on the cultural translation of chinese poetry from the perspective of peter newmarks theory论文.docx

1、on the cultural translation of chinese poetry from the perspective of peter newmarks theory论文OntheCulturalTranslationofChinese【Abstract】AsatypeofclassicalChineseliteraturewithalonghistory,theancientChinesepoetryhaslongattractedtheattentionofscholarsathomeandabroadandbeentranslatedbythem.Thispaperatt

2、emptstomakeatentativestudyonPeterNewmarkstheoryintheculturetranslationofChinesepoetry.ItprovesthatthetheoryplaysakeyroleintheculturetranslationofChinesepoems.【KeyWords】PeterNewmark;communicativetranslation;semantictranslation;poemtranslationAsatypeofclassicalChineseliteraturewithalonghistory,theanci

3、entChinesepoetryhaslongattractedtheattentionofscholarsathomeandabroadandbeentranslatedbythem.Fordifferenttranslators,thetranslatedversionsandmethodsarequitedifferent.Basedonhisownpastresearchandsomeothertransdisciplinaryknowledge,PeterNewmark,thefamousEnglishtranslationtheorist,hasputforwardtheprinc

4、iplesof“semantictranslation”and“communicativetranslation”.1.TheCharacteristicsofPoemTranslationPoemtranslationisquitedifferentfromthetranslationsofnovels,dramas,prosesandfilmscripts.Thisisdeterminedbyitsowncharacteristics.Thenwhatareitscharacteristics?Generallyspeaking,therearethreeprimeaspects.Firs

5、tly,poememphasizesonthebeautyoftempoandmetre.Abeautifulpoemmusthavemuchattractivenessbetweenthelines.Whenyouhearsomereadingthecharmingpoem,itseemsthatyouarelisteningtoabeautifulsong.Secondly,fromalingualperspective,thelanguagesofpoemisquitesuccinctandtheinformationinoneunitstructure.Itsstructureisra

6、therdifferentfromsomecommonlingualstructures,duetotherequirementofitsmetre,rhythmandform.Finally,apoemisthemostseniorformofliterature,itsmetre,formandideabecomingintegration.Thelackofanyoneofthemwillleadtothedestructionofthewholepoem.Whatsmore,thesignificanceshouldbereadbetweenthelines,becausethelin

7、esconsistofmanyconstituentsofimaginationwhentheauthorproducesthepoem.Thatistosay,wecanalwaysseethebeautyofobscurityfrompoems.Theunderstandingandfeelingtowardsapoemdependsontheappreciator,timeandspace.2.AboutPeterNewmarksTranslationTheoryAccordingtoPeterNewmark,communicativetranslationattemptstoprodu

8、ceonitsreadersaneffectascloseaspossibletothatobtainedonthereadersoftheoriginal.Semantictranslationattemptstorender,ascloselyasthesemanticandsyntacticstructuresofthesecondlanguageallow,theexactcontextualmeaningoftheoriginal.Intheory,therearewidedifferencesbetweenthetwomethods.Communicativetranslation

9、mustemphasizetheeffectratherthanthecontentofthemessage,andsemantictranslationwouldbemoreinformativebutlesseffective.Semantictranslationattemptstorecreatethepreciseflavorandtoneoftheoriginalanditrelatestothe“expressive”functionoflanguage,whereascommunicativetranslationrespondstotherepresentationaland

10、vocativefunctions.Thusfor“WetPaint!”,thecommunicativetranslation“Donttouchthewetpaint”ismandatory;thesemantictranslation(paintiswet)wouldbemoreinformativebutlesseffective.3.AStudyontheCulturalTransferenceofChinesePoetry3.1AppellationCultureAppellationcultureisadual-propertysemioticsystemwhichconcern

11、swithappellationandinvolvesbothlinguisticsandculture.Itisasemioticsystembecauseitismarkedbywordsorphrasesinlanguages.TheevolutionofChinesehistoryandthecontinuousblendingamongnationalitiesinancientChinahasgivenrisetoacomplexHanculture.Appellationcultureisagoodcaseinpoint.Appellationcanbedividedintore

12、lativeappellationandassociation.Arelativeappellationisaculturalsymbolproducedbymarriagesystem.Afterlong-termculturalsediment,ithasbecomewellestablished.InancientChina,thecomplexmarriagesystemfinallyledtoacomplicatedrelativeappellationsystem,whichinevitablycausestroublesintranslation.E.g.2未谙姑食性，先遣小姑尝

13、。Verginial:Idecidethatnotmymother-in-law.Butmyhusbandsyoungsistershallhavethefirsttaste.XuYuanchng:Tomeetmymother-in-lawstaste,Isendherdaughterthefirstshare.Fletcher:Butwhatkindoftasteauntielikes,Idontknow,Sosendtomysister-in-lawthefirstshare.InancientChina,therewasatraditionalcustom,whichmeanttotur

14、ncousinshipintomarriageship.Inotherwords,agirlwassupposedtomarrythesonofhermothersbrother,thusshewouldcallherhusbandsparents,i.e.herfather-in-lawandmother-in-lawuncleandauntorauntie.Fletcher,obviously,hasbeenconfusedbythesurfacemeaningof“姑”,hence,hetranslatesthiswordsemanticallyas“auntie”.Althoughth

15、egirlcallsherhusbandsmotheraunt,shehastopresentasadaughter-in-lawandlookatthe“aunt”asmother-in-lawandservehereverydayafterthemarriage.Thisisdeterminedbythefeudalmarriagesystem.Thus,Fletcherhasmadeasemantictranslation.Butherethe“auntie”onlyactsasa“signifier”.Agoodwaytodealwithitistouncoveritsveilandm

16、akethereadersseeclearlyitsface,torevealthewordinitstruecolours.Afteranalyzingandconsultingreferencebooks,thisisnotadifficulttask.Thebestwayistotakeacommunicativetranslation.Boththefirsttwotranslatorshavedoneinthisway.“姑”istranslatedcommunicativelyas“motherinlaw”.Underthiscondition,theTLreaderswillun

17、derstandthepoeminafull;otherwise,theymustbeconfusedabouttherelationship.Nowletstakeanotherexample:E.g.3嫦娥应悔偷灵药，碧海青天夜夜心。ZhangTingchen&WeiBosi:ChangEmustregrethavingstolenthemagicelixirInthatblueoceanofasky:endlessthoughts,nightafternight.SunDayu:ChangeshouldnowsorelyregretForstealingtheherboffay,Sosh

18、ehathtofaceallalonetheblueskyAndtheseaimmensenightandday.Bynner:AreyousorryforhavingstolenThepotionthathassetyou.Overpurpleseasandblueskies,Tobroodthroughthelongnights?ChangeisafairyladyinaChineselegendwhoswallowedelixirstolenfromherhusbandandflewtothemoon.Here,inordertolettheTLreadersgettoknowthele

19、gendaryfigureinChineseculture,bothChinesetranslatorshavetakenthesemantictranslationandtranscribeditinto“Change”,thealphabeticcorrespondenceof“嫦娥”.Sincetheoriginalverseisanarrative,inwhich“Change”functionsonlyasasignofaperson,itishardforreaderstofullyunderstandthefigureinthepoem.So,thiskindoftranscri

20、ptionisquiteallright.Meanwhile,Bynner,startingfromthewesternthinkingmode,hascommunicativelytranslatedtheversebyusingthesecondasifinadialoguewithGodorsomeoneelse.ThiskindoftonemaybringtheTLreaderskindnessandmakethemfeelasiftheyareparticipating.Butthiscantyetexplainwho“嫦娥”is.Thisshowsthatsometimeswhen

21、thedifferencesbetweenthetwolanguagescantbeunderstoodbyTLreaders,theyshouldbeeliminatedbysensibletranslators.3.2CultureaboutWeightsandMeasuresWeightsandmeasureswereverycomplicatedbeforetheunitybytheQinDynasty.Eachcountryfolloweditsownsystemofweightsandmeasures.Aftertheunityofthecountry,Qinalsostandar

22、dizedthem.Suchasystemishandeddownfromgenerationtogeneration.Nevertheless,theyareunknownorunfamiliartoforeigners.AlthoughtheTangDynastyreachedinapeakinculturalinfluenceabroad,someoftheculturalconceptsareunknowntoforeigners.Nowletsseethefollowinginstances:E.g.4桃花潭水深千尺，不及汪伦送我情。Obata:ThePeachFlowerLakei

23、sathousandfathomsdeep,Butitcannotcompare,OWangLun,Withthedepthofyourloveforme.E.g.5一片孤城万仞山。WenShu:OnasteephighmountainthelonegarrisontownstandsZhangTingchen&WeiBosi:AmidthemassivemountainsliesthesolitarysliverofatownSunDayu:AndalonepileliesbyamountahundredfurlongshighXuYuanchong:TheloneGreatWalllost

24、amidthemountainsproudFletcher:MidpeakssohighourtinytowntosightisalmostlostSuchunitsas“尺”(initsancientmeaning),“仞”havenoequivalenceinAnglo-AmericancultureormodernChineseculture.AccordingtoADictionaryforAncientChineseWords,bothofthemaremeasuresoflength,heightordepth.InancientChinese,1尺0.26m;1仞6.4chi(c

25、urrent)2.42.5meter.So“万仞”24000meter25000m.EvenpeopleinChinatodaymaynotknowthese.Wemaytranslatethemsemanticallyas260mand24000m,butwhichmaymakethetranslatedversionslosttheiroriginalcharmingandbecomemorecomplicated.Therefore,Obatachoosesanotherway,headaptsandmakesthethoughtandculturalcontentoforiginalm

26、oreaccessibletoreader.Inhisversion,“尺”isreplacedby“fathom”,awordfamiliartoforeigners.1尺0.26m,then1000尺260m;1fathom1.8m,then1000fathoms1800m.Thusitseemsthetwofiguresdifferlargelyfromeachother,butafterall,the“千尺”hereisinitsexaggeratedmeaning.Inthisway,thereaderscangettheroughmeaningofagreatdepthconvey

27、edbytheoriginalpoem.Whileinthesecondversion,SunDayuhassemanticallytranslated“仞”into“ahundredfurlongs”.HeusedasimilarunitinAnglo-Americancultureforreplacement.1furlong201m,then100furlong20100m.Thisisalmostequaltotheheightof“万仞”.ThedomesticatingmethodherehasnotmerelymadetheTLreadersunderstandthegrandeurofthemountainstheauthorwantedtoconvey,butalsogiventhemaperceptualknowledgeofthispoint.ThuswecanseethatMr.Sunhasreallygivenmuchthoughttothematter.Asfortheotherversions,theyshouldbecategorizedundercommunicativetranslation.Although