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

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.