ABSTRACT
Postcolonial criticism reveals commonalities between histories of European imperialism in Asia, Latin America, the Middle East and Africa, with translation playing a crucial mediating role that–at its worst–reinforces western epistemologies and perpetuates entrenched hierarchies. To counter the colonial attempt at producing “transparent” translations and ensuring their adoption in a range of discourses, T. Niranjana proposes that postcolonial readers look more carefully at the “effective history” of each text, asking instead who used it, in which context and for what purpose. A number of translation scholars and postcolonial theorists have since critiqued existing language hierarchies, either individually or collaboratively. Postcolonial theorist Anuradha Dingwaney and translation studies scholar Carol Maier coedited a volume in 1995 that brings increasing nuance to the reading of difference across a range of categories. The best work in postcolonial translation has come from vexed collaborations such as these, and will continue to engender lively, thoughtful debate if we remain committed to nuancing received categories.
