Cover not available

In:Field Research on Translation and Interpreting
Edited by Regina Rogl, Daniela Schlager and Hanna Risku
[Benjamins Translation Library 165] 2025
► pp. 137–156

Get fulltext
PDF logo with download linkDownload Chapter PDF
EPUB logo with download linkDownload Chapter EPUB

Chapter 6
Practisearcher meets ‘non-professionals’

A journey of conducting reflexive translation and interpreting research in an NGO

 | University of Graz
Open Access logo
Available under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial (CC BY-NC) 4.0 license.

For any use beyond this license, please contact the publisher at rights@benjamins.nl.

Published online: 15 May 2025
DOI logo with link
https://doi.org/10.1075/btl.165.06ste
Abstract
This chapter discusses the concept of reflexivity, which has increasingly become the focus of research interest in translation and interpreting studies. It is argued that critical reflexive research practices would be particularly beneficial to the field of non-professional interpreting and translation, where so-called non-professional translators and interpreters encounter researchers who are not only translation scholars but also practising translators and/or interpreters themselves. Drawing on experiences from my ethnographic study on interpreting and translation practices in an NGO in Austria, the aim of this chapter is to investigate boundary work practices during the fieldwork process. The analysis shows the reciprocal influence between researcher and research participants and how boundaries — if reflected upon — are no obstacle to mutual understanding in fieldwork relationships.
Article outline
  • 1.Introduction
  • 2.Setting the scene: Data and methodology
    • 2.1Professionals, multiprofessionals and everyone in between
    • 2.2Methodological approach for the chapter
  • 3.The ethnographic self
    • 3.1‘Tales of the field’: Reflexivity in qualitative research
    • 3.2Towards reflexivity in TIS
  • 4.About untold stories of the field
    • 4.1Entering and positioning myself in the field
    • 4.2Being in the field: Relationships and perceptions
    • 4.3Exiting the field and leaving behind footprints
  • 5.Concluding remarks
  • Notes
  • References
References (44)
References
Bourdieu, Pierre, and Loïc J. D. Wacquant. 1992. An Invitation to Reflexive Sociology. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Breuer, Franz, Petra Muckel, and Barbara Dieris. 2019. Reflexive Grounded Theory: Eine Einführung für die Forschungspraxis [Reflexive Grounded Theory: An Introduction for Research Practice], 4th edition. Wiesbaden: Springer VS. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Clifford, James. 1983. “On Ethnographic Authority.” Representations 2: 118–146. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Davies, Charlotte Aull. 2008. Reflexive Ethnography: A Guide to Researching Selves and Others, 2nd edition. London: Routledge.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Denzin, Norman K., and Yvonna S. Lincoln. 2018. “Introduction. Entering the Field of Qualitative Research.” In The Sage Handbook of Qualitative Research, 5th edition, ed. by Yvonna S. Lincoln, and Norman K. Denzin, 1–17. Thousand Oaks: Sage.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Ehrensberger-Dow, Maureen. 2014. “Challenges of Translation Process Research at the Workplace.” MonTI Special Issue 1 — Minding Translation: 355–383. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Finlay, Linda, and Brendan Gough. 2008. Reflexivity: A Practical Guide for Researchers in Health and Social Sciences. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Geertz, Clifford. 1973. The Interpretation of Cultures. Selected Essays by Clifford Geertz. New York: Basic Books.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Gieryn, Thomas F. 1983. “Boundary-Work and the Demarcation of Science from Non-Science. Strains and Interests in Professional Ideologies of Scientists.” American Sociological Association 48 (6): 781–795. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
1999. Cultural Boundaries of Science: Credibility on the Line. Chicago & London: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Gile, Daniel. 1995. “Interpretation Research: A New Impetus.” Hermes: Journal of Linguistics 14: 15–31.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2023a. “Who is an Interpreter? Introducing a Flexible Map of Translation and Interpreting Phenomena.” In Introducing New Hypertexts on Interpreting (Studies), ed. by Cornelia Zwischenberger, Karin Reithofer, and Sylvi Rennert, 147–166. Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2023b. Gebärdensprachdolmetschen als Beruf. Professionalisierung als Grenzziehungsarbeit. Eine historische Fallstudie in Österreich [Sign Language Interpreting as a Profession. Professionalisation as Boundary Work. A Historical Case Study in Austria]. Bielefeld: transcript.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Grbić, Nadja, and Pekka Kujamäki. 2019. “Professional vs Non-Professional? How Boundary Work Shapes Research Agendas in Translation and Interpreting Studies.” In Moving Boundaries in Translation Studies, ed. by Helle V. Dam, Matilde Nisbeth Brøgger, and Karen Korning Zethsen, 113–131. London: Taylor & Francis.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Hammersley, Martyn, and Paul Atkinson. 1983. Ethnography. Principles in Practice. London & New York: Tavistock Publications.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Hubscher-Davidson, Severine. 2011. “A Discussion of Ethnographic Research Methods and Their Relevance for Translation Process Research.” Across Languages and Cultures 12 (1): 1–18. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Kadiu, Silvia. 2019. Reflexive Translation Studies: Translation as Critical Reflection. London: UCL Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Koskela, Merja, Kaisa Koskinen, and Nina Pilke. 2017. “Bilingual Formal Meeting as a Context of Translatoriality.” Target 29 (3): 464–485. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Koskinen, Kaisa. 2006. “Going into the Field: Ethnographic Methods in Translation Studies.” In Übersetzen — Translating — Traduire: Towards a ‘Social Turn’?, ed. by Michaela Wolf, 109–118. Münster, Hamburg, Berlin, Wien & London: LIT-Verlag.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2008. Translating Institutions: An Ethnographic Study of EU Translation. Manchester: St. Jerome.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Lamont, Michèle. 1992. Money, Morals, and Manners: The Culture of the French and American Upper-Middle Class. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Lomeña Galiano, María. 2020. “Finding Hidden Populations in the Field of Translating and Interpreting: A Methodological Model for Improving Access to Non-Professional Translators and Interpreters Working in Public Service Settings.” FITISPos International Journal 7 (1): 72–91. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Madison, D. Soyini. 2019. Critical Ethnography: Method, Ethics and Performance, 3rd edition. Los Angeles: Sage.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Marcus, George E. E., and Michael M. J. Fischer. 1986. Anthropology as Cultural Critique. Chicago: Chicago University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Marin-Lacarta, Maialen, and Chuan Yu (eds). 2023. “Ethnographic Research in Translation and Interpreting Studies.” Special Issue, The Translator 29 (2). Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Mellinger, Christopher D. 2020. “Positionality in Public Service Interpreting Research.” FITISPos International Journal 7 (1): 92–109. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Mellinger, Christopher D., and Brian James Baer. 2020. “Research Ethics in Translation and Interpreting Studies.” In The Routledge Handbook of Translation and Ethics, ed. by Kaisa Koskinen, and Nike K. Pokorn, 365–380. London & New York: Routledge. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Mercer, Justine. 2007. “The Challenges of Insider Research in Educational Institutions: Wielding a Double-Edged Sword and Resolving Delicate Dilemmas.” Oxford Review of Education 33: 1–17. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Merton, Robert K. 1972. “Insiders and Outsiders: A Chapter in the Sociology of Knowledge.” American Journal of Sociology 78 (1): 9–47. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Milošević, Jelena, and Hanna Risku. 2020. “Situated Cognition and the Ethnographic Study of Translation Processes: Translation Scholars as Outsiders, Consultants and Passionate Participants.” Linguistica Antverpiensia 19: 111–131.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Pérez-González, Luis, and Şebnem Susam-Saraeva. 2012. “Non-Professionals Translating and Interpreting. Participatory and Engaged Perspectives.” The Translator 18 (2): 149–165. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Phillippi, Julia, and Jane Lauderdale. 2018. “A Guide to Field Notes for Qualitative Research: Context and Conversation.” Qualitative Health Research 28 (3): 381–388. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Pole, Christopher, and Sam Hillyard. 2016. Doing Fieldwork. London: Sage. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Pym, Anthony. 1998. Method in Translation History. Manchester: St. Jerome.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Soedirgo, Jessica, and Aarie Glas. 2020. “Toward Active Reflexivity: Positionality and Practice in the Production of Knowledge.” PS: Political Science & Politics 53 (3): 527–531.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Tesseur, Wine. 2022. Translation as Social Justice. Translation Policies and Practices in Non-Governmental Organisations. New York: Routledge. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Tipton, Rebecca. 2008. “Reflexivity and the Social Construction of Identity in Interpreter-Mediated Asylum Interviews.” The Translator 14 (1): 1–19. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Tiselius, Elisabet. 2019. “The (Un-)Ethical Interpreting Researcher: Ethics, Voice and Discretionary Power in Interpreting Research.” Perspectives 27 (5): 747–760. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Torres-Simón, Esther, and Anthony Pym. 2016. “The Professional Backgrounds of Translation Scholars. Report on a Survey.” Target 28 (1): 110–131. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Tymoczko, Maria. 2002. “Connecting the Two Infinite Orders: Research Methods in Translation Studies.” In Crosscultural Transgressions: Research Models in Translation Studies II. Historical and Ideological Issues, ed. by Theo Hermans, 9–25. Manchester, UK & Northampton, MA: St. Jerome.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Van Maanen, John. 1988. Tales of the Field. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Yu, Chuan. 2020. “Insider, Outsider or Multiplex Persona? Confessions of a Digital Ethnographer’s Journey in Translation Studies.” Journal of Specialised Translation 34: 9–31.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Mobile Menu Logo with link to supplementary files background Layer 1 prag Twitter_Logo_Blue