LANGUAGE TEACHING AND TRANSLATION The application of translation as an inherent element of FLT was prevalent right up until early in the present century. The Grammar-Translation method, dominant during the first half of the century, burdened translation and grammatical evaluation, and put increased emphasis on accuracy than upon fluency, finding academic erudition to franche competence (Titone& Danesi 1985).
At the time for the hundred years, the Grammar-Translation method little by little gave way to the Direct Method (more characteristic of ELT in Europe as compared to America (Rivers 1991)), which will advocated optimum exposure to the prospective language, with no recourse both to L1 or to translation.
During this period, “Translation used to be regarded as an important evil” (Levenston 1985a). The Direct Approach made their way very prominently in to the field of ELT inside the east through the British Requirement (Bamberger 1958).
The American behaviorist school (Skinner 38, Watson 1913) of terminology teaching ushered in the Audio-lingual Method, which usually concentrated upon patterns and structure with an emphasis on drill and technique. The item, not the process, was significant, there was to get minimal justification of guidelines and no option to translation (Larsen-Free-man 1962). The reaction to the audio-lingual technique, grounded in the Chomskian Wave, was the Franche Approach (Ministry of Education 1988, Savignon 1987).
Franche competence “has come to be found in language instructing contexts to refer to the capacity to negotiate which means, to efficiently combine an understanding of linguistic and sociolinguistic rules in communicative interactions”(Savignon 1987: 16). At the same time, the advance of cognitive psychology, which was also influenced by the Chomskian wave, made a direct effect on ELT (Titone & Danesi 1985). The findings of cognitive psychology mentioned that “deductive, or rule-based, strategies play a dominant role in language learning.
Deductive teaching methods are as a result based on the learning principles of cognitive mindset and its linguistic counterpart, transformationalism, and are generally known as cognitive-code procedures” (Titone & Danesi 85: 110). “The role in the teacher is usually to recognize the importance of mental activity in learning” (Chastain 1971: 92). Teachers of FLT were now asked to address the difficulties of consciousness raising. (Bialystok 1986, 1988, Carrel 1989, Castillo 1991, Cohen 1986, Gerloff 1986, Hosenfeld 1978, Kern 1989, Rivers 1991, Rubin 75, Templeton 1989, Thomas 1988, Vieira 1991, Wenden & Rubin 1987).
It came to be realized that the study of translation abilities might have benefit as a means of raising the learner’s linguistic awareness with regards to his or her indigenous as well as to russian (Boersch 1986, Carton 1966, cited simply by Rubin 1986, Faerch, Kasper 1986, Hosenfeld 1978, Lehmann 1986, Levenston 1985b, Loerscher 1986, Ministry of Education 1990, Naiman 1978, quoted by Levenston 1985a, Rosenblith, stated in Ackerman 1992, Sharwood Smith 1981, Titford 1983).
The contrastive analysis with the two languages, L1 and L2, which in turn accompanies the translation process, is assumed to heighten the learner’s metalinguistic awareness of equally languages and also to facilitate all their perception as abstract terminology systems.
