ABSTRACT
With regard to the relationship of direct translation to relevance theory, the answer is that direct translation is covered in the relevance-theoretic framework as an instance of interpretive use. Since indirect translation, too, falls under interpretive use, the author's find that they have, in fact, arrived at a unified account of translation: both direct and indirect translation are instances of interlingual interpretive use. Thus despite first appearances to the contrary, direct translation is not of a kind altogether different from indirect translation, relevance theory offers a unified account of both. For the translator, one of the important consequences of this is that it makes the explication of implicatures both unnecessary and undesirable. The most representative class of the translational phenomena the author's want to look at glosses or back-translations. Textbooks on translation thrive on examples where translations failed because the differences between the languages had not been observed properly by the translator.
