Translanguaging in Transnational Interview Settings: Power, Positionality, and Epistemic Inequalities in Migration Research

Drawing on their empirical study of refugee family reunification in France and Germany, Manuela Barriga Morachimo and Emmanuel Ndahayo present a critical examination of translanguaging within transnational interview settings. Their research, published in Forum Qualitative Sozialforschung / Forum: Qualitative Social Research, delves into the complex interplay of language, power, and knowledge production in migration studies, particularly when researchers and participants operate across linguistic and cultural divides. The study highlights how language is not merely a tool for communication but a site where colonial legacies, institutional hierarchies, and epistemic inequalities are enacted and negotiated.

The Context: Refugee Family Reunification and Multilingual Encounters

The research by Barriga Morachimo and Ndahayo is situated within the broader context of refugee family reunification, a process fraught with administrative hurdles, bureaucratic complexities, and significant emotional stakes for individuals and families. In countries like France and Germany, the legal frameworks governing family reunification often require extensive documentation, interviews, and assessments, all of which can be heavily influenced by linguistic capabilities and the perceived legitimacy of different languages.

The study’s empirical grounding in France and Germany is significant. Both nations have distinct immigration histories and legal frameworks that shape the experiences of refugees. Germany, for instance, has seen a substantial influx of asylum seekers in recent years, leading to evolving policies and societal debates around integration and family reunion. France, with its long history of colonial ties and a more assimilationist approach to integration, presents a different but equally complex landscape for migrants and refugees.

The authors’ own backgrounds add a crucial layer of understanding. Manuela Barriga Morachimo, a PhD candidate at the University of Siegen, focuses on the experiences of refugee families in Germany and France concerning family reunification, with research interests spanning transnational migration, displacement, gender, racism, and coloniality. Emmanuel Ndahayo, a political refugee from Rwanda with a doctoral degree from the University of Siegen, brings firsthand experience of navigating migration systems and research on citizenship, racism, and Africanity. This dual perspective, encompassing both academic inquiry and lived experience, is central to their nuanced approach.

Translanguaging as a Site of Power and Knowledge Production

At the core of the research is the concept of translanguaging, defined not just as the fluid use of multiple languages by bilingual individuals but as a fundamental human capacity to draw on the full linguistic repertoire available to them. In the context of transnational interviews, translanguaging becomes a dynamic social practice where participants and researchers navigate their linguistic resources to achieve communicative goals.

Barriga Morachimo and Ndahayo argue that language in these settings is inherently imbued with power. This power dynamic is shaped by historical factors, including colonial legacies that have often privileged certain languages and marginalized others. Institutional hierarchies, such as those within asylum systems or academic research, further reinforce these linguistic power imbalances. Moreover, epistemic inequalities—disparities in whose knowledge is recognized and valued—are often intertwined with linguistic proficiency.

The researchers view participants as co-producers of knowledge. This perspective challenges traditional research models where the researcher is seen as the sole authority. Instead, they emphasize how translanguaging practices within the interview setting actively contribute to the co-construction of understanding. This means that the linguistic choices made by both interviewers and interviewees, consciously or unconsciously, shape the knowledge that emerges from the research.

Intersectional Perspectives and Asymmetries of Power

The study adopts an intersectional perspective, a framework developed by Kimberlé Crenshaw, to understand how linguistic practices are intertwined with multiple axes of power and social inequality. Intersectionality recognizes that individuals hold multiple social identities (e.g., race, gender, class, legal status, language) that interact to create unique experiences of privilege and oppression.

In the context of transnational interviews, this means that the power asymmetries observed are not solely determined by language proficiency. They are also shaped by the participants’ and researchers’ origins, legal status (e.g., refugee, citizen, researcher), and other positionalities. For example, a refugee’s limited command of the dominant language of the host country, coupled with their precarious legal status and potentially marginalized ethnic background, can create a significantly different power dynamic compared to a researcher who is a native speaker of that language and holds institutional authority.

The authors highlight how these linguistic practices are entangled with existing power structures. For instance, a refugee’s decision to use their native language, a dominant language, or a combination of both can be influenced by their assessment of who holds more power in the interaction and what linguistic strategy might best serve their interests. Similarly, a researcher’s approach to language—whether they encourage translanguaging, insist on a specific language, or rely on translation—can either reinforce or challenge these asymmetries.

Positionality and Reflexivity in Research

A key contribution of this research is its emphasis on the researcher’s positionality and the necessity of reflexivity. Positionality refers to how a researcher’s own social identities, experiences, and background shape their perspective and their interactions with participants. Reflexivity involves the ongoing critical self-examination of these influences.

Barriga Morachimo and Ndahayo underscore the importance of researchers being aware of their own linguistic capital, cultural background, and institutional standing. This self-awareness is crucial for understanding how their presence and linguistic choices might impact the interview dynamic and the data collected. For example, a researcher who is a native speaker of the dominant language might inadvertently create an environment where participants feel compelled to use that language, even if it hinders their ability to fully express themselves. Conversely, a researcher who is also a migrant might share certain linguistic or cultural understandings with participants, which can foster rapport but also requires careful consideration of potential biases.

The study advocates for treating translanguaging as an epistemic resource—a valuable tool for generating knowledge. By embracing and analyzing the multilingual practices of participants, researchers can gain deeper insights into their experiences, perspectives, and the complexities of their lives. This approach moves beyond simply "overcoming" language barriers through translation, which can often flatten nuances and erase important linguistic and cultural specificities. Instead, it seeks to understand how the multilingual repertoire itself is a source of knowledge and meaning-making.

Implications for Migration Studies Methodologies

The research has significant implications for the methodologies employed in migration studies and qualitative research more broadly. It challenges researchers to move beyond linguistic homogeneity and to develop more inclusive, context-sensitive, and power-reflective approaches.

Key takeaways for methodology include:

• Embracing Multilingualism: Researchers should actively consider and plan for the multilingual realities of their participants. This may involve developing strategies for conducting interviews in multiple languages, utilizing translation resources thoughtfully, or even exploring translanguaging as a primary mode of interaction.
• Intersectional Analysis: Applying an intersectional lens is crucial for understanding the multifaceted nature of power dynamics in research. This means considering how language intersects with other social categories like race, gender, legal status, and class.
• Researcher Reflexivity: A commitment to ongoing reflexivity about one’s own positionality and its impact on the research process is paramount. This includes acknowledging linguistic biases, cultural assumptions, and institutional power.
• Participant-Centered Knowledge Production: Recognizing participants as co-producers of knowledge requires a willingness to cede some control over the research process and to value the knowledge and linguistic resources they bring to the interaction.
• Challenging Language Hierarchies: The study implicitly calls for a deconstruction of language hierarchies that privilege dominant languages and devalue others. This involves recognizing the intellectual and communicative value of all languages.

The DOI for this research is https://doi.org/10.17169/fqs-27.3.4825, and the keywords associated with it are migration, intersectionality, translanguaging, language hierarchies, positionality, reflexivity, and qualitative research. The abstract further elaborates on the study’s aim to contribute to the development of more inclusive and power-aware methodologies in migration studies.

Data and Future Directions

While download data for the specific study is not yet available, the researchers draw upon extensive qualitative data gathered through interviews. The methodology employed likely involves in-depth qualitative analysis, possibly incorporating elements of grounded theory or documentary method, given the references to Bohnsack and Nohl. The authors’ references to scholars like Anna Amelina, Suresh Canagarajah, and Ofelia García signal a strong engagement with contemporary debates in migration studies, sociolinguistics, and critical theory.

The work builds upon existing scholarship on multilingual research practices, as evidenced by the extensive bibliography. References to studies like Berg et al. (2025) on qualitative interview research in multilingual contexts, Erhard et al. (2021) on openness, reflexivity, and pragmatism in cross-language research, and Havlin (2022) on multilingualism and translanguaging in migration studies demonstrate a rich academic conversation. The study also aligns with broader calls for decolonizing research methodologies, as seen in references to Spivak (1988) and Kosnick (2021).

The implications of this research extend beyond academic circles. For policymakers and practitioners involved in refugee support and family reunification processes, understanding the linguistic and power dynamics at play in interviews is crucial for ensuring fairer and more equitable outcomes. It suggests a need for training for immigration officials and support workers on culturally and linguistically sensitive interviewing techniques.

In conclusion, Barriga Morachimo and Ndahayo’s research offers a vital contribution to the field of migration studies by foregrounding the complexities of language, power, and knowledge in transnational research. Their advocacy for an intersectional, reflexive, and translanguaging-informed approach promises to enrich qualitative methodologies and foster more equitable and nuanced understandings of migration experiences. The study serves as a powerful reminder that language is never neutral; it is always intertwined with histories, identities, and power relations.