國立台灣師範大學翻譯研究所碩士論文 a Thesis Submitted to Graduate Institute of Translation and Interpretation National Taiwan Normal University
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
國立台灣師範大學翻譯研究所碩士論文 A Thesis Submitted to Graduate Institute of Translation and Interpretation National Taiwan Normal University 語言變異的(不)可譯性:以中文的文白並陳為例 (Un-) Translatability of Linguistic Variation: Chinese Diglossic Situation as Case in Point 指導教授:賴慈芸 博士 Thesis Advisor: Dr Sharon Lai 研究生: 牟傳門 Advisee: Todd Klaiman 中華民國一O二年一月 January 2013 國立台灣師範大學翻譯研究所碩士論文 A Thesis Submitted to Graduate Institute of Translation and Interpretation National Taiwan Normal University 語言變異的(不)可譯性:以中文的文白並陳為例 (Un-) Translatability of Linguistic Variation: Chinese Diglossic Situation as Case in Point 指導教授:賴慈芸 博士 Thesis Advisor: Dr Sharon Lai 研究生: 牟傳門 Advisee: Todd Klaiman 中華民國一O二年一月 January 2013 Dedications I would like to dedicate this work to Sunny, Cecibel Martinez and the memory of Sheila Gray. Their love, patience, and support made it possible for me to complete my studies and produce the present thesis. i Acknowledgments I would like to thank my thesis advisor Dr Sharon Lai for all her help and support in the preparation and writing of the present work. Also, I would like to thank the staff and faculty of the Graduate Institute of Translation and Interpretation for their support and guidance throughout my studies at the National Taiwan Normal University. ii Abstract The present paper addresses (un‐) translatability of linguistic variation as it pertains to literary translation of diglossia from Chinese to English. The paper investigates issues of potentiality and importance of translation of diglossic linguistic variation. Discussion of potentiality is carried out through an extensive review and comparison of major trends in the Translation Studies literature on linguistic variation. The discussion brings into contrast discourse‐ restrictive, yet ubiquitous, “translatability of dialect” issues with a rare, yet discourse‐liberating, notion of “syntagmatic alteration of distance” put forth by Anthony Pym (2000) as basis for translation of linguistic variation. A brief example from Lu Xun’s (魯迅, 1881‐1936) novella The True Story of Ah Q (阿Q正 傳, A Q Zhengzhuan) (1921) provides an argument for importance. The example focuses on parody and linguistic variation as they function together in the language and qualities of the novella’s main antagonist and his biographer, the narrator, as they are translated out from the historicized Chinese referential frame of the original text into the English‐speaking‐world of the translation. Analysis is carried out across four English‐language translations: Wang Chi‐ chen’s Ah Q and others: Selected stories of Lusin (1941); Yang Xianyi and Gladys Yang’s The true story of Ah Q (1956); William A. Lyell’s Diary of a madman and other stories (1990); and Julia Lovell’s The real story of AhQ and other tales of China (2009). Keywords: Diglossia, historiography, linguistic variation, standard‐with‐dialects, Lu Xun iii Table of Contents 1. Introduction…………………………………………………………………………………...………. 1 2. Translation Studies and Linguistic Variation 2.1 Early Considerations……………………..……………………………………………. 6 2.2 Minority Languages and Power Relations…………………………………... 10 2.3 Reflexivity and the (Un‐) Translatability of Linguistic Variation….. 10 2.4 Reconsideration of Textual Function…………………………………………. 16 2.5 Beyond Standards‐with‐Dialects……………………………………………….. 18 3. Diglossia 3.1 Definition and Ferguson’s 9 Variables….………………………….. 22 3.2 Classical and Extended Diglossia………………………………….…. 31 3.3 Diglossia and Bilingualism……………………………………………… 33 3.4 Diglossia and Standards‐with‐dialects…………………………….. 36 3.5 Diglossia and Code‐switching………………………………………..... 37 4. Chinese Language Situation 4.1 Chinese Diglossia…………………………………………………...………. 40 5. Parody, Translation, and Chinese Diglossia 5.1 Chinese Historiography and Language Use………………..…….. 45 5.2 Ah Q Zheng Zhuan……...…………………………………………..……….. 47 5.3 Translators and Translations …………………………………………. 51 5.4 Text Excerpt: Analysis and Discussion…………………….………. 60 5.4.1 Text Excerpt (Original)…………………………………....... 60 5.4.2 Text Excerpt (Wang)……………………………………….... 63 5.4.3 Text Excerpt (Yangs)……………………………………....... 64 5.4.4 Text Excerpt (Lyell)………………………………………….. 67 5.4.5 Text Excerpt (Lovell)……………………………….............. 69 6. Conclusion………………………………………………………………………………………........ 72 Bibliography………………………………………………………………………………………......... 76 iv 1. Introduction Within Translation Studies literature, the issue of the (un‐) translation of linguistic variation has received a certain degree of attention (Catford 1965; Newmark 1988; Hatim and Mason 1990; Brisset 1996; Sanchez 1999; Sanchez 2009). The attention, however, has been quite unflinchingly focused upon (un)‐translatability of dialect — in particular, socio‐ and geographic dialect — and the problems associated with it. The present paper would like to suggest that the limited scope of the discussion has caused research into various other aspects of linguistic variation — bilingualism, multilingualism, and diglossia,1 to name a few — to be left underdeveloped. The call for increased awareness and broadened scope for discourse related to translatability of linguistic variation is not new. The issue has been raised before and even with particular reference to diglossia (Muhammad Raji Zughoul & Mohammed El‐Badarien 2004; Meylaerts 2006; Anderman 2007). However, based upon research carried out for the present paper, it seems that the Chinese diglossic situation, in particular, has never before been considered within the Translation Studies Literature. It will be dealt with in the present paper. It remains to be seen whether or not a call to broaden the scope of the discussion will be answered. A simple example of the limited scope of recent research upon the topic of translatability of linguistic variation may be observed in the limited treatment of the subject in two of Translations Studies’ most general, but comprehensive, resource texts — Jeremy Munday’s (2009) The Routledge Companion to Translation Studies and Mona Baker’s (2011) The Routledge Encyclopedia of Translation Studies. Munday’s text, for example, provides an extensive treatment — written by Basil Hatim (2009:36‐53)— of register‐related issues that pertain, in particular, to register and discourse analytic models imported from applied linguistics and to 1 Diglossia, the focal point of the present paper, will be discussed in further detail in Chapter 3. The term generally describes a language contact situation in which two variants of the same language co-exist in an asymmetrical relationship — across variables of function, prestige, literary heritage, acquisition, standardization, stability, grammar, lexicon, and phonology — within a society (Ferguson 1959:325-340). 1 translation quality assessment models such as those developed by Julian House. With respect to translation of other types of linguistic variation, the book offers a brief discussion of dialect — ideolect and sociolect — in audiovisual translation (2009:158‐159) and a short definition of ‘dialect translation’ as a practice characterized by general adherence to the norm of ‘homogenizing’, or standardizing, the target text language (2009:181). Diglossia as a form of linguistic variation is not mentioned. In Baker’s (2011) The Routledge Encyclopedia of Translation Studies, dialect, register, and style are all presented and dealt with extensively. Diglossia, however, receives only a single, obscure reference in a section of the book dealing with ideology and translation. In particular, diglossia is mentioned in reference to a promising, yet sluggish, increase in awareness of alternative perspectives on translation in non‐Western cultures (2011:140) The aim of the present paper is to further address through presentation and explication of the Chinese diglossic situation the lacuna that exists within Translation Studies and the discourse on translatability of linguistic variation as it pertains to diglossia. In particular, the present paper will investigate both the potentiality and importance of translation of diglossia as a form of linguistic variation. In order to address issues relating to the potentiality of translation of diglossia as linguistic variation, the present paper will compare and contrast popular variety‐ for‐variety, equivalence‐fidelity‐based approaches to translation of dialect with more general, register‐based, relative‐distance styled approaches taken from Catford (1965) and Pym (2000) readings of the problem. A comprehensive review and discussion of Translation Studies literature as presented in the subsequent section of the present paper will function to identify an overall trend in the field toward discourse that focuses upon translation of linguistic variation issues that pertain to structuralist notions of equivalence and fidelity to source text. The trend, considered to be out of fashion amongst post‐structuralist translation theorists, will serve as comparison to infrequently referenced, relativist notions based upon the 2 author’s reading of Catford (1965) and Pym’s (2000) treatment of the issue of translatability of linguistic variation. Finally, analysis of a representative instance of literary linguistic variation and its translation will serve to highlight the potentiality of a more register‐based, relative‐distance styled approach to the translation of variation. The importance of translation of diglossic variation will be addressed by way of analysis of a representative piece of Chinese fiction and its translation into English. Lu Xun’s (魯迅, 1881‐1936) novella Ah Q Zhengzhuan (阿Q正傳, The True Story of Ah Q) (1921) will