What is it about?
AI translation tools like ChatGPT and DeepL are transforming how translation gets done, raising urgent questions about what role human translators will play in the future. This paper explores these questions through the lens of posthumanism — a philosophical framework that rethinks the relationship between humans and technology. I outline three branches of posthumanism (reactive, transhumanist, and critical) and show how each connects to different attitudes toward translation technology: resisting it, using it to enhance human abilities, or recognizing AI as a co-participant in the translation process. I argue that the third approach — critical posthumanism — offers the most productive path forward, and I propose the "Round Table Hypothesis," which envisions future translation as a collaborative meeting where human translators, AI tools, clients, and other agents all sit at the same table, contributing to the task with different but equally important roles.
Featured Image
Why is it important?
The translation industry is changing rapidly, yet most discussions about AI in translation remain either overly optimistic or deeply anxious. This paper offers a middle path grounded in philosophy. It is among the first to systematically connect the three main branches of posthumanism to translation studies, providing a theoretical map that was previously missing. The "Round Table Hypothesis" gives translators and educators a concrete framework for rethinking professional identity, training curricula, and human-AI collaboration. At a time when translators are being asked to work alongside increasingly capable AI, this paper argues that developing communication skills with AI, evaluating which tools to use, and embracing interdisciplinary knowledge (such as computer science and marketing) are no longer optional — they are essential competencies for the next generation of translation professionals.
Perspectives
This article grew out of my own experience as a translation studies PhD candidate at UAB who works daily at the intersection of technology and language. I wanted to bridge a gap I kept encountering: translation scholars discussing AI purely in practical terms, while the deeper philosophical questions about what it means to be a translator in the AI era remained underexplored. Posthumanism can feel abstract, so I tried to make it accessible and relevant to working translators and students who may never have encountered the term. The "Round Table Hypothesis" came from a simple intuition — that the future of translation is not about humans versus machines, but about learning to sit at the same table. I hope this paper encourages translators to see technology not as a threat to resist or a savior to embrace uncritically, but as a co-evolving partner that demands new skills, new ethics, and a willingness to rethink professional boundaries.
Haohong Lai
Universitat Autonoma de Barcelona
Read the Original
This page is a summary of: Using critical posthumanist methods to navigate human translators’ roles in the AI era, INContext Studies in Translation and Interculturalism, May 2025, John Benjamins,
DOI: 10.54754/incontext.v5i1.113.
You can read the full text:
Contributors
The following have contributed to this page
