PofoliaShared via Pofolia

Discourse & Communication· 2026Q1

Bridging or reproducing inequity? Machine translation tools as disruptive participants in clinical interactions

Jennifer Watermeyer

Short summary

Machine translation tools (MTTs) disrupt clinical interviews by forcing participants into time-consuming 'MTT management projects' that hinder medical information gathering and patient-centered communication, potentially reinforcing linguistic inequity.

AI-generated from the title and abstract; the full text is not read.

Key points

  • Machine translation tools (MTTs) function as disruptive third participants in clinical interactions.
  • Technical failures and inaccuracies force participants into time-consuming 'MTT management projects'.
  • This 'MTT management' disrupts the medical information gathering ('case history project'), halting progress and undermining intersubjectivity.
  • Redirecting focus to device management erodes patient-centered communication and risks reinforcing linguistic inequity.

AI-generated from the title and abstract; the full text is not read.

Abstract

Language differences are a critical social determinant of health that can limit healthcare access, leading to adverse health outcomes when interpreters are unavailable. Machine translation tools (MTTs) may offer a pragmatic solution, but little is known about their interactional consequences. This exploratory study adopts an interactional analysis informed by Conversation Analysis (CA) and Interactional Sociolinguistics (IS) to explore two Neural MTTs (Google Translate, Microsoft Translator) in simulated South African case history interviews mediating English, isiZulu and Sesotho. Analysis reveals how MTTs may function as disruptive third participants. Technical failures and inaccuracies force participants into a time-consuming ‘MTT management project’ with interactional work organised across turns to manage the tool. This competing project recurrently disrupts the medical information gathering of the ‘case history project’, reorganising interactional architecture, halting progressivity and undermining intersubjectivity. Redirecting orientation to device management erodes patient-centred communication and risks reinforcing linguistic inequity. However, observed adaptive strategies highlight potential avenues for managing communication breakdowns when professional interpreters are unavailable.

The authors' abstract, as published at the source. Discourse & Communication, 2026 · DOI ↗

TakeawaysPremium
Ask the paperFree account

Continue with a free account

Ask the paper: 3 free questions a day about this paper; save it, get its citation, new summaries every day for your field. Takeaways are Premium.

Continue free on the web

Sign in with Google or Apple; no card needed. You come back to this paper.

On your phone:

Field: General Health Professions

General Health ProfessionsHealth Professions