Editing Cross-cultural communication (section)

== Challenges in cross-language qualitative research ==
Cross-language research refers to research involving two or more languages.<ref>{{Cite journal |last=Squires |first=Allison |date=February 2009 |title=Methodological Challenges in Cross-Language Qualitative Research: A Research Review |journal=International Journal of Nursing Studies |volume=46 |issue=2 |pages=277–287 |doi=10.1016/j.ijnurstu.2008.08.006 |issn=0020-7489 |pmc=2784094 |pmid=18789799}}</ref> Specifically, it can refer to: 1) researchers working with participants in a language that they are not fluent in, or; 2) researchers working with participants utilizing a language that is neither of their native languages, or; 3) translation of research or findings in another language, or; 4) researchers and participants speak the same language (not English). However, the research process and findings are directed to an English-speaking audience.

Cross-language issues are of growing concern in research of all methodological forms, but they raise particular concerns for [[qualitative research]]. Qualitative researchers seek to develop a comprehensive understanding of human behavior, using inductive approaches to investigate the meanings people attribute to their behavior, actions, and interactions with others. In other words, qualitative researchers seek to gain insights into life experiences by exploring the depth, richness, and complexity inherent to human phenomenon. To gather data, qualitative researchers use direct observation and immersion, interviews, open-ended surveys, focus groups, content analysis of visual and textual material, and oral histories. Qualitative research studies involving cross-language issues are particularly complex in that they require investigating meanings, interpretations, symbols, and the processes and relations of social life.

Although a range of scholars have dedicated their attention to challenges in conducting [[Qualitative research|qualitative studies]] in [[Cross-Cultural Research|cross-cultural]] contexts,<ref name=":0">{{Cite journal|last=Squires|first=Allison|date=February 2009|title=Methodological challenges in cross-language qualitative research: A research review|journal=International Journal of Nursing Studies|language=en|volume=46|issue=2|pages=277–287|doi=10.1016/j.ijnurstu.2008.08.006|pmc=2784094|pmid=18789799}}</ref> no methodological consensus has emerged from these studies. For instance, Edwards<ref name="Edwards 197–208">{{Cite journal|last=Edwards|first=Rosalind|date=January 1998|title=A critical examination of the use of interpreters in the qualitative research process|journal=Journal of Ethnic and Migration Studies|volume=24|issue=1|pages=197–208|doi=10.1080/1369183x.1998.9976626|issn=1369-183X}}</ref> noticed how the inconsistent or inappropriate use of [[Translation|translators]] or [[Language interpretation|interpreters]] can threaten the trustworthiness of cross-language qualitative research and the applicability of the translated findings on participant populations.  Researchers who fail to address the methodological issues translators/interpreters present in a cross-language qualitative research can decrease the trustworthiness of the data as well as compromise the overall rigor of the study<ref name="Edwards 197–208" /><ref>{{Cite journal|last1=Mill|first1=Judy E.|last2=Ogilvie|first2=Linda D.|date=January 2003|title=Establishing methodological rigour in international qualitative nursing research: a case study from Ghana|journal=Journal of Advanced Nursing|volume=41|issue=1|pages=80–87|doi=10.1046/j.1365-2648.2003.02509.x|pmid=12519291|issn=0309-2402}}</ref> Temple and Edwards<ref name="Temple 1–12">{{Cite journal|last1=Temple|first1=Bogusia|last2=Edwards|first2=Rosalind|date=June 2002|title=Interpreters/Translators and Cross-Language Research: Reflexivity and Border Crossings|journal=International Journal of Qualitative Methods|language=en|volume=1|issue=2|pages=1–12|doi=10.1177/160940690200100201|issn=1609-4069|doi-access=free}}</ref> also describe the important role of translation in research, pointing out that language is not just a tool or technical label for conveying concepts; Indeed, language incorporates values and beliefs and carries cultural, social, and political meanings of a particular social reality that may not have a conceptual equivalence in the language into which will be translated.<ref>{{Cite journal|last1=Tinsley|first1=Royal L.|last2=Bassnet-McGuire|first2=Susan|date=1982|title=Translation Studies|journal=The Modern Language Journal|volume=66|issue=1|pages=77|doi=10.2307/327826|jstor=327826|issn=0026-7902}}</ref> In the same veing, it has also been noted that the same words can mean different things in different cultures. For instance, as Temple et al.<ref name="Temple 1–12" /> observe, the words we choose matter. Thus, it is crucial to give attention to how researchers describe the use of translators and/or interpreters since it reflects their competence in addressing language as a methodological issue.

===Historical discussion of cross-language issues and qualitative research===

In 1989, Saville-Troike<ref name=":1">Saville-Troike, M. (1989). ''The ethnography of communication: An introduction'' (2nd ed.). New York: Basil Blackweli.</ref> was one of the first to turn to apply the use of qualitative research (in the form of ethnographic investigation) to the topic of cross-cultural communication. Using this methodology, Saville-Troike demonstrated that for successful communication to take place, a person must have the appropriate linguistic knowledge, interaction skills, and cultural knowledge. In a cross-cultural context, one must be aware of differences in norms of interaction and interpretation, values and attitudes, as well as cognitive maps and schemata.<ref name=":1" /> Regarding [[Cross-cultural studies|cross-cultural]] interviews, subsequently Stanton<ref name=":2">Stanton, A. (1996). Reconfiguring teaching and knowing in the college classroom. In Goldberger, N.R., Tarule,J.M., Clinchy, B.M., & Beienky, M.F. (Eds). ''Knowledge, difference, and power'' (pp, 25–56). Basic Books</ref> argued in 1996 that in order to avoid misunderstandings, the interviewer should try to walk in the other person's shoes. In other words, the interviewer needed to pay attention to the point of view of the interviewee, a notion dubbed as "connected knowing," which refers to a clear and undistorted understanding of the perspective of the interviewee.<ref name=":2" />

===Relationship between cross-language issues and qualitative research===

As one of the primary methods for collecting rich and detailed information in qualitative research, interviews conducted in cross-cultural linguistic contexts raise a number of issues.  As a form of data collection, interviews provide researchers with insight into how individuals understand and narrate aspects of their lives. Challenges may arise, however, when language barriers exist between researchers and participants. In multilingual contexts, the study of language differences is an essential part of qualitative research.  van Ness et al. claim that [[language]] differences may have consequences for the research process and outcome, because concepts in one language may be understood differently in another language.<ref name=":3">{{cite journal|doi=10.1007/s10433-010-0168-y|title=Language differences in qualitative research: Is meaning lost in translation?|year=2010|last1=Van Nes|first1=Fenna|last2=Abma|first2=Tineke|last3=Jonsson|first3=Hans|last4=Deeg|first4=Dorly|journal=European Journal of Ageing|volume=7|issue=4|pages=313–316|pmid=21212820|pmc=2995873|doi-access=free}}</ref> For these authors, language is central in all phases of qualitative research, ranging from data collection to analysis and representation of the textual data in publications.

In addition, as<ref name=":3" /> van Ness et al. observe, challenges of translation can be from the perspective that interpretation of meaning is the core of qualitative research. Interpretation and representation of meaning may be challenging in any communicative act; however, they are more complicated in [[cross-cultural]] contexts where interlingual translation is necessary.<ref name=":3" />).  Interpretation and understanding of meanings are essential in qualitative research, not only for the interview phase, but also for the final phase when meaning will be represented to the audience through oral or written text.<ref name="Temple 1–12" /> Temple and Edwards claim that without a high level of translated understanding, qualitative research cannot shed light on different perspectives, circumstances that could shut out the voices of those who could enrich and challenge our understandings.<ref name="Temple 1–12" />

===Current state of affairs of cross-language studies in qualitative research===

According to Temple et al.,<ref name="Temple 1–12" /> a growing number of researchers are conducting studies in English language societies with people who speak little or no English. However, few of these researchers acknowledge the influence of interpreters and translators. In addition, as Temple et al.<ref name="Temple 1–12" /> noticed, little attention is given to the involvement of interpreters in research interviews and even less attention to language difference in focus group research with people who do not speak English.  An exception would be the work of Esposito.<ref name=":4">{{cite journal|doi=10.1177/104973201129119217|title=From Meaning to Meaning: The Influence of Translation Techniques on Non-English Focus Group Research|year=2001|last1=Esposito|first1=Noreen|journal=Qualitative Health Research|volume=11|issue=4|pages=568–579|pmid=11521612|s2cid=43682083}}</ref> There is some work on the role of interpreters and translators in relation to best practice and models of provision, such as that of Thomson et al.,<ref>Thomson, A.M., Rogers, A., Honey, S., & King, L. (1999). ''If the interpreter doesn't come there is no communication: A study of bilingual support services in the North West of England.'' Manchester: School of Nursing, Midwifery and Health Visiting, University of Manchester.</ref> However, there is a body of literature aimed at English speaking health and social welfare professionals on how to work with interpreters.<ref>Freed, A. O. (1988, July/August). Interviewing through an interpreter. ''Social Work'', 315–319.</ref><ref>Fuller, J. H. S. & Toon, P. D. (1988). ''Medical practice in a multicultural society''.

Heinemann Medical.</ref><ref>Karseras, P., & Hopkins, E. (1987). ''British Asians' health in the community''.  John Wiley & Sons.</ref>

Temple and Edwards<ref name="Temple 1–12" /> point out the absence of technically focused literature on translation.  This is problematic because there is strong evidence that communication across languages involves more than just a literal transfer of information.<ref>Bhabha, H. K. (1994). ''The location of culture''. Routledge.</ref><ref name=":5">Simon, S. (1996). ''Gender in translation: Cultural identity and the politics of transmission.'' Routledge.</ref><ref>Spivak, G. C. (1992). The politics of translation. In M. Barrett & A. Phillips (Eds.), ''Destabilising theory: Contemporary feminist debates'' (pp. 177–200). Polity Press</ref><ref>Temple, B. (1997). Issues in translation and cross-cultural research. ''Sociology, 31 (3),'' 607–618.</ref> In this regard, Simon claims that the translator is not someone who simply offers words in a one-to-one exchange.<ref name=":5" /> Rather, the translator is someone who negotiates meanings in relation to a specific context. These meanings cannot be found within the language of translation, but they are embedded in the negotiation process, which is part of their continual reactivation.<ref name=":5" /> For this reason, the translator needs to make continuous decisions about the cultural meanings language conveys. Thus, the process of meaning transfer has more to do with reconstructing the value of a term, rather than its cultural inscription.<ref name=":5" />

===Significant contributions to cross-language studies in qualitative research===

[[Jacques Derrida]] is widely acknowledged to be one of the most significant contributors to the issue of language in qualitative social research.<ref>Derrida, J. (1967a). ''Marges de la philosophie'' [Margins of philosophy]. Galilée.</ref><ref>Derrida, J. (1967b). ''Écriture et différence'' [Writing and difference]. Éditions du Seuil.</ref><ref>Derrida, J. (1996). ''Le monolinguisme de l'autre ou la prothèse de l'origine'' [Monolingualism of the other or The prosthesis of origin]. Galilée.</ref><ref>Derrida, J. (1998a). ''Monolingualism of the other or The prosthesis of origin''. Stanford University Press.</ref><ref>Derrida, J. (1998b). ''The secret art of Antonin Artaud''. MIT Press.</ref><ref>Temple B. (2002). Crossed wires: Interpreters, translators, and bilingual workers in cross-language research. ''Qualitative Health Research, 12 (6),'' 844–54.</ref> The challenges that arise in studies involving people who speak multiple languages have also been acknowledged.

Today, the main contributions concerning issues of translation and interpretation come from the field of [[health care]], including from [[transcultural nursing]]. In a globalized era, setting the criteria for qualitative research that is linguistically and culturally representative of study participants is crucial for improving the quality of care provided by health care professionals.<ref name=":4" /><ref>Yach D. (1992). The use and value of qualitative methods in health research in developing countries. ''Social Science & Medicine, 35 (4),'' 603–612.</ref> Scholars in the health field, like Squires,<ref name=":6">{{cite journal|doi=10.1111/j.1466-7657.2008.00652.x|title=Language barriers and qualitative nursing research: Methodological considerations|year=2008|last1=Squires|first1=A.|journal=International Nursing Review|volume=55|issue=3|pages=265–273|pmid=19522941|pmc=2697452}}</ref><ref name=":0" /> provide useful guidelines for systematically evaluating the methodological issues in cross-language research in order to address language barriers between researchers and participants.

===Cross-language concerns in qualitative research===

Squires<ref name=":0" /> defines '''[[Cross-language information retrieval|cross-language]]''' as the process that occurs when a language barrier is present between the researcher and participants. This barrier is frequently mediated using a translator or interpreter. When the research involves two languages, interpretation issues might result in loss of meaning and thus loss of the validity of the qualitative study.  As Oxley et al.<ref name=":7">{{cite journal|doi=10.1080/02699206.2017.1302512|title=Multilingual issues in qualitative research|year=2017|last1=Oxley|first1=Judith|last2=Günhan|first2=Evra|last3=Kaniamattam|first3=Monica|last4=Damico|first4=Jack|journal=Clinical Linguistics & Phonetics|volume=31|issue=7–9|pages=612–630|pmid=28665758|s2cid=24812324}}</ref> point out, in a multilingual setting '''[[Interpretation (logic)|interpretation]]''' challenges arise when researcher and participants speak the same non-English native language, but the results of the study are intended for an English-speaking audience. For instance, when interviews, observation, and other methods of gathering data are used in cross-cultural environments, the data collection and analysis processes become more complicated due to the inseparability of the human experience and the language spoken in a culture<ref name=":7" /> Oxley et al. (2017). Therefore, it is crucial for researchers to be clear on what they know and believe. In other words, they should clarify their position in the research process.

In this context, '''[[Standpoint theory|positionality]]''' refers to the ethical and relational issues the researchers face when choosing a language over another to communicate their findings. For example, in his study on Chinese international students in a Canadian university, Li<ref>Li, Y. (2011). Translating Interviews, Translating Lives: Ethical Considerations in Cross-Language Narrative Inquiry. ''TESL Canada Journal, 28(5)'', 16–30.</ref> considers the ethical and relational issues of language choice experienced when working with the Chinese and English language. In this case, it is important that the researcher offers a rationale behind his/her language choice.  Thus, as Squires<ref name=":6" /> observes, language plays a significant role in cross-cultural studies; it helps participants represent their sense of self.

Similarly, qualitative research interviews involve a continuous reflection on language choices because they may impact the research process and outcome. In his work, Lee<ref name=":8">Lee, S. (2017). The Bilingual Researcher's Dilemmas: Reflective Approaches to Translation Issues. ''Waikato Journal of Education, 22(2),'' 53–62.</ref> illustrates the central role that '''[[Reflexivity (social theory)|reflexivity]]''' plays in setting researcher's priorities and his/her involvement in the translation process. Specifically, his study focuses on the dilemma that researchers speaking the same language of participants face when the findings are intended to an English-speaking audience only. Lee<ref name=":8" /> introduces the article by arguing that "Research conducted by English-speaking researchers about other language speaking subjects is essentially cross-cultural and often multilingual, particularly with QR that involves participants communicating in languages other than English" (p.&nbsp;53<ref name=":8" />).  Specifically, Lee addresses the problems that arise in making sense of interview responses in Mandarin, preparing transcriptions of interviews, and translating the Mandarin/Chinese data for an English-speaking/reading audience. Lee's work then, demonstrates the importance of reflexivity in cross-language research since the researcher's involvement in the language translation can impact the research process and outcome.

Therefore, in order to ensure '''[[Trust (social science)|trustworthiness]]''', which is a measure of the rigor of the study, Lincoln & Guba,<ref>Lincoln, Y., Guba, E., 1985. ''Naturalistic Inquiry''. Sage.</ref> Sutsrino et al.<ref name=":9">Sutrisno, A., Nguyen, N. T., & Tangen, D. (2014). Incorporating Translation in Qualitative Studies: Two Case Studies in Education. ''International Journal of Qualitative Studies in Education (QSE), 27(10)'', 1337–1353.</ref> argue that it is necessary to minimize translation errors, provide detail accounts of the translation, involve more than one translator, and remain open to inquiry from those seeking access to the translation process. For example, in research conducted in the educational context, Sutsrino et al.<ref name=":9" /> recommend bilingual researchers the use of inquiry audit for establishing trustworthiness. Specifically, investigators can require an outside person to review and examine the translation process and the data analysis in order to ensure that the translation is accurate, and the findings are consistent.