If there is one phenomenon nearly all bilingual immigrant children know, it is the role of being a translator for your parents. This is not a new phenomenon in the slightest. There have been many stories to videos describing how children will translate for their families, for better or for worse; Children trying to get a video game out of their age rating, being annoyed to help their parents talk to Customer Service, to even just language brokering between the waiter and their parents. However, in Jennifer F. Reynolds’ article, “In the Service of Surveillance: Immigrant Child Language Brokers in Parent-Teacher Conferences”, a specific case study is done; How do bilingual children cope with being an interpreter between two authoritative figures, their parents and their teachers? According to Reynolds, the act of being a translator between parents and teachers subjects children to multiple layers of surveillance, as well as how these children are both empowered and restricted in this unique position they hold. Reynolds then moves forward on how children in these positions are essentially unpaid labor, who’s knowledge of both languages and cultures are utilized to help their parents learn and navigate their new environment. In this way, parents are dependent on children, despite the parent typically being the authoritative figure in most cultures. In this case, we can see how language provides authority, when one is dependent on another for communication. However, in the case of parent-teacher conferences, teachers are talking about children. This means, in this specific scenario, teachers, an authoritative figure, is talking about the child, and asking the child to tell their parents what they said. This means that the child on question has the power to honestly (or dishonestly) translate language between the two authority figures, giving children the power in this scenario, despite in a normal mono-language social situation, children would not have any power. Furthermore, an interesting finding is that in these situations, teachers have (generally) three different models: Talking to the parents (and having the children passively translate), talking to the child directly (and have the child translate to their parents) or expecting the child to translate word-for-word in real time as they were speaking. This meant that the children had to determine the model the teacher is using. This also shifts the power positions each participant has, with the secondary power figure being either the child or the parent depending on the model used. This is an interesting (in anthropology, at least) situation, because this is a specific paradoxical situation; One is talking about a child, to a child, to tell their parents. This puts children in the position of speaking to and for both their parents and their teachers, while putting pressure on them to be honest, and accurate. However, this fails to consider the fact that some words do not translate exactly between languages. It is a very difficult position if one looks a little deeper beyond the surface. But, this study has revealed the necessity to address the pressures put on bilingual children, and work to ease these societal pressures.
- Funny All You Need “Jesus Garcia Translating Phone Calls For Mexcian Mom 😁#MrChuy”. Youtube video, 1:52. Februrary 23, 2019. https://youtu.be/KjPomoWEdz4
- Reynolds, J, M Orellana, and I García-Sánchez (2015). “In the Service of Surveillance: Immigrant Child Language Brokers in Parent-Teacher Conferences.” Langage et société 153(3): 91-108.
2 thoughts on “The Struggles of Being a Bilingual Immigrant Child”
You begin with some good examples showing that the topic being discussed in the text is a significant phenomenon in society. You then give an accurate paraphrase of one of the main questions motivating the authors, and a succinct summary of their findings, and you bring up an important point they make about translation as unpaid labor. But after this, you never mention surveillance again, yet it’s the main focus of the authors’ analysis.
In your review of the evidence, you should concentrate on demonstrating how the authors support the main argument that you’ve identified about surveillance. Also, be careful with your language when doing so. In several places you suggest the authors say that in the situations they’re talking about children have “power” or “authority,” but I think one of their major points is that even though children are doing all this unpaid yet important labor, they still have no power or authority. The authors discuss how the children have “agency,” which is conceptually different from power or authority.
Your discussion of the article’s contribution touches on one of the authors’ main points (the pressures put on bilingual children), but could be more specific. For example, the text makes claims about contributing to an understanding of racialization and the effect of language on structural inequalities.
Your summary would greatly benefit from being broken into paragraphs, which will make its organization more clear.