Supporting Research Writing: Roles and Challenges in Multilingual Settings

Chandos Information Professional Series

Supporting Research Writing

Roles and challenges in multilingual settings

Valerie Matarese

Table of Contents

Cover image

Title page

Copyright

List of figures and tables

First foreword

Second foreword

Third foreword

Editor’s preface

Valerie Matarese

About the contributors

Chapter 1: The contribution of language professionals to academic publication: multiple roles to achieve common goals

Abstract:

Introduction

Managing expectations

Establishing credibility as a language professional

Issues of authority and control

Putting it all together: the multifaceted nature of the language professional’s role

Learning points

Part 1: Teaching NNES authors to write in English

Chapter 2: Teaching academic writing in Europe: multilingual and multicultural contexts

Abstract:

Introduction

Teaching academic writing in European universities: origins, approaches and clientèle

Teaching academic writing: key perspectives and approaches

Who teaches academic writing and who should teach it?

Conclusions

Learning points

Chapter 3: Writing process research: implications for manuscript support for academic authors

Abstract:

Introduction

Real-world writing

Recursive writing

Revision and dissonance

Further considerations for non-anglophone settings

Generalizability and conclusions

Learning points

Chapter 4: Using genre analysis and corpus linguistics to teach research article writing

Abstract:

Introduction

Using genre analysis in a publications skills course: an overview

Relationships of structure to what editors and referees look for

Analysis of moves or stages: using insights from linguistics research to model Introduction structure

Introducing authors to corpus linguistics

Using this approach in one-to-one contexts

Learning points

Chapter 5: Using strategic, critical reading of research papers to teach scientific writing: the reading–research–writing continuum

Abstract:

Reading in the research setting

A writing course based on reading

A stand-alone reading module

The reading-research-writing continuum

Learning points

Part 2: Helping NNES authors publish through translation

Chapter 6: The translator as cultural mediator in research publication

Abstract:

Introduction

The dynamics of intercultural transactions

Conclusion

Learning points

Chapter 7: Giving authors a voice in another language through translation

Abstract:

Introduction

Knowledge creation, epistemology and voice

Translating voice

Conclusions and recommendations

Learning points

Chapter 8: Bilingual publication of academic journals: motivations and practicalities

Abstract:

Introduction

A small but steady trend towards bilingual publishing?

Why publish a bilingual journal?

The practicalities of bilingual publication

Final considerations

Learning points

Part 3: Facilitating publication through editing and writing support

Chapter 9: Defining and describing editing

Abstract:

A difficult term to define

Editing, publishing and redacting: an excursion into etymology

Types of editing

Defining and describing the editing assignment

A hybrid between editing and translation

A glossary of editing terminology (excluding journalism)

Learning points

Chapter 10: Journal copy-editing in a non-anglophone environment

Abstract:

Introduction

Defining NNES journals

Copy editors working for NNES journals

Challenges of copy-editing in NNES journals

The educating role of copy editors

An effective strategy for NNES journals

Conclusions

Learning points

Chapter 11: The authors’ editor: working with authors to make drafts fit for purpose

Abstract

Introduction

Author editing

The levels of author editing

Working with NNES authors

Practicalities of author editing

Establishing a long-term relationship with authors

Recognition of the AE’s work

Conclusions

Learning points

Chapter 12: The writer’s approach to facilitating research communication: a very different way of engaging with authors

Abstract

Introduction

The relationship between writing and authorship

Facilitating written communication—the writer’s approach

Ethical issues

Applicability to other approaches

Learning points

Part 4: Blurring the boundaries

Chapter 13: Didactic editing: bringing novice writers into the arena of scholarly publishing

Abstract

Introduction

Learning simply by reading edited texts

The advantages of editing proactively

Skills useful to novice and more experienced authors

Formal opportunities for teaching through editing

The benefits to authors’ editors

Learning points

Chapter 14: Collaborative research writing: developmental editing with an underlying educational vein

Abstract

The research paper in crisis, developmental editing to the rescue

Team research writing

Helping novice authors get started

Handling the manuscript not ready for editing

When collaborative writing may not work or is not appropriate

Conclusions

Learning points

Chapter 15: Putting ‘wordface’ work at the centre of academic text production: working with an international journal to develop an authors’ mentoring programme

Abstract:

Introduction

Anglophone centre journals

Why and how the mentoring programme came about: three points of contact

The journal editor: concerns

The researcher: findings

The writing teacher-translator: insights

A shared perspective on the importance of ‘wordface’ work

The programme

Wordface work: facing in two directions

Funding

Outcomes of the programme

Conclusion

Learning points

Afterword: Supporting research writing in non-anglophone Europe: reflections and recurring themes

Abstract:

Introduction

The profession of writing support provision

Recurring themes in supporting research writing

Conclusions

Learning points

Index

Copyright

Chandos Publishing

Hexagon House

Avenue 4

Station Lane

Witney

Oxford OX28 4BN

UK

Tel: +44(0) 1993 848726

Email: info@chandospublishing.com

www.chandospublishing.com

www.chandospublishingonline.com

Chandos Publishing is an imprint of Woodhead Publishing Limited

Woodhead Publishing Limited

80 High Street

Sawston

Cambridge CB22 3HJ

UK

Tel: +44(0) 1223 499140

Fax: +44(0) 1223 832819

www.woodheadpublishing.com

First published in 2013

ISBN: 978-1-84334-666-1 (print)

ISBN: 978-1-78063-350-3 (online)

© The editor and contributors, 2013

British Library Cataloguing-in-Publication Data.

A catalogue record for this book is available from the British Library.

All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in or introduced into a retrieval system, or transmitted, in any form, or by any means (electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording or otherwise) without the prior written permission of the publisher. This publication may not be lent, resold, hired out or otherwise disposed of by way of trade in any form of binding or cover other than that in which it is published without the prior consent of the publisher. Any person who does any unauthorised act in relation to this publication may be liable to criminal prosecution and civil claims for damages.

The publisher makes no representation, express or implies, with regard to the accuracy of the information contained in this publication and cannot accept any legal responsibility or liability for any errors or omissions.

The material contained in this publication constitutes general guidelines only and does not represent to be advice on any particular matter. No reader or purchaser should act on the basis of material contained in this publication without first taking professional advice appropriate to their particular circumstances. All screenshots in this publication are the copyright of the website owner(s), unless indicated otherwise.

Typeset by RefineCatch Ltd, Bungay, Suffolk

Printed in the UK and USA.

List of figures and tables

Figures

4.1. Four common structures of research articles 61

4.2. Output of a concordance search using AdTAT of a corpus of 30 research articles in the field of biotechnology 68

15.1. Three points of contact in developing a journal-based authors’ mentoring programme 241

Tables

5.1. Six steps of browsing, a fast, superficial but structured approach for the first evaluation of a biomedical research paper, designed to substitute abstract reading 77

5.2. Content and structure of the course ‘Effective Biomedical Reading and Writing’, as organized for a seven-day programme 78

10.1. Examples of medical texts with transfers from Italian into English 161

15.1. Authors’ mentoring programme overview and schedule 246

Box

15.1. Example feedback sheet for the writer 249

First foreword

When I got the proofs of this book, my first thought was ‘Why wasn’t it published 20 years ago, when we started a medical journal in a small and developing country, where English was not a mother tongue?!’ Supporting Research Writing: Roles and challenges in multilingual settings is a book mainly addressed to language professionals, but should also be read by journal editors and publishers, administrators of research and educational institutions and all other stakeholders in research—to understand the issues in research writing and learn how to facilitate it in multilingual settings. Even current and prospective authors would benefit from the book, to understand what they can expect from writing and editing services and how to prepare their manuscripts or data for their collaboration with experts in editing.

When we started the Croatian Medical Journal, we were overwhelmed by our authors’ needs for writing and presentation assistance: they had done excellent and admirable work in calamitous conditions but could not present their results in a form suitable for publication in international medical journals (Marušić and Marušić 2012). At that time, there were no language professionals in Croatia who could help our authors to improve their manuscripts—editors were lacking and standard translation services were limited to providing grammatically correct text (usually, although I remember a manuscript where the word ‘pulmo’ from the original Croatian manuscript ended up as ‘plum’ in the translated article). Unfortunately, these texts were often perplexing to medical professionals used to standard medical terminology. In the first ten years of journal work, we changed nine language editors, all with a fresh university degree in English language and literature, but with little knowledge about scientific writing and editing and, particularly, about medical English. We finally found the ideal solution—a colleague physician studying the English language after her MD degree. With Sasa Mišak, an active member of Mediterranean Editors and Translators, we built up a scientific editing service for our own authors and for colleagues writing for other journals (Mišak et al. 2005).

Language editing was the least of our concerns, as our authors had even greater problems in data presentation, statistics and, very often, study design. We had some success in improving our authors’ writing and publication skills through tutoring (Marušić et al. 2006). However, the final outcome was often disappointing: while we hoped and expected (and publicly declared this expectation) that our authors would have no problems in writing their next manuscript after the intensive tutoring they received from us, their subsequent manuscripts often had the same mistakes as the first ones. Just as in the real-life cases from this book, we have experienced the whole spectrum of positive and negative working relationships with authors. However, perhaps because our tutoring was provided for free, we always felt that we were on the ‘losing’ side: if the manuscript was accepted, the authors thought that they did it all by themselves but, if the manuscript was rejected, it was all our fault. If we had the book you are reading now, we could have better understood the problems and needs of our authors and dealt with them in a different and perhaps better way. And our authors would surely have better understood the value of professional writing and editing services.

This book will also be an important tool for us to further develop our new course on research methodology and communication for undergraduate students. In the past we have worked with early career researchers, practicing physicians attending continuous medical education courses, as well as postgraduate/doctoral students in medicine and life sciences. In our experience, teaching scientific communication at these professional stages is too late, and the problems have to be addressed early in professional development. We then organized a single course for second-year medical students, and showed in a cohort study and a nonrandomized trial that course attendance had a significant positive but only short-term effect on students’ attitudes toward science (Vujaklija et al. 2010). Using this evidence, we recently introduced a longitudinal course on research methodology to gradually build students’ knowledge and skills in research, critical assessment and writing. The new course is spread throughout the whole six-year curriculum. It aims to build up students’ research skills, starting from writing a research proposal and continuing on to performing the study and writing a research report. This effort requires intensive supervision but is rewarding not only in that it encourages the students to publish research articles in peer-reviewed journals and thus contribute to the global body of knowledge, but also facilitates their personal and professional maturation into critical thinkers (Balajić et al. 2012). As editors, we found our work with students on their proposal and diploma theses even more rewarding than working with authors submitting manuscripts to our journal. It will be interesting to see what kind of professional services in writing and editing our students will need later in their professional life. Just as research itself, supporting research writing is a continually developing and growing area, and I hope that the next editions of this excellent book will help new generations of all stakeholders in research.

Ana Marušić

Head, Department of Research in Biomedicine and Health

Editor in Chief, Journal of Global Health

University of Split School of Medicine

Split, Croatia

References

Balajić, K., Barac-Latas, V., Drenjanćević, I., Ostojić, M., Fabijanić, D., Puljak, L. Influence of a vertical subject on research in biomedicine and activities of The Cochrane Collaboration branch on medical students’ knowledge and attitudes toward evidence-based medicine. Croatian Medical Journal. 2012; 53:367–373.

Marušić, A., Marušić, M. Can small journals provide leadership? Lancet. 2012; 379:1361–1363.

Marušić, M., Markulin, H., Lukić, I. K., Marušić, A. Academic advancement of authors receiving tutoring from a medical journal. Teaching and Learning in Medicine. 2006; 18:126–129.

Mišak, A., Marušić, M., Marušić, A. Manuscript editing as a way of teaching academic writing: experience from a small scientific journal. Journal of Second Language Writing. 2005; 14:122–131.

Vujaklija, A., Hren, D., Sambunjak, D., Vodopivec, I., Ivaniš, A., Marušić, A., Marušić, M. Can teaching research methodology influence students’ attitude toward science? Cohort study and nonrandomized trial in a single medical school. Journal of Investigative Medicine. 2010; 58:282–286.

Second foreword

My career in international organizations, mainly the European Commission, has included translation, revision and translation management, with plenty of hands-on translation and, more recently, editing. Translation and editing have a great deal in common and require very similar skills, but one great mystery was this: ‘Why do authors regularly say Thank you! to editors, yet hardly ever seem grateful for translation?’ For that is what I and my fellow editors invariably found to be the case. And the authors’ gratitude was genuine, as we could see from the repeat orders and exponential increase in editing requests. Sometimes, to our surprise, it seemed that editing had solved some kind of intractable problem in the text (often produced, in our institutional context, by a drafting committee of several authors rather than an individual author). What was our secret? Why this gratitude?

This collection of papers helps to untangle the mystery of editing, by exploring the varied interactions between authors and their editors and showing how to make this interaction work best. Cleverly, the title is Supporting Research Writing, and the word support is perhaps the key to successful relationships. Authors just need to understand that what they are being offered is support and not interference. And once authors have seen how editing can help them—by making their message more effective, by making their text publishable, by making it work—editors may earn their respect and gratitude.

In most international organizations, like the ones where I worked, English has now become the lingua franca. Whatever the nationality and native language of the writer, documents are written in English. This is neither an official diktat nor linguistic imperialism. There may be no obligation to draft in English, yet authors choose to do so. Why, one wonders, don’t they write in their native language and get the text translated into English by a professional translator? There are several reasons—time, cost, and above all convenience. If a multinational working party wants to discuss a draft in their common language, and the only common language is English, then the authors will usually write in English. When the text has been finalized at the European Commission and is ready for discussion in the European Parliament and other EU institutions, it must be translated into all the EU official languages and finally published in all those languages too—the final consumers throughout the EU must all be able to read it in their national language. That is what is meant by the EU’s policy of multilingualism: equal rights for all official languages. But it does not mean that all languages are used simultaneously in the earlier stages of drafting. There, the English language now rules.

English has not always been the prevalent common language in the EU institutions. Instead, French had the role of lingua franca until the 1990s, and thanks to the inherent discipline of that language, it was correct French, too. Being a lingua franca creates problems for English—which is much more elastic than French—making for a somewhat clunky and approximate style that is difficult to understand and to translate. Ideally, all these ‘English’ texts should be edited before being translated, as that guarantees a better multilingual end product. Editing is not always possible in the EU institutions, owing to time constraints, but it can at least focus on the most important texts and web material. Translators can, too, make up for deficiencies in the original English texts by highlighting problems, suggesting improvements and pointing out inconsistencies to authors. This is easiest in an institutional context where translators have information-sharing structures and can contact authors directly. When a text has to be published in 23 languages, as in the EU context, that means there are at least 22 translators working on it. If all these translators contact the author with queries, it can be time-consuming and irritating for the authors. This can lead to resentment and a failure to appreciate the translators’ contribution—which is invaluable, as they are the first and possibly the closest readers of every text produced. To pre-empt such problems, some EU institutions take a project-based approach: for each job they appoint a ‘lead translator’ who collects all the translators’ queries and suggestions, discusses them with the author department, and shares the outcome with the rest of the translation team.

Another contribution made by translators and editors at the European Commission has been the ‘Clear Writing Campaign’ to encourage Commission authors to write more clearly—not only for the sake of translators, but above all for the sake of their readers. Supported by national plain language associations in many countries inside and outside the European Union, the campaign helps to remind anyone writing Commission documents that their readers deserve some consideration—they are busy people who have a tendency to switch off (literally) when faced with long jargon-laden texts in any language. For many authors, it comes as a surprise that complexity is not an essential prerequisite of a convincing document—that in fact the reverse can be true: clear, simple texts have more credibility.

This message comes across loud and clear in many of the papers in this collection, showing how authors, editors and translators can best work together to produce effective texts that will get published and will ultimately attract and interest their readers.

Emma Wagner, MA (Cantab), Diploma in Translation and Interpreting (Bath)

Fellow of the Institute of Translation and Interpreting and former education officer

Former translator, reviser, translation manager and editor at the European Commission (retired)

Brighton, UK and Corfu, Greece

Bibliography

Chesterman, A., Wagner, E. Can theory help translators?. Manchester: St Jerome Publications; 2002.

Cutts, M., Wagner, E., Clarifying EC Regulations. Plain Language Commission, High Peak, 2002. Available from: http://www. clearest. co. uk/pages/publications/books/clarifyingecregulations

Wagner, E., Bech, S., Martínez, J. M. Translating for the EU institutions. Manchester: St Jerome Publications; 2002.

Third foreword

Working in a language service offering translation and editing services at a technical university in Barcelona, I found that many members of the academic staff depend on language support in order to publish their research. However, their needs vary greatly: some are fully aware of the conventions of publishing within their fields and have a fairly good grasp of English, whereas others have little knowledge of publishing requirements and poor writing skills even in their native language. The editing services needed by these researchers range from sorting out the prepositions and false friends to carrying out major work on the style, organization and content. When translation is required, preparing the manuscripts for submission may also involve substantial reorganization of the text. One of the great challenges faced by professionals offering these services is deciding how far to go in each case in order to offer the authors the best chance of having their work accepted for publication.

The professionals providing language support services in the Mediterranean area are a motley group, including many without formal training as editors or translators. Those who are freelances normally work alone, and even those who work in-house are often the only persons providing English language services to researchers in their institutions. Mediterranean Editors and Translators (MET) was set up in 2006 to offer these professionals opportunities for networking and continuing professional development: to ‘bring them in from the cold’. Over the last six years I think we have succeeded in doing that for many MET members. Many of us now have a clearer idea of ‘how far to go’ with the translation or editing of a research article.

The six objectives set out in MET’s charter can be summarized as follows:

1) To maintain a stable network and means to hold events for English language consultants.

2) To communicate knowledge that can contribute to improving the quality of language support services available in the Mediterranean.

3) To be a conduit for exchanging information between language consultants in our geographic area and those in other parts of Europe and the world.

4) To stimulate research in Mediterranean communities on the needs of academics, scientists and others and on promising practices that meet their needs well.

5) To identify local expertise in language support and help our experts share their knowledge with a wider audience.

6) To help users of language support services locate appropriate solutions to their needs and promote mutual understanding between suppliers and users of these services.

A large proportion of MET members are involved to some extent in providing language support to non-native English-speaking researchers who wish to publish in international journals. Much of the content of MET’s workshops and annual meeting has addressed this area of work, highlighting the great variety of tasks undertaken by members: by choice or by chance, many of us have found ourselves translating, editing, interpreting, teaching, coaching, and training our peers.

This book developed from a panel discussion on ‘Defining roles in writing support services: a look at the full spectrum’, held at MET’s 2009 meeting. The members of the panel and most of the authors of this book have been with MET right from the beginning, sharing its values and making major contributions to continuing professional development for its members through workshops and presentations. Readers will find that the book addresses the particular situation and needs of professionals providing language services to researchers whose native language is not English, dealing with the wide range of services that they are called on to provide and covering many of the issues laid down in MET’s objectives. This book is therefore a very welcome contribution because it brings together and structures many of the ideas that have been discussed over the years since our foundation. The editors and authors are to be congratulated for their dedication and tenaciousness in carrying out this ambitious project.

Alan Lounds

Chair, Mediterranean Editors and Translators

Unit head, Language and Terminology Service, Universitat Politècnica de

Catalunya

Barcelona, Spain

Editor’s preface

This book has its roots in Mediterranean Editors and Translators. Affectionately called MET by its members, this non-profit, professional association was founded in Barcelona, Spain, in the spring of 2006 after an initial, exploratory meeting the preceding autumn. From its inception, the association was designed to bring together people who provide language support—editing, translation, teaching of English for specific purposes, and other related activities—for international communication in English. While its members are mostly based in the Mediterranean region and elsewhere in Europe, many originate from countries where English is the vernacular. These ‘language professionals’, as we have called them, come from diverse educational backgrounds spanning linguistics and language teaching, translation studies, humanities, business and finance, basic biomedical and clinical sciences, and more. What unites them is a belief in peer sharing of knowledge and experiences as an effective means of continuing professional development.

MET meetings, or ‘METMs’, have been organized annually ever since the first event. The 2009 meeting, featuring a theme of ‘Translation, editing, writing: broadening the scope and setting limits’, opened with a panel discussion organized and moderated by Iain Patten. The panel, entitled ‘Defining roles in writing support services: a look at the full spectrum’, aimed to illustrate the range of writing support services on offer to academic authors seeking to publish in English. In addition to Iain, the panellists were Sally Burgess, Susan DiGiacomo, Joy Burrough-Boenisch and myself. Our individual presentations focused on the teaching of academic writing (Burgess), translating into English (DiGiacomo), editing English texts written by non-native speakers (Burrough-Boenisch), writing on behalf of authors (Patten), and offering a hybrid service combining aspects of education, translation, editing and writing in cases when manuscripts are far from publishable (Matarese). Discussion touched on the fact that authors, if unfamiliar with the options available to them, may request services that are not the most suitable to help them achieve their publishing goals. Furthermore, if language professionals have an overly rigid perception of their roles, they may not recognize situations in which they fail to serve their clients’ best interests. The panellists noted that in real-life situations, non-native English speaking (NNES) authors may best be served by translators who are able to edit and by editors who can guide rewriting. They also asserted that language professionals can serve an educational role, even if this is not the stated aim of their services. Consequently, effective writing support can be considered a fluid continuum in which the boundaries separating education, translation and editing are inherently fuzzy.

Through the discussions that drove the development of the panel and our thinking on the subject of writing support for academic authors in non-anglophone countries, we recognized the need for a book that would explore the question of writing support in real-world situations. In particular, we felt that the complex needs of NNES researchers seeking writing support in multilingual contexts had not yet been adequately addressed. Therefore, we envisaged this edited volume in which experienced practitioners describe the varied situations in which they work and the particular services they have developed to serve their clients. Our aim was to specifically address persons who provide similar services in freelance, entrepreneurial or institutional roles (and also those who wish to enter the field), bringing their attention to the range of issues surrounding writing support in non-anglophone settings. To broaden the coverage beyond the five experiences reported in the panel, we invited contributions from colleagues, mostly selected among MET members. Given the composition of the final group of contributors, the book presents the diverse experiences and viewpoints of language professionals working in southern Europe (Italy, Portugal, Spain), northern Europe (Netherlands and United Kingdom), and even Australia.

The volume is structured in four parts: the first three reflect the main areas of writing support—education, translation and editing—while the fourth explores innovative means of combining these activities. These parts are preceded by an introductory chapter in which the authors, Sally Burgess and Theresa Lillis, use vignettes based on real-life cases to examine the varied working relationships that can be established between academic authors and language professionals. The chapter illustrates the overlapping activities in which we and our colleagues engage, and points out factors that influence the success of these collaborations. This chapter sets the scene for the remainder of the book.

The first part of the book, ‘Teaching NNES authors to write in English’, focuses on approaches to the teaching of academic writing that are relevant to language professionals. It opens with an overview of academic writing teaching in Europe in both anglophone and non-anglophone contexts. Written by Sally Burgess and Anne Pallant, this chapter explains how academic writing programmes can take different didactic perspectives, by focusing on the text (its linguistic forms and patterns), the writer (and the cognitive processes of writing), the discourse community (and its readers’ expectations), or—in the case of NNES students—their first-language writing culture. The authors point out, however, that these approaches are complementary, not exclusive, and that many writing programmes mix them to some extent. The second chapter, by Mary Ellen Kerans, reviews the body of knowledge that emerged from early research on writing processes; it then extracts key messages about writing that can be leveraged by editors and translators to facilitate the production of a publishable text while imparting good writing skills to novice authors. The next contribution, by Sally Burgess and Margaret Cargill, describes the use of genre analysis and corpus linguistics to teach research writing at the university level and suggests how knowledge of these approaches may benefit language professionals who work individually with authors. Part 1 concludes with another practical example of teaching research writing. In this chapter I relate how, as a biomedical scientist-turned-editor, I was able to combine disciplinary knowledge and familiarity with the publishing paradigms in my field to supplement faculty teaching in a doctoral programme.

Part 2, ‘Helping NNES authors publish through translation’, focuses on serving researchers who need to communicate in English but do not feel able to write in this language. It opens with a contribution by Karen Bennett who explains the considerable differences in academic discourse between English and the Romance languages of southern Europe. She argues that academic translators must be sensitive to the different norms governing text production in the source and target languages, in order to negotiate a text that is satisfactory to both authors and readers. For Bennett, a good translator is a cultural mediator. The next chapter, by Susan DiGiacomo, describes how an author’s literary ‘voice’ is deployed in academic writing according to discipline-specific conventions; examples are drawn from two widely divergent fields, biomedicine and ethnography. DiGiacomo advances the idea that a translator also has a voice and must recognize how it is used in the service of the translated author. For DiGiacomo, a good translator is a good writer who is sensitive to voice in writing. Part 2 closes with an examination of the practice of bilingual publication of academic journals. According to the authors Greg Morley and Mary Ellen Kerans, evolution in the publishing sector over the past decade drove some non-English journals to choose bilingual publication as a means of reaching a wider international audience and attracting better submissions, while preserving disciplinary discourse in the local language and respecting subscribers’ preferences to read in that language. Translating a scholarly journal is labour intensive, however, and clear data as to the real benefits of this practice are lacking. The authors discuss the practical aspects of journal translation, regarding issues such as engaging a suitable number of qualified translators, managing the workflow, and assuring quality. Despite doubts as to the sustainability of bilingual journal publication, the authors highlight how a well-managed team-translation project benefits both the journal, which is able to publish higher quality texts in both the source and target languages, and its translators, who improve