in that research challenged the meanings of the label 'coloured' that was imposed upon them, and which they viewed as negative (Sonn and Lewis, 2009). A similarly pejorative label in Australia, 'coloured' was used in the past to refer to Aboriginal people of mixed ancestry in relation to attempts at assimilation (Reynolds, 2005). For some South Africans in Australia, the label was also rejected, deconstructed and/or redefined in terms of a shared experiential reality, and often delinked from apartheid classification. Some participants replaced the label by defining themselves as South African, South African-Australian, or in terms of being from a place like Cape Town or Durban. Others said they were black South Africans, in line with the more politicized understanding of identity informed by Black Consciousness politics (Biko, 1976). These different identifications point to the ways in which people go about making sense of racialization in Australia in relation to the racist history of the home country.  
The terms that people use to name themselves conceal a more complex set of negotiations of displacement, making sense of the discourses that are used to signify people and give meaning to blackness in Australia and globally. The process of interpellation is illustrated by comments made by a participant in a study on identity negotiation among South Africans. One participant commented that:  
In Australia we are known as blacks, in South Africa we are known as coloured. So naturally, when Australians identified me as a black, I felt obliged to correct them, that I am not black, I am coloured. It is still a tough one because even when I say I am black it does not roll well off the tongue. It is just a hard thing to say that I am black because I did not grow up with that identity. I grew up as a coloured South African, and all along I have been a black South African by international standards, as I found out (Sonn et al., 2015).