ABSTRACT

Mobility lies at the heart of transculturality. In order to elucidate this linkage, it might suffice to recall the predominant terminology of transcultural studies: one of the latter’s most striking characteristics is the extent to which its semantics are marked by the language of movement. Terms such as ‘entanglements’, ‘flows’, ‘cross-pollination’, ‘transfer’ all signify particular constituents of motion. 1 This tendency is by no means accidental, but indeed essential – processes of transculturation are best conceptualized as a form of movement, because the basic notion of transculturality is change by contact. While one can debate if change is in itself always or fundamentally a form of moving, the contact dimension inherent to transculturation definitely presupposes motion. It implies that ideas, practices, people, etc. necessarily have to move precisely in order to change. There is thus an intrinsic relation between mobility and transculturality which calls for outlining the field of mobility more precisely.