Module 1: Language Brokering: Issues

Introduction: Module 1 consists of defining ‘language brokering’ and giving a brief research panorama based on literature review or previous research on children brokers.

Objective: The objective of this module is to introduce the educator into the “language brokering” practices through some studies that have been conducted, studies which focused specifically on the children brokers. 

Literature review: Many children translate for their parents or relatives in a broad range of situations (Baker, 2006). There are many framing translations that were proved in clinical psychology in regards to children brokers: ‘parentified child’, ‘adultification’, ‘parentification’ of children, role reversal, weakness of parental authority, etc. (Love & Buriel, 2007; Orellana, 2009). Other studies examined the relationship between brokering practices and children’s academic performance, academic self-efficacy, biculturalism, social self-efficacy, biculturalism, mental health and risky behavior. The findings show a possible acceleration of academic and socio-emotional development on one hand (Buriel, Perez, De Ment, Chavez, & Moran, 1998), and a reduction of acculturation stress in family with alcoholic behavior (Kam, 2011). Even though language brokering has been negatively portrayed because of excessive responsibilities on young people, monolingual speakers’ point of view is positive to brokering. For bilingual speakers with brokering experience, it’s a normal and appreciable activity (Cline, Crafter, O’Dell, & Guida de Abreu, 2011) that they do only to help the family (Orellana, 2009).

In contrast, in a study conducted by Martinez Jr., Heather, & Eddy (2009), a higher demand of language brokering reveals higher levels of family stress and poor academic achievement for brokers. In another survey study, when language brokering is practiced in a dysfunctional family, children feel angry, scared, ashamed, embarrassed, nervous, uncomfortable, and obligated (Weisskirch, 2007).