Against the Implied Translator

This article calls into question the validity and necessity of the concept of the ‘implied translator’, aiming at clarifying the confusion it creates between the translational and narratological concepts of ‘translator’s voice’ and ‘narrative voice’. It suggests that some translation scholars’ concern about the translator’s textual status reflects anxiety about the disciplinary status of Translation Studies, and that in their wish to improve the situation they run the risk of a lopsided emphasis on the translator’s role, which may result in a confrontation between translation (Translation Studies) and literature (Literary Studies). Translated narrative studies based respectively on bilingual textual comparison and monolingual translated narrative analysis should, it is argued, be integrated. Meanwhile, translation scholars’ endeavours to promote the status of Translation Studies do not have to turn the translator into an interceptor who needs to usurp the author’s original voice.