达诠查基毯剧煎边篷童幺塑鋈==丛笪些盘壶滏羞倒⑧论文作者签名：益盔聋指导教师签名：论文评阅人1：评阅人2：评阅人3：评阅人4：评阅人5：答辩委员会主席：俭堡堡教援浙江理王太堂委员1：郄这垡教拯浙江太堂．委员2：鱼整数援浙江堡王太堂委员3-自堡矗趸4数援浙江太堂委员4：王垄迸副教握浙江太堂委员5：答辩日期：2011．5．9
——／懒幽Author’Ssignature：一‘●‘ASupervisor7Ssignature：Thesisreviewer1：一XuXihuaProfessorZhejiangSci-TechUniversity．Thesisreviewer2：WuFengProfessorZheiiangSci-TechUniversity．Thesisreviewer3．BaiXiiiaAssociateProfessorZhejiangUniversityThesisreviewer4．●--_●-●-__●_l_-_--●____．．___●_-__●_●__●_●__●_-___I___-____-_-__-·●_--___I__-__●_-●_--●__-____-_一Thesisreviewer5：(Committeeoforaldefence)Committeeman1：Zh皇卫g旦垦h坠垒旦!Q鱼墨墨Q￡兰h曼ji垦ng堕塾iY曼!墨i垃Committeeman2：WuFengProfessorZheiiangSci-TechUniversityCommitteeman3：BaiXijiaAssociateProfessorZheiiang．Uni．versityCommitteeman4．Committeeman5：Dateoforaldefence：2笾型』2Q!!
学位论文版权使用授权书本学位论文作者完全了解逝姿盘堂．有权保留并向国家有关部门或机构送交本论文的复印件和磁盘，允许论文被查阅和借阅。本人授权逝姿盘堂可以将学位论文的全部或部分内容编入有关数据库进行检索和传播，可以采用影印、缩印或扫描等复制手段保存、汇编学位论文。(保密的学位论文在解密后适用本授权书)学位论文作者签名：教朱莓签字日期：猡／f年岁月万日导师签名：弋签字日期：伽ff年f月落日
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTSIthastakenmealmosttwoyearstocompletethisthesis．Then,IfeelthecompletionsuchapleasureaswellfitSadelighttoexpressmygratitudetOthosepeoplewhohaveofferedmealotofhelpduringthewritingofthisthesis．Firstly,1wouldliketoextendmydeepgratitudetomysupervisor,Prof．ChenGang，whohascarefullyandpatientlyrevisedmyproposalandthesismanytimes．Withouthisinspiringandenlighteninginstructions，itwouldnothavebeenpossibleformetocompletethisthesis．Besides，Ianlverymuchtouchedbyhisstrictandenthusiasticworkingmanner．Hisseriousattitudetowardsscholarlyresearchandteachinghasalsoproducedagreatinfluenceonme．Mythanksalsogotomyfamilymemberswhohaveprovidedassistanceinnunlerouswaystohelpmefinishthisthesis．Iespeciallythankmymotherwhohasdonemostofthehouseholdchoresandmyhusbandwhohasfoundalotofimportantbooksandelectronicresourcesforme．Iamalsoobligedtotheschoolinwhich1work．Withoutitssupport,thisthesiswouldnothavebeenpossibleeither．
摘要中国古典戏剧的翻译和海外传播一直是个困难重重、疑惑颇多的领域。本文以《牡丹亭》为例，立足功能主义，旨在为中国古典戏剧的翻译和海外传播寻找一条有效可行的道路。首先，本文作者通过概述戏剧翻译理论中关于“可读性"和“可表演性’’的两极对立观，并借用霍恩比的概念，提出根据功能主义两极对立观应被“流动光谱式"概念取代。其次，作者针对中国古典戏剧在目标文化中表演难、接受难两大特点，提出古典戏剧的翻译应从功能主义出发，根据不同的受众，采取多元化的翻译策略。如有针对个人读者的归化翻译法；有针对学术研究的异化翻译法；有针对舞台演出所需的字幕翻译法，即交替使用归化和异化的方法，同时考虑字幕翻译在时间和空间上的限制性。．再次，为论证自己的假设之正确性，作者以汪榕培、白芝和许渊冲、许明的《牡丹亭》英译本为实例，对比了戏剧的诗学功能和表达文本中的次功能在译文中的不同体现，并指出汪译、白译和许译在翻译策略、“忠诚"对象等方面的差异及产生差异的原因。最后，本文得出结论：功能主义不仅适用于中国古典戏剧的翻译，而且能丰富古典戏剧的翻译策略、促进古典戏剧的海外传播。关键字：功能主义；目的论；中国古典戏剧；翻译策略；多元化II
Thirdly,tojustifyherhypothesis，theAuthorcarriesoutacomparativestudyofthreeEnglishversionsofThePeonyPavilionrenderedbyWangRongpei，CyrilBirch,andXuYuanzhongandXuMingrespectivelyinthewayinwhichthepoeticfunctionandothersub—functionsoftheexpressivetextarcrepresentedinthesaidEnglishversions，andpointsoutthedifferencesandtheircausesintermsoftranslationstrategyandtheobjectof‘‘loyalty'’bymakingacomparativestudy．Finally,thethesisreachestheconclusion：functionalismcannotonlyworkforthetranslationoftraditionalChinesedramabutalsodiversifythetranslationstrategiesandhelppromotetheoverseasdisseminationoftraditionalChinesedrama．Keywords：functionalism；Skopostheorie；traditional(classical)Chinesedrama；translationstrategy；multi—levelIII
TableofContentsACKNOWLEDGEMENTS⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯I摘要兽⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯IIAbstract⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯．．IIIChapterlIntroduction⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯··l1．1TheRationaleandSignificanceoftheProposedStudy⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯·l1．2ResearchMethodologyandDataCollection⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯21．3AnIntroductiontotheLayout⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯·2Chapter2FeasibilityofApplyingFunctionalismtotheTranslationofTCD⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯42．1AnIntroductiontotheFunctionalistTranslationTheory⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯。42．1．1BackgroundofEmergence⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯．42．1．2Functionalist’SDefinitionofTranslation⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯42．1．3Skopostheorie⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯j⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯“52．1．4AspectsofSkopostheorie⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯62．2FunctionalismandLiteraryTranslation⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯．72．2．1Hans．J．Vermeer’SView⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯．82．2．2ChristianNord’SView⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯．．92．2．3MarySnell．Homby’SView⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯．102．3FunctionalismandDramaTranslation⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯．1l2．3．1ReadabilityorPerformability一-SubjecttotheSkopos⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯112．3．2ApplicabilityofSkopostheorietoDramaTranslation⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯13Chapter3ApplicationofFunctionalismtotheTranslationofTCD⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯163．1ProblemsintheTranslationandDisseminationofTCD⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯．163．1．1Di街cultyintheTranslationofTCD⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯。163．1．2Di伍cul锣inStagingTCD⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯·l’73．I．3Di伍cuIt、，inAcceptanceofTCD⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯．183．2ApplicationofNord’SFunctionalApproach⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯·193．2．1TheTranslationBrief⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯．203．2．2STAnalysis⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯．203．3Multi—levelTranslationStrategy⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯·⋯⋯⋯⋯213．3．1Situationl：ForPrivateReading⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯。223．3．2Situation2：ForScholarlyStudy⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯．．223．3．3Situation3：ForStagePerformance⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯233．4TheProcessofSTAnalysis⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯233．5Sub-conclusion⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯．25Chapter4CaseStudy⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯．．294．1AnIntroductionto刀lPPeonyPavilion⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯294．1．1WhyThePeonyPayf打D甩?⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯294．1．2TheTranslationofThePeonyPavilion⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯．29IV
4．1．3CurrentStudyOiltheTranslatedVersions⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯304．2PoeticFunctionoftheThreeEnglishVersions⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯304．2．1InTermsofBeautyinSense⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯”314．2．2InTermsofBeaut3,inSound⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯．424．2．3InTermsofBeautyinForm⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯484．2．3Summary⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯·．514．3MajorFindings⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯．524．3．1TranslationMethods⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯5Z4．3．2objectof“Loyalty”⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯·534．3．3CauseofDifferencesofTranslationStrategy⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯．55Chapter5Conclusion⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯．．，OBibliography⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯58WorksCited⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯”58WorksConsulted⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯⋯．61V
Chapter1Introduction1．1TheRationaleandSignificanceoftheProposedStudyThetranslationoftraditionalChinesedramaisaproblematic，neglectedandpuzzlingareaforstudy．Therearefewmonographsorscholarlyarticleswrittenonit,whereaswiththerisingofChina,manymoretraditionalChinesedramashavebeenintroducedoverseas．Currently,manygovernmentalandnon—governmentalorganizationsalemakinggreateffortstodisseminatethetraditionalChinesedramaoverseasandtohelpChineseculturetogainmoreinternationalrecognition．Intheprocessofoverseasdissemination,itisneedlesstosaythatthetranslationplaysafundamentalrole．ThisthesisisanattempttoprovidesomenewideastothetranslationanddisseminationoftraditionalChinesedrama．AnneUbersfelddiscussesthedangerofbasingdramatranslmionOilthesemanticequivalencebetweenthewrittentextanditsperformance(qtd．inBassnett,2004：120)．Shebelievesthat“Thepre．eminenceofthewrittentextleadsontoanassumptionthatthereisasinglerightwayofreadingandhenceperformingthetext,(．．．．．．)．’’(ibid)PatriceParisalsoclaimsthat‘‘it(dramatranslation)callnolongerbeassimilatedtoamechanismofproductionofsemanticequivalencecopiedmechanicallyfromthesourcetext．Itisrathertobeconceivedofasanappropriationofonetextbyanother．”(qtd．inBassnett,1991：100)Inthisthesis，theauthordiscussestheapplicabilityandapplicationoffuncfionalismtodramatranslationfromboththetheoreticalandthepracticalaspects，withspecialreferencetoThePeonyPavilion．AcasestudyinvolvingtheEnglishversionsprovidedbyWangRongpei，CyrilBirchandXuYuanzhongandXuMingwillalsobemadeinordertoillustratehowthefunctionalismworks．Thethesismaybeofsignificanceinthefollowingseveralaspects：a)itexploresthefeasibilityofapplyingthefunctionalismtothetranslationofdrama；b)itmayoffersomenewideastodramatranslationbyadoptingfunctionalisminsteadofthetheoreticalpolarizationofreadabilityandperformability；c)itdisplayshowthefunctionalapproachmaybeappliedtothetranslationofadramafromChineseintoEnglish；l
d)finally,itmayserveasareferenceforthosestudentsorinterestedpeoplewhointendtomakeresearchesonthetranslationoftraditionalChinesedrama．1．2ResearchMethodologyandDataCollectionThisthesisismainlywrittenbasedontheoreticaldiscussionandcasestudy．Dataaremainlycollectedbyreading,analyzing,classifyingandsummarizingthematerialsreadbytheAuthor．Thematerialsusedforpreparingthisthesisincludearticles，thesisandmonographsconcerningThePeonyPavilion，thetranslationofdramaandthefunctionalisttranslationtheory．1．3AnIntroductiontotheLayoutInChapter1，theAuthormainlyintroducestherationaleandsignificanceoftheproposedstudy,theresearchmethodologyanddatacollectionofthisthesisaswellasthelayoutofthewholethesis．InChapter2，theAuthorfocusesonthefeasibilityofapplyingfunctionalismtothetranslationoftraditionalChinesedrama．Shestartsfromintroducingthefunctionalisttranslationtheory,includingthebackgroundoftheemergenceoffunctionalisttranslationtheory,thefunctionalist’Sdefinitionoftranslation，theSkopostheorieandtheaspectsoftheSkopostheorie．Afterwards，shecontinuestodiscusstheapplicabilityoffunctionalismtoliterarytranslation．AftersummarizingtheviewsofHansVermeer，ChristianNordandMarySnell—Homby,theAuthorreachesaconclusionthatthereisnostrictdivisionbetweentheliterarytextandthenon—literarytextintheactional，communicativeandlinguisticperspective．Thedifferencebetweenthetwocategoriesoftextsisoneof“degree”butnotof‘'kind'’(Snell-Homby,2001：50)．Therefore，iffunctionalisttheoryworksfornon—literarywork，italsoworksforliterarytranslation．ThentheAuthordiscussestheapplicabilityoffunctionalismtodramatranslation．ShereviewsSusanBassnett’SandPatricePavis’SviewsconcemingtheatretranslationandstatesthatpolarizationinthetheoriesoftheatretranslationshouldbereplacedbytheadequacyfortheSkopos，undertheguidanceofSkopostheorie．BydrawingonSnell-Homby’Sconceptof“spectrum”，theauthorproposesthatthedichotomyofreadabilityandperformabilityshouldberesolvedintoaspectrum．2
InChapter3，theAuthormainlyfocusesontheapplicationoffunctionalismtothetranslationoftraditionalChinesedrama．ShepointsouttheproblemsexistinginthetranslationoftraditionalChinesedramaanditsoverseasdissemination．Thenaccordingly,shesuggeststhatafunctionalapproachbeadoptedinthetranslationprocesstosolvetheseproblems．FollowingNord’Sfunctionalapproach,theAuthoridentifiesthe‘'top-down”translationprocedure．Asaresultofthisprocedure，shebringsforthamulti-leveltranslationstrategyforthetranslationoftraditionalChinesedrama．ShethencontinuestoanalyzethethreemajorsituationsofthetranslationoftraditionalChinesedramaandputsforwarddifferentmethodsfordifferentsituations．Chapter4，theAuthorprobesintotheapplicationoffunctionalismtothetranslationoftraditionalChinesedramawithspecialreferenceto砌PPeonyPavilion．AcasestudyinvolvingthetranslatedversionsofCyrilBirch,WangRongpeiandXuYuanzhongandXuMingiscarriedout．,wheretheAuthorcomparesthepoeticfunctionsandsub·functionsofthethreeEnglishversionsintermsofbeautyinsense，beautyinsoundandbeautyinform．Throughadetailedanalysisandcomparison，theAuthorpointsoutthemajordifferencesofthethreeversionsintranslationstrategy／methodandtheobjectof‘qoyalty'’．Itisfoundt11atthedifferenceinthechoiceoftranslationstrategyhingespartlyonthedifferentaddresseeskeptinthemindofthethreetranslators．ItisprovedthatbeingawareoftheSkoposinthetranslationprocessCanhelpthetranslatortoadoptaconsistentglobalstrategyandthusimprovesthetranslatuminan2Lll-aroundway．3
Chapter2FeasibilityofApplyingFunctionalismtotheTranslationofTCD2．1AnIntroductiontotheFunctionalistTranslationTheory2．1．1BackgroundofEmergenceAccordingtoMarySnell-Hornby,thereare‘'twomainschoolsoftranslationtheorywhichnowdominatethesceneinEurope”．(Snell-Homby,2001：14)OneistheLeipzigSchoolandtheotheristheSaarbruckenSch001．(谢天振，2008：135)TheLeipzigSchoolisalinguisticallyoriented——～——school，whichaimstostudytranslationasarigorouslyscientificdisciplineandadoptsviewsandmethodsoftheexactscience．(Snell．Hornby,2001：14)TheSaarbruckenSchoolbasestheirtheoryonthetransformationalgrammar(ibid)．Bothschoolstakeequivalence弱theaSsessmentcriteriaoftranslation(ibid)．However,scholarsgraduallyfredthatitisimpossibletoachieveequivalenceinsomecasesforthetranslation,asequivalencerequiresadegreeofsymmetrybetweentheSTandtheTT,whichdoesnotalwaysexistbetweenlanguagepairs．Whileinothersituations，itisnotnecessaryatalltoachieveequivalence，forexample，theadaptationofafictionforstageperformance．Asaresult，manyscholarscometofindthatthetheorytheystudyisnotintightconnectionwiththepracticaltranslation．Thisgivesanimpetustotheemergenceofthefunctionalisttranslationtheory．2．1．2Functionalist’SDefinitionofTranslationTherehavebeenmainlyfourcontributorstotheformationofthefunctionalisttranslationtheory,i．e．KatharineReiss，HansVermeer,JustaHolz．M冱ntfftriandChristiareNord．Alltheabovefourfunctionalistsdespisetheideaofmerelytranslatingwords，roundwhichthevariousprevioustranslationtheoriesrevolved．Theydisagreewiththeclassicaltranslationtenetofequivalenceandstressthefunctionoftranslatedtexts．Theyhavedefinedtranslationinanewway．In1986，Vermeersummarizedhispreviousdefinitionsoftranslation(translatedintoEnglishbyMary4
Snell—Hornbyinl995)：IhavedefinedtranslationaSinformationofferedinalanguagezofcultureZwhichimitatesinformationofferedinlanguageaofcultureASOastofulfillthedesiredfunction．Thatmeansthatatranslationisnotthetranscodingofwordsorsentencesfromonelanguageintoanother,butacomplexactioninwhichsomeoneprovidesinformationaboutatextundernewfunctional，culturalandlinguisticconditionsandinanewsituation,wherebyformalcharacteristicsareimitatedasfaraspossible(qtd．inSnell—Horny,2001：4们Probingintotheabovedefinitionoftranslation,weCallfmdthatfromVermeer’Sp0缸ofview,translationis：●action-based；itisviewedasaction,across—culturalevent、)l，ithapurpose．●function-dominant；thepurposeofthetranslationistofulfillthedesiredfunction；thereforetheapproachtothetranslationisdynamic，dependingOlltheaimofthetranslation．●culture—oriented；theculturalelementsofthesourcetextandthatofthetargettextistakenintoconsideration,andtherefore，thetranslatorshouldnotonlybebilingualbutalSObicultural．●communicative；translationisnotequaltotranscoding；itisnotmerelyamatteroflanguagebutacross—culturalcommunication．Formanyyears，HansVermeerhasbeenoneoftheleadingfiguresinGermantranslationtheory．HisbasicconceptispresentedinthebookGroundworkforaGeneralTheoryofTranslationwhichWasCO—publishedbyhimandhisteacherReissin1984．Inthisbook,VermeerputforwardtheSkoposthoerie，aimingtoprovideageneralruleapplicabletoallkindsoftexts．SkopostheorieisgenerallyregardedasthecoretheoryoftheGermanschoolofthefunctionalisttranslationtheory．DrawingonHolz-Miintt黼’Stranslationalactiontheory,Vermeerviewstranslationasaspecifickindofhumanaction．Likeanyotherhumanaction，translationalsohasapurpose，i．e．askopos．“Skopos"’isthetechnicaltermforthepurpose，aim，orobjectiveofatranslation．Basedonthepostulatethatallhumanactionisdeterminedbyitspurpose，Vermeer5
deriveshisskoposrule：itistheskoposofthetargettextthatdeterminesthetranslationmethodsandstrategies．Vermeerclaimsthatneverwillatranslationbepossiblewithomawell—definedobjective，anditisthisveryobjectivewhichalwaysdeterminesthestrategytobeadoptedSOastoachievethatspecificobjectiveinthebestpossiblewayinthespecifictargetsituation．ApartfromtheSkoposrule，Vermeerhasalsodevelopedothertworules，thecoherenceruleandthefidelityrule．Thecoherencerulestatesthatthetargettextproducedbythetranslatormustbecoherent谢nlthetargetsituationtoallowtheintendeduserstounderstandit．(Nord，2001：32)Thismeansthatthetranslatorshouldfullyconsiderthetargetreaders’backgroundsituationandknowledge．Thefidelityrulestatesthatthetargettextmustbefaithfultothesourcetext．Inotherwords，thetargettextmustimitatethesemanticandformalaspectsofthesourcetextmaximally．(ibid)Theinformationthetranslatorencodedforthetargettextshouldbecoherent——．．．．．．．．．．．．．．．．．，———．————withtheinformationthetranslatorreceivedfromthesoBrcetext．IntheSkopostheorie，theabove-mentionedthreerulesareofdifferentimportanceforthetranslation．TheSkoposruleisthetoprankingruleandisthemostimportantdecisivefactorforthetranslation．ThefidelityroleissubordinatetothecoherenceruleandboththerulesaresubordinatetotheSkoposrule．2．1．4．1TheoreticalBasisofSkopostheorieThetheoreticalbasisofVermeer’SSkopostheorieisthetheoryoftranslationalactiondevelopedbyJustaHolz—Mitnttafi．Thetheoryoftranslationalactiondrawsonthecommunicationtheoryandactiontheory,aimingtoprovideguidelinesapplicabletoallkindsoftranslationsituations．Holz—M{inttLfiseestranslationprimarilyasaprocessofinterculturalcommunicationwhosepurposeistoproduceafunctionallyadequatetextinspecificsituationsandcontexts．Inordertodistinguishhertheoryfromtraditionalapproach,Holz—Manttaribasicallyavoidsusingtheterm‘'translation’’instrictsenseinherwork．‘‘Shearguesthatbecausetheverb‘translate’(abersetzen)requiresagrammaticalobject,ittendstodirectattentionbacktowardsthetextthatistobetranslated,tothedetrimentofthetextthatistobeproduced，anorientationwhichshefindsparticularlyunhelpful．”(qtd．inSchiiffner2004：3)InHok—M百日_ttiirj’Stheory,thesourcetext6
playsaverylimitedrole．Ithasnointrinsicvalueandmaybemodifiedtoagreatextentintheinterestofthetargetreader．(ibid)Inaword,thesourcetextisabsolutelysubordinatetOthepurposeofthetranslationalaction．2⋯142TheStatusoftheSource1kxtIntheequivalence．basedtranslationtheories，thesourcetextgenerallyholdsasacredanddominantposition．InVermeer’SSkopostheorie，thesourcetext,tlleeffectsofthesourcetextonitsrecipient,andthepurposeoftheoriginalauthordonotholdadominantpositionanymore．Itisnotthesefactorsthatdeterminethetranslationprocess．ThesourcetextisviewedbyVermeerasaIlofferofinformation(Nord,2001：37)．VermeerclaimsthattheSOUrCetextiS“dethroned”(ibid)．Asaresult，intheSkopostheorie，theequivalencetotheSOUrCetextisnotan⋯一essentialrequirementforthetranslator,andinstead,adequacytotheSkoposisrequired(ibid：36)．2．1．4．3VarietiesoftheTargetTextTheSkopostheorienotonlytakestheneedsandexpectationsoftheaddresseesintoconsiderationbutalsojustifiestheexistenceofavarietyoftargettextsforoneSOurCetext．Inmostcases，whentheSkoposofthetargettextandtheSkoposofthesourcetextaredifferent，achangeoffunctionisrequiredandthusafreetranslationisadvocated．IncasetheSkoposisthesameforthetargettextandtheSOurCetext,fidelitytothesourcetextshallprevail．BySkopostheorie，atranslationcanrangefromextremelyliberaltoextremelyliteral，dependingonthepurposeofthetargettext．Everythingbetweenthetwoextremesisreasonable．2．2FunctionalismandLiteraryTranslationBothinPeterNewmark’SATextbookofTranslationandinSusanBassett’STranslationStudies,dramaiscategorizedunderseriousliterature．Therefore，theAuthorwillstartfromjustifyingtheapplicabilityofthefunctionalisttheorytoliterarytranslation．Throughinvestigations，theAuthorfindsthatalotofscholarshaveprovidedconvincingevidencestotheapplicabilityoffunctionalismtoliterarytranslation．7
2．2．1Hans．J．Vermeer’sViewAccordingtoVermeer,objectionstotheapplicationofthefunctionalisttheorytailbeclassifiedintotwotypes：(1)Notallactionshaveallintention．(Nord，2001：109)(2)Notalltranslationshaveapurpose．(Nord，2001：110)Asforobjection(1)，Vermeerarguesthatbehaviorthatdoesnothaveanyintentionalityorpurposecannotberegardedasanaction．Andeventhereareactionswhichdonothaveapurpose；theseactionsareinterpretedasbeingpurposefulbytheparticipantsorobservers·Vermeer’Sviewisshownasfollow：“Objection(1)，then,canbeansweredasfollows：ifagivenactofbehaviorhasneithergoalnorfunctionnorintention,asregardsitsrealization,resultormanner,thenitisnotallactioninthetechnicalsenseoftheword．"(Vermeer,2004：230)AsforObjection(2)，VermeerbelievesthatitCanbefurtherinterpretedas：a)Theclaimthatthetranslatordoesnothaveanyspecificpurposeinmindwhentranslating‘whatisinthesourcetext’；b)Theclaimthataspecifictranslationpurposewouldlimitoratleastrestricttherangeofpossibletranslationproceduresandthustherangeofpossibleinterpretationsofthetargettextincomparisontothoseofthesourcetext；andC)theclaimthatthetranslatorhasnospecificaddresseesinmindwhentranslatingthesourcetext．(Nord,2001：110)Astoclaima)，Vermeerbelievesthatalltranslationshaveapurpose；thereisatleastonebasicpurpose：conveyinginformationtothereaders．What’Smore，ifatranslatorneedstomakechoicesbetweentwoOrmorethantwopossiblemodesofbehaviorinthetranslationprocess，thetranslator’Schoicemustbeguidedbyacertainpurpose．Astoclaimb)，Vermeerstatesthatagivenpurposewillsurelyruleoutotherinterpretationswhichareconsideredpointlessfortheparticulartargetaudience．ButtherecanbeonetranslationpurposewhichaimstoproduceexactlythesamerangeofpossibleinterpretationsasthatofferedbytheST,althoughhowfarthisCanbeachievedisnotSure．Astoclaimc)，Vermeerdeemsthatatextproducergenerallyhasavaguenotionofwhomthey冀
areaddressingintheproductionprocess．Hebelievesthat：“Aslong舔onebelievesthatoneisexpressingoneselfina“comprehensible”way,and缎longasoneassumes，albeitunconsciously,thatpeoplehavewidelyvaryinglevelsofintelligenceandeducation,thenonemustinfactbeorientingoneselftowardsacertainrestrictedgroupofaddressees，notnecessarilyeonseiously山utunconsciously"．(Vermeer,2004：233)2．2．2ChristianNord’sViewSomescholarsclaimsthatonedistinctivefeatureofliteratureisthatitlackscommunicativepurpose，andthereforethefunctionalapproachcannotbeappliedtotheliterarytranslation．Tocounteractthisview,Nordfirstanalyzestheactionalaspectoftheintra-culturalliterarycommunicationandthencomparestheliteraryfeatureswiththefeaturesofnon-literaryworks．ShefindsthatnotonesinglefactorCandefineliterarinessonitsown,becauseeachofthemCanbefoundinnon．1iterarytexts．(Nord,2001：82)Literaryworkshavetheirowncommunicativepurpose．Eveniftheliteraryworkdoesnothaveapurpose，thetranslationisalwaysorientedtOsomeaudience，andthenissupposedtoproducespecialeffects0nthereaders．(ibid)Literarytranslationistraditionallybasedontheequivalencetheory．ItisstatedbyReiss‘‘Inliterarytranslation,thetranslatorisexpectedtotransfernotonlythemessageofthesourcetext，butalsothespecificwaythemessageisexpressedinthesourcelanguage”(Nora，2001：89)．AccordingtoNord，itisalmostimpossibletoachieveequivalencebecausetheequivalencerequirementsinfouraspectsincludingtheinterpretationoftheST,thetextfunction,theculturaldistanceandthetexteffectimpossibletoachieve．Nordthenputforwardsfour‘"Skopossuggestions”totakeplacethefourequivalencerequirements：Skopossuggestion1：Thetranslatorinterpretsthesourcetextnotonlywithregardtothesender≥intentionbutalsowithregardto如compatibilitywiththetargetsituation．(Nord，2001：92)Skopossuggestion2：Thetargettextshouldbecomposedinsuchawaythatit#tillsfunctions切thetargetsituationthatcompatiblewiththesender≥intention．(ibid)Skopossuggestion3：ThetextworldofthetranslationshouMbeselectedaccordingtOtheintendedtarget-textfunction．(ibid)9
Skopossuggestion4：ThecodeelementsshouMbeselectedinsuchawaythatthetarget-texteffectcorrespondstOtheintendedtarget-textfunctions．(ibid：93)Nordbelievesthatfunctionalistnotonlyworksinliterarytranslationbutalsobringsthepossibilityofagreatvarietyofliterarytranslations．2．2．3MarySnell-Hornby’sViewInTranslationasaCross·-culturalEvent,Snell-Hombyarguesfromthelinguisticperspectivethattherearenostrictdivisionbetweenliterarylanguageandordinarylanguageandthereforetheliterarytranslationand‘‘other'’translationshallbetreatedequally．Snell—Hombystartsfromcriticizing‘'Saussureandichnotomies’，’whichmakesadistinctionbetweenlangue，astheabstractlanguagesystem，andparole，astheconcreteutteranceoftext．一～Bydichnotomy,thelangueisthelanguage—systemwhichthelinguistdescribes(qtd．inSnell-Homby,2001：48)，while‘'reallifeutteranceswereimperfectorindividualisticreflectionsofthesystemwithinexplicablequirksanddeviationsthatmadethemunfitforscientificstudy．’’(Snell_Homby,2001：48)Ifthisistrue，mostofthereal-lifelanguageshouldbedeemedasbeingdeviantbydichnotomy．Snell-Hombythusassertsthatthedichnotomyisincompatiblewiththerealitiesoflanguage．Instead，sheresolvesthedichnotomyintoaspectrumwiththeabstractsystematoneendandconcretetextattheotherend，嘶也thelanguageprototypeandunmarkednorminbetween．FromSnell—Homby’Spointofview,normisnotentirelyprescriptive．Fortranslation，itistheprototypeandconventionatthesametime．Forexample，thegrammaticalnormismoreprescriptivethanthelexicalnorm．Howprescriptivethenormisvariesfromculturetoculture．SheespeciallyagreeswithVermeerwhousedtheanalogyofthe“game’’andthevarious‘'rulesofthegame”toillustratetheinterplaybetweennormandtext．(Snell-Homby,2001：50)Normsmustbeknownandobserved，buttheyalsoprovideinfinitecreativepotential(ibid)．Peopleusethecreativepotentialinacontrolledwayandproducenumerousrelationshipsbetweennormandtext,whichalsoresultsinacontactpo诚betweenliterarylanguageandordinarylanguage(ibid)．AccordingtoSnell-Homby,literarylanguageshouldnotbeconsidereddeviant,becausenormisnotarigidandprescriptivelineofdemarcation(ibid)．Literarylanguage，particularlypoetic1n
language，exploitstheentirecapacityofalanguagesystemandinvolvesthecreativeextensionofthelanguagenorm(ibid：51)．Snell-HombyespeciallyagreeswithCoseriu’Sviewthat“poetryisnot‘deviance’fromotherkindsoflanguage，buttheveryepitomeoflanguage，therealizationofalllanguagepotential”．(qtd．inSnell-Homby,2001：51)Herviewinthisarticleissummarizedbyherselfasfollows：Suchanapproachlaysthefoundationforwhatiscentraltothisstudy：theremovalofthestillrigiddivisionbetweenliteraryand“other’languageingeneral．andbetweenliteraryand“other'’translationinparticular．AsVermeerpointsout(1986：35)，thedifferenceisoneofdegreeandnotofkind．Heretwowearedealing，notwithapolarizeddichotomy,butwithaspectrumthatadmitsblendsandoverlappings·AswaspointedOutabove(1．3．2)，evenspeciallanguagesarecharacterizedbymetaphor,andjournalisticlanguageaboundsin‘‘literary"devicessuchasalliterationandword-play．ItisaLllaquestionofqualityandintensity,notoneofabasicdifference．(Snell—Homby,2001：50_51)Since，accordingtotheabovethreescholars，therearenostrictdivisionbetweenliterarylanguageandnon—literarylanguageintheactional，communicativeandlinguisticperspective，wecanthenreachsuchaconclusion：iffunctionalisttheoryworksfornon-literarywork,italsoworksforliterarytranslation,includingdramatictranslation．2．3FunctionalismandDramaTranslation2．3．1ReadabilityorPerformability—SubjecttotheSkoposThetheoriesoftheatretranslationarepolarizedattwoextremes，i．e．performabilityandreadability．EkateriniNikolarea(Nikolarea,2002)declaresthatatoneextreme，scholars，especiallysemioticiansoftheatretranslation,claimthatthetranslationofdramatictextgoesbeyondtheinterlingualtranslationandshouldbeorientedtowardsperformability；whileotherscholars，withSusanBassnettastheleadingfigure，opposeperformance—orientedtranslationandstressthereadabilityinthetranslation．SusanBassnettintheearly1980sclaimedthatperformabilityshouldtakeprecedenceoverlinguistictextinthetranslationofdramatictext．InSpecificProblemsofLiteraryTranslation，Bassnettstartswithassumingthatdramatictext“isreadassomethingincomplete，ratherthanasafullyroundedunit,sinceitisonlyinperformancethatthefullpotentialofthetextisrealized”．
(Bassnett,2004：119·120)SheassertsthatitWasimpossibletoseparatetextfromperformancebecauseitisthedialecticalrelationshipbetweenthesetwoelementsthatconstitutetheatre．(ibid：120)Therefore，whenadramatictextistranslatedintoanotherlanguage，itshouldbehandleddifferently．Itisveryriskytohandleadramatictextlikeotherliterarygenres，forthesupremacyoftheliterarytextwillinevitablylimittheperceptionofperformancetomere”translation"．(ibid)Sheassumedthatapartfromstagedirections，adramatictextgenerallyinvolvesotherstructuralfeatureswhichmakeitperformable(ibid：122)．AtranslatorshouldidentifythesestructuresandtranslatethemintotheTL，eventhoughthismayleadtomajorshiftsonthelinguisticandstylisticplanes．(ibid)Inthearticle"ProblemsofTranslationfortheStage：InterculturalandPost-ModernTheatre”，PatricePavisalsoassertsthattextisjustoneoftheelementsofperformance．Hedeemsthat“it(dramatranslation)cannolongerbeassimilatedtoamechanismofproductionofsemanticequivalencecopiedmechanicallyfromthesourcetext．Itisrathertobeconceivedof硒allappropriationofonetextbyanother．”(qtd．inBassnett,1991：100)Itismuchmorethanapurelylinguistictranslationanditshould‘'takesplaceonthelevelofthemiseensceneasawhole”．(ibid)Laterinthemiddleofthe1980s，Bassnett’Snotiontowardsdramatranslationchangeddrasticallyfromperformabilitytoreadability．Inthearticle"WaysthroughtheLabyrinth：StrategiesandMethodsforTranslatingTheatreTexts，，’shedisregardsherpreviousattitudethatthetranslatorneedtostressperformabilityduringthetranslationofthedramatictext．Shestatesthat：”Itso,mstomethatthetimehascomet0setaside”performability”舔acriterionfortranslatingtoo，andtofocusmorecloselyonthelinguisticstructuresofthetextitselLFor,afterall，itisonlywithinthewrittenthattheperformablecallbeencodedandtherealeinfiniteperformancedecodingspossibleinanyplaytext．Thewrittentext，Iroudthoughitmaybe，isthelaWmaterialonwhichthetranslatorhastoworkanditiswiththewrittentext,ratherthatwithahypotheticalperformance，thatthetranslatormustbegin．”(Bassnett,1985：102；qtd．inNikolarea,2002)．Inher“StillTrappedintheLabyrinth”，BassnettfurtherascertainstheroleoftranslatorandadvocatesthatthetranslatorshouldgobacktoconcernwitllthesignsofthetextitselffBassnett,12
2001：107)．Shedeemsthatitisimpossibleandnotnecessarytodeducethegesticsubtextfromthetargettext(ibid：90—92)．Thegesticsubtextbelongstothepsychologicalrealismandispresentedandunderstooddifferentlybypeoplefromdifferentbackgroundatdifferenttime(ibid：107)．Moreover,shequotesTadeuszKowzan’Scategorizationofexpressioninthemakingofaperformanceandarguesthatthewrittensystemismerelyoneelementinthestageperformance(ibid：991．Toexplorehowthewrittentextworkswimtheothersignsystemsisthedirectorandactor’Staskbutnotthetranslator’Stask．(ibid)Finally,sheappealsforthetranslatorstostopseekingforthegesticsubtextandfocuseson‘'thelinguisticandparalinguisticaspectsofthewrittentext'’(ibid：107)，i．e．thereadabilityofthetext．Thetheoreticalpolarizationofreadabilityandperformabilityisnotfeasibleinpractice．TheAuthoragreeswitllEkateriniNikolarea’Sviewthat‘'therearenoprecisiondivisionsbetweenaperformance-orientedtranslationandareader-orientedtranslation,butratherthereexistsablurringofborderlines．”(Nikolarea,2002)Afunctionalapproachtothetranslationofdramawillendtheargumentsbetweenperformabilityandreadability．XiongTingtingalsodiscussedthetranslationofdramaundertheframeworkofSkopostheorie．Shearguesthatifthedramatranslationisforperformance，theyardstickforassessingdramatranslationshouldbe‘'performabili矿’andifitisforreading，theassessingcriteriashould‘'readability"．(熊婷婷，2006)Fromthefunctionalperspective，whetherreadabilityorperformabilityshouldbestressedoracompromiseshouldbemadebetweenthetwoextremesiscompletelyduetothe"ITreceiver2．3．2ApplicabilityofSkopostheorietoDramaTranslationInfact,theSkoposofthetranslationofadramavariesfromsituationtosituation．PeterNewmarkclaimsthat“agreatplaymaybetranslatedforthereadingpublic’Senjoyment，forscholarlystudy,orforperformanceonstage．"(Newmark，2001：173)Nidaalsostatesthat：“Thetranslationofadramatobereadinthequietofone’Shomeisgenerallyquitedifferentfromonewhichisdesignedtobeactedonthestage．”(Nid如2001：94)Inher“StillTrappedintheLabyrinth",SusanBassnettcategorizesthetranslationofdramaintonon--performance·-orientedreadingsandperformance—orientedreadings．Bassnettevencategorizedthereceiversoflj
performance—orientedreadingsintoseventypes，includingtheplayreadsolelyaSliterature，thepost-performancereading，thedirectors’Sreading，theactor’Sreading，thedesigner’Sreading，thedramaturgicalreading，therehearsalreadingandSOon．(Bassnett,2001：101)AlthoughBassnettfinallyholds‘'readability'’asthetenetfordramatranslation,herstatementshereprovesthatdifferentreadershavetotallydifferentrequirementsfortheTTofadrama．DengDialsostatesthataccordingtoBassnett’Scategorization,‘‘itisunrealistictoadoptonlyoneapproachtothetranslationofdrama,淞itisimpossibleforatranslatedversiontoserveasagoodliteraryreadingandagoodperformancescriptatthesametime”．(邓笛，2008，mytranslation)Alltheabovestatementsindicatethatforthesamedramatherecallbeavarietyoftargetreadersrangingfromprivatereaderstodirectorsandactors．Itisobviousthatforaprivatereaderwhomainlyintendstoknowaboutthestorycontainedinthedrama,itisofnonecessitytostresstheperformabilityofthetranslation．WhileforallactorwhoistheTTuser,performabilityisofhighlyimportance，especiallywhentheactorisnotabletoperceivethegesturalpatterningimpliedbutnotdemonstratedinthedramatictextbecauseoflinguisticandculturalbarriers．Fromreaderstoactors，therequirementforthetextalsorangesfromreadabilitytoperformability．TheAuthorthussuggeststhatafunctionalapproachbeadoptedtohandlethedramatictext．ThewholetranslationprocessshouldbesubjecttotheSkopostheorie．BydrawingonSnell·Hornby’Sconceptof“spectrum”，theAuthorthusproposesthatthedichotomyofreadabilityandperformabilityshouldbereplacedbya“fluidspectrum”．Atoneendliereadabilityandtheprivatereader；attheotherendlieperformabilityandtheactor．Inbetweenthetwoends，therearealotofotherpossibilities，suchastranslationforsubtitlingortranslationforscholarlystudy．ThefollowingdiagramdisplaystheAuthor’SpresuppositionwhichincludesthemostpossiblefourtypesoftranslatumsofatraditionalChinesedrama．Here，thegenreoftheTTmaybedifferentfromthatoftheST,duetotherequirementoftheSkopos．E位d0fTT—Re叶m够——compro了远eofV撕ouSd’∞3——Pe仃。肋捌n秒№骶砒r一蹦Vate删er一&№M1reader一舢d{fnce—ArGenreofTT·—-----—·Fiction--——---·—-··-——--·LiteraryDrama··——-——·Subtitles-·-————----·----Script14
ThediagramshowsthatdifferentreadersusetheTTfordifferentpurposes．Thisindicatesthatitisnotfeasibletoadoptoneuniversaltranslatingstrategyforalltypesoftargetreaders．Forexample，ifadramatictextistranslatedforprivatereading，itisessentialtohighlightthereadabilityofthetargettext．AndadaptingtheSTintoafictionwouldbeagoodpreference，asthefictionistheconventionalgenretotellastoryandisveryeasytoreadandunderstand．Onthecontrary,forstageperformance，theperformableaspectoftheSTshouldnotbeignored．Thetranslationshouldbe‘'readable，pleasanttotheear,andeasytoreadaloud．”(余光中，2002：127，mytranslation)Inbetweenthetwoextremes，therearecompromisesofdifferentdegrees．Forscholarlyreaders，readabilityisthemainrequirement，butperformabilitycannotbeignored．AscholarlyreaderwouldprefertoknowtheperformableaspectscontainedintheST(suchasthestageinstructions)inordernottomissusefulinformation．Fortheaudienceinthetheatrewhoreadssubtitles，performabilityisthemainrequirementbutreadabilityisalsoimportanLsubtitlesshouldmatchtheactor’Sperformanceandmeanwhilebereadable．Apartfromreadabilityandperformability,otheraspectsconcerningtranslatingmethodsshouldalsobetakenintoconsideration．Forexample，ifthetranslationisforscholarlyreading，allliterarycodesandstylisticfeaturesoftheSTshouldberepresentedinthe"iTwiththehelpofcompensationmethodsSOthatthescholarlyreaderscanhaveadequateaccesstotheoriginalstyle．Ifthetranslationisforsubtitling，thetemporalandspatialrestrictionsshouldalsobetakenintoconsideration．Thedetailsoftheseaspectswillbe缸rtherdiscussedinChapter3．15
Chapter3ApplicationofFunctionalismtotheTranslationofTCD3．1ProblemsintheTranslationandDisseminationofTCDForalongtime，thetranslationandoverseasdisseminationoftraditionalChinesedramahavebeenaproblematicandpuzzlingarea．Throughinvestigations，theAuthorfindsthattheproblemswhichhavebeensummarizedbymanyscholarscanbasicallybedividedintothefollowingthreetypes．3．1．1DifficultyintheTranslationofTCDFirstofall，itisextremelydifficulttotranslatetraditionalChinesedramaintoEnglish．ProfessorXieJiangnan,aDoctorofEnglishandAmericandrama,whoisinchargeofthe‘‘OverseasDisseminationProjectofTraditionalChineseDrama'’initiatedbyRenminUniversityofChina,believesthattherearealotofdi伍curiesinthetranslationoftraditionalChinesedrama,whichneedtobeconqueredurgently．Firstly,Xiebelievesthatitisverydifficulttotranslatepoetrycontainedinthedramatictext(田文，2008)．Thetraditionaldramatictextisusuallycomposedofprosedialogue，intonedversesandarias．111eversesandariasmaytaketheformofshi(poeminregularmeterwithregularlines)orci(poeminregularmeter埘mirregularlines)．Shiorci，whichmarksthesummitofChineseliterature．CanbesaidtobethemostdifficultpartofthetranslationofTCD．Ifliterarytranslationisthemosttestingtypeoftranslation(Newrnark，2001：162)，thenthetranslationofpoetryshowsthemostchallengingnatureofthistask．ItisnowonderthatRobertFrost，thefamousAmericanpoet,claimsthat‘'poetryiswhatgetlostinthetranslation'’andthatsomecriticsevenassertsthatpoetryisuntranslatable．Secondly,XiepointsoutthattraditionalChinesedramaaboundsinrichrhetoricaldevicesaswellasdramaticterminologieswhichareverydifficulttotranslate．(田文，2008)Ontheonehand，theplaywrightgenerallyemploysagreatvarietyoffiguresofspeechsuchasallusions，metaphors，puns，parallelismandrepetitiontoenhancetheartisticflavorofthedramatic16
language．Ontheotherhand，thedramaticterminologieswhicharespecifictotheChineseculturearestrangeevenforordinaryChinesepeople，nottomentionWesternreaders．ZhangZhenin2004claimsthat‘'thephrase‘嫦娥’appearsfourtimesintheshort50．wordstanzaofScene26；totranslateitinto‘ChangE，afairladydwellinginthemoon’，‘ChangE，Artemis’，‘Diana’or‘GoddessoftheMoon’isaproblemwhichthetranslatorshouldponderon．”(张政，2004，mytranslation)Howtohandlethisproblem，i．e．totranslateliterallyorliberally,toadoptdomesticationorforeignization,tobeSOUl℃e—cultureorientedortarget-cultureoriented，isadilemmathateverytranslatorshouldface．ThetranslatorneednotonlyfullyconveythecontentoftheSTbutalsoensuretheeffectOilthereader,meanwhiletakingintotheaccounttherhythm，rhyme，estheticimage，culturalconnotationsoftheST．Thirdly,Xiepointsoutthat‘'therearefewforeignSinologistsortranslatorswhoareproficientinChineseandinterestedintraditionalChinesedramaconcurrently'’．(田文，2008，mytranslation)Besides，onlywhenthetranslatorisequipped、)I『i廿1essentialprofessionalknowledgeofdrama,Canheundertakethetaskofdramatictranslationwell．ItisthedemandofomnipotenceofthetranslatorthatcausesthetranslationoftraditionalChinesedramaatoughertask．TheabovearethethreemajordifficultiesexistinginthetranslationofTCD．3．1．2DifficultyinStagingTCDItisverydifficulttostagetraditionalChinesedramainaforeignlanguage．AccordingtoCyrilBirch(Birch，2001：174—175)，beforethetwentiethcentury,onlyasmallnumberofTCDshavebeenrenderedintoEnglish,theimportantpiecesofwhichincludeTheOrphanoftheZhao(赵氏孤儿)，TheAutumnintheHanPalace(汉宫秋)，AnHeirinHisOldAge(老生JL)，TheCircleofChalk(灰栏记)．Amongtheseplays，onlyTheOrphanoftheZhaohasbeenstagedinEnglishandcapturedpopularattentionduetothesuccessfuladaptationbythegreatplaywrightVohah．Intothetwentiethcentury,moreTCDshavebeenrenderedintoEnglish．AccordingtothestatementofCyrilBirch(Birch,2001：175—181)，thefamousonesincludetheRomanceoftheWesternChamber(西厢记)，TheInjusticetoDouE(窦娥冤)，LiKuiCarriesThorns(李逵负荆)，RainontheXiaoxiang(潇湘雨)，TheRiverside胁f，fD门(望江亭)，RescuedbyaCoquette(救风尘)，SellingRiceatChengzhou(陈州粜米)，砌PFloweroftheBackCourtyard17
18
performancestylesandconventionscombineinanewwhole，wheretheaudienceisactivelyengagedintheprocessofdecodingandisalwaysdeniedtotalunderstanding'’．(Bassnett＆Lefevere，2001：106)TheabovethreeaspectsaxethemajorproblemsexistinginthetranslationofTCDanditsoverseasdissemination．Althoughtheseproblemsaxethorny,theyCallbesolvedtOagreatextentwithafunctionalapproach．Inthefollowingpartofthischapter,theAuthorwilldiscussbowtOapplythefunctionalapproachinthetranslationapproach．3．2ApplicationofNord’sFunctionalApproachChristianeNordisthedoyermeoftheGermanschooloffunctionalisttranslationtheory．Hans．Vermeer’SSkopostheorieprovidesageneralrulefortranslation；butitisNordwhohasbroughtaboutthespecificalprocessforfunctionaltranslation．Nordcriticizesthetraditionaltranslationprocesswhichstressesthelexicalorsyntacticequivalenceandclaimsthatitisa‘'bottom。up'’approachwhichregardstranslating弱code-switching．Nord(2001：67)pointsOutthatthisapproachworksinsuchaprocess：●Consideraboutlinguistictext-surfacestructure；●Consideraboutconventions；●Consideraboutpragmatics．Sheassertsthatthisapproachmaycauselinguisticinterferencesandmistakesandmakethetranslatormisstheholisticfunctionofthetext．Toreplacethis“bottom-up'’approach,Nordthenputsforwarda‘'top-down'’approach,whichissummarizedbyMundayasfollows：a)Theintendedfunctionofthetranslationshouldbedecided(documentaryorinstrumental)．b)ThosefunctionalelementsthatwillneedtobeadaptedtotheTTaddressees’situationhavetobedetermined(afteranalysisofthetranslationcommissionasin1above)．C)Thetranslationtypedecidesthetranslationstyle(source—cultureortarget-cultureoriented)．d)Theproblemsofthetextcarlthenbetackledatalowerlinguisticlevel(asintheSTanalysisin2above)．Munday(2001：83)AccordingtONord，thisapproachhelpsthetranslatortOseethefunctionofthetextinitscommunicativesituation．Withthismethod,theSTthenCanbeadaptedtOtheTTreceiver’S19
situation．3．2．1TheTranslationBriefAccordingtoNord’Sfunctionalapproach,thetranslationbriefisveryimportantforthetranslationprocess．Beforethetranslatorsstarttowork,theyshouldfirstconsultthetranslationbriefwhichdefinesthecommunicativesituationoftheSTinthesourcecultureandtheTTinthetargetculture．Nordstatesthatthetranslationbriefshouldcontainthefollowingaspects：●the(intended)textfunction(s)，●thetarget-textaddressee(s)，●the(prospective)timeandplaceoftextreception,●themediumov@rwhichthetextwillbetransmitted,and●themotivefortheproductionorreceptionofthetext．Odord,2001：60)3．2．2STAnalysisAlthoughinfunctionalism，thepurposeofthetargettextdecidesthetranslationstrategy,thisdoesnotmeanthatsourcetextisofnouse．Infact,theSTofferstheinformationfortranslation,whichisthebasisfortheformulationoftheTT．fNord，2001：62)AfterthetranslatorshavecomparedtheinformationoftheSTandtheTTinthetranslationbrief,theyshouldstarttOanalyzetheST．AccordingtoNord，varioustext-linguisticmodelsCanbeusedtoanalyzethesourcetext,butwhatreallymattersisthepragmaticanalysisofthecommunicativesituation．(ibid)Nord’SanalysisoftheSTisexplmnedinMlinthebookTextAnalysisinTranslation．Itisconductedbasedonthefollowingintratextualfactors：·subjectmatter；●content：includingconnotationandcohesion；●presuppositions：real—worldfactorsofthecommunicativesituationpresumedtobeknowntOtheparticipants；●composition：includingmicrostructureandmacrostructure；●non-verbalelements：illustrations，imlics’etc．；●lexic：includingdialect,registerandspecificterminology；20
●sentencestructure；suprasegmentalfeatures：includingstress．rhythmand‘stylisticpunctuation’．(Munday,2001：831Aftertheaboveanalysis，thetranslatorscandecidethebestwaytotranslatetheST．3．3Multi—levelTranslationStrategyNordbelieves，“Evenifasourcetexthasbeenwrittenwithoutanyparticularpurposeorintention,thetranslationisalwaysaddressedtosomeaudience(howeverundefineditmaybe)andiSthusimendedtohavesomefunctionforthereaders．”(Nord,2001：83)T11ismeansthatthetranslatorsalwayskeepacertaintypeofaddresseesintheirmindconsciouslyandunconsciouslyintheprocessoftranslation．Theirtranslationisalwaysintendedtohavesomefunctionforthetargetreaders．IfthetranslatortakestheneedsandexpectationsoftheTTreadersandthefunction(s)whichtheTTisintendedtofulfillintoconsiderationduringthetranslationprocess，theyCallachievebettereffectsonthereaders．LiuYustatesthatSunflowerSplendor,themostfamousChinesepoetryanthology,mainlyrespondstothreekindsofreceivers：fir瓯thenon-ChineseEnglish·speakingreaderswhodonotknowChinese；second，thenon-ChineseEnglish-speakingreaderswhoknow(orwhoarelearning)Chinese；tllird，theEnglish-speakingnativeChinesereaders．(刘羽，2005)Hiscategorizationismainlybasedonthelinguisticcompetenceofthetargetreaders．CombiningLiu’Scategorization、)l，imNewmark’Sstatementthat“agreatplaymaybetranslatedforthereadingpublic’Senjoyment,forscholarlystudy,orforperformanceonstage"．(Newmark，2001：173)，weCallthendividetheTTreceiversoftraditionalChinesedramaintothreetypes：theprivatereaderwhoreadstheTTforpleasureorotherpersonalreasons(whomostlikelydonotknowChinese)，thescholarlyreaderwhoreadstheTTtoknowmoreabouttraditionalChinesedrama(whomostlikelyknoworarelearningChinese)andtheaudienceinatheatrewhoreadstheTTwhenwatchingtheplay(whoeitherknowordonotknowChinese)．DifferemTTreadershavetotallydifferentrequirementsfortheTT．Ifthetranslatorsbeartheserequirementsintheirmind，itisnodoubtthattheTTtheyproducewillbemoresatisfyingandeffective．FollowingNord’S‘'top-down'’approach,weshouldfirstanalyzethetranslationbriefofthe2t
abovethreesituations．3．3．1Situation1：ForPrivateReading●Theintendedtextfunction(s)：Thetargettextshouldhaveallemertainingfunction．TheprivatereaderschoosethetranslatedversionstOknowsomethingabouttraditionalChinesedrama(probablymerelythestoryoftheplay)toentertainthemselves，thereforetheyarenotsupposedtofacetOomanyinterruptionsduringthereadingprocess．Thetranslatorshouldchooseallea8抄understandwaytOhandletheculture-specificterms．●Thetarget-textaddressee(s)：Theprivatereaderswhoarenon·ChinesespeakingEnglishreaderswhodonotknowChinese．●The(prospective)timeandplaceoftextreception：TheTTreceiversmayreadtheTTatanyconvenienttimeatanywhere．●Themediumoverwhichthetextwillbetransmitted：paperbook●Themotivefortheproductionorreceptionofthetext：TheTThasthepurposeofentertainingthereaders．3．3．2Situation2：ForScholarlyStudy●nleintendedtextfunction(s)：netargettextshouldhavealleducativefunction．nlescholarlyreadersCanbeanexpert，ateacherorastudentwhostudiesdrama．Thistypeofreaderschoosesthetranslatedversionsmainlyforprofessionaloracademicstudy．Ⅵ协attheyintendtoknowisthescholarlyaspectsabouttraditionalChinesedramaandChineseculture．Therefore，theseaspectsoftheSTshouldbefullyreflectedinthe耵．Culture-specificterms，figuresofspeech,dramaticterminologiesshouldallbereproducedintheTTproperlybyavarietyoftranslatingmethods，forexample，inter-textualorintra-textualexpansion,compensation，end-noting，foot-notingandSOon．●nletarget-textaddressee(s)：111escholarlyreaderswhoarenon-ChinesespeakingEnglishreaderswhoknowChinese．22
●The(prospective)timeandplaceoftextreception：TheTTreceiversmayreadtheTTintheirstudytime．●ThemediumOVeTwhichthetextwillbetransmitted：paperbook●Themotivefortheproductionorreceptionofthetext：TheTThasthepurposeofeducatingthereaders．3．3．3Situation3：ForStagePerformance●Theintendedtextfunction(s)：Thetargettextshouldserveastheplayscript．However,asitisalmostimpossibletOstagethetraditionalChinesedramainEnglishundercurrentcircumstances，itinfactservesassubtitles．Thetargetreadersaremainlytheaudienceinthetheatre，whodependsonthetranslatedsubtitlestOunderstandtheplay．●Thetarget-textaddressee(s)：Theaudienceinthetheatrewhoarenon-ChinesespeakingEnglishreaderswhoknowordonotknowChinese．andplaceoftextreception：TheTTreceiversmayreadtheTTinthetheatre．●Themediumoverwhichthetextwinbetransmitted：audio-media●Themotivefortheproductionorreceptionofthetext：TheTThasthepurposeofsupportingthestageperformanceofthetraditionalChinesedrama．3．4TheProcessofSTAnalysisInherTextAnalysisinTranslation，Nordseekstogivetranslationstudentsamodeltoanalyzesourcetexts，whichaimstobeapplicabletoalltexttypes，translationsituationandlanguagepairs．HertextanalysismodelmainlyfocusesontheunderstandingofthefunctionofSTfeaturesandtheselectionoftranslationstrategiesappropriatetotheintendedpurposeofthetranslation．(Nord，2006：1)Nord’Smodelinvolvestheanalysisofaseriesofinterlinkedextra-textualfactorsandintra—textualfactorsintheST．AccordingtoNord,anypragmaticanalysisisapplicabletothetranslationprocess，aslongasitmakesacomparisonbetweentheSTandtheTT．Herewechoosesomeaspectsthat，intheAuthor’Spointofview,areofparticular23
importanceinthetranslationprocess．一Medium：Themediumoverwhichthetranslatumistransmittedisveryimportantforthetranslationprocess．ForSituation1andSituation2，thisfactorCanbeneglectedastherearebasicallynoalterationbetweentheSTandtheTT．ButforSituation3，themediumischangedtotallyandthisinfactseverelylimitsthetranslator’Sjob．Itshouldbenotedthatthe订ofSituation3belongstotheaudio—medialtextdefinedbyReiss．AccordingtoReiss，“atranslationmethodappropriateforaudio-medialtextsmustpreservethesanleeffectonthehearerthattheoriginalhasinthesourcelanguage．"(Reiss，2004：46)GeorgeMouninexplainsthisproblemfurther：“Fidelitytothewords，thegrammar,thesyntax，andeventothestyleofthesentencesinatextmustyieldtothepriorityofwhatmadetheplayaSUCCESSinitshomeland．Effectivenessasastageproductionismoreimportantforthetranslationthanconcernsforparticularpoeticorliteraryqualities，andifaconflictarisesitisoveralleffectivenessthatshoulddeterminepriorities．"(qtd．inReiss，2004：45-46)Hence，on-spoteffectivenessisthemostimportantrequirementforSituation3．Wefindthatinpractice，itiscurrentlynotpossibletostagetheperformanceofTeDinEnglishduetovariouskindsofrestrictions．Thesubtitlingtranslationiswhatisrequired．Theninthepracticaltranslationprocess，therequirementsforsubtitlingtranslationwhichregardsthespatial，temporalandotheraspectsshouldbefullynoted．ThefollowingaresomeoftheaspectscollectedbytheAuthor：●“Giventhatpeoplegenerallyspeakmuchfasterthantheyread，subtitlinginevitablyinvolves⋯technicalconstraintsofshortageofscreenspaceandlackoftime．"(qtd．inBaker,2010：14-15)；●“Subtitlescomposedaccordingtowidelyspatialparameterscontainamaximumoftwolinesoftext,eachaccommodatingupto35characters．”(qtd．inBaker,2010：15)；●“TheactualnumberofcharactersthatCanbeusedineachsubtitlethendependsonthedurationofthecorrespondingspeechunit．”(qtd．inBaker,2010：15)Genre：AmongtheabovethreeSituations，thepurposesofSituation1andSituation3arefarawayfromtheSkoposoftheST．ForSituation2，wefindthatitisofgreattoreflecttheSkoposoftheSTintheTT,SOthatthescholarlyreadersmaygetfullaccesstotheST．With24
regardtoancienttext,Nordpointsoutthat：“⋯inCaseswherewedon’thaveenoughinformationabouttheoriginalsituation(asisthecasewithancienttexts)orwherethesource=textsituationisSOdifferentflorathetarget-textsituationthatthereisnowayofestablishingadirectlinkbetweenthesource-textauthorandthetarget-textreaders．Inthesecases，adocumentarytranslationmaybetheonlywaytosolvethedilemma．”('Nord,2001：126)Enlightenedbythisstatement,theAuthorsuggeststhatadocumentarytranslationbeadoptedforthissituation,wherethegenreoftheSTisfullypreservedandallthestylisticfeaturesandliterarycodesoftheSTarerepresentedintheTr．ForSituation1，weshould，asstatedabove，adopttheinstrumentalmethodtomaketheTTmoretarget-cultureoriented．AstheTTreceiversarenon-ChinesespeakingreaderswhodonotknowanyChinese，itwouldbepreferabletoadapttheSTintoastoryandchangethegenretofacilitatetheunderstanding．Ifthereaderisinterruptedbytoomanyculturalbarriers，theywillbeexhaustedandquitreading．Infact,manyofShakespeare’Splayshavebeenadaptedintostoriesorfictionsforthepurposeofoverseasdissemination．Forsituation3，thegenreoftheSTshouldalsobealteredduetothespecialdemandofsubtitling．nletranslationofthesetwoSituationsistheadaptationorrewritingoftheSTwhich,accordingtoNord，alsobelongtothefieldoftranslation．Presupposition：nlcreal-worldfactorsofthecommunicativesituationpresumedtobeknowntotheparticipantsoftheSTandtherrsofthethreeSituationsaretotallydifferent．TheSTreceiversarepresumedtobeelitesoftheancientChinesesociety,whoarewelleducatedandknowstheclassicpoetrywell．TheauthoroftheSThasquotedalotofversesandadoptedavastrangeofrhetoricaldevicesfromtimetotimetoshowoffhistalentsandcaterthetasteoftheeliteaudienceofthatage．Onthecontrary,theTTreceiversofalltheabovethreeSituationsarelackingintherelevantknowledgeduetotemporal，cultural，lingualandotherconstraints．Therefore，theserhetoricaldevicesshouldbehandledindifferentwaysaccordingtotheirrespectivesituations．3．5Sub．conclusionWithintheframeworkofNord’Sfunctionalapproach,thetranslatorsCandecideexactlywhich25
STaspectsshouldbetakenintoaccountandwbJchshouldbeneglected．Thetranslatorscanfocusonparticularaspectsanddisregardothersinaccordancewimthe"ITSkopos(Nord,2006：33)．Forexample，iftheTTaimstostressthesyntacticstructures，theword·for-word‘translationshouldbeadopted．(ibid)IftheTTaimstostressthereadingeffect,afreetranslationshouldbeadopted．‘'Dependingonthepercentageofpreservedelements，differentformsor‘grades’oftranslationcanbearrangedOilascaleextendingfromextremefidelityatoneendtoextremelibertyattheother．”(ibid．)nlisisshownbythefiguredrawnbyNord：阳翻—穗晒喇mll雒tattluInt删mdltlN豫窟强盈V箕noNAUA量，IAlIU熊靠鞠黼蝻脚wocd-for-word赶翟喇寮l翻国∞literal勰翟嗽迭硝。曩●●●free缸薯n蝴|曩Iio耱frL)text肛谢Ill涵Figurel{Nord，2006：33)Thefigureshowsthattranscription(ortransliteration)andfreetextproductioninthetargetculturearethetwopolarizationsofthetranslation．Intheformer,allofthesurfaceelementsofthearepreserved；whileinthelatter,noneoftheseelementsarekept．Obid)Betweenthesetwoextremes，thereareotherformsoftranslationwhichadoptsdifferentdegreeofadaptationdependingontheSkoposoftheTT．(ibid)Drawingontheabovefigure，wethenbringaboutthefollowingfiguretoshowthetranslationstrategiesforthethreeSituations：
巍嘲嚣啊瞄豫嘲刊嘲融蜘瓴lf绷瞳妇秽豳隧滢驭V众羽【oKAUA量，l7A“U捉■_—●S洒圳西硼2●_●料SiUmtiu3●H●一籁瞻H蝻觚l●_●-Figure2(adaptedbytheAuthoOTllisfigureshowsthatSituation2isclosertotheliberaltranslation,Situation1isclosertofreetranslation；whileSituation3standssomewherebetweenthetwokindsoftranslatiom．ForSituation1，theSTshouldbeadaptedtOthetargetculturebydomestication．mTTshoddconformtOthetargetreader’Sbackgroundknowledgeandcoherent、析mthetargetsituation．ItshouldbeeasyandsmoothtOreadand触fiUthefunctionofentertainmentinthetargetculture．n比genreoftheSTcallbeadaptedtOfictionfortheconvenienceofunderstanding．ForSituation2，theSTshouldbetranslatedbyforeignizationandthegenreofitshouldbekept嬲muchaspossibletOthesourceculture，SOastoprovideatlexoticflavorforthetargetreader．Onreadingthetranslation,thetargetreadersCangetaccesstomorecultural，linguisticanddramaticfeaturesoftheST．Thetargettextshouldgivemoreinformationaboutthesourcetextinitssituationinsteadoffulfillingallanalogousfunctionofthesourcetext．ForSituation3，theSTshouldberenderedintoEnglishinabalancedwaybydomesticationandforeignizationalternatively．111etranslatorshouldmatchthetranslationwinlthestageperformanceandensuretheon-spoteffectfortheaudienceinthetheatre．Nordhasmadeadistinctionbetweentwotypesoftranslationmethods，i．e．documentarytranslationandinstrumentaltranslation．Nord(2001：47-52)claimsthatindocumentarytranslation，thetranslatormainlyaimstoreproduceacertainaspectoftheST,suchasthelinguisticfeatures，ortheliterarycolor；intheinstrumentaltranslation,thetranslatortransmitsthemessageoftheSTinanewcommunicativeenvironmentinTC，intendingtoexpressacertaincommunicativepurposewithoutmakingthereceNerbeingawareofreadingatranslated27
text．Therefore，itissuggestedthatthedocumentarytranslationshouldbeadoptedforSituation2，andthattheinstrumentaltranslationbeadoptedforSituation1andSituation3·
Chapter4CaseStudy4．1AnIntroductiontoThePeonyPavilion4．1．1WhyThePeonyPavilion?KunquoperaisthemostexquisiteandrefinedofallformsofChinesedrama．PaiHsien-yung，afamousTaiwanesewriterandplaywright,deemsthatKunquopera,combiningliterature，music，dance，anddrama,embodiesthetypicalaestheticvaluesofChineseculture．(季国平，2006)ThePeonyPavilionisthemasterpieceofKunquopera．TheplayhasbeenrenderedintoEnglish,French,German,andItalianandperformedinmanycountries．Ithasbeeninterpretedandadaptedbydramatistsworldwide．Websitesearchesshowthattheplayhasbeeninterpretedandstagedbyalotofoverseasdramatists．PanHsien-yungproduceda“youthedition'’(oryounglovers’edition)atthebeginningofthe21武century,whichhasresultedinaresurrectionoftheoperainyoungpeople，especiallyincollegestudents．TheAmericandirectorPeterSellarhasallavant-gardeinterpretationofthisplay．Band5Tamasabur5，themostpopularandcelebratedKabukiactorofJapan,hasalsostagedhisinterpretationofthisplay．In2001，ThePeonyPavilionWaslistedasoneofthe19inaugural‘'masterpiecesofOralandIntangibleHeritageofHumanity”bytheUNESCO．4．1．2TheTranslationofThePeonyPavilionThePeonyPavilionhasbeentranslatedintoseverallanguages，includingEnglish,French,GermanandItalian．Now,thereareseveralEnglishVersionsavailable．ThefirstversionistranslatedbyCyrilBirch，ProfessorofChineseandComparativeLiteratureoftheUniversityofCaliforniaatBerkeley,publishedbytheIndianaUniversityPressin1980．CyrilBkchisawell—knowntranslatorofMingdramaandstories,amongwhichThePeonyPavilionisthemostsignificantandinfluentialone．ProfessorZhangGuanqianoftheUniversityofScienceandTechnologyofChinaisthesecondonetranslatingthedramaintoEnglish,whichwaspublishedbytheTourismEducationPressin1994．Basedontheabovetwoversions，ProfessorWang
RongpeiofDaliangUniversityofForeignLanguagesofferedhisversionin2003，whichWaSpublishedbyShanghaiForeignLanguageEducationPress．ThelatestversionisCo-authoredbyXuYuanzhong(betterknown嬲XYZ)andXuMing，publishedbyChinaTranslationandPublishingCorporationin2009．apmfromtheabovefourversions，wecanfindanotheradaptedversionsofthedrama．ChenMeilinadaptedthedramaintofictiontellingaclassicalChineselovestoryinafreestyle．Ofalltheseversions，theonetranslatedbyCyrilBirchisthemostinfluentialinEnglishspeakingcountriescurrently；whileWangRongpei’SversionisthemostinfluentialoneinChina．TheonebyXuYuanzhongandXuMingisthelatestone．4．1．3CurrentStudyontheTranslatedVersionsUptonow,alotofcomparativestudieshavebeenmadeonthetranslationofThePeonyPavilion．ProfessorWangdidSOconcerningthethreeversionstranslatedbyCyrilBirch,ZhangGuangqianandhimself．HeclaimedthatZhang’SversionismoreaccurateandmoreconcisethanBirch’S(Wang，2000：847)．AsearchingonthewebsitefindsthatMAthesesrelatedtothistopicinclude：AComparativeStudyofTwoEnglishTranslationsofThePeonyPavilion：AContextualPerspectivebyFanJinghua(樊静华，2008)whichisapproachedfromthelinguisticperspective，AStudyoftheEnglishVersionofthePeonyPavilionbyShangNa(尚娜，2003)approachedfromtheculturalperspective，AHermeneuticApproachtotheDifferentEnglishVersionsofThePeonyPavilionbyDuLijuan(杜丽娟，2008)whichisapproachedfromthehermeneuticperspective，andAComparativeStudyofTranslationsofthePeonyPavilionbyXuShuo(徐溯，2004)intermsoftranslationmethods．Thisthesis，totheAuthor’Sknowledge，iscurrentlythefirstonewhichapproachesthetranslationofThePeonyPavilionfromtheperspectiveoffunctionalism．4．2PoeticFunctionoftheThreeEnglishVersionsDrawingonReiss’StexttypologyandKarlBuhler’Sorganontypology,Nordbringsforthatranslation．orientedmodeloftextfunctions．Sheclaimsthattextshavefourfunctionsinthetranslation,thereferentialfunction,theexpressivefunction，theappellativefunctionandthephaticfunction．nefourbasictypesoffunctionscanbeftll'therdividedintosub—functions30
accordingtowhatisexpressed．AccordingtoNord,‘'IfthesenderexpressesindividualfeelingsOremotions(forexample，inaninterjection)，wemayspeakofanemotivesub—function；ifwhatisexpressedisallevaluation(perhapsagovernmentdecision)thesub—functionwillbeevaluative．Anothersub—functionmightbeirony．”(Nord，2001：41)AsitispointedoutbyBirch(2001：174)thattraditionaldramasaremostlyprizedforthepoeticexcellenceoftheirariasmorethananythingelse，itisevidentthatthepoeticfunctionshallbethemostsignificantfunctionofthetraditionaldrama．Therefore，inthefollowingpart,theAuthormainlyfocusesoncomparinghowthepoeticfunctionsofThePeonyPavilionarerenderedintoEnglishbythefourtranslators，representedbythreeparties：CyrilBirch,WangRongpei，andXYZandhissonXuMing．XYZ，AnoutstandingtranslatorofclassicalChinesepoetry,hasputforththe‘'three-beautyprinciple'’，i．e．beautyinsense，beautyinsound，andbeautyinform，toassessthetranslationofclassicalChinesepoetry．Beautyinsoundmainlyreferstobeautyinrhythmandrhyme；beautyinformreferstothearrangementofsyllablesinapoeticlineandthelengthoflines；beautyinsensereferstotheconveyanceofthemeaningoftheST．Heclaimsthattranslatorsshoulddotheirutmosttoretaintheabovethreebeautiesinthetranslationprocess．Healsodeemsthatbeautyinsenseisthemostsignificantinthetranslationofpoetry,whichisfollowedbybeautyinsoundandfinallybeautyinform．AsuccessfultranslatorshouldfirstofallconveytheoriginalmeaningoftheST,thenendeavortopreserveandrepresenttheoriginalbeautyinsound,andbeautyinform．Healsoinsiststhattranslatorsshouldendeavortoachieveallthesethreebeautiesatthesametime．(许渊冲，1984)HerebytheAuthorintendstocomparethepoeticfunctionoftheabove—mentionedEnglishversionsinthesethreeaspects，i．e．sense，soundandform，whichtoXYZisofdescendingimportanceinthetranslationofclassicalChinesepoetry．4．2．1InTermsofBeautyinSense●RenderingofCulture-loadedVersesExamplel：【STI】停半晌，整花钿，没揣菱花，偷人半面，迤逗的彩云偏。3I
【TTl一11【TTl-2l【TTl—3】Pausingtostraightentheflowerheadsofhairornamentsperplexedtofindthatmy聊f珊厂(汪榕培，2000：53)hasthrownthese‘'gleamingclouds’’intoalarmeddisarray．(Birch,2002：43)Ipauseawhile而domyhairstyleThemirrorglancesatmyfaceItrembleandmyhairslipsoutoflace．Ipausewordless,Toadjustmyheaddress．Themirrorstealshalfaglanceatmyface，Mycloudlikecurlsslipoutofplace．(汪榕培，2000：98)(许渊冲、许明，2009：93)Ontheonehand,fromthelinguisticperspective，theSTcitedhereconsistsofancientSLsubjectlesssentences(singingverses)，whicharecharacterizedbyeconomyandconciseness·ThisphenomenonisveryeasyforaChinesereadertojudgethatthesubjectshouldbe“I”·WefindthatBirch，StranslationfollowstheChinesegrammar,whichseemstObe‘"ungrammatical’’iIltheTL，whileWang’SandXu’SareinlinewiththeTLgrammarduetOtheadditionofthesubject“I”to恤TT．32
Ontheotherhand，Birchpaysdueattentiontothecorrectnessofculture-loadedtermscontainediIltheverse，whileWangtriestoversifytheversionbyadaptation．Inthisconnection,therefore，culturalcontentsarewellpreservedin【TTl—1】，butthosearelostorchangedforlittlereasonin[TTl·2】．’Therearemanyculture．10adedtermsin[STI]，suchaS“花钿”，“菱花”，and“彩云”，whichthetranslatorcall’tignore，sincethefunctionoftranslationistoconveytheinformationofChinesefoilculturetoWesternaudience．Inaddition,thepersonifiedverse“没揣菱花，偷人半面”failst0betransferredin【TTl—2】．UnlikeWang’Stranslation,Xu’StranslationpreservesmostoftheculturalcontentsoftheTT觞wellasthepersonificationofit．ComparedwithBirch’Stranslation,itismuchbetterwithregardtothereadabilityandexpressiveness．Besides，itisalsocharacterizedbyharmoniousmusicalitywitheachlinerhymedattheend．删sAuthorpreferstoofferhersupervisor’Stentativetranslation,whichcouldbeabetteroneintermsofculturalreadingorculturalperformanceandoffaithfulandexpressiverendering：【TTl-4】Ipauseawhiletoy=myha切in,notexpectingthebronzemirrortostealitsglanceatmyfaceside．I’mSOshyastohavemybunindisarrayExample2：【ST2】虽然为政多阴德，尚少阶前玉树兰。Manyaretheunsungac捃ofgracemygovernmenthasaccomplished,butstill1findon’'thestepsofmyhall”33(汪榕培，2000：38)
no"jaaetree’：no7'orchid7：nosonatmyknee．(BirclL2002：20)ITT2-2】ForallmycontributionsSOsupremeIhavebegotnOmaleheirtomyclan．(汪榕培，2000：30)【TT2—3】SomuchgoodforthelfvingandthedeadI'vedone,Still1havenotajade—likeSOn．(许渊冲、许明，2009：35)Inthiscouplet,thephrase“玉树兰”consistsof“玉树”and“兰芝”whichliterallymeans‘'jadetree’’and‘‘orchid'’．InChineseculture，‘'jade’’and‘‘orchid'’aletwoimagesbearingspecialculturalconnotation．JadeembodiestheConfucianvirtuesofwisdom，justice，modestyandcourage；orchidisalsofavoredbyConfuciusasthesymbolofbeauty,refinementandmorality．Therefore，the‘'jadetreeandorchid'’aregenerallyusedtosymbolizetheheirwhocanbringhonortothefamily．Wefindthatthesetwowordsaletotallymissedin【．丌2—21，partlyreproducedin【n2-3】andalefullypreservedin【m一1】．Itisquiteobviousthat【TT2-3】and【TT2-1】containmoreculturalelementsthan【rr2-2】．Theexpression“尚少阶前玉树兰”isametaphoricexpressionwhichliterallymeans“Y＆，Idonothaveagoodsonasmyheir'’．In[rr2-1】，“阶前”istranslatedinto”thestepsofmyhall”；and“玉树兰”istranslatedinto’5adetree”，”orchid”inaword-by-wordway．Besides，anextraphrase‘'nosonatmyknee”issupplementedtoexplainthemetaphoricmeaning．T11isword—to-wordtranslationplussupplementmakes【TT2-l】almostimpossibleforWesternreaderstounderstandinspiteofpreservingtheculturalelementsandrhetoricalspeechmechanically．Onthecontrary,【TT2-2】catchestheessentialmeaningandquitstherhetoricaldevice．Itreadssmoothbutislackingintheculturalelements．【rr2·3】standsbetweenthetwoextremes．Itretainstherhetoricaldeviceflexiblyandconveystheessentialculturalelements．【TT2-3】thusoutshinestheothertwotranslationsintermsofcommunicativeeffect．●RenderingofAllusions34
Example3：IST3】愚老恭承捧珠之爱，谬加琢玉之功。(汪榕培，2000：10)Unworthytoaccepttheregardofa'：／ewelheldinthepalm，’’stillImakeboldto’'sculptthejade．”(Birch,2002：17)【TT3-2ll|’sanhonourforanoldmanlikemetoteachatalentedstudent．(汪榕培，2000：34)【TT3—3】Youareasworthyasapearl,I'mhonoredtoteachajade—likegirl．(许渊冲、许明，2009：41)IntheST，“捧珠之爱”alludestotheidiom“掌上明珠”，whichliterallymeans‘‘apearlinthepalm”．Thephrase‘‘apearlinthepalm”bearssimilarmeaningtotheEnglishidiom‘'theappleofone’Seye’’andisusedbytheSTauthortodepicttheheroinewhoisthebeloveddaughterof舭Dufamily．“琢玉之功”alludestothequotationfromTheBookofRites“玉不琢，不成器；人不学，不知道”，whichliterallymeans“Jadeunsculpted,unfitforuse；personuntutored,unawareoftheWay”(Birch’Stranslation)．Therefore，thephrase“琢玉之功”literallymeans‘'thejobofcarvingjade”(whichisgenerallycomparedtotheeducationofaperson)．TheSTisaclichdutteredbyChenZuiliangwhenheacceptsthepositionastheheroine’Stutor．HereWang’Stranslationignoresthefiguresofspeechanddirectlyoffersthemeaningindicated．Birch’S‘'jewelheldinthepalm”and”sculptthejade”preservethelinguisticfeaturestothemaximaldegree．Xu’Stranslation‘'asworthyasapead”and“ajade—likegirl”haveretainedthe35
figurativedevicesandpreservestheoriginalflavor．Intermsofreadingeffect，both【TT3—1】and[TT3-2】areovershadowedby【TT3-3】．Besides，wecanalsofindthatthelanguageof【TT3-2】iscolloquial，rhymed，closetothemodemdailyspeechandthereforetargetculture—oriented；thatof【TT3-1】ismoreelegant,literary,andsourceculture-oriented；whilethatof【TT3-3】standssomewhereinbetween．Fromthefunctionalperspective，【TT3—2】isadaptedtoaddressee’SbackgroundknowledgeandplaysallanalogousfunctionastheST；[丁r3—1】triestodocumemtheinformationabouttheSTbyliteraltranslation(usingthequotationmarkstohiglllightthatitisallallusion)．Itseemsthat【TT3-3】bestreflectstheoriginalfunctionoftheST．Example4：【ST41能凿壁，会悬梁，偷天妙手绣文章。(汪榕培，2000：10)[TT4-1】Drillingthewallforlight,hairtiedtobeaminfearofdrowsing,21wrestfromnatureexcellenceinletters3(Birch,2002：3)ITT4-2】BecauseIstudyhardtilllateat行函忱Icanwriteessayswith#r-reachingsight．(汪榕培，2000：6)【TT4．31Borrowinglightandprickingmythigh,l'velearnedtheartofwritingfromonh谵h．(许渊冲、许明，2009：7)TheSTtextcontainstwoallusionsofscholarlystudy．“凿壁”alludestoascholarnamedKuangHengwhoistoopoortobuyoilforlightingandhastodrillaholeinthewalltoletinthe36
neighbor’Slightforreading．“悬梁”alludestoanotherscholarSunJingwhotiedhishairtothebeantopreventnoddingoverhisbooks．InChineseliterarywork,“悬梁”isoftenjuxtaposedwithanotherphrase“刺股”todescribethediligenceinstudy．ThelatteralludestothefamousancientscholarSuQinwhoprickshisthigh、析也anawlinordertopreventhimselffromfallingasleepduringthestudyatnight．Wanggivesabriefingofthemeaning“studyhardtilllateatnight'’．BirchtriestoexplaintheallusionwithinthelinesandexpandstheST．Healsosuppliesfootnotestohelpthereaderunderstandtheallusion．Itisevidentthat【”’4—1】containsmoreinformationthanboth【订4—2】andthan【ST4]．Wefmdthatin【rr4-1】thefunctionoftheSThasbeenchangedandmoreemphasishasbeenputontheinformativefunction．Onreading【TT4-1】，onedoesnotonlyknowsaboutthedramabutalsohaveaglimpseofthetraditionalChineseculture．However,althoughthefootnotesprovidedbyBirchCanfacilitatetheunderstandingofthereaders，theymayalsointerrupttheflowofreadingandthusrequiregreatreadingpatience．ThewayXuhandlestheallusionispreferabletothatofWangandBirch．UnlikeWang，herenderstheallusionfaithRdlyintheTTbutnottothedegreebywhichtointerruptthereaders．Meanwhile，heflexiblyadoptsthephrase“prickingtheUgh'’totakeplaceoftheoriginalallusionof‘'tyinghair'’inordertoachievetherhymingeffect．Asitstatedabove，‘'prickingthethigh'’bearssimilarculturalconnotationto‘'tyinghak'’．Asaresult,【rr4-3】outshines[T]心-1】intermsofbeautyofsoundandoutshines【rr4—2】intermsofbeautyofmeaning．TheaboveexamplealsoillustratesthatWang，BirchandXuattachdifferentimportancetothefunctionoftheTT．WangemphasizesthereadabilityoftheTT,whereasBirchchangesthefunctionoftheST,makingtheTTmoreinformative．XukeepsthefunctionoftheSTandmeanwhilepaysdueattentiontothereadabilityoftheTT．Example5：【ST5】经史腹便便，昼梦人还倦。(汪榕培，2000：49)【TT5-1J37
LikeBianShao,whodozingbydaytimewasmockedforthesizeofhisbezlyandexplained豇wasfulloflearningminetoobulgeswithweightofClassicsandHistories．Yetafterdaylightdreamsweary1wakefromlonging．趼咖learningandexperienceBehindaninconspicuousappearance,(Birch,2002：20)(汪榕培，2000：42)ITT5-3】VersedinclassicsIseem，Tiredafteradaydream．(许渊冲、许明，2009：49)Thephrase“经史腹便便”alludestotheconceitedscholarBianShao，who，whenmockedforhisbigbellybyhispeersafteradoze，jokedthathisbellywasfilledwithlearning．Here，LiuMengmei，thehero，compareshisowntalentandlearningtothatofBianShao．It’Sworthnotingthattheallusionisemployedtoindicatetheeruditenessbutnottheappearanceofthehero．IIl【TT5-2】，WangtotallyneglectstheallusionandaimstocatchwhattheSTconnotes．However,histranslation‘'Behindaninconspicuousappearance’’isbasedonawrongunderstandingoftheST．Asitisstatedintheabove。“经史腹便便”indicatestheeruditenessoftheherobutnotthebigbellyofthehero．Wangmakesamistakeinrenderingtheconnotationoftheallusionandleavesallimpressiononthereaderthattheherohasaninconspicuousappearance．Thisistotallyagainsttheintentionoftheoriginalauthorandthusviolatesthefidelityrule．Besides，Wangalsopretermitsthesecondhalfpartof[ST5]．Birch，totheotherextreme，makeseffortstoexplaintheallusionattheriskofviolatingthe38
concisenessandbrevityoftheST．Itissuchallinterestingthingtofindthatthefive—wordphrasein【ST5】isfinallyexpandedintofourlonglinesin【TT5—1】．Theoriginalsuccinctpoeticlineisrenderedintoversestellingashortstory．Thisinfacthindersthereadersfromunderstandingandappreciatingtheoriginalmeaningandtheoriginalartisticflavorofthe【ST5]．Xuhandlestheverseinawiwyway．His臼?anslationnotonlyrenderstheoriginalmeaningbutalsopreservestheoriginallinguisticfeaturesandtheculturalconnation．TheaboveexamplesalsodemonstratethatWangtendstounder-translatetheST,whileBirchtendstoover-translate．InWang’Stranslation,alotofthingsincludingtherhetoricaldevicesandtheculturalelementshavealwaysbeenlost，whileinBirch’Stranslation,onecanoftenfindsomeextraandredundantinformation．Comparedtotheirtranslation,Xu’Smanipulationismoderateandthereforepreferable．●RenderingofMetaphoris“afigureofspeechthatconstructsananalogybetweentwothingsorideas”．1InThePeonyPavilion，metaphorhasbeenemployedbytheauthorfrequentlytoachievespecialreadingeffect．Thefollowingaresomeexamples：Example6：【ST61必须砍得蟾宫桂，始信人间玉斧长。(汪榕培，2000：10)【TT6-1landsoontheaxofjadetoproveitsworthmustfellthecassiahighinthemoon台toadpalace．4(Birch，2002：3)[TT6-2lWhen1winthelaurelinthefuturedays,1willprovethatIamreallysmartandbright．(汪榕培，2000：7)39
1donotknowifmyarmscancutthetreedown,Tillhavewonthelaurelcrown．(许渊冲、许明，2009：7)Inthisexample，“砍得蟾宫桂”literallymeanschoppingdownthecassiatreeinthemoon．TKsexpressionmainlycomesfromthefo墩storyofWuGang，whoisasimilarcharacterlikeSisyphusintheGreekmythology．SisyphuswasakingpunishedbybeingcompelledtOrollannimmenseboulderupahill，onlytowatchitrollbackdown,andtorepeatthisthroughouteternity．Similarly，WuGangWassenttotheMoonPalaceandorderedtochopdownthecassiatreewhicheternallyspringsupagain．InChineseculture，“砍得蟾宫桂”isametaphorofsuccessintheimperialSuccess，whichalwaysrequiresthecandidate’Sendlessandunavailingwork．WangandXutranslatethephraseinto‘‘winthelaurel’’and‘'havewonthelaurelcrown'’respectively．Inthewesternculture，laurelistheemblemforpoetsandvictors．Ancientpoetswhowondistinctionwerecrownedwithawreathoflaurel．Studentsinmedievaluniversitiesawardedacademicdegreeswerealsocrownedwithlaurel．Therefore，WangandXu’Stranslationnotonlyconformstothetargetreaders’backgroundsituationandknowledgebutalsoisf．aitll铷tothesourcetext．InVermeer’Swords．theirtranslationsabidebyboththecoherenceruleandthefidelityrule．Thedifferencebetweenthetwotranslationsisverysmall，butwestillcanfindthatXu’S‘'havewonthelaurelcrown'’ismoreaccurateandvividthanWang’S“winthelaurel”．Onreading【TT6-1】，wefindthatBirchhastransferredalmosteverywordof[ST6】correspondently．Adoptingtheword-to—wordtranslation,heendeavorstoreproduceallthelinguisticandculturalfeaturesoftheST．However，hisword—to-wordmethodalwaysfailstobringaboutafaithfulandaccuraterendition．Inthisexample，histranslationisawkward．Intermsofreadingeffect,itisinferiortoWang’SandXu’S．Example7：【ST7】寸草心，怎报得春光一二!(Wang，2000：21)40
ITT7-1】Howcanthisheart,merewispofstraw,Givethanksfortight砂lovingparentsshed?(Birch,2002：8)【TT7．21Howcanle'errequiteMyparentsfo，．theircaressinglight!(Wang，2000：14)【TT7_3JHowcanyounggrassrepayThewarmtightofspringday?(许渊冲、许明，2009：35)TheoriginalisametaphoricexpressionwhichconnotesthatthesonordaughterCanneverrepaythelovegivenbYparentsjustlikethegrassinthespringcallneverrepaythelightshedbythesun．Wangcatchestheessenceofthismetaphorandexpressesitdirectly．Birch,however，persistsinofferingthetranslationwordbyword．In【TT7—1】，“寸草心”istranslatedinto‘'thisheart,mere、vispofstraw'’and“报得春光”istranslatedinto“givethanksforlightbylovingparentsshed'’．However，wefindthatBirchisunfamiliarwiththeculturalconnotationofthemetaphoricdevice．HehasmadeaseriousmistakebYrendering“寸草心”into‘'thisheart,mere谢Spofstraw'’，asintheSTtheheroinecomparesherselfto“草”，whichliterallymeans“grass”butnot“straw'’．【TT7—3】byXuoutstripstheothertwo．Itconveystheoriginalmeaning，retainsthemetaphoricdeviceandboastsofharmoniousmusicality．Example8：【ST8l一名禀生陈最良，年可六旬，从来饱学。(汪榕培，2000：38)【TT8一l】彳salariedscholarnamedChenZuiliang．乃西括asexagenarianwhohasfilledhbzbe砂withbook41
(Birek2002：14)【TT8·2】AscholarbythenameofChenZuiliang,alearnedmanaboutsixtyyearsold．(汪榕培，2000：30)ITT8·3】As改ty-yearoldscholarChenZuiliang(许渊冲、许明，2009：35)Inthisexample，thephrase“饱学”isadeadmetaphor．Thedeadmetaphoristhekindofmetaphor‘'whereoneishardlyconsciousoftheimage．”(Newmark，2001：106)Generally,theoriginsofdeadmetaphorsareentirelyunknowntothemajorityofpeopleandmostofthedeadmetaphorsCanbeunderstoodwithoutknowingtheirearlierconnotation．Astothephrase“饱学”，eventhenativeChinesespeakerdoesnotknowitsorigin,buteveryoneknowsthatthisphraseme&ns“learned”or“fullofknowledge”．Newmarkpointsoutthat‘'normallydeadmetaphorsarenotdifficulttotranslate，buttheyoftendefyliteraltranslation,andthereforeofferchoices”．(ibid．)Healsomentionsthat“originalmetaphors，inprinciple，inauthoritativeandexpressivetexts，shouldbetranslatedliterally,sinceoriginalmetaphors：(a)containsthecoreof跹importantwritersmessage，hispersonality,hiscommentonlife，andthoughtheymayhaveamoreorlessculturalelement，thesehavetobetransferrednem；(b)suchmetaphorsaleasourceofenrichmentforthetargetlanguage”．(ibid：l12)【TTS-2】byWangand【TT8·3】byXudefythedeadmetaphorusedbytheoriginalauthor．Butbothofthemareaccurateandfaithful，onlythatthelatterismoresuccinctandconcisethantheformer．Differingfromtheabovetwoversions，【TT8-3】byBirchhaslivenedupthedeadmetaphorandenrichedthetargetlanguage．4．2．2InTermsofBeautyinSound●RenderingofRhymesandRhythm砀edramatictextconsistsofaria,intonedverses，dialogueandmonologues．西eariaandintonedversesoftheSTof刀zPPeonyPavgionareconstantlyrhymedthroughoutthewholescene．Generallyonerhymeenduresforthewholescene；onlyinafewcases，theremaybea42
switchoftherhymeatthemiddleofthescene．Thismakesthewholetextharmoniousandfullofmusicality．LetUSfirsttakealookathowthemusicalityoftheSTisreproducedbyWang，BirchandXu．ThefollowingexampleisashortstanzaforariaselectedbytheAuthorfromOlleSCene．Example9：【ST9】原来姹紫嫣红开遍，似这般都付与断井颓垣。良辰美景奈何天，便赏心乐事谁家院?(汪榕培，2000：113)●【TT9-1lSeehowdeepestpurple，brightestscarletopentheirbeautyonlytodrywellcrumbling．’'Brightthemorn,lovelythescene,"listlessandlosttheheartwhereisthegarden’'gaywithjoyouscries”7ITT9-21【TT9-3】(Birch，2002：44)Theflowersglitterbrightly加theair,Aroundthewellsandwallsdesertedhereandthere．Whereisthe‘'pleasantdayandprettysight”7Whocanenjoy“contentmentanddelight”夕(汪榕培，2000：99．100)彳riotofdeeppurpleandbrightred,Whatpityontheruinsfheyoverspread／WhydoesheavengiveIZSbrilliantdayanddazzlingsight?43
Whosehousecouldboastofasweeterdelight?(许渊冲、许明，2009：95)Inthisshortstanza,thelastcharacterofeachlineisrhymedwitht11eVOWel“an'’．Thisrhymeenduresduringthewholescene，whichisthemostfrequentrhymeschemeinthetraditionalChinesedrama．Toreproducethisrhymescheme，Wanghasadoptedmetricalpoetryforalltheintonedversesandarias，ashestatesinStudiesinThePeonyPavilion．(汪榕培，200：848)Hisversesaremostlybasedoniambicpentameter，themostcommonmeterinEnglishpoetry，whichiso髓nusedbyWilliamShakespeareinhisplaysandsonnets．Therhymeschemeadoptedhereis“aabb”．ThisdemonstratesthatWangistryinghisbesttoadapttheSTintotheconventionaldramaticformofthetargetculture．HeaimstoproduceaTTwhichreadsliketheonewritteninEnglishandplaysananalogousfunctionastheST．HistranslationisTL·oriented．Wangtendstokeeptherhymeandrhythminthetranslation．Examiningalltheaboveexamples，wefmdthatalmostalltheversestranslatedbyWangarerhymedattheend．Inexample1‘‘Ipauseawhile／Todomyhairstyle／Whenatonce／Themirrorglancesatmyface／Itrembleandmyhairslipsoutoflace”，thefirsttwolinesarerhymedwith“【aII】，，andthelastthreelinesarerhymed、^，inl“【eIs】”．Toachievetherhymingeffect,Wanghas，inmanycases，sacrificedtheaccuracyofmeaning，asitisclaimedbyhim．(汪榕培，2000：849)Xu’Stranslationisalsobasedonmetricalpoetry．Allthelinesarerhymedattheendwithdelicaterhythmicarrangement．Althoughhedoesnotadopttheiambicpentameterconsistently，justlikeWang，healsosuccessfullypreservesthemusicali够oftheoriginal．Histranslationthusreadsnaturalandharmonious．Itisworthnotingthat，unlikeWang，Xuseldomsacrificesthebeautyofsenseforthebeautyofsound．Inf．a吒Xustickstotheprinciplethatbeautyofsenseisofgreaterimportancethanbeautyofsound．Healwaysstrivestopreservetheoriginalmeaningandflavorandretainthemusicalitysimultaneously．Onthecontrary，Birch’Stranslationisintheformoffreeverse、vinl110rhymes．Headoptsfreeverseforthetranslationofthewholedramaandveryrarelyadoptsrhymescheme，asitis
claimedbyhim：‘‘Ihaverhymedtheariasonlywhenrhymeseemednecessarytoaidthecomiceffect'’．(Birch,2002：xv)●RenderingofRepetitionofasound,word，orphraseisabasicrhetoricaldeviceinallpoetry．Repetitionmayreinforce，supplement,orevensubstituteformeterandrhythm．InThePeonyPavilion，repetitionsalefrequentlyusedbytheSTauthortoachievespecialpoeticfunction．Example10：【STIOl嵌雕栏芍药芽儿浅，一丝丝垂杨线，一丢丢榆荚钱，线儿春甚金钱吊转。(汪榕培，2000：138)【TTIO-1】【TTl0-2】【TTl0-3】Budsofpeonyinsetalongthebalustrade，Strandbystrandwillowhover,Stringbystringelmsseedsdangle，offeringsofcoinstomournthespring／Therethepeoniesdottheway,Thetwigsofwillowssway,TheelmfruitsdanglingfromthetreesAremourning加thespringtimebreeze／(Birch,2002：58)(汪榕培，2000：129)Herebythebalustradetheflowersplease，Therethreadbythreadswaywillowtrees．砀Pelm少uithanglikecoinsinstring,Butcouldtheybuybackthreadsofspring?(许渊冲、许明，2009：131)4S
In[STIO]，“一丝丝”and“一丢丢”containtheuseofrepetition．Thetwophrasesvividlydepictthegestureofwillowbranchesandelmfruitsinthespringwind．Wang’Stranslation,aswehaveexpected，attachesgreatimportancetOtherhymingeffect,with‘'way'’rhymingwithswayand‘'trees”rhymingwithbreeze．Althoughtherhetoricaldeviceofrepetitionhasnotbeenreproducedin【TTl0-2]，Wangusestwoverbs“sway'’and‘'dangle”tOcompensateforit．Birchhastranslatedthephrases“一丝丝”and“一丢丢”ingeniouslyinto“strandbystrand”and“stringbystring'’in【TTl0—1】．Therhetoricaldeviceissuccessfullyconveyed诚m900deffectsinsense，formandsound．Xu’SbenertransitionisthankstObothtranslators，namely,fatherandson．Herendersoneoftherepetitivephrasesinto‘'flareadbythread’’andretainstherhymingeffects．Besides，healsopreservestheartisticimageoftheoriginal．●RenderingofPunsApunisaformofwordplaywhichsuggeststwoormoremeanings，byexploitingmultiplemeaningsofwords，orofsimilar-soundingwords，foranintendedhumorousorrhetoricaleffect2．InThePeonyPavilion，punsarefrequentlyemployedtOproducevariouseffects，includingdemonstratingthespecialpersonalityofacertaincharacter,revealingthespecialconnotationofacertainthingandmostfrequentlycreatingahumorousatmosphere．Althoughthetranslationofpunsisnotimpossibleunderallcircumstances，weshouldadmitthatthedifficultyishuge．Intranslatingpuns，translatorswillinevitablymeetdifficulties，astherearefewexpressionswhichhavethesameconceptualandassociativemeaningsbothinChineseandinEnglish．Example11：【STll】(末)“人之患在好为人师”。(丑)人之饭，有得你吃哩。(汪榕培．2000：17)【TTll-1】．ChenZuiliang：“ThehumanvicetStheurgetoteachothers”．asMenciussaid．Janitor．"Don}worryaboutthe“humanvice’，-Whatabout“humanrice”?Atleastyou7l
beyea(Birch，2002：12)【TTll-2】Chen：MenciusteachesUS．“Man≥anxietybeginswhenhewouldliketOteachothers．”Janitor：Butman§hungerismoretormentingthanmanianxieties．Youdon7havetOworryaboutyourstomachatleast．(汪榕培，2000：25)【TTll-31Chen：TroublebeginswheneachhasmuchtOteach．Courier：Troubleendswheneachhasmuchfoodtoeat．(许渊冲、许明，2009：31)msisadialoguebetweenChenandthejanitor．Inthesourcete鸡thecharacter“患”bearssimilarpronunciationwith“饭”andthecharacter“师”hassimilarpronunciationwith'‘吃”．111etutorquotesthefirstsentenceofMenciustoshowhisloftytaste，whilethejanitorrespondswithavulgarreactiontomockthetutor’Spoverty,thusreachingacomiceffect．Again,Birch’Stranslationisingenious．Inhistranslation,“humanrice’’bearsasimilarpronunciationto‘'humanvice”，thusreproducingthepunningeffectoftheST．Histranslationrevealsthepersonalityofthecharactersandsubtlycreatesahumorousatmosphere．Compared、衍tllBirch,WanghastriedtoconveythebasicmeaningoftheST(despitethefacthehasmanipulatedabittoomuchinmanycases)．butfailedtOreproducetheSLrhetoricaldevicesinthe竹．Xu’ShandlingofthepunisinthedifferentwaythanbothBirchandWang．HecreatesaparallelismtoreproducethepunningeffectoftheST．Intheparallelcouplet,thesecondlineisarepetitionofthefirstline，withonlythelastfewwordsvaryingfromeachother．Althoughtheoriginalpunisnotpreservedin【TTl1—3】，thefunctionoftheST,i．e．creatingahumorousatmosphere，issuccessfullyretained．InherTranslationCriticism：thePotentialsandLimitations,ReissstatesthatitisimpossibletoconvertthephonolinguisticelementsoftheSTintotheTTbecauseofthephonological47
differencesbetweenlanguages．(Reiss，2004：33)Whatthetranslatorshoulddoisnottoadopttheoriginalformbut‘‘appreciatetheformofthesourcelanguageandbeinspiredbyittodiscoverallanalogousforminthetargetlanguage”．(ibid)4．2．3InTermsofBeautyinForm●RenderingofPoeticFormsThePeonyPavilionismainlywrittenintheformofqu(1iterally,song，tulle，ormelody)，whichisatypeofverseforsingingthatemergedintheSouthernSongandJindynastiesandflourishedintheYuandynasty．Everykindofquhasthenamesofthetunestowhichitiscomposed．Eachsuchtunestipulatesthespecificformofit,includingthenumberoflines，thenumberofwordsusedineachline，rhythmandrhymeandeventheintonationofeachChinesecharacterused．Themostsignificantdifferencebetweenapieceofquandapieceofpoetryisthattheformeristobesungwiththeaccompanyofmusicalinstrumentsandthelatteristobereadaloud．IntheSTofThePeonyPavilion，thereexistanumberofpoeticformswhichcallforrigorousstructures，accordingtotheirdifferenttullenalnes．ItisalmostimpossibletorenderthestructureofthesetunesintoEnglishduetothelinguisticandculturalbarriersbetweenChineseandEnglish．Noneofthetranslatorshasattemptedatthisimpossibletask．However,WangandXuprovidethenameofeachtuneinhistranslationtoindicatethatthecontentbelongstooneparticulartune．While，Bircheventotallyneglectsthetunenames，ashestates：‘‘Ihavenotgiventhe‘tUlletitles’ofthecLsincetheyarerecitedratherthansungandarethereforenotapartofthemusicalstructure．"(Birch,2002：XV)ToreflectthepoeticformoftheST,Wanggenerallybaseshistranslatedlinesoniambiclines；whereasBirchjustadoptstheformofficeverse．●RenderingofAntithesisExample12：【STl2】天下秀才穷到底，学中门子老成精’(汪榕培，2000：29)[TTl2—1】Showmetheteacherwho捃刀}apauper4窖
orthejanitorwho捃"}acunningrogue．①ircll，2002：12)ITTl2-2】ThescholarsintheworldarepoorWhilejanitorsaresmartfo，．sure．(汪榕培，2000：99—100)[TTl2-3】Howcanascholarnotbepoor?Butoldcouriersknowmoreandmore．(许渊冲、许明，2009：29)Antithesisis‘‘afigureofspeechinvoNingthebringingoutofacontrastintheideasbyallobviouscontrastinthewords，clauses，orsentences，withinaparallelgrammaticalstructure’”．Inthisexample，antithesisisusedtoenhancethebeautyofformandthemusicalityoftheST．AllthethreetranslatorshavedonetheirbesttorendertherhetoricaldevicesintotheTT．InBirch’Stranslation,twosimilarattributiveclausesareappliedtoreachthiseffect．Strictlyspeaking，itisalessperfectantitheticstructureaccordingtothetraditionalChinesepattern,butthewayBirchexpresseshimselfismoreeffectiveandpowerful．InWang’Stranslation，the“be+adjective”formisemployedinthetwosentences．InXu’Stranslation,arhetoricalquestionplusallanswerisadopted．Comparingthethreeversions，wefmdthatBirch’SoutshinesWang’SandXu’Sinthemeaning．ItisevidentthatBirch’S‘'pauper'’and‘'rogue’’aremorefaithfulandaccuratethanWang’S‘‘poof’and‘‘sure’’andXu’S‘'poor'’and‘'knowmoreandmore”．Wang’SandXu’Saremorepleasantinsound．◆RenderingofParallelismExample13：【STl3】亏杀你走花阴不害些儿怕，点苍苔不溜些几滑，49
【TTl3—2】lTTl3—31thatIamyourtruelove．Youdreadnotwhenyoucrosstheshade,Youslipnotwhenyoutreadonthemoss,Youfearnotwhenyoushunyourparents,Youerrnotwhenyoucometomyaid．HowcouMyoupasstheshadewithoutbeingafraid?HowcouIdyoudescendonthemoss,withoutslipperyandloss?Howcouldescapeyourparent'seyeswithoutcarefo，theirsighs?Howcouldyoufindmyroomwithoutmistakeorfeorofgloom?(Birch,2002：164)(汪榕培，2000：355)
(许渊冲、许明，2009：269)‘'ParallelismmeansgivingtwoormorepartsofthesentencesasimilarformSOaustogivethewholeadefinitepa：ttern．’’4Theparallelismadoptedbytheoriginalauthorhelpstheideasflowbetter,strengthensthesequencedescribed，improvesthewritingclearnessandincreasesthemusicality．Wefindthatallofthethreeversionshavereflectedtheparallelismbutindifferentways．【TTl3·2】byWangistheclosesttotheorigh埘structureduetoitsneatnessandclearness，butintermsofexpressiveness，itisinferiortotheothertwo．【TTl3·3】reflectstheoriginalwritingstyleandtheoriginalmeaningbest,雒itscolloquialexpressionbearsgreatestsimilaritytothatof【STl3]．Intermsofthelastsentence“认书生不着些儿差”，wefredthatBirch’StranslationisbasedonawrongunderstandingoftheST,whileWang’Sisnotfaithfultoitatan．Thesceneof【STl3】takesplacewhentheheroine’Sspiritfindsherwaytothehero’Sroom．Therefore，onlyXuhasaccuratelyandfaithfullyrenderedthemeaningofthelastsentence．TllisisanotherexamplemanifestingthatWanghassacrificedtheaccuracyofmeaningforthebeautyofsoundandform．FromReiss’Spointofview,formalelementsareveryimportantforliteraryworks，aSinliterarytranslation,theformalcomponentnotonlyconveystheartisticstructurebutalsoanestheticvalue．(Reiss，2004：34-35)Therefore，whenhandlingthisproblem，weshouldworkunderReiss’Sguidancethat“The‘tempo’ofthestyle，aswellasstylisticformsandrhymeschemes(⋯)，comparativeandfigurativemannersofspeaking，proverbsandmetaphorsshouldallbeobserved．"(ibid：32-33)However，asitisimpossibleforatranslatortorenderalltheformalelementsintothetargetlanguage，therefore，thetranslatorshouldmakehisdecisionsaccording4．2．3SummaryAfteranalyzingtheaboveexamples，wefindthatBirckWangandXudiffergreatlyinseveralaspects．In1994，ProfessorLiuZhongdedefinedliteraltranslation私follows：“Intheprocessof4Itiscitedfromhttp：／／en．wikipedia．org／wiki／Parallelism(rhetoric)．51
translation,literaltranslationtreatssentencesasbasicunitsandatthesalnetimetakesthewholepassageintoconsideration；atranslatorwhoattachesgreatimportancetoliteraltranslationdoeshisorherbesttoreproducetheideasandwritingstyleoftheoriginalwork,retainingintheversionasmanyrhetoricaldevicesandsentences仃ucn玳softheoriginalaspossible．”(刘重德，1994：172)Healsodefinedliberaltranslationasfollows：“Liberaltranslationisemployedforthepurposeofexpressingtheoriginalmeaninginsteadofreproducingtheoriginalsentencestructureorrhetoricaldevice(s)．”0bid：173)Fromcomparingthethreeversions，itisfoundthatBirchtreatsphrasesorevenwordsasthebasicunitoftranslationanddoeshisbesttoreproducethewording，grammaticalstmcture，rhetoricaldevicesandwritingstyleoftheoriginalwork．Histranslationthusisclosertoliteraltranslation．Bygivinguptheoriginalwordsandimages，however,Wangresortstofindingavarietyofappropriatewaytoexpresstheintendedmeaningoftheoriginal．Histranslationismuchfreer．Xu’Stranslationstandsinbetween．Hehasflexiblyandfaithfullyconveyedthemeaningoftheoriginalandretainedtherhetoricaldevices．Histranslationisascribedtothestrengthsofbothtranslatorsandthereforebetterintermsofreadingeffect．Thethreetypesoftranslationsareillustratedasbelow：№e嗍妇谢adltp咖h臼啊霸嗣|I妇捌刚嚣粼ATION4．3MajorFindings4．3．1TranslationMethodsAUArlAllU越Birdt'sTramlatien■●●●●●Xu‘誊∞脯嬲btio靠●■●●●●Wang’摹TranslationFigure3(adaptedbytheAuthor)Nordhasdefinedtwotypesoftranslationmethods，i．e．documentarytranslationandinstrumentalmethodbasedonfunctionalistterms．Shedefinesthat：52
‘'Documentarytranslations(⋯)serveasadocumentofanSCcommunicationbetweentheauthorandtheSTreceiver,whereastheinstrumentaltranslationiscommunicativeinstrumentinitsownrig坻conveyingamessagedirectlyfromtheSTauthortotheTTreceiver'’．(Nord,2006：80)Thetargettextproducedbythedocumentarytranslationis“atextaboutatext，oraboutoneOrmoreparticularaspectsofatext．"(Nord，2001：47)Therefore，thedocumentarytranslationisintendedtoreproducethefeaturesoftheST,suchasthelexicalfeature，thesyntacticfeatureortheculturalfeature．Nord(ibid：48)categorizestheword·for-wordtranslation,literaltranslation,philologicaltranslationandexoticizingtranslationunderthescopeofdocumentarytranslation．ButtheystressdifferentaspectsofthefeaturesoftheST．Shestates0bid：48-49)thatword—for-wordtranslationaimstOreproducethesourcelanguagesystem，literaltranslationaimstoreproducethesourcelanguageform，philologicaltranslationaimstoreproducethesourcelanguageformandcontent,andexotizingtranslationaimstoreproduceSTform，contentandsituation．Nordalso(ibid：50-51)statesthatinstrumentaltranslationmainlyincludeequifunctionaltranslation,heterofunctionaltranslationandhomologoustranslation．Thesethreesub-typesstressdifferentpurposes．AccordingtONord0bid：51-52)，theequifuncfionaltranslationisintendedtoproduceatargettextwhichhasthesamefunction觞thesourcetext,theheterofunctionaltranslationproducesatargettextwhichhasasimilarfunctionasthesourcetext,andthehomologoustranslationaimstOachievehomologouseffecttOsourcetext．FollowingNord’Sfunctionaltranslationtypology,wethenfindthatBirch’stranslationandWang’stranslationareorientedtowardsdifferentfunctions．Birch’SreflectsmorefeaturesoftheST(includingthelexicalfeature，thesyntacticfeatureandtheculturalfeature)，whileWang’SaimstoachievethesimilaroreventhesanlefunctionOreffectoftheST．Therefore，Birch’SiSclosertothedocumentarytranslation,whileWang’SisclosertOtheinstrumentalone．Xuadoptsthetwotranslationmethodsalternatelyandstrivestopreservethefunction硒well嬲thelinguisticandculturalfeaturesoftheSTinabalancedway．4．3．2Objectof“Loyalty"Theconceptof“functionplusloyalty”istheoneproposedbyNord．Byfunction,Nordmeans53
thatatranslatorshould‘‘makeatargettextworkintheintendedwayinthetargetsituation"．(Nord，2001：126)However,Nord(ibid：126-127)alsoarguesatranslatorisnotleftfleetodowhateverhelikesorwhatevertheirclientslikewiththesourcetext；instead，heshouldalsoabidebythe‘'loyalty'’principle．ThisprincipleisexplainedbyNord(ibid：128)船follows：Theloyaltyprincipletakesaccountofthelegitimateinterestsofthethreepartiesinvolved：initiators(whowantaparticulartypeoftranslation)，targetreceivers(whoexpectaparticularrelationshipbetweenoriginalandtargettexts)andoriginalauthors(whohaveafighttodemandrespectfortheirindividualintentionsandexpectaparticularkindofrelationshipbetweeBtheirtextanditstranslation)．XieTianzhendeemsNord’S‘functionplusloyalty’modelseemsperfectbutisverydifficulttOfollowinpractice，foritisalmostimpossibletobeloyaltOtheST,theSTauthor,曲e巧andtheTTreadersespeciallywhenthepurposeoftheSTisdifferentfromofthe订．(谢天振，2008：176，mytranslation)ZhangMeifangalsoclaimsthat“Inpracticalsituations，itisnoteaSytobeloyaltotheinitiator,theoriginalauthorandthetargetreceiversimultaneously．The‘functionplusloyalty’modelworksforthesituationwherethepurposeoftheSTisidentical、^，imoftheTT．However,incasethepurposeoftheSTisdifferentfromoftheTT,whatshouldthetranslatordo?Shouldhebeloyaltytotheinitiatorortheoriginalauthororthetargetreceiver?(张美芳，2005：65，mytranslation)”BaSedonthestatementsoftheabovetwoscholars，itCanbededucedbeingabletobeloyaltoalltherelatedsidesisararecaseinpracticalsituations．InmostcaSes，thetranslatorislefttodecidewhichsidehechoosestostandon．Throughtheabovecomparison,wefindBirchattachesgreaterimportancetotheloyaltytotheoriginalauthor,whileWangpaysmoreattentiontotheinterestofthetargetreceiver．Xumanipulatesthe‘‘functionplusloyalty'’modelbetterthantheabovetwotranslators．HehaS，toacertainextent，managedtotakenintoaccounttheinterestsofwhatandwhoareinvolvedintranslationatthesanletime．HistranslationreflectsthefunctionofSTbetterthantheothertwo．
4．3．3CauseofDifferencesofTranslationStrategyVermeerbaseshisSkopostheorieonthetheoryoftranslationalaction；therefore，fromhispointofview,thereexistnotranslationactivitieswhichdonothaveapurpose．Hestressesthat‘‘actionsdonothaveapurposeanyway,buttheyareinterpretedasbeingpurposefulbytheparticipantsoranyobservers．"(Nord,2001：110)Toprovethisviewpoint,heftLrtherbringsforththat“Inordertobeinterpretedaspurposeful，aparticularactionmustbetheresultofafreedecisionfor(oragainst)oneoftwoormorepossiblemodesofacting，includingthepossibilityofnotactingata11．’’(ibid)NordhasalsoofferedherideatosupportVermeer’Stheory．ShecIaimsthatthetextproducersoften‘‘haveavagueorfuzzynotionofwhomtheyareaddressingoratleastaratherclearnotionofwhomtheyarenotaddressing．”(Nord，2001-111)Moreover,whentheyareendeavoringtoproducetextswhichtheythinkarecomprehensiblebythereceivers，‘'theymustconsciouslyorunconsciouslyorienttheirwritingtowardsomeprototypicalaudiencewhosepossibilitiesofcomprehensioncansomewhatbeenvisaged．’’(ibid)Accordingtotheabovestatements，itcanbededucedthatBirch,WangandXukeepacertainrangeofreadersintheirmindduringthetranslationprocess．Althoughtherearemanyfactorswhichhavecausedthedifferencesofthetranslationstrategiesofthethreetranslators，suchastheculturalbackground,thelinguisticcompetence，thehermeneuticfactors，thetranslator’SsubjectivityandSOon,theaddresseekeptinthemindofthetranslatorisevidentlyoneofthemanyfactors．Wang，BirchandXuhavedifferentexpectationsofthetargetreadenWangneverbringsanyculturalbarriersorlinguisticinterruptionstohistargetreaders．Birch’Stargetreadersarealwaysboundtofacetheconstantinterruptionofexpansionsandfootnotes．TheyareexpectedtoexploretheSTthroughtheruggedandrigorousword-to—wordtranslation．Therefore，theyshouldbeequippedwithstrongerlinguisticcompetenceandricherculturalknowledgeinordertounderstandthetranslation．Xumakesacompromisebetweenthetwo．Hecreatesasmoothversionwhichcarriesamoderateamountofexoticflavor．Throughhisversion，thetargetreadersCanappreciatetheoriginalstylebetter．TheaboveexamplesmanifestthatBirchsparesnoeffortstoreproducethelinguisticandculturalfeaturesoftheSTinalmostallcases．55
Chapter5ConclusionInthepreviouschaptersofthisthesis，theAuthorhasattemptedtojustifytheapplicabilityoffunctionalismtothetranslationoftraditionalChinesedramaandillustratehowfunctionalismworksforthesaidtranslation．Throughinvestigations，itisfoundthatthereisnorestrictdivisionbetweendramaandothergenresintermsoffunctionaltranslation；therefore，functionalismisworkablefortraditionalChinesedrama．DuringthetranslationprocessoftraditionalChinesedrama,thefunctional‘'top-down'’approachshouldbeadoptedtopreservetheholisticfunctionofthetextinitscommunicativesituation．Finally,tojustifyherhypothesis，theAuthorhasalsocarriedoutacomparativestudyofthreeEnglishversionsofThePeonyPavilionrenderedby一一一WangRongpei，CyrilBirchandXuYuanzhongrespectivelyfromthefunctionalperspective．ItisfoundthatBirch’Stranslationbelongstothedocumentarytranslation,whileWang’Sbelongstotheinstrumentalone．XuYuanzhongflexiblyadoptsthedocumentarytranslationandtheinstrumentaltranslationalternatelyandbestkeepsthefunctionoftheST．Thedifferenceinthechoiceoftranslationstrategieshingespartlyonthedifferentaddresseeskeptinthemindofthethreetranslators．ThethesisfamilyprovesthatfunctionalismCannotonlyworkforthetranslationoftraditionalChinesedramabutalsodiversifytranslationstrategiesandhelppromotetheoverseasdisseminationoftraditionalChinesedrama．TheAuthorbringsforthamulti-leveltranslationstrategybasedonthefunctionalismfordramatranslation．Thedomesticationmethodforprivatereadinghelpsthereadersunderstandthecontenteasilyandgetthempreparedforfurtherappreciationofthedrama．TheforeignizationmethodforscholarlystudyenablesprofessionalreaderstohavefullaccesstotheoriginaltextandhelpstodisseminatetraditionalChinesedramainacademiccircles．Thealternateuseofdomesticationandforeignizationforsubtitling(／surtitling)whichtakestemporalandspatialrestrictionsintoconsiderationensurestheon·spoteffectsandprovidesapowerfulsupportforthestageperformance．Themulti-leveltranslationstrategyalsoworl(swellforaparticularreaderwhowantstoknowabouttheChinesedramaticculture．ThereaderCanstartsfromreadingadomesticatedversiontohaveaprimary56
understanding，continueswithaforeignizedonetodeepenhisorherunderstandingandfinallyends谢n1theappreciationofthestageperformancewiththehelpofsubtitling．Bassnettonceclaimedthat“IntermsofTranslationStudies，也eatretranslationhasalwaysbeenthepoorrelation"．(Bassnett，2001：107)ThisthesisistheAuthor’spreliminaryattemptatthestudyofdramatranslation,aimingtooffersomenewideasforit．However,嬲theAuthorisanewhandinthescholarlywritingandabeginnerinthefieldofTranslationStudies，herweaknessesintranslationtheory,translationpracticeandlanguagearequiteobvious．ShehopesthatinthefuturemoreresearcheswillbedoneOlldramatranslationfromapracticalperspective，andexpectsthatitwillfurtherpromotetheoverseasdisseminationoftraditionalChinesedrama．57
事饧rksCitedBibliography1．Baker,Mona&GabrielaSaldanba．RoutledgeEncyclopediaofTranslationStudies(2noEdition)【Z】．Shanghai：ShanghaiForeignLanguageEducationPress，2010．2．Bassnett,Susan．“StillTrappedintheLabyrinth：FurtherReflectionsonTranslationandTheatre．，’【A】．InBassnett,Susan&Andr6Lefevere．ConstructingCultures：EssaysonLiteraryTranslation【C】．Shanghai：ShanghaiForeignLanguageEducationPress，2001．3．Bassnett,Susan．“TranslatingfortheTheatre：ThecaseagainstPerformability．”[A／OL]．TTR(Traduction,Terminologie，Reduction)4．1(1991)：99—111(http：／／www．erudit．org／revue／TTR／1991／v4／nI／037084ar．pdf)[accessed22／Feb．／201114．Bassnett,Susan．TranslationStudies(3坩Edition)瞰】．Shanghai：ShanghaiForeignLanguageEducationPress，2004．5．Bassnett,Susan．“WaysthroughtheLabyrinth：StrategiesandMethodsforTranslatingTheatreTexts．”【A】．InTheoHermans(ed)．TheManipulationofLiterature．London：CroomHelm，1985．6．Birch,C徊l(trans)．ThePeonyPavilion(2们Edition)【c1．ByTangXianzu．Indiana：IndianaUniversityPress，2002．7．Birch，Cyril．“YuanZaju．”【A】．InChanSin—wai&DavidE．Pollard(eds)．AnEncyclopediaofTranslation【z／ou．HongKong：TheChineseUniversityPress，2001．(http：／／books．google．com．hk／books?id=4fWflW1CStcC&lpg=PP1&hl=zh-CN&pg=PP1#v=．onepage&q&f=-false)[accessed03／Mar．／2011】8．Munday,Jeremy．IntroducingTranslationStudies【M】．Shanghai：ShanghaiForeignLanguageEducationPress，2010．9．Newmark,Peter．ATextbookofTranslation[MI．Shanghai：ShanghaiForeignLanguageEducationPress，2001．58
10．Nicla,EugeneA．LanguageandCulture--Contexts加Translating【M】．Shanghai：ShanghaiForeignLanguageEducationPress，2001．1．Nikolarea’Ekaterini．‘'PerformabilityversusReadability：AHistoficMOverviewofaTheareticalPolarizationinTheatreTranslation．”TranslationJournal．6．4．October,2002．【OB／OL】(http：／／translationjoumal．net／ioumal／22theater．htm)【accessed22／Feb．／2011】2．Nord，Christiane．TextAnalysis砌Translation：Theory,MethodologyandDidacticApplicationofaModelfo，．Translation—OrientedTextAnalysis(2硼Edition)【M】．Beijing：ForeignLanguageTeachingandResearchPress，2006．13．Nord，Christiane．TranslatingasaPurposefulActivities-FunctionalistApproachExplained【M】．Shanghai：ShangllaiForeignLanguageEducationPress，2001．14．Reiss，Katharina．TranslationCriticism：thePotentialsandLimitationsM】．Trans．ErrollF．Rhodes．Shanghai：ShanghaiForeignLanguageEducationPress，2004．5．Schaffner,Christina．‘'Action．”[A】．InMonaBaker(ear)．RoutledgeEncyclopediaofTranslationStudies【Z】．Shanghai：ShanghmForeignLanguageEducationPress，2004．6．Snell-Homby,Mary．TranslationStudies：AnIntegratedApproach(RevisedEdition)【M】．Shanghai：ShanghaiForeignLanguageEducationPress，2001．7．Vermeer,HansJ．“SkoposandCommissioninTranslationalAction．”[A】Trans．AndrewChesterman．InLawrenceVenuti(ed．)TheTranslationStudiesReader(2加Edition)[C／OL]．NewYork：Routledge，2004．(http：／／books．google．com．hk／books?id=vLC51uAnbSUC&lpg=PPl&hl=zh-CN&pg=PPl#v．=onepage&q&f=false)【Accessed03／Sep．／200】18．邓笛．从目的论看戏剧翻译[J／OL]．四川戏剧．2008(4)。(http：／／www．cnki．com．cn／Article／CJFDTotal-SCXJ200804019．htm)[accessed22／Feb．／2011】19．杜丽娟．以诠释学视角解读《牡丹亭》英译本[D／OL]．河北：河北师范大学，2008。0attp：／／cdmd．cnki．com．cn／Article／CDMD-10094-200824982．htm)【accessed22／Feb．／201】20．樊静华．从语境的层次看《牡丹亭》的两个译本[D／OL]．南京：南京师范大学，2008。(http：／／202．119．108．211／lunwen／list．asp?id=13352)【accessed22／Feb．／2011】21．季国平．不到园林，怎知春色如许——诸版《牡丹亭》杂记[J／OL]．中国戏剧，2006(4)。59
Ottp：／／www,cnki．com．cn／Article／CJFDTOTAL-XIJU200604019．htm)【accessed22／Feb．／2011】22．刘羽，古典诗歌的功能主义翻译[hi．屠国元、廖晶(编)翻译研究的多维视角[Z／OL】长沙：湖南人民出版社，2005。．(]attp：／／www．chineseall．cn／book／vnet／book／O／1／106／10672／10672．html)【accessed10／Sep．／2010】23．刘重德．翻译漫谈【M】．西安：陕西人民出版社．1994。24．尚娜．评《牡丹亭》英译本【D／OL]．南京：南京师范大学，2003。(http：／／cdmd．cnki．com．cn／Article／CDMD-10254-2004122624．htm)[accessed22／Feb．／201l】25．田文．古典戏剧的翻译：一场浩瀚的工程【J／OLI．英语教育周刊，2008。0attp：／／paper．i21st．cn／story／46242．html)【accessed22／Feb．／2011】26．汤显祖(著)，汪榕培(译)．牡丹亭，砀PPeonyPavilion【C】．上海：上海外语教育出版社，2000。27．汤显祖(著)，许渊冲、许明(译)。牡丹亭，DreaminPeonyPavilion【C】．北京：中国对外翻译出版公司，2009。28．汪榕培．《牡丹亭》的英译及传播【A】．汤显祖(著)，汪榕培(译)．牡丹亭，ThePeonyPavilion【M】上海：上海外语教育出版社，2000。29．熊婷婷．从目的论看戏剧翻译的评价标准【J／OL]．绵阳师范学院学报，2006，(4)。(hrtp：／／www,cnki．com．cn／Article／CJFDTOTAL-MYSF200604030．htm)[accessed22／Feb．／2011】30．徐溯．《牡丹亭》译本对比研究[D／OL]．北京：外交学院，2004。Qttp：／／cdmd．cnki．com．cn／Article／CDMD-10040-200407113．htm)【Accessed22／Feb．／2011】31．谢天振(主编)．当代外国翻译理论导读【C】．天津：南开大学出版社，2008。32．许渊冲．翻译的艺术【M】．北京：中国对外翻译出版公司．1984。33．余光中．余光中谈翻译[M】．北京：北京对外翻译出版公司，2002。34．张美芳．功能加忠诚——介评克里丝汀·诺德的功能翻译理论[J／OL]．外国语，2005，(1)。0attp：／／www．cnki．com．cn／Article／CJFDTOTAL-WYXY200501008,htm)【accessed22／Feb．／2011】35．张政．文化与翻译——读汪榕培《牡丹亭》英译本随想【J／OL]．西安外国语大学学报，
2004，(1)。(http：／／www．cnki．com．crgArticle／CJFDTOTAL-XAWX200401011．htm)[accessed22／Feb．／2011】Worl娼Consulted1．Dollemp，Cay．BasicsofTranslationStudies【M】．Shanghai：ShanghaiForeignLanguageEducationPress，2007．2．Williams，Jenny&AndrewChesterman,TheMap：ABeginner譬GuidetoDoingResearchinTranslationStudies【M】．Shanghai：ShanghaiForeignLanguageEducationPress，2007．3．陈刚、胡维佳，功能主义理论适合文学翻译吗?阴．外语与外语教学，2004(2)。4．陈刚，旅游翻译与涉外导游【M】．北京：中国对外翻译出版公司，2004。5．郭著章，谈汪译《牡丹亭》【J】．外语与外语教学，2002，(8)。6．金学勤，《论语》英译之跨文化阐释【M】．四川：四川大学出版社，2009。7．刘重德(编著)，西方议论研究【C】．北京：中国对外翻译出版公司，2003。8．赵山林，牡丹亭选评瞰】．上海：上海古籍出版社，2002。61
微信/支付宝扫码支付