companies around the globe are recognizing the importance of engaging in Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) that is crucial to their survival and growth. It is evident that when an organization integrates appropriate CSR practices in its strategy that embed the societal and environmental concerns, these practices undoubtedly bring tangible benefits to the business along with a sustainable competitive advantage. In Lebanon, there is a consistent need for the Lebanese community to live in a safe, clean and healthy environment. Companies can no longer act as isolated entities that can run separately from the society and the environment in which they operate and with which they interact, disregarding the impact of their activities on the economy, the society, and the environment; these companies are assuming and acknowledging their responsibility not only towards shareholders through profit maximization but also towards all stakeholders through enhancing the welfare of the society and adopting environmentally-based behavior. However, there exists a substantial lack of awareness of CSR among Lebanese companies. The current practices in Lebanon have suffered from the lack of responsible behavior towards the employees, the economy, the society, and the environment. Consequently, the current research addresses the urgent managers’ need to understand what CSR is and assess the multiple benefits of its programs, and how they may help and end up in a win-win situation if CSR is implemented adequately. This research is exploratory in nature and uses a survey questionnaire distributed to a convenient sample of Lebanese managers and employees working in Lebanon. The purpose is to assess the knowledge and the implementation of CSR programs at selected number of Lebanese firms. This research attempts to define the gap between the existing socio-economic and environmental problems and the responsiveness levels of Lebanese firms to such problems.

This paper has emerged out of the conviction that linguistic theory has more to offer to translation theory than is so far recognized and vice versa. One reason for the relative separation between the two fields is, perhaps, the domination of formal approaches to language study for a considerable period of time. But, with the spread of functional linguistics in the last three decades, there have been growing hopes for establishing links between linguistics and translation studies. Accordingly, the discussion, in the present study, proceeds primarily from the perspectives of “Translation Studies” and “Applied Linguistics”. One major goal is to show the interrelationships between linguistics and translation, and how they benefit from each other. The basic underlying theme, here, is that “inside or between languages, human communication equals translation. A study of translation is a study of language” (Bassnett-McGuire, 1980: 23). In addition, both translators and linguists deal with two linguistic systems, each with, perhaps, a different cultural system. So, if we agree that ‘all communicators are translators’ (Bell, 1994), we must remember that the role of the translator is different from that of the ‘normal communicator’: the translator is a bilingual mediating agent between monolingual communication participants in two different language communities. On the other hand, there has been a great focus on using English only as a medium of instruction in all courses taught in the UAE University. Accordingly, the second goal of this study is to try to answer the questions, “How much translation from L1 is permitted in FL teaching? and “What are the factors that determine the quantity to be used?”. The view adopted in the present study is that disregarding L2 learners’ mother-tongue and considering it “a bogey to be shunned at all costs” is a myth. And, providing maximum exposure to the foreign language may help in learning that language (Krashen, 1982, 1985), but, sometimes, at the expense of understanding and intelligibility.