ABSTRACT
Linguistic forms such as those from Powell's speech are intertextually seen by translators in terms of (a) a pre-discoursal linguistic norm in which synonymy could be said to exist (e.g. offspring = children); (b) an unmarked, register-based legal English (offspring = + legal); and (c) a marked, imported discourse which involves the hijack ing of the normal discourse of (b) - Powell is not a lawyer but a politician, and the lawyer's discourse would be a discoursal tool intended, say , to dehumanize. The competition of the various discourses can ultimately be reconciled by arriving at a reading which, while institu tionally sound (the text producer could not be taken to court for libel), is intertextually perni cious: in the particular context under study, Powell's remarks are reminiscent of statements often heard within racist discourse such as 'they breed like rabbits ' . Translators work with this intricate network of relationships, each of which would constitute the limits of discoursal expression which has to be reached before real intentions are properly relayed.
