ABSTRACT
The ideology of a translation is complex, resulting from the layering of the subject of the source text, the speech acts of the source text, the representation of the content by the translator, and the speech acts of the translation itself, as well as resonances and discrepancies between these aspects of the source text and target text as ‘utterances’. If such ideological aspects of a translation are inextricable from the ‘place of enunciation’ of the translator, which is as much ideological as geographical and temporal, how does the discourse of ‘in between’ relate to an analysis of the ideology of translation? Why is this trope popular at present? After considering reasons for the use of the trope, this article argues that the discourse of ‘between’ is ultimately misleading and even retrograde with respect to understanding both the role of the translator and the notion of ideological engagement itself.
