Volume 44, Issue 1 - Special Issue: ‘Spaces of linguistic non-understanding’ when ‘researching multilingually’: analyses from a linguistic-ethnographic perspective; Guest Editors: Marie Jacobs & Ella van Hest

This paper gives an account of the impact of spaces of linguistic non-understanding and spaces of linguistic partial understanding in the first author’s linguistic ethnographic doctoral study of lawyer-client communication within UK immigration legal advice meetings. The paper uses the researching multilingually framework as a lens for exploring how the researcher’s positionality as a native speaker of English, an elementary-level learner of Arabic, and a non-speaker of other languages she encountered were material to the research process. Data in the form of researcher reflections, notes and records made about the impact of language(s) at different stages of the project is drawn on to examine the role of linguistic support – in the form of input from translators – at each stage, and the exercise of linguistic reflexivity in relation to this dimension of the research. The paper argues for the need, when doing ethnographic research in contexts of linguistic unpredictability, to be reflexive about the literacy practices and language ideologies of people involved in linguistic support, since these are also part of the language ecology that shapes the process of knowledge production. Thus, linguistic reflexivity is part of a practice of epistemological accountability in multilingual linguistic ethnography.

Researching in heterogeneous communities can present challenges for the most experienced of researchers, especially in the context of ethnographic work, where the dynamism and unpredictability of a research setting can make it difficult to anticipate the languages spoken. Drawing on data from multilingual health consultations, I reflect on incidents where language(s) extend beyond the scope of my repertoire and inhibit the immediacy of inference. Ensuing collaborative processes of translation, transcription and analysis offer opportunities to illuminate (mis)understanding(s), but also demonstrate how additional contributions can complexify and shape what can be understood as ‘interpretation’. In documenting some of the practical and ethical considerations that emerge during the research journey, I explore the experience of developing capabilities to cope with communicative opacity and (un)expected tensions. I conclude with some tentative recommendations for institutions seeking to support doctoral students embarking on fieldwork in diverse settings.

The COVID-19 pandemic has highlighted the importance of collecting and disseminating publicly relevant health information from and to lay audiences to combat global health crises. In Flanders, Belgium, reaching linguistic minority groups within this context largely depended on government-mandated contact tracing through telephone interactions, which was initially put in place to contain the level of outbreak, but was gradually tasked with relaying safety measures and other information related to the pandemic. In line with these developments, Flemish contact tracing over the telephone initially supported Belgium’s three national languages, viz. Dutch, French and German, as well as English as a lingua franca. This list was gradually expanded with minority languages including, among others, Turkish, Arabic, Bulgarian and Polish. This article reports on a one-year fundamental research project as part of which we recorded and analyzed telephone contact tracing conversations which were conducted in the minority languages Turkish and Arabic. We specifically analyze these Turkish and Arabic data as spaces of linguistic non-understanding from the perspective of the researcher-fieldworker (van Hest, Ella & Marie Jacobs. 2022. Spaces of linguistic non-understanding in linguistic ethnography (and beyond). In Methodological issues and challenges in researching transculturally , 14–38. Cambridge Scholars Publishing. Available at: https://hdl.handle.net/1854/LU-8772518), and aim to uncover their impact on the interactional dynamics in this ‘novel’ institutional activity type. Through a Goffmanian analysis, the study reveals how the inclusion of minority languages in contact tracing practice led to complex shifts in participant roles, as contact tracers balanced their institutional responsibilities with imperatives of patient-centered rapport, cultural mediation, and enabling the data collection on behalf of the researchers. The condition of linguistic non-understanding also underlines how the (potential) presence of an overhearing eavesdropper may have influenced the interactional dynamics between contact tracers and index patients. The paper hence provides insights into the complexities of conducting contact tracing in a multilingual context, while simultaneously shedding light on the implications of linguistic diversity on situated institutional practices.

In my research I examine the linguistic practices of Moroccans in Spain, many of whom speak Moroccan Arabic as well as Modern Standard Arabic, Tamazight, French, English and Spanish at varying levels of proficiency. As part of my research, I conducted a 10-month linguistic ethnography. I was able to rely on my native English and near-native Spanish language skills for my research, but it was also necessary to use Modern Standard Arabic and even Moroccan Arabic in my sociolinguistic nterviews. I possess limited working knowledge of Modern Standard Arabic and even more limited knowledge of Moroccan Arabic. In this paper, I discuss one instance of conducting a sociolinguistic interview in Moroccan Arabic and Modern Standard Arabic. I conduct a discursive analysis of the interactional positioning and linguistic resources in this 46-min interview based on a perspective of “spaces of linguistic non-understanding.” I show how spaces of “linguistic semi-understanding” arise in the sociolinguistic interview which require the researcher to move beyond the genre of the interview. I also demonstrate how these spaces are intertwined with negotiations of social and cultural knowledge. Lastly, I highlight the challenges and opportunities afforded to researchers who work in communities and languages outside of their own.

In our article, we investigate the complex dynamics of linguistic understandings and mis- or non-understanding within multilingual contexts. Through the lens of sociolinguistic exploration, we navigate the multifaceted landscapes of language use, applying a multi-perspective approach and the triangulation method to explore the depths of linguistic non-understanding (LNU). Drawing on ethnographic data collection and multi-perspective analysis, we highlight the challenges and opportunities inherent in incorporating LNUs into research practice. Embracing a non-positivist stance, we acknowledge the role of being a ‘non-knower’ in our pursuit of understanding. Our methodology section briefly demonstrates the application of the triangulation method for researching multilingualism, while our empirical findings unveil various instances of LNU across everyday language use. We emphasise the importance of researchers’ reflexivity and the recognition of repertoire users as experts in their linguistic practices. Ultimately, our study offers insights into the analytical advantages of adopting an in-depth and multi-perspective approach to research in multilingual environments.