翻译美学视角下《呐喊》英译本对比研究

AComparativeStudyonEnglishVersionsofCalltoArmsfromthePerspectiveofTranslationAestheticsAbstract:FromtheperspectiveofLiuMiqing’stranslationaesthetics,thethesisstudiestwoEnglishtranslationsofLuXun’sCalltoArms.Itfocusesprimarilyontheaestheticreproductionofformalandnon-formalsystems,inquiringhowtranslatorshandlethelinguisticandculturalchallengesstemmingfromLuXun’sconcise,ironic,andemotionallyprofoundstyle.ThroughthecomparisonofYangXianyiandWilliamLyell’sversionsofHometownandKongYiji,thispaperinvestigatestheirstrategiesforconveyingaestheticfeatureslikedialoguerhythm,culturalimagery,andemotionalexpression.Theresultsshowsignificantdissimilaritiesinthetranslationroutesoftwotranslators,mirroringtheinteractionbetweentheaestheticobject(thesourcetext)andtheaestheticsubject(thetranslator’ssubjectiveinitiative).ThisstudynotonlybroadensthecomprehensionofLuXun’stranslatedworksbutalsomanifeststheapplicabilityoftranslationaestheticsintheinterpretationofmodernChineseliterature.ItfurtherstheeffectivetransmissionofChineseculturebyfacilitatingChinesenovels’reachtoaglobalaudience.Keywords:TranslationAesthetics,Translator’sStyle,AestheticReproduction,ComparativeTranslationAnalysis翻译美学视角下《呐喊》英译本对比研究摘要：本研究基于刘宓庆翻译美学理论，对比分析鲁迅《呐喊》的两种英译本。研究聚焦于形式系统和非形式系统的美学再现，探讨译者在翻译中如何应对鲁迅独特的语言风格（简洁、讽刺、情感深刻）所带来的语言和文化挑战。通过对比杨宪益和威廉·莱尔译本中《故乡》和《孔乙己》的选段，本文分析了二者在对话节奏、文化意象及情感表达等美学特质上的翻译策略。研究结果表明，两位译者的翻译方法差异显著，体现了审美客体（源文本）与审美主体（译者主观能动性）之间的互动。本研究不仅深化了对鲁迅作品翻译的理解，还证明了刘宓庆翻译美学在现代中国文学文本分析中的适用性，有助于中国小说与中国文化的国际传播。关键词：翻译美学，译者风格，美学再现，翻译对比研究ContentsTOC\o"1-3"\h\u28876Chapter1Introduction Chapter1Introduction1.1IntroductionofLuXunandCalltoArmsLuXun(1881-1936)isapioneeringChinesewriter,essayist,andthinker,widelyregardedasthe“fatherofmodernChineseliterature”.Knownforhissharpsocialcriticismandsatiricalstyle,hismostfamousworksexposedtheflawsoftraditionalChinesesociety.AsakeyfigureintheNewCultureMovement,LuXun’swritingsadvocatedforsocialreformandintellectualawakening,leavingalastingimpactonChineseliteratureandculture.CalltoArmsisthefirstcollectionofshortstorieswrittenbyLuXun,containingfourteennovels,includingDiaryofaMadman,KongYiJi,Medicine,TheTrueStoryofAhQ,andHometown,etc.ItprofoundlyreflectstheturbulenceandchangeoftheChinesesocietyatthebeginningofthe20thcentury,andmarksthebeginningandmaturityofmodernChinesenovels,creatingtheprecedentofmodernrealistliterature.Withitsconciselanguage,sharpsatireandprofoundideologicalconnotation,thisworkhasbecomeamilestoneinthehistoryofChineseliterature.Duetothespecialhistoricalbackground,thenovelhasdistinctiveperiodcolorsandnationalcharacteristics,andthelanguageinthenovelisexpressive,containingalargenumberofidioms,metaphorsandculturalcharacteristics,whichbringsmanychallengesforEnglishtranslation.Intermsofstyle,LuXun’snovelsarewritteninalivelyandhumoroustone,fullofbittersatire.Linguistically,LuXun’swritingsareconcise,simple,plain,vivid,highlycharacterizedandfullofthecharacteristicsofhistime.ThesecharacteristicshavemadeLuXun’swritingsthemostfamousinChineseandforeignliterarycircles,butalsomadeitdifficulttoreproducetheoriginalworksfaithfullyandvividlyintheprocessoftranslatinghisworks.ThisstudyselectstwomostrepresentativestoriesKongYijiandHometown,notonlybecausetheyhavebeenwidelyanthologizedintextbooksdomestically,butmoreimportantlybecausetheyreflectLuXun’sdistinctivecreativecharacteristics.Thechoiceofthetwotranslationscarriesparticularsignificanceastheyrepresenttwocontrastingapproaches.Theirdifferentmethodologiesproviderichmaterialforexamininghowaestheticvaluesnavigateacrosslinguisticandculturalboundaries.TheessenceoftranslationaestheticsresearchonLuXun’sworksliesinhowtoconverttheconceptsandcontentsinonelanguageintoanotherlanguagemorecomprehensivelyandharmoniouslywhilemaintainingtheaestheticvalue.Still,translationaestheticsconfrontschallenges,forinstance,thegapbetweentheoreticalknowledgeandpracticaloperation,anddealingwithculturaldistinctions.Futurestudieswilldevelopmoreintocross-culturalaspectsandpracticalapplications.1.2PreviousStudiesonTranslationAestheticsandTranslationofLuXun’sNovelsTheoriginsofChinesetranslationaestheticscanbetracedbacktothetimewhenancientBuddhisttextsweretranslated.FromtheEasternHanDynastytotheTangSongDynasty,thefieldadvocatedtheprincipleof“雅”intranslationpractice.Itsymbolizedthepursuitofaestheticvaluesintranslation.Althoughtranslationtheoryduringthisperiodwasnotsystematicallyformulated,itlaidthefoundationforthelaterdevelopmentoftranslationaesthetics.Intheearly20thcentury,withtheriseofmodernChineseliteratureandtranslationactivities,theconceptoftranslationaestheticsbegantogaintraction.YanFu’sprincipleof“faithfulness,expressiveness,andelegance”wasfurtherrefinedandbecameanimportanttheoreticalsourceoftranslationaesthetics.WritersandtranslatorssuchasLuXunandLinYutangemphasizedtheaestheticvalueoftranslation,especiallytheemotionalreproductionoftheoriginaltext.WithChina’sreformandopeningup,thefieldoftranslationinChinagainednewopportunitiesfordevelopment.In1986,LiuMiqingpublishedagroundbreakingbook,TheBasicTheoreticalFrameworkofTranslationAesthetics,whichlaidoutthecoreconceptsofthefield.What’smore,in1993,FuZhongxuanpublishedthefirstChinesemonographTheAestheticsofPracticalTranslation,whichcoveredimportanttopicssuchastheaestheticroleoftranslatorsandtextsandthenatureoftheaestheticactivityoftranslation.In1995,LiuMiqing’sworkIntroductiontoTranslationAestheticsfurtherelaboratedtheseconcepts,makingtranslationaestheticsbecameamatureacademicdisciplineinChina.Atthebeginningofthe21stcentury,thestudyoftranslationaestheticshasaccelerated.In2005,MaoRongguipublishedTheAestheticsofTranslation,whichwasadetaileddiscussionofhowprinciplesofaestheticscanguidethepracticeoftranslation.Inthesameyear,LiuHuawei’sTheSubjectiveAestheticsofEnglishTranslationofClassicalChinesePoetrywaspublished,addinganewdimensiontothestudy.XuYuanchong’sThreeAestheticsTheoryhassincebecomeinfluentialasacornerstoneofthefield,focusingonthebeautyofmeaning,sound,andform.ThewesternstudyoftheaestheticsoftranslationdatesbacktoancientRome.CiceroandSt.Jeromearguedover“freetranslation”versus“literaltranslation”intranslationpractice,emphasizingtheimportanceoftheaestheticvalueoftranslation.DuringtheRenaissance,translatorslikeMartinLutheralsoemphasizedthereadabilityandaestheticvalueoftranslationwhentranslatingBible.WiththeriseofRomanticisminthelate18thandearly19thcenturies,thetranslationaestheticstookonamoretheoreticalform.GermanphilosopherFriedrichSchleiermacheremphasizedtheneedtopreservethe“exoticism”oftheoriginal,aviewthathashadalastingimpactonthestudyoftranslationaestheticseversince.Inthe20thcentury,Westernresearchontheaestheticsoftranslationcontinuedtodeepen.InhisessayTheWorkoftheTranslator,WalterBenjaminproposedtheconceptof“purelanguage”andarguedthatthepurposeoftranslationistorevealthehiddenaestheticessenceoftheoriginaltext.Inrecentyears,theresearchesintoaesthetictranslationhaveincreasinglyintertwinedwithotheracademicdisciplines.Whilestudyingthetranslationofliteraryworkslikepoetry,prose,andfictionalcreations,manyresearchersanalyzeparticularinstancesfromanaestheticpointofview.Nevertheless,theadoptionofLiuMiqing’stranslationaesthetictheoryintheexplorationofliterarytranslationhasnotbeenfullyprobed.Therefore,itisnecessaryforscholarstoconductdeeperresearchtobroadenthescopeofthestudy.ThetranslationofLuXun’snovelscanbedividedintothreestages.Thestagebetween1926to1949ischaracterizedbythelargenumberoftranslatorssuchasMills,E.andGeorgeA.Kennedy,butmostofthemhavetranslatedonlyafewnovelsthattheywereinterestedin.In1953,ForeignLanguagesPressreleasedtheEnglishversionofTheTrueStoryofAhQtranslatedbyChinesetranslatorsYangXianyiandDaiNaidie.ThissignifiedthesecondphaseintheEnglishtranslationofLuXun’snovels.Theirtranslationswereremarkablytruetotheoriginaltext,closelyfittingitinbothsyntacticstructureandvocabulary.EsteemedpublishinghousesbothwithinChinaandoutsidehavereprintedthesetranslationsonmanyoccasions.By1981,YangandDaihadtranslated33novelsfromLuXun’scollectionsNaHan,Hesitation,andNewStories.In1990,thethirdstageoftheEnglishtranslationofLuXun’sworksbeganwiththepublicationofDiaryofaMadmanandOtherStoriesbyAmericanscholarWilliamLyell,publishedbytheUniversityofHawaiiPress.Lyell’sAmerican-languageversionofDiaryofaMadmanandOtherStoriesishighlyreadableandhassetamodelfortheEnglishandAmericanversionsofLuXun’snovels.Astranslationstudiesdeepen,moreandmoreresearchersbegintoexploreCalltoArmsfromanaestheticperspective.Thesestudiesmainlyusetextualcomparisons,corpustools,andaesthetictheoriestodemonstratethefar-reachingeffectsoftranslatorsubjectivity,culturaladaptation,andaestheticreproductionontheEnglishtranslationstyleofLuXun’snovels.Forexample,ZhaoShufang(2011)selectedseveralrepresentativebodymetaphorssuchas“heart,”“eyes”and“head”fromtheEnglishtranslationofCalltoArmstoconductacomparativeanalysisofthetranslationstrategiesofbodilymetaphorsbetweenEnglishandChinese.ShiLili(2021)conductedadescriptivestudyofculturalkeywordsusingtheparallelcorpustoidentifyspecificdifferencesbetweendifferentversionsinthetranslationofculturalkeywords.WuXiaodong(2010)useddescriptivemethodstoanalyzetheimpactoftranslatorsubjectivityontranslationdifferences.WangDandan(2020)adoptedWordsmithandAntConctoolstocombinequantitativeandqualitativeanalysisforresearch.ShefeltthatYangXianyi’stranslationstylewasrelativelyconcise.Preferingthewayofdirecttranslation,Lyell’stranslationwouldreproducetheoriginaltextbyusingitalicsandOldEnglishformsoftheoriginaltext,andalsoaddmanyfootnotestoconveythecontentrelatedtotheculturalcontext.Otherresearchersbegantheirstudiesfromanaestheticperspective.MengZushuai(2009)analyzedLuXun’sworksandtheaestheticvalueofthetranslationsystembasedonLiuMiqing’stheory.WeiTaina(2013)tookthetranslationofWildGrassasanexampletoexaminethereproductionofaestheticelementsinbothformalandnon-formalsystems.YanMing(2023)comparedthreedifferenttranslationsofCalltoArmsbasedonthecorpusheestablished.Throughquantitativeanalysis,itwasfoundthatLyell’stranslationwastranslatedwordforwordandsentencebysentence,andthesyntaxwasalsorelativelycomplex.However,Yang’stranslationisconciseandeasytounderstand.XieHua(2011)examinedthesimilaritiesanddifferencesbetweenthetwotranslationsfromtheperspectiveoftranslationrevisionstrategies,emphasizingthatbothhadreducedthelossofculturalinformationthroughdifferentmethods.Accordingtoexistingstudies,mostofthemfocusmainlyontheoreticalknowledgerelatedtotheabovetopics.Someresearchesonlydiscusstheaestheticelementsfromasingleaspect,andsomestudiesuseYangorLyelltranslationasasingleframeofreference,inevitablyleadingtooverlappingperspectivesandsimilarmethodsofanalysis.Therefore,comparativeresearchfrombothaestheticobjectandsubjectaspectsonthesetwotranslatedversionsshouldbestrengthened.Chapter2TheoreticalFramework2.1BriefIntroductiontoLiuMiqing’sTranslationAestheticsTheoryLiuMiqingisanoutstandingfigureinthefieldoftranslationstudies.Thetheoryoftranslationaestheticsheproposedarelativelycomprehensiveframeworkforanalyzingthesituationoftranslationintermsofaesthetics.Translationaestheticsmainlyfocusesonalltheaestheticandartisticvaluesoftheoriginaltextandthetranslation.Itparticularlyemphasizeshowthetranslatorshouldeffectivelyconveytheaestheticqualitiescontainedintheoriginaltexttothetargetreaders.Histheorycombinestheprinciplesofaesthetics,linguisticsandculturalstudiestostudythecomplexinteractionbetweenformandcontentinthetranslationprocess.LiuMiqinghaswrittenmanyarticlesontranslationaesthetics.Hebelievesthatwhattranslationaestheticsdoesistoanalyzeandsolvetheaestheticproblemsencounteredinthetranslationprocessbyusingaestheticprinciples.Thisincludesthestudyofaestheticobjects,aestheticsubjectsandtheirrelationshipsduringtranslation.(LiuMiqing,2005:2)Healsomentionedsomecommonwaysofpresentingaestheticsintranslation,includinghowthetranslatorpsychologicallyexperiencesaestheticsandwhattheaestheticstandardsofliterarytranslationare.Insimpleterms,translationaestheticsisactuallyadiscipline.Thisdisciplineuseslanguageaestheticsandartaestheticstostudyhowtranslationworks.Itfocusesonthesourcetext,thetargettext,anddifferentaestheticaspectsduringthetranslationprocess.WhenconductingEnglish-Chinesetranslation,thepurposeoftranslationaestheticsistopresenttheaestheticelementsoftheoriginaltexttothegreatestextent.2.2MainConceptsThecoreoftranslationaestheticstheoryliesinsystematicallyanalyzingtheaestheticactivitieswithinthetranslationprocess.Itstheoreticalfoundationisbuiltuponthedialecticalrelationshipbetweentheaestheticsubjectandaestheticobject.Thesetwoconceptsformthepillarsoftranslationaestheticsresearch:Theformerfocusesontheformalandnon-formalaestheticcharacteristicsofthetextitself,whilethelatteremphasizesthetranslator’sinitiativeinaestheticreproduction.2.2.1AestheticObjectTheaestheticobjectoftranslationmainlyincludetwoaspects:oneistheoriginaltext,andtheotheristhetranslation.Bothofthemhaveaestheticvaluesthatcanmeethumanaestheticneeds.(LiuMiqing,2005:209)Theoriginaltextactuallyreflectstheauthor’slifeexperiencesinobjectivereality,aswellastheauthor’sunderstandingandfeelingstowardstheseexperiences.Theoriginaltexthasaparticularlystrongpersonalcolor,whichcontainstheauthor’suniqueperspectiveonthings.Toputitanotherway,thetranslationisthepsychologicalprocessingprocessandtheproductoflanguageactivitiesofthetranslatortransformingtheoriginaltextintoanotherlanguage.Thetranslationisnotsimplycopyingtheoriginaltext;itisinfluencedbythetranslator’sownpersonalityandcreativity.LiuMiqingdividedtheaestheticelementsintheoriginaltextintotwosystems,namelytheformalsystemandthenon-formalsystem.Theaestheticobjectreferstotheobjectthatisrelatedtoaestheticevaluation.However,onlythoseobjectswithaestheticvalueinthecontextofevaluationcanbeseenasaestheticobjects.Inthefieldoftranslationstudies,the“translationaestheticobject”referstotheobjectthatcanreflectaestheticvalueandmeetcertainaestheticrequirements.(LiuMiqing,2005:86)Itcanbesaidthatwhetheritistheoriginaltextorthetranslation,theyareallaestheticobjectsthatcanreflectthespecificperspectiveoftheauthorortranslator.Theformalsystemactuallyconsistsofaseriesofaestheticsymbolsamongotherelements(thoughhereemphasizingthesymbols).Inthefieldofaesthetics,formisassociatedwithsensibility.Here,formreferstothephysicalorexternalappearanceofatext.Whenconductinglanguageappreciation,formreferstothecomponentsofatextthatcarryaestheticvalue.Thesecomponentscanbedividedintofourlevels:sound,text,vocabulary,syntax,andparagraphs.(LiuMiqing2005:84)Intheworldofaesthetics,“form”possessestwoextremelycriticalattributes:oneistheassociationwithsensibility,andtheotherisitsessentialtraitasarelativeandcomplexconcept.Inthedynamicinteraction,meaningreflectsemotionalqualitiesandisendowedwithspecificforms.Obviously,formisthebasisforanalysisandalsothestartingpointofanalysis.(LiuMiqing,2005:92)Thenon-formalsystemintranslationismainlycomposedoffourkeyparts:emotion,ideal,imageandsymbol.“Sentiment”and“ideal”arecloselylinkedtotheintentionthattheauthorwantstoexpressinhisheart.Together,theyconstituteaverycrucialcomponentoftheinnerbeautyofliteraryworks.Whendoingtranslation,Onlywhenthetranslatoraccuratelygraspstheoverallemotionsandidealscontainedintheoriginaltextcantheyselectappropriatewordsandsmoothlyrepresentthestyleoftheoriginaltext.“Image”canreflecttheemotionsandidealsintheauthor’sheart.Toalargeextent,itsinfluenceisdeterminedbytheauthor’scarefulselectionoftheobject.“Symbol”issomewhatsimilartoimage.Itisgeneratedfromtheauthor’simaginativeactivitiesandmostlyconveysthoughtsandemotionsthroughspecificvisualelements.(LiuMiqing,2005:141)2.2.2AestheticSubjectJustasmentionedabove,onlywhentheaestheticsubjectbeginstostudyanaestheticobjectcarefullyandappreciateitwithheartcanthisobjectberegardedasanaestheticobject.Bythesametoken,ifnoonereadsandappreciatesthebeautycontainedwithinitwell,thenthetranslatedaestheticobjectwillnotexist.Thetranslatorwillappreciatetheoriginaltextanddotheirbesttotranslateitintothetargetlanguage.Inthefieldoftranslationaesthetics,thetranslatoriscalledtheaestheticsubjectoftranslation.(LiuMiqing,2005:159)Thetranslatorhastoundertaketwotasks:oneistounderstandandappreciatethesourcetext,andtheotheristoreproduceorcreatetheaestheticinformationinthesourcetext.Whentranslating,theidentityofthetranslatorisratherspecial.Heisbothareaderandacreator.Theroleplayedbythetranslatorinthetranslationprocessisverycrucial.Thetranslator’ssubjectiveinitiativeismainlyreflectedintworelativelykeyabilities,namelyaestheticabilityandlanguageandculturalliteracy.Aestheticabilityreferstothetranslator’sknackforperceivingandrespondingtotheemotionsinthetext.Thisabilityisanindispensablefactorforthetranslatortopreciselyseizeupontheaestheticvalueoftheoriginaltext.Besides,languageandculturalliteracypertaintothetranslator’scapacitytounderstandthesourcelanguageandtheculturelinkedtoit,alongwiththeireffectivenessinexpressingtheseelementsinthetargetlanguage.Generallyspeaking,withtheseabilities,thetranslatorcandiscoverthehiddenbeautyinthesourcetextduringtranslationandreproducethisbeautyinthetranslation.(ZengLisha,2006:10)Justliketheaestheticobjectoftranslation,theaestheticsubjectoftranslationalsohassomecharacteristicsofitsown.Closelyrelatedtothissituationissubjectiveinitiative.Tobringoutthesubjectiveinitiativeofthetranslator,thetranslatorneedstohaveaestheticqualitiessuchasaestheticemotion,aestheticknowledge,aestheticskillsandaestheticadaptability.(LiuMiqing,2005:164)Inshort,theaestheticsubjectmainlyconsiststwoaspects:translator’saestheticcompetenceandtranslator’slanguageandculturalliteracy.Translator’saestheticcompetencereferstothetranslator’sabilitytoperceivetheaestheticelementsintheoriginaltext,appreciatethem,andreproducethemintranslation.Essentially,thisinvolvesthetranslator’ssensitivitytodetecttheaestheticfeaturesofthesourcetext,anditfurtherrequiresthetranslatortounderstandthesefeatures,liketherhythm,imagery,andemotionalbackgroundofthesourcetext.Aestheticabilityfurtherencompassesalltheartisticjudgmentsformedbythetranslatorwhenmakingchoices.Thisdecisionneedstobeshrewd,thatis,todeliberateonhowtoconveytheseaestheticfeaturesofthesourcetextmostideallyinthetargetlanguage.Inthecourseofperformingtranslation,itisrequisitetobalancethedemandsofbeingloyaltotheoriginaltextandtheclarityandcoherenceofthetranslationresult.Thosewithasuperioraestheticabilityamongtranslatorsaremorelikelytocapturethebeautyandartisticvalueoftheoriginaltextintheirtranslatedcreations.Translator’slanguageandculturalliteracyplaysaveryvitalroleinallowingtranslatorstoeffectivelyshrinkthegapbetweenthesourcelanguagecultureandthetargetlanguageculture.Ahighlevelofproficiencyinbothlanguagesisessentialfordoingtranslationwell.Themasteryreferredtohereincludesaspectsliketheacquisitionofgrammaticalschemas,accustomedphrasings,andstylisticidiosyncrasies.Adeepunderstandingoftheculturalbackgroundoftheoriginaltextandthetargetlanguagecomprisescomponentslikehistory,socialsettings,andliterarytraditions.Onlyinthismannercantranslatorsoptmorewiselywhendealingwithparticularculturalelements.Iftranslatorshaveexcellentlanguageskillsandculturalawareness,theycandealwiththecomplexsituationsintranslation,ensurethetranslatedworksarecomparabletotheoriginalworks,andbeintelligibletothetargetgroup.Chapter3ComparativeAnalysisofTwoVersionsfromthePerspectiveofTranslationAesthetics3.1AestheticReproductionofAestheticObjectsTheaestheticobjectintranslationencompassesboththesourcetextandthetargettext,eachcarryinguniqueaestheticvalues.AccordingtoLiuMiqing(2005),theaestheticobjectisnotmerelyalinguisticconstructbutareflectionoftheauthor’slifeexperiencesandperspectives.Thesetranslationsareartisticrecreationsinfluencedbythetranslators’culturalbackgrounds,aestheticsensibilities,andcreativechoices.Theaestheticreproductionoftheoriginaltextinvolvescapturingitsformalandnon-formalsystems.3.1.1AestheticsReproductionofFormalSystemThisarticlewillmainlycarryouttheanalysisworkfromthetwolevelsofpronunciationandvocabulary.Theaestheticinformationconveyedbysoundlevelcanendowthetextwithacertainrhythmandcreateacertainatmosphere.Sometimes,thisaestheticinformationconveyedbysoundlevelcanevenconveytheauthor’sinneremotions.Theaestheticeffectproducedatthevocabularylevelismainlyachievedthroughwordselection.Appropriateandproperwordselectioncancreateanoverallaestheticsense.Soundisanessentialelementinconstructingtheaestheticvalueoflanguage.LiuMiqingstatedthattheaestheticqualitiesofsoundareexpressedviarhythm,rhymeandonomatopoeicwords.Thisiscapableofcraftingrhythmicandmemorabletextcontentwhilealsoconveyingtheauthor’sinnermostemotions,thuscreatingaratheruniqueatmosphere.Precisereproductionofsoundsisanessentialconditionforpreservingthebeauty,emotionaldepth,andmeaningoftheoriginaltext.Inthetwoworks,KongYijiandHometown,dialogueisthekeytodrivingtheplotforwardandalsothekeywaytoexpressironyandhumor.“你怎么这样凭空污人清白……”(鲁迅,2005:18)“Whysullyaman’sgoodnamefornoreasonatall?”(杨宪益,戴乃迭,2000:59)“Howdareyou,withoutashredofevidence,besmirchaman’sgoodnameandeven”(Lyell,1990:44)我到现在终于没有见——大约孔乙己的确死了。(鲁迅,2005:22)NorhaveIeverseenhimsince—nodoubtKongYijireallyisdead.(杨宪益,戴乃迭,2000:69)Ineversawhimagain—guesshereallydiddie.(Lyell,1990:48)ThislineisKongYiji’sresponseafterhecametothestoretohaveadrinkandwaswronglyaccusedbythedinersofstealingmoney.Itrevealsthecoldnessandharshnessofthesocietythroughthediners’jeers.Yangtranslates“污人清白”as“sullygoodname”directly.Thisway,readerscansenseKongYiji’sindignationwhilestillkeepingthesimplestyleoftheoriginaltext.InLyell’stranslation,heincreasestheemotionalstrengthofthedialoguewithexpressionslike“howdareyou”and“besmirch”.TheseexpressionsmorestronglyconveyKongYiji’sfuryandthediners’unreasonableness.Byadjustingthelanguagestyle,Lyell’stranslationaddsmoreemotionalexpressionandmakesitsimplerforreaderstounderstandtheironyandhumorinthedialogue.“窃书不能算偷……窃书！……读书人的事，能算偷么？”接连便是难懂的话，什么“君子固穷”，什么“者乎”之类，引得众人都哄笑起来。(鲁迅,2005:18)“Takingbookscan’tbecountedasstealingTakingbooks...forascholar...can’tbecountedasstealing.”Thenfollowedsuchquotationsfromtheclassicsas“Agentlemankeepshisintegrityeveninpoverty,”togetherwithaspateofarchaismswhichsoonhadeverybodyroaringwithlaughter.(杨宪益,戴乃迭,2000:59)“Thepurloiningofvolumes,goodsir,cannotbecountedastheft.Thepurloiningofvolumesis,afterall,somethingthatfallswellwithinthepurviewofthescholarlylife.Howcanitbeconsideredmeretheft?”Tackedontothatwasawholestringofwordsthatweredifficulttounderstand,thingslike“Thegentlemandothstandfirminhispoverty,”and“verilythisandforsooththat”.Everyoneroaredwithlaughter.(Lyell,1990:44)Yangdirectlyrenders“窃书不能算偷”as“Takingbookscan’tbecountedasstealing”,usingplainlanguagewithoutembellishment.ForKongYiji’sclassicalChineseexpressions,suchas“君子固穷”,Yang’stranslationaccuratelyrendersitas“Agentlemankeepshisintegrityeveninpoverty.”However,phraseslike“者乎”aregeneralizedas“aspateofarchaisms”merelyindicatetheirarchaicnature,buthisapproachalignsmorecloselywiththesatiricaltoneoftheoriginal.Lyellusesliberaltranslationtoheightencharacterportrayal.Hetranslates“窃书”as“thepurloiningofvolumes”andaddstermslike“goodsir”,makingKongYiji’sdefensesoundmorepompousandcomical.HeemploysarchaicEnglishwordssuchas“doth”and“verily”tomimictheoriginalstyle.“君子固穷”becomes“thegentlemandothstandfirminhispoverty”supplementedwithphraseslike“verilythisandforsooththat”toconvey