（英语语言文学专业论文）论文化翻译中译者的文化主体性——从解释学角度来看《论语》两个英译本.pdf

descriptive chinese abstract 摘摘 要要 译者主体性问题是近年来国内外翻译学界的热点问题。随着翻译的“文化转向”的 提出，文化翻译作为一种新的翻译观为译者主体性问题的研究提供了更为广阔的空间， 译者主体性正是在文化翻译的观照下才得以彰显出来的。 以苏珊 巴斯奈特和安德烈 勒 费弗尔为代表的“翻译研究派”提出了“翻译就是文化改写”的观点，无疑将译者的地 位提升到了一个前所未有的高度。因此，将译者主体性置于文化翻译一种作为文化 交流和构建的翻译观的背景中来探讨目的在于强调译者作为文化存在的主体性， 即 译者所具有的文化主体性。 翻译的过程即理解的过程。解释学的一个基本理念是理解并非对原文的复制，而是 对文本做出创造性地阐释。这就从理论上肯定了译者的创造性：译者在翻译过程中并非 只是文本的被动接受者， 而是意义生成的主体。 译者主体性的发挥与其前理解密切相关， 前理解即先在性，它的形成源于影响个人的历史文化传统、意识形态、生活阅历、文学 素养、审美情趣等因素。前理解贯穿于整个翻译过程，影响译者的翻译策略。不同的译 者由于具有不同的前理解结构，形成不同的视域，译者通过与原文本的对话产生不同的 “视域融合” ，从而有了不同译本的出现。 论语 这一承载着中国传统文化精神的典型文本在中西交流过程中一直起着举足 轻重的作用，其英译本长期以来就是翻译学界以及其他人文领域讨论的焦点。不同论 语英译本之间的对比研究使译者主体性问题的探讨从理论具体到了实践层面。文化翻 译理论在文化层面对翻译所作的反思可以解释论语不同时期英译本的巨大差异，本 文在这一理论的指导下对论语理雅各译本和安乐哲译本进行对比研究是具有实际意 义的。文章通过分析认为理雅各译本是基于文化中心主义基础上的语言翻译代表作品， 而安乐哲译本则是基于多元化理论的文化翻译典范， 它更在事实层面证实了文化翻译的 可能性。两位译者作为不同的翻译主体在其译作中分别展现出了不同的文化主体性。 文章还借用解释学中另一个重要概念“理解的历史性” ，对译本的永恒性提出了质 疑， 认为在文化翻译这一翻译新视角下产生的安乐哲译本也只是一定历史时期理论思潮 影响下激起的反应，因此重译现象将不可避免。翻译的“文化转向”问题应该是一个历 史性命题。 关键词：译者文化主体性；文化翻译；解释学； 论语 ；理雅各；安乐哲关键词：译者文化主体性；文化翻译；解释学； 论语 ；理雅各；安乐哲 english abstract abstract translators subjectivity has become a subject of great topical interest in translation studies. with the emergence of “cultural turn” in translation studies, a wider stage has been set for the issue of translators subjectivity. andre lefevere and susan bassnett, two advocators of the “cultural turn” in translation studies, hold the view that “translation is rewriting” which has promoted the visibility of translators status into an unprecedented degree compared with the traditional translation theories. cultural translation aims to emphasize the fact that translators are cultural beings and they reveal cultural subjectivity in the process of translating. theoretically speaking, hermeneutic approach of translation studies confirms translators creativity, for one of its basic notions is that understanding means creative interpretation of a text. in other words, translators are not passive receptors but meaning creators whose translation products will be interpreted by target readers. the exercising of translators subjectivity is intricately associated with their pre-understandings. pre-understanding or pre-existing which is possessed by every language user, originates from social and cultural traditions that influence a persons ideology, life experience, literary cultivation and aesthetic taste, etc. pre-understanding, hence, pervades translation process all through and affects the methods translators use. as different translators own different pre-understandings, they may form distinctive horizons and create special “fusion of horizons” which are fully displayed in their translations. the analects, long considered as a collection of the quintessence of chinese traditional culture, weighs a lot in the intercommunication between china and the west. the study of its english translations has been a focus in translation studies as well as other related field of the humanities. in the perspective of cultural translation, the thesis, based on a comparative study on the different english versions of the analects, discusses translators subjectivity from a theoretical level into a practical one. and specifically taking james legges and roger t. ames versions as analytical materials, it claims that legges version is a semantic translation grounded on cultural centralism whereas ames version is a cultural translation in view of pluralism. different cultural subjectivities of the two translators are unfolded through the analysis on their pre-understandings and fusion of horizons. borrowing another important hermeneutic concept of “historicality of understanding” indicating that understanding is historical, this thesis also proposes that roger t. ames version can be regarded as a reflection of the thoughts in a certain historical time, although it english abstract is recommended that his version is a model of cultural translation. as the concept of “historicality of understanding” oppugns the problem about the permanence of a translated version, retranslation cannot be avoided. therefore, the issue of “cultural turn” in translation should be a historical proposition. key words: translators cultural subjectivity; cultural translation; hermeneutics; the analects; james legge; roger t. ames 湘潭大学湘潭大学 学位论文原创性声明学位论文原创性声明 本人郑重声明：所呈交的论文是本人在导师的指导下独立进行研究所 取得的研究成果。除了文中特别加以标注引用的内容外，本论文不包含任 何其他个人或集体已经发表或撰写的成果作品。对本文的研究做出重要贡 献的个人和集体，均已在文中以明确方式标明。本人完全意识到本声明的 法律后果由本人承担。 作者签名： 日期： 年 月 日 学位论文版权使用授权书学位论文版权使用授权书 本学位论文作者完全了解学校有关保留、使用学位论文的规定，同意 学校保留并向国家有关部门或机构送交论文的复印件和电子版，允许论文 被查阅和借阅。本人授权湘潭大学可以将本学位论文的全部或部分内容编 入有关数据库进行检索，可以采用影印、缩印或扫描等复制手段保存和汇 编本学位论文。 涉密论文按学校规定处理。 作者签名： 日期： 年 月 日 导师签名： 日期： 年 月 日 introduction 1 introduction nowadays, communication between and among different nations is becoming more and more frequent with the rapid process of globalization, which undoubtedly brings about cultural exchanges and conflicts. although there may be different means by which the exchanges can be achieved and the conflicts resolved, translation is regarded as the most useful modern medium to serve both purposes. the turn of the 20th century has witnessed a big boom in the circle of translation studies both at home and abroad. in western academia, postmodernism theories, including feminism, deconstructionism and postcolonialism, mushroomed in the field of translation studies. since the late period of 1980s, translation studies has began to be cultural-oriented, which brings about new dimensions and approaches of translation studies. with the appearance of postmodernism theories, a group of rising forces in translation studies such as andre lefevere and susan bassnett, have advocated that translation studies should move away from the linguistic approach to enjoy the “cultural turn”. they call for an incorporation of culture as part of translation rather than the linguistic transfer of different languages. they also claim that translation should be observed from the exterior cultural context, social elements, ideologies and political powers, etc. in light of this vision, “translation is a rewriting of the original text.”(lefevere, 2004: ) andre lefevere and susan bassnett who are two pioneers in this field, have first explored the interactive relations between translation and cultural intervention in their masterpiece translation, history, culture. this book marks that translation studies officially takes the “cultural turn” which has been considered as the most exciting development in western translation studies since the 1990s. chinese scholars of translation have also moved into the cultural perspective since the 1990s. they have published many academic papers and books dwelling on the subject. in recent years, a heated discussion has been held on which strategies should be taken under cultural context dealing with literary translation. professor sun zhilis statement that foreignization will be the preferred strategy of literary translation in china in the 21st century arouses immediate interest in the translation circle. it is a debate on domestication and foreignization. mr. cai ping points out that “as a translation strategy, foreignization or introduction 2 domestication is primarily concerned with form. relating the two strategies to the aim of translation, domestication should be preferred to foreignization”(cai ping, 2002:35). he concludes that domestication should be the main strategy in literary translation. but mr. xu jianping and zhang rongxi advance that “in order to achieve cross-cultural communication in english-chinese translation, foreignization should be appreciated, with supplementary domestication, while in chinese-english translation, domestication should be used as much as possible”(xu jianping deconstructionist translation theory also subverts translators marginal position in traditional translation studies. walter benjamin declares that “translation provides the after-life of a text, enabling it to survive and sometimes even resurrecting it.the task of the translator is simply a different kind of writing task, and it follows on from the primary task of reading.” (bassnett, 2001: 66) without its after-life original texts cannot survive and thrive in a new cultural system. the view that translators are at least equally important as original authors justifies translators authority to a great extent, and it also broadens the scope of translation studies; feminist translation theory focuses its attention on target text, translators and the disapproval of the utmost authority of the source text. its representative theorists are barbara godard and sherry simon, who claim that the misunderstanding of treating the source text as introduction 4 man and translation as woman not only devalues translators and translation but also implies discrimination against women; postcolonialism compares translation to cannibalism (mundy, 2001:136) which reveals that translators produce the receptor text only after they devour and digest the original text. hence the process of translation involves a high degree of active manipulation of the source text. this view highlights the translators active role, and it no longer considers translation a secondary and derivative genre. from these translation schools viewpoints, we can find that the translators humble status does not exist any more with the appearance of “cultural turn”, instead, increasing attention has been paid to the subject status of the translator. as a result, the exploration of the translators subjectivity has been put on the agenda of translation studies. all translation, especially literary translation, is basically constructed on understanding and comprehension of the source text. this characteristic of translation studies defines its close relationship with hermeneutics. “understanding means creative interpretation of a text,”(hong handing, 2001:2) which has much in common with the essence of literary translation. hermeneutics has long been combined with translation studies. it concentrates on the issue of understanding what is being said in a text, and sheds new light on considering the process of interaction between literary texts and receptors. in view of this sense, the subjects in translation are the subjects of interpretation. so it is proper to choose hermeneutics as a tool to analyze the realization of the translators subjectivity. hermeneutics, as a strong support in analyzing the translators subjectivity, emphasizes translators active interpretation of the source text. the translator is no longer a passive recipient of meaning but an active and creative agent in the making of meaning under this perspective. he cannot be excluded from his pre-understanding structure in the complex process of interaction with the source text, and the translation version is a reflection of his own mental outlook as well as idiosyncratic feature. this thesis attempts to discuss the translators cultural subjectivity in cultural translation on the basis of a hermeneutic study on two english versions of the analects, one of the most outstanding confucius works. since the publication of the first latin version of the analects, confucius has exerted his influence on the west for more than three hundred years. some leading figures have developed an overwhelming admiration for confucian thought through introduction 5 their english versions of the analects. james legge (1815-1897) is one of those representatives. the most important characteristic of legges translation is his attempt to be faithful to the chinese classical works as much as possible, in terms of both content and form. having been considered as a model translation since its appearance, legges version still enjoys its stable status today. however, the reality is that chinese culture has been largely degraded in its position by western scholars through centuries. rooted in the western tradition of eurocentrism, they arrogantly depict or create the image of china according to their one-sided imagination. in order to get rid of this restriction, roger t. ames , as a pioneering force in modern sinology and philosophy, shares the color of some thoughts in postmodernism in his english version of the analects. he claims that when chinese classics are translated into english the translation should first show respect to chinese philosophy and we would better preserve the original flavor of the text to the large extent. chinese philosophy has its own voice which deserves western attention. a meaningful comparison between cultures under the context of globalization lies in observing the rising of different cultural horizons. it is significant to make a comparative study of the above two versions as their translations are products of exercising their subjectivities under different historical circumstances. the process of both translators translation contains two major steps: understanding and interpretation. hermeneutics, loosely defined as the theory of the interpretation of meaning, can be applied to explain how this process is possible and to render accounts of meanings in the face of the fact that they are mediated by the interpreters own subjectivity. this thesis proposes to, analyzing translators subjectivity from a comparative study on two english versions of the analects from a hermeneutic perspective, addressing the need for incorporating culture as part of translation studies. it is presented in three chapters in addition to introduction and conclusion. introduction is a literature review of this thesis, ranging from the source of this thesis, the theoretical framework to the significance of this thesis. chapter one begins with the definition of subjectivity and lays its emphasis on the translators cultural subjectivity from a hermeneutic perspective. chapter two is mainly a case study of the two english versions of the analects, introduction 6 analyzing the issues of translating purpose, translators cultural attitude as well as the translation method of the central concept. a further interpretation on the key concepts translation by ames from the perspective of cultural translation has been done in the later part of this chapter. the embodiment of ames pre-understanding structure and fusion of horizon in his translation can be regarded as an efficient contribution to the development of cultural translation. it concludes that translators subjectivity plays an essential role in the process of cultural translation. chapter three is a reconsideration of this thesis. borrowing the concept of “historicality of understanding” from hermeneutics, this chapter reflects that translators cultural subjectivity is a historical phenomenon and there is not a permanent model translation in history. retranslation cannot be avoided and cultural translation leaves us much room to rethink the criteria and principles of translation. the last part serves as a conclusion of this thesis. it concludes the cultural subjectivity of the translator could promote the development of cultural translation. chapter i cultural subjectivity and its hermeneutic understanding 7 chapter i cultural subjectivity and its hermeneutic understanding 1.1 definition of subjectivity in cultural translation 1.1.1 translator: a cultural subject in translation culture, according to word origin, has two meanings. in the narrow sense, it means the totality of spiritual values created in any giving society, including politics, economy, ethics, religion, social customs and habits, traditional arts and social relationship etc. in the broad sense, it means all the material and spiritual wealth made by mankind. according to the definition, culture is all-embracing and language is a proper part of it. more specifically concerned with language and translation, newmark(1988:94) defines “culture” as “the way of life and its manifestations that are peculiar to a community that uses a particular language as its means of expression”, acknowledging that each language group has its own culturally specific features. he further clearly states that operationally he does “not regard language as a component or feature of culture”(newmark, 1988:95) in direct opposition to the view taken by vermeer who states that “language is part of a culture”(1989:222) according to newmark, vermeers stance would imply the impossibility of translation, whereas for vermeer, translating the source language (sl) into a suitable form of target language(tl) is part of the translators role in transcultural communication. discussing the problems of correspondence in translation, nida (1964:130) confers equal importance to both linguistic and cultural differences between the sl and the tl and concludes that “differences between cultures may cause more severe complications for the translator than do differences in language structure”. it is further explained that parallels in culture often provide a common understanding despite significant formal shifts in the translation. lotmans theory states that “no language can exist unless it is steeped in the context of culture，and no culture can exist which does not have at its centre, the structure of natural language.”(lotman,1978:211-32) bassnett (1980:13-14)underlines translating by stating that language is the heart within the body of culture, the survival of both aspects being chapter i cultural subjectivity and its hermeneutic understanding 8 interdependent. linguistic notions of transferring meaning are seen as being only part of the translation process and “a whole set of extra-linguistic criteria” must also be considered. as b