Training Translators for Crisis Communication: Translators Without Borders as an Example

  • Sharon O’Brien
Part of the Palgrave Studies in Translating and Interpreting book series (PTTI)


Translation across natural languages and communication across cultures are recognized as being important in crisis communication literature. However, analysis of the literature suggests that this criterion has not been studied in depth. Recent advances in translation technology, although helpful, do not provide an adequate solution. There is a growing need for a more serious consideration of translation and interpreting requirements for crisis communication and for the embedding of translation into crisis communication policies, frameworks, and training. This would also necessitate the training of translators for crisis communication, which challenges traditional translator and interpreter training modes. Shorter, more directed training of volunteer translators might be appropriate, and an evaluation of the potential for this is presented here in the context of training provided by Translators Without Borders using a method of self-evaluation for self-efficacy.


Machine Translation Confidence Rating Professional Translator Simulation Task Crisis Communication 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


  1. Bandura, Albert. 1977. Social learning theory. Englewood Cliffs: Prentice-Hall.Google Scholar
  2. Bandura, Albert. 1986. Social foundations of thought and action: A social cognitive theory. Englewood Cliffs: Prentice-Hall.Google Scholar
  3. Boin, Arjen. 2009. The new world of crises and crisis management: Implications for policymaking and research. Review of Policy Research 26(4): 367–377.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Businario, Roberta. 2012. Relief operations across language barriers: The interpreter factor. Unpublished MSc thesis, University College Dublin.Google Scholar
  5. Cadwell, Patrick. 2014. Translation and interpreting needs in the Great East Japan Earthquake of 2011. Proceedings of the FIT XXth World Congress, ed. Wolfram Baur, B. Eichner, S. Kalina, N. Kessler, F. Mayer, J. Orsted, 752–60. BDÜ Fachverlag.Google Scholar
  6. Cadwell, Patrick. 2016. A place for translation technologies in disaster settings: The case of the 2011 Great East Japan Earthquake. In Conflict and communication: A changing Asia in a globalising world, ed. Minako O’Hagan and Qi Zhang. New York: Nova Science Publishers, Inc..Google Scholar
  7. Doherty, Stephen, and Dorothy Kenny. 2014. The design and evaluation of a statistical machine translation syllabus for translation students. The Interpreter and Translator Trainer 8(2): 295–315.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Falkheimer, Jesper, and M. Heide. 2006. Multicultural crisis communication: Towards a social constructionist perspective. Journal of Contingencies and Crisis Management 14(4): 180–189.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Harvard Humanitarian Initiative. 2011. Disaster relief 2.0: The future of information sharing in humanitarian emergencies. Washington, D.C./Berkshire: UN Foundation and Vodafone Foundation Technology Partnership.Google Scholar
  10. Hester, Vaughn, Aaron Shaw, and Lukas Biewald. 2010. Scalable crisis relief: Crowdsourced SMS translation and categorization with mission 4636. Proceedings of the First ACM Symposium on Computing for Development (ACM DEV’10), 1–7. New York: ACM.Google Scholar
  11. IFRC. 2013. World Disasters Report: Focus on technology and the future of humanitarian action, International Federation of the Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies. Available at: Accessed 19 Oct 2015.
  12. Kaigo, Muneo. 2012. Social media usage during disasters and social capital: Twitter and the Great East Japan Earthquake. Keio Communication Review 24: 19–35.Google Scholar
  13. Koehn, Philipp. 2010. Statistical machine translation. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  14. Lewis, William. 2010. Haitian Creole: How to build and ship an MT engine from scratch in 4 days, 17 hours, & 30 minutes. Proceedings of the 14th Annual Conference of the European Association for Machine Translation (EAMT 2010). Saint-Raphaël, 27–28 May 2010 (no page numbers).Google Scholar
  15. Lewis, William, R. Munro, and S. Vogel. 2011. Crisis MT: Developing a cookbook for MT in crisis situations. Proceedings of the 6th Workshop on Statistical Machine Translation, 501–511. Edinburgh, July 30–31.Google Scholar
  16. Manoj, B.S., and Alexandra H. Baker. 2007. Communication challenges in emergency response. Communications of the ACM 50(3): 51–53.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Mizuno, Makiko. 2012. Community interpreting in Japan: Present state and challenges. In Translation and translation studies in the Japanese context, ed. Nana Sato-Rossberg and J. Wakabayashi, 202–221. London: Continuum.Google Scholar
  18. Morrow, Nathan, N. Mock, A. Papendieck, and N. Kocmich. 2011. Independent evaluation of the Ushahidi Haiti Project [Online]. Available from: Accessed 19 Oct 2015.
  19. Moser-Mercer, Barbara, L. Kheriche, and B. Class. 2014. Interpreting conflict: Training challenges in humanitarian field interpreting. Journal of Human Rights Practice 6(1): 140–158.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Munro, Robert. 2013. Crowdsourcing and the crisis-affected community: Lessons learned and looking forward from mission 4636. Journal of Information Retrieval 16(2): 210–266.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Naito, Minoru. 2012. Community interpreting at the time of Great East Japan Earthquake. Conference Interpretation and Translation (국제회의 통역과 번역) 14(1): 97–115.Google Scholar
  22. O’Brien, Sharon, and M. Simard (eds.). 2014. Introduction to the special issue of machine translation on post-editing. Machine Translation 28(3–4): 159–164.Google Scholar
  23. O’Brien, Sharon, M. Carl, M. Simard, L. Specia, and L. Winther-Balling (eds.). 2013. Post-editing of machine translation: Processes and applications. Newcastle: Cambridge Scholars Publishing.Google Scholar
  24. O’Hagan, Minako. 2009. Evolution of user-generated translation: Fansubs, translation hacking and crowdsourcing. Journal of Internationalisation and Localisation 1: 94–121.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. O’Hagan, Minako. 2011. Introduction: Community translation: Translation as a social activity and its possible consequences in the advent of Web 2.0 and beyond. Linguistica Antverpiensia 10: 1–10.Google Scholar
  26. Olofsson, Anna. 2011. Organizational crisis preparedness in heterogeneous societies: The OCPH model. Journal of Contingencies and Crisis Management 19(4): 215–226.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Palttala, Pauliina, and M. Vos. 2012. Quality indicators for crisis communication to support emergency management by public authorities. Journal of Contingencies and Crisis Management 20(1): 39–51.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Quinn, Sandra C. 2008. Crisis and emergency risk communication in a pandemic: A model for building capacity and resilience in minority communities. Health Promotion Practice 9(18S): 18S–25S.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Reynolds, Barbara. 2007. Crisis and emergency risk communication: Pandemic influenza. Atlanta: Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.Google Scholar
  30. Sellnow, Deanna D., Derek Lane, Robert S. Littlefield, Timothy L. Sellnow, Bethney Wilson, Kimberly Beauchamp, and Steven Venette. 2015. A receiver-based approach to effective instruction crisis communication. Journal of Contingencies and Crisis Management 23(3): 149–158.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Stephens, Keri, and Patty C. Malone. 2009. If the organizations won’t give us information…: The use of multiple new media for crisis technical translation and dialogue. Journal of Public Relations Research 21(2): 229–239.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Stephens, Keri, and Patty C. Malone. 2010. New media for crisis communication: Opportunities for technical translation, dialogue, and stakeholder responses. In The handbook of crisis communication, ed. Timothy Coombs and S. Holladay, 381–385. Oxford: Wiley-Blackwell.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Sutherlin, Gwyneth. 2013. A voice in the crowd: Broader implications for crowdsourcing translation during crisis. Journal of Information Science 39: 397–409.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Tran, Mark. 2012. Translators fight the fatal effects of the language gap. The Guardian, April 11. Available at: Accessed 19 Oct 2015.
  35. Zaidan, Omar, and Chris Callison-Burch. 2011. Crowdsourcing translation: Professional quality from non-professionals. Proceedings of the 49th Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics 1220–9. Portland, Oregon, June 19–24.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© The Author(s) 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  • Sharon O’Brien
    • 1
  1. 1.SALISDublin City UniversityDublinIreland

Personalised recommendations