz method, basically a set of drills we did with the students. we were presented with the Berlitz book and were told that there were micropliones in each of the classrooms and that, periodically, Our lessons would be monitored to ensure W e were using the Berlitz method properly. Intercstingly. tlir Berlitz book, which is used in many countries, had only one picture of person o f colour (wlio was a nieclianic).

As Pennycook says above, there is a perception that the teacher uses the "latest and most scientific methods" to teach English." At the moment, the latest scientific method to teach ESL
is the communicative. leamer-centred classrooin loosely based on the ideas of Stephen Krashen.

Krashen's hypothesis in a nutshell is ihat people will acyuire a language if they receive comprehensible input. in other words, a message they understand (Griggs. Progosh. van Slyck & Wagner. 1997.2). A teacher's role within this approach is to design cornfortable situations where coniprehensible messages can be exchanged. Krashen believes in a division of acquisition
and learning and that an. knowledgr yained tlirough lcurning. studying grammatical rules. for

example. will not Iielp the learner to brcome a proficient speaker of Enylish. Some schools have sucli a strict rule against teaching grammar that teachen are not allowed to use metalanguage (such as noun or prcsci~f perficr) l 8 to explain anytliing. When teachers and teacher trainers ta1k about O lder methods. li ke Gramniar-Translation or Audio-lingual approaches, there is a sense. sometimes explicit. that now we have a much more enlightened approach. Tliere is an assumption tliat there is a teleological progression of methods which is bascd on scieiitific

l 7 1 feel I need to emphasize here that although I will be criticizing these assumptions, some of the ideas and training that second language teachers receive help immensely in teaching. Encouraging teachers to focus on. for example, the purpose of the activity, how to help students with strategies, trying to focus on salient features of the language, etc. is extremely useful when teaching. Adopting a different frame does not entail getting rid of everything in the old frame.

" This led to the ridicutous situation of renaming the present perfect tense. "Let's just cal1 it 'George.' Now. why do we use George in this sentence"? Unforrunately, it also led to a teacher being tlred because she answered a student's question.

'

studies of language acquisition.

This belief in the supreme importance of metliodology has been supported in different ways. Fint. the belief that language itself is a standard. neutral thing lends support to the idea that there is a best way for students to acquire it and for teachers to teach it. Second, as 1 have mentioned, the niethodology itself has tended to corne from outside the field from the academic discipline of applied linguistics. The frustration with this state can be seen in many cornments teachen make both in staffroonis and on the Internet. Ronald Green says: Froin niy talks at conferences and at univrrsities in Europe. I can verif\.the deep well of discontent of *EFL* [Englisli as a Foreign Languiige] (as opposrd to ESL) teachers'" witli an approach tliat is thrust upon theni from above. What they say is that the extreme form of comniunicativity which the "experts" continually exhort them to adopt. [sic] bas not been found a very efficient way of gettinp students to learn (personal communication. TESL List, Aug. 1996).?') Applied linguistics is in turn based on the positivist field of linguistics. Professors working in the field of'applied linguistics have. partly in an attempt to establish the field as legitimate and separate from linguistics. focused on creatiny supposedly scientific rnethods of learning and teaching anotlier language. However. Pennycook ( 1996) argues convincingly that when the concept of "Method" is examined closely. there is little coherency in the idea. He believes that

'" Many teachrrs feel that teacliing English as a foreign language, Le., in a country where English is not spoken, requires a di fferent ripprorich tlian teacliing Englisli as ri second language. See Sampson ( 1983) and Burnab~ Sun ( 1989) for more discussion on tliis issue. &
=" Ronald Sheen says, "This field has been dominated by applied linguists such as Krashen, Widdowson, Candlin and Long who appear more concemed with theorizing about SLA [Second Language Acquisition] and advocatins doctrinaire teachin~ principles WITHOUT concerning thernselves with the necessity o f dcmonstrating by mrans o f long term pilot studies the greater efficacy o f their proposed methods" (personal communication. 'TESL list, August 1996).
'

26

so-called scientific methods "serve the advancement of academic careers and limit the practice of teachers" (Pennycook. 1996.609). Third, in the last few years, there has been an atternpt to professionalize ESL teaching amongst practitioners. Organizations like Teaching English to Speakers of Other Languages (TESOL) have started a process of accreditation for Intensive English Programs (IEPs) and have written various documents outlining the minimal conditions

of treatment of ESL teacliers. This has been done in an attempt to win more respect and money2'
for the job. During this time, the academic requirernents to obtain a good ESL job in North America (and other parts of the world) have been expanding from a short certificate course to a Master's in Teaching English as a Second Language (TESL). Education. or Linguistics. In addition. ESL teachers themselves have felt it necessary to focus on methodology to distinguish themselves from the 500 million other English-as-a-first-language speakers. After all, if ESL teacliers do not have any "real" tliings to teach. as Mason asserts, and if teacliing grarnmar is seen as not useful. the only thing left is a thorough knowledge and grasp of the scientific metliods to teach the lanpuage.

There are quite a few implications that follow. given the assumption that the teacher is a neutral technician that simply follows the inost advanced scientific methods to teach a neutral mrans of communication. An important one is tliat the teacher does not have to acknowledge or think about hedhis social position. The fact that slhe is, for example. white. middle class.

The going rate in Toronto at a private languiige school is as low as $12 per teaching hour. Colleges and Universities tend to pay between $30-50.

'' ESL teachers are generally paid less tlian public school teachers (sometimes quite a bit less).

heterosexual. etc.. is seeii as completely unrelated to her/his teaching. In addition. these assumptions imply that the actual content of the class is not at al1 important. If al1 that matters is that messages are being exchangeci. what the messages are about is seen as unimportant. This leads to such "typical" ESL activities as "describe the qualities of a perfect spouse" or "euthanasia is a positive thing, discuss." When students are asked, again and again. to talk about the typical food of their country. or their favourite movie. tliey get frusirated and begin to feel infantalized. One student said. "1 was sick and tired of telling 'my future spouse' things" (Student in Schenke. 1996.3). Byung Kuk. another student, annoyed with the silly topics he had to discuss in class commented tliat he supposed ESL students had to talk about those topics because they wcre like children (persona1 communication, August 1 998). Final1y. if teaching

ESL is sern as a poli tically neutral activiO*. then any techer who niakrs herhis pproach explicit
or who acknowledges her/his position as a political one tends to be defined apaiiist the rest of teacliers wlio are teacliing in a "neutral" way. This is both difficult for the "political" teacher and for other teachers who might wisli to explore different ideas but fear ostracization or losing their job for doing so.

There are many situations in the classrooni and in the staff-room where relying on the tenants of niainstream ESL pedagogy is unheipful or even negative. 1 wiil talk about two examples here. First. at a staff meeting at the school where 1 work, we had a (bief) discussion about controversial issues and racism. The two incidents sparking the discussion were cornplaints of racism from students. The trst involved two (Jewish) students froni lsrael who reacted to particular way a textbook assignment comparing the middle passage from the slave trade to the

28 Holocaust was handled by the (Christian) teacher. The other cornplaints were a few comments on the evaluation form which suggested that the teachers were giving the European students preferential treatment (as compared to the Asian students). The program director briefly outlined the two situations and then said. essentially, to be careful about introducing controversial issues
and about treating everyone equally. There was a short discussion following this announcement

where teachers talked about the ways they attempted to deal with controversial issues. Some teachers said they avoided controvenial issues; others said they were very careful never to reveal their persona1 opinions in class: others talked about developing a teacher persona to be used in the classroom. Tlir nictrting endrd with anotlier admonishment to be careful. Af~er some all. teacliers said. the students were here to have fiin. Schenke notes: while in an educational model (albeit a Non11 American educational model), controversy is held to be a resource for learning and a forum for dialogue and student voice, in a corporate climate. it can be seen to nin the risk of upsetting client interests or of teachers imposing their persona1 opinions (Schenke, 1998.4)

1, and several colleagues. left the meeting feel dissatisfied. What did "being careful" mean?

Should we avoid al1 controversial issues? Should we keep ourselves out of the classroom? (Whatever that means?) 1s having fun the main motivation of our students? Presumably. al1 of

us are already trying to treat our students fairly. Why is it that some people felt we were
behaviiig in racist ways? How could they be sreing thinys differently from us? Was this a place where we should consider how Our social location midit effect the way our students see us and
how we see them? This is a situation where it is evident that the mainstrearn pedagogy is not

neutral nor helpful. Indeed, it seems to stop discussion rather than encourage it. Controversy.

29

conflict, racism. sexism. homophobia. etc., do occur in second laquage ciassrooms. Within a pedagogy where conflict is meant to be avoided. there is no guidance on how to deal with it if it occurs.

The other example 1 would like to discuss also challenges the assumptions that the prevailing

ESL methodology is neutral. At the moment. I am teaching a new course designed for ESL
students wlio are or wlio wish to be ESL teacliers in their own countries. The course focuses on developing the students' language skills throuph teacher training materials. Recently. my class was discussing what kiiid of feedback teachers should give ta students on their writing. We were discussing feedback on organization when Jonathan. a Taiwanese student. said that he had an experience where he felt insulted wlien a teacher told him he had to re-write his essay because it was written in a Chinese style. He felt an attack on his organization was an attack on his way of tliinkiny and l i s culture. Sandra. a Mexican student. said tliat she felt it was ver): important to teacli her students standard Eiiglisli. We then got into a discussion about what constituted standard written English. Some students mentioned the five paragraphs essay that they had al1 learned to write as standard. 1 mentioned that. in fact, at a university level, the five paragraph essay was not standard.?' 1 also talked about how 1 felt tliat various authors (such as Gloria Anzaldua and soine of the French feminists) had challenged the standard. Jonathan said that he
expected Iie would use English priniarily to communicate with other Asian speakers; therefore.
See Atkinson & Ramanthan (1995). They studied the writing course offered to English and nonEnglish speaking students at a University. While non-English speaking students studied five-paragraph ' essqVs.in the course designed for native English speakers, it is "considered anatherna to the full and natural development of ideas and. as a result, is highly proscribed" (Atkinson and Ramanthan, 1995,547).

he thought retaining the Chinese rhetorical style would perhaps suit his purposes better. It is clear from the description of this discussion that the seemingly neutnl suggestion of teaching standard English organization is not so neutral. and standard English might not be so standard?

The Studenr

I would iike to conclude tliis section by esaniining how the ESL student is seen by the
prevailing approach. ESL students are often seen as uninterested in any serious, substantive topics. or if they are seen as interested. they are seen as unable or unwilling to demonstrate any sustained interest in a particular topic. This cm be seen by looking ai ESL textbooks or teacher resource books wliich are ritlier full of trivial topics. or address serious topics but in a very cursory way. This attitude was also deinonstrated by the reaction at iiiy workplace to an issue of the student newspaper for wliich 1 am CO-editor.That particular session. there were many dedicated students who wrote and rewrote their pieces. One wrote a report on the first sexual harassrnent case in Korea: another. a critical look at multi-culturalism in Canada; and a group of students wrote letters to the editor expressing k i r thoughts on a murder committed by a child.

My CO-editor 1 were told that the students couldn't have written the articles because they and
were too well-written, too sophisticated and on topics that were too serious. In addition, we were told that the articles in the paper weren't interesting or appropriate for our students. The paper

See Corson 8: Van Lier ( 1997) and Corsn & Wodak ( 1997) for a review of the critical work done on non-standard language use and the social marginaiization of the speakers of non-standard language.

31
wasn't sufficiently "fun" or "interactive." However, the students were the ones who had chosen the topics and had been willing to spend the time re-writing, editing and polishing their work. Another example which illustrates the paternalistic attitude some teachers take involves a student who had written a niystery story with some reference to lesbianism. Her teacher was reluctant to distribute the story to the rest of the class (her original plan) because she felt she needed to protect her students from the idea of lesbianisrn.

The assumption that ESL students "just wanna have fun" is embiematic of the general
assumptioii that we can know and understand Our students thoroughly aiid that thry are more like frivolous children than adults. Tliat is, t h e is a temptation to "explain" the Japanese. the Koreans or the Latin Americans. This was very evident when 1 was teaching in Japan. Foreign teachers would gather at a bar after work and talk about how the Japanese were like this and like that. Often times in an ESL staff-room. you will hear how Koreans. for example. don't think critically. or Latin Americans are lazy. Sonietimes ail of our students will get lumped together. Recently. in the staff-room. there was a discussion about how our students reacted to older female teachers who were single or closeted (to their students) lesbians. Phrases like "rhey can't understand," "they feel sorry for me." and "I get mistrated with fheir attitude" were flying around. In another situation, a teacher. fmstrated at her students' difficulties in writing a Test of Witten English (TWE) exam,'" exclaimed "our students can't think!" This tendency to lump

The TWE is part o f the TOEFL test, which is used estensively by Universities in North America. The test is 30 minutes and students nwst br able to write a well-organixed and supported 5 paragraph essay. Little depth o f thought is required.

''

32

students into one group. or even into ethnic groups is unhelphil and untrue. Our students corne

from as many different ideological positions as we do.

The rnainstrearn ESL approacli is said to be a learner-centred one. but. in reality. it is teachercontrolled. As 1 mentioiied, in some schools. students want grammar explanations, but teachers

are not allowed to give them. Students are often the object of teaching. When there are
problems, Le., students not doing what the teacher has organized. or students talking about something else, there is a tendency to try and funlier restrict the situation. Giltrow and Colhoun
(1992) describe how the initially critical rrsercli carried out by Pica. a srconci languap

acquisition researcher. ends up reinforcing power inequities. Pica suggests tliat the remedy for
teucher y iicsrions which are mostly used to test students, rather than to clarify meaning, is to

design an "activity whicli rquires that they exchange information" (Pica, 1987, 16). In other words. there is a tendency to try and create stricter controls rather than to suggest a different way
of going about thinys.

Another example of a teacher controlled exercise, which purports to be about students positively influencing each other, was developed by Tim Murphey (Murphey. 1998). Murphey's goal was to use near peer models to help students adjust their zone of proximal development

(Murphey. 1998). In otlier words, he wanted students to encourage each otlittr to be open to
various i d e s for improving their English. His ideas seemed to work well with his students; however, the way he implernented his ideas seemed paternalistic. His goal was both to increase the time his students spent speaking English and to improve their attitude about their ability and

33
the desirability to speak English. He asked his students to cal1 each other and talk on the phone for 10 minutes once a week. His students keep uaion logs in which they reported their feelings about the activities they did in class and for h~mit.t.ok. Most (90%) of the comments about the phone exercise were negative. However, Murphey selected the positive comments, published them in a newsletter, and distributed the paper, telling his students that these were only some of the cornments made (Murphey, 1996.3). He repeated the phone exercise several times. always following up witli only the positive comments that students made. He round that more and more students were reporting that they enjoyed the exercise.

Murphey was excited about the change in students' attitudes, the fact that they were speaking niore English and the fact that the students had influenced each other. If students are speaking more Enylish. tliis is a positive change. However, the method tliat Murphey used seems probleinatic. Altliouyh students did write the comments he published. Murphey completely controlled which comments were published. If 1 liad been a student in his class. 1 think 1 would have felt manipulated. Did students genuinely change their attitude or did they simply realize the kind of comments he wanted to hear? If al1 the negative or critical comments are ignored, does the student get the message that what they say is not important? Writing an action log seerns to be only another way for the teaclier to control his students.

Tliere are many cases where both teachers and students resist this picture of students as uninterested in serious topics. as knowable and as objects to be controlled. Sometimes, in the case of the Mayans in Vancou\fer, it leads to students dropping out of classes. Elizabeth. a

34

Chinese woman 1 tutor wlio was in a low intermediate class of English. told me about her decision to drop out of ESL classes and seek help in a literacy program at Parkdale Project Read3 because she was fmstrated by the silly games she played in the classroom which, she felt, didn't help her. She showed me her vocabulary list which contained some of the following words: ubiquitous, panacea, voluptuous, void. These were the words that were interesting to her. She wanted to engage in English at the intellectual level she was capable of. Arleen Schenke. a teacher at the school I work at. staned a class organized and run like an undergraduate university class called "Perspectives on Multiculturalism: A Canadian Context." The class combined content, critical thought. language skills and the students' knowledge. Schenke cornments that "the cross-culturd studies focus atteinpts to offer a context wliere students are cliallenged to build on the intelligence and complexity of tlirir rxisting knowledges...in short. the approach implies taking students seriously" (Schenkr, 1996,4). Students in the class made the following comments about the class: "I higlily recommrnd this type of course because it's the real way to learn language. Language is the idea of thinking" (Student in Schenkr. 1996, 3). "It's better. Even though we learned about some ski11 to say something in other class, we didn't have chance to use it freely and seriously. And if we don't use that expression. we will forget everything naturally. It's not useful." (Student in Schenke. lW6,6). Despite the success of this course. there was no administrative suppon to establish this as a regular class. Teachers need the suppon of the administration.

?' The program is actually intended for only English speaking clients. However. she managed to persuade them to accept her- a task not norniallq assuilied to be witliin the ability of a low-interniediate student.

Critical Pedagogy

As 1 have been describing and criticizing the mainstream ESL pedagogical approach, an

alternative model has been emerging. In this new model, language is seen as political, and leaming a new language involves changes in identity and is sometimes a dif'fcult, ambiguous process. Teachers are seen as educators in the broad sense and might have to deal with issues such as discrimination. They consider how their social location might affect their choices and their students. The neutrality and stability of the concept of methodology are questioned and the role of controversy within teaching is being reconsidered. The view of the student as only interested in having a good time is also questioned. This alternative model has developed through objections to the mainstrearn model from both experiences 1 have had and fiom ideas and experiences described by scholars working within the framework of critical pedagogy and

ESL. Critical pedagogy does have much to offer. It is important to consider why 1 am tuminp to
iranslation theory to develop these ideas rather than continuing to work with critical pedagogy. While critical pedagogy is very helpful in that it exposes the myth of a natural and neutral pedagogy and acknowledges issues of racism, sexism, etc., in the critical pedagogy that 1 have read," 1 feel there is an implicit belief that teachers have the power to "liberate" their students. Rachel Martin's comment on (Freirean) critical pedagogy resonates with me: the only role it [Freirean teaching] lefi me (as a teacher) was that of facilitator...whose consciousness was already raised. This despite the rhetoric of CO-learning which many to radical teachers appeal, but in which I've felt many of us have had no more than a token

" Mainly

Friere (1970) and Giroux.

belief (Martin in Schenke, 199 1, 1 13). " Despite my reservations about some of the field of critical pedagogy, the main reason why 1 have tumed to translation theory is 1 believe using it to develop a mode1 of teaching is simply a different route to arrive at some of the same considerations and some new insights. This route might be politically advantageous because it might be more compelling to ESL teachen. Critical pedagogy, fiom what 1 have seen, tends to alienate teachers (myself included) because it is perceived as rejecting traditional ESL pedagogy outright rather than incorporating some of the useful techniques or ideas? Seeing teaching a second language as a kind of translation and then considering the implications for teaching might be a less threatening, more successfl rnove to make. 1 will not be making the argument that my rnodel might be more effective directly because it requires a different sort of proof, one beyond the scope of this paper; however, 1 believe it is important to consider this type of issue as well.

" Having made the previous point, I do have to acknowledge that there are many scholars working in the field of critical pedagogy or greatly influenced by critical pedagogy who have worked towards an alternative model. See Schenke ( 1991 ), Pennycook ( 1989, 1994, 1996), Morgan (1 997), Boume (1 988), Scollon ( l997)and Peirce ( 1995) among others.

When I first read the article quoted earlier by Giltrow and Colhoun (1992) about the Mayan studying English in Vancouver, 1 was very angry with the tone of the article. It seemed to me like the authors applauded the Mayan efforts to resist learning English and, at the same tirne. ridiculed the efforts of their English teacher. The authors did not seem to acknowledge the reasons why the teacher was acting the way she or he was. My first reaction was defensive, and 1 couldn't hear another point of view. As 1 retumed to the article several times over the next few yean, 1 was able to get bcyond the tone of the article and iisten to what the authon were saying. 1 was able to ask myself how 1 would react if 1 had been their teacher. Would 1 have been able to hear their point of view? Would they have expressed it to me? Would I have dismissed them as not serious?
2a

Chapter Two

In the first chapter. 1 explored how mainstrearn ESL pedagogy sees language, the role
of the teacher and the student. Using examples rnainly frorn my teaching experience. I

argued that tliis view was inadequate. Through my examples and objections to mainstrearn ESL pedagogy, a picture of the approach 1 favour has bepun to emerge. However, 1 have not yet justified the new approach. What 1 will do in this chapter is
justify this approach. using work done in trmslation theory and moral philosophy.

First. 1 will present a sketch of traditioiial translation theory" from which and apinst which the translation throry 1 will be using to makr my argument lias developed. Traditional tlieory bears a remarkable resernblance in philosophical approach to mainstream ESL pedagogy. Traditional translation theory is persuasive. pervasive. and it makes a powerful appeal to "cornmon sense." Most people would probably agree. on first thinking. with the preniise that translation is a mimetic procrss wherr the message is
read. understood. and then re-coded in aiiotlier lanpuage. It seems to niake sense to

evaluate translations by comparing the translation to the original. Alter all, a translation is nieant to be a substitution for the original. Moreover, if the translation is meant to be a

"' It is important to note tliat what 1 an1 collapsing into the term "traditional translation theory" is a variety o f diffrent schools o f tliought about translation. In creating this picture. I have drawn on literature from Eugene Nida (Nida, 1969, Gentzler. 1993 and Venuti, 1995) and others who have focused on the science o f translation. I.A. Richards (Gentzler, 1993) and others who have focused on the "American translation workshop", as well as Gideon Toury (Gentzler, 1993), ltamar Even-Zohar (Even-Zohar, 1979) and others involved in Polystream theory and translation studies. For an excellent overview o f the field, see Gentrler ( 1993). 1 have focused sliglitiy more on Nida because o f his enorrnous and coiitinuing influence on the field.
'

substitution. translators should try and keep themselves out of the picture as niuch as possible. This view of translation is based on seeing language as neutral code or tool. 1 will argue. drawinp on particular moral philosophers such as Young and Boyd, that this theory tends to ignore or diminish difference. Ignoriiig difference. 1 will argue. is hannful. 1 will then explore how different translation theories are more helpful because they make more of an attempt to deal with difference and inequality. In the third chapter.
I will use the work 1 do with these theorists to help me to clarify some of the ideas

introduced in the first cliapter. 1 will also show why the consideration of translation theory is fniitful for ESL trachers.

Tradi tional Translation Theory

If we examine the Latin roots of the word ~runslution wliich are Irons (across) and
krtii.s (past participlr of

the verb to carry). the definition of translation. to carry across.

commits us to seeing iiieaning as somethiny like an object which is transportable. Eugene Nida, an influential translation theorist who worked on the science of translation, supports this view. He says, "words may be likened to suitcases used for carrying various articles of clothing" (Nida, 1969.492). In this view, the meaning or content and the f o n are completely separable. This view of language commits us to the belief that there is an unchanging object in the world to wliich many labels are attached: bread,ph. brot, pita,

etc." Words are simply labels for a content that remains unchanged throughout time and across cultures. Andrew Benjamin (1989) has said that this view of language dates back to the Platonic separation of f o m and content. Benjamin argues that Plato's waming about the dangers of poetry in the Republic is based on a belief of an underlying singularity. Plato sees literal meaning as coming first and then being "dressed up" into poetry. The reason why poetry might be harmful for people is because the figurative language will obfuscate the literal or ''real" meaning. The figura1 language of poetry is seen as dependent on the literal utterance. Benjamin points out that this implies that "ambiguity may exist, polysemy is possible, however each must always be viewed as a secondary effect prior to which is the singularity of the literal" (Benjamin, 1989, 13).

This singularity is presumed to underlie al1 languages. These views of language3'

explored above assume both that it is neutral and that "we al1 live in a common nonlinguistic world .... which different languages happen to label differently. with different sounds" (White, 1990,243-254).

The assumption that language is neutral and that the form and content are easily separable affects the way the foreign (or original) text, the translated text and the

JO Benjamin (1992) uses the example o f "brot and pita" when he argues that although they both refer to a similar object, the mode of intention is very different. He says the words "are not interchangeable....They strive to exclude each other" (Benjamin, 1992,75).

Pennycook argues that in second language teaching language is seen as "a fixed code shared by a homogeneous speech community as the guarantor of shared meanings.... This suggests, therefore, that there is some kind of tacit agreement on meanings in English that is shared by speakers the wortd over" (Pennycook. 1994, 12 1 )

relationship between the two are seen. In addition, traditional translation sees the original as "a form of self-expression appropriate to the author, a copy true to his personality or intention, an image eiidowed with resernblance" (Venuti, 1992, 3). There is a belief that tlie meaning of the foreign text is eternal. static, monosemic and knowable (if the reader is properly educated) (Gentzler, 1993, 13). There are no ambiguities; there is a correct reading and a correct translation possible. Gregory Rabassa illustrates the belief in the eternal nature of the original as well as the belief in the genius of the creator with the following observation: The fact is that tliere is a kind of continental drift that slowly works on language as words wander away from their original spot in the lexicon and suffer the accretion of subtle new nuances.... The choice made by an earlier translater. then, no longer obtains. and we niust clioose again. Through some instinct wrouglit of genius. the author's original choice of word and idiom seem to endure (Rabassa in Venuti, 1992,3).

The translation is juxtaposed to the original and is seen as no more than "a copy of a copy. derivative. simulacral. false. an image witliout resemblance" (Venuti, 1992.3). lt is a derivative

piece of work not even owned by tlie traiislator." Although there are particularities and beauty

of form which might get lost in translation, these are not important to translating the core
meaning. This view of the relationship between the original and the translation is based on the view of language as neutral and a belief in some son of backdrop of universality. Some iranslators subscribe to belief in a kind of univenal language; others draw on the idea of the

'' Translators usually do not have the copyright to their translations (Venuti, 1995. 8-9).

42

"universal" human experience. Any cultural andor linguistic differences are seen as secondary to the core meaning which underlies al1 text. This is clear in Nida's assertion that the translater's job is to "draw aside the curtains of linguistic and cultural differences so that people may see clearly the relevance of the original message" (Nida in Venuti, 1995,2 l).j3 The underlying idea is that there is a core text or meaning which transcends al1 particular features: it is untouched by the nationality, ethnicity, gender, race, sexual preference, and language of the author, as well as the time and place it was written.

The evaluation of the translated text proceeds on two levels. First, the translated text is evaluated in comparison with the original; it has to be the "sarne" as the original. Since there are obviously many differences between the two texts, Nida suggests the aim should be to produce "in the ultimate receptors a response similar to that of the original receptors" (Nida in Venuti,

1995.2 1). As rnentioned above, the original is treated as somehow unchanging and beyond
interpretation. a reference that everyone c m refer to and agree upon. The difficulty in making the comparison has nothing to do with trying to understand why the translator made one choice rather than another and everything to do with deciding if the translation is "proper," if the meaning has been camed over. According to Nida, the cornparkon is unproblematic, except that the person who is verifying the translation might be so familiar with the original that they might read into the translation what isn't there (Nida. 1969,495).

Nida's belief in the universality of the message stems, in part, from his work as a missionary and bibte translator. For Nida, God is the source o f meaning and, hence, meaning can be trusted to be stable and unitary (See Venuti, 1995,2223 and Gentzler, 1993,4440).

''

The main point is that there seems to be one "correct" translation. To be judged a correct translation, in addition to being the same as the original, the text has to fit into the literary noms of the target or receiving culture. The text has to sound like an English text. This view is clear in the assertion by Frederic Will that the translations of some poems by Gyula Illyes written in Hungarian. a language and literature that he did not know well, were not good translations because they didn't "feel" like English poems (Gentzler, 1992,32). Lawrence Venuti agrees that the text has to sound like an English text to be successful. He argues that a translated book is seen as successful "wlien it gives the appearance that it is not translated. tliat it is the original" (Venuti, 1992 4).

Given that language is neutral and that a translation should be an accurate "copy" of the

original. what should the job of the translator be? The translator has to move beyond the actual words of the text to grasp the Platonic idea of the piece which lurks somewhere beliind or over the text. Although this seems exaggerated. tliere are schools of translation that seem to think this
was. Indeed. in some scliools of traditional translation theory, it was not considered essential for

a translator to have a thorough knowledge of the language to be translated. Milan Kundera tells of meeting one of his translators who didn't kiiow any Czech. He asks the translator. "'Then how did you translate it?' 'With my heart.' And he [the translator] pulls a photo of me from his wallet" (Kundera in Gentzler, 1992. 38). Translators often cal1 on a long tradition of being sympathetic to the author. abnegating their voice to that of the original author and, in effect.

becoming the author. In the 17th century, the Earl of Roscommon writes of this sentiment: Chuse an author as you chuse a friend .... You grow Familiar, Intimate, and Fond; Your thoughts, your Words, your Stiles, your Souls agree No longer his Interpreter, but He. (Earl of Roscommon, in Chamberlain. 1992,58) Minimizing any effect that their personality or social location might have on the text is very
important because translators are merely the medium through which the voice of the author must

shine. According to Nida, the translator is a technician who must make every attempt to reduce the impact of his "personality" on the translated text. The translator can reduce his influence through the scientific process of analyzing the source language into its kcrnel structures, or corc meanings, transferring them and then re-coding h e m into the target or receptor language (See diagram below). This process is meant to reduce the chance of a mistake in the transfer of meaning. Similar to the idea of the original text as a coherent whole which transcends al1 particular features. so too. the social location (gender. race, class, etc.) of the translator is seen as irrelevant because it does not affect the text.

Source Language Text

Receptor Language Text

Core (Theoretical Level Core

of Transfer)
(N ida, 1969,483-493)

Finally, the translator is clearly unimportant in cornparison to the original author. This is illustrated in different ways: copyright law, pay and acknowledgment of the translator. Translators. particularly literary translators, are paid poorly3' and do not have copyrights to their translations. Venuti points out that copyright laws in British and the United States are careful to define translation as a "second-order product" whose copyright is vested in the (original) author.
#

In the United States, a translation can be defined as a "work for hire" which means that the owner and therefore. "author" of the translation is the person who hired the translator. (Venuti, 1992,2).

The translator is not usually rnentioned in a review of a book other than in one or two sentences
which tend to either praise the "clear, fluent. transparent" prose or criticize the "translationese".

The translator is contrasted to the original author who is seen as creative and expressive. The
translator. on the other hand, is ofien seen as a second-rate writer doing an uncreative task or a kind of technician who must always remernber that she is working for someone else. This view of the translator is eloquently summarized by John Dryden in the 16th century3' He wrote:

.'' rate in 1990 was from forty to ninety American dollars per thousand English words. Venuti points The out that the translation of a 300 page novel would pay between $3,000 to $6,000. (Venuti, 1995, 1 1). If translators buiid up a reputation, they have some power to negotiate their rates; however, in order to build up a reputation. they have to focus almost exclusively on preparing manuscripts. They have no time to do any "sustained methodological reflection" (Venuti, 1992, 1 ).
" It is important to point out that although this vision of the work of a translator has dominated translation theory, there have been challenges to this image at the same time. For example. in 1540, Etienne Dolet published a treatise on translation wliere he insisted that "the translator must 'not enter into . slavery' ....[and] the role of the translator is an active one" (Bassnea, 1996, 14). 1 draw attention to this because although al1 of the theorists 1 will make reference to are from the 20th century. 1 do not want to imply that it is only now that people have "seen the light."

But slaves we are, and labor in another man's plantation; we dress the vineyard, but the wine is the owner's .....He, who invents. is master of his thoughts and words: he c m tum and vary them as he pleases, till he renders thern hamonious; but the wretched translator has no such privilege: for, being tied to the thoughts, he must rnake what music he can in the expression; and, for this reason, it cannot always be so sweet as that of the original (Dryden in Lefevere, 1992,24).

Traditional Translation and ESL

As is obvious from the description of traditional translation theory and the description in the previous chapter about mainstream second language pedagogy, there are many similarities between the two. First, they both stress the neutrality of language and see it as a tool. Translating

a foreign text or learning a language should not affct the core identity of the text or student
because there is a belief that language and meaning are separated. In ESL pedagogy, consequently, learning another language is always seen as a beneficial, or at the very least. neutral process. Although traditional translation theory recognizes that something is lost from the original, there is a belief that the core message can be transferred relatively untouched. So the beneficial aspects of translation such as: transiating the bible, and other holy books, enriching the mother tongue, encouraging cross-cultural communication, etc., have usually been seen as outweighing the negative. The role of the teacher and translator, given the belief in the neutrality of language and the belief that both are positive things, is that of a skilled, knowledgeable, but uncreative technician who must strive to reduce the impact of her personality and social location on the texthtudent. The translator either "becornes one" with the author to act as the author's voice or utilizes a scientific methodology. Likewise, the teacher must seek to

47

be neutral. follow the latest scientific method developed by applied linguistics and simply allow the student to fmd his/her voice. The product of teaching and translating, tlie student or text.

must fit into the receiving culture, in this case. the standard English culture. The text must read
like an English book. while the student will be judged on how closely slhe approximates the (mythical) native English speaker. There is a belief that the process can be neutral.

The underlying similarity between the two approaches. and where 1 believe the problem lies. is the way each of them approaches differencr and inequality. Both approaches tend to subscribe to a belief in univenality and a belief that the differences that do exist are relatively trivial. more questions of lifestyle than real difference. This is clearly evident when Nida talks about revealinp the original message of the text by simply opening "the curtains of linguistic and cultural differences" (Nida in Veiiuti. 1995.2 1). In the ESL classroon~. difference and diversity are rrduced to what Du-iglit Boyd calls the "niuiicb. stoinp. and dress iip" (Boyd. 1996. 612) approach. focusiiig only on superficial aspects of cultural difference like food. traditional dress. art. music and dance. The problem with these approaches is that a reliance on universal experience or beliefs tends to lead to a situation where the dominant group" in society presents its view as the universal one and is reluctant to probe any funher. Boyd points out that

any potentially threatening questions of difference....are banned by the Pollyanna-ish belief that it can only be misguided to focus on what might pull people apart when, in fact. tliey really are essentially the same. The 'searching' [for universals] need not go on because the universals are already within the walls, provided by the dominant moral view (Boyd, 1996,626).

; "

In the case o f ESL, the dominant group is usually white, middle-class English-speaking women.

48

Accepting that there is such a thing as "reasonable pl~ralism"~' that there are differences in and belief that are incommensurable is more likely to lead to a situation where people continue to attempt to understand others rather than stopping, assuming that we are al1 more or less the same.

Different Translation Theory

In this section 1 argue that traditional translation relies on this view of fundamental similarity

and suggest that other translation theorists offer us a way to think about language, difference,
inequality in a way that does accept the existence of reasonable pluralism and that does recognize difference and inequality. One important thing to acknowledge at the beginning is that the ideas
1 have taken from translation theorists are frorn a wide range of multidisciplinary approaches.

Scholars in this field draw from disciplines as varied as linguistics, philosophy, literary criticism.
law, and performance art (not strictly a discipline). My goal in this thesis is not to provide a

comprehensive overview of translation theory, nor to explain, in detail, the positions of key theorists. Rather, 1 am interested in taking various ideas articulated by certain translation theorists who resist the approach of traditional translation theory in order to create a new model for second language teachers. As I said in the introduction, 1 hope this model will create a situation for teachers where they are encouraged to be more self-reflective, consider the impact their social location has. and see the job as creative. This different view on teaching will

Boyd defines this as "the recognition that any number of comprehensive doctrines about how humans ought to lead their lives may be held by equally reasonable people. even though these doctrines can and do provide fundamentally incompatible guidance" (Boyd, 1996.6 14).

"

49

empower students, assign them real responsibility, and enable students to leam the language in a more thorough fashion.

The first issue to tackle is that of language because the view of language a particular theorist holds substantially shapes their view of translation. As 1 argued in the fint section, the view of language given by traditional translation theonsts is that of a common world with different labels attached to al1 the objects. To go back to the same example, imagine a loaf of bread sitting on the counter. Attached to the bread are al1 sorts of labels: pain, brot, pan, punnir, pita, naan, etc. However, it is obvious that if a lucrfof bread is pictured, we've already imposed some son of linguistic reality on it because naan. pannir and pita do not corne in loaves. This view of lanyuaye forces us to resort to a kind of Platoiiic concept of bread. It miglit be argued that there

is some concept of bread that exists cut off from any particular shape; however. can we make the
same argument for a concept likefiedom? Can we say that there is a conceptfreedom which al1 of the labels in diffrent laquages refer to? Clearly the conceptfrecdom is quite meaningless without being integrated into the "complex. dynamic web of meaning and justification that constitutes different cultures" (Boyd, 1996,625). As Wittgenstein (1963) asserts, the rules of use of a particular word will Vary according to the situation or the language garne.jB ln each
3Torson ( 1 995) demonstrates Wittgenstein's idea with the sentence: "Sheep are camivorous." In most languase games. this sentence is senseless because the "ruks governing the use of the sign SHEEP and the sign CARNWOROUS are incompatible with placing the two words together" (Corson. 1995.24). However. in a science fiction or cartoon language gaine, the sentence could makr sense. To talk about a concept like freedom without considering the ''grne" being ployed is not helpful.

50

language and culture (and even within cultures). the word and concept jkeclom means something different. The consequence of seeing language as a transparent, neutral medium is having to assume "that linguistic and cultural differences do not exist at a fundamental level" (Venuti.
1995. 63-73). The danger in assuming fundamental similarity is that the differences that do exist
will be ignored and paved over.

The translation theorists who challenge the neutral view of language see it as being

polysemic. constitutive of identity and retleciing power relationships in the world. Tlieir view of language allows for recognition of some of the fundamental differences between languages and cultures. Meaning does not exist independently of language in some noiilinguistic realm. Meaning is tied up with the words and with the culture.'' These theorists reject the idea that ihere is a "core" meaning to a particular word whicli then can be transferred to another language.
Among others. Derrida ( 1985). Johnson (1 997). Benjamin (1 989)"' and White (1990) have

argued tliat al1 words have many different primary meanings and a potrntially different meaning

every time tliey are used. White describes the discussion of the two wordspulis and stute in the preface of a translation of Aristotle's Polilics by Sir Emest Barker. Originally, Barker States tliat

; "

See Becker ( 1 995) for a fascinating look at translating the word sihnce into Malay.

"" Andrew Benjamin considers the meanings the word tru~tskurion It provides a way to think about has. tnnsmitting culture: it is evoked when considering claims o f universality. Many o f these ideas and more are iniertwined when using this word. Translation i s "both a plurality o f activities and has a plurality o f signitications" (Benjamin. 1989. 35). He extends this example and argues thai al1 words are "of necessity. over-dererniined and a sucli [are] always the site of a range of semantic possibilities" (Benjamin. 1989, s 35).

51

the ovenones and associations of the two words pulis and s m e are different. This implies that the core meaning of the words are the same. However, as lie continues describing the origin and significance of the two words, it beconies obvious that the two words are completely different words. White States: "it is not their sccondary meanings that are different but their pnmary meanings; they are different al1 the way through" (White, 1990.25O). Johnson (1 992) quotes Derrida's exarnple of the Greek word phrrrmcikon which can be translated as eitlier poison. remedy, drug. or recipe (Johnson. 1985, 145). The word does not have one core or univocal meaninp and additional denotative meanings; it has many meanings. When translating
ph~irntcikon.translators have to choose which meaning to translate and end up "deciding what in

Plato remains undecidablr" (Johnson 198% 145). Rather than an original semantic unity. we have a picture o a word as "a site of diffrrential meanings in wliich potential and actual meanings are present" (Benjamin. 1989.35). If the words are not reduciblr to core or single meanings but are places of multiple meaning. tlieii translating a text will necessarily change its

Traditional translation theory advocates that books translated into English should "feel" like English books. The necessity for translations to fit into "standard English" has led Spivak to comment that "the literature by a woman in Palestine begins to resemble. in the feel of its prose. sometliing by a man in Taiwan" (Spivak. 1992. 180). This erasing of difference is a problem because it leads us to assume that al1 other cultures are like us, more or less?' Other theorkts

" When I tirst realized the existeilce of diftitrent languages as a child, I felt sorry for people who spolie other languriges. I assumed tliat the speaker used Enslisli (the only "real" language) in tlirtir head and was forced to translate. I thouglit they must have bcen exhriusted fioin the continuous effort.

suggest a more careful approach. Lawrence Venuti strongly criticizes tlie consistent use of fluent. standard English in translation. In his books and articles, he argues strenuously against the invisibility of the translator and the tradition of translating foreign texts into fluid. standard English because he bel ieves such strategies tend to erase the difierences in cultures and allow the reader of the translation "the narcissistic experience of recognizing liis or her own culture in a cultural other. enacting an iinperialism that extends the dominion of transparency with other ideological discourses over a different culture" (Venuti. 1992, 5). Venuti's argument is that if the text reads very clearly and fluently in standard English, the reader will be encouraged to over ideniify with it. He argues tliat tlie fluent strategies evoke the illusion of autliorial presence. maintain ...the cultural dominance of Anglo-American individualism. represent ...foreign cultures with ideological discourse specific to Englishlanguage cultures- but conceal ...al1 these determinations and effects under the veil of transparency (Venuti. 1992, 6).

Venuti compares tu.0 translations to illustrate his point. Fint he considers the translation (Venuti. 1995.20-34) of Surtonius's The Titdsc C1ucsut=s Robert Graves. a British translator by workinp in the 50s. His translation. according to Venuti. smoothes out the text and creates a coherent account from a less tlian coherent foreign text. Venuti points out that although tlie fluent style of translation was panly a decision of Graves, it was conditioned by other considerations such as the contemporary Engiish-language values, the decline of the study of the classics. the prowth of a mass market. the perception that readers are not interested in reading a footnotes. etc. In addition to creating a more coherent text. Graves in~poses moralizing tone

and homophobic attitudes on the text which in Latin only makes "general and non-committal references to Caesar's sexuality" (Venuti, 1995,33). The Latin text itself is a collection of information about the rulers of Rome presented without a moralizing bias. Graves creates a text
which is slanted against Caesar (Venuti. 1995. 32). When translating an account of a same-sex

sexual relationsh ip Caesar, Graves chooses words which stigmatize the relationship as perverse. Venuti contrasts this example with a translation (Venuti, 1995, 34-38) of "The Seafarer" by
Pound. Pound "foreignizes" the translation by focusing on the sounds of the language and by

using arcliaisms to focus attention on the language. As a result, the translation is less fluent and more difficult to understand. Vrnuti does not mean to suggest that non-fluent translations. like those of Pound, are free of'bias, but that tlie bias tends to be niore visible. Indeed. Venuti does believe that Pound imposes a certain view of individualism on the text. Venuti says: "foreignizing translations tliat are not transparent. that eschew fluency for a more heterogeneous

mis of discourses are rqually partial in their interpretation of tlie foreign text. but they rend to
Haunt tlieir partiality instead of concealing itq-(Venuti. 1995, 34).

The important point that Venuti makes is tliat standard language (whether grammatically, rhetorically or stylistically) is not neutral. Translation is not a neutral activity; it will change the identity of the text. Venuti argues for a form of non-fluent translation to draw the reader's attention to the fact that the text has been mediated. Many other translation theorists cal1 for "foreignizing" translation." However, one of possible dangers of this decision, as Carol Maier

See Philip Lewis ( 1 995) and Tejaswini Niranjana ( l992).

54

considers. is whether or not anyone will take the time to read a translation which is non-fluent or "strangee"(Maier. 1989.63 1). What is attempted in translation, according to Maier, is to achieve a balance between writing a poem which reflects the author's language and culture and which also risks being rejected by the reader because of the awkwardness or strangeness of the language. and writing a good English poem where often the poet's voice is subsumed to that of the translator. Maier warns us against the uncritical acceptance or embracing of Venuti's ideas. She is concened with holding both cultures simultaneously in tlie poeni and avoiding both extremes: overfamiliarity and complete foreignness."

Given the recognition tliat language is noi'iieutral and that translation clianges the identity of the iext. these translators reject tlie idea put forth by traditional translation tlirory that the translation is a matching or equivalent product. Rather than focusing on the product and how closely it matches the original and how well it fits into the receiving culture. these theorists focus on the process of translatiny, tlie choices tlie translator makes and whai can be learned through translation. The purpose of focusing on the process is twofold: it is to allow the translator time to explore the unchosen alternati~es,'~and it is to allow the translator space to explore differences

'' 1 will return to Maier's dilemma in the last section of the chapter which focuses on the role of the translator.
' Maier describes how students studying translation for the tirst time tend to feel a sense of 105s when " iranslating. The greatest sense of loss, contrary to conimon assumptions, is not that of the "meaning" of

and inrqualities of languaps and cultures. lt gives them space to explore wliat is erased and what is added when translating. Mary Layoun agrees and argues the space-between is crucial to translation. It is decisive to the end "product" of translation and to the consumption of that product. For who can make it between and across? And bearing what? From whom (and not just from where) do they corne? To whom do they arrive'? (Layoun, 1995.270)
One of tlie things we can learn by explorinp the choices the translator made is "the canons of

accuracy by which [the text] is produced" (Venuti. 1995.37). Venuti explores several examples of what he calls symptomatic readings.15one of which is Bruno Bettelheim's critique of the translations of Freud's tests. Bettelheim argues that Freud was translated into an abstract. highly theoretical scientiiic discoursr in Englisli. whrrras in German he wrote witli colloquial terms. focused on liis own esperience and attenipted to devrlop a humanistic/spiritualist approach. Altliough Bettellieirn's critique involved a close comparison between the German and English. Venuti argues that a close reading of the translation alone suffices to explore the gaps and inconsisteiicies. ln one section. the inconsistencies in the register of certain words and terms alert the rrader to the mediatioii of the translator. Along with very cornnion and even colloquial terms. suc11 asjiwget~ing go uur oj'rny h c d is an academic word like prtr*~rpruxis.'l~ the and In same text both the academic and common words were used. For example. "'id' vs.

the original. or the inabilit~ find "equivnleiices." but the loss of "the opportunity to explore available ro possibilities and to discover neiv ones" (Maier, (995, 2 I ).
" Later on in the chapter when exploring the role o f the translator, I will examine another symptornatic reading which suggest that the translater's social location miglit also influence the translation.

'"' The word 'Parapraxis' was created in order ro describe the German 'Fehlletsrlcng' (Venuti 1995,26).

56

'unconscious'; 'cathexis' vs. 'charge,' or 'energy'; 'libidinal' vs. 'sexual"' (Venuti, 1995,26). Bettelheim argues that the translation made Freud's text appear to be an abstract. scientific theory best understood in the framework of medicine in order, panly. to "facilitate the institutionalization of psychoanalysis in the medical profession and in acadeniic psychology" (Venuti. 1995.27). Although Venuti praises Bettelheim's discovery and exposure of the inconsistencies of diction in the translations of Freud's text, he rejects Bettelheim's assumption that there is a true, accurate translation possibie. The inconsistent diction could be seen as a series of interpretive choices, conscious and unconscious, that the translator made to Iiighlight an alternative reading of Freud. The important issue is not that the translation is inaccurate. but that
it lias been done within certain assurnptions about translation and about psychology and science.

The important thing is not to judge the translation as right or wrong. correct or incorrect. but to
investigate what sorts of criteria the translator was eniploying." Venuti summarizes: "a syniptomatic reading ....is historicizing: it assumes a concept of determinate subjectivity that exposes bot11 the ethnocentric violeiice of traiislating and the interested nature of its own Iiistoricist approach" (Veniiti. 1995. 39).

With a focus on the process of translation and the recognition of language as political. and
meaning as more amorplious. the view of the original or foreign text and the translated text also

changes from the traditional view. Rather tlian a hierarchical positionhg of the foreipn text as

'' See also Jacob's note wlien comparing her translation o f Benjamin's article to tliat o f Harry Zohn. She says. -'the criticism that appears here and there in my test should be recognired more as a play between possible versions than as a daim to establish a more 'correct' translation" (Jacobs, 1975. 755).

57

the good. the pure and 'the translation as the bad. the impure, the simulacrum (in Plato's sense), the hierarchy has been upset. One of the theorists who has challenged this idea is Walter Benjamin (1 992). In his essay, "The Task of tlie Translator," (Benjamin. 1992) Benjamin introduces a temporal element to the discussion of translation. He believes that if the original is translatable. it makes a daim to be translated in order to continue its life or afterlife. Benjamin makes it clear that by l i f i . he does not mean anything organic or connected to the soul. Rather. the idea of the life of a piece of art is associated with its survival throughout history . When the original begins to attain fame. it is translated. Tlie translation. then. marks a continuhg life for tlie original and emerges from the afterlife of the rig gin al.^' The translation does not serve the original. but owes its existence to it (Benjamin, 1992, 73). The original. on the other hand. is indebted to the translation because the translation ensures its survival. Venuti explains: a translation cnonizrs the foreign text. validating its fame by enbling its survival. Yet the afterlife made possible by translation siniultaneously cancels the original ity of the foreign test by revealing its dependence on a derivative form: translation dors not so rnuc1.i validate literary fame as create it (Venuti, 1992, 7). In addition to upsetting the traditional relationship between the foreign and translated text. the introduction of time also upsets the notion that the original, because it is "created by genius." somehow remains static. and eternal. Benjamin explains that "in its afierlife - which could not be callrd that if it were not a transforniation and a renewal of somethinp living - the original undergoes a change" (Benjamin. 1992, 74)."' The implication of this. as Derrida points out. is

"' Afterlife (Fortleben) as opposed to the life (Leben) of the original.

'" Sieburth succinctly espresses the idea: "ln sliort, Benjamin insists that the original is in no wayfixed as it moves through the various avatars of its aftrrlife. it is subject ta any number of ramifications. And the sanlr holds true of translatioris" (Sieburtii. 1989.34 1 )

that translation "is writing: that is it is not translation only in the sense of transcription. IL is a productive writing called fonh by the original text" (Derrida, 1985, 153).

There are other theorists who upset the hierarchy by questioning the status of the original and
by suggesting that the translation affects the original. Suzanne Jill Levine (1 989) quotes Jorge

Luis Borges who. in a number of his writii~gs.~~ challenged the idea of an original. Borges has is suggests that "the only real difference between original and translation ..... that the translater's referent is a visihk text against which the translation can be judged: the original escapes this scrutiny (and mistrust) because its referent is unspoken, perhaps forgotten. and probably embarrassingly banal" (Borges in Lrvine, 1989. 3 1 ). Richard Rand. in his essay "o'er-brimm'd" (Rand. 1985). illustrates this senii-coniical reiiiark by Borges by examining John Keats' poem

"To Autumn" for references to other texts. His goal is ta upset the rigid concept of translation as
strictly between texts in different languages by an acknowledged author and translator. Throuph analysis of the text and a searcli for the orieiii of the ideas or images in the poem. he makes the point tliat the poem could be said to be a translation because there are many references to other texts. Also, Rand argues that in the poein Keats is "translating" Autumn. but at the same tirne.

the concept Aurltrnn is translating various aspects of the poem. He says that "to speak of some
decisive 'original' here....is absolutely out of the question. The cherished values of originality

'"In "Pierre Menard. Autlior of Don Quixote", Borges (1962) writes an (invented) biblioyraphical honiage to Pierre Menard. a niodern French citizen whose goal is to rewrite (not translate, plagiarite, or . copy. but re-create) 0017 QIIISOIC' in Cervantes' Spanish. T h r o u ~ lthe story. Borses makes us think about i the slippery existence o f the original.

and identity are truly undecidable" (Rand, 1985,95). Jacqueline Risset, amongst others. has

drawn on the (seln translations done by James Joyce of Finncgan S Wuke to make a similar point about the unfinished or unstable state of the original. Joyce translated several passages of
Finncgctn S Wukc froin an English stretched to the point of incomprehensibility by the inclusion

of other languages into only Italian." Joyce does not see his translation as a rewriting which exists as a poor copy next to the sanctified original. Rather, the original itself is now viewed as a
"work in progress" (Risset. 1984.3). Risset concludes.

What emerges above al1 from the detailed analysis of the Italian version is that this translation is no pursuit of hypothetical equivalents of the original text (as given. definitive) but a latrr elabontion representiiig (in relation to the first test as seen as really - literally - 'work in progress') a kind of extension. a new stage. a more daring variation on the text in process (Risset. 1984.6).

The work that the above theorists do to destabilize the hierarchical arrangement between original and translation is very important. Altliough polyglot authors like Joyce have more autliority to subven the original. panicularly wlieir it is their own original (Levine. 1989. 32) than most translators do. they still create a mode1 of translation which is more like transcreation. The original text itself becomes recognized as one in which difference already exists. The translation theorists that 1 have chosen always work with a respect for the difference in the foreign text. They recognize tliat it is never possible to "cover" a text completely. that there is always sornethinp "left ovei' in the text which is unknowable. Richard Sieburth (1 989) explores this

'' III this passage. for example. the allusions to German, Latin and Greek and completely dropped in the translation.: "Annona gebroren aroostodrat Nivia, dochter of Sense and Art with Spark's pirryphtickathinis fuiikling her fran" and the translation "Annona grnata arusticrata Nivea, laureolata in Senso e A m , i l ventaglio costellato di filigettanti" (Joyce in Risset. l984,9).

idea ratlier poetically wlien he talks about how Holderlin's poems passed through his English translation to continue their "life." Wliile he was translating. he arrived at the point when he felt his translation covered the Gern~an originals. After the initial euphoria of finishing his translations. he returned. again and again. to both the originals and translations (his translations were published in an m f u c v edition) and found. to his surprize, that the originals were '-gradually erasing or obscuring the versions [he] had created in their stead....the originals were once again reasserting their place u l o ~ s i d e [his] translations to such an extent that the light emitted by Holderlin's Gernian on tlie left page was now blinding [his] panllel English version on tlie right" (Siebunli. 1989. 240). He realized that what he had writien did not and could not cover the original and thai the original could always tell itself in a different way. Maier (1995) drscribes the work done by Venuti. Niranjana and Sieburth as done within Nol Valis' definition

of respect as '*theability to approach a work knowing you can't explain it away or -know' it
entirel!? ...ackno~.ledpiiig the work does not belong to you. tliat the uwk is in sonie iliat fundamental way alien to you tlie critic" (Nol Valis in Maier. 1995. 25). This notion tliat the translator does not have complete knowledge of the text is a recognition of the difference and unstability in the original text. a recognition of the difficulties a translator fiom another time. place and culture will have witli a text. and a recognition that the translations created will always

be interpretations. subject to revision.

III addition to tlie notion of '*difference" between texts and cultures, Maier insists on
considering inequality. Slie argues that it is important to realize that the translator is often within

61

"ndically asymmetrical rrlatioiis of powerq'(Maier. 1995,29)." She argues, with rekrence to Prasad. Radliakrishnan. Shohat and Mohanty (Maier, 1995,25), that difference and inequality are not the sarne thing and that simply resisting difference is not enough to guarantee that inequalities will be erased. She belie\?esthat translation has to be made visible as "an activity that occun within an rxplicit context or compact of difference and inequality" (Maier, 1995.29). If this situation is recognized and made visible. there will be more chance that a translation that holds the two cultures in a balance (rather tlian a withholding of translation or a translation which erases either culture) might emerge. Althouph she does not explicitly state her arguments for the importance of talking about inequality. 1 believe she is working wi th a similar argument that lris Young constructs.

The idea that translators can never completely know the foreign text and must realize tliey often work within b-ndicallyasymmetrical relations of power" is diametrically opposed to the advice from traditional translation to become one with the author. Iris Young's notion of understanding others tlirough asymmetrical reciprocity (Young, 1997) is heipful in exploring these differences. Young rejects the idea tliat we can see things from anotlier person's point of view. Young argues that the idea of symrnetry obscures difference, is ontologically impossible.

'= are many examples of translations. done in inequitable situations where the lesser 'power' loses There out. When Edward Fitzgerald. for example, was translating the Aitbaiyur, he wrote to a friend in 1857 that "[i]t is an amusement for me to take what Liberties I like with these Persians who (as I think) are not Poets enough to frighten one from such excursions, and who really do want a Iittle Art to shape them" (Fitzgerald in Lefevere, 1992,4). See also Tejaswini Niranjana (1992) where she argues that translations of works in Hindi. done in the mid to late 1800s by the British, were used as source materials by government offkials tvlio then created an image of Hindus as lazy, insincere. cowardly, diny, and untrustworthy and eiiiinently in need of guidance froni a "civilized" culture.

62

and lias politically undesirable consequences. It tends to obscure ditference because. even with people who are very similar to us, we bring different histories, experiences. so on to Our encounters. If we only seek symmetry. we nsk closing off the discussion and fruitful exchange that acknowledgment of difference can bring. Young believes thqt it is ontologically impossible to stand in another's shoes because "our positions are partly constituted by the perspectives each of us has on the others" (Young, 1997.47). She uses the example of a mother and dauphter to demonstrate that although they seem to share a lot of similarities. their relationship is based on the asymmetry of the positioning between the two of them. The daughter's position is created. in part. througli the mediation of her motlier. It is liard to imagine that the daughter could suspend her perspective (constituted. in part, by her relationsliip with her inother) to assunie her mother's perspective (constituted. in pan. by her relationship with her daughter). Young concludes. "the infinity of the dialectical process of selves in relation to others both makes it impossible to suspend our own positioning and leaves an excess of experience when I try to put myself in the other person's place" (Young 1997.47). Finally, trying to completely understand another is a politically suspect move because "when members of privileged groups imaginatively try to represent to thernselves the perspective of members of oppressed groups, too often those representations cany projections and fantasies through which the privileged reinforce a coniplementary image of themselves" (Young, 1997.48). Rather than embracing a symmetrical ideal of understanding another. Young advocates the idea of asymmetrical reciprocity. In asymmetrical reciprocity. both parties recopnize two points. First. that each party has its own Iiistory and that that history can always be retold. Second, that al! social positions are multiply constructed in relation to many other positions. Young tells us that '.there is always a remainder.

much that 1 do not understand about the other person's experience and perspective"(Young,
1997.53). The people or translators who wish to approach others or foreign texts have to do so

knowing that full understanding is not possible. but the process of reaching understanding is revealing. Translation. as Maier says, lias to be seen as the "humbling, disconcerting experience it otten is" (Maier. 1995.29).

Given tlie coinplesity of the relationsliip between tlie foreign and translated text. the role of the translator in this mode1 is much more comples and complicated than that in the traditional model. In the traditional model, the translator was expected to be able to read the (one true) message of the original. and meticulously translate the book so that it seems like an English test.

The translator is uncrrativr compared to the autlior of the original. Tlir recognition of the
political nature of lanpuage. the rejection of a mimetic isomorphic relatioiiship between the two texts. and the recognition of the existence of difference in the original significantly change the role of the translator in this model. The translator has to approach the t e a with respect, knowiny slhe will not be able to "cover" it completely. S/he has to consider how hedhis social location
will affect herlliis approach to the text, slhe needs to report about the process. discussing choices.

differences. canoiis of acc~racy,~' s/lie nreds to try and maintain a balance between the two and

" Although many translation tlieorists Iiave made this call, it is important to acknowledge the practical constraints. In addition to the low p l , translation tends to be dismissed by academia. (Venuti, 1995. 2-5).

cultures. The job that the translator does is difficult, humbling and creative.

Unlike some of the traditional translation tlieorists, these theorists stress the necessity of a thorough knowledge of the language. Gayatri Spivak. in addressing the inequalities in translation. specifically between the "third" and "tjrst" world, suggests: "to decide whether you are prepared enough to start translatinp. ...A mipiit help if you have praduatrd into speaking, by choice or preference. of intimate matten in the language of the original" (Spivak. 1992, 185). This recommendation is a reaction to a colonial type of translation that erased difference and presented foreign texts as if they already contained Western values. Maier agrees with Spivak's requirement of iiitiniacy with tlie language to be translated. She also acknowledps that most often translation takes place not only in difference. but inequality. If translation is made visible as an activity tliat takes place witliin a situation of linguistic and cultural difference and (often) inequality. there is a bettrr chance that there will be understanding witliin asymmetrical power relations because people might be willing to "listeii" longer. Althougli Maier agrees witli Spivak's requiremrnts of the translator. she also suggests seeing translation in terms of inquiry. Inquiry. for Maier. is related to subjectivity and identity. Subjectivity is achieved if identity is problernatized. What she nieans by problematizing identity is recognizing that our identity as tnnslators and readers is constructed by al1 of the particular groups we belong to. Our identity shapes how we read the text. She questions the traditional goal of self-effacement by the translator in order to give authorial illusion to the translated text because she believes that Dtniisparency the translator] results in a concealment of the cultural and social conditions of [of the translation" (Venuti. 1995, 61) and. she would add, the translator. The goal of rendering the

65

work done by the tnnslator visible is iiot done with a view to criticizing them for not getting it "right," but as a way of acknowledging them and considering the various changes that have been made to the text." If we, as readers, ignore the presence of both translator and author, she argues. we risk not acknowledging changes to the text and denying "the poet a distinctiveness that resists absorption by another culture" (Maier. 1989,630).

1 would like to consider Maier's relationship to Ana Castillo. a Chicana writer, and the
translation of some of her poetry as an example of what the transiator's job is. Maier rejects the idea of "fusing" or "becoming one" with the author because she recognizes that that gesture leads to a rejection of differeiice and rinphasis on sanienrss. Slie sees wliat slie and Castillo did as entering a coalition. During her struggles to understand Castille's poetry. an act that Castillo welcoined, Maier realized tliat her atteinpt was also a violation because she had to make changes to the poem. Despite her desire to create a situation where the poet is given a voice. Maier recognizes that translation also silences voices. Sbe notes that "the transiator's gesture of generosity. her enthusiastic rmbracr, tends to inask-despite the coniinual representation [oq translation as a strupgle. the conquest. or even murder-that gesture's inherently rapacious nature" (Maier. 1989.630). Usine words like conqtrcsr or miwder to describe translation seerns excessive; however, what is risked in translation, according to Maier, is achieving a balance

'' See also the work done by Niranjana ( 1992) who examines two translations o f ri vucunu (poem) written in Knnada. She conipares the two translations witli one done by herself. She sliows that the tkst two translations were done in such a way so as to r a d the wcunu as already embodying Christian values. In fact. she argues, the vucunus were chosen because they were seen as already Christian and modern, and thus "worthy of the West's attention" (Niranjana, 1992. 180). This point is usehl to remind us that the urge to siinply make works accessible is not always value free.
'

between the two cultures without obliterating either.

When reading over a published translation tliat she has done of Castillo's poems, Maier worries that she has obliterated part of Castillo's culture by using the uppercase I in her translation. In Spanish. pronouns are usually left out of most speech and writing. "1 want to eat" becomes "Quiero (want) corner (to eat)." She is surprized by the decision she had made because she knows that whenever Castillo writes in English. she uses a lower case i to indicate collective voice. The Spanish poem. she feels conveys a "strong experience of identity with a nonspecified subject" (Mairr. 1989,640). Hou. can she convey this in English? Slie writes five different versions of' the poem using a corn bination of al1 upper case 1s. and lower case is. Here are excerpts of versions one, two and the.

El Suefio

The Dream

The Dream
i was radiant weariiig my Zapotecan dress a red red huipil

The Dream
Radiant, wearing iny Zapotecan dress a red red huipil

Lucia 1 was radiant mi traje zapoteco wearinp my Zapotecan dress un huipil a red red rojO rojO huipil

....

....

(Maier. 1 989,632-35)

Maier explores these options, pondering which version best represents the Spanish and which version would be best received in English. She worries about using a lower case i because she feels it is trivial and may lead to the translation being ignored. She asks herself. "is the

67
translation complrte if no one stops. risks lateness long enough to listen. to build further on the coalition it represents?' (Maier, 1989,63 1). Maier then considers the "translation" (or transcription) of Mc ffr<ntoRigobertu MenchU y usi me nacib Iri conciencici (4 Rigoberra

Menchi) as an example of tliis struggle over the standardization of the language of a translation.
Burgos-Debray. the woman who interviews Menchu and fashions the interview into a seamless narrative, makes many changes to the text. She "also makes it clear that Menchu's Spanish has been corrected so as to keep it from seeming Tolklorico"' (Maier, 1989.636). Maier wondered if by using the uppercase 1. she is doing the same as Burgos was in trying to keep Menchu from
soundiny.fi,lklb,ico*ico avoid alienating English readers. She wonders if her rrluctance to use and

the lower case i is because it might be read as trivial. Although initially happy wiih version five. she decides that it is unsatisfactory because it eliminates the action. the verb from the poem. She decides that the coilabora~ion she sees translation as demanding chat a willingness to coiisider the 1i.w of the small "i" as a practice which is not trivial and i n . In otlier words. it involves the recognition of a "lower case" poetics as a serious strategy that conscioiisly employs "triviality" even though it is a form that the translator Iierself would iiot otlierwise use- as eitlier writer or translator (Maier, 1989.643). Maier sugpests that takiny risks over not appearing "correct" might be necessary if she is committed to holding two worlds in one translation and to accepting that a poet's words are capable of changing her translation (Maier. 1989.643).

In addition to struggling with the decision of whether or not to use standard English, Maier
considers how her particular social location might influence her translation or reading of the text. Mairr and Anuradlia Dingwaney, a colleapue, retum to examine I Ripbcrtcr MenchU with their

68

class in an attenlpt to encourage their students to see that both readers and translaton corne to a text from a particular location. They choose I, Rigoberta Menchd because it is a doubly mediated text: first by Burgos-Debray, the eihnographer, and then by Anne Wright, the translator. Dingwaney and Maier start by considering. with their classes, the role Burgos-Debray played and draw on literature on ethnographers to argue that "the ethnographer's acknowledged and unacknowledged assumptions-social, cultural, political-about the speaker and her culture are implicated in the rendering of the life history" (Dingwaney & Maier, 1995.305). Dingwaney and Maier write about the uneasiness they feel by the quick (over) identification Burgos-Debray makes with Menchu. Elizabeth Burgos-Debray. an upper class Venezuelan woman, meets witli Menchu in Burgos-Debray's Paris apartment and tape records and transcribes her intetviews with Menchu. When Burgos-Debray is re-readiny the transcript. she decides to eliminate the interview structure and write the manuscript as a seamless narrative. In so doing. she seems to eliminate Menchil from the position of author. She refers to MenchU in the third person in the chapter headings: the epigraplis at the bepinniiig of each chapter are attributed to Menchu. which

makes it seems that it is not Menchu who is speaking in the bulk of the book: and the author's

name in the Spanish version is actually Burgos-Debray, not Menchil. In addition. BurgosDebray writes the introduction. at the end of which she dedicates a poem to Menchu!

Burgos-Debray seems to erase Menchu as the author of the book. Dingwaney and Maier ask thrmsehes the following questions: 1s Burgos-Debray assuming the identity of Menchu? 1s it possible for her to assume Menchu's identity? 1s she actually violatinp Menchu's identhy by erasing her as the author? On the other hand, perhaps the production of a seerningly unmediated

69

narrative was a collaboration wi th Menchu" to enable Menchu to reach her political goals of effecting change for her people. Did Menchu, as Dingwaney and Maier ask themselves, "use" Burgos-Debray as pan of a larger strategy, perhaps for the sarne reason she decided to learn S p a n i ~ h ? ~ ~ fact that Menchu warns Burgos-Debray and us that she is "still keeping secret The ahat [she] think[s] no-one sliould know" (Menchu in Dingwaney & Maier. 1995,309- 10) supports the idea that this rnight be pan of Menchs strategy.

Diiipwaney and Maier go on to think about the role of the translator, Ann Wright. and first react negatively to her mrdiation. as tliey did to Burgos-Debray because tliey feel that both create a test that mi& lead "to a reader's unexainineci compassion" (Dingwaney & Maier. 1995, 3 10). Wright States that she wants to be an invisible mediator and let Menchu's words shine through. In fact. slie says that she "has tried ...to stay with Rigoberta's original phrasing" (Dingwaney & Maier. 1995. 3 10). This is odd given that there is no evidence that she had access to the original transcript. However. wlien the. re-rsamine the test. tliey notice certain clianges that Wright has niade which miglit support the idea of staying with Menchu's words. In particular. Wright has Menchu using yuu as if slie is talking to another person. This does not occur in the Spanish version. Perhaps this is an attempt to (re)write Burgos-Debray back into the picture as a

Dingwaney and Maier noie that by focusinp on Burgos-Debray, they ended up ignoring Menchu's role in this siory and risk "reproducing the classic colonizing gesture identified by Edward Said, wliereby representatives o f a hegemonic (colonizins) culture invest themselves with the authority to speak about, describe represent the colonized/subaltern subject" (Dingwaney & Maier, 1995, 308).
"' As 1 mentioned in chapter one, learning Spanish for some Guatemalan Native people is seen as

"

dangerous because one risks iosing their identity. Menchii's father actually prohibited her from studying Spanish. She chose ta study it so that she could speak for her people. (Dingwaney & Maier, 1995.309)

70

niediator. In addition, Menchu is acknowledged as the author in the English version, and Wright did not translate Burgos-Debray's introduction. acknowledgments or dedication. Wright seems to be making an effort to niove Menchu back in:o tlie center of the book.

Through this process of examining, re-examining, and questioning the text, and recognizing the mediation involved. translation is seen as "a reading- a construction of social. political. cultural 'rea1ities'-by an individual wlio inserts herself and her work (and is embedded) in that culture in particular ways, for panicular purposes" (Dingwaney & Mairr. 1 995. 3 1 3). Just as the traiislator is recoynized as a person iocated in a particular culture. so also readers can look ai their own location and see how tliat influences tlie interpretations they inake. This does not imply that anytliing goes: the text exists and restrains the readerltranslator. White articulates what Maier. Benjamin and otliers seem to imply. He says tliat the original text can not be forgotten becaiise "it is upon the prior test tliat our right to speak at al1 deprnds. One has no autliority to disregard it and substituie for it texts of one's own composition" (White. 1990. 246). The probleni with this statement. of course, is that it is unclear what the restraint of the original text is. It seems that we are back again with the idea of a core meaning of a text which determines the correctness of the translation. While a full exploration of this important problem would require another tliesis. 1 believe it is possible to propose a way of tliinkinp about it for now. The tlieorists 1 have been drawing on in tliis chapter al1 share a respect for the text. They listen to the text and write another text almost in response to the original text from a particular location and with particular ideological ways of seeing the world. They write a text knowing both thai they

71

are neitlier freely making up our tlieir own compositions without any regard for the text nor tliat

tliere is a definite "essence"in the text to capture. Many interpretations arc possible.

Chapter Three

73

In this chapter. 1 will be drawing on the work done in the first and second cliapters to create the beginnings of an alternative model or way of thinking about teaching for ESL (and other second language) teacliers. In the first chapter. 1 argued that traditional ESL pedagogy. based in the positivistic arena of applied linpuistics is structured so that certain questions can not be asked. Some of those questions that are difficult to ask are: how does my social location affect
rny teaching? How does the emphasis on

fun and light classes affect my students? What

difference does it make tliat my students are leaming English, instead of. for example. Farsi? Being able to ask these questions and start thinking about tlie answers is crucial to helping students learii. In tliis model of second language acquisition pedagogy. language is seen as a neutral tool: teacliers are seen as technicians who only have to master tlie most scientific and supposedly neutral methods to teach English: and students are often seen as two dimensional. uninterested in any substantive or serious topics.

In tlie second cliriprer. ! iirst introduced traditional translation theory whicli is similar in

philosophical approach to inainstream ESL pedagogy in many ways. With traditional translation theory as a backdrop. 1 then explored four main ideas of the translation theory I will now use to build an alternative mode1 for ESL teaching. The first was the focus on process of translation as opposed to tlie product. Focusing on the process can lead to new ideas about differences between cultures and the nature of language. Second, language is not seen as a transparent tool, but as a non-neutral nrayof seeing the world. Words are seen as having many primary meanings and as being sornewhat overdetern~ined. Third, the nature of the relationship between the onginal and the translation is altered. The mimetic. isomorphic idea of translation is rejected. Rather than

74

judying the translation oii liow similar it is to the original. the translation is explored to examine the choices translators made and to recognize the niediated nature of the text. The translation is not seen as simply a copy. but another text which continues the life of the original. The sacrosanct status of the original is questioned. and it is recognized that many readings are possible. Sometinies. the translation can expand some of the ideas in the original. In addition. any text. but particularly one from a different culture than that of the translator. is seen as never completely knowable. The translator will never be able to "cover" the whole text. There is always a remainder. Given this. the fourth idea explored concerns the role of the translator. The translator approaclies tlie original with a certain respect that recognizes that there is always a remainder. In this mode1 of translation. the translator recognizes tliat liis/lier social location will effect the reading and traiislating of the test. Hencr. social location is rrcognized as sometliing tliat needs to be coiisidered when translating. Ayain. tliis is not done with the assuniption that the translator will be able to produce a perfect translation. but that the translator can attempt to acknowledge the iiiequalities tliat exist.

Translation and Teaching

In this Iast chapter, 1 will start to explore the implications of translation theory for ESL teaching and for tlie creation of a better model. As an introduction to the body of this chapter. 1 will outline five reasons why translation theory might help infom ESL teaching. The first reason is practical. While working. it is easy to yet so caught up in the daily prind of preparing for classes, dealing with emergencies, etc.. that teachers feel they do not have time for wliat can

75
seem like more abstract concerns. Along witli being caught up with pragmatic day-to-day issues, most ESL teachers work in a model which does not encourage reflection. Most of the places I've worked have been cost-recovery, corporate model programs where the focus is on keeping "clients" happy and keeping things fun and light. Seeing teaching as translation could give teachers a bit more space to contemplate and criticize. It gives teachers a chance to draw back from the daily work, retlect. and think about connections, and how these ideas would affect their teacliing.

The second reasoii is the parallels between ESL teachers and translators: I will mention several siniilarities Iiere. Tliey both are in a paradosical place of liaving a lot of power and not having much power at all. In the classroorn or when translating a text. they have a lot of power. However, in the real world, they are both often seen as technicians and not "anists"; they generally have a fairly low status. seen in bot11 the low payv they receive and their second class siatus versus original authors or "real" teachers, teachers of literature. Also. they both deal with expressing ideas in a new laiipuaye: tlir ESL teecher's job is to Iielp students develop tlie language to express their thoughts; the translater lias to find words for the original author to express his/her ideas. Finally, both ESL teachers and translators deal with and have to understand "the other." Translators take a text from another culture and are responsible for creatiny a translation. ESL teacliers work with a student from another culture to help them

''Technical translators rend to receive higher pay. Literary translation, by itself, would be almost impossible to make a living at. As I mentioned in the first chapter, ESL teachers in Canada who work with a board o f education or with a University or Collegc tend to be paid more; however, most ESL teachers are paid far less than public school teachers.

achieve their goals in this culture.

Third. using traiislation tlieory to explore second language teaching is appropriate because students leaming a second language are going through a process of translation. As I will argue, learning a language is more than just the process of being able to substitute one word for another:
it also involves creating a new identity. Languap students are learning to express their ideas and

thoughts in English. to create an identity in English. or to translate their identity into English. Hofhaii deals witli the issue of translatiiip her identity from Polisli into English when her farnily immigrates to Canada. She writes about the frustration of being forced to use English. a language which initially has no living connections for her. In Polish, she's intelligent, witty. alive. In English. she's dull. a bit odd and pedantic. She expresses her anger at her friends because "they caii't see through the guise. can't recognize the iight-footed dancer 1 really am. They only see this elepliaiitiiie crentiire who too often sounds as if she's making pronounceinents" (Hofhan. 1989. 1 19).

Fourth, when 1 hear a student speaking in English. 1 ofien understand that they are translating from their own language. When 1 hear a Korean student Say, "Please play your Bute continuously." 1 understand they're translating from Korean. When an Arab student writes a poetic description wlien we're practicing a TWE essay 1 understand (or think 1 do) that he's translating the rhetorical pattern from Arabic. 1 hear their English and 1 try and help them translate it into a style of English 1 believe would help them make themselves understood. My students and 1 share, in effect, the role of the translater. 1 hear them translate and guess at what

77
they iiiean. They rely on me. to some degree. for information of the effect of the particular word or sentence or intonation in English.

Finally. theories on translation and on teaching depend. to a large degree. on how language is
seeii. If words are seen as having a core meaning which is fixed, and if language is seen

primarily as representatioiial. then translation, as well as teaching, is an essentially neutral task of decoding the meaning of one language and re-coding it into another. This view of language is both pervasive and persuasive in translation and teaching. Alternatively. if we beiieve that "the meaning of a word is its use within a language game. where meanings can change with almost every use to which a word is put" (Corson. 1997. 176). and we believe language is not representatioiial but (soinewhrit) indeterminrite and imbued with power, thm translation and learning a language are not neutral. Translatiny a test and learning a languap becorne transformaiional activities. Activities where inequalities and difference play a role.

Shared Role of Translator

Before considering in more detail the fociis on the process. the view of language, the way of seeing the student and the role of the teacher, 1 would like to develop one idea which 1 think will efkct everything else. As 1 mentioned briefly above, the role and responsibilities of the

translater are shared by both the student and the teacher. There are two reasons for this. The
first is the fact that most ESL teachers in North America have studcnts who speak many languages and are from many different countries. It is impossible for them to knoa about al1 of

78 the different cultures of tlieir students in detail. Maier describes the translator as having a foot in

each culture/language she is translating to and from. ESL teachers in North America can not
have our feet in both Our culture and language and the cultures and languages of al1 our students;
O

we must rely on our students to do thrir share of the translating role.

ESL students have.

obviously. detailed knowledge of their own cultures and languages, and they usually have quite a bit of knowledge about English and cultures where English is spoken. Given the immense econoniic and cultural power that English and English speaking countries have. non8nglish speakers Iiave had to acquaint themselves with the dominant power.

Given this argument. Iiowrver. one niiglit ask about the role of the Korean teacher teachiny
Englisli to Koren students, or the Canadian teacher who has lived in Korea for years and speaks the language fluently. Do they still share the role of translator with their students? They have intimte knowledge of both English and Korean. Certainly. they have an advantage over the non-bilingual teacher: Iiowever. differences in language and culture are not the only differences teachers and students experience. Spivak recoynizes that when shr ackiiowledpes tliat for a translator. speaking the language is not enough. In addition to speaking the language, the transiator's space is also class organized (Spivak, 1992, 186). There are also (possible) diftrences in age. gender. race, ethnicity, sexual orientation. etc. In addition to al1 of the differences which we experience. student and teacher are also separated by the inequalities of the role of teacher and student. Ellsworth (1 989) has written about the danger of assuming that students will be cornfortable talking about such issues in the (non-neutral) classroom. The implication of these differences is a recognition that 1, as a teacher, can never have complete

79
knowledge of my student. There is. as Young (1 997) argues, always a remainder. Because of the asymmetrical relations of power between two people and the fact that our positions are made up through interaction with others. we can never see things frorn Our students eyes. Even with students who are similar to us, we n~ust recognize that we can never completely understand a student and that. tlierefore, they must share the translating role with us. This recognition of the inability to "fuse" with another does not mean there is a fail~re;~' means that teachers need to it be prepared to share their role with the students and realize the limitations of their own knowledge. Assuming we can know our students so well is dangerous because it is more likely
we will not be able to recognize when difference doss occur.

and Exploring some of the implications of seeing Our students as CO-translators as ultimately opaque is important because 1 believe this recognition will help make us better teachers and also

help ocir students leam. One of the niain implications is the realization that we can not assume
we know what stiidents are like or what rhey waiit. Making sweepiny assumptions about Our

students (such as. they just want to have fun. they wouldn't be interested in that subject. etc.,) leads to seeing them in a very uni-dimensional. diminished way. Of course, this does not irnply that we can not make generalizations about groups of students. We can. and do, become familiar witli groups of students from various cultures. The generalizations we make help us teach. For example, 1 know tliat many Arabic students have a hard time with Iiandwriting because they have

'' Maier says that "one must work to redefine expectations for translation by coming up with approaches 1995.29). that will show it as the humbling, disconcerting experience translation can bcW(Maier,

to train themselves to write "backwards" in English. Also, given the huge difference between spoken and written Arabic and differences in rlietoric. they will need a lot of Iielp leaming about the "standard" English way of organizing a paragraph. Japanese students (and most other Asian students) will have problems distinpuishing and pronouncing the letters I and r properly. Obviously. these types of generalizations are extremely useful to us as teachers. However, when

we start extending the statements to more substantive and moral pronouncements like "Asian
studems can't think critically" or "that's too serious for our students. they just want to have fun."

or "our students don't understand why women would want to remain single." we go too far. We
assume too inucli kiiowledge. We risk conlating our students' Eiiglish ability with their wliole self.

Recognizing our inability to know exactly wlio our students are does not imply paralysis on

our part. It does not iniply that we can not make certain choices about what to study or what
approach to take. Wliat it does imply is that Our clioices have implications; they are not neutral.

We have based them on our ideas of our students. We need to recognize that they will not
necessarily agree and that we might or might not hear about their reactions to Our assumptions and choice of material. We liave to rerneniber that the questions we ask will determine. to some extent. what kind of answers we will receive. In addition, students sometimes do not feel con~fortable expressing tlieir complaints. Wliat we can do is try and remain open to comrnents students do make.

81

Another in~plication seeing the student as co-translater is, 1 believe. a deep respect for students of and for the decisions they rnal~e.'~ respect cornes through in Maier's argument that taking a This risk by using non-standard English (such as using i ) may be justified if she is willing "to accept the poet a [sic] a women [sic] whose word is capable of orienting its own (and my) translation" (Maier. 1989, 643). If, as teachers, we recognize the role of students as co-iranslators. it means
we might not understand or agree with the decisions they make with the language. In the case of

Ji-Hae. the woman who apologized before her presentation, 1 was able to understand her decision because she felt cornfortable enough to tell me why she had said what she said. This is not always the case.

This idea of respecting students' drcisions does not irnply that whatever the students decide to do in the classroom is fine. As Maier, and other translators point out. if a translation is overly strange or "foreign-sounding." people might not listen? If a student makes a decision to use a strange plirase or a rheiorical device not used in English, the teacher's job is to ensure the student

"' 1 think Schenke makes this point in a slightly different way when she stresses that teachers have to recognize that "students corne to classrooms already knowing, and yet this is rarely the place from which ESL pedagogy begins" (Schenke, 1993,54).
'* Even theorists like Venuti. who advocated foreignizing translations in order to draw attention to the difference in them, also sees the value of using fluent translations sometimes. Venuti ( 1995) writes about how Paul Blackburn translated Julio Cortazar's work through a combination o f maintaining some difference (by using many Spanish words in the text) and writing a fluent translation. He says that "Blackburn's translations smuggled Conazar's fiction into Anglo-American culture under the fluent discourse that continues to dominate English-language translation" (Venuti, 1993,267). The acceptance o f Latin American fiction in English opened up a larger space for experimentation (for authors such as. Donald Bartheleme, Angela Carter, etc.,) (Venuti, 1995,166).

knows the Iikely interpretation of lier decision." Ji-Hae needs to know that native English speakers might be quicker to dismiss her if she starts her presentation with an apology. Another student might need to know. for example, that writinp a sentence like "I wish I could be a teacher like you" will conie across as childlike in English. Students need to have access to "standard languap," but thry also need critical knowledge of that "standard" lanyuage. Delpit explains
1 suggest that students must be raughf the codes needed to participate fully in the mainstream of American life...and that even while students are assisted in leaming the culture of power. tliey must also be helped to leam about the arbitrariness of those codes and about the power relationships they represent (Delpit, 1988.296).

If a student is aware of tlie impact a word or way of speaking will likel y have. and they still
choose to use it. the teacher has to respect that decision. There are limits to this respect which 1 will discuss later.

Process

1 will now consider tlie rmpliasis that translation theory places on the process of translation.

This focus is helpful, as 1 mentioned above. for tlie simple reason that most teachers tend to get caught up in the product rather than the process, so anything that gives us time to sit back and think about the process is valuable. However, the theorists 1 examined move beyond a simple call to consider proccss for the sake of process. They call for the translater to write about the actual experience of translating because it will make translation visible, expose inequalities and

O ' As Delpit points out, "pretending that gatekeeping points don't exist is to ensure that many students will not pass through hem" (Delpit, 1988,292).

83

differences between cultures/languages, demonstrate the creative role of the translator. and be a valuable space in which to explore cultural difierences and spaces betwern languages. Maier
( 1989. 1995). Levine (1 992).

and Chamberlain (1 992). for example, stress the need not to shy

away from sexist texts. but to engage with them. challenge them and write about the experience of translating them. Venuti urges the symptomatic reading of translations to find the inconsistencies. the gaps. the evidence of mediation. Teaching a second language could also be a place CO expose inequali ties and di fferences.

How should ESL teaclirrs expose or explore these inequalities and differences? Researching and writing articles in scholarly journals about Iiow teaching can reinforce or challenge inequality is one important way. Anotlier important way is to be more open in the classroom.

Like most translators, teacl~erstend to be silent about their choices and decisions in the
classroom. probably lagely because the decisions are perceived to be apolitical. neutral decisions made by professionals wlio know how people learn a language. If we reject the idea of neutrality. teachers and students have io realize that there is no form of teaching that is apolitical. This is similar to the view in translation theory which recognizes that every translation is a kind
of transformation. As Sclienke points out.

like al1 curriculuni decisions, providing a direction involves a moral and political standpoint as to what knowledges are io be valued in tems of learning and teaching. It is not as thougli there is a 'political' and 'non-political' (or neutral) way of doing cumculum or teaching (Schenke. 1996,s).
As well as recopniziiig the non-neutral or political nature of teaching. this mode1 encourages

teachers to verbalize their choices and rationales to their students. Just as the act of translating

84
should become visible. so too should the act of teaching. This is particularly salient if the teacher remembers she is sharing her role as translator with the student. Sharing reasons and rationales witli students is sometimes frightening because it involves more thinking. planning and leaving oneself vulnerable. It might mean admitting that we do not know the absolutely best way of iearning a language. It might mean accepting and acknowledging that we are not working with a particular set of principles from a scientific methodP2but that we are influenced not only by Our professional training and readinp. but also by our personal experiences as teachers and leamers. and by our instinct. Being able to explain our choices Iielps us as teachers think through what we are doing in a thorough maiiner. Jt also gives Our students more knowledge about us and our ideas about education and second languge Irmrning. Being open does not guarantee that we. as teachers. will always be able to identify a particiilar decision; certain decisions we make are not conscious. Being explicit will also not guarantee that the students will agree with the teacher or that tliey won7 rver feel manipulated; however. to the degree that tlie teacher tries to share the reasons for lier choicrs. the possibility of a non-coercive space is created.

One other idea that ESL might borrow from translation theory is tlie notion that translators.
working from a space "in-between" might have interesting things to learn about differences, inequalities. and spaces between cultures and languages. If ESL teachers are seen as (CO) translators who work with tlieir students, at least to some degree, in the space in-between cultures and languages, they might have something to teach other people working in applied linguistics,

"' Pennycook ( 1989). He deconstructs the notion that "methods" reaily exist. See

second language acquisition, critical pedapgy, cultural studies, etc.

Mainstream ESL. as 1 argued in my first chapter, sees language as neutral and sees language learning as beneficial. However, in the translation theory explored in the last chapter. language is not seen as transparent and neutral. but as political. involving inequalities. and connected to identity. Words are not easily excliangeable and do not have a core unitary meaning surrounded
by add-on connotational meanings. They have many primas, meanings and are not neutral.

Words are over-detrrmined and are "always the site of a range of semantic possibilities" (A. Benjamin. 1989. 35). In addition to rejecting the notion of language as a kind of label. these
is theorists stress that "standard" lang~iage not nrutral. Both Venuti and Spivak. for exarnple.

a-ued tliat the overriding style of current English language translation to translate the piece into tluent. standard English hides differences from the reader. However, the concem for markinp difference and inequality is also balanced by a concem for acceptability. Maier addresses this point when slie talks about the danger of writing a poem that no one will read.

If we recognjze that standard language is not neutral and we believe tliat pan of the job of an

ESL teacher is to try and uncover differences and inequalities, then we must talk about these
ditlierences in our ESL class. It is important for us, as teachers, not only to help our students achieve some control over standard language, but also to give students information on the powers

that shape the language and help them develop their own critical abilities. For a concrete example of giving students information about language think of the example, cited in the first chapter. of the TOEFL book which teaches students to use hr when they do not know the gender of the person speaking or acting. By noi addressing the controversy around this issue, we are both presenting language as if it never changes, and supporting a sexist viewpoint in our language. In fact, this particular piece of "standard" English has become non-standard and almost a r c l ~ a i c .Studrnts should know that this issue has been talked about for quite some time ~~ and that choosing anions he. dhc, hr or she. ihcy or simply using she can make quite an impact on the reader. In addition to talking about how English deals with this issue. the discussion could be extended to hou: the students' languages deal with this problem. or even if it is seen as a problem. The discussion could be funher extended to talk about efforts to make other parts of the language less sexist. cg.. replacing words like chc<irmanwith chuirperson or choir, etc. Equally important. wlien students corne across overtly or covertly racist words or phrases like
gook. bluck mccgicB lu bc gypped, it is crucial to point out where these words corne from and and

what racist slurs they carry. again both to combat the racism in the language (and culture) and to explore the power that language has.

Similarly. standard rhetorical patterns and conventions surrounding language in. for example. a presentation, nred io be addressed in a critical way. If they are presented in a non-critical way,

"'In the OISE/UT handbook on guidelines for theses and orals, i t States that students must use non-sexist language.

87
there is a danger that they will be presented as if tliat particular way is rhc way to do things, not
just the EngiisWntiddle cluss/ white, etc. way of doing things. If the teacher acknowledges that

this particular way of doing a presentation is the way it is done in middle class. white English culture. for example, it could leave more room for students to compare it to their ways of doing

a presentation. It couid lead to some exploration of some of the differences between languages
and cultures and how students will negotiate these differences. Think again of Ji-Hae's apology before her presentation. Being told that she had done the wrong thing and that she should never apologize before a presentation is not good enough. Yes. that's the standard way to do presentations in Englisli. However. it is important to critique that notion of standard. It is important to have soiiir acknowledgment of how people view presentations and apologies di fferently. The exploration of cultural nornis around present ing, apologiziiig and considering the view of self which prevails in each culture could lead to a better understanding for both student and teacher. Tliere could be some exploration on how slie could espress her (Korean) sense of self while not alienating her audience. She could have, for example, introduced herself in both English and Koreaii and apologized in Korean. Aiternatively. slie rnight have introduced herself and her presentation with an apology and an explanation of the apology. She also could have drcided to drop the apology completely or to use it without explanation. Her knowledge of
ways that standard language is produced give her more autonomy to make decisions about how

to present herself.

Wlien i worked with Elizabeth. the wonian who dropped out of lier low intermediate ESL class. I attempted to strike a balance between working on a standard style of writing while

88

acknowledginp its limitations. Although Elizabeth had an extensive (and esoteric) vocabulary, her written English was at quite a low level. Reading her prose was more like reading poetry; there seemed to be many interesting ideas. but it was very difficult to make much sense of it. When she was preparing to take an English test to be admitted to Sheridan college. we worked on a basic five paragraph essay. As we worked on this organizational pattern, 1 stressed that this was one of the basic patterns which was used as a jumping off point, not as an end. We talked about the differences between good writing in English and in Chinese. Rather than hearing she was a poor writer. she learned about a basic English pattern of organization. She felt free to criticize and expressed hrr surprize that English writinp. at least at tliis level. was so unsubile. She learned how to write a basic pattern. Maier reminds us of the importance of considering a balance when shr tells us that "to refuse to entertain the complexities of translation, either by subsurning the poet in the translater's voice (arrogance or excess agression) or by giving her too strong a voice of her own (rscess compassion) is to render her [the original author] speechless
and iiivisiblr in the nrw langiiage" (Maier. 1989.63 1 ). Elizabeth was Iiad a voici: and was able
io espress her own ideas.

Language and Identity

Anotlier idea that 1 esplored in the previoiis cliapter is the idea tht language is connected witli identity and that the act of translating does not only produce a text with a different identity, but also c m alter the identity of the original. The main idea explored in the second chapter concerning identity is that a translation transforms a text. Recall the example about Freud where

Bettleheim argues that in English, Freud's ideas seem medicalized and scientificized, whereas Bettleheim reads a more humanistic, spiritualist Freud in German. Similarly. when Graves translated Suetonius's The Twclve Caesurs, the text that emerges is quite different from the original. The intention of the piece has completely changed. In traditional translation theory. this has been seen only negatively, as the original text losing a vital component. The notion that the translation can develop the original is liberating for the translater and means that the original text is still vital because it is being read. discussed and interpreiedY The best example of this is probabl y Joyce's translation of Finncgcrn Y Wuke, where the original text itsel f becomes a work .'
in progress and the translation takes the identity of the original and develops and changes it.

Before I go on to talking about tlie identity ohtudents, 1 need to clarify the analogy I am making between the ideiitity of a text and tlie identity of a penon. The two are not always the same kind of thing. In ternis of the identity of a test. one could talk about the identity of the author that cornes through that text. like the medicalized Freud. or one could talk about the over al1 meaning of the text. In terms of the identity of a person, one could also talk about different kinds of identities: we identify ourselves by Our profession, our nationality, our "personality," etc. Tlirre are three points of similarity tliat 1 want to focus on here for the sake of my argument. First. language is connected with identity. When texts are translated, they are transforrned. Wlien people learn new languages, tliey leam new ways of being aiid thinking. Second. the

'" Niranjana (1992) and Maier ( 1 989 & 1995) do warn us that we need to be careful when translating that we don't obliterate tlie differences in the original text.

identity of both the text and persoii already contains difference in the original. Their "subject positions" are not fixed and unitary. Third, they can both be "read" in different ways. There is not only one translation possible.

Language, Ideiitity and Students

In ESL teaching. tliis implies that learning a language can be connected to creating an identity and that an "English" identity can reflect the students' original identity. can alter their original identity. or at least provide difirent ways of thinking about it. As they learn English. it seenis clear that our studrnts are in a process of constructing (with our help) their identity in English. The Guatemalan Mayans rejected the change in identity tliat learning English seemed to entail. Another clear example of tliis cornes from Hofiman. Learning English for Hoffman was a process of developing a different identity. She describes some of the process of learning
Mg mother says I'm becoming '*English". This hum me. because 1 know she means Im ' becoming colder.....l'm learning to be less demonstrative. 1 ieam this from a teacher uho. after contemplating the gesticulations with which 1 help niyself describe the digestive system of a frog, tells me to "sit on my hands and then try talkiny....1 learn my
new reserve froni people who take a step back when we talk, because l'ni standing too

close. (Hoffman. 1 989. 146) Learning a second (or third, or fourth) language can be very fmstrating. In the new language, you make mistakes, express your ideas in a simplified way, etc. You feel as if you have to give
up your identity as a successful. competent adult6' and revert back to childhood. Not only do you

"'This is particularly tlie case for immigrants and retgees who give up not only tiieir language ability, but also rheir family, friends. and often their professional training.

91

have to revert back to childliood. you also have to revert back to a childhood of another culture. You're expected to start obeying customs which are not your own. This feeling of frustration can be exacerbated by infantalizing activities and the low expectations ESL students often have
to cope witli. Recall tlie example of Byung Kuk who. although frustra~ed the silly topics he by

had to discuss, resigned himself to accepting them because, after all. he was like a child in
English.

If learning a languaye is connected to translating identity. then what we're asking students to
do in the classroom has a real impact. By asking ihem to do simple. uncritical, infantalizing

tasks, we risk not recognizing the importance of what they are doing. Carolina, a Mexican student. felt frustrated in class by the exercises she was asked to do. She mentioned one exercise where students were supposed to talk about the qualitie they wanted in a husband or wife. As a wornan who was espioriny the possibilities of being bisexual or a lesbian at the time. she felt niztrginalized in class.

Students will construct their identities in different ways. They might choose (sometimes unconsciously) to foreignize their English, just as translators' foreignize their translations in order to alert the listener to the fact that they are not (in this case) a Canadian. Ali. an Iranian student in a class at OISE. was very uncomfortable addressing the professors by their first names. In the end. he and tlie professors reached an agreement. The professors were uncomfortable being called "Doctor so-and-so," but agreed that he could cal1 them Professor so-and-so. When 1
was learning Japanese. 1 made a similar decision. I could not bring myself to use the teml

suimasrn (meaning T m sonylthank YOU") when 1 wanted to expressing thanks. From my

observation. the Japanese use the word suimcrsrn in two very different circumstances: when they

are excusing theinselves or apologizing. and when they are saying thank you. There are
additional words that people use when thankiny which Vary according to fomality: arigc7io. a r i w o gozuimasu. However, it is very common for people to use both suimusen and arigato at the same time. They are thanking someone and apologizing for the tirne the other person spent on tliem. 1 used more neutral (to me) crrigulo or d g u t o gozuimusti al1 the tirne. 1 choose not to use .szrirnr~.ssen because 1 felt unconifortable apologizing instead of thanking. It didn't fit my (albrit rudinieniary ) idrnti ty in Japanese.

Altematively. students may find that adopting "Enplish" ways of speaking gives them a vantage point from whicti to view tlieir own cultures. For exaniple, Keiko. a female Japanese student. used lier experience learning Englisli to reflect critically on both Japanese and Canadian culture. Slie wote an anicle for the school paper about the experience of visiting a seniors home in Toronto. The students were paired up with a resident and spent an afternoon talking. One of the stranpst things for her was using the resident's first name. She explained that in Japanese. a younger person would always use a honourific terin when speaking to a person that much older than she. Althouyh slie said she would never teel comfortable doing that in Japanese. it led her to think about both the more intimate talk slie felt she was able to have with the resident and lier own feelings about older people. At the sarne tirne, she commented on the respect the Japanese show to the aged that she felt was severely lacking in Canada. Sung Hee, a female Korean student who started using the word w m y n in her writing, took some of what she leamed in

93

English to look at Korean language and identity.. She told me about how her awareness of sexist language in English gave her a place to reconsider some of the sexist implications of Korean
vocabulary. My own experience leaming about the much more flexible and context dependent 1

that exists in Japaneseo'%elped me to reflect on the absurdity of the English concept of self
which is never changine, always unique, and individual.

Unlike mainstreani ESL pedagogy which seeins to see ESL students as uninterested in any serious. substantive topics. unwilling to demonstrate my sustained interest. and interested.

in n~ainly. having fun. this rnodel acknowledges that leaming a new language could involve a
shift in identity. There are two other ideas about students I would like to explore. The first is one 1 have explored in the tirst part of the essay: our students will remain somewhat opaque to

us. One of the most important ideas explored in the last chapter was a realization, on the pan of
the translator. that it is never possible to completely "cover" or know the text. As Maier points oui. there is always a remainder. Given the recognition of difference and instability in the original text. as well as the difficulty the translator from another culture. time. and place has in understanding, there is a recognition that the text will always yield other interpretations.

In ternis of teaching English as a Second Language. the teacher must recognize that she can
never know her students completely. that there will always be a remainder. that they c m tell their
'"'The pronoun "I" can be espressed in three diftrent ways for women and five for men. They Vary in degree of formality and politeness. In addition. insiead of using a pronoun, you can use your role in the f%ii~ily (Daughter am/is here) or in the workplace (Teacher want/s you to be quiet). Ofien times, pronouns are simply dropped. See Kondo (1990) for further exploration of this idea.
'

history a different way, and that we need to leave room in Our readinp of people to allow them to

change it. As 1 argued with the help of Young (1997), no-one c m ever know another completely,
or see the world from another's point of view. When you add the additional differences and inequalities of cultural differences and (sometimes) radically different language abilities. the

problem is compounded. Maier (1 989), Venuti (1992 & 1995) and others recognize the dangers
of assuming you can fuse with another penon. In attempting to fuse with another person or become like the author. the translater rnust look for similarities. The danger is in searching for

these similarities. we risk closing off differen~e.~' we end up appropriating the pain of others Or
or imposing Our values on the foreign or other person or text." Both Young (1997) and Boyd
(1 996) emphasize that the great danger in seeking similarity or universal values is that the person

with the dominant viewpoint will end up imposing their values on a situation thinking that they

are imposing universal values. Schenke expresses the idea of rejectinp fusion while still listening
and supponing:

1 cannot. and clioose not. to stand in your place. perhaps not even beside you. What 1 can leam is that your struggle is beinp made. And how it is done. And what it supports. And how wliat it supports, is similar. cornplicitous, yet different from my own. 1 can leam from the pedagogy of your talking back as you c m l e m from mine (Schenke. 1991. il).

"? Dingwaneg and Maier (1995) give an example from a letter from one o f their students living in a middle class suburb who seemed to nor recognize difference. "1 live down the street from what 1 consider to be the prettiest park .... lt includes a big rose garden with 300 types o f roses. There is a community garden where neighbors plant corn or beans or whatever side by side. Almost like Rigobena Menchu's community"(Dingwaney Br Maier, 1995,3 16). They point out that Menchu's fiht is to encourage us to identify with her agenda, but not imagine that we are her.

Recall the work done by Niranjana (1992) who argued that the English translators of a vucunu read the poem as already incorporating Christian ideas of God when, in fact, it did not.
' l n

If we accept that we only ever have partial knowledge of our students. we must recognize that

al1 assumptions we niake about our students have to be provisionary. Assuming al1 students "'just
wanna have fun" and are not interested in any topics of substance is dangerous. Assuming al1 Asian students can not understand what it is like to want to remain a single woman is dangemus. Assuming Our ESL students do not have the ability think critically is dangerous. Assuming everyone in our class likes English and North American culture is dangerous. Assuming Our studeiits need English to free tliemsrlves is also dangerous. Obviously. wrt do go into the classroorn with certain assuinptions: it is not possible to enter a class (or translate a text) in a neutral way. However. what 1 am aquing here is that we need to be as open as possible. As

ESL teachers we need to be even more vigilant because Our students do not always have the
language they need to express tlieir ideas. lf they do say something. they may corne across as rudew or blunt because the' do not know how to express their ideas in the typical middle-class
way of asking. In addition. pi~eii power the teaclier lias in the classroom and as a speaker of [lie

English. she has to realize tliat her students might not feel cornfortable revealinp too n~uch her. to As Ellsworth says about her own experience. "acting as if our classroom were a safe place in which democratic dialogue was possible and happening did not make it so" (Ellsworth. 1989.

3 15).

'" l am reminded of a personal example. I became frustrated with a friend of mine (who spoke little English at the time) because almost every time 1 invited him to do something, he responded, simply, with "No." I told him 1 felt hurt. He said that he had been very busy, and it dawned on me that the problem was one of language. I esplained that in English, if invited to do something, the invitee should always give appreciation for the invitation. an excuse. and show some interest in doing something at a more convenient tirne. 1 tauglit Iiim a k w stock phrases which he incorporated. From that time on. our friendship became mucli more corn fortable.

The second idea that I want to explore rnay seem contradictory because 1 will argue that
although the student must be respected as a CO-translator, teachers need to engage with and question students if tliey are acting in a discriminatory fashion. The theorists I explored in the last chapter emphasized the need to make translation visible and to talk about translation by exploring the process in order to highlight the differences and inequalities between cultures. They argued that texts shouldn't be rejected because of offensive characteristics, but neither should the feminist/anti-racist translator be silenced. The translator is aware of the differences and inequalities between different cultures and languages and wants to highlight them. Being aware of differences includes more than simply being aware of the differences between whole cultures and languages. 1t is also an awareness of differences witliin cultures. Maier writes about the multiple subjectivities and oppressions Latinas have to deal with. They include: "as
women. as mestizas or Latin Arnerican. as Latinas, and then again as memben of the individual

ethnic groups witliin that terni" (Maier, 1989, 626). The translator, then, should also be aware of otlier inequities. Le.. grnder. race. sexual orientation. etc. Both Levine and Maier talk about the problem of translating misogynistic texts. Maier ralks about how she manages both to give voice to various antagonistic work and to engage with them and question them: The translater's quest is not to silence but to give voice, to make available texts that raise difficult questions and open perspectives. It is essential that as translators women get under the skin of both antagonistic and sympathetic works. They must become independent. "resisting" interpreters who do not only let antagonistic works speak...but also speak with the111 and place them in a larger context by discussing them and the process of translation (Maier in Chamberlain. 1992,71). Just as translators are aware of differences and inequities, so too ESL teachers are aware of differences and inequalities. We know that some people will judge our students solely by the

way they speak. We deal with this in a number of ways: we ourselves struggle to remember that

their English does not equal their person. we talk with them about the perception that other people might have of tliein. we try and give them tools both to improve their English ability and strategies to communicate. we comrnunicate with other people about the unfaimess of being judged by language ability. We realize that our students, particularly those who are refugees and immigrants, have to learn to function in a different world.'' Given this acknowledgment and

rejection of this form of discrimination, we, as ESL teachers, also need to be aware of other kinds of discrimination. ESL students should not be silenced; the teacher's quest is not to silence but to hrlp students develop tlieir voicr. Howrver. drvcloping a voice does not niean teachers

simply supply grammatical correction; teachers too can be "independent and 'resisting'
interpreters" (Maier in Chamberlain. 1992, 7 1 ). Just as students need to know histories of words

and racist/sexist meanings of common words. so too do oppressive statements need to be

addressrd. If the teaclirr is open and attempting to become awre of tliose differences herself, she must also be prepared to address comrnents made by her students." Schrnke iiisists the Mexican student wlio, in the same moment of speaking. proudly addresses his ancestry of lndian resistance to Spanish colonization and his resentment of black people's 'laziness', necessitates a pedagogical response willing to engage precisely in the site of conflict and contradiction rather than glossing it over (Schenke, 1991, 123)

' O As Hoffman says when she reaIizes that to her classrnates, Poland will never be the center of the universe, "it is I who will have to learn to live with a double vision ....1 have been dislocated from my own center of the world, and that world has been shifted away from my centre" (Hoffman, 1989, 133).

'' There is little support for this in Language schools at the moment. Also ESL teachers' training does not address these issues.

Teachers

Given the ideas developed in the last section. it is obvious that tlie role of the teacher is far more than merely a neutral language technician. One of the first things 1 have argued is that the teacher and the student share the translator's role. Together, they're in-between cultures. This means that the student has equal responsibility and that the teachers need to recognize that responsibility. It also means tliat students will make choices that we won't necessarily understand or agree with. Teachers do have a responsibility, though. to intervene when oppressive statements are made. Another idea 1 have argued for is that teachers need to be open about their pedagogical decisions. Their decisions are not neutral. but are based on our assumptions about learning a language and about our students. Finally. 1 would like to argue that teacliers need to considrr tlie effect of tlieir social location on their students and their pedagogical decisions.

An important point that translation theorists try to make is that there is no essential core or platonic idea of a text hovering somewhere above or behind the text. The original message is not something independent of the form or lanyuage and culture it is written in. The language and the content are together. The words and text contain many readings. This idea can be linked with the idea that there is no core self devoid of race, gender, class, ethnicity, sexual orientation, etc. As Boyd argues, "both Our experience of the social world and our interactions within it are already 'alignedg for us insofar as we are unavoidably members of groups (in Young's sense). And by this. we are differentially enabled/constraining or disenabledkonstrained in relation to

99

each other" (Boyd, 1997.20). If our interactions are already aligned because of our membership

in groups. we must consider how Our membership might affect our decisions and how our
students see us.

Dingwaney and Maier (1 995) use the awareness that 1, Rigobenu McnchU had been mediated. in this case by both an ethnographer and a translator, to get the students to realize that those mediating bad read and interpreted the text as people influenced by their belonging to particular groups and categories. Through thinking about and questioning the decisions both BurgosDebray and Wright made. tliey hoped that the students would be able to read the text and recognize themsrl\~es a subjects also made up of various conflicting and di ffering group as nieniberships whicli intluences their reading. Nrither Dingwaney and Maier nor the other theorists are suggesting tliat it is simple to trace the influences of social location. nor that belonging to a particular group will necessitate certain re-actions. Maier and Dingwaney acknowledp that when thinking about Burgos-Debray's involvement: they continually doubled back on their assuniptions and thouylit about different ways to interpret her involvement. Similarly, 1 do not want to propose the adoption of some kind of rigid identity politics'! for ESL teachers. Being a woman. for example. does not cause me to write in a certain way. Nor do 1 want to imply that people who belong to the category womun or working ciuss have some son of privileged access to the truth and people who don't belong in this category can not speak.

For one thing, the concept o f a 'group' is fuuy and. in some cases, very large. When the cateyory of "wonian" is shared by genetically and in sonie cases biologically male people who identify as transgendered women, it is a large and uncertain category.

However, being a woman is part of who 1am. Being a white middle class able bodied heterosexual English speaking woman will influence how I teach and will influence how my students see me.

When talking about social location, the usual categories include: gender, race, class, ethnicity. sexual orientation, ableness. As Boyd says, "these group categories dp shape my social experience, and even more so, that of others....any attempt to understand my social relation lllll~f include these markers of difference because they are so systemically determinant of both our identities and our life prospects as persons" (Boyd, 1997, 16). In addition to thinking about al1 of these areas, an important addition for the second language teacher is to consider the language being taught. Although this is not normally one of the categories u ~ e when~ d ~ tnlking about social location, in this case 1 believe it is important. 1, as an ESL teacher, need to recognize the not power that I have as a native speaker,74 just of the lariguage my students want to l e m , but of English. the International language, the language people of'ten feel they need or are forced to leam. Both mainstream second language pedagogy and traditional translation theory opente as if

the particular language being discussed is not important. However, the theorists I have been
exploring stress that the languages and the inequalities of the languages are important. As Spivak says, "the status of a languoge in the world is what one must consider when teasing out
'"ee Boyd ( 1 997) for a deeper exploration of social location.

'" Another distinction that could be explored is the distinction between native speaker of English and non-native speaker of English and the assumption that a native speaker is preferable. Indeed, the whole notion tliat people can speak with authority of what or wlio a "native speaker" actually is seems problematic.

101

the politics of translation" (Spivak. 1992. 189). As is clear from the examples cited in the first chapter. the language being learned can make quite a difference to the leamer. The Guatemalan Mayans lefi their ESL class choosing instead to focus their energy on leming Quiche rather than English. Although ESL teachers tend to act as if students have chosen to l e m English. we need to recognize that the notion of "choice" operating here is not quite the open, free version of choice that we assume. Many students feel they have little choice; they have to study English (for univenity. jobs. because of immigration. etc.).

As someone in a mainly privileged position, 1 have to recognize that 1 benefit from my

position. that 1 might be reluctant to give those privileges up and that my position might be less visible to myself. If 1 am iiot aware of my location. 1 might end up treating my students like they are in tlie same position 1 am. An exampie miglit Iielp illustrate my point. ln the past. 1 have worked with immigrants taking free ESL classes sponsored by the Federal povemment. Along witli a skills based curriculum, the students liad two classes a week on job skills. I was in charge
of that pan of the course. Afrer doing sorne research and drawing on my experience and friends'

experience looking for work. 1 decided to design tlie course to focus mainly on accessing the hidden job market rathrr than focusing only on resumes and newspaper ads. Many of my students had come from countries where they had been assigned jobs and hadn't had the experience of searching for them. 1 tried to focus on building contacts, making cold calls, developing persistence. etc. The class was moderately successful, but 1 became frustrated with the attitude of some of rny siudents. A few of my students had complained that they had experienced racism when looking for work, that they were told they needed Canadian experience.

1 02

that tlieir credentials werr wonhless, etc. Some of them felt they had bren misled by consulate in their countries and wouldn't have immigrated if they had known how difficult it was to find good work in Canada. My reaction at the time was a mixture of acceptance, frustration and anger. 1 thought that 1 had acknowledged the difficulty that they would face. but 1 wanted to move on and focus on wliat they could do.

1 began to realize. near the end of my time tliere. that 1 had not sufficiently considered hou?

my social location as white. native-English speaking. middle-class. educated. young woman influenced my assumptions and the way I responded to the class or how my social location would influence Iiow my students perceived and received my actions. Nothing in rny training or reading in traditional ESL theory addressed tliis kind of issue. If 1 had considered how my social location miyht be interpreted by my students. what would 1 have done differently in the classroom? 1 think 1 miglit have done a number of things. 1 should have included more discussions led by studeiits on the obstacles immigrants face. Simply assuming my students would be like me was not helpful. 1 could have brought in one or two puest speakers who were theniselves immigrants and who could have talked about the difficulties in working in Canada as immigrants. as well as tlie choices they made. 1 might have tried to incorporate a more critical approach to al1 of the workshops, always leaving time for some discussion about who tends to benefit because of this situation, or how this makes it difficult for immigrants who are ofien in a catch-27- no Canadian experiencr, therefore no job. therefore no Canadian experience. 1 still would have included many of the classes and workshops on certain skills that 1 had originally planned. In a number of the workshops, we talked about two goals: a shon term goal and a long

term goal. We talked about getting a survival job. and we talked about ways of choosing a survival job which might eventually lead to their choice of a long term job. Only focusing on the negative is not helpful. Students need access to the kind of job search skills that most (middle-class) Canadians have if the)! are to compete. Delpit reminds us that not teaching students skills they need to succeed is unfair to students (Delpit, 1988,292).

Another example tliat I mentioned in the first chapter concerned accusations of racism towcirds Asian students and preferential treatment to the European students. The solution to this probleni seemed only to woid controversial issues, to "be careful" and perliaps to leave ourselves outside of the classroom. When we accept that we can't leave our group identities behind because they have already formed Our identities. we realize how ridiculous the idea of leaving ourselves outside actually is. Boyd argues not only that it is impossible. but that it does harm.

He says. "failinp to locate inyself in the sense of group embeddedness warps the nature of my
performative moral engagement with others tliat is necessary for educational discourse" (Boyd.
1997. 24). Given that the issue raised merited only 15 minutes of discussion in a staff meeting.

there was not really any other solution possible. Obviously a simple direction like. "consider how your social location might have caused our Asian students to cornplain" would also not have been helpful. Teachers would have felt like they were being accused of racism and would have reacted negatively. Since eveii the idea of seriously thinking about ethnocentrism and cultural differences (in a real. deep way, not in the superficial, tell us what kind of food you eat way) is so foreign to many people, including ESL teachers, simply bringing the idea up in a 15 minute discussion would be useless. Dealing with issues of racism. sexism. homophobia. conflict and

1O4

controversy is extremely difficult. Ail of thesr: issues do occur in a second languap classroom. Starting to deal with these issues would mean a cornmitment of tinie where teacliers could talk about their experiences in the classroorn, hear from others about issues of discrimination, and receive encouragement. Seriously addressing these issues would also imply that TESL courses, whether they be certificate or diplorna. pre-service or not, need to incorporate these ideas in their curricula.

1 think it is clear by these exarnples that accepting that it is important to consider social

location when teaching does not lead to a strict adlierence to a particular code of behaviour. What it does imply is that teachers need to be aware of their location and consider how it might affect their class. There are certain activities that require more thinking about social location on the teacher's part. When I'm trying to explain tlie difference between tlie simple past and the present perfect, for example, 1 will not be thinking about my social location. If I'm teaching a
course on how to teach ESL. 1 must consider my social location because it affects how 1 teach

and iny position niay not be shared. In addition to the importance of thinking about one's social

position. it is also clear from the above examples that teachen need time to consider how conflict and controversy "fitb'into the prognm and how they can be handled constructively in the classroom.

The final point that translation theory makes is that the job of the translator is a creative, demanding. humbling job. The translation tlieorists rejected the hierare!-ka1 positioning of autlior as supreme. and translator as humble slave/servant. They recognize that tnnslating

1O5

involves knowledge, cultural sensitivity. awareness of social location. difficult decisions, a political stance, and creativity. ESL teachers need to learn from translation theory and embrace their role as teachers. As shown above. they are not simply technicians imparting value free information. They are educators wlio, just like translaton, m s be aware of the nature of their ut work. It is a political activity. It does invoive cultural sensitivity, difficult decisions. awareness

of inequalities and difference. And it does involve creativity.

Conclusion

In this thesis 1 have used idras from the fields of translation theov and moral philsophy to argue for a way of seeing ESL teaching that recognizes that it is not a neutral activity. Language itself is not neutral but is a contested place where meaning is constructed. Second language teachers should not simply help their students learn the standard language, but should also explore the power of lanpuage. Teachen share their role as 'btranslator*' with their students. and

hence, must respect the choices their students make. Teachers also need to recognize that they
can not leave their social location outside of the classroom. The role of teacher expands from that of technician to that of educator in a wider sense. 1 think it is clear from my suggestions in the tliird chapter that this particular way of thinking about ESL teaching enables the asking of many questions. It allows space for questions about social location, the power of English. how Our teaching methods affect Our students, etc.

ln the third chapter. 1 esplored how translation theory would "translate" into ESL teaching. 1 looked at some specilic rsamples from my classroom to help me figure out the kinds of changes that might corne about from the guidance of this pedagogy. 1 did corne up with some concrete ideas of what to do in the classroom. However, the overall pedagoyy does not provide a kind of
ABC lesson plan which al1 teachers can follow and arrive at the answer. It is not a deskiliing

kind of theory where teachers need only learn a few ideas, follow the textbooks and, presto, a bettrr English class. This \ \ of looking at ESL teaching provides more opponunity for a. questions than for answers. 1 believe this is a strength. This is the kind of theory that promotes tliinkiiig and discussioii. As Maier says when talking about translation, "for if translation is detned not as a product but as the practice for which 1 have been arguiny. its 'endt is the

prompting of rather than the resolution of an inquiry" (Maier, 1995,3 1).

The next step for teachen to take is to discuss how, given this framework, other aspects of Our teaching will be tnnsformed. 1 have given some examples. but we need to develop them and consider more. Given this framework, for example. does it matter if classes are primarily skill based or should they be content based? One criticism of mainstream ESL is the total lack of concern about content. This tends to reswlt in either an endless Stream of "common interest" and almost mindless topics suc11 as movies. families. comparing cultural traditions, etc.. or very controversial topics sucli as abortion. capital punisliment. etc.. wliich receive only very cursory treatment. Perhaps a subject-based course (which draws on particular skills when relevant). especially for students at the intemediate and higlier levels, would be more appropriate.

Two of the biygest questions that 1 have brought up in this thesis. but have not explored are iinding a role for controversy witliin a classroom setting and dealiiiy effrctively with offensive (racist. sexist, homopliobic. etc.) comments from students. How do l structure or contain the controversy to encourage growth in ideas and in English? How do 1 best help students to develop their own thoughts and ideas? How do 1 avoid imposinp my point of view? How do 1 respond to the man who makes a homophobic comment in class? How do 1 interact with that student in a more productive way than simply telling him that his comment is offensive and he should not use that language in the classroom? How do 1 avoid simply glossing it over?

1O9

When considering issues like the above, it becomes obvious how important it is to have the suppon of colleagues as well as institutional support. It is very difficult to make these kinds of changes individually because. sometimes. the institutional structures teachers work within do not suppon. but even actively discourap. these kinds of changes. When working in a place where teachers are never given time to talk about pedagogical issues, for exarnple, it is difficult to institute any changes. When trying to change the basic ideas that suppon one's teaching, it is often very useful to talk with colleagues and find out what they have been doing in their classroorns and how they are thinking about a particular issue. In addition to theoretical discussions. workshops where teachers can role-play dealing with offensive statements would be helpful. Having the suppon of colleagues and the administration is also useful when considering
the kinds of textbooks and materials being purchased.

At the end of Iiis book. The Trrinskt~or lnvisihili[y, Venuti (1995) writes a "cal1 to action." S In this section. h r calls for translators to change they way they work and the way their work is perceived. He encourages them to resist the transparent style of translating. ro write sophisticated prefaces. essays and presentations on the issues around translation. to fight for a translating contract tliat gives them copyright of the translation, etc. He also calls for a change in the way the general public thinks of and reads translation. At the risk of sounding too idealistic.
1 think ESL teachers need to do the same kind of thing. We need to make these suggestions in

Our workplaces. in journals, and at conferences. We need to think about our teaching and what
we can do to improve it.

Reference List

Applebaum. B. & Boyd, D. (In Press). The Meaning of Dominance, The Dominance of Meaning,
and the Morality of the Matter. In M. Leicester, C. Modgil, & S. Modgil (Eds.), Values

Education/ulturul Divwsity Series. London: Falmer Press.

Atkinson, D & Ramantha. V. (1995). Cultures of Writing: An Ethnographic Cornparison of LI . and L2 University WritindLanguage Prograrns. TESOL Quartcrly 29(3). 539-568.
Basnett. S.(]996). The Meek or the Mighty: Reappraising the Role of the Translator. In R.

Alvarez and M. c.-A. Vidal (Eds.). Trunsiation.Ponvr, Subversion ( 1 0-24). Clevedone.

Philadelphia. Adelaide: Multilingual Matters Ltd.

~.~ Becker. A.L. ( 1 995). Beyonil Trumluriun: E S S L Itowcird u Mudcrn Philolugy. Ann Arbor, M I :
The University of Michigan Press.

Benjamin, A. ( 1 989). Trcrnslution and the Nu~irre oj'Philosophy. London and New York: Routledge Press. Benjamin, W. (1992). The Task of the Translator. (H. Zohn. Tram.). In R. Schulte and J. Biguenet (Eds.). Thcories of Trmlution: An Aniholua of Essuysjrorn Dryden to Derrida (pp.

7 1-82). Chicago and London: The University of Chicago Press.

Borges. J. L. (1 962). Ficciunes. (Emec Editores. S.A., Buenos Aires, 1956, tram.). (A. Kerrigan. ed.). New York: Grove Press.
Bourne. Jill. ( 1 988). 'Natural Acquisition' and a 'Masked Pedagogy'. Applird Linguisiics 9(1).
83-98.

111

Boyd. D. ( 1 996). Dominance Concealed through Diversity: Implications of Inadequate

Perspectives on Cultural Pluralism. Harvard Educu~ionalRcview 66(3), 609-630

Boyd. D. (1998). The Place of Locating Oneself(ves)/Myself(ves)in Doing Philosophy of

Education. In Susan Laird (Ed.). Philusophy cfEducution 1997 (pp. 1 - 19). Urbana. IL: Philosophy of Education Society. Bumaby. B. & Sun, Y. (1 989). Chinese Teachers' Views of Western Language Teaching: Context Informs Paradigms. TESOL Quurfcrly. 23 (2). 2 19-238. Chamberlain. L. ( 1992). Gender and the Metaphorics of Translation. In Lawrence Venuti (Ed.).
Rchinking Truidtdion: Di.sczir.sc..Siibjcc~iviry, IJcololy (pp. 57-74). London and New York:

Routledge. Corson. D. ( 1995). Using English W(r<ls.Dordrecht. Boston, London: Klwer Academic Publishers. Corson. D. (1997). Critical Realism: An Emancipator)' Philosophy for Applied Linguistics?
.4pplied Linguisiicu 18(2). 1 66-1 88.

Corson. D. & Wodak. R. (Eds.). ( 1997).Encyclopedia o lunguuge und Educurion. Voiunw f. f

Lunguuge Pulicy und Poliricul I.c~ucs Educuzion. Dordrecht, Boston, & London: Kluwer in Academic Publishers.

Corson. D. & Van Lier. L. (Eds.). (1 997). Encyclopdicr oj'ltrngutrge und Edwrriion. Volzrmc 6.
Knowkdge Abor<r Lunguuge. Dordrecht, Boston. & London: Kluwer Academic Publishen.

Delpit. L. (1 988). The Silenced Dialogue: Power and Pedagogy in Educating Otlier People's Children. Hurv~~i'J Edttc~~rionrrl Review 58(3), 280-298.

Demda, J. (1985). The Ear of the Other: Olobiography, Transfrence, Tramla~ion. Ronell, (A. trans.) and (P. Kamuf, ed.). C. McDonald, New York: Schocken. Dingwaney, A. & Maier C. (1995). Translation as a Method for Cross-Cultural Teachiny. In A. Dingwaney and C. Maier (Eds.), Between Languages and Cultures: Translation and CrossCuliural Texrs (pp. 303-3 19). Pittsburg and London: University of Pittsburg Press. Ellsworth, E. (1989). Why doesn't this feel empowering? Working through the repressive myths of Critical Pedagogy. Huvard Educational Review 59(3), 297-323.

Even-Zohar, 1. ( 1979). Polysystem Theory. Poetics Toduy l(1-2), 287-3 10.

Ford, M. & Pepper-Smith, K. (In Press). Dividing the Difference: lntelligibility as an Element of

Moral Education under Oppression. The Journul o Moral Educution. f

Freire. P. (1970). Pchgogy o fhc Opprcssed. ( M . Bergman Rarnos, trans.). New York: f Continuum Publishing Corporation. Gentzler, E. (1 993). Contrmporury Translation Theory. New York and London: Routledge. Giltrow, J. & Colhoun, E. R. (1 992). nie Culture of Power: ESL Traditions, Mayan Resistance.

In B. Bumaby and A. Cummings (Eds.), Socio-political aspects of ESL (pp. 50-66). Toronto,
Canada: OISE Press.

Goldstein, T. (1997). Bilingual Life in a Multilingual High School Classroom: Teaching and Leaming in Cantonese and English. Cunadiun Modern Language Review 53(2), 356-370.

113 Griggs, A., Progosh, D., van Slyck, L., Wagner, M. (1987). Do consciousness-raising & techniques in grammar aid in learning in the collaborative classroom? An Empiricai Study. Unpublished paper for a course at OISENT. Hoffman, E. (1989). Lost in Translation: A Lifc in a New Languuge. New York: Penguin Books.

06, Jacobs, C. (1 975). The Monstrosity of Translation. Mondern Language Notes 9 ( ) 755-66
Johnston, J. (1 992). Translation as Simulacrum. In Lawrence Venuti (Ed.) Rerhinking Trairslation: Discourse, Subjectivity, Ieology (pp. 42-56). London and New York: Routledge. Kondo, D. K. ( 1990). Crcuting Selves: Powcr, Gender, and Discourses o Ideniity in a Japancse f Workplacc. Chicago and London: The University of Chicago Press. Layoun, M. N. (1 995). Translation , Cultural Transgression and Tribute, and Leaden Feet. In A. Dingwaney and C. Maier (Eds.). Bciwccn Luqquugcs and Cultures: Trunslution and CrossCuirlira1 Tcxrs (pp. 267-289). Pittsburg and London: University of Pittsburg Press. A Soicrcebook. London and New York: Lefevere, A. ed.(1992) Tr~rnslc~tio~~~History/Culture:

Routledge.
Levine, S. J. (1989). Frum 'Little Painied Lips' to Hearthbreak Tango. In Rosanna Warren (Ed.),

The Art of Trunslatiun: Voiccsfrom the Field (pp. 30-46). Boston: Northeastern University
Press. Levine, S. J. (1992) Translation as (Sub)venion: On Translating Infante's Inferno. In L.Venuti
(Ed.), Reihhking Translation: Discourse, Subjecfivity, Ideology @p. 75-85). London and New

York: Routledge.

114

Lewis, P. (1985). The Measure of Translation Effects. In J. F. Graham (Ed.), Dlflerence in Translation (pp. 3 1-62}. Ithaca and London: Corne11 University Press. Maier, C. (1 989). Notes After Words: Looking Forward Retrospectively at Translation and

(Hispanic and Luso-Brazilian) Feminist Criticism. In H. Vidal (Ed.), Cultural and Historical
Groundingfor Hispanic and Luso-Brazilian Feminist Literary Criticism (pp 629-653). Minneapolis: Institute for the Study of Ideologies and Literature. Maier, C. (1 995). Toward a Theoretical Practice for Cross-Cultural Translation. In A. Dingwaney and C. Maier (Eds.) Berwecn Languages and Cultures: Translation and Cross-Cultural Texts

(pp. 2 1-38). Pittsburgh and London: University of Pittsburgh Press.

Morgan, B. (1997). ldentity and Intonation: Linking Dynamic Processes in an ESL Classroom.
TESOL Quartcdy 3 1(3), 43 1-450.
Murphey, T. ( 1 996, Septernber). Proactive adjusting to the Zone of Proximal Developrnent: Leamer & Teacher strategies. Paper presented at the second conference for socio-cultural Research Vyotsky-Piaget, Geneva. Murphey, T. (1998, October). Expanding the ZPD through micro and macro modeling of near peer role models. Paper presented at Modem Language Centre Lecture Series, Ontario Institute for Studies in EducationRTniversity of Toronto. Nida, E. A. (1969). Science of Translation. Language 45(2), 483-498 Niranjana, T. (1992). Siting Translation: History Post-Structuralism. and the Colonial Context. Berkely, Los Angeles, Oxford: University of Califomia Press.

1l 5

Peirce, B.N (1995). Toward a pedagogy of possibility in the teaching of English intemationally.

TESOL Quarteri)) 23,9-3 0.

Pennycook, A. (1 989). The Concept of Method, Interested Knowledge, and the Politics of

Language Teaching. TESOL Quarterly 23(4). 589-616

Pennycook, A. ( 1994). The Cultural Politics o English as an Internafional Language. London f and New York: Longman Group Limited. Pennycook, A. ( 1996).Borrowing Others' Words: Text, Ownership. Memory. and Plagiarism.

TESOL Quarterb 30(2 ), 201 -230.

Pica. T. (1987). Second-language acquisition. social interaction, and the classroom. Applied Linguisfics, 8, 3-2 1.

Rand. R. ( 1985). o'er-brimmed. In J.F. Graham (Ed.), Dgerence in Trumlarion (pp. 8 1- 10 1).
Ithaca and London: Corne11 University Press. Risset, J. (1984). Joyce translates Joyce. (D. Pick. tram.). In E.S. Shaffer (Ed.) Comparurive
Criticism 6 (pp 3-1 8). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

(1 Sampson, G.P. 983). Exporting Language Teaching Methods from Canada to China. TEX Cunadu Jotrrnul 1(1), 19-31. Schenke, A. (1 991). Speaking the Autobiographical"1" in Poststructuralist Practice: A Pedagogy of Voice and Memory-Work. Unpublished Master's Thesis for the Ontario Institute for Studies in Education, Canada. Schenke, A. (1996). A Report on the fint course in 'Cross-Cultural Studies': A Proposed Special

116 Schenke, A. ( 1996). A Report on the first course in 'Cross-Cultural Studies' : A Proposed Special Topic Focus for Advanced Students of ESL. Unpublisheci report for the school of continuing studies at University of Toronto. Schenke, A. (1998, March). Effects of Corporatization in ESL. Paper presented at the annual

TESOL Convention, Seattle, WA.

Scollon, R. (1995). Plagiarism and ideology: ldentity in intercultural discourse. Language in
Society 24(1), 1 -28.

Sieburth, R. (1989). The Guest: Second Thoughts on Translating Holderlin. In Rosama Warren

(Ed.), The Art of Transluiion: Voicesfiom the Field (pp. 237-243). Boston: Northeastern
University Press. Spivak. G. C. (1992). The Politics of Translation. L M. Barret and A. Phillips (Eds.) n

Desiabking Theory: Contemporary Ferninisr Debates @p. 1 77-200). Cornwall: Poli ty Press.
Tollefson J. (1988). Covert policy in the United States rehigee program in Southeast Asia.

Language Problms and Lunguugc Planning 12( 1), 30-42.

Venuti, L. (1995). The Translaror S Invisibiliw A History o Translation. London and New f York: Routledge. Venuti, L., (Ed.) (1992) Rethinking Translation: Discourse, Subjecfivity,Ideology. London and New York: Routledge. White, J. B. (1990). Jusfice as Translation: An Essay in Cultural and Legal Criticisrn. Chicago and London: University of Chicago Press.

117

Wittgenstein, L.(1 953). Philosophical Investigations. (G.E.M. Anscombe, tram.). Great Britain:

Billings & Sons.

Young, 1. M. (1 997). Intersenhg Voices: Dilemmas of Gender, Polifical Philosophy and Policy.

Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.