Translation is an integral component of cross-cultural research that has remained invisible. It is commonly assumed that translation is an objective and neutral process, in which the translators are “technicians” in producing texts in different languages. Drawing from the field of translation studies and the findings of a translation exercise conducted with three bilingual Cantonese-English translators, the authors highlight some of the methodological issues about translation in cross-cultural qualitative research. They argue that only by making translation visible and through open dialogue can researchers uncover the richness embedded in the research data and facilitate multiple ways of knowing.
Badia, X., Garcia-Losa M., & Dal-Re R. ( 1997). Ten-language translation and harmonization of the International Prostate Symptom Score: Developing a methodology for multinational clinical trials. European Urology, 31, 129-140.
2.
Bassnett, S. ( 1996). The meek or the mighty: Reappraising the role of the translator. In R. Álvarez & M. C. A. Vidal (Eds.), Translation, power, subversion (pp. 10-23). Philadelphia: Multilingual Matters.
3.
Bell, R. ( 1996). Equivalence and fidelity: Of what, to what and to whom? Some pseudo-problems of translation theory. In M. Coulthard & P. A. Odber de Baubeta (Eds.), The knowledges of the translator: From literary interpretation to machine classification (pp. 31-51). Lampeter, UK: Edwin Mellen Press.
4.
Benkert, H. ( 2002). Liberating insights from a cross-cultural sexuality study about women. American Behavioral Scientist, 45, 1197-1207.
5.
Brainerd, M. ( 1987). Translation and politics. Critical Matrix: The Princeton Journal of Women, Gender and Culture, 3, 56-69.
6.
Bühler, A. ( 2002). Translation as interpretation. In A. Riccardi (Ed.), Translation studies: Perspectives on an emerging discipline (pp.56-74). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
7.
Burr, V. ( 1995). An introduction to constructionism. New York: Routledge.
8.
Chamberlain, L. ( 1992). Gender and the metaphorics of translation. In L. Venuti (Ed.), Rethinking translation: Discourse, subjectivity, ideology (pp. 57-74). London: Routledge.
9.
Condon, J.C., & Yousef, F.S. ( 1988). An introduction to intercultural communication. New York: Macmillan.
10.
Dunckley, M., Hughes, R., Addington-Hall, J.M., & Higginson, I.J. (2003). Translating clinical tools in nursing practice. Journal of Advanced Nursing, 44, 420-426.
11.
Escalante, A., Lichtenstein, M.J., Rios, N., & Hazuda, H.P. ( 1996). Measuring chronic rheumatic pain in Mexican Americans: Cross-cultural adaptation of the McGill Pain Questionnaire. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology, 49, 1389-1399.
12.
Esposito, N. ( 2001). From meaning to meaning: The influence of translation techniques on non-English focus group research. Qualitative Health Research, 11, 568-579.
13.
Foucault, M. ( 1972). The archaeology of knowledge and the discourse on language . New York: Pantheon.
14.
Frow, J., & Morris, M. ( 2000). Cultural studies. In N. K. Denzin & Y. S. Lincoln (Eds.), Handbook of qualitative research (2nd ed., pp. 315-346). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
15.
Gastaldo, D., & Holmes, D. ( 1999). Foucault and nursing: A history of the present. Nursing Inquiry, 7, 231-240.
16.
Hendrickson, S.G. ( 2003). Beyond translation . . . cultural fit. Western Journal of Nursing Research, 25, 598-608.
17.
House, J. ( 2001). Pragmatics and translation. In P. Fernández Nistal & J. M. Bravo Gozalo (Eds.), Pathways of translation studies (pp. 57-78). Centro Buendia, Spain: Universidad de Valladolid.
18.
Jacquemond, R. ( 1992). Translation and cultural hegemony: The case of French-Arabic translation. In L. Venuti (Ed.), Rethinking translation: Discourse, subjectivity, ideology (pp. 139-158). London: Routledge.
Kvale, S. ( 1996). Interviews: An introduction to qualitative research interviewing . Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
21.
La Rosa, Z. ( 1995-1996). Language and empire: The vision of Nebrija. The Loyola University Student Historical Journal , 27, 24-42.
22.
Maier, C. ( 1995). Toward a theoretical practice for cross-cultural translation . In A. Dingwaney & C. Maier (Eds.), Between language and culture: Translation and cross-cultural texts (pp. 21-38). Pittsburgh, PA: University of Pittsburgh Press.
23.
Martin, P., & Midgley, E. ( 2003). Immigration: Shaping and reshaping America. Population Reference Bureau. Retrieved December 1, 2004, from http://www.prb.org/Source/58.2ImmigrShapingAmerica.pdf
24.
Mauthner, N.S., & Doucet, A. ( 1998). Reflections on a voice-centered relational method of data analysis: Analysing maternal and domestic voices. In J. Ribbens & R. Edwards (Eds.), Feminist dilemmas in qualitative research: Private lives and public texts (pp. 119-144). London: Sage.
25.
Meleis, A.I. ( 1996). Culturally competent scholarship: substance and rigor . Advances in Nursing Science, 19, 1-16.
26.
National Institute of Health. (2001). Qualitative methods in health research: Opportunities and consideration in application and review (NIH Publ. No. 02-5046). Retrieved from http://obssr.od.nih.gov/pdf/Qualitative.pdf
27.
Neubert, A. ( 1997). Postulates for a theory of translation. In J. H. Danks, G. M. Shreve, S. B. Fountain, & M. K. McBeath (Eds.), Cognitive processes in translation and interpreting (pp. 1-25). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
28.
Neubert, A., & Shreve, G.M. ( 1992). Translation as text. Kent, OH: Kent State University Press.
29.
Poland, B.D. ( 1995). Transcription quality as an aspect of rigor in qualitative research. Qualitative Inquiry, 1, 290-310.
30.
Robinson, D. ( 2001). Who translates? Translator subjectivities beyond reason . Albany: State University of New York.
31.
Said, E.W. ( 1995). Embargoed literature. In A. Dingwaney & C. Maier (Eds.), Between language and culture: Translation and cross-cultural texts (pp. 97-102). Pittsburgh, PA: University of Pittsburgh Press.
32.
Sandelowski, M. ( 1993). Rigor or rigor mortis: The problem of rigor in qualitative research revisited. Advances in Nursing Science, 16, 1-8.
Schwarz, H. ( 2000). Aesthetic imperialism: Literature and the conquest of India. Modern Language Quarterly, 61, 563-586.
35.
Sengupta, M. ( 1995). Translation as manipulation: The power of images and images of power. In A. Dingwaney & C. Maier (Eds.), Between language and culture: Translation and cross-cultural texts (pp.159-174). Pittsburgh, PA: University of Pittsburgh Press.
36.
Shi-xu, & Wilson, J. (2001). Will and power: Towards racial inter-cultural communication research and pedagogy . Language and International Communication, 1, 76-93.
37.
Sparks, B. ( 2002). Epistemological and methodological considerations of doing cross cultural research in adult education. International Journal of Lifelong Education, 21, 115-129.
Temple, B. ( 1997). Watch your tongue: Issues in translation and cross-cultural research. Sociology, 31, 607-618.
40.
Temple, B., & Young, A. ( 2004). Qualitative research and translation dilemmas. Qualitative Research, 4, 161-178.
41.
Threadgold, T. ( 2000). When home is always a foreign place: Diaspora, dialogue, translation. Communal/Plural, 8, 193-217.
42.
Tilley, S.A. ( 2003). "Challenging" research practices: Turning a critical lens on the work of transcription. Qualitative Inquiry, 9, 750-773.
43.
Unesco. (2001, November 2). UNESCO Universal Declaration on Cultural Diversity. Adopted by the 31st session of the General Conference of UNESCO. Retrieved January 14, 2010, from http://unesdoc.unesco.org/images/0012/001271/127160m.pdf
44.
Venuti, L. ( 1995). Translation and the formation of cultural identities . In C. Schaffner & H. Kelly-Holmes (Eds.), Cultural functions of translation (pp. 9-25). Bristol, UK: Multilingual Matters.
45.
Wagner, A.K., Gandek, B., Aaronson, N.K., Acquadro, C., Alonso, J., Apolone, G., et al. (1998). Cross-cultural comparison of the content of SF-36 translations across 10 countries: Results from the IQOLA Project . Journal of Clinical Epidemiology, 51, 925-932.
46.
Yom, Y.H. ( 1998). Translation and validation of nursing interventions classification (NIC) in English and Korean. Image: Journal of Nursing Scholarship , 30, 261-264.
