There are very few countries that embrace only one language. Even those countries that have an official language of government, for commercial and formal educational purposes, and for public discourse, may have citizens who conduct their personal affairs in a different language. There may be a large immigrant community. Or the multi-ethnic nature of the state may encompass a range of different languages. Whatever the case, educators will have to consider the extent to which education is provided in people's mother tongue, as opposed (if this be the case) to the official language of the state.
There are a number of considerations for educators. In general, adults learn best in the languages with which they feel most comfortable. Where such learning involves reading, texts in the language that people read in other works (newspapers and books) are most effective. There may be constraints, however, that have to be overcome.
Legal Restrictions
Statutory education authorities may be restricted to offering material and education in the official language only. Such a policy may be established in order to encourage national unity in a diverse society or for some other equally valued policy rationale. Unless there is a national language teaching policy and general consensus about this approach, however, those who do not speak the dominant language may find that voter education offered in the official language is ineffective and exclusionary, both counter-productive to the nation building exercise. In other countries, however, the law may specifically enumerate a number of languages in which voter education must be provided.
Even countries that are relatively homogeneous and enable immigrants and temporary residents to learn the official language provide public information in a range of languages or provide parallel texts. Once there is agreement to provide educational material in a variety of languages and possibly even in a number of oral or written dialects, complications quickly arise for educators.
Terminology
Many of the terms used in voter education, as well as in civic education, are coined in the dominant international languages. They may have become current in a country in the dominant language of commerce and government, or this language may in fact be an international one. Other languages, however, may not easily embrace democratic concepts. In some cases these may translate only clumsily, very often through cumbersome and lengthy phrases rather than succinct words or concepts, or may not translate at all. One of the unfortunate consequences of this is the possibility that people may feel the concepts are not their own or have been imposed upon them.
The onus then is on educators to ensure that there is assimilation of concepts. This may be achieved by direct translation or by indirect translation through idiom and metaphor, by the discovery of words and phrases in the target language that have similar meaning, or by the invention of new words and phrases. In some cases, educators may have to use terms that appear in law. To avoid creating greater confusion, it may be necessary for all organisations and institutions engaged in voter education, both international and domestic, to use the same words, phrases, and concepts. To facilitate this process, some educators have taken the lead in developing glossaries, as standalone documents, that define, translate, and that may offer synonyms and acronyms (see, for example Multi-use Package - Australia).
Beyond coming up with the terminology to discuss voting rights and the electoral process, one illustrative challenge faced early on by every educator in a multi-lingual situation is how to come up with a catchy slogan. Very often a slogan may work very well in one language, but sound or look bad or be devoid of meaning in other languages.
Publishing
Publishing poses a special problem in multilingual societies. Preparing parallel publications raises costs, increases the preparation and production time, and does not always deal effectively with the terminology dilemma. In many cases, those who read technical language may choose to use the dominant language. And there are many examples of well-meaning publications that are not read.
Parallel language publications often are first published in one language and then translated into others. This leads to delays, uneven quality and sequencing of the different languages, and continuing sensitivity on the part of learners.
There have been attempts to overcome these problems by initiating separate publications in different languages, by starting in a marginal language and then translating into the dominant language, or by convening a group of writers to prepare parallel texts in a collaborative way. The most successful approach seems to be to prepare a single publication in a range of languages. This has the advantage of demonstrating the importance of these languages.
Cost-Effective Publishing Alternative
An alternative approach is to select a language that is understood by a majority and then prepare a basic text in a simple version of that language combined together with a glossary in which key terms are translated into one or more other languages. This layout serves to make it easier for people to cope with a second or third language.
Training of Educators
Educators may well cope in a number of different languages. As a result, and because of the difficulty of conducting technical courses in multiple languages or developing specialist texts in multiple languages, it may be possible to find a lingua franca. These same educators, however, will need to conduct their programmes in their home language. For this reason, training programmes should include exercises in which a range of languages are used, and materials prepared for distribution should be translated either at the course or prior to the course, so these can be communicated and then handed out in the appropriate language.
Face to Face Education
In some multilingual societies, it may be possible to match the educator to the participant group. This is no doubt the best way, but it is not always possible. A number of strategies may have to be introduced to ensure that people can understand one another.
One way, but perhaps the most costly, is to provide simultaneous translation. If it is not possible to provide the equipment and translators to provide everybody with their own receiver, it may be possible to group people according to language and have someone assist them from a nearby seat. It may also be possible to provide phrase-by-phrase translation intercut with a speaker. Beyond that, an interpreter may provide a synopsis. All of these require skilled translators; and where booths and high tech equipment are used, these translators may need additional training.
However, trained interpreters may not always understand the nuances of political language, and local community interpreters can often serve a programme better. If the problem is facility with the language of instruction rather than lack of knowledge, it may be possible to give instructions in one language and have exercises conducted in another, with people grouped according to language. Questions may be posed in one language but distributed on prepared handouts that have all the languages. Discussion may take place on a multilingual basis with people speaking their own language and then either giving a synopsis themselves or having another participant translate.
Where the educator alone is an outsider, it may be preferable that this person has an interpreter other than one of the participants to accommodate the educator. Surprisingly, not having access to everything that people say can make other processes more apparent to an educator, such as group interactions and questions that, because of the need for translation, lead to conceptual debate.
