History of Translation Studies 2

From China Studies Wiki
Jump to navigation Jump to search

这里是《翻译学史》的书稿第二部分(Part 2)。麻烦各位同学看一下已经存在的章回（样品），自己再加进去新的一个章回（就是你们的学期论文）。请也帮助同学们把他们的论文改正。这样多次修改，大家的论文会越来越好。

学期论文（结合学期所学，撰写一篇5000以上单词的英文论文，按照专业杂志的格式，题目、摘要、关键词和参考文摘需要英中，文章英）。学期论文成绩占70%，平时成绩（含课堂表现、展示及作业）占30%。

Western Translation Theories

Impacts of Western Translation Theories on The Translator’s Guide to Chinglish

Sample 样品

Abstract

In the west, studies on translation practices and theories have walked through the recorded history of over two thousand years, during which there exist various characters, theories, schools of translation, exerting great influences on translators an translating activities at present. The book The Translator’s Guide to Chinglish has discussed the “Chinglish” by English learners and translators in China. The author’s outlooks on translation also have shown the ideologies of western translation theories.

Keywords

Western translation theories; Translation history; Translator’s Guide to Chinglish;

摘要

据记载，西方翻译理论与实践的历史已达两千余年，这其中不乏各大翻译家、翻译理论和翻译流派等，他们都对如今的翻译工作者和翻译活动产生了深远的影响。《中式英语之鉴》这本书讨论了中国英语学习者和翻译工作者的“中式英语”问题。作者在此书中的观点体现着西方的翻译理论思想。

关键词

西方翻译理论；翻译史；《中式英语之鉴》

I. Introduction

Translating sets forth on its journey a long time ago. It has been over 2200 years since Livius Andronicus translated Homer’s Odyssey from Greek into Latin around 250 BC, which is the earliest activity of translating from recorded history. Throughout history, translation is not only involved in politics,culture, religion, language and so forth, but also keeps changing as times and social conditions roll on. On grounds of the changes of targets and contents of translation history, considering the specific periods of people’s apprehension of translation and the roles translation plays in society of different times, researchers divided the history of western translation into 3 parts, translation of religious materials, translation of literary classics and translation of non-literary materials.

The division of western translation history varies from person to person in circles of translation. Generally speaking, from about 250 BC when people translated Septuagint into Greek to the 16th century when the translation of the Bible prevailed, it is the historical period of translating religious materials, followed by period of translation of literature mainly from literary classics and great works of social sciences.(Wu & Shu 2011:76) After the Second World War, however, translation of non-literary and practical materials began to exert influence as a major force.

In the west, studies on translation practices and theories have walked through the recorded history of over two thousand years, which is very close to the one in China. Nevertheless, China had made little progress with translation studies because of closed-door policy. Before years around 1980s, the systematic study on theories of western translation had been left incomplete in China, where few books and papers related were published. And even in the western countries, there existed similar situations. However, studies on theories of western translation has made appreciable development since 1980s, especially the books on history of western translation theory written by Rener, Robinson, etc. These books and materials are indisputably of great value for us to take a closer look at theories of western translation, yet it is very hard for people of Chinese cultures to search, unearth and analyse the history of translation theories in the backgrounds of western cultures. As Tan Zaixi put it in his book The Brief History of Western Translation, “From ancient times, translation in the west has been proceeding for over two thousand years, along with extraordinary translators and divergent theories, which can not be expound within twenty or thirty thousand words.”(Tan 1991:1) And for translation studies as a independent discipline, it is a very meaningful job to study translation and its theories from all over the world, which includes the western translation theories.

Accordingly, while studying the history of western translation theories, we must understand the necessity of describing the development of western translation theories in a proper way and figure out how they are classified, especially for theories of modern and contemporary times. Based on the fundamental way of studying translation or ideologies of various schools, now people would usually divide translation studies into literary school, linguistic school and cultural school. The literary school includes the traditional philological approach and the hermernutic approach; the linguistic school consists of the equivalence approach, the functional approach and the cognitive approach; the cultural school covers translation studies approach, deconstruction approach, feminism approach, post-colonial approach and the integrated approach, of which translation studies approach can be further divided into polysystem theory, the norm theory and the manipulation theory. By contributing new thoughts to this discussion, the study aims to reach more consensus among translation studies scholars in this aspect.

II. School Classification

Beyond dispute, it’s practicable that people describe the history of western translation theories by dividing them into different schools in light of theories and ideologies of translation studies. With the modernization and integration of economy in western society, western translation theories also begin to get over the hurdles in the way of mutual development and blur the distinction among nationalities, which makes it harder to owe some ideology or theory of translation to a certain country or area. For instance, Gideon Toury was famous in the west but lived in Israel. In contrast, when some ideology or theory is proposed by someone in some place, it can probably be responded to or supported by scholars from all corners of the world. They hold it up totally out of agreement with the points someone makes, not necessarily where the points come from. Another example, Eugene A. Nida, who put forward the idea of “functional equivalence”, is American, but Kade, who is his supporter, comes from German. Therefore, it might be easier to understand the present situation and trends of western translation theories from levels of translation schools and ideologies, especially for theories of contemporary and modern times.

As one would expect, it is just one of the methods to classify western translation theories on the basis of translation schools or ideologies. From a perspective of historical development, it would be a more traditional way to classify western translation theories by times and nations. This diachronic way of studying it helps to organize the historical materials clearly and make profitable comparisons among traditions and characteristics of translation theories among western countries and regions, which enables people to understand the distribution and trends of western translation theories with an open mind. On the other hand, the diachronic way also describes the divergence and amalgamation of western translation theories. To give an example, the debate between free and literal translation never ends during which the eclecticism occurred and then literal translation was overtaken by free translation; the transfer from regarding the words as translation units to viewing sentences, discourses and even the whole passages as translation units... and so on. Despite that, as for studies on western translation theories, it is not the best way to do it only by a certain means. If we completely choose the way of describing the history of western translation theories by dividing them into different schools in light of theories and ideologies of translation studies, the relation between translation theories and specific cultural environment of society may be ambiguous and so is the relation between diachronic and synchronic development of translation. If we only decide on a more traditional way to classify western translation theories by times and nations, our research and description will inevitably be in need of subjects of translation theories. To avoid such deficiencies, we must adopt a way combining both means mentioned above to study western translation theories. In other words, we must take into consideration not only the historical connection between theories and ideas of translation but also the relation of translation theories with the specific social and cultural environment. Only by doing so, our research would be able to describe the whole process of western translation theories from an objective perspective.

From what we have mentioned above, we view western translation theories from two sides. First, we view it from the respect of historical development steadily. Cicero, was the first translation theorist in the west during times of Roman empire. As a rhetorician and orator, he categorized translation into ones by “ut interpres” and “ut orator” for the first time. Translation by “ut interpres” means translation of no creativity but translation by “ut orator” means translation of creativity which may even rival the original. As a matter of fact, Cicero put forward two fundamental ways of translating and pioneered the study of theories and methods of translation. Since Cicero’s studies on translation, western translation theories have been dealing with arguments between free translation and literal translation, word-for-word translation and excessively free translation, faithfulness and unfaithfulness and so forth.

Besides Cicero, there are an abundance of excellent translation theorists in western translation history, who have proposed assorted theories and ideas from different angles in different times. In ancient times, aside from Cicero’s categorization of “literal translation” and “free translation”, Marcus Fabius Quintlianus thought that the target ought to compete with the original; St. Jerome believed that people were supposed to follow the rules of literal translation when translating the Bible and use free translation when it came to literary classics; St. Augustine held the view that translation was inspired by God. In the Middle Ages, Manlius Boethius promoted the literal translation that would rather keep “faithful” than “elegant”; Dante was of the opinion that “works of literature are untranslatable”. During the Renaissance, Desiderius Erasmus believed that translation was not a subjection to authority of religious beliefs and translation of the Bible depended on the language of a translator; Martin Luther held the view of humanism that texts must be rendered in the people’s language; Etienne Dolet reckoned that people translated on “five principles” of understanding the content of the original, being proficient in the original language and the target language, avoiding word-for-word translation, expounding in simple languages and focusing on the style of the target text. From the 17th to 19th century, Charles Batteux was of the opinion that author was the master and translator was the servant, whose work were not allowed to be amplified, to omit and change the wording of the original; John Dryden categorized translating into metaphrase, paraphrase and imitation and he thought translation was some kind of art; Tytler put forward three principles that the target reflected the ideas exactly the original conveyed, the style and skills the target used should be of the same characteristics of the original and the target should be as expressive as the original; Friedrich Schleiermacher made a distinction between translation and interpretation, literal translation and mechanical translation; Humboldt believed his theories that language decided the translatability and untranslatability of the world; Matthew Arnold thought whether a translation was good or not depended on the experts; Francis W. Newman had the idea that it were common readers, not the experts,who determined the criteria of translation. In the 20th century, we have Fedolov’s theories that people should study translation theories from linguistics first and translation theories is categorized into history, introduction and arguments of translation; we have Roman Jakobson’s three classification of interlingual translation, intralingual translation and intersemiotic translation; we have Levy’s thoughts that “translating should make reader have an illusion of the original”, “translating is a deciding process”; we have Gachechiladze’s theories on literary translation that “translation is always a artistic and realistic reflection of the original” and “ translation of literature and art is a artistic work”; we have Carford’s theories of linguistics that translation should reach an equivalence of context; Nida thought “translating is a science”, “translating is communicating” and there exists equivalence between the readers of the original and the target; Mounin’s view of modern linguistics on translation theories; Paul Valery emphasized that the target needed to break the limits of the original. All the thoughts and ideas mentioned above have constituted the most essential parts of western translation theories.

Furthermore, we could look at the whole system of western translation theories from the other side, which is the schools of ideology. There are two branches of it: translation theories of literature and art and linguistics theories of translation. The school of translation of literature and art stems from the early drama by Terentius in Ancient Rome, ucceeded by Levy and Gachechiladze in modern times, and continues to thrive in the 21st century. People of this branch perceive translation as a kind of literary art, which draws attention to recreation of literature. Theorists have been discussing the defects and merits between faithfulness and unfaithfulness, word-for-word translation and excessively free translation, literal translation and free translation and so on. Besides, they also foreground the purposes and effects of translation. They stress both the original and the literary attributes of the language of it., as well as the idiomatic expression and tradition of literature of the original that people must respect whiling translating. They not only zero in on the style and literariness of the text very much but the talent of literature a translator or interpreter should possess. The school of linguistic theories of translation is from Augustine and people of traditional linguistics or philology in Ancient Rome to various schools of modern linguistics in the 20th and 21st century. For this situation, the core lies in language. People of this school, who think that the goal of translating is to reach the equivalence between the original and the target, combine translation theories with analysis of semantic and syntactic functions and talk on issues of translation from the characteristics of structure and sentence-making skills of a language so as to show how the equivalent texts are made from words, grammars and other features of a language.

From either branches we can see that they have their own advantages and disadvantages. Translation theories of literature and art give an emphasis to the purposes and results of translating and the artistic effects from a macroscopic view, but neither pay much heed to practical process of translating and skills of using a language nor care about whether the target and the original reach the equivalence of structures. Linguistics theories of translation is also not spotless because some theories don’t stress the aesthetic functions and ignore the recurrences of works of literature and art. They mostly focus on the structure of a language to and theoretically are limited to word, sentence or syntax only, which disregards the main structure of a text and the structure of discourse and the cultural features to a larger extent.

However, no matter it is the branch of translation theories of literature and art or linguistics theories of translation, they are not completely isolated but complement each other. Although either of two branches has its own shortcomings, there is no translation theorist of literature and art who could talk about the artistic value of literary works divorced from linguistic issues; there is no theorist of linguistics who could be immersed in linguistic structures of a text without issues of aesthetics.

III. About The Translator’s Guide to Chinglish

Joan Pinkham, a professional translator from the U.S., published the book The Translator’s Guide to Chinglish in 2000. She worked for the Foreign Languages Press and Central Compilation and Translation Bureau in China for 8 years from 1980s to 1990s. It is one of the few books by westerners that systematically discuss the “Chinglish” issues in China. In the years working for the Foreign Languages Press and Central Compilation and Translation Bureau, her job was to revise and polish the drafts from Chinese translators, which was inevitably affected by Chinese and mindset of Chinese people. For that reason, Pinkham got to know many English translations with “Chinese characteristics” and wrote this book. The Translator’s Guide to Chinglish consists of three parts, Unnecessary Words, Sentence Structure and Supplementary Examples, which reveal lots of mistakes Chinese translators tend to make.

First of all let’s take a look at examples given in the fist chapter:

promoting the cause of peaceful reunification;

reforms in the sphere of economy;

to ensure a relationship of close cooperation between.

Phrases like these can often be seen in some English papers or periodicals and they seem to make sense to English learners or translators in China. But the author regards them as negative examples in the first chapter of the first part, Unnecessary Nouns. The author mentioned that “Many of these nouns are easy to recognize. They are plainly redundant because their sense is already included or implied in some other element of sentence.”(Liu 2002:34) in the book. Here the author perceives nouns like “cause”, “sphere” and “relationship” as “category nouns”, which are the general nouns that sever only to introduce a specific noun to follow. Let’s take the first phrase as an example. In such constructions, the first noun announces the category of the second; in this case, it tells the readers that “promoting” falls into the category of “cause.” That is something they already know. Accordingly, the first noun should be deleted: “ promoting peaceful reunification.”(Pinkham 2000:16) It is the same for other two examples. What’s more, the first chapter also involves “Unnecessary Verbs.” Examples are as follows:

to bring about a change in this state of affairs;

until China realizes its modernization;

trying to entice the Korean army to launch an attack against them.

“Like unnecessary nouns, most unnecessary verbs in Chinglish occur in phrases. Usually they are combined with nouns (plus the inevitable articles and prepositions that nouns bring with them).”(Pinkham 2000:34) The commonest type is phrases like these. As for “to bring about a change in this state of affairs”, here the verb (“bring about”) is a weak, colorless, all purpose word having no very specific meaning of its own, while the real action is expressed in the noun(“change”). Since the verb is not contributing anything to the sense, it can be edited out: “change this state of affairs.”

In the second chapter, the author talks about Unnecessary Modifiers, which is not a problem easy to cope with for Chinese translators because it covers the issue of whether they should be used and using the modifiers properly. Five types of unnecessary modifiers are listed, redundant modifiers, self-evident modifiers, intensifiers, qualifiers and cliches. But the author especially points out that it is not appropriate to revise some accepted phrases, which are related to some national policies, even if they have unnecessary modifiers in the sentences, because this may cover political affairs.

In the third and forth chapter the author talks on Redundant Twins and Saying the Same Thing Twice. For instance, views and opinions, help and assistance, stir up and incite, sentiments and feelings, prudent and cautious. The author classifies the redundant words into three groups according to the relation between synonyms and clauses and offers corresponding reversion. And she adds that examples of redundant synonyms are too many to list even for native English speakers; for example, rules and regulations, bits and pieces, by leaps and bounds, betwixt and between, by hook or by crook, huffing and puffing. After centuries of development, these phrases are now accepted by native English speakers or learners probably because of their jaunty alliteration or rhythm. But the author believes that these phrases unavoidably “exert an influence not only on native speakers of English (including foreign polishers) but on Chinese translators as well, reinforcing the habits of their own language. No doubt this influence contributes to the abundance of twins in Chinglish.”

The first chapter of the second part is mainly about The Noun Plague. Here the author shows a draft: “The prolongation of the existence of this temple is due to the solidity of its construction.” She also gives a revision: “The temple has endured because it was solidly built.” The first version contains four abstract nouns, while the second has none. Not only do the nouns make the statement nearly twice as long, but they also make it pretentious, wooden and hard to understand.(Pinkham 2000:56) Yet, the author doesn’t think that “noun plague” only occurs in Chinglish but in English by native speakers, especially in theses and government documents where abstract nouns can often be seen, because they want their theses or documents to seem more “authoritative” or “scientific.” The author thinks this is a dangerous trend which we should all fight against. And she advocates to use more verbs, gerunds or adverbs instead of abstract nouns. From the eighth to the twelfth chapter, the author gives some instruction to tell English learners and translators in China how to get rid of the mindset of Chinglish by putting pronouns and antecedents first, then the adjuncts and its purposes, in a logical way. The eighth chapter discussed the improper collocation of pronouns and antecedents. In this condition, personal pronouns, relative pronouns or demonstrative pronouns show up without antecedents or are too far away from antecedents. This is exactly what the uncertainty and lack of rigor of Chinese has brought about. The ninth chapter mainly talks about where we should set phrases or clause in an English sentence. The author is of the opinion that translators should pay attention to where the phrases or clauses are in a sentence so that the logic is clear and key points are highlighted. She also thinks that the phrases or clauses ought to modify what is close to them, otherwise in the sentence may occur the illogical parts. In addition, to stress the key points, the most important information should be imparted at the end of a sentence.

IV. Discussion

From Introduction and School Classification, we have leaned that in western translation history, there are traditionally two branches: translation theories of literature and art and linguistics theories of translation. In 1959, the book, On Linguistic Aspects of Translation by Roman Jakobson, analyzed comprehensively the relation bewteen language and translation, the importance of translation and some existing problems of translating from an angle of linguistics, which had made groundbreaking contribution to linguistics theories of translation. Eugene A. Nida put forward a concept of “Translating is science” and he also applied Theory of Communication into translation on the basis of linguistics, believing that translating is communicating. He proposed the principle of “Dynamic Equivalence” and further submitted “Functional Equivalence” from the perspective of social linguistics and communicative function of language, which was instrumental in modern history of translation theories in the west as well. Nonetheless, Nida’s theories paid too much heed to content rather than form. To make up the deficiency, Peter Newmark put forward “Communicative Translation” and “Semantic Translation.” The former aimed at restructuring the language of the target in order to make it expressive and underline the effects of information; the latter emphasized the formal resemblance between the original and the target. From theories and ideas above, the core issue they care about is how the source language is transferred into the target language and “equivalence” is what they have in common. Katharina Reiss, Hans Vermeer, Justa Holz-Manttari and Christiane Nord from Germany started to use communicative theories, theories of communication, discourse linguistics and ideology of aesthetics to switch the focus of their studies from source texts to target texts, which made it an influential school in international translation circles. In 1971 in the book Translation and Limitations in Translation Criticism, Reiss’s functional theories of translation was in embryonic state, where she believed that translation should reach equivalence in respects of conceptual content, forms of language and communication and name it “integral communicative performance.” In practice, however, she realized that the equivalence was not what people expected so relation between function of the original and the target was the priority. Hans Vermeer proposed skopos theory for that matter, which looked on translating as a process with purposes and results of the original. The skopos theory has three rules: skopos rule, coherence rule and fidelity rule. Skopos rule is considered as the primary one. It means that in the context and culture of target language, translation ought to work in a way exactly the recipient of target language expects and the purpose of translation actions determines the whole process of translating, that is, “the end justifies the means.” Coherence rule is that translation must accord with the standard of intratextual coherence, which means that translation has readability and acceptability to the recipient and makes sense in communicative context and culture of the target language. The fidelity rule means that there exists intertextual coherence between the original and the target. This is actually what other theories have talked about faithfulness in translation but the faithfulness depends on the purpose of the target and how translator understand the original.

Here we also have talked about the book The Translator’s Guide to Chinglish. This book has discussed some problems English learners and translators in China have in grammar and vocabulary. For discourse and semantics, there also exits some issues. And the author is American who has the typical mindset of the west and is able to find out some problems of translation by Chinese translators. And the author tends to revise those translations in an aspect of linguistics theories of translation. For example:

the editorial calls on the Chinese people to fully implement the CPC’s basic line, deepen reform and further opening to the outside, so as to further push forward the political, economic and social development of the country in a steady way;

The author revises it into:

the editorial calls on the Chinese people to implement the CPC’s basic line, deepen the reform, and promote the opening to the outside, so as to steadily push forward the political, economic and social development of the country.

In this sentence, “fully” is deleted because the author thinks it is unnecessary for its sense can be taken for granted: policies should always be fully carried out. If the word conveys something more specific in Chinese, that must be spelled out for the reader of English. We must say, for example, “to implement CPC’s basic line in all its aspects,” or “in every respect.” As for “further”, it is obvious that at this point in history any push given to development will be a “further” push. The repetition of “further” in the draft is particularly undesirable because the word is used in two different senses. It appears first as a verb (“to further opening”), then immediately after as an adverb (“to further push ahead”), so that the reader is obliged to go back and read the sentence again in order to make sense of it.(Pinkham 2000:74)

Even though the author doesn’t talk on any translation theories directly in her book, her discussion on Chinglish and the revision she offers do involve some translation criteria, for example, domestication and foreignization. Translating is the transfer process from one language to another, during which it carries wide backgrounds of culture. To be specific, it is also the process of transferring cultures among each one. In general, there are two ways when it comes to this process: domestication and foreignization. Domestication is that features of the original are abandoned, that is to say, characteristics of translation follow ones of the target, which would, to some degree, make it easier to understand for recipients of the target language and contributory to culture exchanges. Foreignization is that translator translates in a way the original does, translation remaining characteristics of the original language.


The author defines “Chinglish” as “Chinglish, of course, is that misshapen, hybrid language that is neither English nor Chinese but that might be described as ‘English with Chinese characteristics’”in the book. And she also points out that “this book is intended to help them turn their work into real English such as might have been written by an educated native English speaker of the language.” It means that the author is in favor of domestication during the process of translating. Here’s an another example:

we should draw up correct development and construction plans for all these zones;

The author revises it into:

we should draw up correct plans for the development of all these zones.

The author thinks that two large abstractions plainly used here mean the same thing. And to avoid using the noun “development” as an adjective, we should say: “ for the development of all these zones.” That would be the simplest, most natural word order in English.(Pinkham 2000:87)

V. Conclusion

In summary, A Brief History of Western Translation Theories by Tan Zaixi recounts the history of western translation theories from ancient times by introducing main characters, translation works, translation schools and other events in the west in historical stages. The book also takes preliminary analysis and discussion into development between theories and practices of translation. There are two different directions in terms of translation theories in the west: translation theories of literature and art and linguistics theories of translation. The former one extends from the ancient dramas to modern translations. In this regard, translation is considered as literary art, which focuses on recreation of the original. Theorist mostly emphasize culture, style and literariness of the target and the literary talent of the translator. The latter direction is linguistics theories of translation, which combine theories with semantics and syntax, and believe that translating should reach semantic equivalence between the original and the target through vocabulary, grammar and skills of using a language. In the long term, linguistics theories of translation has had predominance of studies of modern translation theories. Theorists hold the view that translation studies ranges from applied linguistics and contrastive linguistics and is closely related to semantics, along with literature and art studies, sociology, anthropology, psychology, theories of communication and so forth.

The Translator’s Guide to Chinglish by Joan Pinkham summarizes the evidence of the common issues in English translation, which are ones translators in China are usually neglectful of. As Jacques Barzun, Dean of the Graduate Faculties of Columbia University, put it, “The clarity of her explanation is equaled only by the deftness with which she states the point of the English usages and the simplicity of the revisions made in faulty sentences. I know of no books as well adapted as hers to the needs of clumsy writers.” Even though the author doesn’t talk on any translation theories directly in her book, her discussion on Chinglish and the revision she offers do involve some translation criteria and the author tends to uphold domestication in this book. And we can’t deny that as a professional translator from America, with the typical western mindset, the author is inevitably influenced in the spectacular background of western translation history. More importantly, the two books this article refers to have demonstrated that theories must be applied into practice, guide practice and reveal the objective patters inside translating, otherwise theories would lose its vitality.

References

Liu Yinyan 刘银燕. (2002) 中式英语, 你在使用吗?——《中式英语之鉴》评介. 外语教学 (2002.09.30).

Pinkham, Joan. (2000). The Translator’s Guide to Chinglish. 北京。外语教学与研究出版社.

Tan Zaixi 谭载喜. (1991). 西方翻译简史 (A Brief History of Western Translation). 北京.商务印书馆

Wu Amei 巫阿苗, Shu Xuejun 束学军. (2011). 西方翻译理论流派划分探索. [Theories of Western Translation]. 合肥工业大学学报 [Journal of Hefei University of Technology]. (2011.12.25).

Derrida and Benjamin

Comparison of Derrida’s and Benjamin’s Translation View

<centre>Sample 样品</centre>

Abstract

In western traditional translation view, conveying the meaning is the first aim. However, in Benjamin’s eye, this is an agreement of language non-identity, which does no good to the development of linguistic development. Benjamin has used the non-identity of language to overturn the ideas that view language as a tool. In this way, he has been regarded by many scholars as the forerunner who rebelled against the western logocentrism. He also did quite a lot contribution to the development of translation and his idea of pure language can be called the most well-known feature of him. While another dominate figure of deconstructivism is Derrida who has put logocentrism under great challenge. He’s no doubt one of the representatives of deconstructivism and he has created many concepts like différance, dissemination, trance etc., which serves not only in linguistics, philosophy but also in translation.

In the history of western translation, Benjamin has always been classified as a member of deconstructivism. However, compared with another leading figure of deconstructivism, he has totally different understanding on translation. This essay is trying to undergo the comparison study between the two predominant figure’s comprehension on translation mainly through the aspects of pure language and difference, metaphrase and relevant translation, later life and rebirth of original texts. In the conclusion, we have concluded the comparison between the two figures’ attitudes towards five dimensions, respectively, original work, author, translator, translation work and translation criterion. At last we can find that in fact, Benjamin does not belong to deconstructivism.

Key words: Benjamin, Derrida, deconstructivism

摘要：在西方传统翻译观中，传递意义是首要目的。但是，在本雅明的眼中，这是对语言不一致性的认同。因此，这种传统的翻译观对于语言的发展并无益处。本雅明运用了语言的不一致性，并以此一举推翻了传统的观念，人们认为语言知识一种工具。通过这种方式，本雅明被视为众多学者中反抗西方逻各斯主义的先驱。他对翻译的发展做出了卓越的贡献，并且他纯语言的概念深入人心，成为他身上最闪亮的思想之一，也是他被众人所知的特点之一。然而另一位解构主义的大人物，德里达亦是以一己之力推翻西方的逻各斯中心主义。毫无疑问，他是解构主义的代表人物之一并且他也创造了“延异”，“播撒”，“痕迹”等概念。这些概念不仅仅推动了语言学、哲学的发展，也推动了翻译学的发展。 在西方翻译历史中，本雅明总是被划为解构主义者。但其实与另一位解构主义的大人物相比，他对于翻译有着自己完全不同的理解。 本文打算进行这两位巨人的翻译理论对比，主要通过以下方面：纯语言与差异性，直译与“relevant”翻译，后世生命与重生。在最后的总结部分，笔者从五个角度总结了两位巨人的不同态度，对于原作的态度，对于作者的态度，对于译作的态度，对于译者的态度和对于翻译标准的态度。最终，我们能够发现严格意义上来说，本雅明完全不属于解构主义学派。

关键字：德里达，本雅明，解构主义

1.Pure Language and Difference

In its essence, translation is a kind of linguistic activity. Therefore, all translation theories involve linguistic issues. Benjamin has presumed a perfect original language as the origin of subsistent languages in real world after summarizing the deflects of subsistent languages. This original language is from God, and has full creativity and cognition, in which, language and spirit, meaning and form, signifier and signified have been united to show the truth through self-manifestation. Benjamin has pointed out that with the corruption of human, the language has no longer been one but multiple. Naming language has corrupted into the abstract conceptual language. (Cao Danhong 6) In this way, it descended to instrumental signs. It refers to things in various manual systems but it can never covey the universality through self-manifestation, so the relationship between the human and world has changed from the intersubjectivity into subject-object dichotomy where human dominates.(Wei Jiangang & Sun Yingchun 75) In another word, due to language descended from the original “being” into lower “having”. Therefore, it has become the synonyms of “abstract”, “judgement” and “meaning”. Language has never been a medium but a kind of means used in communication of “subjects” (Wohlfarth 27). As a result, meaning has been the external reference out of sign itself, instead of spirits of self-manifestation of pure language. And the relationship between signified and signifier is actually external instead of being original, direct and internal. Paul De Man has said that we think we use our language freely. We feel comfortable and familiar with the dwelling place within our language, in which we thought we weren’t alienated, but we don’t notice that this kind of alienation has been shown strongly in our relationship with our original language. It has been disintegrated already, which bring a special alienation, a peculiar pain. (Paul De Man, 99)

Benjamin has set the transcendental existence of pure language in order to make the path of salvation to human clear, that’s to say to find the lost pure language is to unite the world together. Benjamin thinks that, all practical languages have a common origin and among themselves a kind of affinity that goes beyond the history. As, Benjamin once said, “The reference of pure language just like each language that exists as an entirety, is identical. However, this reference cannot be achieved through one single language, but through the complement of various languages” (Benjamin 61) That’s to say, if we want to reconstruct pure language, we have to eliminated the external relationship of linguistic reference and restore the identical relationship between spirit and language, which means to promote the linguistic reference of all languages to form an integral complementary, which call duty on translation. Only through translation can the mode of reference of source language enter into the target language. Therefore, to Benjamin, the significance of translation is not to covey the basic meaning and content of source language but the changes to both languages after translation, thereby translation can make us to know more about the differences and complementation of each language.

What is different between Benjamin and Derrida is that Derrida has invented the concept of “la differánce", which uses infinitely flowing stream of meaning to overthrow the western logocentrism. Thereout, it has assured the translation view that advocates difference and opposes the identity. Derrida has pointed out that la differánce is the precondition of possibility of multiple meanings so that meaning is the result of its moving. While meaning cannot precedes la differánce, there would be no existence of pure and completely identical origin of meaning, just like what the Babel story reminds us. (Davis 10) In another word, as meaning is in la differánce so that there cannot be any conceptual or theoretic systems no matter it is in one language or in several languages. Meaning always presents its fluidity, uncertainty and diversity. We cannot make meaning independent of language nor can we make language independent of meaning. On the contrary, meaning is already in language so meaning is the linguistic meaning. Due to the language is so complicated, fickle, ambiguous and different with itself, thus, meaning is also unclear ambiguous and even mysterious. (Cai Xinle 200) What we can discuss is only the relationship of difference instead of the transcendental identity. In Derrida’s view, word is in a dynamic state, we can only understand it, describe it or listen to its voice in such a dynamic condition. If there is a starting point, the meaning will flow no more as it can be fixed in the very beginning. If we must establish an origin, the difference will be it. Derrida has regarded the difference as the origin, aiming to explain that in the very beginning where meaning formed, that’s to say the source has already had initial difference among meanings. The so-called purity has been contaminated and the source is rather complicated. (Zhu Gang 20)

Derrida and Benjamin all oppose to structural linguistic view. What is different is that Benjamin opposed the human control and domination of language by emphasizing the identity of language and spirit. We’d rather to say that it’s opposed to structuralism but to the opposite relation between the subject and object. In essence, Benjamin is not against the concepts like structure, order, and center etc. He just opposes the structure, order and center etc. that are based on the interference to language done by the subject-object relationship, emphasizing that language will not be constrained by the fetter of any subject-object relationship. If we consider more carefully, he doesn’t disapprove the logocentrism completely as he just emphasizes that logocentrism cannot be constructed and learned by the subject and object relation. It must be built and realized by the way of unintentionality or the “presence” of logos will be delusive. On the contrary, Derrida is refusing any metaphysics during the process of his deconstruction of any conceptual system. In his opinion, Benjamin has not cast off the set pattern of logocentrism because Benjamin’s “Pure language” is still a construction of a concept, no matter how transcendental and absolute identity it is. Videlicet, if God were the person who deconstructs, we would see that rationality dominates everything and logos will be the deconstruction in the speaker’s status. It would not be the deconstruction of deconstruction. Once there is an unshakable center, logos will take the domination and everything will obey the authority in the center. Therefore, in order to avoid constructing any central system or structure, Derrida take the difference as the origin of everything. There will be no identity and everything is constantly reproducing and differentiating, so it presents nothing but difference. At any moment, it’s different from others as well as itself. In this way, the identity doesn’t exist. All we can observe is the dynamic stuff, which constantly changes.

2. Metaphrase and Relevant Translation

As Benjamin and Derrida has different linguistic view, their comprehension about the translation criterion are also different from each other’s. Benjamin thinks that in various languages, the ultimate essence, pure language, is only relevant to the linguistic factors and its changes. In linguistic works, it bears heavy alien meaning. Translation’s unique function is to make the pure language get rid of this heavy burden, to turn the symbolic action into symbolic objects itself, to make the pure language reoccur during the linguistic transition. (Benjamin, 67) In other words, real languages, without exception, refer to things externally. To recover the identity of language and spirit, we must let the language to break the shackle of meaning while the effects of translation are to make the two languages free of the heavy burden by making the modes of reference of the two languages complementary of each other. To judge whether translation of a work is successful is to observe the combination of signifier and signified of language. Benjamin thinks Hölderlin’s translation work is the perfect sample of for instance, his works are almost perfect transition of texts because they are absolutely literal translation and metaphrase but also not readable. It dismembered the sentences, leading to the consequence that meaning is missing. (Paul De Man 104) To Benjamin, the translation that gets the language out of the shackle of meaning, and makes the language manifest itself to covey the spirits is the best translation. Anyway, translation has to turn back to language itself, to the reference of language, to reach pure language commonly shared by the two languages by complementing the modes of reference of source language and target language. Benjamin declares that the interlinear version of Babel is the prototype of all translation due to the reason that Babel is the words of God, which are so true that language identifies with spirit.

Derrida is totally different from Benjamin’s proposition that he proposes the relevant translation. In general, “relevant” is the best translation in Derrida’s view, which is also the sort of translation expected by people. It’s a kind of translation that fulfills its duty and finishes its mission. It’s that kind of translation that finds the most comparatively accurate words for the expressions in the source text, that language used is the most correct, appropriate, relevant, direct and apropos… Obviously, Derrida is trying to use a series of words to set standard for the best translation or the ideal translation. What’ a pity is that many scholars believe the literal meaning that such is what set by Derrida, ignoring the implication. (Wang Yingchong 15) However, if we reflect on the “relevant”, we can hardly make what it means clear, and Derrida himself has made no ostension on “relevant”, thus, this is actually the word game of Derrida that meaning being not assured makes translation impossible. With the trick of the untranslatability of the word “relevant”, Derrida implies the deconstruction of his standard of translation. What Derrida really wants to express is that if there was a standard of translation, and the standard would work as the same, then would the standard still support itself? The untranslatability of “relevant” has already told us the untranslatability, not mentioning the translation standard. In Derrida’s point of view, meaning is already the delayed presence, leading to the result that translation is a debt that translator can never pay off, a mission that translator can never finish. Therefore, can text really not be translated?

Derrida says that we have to know what relevant translation is, what relevant translation means and what the essence of translation is, its mission, ultimate purpose and final mission. On one hand, relevant translation, no matter wrong or right, is generally better than irrelevant translation, and is likely to be viewed as the best translation. The definition of translation skopostheorie and the definition of the essence of realization in translation are contained in the definition of relevant translation. Therefore, the question that what relevant translation is goes back to what translation is or what should the translation be. While what the translation should be seems to be equal to what the possible best translation would be. (Derrida 429)

Therefore, Derrida’s discussion about the standard of translation goes back to the translatability and untranslatability. Actually, what Derrida wants to prove is that translation itself is a paradox, that is, just in the untranslatability can translation exist and go on. The original text always owes to translation, and constantly summons translation, and in a larger sense, anything meaningful calls for interpretation. (Wang Yingchong 17). Whereas, the good translation or the translation standard can only be discussed in absolute translatability; pursuit of translation in absolute untranslatability will be nonsense, and it can only be infinitely approached but never reached as once it become absolute translatability, which means translation presents the meaning in limitless differánce in presence, the identity occurs, then the translation will be unnecessary.

In short, Derrida and Benjamin have different view on translation. Benjamin worships metaphrase through which two languages can supplement each other’s referential pattern to manifest the pure language, whose spirits are the best translation. While Derrida plays a small fraud that he sets relevant translation as translation criterion but he doesn’t make it clear, in which way he indicates his ideas of untranslatability and that pursuit of translation in absolute untranslatability will be nonsense, and it can only be infinitely approached but never reached.

3. Afterlife and Rebirth

Benjamin also differs most from Derrida in the insight of the relationship between the original work and translation work. In Benjamin’s perspective, the purpose of translation is to promote the complementation of referential modes of different languages so as to restore the identity. Therefore, translation work is never the copy or reappearance of the original work, but the supplement and succession of the original work and in turn, original work can only rely on its translation work to refresh its vitality and go on its subsistence. The relationship of the two can only be understood in the whole purpose of realizing pure language. What Benjamin expects is through constant translation, we can make the referential modes of original work and translation work interflow until we exhaust all the referential modes to realize the final identity of language and spirit in entity. To the relationship of original work and translation work, Benjamin interprets from the perspective of organism and survival. Various forms of life closely correlate with biological phenomena though it has no great significance to biological phenomena. Translation work grows out of original work or we’d rather say it originates from the afterlife. Due to the fact that original work precedes the translation work, and in the range of world literature, no great works meets a perfect translator when its author is still alive, so translation work only marks the continuity of the original work. (Benjamin 76) Benjamin has regarded the original work as vigorous organism so that translation is views as the continuity of original work, which is also the afterlife of original work. Benjamin stresses that life is a historical concept instead of the existential concept. Life doesn’t limit within biological body. Only when we view life as a historical process of organism survival, can the concept of life be understood correctly. With this sense, translation work being the continuity of original work can be comprehended. Those that was flashy will corrupt and those that was fashionable will become old. So does the linguistic form. The linguistic form of the original work will die out with time passing by, but the life of original work will not die with the existential form of original work. With the help of translation work, the life of original work will be continued, updated and expanded, thus being constantly succeeded in its life history. Hence, translation was like the source of rejuvenation. (Kramer 24) However, in Benjamin’s points, translation work is the afterlife of original work doesn’t mean it’s the end of original work’s life nor that translation work replaces the original one to be an independent organism. Benjamin stresses that continuity of life doesn’t pay much attention to the survival of organism, which means that translation is a medium that pushes the original’s life process, a medium that provides a chance for the continuity of original’s life instead of substitution. The mission of translation is to promote the original work’s linguistic life growing until it ripens and fruit the pure language.

The final purpose of language is to meet our needs to show that the relation among languages is quite close. Translation cannot reveal or build such hidden relation, but translation can reoccur it by intensification and embryotic appearance. Right through the expression of embryotic form, it makes relation among languages reoccur. (Benjamin,60) Accordingly, translation is not the birth of original work nor the death of original work but the living on of the original. It’s the birth after death and death after birth. In this way, Benjamin has assured the position of the original work which is higher than the translation work, on which the original work depends to continue its life. Translation can never be equal to the original work because only the original language has the vigor to embody the fruit of pure language.

Compared to that, Derrida thinks that translation work is the rebirth of the original work and notes that there are two implications in “rebirth”, which are given by “Fortleben and Uberleben” in Benjamin’s The Task of Translator, indicating that life will continue, consistent and survival continues, but it also indicates resurrection after death. Derrida emphasizes that original work has equal and independent position with translation work, which are complementary for each other. If the original text calls for supplement, that’s because it’s not flawless, complete, entire and self-identified. The original texts to be translated fell into exile from the very beginning. (Derrida 2003) Starting from such complementary relationship, Derrida abolished the original position of the original work as original work has no difference from translation work in that original work is the translation work of former texts, and translation work can be translated as original work for later texts. La differánce of meaning is infinite that all the texts are the limited comprehension of semantic differánce, which supplement and substitute each other, constructing a constantly flowing semantic chain. A text that depends on other texts but differs from other texts at the same time constantly waits for supplement and substitution in the semantic net. Text is a claiming process that goes beyond meaning in itself; it’s the trace of a sequence of movements. The ultimate text that can cover the infinite semantic differánce doesn’t exist and the ultimate meaning is intangible as meaning is mobile and infinite.

All in all, Derrida and Benjamin have shown their distinctive comprehension about the original work and translation work. Benjamin has claimed that translation work is the afterlife of original work and original work also depends on translation to continue its life. Due to the fact that only the original work can deliver birth to pure language, although the very relations among languages can be reoccurred in translation work, original work ranks first. Derrida holds another opinion that the two, original work and translation work are equal and complementary. There is a doubt that why Benjamin insists that the fruit of pure language is on the original work’s side, as we mentioned in the beginning that Benjamin want to realize the identity of language and spirit through exhausting all the referential modes of all languages, and making them melt with each other. Though translation is the living-on of original work which just like the baby from a mother, affiliated to the original. Why the final result will be on the original side still needs our attention. During the differánce of texts, original text can become the translation of former text while the translation can be the original text of later text, thus the chain of textual differánce are built.

4.Conclusion

In a word, through the comparative study of Benjamin’s translation view and Derrida’s translation view, we can find something in common but the two still distinct with each other and own their unique perspective and ideas.

Firstly, on the aspect of original work, translation theories of deconstructivism emphasizing infinite differánce of meaning and relativity and fluidity of text deny the originality of original works with intertextuality. Lots of texts appear, one differing from the former a little bit; all of them are the translation of translation. Each text has its unique features, and at the same time, it’s the translation of another text, thus, no text is the absolute original work plus language itself is a kind of translation. In the first place, it’s the translation of non-linguistic world and in the second place, every sign and phrase are the translation of another sign and phrase. (Bssnett 112) Nonetheless, Benjamin insists on the originality of original work, emphasizing that linguistic core is contained only in the original work and the function of translation is to liberate the relationship between the signifier and signified. Hence, if Benjamin denies the originality of original work will make the ground of his translation view lost.

Secondly, on the aspect of the author, deconstructivism emphasizes the intertextuality instead of the author, declaring that God was already dead and trying to overthrow the concept that author is the source of meaning from the ground level, so translation views of deconstructivism denies the originality of the author and even the copyright of the author(Jiang Xiaohua & Zhang Jinghua 42). However, Benjamin advocates the originality of the author. Though he has not mentioned the issues about author’s copyright, we can infer from the emphasis of originality of original work and creativity of the author that he should admit the copyright of the author.

Thirdly, on the aspect of translator, translation view of deconstructivism places the translator in the equal position of author, but at the meantime, it denies the creativity and copyright of translator. What Derrida does is to completely ignore the subjectivity of translator but focus on text. On the contrary, Benjamin does not only emphasize the position of translator and consider that translator contributes creativity as well as author, which just differs in the way of wok and he also points it out that the success of translation depends on the ability of translator.

Fourthly, on the aspect of translation work, translation view of deconstructivism has eliminated the difference between the original work and translation work, believing that original work and translation work supplements each other and coexists with each other; the original work lives on with the help of translation work while the translation work becomes independent text because it succeeds the semantic differánce of the original work. Whereas, Benjamin stresses that translation is the continuity and supplement of original life but at the same time, he disapproves the independence of translation work as the effect of translation work is only to promote the growth of “pure language” existing in original work and translation itself contains no organism of pure language so translation work has not been equipped with translatability.

Fifthly, on the aspect of translation criterion, translation view of deconstructivism has deconstructed the traditional translation view that seeks loyalty and equivalence and it has deconstructed the comprehension, extraction and transmission proposed by itself. (Wang Yingchong 18) As a result, it has treated the translatability and untranslatability in an equal way, indicating that any text can be translatable and untranslatable. Accordingly, the criterion of translation has been dissolved. Compared to Derrida, Benjamin prefers literal translation, advocating that we should promote the supplement of the referential modes of original work and translation work in the general purpose of realizing pure language. The most obvious distinction between the two is that the former has no intention to provide a solution or a conclusion after dissolving the criterion of translation, which is a little bit puzzling while the latter has set the transcendental body of pure language to declare the existence of absolute translatability, with intensified mode to present what is not in presence and to bring things far away nearer to us as distant things. (Derrida 79)

To sum up, Benjamin cannot be classified as a member of translation school of deconstructivism no matter from the perspective of ideas and the structure of his theories. Although Benjamin has many points of view that are similar with ideas of deconstructivism, but his theory system completely different.

Bibliography

Basnett, Susan & Lefevere, Andre (eds.). (1990). Translation, History and Culture. London and New York: Pinter Publishers

Benjamin, Walter. (2004). The Task of the Translator: An Introduction to the Translation of Baudelaire's Tableaux Parisiens. Harry Zohn (trans.). Lawrence, Venuti (ed.). The Translation Studies Reader (Second Edition). New York: Routledge, 75-85.

Davis, Kathleen. (2004). Deconstruction and Translation. Shanghai: Shanghai Foreign Language Education Press.

Derrida, J. (2004). What is A “Relevant” Translation? Lawrence, Venuti (trans. & ed.). The Translation Studies Reader (Second Edition). New York: Routledge, 423-446.

本雅明. (2009). 写作与救赎:本雅明文选.李茂增、苏仲乐译.上海:东方出版社 61

蔡新乐. (2007). 相关的相关——德里达“相关的”翻译及其他.北京:中国社会科学出版社.

曹丹红. (2012). “本雅明《译者的任务》再解读”，中国翻译：（5）：5-9

德曼. (2003). “结论”:瓦尔特.本雅明的“翻译者的任务". 郭军译.郭军、曹雷雨编. 83-112.

蒋骁华、张景华. (2007). “重新解读韦努蒂的异化翻译理论兼与郭建中教授商榷”.中国翻译 (3): 39-44.

克拉默.本雅明. (2008). 鲁路译. 北京:中国人民大学出版社.

王颖冲. “再论德里达的 “relevant" translation”. 中国翻译，2011 (5): 11-19.

魏建刚、孙迎春. “本体论抑或方法论——本雅明《译者的任务》再探”.外语与外语教学，2013(2): 72-76.

沃尔法思. 一个马克思主义者的“创世纪" . 郭军译. 郭军、曹雷雨编.2003:27-42.

朱刚. 本原与延异:德里达对本原形而上学的解构.上海:上海人民出版社，2006.

Translation Aesthetics

Study on Gladys’ Translation of The Border Town from the Perspective of Translation Aesthetics

样品

Abstract: As a famous novel, The Border Town written by Shen Congwen maninly introduces young people’s pursuit of love in Xiangxi as well as the simple folk customs, so the novel has great aesthetic value. It is necessarily of high significance to analyze English versions of The Border Town, which is full of aesthetic features, from the angle of Translation Aesthetics. The paper tries to analyze Gladys Yang’s English translation of the novel from five aspects under Translation Aesthetics: beauty in sound, beauty in lexis, beauty in form, beauty in image and beauty in ideorealm in order to test and measure the practicality and operability of Translation Aesthetics in literary translation.

Key words: Translation Aesthetics; The Border Town; Liu Miqing; Lin Yutang

翻译美学视角下《边城》戴乃迭英译本之探究

作 者：向晓蔚

（湖南师范大学外国语学院，长沙 410081）

摘 要：作为一部名作，沈从文的《边城》以清丽的笔触描绘了湘西地区的青年人对美好爱情的追求以及纯厚朴实的民风，蕴含浓郁的审美价值。对于《边城》这样一部美学价值极高的作品，从翻译美学的角度进行探讨将具有重要意义。因此，本文从翻译美学角度入手，从音韵美、用词美、形式美、意象美和意境美五个方面对小说《边城》戴乃迭的英译本进行分析，旨在验证翻译美学理论在文学翻译中的实践性和可操作性。

关键词：翻译美学；《边城》；刘宓庆；林语堂

Translation, especially literary translation, is a creative activity in nature. Translation is the pursuit of beauty and truth, and it involves philosophical concerns. Aesthetics, the study of beauty, is an eternal theme of Chinese literature. Ever since the emergence of translation, aesthetics and translation have been closely bonded together. Translation Aesthetics is a perfect combination of translation and aesthetics.


1 About Translation Aesthetics

Translation Aesthetics is to analyze, explain and solve the aesthetic problems emerging in interlingual conversion. Its main contents are aesthetic subjects, aesthetic objects, the aesthetic subject’s experience of aesthetic objects, the methods of representing beauty in translating process, the criteria of translation aesthetics and so forth.

1.1 Development of Translation Aesthetics in China

The traditional translation theory in China originated from the translation of Buddhist scriptures more than 1700 years ago. Chinese translation theory has a close relationship with philosophy and aesthetics. In China, aesthetic thoughts have a long history. Confucius, Mencius, Laozi and other famous ancient thinkers put forward their views on aesthetics. In the process of the formation and development of literary translation, ancient aesthetic thoughts provided the ideological basis for it. Classical aesthetic thoughts made subtle influence on Chinese literary translation theories. The translation theories which contain classical aesthetics are naturally different from other countries' translation theories. Yan Fu, a Chinese scholar, once put forward the theory of faithfulness, expressiveness and elegance, and Qian Zhongshu also put forward the theory of transformation, and so on. All these theories reflect the influence of classical aesthetics on Chinese writers. Reviewing its development, it is not difficult to find that almost all Chinese translation theories have their aesthetic origin. The combination of translation theory and aesthetics is traditional Chinese feature, and Translation Aesthetics carry forward traditional translation theory. With the increasingly close communication between China and other countries, Chinese classical aesthetics and Western aesthetics have developed a certain degree of integration, which is also a special form of mutual learning between China and the West in a sense. This kind of reference promotes the development and application of Translation Aesthetics.

1.2 Lin Yutang’s theory of Translation Aesthetics

In 1933, Lin Yutang put forward three principles for translation: faithfulness, smoothness and beauty in the article of On Translation. The three principles of translation represent three responsibilities respectively: that toward the original author, that toward the reader, and that toward art. Here, fidelity becomes threefold. It is not only the fidelity to the original author, but also fidelity to the target reader and to art. In Lin Yutang’s opinion, translation is a kind of art. The main difference between art and science is that science is guided by the rule, while art is not. As for the standard of beauty in translation, he thought that “Every writing has its beauty in sound, meaning, spirit and style.”[1] The ideal translator should make his work an art. He should love it with the heart of art, be careful with it and regard translation as fine art. Especially when translating literary works, translator should pay more attention to the beauty of words. Lin Yutang believes that the most important thing in literary translation is to embody the style of the original work. That is, “not only what it says, but also how to say it”. From this point of view, Lin Yutang's translation thought is mainly aimed at literary translation. Among his three translation principles (faithfulness, smoothness and beauty), the third principle--beauty is regarded as the most important point in literary translation. Therefore, Lin Yutang's translation thought is also recognized as “translation of aesthetics” by some scholars.

So in the article of On Translation written by Lin Yutang, the main content is about the discussion on translation standards, and the core idea of the full text is that translation is an art. The most important thing in literary translation is to express the beauty of the original work, and to embody the original author's “how to say” in the translation. At the same time, Lin Yutang also affirmed that translation is creation. The translation with beauty features can make the original work be loved by the readers in the foreign culture, spread widely to the other countries, and achieve its equivalent effect in the source language environment to the greatest extent, which is the greatest responsibility and loyalty to the original text, the author, the readers and the art.

1.3 Liu Miqing’s theory of Translation Aesthetics

In 1995, Liu Miqing offers a theoretical framework of Translation Aesthetics in detail in his book An Introduction to Translation Aesthetics. “Translation Aesthetics refers to the study on aesthetic object (the source text and the target text), the aesthetic subject (translators and readers) and aesthetic activities in translation, such as aesthetic judgments, aesthetic appreciation, and creative aesthetic representation in translation.”[2] Except for paying attention to the elements of translation, translation aims to find out the ways to produce wonderful works and principles in assessing the quality of translation. Generally speaking, Translation Aesthetics does research on translation theory and practice from the perspective of aesthetics. Its major task is to analyze and elucidate the aesthetic principles, with which we can guide translation practices and assess the literary translation. Moreover, a satisfying version needs some other elements, such as the aesthetic experience of a translator, comprehension of source text, and evaluation and reproduction of beauty.

“Aesthetic object (AO) refers to the objective matters that human's aesthetic activity targets at.[3] However, not everything in the objective world is aesthetic object. For instance, The Book of Songs on the bookshelf is not an aesthetic object until translator buys and translate it. In the aesthetic process, the translator appreciate the beauty in sound, beauty in form and beauty in sense in the book. These beauty in various forms is called “aesthetic object”. Translation aesthetic object (TAO) is the source text (ST) which the translator is about to translate. But not every source text can be TAO. For example, if the source text is inconsistent, empty and has no value to translate, it cannot be translation aesthetic object. TAO possesses aesthetic values and is designed to satisfy human's aesthetic needs. It clings to the aesthetic constituents and the aesthetic effects of the ST. If one pursues or analyzes the beauty in translation without adequate consideration of the ST, it equals to fish in the air and yields nothing but vainness. The attribute of TAO is different from the attribute of AO. On the one hand, it is attached to the aesthetic composition of SL. That is to say, translator cannot add something that is not in the aesthetic constituents of ST. If there are no rhymes in the original, translators should not add rhymes. If there is no irony in the original, translator should not add irony. If there is no hyperbole, translator should not add hyperbole, and so on. On the other hand, it has flexibility for aesthetic subject. In some circumstances, we can’t find an appropriate word to translate which is in line with the ST. Under these circumstances, we should translate it in a flexible way.

According to Liu Miqing, “Aesthetic constituents of source text can be classified into two systems: formal aesthetic constituents and non-formal aesthetic constituents.”[4]. Formal aesthetic system include the scope of phonetics, morphology and syntax. While the non-formal aesthetic system is non-material, non-natural sensible. It is an indefinite, non-quantitative system. So it is also called “fuzzy sets” or “sets of fuzziness”. All kinds of beauty in the two systems are aesthetic objects, which we will experience in translation.

The aesthetic subject (AS) refers to people who carry out aesthetic appreciation activity on the aesthetic object; and translation aesthetic subject (TAS) refers to the translator. When translating, translator plays a dual role. For one thing, he is the recipient of the SL text who should first decode the aesthetic information in the SL text. In this process, his role is both passive and subjective. For another, he is identified as the creator of the target text. Being so, he undertakes the task of aesthetic representation to the target text readers. Hence he ought to play his dynamic role as the aesthetic subject.

In aesthetics, aesthetic subject and aesthetic object are two concepts and two categories that cannot be separated. There is a dialectical relationship between them. Therefore, a qualified translator should possess the dual characters as the translation aesthetic subject: objectivity and subjectivity.

Comparing Lin Yutang’s theory with Liu Miqin’s theory, we can find that their thoughts have something in common. They both agree that Translation Aesthetics plays a significant role in translation, especially literary translation. Lin Yutang believes that literary translation is a creative art with beauty as its soul, so translators should always keep a heart of beauty-pursuit during the process of translating. While Liu Miqing offers a theoretical framework of Translation Aesthetics in detail. He regards source language and target language as aesthetic objects, treats translators as aesthetic subjects, and constructs basic framework of Translation Aesthetics in a dynamic role of subject and object.

2 A case study of The Border Town from the perspective of Translation Aesthetics

The Border Town is Shen Congwen’s masterpiece, which is also the supporting pillar for him to construct Xiangxi. He adopted a pristine love story to display the pursuit of his ideal life. The love story set in a town of Hunan province which is beside Sichuan province. In the 1930s, it is a quite tranquil place without lots of people in rural area. People there live a simple and honest life. The language of the novel is simple, deep, implicit and subtle, and it is in harmony with the content. It contains rich poetic feelings and produces a beautiful and graceful beauty.

Literary translation is a very important part in translation studies, and it’s a complicated process that requires many different skills. On the one hand, the aesthetic style and aesthetic feeling are very necessary for the author to compose his work. Therefore, the translator should pick up the literary words to transform the aesthetic sense of the source text in the process of translation. On the other hand, literary translation is the representations of all-round artistic quality which can make the target reader get the similar appreciation of the original beauty in the context of the target language. In this part, a case study is conducted in detail based on Gladys Yang’s English translation of The Border Town from the perspective of Translation Aesthetics.

2.1 Beauty in sound

Sound is one of the fundamental forms which carries the aesthetic information of language, either in poetry, drama or fiction. Guided by the principle of preserving the beauty on the phonetic beauty as much as possible without hindering readers’ understanding, Gladys Yang not only reproduces the original rhyme but also tries to preserve the original sound effect of the onomatopoeias.

2.1.1 Rhyme

Generally speaking, rhymes are applied into songs and poems. However, it doesn't mean there is no rhyme in fictions. Technical fiction writers also attempt to select word and phrase patterns so as to make their works imbued with a regular beat. In regard to fiction, rhyme refers to the general way in which a passage moves and flows. “Rhythm, the beauty in sound, often takes the form of wave movement in prose”[5]. To be specific, rhyme is a linguistic phenomenon referring to the repetition of the same or similar syllable sounds. It is achieved by the means of repetition, phrase structure, sentence structure and pause. The function of rhyme is mainly of the aesthetic aspect and the semantic meaning. On the one hand, the use of rhyme adds musicality to the literary .On the other hand, it arouses the readers' resonance and satisfaction. Since the rhythmic features contribute greatly to the aesthetic flavor, translators should take them into consideration and try to present the rhyme in the source text.

Example 1: 无人过渡时，等着祖父又不来，便尽只反复温习这些女孩子的神气，且轻轻的无所谓的唱着：“白鸡关出老虎咬人，不咬别人，团总的小姐派第一……大姐戴副金簪子，二姐戴副银钏子，只有我三妹没得什么戴，耳朵上长年蜜条豆芽菜。”[6]

Translation: When no one comes she waits for her grandfather, and when he fails to come she compares the looks of the girls and chants softly: The tiger eats the captain’s daughter first; Most girls have gold and silver for their hair; Poor Emerald is the one who comes off worst-No trinkets, nothing but beansprouts to wear![7]

This folk song sings Cuicui’s heart at that moment. The density of the rhythm contributes a lot to the reflection of Cuicui’s mood. Owing to the poor condition in her family, she could only admire the landlord's daughter's dress and ornaments. The sound / i / and / ai / repeat five times and emerge in different positions of the original text. When singing, people should open and narrow their mouths forming a beautiful rhythmical meter. In Chinese the sound / i / vividly imitates the sound of weeping, and / ai / is like the sound of sighing. So the shift of the rhyme produces a sort of self-mockery effect to the audience, meanwhile arouses deep sympathy toward the pure girl in the readers’ heart.

2.1.2 Onomatopoeia

Onomatopoeia means that an object or something is related to some actions which can be imitated by some vivid words. It is one of the rhetorical devices that are widely used in literary works, which makes great efforts to let speech sound vivid and lifelike. There are plenty of onomatopoeias in English and Chinese, though they have different expression forms, they are all used to imitate the sound. Onomatopoetic words can add interest to the work, which also can create aesthetic effect in literary works.

The onomatopoeias in The Border Town demonstrate readers with a lively picture and put them in the scene by themselves. Meanwhile, the use of the onomatopoeias also enhances the aesthetic effect of Shen’s literal expressions. It is fortunate that in many cases English and Chinese onomatopoeias can be inter-translated. However, sometimes it is impossible to achieve. So it is often hard for aesthetic subjects to render the onomatopoeias accurately and appropriately. In some translations, Gladys Yang has selected appropriate onomatopoeias of other appropriate words not only to imitate the sound but also to denote the original meanings. In the end, the description becomes more concrete and vivid, as it is showed in examples.

Example 2: 那黄狗汪汪的吠着，受了惊似的绕屋乱走，有人过渡时，便随船渡过东岸且跑到那小山头向城里一方面大吠。[8]

Translation: Barking wildly, he dashes round the house. Next time, passengers are ferried across he follows them up the east bank and races up the hill overlooking town, yapping frantically.[9]

Example 3: 黄狗为了表示同主人的意见一致，也在翠翠身边汪汪的吠着。[10]

Translation: To show his agreement, Brownie sets up a furious barking.[11]

In the two examples, there are three “吠”(fèi, meaning bark)，which is as a modifier of the verb “叫”. In the first translation, Gladys uses “barking wildly” to show the dog’s scare. And the second one is translated into “yapping frantically”, which shows that it’s on duty. And the third one is “furious barking” to show its anger. In Chinese, we can only use different adverbs to modify the same verb. However, the same character in Chinese is translated into three different expressions. In this way, the target readers can understand the original clearly.

2.2 Beauty in lexis

Beauty in lexis is associated with word choice, register, and collocation, and there are many rhetorical devices that contribute to the formal beauty on the lexical level, such as euphemism, zeugma, oxymoron, etc. Shen Congwen, with deep affection to his hometown, writes his fiction in a language as genuine and beautiful as the frontier folk songs in his hometown. His language, which has also enriched the modern vernacularism in China, is imbued with metaphors, local jokes and ballads. As for the aesthetic representation on the lexical level, Yang’s English translation have done a satisfactory job in that she attempts to retain the aesthetic features of original lexis as much as possible, though when it comes to the lexis loaded with heavy cultural connotations, due to the cultural untranslatability, the translator has employed domestication to avoid misunderstanding.

Example 4: 翠翠在风日里长着，故把皮肤变得黑黑的，触目为青山绿水，故眸子清明如水晶。自然既长养她且教育她，为人天真活泼，处处俨然如一只小怪兽。人又那么乖，如山头黄麂一样，从不想到残忍事情，从不发愁，从不动气。[12]

Translation: Wind and sun have tanned this growing girl’s skin，her eyes rest on green hills are as clear as crystal. Nature is her mother and teacher, making her innocent, lively and untamed as some small wild creature. She has the gentleness of a fawn and seems not to know the meaning of cruelty, anxiety or anger.[13]

Shen Congwen's description of Cuicui is based on the perfect combination of a pure little girl and nature. Shen Congwen used “dark black” to describe the natural and healthy skin color of Cuicui. She described the clear and bright eyes of Cuicui as “as clear as crystal”. Only through the description of skin and eyes, the youthful image of Cuicui was vivid. In translation, like “small wild creature” and “fawn”, it shows the lively side of Cuicui. Therefore, whether or not the aesthetic value of the source language image can be reproduced in the translation becomes the key to the reader's ability to understand Cuicui’s character. For example, “dark black” Gladys Yang uses “tanned” to indicate that her skin is a natural and healthy beauty after the sun has shined.

2.3 Beauty in form

Like sound and lexis transmitting beauty, syntax and paragraphs also carry lots of aesthetic information. There are many differences existing in Chinese and English sentence structures. Chinese sentence is like a bamboo that all structures come out from the base, while English sentence is like a grape tree with branches from the stem and twigs from the branches and the clauses are strictly arranged by the grammatical rules. Sentences can express a comprehensive meaning and carries certain aesthetic information. The successful translation is always with a figure, and most works have their own way of using figures of speech to form their own characteristic style. Thus the beauty in form came into being.

Structural balance and harmony is one of the basic aesthetic principles, and it is obtained with the use of right rhetorical devices. Here the author chooses three typical rhetorical devices: antithesis, parallelism and repetition to express the beauty of sentences in translation. What’s more, the three rhetorical devices have been used in Shen’s The Border Town.

2.3.1 Parallelism

Parallelism is to use repetition in equivalent positions to enhance language expression and pay attention to emphasis, clarity and coherence of opinions. In parallel construction, it is necessary for writers to balance word with word, phrase with phrase, clause with clause, and sentence with sentence. At the same time, importance of grammar should be concerned to strengthen coherence of the sentence. In terms of the syntactic level, parallelism is a sprightly succinct rhetorical device. The identical meaning, structure or tone appeals to the readers’ eyes and ears, and heightens the readers’ aesthetic experience. It is one of the valid ways to satisfy aesthetic demands of language: balance and concordance in structure, while rhythm and harmony in tonality. The aesthetic information in parallelism is largely showed in the reoccurrence of a specific pattern, which carries lots of aesthetic value to make the original more lively and impressive. So it is widely employed in literary works. There’s no exception in The Border Town. Look at the example:

Example 5: 这事情在本地人并不希奇，边地俗语说：“火是各处可烧的，水是各处可流的，日月是各处可照的，爱情是可各处可到的。”[14]

Translation: There is nothing strange in these parts, where folk have a saying, “There is no place on earth where fire cannot spread, water flow, sun and moon shine, or love make its way.”[15]

In this example, the same concise and symmetric sentence structure reoccurred many times. The repetition “各处可”(meaning everywhere) produces rhythm, making the sentence read like a song. By comparing love to fire, water, the sun and the moon, it vividly depicts the honesty, and straightforwardness of the local people. In Gladys’ version, she transforms the original parallel structure into a simple sentence and an attributive clause. Concise as it is, it isn’t in line with the writer’s intention and obviously disobeys the style of the original. Although it has transmitted the meaning of the original sentences, it fails to render the aesthetic features of this local saying.

2.3.2 Antithesis

Antithesis, a rhetoric technique with symmetric form and harmonious tonality, is designed to illustrate different things or aspects of the identical thing by comparison, and the symmetric components can replenish and contrast each other. Look at the example below.

Example 6: 轻轻的自言自语：“每只船要有个码头，每只雀儿得有个巢。”[16]

Translation: “Boats have a wharf, birds have a nest.” he murmurs.[17]

In this sentence, “船”(chuán, meaning boat) and “雀儿”(què ér, meaning bird), “码头”(mǎ tóu, meaning wharf ) and “巢”(cháo, meaning nest) in the Chineses version make an antithesis with each other, and it is well balanced in form. The writer expresses the grandpa’s care to Cuicui. Gladys’s version is structurally well-balanced. However, the utilization of the word “have” in English version fails to show the strong sense of belonging, reducing the aesthetic value of the original. If she use “need” to replace it, I think the aesthetic enjoyment could be realized better.

2.3.3 Repetition

From the word of repetition, we know that the same word can be used several times in one sentence. The main function of this rhetoric is to emphasize some things or information. It may help to produce strong aesthetic effect. In The Border Town, Shen Congwen employs repetition deliberately to achieve his purpose of emotive intensification. The intensive repetition can be used as a powerful thematic device. Here is an example:

Example 7: 老船夫说：“翠翠我看了个好碾坊，碾盘是新的，水车是新的，屋上稻草也是新的！”[18]

Translation: “Emerald,” he tells her, “I've just seen a fine mill. Brand-new from the millstone and water-wheel to the thatch on the roof.”[19]

This sentence vividly reproduces grandfather's psychological state after he has visited the new mill. The repetition of “是新的”(meaning new) for three times echoes each other to highlight how the mill knocks the breath out of grandpa, and strengthen his envy and longing for the mill. Gladys translates it into “Brand-new from... to...” Though it fails to keep the symmetric form of the original, it still succeeds in recreating the particular aesthetic effect of the original text. The inverted sentence pattern, the shifted perspective and the emphatic words make up for the loss of the repetition to great extent. Meanwhile, the concise and paralleled sentence structure represents the aesthetic information of the original more appropriately.

2.4 Beauty in image

Image in the literary text refers to the output of the subjective intrinsic emotion of the author and the extrinsic objective substances or the incarnation of emotion produced out of language narration. It is the unity of finity and infinity, the unity of the latent and the outstanding.

Example 8: 翠翠温习着两次过节所见所闻的一切，心中很快乐，好像目前有一个东西，同早间在床上闭了眼睛所看到的那种捉摸不定的黄葵花一样，这东西仿佛明朗地在眼前，却看不准，抓不住。[20]

Translation: Going over two festivals in her mind, happily savoring what she had seen and heard, Emerald has the same sensation as when she closed her eyes in bed in the morning and sees yellow sunflowers just out of reach. Something exciting lies ahead as yet indistinct and intangible, but too lovely to let go.[21]

This sentence is a psychological description of Cuicui. She recalled the days of last two Dragon Boat Festivals when she encountered Nuosong. Her heart was filled with unnamable expectation. She wished to see Nuosong again. The above sentence describes the sprout of love in Cuicui’s heart which is implicit but brings her sweetness and dream. The image “黄葵花”(huáng kuí huā, meaning yellow sunflower) symbolizes that the love has planted its seed in Cuicui’s heart, and is in full blossoms which brings Cuicui happiness and which she would like to pluck. In the translated versions, Yang makes uses of literal translation by preserving the image of “黄葵花”and puts it into “yellow sunflower”. With the help of the context, it is easy for the target readers to understand the image of “yellow sunflower” and acquire the implicit aesthetic value in it in Yang’s version. It depicts the hope and happiness in Cuicui’s heart and brings the same enjoyment to target readers as it does to the source readers.

2.5 Beauty in ideorealm

Artistic ideorealm is defined as an artistic realm in lyric poetry and other literary works, which is an integration of subjective emotion and objective images and feelings. It is characterized as beautiful and implicit as a traditional Chinese painting, which can evoke readers’ association and imagination, and surpasses the concrete vision and ascends an extensive artistic space.

Example 9: 由四川过湖南去，靠东有一条官路。这官路将近湘西边境到了一个地方名为‘茶峒’的小山城时，有一小溪，溪边有座白色小塔，塔下住了一户单独的人家。这人家只一个老人，一个女孩子，一只黄狗。[22]

Translation: The highway running east from Sichuan to Hunan comes, just west of the border, to Chadong, a small town in the hills. Nearby a stream flows past a small pagoda, at the foot of which lives a solitary household: an old man, a girl, and a dog.[23]

This is the first paragraph of the novel. Like telling a story, it is slow and plain. From what Shen Congwen has described, we can see that he has a special writing style which expresses the beauty of nature. Here, the writer uses seven “一”(yī, meaning one) in all, and every one describes different images. What’s more, “一”represents Shen’s melancholy aesthetic sentiment and creation view. Shen uses the rhetorical device of anadiplosis which means repeating the ending words of the precedent sentence in the following sentence. This kind of discourse progression mode is not only good for the coherence of narrative and understanding of discourse but also full of interest. Gladys thoroughly adverts to the aesthetic connotation and narrative techniques contain in “一” of the original text and strive for “formal similarity” and “spiritual similarity”. In sentence structure, Gladys retains the anadiplosis rhetorical device like “一”. More importantly, the static beauty of the original text has been changed into dynamic beauty by the recreation of the translator. To sum up, the whole translation is simple and fluent which correspond to the intangible and solitary artistic conception in the original text.

Example 10: 那首歌声音既极柔和，快乐中又微带忧郁，唱完了歌，翠翠觉得心上有一丝儿凄凉。她想起秋末酬神还愿时田坪中的火燎同鼓角。远处鼓声已起来了，她知道绘有朱红长线的龙船这时节已下河了。细雨依然落个不止，溪面一片烟.[24]

Translation: This gay, haunting melody has an undertone of sadness, making Emerald feel a pang of loneliness. Her thoughts fly to the bonfires and drumming in the fields to welcome the spirits at the end of autumn. Meanwhile drums sound up in the distance. The long crimson dragon boats will soon be staring their race. A light rain falls steadily, the stream is misted over.[25]

In this example, Gladys’ translation almost reaches the realm of “spirit likeness”. In the wording, she not only carefully uses some expressive words but blends her own aesthetic attitude and aesthetic ideas into translation. Cuicui has stirred her love since she met Nousong two years ago on Dragon Boat Festival. Henceforth, she has a load in her mind, which is nothing to do with her grandfather. Dragon Boat Festival comes again, and Cuicui sits alone on the ferryboat, waiting for her grandfather. Then she go to see the dragon boat race together with him in town, where she may meet Nuosong again. The example above come about after Cuicui chanted a folk song on the ferryboat. The lonely and gloomy scenic description to some degree symbolizes that Cuicui’s love will end in tragedy. The repetition, though merely a few characters, forms an echo which achieves the artistic effect of inexhaustible sadness and sympathy of the readers toward Cuicui.

3 Conclusion

After the research and analysis, the author has found that Translation Aesthetics can be regarded as a criteria to evaluate literary works. The unique aesthetic characteristics in literature indicate that Translation Aesthetics is an effective and practical theory to analyze literature translation. A good literary translation should fully express the literary features and artistic connotations of literary works, embody the aesthetic value of the works, and make the readers realize the infinite charm of oriental art and the great vitality of literary works. On the one hand, it is necessary to reproduce the linguistic features of literary works in a proper and flexible way. On the other hand, it is necessary to take into account the cognitive level and understanding ability of readers in different countries, so as to maximize the aesthetic charm of literary works.

Culture Loaded Words

The Translation of Culture-loaded Words in Chinese-English Communication

样品

文化负载词在中英交流中的翻译

摘要：随着经济全球化的深入发展，各国之间的文化交流日趋频繁。文化信息的成功传递是跨文化交流中的重要一环。文化负载词的翻译一直是译者面临的一大难题。准确传译文化负载词关系到译文质量的提高，跨文化交流活动的顺利进行以及文化的传播。本文将由六个部分组成。第一个部分和第二部分将分别讲述文化负载词的定义以及其翻译的难点。第三部分和第四部分将讲述文化负载词的翻译策略及其不可译性。第五部分和第六部分将分别讲述文化负载词的翻译对口译的影响并对本文进行一个简短的总结。

关键词：翻译；文化负载词；文化差异

Abstract: With the development of economic globalization, the cultural exchange among different countries becomes more and more frequent. The successful transmission of cultural message is an important link in international exchanges. In translation activities, the translation of culture-loaded words is a great challenge for translators, because the speaker and the audience come from a different linguistic and cultural environment. The accurate translation of culture-loaded words will help improve the quality of translation, enable successful cross-cultural exchanges and promote culture transmission. This paper will be divided into six parts. The first part will tell readers what is culture-loaded words. The second part will concentrate on the difficulties to translate culture-loaded words.The third part will discuss the translation approaches to culture-loaded words. The fourth part will focus on the question of translatability of culture-loaded words. The fifth part will introduce the interpreter’s translation of culture-loaded words. And the last part will briefly draw a conclusion about the paper.

Key words: translation; culture-loaded words; cultural differences

As we all know, translation plays an important role in intercultural communication. A good translator can help to promote the communication between two different cultures. With the process of globalization, intercultural communication is becoming more and more frequent. However, there exist plenty of cultural differences between different cultures, especially between the East and the West. Cultural differences make it hard for translators to translate well. Culture-loaded words belong to one of the differences between different cultures. Therefore, it is of great significance to be aware of the appropriate translation of culture-loaded words. This is because it can help translators translate better and thus make two different cultures communicate better.

1 The Definition of Culture-loaded Words

Before discussing what are culture-loaded words, we should know what is culture first. “Culture, in a broad sense, means the total way of life of a people, including the patterns of belief, customs, objects, institutions, techniques, and language that characterizes the life of the human community. As culture is so inclusive, it permeates virtually every aspect of human life and influences predominantly people’s behavior, including linguistic behavior. In a narrow sense, culture may refer to local or specific practice, beliefs or customs, which can mostly be found in folk culture, enterprise culture or food culture etc.” (Dai Weidong 2002:127) Culture is learned by human beings. A child is born without any certain kind of culture. A child gets its culture through learning. For example, a Chinese kid will speak, act and think like a Chinese if it grows up in China. An American kid will speak, act and think like an American if it is raised in the United States. Meanwhile, if a Chinese kid is raised by an American family in the USA, he will think, act and speak like American people do and vice versa. Culture is owned by all the social members. The special behavior and habit of a single person is not culture because it is not owned by every member of the society. Culture can be transmitted from generation to generation. During the transmission, culture will also develop. “Generally speaking, there are two types of culture: material and spiritual. While material culture, as the term itself suggests, is concrete, substantial and observable. Most of spiritual culture, the products of mind (ideologies, beliefs, values and concepts of time and space, for example), is abstract, ambiguous, and hidden. In contrast with nature in the sense of what is born and grows, culture refers to what has been grown and brought up with, in other words, what can be nurtured. Culture, especially material culture, is reproduced and preserved through the maintaining of beliefs, traditions, education and other institutional mechanisms, meanwhile, it changes slowly with the development of the society.” (Dai Weidong 2002:127-128)

“Language is one of the most fundamental systems of culture, with the function of storing, describing, expressing and disseminating culture. As the basic unit of language, word is of course the most direct reflection of culture. Culture-loaded words refer to the words, phrases, and idioms only contained in a culture. These words reflect the uniqueness of certain nations. This kind of uniqueness develops from the long historical process.” (Liao Qiyi 2002:232) Culture-loaded words can make a distinction between two different cultures. Culture-loaded words can also reflect a country’s social background, financial base and culture in a certain period of time. During different historical periods, different culture-loaded words occur. Different countries differ from each other because every country has its uniqueness that makes it special. Ordinarily speaking, a literary work, which shows a lot of national characteristics, contains plenty of culture-loaded words. Culture-loaded words make it difficult for translators to translate.

2 Difficulties in the Translation of Culture-loaded Words

Every country has its own cultural origin. And “every nation has its own cultural focus. So its vocabulary always develops according to the cultural focus and becomes more and more detailed and complex.” (Liao Qiyi 2002:232)As we all know, Chinese culture and western culture have different origins. Chinese culture came from the Chinese mainland. There exist two big rivers, the Yellow River and the Huanghe River, across China. So Chinese people fed themselves by fishing, hunting and farming. The vast territory provided Chinese people enough resources to support themselves. The lofty mountains and high ranges, on the one hand, protected ancient China from the invasion of other countries, while on the other hand, also prevented China from communicating with other countries. Therefore, Chinese people is more conservative and emphasize harmony.

“There is a great difference of the physio geographic condition between China and the western countries, especially the relationship between sea and land. If we say that Chinese civilization came from the land, western civilization came from the sea.”(Huang Yongyuan and Zhang Jing 2011:237) Europe is surrounded by the sea on the west, south and north, and borders on Asia in the east. The whole Europe continent is close to the sea, and the maritime climate is very significant. As the cradle of Western culture, the ancient Greece, was more connected with the sea. Greece was transportation center of the eastern Mediterranean. It had many ports and mountains but had a barren land. This kind of condition forced the ancient Greeks to operate maritime trade very early to support themselves. Therefore, people from western countries are easy to accept foreign cultures.

China’s national spirit is different from that of the western countries. For example, China’s definition of “dragon” is so far away from that of the western countries. “The dragon, in Chinese myths and legends, is a kind of god . It is a symbol of the Chinese nation. The Chinese all call themselves "the descendants of the dragon"; it is also a symbol of the ancient imperial power, and the emperors of all ages considered themselves to be the true dragon. Each feature of the dragon represents an advantage. The wide forehead represents intelligence, the sword-like eyebrows represent courage, the tiger eyes represent majesty, the lion nose represents prosperity, the horse teeth represent diligence and kindness, the crocodile mouth represents swallowing, the shrimp mustache represents free water absorption , the cattle ears represent the leadership, the antlers represent health and longevity, the fish and clam represent defense, the camel head represents drought resisting, the eagle claws represent the ability to fly, and the snake neck represents the ability of accomplishing a task with ease. The Chinese dragon can be said to be a favorite to Chinese people. In the Western world, the dragon is called Drakon in Greek, Dragon in English, and Draco is in Latin. The dragon is a derogatory term in the West and a symbol of evil. In Western mythology, the dragon is the demon that makes people fear. The Bible illustrates dragon as a demon, and the devil Satan, who is opposite to God, is called the "great dragon"; the Old Dragon is the Devil, or Satan. In a biological perspective, dragon is a kind of particularly ferocious animal. In many cases, western literature describes the dragon as a monster to be eradicated by the hero.”(Huang Yongyuan and Zhangjing 2011:238)

Apart from the examples above, there are still many example containing different meanings in different countries because of cultural differences. For example, the color “red” represents happiness, auspiciousness and success. This is because the color red came from the sun. Ancient Chinese people worshiped the sun. Thus, when getting married, Chinese bride’s wedding dress is red. People will hang red lanterns and paste red couplets in Spring festival. However, in western countries, although they have words like, “red-letter day” and “the red carpet”, which contain positive meanings, the color “red” is a kind of taboo. In English, the color “red” is the association of fire and blood. It represents the radical and violent revolutions. So many English phrases containing red have negative meaning, like red-headed, red-light district, red-handed, red ruin, red ink, in the red etc. Similarly, the color “white” contains different meanings in the East and the West. In western countries, white means innocence, honesty, kindness and so on. When getting married, the bride will white wedding dress. Although the color white contains the meaning of purity and innocence, like “白衣天使”(white angel) which represents doctors and nurses in Chinese, white is a kind of taboo color in China. The color white represents death and ill omen. When a family member died, they will hang white cloth inside and outside the house. We can also realize the different meanings of the same word in different countries. For instance, the word “狗”(dog) contains a negative meaning. However, in western countries, dog always contains a positive meaning, like a lucky dog.

3 Approaches to Translate Culture-loaded Words

Under the great progress of globalization, different cultures have more accesses to communicate with each other. According to Eugene Nida, “Translating consists in reproducing in the receptor language the closest natural equivalent of the source-language message, first in terms of meaning and secondly in terms of style.” (Nida Eugene A and Charles Taber R 1969:13) “Ordinarily speaking, there are three approaches to translate culture-loaded words, namely foreignization, domestication and translation compensation. The translation of culture-loaded words belongs to the micro aspect of cultural translation. In the context of globalization, the fundamental standpoint of exploring the translation approach is to preserve the unique cultural significance carried by culture-loaded words, which determines that we should use foreignization and translation compensation as the main translation approaches to translation culture-loaded words”.(Wang Xiang 2017:75)

3.1 Foreignization

Venuti(1995: 20) considers the foreignizing method to be ‘an ethnodeviant pressure on target language cultural values to register the linguistic and cultural difference of the foreign text, sending the reader abroad’. It is ‘highly desirable’, he says, in an effort ‘to restrain the ethnocentric violence of translation’. In other words, the foreignizing method can restrain the ‘violently’ domesticating cultural values of the English-language world. The foreignizing method of translating, a strategy Venuti also terms ‘resistancy’ (1995: 305-6), is a non-fluent or estranging translation style designed to make visible the presence of the translator by highlighting the foreign identity of the ST and protecting it from the ideological dominance of the target culture. Foreignization can preserve the uniqueness of the source language’s culture because respecting the source language culture is starting point. Compared with domestication approach, foreignization considers more about the source language’s cultural background and is more faithful to the source language’s culture. It can keep the exotic flavor of the source language text. However, foreignization is not a perfect translation approach. If the translation doesn’t pay enough attention, the foreignization approach will be abused easily. If the translator misuse the foreignization approach, the target text will be awkward and hard to understand.

The food culture contains great national characteristics. It shows the creative spirit and unique style of the Chinese nation. The words related to the food culture are rich in Chinese culture. Many examples of using foreignization approach can be found in the translation of traditional Chinese food. Firstly, the translation of traditional Chinese food can be related to Chinese allusions. Let’s take the translation of Yuanxiao or Tang-yuan(glue pudding) as an example. “It’s said that a lady-in-waiting called Yuanxiao during the Han dynasty missed her parents so much that she cried with tears in her face every single day. In order to help her, a minister named Dongfang Shuo lied to Emperor of the Han dynasty that the god of fire with the order of the Jade Emperor would burn Changan(the Capital of China in Han dynasty) on the 15th of the first lunar month. The solution to avoid this disaster was to ask the lady-in-waiting named Yuanxiao to make Tang-yuan, the favorite food of the god of fire, and to ask all the people in Changan to hang lanterns. Emperor Wu approved this plan. Finally, the girl named Yuanxiao met her parents. Thus, the tradition of Lantern Festival ( pronounced Yuanxiao Jie in Chinese, “jie” in Chinese means festival) appeared.” ( Xu Xianling and Li Xiangzhaung 2005:230) Therefore, if we translate the Chinese food “元宵” into Yuanxiao by the foreignization approach instead of translating into the glue pudding, the special Chinese culture in the food can be preserved well.

Secondly, the translation of Chinese food can be related to Chinese customs. Chinese people eat special traditional food in special Chinese festivals. For instance, people will eat double-ninth cake on the Double Ninth Festival. The Double Ninth Festival is on the 9th day of the 9th lunar month. The translation of double-ninth cake can keep the traditional Chinese culture well. Thirdly，the translation of traditional Chinese food can be related with Chinese people’s appreciation of beauty. For example, “the Chinese cuisine ‘鸟语花香’, can be translated into ‘Singing Birds and Fragrant Flowers(Steamed mandarin fish and bird-shaped shrimps)’’ and ‘青龙过海’ can be translated into ‘Green Dragons Crossing the Sea(Soup with green onion)’”. (Zhang Jiachen 2014:106) By using the foreignization approach, this kind of translation can preserve the beautiful image of these cuisines and the explanatory note can also prevent foreigners from being confused. What’s more, the translation of some Chinese cuisine can be related to the traditional Chinese medical science. For example, “‘八珍食品’ can be translated into ‘Eight Delicacies (Stimulate your baby’s appetite and better his or her growth) and ‘当归生姜羊肉汤’ can be translated into ‘ Angelica Ginger Lamb Soup(Replenish your blood and warm your spleen and stomach)’”. (Zhang Jiachen 2014:106) Translating in this way can pass the traditional Chinese medical culture to readers.

Although the foreignization approach can be of great help to pass the source language’s culture to the target readers, it requires the translator’s great knowledge between the two cultures. Therefore, translators have to do a good preparation before translating.

3.2 Translation compensation

George Steiner divides the process of translation into four parts and “By ensuring the translation is possible, compensation is the last step in the whole procedure”.(2001: 176) It should be acknowledged that translation compensation occurs and accompanies translation activity as early as cultural difference exists. It possesses a history as long as translation activity does. Scholar Mona Baker holds the view that compensation is a translation skill, which can be applied when “target language is impossible to directly make up for the losses in meaning, language style or emotional force”.(1992: 33) Due to the translation difficulties caused by cultural default and cultural differences, translators have to employ different compensation strategies to make sure their translation outcome can be totally understood by the TL readers. Hervey and Higgins divided translation compensation mainly into four kinds, namely compensation in kind, compensation by splitting, compensation by merging and compensation in place.

The translation compensation approach can be often used to translate the name of Chinese teas. China is the birthplace of tea culture. The record about tea appeared in the era of Shennong about 4700 years ago. Since ancient times, the tradition of providing to guests has been preserved. There are various kinds of teas in China like Longjing tea from Hangzhou , Oolong tea from Fujian etc. Chinese tea culture are also involved in Chinese Confucianism, Buddhism, Taoism and so on. Chinese tea culture is a treasure in traditional Chinese culture.

Chinese and English belong to different language systems. There are great differences between the two languages. Due to the different social environment , life style and vocabulary, sometimes it is impossible for translators to achieve complete equivalence. Chinese people’s ways to name teas are various. Sometimes, the Chinese character “茶” (tea in English) doesn’t even exit in the name of a tea. For example, some teas exhibited in the China Tea Museum in Hangzhou, like “羊岩勾青”(Yangyan Gouqing), “庐山云雾”(Lushan Yunwu), the names of these teas don’t contain the character of tea. If translators show the English names of these teas to the target readers without explanation, readers may feel confused. Sometimes, the names of some teas are the same as the names of other stuff. For example, “ ‘茉莉花茶’ is translated into Jasmine Tea. This kind of translation mixes the tea name with the flower name. Actually, ‘茉莉花茶’ is a kind of green tea which has the aroma of jasmine. Some kind of ‘茉莉花茶’ contains jasmine flower, some don’t. Similarly, ‘竹叶青’ is translated into Bamboo Leaf Green and ‘玉露’ is translated into Jade Dew. Although the translation of these names of teas used the literal translation approach and realized the verbal equivalence, translators neglected the features of the teas. This kind of translation will mislead the target reader to think of ‘竹叶青’ as the tea made of bamboo leaves and ‘玉露’ as the tea made of jade and dew, which is totally impossible”. (Cui Shan 2019:125) The translation of tea names is also a part of intercultural communication. It can directly influence the transmission of Chinese culture in the world and can also influence the business result. If a translator doesn’t pay enough attention to the cultural differences, it may lead to bad consequences. For example, a Chinese tea called “龙虎斗” was translated into “The Fighting Between Dragon and Tiger ”. Although the translation kept the verbal meaning of the tea, it violated the western taboo. This is because dragon is referred as a kind of evil and fierce beast. A reader without the knowledge of Chinese culture will have the image of two fierce beasts fighting and killing each other when reading the translation of the tea. The target reader will feel uncomfortable to read the name of the tea, let alone buy and drink it. “珠茶” is a kind of special tea from Shaoxing, Zhejiang Province. It is round and bullet-shaped. So it was translated into “gun power”. This kind of translation can easily make people think about the violent images of war. Therefore, when being sold to India, Indian purchasers strongly asked the seller to change the translation of the tea name.

Due to cultural differences, sometimes literal translation cannot express the true meaning of the tea name well. During this circumstance, translator should compensate the important information under the verbal meaning of the tea name. This kind of purpose can be achieved through the explanation of connotation under the tea name. Let’s take the tea names we have mentioned in the last paragraph as an example. According to the background information of the tea “玉露”, “ the shape of the tea is round and its color is white like jade. So it’s better to translate ‘玉露’ into ‘Jade-green Tea’ instead of ‘Jade Dew’”. (Cui Shan 2019:126) This kind of translation can show the color and type of the tea. It is more acceptable and less confusing for the target readers. Similarly, “‘茉莉花茶’ can be translated into ‘Jasmine Scented Tea’ instead of ‘Jasmine Tea’ and ‘竹叶青’ can be translated into ‘Bamboo-Leaf-Shaped Green Tea’ instead of ‘Bamboo Leaf ’”. (Cui Shan, 2019:126) “Jasmine Scented Tea” can show the true features of the tea and distinguish the tea from jasmine flower. And “Bamboo-Leaf-Shaped Green Tea” can tell the target readers the type and features of the tea and stop misleading readers to think of it as the tea made of bamboo leaves.

4 Untranslatability of Culture-loaded Words

Catford thought that untranslatability is caused by the target language’s lack of lexical or syntactical substitute. Different languages differ from each other in the phonetic, grammatical, semantic, pragmatic aspect etc. When translating culture-loaded words, it is hard for translator to translate the culture behind these words in a perfect way. For example, “纸老虎” is translated into “Paper Tiger” in English. But if people don’t have a knowledge of Chinese culture, when they read the phrase “paper tiger”, they will think of it as a kind of artistic work. Similarly, “八股文” is translated into “Eight-part Essay”. When people read this kind of translation, they will only think of it as a kind of article containing eight parts. They cannot understand the moral imprisonment this kind of writing style brought to Chinese people. When the famous sinologist David Hawkes was translating the famous Chinese novel A Dream of Red Mansions, he translated a servant girl in the novel called “紫鹃” into “Nightingale” instead of “cuckoo”. This is because the word “cuckoo” in western countries can be used to refer the woman who cheated in a relationship. In the novel, “紫鹃” is a quite innocent girl. So the word “cuckoo”, although is literally equivalent to “紫鹃”, it was still not chosen by David Hawkes to be the girl’s name. In English, “nightingale” refers to a small brown bird, the male of which has a beautiful song. It can also refer people who can sing beautifully. Although the translator avoided cultural conflict by translating “紫鹃” into “Nightingale”, “nightingale” still cannot show the innocence of that girl. Sometimes, translators will borrow words from other cultures to help themselves translate better. For example, translators translate “a beauty in ancient China named Xi Shi into ‘Chinese Cleopatra’. However, Cleopatra is more like the first and the only female emperor in Chinese history Wu Zetian in Chinese people’s mind to western people. In Chinese phrase ‘蝙蝠迎宾’， the word ‘蝙蝠’ is translated into ‘bird’ in English instead of ‘bat’. This is because bat represents vampires in western culture. This kind of translation avoided the violation of western taboo. But it also doesn’t translate the inner ‘happiness’ behind the phrase in Chinese culture.”(Chen Junming 2013:29) Catford thought the cultural untranslatability was caused by the lack of the target target culture’s relevant situational features to the source language’s culture. Cultural untranslatability comes from cultural differences. Although it is hard to translate culture-loaded words into target language in a perfect way, translators still need to try to discover the translation of culture-loaded words. Translators can also add some explanations after the translated sentences or words to make the meaning and culture behind the source language text be understood by target readers.

5 The Interpreter’s Translation of Culture-loaded Words

Unlike translators, interpreters have much shorter time to translate. Sometimes, it is a great challenge for interpreters to translate in such a short time. As we have discussed above, culture-loaded words make it hard for translators to translate. So during the interpreting, it may be even harder for interpreters to translate utterances with culture-loaded words. An interpreter’s translation can be divided into three steps, namely comprehension, de-verbalization and reformulation. If an interpreter wants to interpret successfully, he should understand what the speaker has said. The interpreter will keep the content of what the speaker just said in his mind. During step two, the interpreter will forget the structure of these linguistic signs which formed what the speaker said and only remembers the ideas these linguistics signs wanted to express. During the last step, the interpreter uses another language to form new utterances to express the speaker’s ideas. The interpreter has to try to express all the information the speaker mentioned as possible and the interpreter also needs to try to make the translated language easy to be understood by target hearers. The striking feature of interpreting is its timeliness. Since the interpreter’s memory is limited, interpretation is more about translating the overall meaning of the discourse. Sometimes interpreters have to identify the key information of someone’s utterances and discard the unimportant information. The approach we have discussed above can also be used to interpret. For example, the interpreter can use literal translation approach to translate. By using the literal translation approach, “ ‘莫道今年春将尽，明年春色倍欢人。我期待着明年中国和世界都会变得更好’，can be translated into ‘Do not regret that the spring is departing, come next year as it will be twice as enchanting. I really hope to see that next year in China and in the whole world people will be better off.’”(Guo Huiqing 2018:94) It’s worth mentioning that interpreters have to translate in a limited time. So when confronting some special expression that is hard to find the equivalent in the target language. They will try to explain the meaning of these expression. For example, the interpreter can translate “ ‘山重水复疑无路，柳暗花明又一村’ into ‘After encountering all kinds of difficulties and experiencing all kinds of hardships, at the end of the day we will see light at the end of tunnel’”.(Guo Huiqing 2018:95) This expression is from ancient Chinese poet Tao Yuanming’s poem. This sentence just express the scenery of the countryside. But combing the poem with the utterances the speaker has said, the interpreter translates the sentence into the translation above. This kind of explanation approach can be often used in interpreting. Translation and interpreting share a lot in common like the approaches to translate. But interpreting has the feature of timeliness while translation doesn’t. This feature brings more challenges for interpreters to translate. It requires interpreter to have to quick response and a better sensibility to cultural differences.

6 Conclusion

“Since the knowledge and beliefs that constitute a people’s culture are habitually encoded and transmitted in the language of the people, it is extremely difficult to separate the two. On the one hand, language as an integral part of human being, permeates his thinking and way of viewing the world, language both expresses and embodies cultural reality. On the other, language, as a product of culture, helps perpetuate the culture, and the changes in language uses reflect the cultural changes in return.” (Dai Weidong 2002:130) Language and culture are interdependent during the process of evolution. Language belongs to culture. Translators, who translate the information from one language to another, have the responsibility to promote the communication between different countries. A good translator can help the transmission of cultures. The cultural differences among different countries lead to different culture-loaded words in different countries. The reason why we call a culture-loaded word a culture-loaded word is because it contains the special meaning of a culture. It is exactly this kind of uniqueness which makes a culture different from other cultures. Although culture-loaded words make it hard for translators to translate well, translators still have to find strategies to overcome this kind of difficulty. As long as cultural differences exist, culture-loaded words will still be there. As a bridge between two language or even two cultures, translators still have to work hard to discover better approaches to translate culture-loaded words well. If translators can translate better, the cultural communication between two countries will be better.

References

Baker, Mona. (1992). In Other Words: A Coursebook on Translation. London: Routledge, 1992

Chen, Junming. [陈君铭]. (2013). 谈汉语文化负载词的不可译性[J]. 淮南师范学院学报, (4):28-31

Cui, Shan. [崔姗]. (2019). 翻译补偿视角下的中国茶名英译研. 福建茶叶, (2):125-126

Dai, Weidong. [戴炜栋]. (2002). 《新编简明英语语言学教程》. 上海: 上海外语教育出版社

Nida, Eugene A, and Taber, Charles R. (1969). The Theory and Practice of Translation. Leiden：E.J.Brill

Guo, Huqing. [郭卉青]. (2018). 释意理论视角下文化负载词的英汉口译策略[J]. 陕西能源学院学报, (2):94-96

Huang, Yongyuan and Zhang, Jing. [黄永媛, and 张晶]. (2011). 中西文化起源对比与研究. 东北农业大学学报(社会科学版). (6):107-109

Liao, Qiyi. [廖七一]. (2002). 《当代西方翻译理论探索》. 南京: 译林出版社

Steiner, George. (1998). After Babel: Aspects of Language and Translation. Oxford: Oxford University Press

Venuti, Lawrence. (1995). The Translator’s Invisibility: A History of Translation. London and New York: Routledge

Wang, Xiang. [王祥]. (2017). 全球化语境下文化负载词翻译技巧. 开封教育学院学报. (8):75-76

Xu, Xianling and Li, Xiangzhuang. [徐先, and 李相状]. (2005). 中国饮食文化. 北京：中国戏剧出版社

Zhang, Jiachen. [张佳琛]. (2014). 中国“食”文化的异化翻译. 长沙理工大学学报（社会科学版）, (3):140-107

Retrieved from "https://bou.de/u/index.php?title=History_of_Translation_Studies_2&oldid=107486"