Cross-cultural research at the borders of language, the body, law and the state:

Researchers’ linguistic resources

Prue Holmes (Durham University)

withJane Andrews (The University of the West of England)

Mariam Attia (Durham University)Richard Fay (The University of Manchester)

Centre for Applied Cross-cultural ResearchVictoria University of Wellington

26 July 2016

Preview“Researching multilingually”

1. The two projects:– RMly network project (AH/J005037/1)– RMly@borders project (AH/L006936/1)

2. Building the framework: Contributions from:– Translanguaging & translingual practice– Critical & indigenous methodologies – Ethics and RMly– Multilingual/intercultural relationships and capabilities

3. Building the methodology: Our “ways of working”4. Contributions from one case study:

– CS1: Translating the emotional impact of sexual and gender-based trauma – Uganda– CS5 Developing TASOL in Gaza – researcher experiences

5. Conclusions

1. The two projects

• RMly network project (AH/J005037/1)http://researchingmultilingually.com/

(AHRC network grant under the “Translating cultures” theme, 2011-12)

• RMly@borders project (AH/L006936/1)http://researching-multilingually-at-borders.com/

(AHRC large grant under the “Translating cultures” theme, 2014-17)

Aim of the initial RMly network project

To investigate and clarify the epistemological and methodological processes of researching in more than one language—whether dialogic, observational, textual, or mediated—and their implications for research design, instruments, data collection and generation, translation and interpretation, and reporting.

implications for understanding, reporting, and representation of people of other languages

Opportunities, affordances, challenges, obstacles

Holmes, P., Fay, R., Andrews, J., Attia, M. (2013). Researching multilingually: New theoretical and methodological directions. International Journal of Applied Linguistics, 23(3), 285-299.Holmes, P., Fay, R., Andrews, J., & Attia, M. (2016,). How to research multilingually: Possibilities and complexities. In H. Zhu (Ed., pp. 88-102). Research methods in intercultural communication. London: Wiley.

The “Researching Multilingually” process

… from the inception of a research project, to designing the project, the lit review, research questions, research framework, choice of methods, ethics and reflexivity, analysis, modes of (re)presentation

RMly conceptualisation

1. Intentionality (purposefulness)• Making informed and intentional researcher decisions• Researcher reflexivity & sensitivity, identity

2. Relationality/interculturality• Researcher, supervisor, participants, translators/interpreters/transcribers• Trust, ethics, power

3. Researching multilingually spaces • Research phenomenon (the “what”)• Context of research (the “where”)• Linguistic resources of researcher (the “who”)• Representational possibilities (the language(s) of dissemination,

the “for where” or “for whom”)=> Interdisciplinary insights ??

Concepts of borders and security/insecurity raise important practical and ethical questions as to how research might be conducted.

Focus on Methods: comparing across discipline-specific methods, interrogating arts and humanities methods where the

body and body politic are under threat, developing theoretical and methodological insights as

a result. There are some pockets of work in disciplines but no

overarching framework across multiple disciplines.”

Context of the AHRC large-grant project:Languages under pressure and pain

(at borders)

The project structure

Multimodal complementary methods

Processes(exploratory, reflexive, ethical)

Researchers

(Research teams: Two hubs, five case study sites, five PhDs)

CATC hub

Performance, artisticcreative methods

RMTC hub

Academic, investigative, comparative methods

The five case studies

CS1: Translating the Emotional Impact of Sexual and Gender-Based Trauma [Uganda] (University of Glasgow) CS2: Translating Vulnerability and Silence into the Legal Process (UG & University of Nijmegen)

CS3: Working and Researching Multilingually at State (and European Union [Romania & Bulgaria]) Borders (UG)

CS4: Multilingual Ecologies in the American Southwest Borderlands (University of Arizona)

CS5: Arabic as a Foreign Language for International Learners (IUG, Gaza)

RMly@Borders brief …

… the members of the RMTC 'hub' will lead the development of integrated conceptual and methodological approaches, tools, and methods for researching translation processes and practices at borders where bodies are often at risk, in pain and/or in transition

RMTC Hub RQs (from proposal)

• How do researchers generate, translate, interpret and write up data (dialogic, mediated, textual, performance) from one language to another?

• What ethical issues emerge in the planning and execution of data collection and representation (textual, visual, performance) where multiple languages are present?

• What methods and techniques improve processes of researching multilingually?

• How does multimodality (e.g. visual methods, ‘storying’, performance) complement and facilitate multilingual research praxis?

• How can researchers develop clear multilingual research practices and yet also be open to emergent research design?

RMTC developments in the RMly@Borders project

To develop a theoretical understanding of how researchers draw on their multilingual resources, and those of others, in multilingual contexts of pressure and pain, e.g., where people are stateless and homeless due to war, poverty, persecution, and economic instability.

• Generally, we are concerned with the following:– what it means to “language”, “be languaged”, “be languagers”, and “language

oneself” in the world today– what alternatives or other modes of researching and representation might be

possible– what is unsaid, liminal– the messiness, precarity, unpredictability of RMly experience

2. Building the framework - Contributions from:

• Translanguaging & translingual practice• Critical & indigenous methodologies • Ethics and RMly• Multilingual/intercultural relationships and

intercultural capabilities• Reflective practice

Languaging

Languaging is …•“… being a person in that language in the social and material world of everyday interactions.” (Phipps, 2011, p. 365)Languaging – not just cultural work, but translation as embodiment of feeling, and ways of relating to place and to words; shared through habitation

Yolland speaks of the land to Marie using the Irish names Maori identity – whakapapa, mihi

How can researchers draw on languaging in their researcher praxis?

Translingual practice

“My aim has been to provide new research insights into the ways in which mobile semiotic resources are negotiated for meaning in global contact zones, and also to suggest pedagogical [methodological] approaches to develop such co-operative dispositions and performative competence for cosmopolitan relationships” (Canagarajah, 2013, p.202).

How can a translingual approach be nurtured in researcher praxis?

Critical theory - Southern theory

“Southern” emphasises “relations of authority, exclusion and inclusion, hegemony, partnership, sponsorship, appropriation—between intellectuals and institutions in the metropole and those in the world periphery” (Connell, 2007, p. ix).

How can critical (“Southern”) theory inform a praxis of RMly?

Critical indigenous methodologies

Indigenous communities seek a “set of ethical principles that are feminist, caring, communitarian, holistic, respectful, mutual (rather than power imbalanced), sacred, and ecologically sound”

Denzin, Lincoln and Smith (2008, p. 569)

Critical indigenous methodologies …

seek to address injustices through research processes that demonstrate an ethical and reciprocal relationship between researcher and researched.

acknowledge marginalised people and “recognize the need to avoid forms of representation that maintain power in traditional locations” (Cannella & Lincoln, 2011, p. 82).

For RMly researchers, they enable the examination of privilege and exclusion created by language in research practices.

Critical indigenous methodologies …

… offer frameworks for democratic research that advocate for voices to be heard—that have been, and continue to be, marginalised and unauthorised by dominant (and often colonial) regimes of power.

(Linda Tuhiwai Smith, 1999; 2012)(Freire, 1972; 1976)(hooks, 2003)

Ethical practice and languages

‘There is a need to recognise the role of languages and how they are brought into being by all concerned as researchers “join with,” and “learn from” rather than “speak for” or “intervene into” others’ lives’ (Cannella & Lincoln, 2011, p. 83).

Ethical practices in Rmly work

Speaking back (and listening)We have to find ways in which the marginalized can enter our discourses in their own genres and their own terms so that we can learn to hear them. They have a universal right to impart information and ideas through any media [and any language] and regardless of frontiers, and we have a duty to listen and understand them through engaging in new acts of becoming (Krog, 2011, p. 384).

3. Building the methodology: The “Ways of working” document

• Exploratory practice

• Reflective practice

4. Contributions from two case studies

CS1: Translating the emotional impact of sexual and gender-based trauma – Uganda

• Ross White, (Richard Fay, Katja Frimberger)

CS5: Arabic as a foreign language for international learners – Islamic University of Gaza

• Mariam Attia, Giovanna Fazetta, Katja Frimberger, Maria Grazia Imperiale, (Prue Holmes)

CS1: Translating the emotional impact of sexual and gender-based trauma - UgandaContext: Emotional distress across borders of geography, language, beliefs, and practices => relevance and validity of interventionsComplex translation processes associated with understanding and supporting the needs of these people People are not in a place of their choosing – “moments of precarity” (Butler)Role of family (not acknowledged in DIME); role of local practices (witchcraft)

Languages: English language descriptions of forms of psychopathology predominate in the training of professionalsLocal (Acoli, Swahili), Lango (LF of most of ppts), EnglishPpts had access to English via US TV programmes (blurring of global/local??) => syncretisation

The DIME methodology:some researcher critiques (1)

Method–Predetermined rather than locally contingent (quant. instrument for evidence-based medicine)–What do participants think and say about it => trust?–Data scribed verbatim - Dangers around written recording (feelings of “interrogation”)–Fragility of evidence (meta analysis – reducing narratives into numbers, e.g., RTCs)–Positionality - researcher and participants (methods seeks validity across “countries” => “category” fallacy)

The DIME methodology:some researcher critiques (2)

Language issues: –Manual - one shared language among Rs and participants; assumed level of literacy–Problems with translating the manual–Social work/psych languaging – discourses of global mental health–Western/non W medical language? Violence of language diagnosis–Need to use Lango in a culturally and context sensitive way

Rmly implications (for psycho-social interventions)

– Ethnographic/interdisciplinary methods; creative arts (sensitive, embedded)

• Human & meaning-making element is important - explore narratives (their meaning), and dignify those stories

• CA => understanding (CA therapeutic in itself); can combat structural violence & social injustice

• Researcher involvement in research (and context), rather than research product

– Translation issues (local -> Lango -> English)??• Violence of language of diagnosis (language wrangles)• How to translate aspirations & capabilities across borders• Human development (Sen) => well being, education http://researching-multilingually-at-borders.com/?page_id=795&paged=3?

page_id=795

CS5: Arabic as a Foreign Language for International Learners

(IUG, Gaza)

Researcher ecologies

Context - Researchers in Glasgow working with researchers/teachers in Gaza (multimodality and technologies of communication)Offices and classrooms at UG and IUGKatja’s home (Glasgow) to make a filmMona’s bedroom (Gaza) - by skype Nazmi’s office at IUG (vacated for the teachers to work in)

Researcher ecologies (cont.)

Positioning – Both Rs and R/Ts were co-producers of the knowledge“Researcher”/”teacher”/”participant” distinction was collapsedAll in a position of “becoming”, of “being stretched” (Katja)Reciprocity; reflexivity; intersubjectivityTrust as a language – Linguistic vulnerabilityFour researchers (all multilingual, none English as lst lang) Qualified to achieve their research objectives?Student teachers in Gaza (Arabic)=> Crucial to build a language of trust between researchers and teachers

Researcher ecologies (cont.)

Rapport building - Power sharing—no micromanaging Important in exploring the modalities of communication (Grazia)Patience, resilience, motivation - in realising the project, to make it successfulModes of communication–Language affordances (English; Arabic; Italian)–technologies (Moodle, Skype)–nonverbal communication (to allow space for thinking)

Theoretical insights• These ecologies aligned with the values of the researchers in resisting

methods developed in the global North (Southern theory - Connell)• => Resisting translation of methods - exportation of language

learning methods developed in TESOL depts in the UK and US => Acknowledging and drawing on methods appropriate to Gaza (indigenous methodologies - Tuhiwai Smith)

• Ethics – reciprocity/speaking back/listening (Cannella & Lincoln; Krog) – Rs & R/Ts experiment, share, give back => “offerings” & “remakings”

• Ethics of equality and “plenty” – All researchers realise their capabilities => humaneness of the researcher role/context

• Languaging & translingual practice (Phipps; Canagarajah) – multilinguality of Rs & R/Ts

4. Conclusions

Researching multilingually praxis…

To ensure the trustworthiness of the research (in contexts of language marginalisation and discrimination), RMly researchers might consider the following:

•Interrogate hegemonic a-linguistic approaches developed in the “metropole”•investigate the in-between communicative spaces—the silences, interruptions, apprehensions, unexplored and unarticulated tensions and decision making—invoked in the minds of researchers and research participants•build and nurture relationships underpinned by linguistic power and positioning among all stakeholders •contest the language rules, values, and motivations of those initiating, undertaking, and evaluating the research (project funders, managers, other researchers, policy implementers)•Negotiate language policies and regimes at all levels of research (examination, dissemination, publication)

Implications for RMly praxis …

• How do/might these approaches inform researcher multilingual practice, especially in conditions of language precarity, marginalisation, and discrimination?

• What opportunities do they offer for the in-between, unexplored spaces in researcher praxis?

• What challenges?• How can the outcomes support change in language

attitudes and policy implementation?

Building a wider RMly researcher knowledge base and network:

www.researchingmultingually.com

www.researching-multilingually-at-borders.com

1) What is your experience of doing research in more than one language?

2) What is your experience of becoming aware of the complexities in this area?

Send 300 – 500 words (same text can be offered in different languages) and photo (JPEG) to mariam.attia@durham.ac.uk or p.m.holmes@durham.ac.uk

Durham conference – 21-23 October 2016“Education and migration: Language foregrounded”http://researching-multilingually-at-borders.com/?page_id=1468

An invitation to participate