Loading…

Reconceptualizing the Link Between Validity and Translation in Qualitative Research: Extending the Conversation Beyond Equivalence

Qualitative researchers often take for granted that the process of translation involves finding in the target language an equivalent linguistic expression to the one used in the source language. The validity of translation in qualitative research is thus based on the equivalence between the original...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:International journal of qualitative methods 2024-05, Vol.23
Main Authors: Pengfei Zhao, Wen Qi, Pei-Jung Li, Peiwei Li
Format: Article
Language:English
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
cited_by
cites
container_end_page
container_issue
container_start_page
container_title International journal of qualitative methods
container_volume 23
creator Pengfei Zhao
Wen Qi
Pei-Jung Li
Peiwei Li
description Qualitative researchers often take for granted that the process of translation involves finding in the target language an equivalent linguistic expression to the one used in the source language. The validity of translation in qualitative research is thus based on the equivalence between the original and the translated texts, and correspondingly, uncertainty and differences between the two are treated as threats to validity and trustworthiness. Integrating insights from critical translational theories and Phil Carspecken’s critical reconstructive analysis, we demonstrate that a series of possible meanings always co-exists in the interpretation of a single speech act in both an original text and its translation. These nuanced meanings carry both foregrounded and backgrounded historical, inter-, and intra-cultural references. Through the application of critical reconstructive analyses to original and translated texts, we use examples to demonstrate an approach to achieve reflexivity and criticality through embracing, dialoguing about, and reflecting upon the uncertainty and difference in the meaning-making process of translation. Under this new approach, equivalence is not the sole criterion to evaluate the validity and trustworthiness of translation-related work in qualitative research; uncertainty and difference are not merely threats to the validity of qualitative research. We argue that, if addressed appropriately, uncertainty and difference can catalyze researchers’ interrogation of their own positionality as well as various forms of power dynamics, and thus enhance the validity of qualitative research.
doi_str_mv 10.1177/16094069241260134
format article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>doaj</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_doaj_primary_oai_doaj_org_article_029f846e7bf948b4a4d65cb9f5939fe5</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><doaj_id>oai_doaj_org_article_029f846e7bf948b4a4d65cb9f5939fe5</doaj_id><sourcerecordid>oai_doaj_org_article_029f846e7bf948b4a4d65cb9f5939fe5</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-d151t-543227978bc2bcb23c967fe96f7afb18c5ef9304ff9144758c0936d35fec59633</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNo1jc1OAjEUhRsTExF9AHd9gdH-d-pOCCoJiZGg20mncwvFsYMzFcWlT-4gujq53835DkIXlFxSqvUVVcQIogwTlClCuThCgz3L9vAEnXbdmhCWS8MG6HsOrokONund1uErxCVOK8CzEF_wCNIHQMTP_acKaYdtrPCitbGrbQpNxCHix30t9ecW8Bw6sK1bXePJZ4JY_cvGTdxC2x06I9g1vWby9h62toZ--gwde1t3cP6XQ_R0O1mM77PZw910fDPLKippyqTgjGmj89Kx0pWMO6O0B6O8tr6kuZPgDSfCe0OF0DJ3xHBVcenBSaM4H6LpwVs1dl1s2vBq213R2FD8gqZdFrZNwdVQEGZ8LhTo0huRl8KKSklXGi8NNx4k_wH24G9-</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Open Website</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype></control><display><type>article</type><title>Reconceptualizing the Link Between Validity and Translation in Qualitative Research: Extending the Conversation Beyond Equivalence</title><source>Publicly Available Content Database (Proquest) (PQ_SDU_P3)</source><source>SAGE Open Access</source><source>Social Science Premium Collection</source><creator>Pengfei Zhao ; Wen Qi ; Pei-Jung Li ; Peiwei Li</creator><creatorcontrib>Pengfei Zhao ; Wen Qi ; Pei-Jung Li ; Peiwei Li</creatorcontrib><description>Qualitative researchers often take for granted that the process of translation involves finding in the target language an equivalent linguistic expression to the one used in the source language. The validity of translation in qualitative research is thus based on the equivalence between the original and the translated texts, and correspondingly, uncertainty and differences between the two are treated as threats to validity and trustworthiness. Integrating insights from critical translational theories and Phil Carspecken’s critical reconstructive analysis, we demonstrate that a series of possible meanings always co-exists in the interpretation of a single speech act in both an original text and its translation. These nuanced meanings carry both foregrounded and backgrounded historical, inter-, and intra-cultural references. Through the application of critical reconstructive analyses to original and translated texts, we use examples to demonstrate an approach to achieve reflexivity and criticality through embracing, dialoguing about, and reflecting upon the uncertainty and difference in the meaning-making process of translation. Under this new approach, equivalence is not the sole criterion to evaluate the validity and trustworthiness of translation-related work in qualitative research; uncertainty and difference are not merely threats to the validity of qualitative research. We argue that, if addressed appropriately, uncertainty and difference can catalyze researchers’ interrogation of their own positionality as well as various forms of power dynamics, and thus enhance the validity of qualitative research.</description><identifier>EISSN: 1609-4069</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1177/16094069241260134</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>SAGE Publishing</publisher><ispartof>International journal of qualitative methods, 2024-05, Vol.23</ispartof><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><link.rule.ids>314,780,784,27924,27925</link.rule.ids></links><search><creatorcontrib>Pengfei Zhao</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Wen Qi</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Pei-Jung Li</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Peiwei Li</creatorcontrib><title>Reconceptualizing the Link Between Validity and Translation in Qualitative Research: Extending the Conversation Beyond Equivalence</title><title>International journal of qualitative methods</title><description>Qualitative researchers often take for granted that the process of translation involves finding in the target language an equivalent linguistic expression to the one used in the source language. The validity of translation in qualitative research is thus based on the equivalence between the original and the translated texts, and correspondingly, uncertainty and differences between the two are treated as threats to validity and trustworthiness. Integrating insights from critical translational theories and Phil Carspecken’s critical reconstructive analysis, we demonstrate that a series of possible meanings always co-exists in the interpretation of a single speech act in both an original text and its translation. These nuanced meanings carry both foregrounded and backgrounded historical, inter-, and intra-cultural references. Through the application of critical reconstructive analyses to original and translated texts, we use examples to demonstrate an approach to achieve reflexivity and criticality through embracing, dialoguing about, and reflecting upon the uncertainty and difference in the meaning-making process of translation. Under this new approach, equivalence is not the sole criterion to evaluate the validity and trustworthiness of translation-related work in qualitative research; uncertainty and difference are not merely threats to the validity of qualitative research. We argue that, if addressed appropriately, uncertainty and difference can catalyze researchers’ interrogation of their own positionality as well as various forms of power dynamics, and thus enhance the validity of qualitative research.</description><issn>1609-4069</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2024</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>DOA</sourceid><recordid>eNo1jc1OAjEUhRsTExF9AHd9gdH-d-pOCCoJiZGg20mncwvFsYMzFcWlT-4gujq53835DkIXlFxSqvUVVcQIogwTlClCuThCgz3L9vAEnXbdmhCWS8MG6HsOrokONund1uErxCVOK8CzEF_wCNIHQMTP_acKaYdtrPCitbGrbQpNxCHix30t9ecW8Bw6sK1bXePJZ4JY_cvGTdxC2x06I9g1vWby9h62toZ--gwde1t3cP6XQ_R0O1mM77PZw910fDPLKippyqTgjGmj89Kx0pWMO6O0B6O8tr6kuZPgDSfCe0OF0DJ3xHBVcenBSaM4H6LpwVs1dl1s2vBq213R2FD8gqZdFrZNwdVQEGZ8LhTo0huRl8KKSklXGi8NNx4k_wH24G9-</recordid><startdate>20240501</startdate><enddate>20240501</enddate><creator>Pengfei Zhao</creator><creator>Wen Qi</creator><creator>Pei-Jung Li</creator><creator>Peiwei Li</creator><general>SAGE Publishing</general><scope>DOA</scope></search><sort><creationdate>20240501</creationdate><title>Reconceptualizing the Link Between Validity and Translation in Qualitative Research: Extending the Conversation Beyond Equivalence</title><author>Pengfei Zhao ; Wen Qi ; Pei-Jung Li ; Peiwei Li</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-d151t-543227978bc2bcb23c967fe96f7afb18c5ef9304ff9144758c0936d35fec59633</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2024</creationdate><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Pengfei Zhao</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Wen Qi</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Pei-Jung Li</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Peiwei Li</creatorcontrib><collection>DOAJ Directory of Open Access Journals</collection><jtitle>International journal of qualitative methods</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Pengfei Zhao</au><au>Wen Qi</au><au>Pei-Jung Li</au><au>Peiwei Li</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Reconceptualizing the Link Between Validity and Translation in Qualitative Research: Extending the Conversation Beyond Equivalence</atitle><jtitle>International journal of qualitative methods</jtitle><date>2024-05-01</date><risdate>2024</risdate><volume>23</volume><eissn>1609-4069</eissn><abstract>Qualitative researchers often take for granted that the process of translation involves finding in the target language an equivalent linguistic expression to the one used in the source language. The validity of translation in qualitative research is thus based on the equivalence between the original and the translated texts, and correspondingly, uncertainty and differences between the two are treated as threats to validity and trustworthiness. Integrating insights from critical translational theories and Phil Carspecken’s critical reconstructive analysis, we demonstrate that a series of possible meanings always co-exists in the interpretation of a single speech act in both an original text and its translation. These nuanced meanings carry both foregrounded and backgrounded historical, inter-, and intra-cultural references. Through the application of critical reconstructive analyses to original and translated texts, we use examples to demonstrate an approach to achieve reflexivity and criticality through embracing, dialoguing about, and reflecting upon the uncertainty and difference in the meaning-making process of translation. Under this new approach, equivalence is not the sole criterion to evaluate the validity and trustworthiness of translation-related work in qualitative research; uncertainty and difference are not merely threats to the validity of qualitative research. We argue that, if addressed appropriately, uncertainty and difference can catalyze researchers’ interrogation of their own positionality as well as various forms of power dynamics, and thus enhance the validity of qualitative research.</abstract><pub>SAGE Publishing</pub><doi>10.1177/16094069241260134</doi><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier EISSN: 1609-4069
ispartof International journal of qualitative methods, 2024-05, Vol.23
issn 1609-4069
language eng
recordid cdi_doaj_primary_oai_doaj_org_article_029f846e7bf948b4a4d65cb9f5939fe5
source Publicly Available Content Database (Proquest) (PQ_SDU_P3); SAGE Open Access; Social Science Premium Collection
title Reconceptualizing the Link Between Validity and Translation in Qualitative Research: Extending the Conversation Beyond Equivalence
url http://sfxeu10.hosted.exlibrisgroup.com/loughborough?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2024-12-29T16%3A44%3A23IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-doaj&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Reconceptualizing%20the%20Link%20Between%20Validity%20and%20Translation%20in%20Qualitative%20Research:%20Extending%20the%20Conversation%20Beyond%20Equivalence&rft.jtitle=International%20journal%20of%20qualitative%20methods&rft.au=Pengfei%20Zhao&rft.date=2024-05-01&rft.volume=23&rft.eissn=1609-4069&rft_id=info:doi/10.1177/16094069241260134&rft_dat=%3Cdoaj%3Eoai_doaj_org_article_029f846e7bf948b4a4d65cb9f5939fe5%3C/doaj%3E%3Cgrp_id%3Ecdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-d151t-543227978bc2bcb23c967fe96f7afb18c5ef9304ff9144758c0936d35fec59633%3C/grp_id%3E%3Coa%3E%3C/oa%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_id=info:pmid/&rfr_iscdi=true