Trying to understand another culture or an outgroup is an act of translation in itself. But what can be said about the translatability of the names of outgroups? Translating ethnonyms may often be hampered by the doubly inscrutable nature of what is being translated. The relationship between ethnonyms and their ostensible real-life referents is complex and mutable. This is true even in the case of endonyms, used within a group about that group. When dealing with exonyms—names for groups given and/or used by other groups—the difficulties about what in fact is being rendered into another language or culture become even more acute, and no real-life referents are necessary. Consequently, some aspects common to translation
processes come particularly to the fore in the case of translation (or more broadly, transmission) of ethnonyms. Taking up the use of an ethnonym from other language—or even from an earlier stage of the same language—has frequently had implications on the world view into which this new (or old) ethnonym was inserted. On the other hand, if the ethnonym is not connected in the receiving culture into a salient referent, the new usage can take novel forms.