Whether we allow audiences to know that a text is a translation or to see the person responsible for translating it are questions that have dominated discussions about translation throughout history. Despite becoming one of the most ubiquitous terms in translation studies, however, the concept of translator invisibility is often criticized for being vague, overly adaptable, and grounded in literary contexts. This interdisciplinary volume therefore draws on concepts from fields such as sociology, the digital humanities, and interpretation studies to develop and operationalize theoretical understandings of translator visibility beyond these existing criticisms and limitations. Through empirical case studies spanning areas including social media research, reception studies, institutional translation, and literary translation, this volume demonstrates the value of such approaches and adds much-needed nuance to one of translation studies’ most pervasive, polarizing, and imprecise concepts.

The question of whether to disclose that a text is a translation and thereby give visibility to the translator has dominated discussions on translation throughout history. Despite becoming one of the most ubiquitous terms in translation studies, however, the concept of translator (in)visibility is often criticized for being vague, overly adaptable, and grounded in literary contexts. This interdisciplinary volume therefore draws on concepts from fields such as sociology, the digital humanities, and interpreting studies to develop and operationalize theoretical understandings of translator visibility beyond these existing criticisms and limitations. Through empirical case studies spanning areas including social media research, reception studies, institutional translation, and literary translation, this volume demonstrates the value of understanding the visibilities of translators and translation in the plural and adds much-needed nuance to one of translation studies’ most pervasive, polarizing, and imprecise concepts.

Peter J. Freeth is senior lecturer in translation at London Metropolitan University.
Rafael Treviño is a sign language interpreter at the U.S. Department of State and is completing his doctoral studies at Gallaudet University.

In this excellent collection, Freeth and Treviño offer a long overdue perspective on the in/visibilities (in plural) of translation and translators, challenging prevailing conceptions of visibility. The importance of this volume lies in its critical approach questioning the assumption of invisibility, as well as how desirable it is for translators to be visible. This book certainly has the potential of reshaping the discourse on a topic ubiquitous in Translation Studies.- Rafael Schögler, University of Graz

The value of nuanced approaches to the concept of translator invisibility

The question of whether to disclose that a text is a translation and thereby give visibility to the translator has dominated discussions on translation throughout history. Despite becoming one of the most ubiquitous terms in translation studies, however, the concept of translator (in)visibility is often criticized for being vague, overly adaptable, and grounded in literary contexts. This interdisciplinary volume therefore draws on concepts from fields such as sociology, the digital humanities, and interpreting studies to develop and operationalize theoretical understandings of translator visibility beyond these existing criticisms and limitations. Through empirical case studies spanning areas including social media research, reception studies, institutional translation, and literary translation, this volume demonstrates the value of understanding the visibilities of translators and translation in the plural and adds much-needed nuance to one of translation studies’ most pervasive, polarizing, and imprecise concepts.

Peter J. Freeth is senior lecturer in translation at London Metropolitan University.
Rafael Treviño is a sign language interpreter at the U.S. Department of State and is completing his doctoral studies at Gallaudet University.

In this excellent collection, Freeth and Treviño offer a long overdue perspective on the in/visibilities (in plural) of translation and translators, challenging prevailing conceptions of visibility. The importance of this volume lies in its critical approach questioning the assumption of invisibility, as well as how desirable it is for translators to be visible. This book certainly has the potential of reshaping the discourse on a topic ubiquitous in Translation Studies.- Rafael Schögler, University of Graz