It has taken a long time for Translation Studies to be approved as a legitimate social discipline until descriptive approach. As a reaction to the myths of untranslatability, Translation Studies has been trying to show its dynamic, unique nature peculiar to humanities and also interdisciplinary connections. Literary translation and specifically poetry translation have been generally used as examples/reasons of subjective and challenging nature of translation, which has been taken as an obstacle for being “scientific”. When it comes to creativity, the common reaction is that it cannot be measured and explained in any way; so it cannot be positioned in any science. Moreover, it has been believed that one cannot mention any ethical judgement or criticism about literary translation except praising the “original” and announcing the deficiency of translation work. However, descriptive approach declared Translation Studies as a legitimate social science and after the postmodernist and postcolonial approaches, the role of subjective interventions has been evaluated from different perspectives such as power relations, gender and identity. Nowadays, we can without hesitation say that translation is by nature creative whether the text is literary or not. Creativity and the intervention of the creator, namely translator, is not an obstacle for a social science but a part of it. Translingualism is an extraordinary case with a hybridized, constructed source language, which obliges literary translators to construct a new language in and from target language with connotations of social and ideological differences. This paper aims to question the autonomy of literary translator in terms of aesthetics and ethics through the example of translingualism.