Analysis on Howard Goldblatts Translation of Rice From the Perspective of Translator Subjectivit.docx

Analysis on Howard Goldblatts Translation of Rice From the Perspective of Translator Subjectivit.docx

《Analysis on Howard Goldblatts Translation of Rice From the Perspective of Translator Subjectivit.docx》由会员分享，可在线阅读，更多相关《Analysis on Howard Goldblatts Translation of Rice From the Perspective of Translator Subjectivit.docx（10页珍藏版）》请在冰豆网上搜索。

AnalysisonHowardGoldblattsTranslationofRiceFromthePerspectiveofTranslatorSubjectivit

AnalysisonHowardGoldblatt’sTranslationofRiceFromthePerspectiveofTranslator’Subjectivity

　　Abstract

　　Withtheemergenceofcultureturninthe1980s，translator’sinvisiblestatushasbeenchanged.Translationprocessisnolongerconsideredasasimpleconversionprocessfromtheoriginallanguagetothetargetlanguage，butaprocessfullofcreativity.

　　RiceistheChinesenovelistSuTong’ssecondnovelwhichdealswithChinainthe1930s.HevividlyportraysDepression-eraChinaandthecharactersthatpopulatethisnovel.HowardGoldblattdevoteshimselftothetranslationofmodernandcontemporaryChinesenovelsintoEnglishandRiceisoneofhisnumerousworks.Hisimpeccabletranslationdoesmuchjusticetotheflowofthetale.FromthestudyonGoldblatt’scase，inspirationscanbedrawnontheexerciseoftranslator’ssubjectivityintheprocessofintroducingandtranslatingChineseliteraturetotheworld.

　　Researchmethodssuchasexemplificationandinductionwereadoptedinthisarticle.Differentinterpretationsoftranslator’ssubjectivitywerereviewedatthebeginningofthearticleaccordingtoProfessorLüJun’sdivisionofthreeparadigmsinChinesetranslationstudy.Theinfluentialfactorsontranslator’ssubjectivitywereanalyzedonthetheoreticalbasisofmanipulationschoolandfunctionalistschool.ThemanifestationofHowardGoldblatt’ssubjectivityinthetranslationofRicewasanalyzed，followedbyreflectionsontheexerciseoftranslator’ssubjectivity.

　　Keywords：

Translator’ssubjectivity；HowardGoldblatt；TranslationofRice

　　Qiu，X.（2015）.AnalysisonHowardGoldblatt’sTranslationofRicefromthePerspectiveofTranslator’Subjectivity.CanadianSocialScience，11（3），-0.Availablefrom：

http：

//

　　DOI：

http：

//dx.doi.org/10.3968/6623

　　INTRODUCTION

　　Forquitealongtime，undertheinfluenceofsource-textorientedtheory，traditionaltranslationstudieshavethistendencytoconsiderfaithfulnessand/orequivalencetheabsolutestandardintheevaluationandjudgmentofatranslation.

　　Iseetranslationastheattempttoproduceatextsotransparentthatitdoesnotseemtobetranslated.Agoodtranslationislikeapaneofglass.Youonlynoticethatit’stherewhentherearefewimperfections-scratches，bubbles.Ideally，thereshouldn’tbeany.Itshouldnevercallattentiontoitself.（Venuti，1995，p.1）

　　Consequently，thetranslatortrieshis/herbesttoreducethesubjectivityinvolvedintheprocessoftranslation.Despitenumerousarticlesandresearchesonthesignificanceofthetranslator’ssubjectivity，theprinciplesandcriterionsonthedisplayortheexerciseoftranslator’ssubjectivityremaincontroversial.Manycontemporarytranslationtheoriessuchasfunctionalistschool，descriptiveschool，hermeneutics，deconstructionism，aestheticsofreceptionetc.arestartingtoquestiontheauthorityoftheoriginal.Theypushtranslatorsintoamoreauthoritativeandsubjectiveposition.Studyontranslator’ssubjectivitycanbetterourunderstandingoftheroleandnatureofthetranslatornotonlyintheprocessoftranslationbutalsointheculturalcommunicationandconstruction.　　HowardGoldblattenjoysthehighestpositioninChineseliteraturetranslatorsintheWesternworld.ChinesetranslationscholarsconcentratetheirstudyonseveraltypicalnovelsincludingWolfTotem，RedSorghum，BigBreastsandWideHipsetcfromvariousperspectives，whileSuTong’sRiceisrarelymentionedinthestudies.Underthisbackground，thisarticletriestofinditswaytotheexplorationofGoldblatt’stranslationofRicefromtheperspectiveofthetranslator’ssubjectivity.

　　1.STUDYONTRANSLATOR’SSUBJECTIVITYINCHINA

　　Chinesescholarshavemadehugeprogressontheconstructionoftranslationtheory.Theygraduallydeepenedtheirawarenessandunderstandingoftheobjectsandpropertiesoftranslation.ProfessorWangZuoliang（1997）andTanZaixi（2000）madeaclearexplanationontheobjectsoftranslation；ProfessorLiuMiqing（2007）andLüJun（2006）alsoexploredthenatureoftranslation.ProfessorLüJunbelievesthattranslationhasgonethroughthreephases，whicharealsoknownasthreeparadigms：

paradigmofphilology，paradigmofstructuralismandparadigmofdeconstructionism.Heanalyzesthephilosophicalandtheoreticalfoundationofthosethreeparadigmsseparately，pointingouttheirweaknesses.Inhisview，theparadigmofphilologylackssystematictheory.Translationisunderstoodasaninspirationalandirrationalperformanceunderthisparadigm.Thephilosophicalfoundationisbasedonacertaindegreeofsubjectivismandmysticism.Linguisticsisthetheoreticalfoundationoftheparadigmofstructuralism.Theparadigmofstructuralismgivesfullexplanationontheimportanceofthetext，butitstepstoanextremeforover-emphasizingthetext.Itputsexcessiveemphasisonlinguisticgeneralityandlanguageanalysis，ignoringthedifferencesbetweenlanguagesandtranslator’ssubjectivityandcreativity.Whileinthedeconstructionismparadigm，undertheinfluenceofHermeneutics，receptionaestheticsanddeconstructionism，thesubjectivityofthetranslatorisawakened，reaffirmedandundisciplined.

　　Fromtheanalysisabovewecanseethat，paradigmofphilologyandparadigmofdeconstructionismareirrational.Translator’ssubjectivityandtranslator’sinitiativearecloselyrelated.Translator’ssubjectivityisinterpreteddifferentlyinthethreeparadigms.Inparadigmofphilology，translationactivitiesarebelievedtobedependentonthetranslator’spersonality，extensiveknowledgeandtranslationskills.Thisinterpretationoftranslator’ssubjectivityisnotbasedonscientificepistemology，soduringthisperiod，mosttranslationstudiesareabouttranslationmethodratherthantranslationtheory.Instructuralismparadigm，thetranslator’sstatusisdowngradedsharply.Translator’ssubjectivityisrestrainedandthetextisseenasafixed，closedandself-sufficientsystem，whichhasnothingtodowiththesubjectiveexperience.Withthedevelopmentoftranslationstudiesinrecentyears，moreandmorescholarsbegintoexploretranslationfromdifferentangles.Paradigmofdeconstructionismisatheoryofskepticismandanon-rationalthought.Deconstructionismdeniesthesignificanceofdeterminismandannouncesthedeathoftheauthor.Itgivestranslatorabsoluterightofexplanationandtranslator’srewritingisbelievedtobenecessarytomaketheoriginalwidelyspreadintheworldandconstantlysurvive.　　Fromthereviewabove，wecanseethetranslator’shumblestatushaschangedgreatlyincontemporarytranslationstudies.Theclaimofsubjectivityendowsthetranslatorwithfreedomtoshowhis/herinitiativeandcreativity.Thetranslatorstartsgainingindependentpersonalityandacademicfame.

　　2.INFLUENTIALFACTORSONTRANSLATOR’SSUBJECTIVITY

　　Withthedevelopmentofnewparadigmsintranslationtheory，twoinfluentialschoolsemerged：

SkoposTheoryandManipulationSchool.Theformerfocusesonthetranslationofpracticaltext，whilethelatteriscommittedtothestudyofliterarytext.Thetwoschoolsalsohavedifferentinterpretationsabouttheinfluentialfactorstotranslator’ssubjectivity，fortranslator’ssubjectivityisconstrainedbydifferentfactorsinthetranslationofpracticaltextandliterarytext.

　　2.1PurposeofTranslation：

OntheBasisofSkoposTheory

　　ThecoreconceptofSkopostheoryisthatthepurposeoftranslationisthemostimportantandinfluentialfactortothetranslator’ssubjectivity.Skopostheorybelievesthattranslationisapurposefulactivity，whichshouldpayspecialattentiontothefeaturesofthetargettextratherthanthefeaturesoftheoriginaltext.TheorientationofSkopostheoryisthepurposeandfunctionofthetranslatedtextanditfocussesonthepracticaluseoftranslationintargetlanguage.Skopostheorybelievesthattranslationisaninterculturalcommunicationactivitywithclearpurposeandtheproductionofinteractionbetweenthemultiplefactors.Skopostheorybelievesthatintheprincipleofpurpose，coherenceandfidelity，thepurposecomesfirst.Hence，undertheguidanceofSkopostheory，thetranslatorshouldbyallmeanstoachievethetranslationandtransmissionofpurposeandfunction，evenbythecostofcoherenceandfidelity.Thatistosay，thetranslatorhasbeenendowedwithsubjectivityandauthorityintheprocessoftranslationinordertoachievetheultimatepurpose.Sourcetextisdethroned，soitispossiblenowforthesametextbeingtranslatedinmanydifferentwaysaccordingtothepurposeofthetargettextandthecommissionisgiventothetranslator.

　　2.2Ideology，PatronageandPoetics：

OntheBasisofManipulationTheory

　　Lefevere，therepresentativeofManipulationSchool，suggeststhattranslationisthemostobviousrecognizabletypeofrewriting，anditispotentiallythemostinfluentialbecauseitisabletoprojecttheimageofanauthorandthoseworksbeyondtheboundariesoftheirorigin（Lefevere，2004，p.9）Lefeverehasrepeatedlystressedthattranslationisnotanactivityinvacuumandcultureisacomplicatedsystemwhichconsistsofmanysubsystemssuchasliterature，science，andtechnology.Thus，choiceoftheoriginalworkandtranslator’ssubjectivityisaffectedandrestrainedbymanyfactors.　　AkeyclaimismadebyLefevereconcerningtheinteractionbetweenpoetics，ideologyandtranslation：

“Oneverylevelofthetranslationprocess，itcanbeshownthat，iflinguisticconsiderationsenterintoconflictwithconsiderationsofanideologicalorpoetologic