    
  
 SITES OF TRANSLATION: WHAT MULTILINGUALS CAN TEACH US ABOUT WRITING, RHETORIC, AND TECHNOLOGY By Laura Joffre Gonzales  
 
            A DISSERTATION  Submitted to Michigan State University in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of  Rhetoric and WritingŠDoctor of Philosophy  2016     
     ABSTRACT SITES OF TRANSLATION: WHAT MULTILINGUALS CAN TEACH US ABOUT WRITING, RHETORIC, AND TECHNOLOGY  By  Laura Joffre Gonzales  Grounded in conversations within technical communication and rhetoric and composition, this project examines the rhetorical, cultural, and technological strategies enacted by multilingual participants during the process of translation. The researcher presents two case studiesŠone conducted with a student run bilingual news organization in Florida and one conducted with a professional translation office in MichiganŠto argue that paying attention to the translation practices of multilingual communicators can help technical communicators and rhetoric and composition researchers understand, value, and highlight the assets of linguistic diversity in professional and academic contexts. Through the use of 
screencast data, video footage, and artifact-based interviews analyzed through community collaborations spanning across two years, the researcher visualizes complex layering of tools and strategies that multilingual communicators use as they transform information from Spanish to English and vice-versa.  This project presents implications for technical communicators aiming to collaborate with 
translators to develop culturally-situated content, and for rhetoric and composition instructors and researchers who seek to make space for linguistic diversity in their 
classrooms.       
  Copyright by LAURA JOFFRE GONZALES 2016   iv ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS  There is nothing more collaboratively written than a dissertation. For me, this project, and more importantly the ideas and support that fuel it, are credited to a wide network of mentors, friends, colleagues, and family.  Surviving the academy long enough to even write a dissertation is no easy task, particularly for women of color. For me, working in the academy is a privilege entirely sustained through my powerful women mentorsŠwomen I call when I feel insecure, when I feel discouraged, when I need advice. Angela Haas, Estrella Torrez, Gabriela Rios, Elaine Richardson, April Baker-Bell, thank you for being the core of my academic identity. I look to you as ambitious examples of the work I hope to continue doing, both in the academy and 
in the communities around me. I look to you as my guides, both through your words and your actions. You are powerful leaders without whom many of us would not make it in this game. Thank you. To my peers, the academic fam that literally built a wall of protection around me as I navigated challenges in and outside of my program: Ronisha Browdy, Heather Turner, 
Becca Hayes, Esther Milu, Suban Nur Cooley,Rebecca Zantjer, Lehua Ledbetter, Matt Gomes, Casey Miles, thank you for being the most genuine, caring colleagues. Thank you for standing up, speaking up, and protecting the hearts and minds of those around you, even before you protect your own. Thank you for teaching me how to be a mentor and a friend.  Ann-Shivers McNair, you are and will forever be my academic sister. Thank you for the calls, messages, ﬁwritingﬂ retreatsŠthe things that picked me off the ground and kept   v me pushing forward at moments when I thought it was impossible. I am lucky to know you, and I  look forward to building the careers we™ve been dreaming about. The ideas that inspired this project would never have existed without the mentorship of the people who taught me to be a good teacher and role model, and without the students who allowed me to see myself through their eyes. Elizabeth Wardle, Blake Scott, Martha Marinara, Melody Bowdon, Pat Angley, Leslie Wolcott, Vanessa Calkins, Laurie Uttich, Camila Carro, Radharany Diaz, Paulina Dubov, thank you for teaching me 
how to be a researcher, mentor, and teacher, and for showing me I had a voice before I even knew how to hear myself. Thank you for pushing me forward while always providing support to fall back on. Thank you for showing me it™s okay to follow my heart.  During the first year of my PhD program, like many other students, I had several identity ﬁcrisesﬂ as I struggled to find a place for myself and my ideas in the academy. I™ll 
never forget reaching out to Liza Potts in one of these crises, during the busiest time of the CCC conference in Indianapolis. Liza told me to meet her for a drink immediately, where she looked me in the eyes and said, ﬁof course you don™t fit inŠthat™s because we need you. Our field needs your voice.ﬂ From the moment I met you, Liza, I admired the way you stood up for yourself and your ideas. After working with you over the last three years, I have grown to also admire the powerful way in which you also stand up for your students. Thank you for being the leader I needed as a student, and the collaborator I need as a colleague.  
 My committee, Stuart Blythe, Steven Fraiberg, Alex Hidalgo, thank you for being the most patient, supportive, and caring mentors in our department. Thank you for taking the   vi time to guide me through each step of this process, and for always acknowledging my needs as a human before my ambitions as a scholar. I believed in myself because you always believed in me.  In this project, I had the opportunity to work with two organizations that have completely transformed my life, the Hispanic Center of Western Michigan at Knightly 
Latino News in the Nicholson School of Communication at the University of Central Florida. I am immensely indebted to the particpants at these sites who became my family. Sara Proaño, thank you for welcoming me to the Hispanic Center, and for telling me that I needed to join your community in order to truly understand your work. More importantly, thank you for welcoming me into your life, and for showing me what it means to build community. Thank you for being an incredible leader, colleague, and friend. Te quiero y te admiro mucho.  Carla Sanchez, thank you for sharing your stories, your smile, and your kindness with me. I could not have made it through this project without you.  Katie Coronado, thank you for letting me dream with you. For showing me what it means to build a sustainable mentorship model for Latin@ students. For showing me how to fight for your community through hard work, love, and dedication.   Many people know that one of the most important roles of the dissertation is to help you get the job that will allow you to continue growing your ideas. For me, the journey through the job market was a journey through the work of this project. Through this experience, I learned to communicate my ideas across contexts, and to tell the stories that built and  sustain my work. I could not have done this successfully without the guidance of   vii the mentors who encouraged me to push forward, to find a home for myself and my ideas. Lilian Mina, Angela Haas, Juan Guerra, Anis Bawarshi, Angela Rounsaville, Stacey Pigg, Rebecca Walton, Emma Rose, Kristen Moore, Sara Alvarez, Isabel Bacca, Lavinia Hirsu, Jennifer Clifton, Susan Golab, and Jeff Grabill, thank you for being my job search, 
dissertation, and life support group. Thank you for attending my presentations and encouraging my work, reading my materials, sharing your knowledge (and beverages!), taking my calls, guiding my ideas and decisions. Thank you for being the network I relied on as I pushed forward. Thank you for being the people who looked me in the eye and told me I could do this. I™m excited to continue working in this field because of you.  To my boos Jennifer Sandoval and Bridget Rubenking, thank you for showing me how to be a badass professor and a caring friend. I continue learning from you and am forever grateful for your advice,  your encouragement, and your love, both through this dissertation and through the tumultous transitions known as grad school.  Lauren Dellacona, Melissa Zamonis, Jodi Rodriguez, Nicole Woodard, Courtney Nordquist, Chris Conte, thank you for helping me build the foundation I needed to even begin envisioning myself in grad school. Our work ﬁhell nights,ﬂ family Christmases, and 
family lunch fund are the strength that still fuels my work.   I would have never considered getting a PhD if it wasn™t for the smartest, bravest, and kindest doctor I know, mi Tia Lizzie. Thank you for being the rock that everyone in our family clings onto. Thank you for showing me how to succeed with your heart first. To the best man in the world, the guy who taught me the definition of love and family,mi Robertito. Everything I do, I do for you and because of you. Thank you for always   viii reminding me who I am, even when I lose sight of myself. Thank you for being my best friend, my brother, and my baby. We have the world as long as we have each other.  When I was 7 years old, my papi told me that we were moving from Bolivia to Orlando. Although my whole family had already moved, my dad decided to join them in the U.S. only after he came to my dance recital. At this recital, my daddy saw that although (according to him) I was the best dancer, I was placed in the back of the dance line because 
I was the tallest one in the group. ﬁWe™re going to the U.S. so you can have a place to shine, baby,ﬂ he said, ﬁA place where you can be in front because you™re the best, not because you™re the shortest.ﬂ Daddy buddy, thank you for letting me shine. I shine brightest only through your eyes.  To my biggest cheerleader, mi mami, thank you for teaching me how to make a room light up with kindness and cheer. Thank you for always being my friend first, and for putting my happiness before anything else in the world. Thank you for holding our family together, and for not giving up even when everyone else does. I love you.  A mis otros papis, Tío Cristian y Tía Yiyi, gracias por su apoyo y su amor. No podría haber logrado nada sin ustedes, y sin mis princesas hermosas, Nadia, Bianca, y Juliana 
Joffre. Los amo.  Although many people saw, lifted, and supported pieces of me and this project throughout this process, no person has (literally) stuck by my side like my viejita Zula. For  12 years, you have selflessly shared your love, your warmth, your invaluable presence. I am 
lucky to be your mami and I cherish every day we have each other.  Victor, thank you for protecting, nourishing, and guiding my heart since the day we met. I look forward to continuing to build a life filled with laughs, noodles, 90s R&B, froyo,   ix movies, treats, trips, naps, and cuddles, all with you by my side. Thank you for completing my family, and for showing me I™m smart enough to change the world while still listening to Ja Rule.  This project is for gramps and Lala, the core of my being.   x TABLE OF CONTENTS   LIST OF TABLES ...................................................................................................................................................xii LIST OF FIGURES ................................................................................................................................................xiii CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION AND LIT REVIEW.................................................................................. 1 TRANSLATION IN PROFESSIONAL SPACES: EMERGING THEORIES IN TECHNICAL COMMUNICATION ............ 4 FROM (AND BETWEEN) WORKPLACES TO CLASSROOMS: TRANSLATION IN RHETORIC AND COMPOSITION .............................................................................................................................................................................. 10 CODE-SWITCHING ............................................................................................................................................... 10 CODE-MESHING/MASHING ................................................................................................................................. 11 TRANSLINGUALISM ............................................................................................................................................. 13 BRIDGING CONTEXTS, BUILDING METHODS: TOWARD A SITUATED STUDY OF TRANSLATION ................. 14 CHAPTER 2: METHOD .................................................................................................................................... 18 DEFINING TRANSLATION ................................................................................................................................... 19 RESEARCH QUESTIONS ....................................................................................................................................... 21 METHODOLOGY ................................................................................................................................................... 24 METHODS ............................................................................................................................................................ 25 DATA ANALYSIS .................................................................................................................................................. 27 CHAPTER 3: TRANSLATION MOMENTS AT KNIGHTLY LATINO NEWS ................................ 33 INTRODUCTION ................................................................................................................................................... 34 GONZALES JOURNAL ENTRY, OCTOBER 15, 2013 ......................................................................................... 36 BACKGROUND ON KLN ...................................................................................................................................... 41 DATA COLLECTION ............................................................................................................................................. 42 DATA ANALYSIS .................................................................................................................................................. 44 TRANSLATION MOMENTS (MACRO-LEVEL CODING) ..................................................................................... 45 TRANSLATION TOOLS AND STRATEGIES (MICRO-LEVEL CODING)–––––––––––––––––.. 47 RESULTS ............................................................................................................................................................... 51 NATALIE: AN EXPERIENCED TRANSLATOR FOR KLN .................................................................................... 56 BRIDGET: A NOVICE TRANSLATOR FOR KLN .................................................................................................. 61 CONCLUSIONS ...................................................................................................................................................... 65 IMPLICATIONS ..................................................................................................................................................... 67 CHAPTER 4: TRANSLATION MOMENTS AT THE HISPANIC CENTER ..................................... 70 INTRODUCTION .................................................................................................................................................. 70 SITE PROFILE: THE HISPANIC CENTER OF WESTERN MICHIGAN ................................................................. 76 METHODS ............................................................................................................................................................ 80 DATA COLLECTED ............................................................................................................................................... 81 DATA ANALYSIS .................................................................................................................................................. 83 RESULTS ............................................................................................................................................................... 87 SIGNIFICANCE ...................................................................................................................................................... 99   xi CHAPTER 5: CONCLUSIONS AND IMPLICATIONS .......................................................................... 102 INTRODUCTION ................................................................................................................................................. 102 MAKING TRANSLATION VISIBLE IN TECHNICAL COMMUNICATION ............................................................. 103 A REVISED RHETORIC OF TRANSLATION: A FRAMEWORK FOR BUILDING BRIDGES BETWEEN TRANSLATORS AND TECHNICAL COMMUNICATORS ...................................................................................... 106 SIGNIFICANCE AND FUTURE RESEARCH: WHERE DO WE GO FROM HERE? ................................................. 113 TRANSLATION IN WRITING PEDAGOGY: AN APPLICATION .......................................................................... 114 PROMPTME: A REVISED RHETORIC OF TRANSLATION APPLIED ................................................................ 115 CONCLUSION ...................................................................................................................................................... 124 REFERENCES ..................................................................................................................................................... 126   
 
   xii LIST OF TABLES   Table 1: Research Methods Used to Study Translation in Academic and Professional Spaces (samples from 2009-2016) ..................................................................................... 23 Table 2: Methods used to Study Translation in this Project ............................................... 26 Table 3: Coding Categories and Descriptions ........................................................................... 30 Table 4: Preliminary Codes .............................................................................................................. 48 Table 5: Natalie™s Translation Moments ..................................................................................... 53 Table 6: Bridget™s Translation Moments..................................................................................... 54 Table 7: Data Collected at The Hispanic Center ........................................................................ 82 Table 8: Codes and Frequencies for Translation Moments in the Language Services Department ................................................................................................................................... 85              
 
   
 
 
   
 
   xiii LIST OF FIGURES   Figure 1: Business in the Streets of Santa Cruz, Bolivia ........................................................... 1 Figure 2: Bridget working at Knightly Latino News ............................................................... 33 Figure 3: Natalie Begins to Translate a News Story ............................................................... 46 Figure 4: Natalie Uses Google Translate to Translate ﬁThreatenﬂ .................................... 46 Figure 5: Natalie™s Translation Process ....................................................................................... 58 Figure 6: Bridget™s Translation Process ...................................................................................... 61 Figure 7: Sara Gestures as she Discusses Translation at the Hispanic Center ............. 70 Figure 8: Mi Plato (My Plate) Flyers ............................................................................................. 72 Figure 9: Sandra Translates Mazorca ........................................................................................... 73 Figure 10: The Language Services Department Business Model ...................................... 78 Figure 11: Screenshot from Coding Translation Strategies into Layers ......................... 92 Figure 12: Sara Layers Gesturing, Storytelling, and Reading Aloud to Translate ....... 93 Figure 13: Sara Pauses to Translate the Word ﬁChampionﬂ ................................................ 94 Figure 14: Layering Translation Strategies in The Language Services Department ... 96 Figure 15: Graciela Describes Interpretation ........................................................................... 97 Figure 16: Carla Describes a Translation Moment During a Birth ................................... 98 Figure 17: A Revised Rhetoric of Translation as Presented to Bilingual Community Members at the 2016 Interpreter™s Training held at The Hispanic Center of 
Western Michigan .................................................................................................................... 107 Figure 18: Activities that take place During a Writing Center Consultation .............. 117 Figure 19: PromptMe Mockup ...................................................................................................... 120 Figure 20: Student-Developed Definitions on PromptMe .................................................. 122   1 CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION AND LIT REVIEW  I was born in Santa Cruz, Bolivia, the industrial hub of a plurinational1 country with 42 nationally recognized languages. Set as the business center of the poorest country in South America, Santa Cruz is one of the only cities in Bolivia with semi-reliable internet connection and global business potential. In turn, Santa Cruz is the place where people from all over the country come to make money.   Figure 1: Business in the Streets of Santa Cruz, Bolivia  Each day, thousands of people come into the city of Santa Cruz from all over the country to sell products or provide services. As a result, walking through the streets of                                                         1 Plurinationalism is defined as the coexistence of different nationalities within a larger state. Bolivia is made up of nine departments, each of which have legal independence. As a result, each department can establish its official language(s), all of which are recognized as national languages in the country as a whole.    2 Santa Cruz, you will encounter several acts of translation, with over 42 languages interacting to set prices, discuss negotiations, and build connections. Often, common words are not available or necessary in these transactions. Instead, people use any available mode to communicate, using their bodies, drawing figures, texting, singing, dancing, chirping, clapping, whistling, twirling, laughing, all to help each other overcome complex linguistic negotiations. You see, in cases like these, translation is not just a classroom activityŠit is a means for survival, as individuals rely on multilingual communication to sell products and 
make a living.    Having witnessed acts of translation my whole life, and after negotiating my own linguistic transitions as an immigrant in the US, I know multilinguals, through their lived experiences, have developed and practice cultural, and rhetorical and technical skills as they transform information across languages. As Lachman Mulchand Khubchandani (1998) suggests, when multilingual communicators ﬁcannot rely on a shared language or grammatical norms, they align participants, contexts, objects, and diverse semiotic cues to 
generate meaningﬂ (31). In this way, through their extensive experience adapting information, multilingual communicators develop a keen rhetorical sensitivity and 
communicative versatility, leveraging a wide range of semiotic resources to communicate when words alone are not sufficient or available.  In this project, I aim to highlight the activity of translation as a rhetorical practice, demonstrating the linguistic, cultural, and technological adaptations that multilingual learners must enact in order to communicate with audiences across languages. Drawing on research from technical communication, rhetoric and composition, and related fields, I aim to show what it is that multilinguals do as they transform information from one language   3 to another. In this way, through the stories of my participants, and drawing on my own experiences, I illustrate the communicative power that multilnguals contribute to contemporary classrooms and workplaces. By paying attention to process of translation, I 
suggest our fields can continue to move away from English-dominant ideologies that limit our potential as researchers, designers, and teachers. I aim to show the rhetorical power of 
translation in order to emphasize the value that multilingual communicators bring into our classrooms and workplaces. In order to demonstrate how studying and understanding translation can benefit research and practice in both rhetoric and composition and technical communication, I™ll begin this chapter by discussing the ways in which the activity of translation has been discussed across these two areas of study. As Grabill (2007) explains, studying  the complex ﬁknowledge workﬂ of communities requires cross-disciplinary connections and resources. Since translation is an intricate activity with a wide range of implications, I choose to situate my study across disciplines, leveraging theories and frameworks that can help me 
honor and understand the complex rhetorical work of the multilingual communicators who were kind enough to be included in this project.  In this chapter, I™ll  I provide an overview of how translation as an activity has been theorized and studied in both academic and professional spaces. To do so, I first outline the terms, processes, and approaches currently used in technical communication and rhetoric and composition to describe and study translation activities. Through this overview, I 
argue that both technical communicators and writing instructors in rhetoric and composition could benefit from further studying the situated translation practices of multilingual learners.   4 TRANSLATION IN PROFESSIONAL SPACES: EMERGING THEORIES IN TECHNICAL COMMUNICATION Because successful technical and professional communication relies on the creation and distribution of user-friendly information, issues of translation are at the core of this discipline. Translation, and in particular professionals who translate, have long been an integral part of technical communication. As Maylath et al. (2013) explain, ﬁdiversity, interdependence, ambiguity, and flux epitomize the conditions under which international professional communicators work todayﬂ (p. 68). Due to issues of mobility and globalization, technical communication must be adapted across languages more quickly than ever. It is no longer acceptable for many technologies and documents to be created in a dominant language (i.e., English) first and translated into other languages later (Batova, 2013). Instead, technical communicators and translators now work side by side, developing content that can be delivered in multiple languages simultaneously (Maylath et al., 2013). Thus, the importance of cross-cultural, multilingual communication has become integral to technical communication research and practice (Fraiberg, 2013; Gonzales and Zantjer, 2015; Maylath, Muñoz Martín, and Pacheco Pinto, 2016). Translation, as Batova and Clark (2015) explain, was initially understood as the replacement of one word in one language with a similar word in another language, an ﬁattempt to duplicate meaning interlinguallyﬂ (p.223). Many early uses of translation functioned under the assumption that simply replacing one word in one language with a word in another language would adapt content to meet the needs of international users (Jarvis & Bokor, 2011). However, the simple one-to-one replacement of words from one language to another language may not account for cultural distinctions and sociocultural   5 contexts negotiated as ideas shift and move between people. In its early perspective, translation was defined based on the ﬁfinished productﬂ of a technical text, without necessarily accounting for the work that goes into making appropriate linguistic and cultural  transformations. That is, replacing one word with another does not necessarily 
translate the ideas, interfaces, and usability of a design. The initial perception of translation as a word-for-word replacement process has been countered by technical communicators for some time (Agboka, 2013; Batova and Clark, 2015; Sun 2006; 2012; Walton, Zraly, & Mugengana, 2014). Batova and Clark (2015) describe localization as an alternative to the one-to-one translation process. Localization aims to ﬁmeet both linguistic and cultural expectationsﬂ of users,ﬁ adjusting technical texts 
to the cultural, rhetorical, educational, ethical, legal, and other characteristics of readers and the global, national, and local contexts in which they interact with texts and productsﬂ (Batova and Clark 2015, p. 223). Hence, localization accounts for not only the replacement of words, but also the re-adaptation and negotiation of meaning that takes place as knowledge is exchanged between languages and cultures simultaneously. For example, while translation would involve revising the text of a website to convey the same ideas in a different language, localization, by contrast, would involve not only the translation of a website's text, but also the potential re-design of the sight to best address the expectations and usage patterns of individuals from another culture (Gonzales and Zantjer, 2015). Through her discussion of text-messaging practices in China, Sun (2006; 2012) extends work in localization to propose what she calls ﬁCulturally Localized User-Experienceﬂ (CLUE). To Sun (2006; 2012), culturally-localized user-experience requires simultaneous translation and localization. By conducting an ethnographic study to explore   6 how international users adapt technologies to meet their shifting needs in local contexts, Sun (2012) shows us how multilingual users are experts at simultaneous translation and localization. For example, when internet speeds are slowed or censored in China, participants in Sun™s study used text-messaging instead of emails, hence transforming (or translating/localizing) the use of these technological resources. Translation, through Sun™s (2012) definition, means the adaptation and repurposing that users partake in as they move technologies between cultural contexts. Sun (2012) is 
particularly interested in the translation methods of users who are not necessarily professionally trained. That is, she makes an argument for the value of ﬁuser-localizationﬂ as opposed to ﬁdeveloper-localization,ﬂ explaining that paying attention to how everyday users adapt technologies across cultures is a valuable resource for professional developers and technical communicators. Agboka (2013) is also interested in the localization practices of everyday users, which he calls ﬁparticipatory localizationﬂ (p. 42). He argues that analyzing how users translate and localize designs in local contexts can help technical 
communicators ﬁfurther question issues of ideology, power, economics, and politicsﬂ in the countries where our technical documents and designs are disseminated (p. 42). Hence, 
both Sun (2012) and Agboka (2013) push technical communicators to study the translation and localization practices of users in local contexts. In their recent discussion of an international community-based research project in Rwanda, Walton, Zraly, & Mugengana (2014) also make a case for the value of translation work. Unlike Sun (2006; 2012), however, Walton, Zraly, & Mugengana (2014) highlight the role that professional translators can and should play in international research projects. 
Walton, Zraly, & Mugengana (2014) contend that researchers can no longer think of   7 translators as additions to a research project who come in at the end and make the work accessible in other languages. Instead, Walton, Zraly, & Mugengana (2014) explain that translators must be acknowledged as ﬁco-constructors of meaningﬂ in research projects, contributing just as much intellectual work and validity as other members of their research 
team. As the researchers explain, ﬁWhen translators operate as co-researchers, they strengthen the trust-worthiness and rigor of qualitative research,ﬂ leading to more contextualized results (Walton, Zraly, & Mugengana, 2014, p. 50).   Although there is still a distinction between professional translators and individuals who translate as part of their everyday communication, the work of Walton, Zraly, & Mugengana (2014), Agboka (2013), and Sun (2006; 2012) shows us that the practice of translation (by both professional translators and everyday users) requires extensive 
rhetorical work that should be valued in professional contexts. Translation is no longer just an activity to be outsourced, but is rather an important practice to be embedded within technical communication more broadly.  Taking into account the connections between translation and technical communication, scholars have recently called for a ﬁconverging of fieldsﬂ between translation and technical communication Ding & Li, 2016). In their introduction to a special issue of Connexions Journal focused on nd Pacheco Pinto (2016) explain, ﬁsome research reveals that the fields of translation and professional communication are converging, as practitioners initially trained in one field seek cross-training in the otherﬂ (p.4). While U.S. based technical communication programs tend to make translation work invisible or irrelevant to the training of new technical   8 outside of the U.S. have been emphasizing the connections between translation an technical communication for many years. Indeed, at the 2016 Conference on College Composition and Communication, Xiaoli Li and Huiling Ding explained that technical communication programs in China already embed extensive training in technical translation, where 
students are taught both to translate language and to think about how this translation work requires a reconfiguration document and system design. In this same presentation, Ding 
and Li also illustrated how businesses in countries outside of the U.S. have been developing multilingual content for quite some time. In turn, these international companies need technical translators, technical communicators, and information architects who can work together to design global-ready content. Following this growing awareness of the connections between translation and technical communication, the call for international technical communication training that emphasizes translation continues to rise (Yajima & 16).  As a field, technical communication has made great progress acknowledging the value of translation in professional spaces. Technical communicators understand the need to adapt information to meet the needs of diverse audiences in varied contexts. However, while technical communicators recognize the importance of translation and localization (Agboka, 2013; Sun, 2006; 2012; Walton, Zraly, & Mugengana, 2014),  ﬁsadly, U.S. technical communication scholars are still grappling with the problems of using English in generating or translating technical communication products across boundaries of national culture and languageﬂ (Jarvis & Bokor, 2011, p. 210). That is, technical communication research has helped us understand the importance of translation, but we are still working   9 to develop best strategies and methods for completing and teaching translation successfully.  Recent calls to converge the fields of technical communication and translation emphasize the role that translation plays in successful technical communication work, calling for further collaborations between technical translators and technical communicators in both industry and academia. As we continue building these relationships across specializations, I argue that it is important for technical communicators to further understand what it is that technical translators do as they transform information across languages. In order to build ethical, sustainable relationships between translators and technical communicators, it™s important for both parties to value and understand the work of one another. As Maylath, Muñoz Martín, and Pacheco Pinto (2016) explain, the field of translation studies has been making efforts to collaborate with technical communicators for quite some time. However, as the authors of the special issue of Connexions Journal (2016) illustrate, technical communication scholarship, particularly stemming from the 
U.S., has a lot of work to do to ﬁcatch upﬂ on the current conversations and practices within translation studies (Yajima & Toyosaki, 2016). Better understanding the rhetorical practices of translators, I argue, can be a generative step in helping technical communicators build successful and increasingly invaluable partnerships with translators. Learning more about multilinguals™ translation practices may lead us to develop adaptable methods for overcoming communicative challenges in technical communication work, 
specifically by teaching us how multilinguals reach broad, multicultural and transnational audiences through their work.    10 FROM (AND BETWEEN) WORKPLACES TO CLASSROOM: TRANSLATION IN RHETRORIC AND COMPOSITION         While translation is directly referenced as an activity in technical communication, the study of translation in academic spaces has functioned largely at a level of theory (Guerra, 2012). That is, the term ﬁtranslationﬂ in itself is rarely used in reference to classroom contexts, particularly within rhetoric and composition. Instead, in order to make spaces for students from various linguistic and cultural backgrounds, scholars in rhetoric and composition have developed critical frameworks and policies for theorizing language. These frameworks help students and teachers resist dominant discourses and discriminatory practices against multilinguals or against students who speak various varieties of English (Perryman-Clark, Kirkland, & Jackson, 2014; Smitherman and Villanueva, 2003; Wolfram, 1974). In this section, I™ll provide an overview of the theoretical frameworks used to describe language difference in rhetoric and composition, before moving on to explain how I will be defining and analyzing translation in this project.  CODE-SWITCHING Since their work in the 1970s, scholars like Geneva Smitherman (1977) and Walt Wolfram (1974) have been advocating for the communicative practices of ﬁstudents from 
the marginsﬂ (Smitherman and Villanueva, 2003, p. 20). As Smitherman (2003) explains, students from the margins (i.e. student of color, students who do not speak English or ﬁstandardﬂ varieties of English) ﬁ[do] not [necessarily] have command of the grammar and conventions of academic discourse/"standard English" (Smitherman and Villanueva, 2003, p.20). However, students from the margins, due to their lived experiences, have ﬁother 
communicative strengths--creative ideas, logical and persuasive reasoning powers,   11 innovative ways of talking about the ordinary and mundaneﬂ (Smitherman and Villanueva, 2003, p. 20). These communicative strengths include translation activities, as ﬁstudents from the marginsﬂ move between languages and dialects to communicate in classroom spaces. As early as 1974, when the ﬁStudents Rights to their Own Languageﬂ resolution was being implemented by the CCC to protect the use of ﬁnon-standardﬂ Englishes in college classrooms, scholars were describing the movement between varieties of English as ﬁcode-
switchingﬂ (Smitherman, 1977; Wolfram, 1974). In many ways a form of translation, code-switching describes the process by which individuals move between Standard American English and other dialects, varieties, and languages (particularly African American Language). This movement is what Wolfram (1974) describes as ﬁfluctuating forms.ﬂ Advocating for the value of code-switching, Smitherman emphasized the need to teach students to acknowledge their linguistic repertoires, and to learn how to draw on adequate linguistic resources to communicate with specific audiences in specific rhetorical contexts. CODE-MESHING/MASHING Stemming from and in some ways in opposition to code-switching, scholars like Vershawn Ashanti Young (2004) and Alistar Pennycook (2003) proposed the alternate 
ﬁcode meshingﬂ model to theorizing linguistic diversity. Proponents of this framework suggest that code-meshing, or ﬁblending minoritized dialects and world Englishes with Standard EnglishŠis a better pedagogical alternative than code-switching in the teaching of reading, writing, listening, speaking, and visually representing to diverse learnersﬂ 
(Young and Martinez 2011, n. pag.). In contrast to Smitherman™s proposition that students be taught to understand and value both Standard American English and dialects like   12 African American English, Young (2009) suggests code-meshing ﬁ holds that peoples™ so-called ‚nonstandard™ dialects are already fully compatible with standard English. Code meshing secures their right to represent that meshing in all forms and venues where they communicateﬂ (p. 62). Hence, rather than advocating for a ﬁswitchingﬂ between languages, code-meshing models emphasize students™ rights to blend and mix codes in all communicative instances. Code-meshing encourages individuals to combine languages to use the ﬁfull quiverﬂ (Selfe, 2009) of their semiotic resources to communicate, rather than having to conform to linguistic standards in any specific context. In this way, rather than referencing (or necessarily valuing) translation, code-meshing models are used by scholars like Young and Martinez to further unbind our discipline from our historical preference of Standard 
English. If we want to truly welcome the communicative practices of students from the margins, these researchers argue, then we must make all languages and dialects valued in our classrooms. We should not push or encourage students to translate, but should instead adjust our expectations for listening and reading academic work. In addition to advocating for the mixing of languages, code-meshing models also point to the ways individuals draw on a variety of other semiotic resources (e.g., images, media) to communicate (Canagarajah, 2013; Pennycook, 2003). Translation, in this sense, extends beyond the changing of ideas between languages, making room for the blending of other communicative resources. Meshing or ﬁmashingﬂ communicative codes including 
languages and modalities, allows us to better understand how linguistic and cultural ﬁflows or scapes are co-constituted in everyday reading, writing, speaking, and design practicesﬂ   13 (Fraiberg, 2010, pg. 104). In this way, code-meshing encourages teachers and students to blend languages, modalities, and other resources to convey their ideas. TRANSLINGUALISM Continuing a move away from the limitations of ﬁStandard English,ﬂ the ﬁtranslingual turnﬂ in composition recently emerged to help rhetoric and composition scholars and teachers understand the movement and blending of languages within their classrooms and programs. The ﬁtranslingual approachﬂ to writing and writing pedagogy 
described by Horner, Lu, Royster, and Trimbur (2011) addresses ﬁhow language norms are actually heterogeneous, fluid, and negotiable,ﬂ hence ﬁdirectly counter[ing] demands that writers must conform to fixed, uniform standardsﬂ (p. 305). Proponents of translingualism 
push researchers and teachers to value ﬁﬁhow writers deploy [and combine] diction, syntax, and style, as well as form, register, and mediaﬂ (Horner, Lu, Royster, p. 304). Proponents of translingualism aim to break ﬁfalse binariesﬂ  such as ﬁmonolingual versus monolingualﬂ by suggesting that ﬁnegotiation and change are inevitableﬂ in all language acts (Matsuda, 2014, p. 480). Hence, the translingual framework to understanding the movement between languages suggests that all communication involves the adaptation 
of languages for specific audiences, consequently making all speakers what would typically be considered ﬁmultilingual.ﬂ In this way, translingualism helps rhetoric and composition scholars and teachers continue breaking away from the ﬁsingle language/single modalityﬂ conception of writing that previously constrained the discipline (Selfe and Horner, 2013). These theoretical frameworks for understanding and valuing linguistic diversity continue shaping our disciplinary policies to acknowledge and welcome all forms of communication.   14 BRIDGING CONTEXTS, BUILDING METHODS: TOWARDS A SITUATED STUDY OF TRANSLATION In tracing the discussion of translation as an activity within classroom and professional spaces, I have shown that both technical communication and rhetoric and composition scholars are making strides toward understanding the important contributions of multilinguals. As these scholars suggest, translation is an intricate, rhetorical activity that encompasses cultural knowledge, a wide range of semiotic resources, and an inherent communicative flexibility that allows individuals to adapt information across contexts. At the same time, as these studies also point out, there is a lot of work to do to help us understand not only that individuals do move between languages, but also how and why these individuals decide to make these transitions at specific moments in time. Indeed, in both rhetoric and composition and technical communication, recent calls have been made for more research that illustrates the specific rhetorical choices that individuals make as they transform information across languages (Guerra, 2012; Maylath, Muñoz Martín, and Pacheco Pinto, 2016; Milson-Whyte, 2013; Worden, 2013). In his piece, ﬁFrom Code-Segregation to Code-Switching to Code-Meshing: Finding Deliverance from Deficit Thinking through Language Awareness and Performance,ﬂ Juan Guerra (2012) draws a distinction between what he describes as ﬁpolicy issuesﬂ in regards to theorizing language and what he deems to be ﬁa matter of practiceﬂ in language negotiation. Opening with an anecdote in which he uses academic English, Spanish, and a blend of the two languages, Guerra (2012) shows how individuals who draw on a wide range of linguistic resources to communicate make thoughtful, deliberate choices about   15 what language(s) to deploy in a specific rhetorical situation. These choices are grounded in broader cultural histories that influence how multilnguals perceive their own communicative abilities in the face of constant linguistic and cultural discrimination. As Milson-Whyte (2013) explains, linguistic moves ﬁare sometimes motivated by social dictates, by ignorance, by desires to make one language contest or complement another, or 
to achieve other specific purposes, or for no apparent reasonﬂ (p. 116). Hence, it™s not enough to acknowledge that linguistic moves like code-meshing exist, and that these linguistic movements should be valued and embedded in our classroom practices. Instead, we should continue working to understand how and why these moves are enacted in specific contexts at specific times. This will in turn help us more intricately understand the work of moving between languages, and the extensive historical factors that influence how multilinguals make linguistic choices in specific moments in time.  In technical communication, recent calls have also been made to increase our focus on translation. As Maylath, Muñoz Martín, and Pacheco Pinto (2016) argue, ﬁDespite diverse attempts at acknowledging the importance of approaching professional communication as translation or as involving translation-related skills (e.g., Hoft 1995; Weiss 1997, 1999; Melton 2008), translation often remains invisible both in the literature 
and in the training of (international) professional communicatorsﬂ (p.4). While technical communicators have metaphorically been described as translators since the 1990s (Hoft 1995; Weiss 1997), Maylath, Muñoz Martín, and Pacheco Pinto (2016) argue that these metaphorical references to translation have moved us away from further understanding the literal practice of translation itself.    16 As these authors explain, ﬁThe extant literature that actually addresses translation usually tends to emphasize, and concentrate on, localization issues, and it often draws from functional approaches to translation as production of a communicative message or instrumentﬂ (e.g., Vermeer 1996; Nord 1997; Reiss 2000) (Maylath, Muñoz Martín, and Pacheco Pinto, 2016, p. 4). In technical communication, Yajima & Toyosaki (2016) explain, more work is needed to help us understand the intricacies of translation in the context of 
ﬁthe hegemonic nature of languagesﬂ (p. 92). That is, technical communication scholars are pushing for a ﬁcritical turnﬂ  in research on translation, one that allows us to further 
ﬁconstruct a figure of translators as ethical mediatorsﬂ in technical communication work (Yajima & Toyosaki, 2016, p. 93).   Having had the opportunity to research conversations on translation from both a technical communication and a rhetoric and composition perspective, I can see the value in both theorizing linguistic difference and in pushing to develop strategies to more effectively enact translation in practice. For technical communicators, the emphasis on developing translation strategies to facilitate localization and the dissemination of global-ready content has limited our attention to how power, culture, and history play a role in translation activities (Agboka, 2013; Yajima & Toyosaki, 2016,). In rhetoric and 
composition, extensive work has been done to make spaces for linguistic difference in our classrooms and pedagogies, leaving room to further explore the specific strategies used by multilingual communicators during the language transformation process (Guerra, 2012; Milson-Whyte, 2013; Worden, 2013). In this project, I aim to expand research in translation from both a technical communication and a rhetoric and composition perspective, specifically by studying the contexts (physical, digital, and cultural), tools (rhetorical,   17 technological, and embodied), and strategies that multilingual communicators use to transform information across languages through their translation practices. In the following chapter, I™ll discuss how I studied translation at two different research sites, gaining a wider understanding of what translation is, what it entails, and what it can contribute to our work in both academic and professional contexts.   18 CHAPTER 2: METHOD  In this project, I aim to highlight the rhetorical power of multilingual communication, specifically by analyzing processes of translation as they are enacted by participants at two research sites. After tracing conversations about the activity of translation in both rhetoric and composition and technical communication in Chapter 1, I found the following: 1. Rhetoric and composition scholars have been developing critical frameworks to theorize the movement between languages since the 1970s (Smitherman, 1977; Wolfram, 1974). These frameworks (e.g., code-switching, code-meshing, translingualism) have helped writing teachers and scholars move away from static conceptions of writing limited to Standard American English (Canagarajah, 2013; Pennycook, 2008; Young, 2011).  2. In technical communication, conversations about translation are typically related to developing effective practices for the creation of global-ready content (Batova and Clark, 2015). Recently, researchers in technical and professional writing have emphasized the value of everyday users in the development of effective translation, shifting conversations from a traditional conception of translation to a focus on localization strategies (Agboka, 2013; Sun, 2006; 2012).  3. While these conversations have been incredibly useful in helping us understand how users adapt information and technologies across contexts, recent work in technical communication has also emphasized the need to further understand the activity of translation in itself (Muñoz Martín, and Pacheco Pinto, 2016).    19  In this chapter, I will discuss how I use work in both rhetoric and composition and technical communication to study translation as a situated practice. In this way, I expand understandings of translation in both fields, specifically by showing what it is that multilnguals do as they transform information across languages. To do this, I will first make clarifications about the specific terms I use in this project to define translation. I will then 
discuss the specific methods used in this study to understand translation as a rhetorical practice.  DEFINING TRANSLATION  In this project, I use the word translation to describe how multilingual communicators transform information from one language to another. As I have demonstrated, the activity of translation has been theorized in different ways within both technical communication and rhetoric and composition, leading to the development of terms like ﬁlocalization,ﬂ ﬁtranslingualism,ﬂ and ﬁtranslanguagingﬂ (among many others). In this project, I choose to use the term translation for several reasonsŠFirst, I want to reclaim the word translation to specifically reference  the rhetorical power of multilingual communicators. That is, the word translation has been used metaphorically for decades to describe the work of technical communicators. Since the 1980s, for example, technical communicators have broadly been described as ﬁtranslators,ﬂ those expert individuals who transform complex information into lay terms for the general public (Weiss, 1997). While these metaphorical uses of the word translation were helpful, I want to use the word translation specifically in reference to the expertise of multilingual learners, those individuals who are often placed in deficit positions due to their difficulties communicating in standard English. Multilingual communicators have historically been positioned as the   20 non-experts, the people who need information from the English-speaking experts. To flip this model, in turn, I aim to reclaim the term translation in a way that adequately credits the intellectual work of multilingual communicators.   In addition to shifting perceptions of expertise, I use the word translation in this project due to its applicability both in and outside of academic contexts. Since my project bridges conversations in both academic and professional settings, and because the conversations reflected in this project span across languages, cultures, and contexts, I use the word translation as a central reference point that can be understood by both academic, professional, and public audiences. While all of my participants may not understand the intricate differences between ﬁtranslingualismﬂ and ﬁcode-meshing,ﬂ for instance, the word translation signals an activity that is familiar to a wide range of audiences, particularly 
when conversing with multilingual communicators with experience in this activity.    When I use the word translation in this project, I am referencing the activity of transforming information from one language to another. Activities like localization, code-meshing, and code-switching, are often a part of this process, as multilingual communicators make rhetorical decisions about how to successfully translate for their 
audiences. Indeed, through my experiences with translators working in low-budget organizations, I found that translators often play the role of localizers and designers as part of their translation work. In turn, for the purposes of this project, I use the term translation to reference the entire adaptive process that multilnguals in my case studies engage in as they transform information across languages. I don™t always draw specific distinctions between translation and localization, primarily because my participants don™t make these 
distinctions. Instead, localization activities are seen as part of successful translation work.    21 RESEARCH QUESTIONS The purpose of this project is to understand the rhetorical practices that multilingual communicators use to translate information from one language to another. To understand these practices, my study centers on the following questions: RQ. 1: What rhetorical practices do multilingual communicators use to translate information? RQ 2: What tools and strategies (technological, cultural, digital) do multilingual communicators use during their translation processes?  In order to answer these research questions, I employed methods used to study composing processes in both rhetoric and composition and technical communication. I wanted to not only understand how my participants describe their translation processes, but to also visualize the intricacies of this process in order to make an argument for their importance. One of the primary objectives of this project is to visualize translation in order to make a space for this activity both within rhetoric and composition and technical 
communication. For this reason, I combined methods across disciplines to both inform and contextualize my findings.  In Table 1, I provide an overview of sample studies used to study translation in both professional and academic spaces. While this list is by no means exhaustive, what I want to illustrate are the similarities in the methods our fields have used to study translation. As evidenced in Table 1, many studies exploring the activity of translation (in both rhet comp 
and tech comm) have relied heavily on interviews, observations, and analyses of texts or other artifacts. While these methods are incredibly valuable and have contributed greatly 
to our understanding of linguistic diversity, these methods also seem to privilege the   22 ﬁproductﬂ of translation rather than valuing the process. For example, Leonard (2014) studies rhetorical attunement by analyzing students written products and interviewing them about their translanguaging practices. Canagarajah (2010) similarly studies his students™ translanguaging practices through their written products. New methods, such as Berry, Hawisher, and Selfe™s (2012) use of video recordings to capture student narratives 
are pushing toward a more situated study of translation. However, Barry, Hawisher, and Selfe (2012) provide their research participants with cameras and ask them to share narratives, without necessarily applying a coding method or analysis procedure to examine these videos.   In technical communication, the focus has remained on studying translation and localization for the purposes of helping technical communicators and designers develop global-ready content. However, only recently have scholars started to make a case for the value of the multilingual people negotiating languages as part of technical communication work. In the recent issue of Connexions Journal focused on translation and technical communication, Anne Ketola (2016) uses translation diariesŠﬁreports on the problems encountered, the strategies employed to solve them, and so onŠwritten about the 
translation processﬂ to understand how participants employ a wide range of semiotic resources as they translate information (p. 14). Ketola (2016) emphasizes the cultural backgrounds and histories of translators who participate in this language adaptation work. As Ketola (2016) illustrates through this project, visual, embodied, and multimodal accounts of translation is an area that deserves more attention in technical communication research.   23 Table 1: Research Methods Used to Study Translation in Academic and Professional Spaces (samples from 2009-2016)  
 
 Author # of Participants On-Site observations/field notes Inter-views Auto-ethno-graphy/ Story-telling Textual/ Artifact analysis Survey
s Alvarez (2014) 10 families (10 mothers, 22 children) x x  x  Agboka (2013) 23 x x  x  Barton & Lee (2013) Various x x x x  Berry, Hawisher, 
& Selfe (2012) 12  x x x  Canagarajah 
ﬁNegotiatingﬂ (2009) 1 class (# of students not specified) x x  x  Canagarajah (2010) 
ﬁThe Rhetoric of Shuttling–ﬂ 1    x  Fraiberg (2010) 5 (though unspecified. may be more) x x x x    24 Table 1 (cont™d) As a whole, the research presented in Table 1 has tremendously helped us understand that multilinguals are moving between languages in intricate ways, both in classrooms and in their professions. However, I argue that as we continue working to understand translation, we should expand the methods through which we study this activity. In the following sections, I will expand on the methodology and the methods used to capture, analyze, understand, and present the process of translation at two different research sites.  METHODOLOGY  I approach this project with an emphasis on community and civic engagement models as presented by Estrella Torrez (2014; 2016) and Jeffrey Grabill (2007). These models teach me to value community knowledge as intellectual contributions to research (Grabill, 2007), and to center participants™ stories as integral parts of community literacy (Torrez, 2016). To study the practices of translation, I built relationships with my Karsh (2009) 10 x x x x x Ketola (2016) 8  x  x  Leonard (2014) 6  x  x  Maylath et al. (2013) 57 x x    Sun (2012) 5 x x x x  Torrez (2013) 3 families  x x x    25 participants before I began collecting any type of data. I honor my personal experience moving between languages  as a lens from which to study translation in practice. In this way, I draw on Torrez (2014) model of civic engagement by layering practice and passion in my research, providing space for my participants and myself to share the stories that frame my findings.  I use the Latin@ practice of testimonios (testimonies) to make space for accounts of my participants™ lived experiences (Torrez, 2016). Testimonios are stories told to reflect and represent the historical experiences of marginalized people (Torrez, 2016). While I aim to collect, analyze, and present data in empirical ways, I also want to be clear about my own positionality as a Latina researcher, giving me a unique perspective and relationality to my participants™ stories. I want to honor the relationships among and between my participants first and foremost, using the data collected as a way to present stories in collaboration with 
the individuals who shaped this project. With this methodology in mind, I will now move on to discuss the specific methods employed in collecting and analyzing data for this project.  METHODS While the communicative power of multilinguals has been studied and highlighted for decades, my goal is to build on these conversations by visualizing what it is that multilinguals DO as they move across languages. I want to move from simply analyzing final products of translation to visualizing the processes and practices of translation themselves. To do this, I employ visual methods for both my data collection and data analysis.  Many scholars in rhetoric and composition and technical communication have discussed the value of visual methods and methodologies (Brumberger, 2005, McKee and   26 DeVoss, 2007, Hawisher, Selfe, Berry, and Skjulstad, 2012). As Hawisher, Selfe, Berry, and Skjulstad (2012) explain, visual methods, and in their case the use of video recordings, ﬁadd additional semiotic information and more to alphabetic representations of researchﬂ 
(n.pag.). In addition, visual research methods can support data collection and analysis in ways that account for and highlight the embodied and embodying nature of interactions (Shivers-McNair and Gonzales, forthcoming). In this project, I use video methods to both collect visual data through video recording and screencast data, and to present my findings in the form of short video clips and visual diagrams. In Table 2, I provide an overview of the specific methods used to collect visual data in this project.  Table 2: Methods used to Study Translation in this Project Method Amount Collected Description Screencast recordings 30 hours Screencast recordings allow researchers to record participants computer screens as they compose (Slattery, 2007; Pigg, 2014). Using screencast data to analyze translation practices allowed me to better understand ﬁwhat 
is going on at that moment when people put pencil to paper, fingers to keyboardﬂ (Sánchez 234). This situated method was particularly useful for analyzing how participants coordinated digital resources to translate. Video footage 403 hours Although screencast recordings allow me to see what participants are doing on their computer screens, this method was not sufficient in accounting for participants™ 
embodied practices (Pigg, 2014). For this reason, I installed 
video cameras at my two research sites to record not only what participants were doing as they translated on their computers, but also to see how participants were using their bodies to transform information.  
  
 
   
   27 Table 2 (cont™d) Artifact-based interviews 16 hours While the screencasts provided an illustration of participant™s digital movements (e.g., mouse-clicks, typing), the screen casts do not provide insights into participants™ 
motivations for making these moves. That is, the screencast 
data allowed me to see what sources and tools students were using to translate, but they did not explain why participants chose to use these resources (See Blythe and Gonzales, 2016). For this reason, each of the participants 
was asked to participate in a follow-up artifact-based interview, where participant and I watched the screencasts 
together and discussed why the participant chose to make specific moves during the digital translation process. For 
example, I asked, ﬁWhy did you decide to use this particular 
definition, or not? Why did you go to that website?ﬂ In this way, artifact-based interviews provided us me an additional layer of analysis for understanding my participants™ translation practices. Field observations N/A In addition to the video footage and screen recordings, I used a field notebook to write down specific moments of translation during my observation at two different research sites. Using this notebook to sketch specific instances and to write timeframes during the video recording allowed me to streamline my analysis and to make space for my own interpretive lens during the data collection process. Total 449 hours   As evidenced in Table 2, the visual methods employed in this project yielded 449 hours of data, not including the 10 months of physical observation and the 5 years of relationship building encompassed in the various stages of this project. While my video recording methods rendered a substantial amount of visual data, one of the challenges I faced was deciding on a method to analyze this footage. In the following section, I™ll discuss my data analysis methods.  DATA ANALYSIS Through the suggestion and guidance of Stuart Blythe, I turned to the digital coding software ELAN (https://tla.mpi.nl/tools/tla-tools/elan/) to help me analyze exactly what   28 my multilingual participants were doing as they translated information. ELAN is a digital transcription and coding tool developed by the Max-Planck-Institute for Psycholinguistics (MPI). Developed by linguists, ELAN is inherently designed to account for the fluidity and flexibility of language. Rather than constraining each instance or iteration to one specific code, ELAN allows researchers to identify one instance or activity as pertaining to multiple layers of codes, known as ﬁtiers.ﬂ  While coding categories are typically intended to be mutually exclusive and exhaustive (Blythe, 2007), layered coding provides a more contextualized way to analyze visual data (Gonzales, 2015). These layers, or ﬁtiersﬂ can be applied simultaneously to a specific section of video data, resulting in ﬁcomplex referential structuresﬂ to code both ﬁspeech and gesture modalitiesﬂ (Brugman and Russell 2014 qtd. in Gonzales 2015). During 
this project, I was able to use ELAN™s tiered coding approach to analyze translation in various simultaneous layers. In this way, by using ELAN, I was able to see (and make an argument for) the layered, iterative work that translators engage in as they adapt 
information. I didn™t have to rely just on what translators were saying or just on where translators were clicking during their translation process. Instead, using ELAN, I could account for these factors while also considering how translators were moving across their 
office space and how they were interacting with other humans, tools, and technologies. I used ELAN to triangulate my analysis, combining my own interpretation of participants™ translation practices with the participants™ input gathered during our artifact-based interviews (See Blythe and Gonzales, 2016).      Using ELAN, I went through 3 rounds of coding to analyze my data. The major unit of analysis used during my first round of coding is what I call translation moments. Drawing   29 from Alvarez™s (2014) discussion of ﬁtranslanguaging eventsﬂ as analytical units for examining how multilnguals transform ideas across languages, translation moments are those instances where multilinguals pause, where we question, ﬁShould I use this word or 
that word? Would it be better to say it this way or that way?ﬂ As I will demonstrate in this project, translation moments are the spaces in which the rhetorical power of multilingualism comes into action, as individuals deploy any and all semiotic resources available to make a decision about how to adapt information from one language to another.   During my first round of coding, I used ELAN to identify all translation moments in my video data. After the first round of coding, I used a preliminary coding scheme developed during a pilot study intended to help me identify a wide-range of strategies multilinguals used to translate information (see Gonzales and Zantjer, 2015 for a 
discussion of this pilot study). During this second round of coding, I also made note of any categories that emerged ﬁin vivoﬂ as I watched my video footage. In the third and final round of coding, I verified my initial counts of the coding strategies while finalizing the list 
of micro level codes. Table 3 presents a list of all codes and descriptions developed through my data analysis.      30 Table 3: Coding Categories and Descriptions   Code Description Use of Digital Translation Tools Digital translation tools used by participants in this project include Google translate, Linguee, a Spanish-English dictionary, and Word Reference, a bilingual synonym finder. Deconstructing Deconstruction strategies include word conjugation or adaptation, when participants take an initial word and adapt it to meet the context of a single sentence or section in the translation.  Gesturing Gesturing strategies include the ﬁgesticulations on the flyﬂ (McNeil, 2012) made by participants as they discuss a word or phrase during a translation moment.  Reading Aloud Reading aloud strategies are used by participants when they are making sure if their translation ﬁmakes senseﬂ in the context of an entire document. 
Participants frequently read their translations aloud several times to ensure accuracy.  Negotiating Negotiating strategies were often used in conjunction with the use of digital translation tools. Participants 
negotiated when they were deciding between possible options for translating a single word.   
 
 
    31 Table 3 (cont™d) Storytelling Storytelling took place when participants would have a conversation about how to translate a specific word or phrase. In these instances, participants would tell stories about how they have heard or used a word or phrase in the past.  Repeating Often, participants would repeat a word or phrase several times during a translation moment. Through this repetition, participants cued their own 
indexed cultural knowledge, deciding 
which word ﬁsounded rightﬂ based on 
the ways in which they have heard that word be used in previous contexts.  Sketching Sketching strategies were used when participants tried to make sense of a word by drawing a figure or object. Sketching strategies were often used when participants tried to explain a concept to another translator in order to come to a common understanding. Intonation Intonation strategies include voice inflections used by participants as they identified potential translation 
options. Participants would raise or 
lower the pitch of their voice as they 
said a word in order to cue their memory of how they have heard a word be used in their past experiences.  Through my analysis of translation moments as they were enacted by participants at two various research sites, I 2nd tier codes in my data. These codes represent the various   32 tools and strategies participants used to translate information. These codes include the use of digital translation tools, storytelling, gesturing, deconstructing or conjugating language, reading aloud, repeating words, sketching ideas, and negotiating definitions. The tools and strategies used by participants during translation moments include technical, digital, and 
embodied actions, as participants made use of various technologies in combination with their cultural knowledge and lived experiences.  In the chapters that follow, I will introduce my research sites, expand on the methods used for each individual case study, and present examples of how these codes were developed in practice. I will then move on to draw implications from these studies for both rhetoric and composition and technical communication.    33 CHAPTER 3: TRANSLATION MOMENTS AT KNIGHTLY LATINO NEWS    
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
           Figure 2: Bridget working at Knightly Latino News  ﬁTranslation for me is not about writing in English or writing in Spanish-It™s about living all the time in both worlds and knowing where to go in the momentﬂ                      -Natalie, Knightly Latino News  In this project, I™m analyzing the tools and strategies multilingual communicators use to translate information from English to Spanish (and vice versa). Drawing on recent conversations in technical communication and rhetoric and composition that situate translation as an intellectual, participatory activity (Agboka, 2013; Batova and Clark, 2015; Guerra, 2012; Walton, Zraly & Mugengana, 2014; Sun, 2012), I argue that paying attention 
to the translation practices of multilinguals can help practitioners, teachers, and researchers develop ethical and culturally-situated documents, frameworks, and systems. In this chapter, I illustrate the translation practices of multilingual communicators at one of my research sites, Knightly Latino News, a news production organization in Florida. I will   34 first situate this chapter by describing the setting, goals, and objectives of Knightly Latino News, before moving on to discuss how multilingual communicators in this organization use their translation skills to reach out to the Latin@ community in Orlando. I will conclude by drawing implications for technical communicators developing content for global audiences.  INTRODUCTION Knightly Latino News (KLN) is a student-run bilingual news broadcasting organization located at the University of Central Florida in Orlando. Students in this organization volunteer to translate news stories published on the English news-network, Knightly News, from English to Spanish for their Latin@ community. I began working with this organization approximately five years ago, when I was introduced to the director, Katie Coronado, during my faculty orientation at UCF. Katie, an instructor at UCF and an 
immigrant from Cuba with over 15 years experience in the news broadcasting field, started KLN because she wanted to give bilingual Latin@ students at UCF the opportunity to work 
in both Spanish and English news networks. As a faculty member in the Nicholson School of Communication (where KLN is housed), Katie built this organization to help her students leverage their linguistic and cultural resources as they go into industry. Since the beginning 
of the program in 2010, KLN graduates have acquired jobs at Univision, Telemundo, and several other Latin@ news networks.  One of the many things that inspired me to work with KLN is the location of the school that houses this program. The University of Central Florida, where I earned my BA 
and MA degrees before working as a full-time writing instructor from 2011-2013, is the second largest University (based on student population) in the US. With over 60,000   35 students, UCF is home to thousands of students from all over the country. Hosting a 21.5% Latin@ student population, UCF is on the verge of becoming a Hispanic-Serving Institution (HSI). Latin@s at UCF are primarily children of immigrant parents from South and Central America as well children from Puerto Rican descent. Together, Spanish-speaking UCF students comprise over 22 different cultures, nations, and dialects. In turn, to ﬁspeak Spanishﬂ at UCF can mean a wide range of different thingsŠdifferent norms, variations, and levels of linguistic experience and expertise.  Having learned a bit about the Latin@ population at UCF through my previous experiences, I know that many of the Spanish-speaking students at UCF are full-time students with full time employment outside of the University. In fact, all of the students working at KLN have other jobs outside of the University (at banks, grocery stores, and restaurants), and are considered at least partial financial contributors to their households. Hence, for many of the students at KLN, the decision to volunteer for after-school activities is difficult, requiring them to manage already overwhelming work and school schedules.  I mention all of these factors to introduce KLN because context is important when considering the linguistic practices of any population. The translation work taking place at 
KLN is a product of cultural, economic, and social negotiation, as participants navigate their cultural and linguistic experiences while also juggling several academic and economic pressures. These factors all come into play in the translation process, when linguistic adaptations, and the accuracy of these adaptations, rely on the experiences and expertise of 
the translators and their community.  I began formally collecting data with KLN during the first year of my PhD program at Michigan State. Since I was no longer living in Florida, and because I was experiencing my   36 own transitions as I adapted to life in Michigan, visits to the KLN studio were a sort of homecoming for me. Because I grew up in similar ways to the students at KLN, my interactions with these participants were not founded on the typical participant-researcher binary. While I had not met any of my participants before collecting data for this project 
(since the students at KLN change every year), forming relationships with these students was the most important and most rewarding aspect of this project. For this reason, before moving on to discuss the specific data collection and analysis methods for this case-study, I™d like to share an excerpt from one of the journal entries I wrote after my initial meeting with KLN students during the Fall of 2013. I wrote this entry on the plane ride home after my meeting with KLN participants, which was also the first time I returned to UCF after 
moving to Michigan.  GONZALES JOURNAL ENTRY, OCTOBER, 15, 2013 I walked into the conference room where my first meeting with Knightly Latino students would take place, armed with bags full of snacks and an overly active mind that kept racing. I knew from the beginning that this place felt like home. As an immigrant from Bolivia who grew up in Florida, I know what it™s like to commute to school every day after working long hours to support your family.   Unlike most other meetings I attend, I knew that my best prep for this meeting would be to simply sitŠto listen to and tell stories. As I continued setting up, a young woman walked into the room, eyes tired but bright, smile shining at the sight of sandwiches. Sweatshirt and flip flops, hair put up in a bun 10 seconds before leaving the house. I knew this girl, without introductions. I had been this girl, and in many ways I™m still this girl (though flip flops do not work in Michigan).    37 ﬁHi miss, are you the one here to talk to us?ﬂ she said. ﬁYep, come on in and get some food. I™m Laura, by the way.ﬂ  ﬁI™m Bridget. Hey do you need help moving the tables? I can help.ﬂ  ﬁSure, thanks, I said, hoping she would be more spatially aware than I am  and therefore able to make sense of how to best rearrange the tables in the room.ﬂ  After Bridget and I re-arranged the room, got our sandwiches, and continued chatting, more students walked in the room. All smiling, all doubtful but welcoming. All tired and happy to see sandwiches. Don™t get me wrong, I had a PowerPoint. I 
always do. With maps, diagrams, and numbers. But as we sat around those oddly arranged desks and tables and looked at each other, a sense of comfort came over the room that I couldn™t break by pulling up any slides.  We sat. We ate sandwiches.  We introduced each other. Not in the typical ﬁMy name is _____ and my major is ____,ﬂ but, admittedly following my lead, with ﬁMy name is___ and I™m here because___.ﬂ  ﬁMy name is Laura, and I™m here because I know you do cool shit and I want to learn from you. Also because it™s warm here, and because my heart is in Florida with UCF students.ﬂ  ﬁHey, my name is Bridget, and I™m here because it™s my only day off work so I come to campus and do as much as I can.ﬂ  ﬁHi, my name is Natalie, and I™m here because Katie told me you want to work with us and she said you™re bringing lunchﬂ  ﬁHola, me llamo Albert and I™m here porque porque no? My friends are here.ﬂ    38 ﬁWell, thanks for coming. I really appreciate you taking the time our of what I know is a busy day to here. Like Katie may have mentioned, I™m here because I™m hoping to work with you. Katie told me about the incredible work you do with Knightly Latino, and I would love to learn more about what you do for the group. But before I tell you 
any of that, I wanna tell you along winded story about why I™m really here. It™s mostly cause of a grudge I started to have in fifth grade.  No, I™m serious. Fifth grade.  
In fifth grade, I was about to graduate from Bonneville Elementary school right down the road by Lake Picket road. Any of you go to Bonneville? Yeah? Guess I™m not that old yet.  Anyway, in fifth grade, I asked my teacher Ms. Weiss to recommend me for advanced Language Arts in Middle School. Partly because I had an A in English, but mostly because my best friends Michelle and Melissa were going into advanced language arts and I wanted to be in the same class as them. You know how it is in middle schoolŠyour friends are your lifeline.  Despite my current ﬁAﬂ in language Arts, Ms. Weiss said she wouldn™t recommend me 
for advanced language arts in middle school because I was ﬁspecial.ﬂ She learned from her colleague Ms. Dupuy whom I had in 3rd grade that I had been in ESOL for two years before coming into her fifth grade class. She told me she learned English is not my first language, and advanced language arts is for people who learned English first.  On that day, I went home and told mi papi that Ms. Weiss said I couldn™t go to advanced language arts in middle school, so I wasn™t going to be in the class with Michelle and Melissa. I also told him that I didn™t think it was fair...partly because   39 nothing is fair when you™re in fifth grade, but also because I thought my English could never be good enough if people kept knowing that I speak Spanish as my first language. I had to hide that, I told him. ‚I have to hide my Spanish and pretend I don™t know it. Then I can go to college and major in English and teach new students and tell them they don™t have to speak English first to be advanced.™ Yep, I was a pretty 
vengeful fifth grader. And not much has changed.ﬂ  As Bridget, Natalie, Albert, and the other students from Knightly Latino listened, I knew we were connecting. There were the familiar nods and ﬁhmmsﬂ and ﬁughhsﬂ I typically 
hear from people who not only sympathize with my story, but who also relate to itŠits™ their story as much as it™s mine.  ﬁSo when I tell you I™m here because of a grudge, I™m not lying,ﬂ I continued.  ﬁBut also, as I™m sure you can imagine, Ms. Weiss isn™t the only one I have a grudge against. I also hold a grudge against people who say students who speak languages other than English are less smart. I hold a grudge against the faculty members who complain about international students™ ﬁstrugglesﬂ in the classroom. I hold a grudge against people who say we need ‚help™ to learn when really they just need help to listen.  I want to be a professor. They say it™s a professor™s job to ﬁbuild knowledgeﬂ about their 
very specific area of study. I™m here because I wanna build knowledge about how smart, creative, and resourceful we are. But I™m not here to study you. I™m really here to listen from you and to share your ideas with others when, where, and if you think it might be useful.ﬂ  We talked about methods. We talked about how to visualize translation through screencasts and empirical methodologies commonly employed in writing studies and in   40 technical communication. We talked about research as collaborative practice. And we decided to build knowledge together. This is the most exciting work I™ve ever done and the best lessons I™ve ever learned.  As we continued planning what now (to my joy) became our project, one student, Janisa, looked up and said, ﬁI wanna say something...ﬂ ﬁYou know how you were talking about ESOL? I just wanna say that I feel you. Like 
when you say a grudge I know what you mean. Cause like I was in ESOL in high school, and they would keep you in the same class as everyone else but then give you an extra 30 minutes or something on your tests. And it™s nice and everything and I would always take the extra 30 minutes to read, but I always thought I was stupid because everyone else would be done earlier. Then I got to college and I™m not in ESOL but I™m in these big classes. They take the 30 extra minutes away, but then a teacher will give everyone like 4 hours for a test, and everyone will still leave before me. I always take the whole 4 hours, and I still  somehow feel stupid for taking longer than other people. Like, my grades are good, but I feel stupid because I was told the slow kids need the extra 30 minutes. So I™m like am I taking more time because my English is still not good, like is that what that means?ﬂ  As Janisa told this story, Natalie was nodding incessantly, saying ﬁyeah, exactly. Yupﬂ Then, Natalie added,  ﬁYou know like we™re always questioning, is my English ﬁgood?ﬂ is my Spanish ﬁgood?ﬂ I don™t know about yall but when I write in Spanish I use the dictionary and Google just as much if not more than when I write in English cause I don™t practice writing in Spanish that much. So I guess what I would wanna show in this project is that writing for Knightly Latino is   41 not about writing in Spanish. It™s not about writing in English. It's about living all the time in both worlds, and knowing where to go in the moment–figuring out how you can say your ideas to the people you™re trying to inform in the way that will be best for them. Whatever it takes...English, Spanish, Spanglish, Google, whatever it takes to inform our people.ﬂ  As evidenced my the journal entry excerpt above, analyzing translation at KLN provides a framework for understanding the histories, relationships, and goals of individuals who share a common goalŠ to provide access to information for their community, to speak back to the people who misrepresent multilinguals, and to move forward together. In this case study, I will be illustrating how translation plays a role in the efforts of the student participants at KLN. Analyzing the translation experiences of these 
students, I argue, can help us better understand the purposeful, rhetorical work that goes into linguistic adaptations. By paying attention to these practices, technical communicators and rhetoric and composition teachers can better understand what translation means to individuals and to communities who move across languages to accomplish their work. In the sections that follow, I™ll provide more details about the make-up of KLN, before moving on to discuss specific methods used to analyze translation in this case study.  BACKGROUND ON KLN KLN is run by a faculty instructor (Katie Coronado) and approximately eight student members each year, all of whom speak both Spanish and English to various degrees. KLN partners with the university™s English-based News network, Knightly News. Three of the eight students involved in KLN also work for the English-based Knightly News. At Knightly News, students write, produce, and share English-language stories with the Orlando community. While students in Knightly News receive university credit for their   42 participation, the eight students (along with the faculty instructor) who also run KLN volunteer their time to translate the stories written for the English-language network. These students translate the stories produced by Knightly News into Spanish and reproduce them for KLN, hence increasing the reach and service of the University™s networks by providing access to the Spanish-speaking Latin@ community in Orlando.  The bilingual members of KLN are part of the Latino community in Orlando to which they are writing. This community connection frequently allows members of KLN to use their personal experiences and rhetorical knowledge to understand the needs of their audience (the Latin@ community in Florida). In the Fall semester of 2013, I began collecting data at KLN, aiming to understand the various tools and strategies that members of this organization use to translate news stories for their community. This data collection 
process is part of an on-going collaboration I have established with KLN, aiming to understand and highlight the value of translation as we continue building opportunities for bilingual writing and communication students across the U.S.  DATA COLLECTION For the purposes of this case study, to understand the translation practices used by members of KLN, I collected three different types of data: Observations (180 minutes total): I observed three 60-minute KLN pitch meetings that took place at the KLN studio in Florida. During these meetings, KLN members were planning their upcoming events, discussing story pitches, and reviewing their recent publications. During these meetings, I  also introduced myself and discussed the research being conducted. I used these meetings as a chance to build relationships with the participants in an effort to enact a reciprocal and ethical research practice. I video-recorded   43 and took written field notes during these meetings, noting the types of translation tasks being discussed by members of KLN.  Screencasts (180 minutes total): While there were 8 KLN members in attendance during the observed meetings, two students, Natalie and Bridget, volunteered to participate as case-study participants for this project. These students agreed to have me install Camtasia Relay on their personal computers, and they agreed to record their computers screens as they worked on stories for KLN. Each case-study participant submitted 90 minutes of screencast data, illustrating the various translation tasks being completed as part of their work for KLN. Using screencast data to analyze translation practices allowed me to better understand ﬁwhat is going on at that moment when people put pencil to paper, fingers to 
keyboardﬂ (Sánchez 234). This situated method was particularly useful for analyzing how participants coordinated digital resources to translate.  Artifact-Based Interviews (240 minutes total): While the screencasts provided an illustration of participant™s digital movements (e.g., mouse-clicks, typing), the screen casts do not provide insights into participants™ motivations for making these moves. That is, the screencast data allowed me to see what sources and tools students were using to translate, 
but they did not explain why participants chose to use these resources. For this reason, each of the two participants was asked to participate in a follow-up artifact-based interview, where participant and I watched the screencasts together and discussed why the participant chose to make specific moves during the digital translation process. For example, I asked, ﬁWhy did you decide to use this particular definition, or not? Why did you go to that website?ﬂ In this way, artifact-based interviews provided us me an additional layer of analysis for understanding my participants™ translation practices.    44 In addition to conducting artifact-based interviews with the participants themselves, I also conducted a 120 minute artifact-based interview with the Katie, faculty adviser for KLN. During this interview, the adviser and I watched selected parts of the participants™ screencasts and discussed the artifact-based interviews already conducted with participants. This interview took place during my coding of the screencast and artifact-based interview data. In this way, I was able to discuss preliminary codes and results with the faculty adviser, asking for her perspective on the emerging patterns as a 
way to both triangulate my coding scheme and to ensure that I was representing the work at KLN in an accurate and ethical way.  DATA ANALYSIS I used three rounds of coding to analyze all data. Using ELAN video coding software, I was able to code all data on several levels or ﬁtiers,ﬂ triangulating coding categories 
emerging from the screencast data with those emerging during the artifact-based interviews and observations (Blythe, 2007; Gonzales, 2015; Blythe and Gonzales, 
forthcoming 2016). In this way, my coding scheme (depicted in Table 1) reflects both my analysis of the data as well as my participants™ discussion and clarification of this analysis. I first coded all data to identify translation moments as the macro-level codes or major unit of analysis. In the second round of coding, I identified instances of the translation strategies 
depicted in Table 1, making note of any new coding categories that could emerge from the data in vivo. I started with an initial coding scheme developed during a pilot study intended to help me identify a wide-range of strategies multilinguals used to translate information (see Gonzales and Zantjer, 2015 for a discussion of this pilot study). In the third and final 
round of coding, I verified my initial counts of the coding strategies while finalizing the list   45 of micro level codes (final list of codes depicted in Table 1). I will now provide additional details and examples of both the macro and the micro level coding categories.  TRANSLATION MOMENTS (MACRO-LEVEL CODING)  In this project, I™m focusing on an analysis of what I™ve come to call translation moments, or instances in time when an individual makes a decision about how to translate information from one language to another. Drawing on Alvarez™s (2014) concept of translanguaging events, translation moments do not encompass the entire translation process. Rather, translation moments take place when individuals pause in their translation process to make a rhetorical decision about how to contextualize a translation. For example, as she translates a story entitled ﬁDevelopment Plans Threaten Orlando Park,ﬂ Natalie, one of my KLN participants has two screens open- the English article published on the University™s English-language network, and a blank document where she is translating this specific story (See Figure 3). While Natalie is reading the article in English and simultaneously translating the piece into Spanish, approximately 10 
seconds into her screencast recording, Natalie stops her simultaneous translation and she opens Google translate. She then looks up the word ﬁThreatenﬂ to find an adequate translation (See Figure 4).    46  Figure 3: Natalie Begins to Translate a News Story  Caption: The image depicts two computer windows open. One is a text document where the student is writing/translating, and the other is a news story published on the Knightly News 
website, titled, ﬁDevelopment Plans Threaten Orlando Park.ﬂ      Figure 4: Natalie Uses Google Translate to Translate ﬁThreatenﬂ  
Caption: The image depicts two computer windows open. One is a text document where the student is writing/translating, and the other is a screenshot of Google translate, where the student is translating the word ﬁthreaten,ﬂ and Google translate provides the Spanish word ﬁamenazar.ﬂ    47 While Natalie translated the first few lines of the article without stopping, she paused to translate and localize the word ﬁthreaten.ﬂ This pause and the following use of Google translate encompass a ﬁtranslation moment.ﬂ While this specific translation moment only consisted of one word search using Google translate, other translation moments encompassed the use and layering of several translation strategies. Analyzing the strategies used by multilinguals during these translation moments, and then speaking with participants regarding their motivation for using these strategies, I argue, provides  useful insights into the ways multilinguals use their rhetorical and cultural knowledge to translate information. These insights can help technical communicators and information architects 
design and translate for global audiences.  TRANSLATION TOOLS AND STRATEGIES (MICRO-LEVEL CODING) Once I identified all translation moments in the data collected, I used axial coding strategies (Saldaña, 2013) to further analyze the tools and strategies employed by participants during each translation moment. I used the coding scheme depicted in Table 4 to code translation moments. ELAN video coding software allowed me to code each translation moment as more than one code. For example, in one translation moment, a participant may gesture, use digital translation tools, and tell a story, which would mean that this moments gets coded as one macro-level code (i.e. translation moment) and three micro-level codes (i.e., gesturing, using digital translation tools, storytelling).    48 Table 4: Preliminary Codes   
 Code Description Example  1 Example 2 Use of digital translation tools Use of digital translation tools are moments where multilinguals access 
online translators to facilitate translations. Natalie used Google translate to look up 
translations for 
the word ﬁdataﬂ Bridget used the digital tool Word Reference to look 
up translations of 
the word ﬁpovertyﬂ Deconstructing Deconstructing are moments where participants translate a word by breaking it down into its component parts. Natalie looked up the word ﬁharm,ﬂ ﬁto harm,ﬂ and ﬁharmedﬂ in order to find an adequate translation.  Bridget deconstructed the word ﬁintentarﬂ (Spanish for ﬁtryingﬂ) into intento, meaning ﬁs/he triedﬂ Gesturing Gesturing moments where multilinguals use abstract physical movements to convey meaning 
and/or support a 
verbal explanation of a word. During a pitch meeting, Camila was discussing the 
number of translation options 
she finds in 
English. She made a fist and said ﬁIn English, you have 
this one 
definition.ﬂ Then, 
making a web-like figure with her 
fingers, Camila 
said, ﬁIn Spanish, 
you have this and this and this word that all mean the 
same thing.ﬂ  During a pitch meeting, as she discussed her story idea, Natalie was discussing her 
previous 
experiences struggling with 
translation. 
Making and ﬁXﬂ 
with her two 
pointer fingers, Natalie said, ﬁIn middle school, 
they just told me 
‚no, we don™t do that here. We don™t speak Spanish 
here.ﬂ Natalie 
made the ﬁXﬂ figure whenever she said the word ﬁno.ﬂ   49 Table 4 (cont™d)     
 
   
 
  Intonation Intonation moments where multilinguals use vocal inflection 
(e.g., raising/lowering 
pitch, altering tone, 
etc.) to convey 
meaning. During a pitch meeting, Francisco was practicing the word ﬁAdobeﬂ in both Spanish and 
English. He used 
voice inflection to distinguish between the different ﬁeﬂ 
sounds at the end 
of the word, repeating each over an over as he 
prepared to 
continue researching this story.  During a pitch meeting, Bridget explained that she 
always ﬁmesses upﬂ the 
pronunciations of the Spanish word 
for tweezers, ﬁpinzaﬂ with the English word 
ﬁpencil.ﬂ She then 
repeated, ﬁpinza,ﬂ ﬁpencil,ﬂ several times to remember 
the 
pronunciations.     Negotiating Negotiating moments where multilinguals explain 
words by putting them in relationship with one or more 
related terms. Natalie inputs both the word ﬁthriveﬂ and the 
word ﬁsucceedﬂ into Google translate as she 
completes a story 
translation.  Natalie inputs both the word ﬁdisplayﬂ and  the word 
ﬁshowﬂ into Google translate as she completes a story 
translation.   50 Table 4 (cont™d) Sketching Sketching moments where multilinguals use visual aids to convey meaning. During a pitch meeting, Camila drew a stethoscope 
as she explained to the team the object that a doctor was 
wearing during an 
interview. She said she ﬁcould not think of the wordﬂ in 
either English or 
Spanish, but she could ﬁvisualize it.ﬂ During a pitch meeting, Camila shared her story idea by sketching her potential interview location 
at a doctor™s office. 
She drew the various individuals 
(patients, 
receptionists, 
doctors) before using words to describe each person.     Storytelling Storytelling moments where multilinguals use narratives (both real and fictional) to 
convey meaning. During a pitch meeting, Fernando was explaining the 
different words he 
had heard in the passed to describe his cultureŠLatino, Hispanic, 
and other variations. He was asking Katie which 
term she would 
prefer for him to use in the recordings, and all 
participants then 
engaged in stories 
regarding the various words they have used for 
these cultural descriptions in the past.  During a pitch meeting, Camila and Fernando 
discuss the various 
ways in which they™ve heard the term ﬁhome careﬂ 
be discussed in the 
community. They were deciding which term to use for their story title.    51 RESULTS Translation moments took place both during pitch meetings, when participants were discussing their upcoming stories, and during individual translation projects, as case-study participants recorded their computer screens and worked individually. Please follow this link to see a video montage I created to reflect how translation moments played out at 
KLN: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LpKJoyL9rBE&feature=youtu.be. As evidenced in the video linked above, translation at KLN is an everyday practiceŠsomething that takes place at every meeting, every interaction, and every story. Often, translation moments lead to stories regarding participants™ backgrounds and histories. For example, approximately :26 seconds into the video linked above, a participant, Ana, was discussing why she decided to pitch her story in English (rather than Spanish) during that 
day™s meeting. As she explains her decision, Ana begins to tell a story about her early experiences in elementary school, stating, ﬁI was raised speaking Spanish, but the [education] system was designed to, instead of helping me embrace my first language, to tell me ‚no, we don™t do that here, we don™t speak that language here.™ﬂ  As she continues her story, Ana shares that when she thought of Spanish at a young age, ﬁall I could here is no, we don™t do that here.ﬂ When she would try to speak Spanish in her classroom, or to use Spanish when words in English were not readily available, Ana™s teachers would reprimand 
her, telling her ﬁno, that language is not acceptable here.ﬂ For this reason, now that she is in college, she doesn™t feel as comfortable communicating in Spanish as she does in English, primarily because she worked so hard to ﬁget rid ofﬂ her Spanish as a child.  Translation moments such as the ones exhibited by Ana took place repeatedly during KLN meetings. As KLN members share knowledge with each other, and as they plan   52 for future events, they have to consider not only the languages that their audiences will feel comfortable with, but also the languages that they themselves feel confident using. As Guerra (2012) explains, the movement between languages is a rhetorical choice for multilingual speakers, one that is often influenced by cultural histories and power structures. For students like Ana, for instance, losing confidence in her heritage language 
came as a result of the educational system in which she was learning, one that consistently favors the use of Standard American English. Now that the movement between languages is 
more accepted within mainstream U.S. classrooms, students like Ana are struggling to implement their heritage languages into their practices. Although programs like KLN encourage and even require the use of English, students like Ana, who have spent many 
years in English-dominant spaces, struggle to re-gain expertise in their first languages. In addition to analyzing translation moments during pitch meetings at KLN, I also analyzed the translation moments experienced by my two case-study participants, Natalie and Bridget. Though the conversations between all participants during pitch meetings were really valuable, analyzing the translation moments captured during the screen cast recordings and follow-up artifact-based interviews reveals useful information regarding how multilingual communicators navigate linguistic, cultural, and rhetorical knowledge during the process of translation.   Each of my two case study participants (Natalie and Bridget) submitted 90 minutes of screencast data. These 90 minutes encompassed a the translation of 2 stories per participant, for a total of 4 translated stories. Table 5 and Table 6 illustrate the number of translation moments experienced by each participant, as well as the strategies each 
participant employed during each translation moment.    53 Table 5: Natalie™s Translation Moments Translation Moment #  Duration (in seconds out of 1800) Words looked up Strategies Used 1  100 Threaten   Harm   Use of DT,   Negotiating 2 89 Fighting   Try   Development   Use of DT , Deconstructing, Negotiating   3 91 town Use of DT, Negotiating 4 80 Developer   Property developer   Use of DT, Negotiating 5 23 Commissioner   Use of DT   6 178 Own   Owns   To own   Alcadre (Spanish to English) Alcanadre (Spanish to English) Use of DT , Deconstructing, Negotiating 7 38 Lease   Use of DT 8 75 Privately Private privacy Use of DT, Deconstructing 9 58 environment Use of DT 10 134 Thrive Thrives Succeed success Use of DT, Negotiating, Deconstructing 11 82 Allows Allowed  permit Use of DT, Negotiating, Deconstructing 12 53 Display show Use of DT, Negotiating, Deconstructing 13 22 Continues continued Use of DT,  Deconstructing, Negotiating 14 19 enrollment Use of DT 15 22 Public Use of DT, Negotiating 16 76 Advantage Increase add Use of DT, Negotiating    Total Time Spent in Translation Moments 1140  (avg. 71.25/moment)    54 As evidenced in Table 5, Natalie engaged in a total of 16 translation moments during her 90 minute screencast recording. She spent a total of 1140 seconds in these 16 translation moments. Hence, translation moments encompassed 21.11% of Natalie™s overall translation time. Furthermore, Use of  Digital Translation Tools was Natalie™s most used translation strategy (n=16). However, Natalie frequently paired the use of digital translation tools with deconstructing and/or negotiating strategies.   Table 6: Bridget™s Translation Moments Translation Moment #  Duration (in seconds out of 1800) Words looked up Strategies Used 1 20 ﬁSpanish exclamation markﬂ Use of DT 2 38 Student loan Student loan debt Debt student Use of DT, Deconstructing 3 78 Trillion The same amount Trillion dollars Use of DT, Deconstructing 4 45 Recently released release Use of DT, Deconstructing, Negotiating 5 34 With the highest debt Use of DT 6 28 Coming up approaching Use of DT, Deconstructing, Negotiating 7 16 debate Use of DT 8 17 mention Use of DT 9 14 Spanish n Use of DT 10 15 ﬁthrives on campusﬂ Use of DT 11 22 ﬁDiverse studentsﬂ ﬁdiverseﬂ  ﬁdiversityﬂ Use of DT, Deconstructing 12 7 Throughout Use of DT 13 18 Allows Allow allowed Use of DT, Deconstructing 14 5 Student Union Use of DT 15 5 Display Use of DT    55 Table 6 (cont™d) 16 30 All-inclusive environment Inclusive environment Use of DT, Deconstructing, Negotiating 17 40 Encouraging growth Encouraging alentador Use of DT, Deconstructing, Negotiating 18 37 To strive for greatness To strive great Use of DT, Deconstructing, Negotiating 19 26 downtown  Use of DT, Negotiating 20 48 Melting pot Use of DT, Deconstructing, Negotiating 21 14 Multicultural Academic Support services Use of DT, Negotiating 22 34 similaridades Use of DT, Deconstructing, Negotiating 23 28 through Use of DT, Deconstructing, Negotiating 24 12 Student loan debt Use of DT, 25 34 Trillion dollars Trillion  million Use of DT, Deconstructing, 26 22 the same amount Use of DT 27 26 ﬁSpanish nﬂ Use of DT 28 23 invention Use of DT 29 22 debate Use of DT 30 78 Recently released Use of DT,   Negotiating 31 48 By increasing By increase Use of DT, Deconstructing, 32 13 infastructure Use of DT 33 9 research Use of DT 34 7 investment Use of DT 35 14 increase Use of DT 36 45 Will lead to economic growth Use of DT  37 34 Student borrowers Use of DT  38 67 Boost bottom lines Use of DT  39 49 Sky rocketing Use of DT  40 78 Tuition rates Rates tazas Use of DT,   Negotiating, Deconstructing 41 49 By Use of DT,   Negotiating,   56 Table 6 (cont™d) 42 34 Income-share agreement Use of DT,   Negotiating,, Deconstructing 43 89 Student Right to know before you Act Use of DT,   Negotiating,, Deconstructing   Total Time Spent in Translation Moments 1417 (avg.  32.95/moment)  Bridget experienced 43 translation moments during her screencast recording, lasting a total of 1417 seconds. Translation moments hence encompassed 26.24% of Bridget™s translation process. Bridget™s most frequently used translation strategy was the use of digital translation tools (n=43), followed by deconstructing (n=17) and negotiating (n=15) strategies. Because both participants, Natalie and Bridget translated these stories at home alone on their personal computers, the embodied translation codes depicted in Table 4 were not present. These strategies are more apparent  during pitch meetings, where all 
members of KLN came together to discuss their articles. In the following sections, I™ll discuss how Natalie and Bridget used translation tools, deconstructing, and negotiation to overcome communicative discrepancies during translation moments.  NATALIE: AN EXPERIENCE TRANSLATOR FOR KLN As the student leader for KLN, Natalie has been translating stories for the organization for 3 years. During her artifact-based interview, Natalie explained that she joined KLN because she wanted to get experience producing news stories in Spanish. As an 
advertising and public relations major, Natalie understands the importance of reaching the Latin@ population in Florida. ﬁLatinos are Florida,ﬂ Natalie explained during her interview; ﬁYou can™t say you are talking to Floridians if you™re only producing news in English.ﬂ   57 After being born in the Dominican Republic, Natalie moved to Orlando with her family at the start of middle school (6th grade). Natalie explains that she learned to speak Spanish in the Dominican Republic first, but she started to learn English as a child even before her family moved to Florida: ﬁTo my family both languages [Spanish and English] have always been important, because our family lives in both places [the Dominican Republic and Florida],ﬂ Natalie stated.  Natalie™s translation practices reflect her keen ability to seamlessly move between English and Spanish. When asked to describe her translation practices as she works on stories for Knightly Latino, Natalie explained, ﬁTranslation for me is not about writing in English or writing in Spanish-It™s about living all the time in both worlds and knowing where to go in the moment.ﬂ Natalie™s sense of ﬁwhere to go in the momentﬂ was clearly 
evidenced in her layering of negotiation and deconstruction strategies during her translation process. While Natalie always used digital translation tools (i.e., Google translate) as a starting point for her translation, she often layered deconstruction and negotiation with the results she received from Google translate. In this way, Natalie contextualized the translations provided by Google translate to address her audience more effectively. Figure 5 illustrates a typical translation moment for Natalie, where she layers 
the use of digital translation tools with negotiation and deconstruction strategies described in Table 4.    
   58   Figure 5: Natalie™s Translation Process  In the translation moment illustrated in Figure 5, Natalie was translating the word ﬁthreatenﬂ as it appeared in the title of the story, ﬁDevelopment Plan Threatens Orlando Park.ﬂ Natalie first inputs the word ﬁthreatenﬂ into Google translate. Google provided 
received four options: amenazar, proferir amenazas contra, acechar, and amagar. All of these words and phrases were identified by Google translate as synonymous to the English 
word ﬁthreaten.ﬂ Rather than using any of the initial options provided by Google translate, however, Natalie searched for Spanish translations of the word ﬁharm.ﬂ Google translate provided 9 options for this translation, and Natalie decided to use the first option, the word daño, in her final article. After negotiating between the word ﬁthreatenﬂ and the word ﬁharm,ﬂ Natalie deconstructed the word daño by conjugating it to fit grammatically into the article™s title. She then decided to go with the word daña as her final translation.  During her artifact based interview, Natalie explained that she didn™t use any of the initial suggestions provided by Google translate because ﬁthe word threaten seemed to be translated into something more related to physical harm. If I amenazar someone, for   59 example, I™m threatening them physically. Threatening a park is completely different, so I decided to look up options for the word harm because I thought that might give me results that are more like harming a physical object instead of a person.ﬂ In this way, as she 
negotiated between the implications of the word amenazar and daño, Natalie also negotiated her cultural understanding of both English and Spanish. In turn, Natalie 
localized the translations provided by Google translate to better fit her intended audience.  It™s interesting to note that after realizing that the word ﬁthreatenﬂ was translated by Google to ﬁamenazar,ﬂ and after deciding that the word ﬁamenazarﬂ was not appropriate for this context, Natalie decided to input another English word, ﬁharmﬂ into Google translate. Rather than searching for Spanish synonyms for ﬁamenazar,ﬂ Natalie knew enough about the functionality of digital translation tools to select another word in English to help with her translation.  During her artifact-based interview, Natalie explained that she looked up a second word in English (ﬁharmﬂ) rather than searching for Spanish synonyms because ﬁthe online tools are always better if you look something up in English.ﬂ ﬁIf you look something up in 
Spanish on Google,ﬂ Natalie continued, ﬁit won™t be as accurate as if you can look it up English.ﬂ Indeed, through this example, Natalie exhibits technical knowledge that aligns with current research regarding the state of digital translation tools. As Chen and Bao (2007) and Balk et al. (2012) explain, digital translation tools, and Google translate in particular, is guided by English-centered algorithms. Although Google translate now has capabilities to translate between 72 different languages (Arche, 2015), as Balk et al. (2012) found through a study of Google translate™s 
accuracy, the most accurate translations are yielded when users use Google to translate   60 from English to another language. That is, rather than translating between Spanish and French, for instance, studies have found that more accurate translations are provided when users translate a word from Spanish to English, English to French, and so on. The algorithms used to organize Google™s dictionaries are developed with English at the center. Therefore, searching for words in English will always yield more accurate translations. Users like Natalie have found ways to hack digital translation tools like Google translate by combining their own cultural and linguistic knowledge with Google™s algorithmically 
designed dictionaries.  As Natalie continues her interview, she explains that the translations provided by Google translate ﬁare just inspiration sometimes. I wouldn™t have thought of the word dañar on my own necessarily, but seeing that amenazar was an option helped me think of similar words to look up in Spanish and English. The Google translations gave me options.ﬂ Hence, as Natalie explains, digital translation tools are most successful when they are paired with the cultural knowledge of human users.  
  As evidenced through Natalie™s example, using the translations provided by Google translate requires that users incorporate linguistic and cultural knowledge in two languages, in this case both Spanish and English. For Natalie, Google translate served as a tool to help or ﬁinspireﬂ her own abilities to move between languages, perhaps suggesting that bilingual users may have additional rhetorical knowledge to supplement the work of digital translation software. Though the translation of the word ﬁthreatenﬂ is just one example, as Table 5 illustrates, the layering of negotiation and deconstruction with the use of digital translation tools is a common translation practice for Natalie, occurring during a total of 6 out of 16 translation moments recorded.    61 BRIDGET: A NOVICE TRANSLATOR FOR KLN Unlike Natalie, Bridget explains that she has limited experience translating news stories for KLN. At the time of her interview, Bridget had been volunteering for KLN for only two weeks. Hence, the screencast recordings submitted by Bridget reflect the translation of the first two stories Bridget translated for the organization. Figure 6 illustrates a typical sequence of translation moments for Bridget.   Figure 6: Bridget™s Translation Process  As evidenced in Table 6 and Figure 6, Bridget experienced almost twice as many translation moments as Natalie. However, while Natalie spent approximately 71.25 seconds in each translation moment, Bridget spent less than half the time (32.95 seconds on average) in each of her translation moments. This difference in the length of translation moments could reflect Natalie™s extended cultural negotiation process.    62 As Figure 6 illustrates, Bridget™s translation moments were often sequenced. In the translation sequence depicted in Figure 6, Bridget was translating an article about student loan debt. Specifically, she was working on translating the sentence, ﬁThe increase in student loan subsidies will be an investment that will lead to economic growth.ﬂ Rather than deconstructing the sentence or translating it in pieces, Bridget began by translating a set of words and phrases in the sentence, before typing any translation. As Figure 6 illustrates, Bridget inputs ﬁinvestment,ﬂ ﬁincrease,ﬂ and ﬁwill lead to economic growthﬂ into 
Google translate, and she uses the first definition provided through this digital translation tool in her translation. However, after looking up the initial sequence of words and phrases 
in Google translate, Bridget does engage in negotiation and deconstruction strategies as she presents a final translation of the entire sentence. For instance, rather than using the word aumentar as the translation of  ﬁincrease,ﬂ Bridget deconstructs this word into aumento in her final translation. Bridget™s use of deconstruction and negotiation only became apparent during her artifact Œbased interview, as there was no evidence of these strategies in her screencast recording.  During her interview, Bridget explained, ﬁI use Google translate to translate all the parts of a sentence that I™m having trouble with first, because I have a hard time coming up with the words I wanna use in Spanish.ﬂ Although Bridget couldn™t think of the translation for the word ﬁincreaseﬂ initially, once the word aumentar  was provided by Google translate,  Bridget did know how to adequately conjugate and deconstruct the word to 
accurately fit her translated sentence. Hence, Bridget explains, ﬁonce I see the word, I know how to fix it to fit what I™m trying to say, but since I™m used to talking in English most of the time at school, I have a hard time coming up with the words at first.ﬂ Like Natalie, Bridget   63 used Google translate as a form of invention, getting and adapting definitions to fit the context of her writing. However, unlike Natalie, Bridget did not necessarily have the extensive vocabulary to engage in negotiation and deconstruction strategies earlier in the translation process.  During another translation moment, Bridget was translating an article regarding a new building in downtown Orlando. The article referenced tensions between the popular tourist appeal of International drive and the more locally recognized venues located in downtown Orlando. Similar to the process depicted in Figure 6, Bridget began by inputting several words and phrases into Google translate, including ﬁdowntown,ﬂ ﬁcity,ﬂ and ﬁbuilding.ﬂ Rather than using the first translations provided for all words input into Google translate, however, Bridget further negotiated these translations through the use of other digital and rhetorical resources.  Google translated ﬁdowntownﬂ to centro de la ciudad, which is a literal translation meaning ﬁcenter of the city.ﬂ During her interview, Bridget explained that she did not want 
to use the phrase centro de la ciudad because that phrase ﬁis too formal. People who live in Orlando wouldn™t talk about downtown like that, like center of the city.ﬂ Dissatisfied with Google™s translation of the word ﬁdowntown,ﬂ Bridget went to Telemundo™s website, a multilingual Spanish/English news network. She searched ﬁdowntown Orlandoﬂ on the site™s search bar, and found several entries that referenced ﬁOrlandoﬂ without referencing downtown. After visiting Telemundo™s website, Natalie went back to her article and used the word ﬁOrlandoﬂ without referencing ﬁdowntown.ﬂ She omitted Google™s suggested 
phrase, centro de la ciudad, and instead used Orlando to reference downtown Orlando and   64 la international drive de Orlando to reference the tourist area described in the English article. During her interview, Bridget described her negotiation process in translating the references to ﬁdowntown Orlando.ﬂ She explained, ﬁA lot of times I™ll Google a word if I have no idea how to use it and I™ll look up the word on Telemundo or Univision, just to get some context clues for how it™s used in the media.ﬂ After looking up the word ﬁdowntownﬂ on Google translate, Bridget had enough rhetorical knowledge to understand that the Latina/o community in Orlando would not use the formal phrase centro de la ciudad to reference their city. Additionally, Bridget knew to leverage other digital resources by visiting bilingual news sites that would be familiar to her intended audience, using articles on 
Telemundo or Univision (another Spanish/English news station) as a reference point for her translations. In this way, Bridget ensured that her final translation would not only be literally accurate (as the phrase centro de la ciudad would be), but would also be culturally localized to the Orlando Latina/o community whom she is aiming to reach.   Bridget™s digital translation practices, as illustrated through this brief example, required that she not only find accurate representations of words and phrases across 
languages, but that she also finds culturally appropriate language substitutions that meet the needs of her intended audience. As a bilingual speaker who lives in Orlando, Bridget knew how to coordinate digital, bilingual resources to come up with a translation that is both accurate and culturally appropriate, even if she did not initially have a Spanish 
vocabulary as extensive as Natalie™s.     65 CONCLUSIONS  My analysis of Bridget and Natalie™s translation practices suggests that multilingual communicators who translate are practicing a wide range of rhetorical strategies as they transform information from one language to another. In addition, the video footage that I recorded during my time with KLN participants shows that multilingual communicators are not only negotiating linguistic transitions as they translate for KLN, but that they are also experiencing stories from their past as they negotiate their confidence in using both Spanish and English. In turn, translators at KLN showcase a rhetorical versatility through their movements between languages, one that echoes participants™ histories and lived experiences just as much (if not more) than their language skills.  During my interview with Katie, the faculty leader for KLN, she referenced cultural and linguistic versatility as integral to the professional training she envisions for all Latino students at her University: ﬁThese students have a skill that is both important and marketable. They have to keep practicing translation in order to represent themselves 
professionally in the world as bilingual communicators. That™s what KLN is all about.ﬂ As Katie and I discussed the deconstruction and negotiation strategies exhibited by Natalie and Bridget during their translation practices, Katie explained that these strategies are always part of translation, even for trained professionals. In addition to her faculty duties, Katie freelances as a translator for an international news network. Though Katie has over 15 years of experience as a translator, she explains that she still experiences 
translation moments that push her to negotiate, deconstruct, and localize information to fit her intended audience.    66 For example, Katie recalled a recent story she was translating about fans at a sports event. ﬁAlthough I knew how to translate the word ‚fans™ into Spanish,ﬂ Katie explained, ﬁI also knew that there are many definitions of this term. I knew that I was translating for a Puerto Rican news network, so I wanted to find translations that would fit that culture.ﬂ Instead of using her own translations of the word ﬁfan,ﬂ Katie decided to call her cousin who lives in Puerto Rico. ﬁI was so surprised when he told me to use the word hinchas to mean fans,ﬂ Katie explained. ﬁTo us [in Cuba], hincha or hinchado means swollen. I guess metaphorically it makes sense that fans are swollen for their team, but I would have never thought of that word. I used it because I knew I was translating for Puerto Ricans, but that 
would have never been my own translation.ﬂ Katie™s discussion of her own translation moment suggests that the negotiation and deconstruction strategies exhibited by Natalie and Bridget may be a common practice for translators. As Katie also illustrates through her example, a translator™s experience moving between languages may also influence the strategies she employs to overcome potential communicative discrepancies during translation moments. That is, Katie™s decision to call 
her cousin can perhaps be attributed to her experience understanding the importance of localizing translations to specific cultures. In addition, Katie seems to have an broader network of resources from which to draw translation assistance. Rather than relying on digital translation tools like Natalie and Bridget, Katie™s first recourse during a translation moment was to call her cousin, another bilingual communicator. As this brief and admittedly limited example suggests, translators with longer translation experience may 
develop new strategies and networks to localize information for their audiences. While negotiation and deconstruction appear to be a common practice in all translation work,   67 additional translation strategies may be developed over time. For this reason, as I will show in Chapter 4 through my discussion of translation practices at a professional translation office, it is important for technical communicators to study and value the translation 
practices of both professional translators and multilingual communicators with limited experience translating for public audiences. As evidenced through Bridget™s creative use of digital resources like Telemundo, inexperienced translators still exhibit creating translation strategies that can inform the development and use of multilingual technical communication tools and resources. In the following section, I™ll conclude with further implications for technical communication researchers and professionals.  IMPLICATIONS  By studying the situated translation practices of multilingual communicators at KLN, I was able to trace how multilinguals use deconstruction and negotiation strategies in conjunction with the use of digital translation tools to successfully translate information across languages. I was also able to see how the process of translation causes participants to recall, enact, and even resist their lived experiences with language as they push themselves to communicate in both Spanish and English.  The implications of this research are relevant to the design of digital translation tools, to the successful development of global technical communication tools and documents, and to the teaching of multilingual learners. For instance, understanding how Natalie and Bridget use digital translation tools as sites of inspiration can help information designers working in digital translation to further consider how multilingual users can contribute to the design of digital translation platforms. From these examples, technical 
communicators aiming to build partnerships and relationships with translators can further   68 understand the linguistic and cultural knowledge that translators deploy during their language adaptation practices. In addition, technical communicators can begin to further understand how the lived experiences of translators may influence their contributions to specific technical communication projects. For translators like Ana, for example, different aspects of the translation process may be more attainable, not due to her lack of skill or 
experience, but due to the power structures she™s had to navigate which caused her to focus on certain aspects of her linguistic repertoire while leaving others behind.  As we continue building pedagogies to teach multilingual participants, both within technical communication and in rhetoric and composition, it™s important for us to consider the impact that our experiences with language may have on our current linguistic practices. That is, asking or requiring students to ﬁmeshﬂ or ﬁswitchﬂ languages in our classrooms may yield tension, even for students who are fluent in more than one language, and for students whose heritage language is something other than Standard American English. The movement between languages is influenced not only by our ability to speak more than one 
language, but also by the confidence we feel (and have been allowed to feel) in our educational training. As Ana emphasizes, after being told ﬁwe don™t do that hereﬂ in reference to practices like codeswitching and code meshing for many years, it may be difficult for multilingual learners to regain the confidence and the will to bring these languages into academic and professional settings.  In addition to connecting translation practices to linguistic and cultural experiences, my analysis of KLN™s translation practices suggests that translation is often  accomplished via multiple, layered, and sequenced strategies. It is very rare for a translator to only use one strategy during the language transformation process. While some of these strategiesŠ   69 like deconstructing and negotiating Š are not necessarily new, the purposeful, rhetorical use and layering of these strategies (as illustrated by translators like Bridget, Natalie, and Katie) exemplify the complex negotiation of history, culture, and language that takes place 
as users translate words and phrases into English. These negotiations are most accurately completed by human translators who have enough experience and context to situate information across languages.  Participants like Bridget and Natalie drew upon their own experiences and cultural knowledge to translate in context. Through the negotiation of words like ﬁdowntownﬂ and ﬁthreaten,ﬂ participants revealed the benefits of cultural knowledge to the translation process. The transformations of meaning participants were focused on conveying experiences (e.g., emotions about downtown Orlando) than about providing ﬁobjectiveﬂ  or literal definitions of the translated words. As technical communicators and practitioners working toward creating user-centered global content, it™s important that we consider not only the words we are transforming through the process of translation, but also the experiences, stories, and histories we are referencing and recreating as we move information across languages.  In the following chapter, I™ll extend my analysis of translation moments by introducing an additional research site, The Hispanic Center of Western Michigan. This site provides a helpful additional layer of analysis by allowing me to continue tracing how different levels of translation experience impact an individual™s resources and networks for translation.      70 CHAPTER 4: TRANSLATION MOMENTS AT THE HISPANIC CENTER   ﬁLos lenguages son VIVOS-Languages are alive. Language moves, it breathes, it changes, and as translators we have to know how to adapt with it. That™s a lot of work, and we have to do it 
every single day, in every single momentﬂ                            -Sara Proaño   Figure 7: Sara Gestures as she Discusses Translation at the Hispanic Center  INTRODUCTION It took several months from the time I first visited the non-profit community center, The Hispanic Center of Western Michigan, to the time I began researching with the Language Services Department  that coordinates translation for this organization. Building trust when working with any organization is a complicated, time-consuming process. However, building trust with organizations that work with people of color (who have historically been discriminated against) requires an added layer of engagement,   71 reciprocity, and good will (Torrez, 2015). It™s important for researchers to understand ﬁappropriate rolesﬂ for their work with communities, especially when coming into organizations to act as observers or outsiders looking in (Blythe, Grabill, Riley, 2008). This chapter is an attempt to honor my relationships with the people of The Hispanic Center while showcasing the contributions that activities in this organization can make to the field of technical communication. In particular, in this chapter, I extend my research on translation by highlighting how professional translators layer rhetorical strategies (e.g., gesturing, storytelling) as they transform information from one language to another. As the field of technical communication continues to work toward the creation of ﬁglobal-readyﬂ content that can be adapted across cultures and languages (Batova and Clark, 2015), I argue that we should collaborate with multilingual communicators who have added experience adapting information as they translate for their communities. Furthermore, as 
we continue working to incorporate students™ linguistic histories into our writing pedagogy, it™s important for us to consider the rhetorical work that takes place as students move between languages both in and outside of the classroom.   To begin illustrating how translation is enacted by participants at The Hispanic Center, I™ll start with a story. My first official interaction with the people of The Hispanic Center happened when I volunteered to help with a ﬁComprando Rico y Sanoﬂ (Shopping Tasty and Healthy) event. Sponsored through a grant intended to promote healthy eating choices in the Latino 
community, this event invited people from the Grand Rapids community to The Hispanic Center to learn more about healthy eating options. To help set up for this presentation, I 
was asked to lay out materialŠin both Spanish and EnglishŠto be made available for   72 community members as they walked in. For example, we laid out flyers titled ﬁMy Plateﬂ or Mi Plato, illustrating what the sponsoring organization deemed to be adequate dinner portion sizes (See Figure 8).                                 Figure 8: Mi Plato (My Plate) Flyers As the image in Figure 8 shows, language accessibility is critical to the success of any task taking place at The Hispanic Center. All events and activities are open to individuals who speak Spanish and/or English to various degrees. For this reason, all materials in the organization itself and on the organization™s digital platforms (e.g., website, social media spaces) have to be provided in both Spanish and English. Language accessibility in these cases is not a matter of choice or preference, but is instead a critical component of any 
effort or initiative in this organization.   73 As the presentation began, the presenter, or Promotora, Sandra, began sharing resources and discussing family eating habits for her community (See Figure 9). Sandra presented information primarily in Spanish. She began her presentation by assuring her audience that although they all come from different places, she would do her best to make sure they can understand each other (ﬁyo creo que nos vamos a entender, aunque somos de differentes paisesﬂ/ ﬁI think we™re going to understand each other, even though we all come from different placesﬂ). Although all the participants in attendance spoke Spanish, Sandra understood that different Spanish countries use different variations of Spanish. Hence, Sandra explained that she would do her best to contextualize information in Spanish to fit the conventions of participants from different South and Central American countries.  Figure 9: Sandra Translates Mazorca    74 As Sandra continued with her presentation, she paused when discussing corn on the cob as a potential healthy dinner option for the families in attendance. As the video linked in Figure 9 illustrates, Sandra paused her presentation to clarify that at a previous presentation, she had used the word mazorca to describe corn on the cob (Click here or click Figure 9 to view the video). An audience member from Mexico at that previous presentation did not interpret mazorca to mean corn on the cob, and instead thought Sandra was suggesting she serve dry corn to her family (which did not seem right to her). Hence, in this moment, Sandra let her audience know that ﬁwhen I reference mazorca, I mean corn on the cob,ﬂ and then she showed a picture of corn on the cob to further clarify what she meant through the word mazorca. Following this initial translation moment, Sandra proceeded to pause at several points in her presentation to ask her audience how 
they define specific words (e.g., ﬁHow do you say beans to your kids? How does your family describe grocery shopping?ﬂ), in this way negotiating languages as she presented information to a bilingual, multicultural audience that is familiar with Spanish and English to various degrees. She situated the information she was presenting within the context of that specific audience during that specific presentation. Translation, through Sandra™s example, required that the communicator not only find a literal replacement of words from one language to another, but that she also localized these words to fit the specific cultural practices of her audience. In this way, as I mentioned in my introductory chapters, translation required both the adaptation of words and the localization of ideas. Translation 
and localization happen simultaneously in this organization. As Sandra™s example suggests, translation at The Hispanic Center is an iterative, layered, human, rhetorical process that requires constant negotiation between people from   75 different cultures. Translation is not an afterthought, but is instead central to all interactions between people working together to improve the health, success, and access of their community. Effective translation, in turn, relies on the skills and experiences of the 
people at the Hispanic Center, as evidenced by Sandra™s use of a previous presentation to clarify a word in a new context. Over time, multilingual communicators gain extensive experience translating information for various audiences (Khubchandani, 1998). Through these experiences (and the resulting communicative strengths), multilingual translators 
can be a valuable asset to technical communicators aiming to develop resources that serve the needs of increasingly diverse communities. Strengthening collaborations between technical communicators and professional translators can help us work toward the development of adaptable, culturally-situated content, pedagogies, and designs.  In this chapter, I aim to illustrate how multilingual translators develop and deploy rhetorical expertise as they move between languages to translate information. In my previous chapter, I studied how multilingual students working at Knightly Latino News translated news stories from English to Spanish to meet the needs of the Latino community 
in Florida. In this chapter, I extend that initial analysis by focusing on the translation practices of professional translators working at my second research site, The Hispanic Center of Western Michigan. Like the student translators at Knightly Latino News, professional translators at The Hispanic Center also layer various rhetorical strategies to translate information. However, due to their increased experience with translation, professional translators take more time and rely on added rhetorical expertise when working through translation moments for their community clients. In addition, unlike the student translators at Knightly Latino News who work at a University to translate and share   76 news stories digitally, members of the Hispanic Center™s staff live and work within the community they are aiming to serve. In turn, employees of The Hispanic Center develop an immediate, personal relationship with members of the Latino community in Grand Rapids. They hear community member™s stories, feel the urgency of community member™s needs, and consequently, deeply understand the impact of their work. The people who work at the Hispanic Center live in the Latino community in Grand Rapids where the center is located. Therefore, services being provided by the center are relevant to all the people coming into the organization, as employees, volunteers, and clients.   In the following sections, I™ll  provide a site profile of my second research site, The Hispanic Center of Western Michigan. I™ll then discuss my methods for analyzing translation moments in The Language Services Department at The Hispanic Center. I™ll provide video illustrations of the translation strategies used by professionals at this site. Then, I™ll conclude by discussing how researchers, practitioners, and teachers can use the translation strategies of multilinguals to develop adaptable, rhetorically and culturally-situated communication practices and pedagogies.  SITE PROFILE: THE HISPANIC CENTER OF WESTERN MICHIGAN In order to study translation moments in practice, I partnered with The Hispanic Center of Western Michigan, a non-profit organization located in Grand Rapids, MI.2 According to the organization™s website, the primary goal of the Hispanic Center is to ﬁprovide unmet social services to the Hispanic Community in Greater West Michigan.ﬂ                                                          2 The leaders of this organization agreed to have their names and information included in this chapter, as this is part of an ongoing collaborative project that highlights the value of this organization and its members.    77 Because The Hispanic Center of Western Michigan aims to provide its community members with opportunities to gain employment, residency, and social assistance in the United States, translation is a critical component of many interactions between the center™s staff and its community members. All translation activities at The Hispanic Center take place in a branch of the organization known as The Language Services Department.  There are four different branches within the Hispanic Center, including the Language Services 
Department, the Immigration Department, the Youth Department, and the Family Support Services Department. Each department has specific programs aimed at improving the livelihood of Latinos in Michigan.  For the purposes of this project, I focus specifically on the Language Services Department and its translation and interpretation services. These services include the 
written translation of technical documents and the verbal interpretation of conversations between Spanish-speaking clients and their English-speaking service providers. For example, in order to apply for residency, community members visit the Language Services 
Department specifically to translate their birth certificates and other documentation from Spanish to English. In addition, community members who don™t speak English frequently come into the Language Services Department for assistance with translation as they fill out school enrollment forms or job applications for themselves or their children. Lastly, the 
Language Services Department also employs 22 interpreters (such as Sandra mentioned in my introductory story), who are trained to accompany Spanish-speaking community members to medical appointments, court hearings, or other gatherings where translation is 
crucial to communication among parties. The Language Services Department partners with   78 several organizations in the city of Grand Rapids to provide language accessibility to Spanish-speaking community members in both verbal and written forms.   Figure 10 is an image illustrating the business model posted in The Language Service™s Department office. The three ﬁpillarsﬂ or cylinders encompassing this model read, ﬁLanguage Accessibility, Sustainability, Professional Development.ﬂ         Figure 10: The Language Services Department Business Model   In addition to providing translation and interpretation services for the community, The Language Services Department also provides training to bilingual individuals who want to serve their community and develop themselves professionally by becoming certified translators or interpreters. For example, Carla, an interpreter currently working in The Language Services Department, worked in a factory packing eggs for 10 years before she entered The Language Services Department interpretation training program. Each year, the Language Services Department facilitates a training program that introduces interested community members to the professions of translation and interpretation. After the 80-hour training program, some individuals who participated are invited to become employed by   79 the organization. In this way, the Language Services Department continues to provide professional development opportunities while facilitating language accessibility in the community.  The Language Services Department is the only branch of The Hispanic Center that provides services for a fee. That is, this branch of the Center charges a fee for translation and interpretation services. The profits made through these fees, however, cover the salaries of the translators and interpreters like Carla who have been trained from the community itself. All additional profits go back to cover the over head costs of the Hispanic Center as a whole, funding services for the Family Support Services Department, the Immigration Department, and the Youth Services Department. In this way, The Language Services Department is the core of The Hispanic Center as an organization, covering the overhead costs that make all other branches of the organization viable and sustainable. The Language Services Department provides language accessibility to the community through its translation and interpretation services, provides professional development to the 
community by developing interpretation and translation training programs, and provides opportunities for the community by allowing community members to benefit financially from the organization either through employment with The Language Services Department or by participating in other events hosted by The Hispanic Center  and funded through the fees that come into The Language Services Department. In the following section, I™ll discuss my methods for collecting and analyzing data within this complex and powerful organization.    80 METHODS In the same way that I studied translation at Knightly Latino News, I studied translation in The Language Services Department  by focusing on my analysis of ﬁtranslation moments.ﬂ Translation moments are instances in time when individuals pause in their translation to make a rhetorical decision in their transformation of information from one language to another (Gonzales and Zantjer, 2015). Drawing on Steven Alvarez™s (2012) concept of translanguaging moments (which stem from Heath™s (1983) discussion of 
literacy events), I developed the ﬁtranslation momentsﬂ framework to situate my study of how multilingual communicators make rhetorical decisions as they translate information across languages.  During my time in The Language Services Department, I recorded (through video, audio, and field notes) over 2000 translation moments, focusing specifically on instances where employees at the Hispanic Center made decisions about how to translate a word, phrase, or idea from Spanish to English or vice versa. For example, as one of my participants was translating a Neighborhood guide for the City of Grand Rapids from English to Spanish, she hesitated in an attempt to translate the 
word ﬁwasteﬂ in the phrase, ﬁhazardous waste disposal in City refuse carts.ﬂ  The translator was not sure if the word ﬁwasteﬂ in this context should translate to desechos or residuos in Spanish. To overcome this translation moment, the translator used digital tools (e.g., Linguee dictionary; Google translate) as well as embodied resources (e.g., a conversation 
with another translator in the room) to make a translation decision. Through her conversation with the second translator, the decision was made to use the word residuos because the translators believed this word to be ﬁmore properﬂ for a formal publication to   81 be sent out to all residents in Grand Rapids, and because the word residuos resonated more with the two translators who discussed their previous experiences hearing and using this word in the context of that community.  To translate the word ﬁwaste,ﬂ the translators involved in this translation moment drew on their previous experiences as well as their research skills to make a choice in translation. They used digital tools such as the Linguee dictionary (www.linguee.com) or Google translate to coordinate their translations, but they combined these digital tools with material, cultural, and historical knowledge (e.g., knowledge about the cultural make up of the community and its linguistic practices, knowledge of how the word residuos has been used historically). In the process of making decisions within translation moments, translators at The Hispanic Center use various resources, layering digital tools with embodied strategies (e.g., gesturing, storytelling, repeating) that allowed for more accessible translations. Paying attention to both the digital and the embodied interactions of translators allowed me to better understand how participants ﬁorganize, dramatize, reflect upon, and understandﬂ information across languages (Sauer, 2003, p. 257). Through this analysis, in turn, I illustrate how multilingual translators have rhetorical and technological expertise that can benefit the field of technical communication.   DATA COLLECTED In order to study translation moments at The Hispanic Center, I collected 20 hours of screencast data and 400 hours of video footage captured during my time at the organization. I also collected 8 months of written field notes, and conducted 12 artifact-based interviews with translators and interpreters.        82 Table 7: Data Collected at The Hispanic Center  I installed Camtasia Relay on a computer in The Language Services Department that allowed me to record the translator™s mouse clicks and digital coordination patterns (Slattery, 2007). However, as technical communication researchers such as Stacey Pigg (2015) has shown us, screencast data may not provide a holistic illustration of writer™s processes, as this method does not allow us to see the embodied aspects of writers who coordinate both digital and material resources to accomplish their work. For this reason, I also collected 400 hours of video footage in The Language Services Department, allowing me to see how translators combined digital and material tools and strategies to transform 
information across languages. The video footage recorded participants™ computer screens 
as well as their embodied interactions. As I collected the screencast and video footage during my 6 months of observation, I conducted artifact-based interviews with 12 translators and interpreters (lasting approximately 1 hour each). During these artifact-based interviews, I shared some of the video footage and screencast data with participants, triangulating my preliminary analyses with participant™s discussions interpretations of the data. In this way, as Geisler and 
Slattery  (2007) and Pahl and Rowsell (2010) explain, artifact-based interviews served as a Data Type Quantity Collected Screencast recordings 20 hours Video footage 400 hours Written field notes 8 months/74 pages Artifact-based interviews 12 interviews/ 750 minutes of video footage   83 way to prompt participant™s memory during the interview process while allowing me to avoid making broad assumptions about my participant™s translation practices (Geisler and Slattery, 2007, Blythe and Gonzales forthcoming).  During my interviews with participants, I practiced what Ann Shivers-McNair (forthcoming) calls a 3-D interview, which accounts for human and non-human participants as well as the embodied interconnections between the two. For example, since The Language Services Department experiences a high frequency of calls and walk-in visitors, artifact-based interviews often consisted of a conversation between myself and a participant which was interrupted by phone call requests for interpretation, or by community members coming into the office to request document translations. The interviews, in turn, were influenced by the environment of the office itself, as well as by input from community members who came in and witnessed our conversations. Rather than ignoring these moments or deeming them to be merely interruptions, I accounted for the ways participants were interacting with me and with other people and objects during 
the interviews, developing a coding scheme for translation that encompassed human and non-human interactions as well as primary and side conversations. In the following section, I™ll discuss the coding scheme and process that emerged from these interactions, before 
moving onto illustrates the results.  DATA ANALYSIS Although I collected 400 hours of recorded data, I used my field notes to determine which translation moments I would analyze in the recorded data. For instance, as I worked in the Language Services Department, I had a field notebook by my desk while the cameras were recording the Language Services office. When translation moments occurred, I would   84 write down the approximate time of these moments in my field notebook, and would then go back to analyze these moments in the video footage. In this way, I did not have to code every minute of recorded footage, and could instead focus on specific translation moments noted through my observations.  I went through three rounds of coding to analyze my data. First, I analyzed the footage into macro level codes, or the instances and duration of all translation moments. I 
then used a preliminary coding scheme developed through a pilot study I conducted with Rebecca Zantjer to both get a preliminary count of the codes presented in the data and to develop additional codes in Vivo (Gonzales and Zantjer, 2015). I then conducted a third round of coding with a revised coding scheme to triangulate my analysis. Throughout this coding process, I used data collected during artifact-based interviews with participants to develop and refine the coding scheme. In this way, the final set of codes was developed 
both through my own analysis and through my participant™s reflections on their translation practices.   I ended up with this set of nine codes, which account for the ways participants used cultural, technical, and rhetorical knowledge to transform information from one language to another (See Table 8).     85 Table 8: Codes and Frequencies for Translation Moments in the Language Services Department Code Description Example 1  Example 2 Frequency Repeating Translators or interpreters say a word over and over again in order to 
determine if 
the word is an adequate translation.  Carla says ﬁlaborﬂ several times when trying to decide if she should 
use the word 
labor or nacimiento to describe a birth.  As she was translating an information packet for an MSU 
organization, 
Mery repeats the word ﬁworkbookﬂ 
several times 
before coming 
up with a Spanish translation 1086 Deconstructing Translators or interpreters conjugate a 
word or find 
variations of a word in order to make an 
adequate translation.  Eloy changes the word ﬁafirmarﬂ to 
ﬁafirmoﬂ in 
order to provide a grammatically-correct translation on a legal document.  Jaylyn breaks down the word ﬁnacimientoﬂ 
into the word 
ﬁnacerﬂ during an adoption document 
translation. 896 Gesturing Translators or interpreters use their hands, faces, or other body parts to 
describe a 
word or phrase (embodied translation).  Graciela pinches her fingers when saying the 
word ﬁdrawingﬂ 
during a 
translation moment.  Sara moves her fingers back and fourth as the attempts to move words 
around in her 
translation of a flyer.  787 Use of Digital Translation Tools Translators use an online dictionary or other platform 
during a 
translation moment.  Sara uses Linguee dictionary to 
find translation 
options for the 
word ﬁheroﬂ  Holly uses Google translate to find 
translations for 
the word  ﬁsedeﬂ 
in a birth certificate from Guatemala 743   86 Table 8 (cont™d) Reading Aloud Translators read their translation in order to see 
how it might be perceived by a community 
member.  Sara reads the phrase ﬁpals dayﬂ several 
times when 
thinking of an appropriate translation for 
a Children™s 
Museum translation.  As they were proofreading a translation for an anesthesia 
clinic, Sara and Mery take turns reading the title 
in order to 
decide which version of the 
title fits best 
within the context of their document.  701 Negotiating Translators or interpreters choose between several 
translation 
options, thinking of a way to best 
localize or 
contextualize the information presented.  Sara chooses between desechos or residuos when referring to 
waste in a 
translation for the City of Grand Rapids.  Mery and Sara discuss possible translations for the term ﬁtoolkit,ﬂ 
deciding to use 
ﬁkit de herramientasﬂ for their 
translation.  680 Storytelling Rather than providing a specific 
definition, 
translators or 
interpreters share a story about how 
they™ve heard a 
word of phrase 
be used in the past.  Maria explains that she word alcantarillas was only used 
to refer to 
drains in Cuba, not necessarily sewers.  While translating death certificates for a 
funeral home, 
Sara tells a story about how she learned to 
translate the 
word ﬁwith 
childﬂ into Spanish after incorrectly 
writing that a 90 
year old woman passed away while pregnant. 643   87 Table 8 (cont™d) Sketching Translators or interpreters draw something to 
represent the meaning of a word during a 
translation 
moment.  Graciela drew a stopwatch for a client during an 
interpretation 
when the client was having trouble 
understanding 
the time schedule for her medicine.  During an over the phone interpretation, Eloy writes 
down ﬁhome visitﬂ and sketches a house 
as the tries to 
come up with the Spanish translation on the spot.  220 Total    8627  RESULTS As evidenced in Table 8, translators and interpreters in The Language Services Department combined a wide range of strategies during their translation moments. Table 8 also illustrates the various audiences that translators and interpreters communicated with, including doctors and patients, government organizations (i.e., the City of Grand Rapids), and academic institutions (i.e., Michigan State University). To meet the needs of each audience, translators and interpreters had to consider several different factors, including 
the reading levels of both the service provider and the client (e.g., the doctor/hospital and the patient), the regional location where the translation or interpretation is being used, and the purpose or objective of the translation work itself. In turn, although all translators and interpreters are considered fluent in both Spanish and English, each individual participant 
brought a specific set of skills into the translation office.  For example, señora Maria, a 75 year old woman who immigrated from Cuba to Grand Rapids 50 years ago, is often asked to proofread translations after they have been completed by another translator, in order to check the readability and accessibility of a   88 document for Spanish-speaking audiences. Maria has been an active member of the Grand Rapids community for over 50 years, giving her added experience communicating with Spanish speakers in the city.  Although Maria does not complete the translations herself due to her lack of confidence with and desire to use a computer, Maria has the cultural and historical knowledge to help proofread completed translation projects to ensure that they are accessible to immigrants like herself who are more confident in Spanish than they are in English. She knows the specific terminology that her community members use to reference doctors offices, community centers, and other social services that represent the translation work frequently brought into The Language Services Department.  During my time researching in The Language Services Department, I also had the opportunity to coordinate and complete translation projects for the organization. This means that I accepted translation requests from clients (e.g., the City of Grand Rapids, St. Mary™s Hospital), provided quotes for the translation work, and then assigned each project 
to a translator for completion. Over time, I got to intricately understand how each translator™s lived experiences influenced their success with specific types of projects. For example, Tanja, one of my primary translators, was incredibly successful translating documents from English to Spanish, primarily due to her experiences living in 12 different South American countries throughout her life. Teresa, on the other hand, was both in the U.S. and learned to speak English as a second language. Although Teresa can translate both 
from Spanish to English and vice versa, her strength is in Spanish to English translations of legal documents. After working as a lawyer for many years, Teresa has extensive knowledge of legal terminology in the English language. By understanding translators™   89 backgrounds and experiences, I could assign them translations that would be both easier to complete and more accurate for our clients.   Although there were 2871 translation moments in the data, there were 5756 strategies coded. This means that approximately 50% of the translation moments coded required the use of at least 2 translation strategies. In this way, participants in this case study were able to use a variety of tools strategically to successfully translate information for their communities. In addition, translation moments in The Language Services Department lasted approximately twice as long as translation moments experienced by student translators at Knightly Latino News. At Knightly Latino News, translation moments lasted and average of 1:48 minutes. In The Language Services Department, however, the average translation moment lasted approximately 2:32 minutes.  Through my conversations with interpreters and translators in The Language Services Department, I learned that the added experience of professional translators may lead to longer translation moments. Since professional translators have more experience with translation work, they have developed broader internal dictionaries and more options for translating specific words or phrases. Professional translators, due to their added experience, also have more room to question the accuracy of their translations, and they 
have developed broader networks through which they can ﬁcheck their work.ﬂ For instance, during her translation moments, Sara, the Director of the Language Services Department, frequently lingered on a single word for several minutes, walking over to her colleagues to discuss this single word and thus extending the duration of a single translation moment.  Translators and interpreters relied heavily on what I call ﬁembodied translation strategies,ﬂ which include repeating (f=1086)  and gesturing (f=787). They did also use   90 digital translation tools (f=743) such as Google translate or Linguee, a Spanish-English online dictionary, to translate information. In this way, translators and interpreters used embodied tools in combination with digital tools to reach their multilingual audiences. The single most frequently used translation strategy in The Language Services Department was ﬁrepeating,ﬂ which consisted of translators or interpreters saying a specific word over and over again to make a decision about a translation. Repeating was used 
frequently as a way for translators and interpreters to draw on their cultural knowledge (rather than relying solely on a digital translation tool) to overcome a translation moment. By cultural knowledge, I™m referencing the lived experiences of translators that they recall in making a decision about what ﬁsounds rightﬂ in their translation. When participants repeat a word over and over again to decide if something ﬁsounds right,ﬂ they are listening for the ways in which specific words or phrases have been used in the past. In turn, these repetitions are a way for participants to use lived experiences to adapt information in new contexts.  When I asked one interpreter, Carla, about her use of repeating strategies during interpretation, Carla explained: ﬁSometimes, you repeat things over and over again to see what sounds right. It™s something that you can™t really look up anywhere else, but if you say it enough, it eventually comes to you.ﬂ Through her statement, ﬁIt™s something that you can™t really look up anywhere else,ﬂ Carla suggests that translation activities in The Language Services Department rely heavily on the cultural and linguistic strengths of the translators and interpreters themselves. Using strategies like repetition allowed translators and interpreters in The Language   91 Services Department to cue their own cultural experiences to make a decision about how to adequately translate a word in the moment of translation. Instead of (or in addition to) using an online dictionary or digital resource, translators in The Language Services Department use their own experiences to index effective translations. This process of ﬁlooking upﬂ words through repetition, in turn, further highlights the rhetorical power of multilingual communicators who have a broad range of linguistic memories to draw upon as they transform information across languages. This rhetorical strength is further leveraged as multilinguals layer translation strategies to accomplish their work.  When I refer to the ﬁlayeringﬂ of strategies for translation, I reference the purposeful combination of rhetorical, cultural, and technological strategies used by translators and interpreters to overcome translation moments. The image in Figure 11, for example, illustrates how I used ELAN software to code translation strategies in various layers (what ELAN software calls ﬁtiersﬂ). In the specific moment depicted in Figure 11, the translator was using ﬁgesturingﬂ and ﬁstorytellingﬂ strategies in combination in order to successfully translate a Bible verse submitted to The Language Services Department by a local church. As evidenced in Figure 11, using this video coding tool allowed me to visualize how 
translators and interpreters were combining or layering strategies to accurately translate information.    92  Figure 11: Screenshot from Coding Translation Strategies into Layers  In the image depicted in Figure 4, Sara, the director of Language Services, was translating a Bible verse as part of a book project translation being completed for local church. In this specific instance, Sara paused shortly after beginning her translation, and she decided to call another translator, Cecilia, who has specific experience with religious documents. During this conversation, Sara and Cecilia began telling stories about different versions of the Bible and the corresponding translations. Sara used her hands to gesture 
back and forth as she referenced the various versions she was discussing, before making any decisions about how to proceed with her translation.  During another translation moment illustrated in Figure 12, Sara was translating a flyer regarding an event sponsored by the organization, Heart of West Michigan United Way. As she read the English version of the flyer aloud during her translation process, Sara 
began making back and forth gestures with her fingers, pointing to the computer screen   93 and moving her hands as she continued reading aloud. Then, within the same translation moment, as she continued gesturing back and forth with her fingers, Sara said: I™m going to start later in the sentence, even though the English version starts with the words ﬁHeart of West Michigan United Way.ﬂ Rather than keeping the order the same in Spanish, I™m going to start the translation in a different spot in the sentence, because if I start the translation with ﬁHeart of West Michigan United Way,ﬂ the Spanish-speaking reader will not be compelled to keep reading. Last time we did a flyer translation, when we started with the name of an organization in English, the Spanish-speaking clients did not feel like the flyer was intended for them. So here, I™m going to start differently.    Figure 12: Sara Layers Gesturing, Storytelling, and Reading Aloud to Translate  In the translation moment depicted in Figure 12, Sara combined gesturing and reading aloud strategies when making a decision about where to begin the Spanish version of this flyer. Sara was not necessarily struggling to come up with the translation of a specific word in Spanish. For this reason, using a digital translation tool in this instance would not have been useful. Instead, Sara used her own previous experiences (ﬁLast time we did a flyer translation–ﬂ) as well as her own embodied practice during the invention   94 process (gesturing and reading aloud) to make a rhetorical decision that helped her overcome this translation moment. As she continued translating this same flyer, Sara paused at another translation moment to decide how she would translate the word ﬁchampionﬂ into Spanish. During this translation moment, Sara used the digital translation tool Word Reference (http://www.wordreference.com/) to look for a word in Spanish that would signal a ﬁchampionﬂ in health insurance rather than a champion of a race or sports event. As she used Word Reference™s options to decide which word to use in her translation, Sara repeated each word provided by Word Reference aloud, using her indexed cultural knowledge and lived experiences to decide which word most accurately matches the rhetorical situations in which she has used this term before.   Figure 13: Sara Pauses to Translate the Word ﬁChampionﬂ  Caption: The image presents a translator, Sara, in the upper left hand corner. Sara is sitting in front of a computer. The caption ﬁI think word reference will have more optionsﬂ is written at the bottom of her image. Below Sara™s image, 9 coding categories are written on the left hand   95 Figure 13 (Cont™d) side of the screenŠﬁuse of DT tools, Deconstructing, Gesturing, Reading Aloud, Negotiating, Storytelling, Repeating, Sketching, Intonation.ﬂ There are markers noting instances of ﬁUse of DT tools,ﬂ ﬁreading aloud,ﬂ and ﬁrepeatingﬂ on the lower right hand side of the image.  During the translation moment depicted in Figure 13, Sara repeated the words ﬁcampeónﬂ and ﬁtriunfadorﬂ over and over again during her translation process, attempting to trigger her memories regarding previous contexts in which she has seen these words. As she moved back and forth between these two options, Sara began to move her fingers back and forth on the computer screen, touching each printed word and signaling a recursive back and forth movement as she made her final decision. In this way, as she moved through this translation, Sara continued to layer rhetorical strategies to transform information, 
using her body, her co-workers, and several digital tools to assist during this process.  The video linked in Figure 14 further illustrates how translators and interpreters layer cultural, rhetorical, and technical strategies to accomplish their work. This video presents Sara as the Director of Language Services, Eloy, the coordinator of interpreters who assigns interpretation jobs to other interpreters at the center, Carla, who is currently working as an interpreter, Graciela, a more experienced interpreter who has been working at in The Language Services Department for over 6 years, as well as me, depicted as I interpret a phone call between a health service provider and a Spanish-speaking community member. Please click the image in Figure 10 or follow this link to view the 
video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mnwz2iIDDrA.       96  Figure 14: Layering Translation Strategies in The Language Services Department  The video linked through Figure 14 illustrates the constant movementŠboth physical and mental, that takes place as professional translators and interpreters navigate translation moments. For instance, the video depicts Graciela explaining how interpreters have to work with health care providers and other clients to develop an adequate 
translation for Spanish-speaking community members (See Figure 14)    
   97  Figure 15: Graciela Describes Interpretation  Caption: The image portrays Graciela, an interpreter, sitting in front of a file cabinet as she discusses translation moment. The caption in Spanish reads, ﬁWe drew, sketched, did anything to communicate..and we managed, but it was very difficult.ﬂ  When Graciela says, ﬁWe drew, sketched, did anything to communicate–and we managed, but it is very difficultﬂ she signals the ways in which interpreters have to combine visual and verbal modes to accomplish accurate translations. Furthermore, the examples shared by Graciela describe the immediacy and urgency through which successful interpretation happens. When interpreters are on a job, they are translating information in the moment, with little time to second guess their choices. Over time, in turn, interpreters develop a critical awareness to the kairiotic impacts of translation.  In the video depicted in Figure 14, we are also introduced to Carla, another interpreter working for the Hispanic Center. In this short video, Carla describes a linguistic decision she had to make as she interpreted interactions between a doctor and his patient 
during a birth (See figure 16).    98  Figure 16: Carla Describes a Translation Moment During a Birth  Caption: The image portrays two interpreters, Carla and Eloy discussing a translation moment. The caption reads, ﬁI could have said to enter ﬁlaborﬂ but many people would have understood that [word] like laborers, like workﬂ  As Carla explains, during the interpretation session, the doctor explained that he was going to ﬁbreak [the patient™s ] water in order to get the labor started.ﬂ In that moment, Carla had to make a decision between using the literal translation of the word labor in Spanish, which happens to be the same word, labor. However, rather than using the word labor in her translation, Carla decided to adjust the language to tell the Spanish-speaking client, ﬁle voy a romper la fuente para empezar con el nacimiento,ﬂ which translates to ﬁI™m going to break your water so that we can get the birth started.ﬂ As Carla explains in her 
conversation with the interpretation coordinator, Eloy, ﬁI could have said ﬁto get the labor started,ﬂ but I knew in that moment that the patient could have misinterpreted the word labor to reference a job or profession. In this instance of translation, Carla knew that she had to erase any potential confusion for her clients, especially during the intensity that is   99 already overwhelming the community member as she is giving birth. In this instance, once again, we see how interpreters like Carla and Graciela leverage any semiotic resource available to them in the moment of translation, combining and layering communicative strengths to facilitate conversations between people from different linguistic backgrounds.  As evidenced in this case study, professional translators layer a variety of different tools, strategies, and resources to adapt information for their community. Often, these tools and strategies require the use of embodied activities, causing translators and interpreters to move their body to communicate information when words are not sufficient or available. Through my work with these participants, I have learned that the embodied aspects of translation are present not only in the visible signs we see through interpreters™ gestures, but also in the internal conflicts that take place as participants adapt information in high-stress environments. Translating during a birth, for instance, requires that interpreters take into account a wide range of contextual factors simultaneously, making the best rhetorical decision in the moment, while being aware of the high impact that these 
translation decisions may have on the livelihood of Spanish-speaking community members. In turn, through my work with this organization, I further understand the humanity 
embedded in translation, both on the part of the multilingual individual adapting the information and on the part of the interested parties who rely on the translator for successful communication.  SIGNIFICANCE  The primary purpose of this chapter was to illustrate the complexity of the translation process in a professional setting, showing how translation encompasses the use of technical, rhetorical,  and cultural knowledge. As evidenced through the layering   100 translation practices of participants in The Language Services Department, translation is a human-centered practice, one that uses (but does not rely on) digital tools. Recent conversations about translation and localization in technical communication argue for the 
importance of contextualizing (or localizing) information (rather than just mechanically replacing words) when moving content from one language to another (Agboka, 2014; Batova and Clark, 2015; Sun, 2012). In this chapter, I illustrated how multilingual translators effectively contextualize information through the embodied and digital strategies they use to overcome translation moments. Working with multilingual professional translators who successfully localize information, I argue, can help technical communicators in culturally and linguistically situated ways. As technical communicators continue researching ways to improve the creation and dissemination of content across cultures and languages, the strengths and experiences of trained translators like those in The Language Services Department at the Hispanic Center can provide a rich source of data and useful opportunities for collaboration. Recent 
developments such as the Trans-Atlantic & Pacific Project (TAPP) (an international research collaboration between technical communication students and translation studies students across 6 countries) and the forthcoming ﬁConverging Fields: Connections Between Translation and Technical Communicationﬂ conference point to the importance of collaborations between translators and technical communicators. In addition, technical communication researchers such as Walton and Zraly (2015) have begun to push us to 
consider translation as intellectual practice that is relevant to all technical communication work. As the field of technical communication continues working across linguistically, technologically, and culturally diverse contexts, listening to and learning from the   101 translation practices of multilingual users will only become more important. Developing frameworks for understanding translation, such as the coding scheme stemming from this case study, will be critical in building the bridges between translation and technical communication that will allow us to continue designing effective tools and user experiences.     In rhetoric and composition, the pedagogical applications of this work can also influence research and pedagogical practices in reference to multilingual writing 
instruction. Understanding the translation practices of these professionals can help rhetoric and composition instructors value the intellectual work that is often at play in our classrooms, as multilingual students move between languages in both their spoken and written interactions. As we continue developing pedagogies to help us reach an increasingly diverse student body, understanding processes of translation can be a useful step in adapting our pedagogies to include, honor, and enhance the communicative practices of our students. Like the translators in the Language Services Department who brought different strengths to the organization depending on their linguistic/cultural backgrounds as well as their educational and professional training, multilingual students who come into our classrooms also bring specific skills related to their own lived experiences. In developing multilingual pedagogies aimed to meet the needs of students whose first language is not English, composition instructors can benefit from working to identify the specific communicative strengths of all students. Like the translator Maria, 
each student brings a unique perspective to language and communication, and it is our job as teachers to help identify and strengthen these contributions.     102 CHAPTER 5: CONCLUSIONS AND IMPLICATIONS INTRODUCTION The purpose of this project is to illustrate the tools and strategies that multilingual communicators use as they translate information from one language to another. In particular, I aimed to analyze and present the rhetorical, technical, and cultural skills that multilingual translators use as they navigate what I call translation moments, or instances 
in time when multilnguals pause to make a decision about how to transform a specific word or phrase from one language to another. The results of this project, as evidenced through the findings of my two case studies, suggest that to contextualize meaning during translation moments, multilingual participants layer embodied strategies (e.g., gesturing, storytelling, sketching), linguistic and cultural knowledge (e.g., deconstructing, negotiating), and the use of digital technologies (e.g., digital translation tools).  By analyzing translation processes as they are enacted by student and professional translators at two different research sites, I present translation as a rhetorical practice that requires the simultaneous use of multiple semiotic resources. By analyzing how my participants translate, I illustrate the intellectual work behind multilingual communication. In this way, I have gathered evidence to support my efforts in flipping the deficit model often used to describe multilingual learners, intricately showing the complex rhetorical work that multilinguals engage in as they communicate with various audiences.  While the evidence provided in the previous chapters is useful in understanding what multilinguals do as they translate information, in this chapter I™d like to draw implications of this project for the field of technical communication and rhetoric and composition. To begin, I™ll introduce my argument for making translation more visible in   103 technical communication research, before presenting further implications through what I call ﬁA Revised Rhetoric of Translation.ﬂ I present this framework to technical communicators aiming to build relationships with translators in order to create and disseminate culturally-situated, global-ready content. Lastly, I™ll move on to share a brief example of how the results of this project can be applied in writing classrooms through the 
design of a tool intended to help teachers and students translate the language used in writing assignment sheets.     MAKING TRANSLATION VISIBLE IN TECHNICAL COMMUNICATION  In some ways, translation has been considered part of technical communication work for quite some time, helping technical communicators create and disseminate information and technologies across diverse cultures and contexts (Agboka, 2013; Batova & Clark, 2015; Maylath, 1997; St. Amant & Olaniran, 2011; Weiss, 1997). As early as 1997, for instance, Weiss argued, ﬁtechnical communicators have always been translators, or bridge builders, between different groups and audiencesﬂ (p. 322). Here, Weiss used the term ﬁtranslationﬂ as a metaphor to describe the language adaptations that all technical communicators engage in as they create and distribute content to various audiences. That same year, Maylath (1997) provided one of the earliest frameworks for teaching technical communication students to prepare documents for translation across languages, in an effort to help students gain an ﬁawareness of their own language and its key differences from other languagesﬂ (343). As evidenced through these brief examples, translation has 
been described as either a metaphor for the work of technical communicators or as a supplementary activity that helps technical communicators reach wider audiences. Yet, as 
Maylath, Muñoz Martín, and  Pacheco Pinto (2016) explain, ﬁDespite diverse attempts at   104 acknowledging the importance of approaching professional communication as translation or as involving translation-related skills (e.g., Hoft 1995; Weiss 1997, 1999; Melton 2008), translation often remains invisible both in the literature and in the training of (international) professional communicatorsﬂ (p. 3, emphasis added).  As much as the word translation has been used metaphorically to describe technical communication work, researchers such as Grabill (2009) note a hesitance to perceive all technical communicators as mere information conduits who metaphorically ﬁtranslate techno-science for othersﬂ (n.pag.). Instead, honoring our roles as researchers and rhetoricians, Grabill (2009) urges technical communicators to leave behind the translation metaphor and ﬁmove toward: a focus on rhetorical problems, a focus on groups and organizations, a focus on how things like ‚culture™ work, [and] a focus on the materiality of rhetorical work.ﬂ Achieving the moves that Grabill suggests, I argue, requires strong, reciprocal collaborations between technical communicators and translators, experts in both areas who can work together to help diverse people and organizations communicate 
with each other.   Answering Grabill™s call, this project is an attempt to show technical communicators how the literal activity of translation can inform our wider goals as technical communication researchers and practitioners. As my data shows, translation is a rhetorical, community-based, cultural, material practice. In turn, by better understanding translation as an activity in itself (as not just as a metaphor for technical communication work), technical communication researchers can continue building bridges with the multilingual translators who facilitate cross-cultural, multilingual, international technical communication.   105 As we continue aiming to create and disseminate content across languages and cultures, the connections between translators and technical communicators will only continue to grow. Indeed, drawing on their international project on translation and technical communication, Maylath, Muñoz Martín, and  Pacheco Pinto (2016) recently 
edited a special issue of Connexions-International Professional Communication Journal, titled ﬁTranslation and International Professional Communication: Building Bridges and Strengthening Skills.ﬂ In their introduction to this issue, Maylath, Muñoz Martín, and  Pacheco Pinto explain that while technical communication research is only recently beginning to show interest in highlighting the importance of translation, research in other areas, particularly within translation studies, ﬁreveals that the fields of translation and professional communication are converging, as practitioners initially trained in one field seek cross-training in the other (Minacori & Veisblat, 2010; Gnecchi, Maylath, Scarpa, Mousten, & Vandepitte, 2011).ﬂ In some ways, conversations in technical communication are lagging behind in efforts to build cross-disciplinary connections to assist in the creation of culturally-situated, multilingual content.  In part addressing Maylath, Muñoz Martín, and  Pacheco Pinto™s (2016) call for ﬁmore research and dialogueﬂ between translators and technical communicators, this 
project introduces translators at two research sites as skilled communicators who rhetorically adapt information for their respective audiences. In order to help technical communicators better understand translation as an activity, in this chapter, I will describe what I call a ﬁRevised Rhetoric of Translation.ﬂ This framework for understanding translation can be useful to technical communication researchers and practitioners who are aiming to build connections with translators to work successfully in increasingly   106 international, multilingual contexts. ﬁA Revised Rhetoric of Translation,ﬂ as I will describe in the following sections, gives technical communicators a framework by which to understand the activity of translation, hence providing a foundation that may lead to more collaborations between these two areas of study and practice.         A REVISED RHETORIC OF TRANSLATION: A FRAMEWORK FOR BUILDING BRIDGES BETWEEN TRANSLATORS AND TECHNICAL COMMUNICATION After conducting research with the Language Services Department at The Hispanic Center of Western Michigan (discussed in Chapter 4), I was invited to present the findings of my research at the 2016 Interpreter™s Training being held within this organization. This 8-week training workshop introduces bilingual community members in Grand Rapids to the activities of translation and interpretation3, in an attempt provide professional development resources to individuals who may be considering these areas as a new profession. While  community members who participate in this training have been moving between English and Spanish in their daily communication, they are only beginning to understand translation and interpretation as professions. For this reason, Sara Proano, the director of Language Services and one of the participants I described in Chapter 4, invited me to present this project to the incoming class of trainees, so that these community members could better understand the ﬁtechnical and professional aspects of translation activities.ﬂ                                                         3 As a reminder, translation refers to the written transformation of words from one language to another. Interpretation, on the other hand, refers to the verbal transformation of words between languages.    107 During my presentation, I asked participants to provide feedback to the image depicted in Figure 174, which (drawing on my coding scheme for this project) illustrates the tools and strategies translators in my project exhibited during their translation processes. Through this discussion, community members and I discussed the rhetoric behind translation, noting how translation activities require the use of digital tools, cultural knowledge, and linguistic resources.   Figure 17: A Revised Rhetoric of Translation as Presented to Bilingual Community Members at the 2016 Interpreter™s Training held at The Hispanic Center of Western Michigan                                                          4 Drawing on Potts™ (2014) ﬁMethods for Researching and Architecting the Social Web,ﬂ Figure 1 illustrates the multiple resources translators use during translation moments. The 
combinations and connections between these resources remain fluid and contextually-dependant.    108 As Figure 17 illustrates, the framework for describing translation developed through this project can be used to highlight the rhetorical work of translation, which can help both technical communicators and translators better understand the tools and strategies necessary to adapt information across languages. This framework help technical communicators and translators understand the overlaps in their orientations to language, 
specifically by highlighting the fluidity and humanity embedded in all communication and the need to contextualize language for various audiences.  In addition to naming and visualizing the activities of translation, the results of this project led to the development of ﬁA Revised Rhetoric of Translation,ﬂ a framework for connecting technical communication and translation through the following data-driven assertions: 1. Translation is a culturally neutral situated process. Frameworks for theorizing translation as technical communication, such as what Grabill (2009) refers to as the ﬁtranslation metaphor,ﬂ often extrapolate translation from its cultural, linguistic roots. That is, using translation as a metaphor to describe all technical 
communication activities detaches expertise from the multilingual communicators who actually adapt information across languages for their communities. As my data suggests, the activity of translation requires extensive cultural knowledge, demonstrated by 
translators like Sandra who needed to know several translations for the word ﬁcornﬂ in order to reach audiences from various cultural backgrounds.  When translators repeat information over and over again, they index their cultural knowledge, sifting through information in their mind in order to determine what will 
ﬁsound rightﬂ to a specific population. The accuracy of a translation, in turn, is entirely   109 dependent on the cultural competence of the communicator transforming information. Understanding technical information or technical communication practices does not necessarily provide the cultural framework needed to adapt information across languages. Therefore, as the data presented in this project suggests, it is important for technical 
communicators to understand translation not as a culturally neutral practice, but rather as a culturally-situated activity that requires collaboration with cultural experts who intricately understand the audience(s) being targeted in a specific communication event.  2. Translation is a linear cyclical process. Rather than thinking of translation as a ﬁone and doneﬂ event that takes place in isolation after a tool or system is designed, the results of this project present translation as a cyclical event. During translation, ideas move from the original language to the target 
language and back again until the translator(s) are satisfied with their work. The translation processes captured in my data were far from linear and involved multiple instances of negotiation and constellation. Strategies like deconstructing, negotiating, 
storytelling, and repeating all took place when as a translator adjusted and re-adjusted information through various revisions in the translation process. Based on this finding, it™s important for technical communicators to understand that partnerships with translators should account for revisions and redesigns throughout the development of a communication tool or product.  Just like websites and technologies need to be updated to remain relevant, translations should be updated frequently to allow or continuous audience response and feedback. By visualizing the processes of translation as they are described in this project,   110 technical communicators might better understand the recursive nature of translation, hence orienting their partnerships with translators to account for this flexibility.  3. Translation is a mechanical creative act. In many earlier partnerships between translators and technical communicators, the work of translation was left to the end of the production cycle (Batova and Clark, 2015; 
Walton, Zraly, and Mugengagna, 2015). That is, when the expertise is positioned only in the hands of the technical communicator, translators are only welcomed into projects post-production, when tools and designs are ready to be shared with international audiences. 
However, as Walton, Zraly, and Mugengana (2015) explain, ﬁtranslators always shape data in cross-language research,ﬂ and must be acknowledged as active participants in technical communication research and practice. The results of this project demonstrate the highly 
creative work that multilinguals put into translation. The best choice for translation is determined by a number of competing and complex factors considered during translation 
moments, such as context, culture, and connotation.  Rather than being an algorithmic, mechanical process, translation activities are creative, as evidenced through strategies such as storytelling, deconstructing, and negotiating. During translation moments, multilnguals have to not only consider the 
grammatical accuracy of a potential translation, but must also develop numerous options for translating a single word or phrase for different audiences. During interpretation, for example, participants at The Hispanic Center frequently had to attempt several translation options when working with a specific client, adapting and replacing translations and drawing or gesturing when words were not accessible. In this way, translators were very much intellectual contributors to the information being conveyed in their organizations.   111 Thus, as connections between technical communicators and translators continue to grow, it™s important to consider (and make time for) the creative aspects of translation activities. Translators cannot be expected to mechanically transform information for technical communicators, but must instead be given the time and resources necessary to build and deploy creativity as part of their practice.  4. Translation is an isolated community activity. Although translators are often depicted working in isolation at a computer, the results of this project suggest translation is shared, community-centered practice. Through strategies like storytelling and gesturing, translators in this project worked together to situate meaning for their community. While translators frequently draw on their own cultural knowledge to transform information, often times, the cultural competence of multiple translators is an invaluable asset during extended translation moments. In particular, conversations, stories, and shared experiences help translators develop more 
accurate representations of information across languages.  Based on this finding, technical communicators and translators aiming to collaborate can develop team-based strategies for creating and disseminating content for multilingual audiences. That is, rather than creating content and then sending it to 
translators, teams of translators and technical communicators can work together, making space and time to share stories, conversations, and experiences that may strengthen the contributions of each participant. In this way, translators and technical communicators can leverage the rhetorical skills, lived experiences, and professional training of all team members when designing tools and technologies for diverse audiences.     112 5. Translation is an abstract material practice While the digital aspects of translation have been studied for over fifty years (Chen and Bao, 2007), the material, embodied components of the translation process have been largely ignored, particularly in recent conversations. When translators gesture, sketch, or use their bodies to communicate information for their audiences, they are engaging in the material practice of translation. While some parts of the translation process take place in digital spaces (e.g., through digital translation tools), much of the translation work depicted 
in this project encompassed the use of embodied, material strategies, which in turn resulted in embodied, material consequences.  As evidenced through the interactions of translators at The Hispanic Center, accurate translations frequently require physical movement, as translators use their hands, facial expressions, and voice intonations to reach a common understanding with their audiences. In addition, during the process of translation, and in particular during live interpretation 
activities, the impacts of translation are also experienced through physical ways, as translators and interpreters empathize with community members who are undergoing 
medical, legal, or otherwise personal procedures. In these moments, translation is a physical activity with embodied processes and consequences--a human practice.  As collaborations between translators and technical communicators continue to build, it™s important for both parties to consider the material consequences of language accessibility and multilingual communication. That is, for many individuals, linguistic 
access to information is not merely a desired quality, but is instead a critical component for survival. For example, for the community members who work with the translators and interpreters at The Hispanic Center, having access to health information is entirely   113 dependent on accurate translation. In this way, translation activities are not just an afterthought or an added bonus to accessible design, but are instead central to the sustainability of entire communities. As the results of this project suggest, collaborations between technical communicators and translators may provide additional opportunities for language accessibility in multilingual communities, leading to more ethical, culturally-situated technical communication work.  SIGNIFICANCE AND FUTURE RESEARCH: WHERE DO WE GO FROM HERE?  Drawing on the results of my case studies, ﬁA Revised Rhetoric of Translationﬂ presents a framework for technical communicators and translators to develop valuable, reciprocal collaborations. Ultimately, my goal as a multilingual technical communication researcher who also practices professional translation is to continue building bridges between these two fields. After working with translators such as my participants at The 
Hispanic Center, I see the importance in continuing to advocate for the technical and professional aspects of translation work.  Based on my experiences, I™ve seen that too often, multilinguals (such as the community members who come into The Hispanic Center) don™t see the professional 
potential in their linguistic abilities. Similarly, student translators like the participants at Knightly Latino News did not always view their translation strategies as part of their professional practice, but instead thought of translation as an ﬁadded bonusﬂ to the news broadcasting work that they were already doing. Through my case studies, I™ve found that multilingual community members often see their own linguistic skills as a deficit, focusing on their lack of proficiency in one language or another rather than noting the rhetorical power that comes from being able to communicate across languages to any degree.   114 Witnessing training programs such as the interpretation training that takes place at The Hispanic Center and the bilingual mentorship taking place at Knightly Latino News, and having the opportunity to share the findings of this project with those communities, allowed me to see the importance of continuing to highlight the intellectual, professional potential embedded in language negotiation. Flipping the deficit model used to describe multilingual communicators requires work both within the multilingual community and with the broader public.  In addition to continuing to build partnerships with translators, the results of this project helped me see the potential in making translation work more visible to technical communication research and practice. Building translation courses into technical communication programs and highlighting the value of multilingual technical communication will strengthen the linguistic and cultural diversity of our field while simultaneously broadening the job opportunities for our students. It™s important for technical communication students to intricately understand the value of multilingual 
communication as they prepare to enter an increasingly diverse field.  TRANSLATION IN WRITING PEDAGOGY: AN APPLICATION In addition to drawing implications for technical communication, the data presented in this project allowed me to begin envisioning applications for rhetoric and composition scholars aiming to acknowledge and leverage the assets of linguistic diversity in their writing pedagogy. For many years now, rhetoric and composition scholars have been arguing for the value of linguistic diversity in academic settings, making space for the diverse communicative practices of student writers. Terms like ﬁcode-switching,ﬂ ﬁcode-meshing,ﬂ and the more recent ﬁtranslingualismﬂ emerged in rhetoric and composition to   115 help us move away from the limitations of Standard Written English. As we continue expanding our conceptions of writing and writing instruction beyond SWE, rhetoric and composition teachers, researchers, and practitioners will continue pushing for new 
pedagogical models that include, leverage, and value the linguistic diversity of our students.  In the remaining section of this chapter, I™d like to share one example of how translation can be incorporated into writing curricula, particularly in reference to the translation and interpretation of writing assignment sheets. To do this,  I will share components of a design specification for PromptMe, a web application that facilitates translation between students and teachers on assignment sheets. This project stemmed from an Interaction Design course taken in my graduate program at Michigan State University, where my collaborators and I drew on our experiences as writing instructors to design a system that helps teachers and students communicate effectively.  PROMPTME: A REVISED RHETORIC OF TRANSLATION APPLIED Although the history of PromptMe warrants more space than this chapter affords, I wanted to introduce the design of this system as an example of the translation practices of multilinguals can be used to design writing curricula. Stemming from a course project, PromptMe is a web application that facilitates translation between students and teachers 
on assignment sheets. In this section, I™ll discuss the design and research behind PromptMe, in this way illustrating how translation can inform writing pedagogies and practices.  The PromptMe design team is made up of three researchers who started working together as graduate students in Bill Hart-Davidson™s Interaction Design class at MSU. At the time, all three collaborators were graduate students and writing instructors, with various level of teaching experience. At the beginning of the course, our instructor asked us   116 to think of an activity we are familiar with and to then imagine what we can make to make the world, through that activity specifically, a little better.  Drawing on our experiences as graduate student writing teachers, and with a focus on language that stemmed from previous research, my design team and I started discussing PromptMe through our desire to understand how communication moves from instructors 
to students (and back) through the design, interpretation, and translation of writing prompts. In Designing Writing Assignments, Tracy Gardner (2008) discusses the complexity in the language used on writing assignment sheets, explaining, ﬁAssignment prompts typically engage in the language of academic discourse and ask student writers not only to complete a writing task but also to complete a task that is explained in language that may not be familiar to them and may recall various previous writing experiencesﬂ (6). In developing ideas for PromptMe, my design team and I wanted to use our research on translation to further understand and facilitate how the language in writing assignment sheets is interpreted by both students and instructors.  Our research started by observing students as they met with writing center consultants to work on their papers. We were surprised by how much appointment time (62.5%) was spent in ﬁtranslations events,ﬂ or moments where students and consultants had explicit conversations about how specific words from assignments sheets should be executed in student work (See Figure 18)5.                                                         5 Translation events inspired the ﬁtranslation momentﬂ framework used in this project.   117  Figure 18: Activities that take place During a Writing Center Consultation  As illustrated in Figure 18, the writing center consultations that we observed consisted of students and tutors discussing a specific writing assignment, reading the assignment prompt aloud, and making plans for future revision. In addition, a majority of the one-hour consultation (62.5% of the time) was spent in translation events, where students and tutors aimed to reach a common understanding regarding a specific word or 
phrase on an assignment sheet. For example, students and consultants spent a significant amount of time discussing potential interpretations of words like ﬁdescribeﬂ and ﬁprofessional.ﬂ Observing these interactions led us to investigate how translation events shape the interpretation and production of writing. After realizing how often translation occurred between students and instructors in assignment sheets, we attempted to get a picture of that translation in process. We pulled a random sample of 150 assignment sheets used in the writing program at Michigan State University. We used linguistic analysis software6 to identify the key verbs in these                                                         6 We used Linguistic Inquiry Word Count (LIWC) to analyze the language on assignment sheets: http://liwc.wpengine.com/ 62.5 12.5 6.25 18.75 010203040506070Percent of time at consultation Translation EventsAssignment OverviewExit PlaningReading Aloud from Prompt  118 assignment sheets. The results showed that words likeﬂ analyze,ﬂ ﬁevaluate,ﬂ ﬁcompare,ﬂ ﬁsynthesize,ﬂ and ﬁreflectﬂ (among others) were popular words used by instructors to guide student performance in their assignment sheets. We then conducted 15 video interviews with students, where we showed one of these key verbs and asked students to describe what they would do if they saw this word in an assignment sheet. The results from these interviews can be seen in  the video following this link: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2SzMWLoR4C8 Based on these interviews, we recognized that the words used to describe writing tasks hold a multiplicity of meanings that may lead to misinterpretation. Students™ definitions of words used in writing prompts were a) wide-ranging in meaning, b) drawn from previous educational experiences that may/may not be relevant to the current 
assignment task, and c) based on student opinion rather than concrete description from an instructor. Interestingly, in subsequent focus groups with instructors we experienced similar responses, as instructors had difficulty articulating the exact meaning behind terminology they were using with their students. With both parties uncertain of how to translate written tasks into completed assignments, it is inevitable that there will be errors 
in the writing process. Our research on translation event  in relation to writing assignment sheets, in addition to my previous training in translation, helped us understand the importance of engaging in conversations about the language we use to design, assign, and describe writing. By better understanding how students process the information that they are 
presented, we hoped to find an ideal way to both present new assignments and to facilitate the conversation around that document design.    119 We transformed these pedagogical and theoretical reflections into functional mockups for PromptMe. This tool works by having instructors upload the text of their assignment sheets into the system and selecting a number of review activities for their students to complete. These review activities include: 1) highlighting confusing parts, 
where students highlight words/phrases in assignment sheets that they are not sure they understand; 2) providing definitions, where students explain key terms from the assignment sheets in their own words; and 3) providing paraphrases, where students explain in a few sentences what they think the assignment sheet is asking them to do (See Figure 18 and Figure 19).     120 Figure 19: PromptMe Mockup   121 Figure 18 presents a mockup of the ﬁinstructor dashboardﬂ for PromptMe. As the instructor uploads her assignment sheet into the system and asks her students to highlight words that might lead to confusion, the dashboard illustrates the words most frequently highlighted by students. As seen in Figure 18, words like ﬁanalyze,ﬂ ﬁsynthesize,ﬂ and ﬁevaluate,ﬂ change in color and size depending on the number of students who identify 
specific terms as confusing. In this way, the teacher receives a visible map of the words that she should focus on when further contextualizing the assignment for her students.   In addition to highlighting confusing words, PromptMe allows teachers to ask that her students provide sample definitions for the words that have been highlighted. In this way, rather than putting all authority on the instructor to determine accurate definitions for particular words, PromptMe provides a space for students to use their own linguistic histories to share definitions that make sense to them. As evidenced in Figure 19, PromptMe shows the instructor the definitions provided by her students, and then gives the instructor the option to ﬁendorseﬂ multiple definitions that accurately reflect her assignment objectives. In this way, by highlighting multiple options, the instructor can further illustrate how there isn™t just one correct way to describe a concept. Instead, by drawing on the linguistic strengths of all students, writing instruction can be more accessible to the class as a whole.           122   Figure 20: Student-Developed Definitions on PromptMe   123 In Figure 19, we see the student-provided definitions for the word ﬁanalyze,ﬂ which include, ﬁto find out what™s wrong with the argument,ﬂ ﬁto summarize what the author said and see if we agree with it,ﬂ and ﬁread between the lines.ﬂ After receiving these definitions from her students, an instructor can revise her assignment sheets to more adequately reflect students™ language. Rather than asking them to ﬁanalyzeﬂ something, for example, an instructor can use PromptMe to ask her students to ﬁread between the linesﬂ as they read 
or watch a specific text.   After developing mock-ups for PromptMe, my research team and I have been conducting low tech demonstrations in various writing classrooms at Michigan State. 
During these demonstrations, we print an instructor™s assignment sheet on a large sheet of paper, ask students to use highlighters to identify potentially confusing words, and use sticky notes of different colors to provide sample definitions for these highlighted concepts. Then, we ask the teacher to endorse definitions she finds useful, as we engage in a conversation about the fluidity of language and the importance of reaching a common understanding as we complete writing assignments.  To date, we have conducted 15 low-tech demonstrations in first-year writing classrooms, preparation for writing classrooms, science and technology writing courses, as well as first-year writing instructor training. Consistently, we have received positive feedback from both teachers and students, explaining how the conversation about 
translation of writing assignments can be valuable and increase student success. During 
one visit to a ﬁPreparation for college writingﬂ course composed primarily of international students, the instructor commented that she really appreciated using PromptMe because it 
allowed her to ﬁvisualize the translation that [her] students were already doing.ﬂ In this   124 way, PromptMe™s grounding in translation provides a space to discuss this activity as valuable, intellectual, and relevant to pedagogy. This award-winning design highlights the benefits of culturally-situated technical communication aimed to facilitate conversations between diverse groups of people.  CONCLUSION In this chapter, I introduced ﬁA Revised Rhetoric of Translationﬂ as a framework to help technical communicators better understand the work of translation in an effort to 
build further collaborations with practitioners in this area. In addition, I introduced PromptMe as an example of how translation research can be incorporated into writing pedagogy through technology design. Analyzing processes of translation as they are enacted by multilingual communicators with different levels of experience and training has helped me make a case for the value of linguistic diversity in both academic and 
professional spaces. More importantly, however, this project highlights the intricate work that multilingual communicators consistently engage in as they move between languages to accomplish work.  Although both of my research sites are located in the U.S., participants in both organizations carry with them a broad range of international experiences that constantly influence their communicative practices. Understanding translation, at least in this project, requires an understanding of immigrant survival strategies. That is, the participants I present in this project have been using their linguistic resources survive in the United States, a space that is largely still governed by (white) English-dominant ideologies. To do so, these participants gather, hone in, leverage, and execute any tool or strategy available to 
help reach their goals. At The Hispanic Center, for example, a team of multilingual   125 individuals has gathered together to do work for their community, leading language accessibility and professional development programs for their people for over 37 years. At Knightly Latino News, a team of students, led by a brilliant and ambitions director, are working to shift opportunities for Latin@ students working in the news broadcasting industry. All of these participants, these people, stemming from so many different backgrounds and carrying so many stories, use their language to make change. This project was merely an attempt to listen.  As the fields of technical communication and rhetoric and composition continue working to understand and value the experiences of marginalized communities (in this case multilingual communicators), it™s important for us to pause and listen to the work that these communities are already doing. By understanding translation as a practical, relevant, human-driven practice, we can continue to support diversity in technical communication and technical communication not only  through metaphors, policies, and theories, but through purposeful and ethical collaborations  and partnerships that make us all more successful.  
    126   
   
 
   
 
   
 
      REFERENCES    127 REFERENCES   Agboka, G. Y. (2013). Participatory localization: A social justice approach to  navigating unenfranchised/disenfranchised cultural sites. Technical  Communication Quarterly,22(1), 28-49.  
Alvarez, Steven.ﬁTranslanguaging tareas: Emergent bilingual youth language  brokering homework in immigrant families.ﬂ Language Arts 91.5 (2014): 326-339.  Arche, N. (2015). Translation tools getting better and better: Google ups the ante  with translate update.Tech Times. Web.   Balk EM, Chung M, Hadar N, Patel K, Yu WW, Trikalinos TA, Chang L. (2012).   Accuracy of data extraction of non-English language trials with Google  translate. Methods Research Report. Agency for Healthcare Research  and Quality.   Batova, T. (2013). Global technical communication and content management: A  study of multilingual quality. Dissertation.  Batova, T., & Clark, D. (2015). The complexities of globalized content  management. Journal of Business and Technical Communication.  Blythe, S. (2007). Coding digital texts and multimedia. In McKee, H. A., &  DeVoss, D. N. (Eds.). (2007). Digital writing research: Technologies,  methodologies, and ethical issues. Hampton Press (NJ). 203-28.   Brumberger, E. R. (2005). Visual rhetoric in the curriculum pedagogy for a  multimodal workplace. Business Communication Quarterly, 68(3), 318-333.  Canagarajah, A. S. (2010). A rhetoric of shuttling between languages. Cross-language relations in composition, 158-82.  
Canagarajah, S. (2013).Translingual practice: Global englishes and cosmopolitan  relations New York: Routledge.  Chen, J., & Bao, Y. (2009). Cross-language search: the case of Google language  tools. First Monday, 14(3).  Ding, H. (2010). Technical communication instruction in China: Localized  programs and alternative models. Technical Communication Quarterly, 19(3), 300-317.  ElShiekh, Ahmed Abdel Azim. (2012) Google translate service: transfer of    128 meaning, distortion or simply a new creation? An investigation into the  translation process & problems at Google. English Language and  Literature Studies, 2(1), 56Œ68  Fraiberg, S. (2010). Composition 2.0: Toward a multilingual and multimodal  framework. College Composition and Communication, 100-126.  Fraiberg, S. (2013). Reassembling technical communication: A framework for  studying multilingual and multimodal practices in global contexts.  Technical Communication Quarterly, 22(1), 10-27.  
Gardner, T. (2008). Designing writing assignments. National Council of  Teachers.  Gonzales, L. (2015, March). Multimodality, translingualism, and thetorical  Genre Studies. Composition Forum, 31, 302-21.  Gonzales, L., & Zantjer, R. (2015). Translation as a user-localization  practice.Technical Communication, 62(4), 271-284.  Grabill, J. T. (2007). Writing community change: Designing technologies for  citizen action. Hampton Press.  Guerra, J. C. (2012). From code-segregation to code-switching to code-meshing:  Finding deliverance from deficit thinking through language awareness and  performance.ﬂ In P. J. Dunston, L. B. Gambrell, K. Headley, S. K.  Hawisher, G., Selfe, C., Berry, P., & Skjulstad, S. (2012). Conclusion: Closing  thoughts on research methodology. Transnational literate lives in digital times. Eds. Patrick Barry, Gail E. Hawisher, & Cynthia L.Selfe. Logan, UT: Computers and Composition Digital P/Utah State UP.  Hoft, N. L. (1995). International technical communication: How to export  information about high technology. John Wiley & Sons, Inc..  Horner, B., Lu, M. Z., Royster, J. J., & Trimbur, J. (2011). Language difference in  writing: Toward a translingual approach. College English, 303-321.  Jarvis, M., & Bokor, K. (2011). Connecting with the ﬁOtherﬂ in technical  communication: World englishes and ethos transformation of U.S. native english-speaking students. Technical Communication Quarterly, 20(2), 208-237.  
Jimenez, Robert, Sam David, Keenan Fagan, Victoria J. Risko, Mark Pacheco,  Lisa Pray, and Mark Gonzales, RTE. Using translation to drive conceptual  development for students becoming literate in English as an additional language.   129  Jordan, J. (2012). Redesigning composition for multilingual realities.Conference  on college composition and communication of the National Council of  Teachers of English.  Ketola, A. (2016). Towards a multimodally oriented theory of translation: A  cognitive framework for the translation of illustrated technical texts.Translation Studies, 9(1), 67-81.  Khubchandani, Lachman M. (1998) A plurilingual ethos: A peep into the  sociology of language. Indian journal of applied linguistics, 24(1), 5-37.   Kramsch, Claire J. The multilingual subject: What foreign language learners say  about their experience and why it matters. Oxford; New York: Oxford  University Press, 2009.  Leonard, R. L. (2014). Multilingual writing as rhetorical attunement. College  English, 76(3), 227-247.  
Matsuda, P. K. (2014). The lure of translingual writing. PMLA, 129(3), 478-483.  
Maylath, B., Muñoz Martín, R., & Pacheco Pinto, M. Translation and international  professional communication: Building bridges and strengthening skills. Conexions: 
International Professional Communication Journal, 3(2), 3-9.  
Maylath, B., Vandepitte, S., Minacori, P., Isohella, S., Mousten, B., & Humbley, J.  (2013). Managing Complexity: A technical communication translation case  
study in multilateral international collaboration. Technical Communication  Quarterly, 22(1), 67-84.  McCown, F., Bollen,J. & and Nelson,M. (2005). Evaluation of the NSDL and  Google for obtaining pedagogical resources, Proceedings of ECDL ™05.  McKee, H. A., & DeVoss, D. N. (Eds.). (2007). Digital writing research:  Technologies, methodologies, and ethical issues. Hampton Press (NJ).  McNeill, D. (2002). Gesture and language dialectic. Acta Linguistica Hafniensia,  34(1), 7-37.  
Milson-Whyte, Vivette (2013). ﬁPedagogical and socio-political implications of  code- meshing in classrooms: Some considerations for translingual orientation to Writing.ﬂ In Literacy as a Translingual Practice: Between Communities and 
Classrooms. Ed. Suresh Canagarajah. New York: Routledge.  Pennycook, A. (2003). 'Beyond Homogeny and Heterogeny' in Christian Mair    130 (ed), The Politics of English as a World Language, Rodopi, Amsterdam, pp. 3-17.  Pennycook, A. (2008). English as a language always in translation. European  Journal of English Studies, 12(1), 33-47.  Perryman-Clark, S., Kirkland, D. E., & Jackson, A. (2014). Students' right to  their own language: A critical sourcebook. Macmillan Higher Education.  Pigg, S. (2014). Coordinating constant invention: Social media™s role in  distributed work.Technical Communication Quarterly, 23(2), 69-87.  Potts, L. (2013). Social media in disaster response: How experience architects  can build for participation. Routledge.  Prado, D. (2012). Language presence in the real world and cyberspace. Net.  Lang: Towards the multilingual cyberspace, 34-51.  
Saldaña, Johnny. (2013). The coding manual for qualitative researchers. 2nd ed.  Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.  Sanchez, R. (2012). The function of theory in composition studies. SUNY Press.  
Selfe, C. ﬁAurality and multimodal composing.ﬂ College Composition and  Communication 60.4 (2009): 616Œ63. Print.  
Selfe, C. & Horner, B (2014). Translinguality/transmodality relations:  snapshots from a dialogue. The working papers series on negotiating  
differences in language and literacy. University of Louisville. Web.   
Shivers-MacNair, A. (forthcoming 2017). Rhetoric and makers in the making:  Geneologies of mattering in a Makerspace. University of Washington. Dissertation.   Shivers-MacNair, A., & Gonzales, L. (forthcoming 2016). Digital Video in data  collection and analysis. Kairos Wiki. Web.    Slattery, S. (2007). Un-distributing work through writing: How technical writers Manage texts in complex information environments. Technical Communication Quarterly 16(3), 311-25.  Smitherman, G. (1977). Talkin and testifyin: The language of Black America(Vol.  51). Wayne State University Press.  Smitherman, G., & Villanueva, V. (2003). Language diversity in the classroom:  From intention to practice. SIU Press.  
Sun, H. (2006). The triumph of users: Achieving cultural usability goals with   131 user Localization. Technical Communication Quarterly, 15(4), 457Œ481.  Sun, H. (2012). Cross-cultural technology design: Creating culture-sensitive technology for local users. Oxford University Press.  Torrez, J. (2013). Somos mexicanos y hablamos mexicano aqui: Rural  farmworker families™ struggles to maintain cultural and linguistic identity in  Michigan. Journal of Language, Identity and Education, 12(4), 277-294.  Torrez, J. (2015). Translating Chicana testimonios into pedagogy for a white  Midwesternclassroom. Chicana/Latina Studies: the Journal of Mujeres  Activas en Letras y Cambio Social, 14 (2), 100-130.  Yajima, Y. & Toyosaki, S. (2016). Bridging for a critical turn in translation studies:  Power, hegemony, and empowerment. Conexions: International Professional Communication Journal, 3(2), 91-125.  Young, Vershawn A. ﬁYour average nigga.ﬂ College Composition and  Communication 55.4 (2004): 693Œ715.    Young, Vershawn Ashanti. Other people™s English: Code-meshing, code- switching, and African American literacy. N. p., 2014. Print.  Young, V. A., & Martinez, A. Y. (2011). Code-meshing as world English:  Pedagogy, policy, performance. National Council of Teachers of English.  Walton, R., Zraly, M., & Mugengana, J. P. (2014). Values and validity: Navigating messiness in a community-based research project in Rwanda.Technical Communication Quarterly  Weiss, T. (1997). Reading culture orofessional communication as  translation. Journal of Business and Technical Communication, 11(3),  321-338.