1887
Volume 18, Issue 2
  • ISSN 1932-2798
  • E-ISSN: 1876-2700
USD
Buy:$35.00 + Taxes

Abstract

Abstract

Researchers’ proximity to their field of interest can make it difficult to create what Bourdieu called “the point of view” needed to look beyond the field’s implicit beliefs when producing new knowledge. Based on a Bourdieusian approach to reflexive sociology, this article discusses proximity and distance when conducting research on and with one’s own students. To problematize proximity and distance in a research project, this article discusses a case in which a teacher/researcher conducted research on and with her own students in a bachelor’s degree program in sign language and interpreting as part of a project focusing on the students’ development of professional characteristics as interpreters for individuals with deafblindness. This article argues that student participation and input created an epistemological rupture and represented the strange point of view that became a counterweight to the researcher’s proximity to the field.

Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.1075/tis.20048.urd
2023-03-10
2024-05-24
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

References

  1. Alvesson, Mats, and Kaj Sköldberg
    2009Reflexive Methodology: New Vistas for Qualitative Research. London: Sage.
    [Google Scholar]
  2. Arnstein, Sherry R.
    1969 “A ladder of citizen participation.” Journal of the American Institute of Planners35(4): 216–224. 10.1080/01944366908977225
    https://doi.org/10.1080/01944366908977225 [Google Scholar]
  3. Balsnes, Anne Haugland
    2009 “Koret Belcanto – en gullgruve av empiri i min hule hånd?” InÅ forske blant sine egne: Universitet og region: Nærhet og uavhengighet [Doing research among one’s own: Universitet and region: Proximity and independence], ed. byHans Chr. Garmann Johnsen, Anne Halvorsen, and Pål Repstad, 248–267. Kristiansand: Høyskoleforlaget AS – Norwegian Academic Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  4. Baraldi, Claudio, and Christopher D. Mellinger
    2016 “Observations.” InResearching Translation and Interpreting, ed. byClaudia Angelelli and Brian James Baer, 257–267. London: Routledge.
    [Google Scholar]
  5. Bland, Derek, and Bill Atweh
    2007 “Students as researchers: Engaging students’ voices in PAR.” Educational Action Research15(3): 337–349. 10.1080/09650790701514259
    https://doi.org/10.1080/09650790701514259 [Google Scholar]
  6. Boéri, Julie, and Jesús de Manuel Jerez
    2011 “From training skilled conference interpreters to educating reflective citizens.” The Interpreter and Translator Trainer5(1): 41–64. 10.1080/13556509.2011.10798811
    https://doi.org/10.1080/13556509.2011.10798811 [Google Scholar]
  7. Bourdieu, Pierre
    1998Practical Reason: On the Theory of Action. Stanford: Stanford University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  8. 2000Pascalian Meditations. Translated byRichard Nice. Méditations pascaliennes. Oxford: Polity Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  9. Bourdieu, Pierre, and Loïc J. D. Wacquant
    1992An Invitation to Reflexive Sociology. Cambridge: Polity Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  10. Brannick, Teresa, and David Coghlan
    2007 “In defense of being ‘native’: The case for insider academic research.” Organizational Research Methods10(1): 59–74. 10.1177/1094428106289253
    https://doi.org/10.1177/1094428106289253 [Google Scholar]
  11. Burn, Jo Anna, and Ineke Crezee
    2017 “‘That is not the question I put to you, officer’: An analysis of student legal interpreting errors.” International Journal of Interpreter Education9(1): 40–56.
    [Google Scholar]
  12. Cameron, Deborah
    1992Researching Language: Issues of Power and Method. London: Routledge.
    [Google Scholar]
  13. Christophersen, Catharina
    2010 “Interesser, nærhet og brudd. Om å forske på egen musikkpedagogisk kultur [Interest, proximity and rupture: About doing research in one’s own music pedagogical culture].” Nordic Research in Music Education Yearbook121: 31–42.
    [Google Scholar]
  14. Cokely, Dennis
    2005 “Shifting positionality: A critical examination of the turning point in the relationship of interpreters and the deaf community.” InSign Language Interpreting and Interpreter Education: Directions for Research and Practice, ed. byMarc Marschark, Rico Peterson, and Elizabeth A. Winston, 3–28. Oxford University Press. 10.1093/acprof/9780195176940.003.0001
    https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof/9780195176940.003.0001 [Google Scholar]
  15. Duflou, Veerle
    2016Be(com)ing a Conference Interpreter: An Ethnography of EU Interpreters as a Professional Community. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/btl.124
    https://doi.org/10.1075/btl.124 [Google Scholar]
  16. Elo, Satu, and Helvi Kyngäs
    2008 “The qualitative content analysis process.” Journal of Advanced Nursing62(1): 107–115. 10.1111/j.1365‑2648.2007.04569.x
    https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2648.2007.04569.x [Google Scholar]
  17. Hale, Sandra, and Jemina Napier
    2013Research Methods in Interpreting: A Practical Resource. London: Bloomsbury.
    [Google Scholar]
  18. Haraway, Donna
    1988 “Situated knowledges: The science question in feminism and the privilege of partial perspective.” Feminist Studies14(3): 575–599. 10.2307/3178066
    https://doi.org/10.2307/3178066 [Google Scholar]
  19. Kitzinger, Jenny
    1995 “Qualitative research: Introducing focus groups.” British Medical Journal311(7000): 299–302. 10.1136/bmj.311.7000.299
    https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.311.7000.299 [Google Scholar]
  20. Li, Li
    2017 “Training undergraduate translators: A consciousness-raising approach.” The Interpreter and Translator Trainer11(4): 245–258. 10.1080/1750399X.2017.1359757
    https://doi.org/10.1080/1750399X.2017.1359757 [Google Scholar]
  21. Lind, Emma
    2009 “Festival research in the local community: A discussion on conflicts of interest and objectivity.” InÅ forske blant sine egne: Universitet og region: Nærhet og uavhengighet [Doing research among one’s own: University and region: Proximity and independence], ed. byHans Chr. Garmann Johnsen, Anne Halvorsen, and Pål Repstad, 215–228. Kristiansand, Norway: Høyskoleforlaget.
    [Google Scholar]
  22. Maunder, Rachel,
    2013 “Listening to student voices: Student researchers exploring undergraduate experiences of university transition.” Higher Education66(2): 139–152. 10.1007/s10734‑012‑9595‑3
    https://doi.org/10.1007/s10734-012-9595-3 [Google Scholar]
  23. Mellinger, Christopher D.
    2020 “Positionality in public service interpreting research.” FITSPOS International Journal7(1): 92–109. 10.37536/FITISPos‑IJ.2020.7.1.250
    https://doi.org/10.37536/FITISPos-IJ.2020.7.1.250 [Google Scholar]
  24. Mellinger, Christopher D., and Brian James Baer
    2021 “Research ethics in translation and interpreting studies.” InThe Routledge Handbook of Translation and Ethics, ed. byKaisa Koskinen and Nike K. Pokorn, 365–380. New York: Routledge. 10.4324/9781003127970‑27
    https://doi.org/10.4324/9781003127970-27 [Google Scholar]
  25. Monacelli, Claudia
    2017 “Mediating castles in the air: Epistemological issues in interpreting studies.” InIntercultural Faultlines: Research Models in Translation Studies: Textual and Cognitive Aspects, ed. byMaeve Olohan, 193–215. New York: Routledge. 10.4324/9781315759951‑13
    https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315759951-13 [Google Scholar]
  26. Monzó-Nebot, Esther, and Melissa Wallace
    2020 “Research methods in public service interpreting and translation studies: Epistemologies of knowledge and ignorance.” FITISPOS International Journal7(1): 15–30. 10.37536/FITISPos‑IJ.2020.7.1.261
    https://doi.org/10.37536/FITISPos-IJ.2020.7.1.261 [Google Scholar]
  27. Nielsen, Jens C. Ry, and Pål Repstad
    1993 “From nearness to distance – And back: On analysing your own organization.” Papers in Organization, No.14. Copenhagen: Copenhagen Business School, Institute of Organizational and Industrial Sociology.
    [Google Scholar]
  28. Norwegian Centre for Research Data
    Norwegian Centre for Research Data 2018 “Data protection official for research.” Norwegian Centre for Research Data. www.nsd.uib.no/nsd/english/pvo.html
    [Google Scholar]
  29. Norwegian National Research Ethics Committees
    Norwegian National Research Ethics Committees 2016 “Guidelines for research ethics in the social sciences, humanities, law and theology.” The Norwegian National Research Ethics Committees. www.forskningsetikk.no/globalassets/dokumenter/4-publikasjoner-som-pdf/tidligere-versjoner/forskningsetiske-retningslinjer-for-samfunnsvitenskap-humaniora-juss-og-teologi.pdf
    [Google Scholar]
  30. Pike, Kenneth L.
    1967Language in Relation to a Unified Theory of the Structure of Human Behavior. The Hague, the Netherlands: Mouton & Co. 10.1515/9783111657158
    https://doi.org/10.1515/9783111657158 [Google Scholar]
  31. Pöchhacker, Franz
    1995 “Writings and research on interpreting: A bibliographic analysis.” The Interpreters’ Newsletter61: 17–31.
    [Google Scholar]
  32. 2010 “The role of research in interpreter education.” Translation & Interpreting2(1): 1–10.
    [Google Scholar]
  33. Roberts, Amanda, and Judith Nash
    2009 “Enabling students to participate in school improvement through a Students as Researchers programme.” Improving Schools12(2): 174–187. 10.1177/1365480209106590
    https://doi.org/10.1177/1365480209106590 [Google Scholar]
  34. Rosiers, Alexandra, and June Eyckmans
    2017 “Investigating tolerance of ambiguity in expert and novice translators and interpreters: An exploratory study.” Translation & Interpreting9(2): 52–66. 10.12807/ti.109202.2017.a04
    https://doi.org/10.12807/ti.109202.2017.a04 [Google Scholar]
  35. Ruyter, Knut W.
    2015 “Bruk av skjønn for å styrke informasjon og frivillighet [The use of professional discretion to strengthen information and volunteerism].” InEtisk skjønn i forskning [Ethical discretion in research], ed. ByHallvard J. Fossheim and Helene Ingierd, 40–49. Oslo: Universitetsforlaget. 10.18261/9788215025162‑2015‑04
    https://doi.org/10.18261/9788215025162-2015-04 [Google Scholar]
  36. Salaets, Heidi, and Lauren Theys
    2016 “Link words in note-taking and student interpreter performances: An empirical study.” International Journal of Interpreter Education8(2): 20–33.
    [Google Scholar]
  37. Shaw, Sherry
    2018 “Interpreting for people that are deafblind.” InSigned Language Interpreting in the 21st Century: An Overview of the Profession, ed. byLen Roberson and Sherry Shaw, 131–148. Washington, DC: Gallaudet University Press. 10.2307/j.ctv2rh28gg.11
    https://doi.org/10.2307/j.ctv2rh28gg.11 [Google Scholar]
  38. Singleton, Jenny L., Amber J. Martin, and Gary Morgan
    2015 “Ethics, Deaf-friendly research, and good practice when studying sign languages.” InResearch Methods in Sign Language Studies: A Practical Guide, ed. byEleni Orfanidou, Bencie Woll, and Gary Morgan, 5–20. Chichester, UK: Wiley. 10.1002/9781118346013.ch1
    https://doi.org/10.1002/9781118346013.ch1 [Google Scholar]
  39. Tiselius, Elisabet
    2019 “The (un-) ethical interpreting researcher: ethics, voice and discretionary power in interpreting research.” Perspectives27(5): 747–760. 10.1080/0907676X.2018.1544263
    https://doi.org/10.1080/0907676X.2018.1544263 [Google Scholar]
  40. Turner, Graham H., and Frank Harrington
    2017 “Issues of power and method in interpreting research.” InIntercultural faultlines: Research Models in Translation Studies. Textual and Cognitive Aspects, ed. ByMaeve Olohan, 253–266. New York: Routledge. 10.4324/9781315759951‑16
    https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315759951-16 [Google Scholar]
  41. Urdal, Gro Hege Saltnes
    2019 “Discoursing into interpreting – Sign language interpreting students and their construction of professional identity as interpreters for Deafblind individuals.” Journal of Interpretation27(1): 1–20. https://digitalcommons.unf.edu/joi/vol27/iss1/4
    [Google Scholar]
  42. Western Norway University of Applied Sciences
    Western Norway University of Applied Sciences 2022 “Tegnspråk og tolking” [Sign language and interpreting]. Western Norway of Applied Sciences: www.hvl.no/studier/studieprogram/tegnsprak-og-tolking/2022h/utdanningsplan/
  43. Wurm, Svenja, and Jemina Napier
    2017 “Rebalancing power: Participatory research methods in interpreting studies.” Translation & Interpreting9(1): 102–120. 10.12807/ti.109201.2017.a08
    https://doi.org/10.12807/ti.109201.2017.a08 [Google Scholar]
http://instance.metastore.ingenta.com/content/journals/10.1075/tis.20048.urd
Loading
/content/journals/10.1075/tis.20048.urd
Loading

Data & Media loading...

  • Article Type: Research Article
Keyword(s): distance; ethics; interpreting studies; positionality; proximity; reflexivity
This is a required field
Please enter a valid email address
Approval was successful
Invalid data
An Error Occurred
Approval was partially successful, following selected items could not be processed due to error