This article is © Copyright 1999 Pilgrims Ltd.  The copyright owners reserve all rights to its reproduction.

INTERLINGUAL TRAINING AND TECHNOLOGY
By Peter Wilberg, Language Engineering Services (LENS)

Interlingual Training and Technology
Interlingual Training is a new approach to language learning and teaching developed in one-to-one work with managers needing English for business and special purposes. It enables even low level students to rapidly master complex grammatical structures, and trains them to make use of the language benchmarks provided by (a) their own native-language professional discourse, and (b) authentic texts related to their own professional communication needs. “Interlingual Builder” is a pioneering innovation in CALL authorware designed to complement this approach to teaching. With it, the teacher can create customised interlingual exercises from parallel texts generated in class or already available in the form of translated corporate documentation. These exercises train the learner to identify the target language equivalents of important terms and phrases highlighted in a matching native-language or L1 text. This helps learners to bring their own interlanguage - their existing, limited version of the target language, closer to the benchmark lexis and structures contained in the target language or L2 text. Called “Interlingual Trainer”, the learner interface thus builds on the learner’s knowledge and expertise of their own vocational language or “L3”, transferring this in stages from its expression in the L1 to the L2, and using the language benchmarks provided by authentic oral or written texts to upgrade their interlanguage. Learners can use Interlingual Trainer “on the job” as well as for self-study. It’s built-in Interlingual Term Finder allows them to search the corpus of company documentation for the terms and phrases relevant to a specific communication task, and in this way prepare themselves for meetings, presentations etc. By encouraging the proactive use of language resources such as bilingual documentation, it promotes learner independence.

Interlingual Knowledge
A knowledge of the learner’s native language can provide the language teacher with invaluable shortcuts for teaching important structures in the target language, whilst at the same time avoiding the need to explain these structures with complex grammatical jargon or ‘metalanguage’. Passive verb structures, for example, can be taught with reference to German verb patterns with werden, since the German structure modal + participle + werden (e.g. sollte benutzt werden) is used in the same way as the English passive form modal + be + past participle (e.g. should be used). Given this, there is then no need to present elaborate explanations of the English passive voice and its functions. Such grammatical explanations easily foster a dangerous myth - the myth that English (or any other target language) is uniquely endowed with linguistic structures that serve particular functions. The teacher may even believe this myth: giving deep philosophical explanations of the differences between the various English tenses, for example, as if other languages had absolutely no way of make similar distinctions between actions at different points and periods of time. 

Attitudes to Interlingual Teaching
For several decades now, it has been regarded as pedagogically and indeed politically incorrect to have recourse to the learner’s mother tongue in the language classroom or in teaching materials. I believe this to be a largely Anglo-American attitude, born of the fact that teachers, especially in England, usually have to deal with multilingual classes of students with different mother tongues. And yet the prejudice against interlingual teaching is one that has been exported around the world, and inculcated in many non-native teachers of English - even though the latter generally teach monolingual classes in which an interlingual approach would be ideal. The main charge levelled against interlingual teaching methods is that they encourage learners to speak by consciously translating words from their mother tongue.  I would argue that the very opposite is the case: namely that teaching which pays no heed to interlingual features (important similarities and differences between the native and target language) allows learners to fall into the trap of unconscious mistranslation - thinking that something can be said in the same way in the target language as in the native language when in fact it cannot, or not realising when it can.

The Principle of “simference”
In the last analysis, no two language are wholly similar or wholly different in any given respect. Rather, they reveal differences in the very areas where they are similar and reveal similarities in the very areas in which they are different. The methodology of Interlingual Training is based on interlingual ‘simference’ i.e. on an intimate understanding of the similarities-in-difference and differences-in-similarity between a given first language or L1 and the  target language or L2. Simference arises for two reasons. One is that all languages are in their own way ‘interlanguages’ - that is to say, they combine elements from other languages. English is simferent to both German and French because it is itself an evolving interlanguage compounded of elements from both the Germanic and Romance languages. Interlingual Training exploits this intrinsic interlinguality in language learning and teaching. 

Interlanguage and Metalanguage
Another reason for simference is that, as Chomsky showed, there are indeed common structures uniting most of the world’s languages. The noun phrase is one such structure, as is the combination of such phrases with verbs and verb groups. Linguistics is an endless quest to perfect an academic “metalanguage” by which to represent and describe such universal structures. But one does not need to be an expert linguist, nor possess a whole arsenal of abstruse linguistic terms, in order to learn how to intuitively perceive the common phrasal constituents of sentences in two or more languages. I term these common multi-word phrasal constituents or “chunks” meta-lingual units; a category which includes noun phrases, verb groups, and their respective adjuncts (eg. post-modifying and adverbial phrases).

Interlingual Learning
Interlingual Learning is not learning by translation but learning by discovery. To begin with the learner is presented with matching sentences in both their native language and the foreign or target language. For example (a) ‘I want a coffee.’ (English) and ‘Ich will ein Kaffee’ (German), or (b) ‘I don’t want any coffee’ (English) and ‘Ich will/möchte kein Kaffee.’ (German). The learner then has to identify the exact equivalent of a particular native item in the target language sentence. An English speaker learning German, for example, may be asked to (1) find the equivalent of the English verb want in the German sentence ‘Ich will einen Kaffee.’ (2) find the equivalent of the English phrase don’t want any in the German sentence ‘Ich will keinen Kaffee’. Conversely, a German speaker learning English may be asked to find the English equivalent of will in the English sentences ‘I want a coffee’ and to find the equivalent of will keinen in ‘I don’t want any coffee’. The structures and expressions that the learners find in this way will often conflict with their own personal interlanguage - their current “half-way house” way of speaking the target language- helping them to bring this interlanguge closer to the target language.

The Translation of Meanings
The fundamental linguistic principle on which Interlingual Training methodology is based is the understanding that speaking or writing our native language is itself translation - the translation of meanings into words. Using parallel texts as the basis of language exercises raises the learner’s awareness of the different ways in which equivalent meanings are translated into the target language. This is a quite different from encouraging learner’s to translate words from one language to another - a common misunderstanding of the work of the translator. The purest form of verbal or linguistic translation is essentially literal, word-for-word translation - of the sort that, in its end results, reveals in full clarity the enormous differences in vocabulary, syntax and word order between languages. Only hermeneutic translation - the translation of meanings - reveals in its end result truly equivalent words, structures and expressions. Hermeneutic translation involves not only replacing individual native language words with target language ones, but re-placing them - reordering them in new sequences and regrouping them in new phrasal chunks. It also involves the replacement and re-placement of these larger multi-word chunks. For this purpose it is of great help to straight away learn the target language equivalents of these multi-word chunks, something which is possible because they constitute meta-lingual units - phrasal sentence constituents common to both native and target languages. 

Parallel Corpora and Interlingual Keys
The increasing availability of parallel texts, whether in the form of multi-lingual websites, internationally published books or translated corporate documentation, provides an ideal resource not only for comparative linguists but for interlingual teaching and learning. It allows textual corpora to be searched for interlingual simferences: contrasting multi-word structures in two or more languages which are semantically equivalent. Once identified, these provide a basis for interlingual language exercises, giving learners the essential keys and shortcuts for restructuring and improving their interlanguage. The Appendix that follows shows some examples of  contrasting but semantically equivalent structures in German and English, the mastery of which can significantly accelerate the learning of both English and German, and upgrade the interlanguage of learners studying either tongue. More authentic examples of each of these Interlingual Keys can be found in plenty by searching bilingual text pairs and corpora using a parallel concordancer. Once found, they can provide the basis of interlingual languages exercises and drills for both learners and trainee translators. 

Interlingual Graphics
Many of the examples shown have to do with fundamental contrasts between English and German word order as defined by the basic meta-lingual categories of Subject / Object / Verb and Auxiliary verb. In practice these differences can be graphically represented in a way that avoids the need even for such basic grammatical meta-language. Subject and Object are both nouns or multi-word noun phrase “blocks” - the basic components of the sentence and can be represented by the symbol . The Verb and Auxiliary elements of the sentence has to do with the relationship between these blocks or components and can be represented by a linking line —. Represented this way, many structures in German can be graphically represented by the symbol ——.

Example:
Subject	Aux	Object	Verb	
NP	V	NP	V	
ch	habe	Brot	gekauft	
I	have	bread	Bought	
	—		—	

But in English, auxiliary and main verbs are usually combined in a single multi-word verb group, that is placed after the Subject and before the Object. The pattern in English is thus ——. By teaching learners to

1.	identify multi-word noun-phrase blocks such as “that wonderful bread I saw in the supermarket yesterday”, and

2.	identify all the elements of the verb group including modals and auxiliaries, the block-and-line symbolism can be used to show graphically how the sentence chunks (including block and lines) need to be rearranged in accordance with English word order rules - in this case by putting auxiliary and main verbs together to form a single relational line between the nominal blocks. The block-and-line symbolism allows the learner to check their own syntax and rearrange sentence chunks in accordance with a graphically represented target language structure. 

Language 
The use of Interlingual Keys can teach even elementary or pre-intermediate students to handle complex structures that would ordinarily only be taught at upper intermediate or advanced levels. It is of course particularly appropriate for one-to-one teaching or class teaching in a monolingual environment (e.g. in-house teaching for companies). In teaching adults foreign languages for business or special purposes the starting point of the interlingual approach  is the analysis of the target language lexis and structures which the learner needs. “Target language” here means a specific commercial, technical or professional interlanguage or intralanguage. The latter can be identified by an audit of texts and documentation related to the learner’s vocational language needs - their job and function, company or organisation, profession or industry. As much information as possible should be elicited from the learner, but a benchmark is also needed by which to judge the technical-professional appropriacy of the interlanguage used by the learner to give this information. This benchmark can be provided letting learners describe their work also in their own native language - creating authentic oral texts which the bilingual teacher can translate with the help of documentary resources belonging to the same technical-professional domain. Alternatively. it may only be necessary for the teacher to reformulate the learner’s interlanguage in order to generate texts containing benchmark structures. 

Language Benchmarks
What follows is an example of an oral text elicited from a learner in a one-to-one teaching situation and showing the benchmark structures needed by the learner (still only an elementary level German speaker of English) in his work. The text as a whole was created by both reformulation of the learner’s interlanguage, and by translation of sentences spoken or written by the learner in German. 

English Benchmark (en)
“In developing this interface I found out that the standard program for foreign payment transactions generated a false data record structure and could not be used for this reason.”

German Benchmark (de)
“Bei der Entwicklung dieser Schnittstelle stellte ich fest, daß das Standard-Program für den ausländischen Zahllauf (USA) einen falschen Datenträgeraufbau erzeugt und aus diesem Grunde nicht zur Anwendung kommen kann”.

Learner’s Interlanguage (en /de)
“By develop this interface.....the standard program for payment transactions a false record structure created
and out of this ground not application.”

By comparing the learner’s interlanguage with the benchmark sentences the teacher can identify the
Interlingual Keys most relevant to this learner’s needs:

Examples:
prepositional phrase (de) <> preposition + present participle (en)   (in developing...)
Object before Verb (de) <> Verb before Object (en)  (...created a record structure...)
OVAux (de) <> AuxVO (en) (couldn’t be used)
“aus diesem Grund” (de) <> “for this reason” (en)

The teacher created classroom structure drills and lessons on Interlingual Trainer for this learner, based on these and several other Interlingual Keys, using lexis drawn from authentic oral and written texts, and employing Interlingual Graphics as an additional teaching aid. After 18 hours of one-to-one combined with CALL the learner was able to build new sentences in the target language containing the benchmark lexis and structures.

Interlingual Learning Activities
In general these can based on one or more Interlingual Keys, such as

modal + Verb + “werden” (de) <> modal passive with “be” (en) 

Example:
könnte vebessert werden (de) <> could be improved (en)

The keys can be exploited for target language training in four main ways:

1.	Retranslation exercises in the classroom
With English as the target language, for example, the teacher writes up on the board or orally dictates an English sentence containing the (en) structure. The learner, however, is asked to orally translate and then write down only the equivalent German sentence. Having done so (and after the translation has been checked for accuracy by the teacher) they are then asked to retranslate the German back into English (after wiping the latter from the board of course!). This exercise is particularly useful for assessing the learner’s interlanguage ie. their current ability to use the target language structure.

2.	Computer assisted learning in the classroom
Teacher and learner use the search facility in Interlingual Trainer to find examples of  “werden” in context with one or more modal verbs in a relevant German source text or corpus of texts. The programs parallel concordancer can then display in turn each sentence or paragraph containing the (de) structure, along with the matching English Text segment. From this a number of benchmark sentences are obtained in English and German. Learners can be asked to identify the matching (en) structure in the English text segments, write them down and then translate the German sentences containing them, with the help of these (en) equivalents. 

3.	Structure and transformation drillsp
Alternatively, an example of the Interlingual Key can be dictated or written on the board, and used as the basis of a drill in which the teacher changes one or more content words and/or progressively transforms or elaborates the structure - introducing more keys through the use of negative and interrogative structures, the construction of main or subordinate clauses etc.)

Examples: 
kann verbessert werden / muss verändert werden / kann nicht benutzt werden / Wenn es benutzt werden kann, ...

With each example of the German structure, the learner is (a) asked for the English equivalent (b) can be asked to create an entire German sentence around the structure and then translate this sentence. 

4.	Computer assisted self-study and revision
The teacher can use Interlingual Builder to create computer exercises focussing on particular Interlingual Keys.

The source text can be printed documentation or learner generated texts. The latter can be turned into benchmark texts either by reformulation of input provided by the learner in the L1 or translation from input provided by the learner in L1. 

Interlingual Auditing and Individualised Needs Analysis
The teacher’s first task, of course, is to decide which Keys are most important for the learner - for these will shape the teaching objectives and provide the criteria  for assessing the learner’s progress. Needs analysis of this sort can be conducted through one or more of the following processes - ideally all three. 

1.	Shadowing learners in their professional lingual environment, listening to their use of both the native and target language in this environment, and comparing their linguistic and communicative performance in each.

2.	Studying company documentation relevant to the learners job in both native and target language versions.

3.	Classroom elicitation of learner input in both languages - allowing the teacher to audit learners’ native and target language discourse and compare the two. This skill of the teacher here lies in eliciting in as natural and unforced a way as possible the type of language that the learner is called upon to produce in their professional environment (e.g. by giving presentations to the teacher, writing reports or showing the teacher    recent e-mails or voice-mails).

Individualised needs analysis in a one-to-one teaching situation is essentially an ongoing process - every time the learner produces in the target language this will give insight into their current interlanguage on the one hand, and, on the other hand provide important clues to the benchmark language which they still lack.

Key Structures and Lexical Keywords
Benchmark language includes not only structures but lexis. Or rather, it consists of already grammaticalised lexis, for even a simple lexical collocation such as “learn a language” takes the form of a grammatical structure: a Verb-Object sequence in English and an Object-Verb sequence in German (“eine Sprache lernen”). The interlingual teaching of key structures such as VO should be firmly based on the collocations, colligations, compounds, and constructions formed from lexical keywords most relevant to the learner’s communicative needs. It is a common myth, however, that learners of English for business or special purposes “know” their specialist professional terminology they need already, and do not need further teaching in this respect. But although a learner working in the domain of English for information technology, for example, may well know that “store” collocates with “data”, they may well be unable to produce properly structured English verb phrases from these words, let alone differentiate and produce such noun-phrase units as “the stored data”, “the data stored in the file”, “data storage”, “storing data”, “the data to be stored” etc. As a result it means very little to say that the learner “knows” the words “store” and “data” already. The individual words may be known, but that does not mean that the learner is able to actively deploy the terms created from these words, for these terms consist of grammaticalised multi-word structures.

There are three ways of grouping the benchmark lexis to be learned:

1.	through the collocational field of a particular lexical keyword such as data
Example: to store / save / process / analyse / display / access / print ...(the) data

2.	through a key structure such as  -ed participle + noun
Example: stored data / corrupted files / customised solutions / unsolved problems etc.

3.	by embedding a particular keyword and its collocations in a key structure:

Example:
the stored data / the processed data / the printed data / the analysed data etc.

Both Interlingual teaching methods and interlingual technology can be used to gather and group lexis in these ways. Thus the teacher can ask the native German-speaking learner to brainstorm as many German verbs as possible that go with the German word “Problem” (ein Problem lösen, ein Problem erklären, ein Problem erkennen etc.). This then provides a benchmark for assessing the learner’s English - seeing how many of these collocations the learner can gloss and deploy in English. The set of keyword collocations can then be used to drill one or more structures linked to the Interlingual Keys. Alternatively, teacher and learner can use Interlingual Trainer to search for collocations and collocational structures in a text or textual corpus, entering either a keyword such as “data” as the search word,  or a marker such as “-ed” to search for key structures such as “participle + noun”. Finally, Interlingual Builder can be used to create computer language exercises which focus on particular keywords and the key structures in which they are embedded. 

Leaner Independence
Just as a doctor can learn a lot from taking a blood sample, so it is also of inestimable value to be able to elicit samples of the learner’s business, professional or technical discourse in their native tongue - either in situ, by shadowing them at work, or in the classroom. These samples can be compared with the learner’s interlanguage and used to establish target language benchmarks. The main role of the trainer is then not simply to present and practice this benchmark language, still less to dispense target language expressions for the learner to digest like pills. Rather it is to strengthen learner independence: giving learners themselves the methods and technologies with which they independently and proactively identify the benchmark terms and phrases which they will need for a specific telephone call or e-mail, meeting or presentation.

Learner Training: Preparing Key Phrases
Knowing what you want to say in a foreign language is not the same as knowing how you will say it. Normally, we rely on our natural native-language expertise to shape the form of our utterances or written language. Yet there are frequently situations, particularly in professional contexts, for which we prepare ourselves by thinking out what we have to say in advance - that is to say, by reflecting on and rehearsing the wording of our statements or questions. For in the last analysis, what we succeed in communicating is in large part a function of how we say it.  One important way in which learners can be helped to independently improve their use of foreign languages in professional contexts is by providing them with methods not only for predicting the language they may need in specific situations but also for preparing in advance the key phrases they will need to say what they want and say what they think. Key phrases are a well-established feature of management and professional discourse, used as “bullet points” in reports, memos and PowerPoint presentations. Linguistically, they take the form of a series of collocated key words, each embedded in the same key structure, usually a noun or verb phrase.

Example:
verbal key phrase
(verb + modifier + noun)

gather market information
establish local agents
organise sales promotions

Speaking from prepared sets of key phrases is not the same as either reading aloud or speaking in an entirely improvised way. And yet it allows complex sentences or questions to be easily constructed with the addition of a single lead-in phrase such as “Over the next six months we intend to...” or  “How are we going to...” followed
by a rhetorical structure that links the bullet points in a pattern such as “A,B & C”.

Example:
“How are we going to gather market information, establish local agents and organise sales promotions?”

Prepared in this way, the speaker may then elaborate each of the key phrases in turn with further verbs, determiners and modifiers, or post-modifying phrases.

Example:
How are we going to
                   ...gather the necessary market information
                  ....train and establish suitable local agents for these markets
                  ...and organise effective sales promotions for our products?

Interlingual Preparation and Practice
Preparing key phrases in a foreign language is even more helpful than doing so in one’s native tongue, whilst at
the same time providing an excellent form of structured practice in collocation and sentence building from key words. Learners should begin by listing key points in the form of noun phrases, either in their native language to begin with, or if they have the terms available, in the target language.

Example:
market information / local agents / sales promotions

Then they should brainstorm the appropriate verbs to go with these noun phrases, but it is important that they select target language verbs which collocate strongly with their respective nouns. To do so it is advisable they first of all ask themselves what the most suitable verb would be in their own language. For unless they take this as the benchmark, they may end up using the first verb that comes to mind in the target rather than making a good lexical choice. Having prepared a set of verbal key phrases, the next step is to brainstorm a range of possible lead in phrases, and ensure that these fit the key phrases grammatically. A lead-in such as “We have had difficulty in...” for example, would require that all the verbs in the key phrase be transformed into “-ing” participles. Teachers can provide the necessary grammatical pointers in the classroom, and give practice in the oral linking, extension and elaboration of key phrases. But the essential thing is that learners are trained to prepare key phrases outside the classroom, using them as mnemonic notes from which they can deliver well-formed statements and questions in professional situations - whether orally or in writing, in informal meetings or in formal presentations. It is important to stress to the learner that these are language rather than content notes - reminders not of what they have to say but of how to say it - how a given message or piece of information can be best and most concisely formulated in the target language.

Technology Enhanced Language Learning (TELL)
Besides the use of specific CALL tools such as Interlingual Trainer, there are many other ways in which learners can make use of technology to support their learning and provide them with useful language resources. Learners whose jobs demand a great deal of interlingual flexibility also often receive large numbers of foreign-language E-mails each day, many of which contain phraseology and terminology useful in formulating their own mails. These can be imported into a personal glossary file. But by simply taking the time to underline or highlight useful phrases and terms in a freshly opened mail, and then filing it in a resource folder, learner’s can create a customised language resource which they can refer to when necessary. Learners on one-to-one language courses often accumulate large and unmanageable quantities of their own scribbled notes as well as printed handouts from the teacher. An alternative is for the teacher to prepare materials in the form of helpfiles on diskette, which can then serve as a permanent resource for the learner on their own personal or company PC’s. Learners who have notebook computers should always be encouraged to bring them to courses, not only because they can then import useful CALL tools, but also  in order to transfer their language notes to them in a suitably organised form. 

Many learners make use of language and learning shareware available on the Internet, and if not can be encouraged to do so. Programs available include bilingual dictionaries such as Babylon which will automatically gloss any word in any document which the learner highlights with the cursor. There are also several programs which simulate bilingual flash-card learning systems, allowing learners to test themselves in a structured way on vocabulary which they pick up or enter from their classroom notes. In addition, there are more and more sites on the Internet offering a range of general-language exercises, or even giving teachers the facility to author their own exercises for learners. Last, but perhaps most importantly, there are standard tools such as Microsoft PowerPoint, which can be turned into a powerful medium for teaching language preparation and business presentation skills. 

PowerPoint Presentations
Presentation slides prepared with a tool such as Microsoft PowerPoint usually have two main elements: a headline and three or bullet points in the form of key words or phrases. Choosing the headline and preparing bullet points in the target language is an important skill in itself (see Preparing Key Phrases). So also is preparing the oral presentation or  “voiceover” for the slide. This requires at least 4 elements:

1.	An introductory sentence introducing the headline and linking its topic with that of previous slides.

2.	A opening phrase to lead into one or more of the key phrases used as bullet points (lead-in phrase).

3.	Word and phrases that elaborate and extent each of the bullets (eg. modifiers and post-modifying phrases).

4.	Linking words that allow the bullet points to be embedded in sentences and rhetorical patterns.

Both the key phrases for the bullet points and the voiceover itself can be prepared interlingually. By first brainstorming the best choice of words and phrases for both in their native language, the learner can then use these as a benchmark for the creation of the target language presentation, thus ensuring that the language used in the latter matches the standard set by this benchmark. As far as the bullets are concerned, I recommend that learners used a fixed structure for the key phrases they employ (eg. verb + noun phrase), as this makes it much easier to construct a voiceover for the slide. Proper training in preparing this voiceover can help overcome the instinctive tendency of learners to either (a) move on the slide headline in a perfunctory way and reel off the phrases aloud, without any elaboration (b) improvise and elaborate on the topic headlined in the slide in a way that bears no direct relation to its key words and phrases. The danger of (a) is to bore the listener. The danger of (b), particularly if the listeners are also non-native speakers of the target language, is that the latter will be mystified, unable to connect what they hear from the speaker and what they see on the screen or overhead. 

Instead of either improvisation or reeling off, I emphasise to the learner the importance of preparing at least two or three fully-formed sentences from the slide in which its key words and phrases are embedded and elaborated. Only fully-formed sentences, with clear beginning and ending, allow intonation and pausing to be used properly within a presentation. Only by preparing in advance a sequence of clear sentences can these be linked in an effective rhetorical structure rather than by a  repetitive use of “and..” as a result of which the listeners lose a sense of where one sentence ends and another begins. I explain to learners that the slide headline and bullets are merely the visible part of the voice-over. The invisible part consists of those lead-in phrases and linking words are that will be needed to generate fully-formed sentences from the visible language on the slide.

An excellent interlingual training exercise is for the learner to create a variety of native language voice-overs for a single target language slide. This gives learners the opportunity to discover what sort of lead-in phrases and linking words they would naturally employ in their native tongue in order to introduce the headline, to elaborate the bullets and embed them in a rhetorical structure. The learner can then select equivalents or near-equivalents of these for the target-language voice-over. I always recommend that these lead-in and linking words and phrases be included in the learner’s own printouts of the slides. These then provide a personal prompt-sheet for their own voice-over, which they can also practice in the classroom or even record and animate with PowerPoint itself.

The Ethos of Interlingual Training
Interlingual Training runs quite contrary to the idea of teachers going into the classroom with a set of standard materials and things to “do” with the learner that are only superficially or formalistically related to the latter’s needs, and to the specific language of their industry. The essential professional ethos underlying the interlingual approach is for the trainer to first learn the learner’s language: to be able to communicate and consult with learners in a way that embodies a genuine interest in their professional language, and a willingness to gain and apply at least a basic knowledge of their mother tongue. As an English teacher, I very much regret the fact that despite the strengthening of Britain’s European ties to the global market, it is not only English companies but English teachers who often show little interest in learning other languages - national or professional. The core terminology of English Language Teaching has hardly changed over the years, and is only just beginning to evolve in response to new information and language technologies. My wish is that it also evolves in response to new, international, intercultural and interlingual relationships in the European and world community. 

Acknowledgements: 
Wolf Friederich (Technik des Übersetzens, Hueber 1983)

For more information on Language Engineering Services, their products and their services, visit their Internet site at http://www.bizonline.co.uk/languageengineering/