'Asiacentrism': A consequence of continentalization?

In several disciplines, including translation studies, so-called „Euro-centrism‟ in reflection and in research has been criticized. This article examines some influential examples of the use of „Eurocentrism‟ as well as the consistency of the criticisms. It also questions the appropriateness of the use of a geographically based term for a complex mixture of political, cultural and historical facts and developments. The antagonistic view underlying the term „Eurocentric‟ does not seem to reflect the complexity of geographical variation in translation studies. Meant as a gentle form of provocation, the term „Asiacentrism‟ is used as another example of terminological simplification that restricts differentiating potential. As an alternative to a confrontational geographical model characterized by a continentalization of discourse, this article pleads for a collaboration model to support the intercontinentalization of translation studies.status: publishe