What is a municipal translation policy?
Over the years, Canadian cities have been welcoming large numbers of immigrants, including an increasing contingent of refugees who are not always proficient in English and French. To facilitate their inclusion and that of local multicultural communities, a handful of cities (see the map section) have implemented language policies. These policies usually place a central emphasis on translation and interpretation (e.g., provision of translation services during public hearings, multilingual interpretation phone lines, and translation of public-facing documents). Most of them set clear criteria (e.g., selection of target languages and choice of source text) for translating public-facing municipal material.
To date, municipal translation policies have attracted limited interest (see references). There are several reasons for this. From a practical standpoint, cities with an overt language/translation policy are the exception rather than the rule. From a theoretical perspective, translation is typically subsumed under general considerations about language (e.g., policy and planning). Moreover, researchers tend to approach cities as mere reflections of higher-level jurisdictions (e.g., provinces and states). The very notion of municipal translation policy is provocative in that it assumes that both translation and cities enjoy a certain degree of autonomy.
The term “translation policy” refers here to the set of translation "practices," "beliefs," and modes of "organization" as defined by Gabriel González Núñez (2016). The benefit of this definition is that it provides a framework flexible enough to accommodate translation activities even when they are not clearly formalized or visible, as is often the case in the municipal context. Taking González Núñez's framework as a starting point, this research is the first to provide a systematic characterization of municipal translation policies. To this end, it draws on extensive fieldwork (see research results), including interviews with city administrators and close analysis of policy documents and city websites of more than 20 large urban centres in Canada.
Why Canada?
Canada is a particularly fertile ground for research on municipal translation policies. Indeed, Canada hosts several large urban centers that are among the most multicultural in the world. Following Toronto's footsteps, municipalities such as Calgary, Markham, Surrey, and Vancouver have developed innovative language policies over the past five years. Such multilingual policies further complicate Canada's linguistic landscape, where federal bilingualism already coexists with various federal language policies.
Municipal translation policies can be broadly described using González Núñez's typology of "translation practices," "translation management," and "translation beliefs." Each of these general aspects was refined through extensive fieldwork conducted in several Canadian urban centres.
González Núñez defines translation practices as "the actual translation practices of a given community. These practices may come in the footsteps of explicit policy formulation, that is, of translation management, but they may also be the result of implicit or covert policy (which may or may not be codified via translation management).” (2016, p. 92).
In the municipal domain, translation practices encompass several aspects, including but not limited to:
The selection of target languages based on criteria such as Statistics Canada's most recent census and language mapping tools.
the selection of source texts based on criteria such as content type and critical nature.
The rewriting of the source-text for accessibility and translatability purposes.
The choice of translation methods, including the use of technology (e.g., human vs machine translation).
The availability and accessibility of translation-related resources for city staff (e.g., intranet) and citizens (e.g., municipal website).
The dissemination of translated material through various channels (e.g., multicultural newspapers, public libraries, and social media).
González Núñez defines translation management as “the decisions regarding translation made by people who have the authority to decide the use or non-use of translation within a domain. These decisions may be made by anyone from legislators to local site managers, so that the decision may be made from outside the domain as well as inside.” (2016, p. 92).
In the municipal domain, translation management encompasses several aspects, including but not limited to:
The type of translation/language frameworks (e.g., multilingual policy, communication strategy, and informal practices).
The monitoring and supervision of translation (e.g., by a centralized unit, a dedicated unit collaborating with other units, and a non-dedicated unit managing other services).
The funding models for translation (e.g., project-based funding, department-based funding, and operational budget).
González Núñez defines translation beliefs as “the beliefs that members of a community hold about issues such as what the value is, or is not, of offering translation in certain contexts for certain groups or to achieve certain ends. . . . Translation beliefs may be expressed, but often remain unspoken, in which case they can be inferred from practice.” (2016, p. 92).
In the Canadian municipal context, translation beliefs and ideologies are diverse and vary across cities. They include, but are not limited to:
promoting multiculturalism.
supporting official bilingualism.
preserving indigenous languages.
promoting social and ethical values, such as accessibility, inclusion and equity.
endorsing localism (e.g., hiring local translation services providers and community translators).
supporting participative approaches (e.g., involving local multicultural communities to assess translation quality).
adopting an integrated approach to translation (i.e., whereby translation is envisioned as a multi-staged process from target language selection to translated content dissemination, as opposed to product-oriented activity).
promoting a quality-oriented approach (e.g., hiring professional translators for critical content and restricting the use of machine translation to non-critical source text).