Chief Admin

Stats

Blogs: 172
Pages: 4
Memos: 113
Invitations: 1
Location: Kyoto and Auckland
Work interests: research, editing, science communication
Affiliation/website: National Museum of Ethnology, Osaka
Preferred contact method: Any
Preferred contact language(s): English, German
Contact: email = researchcooperative-at-gmail-dot-com
Favourite publications: Various, and especially the open access versions of older journals with effective review systems

Founding Member



Work: ethnobotany, prehistory, museum curation
Affiliations: 1996-present: National Museum of Ethnology, Osaka. 1995: Freelance editor, Kyoto. 1994: JSPS Research Visitor, Kyoto University, Kyoto. 1993: Research Visitor, Australian National University, Canberra. 1991: Visiting Researcher, National Museum of Ethnology, Osaka.1990: STA Fellow, National Institute for Ornamental Plants, Vegetables, and Tea (NIVOT), Ano, Japan
Contact: National Museum of Ethnology, Senri Expo Park, Suita City, Osaka, Japan 565-8511
Biographical: Established the Research Cooperative in 2001
Favourite Publications: Various

Science communication in developing countries

The following exchange is from the Research and Media Network

(http://researchandmedia.ning.com/profiles/comment/thread?screenName=nandan3000)

On April 22, 2009, Shahidul Islam Chowdhury asked

Hi Peter,

What do you think about making communicating science issues in (a) second language in developing countries easier?

Shahid, Dhaka

Peter Matthews replied

Dear Shahidul,

Firstly, It is important for researchers and science writers in developing countries to communicate in non-native languages, but the effort needs to be selective and cost effective, since it does cost something - in time, effort, and (usually) money - to do this to a high standard. Although content should take priority over style and smoothness, poorly written work - in any language - has to compete with a large quantity of better writing that also has important content. So my advice is that all researchers should be involved in translation into other languages, in wealthy and less wealthy countries, but the focus should be on the best work, and on key papers or key areas of study.

Secondly, researchers and science writers should not ignore the potential for reaching out more effectively to audiences using their home language. Every country should support critical, constructive, informed writing that helps the development of that country in ways that benefit all, directly or indirectly. And there is always a need to translate and interpret work from other countries into local languages (the difference intended here is: translation is an attempt at unaltered transfer of meaning, for the same audience type as for the original text; interpretation may summarise, transform, and express in ways that allow meaning to be understood by different audiences).

So - for example: The people of Bangladesh should know everything that can possibly known about the management of water levels and water quality, and the likely course of sea-level rise, and other countries might also learn a lot from the efforts of local researchers (in Bangladesh) on such topics.

Translation and interpretation are needed in all directions.

Tags

Dislike 0