Research on multilingualism sometimes involves the analysis of language events that could be categorized as "failures." These failures can occur at a macro or micro level, from community loss of a heritage language to a participant struggling with the learning or teaching of an additional language. While investigating the reasons for these failures is valuable for improving multilingual policies and practices, failure in a research study can produce significant emotional distress for participants and researchers alike. This distress can be compounded by the perceived researcher role of "expert" in the topic being studied, particularly if the researcher is known by the participant to be a more proficient multilingual. In interpretive research, which seeks to capture participant perspectives, these events can undermine the trust so essential to high quality research. In this presentation I use an autoethnographic approach to examine three events of language-related "failures," and which also highlighted the negative perceptions and distress of both participants and researcher regarding participant multilingualism.
In the first example, I discuss my discomfort with being positioned as a language expert in a community where multilingualism in Spanish and Quichua was the norm, but where debates raged about the legitimacy of certain varieties of Quichua, which I perceived as contributing to the language's loss in the community. In the second example, I examine my role as researcher with a group of former students studying abroad in Brazil, and how one student's difficulties with learning Portuguese may have led to increased negative self-perceptions during our final interview. In the final example I reflect on my interactions with a Spanish teacher participant, whose insecurities about her abilities in the language were reflected in limited classroom use of the language, as well as other language teaching practices that conflicted substantially with my own beliefs. In each of these examples I highlight how mutual perceptions of participant failure may have impacted participant-researcher interactions, which shape the very data we collect and the interpretations we construct.
The implications for researcher practices are myriad. As researchers, what are our obligations to participants? Should we help them learn languages? Or do we watch them fail, reporting "objectively" on their difficulties? After all, we have both an obligation to understand when multilingualism does not work (and why), as well as an obligation to enhance the benefits that participants might reap from participating in our research. What if these participants are negatively impacting the multilingual possibilities of others? How do our choices shape our data and our findings? How do our actions position us as expert, collaborator, or colleague? I argue for an empathetic approach that allows the participant to guide researcher responses to perceived participant failure through mutual rapport and reflection. I also emphasize the continuing need to analyze interviews and other participant contact as situated events, as well as the importance of triangulating data sources for a deeper view of participant experiences.
