Sage Journals: Discover world-class research

Abstract

Achieving conceptual equivalence between two languages is a challenge in cross-cultural, cross-language research, as the research is conducted in a language that is not the researcher's or research team's first language. Therefore, translation provides an additional challenge in cross-cultural research. The comprehension and interpretation of the meaning of data is central in cross-cultural qualitative analysis. The purpose of this article is to provide an overview of the translation process and explore some of the challenges, such as difficulties in finding a suitable translator, and the importance of communication between the researcher and the translator.

Keywords

translation translator qualitative methods research cross-culture research cross-language research

In recent years, many scholars have analyzed the effect of translation on research from a variety of perspectives including culture, power, and ideology (Baker, 2007; Eco, 2001; Murray & Wynne, 2001; Spivak, 2000, 2001; Wolf, 2011; Wolf & Fukari, 2007). Several authors (Larkin, Dierckx de Casterlé, & Schotsmans, 2007; Prunč, 2007; Temple & Young, 2004) have commented on the potential impact that translators may have on research. Most cross-cultural, cross-language qualitative research has been focused on the challenge of linguistics and the impact of translation on research findings, including translation techniques (Esposito, 2001; Regmi, Naidoo, & Pilkington, 2010), multilingual translation issues (Larkin et al., 2007), the use of interpreters in data collection (Baker, 2006; Kapborg & Berterö, 2002), and translation barriers in conducting qualitative research (Lopez, Figueroa, Connor, & Maliski, 2008). Very few researchers have addressed how translators are selected and the researcher-translator relationship following the interview. In fact, no scholarly publication has explored the researcher-translator relationship and the methodological rigor of translation in the context of Korean language and culture. Esposito (2001) concluded that the potential for miscommunication between researcher and translator exists in all qualitative research, and that this miscommunication increases when researchers are not familiar with the participants' native language (the first language that a person learns at home). This increases the potential to produce flawed data due to language barriers. In the current study, several challenges were encountered during the translation of interview transcripts from Korean immigrant women.

Cross-cultural research is sometimes conducted in a language other than the researcher's or research team's first language, and the translation of instruments, data, and analysis guidelines must be completed. Translation, therefore, provides an additional challenge in some cross-cultural research; the language translation process may be the most important part of cross-cultural qualitative studies (Im, Page, Lin, Tsai, & Cheng, 2004). Nevertheless, qualitative researchers frequently do not describe the translation process of their studies in detail because journals do not require a description of language translation methods (Esposito, 2001). As a result, qualitative researchers fail to recognize the importance of the translation of data (Larkin et al., 2007) to the overall rigor of the study. This oversight may have negative consequences for the ultimate interpretation of findings from the study.

To conduct cross-cultural, cross-language research is typically more expensive and more time-consuming than non-cross-cultural research, and may be one of the reasons why researchers exclude non-English speaking immigrants from their studies (Esposito, 2001). Non-English speaking immigrants who are experiencing a new culture, however, should not be excluded from research. Their experiences might differ from those of English-speaking immigrants. In this article, we provide an overview of the translation process during the first author's recent research and explore some of the challenges that were encountered in relation to the translation of interviews conducted with Korean immigrant women.

Background

In cross-cultural research, there are two common ways to conduct interviews with those who do not speak the language of the study being conducted (often English). Some researchers interview the participants using the participants' language, transcribe the data into the participants' language, and then translate the full transcript into the research language (often English) (Poss, 1999; Suh, Kagan, & Strumpf, 2009). This was the process used in the current study; however, this approach rarely occurs in cross-cultural research because there are not many competent bilingual researchers (Esposito, 2001).

A second approach to conducting cross-cultural research is with the assistance of an interpreter (Esposito, 2001; Essén et al., 2000; Gannagé, 1999; Johnson, 2002; Kapborg, 2000; Silveira & Allebeck, 2001). Interviews are completed by interpreters in the participants' native language; the interpreters then translate the conversations into the study language (often English) without first transcribing them in the participants' native language (Dagher & Ross, 2004; Mackinnon, Gien, & Durst, 1996; Miller, Worthington, Musurovic, Tipping, & Goldman, 2002; Olsson, Tuyet, Nguyen, & Stålsby Lundborg, 2002). This is the most commonly used interview and translation approach in cross-cultural studies.

Translation Following the Interviews – the Meaning

In the research context, translation is the transfer of meaning from a native or mother tongue, such as Korean, to a study language, such as English (Esposito, 2001). The translator translates the vocabulary and grammatical structure of the words to transfer the meaning of the original language to the study language. Therefore, the word translation itself “loses its literal sense” (Spivak, 2000, p. 13); however, each of the words, phrases, and sentences in a native language becomes suitable language that has meaning and helps individuals communicate with each other in a study language by using the generality of a semiotic that contributes to meaning (Spivak, 2000). Spivak (1993) argues that translators consider logical connections between words and also look at texts as rhetorical devices.

During the translation process, the translator considers the individual situation and the cultural context of both societies to develop a translation that is understandable on several different levels (Larson, 1998). A translator who fully understands the participants' culture and language will reduce potential threats to the validity of the data. Furthermore, qualitative researchers in cross-cultural research typically depend on professional translators, who may be fluent in languages but not the nuances embedded in cultural expressions, and the researchers are confronted with the challenge of producing meaning-based translations rather than word-for-word translations. The reason for this is not all expressions can be readily translated because not all concepts are universal (Jones & Kay, 1992). But, the translation needs to be easily understood by diverse audiences. Translators must use vocabulary and grammar to ensure that the syntax is correct, and to ensure the meaning of the translation is comprehensible to anyone (Esposito, 2001).

Researchers have a responsibility to communicate with the translator to understand meaning in a language and culture that may be little known to the researcher. In other words, researchers may not understand the translation process and emerging data if they do not consider the translator as a coworker when interpreting research findings (Temple & Edwards, 2002). Nevertheless, translator and translation challenges are rarely mentioned in mainstream methodological accounts (Temple, 2002). We will describe such an experience from a recent study, Exploring the Health and Aging Experiences of Korean Immigrant Women, to highlight several challenges, including difficulties in finding a suitable translator and the importance of communication between the researcher and the translator.

The Current Study

The Korean immigrant population in Canada, in which women are in the majority, constitutes one of the largest and fastest growing non-European ethnic groups (Statistics Canada, 2007). Unfortunately, very little is known about Korean women's immigration experiences, even though their numbers continue to grow. The purpose of the study described here was to explore health and aging among Korean immigrant women, particularly in the context of their employment and retirement experiences.

Design and Methods

Focused ethnography was the methodology used to guide data collection, data analysis, and report writing. The target population for the study was Korean, female immigrants aged 50 years or older who lived in Edmonton, Alberta, Canada. Purposive and snowball sampling (Morse, 1991) were used to recruit participants for this study. The study was approved by the University of Alberta Health Research Ethics Board (HREB, Panel B).

A face-to-face in-depth interview was conducted with each participant who gave consent. Guiding questions were used during the audio-recorded interviews. All interviews were conducted in Korean, which was the women's preference, and the first author's native language. The recorded interviews were immediately transcribed as spoken in Korean; however, it was almost impossible to capture emotional stress and nonverbal communication (e.g., looks, body postures, and body language) that were not recorded (Poland, 1995). As a result, field notes were written following each interview to record information about the setting and nonverbal communication, and each interview was immediately analyzed by reviewing field notes and the transcripts as soon as they were available. The first author, who is Korean, is a PhD student in the nursing program at the University of Alberta, Canada. For her doctoral research, she interviewed Korean immigrant women using Korean and transcribed the interviews into Korean to improve the quality of the transcripts. The Korean transcripts were then translated into English. Using the method of back translation (Smith, Bond, & Kâğıtçıbaşı, 2006), translators back-translated two of the interview transcripts from English to Korean to ensure the accuracy of the transcripts. The first author then checked all data by listening to the audio recordings and comparing them to the transcripts. Demographic information for the sample is summarized in Table 1.

Table 1.

Demographic Information of Korean Immigrant Women (n=15)

Variables	Items	Frequency (n)
Age	50 – 59	2
	60 – 69	5
	70 or over	8
Marital Status
During Employment	Married	10
	Widowed	2
Current	Married	9
	Widowed	6
Length of Time in Canada (years)	1 – 9	2
	10 – 19	4
	20 – 29	3
	30 or over	6
Education	Elementary	4
	High school	3
	College	1
	University	7
Length of Time Working in Canada (years)	10 months - 19	4
	20 – 29	5
	30 or over	3
	Not working	3
Length of Time since Retirement (years)	<1 – 9	8
	10 – 19	3
	Still working	1

Data analysis of the transcribed interviews initially took place using content analysis to identify conditions, actions, phenomena, and consequences in relation to the experiences of the Korean immigrant women (Richards & Morse, 2007; Wood & Ross-Kerr, 2006). The first stage of content analysis was to code the data. The first author used NVivo 8 to assist with coding and data management. In the next stage, the data was categorized. For the third stage, categories were placed together to produce themes by exploring the complex interrelationships of the content drawn out from each category. Finally, exemplars were selected to illustrate Korean immigrant women's experiences of health and aging.

Establishing a set of strategies to enhance rigor in qualitative research helps the researcher to manage reactivity and bias, and legitimizes the findings (Padgett, 2008). In the current study, the first author used Meleis' (1996) eight evaluation criteria to enhance rigor and to ensure culturally competent data: contextuality, relevance, communication styles, awareness of identity and power differential, disclosure, reciprocation, empowerment, and time. The first author lived in Korea for 38 years and worked as a registered nurse for 15 years prior to beginning her doctoral studies in Canada. Since moving to Canada five years ago, she has attended a Korean church. As a result, the first author has extensive personal and professional knowledge and experience with Korean culture and society, including aspects of acculturation. This combined history of the first author also enhanced the rigor of the study (Shklarov, 2007). Culturally competent knowledge provides a context for the phenomenon, research questions, results, and interpretations. Context includes sensitivity to structural conditions that contribute to informants' responses and to the interrelations of situations formed by experiences, by validation of perceptions, and by a careful review of existing knowledge (Meleis, 1996). Without contextual understanding, phenomena described in the study may not be fully understood, and the socioeconomic and/or sociocultural contexts of daily lives may distort the findings of the study.

Translation Challenges in Cross-Cultural Research

As a new researcher who is proficient in two languages (Korean and English) and who conducted cross-cultural research for the first time, sometimes the first author paused to think about what should be done to obtain accurate and meaningful data. The first author also took time to read books and articles that outlined recommended procedures for conducting cross-cultural research. There is limited literature on translation challenges and issues, even though many researchers are interested in cross-cultural research. Other researchers have expressed similar concerns in their research; cross-cultural research has additional challenges because of the lack of bilingual researchers and the difficulties of generating reliable and valid data (Esposito, 2001; Lopez et al., 2008; Squires, 2008; Suh et al., 2009; Tsai et al., 2004; Twinn, 1997).

The most important role for the translator is to develop accurate and meaningful transcripts that minimize potential threats to the validity of the data. The translation process is not just about the direct translation of the words; it also involves portraying as many layers of meaning as possible. Even though the translators may have perfect English skills (as the research language), they cannot contribute to the research if they do not accurately and meaningfully translate what the research participants say. It is difficult to fully develop accurate and meaningful transcripts because the exact equivalence or meaning may not exist (Regmi et al., 2010). A central issue for cross-language research, therefore, is ensuring translations that arrive at the same meaning and maintain relevance in the cultures of both the original language (non-English) and the study language (English) (Regmi et al., 2010; Squires, 2009).

It is a challenge to achieve conceptual equivalence between two languages (Squires, 2008). Equivalence is a form of validity in meaning or interpretation between two different categories such as languages or cultures (Chang, Cahu, & Holroyd, 1999). Conceptual equivalence in cross-cultural research refers to words, ideas, or concepts that have similar meanings in two languages after being translated (Chang et al., 1999). Achieving conceptual equivalence requires that interviews are accurately translated across languages and take into account cultural differences (Squires, 2008). Therefore, working with trained translators may be an optimal way to produce accurate and meaningful data. The translators will choose the words best suited to convey the meaning of the participants' native language in the research language if they fully understand the research participants' culture and language (Temple & Edwards, 2002). For example, a bilingual translator with a graduate degree in nursing may be able to easily translate nursing or medical terminology, but a non-professional serving in the role of translator may not be familiar with this terminology. The lack of experience of the translator will have an impact on how she or he translates from the participants' native language to the research language. Despite this issue, many researchers use non-professional translators for the sake of convenience (Squires, 2008).

Translators' Background Characteristics: Understanding the Language, the Culture, and the Experience

Immigrant populations typically form small communities in cities to which they immigrate. Similarly, Korean immigrants make up a small community in Edmonton, which is where the research was conducted. The first author looked for a translator who was fluent in Korean and English, fully understood Korean culture, and had some experience regarding immigrant life as an adult. It took time, however, to find a suitable translator who had extensive experience in all of these areas. The first author reviewed articles related to cross-cultural research to find information on how to locate a good translator, but there was no information available; most articles just reported personal information including gender, ethnicity, language proficiency, and occupation of the translators without explaining how they were chosen.

While interpreters are employed to conduct interviews or focus groups for translation services, translators are employed to translate written documents, including interview transcripts from one language to another. We hired two translators to translate transcripts from Korean into English. Unlike with interpreters, the social characteristics of translators, including gender, age, sexuality, and ethnicity, are not important factors in producing accurate and meaningful data; however, having the same cultural background as the research participants is believed to be an important factor in developing accurate and meaningful transcripts (Lee, Tripp-Reimer, Miller, Sadler, & Lee, 2007; Temple, 2002). Therefore, we chose both a female and a male translator who fully understood the Korean culture. There have been questions about how translators might influence the quality of transcripts through their own cultural, religious, and social biases. Thus, the first author searched for articles on translator bias but discovered that no studies have been published; however, there has been some discussion about the influence of interpreters in cross-cultural research (Squires, 2008; Temple, 2002). The need to maintain neutrality is considered an important factor in the ethical behavior of translators (Squires, 2008).

The first author struggled to find a translator for more than two months. After receiving ethics approval for the study, she began talking to people in her social network about her need to find a translator for the study. The first author found two potential translators, a male and a female, who were interested in the study. They struggled, however, to understand and to translate some of the medical terms and some of the metaphors used by the research participants. Subsequently, the first author found two translators who were not hindered by the challenges encountered by the first two individuals and, therefore, were qualified to provide translations for the study. In the current study, two translators with extensive experience translating from Korean into English were hired to translate 14 interviews. One was female (Alice) and the other was male (Justin). They fully understood the Korean culture and language and were also fluent in English. It could be questioned that male translators might not understand women's health and aging experiences. In the current study, the first author communicated frequently with the male translator on the phone and by email about women's health and aging experiences. Because he had a mother who was in the same age range as the research participants, and who had experienced pre- and postmenopause and other health issues, he was able to translate the transcripts without struggling to understand women's health and aging experiences.

The Translation Process

The first author originally planned to hire only one translator to ensure consistency in translation (Larkin et al., 2007; Twinn, 1997); however, this was not possible due to Alice's busy schedule. Prior to beginning the translation process, the first author had a meeting with Alice to help her understand the purpose of the study and the importance of accurate translation of the interviews. The first author did not meet with Justin in person because he lived three hours from the study site; however, the first author spoke by telephone with Justin and provided him with key information regarding the research project. She also made him aware of the need for an accurate translation of the participants' interviews. According to some studies (Poland, 1995; Temple, 2002; Temple & Edwards, 2002), providing translators with key information regarding the research project, including the purpose of the study and the importance of accurate translation of the interviews, is essential to producing accurate and truthful transcripts. For example, in Poland's (1995) study, he mentioned that “the opportunity to engage the transcriber more fully in the research project should not be overlooked” (p. 303). Therefore, it is an imperative step to provide translators with key information about the research project before they begin to transcribe interviews.

Following transcription of the interviews to Korean by the first author, the transcripts were sent to the translators by email in password-protected files, to protect the confidentiality of the participants. In the beginning of the translation process, the first author translated the first interview, but it was time-consuming and some of the translation was awkward because English was not her first language. She thus hired an editor to revise part of the first transcript in order to facilitate reading and to enhance the validity of the data. The editor followed the same instructions regarding the transcripts that were used by the translators. She added and/or changed words, phrases, and sentences to ensure that the interview flowed well and that the meaning was the same before and after editing. The following are examples of the editorial changes made:

First author: I started to work at the hospital when my kids became school age.

Editor: I started working at the hospital when it was about time for my kids to go to school.

First author: After that, I haven't been to [Korea] for a holiday.

Editor: Since then I haven't really been to [Korea] for a holiday.

Alice translated four interviews and Justin translated ten interviews. If the translators had made a hard copy of the transcripts to facilitate the translation, the first author requested that the translators erase the transcripts from their computers or destroy them after translation. The translators sent the translated transcripts back to the first author by email with the same password protection. It generally took two weeks to get the transcripts back from the translators. The first author thoroughly reviewed each translated transcript to ensure the accuracy of the translation and continued to communicate with the translators in order to develop accurate transcripts and reduce potential threats to the validity of the data. Meaning-based translations were used for the study rather than word-for-word translations because Korean people are more likely to use metaphors and nonverbal language in communication than other ethnic groups (Im et al., 2004).

Back-translation was used as a strategy to ensure the accuracy of the translation process and to check for translation errors (Smith et al., 2006). This was done midway through the translation process. The first author chose one transcript from each of the translators and gave it to the individual who had not done the original translation. The translators then back-translated the English version of the transcript into Korean. The first author reviewed the back-translated version of the two transcripts and compared them to the original Korean transcripts to ensure accuracy. There were no significant differences between them. There were only a few mistakes found because of the translators' word choices. This was because some participants used different dialects, which sometimes resulted in different words being used to describe the same concept. In South Korea, there are about six dialects, but these dialects do not have a significant impact on the meaning of the language (Cho, Jun, Jung, & Ladefoged, 2000; Cho, Jun, & Ladefoged, 2000). In other words, Korean people from different provinces can still communicate with each other. The first author then shared the minor errors with the male translator because the female translator was no longer available at that time in the study.

Translation Challenges in Cross-Cultural Research

As other researchers have indicated (Esposito, 2001; Larkin et al., 2007; Regmi et al., 2010), translators have a powerful effect on the interpretation of the research data. It is, therefore, imperative to communicate with the translators during the translation process, in order to obtain accurate and meaningful transcripts. In this section, we provide examples to highlight the importance of continual communication with the translator in cross-cultural research.

During the translation process, the first author occasionally found that the translators had misunderstood some words or sentences due to the participants' use of metaphors in the Korean language. In addition, some of the participants used unique native language expressions to represent their immigration experiences. Sometimes, the first author had to add explanations in brackets to the translated transcripts. For example, most of the Korean immigrant women referred to their husbands as father or dad; “my dad [husband] passed away in 1949,” which actually meant, “my HUSBAND passed away in 1949.” Therefore, the first author added “husband” in brackets behind the word “dad.” If the first author had not added the word, “husband,” the meaning of the phrase would have been misinterpreted. As another example, one of the participants said:

The initial translation of this Korean sentence was:

“… my older son doesn't receive the money for the apartment. My second son isn't that well off and my older son let him live in it.”

After reviewing the transcript, however, the first author revised the translation as follows:

“… my older son doesn't receive the money for the apartment [where participant lives now]. My second son isn't that well off and my older son let me give that money to my second son.”

Although this was a fairly minor error in word choice, the meaning of part of the sentence was distorted. The first author informed the translator of this before correcting these sentences.

The first author always tried to talk with the translators when she found a difference between the translation and her own understanding of what had been said in the interview. She either asked the translator to change that part of the transcript or changed it herself. Thus, the first author and the translators were in regular communication by email. At first, the translators did not understand why they should discuss these issues; however, following an explanation from the first author, they understood the need for this type of communication. In addition, when the first author and the translators had a disagreement about words, phrases, and sentences, they came to a consensus on appropriate and culturally sensitive language to describe women's health and aging experiences.

The following excerpts illustrate the subtle word choice distinctions in translation and the communication with the translator to explore and address differences. In one of the interviews, a participant said:

The translator initially translated this statement as follows:

“… So I found that quite disappointing. So I complained to my daughter-in-law saying, ‘You didn't bring me here so I could baby-sit your children, that's not why I am here’ so I complained like that. Then she said, ‘Mom, it's not what you think…’”

The translator misunderstood the part of the transcript that said, “… …” This translation was not technically wrong, but it was awkward and too literal. In other words, this translation was a word-for-word translation, rather than a meaning-based translation. The first author, therefore, asked the translator to make a further revision. After communication between the first author and the translator, the translation was revised as follows:

“… So I found that quite disappointing. So I complained to my daughter-in-laws saying, ‘You brought me here to baby-sit your children, that's not why I am here’ so I complained like that. Then they said, ‘Mom, it's not what you think…’”

An excerpt from the translator's email reveals his difficulties in understanding what the participant meant by “… …”:

first of all, the ending “” was very confusing because just by her words alone, she meant that she WANTS to baby-sit the kids, because her sentence ending translates to “Isn't it (babysitting your children) and stuff like that?” and the whole thing should be “Didn't you bring me here so I could baby-sit your kids or something like that?” “,” to my understanding, is “stuff like that.” However, her context seemed the exact opposite because she previously wanted to learn driving and travel around, but she was disappointed that she was asked to baby-sit. So her words should've been “… ” or “… ” which will translate to one of the following: “You didn't bring me here so I could baby-sit your children,” or “You didn't bring me here to baby-sit your children.”

This example illustrates the complexity of understanding some of the Korean language because Korean people tend to use metaphors in their conversation. The part of the transcript that said, “… …,” is a common metaphor that Korean people use in their dialogue and does not mean anything when taken out of context. However, its meaning is completely changed if it is combined with a sentence. The translator may misunderstand it if he or she does not look carefully at the interview transcripts. Therefore, it is recommended that the person who completes the interviews thoroughly review the translated transcripts. More important, it is imperative to have clear communication between the translator and the researcher throughout the translation process in order to obtain accurate and meaningful data.

Conclusion

In this article, we presented the general translation process used following interviews, in order to contribute to a better understanding of the translation process. We also highlighted challenges that may be experienced in finding a suitable translator, and the importance of communication between the researcher and the translator, in order to achieve accurate and meaningful transcripts. It may be difficult to find a translator who has the necessary skills and expertise, particularly when a specific immigrant community is small, as was the situation for us. Given that the participants and translators were recruited from a small immigrant community, we were concerned that participants' anxiety about confidentiality might inhibit them from speaking openly about their immigration experiences (Murray & Wynne, 2001). We informed the participants that the translators did not share information from the interview with any unauthorized individuals, and also informed the translators of the need for confidentiality; the translators were not given participants' real names. Therefore, this did not hinder the participants' openness during interviews.

Finding a translator who comprehended the culture, the language, and the experience of the participants was the most essential step in the process, since this reduced the potential threats to the validity of the data. We were concerned about translator bias in the context of the study, but this did not appear to be a problem. In the current study, we hired two translators who were each fluent in Korean and English, and understood Korean culture. They completed back-translation of one interview; however, they did not have any experience in research. Smith et al. (2006) recommended that it is beneficial to use two competent bilingual translators who are familiar with the research; one to translate forward (the researcher's language) and a second to translate back to the original language (the participant's language). Therefore, our experience illustrates potential barriers to following Smith and his colleagues' recommendation.

The communication between the researcher and the translator helped the researcher understand the translation process and the meaning of the emerging data. This ongoing communication was imperative in order to develop accurate and meaningful transcripts, and to achieve conceptual equivalence. The importance of this communication became apparent as the study progressed through the various stages, from data collection to translation and finally to analysis. The comprehension and interpretation of meaning from the data is central in cross-cultural qualitative analysis (Alasuutari, 1995). Translators must accurately convey meaning from one language and culture to another. Researchers should not minimize the translators' role in the research project because the translators have the potential to significantly impact the interpretation of the data. Maintaining rigor may be problematic in studies in which researchers neither understand nor speak the participants' native language. It is critical for all researchers who conduct cross-cultural, cross-language research to ensure open and ongoing communication between themselves and the translators, in order to enhance the rigor of the study. Therefore, rigorous translation that achieves conceptual equivalence between two languages enhances the validity of cross-cultural research.

References

Alasuutari

(1995). Researching culture: Qualitative method and cultural studies. London, United Kingdom: Sage.

Baker

(2006). Contextualization in translator- and interpreter-mediated events. Journal of Pragmatics, 38(3), 321–337.

Baker

(2007). Reframing conflict in translation. Social Semiotics, 17(2), 151–169.

Chang

A. M.

Cahu

J. P.

, & Holroyd

(1999). Translation of questionnaires and issues of equivalence. Journal of Advanced Nursing, 29(2), 316–322.

Cho

Jun

S.-A.

Jung

S.-C.

, & Ladefoged

(2000). The vowels of Cheju. UCLA Working Papers in Phonetics, 98, 81–94.

Cho

Jun

S.-A.

, & Ladefoged

(2000). An acoustic and aerodynamic study of consonants in Cheju. Journal of the Korean Association of Speech Science, 7(1), 109–141.

Dagher

, & Ross

(2004). Approaches of South African traditional healers regarding the treatment of cleft lip and palate. Cleft Palate Craniofacial Journal, 41(5), 461–469.

Eco

(2001). Experiences in translation. Toronto, ON: University of Toronto Press.

Esposito

(2001). From meaning to meaning: The influence of translation techniques on non-English focus group research. Qualitative Health Research, 11(4), 568–579.

10.

Essén

Jonsdotter

Hovelius

Gudmundsson

Sjöberg

N.-O.

Friedman

, & Ötstergren

P.-O.

(2000). Qualitative study of pregnancy and childbirth experiences in Somalian women resident in Sweden. British Journal of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, 107(12), 1507–1512.

11.

Gannagé

C. M.

(1999). The health and safety concerns of immigrant women workers in the Toronto sportswear industry. International Journal of Health Services, 29(2), 409–429.

12.

E. O.

Page

Lin

L. C.

Tsai

H. M.

, & Cheng

C. Y.

(2004). Rigor in cross-cultural nursing research. International Journal of Nursing Studies, 41(8), 891–899.

13.

Johnson

S. K.

(2002). Hmong health beliefs and experiences in the western health care system. Journal of Transcultural Nursing, 13(2), 126–132.

14.

Jones

, & Kay

(1992). Instrumentation in cross-culture research. Nursing Research, 41(3), 186–188.

15.

Kapborg

(2000). The nursing education programme in Lithuania: Voices of student nurses. Journal of Advanced Nursing, 32(4), 857–863.

16.

Kapborg

, & Berterö

(2002). Using an interpreter in qualitative interviews: Does it threaten validity? Nursing Inquiry, 9(1), 52–56.

17.

Larkin

P. J.

Dierckx de Casterlé

, & Schotsmans

(2007). Multilingual translation issues in qualitative research: Reflections on a metaphorical process. Qualitative Health Research, 17(4), 468–476.

18.

Larson

M. L.

(1998). Meaning-based translation: A guide to cross-language equivalence (2nd ed.). New York, NY: University Press of America.

19.

Lee

E. E.

Tripp-Reimer

Miller

A. M.

Sadler

G. R.

Lee

S. Y.

(2007). Korean American women's beliefs about breast and cervical cancer and associated symbolic meanings. Oncology Nursing Forum, 34(3), 713–720.

20.

Lopez

G. I.

Figueroa

Connor

S. E.

, & Maliski

S. L.

(2008). Translation barriers in conducting qualitative research with Spanish speakers. Qualitative Health Research, 18(12), 1729–1738.

21.

Mackinnon

M. E.

Gien

, & Durst

(1996). Chinese elders speak out: Implications for caregivers. Clinical Nursing Research, 5(3), 326–342.

22.

Meleis

A. I.

(1996). Culturally competent scholarship: Substance and rigor. Advances in Nursing Science, 19(2), 1–16.

23.

Miller

Worthington

G. J.

Musurovic

Tipping

, & Goldman

(2002). Bosnian refugees and stressors of exile: A narrative study. American Journal of Orthopsychiatry, 72(3), 341–354.

24.

Morse

J. M.

(1991). Strategies for sampling. In Morse

J. M.

(Ed.), Qualitative nursing research: A contemporary dialogue (pp. 127–145). Newbury Park, CA: Sage.

25.

Murray

C. D.

, & Wynne

(2001). Researching community, work and family with an interpreter. Community, Work & Family, 4(2), 157–170.

26.

Olsson

Tuyet

L. T. N.

Nguyen

H. A.

, & Stålsby Lundborg

(2002). Health professionals' and consumers' views on the role of the pharmacy personnel and the pharmacy service in Hanoi, Vietnam – a qualitative study. Journal of Pharmacy and Therapeutics, 27(4), 273–280.

27.

Padgett

D. K.

(2008). Qualitative methods in social work research (2nd ed.). Los Angeles, CA: Sage.

28.

Poland

(1995). Transcription quality as an aspect of rigor in qualitative research. Qualitative Inquiry, 1(3), 290–310.

29.

Poss

J. E.

(1999). Developing an instrument to study the tuberculosis screening behaviors of Mexican migrant farmworkers. Journal of Transcultural Nursing, 10(4), 306–319.

30.

Prunč

(2007). Priests, princes and pariahs: Constructing the professional field of translation. In Wolf

& Fukari

(Eds.), Constructing a sociology of translation (pp. 39–56). Amsterdam, Netherlands: John Benjamins Publishing Company.

31.

Regmi

Naidoo

Pilkington

(2010). Understanding the processes of translation and transliteration in qualitative research. International Journal of Qualitative Methods, 9(1), 16–26.

32.

Richards

, & Morse

J. M.

(2007). Readme first for a user's guide to qualitative methods. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

33.

Shklarov

(2007). Double vision uncertainty: The bilingual researcher and the ethics of cross-language research. Qualitative Health Research, 17(4), 529–538.

34.

Silveira

, & Allebeck

(2001). Migration, ageing and mental health: An ethnographic study on perceptions of life satisfaction, anxiety and depression in older Somali men in East London. International Journal of Social Welfare, 10(4), 309–320.

35.

Smith

P. B.

Bond

M. H.

, & Kâ##x011F;ıtçıbaşı

Ç.

(2006). Understanding social psychology across cultures: Living and working in a changing world. London, United Kingdom: Sage.

36.

Spivak

G. C.

(1993). Outside in the teaching machine. London, United Kingdom: Routledge.

37.

Spivak

G. C.

(2000). Translation as culture. Parallax, 6(1), 13–24.

38.

Spivak

G. C.

(2001). Questioned on translation: Adrift. Public Culture, 13(1), 13–22.

39.

Squires

(2008). Language barriers and qualitative nursing research: Methodological considerations. International Nursing Review, 55(3), 265–273.

40.

Squires

(2009). Methodological challenges in cross-language qualitative research: A research review. International Journal of Nursing Studies, 46(2), 277–287.

41.

Statistics Canada. (2007). Canada: Population gain fastest among the oldest. Retrieved from http://www12.statcan.ca/english/census01/products/analytic/companion/age/canada.cfm#senior_men_gaining

42.

Suh

E. E.

Kagan

, & Strumpf

(2009). Cultural competence in qualitative interview methods with Asian immigrants. Journal of Transcultural Nursing, 20(2), 194–201.

43.

Temple

(2002). Crossed wires: Interpreters, translators, and bilingual workers in cross-language research. Qualitative Health Research, 12(6), 844–854.

44.

Temple

, & Edwards

(2002). Interpreters/translators and cross-language research: Reflexivity and border crossings. International Journal of Qualitative Methods, 1(2), 1–12. Retrieved from http://www.ualberta.ca/~iiqm/backissues/1_2Fin-al/pdf/temple.pdf

45.

Temple

, & Young

(2004). Qualitative research and translation dilemmas. Qualitative Research, 4(2), 161–178.

46.

Tsai

J. H.-C.

Choe

J. H.

Lim

J. M. C.

Acorda

Chan

N. L.

Taylor

, & Tu

S.-P.

(2004). Developing culturally competent health knowledge: Issues of data analysis of cross-cultural, cross-language qualitative research. International Journal of Qualitative Methods, 3(4), 16–27. Retrieved from http://www.ualberta.ca/~iiqm/backissues/3_4/pdf/tsai.pdf

47.

Twinn

(1997). An exploratory study examining the influence of translation on the validity and reliability of qualitative data in nursing research. Journal of Advanced Nursing, 26(2), 418–423.

48.

Wolf

(2011). Mapping the field: Sociological perspectives on translation. International Journal of the Sociology of Language, 2011(207), 1–28.

49.

Wolf

, & Fukari

(Eds.). (2007). Constructing a sociology of translation. Amsterdam, Netherlands: John Benjamins Publishing Company.

50.

Wood

M. J.

, & Ross-Kerr

J. C.

(2006) Basic steps in planning nursing research: From question to proposal (6th ed.). Sudbury, MA: Jones and Bartlett Publishers.

Understanding the Language,the Culture,and the Experience: Translation in Cross-Cultural Research

Abstract

Keywords

Background

Translation Following the Interviews – the Meaning

The Current Study

Design and Methods

Translation Challenges in Cross-Cultural Research

Translators' Background Characteristics: Understanding the Language, the Culture, and the Experience

The Translation Process

Translation Challenges in Cross-Cultural Research

Conclusion

References