Language brokering

Although the Internet plays a large part in providing non-professional translations in the society of today, a large part on non-professional translating and interpreting takes place in homes and institutions in real life. A significant portion of these translations are conducted by children and researchers have been interested in the phenomenon for decades now.

39

The focus of the early studies by Brian Harris (1976, 1978), who is a centre figure in the field of natural translation, were multilingual children, who acted as interpreters for their families, or who translated as a part of family interaction. For this phenomenon Harris (2012b) uses Tse’s (1995) term language brokering, which differs from traditional interpreting in the sense that the children ‘influence the messages they convey and may act as a decision maker for one or both parties’.

Although child language brokering has probably been the most researched subject in the field of non-professional interpreting and translation, it is still relatively new, when one compares it to the period of time the phenomenon has existed. As Orellana (2009: 148) points out, it is actually quite surprising that there are very few mentions of child translators during any large-scale immigration waves, although language brokering must have certainly occurred, since those types of exchanges have been reported afterwards, for example in memoirs. However, Orellana (2017: 65) mentions that although child language brokering research had a slow start, it has grown quite rapidly during the last decade. Additionally, child language brokering has become even more relevant with the recent mass-migrations happening not only in Europe but in other parts of the world as well.

According to Orellana (2017: 66), the interest in language brokering in developmental psychology and educational research began in the 1990s, but the focus was not on the language itself but more on the psychosocial aspects and its effect on academic performance. Orellana (2017: 66–67) also states that the research at the time nearly always assumed that the practice was bad for children, since the focus was on, for example, stress and family conflicts. However, Orellana (2017: 68) adds that over time, developmental psychologists started studying the positive effects as well along with the negative ones. For example, Guan, Greenfield and Orellana (2014) studied how language brokering affects perspective taking and empathy and discovered that there is a connection between these prosocial skills and language brokering.

However, Orellana (2017: 67) also raises the question of why it took so long for translation studies to start paying attention to the phenomenon, although the practice clearly involves translating and interpreting. According to her, language brokering was considered a practice that should not happen in normal multilingual communication, and which was potentially harmful to child development. In addition, the amateurish practice did not fit the scope of translation studies, which focused on what translation and interpreting should be like and not

40

how it actually manifests in everyday multilingual situations. However, nowadays, it is acknowledged that there are, indeed, instances when speakers of different languages interact, and that in many cases they are children who bridge this gap between the parties.

According to Orellana (2017: 69), there are several aspects that affect language brokering. For example, the language that needs translating may be in either spoken or written form and the setting can be either public or private. Depending on the setting, the people involved can be family members or authorities, which in turn affects the pressure or the feeling of support that the broker may experience. These aspects focus on the individual language broker, who has been the usual subject for research. However, Orellana (2017: 70) mentions that the practice also affects the whole family and even the community at large. According to Valenzuela (1999:

720, 728–729), children act as tutors, who do not only translate and interpret for their parents and younger siblings, but also educate them in complicated culture-bound matters, such as tax filing or legal issues regarding immigration. The translation work can include, for example, translating news, government documents or mail and interpreting interactions between the family and restaurant staff or officials. In more complicated and harder to understand situations, such as physician visits, children may also act as more than interpreters and their role resembles more that of a negotiator. Furthermore, in addition to the translations, the parents may ask for clarification from their children if the translations include difficult issues, thus treating them more like consultants.

For the reasons mentioned above, these children have a lot of influence in family matters.

However, another interesting factor is that, according to Valenzuela’s (1999: 728) study, girls were more likely to participate in tasks that involve complicated explanations or translations, whereas boys, while participating in other tasks, did not have the same responsibility nor influence. Orellana, Reynolds, Dorner and Meza (as cited in Orellana 2017: 71) noticed that in the case of younger children the practice is not as clearly divided by gender, but the older the children get, the girls are more likely continue the work.

Although these children possess great influence in their families, it can also be a source of stress and anxiety. According to Orellana (2009: 116–117), the factors that affect the level of stress include the support available, the attitudes of the people present and how serious and impactful the situation is. She also guesses that the tension the children experience is not necessarily caused by the reversed parent-child relationship, but rather the difference between two cultural

41

worlds and their different roles in them, in addition to the constantly changing expectations of getting older. However, according to Orellana (2017: 73), the level of stress the children experience depends on the individual child as some children enjoy acting as language brokers and others simply do not. Additionally, the children may find some aspects of the practice fun, while others cause anxiety. Therefore, it is difficult to find a definitive conclusion whether acting as a language broker is inherently good or bad for children. On one hand, the children may feel empowered by their abilities, but on the other hand, they may also experience fear caused by difficult scenarios. Guske (2010) thinks along similar lines. She says that most language brokers do not appreciate the advantages that language brokering provides them, and even if they do, it is usually with the benefit of hindsight.

2.4.4.1 Language brokering among prisoners

Although language brokering is usually associated with immigrant children, it does not mean that children are the only ones who can act as language brokers. Adults can act as language brokers as well, but this has not been studied as extensively as child language brokering, although it most certainly happens on a daily basis in different settings. One noteworthy example of such behaviour is the language brokering conducted by prisoners with fellow inmates and facility staff. Whether the phenomenon should be considered language brokering or ad hoc interpreting is debatable. Rossato (2017: 157) states that language and cultural brokering in prisons is a form of ad hoc interpreting, but in her paper, she uses both terms somewhat interchangeably. In addition, Martínez-Goméz (2014) frequently uses the term community interpreting when talking about interpreting occurring in a prison setting. Therefore, as was already made clear in Section 2.1, where terminology was discussed, it is safe to say here as well that the line between the different terms is vague at best, and there is no definite conclusion which should be the correct one.

According to Rossato (2017: 157–158), in countries where large-scale immigration is still a relatively new experience, there is a severe lack of professional language services. The immigration causes a dire need for interpreters and translators in different institutions such as prisons, but since there are not enough professionals available, the inmates themselves answer to the need. For instance, in Italy, a migrant convict who is fluent in Italian in addition to their first language may act as a mediator between a fellow inmate, who does not speak Italian, and a prison guard, who has no knowledge of the language the inmate uses.

42

Although the situation with language services in Italian prisons is poor, it is, by far, not the biggest problem the facilities face. As Rossato (2017: 160–161) points out, Italian prisons have unbearably inhumane conditions, with a great number of inmates suffering from mental or physical issues, attempting suicide or being victims of different acts of violence. In this light, it is understandable that updating their language policy is not first on the list of improvements for these prisons, even if the lack of translators results in frustration in prisoners for not being understood by the staff. However, even if the conditions in the facility are not at an abhorrent level like in the case of Italy, Martínez-Goméz (2014) mentions that in many prisons professional interpreters are only used in complicated situations or if the issue is confidential, such as medical appointments or legal matters.

In Rossato’s (2017: 168–169) study, it was clear that the frequency of translations varies greatly from prisoner to prisoner, but they told in a questionnaire that usually they were needed more when new convicts came to the facility. Another factor with great variation was the attitude of the prisoners towards the language brokering activities. Similarly to child language brokers, most of the inmates viewed translating as both a pleasure and a burden, since, on one hand, they felt a sense of pride in helping other people, but on the other hand, they also felt frustration and uneasiness. However, some participants reported that they did not care about the negative feelings the activity causes, and most respondents told that acting as a mediator had improved their proficiency in Italian language and cultural competence.

Rossato’s (2017: 170–171) study also showed that while the inmates were not aware of using specific translation strategies, they reported that they attempted to keep things simple by getting the main point across and omitting unimportant details. In addition, they were not as concerned about their language competence but paid more attention to their ethical responsibility and roles as cultural mediators. For example, they said that they need to be honest but also told that they refused to translate some things that would be insulting to the other party. This is consistent with the findings of Martínez-Goméz (2014), who says that the prisoners tend to deviate from translation norms in that they tend to attempt to improve their own face or that of their fellow inmate in front of administrative staff.

Martínez-Goméz (2014) also states that while the prisoners do not always adhere to the norms that are usually associated with professional interpreting, this does not necessarily disturb the

43

communication. The prisoner interpreters usually adopt a more conversational tone than their professional counterparts, and they may add information based on their own knowledge of the situation, such as explain culture-related elements or even answer on behalf of the other party.

Depending on the situation, these answers may not have any particular significance, but in some cases, they may compromise the entire situation. In the study of Martínez-Goméz (2014), one of the interpreting prisoners added wrong information about the drug using habits of an interviewed prisoner, possibly based on his familiar relationship with him. The other prisoner, however, had a certain understanding of the used language and was therefore able to correct the interpreter. However, since this is not always the case, it is quite probable that forwarding false information is quite common, which in a worst-case scenario may result in severe consequences for the prisoner who is being interpreted.

Therefore, it seems that non-professional interpreters tend to take a more active role in communicative situations when compared to professional interpreters, which may lead to ethical problems. According to Bauer (2017: 365), whose work is concentrated more on child language brokering but which seems to apply to all types of brokering, language brokers exercise their agency by: “(1) manipulating the information they interpret or translate and (2) censoring (leaving out/omitting) information”. Bauer (2017: 367–368) explains that brokers use their own judgement when deciding what information is important or appropriate to translate.

They may paraphrase the contents of the speech significantly and leave out parts that they feel are not beneficial to themselves or which may insult the other party. It is therefore probable that some information is lost during the interpretation whether it is unintentional or not. Bauer (2017: 369) says that there are several reasons why brokers decide to manipulate the information while relaying it to the other person. Among the main reasons is the lack of vocabulary the situation requires, or simply the fact that they do not have enough knowledge or understanding regarding the discussed topic. Other reasons include, for example, that there is too much information to be interpreted word for word, so brokers resort to paraphrasing.

Despite the similarities between child language brokering and the translating practice involving prisoners, there are also differences. Rossato (2017: 171) mentions that whereas language brokering makes children feel more connected to their ethnic identity, the prisoners in the survey appeared to perceive their identity in a wider perspective, not just as the ethnicity of their country of origin.

44

As language brokering is a relatively common phenomenon in a prison setting in many countries, and it is clear that the facilities will not invest in language services for prisoners any time soon, it may be worth considering, as Rossato (2017: 173) points out, if language brokering could be used as rehabilitation tool. Some inmates had reported that interpreting had ‘made them a better person’, which suggests that the activity may be beneficial when considering the future of these translating inmates.

3 Data and methods

This study concentrates on the translation practices that are used by two Finnish-speaking researchers belonging to the same department at the same university and what professional aspects their work includes. The research material consists of two interviews and a text that has been translated by the two research participants (from now on referred to as RP1 and RP2).

These people have no official translator training, but they are undoubtedly knowledgeable of their own field. Translating is part of their work, and therefore, they offered a fascinating possibility for research concerning non-professional translation (the term is discussed in more depth in Section 2.1).

The vast majority of previous research has concentrated on spoken language and interpreting and ignored the written aspect of translating. In addition, according to Harris (2012a), the research participants have traditionally been children or young people, which may skew the view people have of non-professional translation. As the research participants in this study are neither children nor interpreters, they offer a valuable addition to non-professional translation studies, which have, fortunately, in recent times started to widen its perspectives to include other non-professional translators and interpreters than children.

According to the interviews and an email exchange with one of the researchers, the texts in the department are usually translated collaboratively by several people. In this case, two researchers have translated a part of the text individually, and then revised the other’s translation. The two researchers improved the text together until a third colleague came along and commented on the text and made final revisions to the translation. The text in this case was a test, which included 24 questions about the subject field. When the translation was ready, a student reviewed and piloted it to make sure that everything was in order. In addition to tests, the researchers occasionally translate other educational material.

In the beginning of this study, I received the translation drafts as well as the original source text.

I also had access to the comments that the researchers had made to each other’s texts, which provided some additional information concerning the translation process. The comments and changes were made using the comment and track changes functions in Microsoft Word, which can be used to mark parts of the text in need of attention. However, the suggested corrections need to be accepted before they replace the old version.

46

The interviews were conducted in December 2016, and the duration of both interviews was about an hour each. The interview consisted of questions that concerned both the translation in question and the general practises and strategies that are used while translating. In addition, there were also questions regarding the interviewees’ proficiency in English and Finnish and what kind of resources they use when working with a translation. The interviews were transcribed for easier access and to aid the analysing process, but the full transcriptions will not be included in this thesis nor in the appendixes to preserve the anonymity of the research participants. After the interviews, in terms of gaining the informed consent of the participants, we discussed how the information from the interviews would be used in the study and how they would be referred to in the text so that the participants would not recognisable. The Finnish privacy statement is included as an appendix.