Words, Meanings & Knowledge in Cross-Language Qualitative Research: Analysis of a Translation Process

Purpose: Many qualitative research projects take place in cross-language contexts. Given that meanings are not transferred from one language to another word-by-word (Esposito, 2001), qualitative researchers must examine the processes of linguistic transformation to understand constraints on the interpretability of the data. Investigation into issues of ethics, positionality and quality are needed. Furthermore, the role of collaborative processes are important to investigate, given that scholars increasingly suggest a shared process, where translation of meaning is discussed and un-covered jointly between researcher and translator (Temple, 2002). This study uses data from the process of Arabic to English translation/transcription of focus groups facilitated by Palestinians for an international, collaborative research project examining political conflict and resilience. This study addresses the research question: What are the epistemological and methodological issues involved in collaborative translation/transcription processes within qualitative research?

Methods: Data came from recordings and field notes derived from a process of translation/transcription. This translation/transcription process included three steps. One of the Palestinian focus group facilitators summarized issues and provided full text for passages she deemed particularly relevant to the project's research questions. Later, a professional Lebanese translator listened to the audio recordings and conducted simultaneous translation, speaking while the lead researcher transcribed. Finally, the lead researcher identified discrepancies between the two translations, upon which the team deliberated until they reached consensus on translation. Notes were kept in the transcripts denoting enduring conflicts in translation.

Results: Analysis of the translation/transcription process produced three distinct outcomes related to our research question. First, it uncovered dynamics of tensions of insider/outsider knowledge. Analysis brought to light the distinct combinations of knowledge that team members held across five domains: place-based, linguistic, cultural, historical, and theoretical. Through an examination of the importance of team members' contributions, issues of insider/outsider status were uncovered. In comparing local, “insider” knowledge and that of relative “outsiders,” we found the “outsider” contribution did not always fare worse, as one might expect. Thus, it appears that insider/outsider status is a complex, fluid notion. Findings therefore underscore the need for collaboration. Second, findings support the long tradition of problemitizing the idea that words carry “fixed” meanings that can simply be transported from one language to another. Results from our study highlight that the critical evaluation of meaning may be particularly important in any cross-language social work research, and particularly when the fundamental structure of the source language differs from the target language. Finally, analysis showed that translation is a process that involves frequent decision-making. Analysis suggests that the iterative, discursive and collaborative nature of the process increased the trust-worthiness of the final transcription.

Implications: This study demonstrates that translation/transcription requires methodological and epistemological consideration. Results support regarding the translator as a partner in the research process. Implications include the need for continued evaluation of the processes of cross-language work in qualitative analysis. This may be particularly important to consider in social work research, given that the issue of transferability of meanings from one language to another is still largely unresolved.