Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
The engagement of scholars and social scientists with cultures not their own is often said today to be a colonial or appropriative action. Such charges are countered here not defensively but by description of the hybridity of intercultural dialogues, of which translation is one case. Jesuit translation in Ming-dynasty China gives the example. Translation is often thought of as a channel – a way of moving content from one language to another. It is more productive, in my view, to treat it as a receptacle, a vessel in which unexpected combinations occur and give rise to new substances. Thus the missionary goal becomes a mere precursor to an actual production of new texts and new identities.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Haun Saussy (2024) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: