Listening and memory training in translation

MINISTRY OF HIGHER AND SECONDARY SPECIAL EDUCATION OFTHE REPUBLIC OF UZBEKISTAN
GULISTAN STATE UNIVERSITY
The English and Literature department
Nurakova Malika’s qualification work on speciality5220100, English philology on theme:
The Theme: Listening and memory training intranslation
Supervisor: Rashidov A.
Gulistan-2006

Contents:
I. Introduction
1.1. Compositional structure of the work
2.1. Purposes of the qualification work
II. The Main Part
1.2. Chapter 1 Memory Training and its types
1.1.2. Why we need memory training
2.1.2 Short-term and long-term memory: opposites andcoincidences
3.1.2 The short-term memory and methods of itsimproving
Chapter 2. Listening techniques in translation.
1.2.2 Some recommendations
3.2.2. Scholars investigations of the phenomenon oflistening
Chapter 3 Russian influence onto development oftranslation.
1.3.2. Introductory remarks
2.3.2. Listening and memory training at schools
III. Conclusion.
1.3. Some words about the thematic content of thework
2.3. Concluding the results and the ways of applyingthe work
IV. Bibliography.

Introduction
1.1.   The theme of my qualification work sounds as following:“Listening and memory training in translation” Our qualification work can becharacterized by the following:
The actuality of this workcaused by several important points. We seem to say that the capacity oftranslation is one of the main skills that a learner of English can possess sothis work will deal with the traditional problems of students caused bydifficulties in interpreting and translation. In other words, our qualificationwork pursues as its major aim to help foreign students avoid the problemsconnected with the art of translation and interpreting from English into themother tongue and vice-versa. So the significance of our work can be proved bythe following reasons:
a) The art of translationis one of the most difficult problems for the learners of English.
b)      The problem of bad memory and inattentivelistening is not a specific problem of the learners of English, but for themajority of people. That is why we tried to find optional methods of improvingthese skills.
c)The proposals mentioned in this work were approvedby a number of worldwide famous Universities of the USA and Great Britain.    
d) A number of modern methods and literary sourcesfrom Internet were used in our qualification work.       
Having based upon theactuality of the theme we are able to formulate the general goals of ourqualification work.
a)      To study, analyze, and sum up the modernmethods of training of memory.
b)      To analyze the major results achieved in thestudied field.
c)       To prove the idea of importance of memory andlistening training.
d)      To help students avoid the problems caused bywritten and simultaneous translation.
If we say about the newinformation used within our work we may note that the work studies the problemfrom the modern positions and analyzes the modern trends appeared in thissubject for the last ten years. Mainly, the newality is concluded in a widecollecting of internet materials dealing with the listening and memory training.
The practical significanceof the work can be concluded in the following items:
a)      The work could serve as a good source ofmaterials for additional reading by students at schools, colleges and lyceums.
b)      The problem of listening and memory training couldbe a little bit easier to understand, since our qualification work includes thechapter concerning the question mentioned.
 c)      Those who would like to possess a perfectknowledge of English will find our work useful and practical.
d) Our qualification work is a general review of theinvestigations made earlier.
Having said about thescholars who dealt with the same theme earlier we may notion Anderson, J.R, GileD, Zhong W, etc.
If we say about themethods of scientific approaches used in our work we can mention the method ofgeneral analysis was used.
The newality of the workconcludes in including the modern interpretations of the play.
The general structure ofour qualification work looks as follows:
The work is composed onto fourmajor parts: introduction, main part, conclusion, and bibliography. Each parthas its subdivision onto the specific thematic items. There are two points inthe introductory part: the first item tells about the general characteristicsof the work, while the second paragraph gives us some words about the aims ofthe work and the general description of the latter. The main part of ourqualification work consists of three chapters, which, in their [1]turn,are subdivided into several thematic paragraphs. The first chapter of the mainpart discusses the memory training as the aspect of learning foreign languages.Here we gave the general description of the memory and analyzed the two typesof memory: long and short. We also studied the modern methods used for improvingof the short memory. The second chapter thoroughly takes into consideration thepeculiar features of listening techniques and gives a comparatively largenumber of practical recommendations for improving listening skills. We alsomentioned the scholar’s opinions concerning the investigating subject. Thethird chapter is meant by itself as a compilation to the previous twos andstudies the question of the Russian influence onto the enlarging of the Englishlanguage and the questions of translation caused with it. We also mentionedhere the question connected with the problem of teaching translation skills atschools. In conclusion to our work we notioned some meaningful words concerningthe thematic content of the work (the first item) and the concluding results ofour investigation (the second item) At the very end of our qualification workwe supplied our work with the bibliography list and the internet materials.
If we say aboutthe practical wais of applying our qualification work we would like to say thatour qualification work can be applied and used by the following:
1) The work canbe useful for all the teachers of foreign languages when they teach theirstudents to translate the written sources of information or when the lettersare taught to speak and transmit the information in foreign languages.
2) All thestudents of foreign languages department would be able to use the work forbetter knowledge of English or when they have practical classes on foreignlanguage.
3) Translatorsand interpreters might find a lot of useful information for the improvement oftheir professional activity.
4) Thequalification work will be useful for everyone who wants to make perfect inlearning foreign languages.
2.1. Thispaper discusses the role of memory training and listening in interpreting.According Gile's Effort Model (a Processing Capacity Account), short-termmemory is an essential part in the process of interpreting. This paper analyzesthe major characteristics of Short-term Memory (STM) and their implications forinterpreters' memory training. We believe that interpreting is an STM-centeredactivity, which includes encoding of information from the Source Language,storing of information, retrieval of information, and decoding of informationinto the target language. The training of STM skills is the first step intraining a professional interpreter. Tactics for memory training forinterpreters like retelling, categorization, generalization, comparison,shadowing exercises, mnemonics, etc. are presented in this paper. The key wordsfor our investigation can be the following: Interpreter Training, MemoryTraining, Short-Term Memory, Effort Model, Listening techniques.

TheMain part
1.2. Interpretingis defined as «oral translation of a written text» (Shuttleworth& Cowie: 1997:83). Mahmoodzadeh gives a more detailed definition ofinterpreting: Interpreting consists of presenting in the target language, theexact meaning of what is uttered in the source language either simultaneouslyor consecutively, preserving the tone of the speaker (1992:231).
Whether noviceor experienced, all interpreters find this profession demanding andchallenging. Phelan says that «when an interpreter is working, he or shecannot afford to have a bad day. One bad interpreter can ruin aconference» (2001:4). In discussing the qualifications required for aninterpreter, Phelan mentions that:
«Theinterpreter needs a good short-term memory to retain what he or she has justheard and a good long-term memory to put the information into context. Abilityto concentrate is a factor as is the ability to analyze and process what isheard» (2001:4-5).
Mahmoodzadehalso emphasizes that a skillful interpreter is expected to «have apowerful memory.» (1992:233). Daniel Gile (1992,1995) emphasizes thedifficulties and efforts involved in interpreting tasks and strategies neededto overcome them, observing that many failures occur in the absence of anyvisible difficulty. He then proposes his Effort Models for interpreting. Hesays that «The Effort Models are designed to help them [interpreters]understand these difficulties [of interpreting] and select appropriatestrategies and tactics. They are based on the concept of Processing Capacityand on the fact that some mental operations in interpreting require muchProcessing Capacity.»(1992:191) According to Gile, ConsecutiveInterpreting consists of two phases: a listening and reformulation phrase and areconstruction phase (1992:191, 1995b:179):
Phase One:I=L+M+N

I=Interpreting,L=listening and analyzing the source language speech, M=short-term memoryrequired between the time information is heard and the time it is written downin the notes, and N=note-taking.
Phase Two: I=Rem+Read+P
In this PhaseTwo of Consecutive Interpreting, interpreters retrieve messages from theirshort-term memory and reconstruct the speech (Rem), read the notes (N), andproduce the Target Language Speech (P). Gile's Effort Model for SimultaneousInterpreting is:
SI=L+M+P
SI=SimultaneousInterpreting.
L=Listening andAnalysis, which includes «all the mentaloperations between perception of a discourse by auditory mechanisms and themoment at which the interpreter either assigns, or decides not to assign, ameaning (or several potential meanings) to the segment which he hasheard.»
M=Short-termMemory, which includes «all the mentaloperations related to storage in memory of heard segments of discourse untileither their restitution in the target language, their loss if they vanish frommemory, or a decision by the interpreter not to interpret them.»
P=Production,which includes «all the mental operations between the moment at which theinterpreter decides to convey a datum or an idea and the moment at which he articulates(overtly produces) the form he has prepared to articulate» (1995a:93).[2]
Gile emphasizesthat the memory effort is assumed to stem form the need to store the words of aproposition until the hearer receives the end of that proposition. The storageof information is claimed to be particularly demanding in SI, since both the volumeof information and the pace of storage and retrieval are imposed by the speaker(1995a:97-98).
In both models,Gile emphasizes the significance of Short-term Memory. It is actually one ofthe specific skills which should be imparted to trainees in the first stage oftraining. Among all the skills and techniques which are required for a goodinterpreter, memory skill is the first one which should be introduced totrainee interpreters.
2.1.2.Psychologicalstudies of human memory make a distinction between Short-Term Memory (STM) andLong-Term Memory (LTM). The idea of short-term memory simply means that you areretaining information for a short period of time without creating the neuralmechanisms for later recall. Long-Term Memory occurs when you have createdneural pathways for storing ideas and information which can then be recalledweeks, months, or even years later. To create these pathways, you must make adeliberate attempt to encode the information in the way you intend to recall itlater. Long-term memory is a learning process. And it is essentially animportant part of the interpreter's acquisition of knowledge, becauseinformation stored in LTM may last for minutes to weeks, months, or even anentire life. The duration of STM is very short. It is up to 30 seconds.Peterson (1959) found it to be 6 — 12 seconds, while Atkinson and Shiffrin(1968) and Hebb (1949) state it is 30 seconds. Memory in interpreting onlylasts for a short time. Once the interpreting assignment is over, theinterpreter moves on to another one, often with different context, subject andspeakers. Therefore, the memory skills which need to be imparted to traineeinterpreters are STM skills.
Input ofinformation: It is generally held that informationenters the STM as a result of applying attention to the stimulus, which isabout a quarter of a second according to the findings of both Sperling(1960)and Crowden(1982). However, McKay's (1973, in Radford and Govier, 1991: 382) findings do not fully support this, asserting that unattended information mayenter the STM.
Capacity: Asmentioned in the previous section, the capacity of STM is limited and small.Atkinson and Shiffrin (1968) propose that it is seven items of information(give or take two). Miller (1956) says it is seven «chunks.» Anotherpossibility may be that the limiting factor is not the STM's storage capacity,but its processing capacity (Gross:1990:55).
Modality: Tostore information in STM, it must be encoded, and there is a variety of possibilitiesas to how this operates. There are three main possibilities in STM: (1) Acoustic(Phonemic) coding is rehearsing through sub-vocal sounds (Conrad, 1964 andBaddeley:1966). (2) Visual coding is, as implied, storing information aspictures rather than sounds. This applies especially to nonverbal items,particularly if they are difficult to describe using words. In very rare casessome people may have a «photographic memory,» but for the vast majority,the visual code is much less effective than this (Posner and Keele: 1967). (3) Semanticcoding is applying meaning to information, relating it to something abstract(Baddeley:1990, Goodhead:1999)
InformationLoss: There are three main theories as to whywe forget from our STM: (1) Displacement—existing information is replaced bynewly received information when the storage capacity is full (Waugh andNorman:1965) (2) Decay—information decays over time (Baddeley, Thompson andBuchanan, 1975). (3) Interference—other information present in the storage atthe same time distorts the original information (Keppel and Underwood:1962).[3]
Retrieval: Thereare modes of retrieval of information from STM: (1) Serial search—items in STMare examined one at a time until the desired information is retrieved(Sternberg:1966). (2) Activation—dependence on activation of the particularitem reaching a critical point (Monsell:1979, Goodhead:1999).
3.1.2.Thepurpose of memory (STM) training in interpreting is to achieve a better understandingof the source language, which will lead to adequate interpreting. As Lin Yuruet al. put it, «Memory in consecutive interpreting consists of nothingmore than understanding the meaning, which is conveyed by the words» (Linet al., 1999:9). Understanding is the first step in successful interpreting;therefore, memory training is to be provided in the early stage of interpretertraining. Memory functions differently in consecutive and simultaneousinterpreting, because the duration of memory is longer in CI than in SI. Thereare different methods of training STM for CI and SI respectively. Interpretingstarts with the encoding of the information from the original speaker.According to Gile's Effort Model, interpreting is an STM-centered activity; theprocess of interpreting could be re-postulated into:
Encoding ofinformation from the Source Language + Storing Information + Retrieval ofInformation + Decoding Information into the Target language.
In ConsecutiveInterpreting, there is probably up to 15 minutes (depending on the speaker'ssegments) for the interpreter to encode and then store the information. This isthe first phase of Gile's Effort Model for CI. In the second phase of Gile'sModel, the interpreter starts to retrieve information and decode it into thetarget language. In SI, encoding and decoding of information happen almost atthe same time. The duration for storing the information is very limited.Therefore, in the first step of interpreting, encoding (understanding)information uttered in the SL is the key to memory training.
According to theprevious description, there are three main possibilities of storing informationin STM: (1) Acoustic Coding; (2) Visual Coding and (3) Semantic Coding. Visualcoding may be used by interpreters in conference situations with multimedia.Notes in interpreting are to assist in such visual coding of information. Butin most interpreting contexts, interpreters will depend on acoustic andsemantic coding. Therefore, exercises should be designed for this purpose. Thefollowing methods are recommended:
Retelling in theSource Language: The instructor either reads orplays a recording of a text of about 200 words for the trainees to retell inthe same language. The trainees should not be allowed to take any notes. In thefirst instance, trainees should be encouraged to retell the text in the samewords of the original to the largest possible extent. The following tacticsshould be used by the trainees after a certain time of training on retelling: Categorization:Grouping items of the same properties; Generalization: Drawing generalconclusions from particular examples or message from the provided text; Comparison:Noticing the differences and similarities between different things, facts andevents; Description: Describing a scene, a shape, or size of an object, etc.Trainees are encouraged to describe, summarize, and abstract the original to alarge extent in their own words in exercises (2) to (5). Shadowing Exercise:Which is defined as «a paced, auditory tracking task which involves theimmediate vocalization of auditorily presented stimuli, i.e., word-for-wordrepetition in the same language, parrot-style, of a message presented through aheadphone»(Lambert 1899:381). This kind of exercise is recommended fortraining of Simultaneous Interpreting, especially the splitting of attentionskills and the short-term memory in SI.[4]
There is anothertool which is effective in memory training: Mnemonic to Memory. Mnemonic is adevice, such as a formula or rhyme, used as an aid in remembering. Mnemonicsare methods for remembering information that is otherwise quite difficult torecall. A very simple example of a mnemonic is the '30 days hath September'rhyme. The basic principle of Mnemonics is to use as many of the best functionsof the human brain as possible to encode information.
The human brainhas evolved to encode and interpret complex stimuli—images, color, structure,sounds, smells, tastes, touch, spatial awareness, emotion, and language—usingthem to make sophisticated interpretations of the environment. Human memory ismade up of all these features.
Typically,however, information presented to be remembered is from one source—normallywords on a page. While reading words on a page reflects one of the mostimportant aspects of human evolution, it is only one of the many skills andresources available to the human mind. Mnemonics seek to use all of theseresources. By encoding language and numbers in sophisticated, striking imageswhich flow into other strong images, we can accurately and reliably encode bothinformation and the structure of information to be easily recalled later (Manktelow:2003).
It is alsoadvisable that Exercises with Interference (e.g. noises) be provided in orderto prevent information loss in the Short-Term Memory, since the environment andother information present in the storage may reduce the information encoded.Recording speeches with specially 'inserted' noises as a background is arecommended classroom practice, since this is a very effective method to enablethe students to concentrate and thus strengthen their STM duration.
Notes:
1. Training ofprofessional interpreters has a three-part structure: the first stage isintroduction to skills specific to interpreting, for example through memorytraining and note-taking exercises. This is followed by intensive classroompractice. The third stage involves work experience and observation where themain focus is on task achievement.[5]
1.2.2.The aim ofprofessional translation and interpretation is transposition of a message froma source language into a target language, with due attention to what one mightcall the ambiance of the message in order to create a similar ambiance in the targetlanguage. Depending on the content and form of the message, this ambiance maybe minimal, as in much scientific and technical translation or purelyinformational interpretation. It may be as important as the message, as inliterary translation or the interpretation of politically or psychologicallysensitive speeches. Or it may even be more significant than the message itself,as in some poetry, in advertising, in many diplomatic communiqués, andin most after-dinner speeches. Although every bilingual speaker who is able toexpress himself with some felicity can usually translate or interpret on themessage level, it takes considerable training, or a special sensitivity coupledwith years of experience, to become a professional translator or interpretercapable of capturing and communicating the nuances of two or more languages.
Ambiance can becreated in various ways. It can be the result of a distinctive linguistic orliterary style or form: colloquial, educated, biblical, commercial, or legallanguage; slang, dialect, or regionalisms; dialogue, stream-of-consciousnessnarrative, or oblique discourse; poetic prose, verse, or such characteristicliterary styles as those of romanticism, realism, or even the New Yorker . It can be created throughreferences to certain aspects of a particular cultural or social heritage, suchas national holidays, historical or geographic landmarks, or national or localcharacteristics and beliefs. Ambiance can also involve ethnic or culturalpeculiarities and idiosyncrasies—special marriage or burial customs or rites,various superstitions and taboos. Finally, it can utilize the specialcharacteristics of one language that have no (or only imprecise) equivalents inanother.
Those who arenot translators may not give much thought to the problem of the mostappropriate treatment in English of the complex and elaborate sentences ofGerman or Russian, or the flowery styles of Russian or Chinese. Most of us,however, are aware of a number of simpler translation problems: “faux amis,”i.e., words which sound similar in two languages but mean different things;regionalisms, where the same word or phrase has different connotations or evendenotations and where the region itself, be it Cockney London or the DeepSouth, may have unique symbolic values; mixed stylistic levels and metaphors;almost untranslatable terms such as Gemütlichkeitor poshlost ; theneed to find English equivalents for the familiar form of address still used bymany languages, or for titles, first names, and surnames used in specialcontexts (e.g., Lord Peter, Sir John; vousma mère; die Anna ); the difficulty of finding theappropriate linguistic and social form for expressing or translating wishes, commands,admiration, gratitude, disagreement; translating into the appropriate ambiancereferences to the Bible, the Koran, the Little Red Book, or Comrade Lenin;quoting Shakespeare to Germans, Goethe and Schiller to Americans. The list isendless.
Many of theseproblems face the language student and teacher long before he confronts them asa translator or interpreter. In general, language students acquire some of thiscultural and social ambiance gradually through their readings, from theirteachers' explanations, habits, and customs, or, if the student is lucky,during a lengthy stay in a foreign country with exposure to that country'scultural and social values. Nonetheless, it takes a very observant, determined,sensitive, and thoughtful student to absorb enough of the ambiance to become a“near-native.”
If thenear-native also has a profound awareness of his primary culture, he can beconsidered bilingual. (Actually, true bilingualism is rare. Unless bothlanguages and cultures are constantly accessible and in equal measure part ofthe working and living environment, one of them soon moves into a secondaryposition.) Finally, in addition to engaging in a comprehensive “contrastiveanalysis” of his two languages (i.e., a comparison which is attuned to themyriad factors of the respective ambiances) and developing methods for solvingat least the more obvious and important problems of linguistic, cultural, orsocial divergence, the bilingual speaker must attain an educational levelsufficiently high for an awareness of aesthetic, philosophical, social, andpolitical factors and innuendos and their possible equivalents in the otherlanguage area. Only then will he have the potential for becoming a goodtranslator or interpreter. Such a preparation may well require a lifetime—andin the past “real” translators and interpreters indeed seemed born rather thanbred. In fact, however, a far greater number of working translators andinterpreters were merely people with some knowledge of a foreign language andan ability to convey the gist of a message, sometimes together with the gist oftheir own preferences and prejudices. The same was, and often is, true oflanguage teachers. Though we have moved through various methodologicalrevolutions, from Berlitz and total immersion to the aural-oral approach, fromthe linguist-plus-informant team to the “classroom abroad,” highly motivatedstudents and teachers often fight a losing battle to retain and expand theirlaboriously and expensively acquired language skills. We have all heard thecollege student complain that “after a year of studying it I now know lessFrench than when I came back from France,” or “I just can't discuss Don Quixote meaningfully in Spanish”; orthe teacher's confession that “I practically rewrite some of my students'master's theses that are written in German,” or the new Ph.D. who admits thathe cannot lecture in Russian.
After World WarII, several European universities established extensive formal programs for thetraining of professional translators and interpreters and developed methods forrefining the techniques of what I have called contrastive analysis. Morerecently, similar programs were established at a few American universities,most notably at Georgetown and the Monterey Institute of Foreign Studies. Whileserving as director of the program at Monterey, I realized that, unlike itsEuropean counterparts which are able to draw on a multilingually orientedenvironment, and perhaps even unlike the Georgetown program which undoubtedlybenefits from Washington's sizable international population, the Institute'sprogram had to provide considerable training in advanced language skills aswell as in translation and interpretation techniques. Moreover, when seekingteachers qualified both to teach and practice translation or interpretation, Isoon discovered that most “bilingual” teachers had either lost or never foundthat sensitivity to conceptual shadings and equivalences which is so importantfor a good translator or interpreter (and equally for a good language speakeror teacher). I therefore consider it essential that academic institutions ofhigher learning provide advanced language training in addition to courses inliterature and culture, and that such language training be required throughoutthe language student's academic residency. This may seem an inauspicious momentfor pleading the case of expanded language programs. But as teachers turn inincreasing numbers to internationally oriented programs of study such asinternational studies, comparative politics and institutions, and comparativeeconomics and management, and as the value of foreign language mastery withinsuch training becomes more and more obvious, there is an increasing need forlanguage programs oriented toward bilingualism. [6]
Students (andeven teachers) from other programs and schools have occasionally requestedpermission to participate in the Institute's translation and interpretation courses—notin order to become professional translators or interpreters but to maintain orexpand their language skills. This fact confirms my belief that some of thetechniques we use to enhance the language facility of our translation andinterpretation students could be applied successfully to general languageprograms at other institutions of higher learning. I am convinced that suchlanguage training can be at least as valuable as a stay abroad, with the addedadvantage that the second cultural environment does not tend to displace thefirst. Both settings, so necessary for proper contrastive analysis, are thusavailable simultaneously.
Chapter2Listening techniques in translation
The followingthree techniques used in the training of translators and interpreters at theMonterey Institute seem especially suitable for advanced language study:
1. Conceptualization . One of the basicpremises for successful translation and interpretation is recognition of the principlethat the working unit is not a word or word group but the concept, the idea. Incontrast to shorthand, which aims at a verbatim reproduction of a text, thevarious note-taking systems used for consecutive interpretation provide, as itwere, “basic training” in conceptualization. They are compression systems, usedto record only the essential concepts of a speech and its organizational orlinkage pattern. As these concepts are orally translated into the otherlanguage, they are again expanded into complete sentences and given theappropriate stylistic and verbal framework. By requiring that the student writedown not complete sentences or word groups, but only minimal significantconcepts and linkages—and there is no time to do more—such note-takingencourages the conceptualization without which effective consecutiveinterpretation cannot occur.
There is, ofcourse, no need for every language student to learn interpretative note-taking,though I consider it an extremely beneficial skill. It improves essay planningand writing skills, leads to better note-taking at lectures, increasesawareness of parallel or divergent ways of expressing ideas in two languagesand thus develops sensitivity toward style, and, most important, it encouragesanalytical and systematic thinking.
Once theprinciple of conceptualization is understood, there are many ways to employ andpractice it: précis-writing; oral and written text summaries; oralenumerations of the salient points of a speech, an essay or a discussion; theselection of appropriate titles and headings for articles and news items; andbrief or extensive recapitulation in the same language or another of speeches,lectures, articles, or stories read or heard. Much of the work should be doneorally, to increase the student's listening comprehension while at the sametime providing an incentive for a critical reception of the presented text. Inaddition, teachers trained in the use of an interpretative note-taking systemmay find it rewarding to introduce such a course in their schools for thebenefit of students and colleagues.
2. Stylistic transposition . Stylistictransposition is usually practiced in preparation for written translation ofstylistically sensitive texts. In an oral adaptation, it is also used toprepare students for simultaneous interpretation. I believe it can also providea valuable technique for advanced language training.
There are manyways to practice stylistic transposition, and I will suggest only a few.Students can write “eyewitness accounts” of an event as seen by a child, anuneducated person, a newspaper reporter, a politician, a poet, a philosopher.They can rewrite a stylistically sophisticated essay in simplified form, or arealistic account poetically. They can be asked to single out and analyze thosecomponents of an essay that are responsible for its stylistic coloring. Theycan study, evaluate, and imitate styles of different writers, or comparedifferent approaches applied to one theme or subject. Finally, they cantranslate stylistically significant texts and compare their translations withthose of their classmates or with published translations.
3. Sight translation . Sight translation isfrequently considered an unpardonable sin, an unmentionable outrage against thecanons of psychologically sound language teaching methodology. If practicedwithout supervision, sight translation usually results in clumsy, literaltranslation with atrocious syntax and abominable style, full of gaps andapproximations. If undertaken with the teacher's assistance, it tends to becomea tedious, time-consuming process, a laborious and frustrating search for theright word or word order, in the course of which all one's carefully hiddenlinguistic sins—long forgotten grammatical and syntactical rules or neverproperly understood words—come to the fore. Despite these handicaps, which arereal enough, I have found sight translation into a foreign language to be themost effective vocabulary builder, and sight translation into English the bestpossible speedy review of grammatical principles and problems. Moreover, ifundertaken systematically, sight translation gradually produces a fluency andsophistication of expression in the foreign as well as the native language thatis often superior to that of the average resident of a foreign country, or evena native speaker in his own country. [7]
The reasons forthis are simple. If a language is used primarily for self-expression, a verylimited vocabulary, if handled skillfully, may be adequate and thus remainconstant. Sight translation, on the other hand, forces the student to work withsomeone else's vocabulary and terminology, while mustering all of hislinguistic and intellectual resources in order to find suitable or possibleequivalents. As a result, terms encountered in one language, and improvised inthe other only yesterday, may crop up in the second language today and berecognized and assimilated into active vocabulary. Observation and memoryimprove as the student struggles to convey special expressions in the otherlanguage, and he is forced to appreciate their uniqueness and felicity.Finally, if texts on different topics provide the “raw material” for sighttranslation, vocabulary begins to extend beyond the terminology of theindividual's own specialization or interests and brings him closer to a totalmastery of the language.
I have found thefollowing method of practicing sight translation most effective, if used in acombination of self-study and supervised performance:
· Sighttranslate aloud for about twenty minutes a day, preferably seven days a week.The time should be subdivided into ten-minute practice sessions to and from thetarget language.
· Useany current newspapers or magazines, preferably different materials each day orweek. At first, sight translate only one or two paragraphs of various articles,making sure that they range over a considerable spectrum of topics—politics,economics, brief news items, society gossip, sports, theater or film, bookreviews.
· Sighttranslate as evenly as possible, to create the illusion of a read text. Skip,improvise, or simplify as needed, but try to convey the message accurately andin complete sentences.
· Do notpause to look up words or phrases, but underline special troublemakers orunknown terms (while guessing at them) in order to check them out and learnthem later.
· Sitdown and learn such terms once you have collected twenty or thirty, and reviewthem on days when there are no new lists to memorize.
· Listento your oral presentation while sight translating, and force yourself to usethe foreign language as correctly and as literately as you can, and your nativelanguage as elegantly and appropriately as possible.
· Avoid,if at all possible, terms or constructions in the foreign language that aneducated native speaker would not be likely to use. (You can try such terms inyour written translations or compositions where they can be corrected ordiscussed, and where they can contribute to the development of a style of yourown. Here your aim is meaningful and correct communication presented smoothlyand clearly.)
· Do notbe discouraged if you get hopelessly stuck and have to summarize a paragraph ina short, simplistic, and vague sentence, or not at all. Summarize as best asyou can, then skip to another article or essay.[8]
Long before theemergence of most academic translation and interpretation programs, sighttranslation was practiced systematically in the language school in Vienna whereI studied English and French. My regular practice of it, coupled withconsistent vocabulary memorization, resulted in my arrival in the United Stateswith so extensive an active English vocabulary that it proved embarrassing, andI quickly reduced it to a less conspicuous level. But what better goal couldthere be for language teachers than that of preparing our students to face similarembarrassments in a country whose language they have learned here at home? H.L.MENCKEN used to tell the story of a state legislator who clinched his argumentagainst a proposed allocation of funds for foreign language instruction bydeclaring proudly, “If English was good enough for Jesus Christ, it's goodenough for me.” Funny perhaps, but it is hard to keep smiling when similarexpressions of smug obscurantism continue to crop up with embarrassingfrequency and in the most surprising places. The deputy superintendent forinstruction in the Washington, D.C. system, James T. Guines, was quoted in the Washington Post (4 September 1977) assaying that a cut in the school budget meant that such luxuries as foreignlanguage classes in elementary schools would be the first to go. After all, heexplained, “Even if you go abroad now, you don't need a language. The dollarspeaks louder than anything.” [9]
A brief trip toEurope might assist Mr. Guines in acquiring a better appreciation of the valueof foreign languages—and of the dollar. But before we become tooself-righteous, we should remember that there is another side to this question.We may agree that foreign languages have intrinsic value, but that value willremain untapped unless and until it is transmitted correctly. Another Menckenanecdote may clarify the point. He recalled studying French for two years inhigh school and looking forward to his first visit to France; much to hisdismay, he discovered that no one in Paris understood “high school French.”
Charity beginsat home. We must put our own house in order. Foreign language instruction needsimprovement at all levels, but the crux of our problem lies in the elementaryand secondary schools. This is where languages should be taught, not in thecolleges. I am convinced that the long-range solution to the plight of foreignlanguages in this country will come with improvement of instruction at the highschool level and with coordination of an effective transition from high schoolto college. However, in the meantime we must face the situation as it is and dothe best we can.
Our presentprospects are, unfortunately, not very happy. There is no need to rehearse thelitany of complaints, but it is worth reiterating that the plight of foreignlanguages reflects a larger problem that threatens the educational system as awhole. I am speaking of the continued decline in verbal and mathematical skillsamong young people, demonstrated by the drop in SAT scores over the past fewyears. To no one's surprise, a special commission charged with studying thematter attributed the lower scores to several factors, including too muchtelevision. My own feeling is that two important underlying causes are, or havebeen, a creeping anti-intellectualism in the public at large and a loss ofconfidence among teachers.
As a result ofthis fatal combination, many students receive high school diplomas that are notworth the paper they are written on. Large numbers of so-called graduates arefunctional illiterates, incapable of even balancing a checkbook. They canhardly read and write their own language, so what hope do they have of learninganother? The gradual abandonment of the emphasis on the three R's has beenencouraged by the “quick fix” mentality and the introduction of “innovative”ideas, whose chief purpose appears to be to persuade children that learningrequires little or no effort. No one is suggesting that we return to the badold days, but surely the pendulum has swung too far from Grad grind to the GoodHumor Man.
The Good HumorMan approach is intellectually dishonest (children are not fooled, by the way),and it does the children a terrible disservice, as many of them come to realizelater in life. Many boys and girls accept tough discipline in sports, andanyone who can learn “plays” in basketball can learn “plays” in English ormathematics. I do not believe that young people who discipline their bodiescannot also discipline their minds. But of course boys and girls have a rightto an education; they do not have any right to play for their school inbasketball or tennis, so they try harder.
Unfortunately,in too many schools sports dominate all other activities. We are drifting awayfrom the Greek ideal, which like so much in the Classical heritage comes downto us in a Latin tag: “Mens sana in corpore sano.” We need to give high schoolteachers something of the authority enjoyed by the football coach. It mighthelp, too, if we could focus more attention on educators rather than“educationists” or organizers of teaching, and also get school boards and PTA'soff the teachers' backs. Perhaps a little “teacher power” would lead to morerespect for teachers—and for the learning process—on the part of the students.
I may appear tohave drifted from the topic of foreign language instruction, but I am trying tomake the point that we share a community of interests with our colleagues inEnglish and mathematics, and indeed with all teachers at the secondary schoollevel. Foreign languages are the most fragile and vulnerable part of thehumanities curriculum. All of us man the front line in a constant battleagainst obscurantism and the Madison Avenue mentality, but high school teachersare in the trenches. Foreign language instruction is bound to suffer if verbaland mathematical skills decline and if the Good Humor Man approach continues toflourish. Anyone involved in FL teaching also has a stake in the maintenance ofhigh standards of oral and written skills in the English language, because thelevel of those skills determines the quality of the students we see in our ownclasses. A foreign language can, of course, be taught well or badly, like anyother subject, but learning must involve effort, memorization, precision, and agood knowledge of how one's own language works. That is why we should allwelcome the “back to basics” movement that appears to be gaining ground invarious parts of the country. Both students and parents are beginning torealize that all the fancy talk about innovation and creative freedom does nothelp much if a graduate cannot read and write beyond the eighth-grade level andtherefore cannot get a job. Frustrated by this discovery, some parents havethreatened to sue high schools for awarding diplomas under falsepretenses—which is precisely what some schools have done.
Perhaps those ofus in Russian studies are more aware of the shared community of interests andof the need for students to have a solid grounding in basic verbal skills. Wecertainly have more to gain, first, because Russian is such a late arrival onthe American educational scene, and second, because Russian requires a goodunderstanding of grammar and syntax (not that one can do without thisunderstanding in learning other languages).
The Universityof Virginia Slavic Department draws heavily upon applied linguistics inteaching Russian. The discipline of modern linguistics was largely created bySlavists and hence figures as a subject of central importance in most Slavicdepartments. At the same time, this approach recognizes the obvious fact thatRussian is a highly inflected language having, for example, six cases. Astudent who cannot distinguish between subject and predicate or accusative anddative is likely to find the going rough. On the other hand, Russian grammar islogical and predictable; students willing to make a reasonable effort usuallydo very well.
Russian classesare anything but dull. Our beginning text is ARussian Course by Alexander Lipson (Slavica Publishers). It is atext with excellent layout, tapes, and an exceptionally good workbook manual.The book offers an ideal combination of liveliness and linguisticsophistication. The first three chapters present a microcosm of the Russianlanguage in practice by use of the question-and-answer technique and frequentrepetition. Thereafter the grammar is introduced in stages because the studentnow has an understanding of how the language works in practice. The instructorspeaks Russian from the outset, eliciting correct answers by writing symbols ormatchstick drawings on the blackboard; he needs to be on his toes and to besomething of a ham in order to create the proper atmosphere of give and take inthe repetition of “rituals.”
3.2.2.Lipson'stext abandons the old-fashioned type of grammar sentence and opts for nonsensephrases which force the student to focus as much on the linguistic nature ofthe words as on their meaning. Much fun is had at the expense of SocialistRealism and Soviet propaganda claims of breaking cement-mixing records, but itis verbal play rather than social criticism. Students learn a great deal aboutthe fascinating inhabitants of the twin cities of West Blinsk and East Blinsk,the latter being renamed Gubkingrad in honor of Gubkin, the renowned hero ofSocialist Labor. There is also the continuing saga of Superman ( Sverxcelovek ) and Superboy ( Sverxmal'cik ).
The point of allthis silliness is that students enjoy the pleasures of contrastive grammar, ofpunning with sounds that exist only in English or only in Russian. Not only dothey acquire a useful set of phrases, but they learn to generate their own“rituals.” They begin to understand that language, any language, is a systemtending toward, but never quite reaching, perfect balance in its variouscomponents and prosodic features. They enjoy being “behind the scenes,” gettingan insight into the ways in which the linguist formulates rules for what takesplace in a language. They enjoy learning about linguistic universals, about therelationship between front and back vowels and hard and soft consonants. Theyperceive a parallel between consonantal and pronunciation changes in Russian ( krast'—kradu ) and in English(wit—wisdom; Christ— Christian).
I have theimpression that many FL instructors lack linguistic sophistication and do notknow as much about the theory of language as they could or should in order toemploy an up-to-date methodology. It might well be that we need a program offellowships to enable foreign language instructors at all levels to “retool”and acquire some understanding of linguistics, semiotics, and communicationtheory.
Our students arenot abandoned at the end of the first or second year, although Virginia doeshave a two-year FL requirement. A determined effort is made to coordinate allfour levels of the Russian language program so that students who wish to maycontinue with Russian in a coherent manner; quite a large proportion do decideto go on with the language. As a continuing text we use Genevra Gerhart's The Russian's World: Life and Language (HarcourtBrace Jovanovich). The aim of the book is to tell the American student “whatevery Russian knows,” and it succeeds admirably. Gerhart gives the connotativeas well as the denotative value of Russian words, thus putting cultural fleshon the linguistic bones, breathing life into the frame.
We placeparticular emphasis on foreign study. Naturally, a summer or semester inLeningrad or Moscow does not fit every student's plans, but we do offer theseopportunities to qualified students through our membership in suchorganizations as the Council for International Educational Exchange and the AmericanCouncil of Teachers of Russian. Closer to home, students have available thetotal-immersion summer programs at Indiana and Middlebury, as well as theweekend Russian Language Camp sponsored in the fall by the University ofVirginia and James Madison University. Attendance at such domestic programs—or,even better, study in the country itself—provides a target for the student toaim at, a time and place to utilize what he or she has learned.
We are fortunateat Virginia in having excellent cooperation among foreign language departments.One immediate result of this cooperation has been the acquisition of ademonstration classroom with excellent video-tape equipment. This superbfacility provides both faculty and teaching assistants with an opportunity toobserve themselves and others performing, and to correct errors or improvetechniques. All foreign language faculty and teaching assistants hold regularmeetings to discuss problems and methodology.
Each departmentand each college or university has its own institutional mission, and it isboth natural and healthy that there should be a wide variety of approaches andemphases. However, the FL program must remain central to the concerns of thetraditional language and literature department. If there are no students with asolid grounding in the foreign language, then there will be no majors, noupper-level courses in which the FL is used, and ultimately no graduates with atrue understanding of the life and culture of the country concerned. Adepartment that neglects its language program loses its heart. Every effortshould be made, whether the institution has a foreign language requirement ornot, to make the language program as successful as possible.
The second majorfocus is, of course, the study of literature. It can be an enormouslycivilizing and liberating experience for undergraduates, providing we do notinsist on burdening them with an unrelieved diet of close formalist analysis ofthe sort inflicted on us in graduate school. At the risk of excommunication byadherents to the exclusively intrinsic study of literature, I must say that Ibelieve it is a mistake to insist that undergraduates share our enthusiasm forformalist or structural analysis of texts. A department should make suchcourses available, but it should also offer courses of a more humane breadthwhich treat, for example, the relationship between literature and the societyfrom which it emanates, a topic that Harry Levin has written on with hiscustomary wit and elegance.
Whatever theapproach, FL departments should never allow themselves to be isolated. No onerelishes playing the FTE game, least of all those of us involved in the studyof literature, concerned as it is with the problematical and contingent in lifeand the larger questions of the human condition. And yet, if we believe in thevalue of what we are doing, we ought to have the courage of our convictions andbe prepared to defend our discipline in an honorable and intellectuallyresponsible manner. A foreign language department should consider carefullyengaging in cooperative joint programs or courses with other FL departments(and English departments), as well as with non-language departments involved inarea studies programs. Another useful idea is to offer courses in Englishtranslation. Some people frown on such courses as a sort of betrayal, but ifthey are offered as supplementary courses to the department's core program theycan provide a useful service and, if taught well, attract good students. Afterall, not every student interested in the novels of Dostoevsky or Camus orThomas Mann or Borges may have the time to study the foreign language to alevel where he or she can read them in the original. Quite often a studentbecomes interested in the language through a literature course in translation.
Team-taughtcourses provide another useful addition to a department's offerings—forexample, a course on civilization and culture, or on contemporary society,taught by an FL faculty member and someone in the history department. Suchinterdisciplinary courses are by no means easy to put together or to teach butthey can be very successful.
These are allideas that have worked quite well for us, but this is certainly not anexclusive or prescriptive list. Nor do I want to suggest that we have noproblems, either in the Virginia program or in Russian studies across thecountry. Enrollments are down in many institutions. If foreign languages arethe most vulnerable part of the humanities curriculum as a whole, then Russianis probably the most vulnerable among them, certainly more vulnerable than themore traditional and better established languages.
In fact, untilabout twenty years ago Russian hardly existed at all as a language taught inthe colleges, let alone the secondary schools, of this country. It is true thatWorld War II and the Cold War aroused considerable interest in the SovietUnion, but, with very few exceptions, neither war had much impact on theAmerican educational system. Appropriately enough it was the Russiansthemselves who obliged us to pay more attention to their language. Thecatalyst, of course, was sputnik ,a new word that entered the language to symbolize both awareness of Sovietachievements and anxiety over an apparent failure of American science andtechnology to keep pace.
One importantresponse to sputnik was theNational Defense Education Act (NDEA) of 1958, which resulted in millions ofdollars being poured into language and area studies programs. Among theso-called critical or strategic languages, Russian has benefited most from NDEAlegislation. Twenty years later we now find that Russian is taught inpractically every respectable college and university in the country. Majorinstitutions have Russian departments, or even Slavic departments where notonly Russian but other major languages such as Czech, Polish, or Serbo-Croatianare taught. There are now twenty-three doctoral programs in Slavic languagesand literatures where only three or four existed prior to 1958. Fourteen Slavicarea studies programs continue to receive federal support under NDEA Title VI,which also provides Foreign Language and Area Studies graduate fellowships tomajor Slavic programs. It should be noted that in awarding these fellowshipspreference is now given to students in the non-Russian Slavic and East Europeanlanguages and in disciplines other than literature, history, economics, andpolitical science, which are felt to have come of age at the graduate level.
It seems to meentirely proper that the traditional foreign languages should maintain theirpreeminence. However, long years of neglect of other major world languages canonly be remedied in the short run by the sort of federal boost provided byNDEA, which has brought the American educational system more in line with theeconomic and political realities of the twentieth century. It is worthremembering that many of the so-called “smaller” languages are in fact spokenby hundreds of millions of people: Chinese, Russian, Hindi, Arabic. No onewould suggest that what this country needs is a samovar in every kitchen, butclearly it is a matter of national interest that a language such as Russianshould be made available in a substantial number of our schools and colleges.
The position ofRussian is certainly much better than it was twenty years ago. However, therather panicky reaction to sputnik broughtwith it some problems because it created a hothouse growth of Russian and EastEuropean programs that could only flourish, or in some cases survive, withconstant financial support from outside sources. Some programs put down roots;others have begun to wither. It is obviously unhealthy and impractical forforeign language instruction to depend upon the inscrutable shifts of Sovietpolicy or the momentary shifts in the climate of international affairs. Therestill exists the danger under NDEA that some programs are obliged to balance ona seesaw of grant and detente; in other words, good news is bad news and viceversa.
We have a habitin this country of throwing money at problems. This leads to a sort of“greening of America” with a difference. What I mean is that federal assistanceand private funding increased FL enrollments for a time, but all the while SAT scoreswere declining. This is a point we would do well to remember as we enter whatmay be a new era of federal funding for foreign language and area studies. Oneunexpected result of the Helsinki Accords has been to bring the importance ofinternational studies to the attention of President Carter. Each signatorycommits itself to “encourage the study of foreign languages and civilizationsas an important means of expanding communication among peoples—for thestrengthening of international cooperation.” Having signed the Final Act of theConference on Security and Cooperation in Europe, the United States findsitself in a rather embarrassing position since it needs to do a great deal morethan it is currently doing to “encourage the study of foreign languages andcivilizations.” In response chiefly to the actions of Representative Paul Simonof Illinois, the President has ordered the creation of a PresidentialCommission on Foreign Languages and International Studies, which should submitits report during 1978.
One encouragingdifference between this renewed federal interest in foreign languages and thatprompted by sputnik twentyyears ago is tone. For example, it was significant that the former NationalDefense Foreign Language (NDFL) fellowships have been retitled Foreign Languageand Area Studies (FLAS) fellowships. In other words, “defense” is being removedfrom the title, and from the motivation behind offering the awards. It wouldseem that we feel less threatened militarily and have a more healthy understandingof the importance of foreign languages for our national well-being, even in aworld at peace.
Whatever therecommendations of the Presidential Commission, it is already clear thatforeign language instruction has the support of the recently installed U.S.Commissioner of Education, Ernest L. Boyer. Dr. Boyer, until last year achancellor in the State University of New York system, has a strongprofessional background in international studies and a thorough understandingof their importance in the American educational system. His public comments onthe problems and objectives of education at all levels have been mostencouraging, particularly his speech at the annual meeting of the AmericanAssociation of State Colleges and Universities last December. He was reportedin the Chronicle of Higher Education (12December 1977) to have stated his intention to “revitalize [federal] support offoreign-language and area-studies programs” and to give “a new priority” tointernationalizing American education.
We shouldwelcome this increased awareness at the upper levels of the federal governmentof what has come to be called “global perspectives.” Let us take advantage ofthe new favorable climate of opinion and the possible increase in federalfunding to get “back to basics.” Foreign language instruction and internationalstudies need to be strengthened at all levels, not simply at the college anduniversity levels. We must devote increased attention to the elementary andsecondary schools in order to effect a genuine change and improvement in thepresent situation.
1.3.2.H.L. MENCKEN used to tell the storyof a state legislator who clinched his argument against a proposed allocationof funds for foreign language instruction by declaring proudly, “If English wasgood enough for Jesus Christ, it's good enough for me.” Funny perhaps, but itis hard to keep smiling when similar expressions of smug obscurantism continueto crop up with embarrassing frequency and in the most surprising places. Thedeputy superintendent for instruction in the Washington, D.C. system, James T.Guines, was quoted in the Washington Post (4 September 1977) as saying that acut in the school budget meant that such luxuries as foreign language classesin elementary schools would be the first to go. After all, he explained, “Evenif you go abroad now, you don't need a language. The dollar speaks louder thananything.”
A brief trip to Europe might assistMr. Guines in acquiring a better appreciation of the value of foreign languages—andof the dollar. But before we become too self-righteous, we should remember thatthere is another side to this question. We may agree that foreign languageshave intrinsic value, but that value will remain untapped unless and until itis transmitted correctly. Another Mencken anecdote may clarify the point. Herecalled studying French for two years in high school and looking forward tohis first visit to France; much to his dismay, he discovered that no one inParis understood “high school French.”
Charity begins at home. We must putour own house in order. Foreign language instruction needs improvement at alllevels, but the crux of our problem lies in the elementary and secondaryschools. This is where languages should be taught, not in the colleges. I amconvinced that the long-range solution to the plight of foreign languages inthis country will come with improvement of instruction at the high school leveland with coordination of an effective transition from high school to college.However, in the meantime we must face the situation as it is and do the best wecan.
Our present prospects are,unfortunately, not very happy. There is no need to rehearse the litany ofcomplaints, but it is worth reiterating that the plight of foreign languagesreflects a larger problem that threatens the educational system as a whole. Iam speaking of the continued decline in verbal and mathematical skills amongyoung people, demonstrated by the drop in SAT scores over the past few years.To no one's surprise, a special commission charged with studying the matterattributed the lower scores to several factors, including too much television.My own feeling is that two important underlying causes are, or have been, acreeping anti-intellectualism in the public at large and a loss of confidenceamong teachers.
As a result of this fatalcombination, many students receive high school diplomas that are not worth thepaper they are written on. Large numbers of so-called graduates are functionalilliterates, incapable of even balancing a checkbook. They can hardly read andwrite their own language, so what hope do they have of learning another? Thegradual abandonment of the emphasis on the three R's has been encouraged by the“quick fix” mentality and the introduction of “innovative” ideas, whose chiefpurpose appears to be to persuade children that learning requires little or noeffort. No one is suggesting that we return to the bad old days, but surely thependulum has swung too far from Gradgrind to the Good Humor Man.
The Good Humor Man approach isintellectually dishonest (children are not fooled, by the way), and it does thechildren a terrible disservice, as many of them come to realize later in life.Many boys and girls accept tough discipline in sports, and anyone who can learn“plays” in basketball can learn “plays” in English or mathematics. I do notbelieve that young people who discipline their bodies cannot also disciplinetheir minds. But of course boys and girls have a right to an education; they donot have any right to play for their school in basketball or tennis, so theytry harder.
2..3.2. Unfortunately, in too many schoolssports dominate all other activities. We are drifting away from the Greekideal, which like so much in the Classical heritage comes down to us in a Latintag: “Mens sana in corpore sano.” We need to give high school teacherssomething of the authority enjoyed by the football coach. It might help, too,if we could focus more attention on educators rather than “educationists” ororganizers of teaching, and also get school boards and PTA's off the teachers'backs. Perhaps a little “teacher power” would lead to more respect forteachers—and for the learning process—on the part of the students.
I may appear to have drifted from thetopic of foreign language instruction, but I am trying to make the point thatwe share a community of interests with our colleagues in English andmathematics, and indeed with all teachers at the secondary school level.Foreign languages are the most fragile and vulnerable part of the humanitiescurriculum. All of us man the front line in a constant battle againstobscurantism and the Madison Avenue mentality, but high school teachers are inthe trenches. Foreign language instruction is bound to suffer if verbal and mathematicalskills decline and if the Good Humor Man approach continues to flourish. Anyoneinvolved in FL teaching also has a stake in the maintenance of high standardsof oral and written skills in the English language, because the level of thoseskills determines the quality of the students we see in our own classes. Aforeign language can, of course, be taught well or badly, like any othersubject, but learning must involve effort, memorization, precision, and a goodknowledge of how one's own language works. That is why we should all welcomethe “back to basics” movement that appears to be gaining ground in variousparts of the country. Both students and parents are beginning to realize thatall the fancy talk about innovation and creative freedom does not help much ifa graduate cannot read and write beyond the eighth-grade level and thereforecannot get a job. Frustrated by this discovery, some parents have threatened tosue high schools for awarding diplomas under false pretenses—which is preciselywhat some schools have done.
Perhaps those of us in Russianstudies are more aware of the shared community of interests and of the need forstudents to have a solid grounding in basic verbal skills. We certainly havemore to gain, first, because Russian is such a late arrival on the Americaneducational scene, and second, because Russian requires a good understanding ofgrammar and syntax (not that one can do without this understanding in learningother languages).
The University of Virginia SlavicDepartment draws heavily upon applied linguistics in teaching Russian. Thediscipline of modern linguistics was largely created by Slavists and hencefigures as a subject of central importance in most Slavic departments. At thesame time, this approach recognizes the obvious fact that Russian is a highlyinflected language having, for example, six cases. A student who cannotdistinguish between subject and predicate or accusative and dative is likely tofind the going rough. On the other hand, Russian grammar is logical andpredictable; students willing to make a reasonable effort usually do very well.
Russian classes are anything butdull. Our beginning text is A Russian Course by Alexander Lipson (SlavicaPublishers). It is a text with excellent layout, tapes, and an exceptionallygood workbook manual. The book offers an ideal combination of liveliness andlinguistic sophistication. The first three chapters present a microcosm of theRussian language in practice by use of the question-and-answer technique andfrequent repetition. Thereafter the grammar is introduced in stages because thestudent now has an understanding of how the language works in practice. Theinstructor speaks Russian from the outset, eliciting correct answers by writingsymbols or matchstick drawings on the blackboard; he needs to be on his toesand to be something of a ham in order to create the proper atmosphere of giveand take in the repetition of “rituals.”
Lipson's text abandons the old-fashionedtype of grammar sentence and opts for nonsense phrases which force the studentto focus as much on the linguistic nature of the words as on their meaning.Much fun is had at the expense of Socialist Realism and Soviet propagandaclaims of breaking cement-mixing records, but it is verbal play rather thansocial criticism. Students learn a great deal about the fascinating inhabitantsof the twin cities of West Blinsk and East Blinsk, the latter being renamedGubkingrad in honor of Gubkin, the renowned hero of Socialist Labor. There isalso the continuing saga of Superman ( Sverxcelovek ) and Superboy ( Sverxmal'cik).
The point of all this silliness isthat students enjoy the pleasures of contrastive grammar, of punning withsounds that exist only in English or only in Russian. Not only do they acquirea useful set of phrases, but they learn to generate their own “rituals.” Theybegin to understand that language, any language, is a system tending toward,but never quite reaching, perfect balance in its various components andprosodic features. They enjoy being “behind the scenes,” getting an insightinto the ways in which the linguist formulates rules for what takes place in alanguage. They enjoy learning about linguistic universals, about the relationshipbetween front and back vowels and hard and soft consonants. They perceive aparallel between consonantal and pronunciation changes in Russian ( krast'—kradu) and in English (wit—wisdom; Christ— Christian).
I have the impression that many FLinstructors lack linguistic sophistication and do not know as much about thetheory of language as they could or should in order to employ an up-to-datemethodology. It might well be that we need a program of fellowships to enableforeign language instructors at all levels to “retool” and acquire someunderstanding of linguistics, semiotics, and communication theory.
Our students are not abandoned at theend of the first or second year, although Virginia does have a two-year FLrequirement. A determined effort is made to coordinate all four levels of theRussian language program so that students who wish to may continue with Russianin a coherent manner; quite a large proportion do decide to go on with thelanguage. As a continuing text we use Genevra Gerhart's The Russian's World:Life and Language (Harcourt Brace Jovanovich). The aim of the book is to tellthe American student “what every Russian knows,” and it succeeds admirably.Gerhart gives the connotative as well as the denotative value of Russian words,thus putting cultural flesh on the linguistic bones, breathing life into theframe.
We place particular emphasis onforeign study. Naturally, a summer or semester in Leningrad or Moscow does notfit every student's plans, but we do offer these opportunities to qualifiedstudents through our membership in such organizations as the Council forInternational Educational Exchange and the American Council of Teachers ofRussian. Closer to home, students have available the total-immersion summerprograms at Indiana and Middlebury, as well as the weekend Russian LanguageCamp sponsored in the fall by the University of Virginia and James MadisonUniversity. Attendance at such domestic programs—or, even better, study in thecountry itself—provides a target for the student to aim at, a time and place toutilize what he or she has learned.
We are fortunate at Virginia inhaving excellent cooperation among foreign language departments. One immediateresult of this cooperation has been the acquisition of a demonstration classroomwith excellent video-tape equipment. This superb facility provides both facultyand teaching assistants with an opportunity to observe themselves and othersperforming, and to correct errors or improve techniques. All foreign languagefaculty and teaching assistants hold regular meetings to discuss problems andmethodology.
Each department and each college oruniversity has its own institutional mission, and it is both natural andhealthy that there should be a wide variety of approaches and emphases.However, the FL program must remain central to the concerns of the traditionallanguage and literature department. If there are no students with a solidgrounding in the foreign language, then there will be no majors, no upper-levelcourses in which the FL is used, and ultimately no graduates with a trueunderstanding of the life and culture of the country concerned. A departmentthat neglects its language program loses its heart. Every effort should bemade, whether the institution has a foreign language requirement or not, tomake the language program as successful as possible.
The second major focus is, of course,the study of literature. It can be an enormously civilizing and liberatingexperience for undergraduates, providing we do not insist on burdening themwith an unrelieved diet of close formalist analysis of the sort inflicted on usin graduate school. At the risk of excommunication by adherents to theexclusively intrinsic study of literature, I must say that I believe it is amistake to insist that undergraduates share our enthusiasm for formalist orstructural analysis of texts. A department should make such courses available,but it should also offer courses of a more humane breadth which treat, forexample, the relationship between literature and the society from which itemanates, a topic that Harry Levin has written on with his customary wit andelegance.
Whatever the approach, FL departmentsshould never allow themselves to be isolated. No one relishes playing the FTEgame, least of all those of us involved in the study of literature, concernedas it is with the problematical and contingent in life and the larger questionsof the human condition. And yet, if we believe in the value of what we aredoing, we ought to have the courage of our convictions and be prepared todefend our discipline in an honorable and intellectually responsible manner. Aforeign language department should consider carefully engaging in cooperativejoint programs or courses with other FL departments (and English departments),as well as with non-language departments involved in area studies programs.Another useful idea is to offer courses in English translation. Some peoplefrown on such courses as a sort of betrayal, but if they are offered assupplementary courses to the department's core program they can provide auseful service and, if taught well, attract good students. After all, not everystudent interested in the novels of Dostoevsky or Camus or Thomas Mann orBorges may have the time to study the foreign language to a level where he orshe can read them in the original. Quite often a student becomes interested inthe language through a literature course in translation.
Team-taught courses provide anotheruseful addition to a department's offerings—for example, a course oncivilization and culture, or on contemporary society, taught by an FL facultymember and someone in the history department. Such interdisciplinary coursesare by no means easy to put together or to teach but they can be verysuccessful.
These are all ideas that have workedquite well for us, but this is certainly not an exclusive or prescriptive list.Nor do I want to suggest that we have no problems, either in the Virginiaprogram or in Russian studies across the country. Enrollments are down in manyinstitutions. If foreign languages are the most vulnerable part of thehumanities curriculum as a whole, then Russian is probably the most vulnerableamong them, certainly more vulnerable than the more traditional and betterestablished languages.
In fact, until about twenty years agoRussian hardly existed at all as a language taught in the colleges, let alonethe secondary schools, of this country. It is true that World War II and theCold War aroused considerable interest in the Soviet Union, but, with very fewexceptions, neither war had much impact on the American educational system.Appropriately enough it was the Russians themselves who obliged us to pay moreattention to their language. The catalyst, of course, was sputnik, a new wordthat entered the language to symbolize both awareness of Soviet achievementsand anxiety over an apparent failure of American science and technology to keeppace.
One important response to sputnik wasthe National Defense Education Act (NDEA) of 1958, which resulted in millionsof dollars being poured into language and area studies programs. Among theso-called critical or strategic languages, Russian has benefited most from NDEAlegislation. Twenty years later we now find that Russian is taught in practicallyevery respectable college and university in the country. Major institutionshave Russian departments, or even Slavic departments where not only Russian butother major languages such as Czech, Polish, or Serbo-Croatian are taught.There are now twenty-three doctoral programs in Slavic languages andliteratures where only three or four existed prior to 1958. Fourteen Slavicarea studies programs continue to receive federal support under NDEA Title VI,which also provides Foreign Language and Area Studies graduate fellowships tomajor Slavic programs. It should be noted that in awarding these fellowshipspreference is now given to students in the non-Russian Slavic and East Europeanlanguages and in disciplines other than literature, history, economics, andpolitical science, which are felt to have come of age at the graduate level.
It seems to me entirely proper thatthe traditional foreign languages should maintain their preeminence. However,long years of neglect of other major world languages can only be remedied inthe short run by the sort of federal boost provided by NDEA, which has broughtthe American educational system more in line with the economic and politicalrealities of the twentieth century. It is worth remembering that many of theso-called “smaller” languages are in fact spoken by hundreds of millions ofpeople: Chinese, Russian, Hindi, Arabic. No one would suggest that what thiscountry needs is a samovar in every kitchen, but clearly it is a matter ofnational interest that a language such as Russian should be made available in asubstantial number of our schools and colleges.
The position of Russian is certainlymuch better than it was twenty years ago. However, the rather panicky reactionto sputnik brought with it some problems because it created a hothouse growthof Russian and East European programs that could only flourish, or in somecases survive, with constant financial support from outside sources. Someprograms put down roots; others have begun to wither. It is obviously unhealthyand impractical for foreign language instruction to depend upon the inscrutableshifts of Soviet policy or the momentary shifts in the climate of internationalaffairs. There still exists the danger under NDEA that some programs areobliged to balance on a seesaw of grant and detente; in other words, good newsis bad news and vice versa.
We have a habit in this country ofthrowing money at problems. This leads to a sort of “greening of America” witha difference. What I mean is that federal assistance and private fundingincreased FL enrollments for a time, but all the while SAT scores weredeclining. This is a point we would do well to remember as we enter what may bea new era of federal funding for foreign language and area studies. Oneunexpected result of the Helsinki Accords has been to bring the importance ofinternational studies to the attention of President Carter. Each signatorycommits itself to “encourage the study of foreign languages and civilizationsas an important means of expanding communication among peoples—for thestrengthening of international cooperation.” Having signed the Final Act of theConference on Security and Cooperation in Europe, the United States findsitself in a rather embarrassing position since it needs to do a great deal morethan it is currently doing to “encourage the study of foreign languages andcivilizations.” In response chiefly to the actions of Representative Paul Simonof Illinois, the President has ordered the creation of a PresidentialCommission on Foreign Languages and International Studies, which should submitits report during 1978.
One encouraging difference betweenthis renewed federal interest in foreign languages and that prompted by sputniktwenty years ago is tone. For example, it was significant that the formerNational Defense Foreign Language (NDFL) fellowships have been retitled ForeignLanguage and Area Studies (FLAS) fellowships. In other words, “defense” isbeing removed from the title, and from the motivation behind offering theawards. It would seem that we feel less threatened militarily and have a morehealthy understanding of the importance of foreign languages for our nationalwell-being, even in a world at peace.
Whatever the recommendations of thePresidential Commission, it is already clear that foreign language instructionhas the support of the recently installed U.S. Commissioner of Education,Ernest L. Boyer. Dr. Boyer, until last year a chancellor in the StateUniversity of New York system, has a strong professional background ininternational studies and a thorough understanding of their importance in theAmerican educational system. His public comments on the problems and objectivesof education at all levels have been most encouraging, particularly his speechat the annual meeting of the American Association of State Colleges andUniversities last December. He was reported in the Chronicle of HigherEducation (12 December 1977) to have stated his intention to “revitalize[federal] support of foreign-language and area-studies programs” and to give “anew priority” to internationalizing American education.
We should welcome this increasedawareness at the upper levels of the federal government of what has come to becalled “global perspectives.” Let us take advantage of the new favorableclimate of opinion and the possible increase in federal funding to get “back tobasics.” Foreign language instruction and international studies need to bestrengthened at all levels, not simply at the college and university levels. Wemust devote increased attention to the elementary and secondary schools inorder to effect a genuine change and improvement in the present situation.
A paper presented at ADFL SeminarWest, 27–30 June 1977, in San Antonio, Texas. The author is Professor ofRussian and Director of the Center for Russian and East European Studies at theUniversity of Virginia.
The paper discusses memory trainingin interpreting. According Gile's Effort Model (a Processing Capacity Account),short-term memory is an essential part in the process of interpreting. Thispaper analyzes the major characteristics of Short-term Memory (STM) and theirimplications for interpreters' memory training. The author believes thatinterpreting is an STM-centered activity, which includes encoding of informationfrom the Source Language, storing of information, retrieval of information, anddecoding of information into the target language. The training of STM skills isthe first step in training a professional interpreter. Tactics for memorytraining for interpreters like retelling, categorization, generalization,comparison, shadowing exercises, mnemonics, etc. are presented in this paper.
Interpreting is defined as «oraltranslation of a written text» (Shuttleworth & Cowie: 1997:83).Mahmoodzadeh gives a more detailed definition of interpreting:
Interpreting consists of presentingin the target language, the exact meaning of what is uttered in the sourcelanguage either simultaneously or consecutively, preserving the tone of thespeaker (1992:231).
Whether novice or experienced, allinterpreters find this profession demanding and challenging. Phelan says that«when an interpreter is working, he or she cannot afford to have a badday. One bad interpreter can ruin a conference» (2001:4). In discussingthe qualifications required for an interpreter, Phelan mentions that:
«The interpreter needs a goodshort-term memory to retain what he or she has just heard and a good long-termmemory to put the information into context. Ability to concentrate is a factoras is the ability to analyze and process what is heard» (2001:4-5).
Mahmoodzadeh also emphasizes that askillful interpreter is expected to «have a powerful memory.»(1992:233). Daniel Gile (1992,1995) emphasizes the difficulties and effortsinvolved in interpreting tasks and strategies needed to overcome them,observing that many failures occur in the absence of any visible difficulty. Hethen proposes his Effort Models for interpreting. He says that «The EffortModels are designed to help them [interpreters] understand these difficulties[of interpreting] and select appropriate strategies and tactics. They are basedon the concept of Processing Capacity and on the fact that some mentaloperations in interpreting require much Processing Capacity.»(1992:191)According to Gile, Consecutive Interpreting consists of two phases: a listeningand reformulation phrase and a reconstruction phase (1992:191, 1995b:179):
Phase One: I=L+M+N
I=Interpreting, L=listening andanalyzing the source language speech, M=short-term memory required between thetime information is heard and the time it is written down in the notes, andN=note-taking.
Phase Two: I= Rem+Read+P
In this Phase Two of ConsecutiveInterpreting, interpreters retrieve messages from their short-term memory andreconstruct the speech (Rem), read the notes (N), and produce the TargetLanguage Speech (P). Gile's Effort Model for Simultaneous Interpreting is:
SI=L+M+P
SI=Simultaneous Interpreting.
L=Listening and Analysis, which includes «allthe mental operations between perception of a discourse by auditory mechanismsand the moment at which the interpreter either assigns, or decides not toassign, a meaning (or several potential meanings) to the segment which he hasheard.»
M=Short-term Memory, which includes «allthe mental operations related to storage in memory of heard segments ofdiscourse until either their restitution in the target language, their loss ifthey vanish from memory, or a decision by the interpreter not to interpretthem.»
P=Production, which includes «all the mentaloperations between the moment at which the interpreter decides to convey adatum or an idea and the moment at which he articulates (overtly produces) theform he has prepared to articulate» (1995a:93).
Gile emphasizes that the memoryeffort is assumed to stem form the need to store the words of a propositionuntil the hearer receives the end of that proposition. The storage ofinformation is claimed to be particularly demanding in SI, since both thevolume of information and the pace of storage and retrieval are imposed by thespeaker (1995a:97-98).
In both models, Gile emphasizes thesignificance of Short-term Memory. It is actually one of the specific skillswhich should be imparted to trainees in the first stage of training. Among allthe skills and techniques which are required for a good interpreter, memoryskill is the first one which should be introduced to trainee interpreters.
III.Conclusion
1.3. As we triedto prove within our qualification work the problems of good listening andconstant training of short-term memory are one of the most difficult andproblematic for those who want to make perfect in learning any foreignlanguage. So our qualification work set its task to find out the mostappropriate and easy-to-understand ways for improving the mentioned tasks.
Why we namedthese problems difficult and decided to study it? As we know, there are twokinds of human memory: long- and short-termed. The day-by-day kind of it is ashort-termed one. We often forget almost immediately, what has just been said.As a result, we waste a lot of time on looking through the requirableinformation in the dictionaries. It is especially harmful when we have to usethe simultaneous translation. Short-Term Memory is alsoan essential part of interpreting, but memory training has long been ignored byprofessional trainers. From the above analysis, we can conclude that memoryskills in interpreting could be acquired by effectively designed exercises.With a well-'trained' short-term memory, interpreters are actually equippedwith an effective tool for the encoding and decoding information. It is,therefore, advised that institutions of interpreter training include«memory training» in the design of their courses.
The second partof the problem is that we cannot listen effectively. The problem caused as aresult of it is that we are not able to transmit the received information tothe other speakers. As a result, the students of foreign languages possess abad capacity to retell the textual information without mistakes or more or lessadequately. That is why so important for the teachers of foreign languages toknow the appropriate methodic of listening. Our qualification work might givesuch an opportunity for the teachers. We gave a number of methods which aresuitable and approved by the collective of educators in the USA and Europe.
As asupplementary part to our investigation we included the third chapter where wegave the synchronic light to the Russian influence onto the development of theEnglish language. It helped us to understand some methods used in the theory oftranslation for translating borrowed words. Vice-versa, it helps us tounderstand the ways of translation of neologisms borrowed from English in theRussian language. The latter is especially actual for the reason of immediateand constant development of electronic informational technologies andprolonging internationalization of the English language.
One more problemwe included into the third chapter is the analysis of teaching the skills ofgood listening and memory training at schools. It seemed to us actual becauseof the reason that our qualification work is thought to be applied at schoolsand colleges previously. In this item we gave the examples of methods used bythe American universities.
On the whole, wedare to say that our qualification work will be useful for everyone who isinterest in the theory of translation.
2.3. Havinganalyzed the question studied we could get the following results:
1) The problemof right translation both from receipted and accepted languages can be solvedby the applying of the formulae SI=L+M+P.
2) Goodlistening skills are achieved by means of training exercises.
3) Developmentof modern informational technologies forces us to pay much attention tostudying the problem of listening and memory training.
In conclusion toour work we would like to say that our qualification work can be applied andused by the following:
1) The work canbe useful for all the teachers of foreign languages when they teach theirstudents to translate the written sources of information or when the lattersare taught to speak and transmit the information in foreign languages.
2) All thestudents of foreign languages department would be able to use the work forbetter knowledge of English or when they have practical classes on foreignlanguage.
3) Translatorsand interpreters might find a lot of useful information for the improvement oftheir professional activity.
4) Thequalification work will be useful for everyone who wants to make perfest inlearning foreign languages.

Bibliography:
1. Anderson,J.R., 1983. The Architecture of Cognition. Cambridge, MA: Harvard UniversityPress. Pp.46-57, 134,139, 212-226
2. Atkinson, R.L., and Stiffrin,R.M., 1968. Human memory: A proposed system and its control processes, in K.W.Spence and J.T. Spence (eds.), The psychology of learning and motivation. Vol.2.London: Academic Press. Pp. 19, 65, 78-79
3. Atkinson, R.L., et al., 1993. Introductionto psychology(11th ed. (s:l): Ted Bucholz. Pp. 46-58
4. Baddeley, A.D., 1966. «Theinfluence of acoustic and semantic similarity on long term memory for word sequences»,in Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 18, pp.302-309.
5. Baddeley, AD., 1986. Workingmemory. Oxford: Oxford University Press pp.l7-18, 332
6. Baddeley, A.D., 1990. Humanmemory: theory and practice. Hove: Erlbaum Associates pp.142-145
7. Baddeley, A.D., Thompson, N.,and Buchanan, M., 1975. «Word Length and the Structure of Memory», inJournal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behaviour, I, pp.575-589.
8. Barnyard,P., and Graysong, A.,1996. Introducing Psychological Research. London: MacMillan Press. Pp.237-238
9. Conrad, R, 1964. «AcousticCoriftisions in Immediate Memory», in British Journal of Psychology, pp.55,75-84.
10. Crowder, R.G., 1982. «Thedemise of short-term memory», in Acta Psychologica, 50, pp. 291-323.
11. Dollerup, G & Lindegaard,A, 1992, Teaching Translation and Interpreting 2: Insights, Aims, Visions, Amsterdam& Philadelphia: John Benjamins p.442
12. Dollerup, G & Lindegaard,A, 1992, Teaching Translation and Interpreting: Training,Talent andExperience, Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins p.81
13. Gile, D,1995b, Basic Concepts and Models for Interpreter and Translator Training,Amsterdam& Philadelphia: John Benjamins.p.59

14. Gile, D, 1992, Basic Theoretical Components in Interpreter and TranslatorTraining, in Dollerup, C and Loddegaard, A (eds), pp.185-194
15. Keppelk, G., and Underwood, B.,1962. «Proactive Inhibition in Short-term Retention of Single Items»,in Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behaviour, pp. 153-161.
16. Kurz, I, 1992,"'Shadowing' Exercises In Interpreter Training", in Dollerup,C andLoddegaard,A (eds), pp.245-250
17. Lambert, S &Moser-Mercer,B, 1994, Bridging the Gap: Empirical Research on SimultaneousInterpreting, Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins pp.511-512
18. Lambert, S, 1988, «A HumanInfromation Processing and Cognitive Approach to the Training of SimultaneuosInterpreters», in Hammond, D(ed).Languages at Crossroads, Proceedings ofthe 29th Annual Conference of the American Translators Association.Medford, New Jersey: Learned Infromation Inc. pp.379-388
19. Mahmoodzadeh, K, 1992,«Consecutive Interpreting: its principles and techniques», inDollerup,C and Loddegaard,A (eds), pp.231-236
20. Miller,G., 1956. «TheMagic Number Seven, Plus or Minus Two: Some Limits of our Capacity forProcessing Information», in Psychological Review, 63, pp.81-97.
21. Monsell, S., 1979.«Recency, Immediate Recognition Memory, and Reaction Time», in CognitivePsychology, 10, pp.465-501.
22. Peterson, R.L., and Peterson, M.J.,1959. «Short term retention of individual items», in Journal ofExperimental Psychology, 58, pp. 193 — 198.
23. Posner, M.I., and Keele, S.W.,1967. «Decay of Visual Information From a Single Letter», in. Science,158, pp. 137-139.
24. Radforsd, J., and Govier, E.,eds., 1991. A textbook of psychology. London:Routledge. P.67
25. Schulman, A., 1974.«Memory for Words Recently Classified», in Memory and Cognition, 2, pp.47-52.
26. Setton, R, 1999, SimultaneousInterpretation: A Cognitive-Pragmatic Analysis, Amsterdam & Philadelphia:John Benjamins pp.84-87
27. Shuttleworth, M & Cowie.M, Dictionaryof Translation Studies, Manchester: St Jerome pp.56-58
28. Sternberg, S., 1966.«Highspeed Scanning in Human Memory», in Science, 153, pp. 652-654.
29. Tulving,E., 1968. «Theoretical Issues in Free Recall», in T. Dixon and D.Horton (eds), Verbal Behaviour and General Behaviour Theory. Englewood Cliffs,N.J.: Prentice-Hall pp.276-279
30.Waughw, N.,and Norman, D.,1965.«Primary Memory», in Psychological Review, 72, pp.89-104.
31. Zhong, W,2001, «Interpreting Training: Models and Contents and Methodology»,in China Translators' Journal, Vol.19,
pp.34-40
32. World Book Encyclopedia Vol. 21N.Y. 1993 pp.473-475
33. Internet:www.accurapid.com/journal/index.html Zhong, W, 2001, «SimultaneousInterpreting: Principles and Training», in China Translators' Journal,Vol.22, pp.39-43
34. Internet:http://www2.ntu.ac.uk/bscpsych/memory/goofhead.htmGoodhead, Jared, Difference Between STM and LTM,, 1999
35. Internet:www.demon.co.uk/mindtool/memintro.html Manktelow,J Introduction to Memory Techniques, 2003