论文部分内容阅读
【Abstract】In 1980， Ying Ruocheng’s English version Teahouse， made a great success in America. Another version published by John Howard Gibbon also got a great reputation in 2001. Zhou Lingshun thinks， translator always tries to make a balance between linguistic being and social being. This paper will make a description and research on their translation and behaviors from intra-translation and extra-translation.
【Key Words】culture-loaded translation； intra-translation； extra-translation
【作者簡介】孙雪微，现就读于西安外国语大学英文学院2016级翻译学专业，研究方向：翻译理论与实践研究。
In Teahouse， How did translator treat cultural-words？ This paper chooses 30 culture-loaded words as the object of study， hoping to have a all know for their translation and behaviors based on“Truth-seeking—Utility-attaining ” Evaluative Model.
I. Ying and John’s Views on Drama Translation
As a actor， Ying know what spoken way is suitable for actors and audience. As a translator， he can freely turn the meaning. He chooses performability， acceptability and individuality as the guiding principle in translation. However， publisher said John’s version can used for spreading culture and also reading materials of domestic people.
II. “Truth-seeking—Utility-attaining” Evaluative Model of Continuum
Two phrases with hyphen to describe the gradients of translator behavior is first put forward by Professor Zhou Lingshun. Truth-seeking is a necessary behavior to make the original text faithful. Utility-attaining is put forward based on truth-seeking， but it is higher than truth-seeking. Therefore， truth-seeking is the basis and guarantee， and utility-attaining is the goal， attitude， effect. Intra-translation effect concerns with the degree of “truth-seeking” the translator has achieved. While extra-translation effects embodies the degree of utility-attaining of meeting social needs. （Zhou lingshun，2014）
III. Analysis of Culture-loaded Words Translation in Two Versions
This paper classifies 30 cases into different categories according to the translation methods used. The following is statistical result. In the 30 cases， Ying adopted 5 translation strategies， including 17 free translation， 3 omission， 1 substitution ，8 literal translation without notes and 1 literal translation with notes. While John adopts 6 translation strategies，including 12 free translation ，4 omission，1 substitution ，1 transliteration with notes， 6 literal translation without notes and 6 literal translation with notes. It can be show that Ying focuses on the semantic content of word and loses the exotic flavor. Comparing with one case of thirty， John uses six cases of literal translation with notes and one case of trans-literation to provide readers more information. But Ying and John are not wholly declined to one side， their behavior always are in certain condition. The only biggest difference is degree of two sides.
In intra-translation effect， how close his translation faithful to the original text？ In extra-translation effect， how degree of their translation meet the society？ See a specific example.
咱們就八仙过海，各显其能吧！
Well done！ Let’s both try our best， and see what happens. （Ying）
Nicely said！ Like the Eight Immortal crossing the sea， we each have our own strengths， eh？（John）
According to Taoist mythology， when the eight immortals crossed the sea， each of them shows their strength and crosses the sea. John translates the original text literally with explanation. It is better for readers who knows little knowledge about Chinese. However， if it was performed on the stage， the audience will get confused. For the effect of stage ， Ying just translates the semantic meaning. Considering this， Ying’s version is also good.
IV. Conclusion
Ying always uses free translation in order to let the foreigner audience understand. It doesn’t means Ying’s translation is not loyal to original text. While John takes a little stage effect into account. In fact， each of them follows their principles they have made. It is wrong to evaluate John’s version using other principles. Every version has its meaning of existence. Importantly， we should check whether translator achieve his original aims and look for reasons supporting the translator’s behavior. Only this can we evaluate the translator’s behavior wholly.
References：
[1]House，Juliane（1997）.Translation Quality Assessment：A Model Revisited.Gunter Narr Verlag Tubingen.
【Key Words】culture-loaded translation； intra-translation； extra-translation
【作者簡介】孙雪微，现就读于西安外国语大学英文学院2016级翻译学专业，研究方向：翻译理论与实践研究。
In Teahouse， How did translator treat cultural-words？ This paper chooses 30 culture-loaded words as the object of study， hoping to have a all know for their translation and behaviors based on“Truth-seeking—Utility-attaining ” Evaluative Model.
I. Ying and John’s Views on Drama Translation
As a actor， Ying know what spoken way is suitable for actors and audience. As a translator， he can freely turn the meaning. He chooses performability， acceptability and individuality as the guiding principle in translation. However， publisher said John’s version can used for spreading culture and also reading materials of domestic people.
II. “Truth-seeking—Utility-attaining” Evaluative Model of Continuum
Two phrases with hyphen to describe the gradients of translator behavior is first put forward by Professor Zhou Lingshun. Truth-seeking is a necessary behavior to make the original text faithful. Utility-attaining is put forward based on truth-seeking， but it is higher than truth-seeking. Therefore， truth-seeking is the basis and guarantee， and utility-attaining is the goal， attitude， effect. Intra-translation effect concerns with the degree of “truth-seeking” the translator has achieved. While extra-translation effects embodies the degree of utility-attaining of meeting social needs. （Zhou lingshun，2014）
III. Analysis of Culture-loaded Words Translation in Two Versions
This paper classifies 30 cases into different categories according to the translation methods used. The following is statistical result. In the 30 cases， Ying adopted 5 translation strategies， including 17 free translation， 3 omission， 1 substitution ，8 literal translation without notes and 1 literal translation with notes. While John adopts 6 translation strategies，including 12 free translation ，4 omission，1 substitution ，1 transliteration with notes， 6 literal translation without notes and 6 literal translation with notes. It can be show that Ying focuses on the semantic content of word and loses the exotic flavor. Comparing with one case of thirty， John uses six cases of literal translation with notes and one case of trans-literation to provide readers more information. But Ying and John are not wholly declined to one side， their behavior always are in certain condition. The only biggest difference is degree of two sides.
In intra-translation effect， how close his translation faithful to the original text？ In extra-translation effect， how degree of their translation meet the society？ See a specific example.
咱們就八仙过海，各显其能吧！
Well done！ Let’s both try our best， and see what happens. （Ying）
Nicely said！ Like the Eight Immortal crossing the sea， we each have our own strengths， eh？（John）
According to Taoist mythology， when the eight immortals crossed the sea， each of them shows their strength and crosses the sea. John translates the original text literally with explanation. It is better for readers who knows little knowledge about Chinese. However， if it was performed on the stage， the audience will get confused. For the effect of stage ， Ying just translates the semantic meaning. Considering this， Ying’s version is also good.
IV. Conclusion
Ying always uses free translation in order to let the foreigner audience understand. It doesn’t means Ying’s translation is not loyal to original text. While John takes a little stage effect into account. In fact， each of them follows their principles they have made. It is wrong to evaluate John’s version using other principles. Every version has its meaning of existence. Importantly， we should check whether translator achieve his original aims and look for reasons supporting the translator’s behavior. Only this can we evaluate the translator’s behavior wholly.
References：
[1]House，Juliane（1997）.Translation Quality Assessment：A Model Revisited.Gunter Narr Verlag Tubingen.