This document discusses the intricacies of conducting multilingual research. It addresses translation-related issues such as achieving conceptual equivalence between languages and interpreting verbal and non-verbal cues in multicultural teams. It also examines the importance of contextualizing studies across different cultures and languages. The role of languages in research is explored at various stages, from designing tools and gathering data to reporting findings. While the native language may be most important for data collection and analysis, English is often used for initial preparation and final dissemination to engage the international research community.

1. THE INTRICACIES OF
MULTILINGUAL RESEARCH
María del Carmen Méndez García
cmendez@ujaen.es

2. Contenido
1 Introduction
2 Reflection on the intricacies of
multilingual research
3 Conclusion

3. 1. INTRODUCTION

4. Introduction

5. Introduction
Bilingual
PhD dissertation:
education in
Cultural aspects in
Andalusia and
EFL textbooks
Intercultural
Competence
National
research
ICOPROMO Project:
Interviews with JAEN Project:
members of Jaen Analysis of
multicultural teams English Needs

6. 2. REFLECTION ON THE
INTRICACIES OF
MULTILINGUAL RESEARCH

7. 2.1. Translation-related issues

8. Translation-related issues
Translation issues
Scenarios:
• Seek for comparable information in different contexts with research
instruments prepared in a language (and culture?) for use in others
(Birbili, 2000)
• Research tools are translated from English into LL (Birbili, 2000)
• Power imbalance (Chen, 2011): even though the interviewee and
interviewer share the same language?
• Language proficiency (status of native speaker) (Méndez & Pérez, 2005)
• Academic status (upper educational stages)
Academic discussion:
• Focus on data generation rather than on data-analysis (Tai et
al., 2004)
• Not a discernible focus on all the stages of research (i.e. initial)

9. Translation-related issues
Translation issues
Collecting data in LL and presenting the findings in FL:
• May have a direct impact on research validity (Birbili, 2000)
• Factors affecting the quality of translation when the translator and the
researcher coincide (Birbili, 2000):
• Translation-related decisions
• Linguistic competence of the translator
• Individual autobiography
• Circumstances in which translation takes place
• His/her knowledge of the informants’ culture:
• Sharing a frame of reference with the informants (Tsai et al., 2004):
languaculture (Agar, 1994)
• For the sake of trustworthiness and validity, insiders have to be present both
for data collection and analysis (Tsai et al., 2004)
• Insider’s researcher perspective: interprets stated and unstated factors, how
things are and how they become (Tsai et al., 2004)
• Insider: subjectivity and may overlook key behaviours and concepts

10. Translation-related issues
1. Achieving conceptual equivalence
Unsolvable problem (Phillips, 1960: 291):
• ‘Almost any utterance … carries with it a set of
assumptions, feelings and values that the speaker may or may
not be aware of’
• Relevance of ‘emotional connotations’ (Temple, 1997;
Birbili, 2000): ‘an important part of
conceptualization, incorporating values and beliefs’ (Temple &
Edwards, 2002)
• When the languages do not offer lexical equivalence
(Birbili, 2000) conceptual equivalence should be obtained
(Deutscher, 1968): wordy?

11. Translation-related issues
1. Achieving conceptual equivalence
At all stages of multilingual research:
• Onset: managing key vocabulary items (‘modules’): ‘the basic
concepts used in a research project need to be investigated’
(Temple, 2005)
• An understanding of the way language is tied to social
realities, to literary forms and to chanding identities
(Simon, 1996: 137)
• Development:
• equivalence of perceived goals and outcomes
• equivalence of perceived achievements
• equivalence of what is ethic or not: whose ‘ethics’ prevail?
• Final stages:
• how, when and where to disseminate?
• who is entitled to do so?
• in which language(s)?

12. Translation-related issues
2. Comparatility of grammatical forms
Comparability of grammatical forms:
• A problem when the LL involves structures that do not
exist in English (Birbili, 2000)
• Syntactical style is reported to be one of the most
difficult features to convey in another language
(Ercikan, 1998)
• Example: Agency

13. Translation-related issues
3. Making participants’ words accessible & understanding
Depending on the function of the quotation (Birbili, 2000):
• ‘Literal’ translation
• it may do more justice to participants’ words
• it may reduce the readability of the text
• often conveys meanings that are not parallel across
language and cultures (González and Lincoln, 2006)
• ‘Free’ translation
• it may be more elegant but risky
• editing quotations in L1 still involves the risk of
misrepresenting the meaning (Rubin and Rubin, 1995)

14. Translation-related issues
4. Multi-vocal and multi-lingual texts
Multi-vocal and multi-lingual texts (González and Lincoln, 2006):
• ‘For the present Western scholars hold more power and
resources in the world of academic and community research’
• ‘Language is not neutral and translation is an act that creates
a world that is presented from the author’s position within it’
(Temple, 2005)
• ‘Translatese’ (Temple, 2005): betrayal of the ideal into the
language of the strongest
• Tenets
• data should be presented in LL and TL
• the results of the research must be available and
accessible in the LL (depends on informants: FLT)
• informants wonder about the way their words would be
translated (depends on the informants: colleagues/FLTs)

15. Translation-related issues
Translation techniques
(Birbili, 2000)
On-going research
check
Consultation with Pre-test Information seeking /
Back-translation
other people or pilot checking and
clarification questions
(Chen, 2011)
Reviewer: Ask
native repondents Contrasting
Creates new Checking
Discussing speaker of FL for answers his/her views
Time- problems: understanding
the meaning able to read and their with other
consuming false sense of with each
of words and interpretation interviewees’
security respondent
understand LL of the items’ opinions
and culture meaning

16. 2.2. Interpreting verbal and non-verbal cues in
multilingual and multicultural teams

17. Interpreting verbal and non-verbal cues
Non-verbal cues
Non-verbal cues:
• are subtle, usually go unnoticed & make people feel uneasy
• the unease may grow: embarrassing to express this feeling
• may cause misunderstandings & communication breakdown
• problematic in meetings and socialization
• examples: haptics, proxemics, chronemics (Pérez &
Méndez, 2007, 2010)

18. Interpreting verbal and non-verbal cues
Verbal cues
Verbal cues:
• The intended meaning or the lack of meaning equivalence
are not always obvious
• Each of us ‘translates’ part of our language into TL
(Meierkord)
• People speaking languages pertaining to the same family
find it easier to understand each other
• Misunderstandings occur even at very basic moments of
research and with basic concepts
• Examples: intonation (Temple, 2005), talk vs. silence, topic
management and turn-taking, direct vs. indirect styles
(Pérez and Méndez, 2007, 2010)

19. 2.3. Contextualising the study

20. Contextualising the study
Contextualisation
Context:
• ‘Participants express their ideas, perceptions, and
interpretations, based in a context in which they have learnt and that
imbues their realities’ González and Lincoln (2006)
• Literature review:
• should include the LL literature
• Data interpretation:
• translation of language and culture
• data should probably be analysed in the LL (González and
Lincoln, 2006): and in the FL?
• Data presentation:
• extensive explanation of the context of language and culture:
comprehensive, holistic portrayal of the social and cultural
dimensions (Erlandson et al., 1993); multi-layared societies
(Jarvis, 1987)
• a suggestion is to present data in more than one language
(González and Lincoln, 2006): space constraints

21. Contextualising the study
ESSENTIAL WHEN:
Working across cultures and languages
(using the FL for dissemination)
Reporting on findings which are context-specific
Disseminating (conferences, seminars, papers) in
contexts other than where the study was conducted
NEED TO STOP TAKING THINGS FOR GRANTED
They are not evident to the external reader / listener

22. 2.4. Role ascribed to the languages

23. Role ascribed to the languages
1. Looking into the literature
• Finding out key references in:
• English (seminal studies?)
• The language of the society/ies where the study is conducted:
feasible?
• Other languages (related languages)
• Pondering on the usefulness of the literature:
• Are seminal studies too broad/too much context-specific?
• Are they helpful / applicable to the ‘local’ study?
• Is there any prior ‘local’ research on the same / related issues?
• If so, in which language(s) are they published?
• How does this language aspect affect the selection of the
literature?

24. Role ascribed to the languages
2. Designing the research tools
LANGUAGE ROLE
LANGUAGE USE Conceptualization: TL
Design & development: TL
Advisors Revision of tools
native speakers of the team language (TL)? academic value + language use /
Team members clarity
do they contribute according to their Role of other languages
command of the TL? Insignificant? Is the tool translated?
• Research tools: likely to be written both in LL and FL
LL: • Revision in both to ensure that ideas are clearly conveyed
International • Demanding process: inclusion of changes (small) in documents in
advisors LL and FL produced
• The LL is probably the only language in the tool design
• Less linguistically demanding process: focus on ‘academic’ factors
LL: Local / • Could the lack of international advisors have an effect on the quality of
no advisors the tool? And the lack of a FL (objetivity, critical approach, mindset)?

25. Role ascribed to the languages
3. Gathering data
When piloting in
multilingual The process is
When working in Translation
teams, the similar in local
multilingual issues become
research tool is research when
teams the data paramount: from
reformulated in resorting to
obtained in LL is a ‘faithful’ to a
TL and then it is international
reported in TL ‘free’ translation
translated into advisors
the LL

26. Role ascribed to the languages
Working individually Working in teams
Data probably analysed in LL Although gathered in LL, data are likely
to be analysed in TL
Finding out similarities and differences
It may be discussed with local advisors with data obtained in the other
contexts
Language and context factors are Linguistic and contextual factors may
shared and taken for granted cause misunderstandings
If data is re-analysed, the perspective Divergent patterns in the different
is very unlikely to change considerably contexts may make it difficult to agree
on the findings
Data may need to be ‘re-analysed’
from a different perspective
Data analysis is consensus oriented

27. Role ascribed to the languages
5. Reporting on findings
Qualitative research:
• Key findings have to be translated into the TL and this may turn
out to be a stumbling-block:
• Complexities of reporting participants’ words: from a
‘faithful’ to a ‘free’ translation
• Necessity to gloss part of the participants’ words
• Making sure that the meaning is accurately conveyed
• Importance of contextualising the ‘individual’ studies
• Making explicit the relationship among the data yielded in
the different contexts where the study was conducted
• Ensuring that the general context of the research is clear
and that the specific contexts are likewise manifiest

28. Role ascribed to the languages
Participants’ words are simply
reproduced
Decision to Contextual clues are not
report in LL essential
The research will not be read
world-wide
Individual Complexities of reporting participants’
words
research
Necessity to gloss the text to make
informants’ words understandable
Decision to
Making sure that the meaning is
report in FL accurately conveyed
(English)
Importance of contextualising the study
Prospective world-wide audience

29. Role ascribed to the languages

30. Role ascribed to the languages
Role ascribed to the languages
Interestingly:
• Spanish prevails in data collection and analysis
(central parts of research)
• English is used in the initial and final parts of research
• Spanish is the ‘working language’ of the research
process core whereas English is the language to
prepare for research and to report on the research
(pre- / post- research):
• English may help the research be more objective
• Reporting in Spanish causes problems of, for
instance, terminology

31. 4. CONCLUSION

32. Conclusion
Researching multilingually
- contributed to my development
- helps me question the role of languages and cultures in the
human communication
- delve into my own language and culture and FLs
- conduct and disseminate research in L1 and FL
- using English has required a change of mindset so that research
complies with acceptable standards (English-dominated realm)
-ELF is powerful but not value-free or culture-free
- needs a constant process of dialogue and negotiation

33. THANK YOU! GRACIAS!
María del Carmen Méndez García
cmendez@ujaen.es