Abstract
The present study was carried out as classroom research after it was noticed that there are obvious cultural elements peculiar to Turkish society which do not have equivalents in English, thereby creating confusion and difficulty particularly for beginner-level Turkish learners of English. This confusion in the learning process stems from the inadequacy of the English lexicon. The study investigated the translation skills of Turkish EFL learners concerning vocabulary related to family and relationships in the language education curriculum, and compared the accuracy and clarity of learner outputs with machine translation outputs. Additionally, the participants were interviewed about the lexical gap and its affects, if any, on their motivation. The participants were 52 beginner-level learners of English (12 male and 40 female) whose ages ranged between 18 and 55. Results revealed that the texts produced by group 1, mostly with the help of MT, were lexically stable and poorer in content and density, but semantically quite confusing for average Turkish learners of English. The texts produced by group 2, mostly by manual explanation and correction of the literal vocabulary, were lexically richer in content and density, and relatively detailed. It was also observed that the translation outputs of group 3 were similar to those of group 1, showing an inclination to use online and android translational tools, which was confirmed afterwards in interviews. The study concluded that the lexical gap in the English lexicon related to the family and relationships especially, but also to other cultural domains, might create serious confusion and gaps in the minds of beginner FL learners that should be approached with extra consideration during the development of learning materials and implementation of educational sessions, which in turn might contribute positively to the motivation of the learners.
Keywords
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution.
Buying options
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Learn about institutional subscriptionsNotes
- 1.
- 2.
- 3.
- 4.
- 5.
- 6.
- 7.
- 8.
References
Arabski, J., & Wojtaszek, A. (2011). Aspects of culture in second language acquisition and foreign language learning. Berlin: Springer.
Albl-Mikasa, M. (2014). The imaginary invalid. Conference interpreters and English as a lingua franca. International Journal of Applied Linguistics, 24(3), 293–432.
Bird, S., & Chiang, D. (2012, December). Machine translation for language preservation. In COLING (Posters), 125–134.
Blum, S., & Levenston, E. A. (1978). Universals of lexical simplification. Language Learning, 28(2), 399–415.
Busse, V., & Walter, C. (2013). Foreign language learning motivation in higher education: A longitudinal study of motivational changes and their causes. The Modern Language Journal, 97(2), 435–456.
Cheung, M. P. (2009). Introduction—Chinese discourses on translation: Positions and perspectives. The Translator, 15(2), 223–238.
Choi, P. K. (2003). ‘The best students will learn English’: Ultra-utilitarianism and linguistic imperialism in education in post-1997 Hong Kong. Journal of Education Policy, 18(6), 673–694.
Cohen, I. (2011). Teacher-student interaction in classrooms of students with specific learning disabilities learning English as a foreign language. Journal of Interactional Research in Communication Disorders, 2(2), 271–292.
Dörnyei, Z., & Ushioda, E. (2013). Teaching and researching: Motivation. New York: Routledge.
Ellis, R. (2001). The study of second language acquisition. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Grosjean, F. (2010). The bilingual as a competent but specific speaker-hearer. In M. Cruz-Ferreira (Ed.), Multilingual Norms (pp. 19–31). Frankfurt am Main: Peter Lang (This chapter originally appeared in the Journal of Multilingual and Multicultural Development).
Harvey, A. (2013). Designing for the ESL learner: A reader-response approach (Doctoral dissertation, Infonomics Society). Literacy Information and Computer Education Journal (LICEJ), 2(1), 1329–1332. doi:10.20533/licej.2040.2589.2013.0176
Ives, P. (2006). Global English: Linguistic imperialism or practical lingua franca. Studies in Language and Capitalism, 1(1), 121–141.
Ives, P. (2014). De-politicizing language: Obstacles to political theory’s engagement with language policy. Language Policy, 13(4), 335–350.
Janssen, M. (2012). Lexical Gaps. In The encyclopedia of applied linguistics. Published online: Blackwell Publishing.
Jenkins, J., Cogo, A., & Dewey, M. (2011). Review of developments in research into English as a lingua franca. Language Teaching, 44(3), 281–315.
Koren, S. (1997). Listening to lectures in L2; Taking notes in L1. TESL-EJ, 2(4).
Laufer, B. (2013). Second language word difficulty. In The encyclopedia of applied linguistics. Published online: Blackwell Publishing.
Lewis, M. (1993). The lexical approach. Hove: Language Teaching Publications.
Lianeri, A. (2006). Translation and the language(s) of historiography: Understanding ancient Greek and Chinese ideas of history. In T. Hermans (Ed.), Translating others (2 vols., vol. 1, pp. 67–86). Manchester, England: St. Jerome.
Lo Bianco, J. (2014). Domesticating the foreign: Globalization’s effects on the place/s of languages. The Modern Language Journal, 98(1), 312–325.
MacKenzie, I. (2013). Lexical inventiveness and conventionality in English as a lingua franca and English translations. European English Messenger, 22(1), 47–53.
Mauranen, A. (2012). Exploring ELF: Academic English shaped by non-native speakers. New York: Cambridge University Press.
Modiano, M. (2001). Linguistic imperialism, cultural integrity, and EIL. ELT Journal, 55(4), 339–347.
Niżegorodcew, A. (2011). Understanding culture through a lingua franca. In J. Arabski & A. Wojtaszek (Eds.), Aspects of culture in second language acquisition and foreign language learning (pp. 7–20). Berlin, Heidelberg: Springer.
Phillipson, R. (1996). Linguistic imperialism: African perspectives. ELT Journal, 50(2), 160–167.
Phillipson, R. (2000). English in the new world order. Variations on a theme of linguistic imperialism and “world” English. In T. Ricento (Ed.), Ideology, politics and language policies: Focus on English (pp. 87–106). Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publishing.
Phillipson, R. (2008). The linguistic imperialism of neoliberal empire. Critical Inquiry in Language Studies, 5(1), 1–43.
Pishghadam, R., & Naji Meidani, E. (2012). Applied ELT as a panacea for linguistic imperialism. Iranian EFL Journal, 8(1), 35–52.
Shlesinger, M., & Almog, R. (2011). A new pair of glasses: Translation skills in secondary school. Methods and Strategies of Process Research. Integrative approaches in Translation Studies, 94, 149.
Sterbenz, C. (2014). 9 Incredibly useful Russian words with no English equivalent. http://www.businessinsider.com/untranslatable-russian-words-2014–4 Retrieved on November 25, 2014.
Stoyanova, R. (2014). Some issues of vocabulary teaching of Bulgarian as a foreign language. International Conference on Education, Language, Art and International Communication (ICELAIC). Retrieved from: http://www.atlantis press.com/php/download_paper.php?id=12557.
Susam-Sarajeva, S. Ì. (2002). Translation and travelling theory: The role of translation in the migration of literary theories across culture and power differentials. Doctoral dissertation, University College London, University of London.
Tymoczko, M. (2013). Translation Theory. In The encyclopedia of applied linguistics. Published online: Blackwell Publishing.
Ur, P. (1996). A course in language teaching. Practice and theory. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Uzun, L. (2011). Foreign language vocabulary acquisition: False cognates, convergence, divergence, collocations, lexical void, and parallel words. Saarbrücken, Germany: LAP Lambert Academic Publishing.
Uzun, L., & Salihoglu, U. (2009). English-Turkish cognates and false cognates: Compiling a corpus and testing how they are translated by computer programs. Poznań Studies in Contemporary Linguistics, 45(4), 569–593.
Vygotsky, L. S. (1986). Thought and language. Cambridge: MIT Press.
Waters, A. (2013). Linguistic imperialism continued. ELT Journal, 67(1), 126–130.
Wentzel, K. R., & Wigfield, A. (2009). Handbook of motivation at school. New York: Routledge.
Whitfield, A. (2005). Towards a socio-cultural turn in translation teaching: A Canadian perspective. Meta: Journal des traducteurs/Meta:Translators’ Journal, 50(4).
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2016 Springer International Publishing Switzerland
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Uzun, L. (2016). Should We Blame Machine Translation for the Inadequacy of English? A Study on the Vocabulary of Family and Relationships. In: Chodkiewicz, H., Steinbrich, P., Krzemińska-Adamek, M. (eds) Working with Text and Around Text in Foreign Language Environments. Second Language Learning and Teaching. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-33272-7_17
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-33272-7_17
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-319-33271-0
Online ISBN: 978-3-319-33272-7
eBook Packages: EducationEducation (R0)