Pseudotranslations are an interesting mode of literary production. In the case of the Turkish versions of Sherlock Holmes, they provide insight into several points. First of all, they suggest the fluidity of literary categories of "original" and "translation". The early pseudotranslations, i.e. those written in the Ottoman script, seem to have developed a variety of strategies in order to keep their status as pseudotranslations veiled. Some of the books mentioned neither an author's nor a translator's name (i.e. "Sherlock Holmes' Mistress" or the series in the 1940s and 1950s). Some called the author of

the same series “author” on some weeks, and “translator” on others, although all of the books were pseudotranslations. Some used the term nâkil (renderer) (e.g. stories by Selami Münir Yurdatap). This term was operational in the Ottoman and early Republican periods and could refer to creators of both originals and translations.

Even when these books made no claim to be translations, catalogues and bibliographies did not include them among original literature. The comprehensive bibliography of works written in Ottoman script prepared by Seyfi Özege classified these stories as translations. The Republican bibliographies were not that clear about their status and placed these books in mixed sections such as Children's Literature (Türkiye Bibliyografyası 1955) and Serialized Publications (Türkiye Bibliyografyası 1938-1948), where no distinction was made between translations and originals.

The anonymity of the last two series is especially interesting. They were published at a time of much discussion about translation and its capacity to reshape Turkish culture and literature. The official Translation Bureau established in 1940 published over a thousand translations of mainly Western classics until 1966. These books were sold at low prices and were designed to reach the masses through the network of the Ministry of Education. The Bureau also published a journal called Tercüme (Translation), offering articles on translation history, theory and criticism. The efforts of the Bureau gave new impetus to translation activity in the private sector, especially in terms of the translation of canonized works from the West. In the sphere of canonized works the issue of source and authorship was well-defined. "Fidelity to the original", "creating the same effect of the original", and "mentality of the author" were some of the phrases that characterized the discourse on translations (Yücel 1940:1–2; Nüzhet Haşim Sinanoğlu in Birinci Türk Neşriyat Kongresi 1939: 390–395). It is interesting that certain fields of popular literature (as exemplified by the Sherlock Holmes pseudotranslations) remained so immune to these discussions and trends. The popularity of these series indicates that some parts of the readership remained unaware of and/or indifferent to the intellectual debates. Their expectations did not include a clear division between original and translation. This may be because these readers had been exposed to the folk tradition, where the idea of anonymity prevailed and source mattered little.