Narrative analysis of written texts: reflexivity in cross language research

Abstract

This article examines how researchers address cross language narratives. Research and writing by migrants suggest that a change of language can lead to changes in both how people perceive themselves and how others perceive them. That is, changing language involves more than a simple change of words. However, researchers rarely consider the consequences of moving between languages in analysing and writing up narratives. This is particularly surprising for those who see narratives as contextually produced by researchers and participants and have an interest in the influence of the research process. Reflexivity is not extended to include the move across languages. I focus on some of the methodological and epistemological issues of analysing written texts produced by researchers in a language that participants did not use.

“Changing the Rules of the Game”: Experiences of Jewish Immigrants From the Former Soviet Union

“…Data analysis of the stories was performed in Russian in order to remain as close as possible to the meanings constructed by the storytellers (Temple, 2008). Only selected quotes supporting the analysis were translated into English.…”

Health Promotion and Life Course Dynamics: Transitions of Brazilian Elderly

“…In order to control for possible translation errors, the researchers compared their analyses to evaluate the confirmability and trustworthiness of the results [8] [16]. But as Temple [17] states, when the language used in interviews is not that of the written transcripts, researchers have a responsibility to investigate how they are representing people in the translation process. This issue is something we bore in mind all the time.…”

How to Research Multilingually: Possibilities and Complexities

“…For example, Magyar and Robinson-Pant (2011) note how research supervisors in UK contexts may discourage the use of literature published in other languages, and they can be critical of writing styles that do not conform to Anglo-centric academic conventions. Insights are also emerging on power negotiations in research, and the acknowledgement of the roles of differing perspectives, histories and contexts among interviewers, interpreters, and translators, for example, on their linguistic choices in research projects (Chen, 2011;Kitchen, 2013;Pant-Robinson & Wolf, 2014;Pavlenko, 2005;Temple, 2008;Temple & Edwards, 2002). This chapter is informed by insights arising from a recent RM-ly networking project http://researchingmultilingually.com (see Holmes, Fay, Andrews & Attia, 2013) in which researchers from a range of disciplines reported how they became aware of the RM-ly possibilities and reflected on the issues arising their RM-ly practice.…”