电影《长安三万里》与许渊冲译本中诗歌翻译对比研究

CHAPTER1Introduction1.1ResearchbackgroundPoetry,thetreasureofChinesetraditionalculture,embodiesnumerousimagesandemotionalstrengththatmapthenation’suniquespiritandaestheticorientation.However,translatingpoetryposesahugechallengeinthefieldofcross-culturalcommunicationduetodifferencesinlanguageandculture.Thetranslatorneedstohaveadeepunderstandingoftheconnotationandartisticconceptionoftheoriginalpoem,whileconsideringtheculturalpreferencesofthetargetreceivers,strivingtoreproducetheartisticcharminanotherlanguage.Manyscholarshaveproposedtheirownprinciplesforpoetrytranslation,likefidelity,fluencyandestheticvalue.Therefore,translatingpoetryisachallengingandartistictask.Effectivepoetictranslationplaysacrucialroleinfacilitatingbroadercross-culturalinteractions.Withtheaccelerationofglobalization,Chinesepoetryhasbeendisseminatedinternationallythroughvariousforms,includingliterature,academicworks,andvisualmedia.Indeed,thetranslationofpoetrybecomesurgentlynecessary.Itopenschannelsforcross-culturalcommunication,preventingliteraryworksfrombeingconfinedtotheirplaceoforigin.Throughtranslation,peopleoutsidetheChineseculturalculturecontextcanappreciateChinesepoetryfromanewperspective,extendingitsvitalityandexpandingitssphereofinfluence.However,poetrytranslationdiffersintwodistinctmedia—filmsubtitlesandwrittentranslations.Basedondiversifieddemandsofculturaltransmission,varioustranslationapproachesshouldbeadoptedfordifferentpurposes.Itcanbeobservedthatthepoetrytranslationinthefilmfocusesonemotionandaccessibility,whilewrittentranslationemphasizesliteraryaestheticsandculturaldepth.Intendedtoexploresuitabletranslationstrategiesforthecross-culturalspreadofpoetry,thisthesisidentifiesthesimilaritiesanddifferencesbetweenfilmsubtitletranslationandwrittentranslation.1.2ResearchquestionandobjectiveThisqualitativestudyemploysacomparativeanalysisframeworktoexplorethestrengthsandlimitationsofdifferenttranslationmethodologies,choosingthepoemsrichinChinesecultureastheobjects:OneisthepoeticversesintheanimatedfilmChang’anasmultimodalrepresentations;TheotheristhesignificanttranslationofclassicalChinesepoetrybyprofessorXuYuanchong,arenownedChinesetranslator.Bycomparingthesetwocases,thestudyaimstoexaminetheirrespectivefeaturesforculturalappreciationacrossdifferentmedia.Herearetheresearchquestions:HowdothetranslationstrategiesdifferbetweenfilmsubtitlesandXuYuanchong’swrittentranslationsintermsoflanguage,culture,andemotion?Howdomultimodalelements(e.g.,visuals,sound)influencethepresentationofpoetryinfilmscomparedtowrittentranslations?1.3SignificanceExtanttranslationofpoemsinarangeofmediaplaysanimportantroleinenhancingforeigners’understanding.Intheory,byidentifyingthesimilaritiesanddifferencesbetweenfilmsubtitletranslationandwrittentranslation,thisstudymovesbeyondthetraditionaltext-basedapproachintranslationresearch,broadeningthefieldofcomparativeanalysisbyconductingthequalitativeresearchfromthecross-mediaperspective,agapnotexploredyet.What’smore,bycomparingthetemporalandspatialconstraintsoffilmsubtitleswiththemeaningfuldepthembeddedinliterarypoetictranslations,thisprojectusesanewperspectiveandtakesthemultimodalsignalsintoaccount,thusofferingsuitabletranslationstrategiesforthecross-culturalspreadofpoetry.Inpractice,italsoprovidesmethodologiesforculturalstudiescenteredonTangpoetry,enhancingtheeffectivenessofculturaldissemination.InthecontextofincreasingglobalinterestinChineseculture,thisstudyseekstouncoverhowdifferenttranslationapproachesrespondtothedemandsofculturaltransmission,audiencereception,andmedium-specificconstraints,highlightingthediversityoftranslationapproachesfordifferentpurposes.

CHAPTER2Literaturereview2.1StudiesonpoetrytranslationPoetryisatypical“expressive”functionaltext,whosetranslationisoneofthetrickiestchallengesinliterarytranslation,whichowestoitsspecialstyle.Thepoet’scognitivefeelingsarenaturallyintegratedintothetextualverses,richlinguisticconnotationandpleasantlanguage.Mu(2000)manifestsinfivedimensions:distinctivemusicality,richimagination,implicitmeaning,uniquelanguage,andperceptibleimagery.Whenitcomestoitstranslation,RobertFrostsaid,“Poetryiswhatgetslostintranslation.”Intheprocessofinterlingualconversion,theconflictofformandcontentishardtobalance.Nevertheless,scholarslikeZhao(1996)criticizethosewhoareexcessivelynegativetowardsthis,arguingthatthephanopoeia(imagery),melopoeia(sound)andlogopoeia(phrases)ofpoetrycanbereproducedthrougheffectivestrategies.Thetranslationofpoetrymainlypresentsthreemainproblems,inabilitytopreservepoeticform,inabilitytoreproducepoeticstyle,andinabilitytoconveypoeticflavor.Abouttheinabilitytopreservepoeticform,formmateriallyfunctionsasthesemioticcodesformeaning,anddifferentformsexpressdifferentmeanings(Huang,2003).Itcanbedefinedasvariousrepresentations—thedistributionforwordweight,thedensityofrhyme,thespeedofrhythm,syntacticrules,aswellasthetonalfeatures.Nevertheless,rigidconversionwilltypicallyobstructtheoverallmeaningandcausesemanticoverload.Wang(2008)advocatesfor“translatingpoetryinthepoeticway”,whichmeansatranslatormustfaithfullyconveythecontent,artisticessence,andemotionsofthesourcepoem.Themetricalstructureshouldgenerallyfollowtheoriginalrhyme.Strivingtoapproximatetheoriginalisconsideredcrucialtocaptureitsvitalityorprecision,particularlywhentranslatingitsimagery.Butthereisnoneedtorigidlyadheretoastandardcharacterperline.Fortheinabilitytoreproducepoeticstyle,SoameJenynsbelievedthat“Translatingpoetryisfutile,asthebeautyofpoetryliesinhowthepoetexpressesit.”ForChinesepoems,phoneticeleganceisamajorcharacteristic,especiallythetonalpatterns,suchaslevelandobliquetones.ThemonosyllabicnatureofChinesecharactersandthepolysyllabicnatureofEnglishwordsalsocreateinherentlydifferentstresspatterns.What’smore,thereexistssyntacticdivergence.Thestrongneedforfunctionwordslikearticles,pronouns,orconjunctionsinEnglishtoachievecoherencedeterioratesinChinesepoems,soclarityandconcisenessishardtobalance(Mu,2000).Rhythmandmeterfurthermakeahugedistinctionbetweentwodifferenttones,asanancientpoemisanorganicwholecomposedofwordsarrangedaccordingtoacertainformatandrules.Thesefundamentaldifferencesmakeitnearlyimpossibletoreplicatetheoriginalintegritywithoutalteringthepreviousarrangement.Asoftheinabilitytoconveypoeticflavor,thecontentofpoetryisinevitablyreflectedinthelinguisticform,andpoeticlanguageusesimagery,metaphors,symbols,andothertechniquestoconveyprofoundmeanings.Thiscanbecalled“aestheticincompleteness”—deliberatelyholdingbackinneremotionstoignitethereader’sexploration,thusmakingpoetryimplicitandprofoundinmeaning(Turner,1976).Forexample,manywordsandphraseshaveacquiredcertainfixedmeaningsinChinesepoetryafterlong-termuse.Ifdirectlytranslated,readersindifferentculturalcontextswillnotexperiencethiskindofassociation,whichforms“undertranslation”—awayoftranslationfailure(Yang&Liu,2005).2.2StudiesonsubtitleswithpoetrytranslationScholarshaveexaminedmethodsanddifficultiesofpoetrytranslationindepth,yetthereexistsanurgentneedtofocusonpoetryinvideos,duetotheincreasinginterestindigitallydisseminatedanimationfilmsnowadays.Tobespecific,currentresearchaboutpoetrytranslationinfilmspredominantlyfocusesonthefeatures,translationstrategies,andchallenges.2.2.1CharacteristicsandtranslationstrategiesofpoetryinfilmsEarlyresearchonpoetrytranslationinfilmreviewstheuniquecharacteristicsofvideotexts.Shao(2009)identifieskeytraitsofvideotexts:(1)Itspreadsthroughbothsoundandimage;(2)Non-linguisticelementssignificantlyimpactthemeaning;(3)Languageelementsandnon-languageelementsworksimultaneously;(4)Thesubtitlecanbereplicableduetotimeandspaceconstraints.Scholarsabroadalsoadvocatethatpoetrysubtitletranslationshouldprioritizeconciseness,adheretoaccuratemeaning,andminimizeinterferencewiththeaudience’svisualenjoyment.Asaresult,therearestrictregulationsonfontsizeandwordcountperline,usuallyrestrictingthecontenttoonetotwolinesatthebottomofthescreen.Insummary,thesubtitletranslationofpoetrystrivestoconveytheoriginalcodes,thoughtsandemotionstothemaximumextentundertheduallimitationsoftimeandspacewhileachievingculturaltransformationfromthesourcelanguagetothetargetlanguage.Overtime,scholarshaveproposedvarioustranslationstrategiesforpoetryinfilms.Zhao(2005)putsforwardthat,inordertoeliminateredundantinformationwithinthemoviesymbols,translatorscanadoptvariousmethods,suchassimplifyingtheoriginaltext,omittingrepetitivelanguage,fillerwordsandnegativequestions,rewritingtheoriginaltext,andsynchronizingsubtitlesandgestures.Li(2001)proposesthatitisbettertoemploya“directway”(直入式),whentranslatingculturalelements,whichisexplainedasliteraltranslationortransliterationinthesourcelanguage,duetotheconstraintsoftimeandspace.Translatorsshouldminimizeusingthe“domesticationway”(归化式),“fusionway”(融合式),and“interpretiveway”(诠释式)asmuchaspossible.Whenitcomestoculturelikepoetry,subtitlesnolongerneedtoemphasizetheoriginalexoticfeeling,butratherserveasinterpreterstoaidunderstanding.Besidesdiscussingthatpoetrytranslationinthemediamustbecompatiblewiththecinema,Kaindl(2013)alsoproposespracticaltipsforit,includingparaphrasing,omissionofcomplexelements,orcreativereimagining.However,challengespersisted.Zhao(2008)highlightsthatsubtitletranslationalsoneedstoaddressthechallengescommonlyfoundintraditionalverses.Forexample,wordscontainingculturalelementsandspecificmaterials,requiretranslatorstohaveasolidlanguagefoundationandadeepunderstandingofthepoems.ScholarslikeChenandQian(2013)arguethattranslationstrategiesshouldbealignedwiththeoveralltheme.Methodssuchasadding,reducing,andomittingarenotcompletelydetermined,butarefluidaccordingtothepurpose,age,educationlevel,andreadinghabitsofthetargetaudience(Sun&Yuan,2015).Ifwecomparetheirstrategies,wecanfindthattheirchoicesaretask-oriented,thatistosay,thetranslationtaskdeterminestheconcretestrategies.Consequently,forpoetrytranslation,whilemaintainingfidelityandfluency,aestheticvalueandculturalconnotationsshouldalsoberespectedtoavoidculturalmisunderstandings.However,italwaysgoesagainsttheconstraintofscreentexts,whichcomplicatestheperformanceofpoeticfeatures.Atthesametime,Bassnett(1980)emphasizesthatitisdifficulttosimplifythetranslationwithinthetimeandspaceconstraintsoffilms,whileretainingpoetry’sessentialelements.Forwrittenverses,readerscanrepeatedlyreadafewlines,whileitisnotallowedinthecinemawithinfleetingmoments.Ifdrawn,thetranslatedtextsonscreenarelowinquality.Equivalencetranslationisoftenchallengedbyhugeculturaldifferences,asvividexpressions,representativedialectsandhistoricalvocabularymanyinChinesemaybemoreorless“lost”intheprocessoftranslation(Yang&Liu,2005).Followingtheseinitialcontributions,the2000ssawaboomintheinterestinthebenefitsofsubtitlestranslation.Li(2001)believesthatsubtitletranslationwilllargelybenefitfromnon-linguisticcues,suchassynchronizedvisuals,accompanyingmusic,naturalsounds,andtheintonation,whichcanhelpconveytheemotionalessenceofthepoem.Whenitcomestoliteraryversions,screenlimitationsalsoprovidealotofopportunitiesforcreativetranslation,especiallyforthestrategyofclevercondensation,whichrequiresidentifyingandretainingthekeyinformation.Forexample,recombinetheoriginalverse,whichalsoconveystheintendedmeaning.Itnotonlyreducestheworkloadofreaders,butalsoenhancestheintellectualfabricofthetranslatedversion,finallymakingtheclassicalpoemconvenientforforeignreaderstoaccept(Huang,2000).Allinall,inthispart,itcanbefoundoutthatacademicopinionsdiffertowardstranslationforpoetryinfilms.Howtoseekcompromiseandachieveflexibilityisaproblemtobesolved.2.2.2MultimodaltranslationofpoetryThesubtitleisthebridgeformoviegoerstounderstandthecontentofthemovie,playingafundamentalroleintheculturalexchange.Withthedevelopmentoffilmmakingtechnology,filmdramasperfectlypursueamultimodalaesthetic,combiningimages,soundeffects,symbols,actions,etc.,inordertoprovideadiversifiedviewingexperience.Therefore,simpleliteraltranslationofpoeticelementsisnotenough,higherrequirementsarise,thatis,theconnectionandinterplaybetweenimages,poems,soundsandothermodalities.Peoplecometo“see”movies,notto“read”them.Basedonthis,itisaninevitabletrendtostudypoetry’ssubtitletranslationbasedonmultimodaldiscourseanalysis.Inregardtothechallengesfacingpoetryinthedigitalworld,Koskimaa(2007)arguesthatadualchallengestemsfromliterature’sstatusastranscendingtheboundariesbetweenbooks,thestage,andtheelectronicmedia.Thischallengeinvolvesbothacknowledgingandmaintainingthespecificityofthepoeticdiscourseandunderminingtheoverallmedialandscape,includingvariousfilms.Attheturnofthecentury,thefieldevolvedwiththeintroductionofrelatedtheory,whichhasbeenadoptedtoconductin-depthanalysis,mainlydoneathome.Bycombiningtheetymologicalandphilosophicaldimensions,Wang(2016)pointsoutthefailureforCummings’stranslationliesininadequatelyconveyingthevisualandauditorymodalitiesoftheoriginalpoems.Suchresearchhasgraduallybeenextendedoutsidetheaudiovisualfield,asHu(2021)underscores

picture-textconversioninWangWei’spaintingpoems,appreciatingtheculturalandtheideologicalconnotationofthepoem.Lateron,Xin&Wang(2024)adoptmultimodaldiscoursetheory(Kress,2009)and“literaryhermeneutics”(Li,2022)toexplorethecoordinationoflinguisticfidelityandothermulti-mediaelements.Bai(2024)exploresthecharacteristicsofclassicalChinesepoetrytranslationinfilm,summarizingthedifferenceandconnectionbetweenvisualartandimaginativeart.Abroad,asignificantbreakthroughoccurredwhentherewereafewcorpus-basedstudies.Li(2003)constructsamultimodalpoetrytranslationcorpustoprovidestrongdatasupportfortranslators.Lin(2020)reportstranslatingaChinesewrittenpoemintoasignedpoem,wheremultimodalelementsinteractandco-existintheprocessoftranslation.Allinall,inthisfield,relatedworkcanbegroupedintotwotypes:theoryframework-drivenandtranslationstrategy-driven.Theformerincludesfunctionalequivalencetheory,ecologicaltranslationtheory,andmultimodaldiscourse,thelatterlistsvariousmethodstopreservetheaestheticandsynchronizepoemswithvisual,andauditorymodalities.However,thereisstillnospecificmodeofholisticanalysisfornon-verbalmodesandpoems.Thisuncertaintyconfusestheinterpretationofimageandmusic,makingtheanalysisofsubtitletranslationambiguous.Lookingforward,thestudyshouldfocusonpositiontranslationstrategyindifferentcombinationsofmodalities,therebyensuringthepreservationoftheclassicalpoem’s

structuralintegrityandphoneticequivalence.2.3StudiesonXuYuanchong’spoetrytranslationXuYuanchong,arenownedtranslationscholarandpractitioner,hasplayedavitalroleinbringingChinesepoetrytotheglobalaudiencethroughhiswrittentranslations.OpposingthemechanicalapplicationofWesterntheories,hisworksemphasize“ThreeBeauties”,thatisbeautyinsense,beautyinsoundandbeautyinform.Hestatesthat“Weshouldexertourselvestoconveythebeautyinsoundoftheoriginalworkundertheprovisionoffaithfulreproductionoftheoriginalbeautyinsense,furthermore,weshouldtryourutmosttoconveythebeautyinformofthesourcetextundertheprovisionofboththereproductionoftheoriginalbeautyinsenseandsound:inaword,weshouldmakethegreatestendeavortoreproducetheoriginalbeautyinsense,insoundandformcomprehensively(Xu,1992)”.Inotherwords,hebelievestheglamourofclassicalChinesepoetryliesinthecombinationofitsexplicitsense,melodioussound,andvisuallypleasantform.2.3.1StudiesonXu’sprinciplesof“threebeauties”AsofthereviewofXuYuanchong’spoetrytranslation,bothdomesticandinternationalresearchhighlightshisinnovativeideasandculturalsignificance.Athome,his“threebeautiestheory”hasgaineddeepapplication,whichemergesasafundamentalapproachtopoetrytranslation.Zhu(2018)recognizesXu’sbeliefthattranslationmustprioritizetheartofliteraryexpression,thusbridgingculturalgapsandrestoringliteraryelegance.Zhu(2019)alsopraiseshisideasnotonlyforpreservingmultipleflavorsofChinesepoems,butalsoforhisconcentrationonthetranslator’ssubjectivityandaudience’sreception,thusaddressingthetensionbetweenliteralandfreetranslation.Furthermore,theessenceofleveragingChineseadvantagesgainsscholars’applause,overcomingthecontradictionsarisingfromlinguisticdifferencesduringthetranslation(Li&Yan,2020).Abroad,thestudymainlyunderscoresXuYuanchong’sabilitytopossessadoublenationalculturalidentity.Fromthepost-colonialperspective,Wang

(2016)elaboratesXu’shybriditywhenconductingpoetictranslation.Bydrawingonthetheoryoftranslation

sociology,Xu(2024a)examinestheinfluenceofsocietalfactorssuchasfamily,school,andtheacademicopiniononhistranslationthought,sortingoutoriginsof“translatingChineseintoforeignlanguages”.Hefurtherexaminesthisprofessor’sspiritof“theUnityofOpposites”(2024b),manifestingastheunitybetweenlanguageandculture,seekingcommonfeaturesandreservingdifferencesforChineseandWesternliterature.Thesestudiesstrengthentheimportanceofthetranslator’sidentityandsubjectivity,buildingthefoundationthat“translationisacreativeart”.Still,XuherecriticizesthisprofessorforputtingChineseandWesterntranslationtheoriesagainsteachother,highlightingthedisadvantageof“theTheoryofRivalryandExcellence”(2024b).Heproposesdilemmassuchashowtoachievethecombinationof“threebeauties”andhowtomaximizetheunityofconveyingexoticflavorsandleveragingtheoriginaladvantagesintranslation.Oneinternationalscholar,Duczek(2024),usesthematicanalysistoevaluateboththestrengthsandlimitationsofthe“threebeautiestheory”indisplayingtheoriginalpoems’culturaldepthandartisticintegrity.Inaword,uponXu’stranslationtheory,academiamainlydiscussesitsorigins,featuresandsignificance,usinghistranslationtextsasexamples.Despitesomecontroversies,mostscholarsrecognizehiscontributioninliterarydiscourseforthegoing-outstrategy.2.3.2CriticalreceptionofXu’stranslationpracticeForover60years,XuYuanchonghastranslatedalargenumberofTangpoemsandSonglyrics,aswellasotherChineseliteraryclassicssuchasTheBookofSongs,ChuCi,etc.ThereareplentyofworksaimedatassessingthewrittentextsofXuYuanchong.Inabroadsense,Xu’stranslationgainsunimaginablepopularityamongacademicfield,suchasChangJian’swell-knownpoeticverses“山光悦鸟性，潭影空人心into”“Inmountain’sauraflyingbirdsfeelpleasure;Inshadedpoolacarefreemindfindsleisure”,andhistranslationofoneofthegreatestpoetsLiuZongyuan’s“千山鸟飞绝，万径人踪灭”into“Fromhilltohillnobirdinflight;Frompathtopathnomaninsight.”Allofthesecanbetherepresentativeinterpretersof“threebeautytheory”.Thisoriginalperiodwitnessedtheemergenceofcertaintranslationmethodsforachievingvariouseffects.Gu(1998)emphasizesXu’screativetechniquesandhisroleindealingwithdomesticationandforeignization,showingXu’scontributioninharmonizingaestheticessenceandglobalunderstanding.Hu(1999)investigatesthetranslationofrhetoricdevices,appreciatingthatitreproducestheprofoundmeaningandbroadrealmoftheoriginalwork,throughskillfulsentencestructureandcarefulwordchoices.Tobespecific,Tian(2022)paysattentiontotherhymingandsymmetricaleffectsofTangpoetryinthetargettext.Studiesalsofocusoncombiningphilosophicalbeliefwithtranslationpractices.Forinstance,Xu(2024b)associatestriadicthoughtwiththreetypesoftranslationmethods:generalization,equalization,andparticularization,correspondingly.Insummary,thesescholarsrecognizeXu’stranslationintermsofexcellentqualityandlargequantity.Hisworkstandsoutwiththebroadrealmandprofoundmeaning,depictingthetangibleandetherealbeautyofthesourcetexts,andaligningwith“threebeautytheory”and“translationisacreativeart”.ThisrecognitionunderscoresXu’ssignificantcontributionstothefieldoftranslation.However,overtime,academiadiffersuponLiurevealsseveralerrorsinMr.Xu’stheorypractice.Liu(1982)buildsuponthiscontributionbyarguingthatXu’spursuitinmatchingasamenumberofwordsandsentencesisunnecessaryandimpractical,leadingtoamorenuancedunderstandingofXu’stranslation.criticizesXu’stranslation,a.HecontendsthatthetheoryofemphasizingsoundsimilarityinChineseisnothelpfulinEnglishpoetry,asthereisnohabitofusingasinglerhymetotheend.Liu(1986)thenarguesthathistranslationexcessivelyemphasizesform,suchasrhythm,soundsimilarityandequalcharacters,attheexpenseofexactcontent.Similarly,Zhang(2022)criticizesthatXu’stranslationreliesontoomanydomesticationelementsandignorestheuseofforeignization,leadingtooutdatedlanguageandalackoffreshness.Xubelievesitisnecessarytoadoptthe“threetransformations”translationstrategy—particularization,generalizationandequalization(深化，浅化，等化).Translatorsshouldprioritizeusingparticularization,thusleveragingtheadvantagesofthetargetlanguage,whichisoneofthereasonswhyZhangcritiquesXu.Xuassertsthattheultimategoalofliterarytranslationcanbeachievedinthisway—tomakethetranslationdelectable(使读者乐之).XuYuanchongbelievesthattheultimategoalofliterarytranslationistoproducetranslatedliterature,meaningthatthetranslatedworksthemselvesshouldbeasoutstandingastheliteraryworks.However,ZhangblamesthefailureofXu’stranslationonhisconservativeandidealisticperspective.ThissectionfocusesonthediscussionofXu’scontributiontoliterarytranslationandsomecriticismaboutinadequatetranslationpractice.Intermsof“beautyinsense”,henotonlyexpressesthesurfaceformoftheoriginalworkandmeaningbetweenwordsbutalsoshowcasesthedeepmeaningandimpliedemotions.Intermsof“beautyinsound”,hevaluesthephoneticsandrhythmoforiginalpoems.Intermsof“beautyinform”,hereproducesthelength,contrast,andrepetition.Itisalsonoteworthythatsomescholarshaveraisedcriticismsabouthistranslationmethods,listingexamplesofhisimperfectpractice.2.4ComparativestudiesonXuYuanchongandfilmpoetrytranslationfromtheperspectiveofcross-mediatranslationThereislimitedresearchdirectlycomparingfilmpoetrytranslationandXu’spublishedpoetrytranslation,whichdiffersignificantlyinmanyways.Tobespecific,Aziz&Zulkefley(2019)conductacomparativestudybetweenthewrittentextandthevideopoetry,showingtheimportanceofliterarytheorywhenincorporatingwithdifferentmediausage.Alghadeer(2014)alsoaimstoexplaintheboundariesofprintedtextsandverbalmeans,showinghowthemultimodalitiestransformpoetictextsintodiversemultimodalvideos.Athome,Zhao(2008)analyzesthesimilaritiesanddifferencesofpoemtranslationandsubtitletranslation,whichbothinvolvebilingualcontextsandculturesandfacetheoreticalchallengessuchasdomesticationandforeignization,optimalcorrelation,andsoon.Aboutthedifference,Zhaoalsopointsouttheirdifferencesfromtheperspectiveofdiscourseanalysis,contextanalysis,andneedfordiscoursecoherence.Literaryformisrelativelylongandcanbepreservedforalongtimeforpeopletoappreciate.Andfilmsubtitlesaresubjecttovisual,plot,andcharacterlimitations.Allinall,thischaptermainlydiscussesthecontributionsandlimitationsofextantstudies.Inwrittentranslations,thefocusisontextualprecision,preservationofrhythm,andtheoverallintegrityoftheoriginalpoem.Conversely,poetrytranslationinfilmsmustcomplementvisualelements,music,andnarration,oftenrequiringcreativeadaptationtofitthemultimodalscreen.Thecomparisonbetweenthetwoformsisrathercomprehensiveintermsofrespectivefeaturesandtheories.However,relatedresearchremainsvaguewhenitcomestotheapplicationofpracticalexamples.Intermsofresearchobject,fewstudiesexplorecombiningcertaintechniqueswithrespectivefeatures,makingthefunctionaldemandsofdifferentmediaconfusingtounderstand.Intermsofresearchcontent,traditionaltranslationstudieshavelargelyignoredthemultimodalattributesofpoems,onlyanalyzingvocabularyandsyntax,suchasculturallyloadedwords,fromtheperspectiveoftranslationstrategiesandeffects.Thisperspectivelacksthecoordinationbetweenvariousmodalitiescausedbydifferentmedia.Inotherwords,thefieldofsymbolictranslationisnotsufficient.Therefore,thisstudysituatesitselfatthisgap,aimingatexploringhowthesetwoformsoftranslationdiffertopreservethepoetic