硕士学位论文-文学翻译中的译者主体性－《印度之行》两个中译本的比较研究.doc

上海海事大学SHANGHAI MARITIME UNIVERSITY硕 士 学 位 论 文MASTERS DISSERTATION论文题目：文学翻译中的译者主体性印度之行两个中译本的比较研究学位专业：外国语言学及应用语言学作者姓名：鲁言波 指导教师：韩忠华教授完成日期：二O O九年五月Subjectivity in Literary Translation:A Comparative Study of Two Chinese Versions of A Passage to IndiaBy Lu YanboUnder the Supervision ofProfessor Han ZhonghuaA Thesis Submitted to the College of Foreign Languagesof Shanghai Maritime Universityin Partial Fulfillment ofthe Requirements for MA Degree Shanghai Maritime UniversityMay 2009Acknowledgements I would like to express my heartfelt thanks to all those who have contributed to this paper in many different ways. First of all, I am deeply indebted to Professor Han Zhonghua, my supervisor, for providing me with valuable support and encouragement. His unfailing enthusiasm emboldened me to write this paper. I have benefited greatly from his constructive comments and insightful suggestions while working on the paper from beginning to end. Without his help, I would not have been able to finish this paper. Next, my thanks are extended to all my teachers in my postgraduate study. Their courses have contributed to the shaping of some of the original ideas that have been included in this paper. I am also grateful to my classmates, my roommates and my friends who helped me in one way or another. My final gratitude will go to my parents for keeping me confident throughout the writing and rewriting of this paper. Their love renders the originally strenuous task enjoyable. They are the people who always back me, and to whom, therefore, this paper is dedicated.摘要当今世界，文学翻译作为文学艺术的再度创作成为一个越来越重要的研究领域。国内外的译学研究者对文学翻译进行了众多研究。本文在前人研究的基础上，围绕译者因素进一步探讨了文学翻译，认为译者作为翻译过程中最重要的参与者应该享有主体地位。译者主体性的发挥是揭示文学作品本质、成功再现原作的唯一途径。 本文从译者地位历史探索、译者主体性理论基础、影响译者主体性的因素等方面探讨了译者主体性问题，并以印度之行两个中译本为例多方面地分析了译者主体性在文学翻译中的体现。本文的理论视角为目的论、结构学、解释学和美学。对于译者主体性的探讨纷纭复杂，对于印度之行各方面的讨论也是缤纷多彩，但却鲜有从译者主体性的角度来研究印度之行者，这也正是本文致力的创新点。本文主要从意义、风格、语篇和文化视角来对印度之行两个中译本进行比较研究，分析译者主体性在文学翻译中的具体体现。关键词：译者主体性；理论基础；文学翻译；印度之行AbstractIn todays world, literary translation, a recreation of literary art, has become a more and more important field of study. The researchers of translation studies home and abroad have done many researches in literary translation. Based on these researches, the author of this thesis makes a further study of literary translation, which circles on the translator. The author holds that the translator, as the most important participant in the process of translation, enjoys the status of translation subject. The exerting of the translators subjectivity in literary translation is the only way to approach the essence of literary work and thus successfully represent the original. This thesis explodes into the history of translators status, theoretic foundation of subjectivity and factors influencing subjectivity. Then the thesis takes two Chinese versions of A Passage to India as an example to illustrate how translators subjectivity manifests in literary translation. This thesis probes into subjectivity from the perspective of skopos theory, destruction theory, hermeneutics theory and aesthetics. There are various research on subjectivity and there are all kinds of study on A Passage to India, yet few study combines these two as one research subject, and this field is what the author dedicated herself to. This thesis mainly conduct its study on A Passage to India mainly from the perspective of meaning, style, discourse and culture to analyze the translators subjectivity.Key Words: subjectivity; theoretic foundation; literary translation; A Passage to IndiaiiiContentsChapter One Translators Status in the History of Translation31.1 The Marginal States of the Translator in the History of Translation31.1.1 In China31.1.2 In the West61.2 The Consciousness of the Importance of the Translator71.3 The Change of Translators role in translation91.3.1 The conqueror.91.3.2 The painter101.3.3 The slave101.3.4 The liberator111.3.5 The master11Chapter Two Translators Subjectivity and Its Theory Foundation132.1 The Subjectivity of the Translator132.2 Theory Foundation of Translators Subjectivity142.2.1 Skopos theory142.2.2 Deconstruction theory172.2.3 Hermeneutics theory192.2.4 Aesthetics222.2.5 A Brief Summary on translators subjectivity24Chapter Three Factors Influencing Translators Subjectivity263.1 The Translators Ideology263.2 The Translators Cultural Standpoint273.3 The Translators Purpose283.4 The Translators Aesthetic Taste, Creativity and Experience29Chapter Four An Introduction to A Passage to India304.1 An Introduction to the Author304.2 An Introduction to the Novel31Chapter Five A Comparative Study of the Two Chinese Versions From the Perspective of Translators Subjectivity335.1 Meaning335.1.1Conceptual Meaning345.1.2 Collocative Meaning365.1.3 Connotative Meaning385.1.4 Affective Meaning395.1.5 Grammatical Meaning405.2 Style435.2.1 Ideological Style455.2.2 Style on Lexical Level465.2.3 Style on Syntactic Level485.3 Discourse495.3.1 Style of Narration505.3.2 Style of Dialogue515.4 Culture53Conclusion56BIBLIOGRAPHY58vIntroductionTranslation, as an act of great complexity, involves many factors. It demonstrates fully the complexity, diversity and indeterminacy of humanities. Among the many factors involved in translation, the most direct and crucial ones that influence the process and the end of translation may probably be the translator, the source text, the two languages and cultures concerned in translation and the target readers. In view of traditional translation theory, home and abroad, most of the discussions are mainly around such topics as the roles and characteristics of the translator, the relationship between the source and target text, the expectations of the target readers etc. All these discussions with certain degree of similarity and overlapping aspects touch the nature and criterion of translation and therefore concern the methodology of translation. In terms of research levels of translation, we have philological approach, the linguistic approach, the cultural approach and the philosophical approach with different schools and approaches holding different viewpoints on the nature of translation. Philological approach regards translation as a process of recreation. Linguistic approach generally defines translation as the replacement of one linguistic form of another or the transference of one linguistic form into another. Cultural approach of early stage holds that translation is a decision-making activity and later, people advocating this approach argue that translation is rewriting and manipulation. Also, there are expressions of the nature of translation in post-colonial theory and deconstruction theory. Here, this thesis does not mean to put forward an ultimate answer, but rather, it attempts to approach the general issues of translators subjectivity.This thesis aims at conducting a more systematic and comprehensive study of the translator through his translating, his different roles played in different stages of translation activity and his strategies adopted in translating, his personalities, his cultural orientation and aesthetic consciousness etc. Its purpose is to reveal the significance of the translator in translation. The present thesis consists of 5 chapters. In chapter one, it introduces the translators status in the history of translation. In chapter two, it tells about the definition of subjectivity and its theory foundation. In chapter three, it probes into the factors influencing subjectivity. In chapter four, it introduces the author and the novel. In chapter five, it illustrates the manifestation of subjectivity in two Chinese versions of A Passage to India. In China, a systematic research on the translators subjectivity has been conducted in recent years, which contributes much to translation studies. However, studies in this direction are still on a preliminary level and remains to be furthered and expanded. The objective of this thesis is to draw peoples attention to this subject and to help carry on a mufti-dimensional and comprehensive study of the translator.2Chapter One Translators Status in the History of Translation1.1 The Marginal States of the Translator in the History of TranslationFor a long history in the human civilization, translation has functioned, contributing greatly to the development of culture. For a long time, the research studies about translation have mainly carried out from the perspective of the source text and language transformation. However, the translators special cultural status is rarely put in systematic and in-depth discussions. In both China and the West, the translator was ignored and depreciated.1.1.1 In ChinaThe self-centered consciousness in Chinese culture is the first reason why the translator was in a marginal status. During the long history of China, the Chinese culture always saw itself as the center of the world and was not inclined to communicate with other cultures. The prevailing status of Chinese culture helped form the intense self-centered consciousness.It is well-known that there were three major waves of translation in Chinese translation history: the translation of Buddhist scripture from the Han Dynasty to the North Song Dynasty, the scientific translation in the Ming and Qing Dynasties and the social science and the literary translation around the May 4th Movement of 1919.Although the three climaxes of translation have had great impacts on the development of Chinese culture, most of the foreign culture is only used as a tool of “cultural filtering and appropriation”. The ruling class in China with the emperor at the core of power once attached some importance to translation, which was then regarded as a supportive means of fulfilling certain political purposes.The first wave of translation, namely the translation of Buddhist sutras started in China in the Eastern Han Dynasty (25-220 AD). It lasted for more than one thousand years till about 1111 AD in the North Song Dynasty with a far-reaching influence on Chinese society and culture.However, the studies on the translator seemed to be rather meager in both weight and impact compared with the abundance of Buddhist sutras translations. Few people paid any attention to the translators in the period. One exception was the renowned monk Yan Qiong who viewed various aspects of the translator in his work On Dialectics. He argued that a qualified translator should have eight merits. Although he was referring to the translation of Buddhist sutras when he discussed those points, he covered a wide range of issues from the inner subjectivity of the translator to his command of translation skills, literary styles, as well as the source and target languages.The second wave of translation occurred six hundred years after the first wave, which lasted from the early seventeenth century to the middle of the eighteenth century. It was characterized by the booming of science translation for the purpose of invigorating the country. Therefore, translation was practiced for its social functions.Particularly from the early nineteenth century, translation was practiced with a view to saving the country from the dark domestic politics and external oppression.In the long period of the second wave of translation, translation was seen as a supplementary means to make up for the inadequacies of the Chinese cultural and social systems rather than an independent intellectual activity. Since the primary commission of translation was the fulfillment of social and practical purposes, seldom translation theorist paid attention to the discussions of the translator in this period.In contemporary China, around the May 4th Movement of 1919, translation practice became diversified, covering a wide range of texts from natural and social sciences to literature, and translation theories advanced from impressionistic comments to serious and in-depth reflections. Translation theory was gradually separated from translation practice and became an independent discipline.Nevertheless, studies on the translator still remain scanty in China except for a few random remarks by a few scholars like Lu Xun, Fu Lei and Qian Zhongshu.Lu Xun advocated that the translation should be easy to understand, but when “faithfulness” and “smoothness” became a contradiction, the translator should “rather to be faithful (in thought) than smooth (in language)” in order to preserve the spirit of the original work (Chen Fukang, 2000: 299).Fu Lei was a famous contemporary literary translator; he put forward “similarity in spirit” as a criterion. His views on translation are well illustrated through the following words by him, “As the effect is concerned, theoretically speaking, translating is just like painting from life which pursues similarity in spirit instead of similarity in form, but practically speaking, translating is much more difficult than painting from life”. This theory of “similarity in spirit” is considered a breakthrough in translation studies in China.A similar theory was proposed by Qian Zhongshu who expressed his views on translation in his article “On Lin Shus Translation” in 1954. He wrote that the highest standard in literary translation is “Transfiguration”. In traditional Chinese literary system, values and concepts, the original author enjoys a higher status, and thus the translator was unwilling to present him/herself as a translator. That is the second cause of the marginalization of the translator. It is found that most of those famous Chinese translators in history have more than one professional identity, such as writer, politician as well as translator. In most cases, they were much better known by their other identities. For instance, Liang Qichaos is remembered as a great thinker and influential statesman in modern Chinese history; Lu Xun and Qu Qiubai are worshiped as great revolutionaries and writers, and Zhu Guangqian as an aesthetician and philosopher. In general, their achievements in translation were overshadowed by their other achievements.Looking back at the long history of translation in China before the modern period, we can see that translation was taken as an instrument to help meet the social and political demands of the time. Almost no translators did translation for their own sake, nor could they earn their living by translating alone. So it was practiced in a rather free way and the translator even did not have to be a bilingual practitioner. A good command of foreign languages was only a desirable virtue for a translator rather than a prerequisite for his/her profession.Throughout the history of China, we find that except in the period of Buddhist translation, there were hardly any full-time translators. It can be summarized that the marginalization of the translator in Chinese history was the outcome of the complex combination of social and cultural influences. 1.1.2 In the WestIn the West, the translator has also been marginalized in society, literary and translation traditions. Firstly, the history of Bible translation greatly affected the translators status in western culture. Bible translation has flourished through the whole history of western translation. In the early history of western translation, particularly before the Renaissance, theories based on Bible translation were tinted with mystery, which insisted that translation cannot be carried out without divine inspirations. As a result, the translators initiative was totally denied and the translator himself was reduced to a recorder of divine edicts. Though more reasonable speculations on the translating of the Bible were presented later, it was still generally accepted before the Renaissance that the best way to convey the word of God was word for word translation. Therefore, it can be concluded that for a long time in the history of Bible translation the translator was regarded as the mouthpiece of God, which then became the historical roots of the low status of the translator in the western culture. Secondly, most of the later translators, particularly literary translators were great writers, (e.g.Victor Hugo and Baudelaire in France, Pope and Fitzgerald in England, Schiller and Goethe in Germany), and the quantity of their translations in general appeared dismal in contrast to those of their literary masterpieces. As for those ordinary translators, most of them were entrusted with translation tasks by their non-expert patrons who made the decisions about what the target texts should be like. In such cases, the translator did not have the right to choose the source text; neither could he/she guarantee her/his own status or the quality of his/her products.Finally, with the fast development of capitalism in the West, particularly in the twentieth century, the economic imbalance in the world resulted in the “narcissistic” (Venuti, 2004:15) cultural mentality in the most developed English speaking countries. English became the most important language in the world, and a great number of English works were translated into other languages, but not vice versa. Thus, the translator became “invisible” in the Anglo-American cultures, and the translators invisibility, in accordance to Venuti, is symptomatic of a complacency in Anglo-American relations with cultural others, a complacency that can be described without too much exaggeration-as imperialistic abroad and xenophobic at home. To conclude, the conservative (or narcissistic) cultural mentality of the developed western countries became a new cause o