The Study on Indirect Translation in Chinese Translation History from A

2017 3rd International Conference on Social Science and Management (ICSSM 2017) ISBN: 978-1-60595-445-5

The Study on Indirect Translation in Chinese Translation History From a Cultural Perspective Yue SUN Department of Arts and Science, Chengdu College of University of Electronic Science and Technology of China, Chengdu, Sichuan, China [email protected]

Keywords: Indirect Translation, Culture, Direct Translation.

Abstract. In comparison with direct translation, indirect translation has its own reasons and values of coming into being and existence. Though indirect translation is not as popular as it used to be in the past, it has played an important role in Chinese history of translation and would not disappear absolutely in the stage of translation with its unique characteristics. This paper tends to study indirect translation from a cultural perspective.

Introduction of Indirect Translation Indirect Translation is a term used to denote the procedure whereby a text is not translated directly from an original ST, but via an intermediate translation in another language [1]. Indirect translation can also be called intermediate translation, mediated translation, retranslation or second-hand translation interchangeably. According to Toury, such a procedure is of course NORM-governed, and different literary systems will tolerate it to varying extents [2,3]. Indirect translation refers to translation from another language version rather than the original book. Some people may name indirect language as medium language translation. For example, Aesop’s Fables was first translated into Chinese from its English version in 1840, which had a profound effect and spread wide in our country; in the year 1955 Zhou Zuoren translated Aesop’s Fables from Greek.

The Reasons for the Existence of Indirect Translation in China Usually an ideal translation should be the task of a person who knows the target language very well. A translator should try his utmost to transfer the meanings and forms of the original text. This kind of translation could be named Indirect Translation—a term used by a number of writers [3] to refer to the type of translation procedure in which a TT is produced directly from the original ST, rather than via another, intermediate translation in another language. Direct Translation tends to be the only permitted type of translation in well-established literary systems which do not depend heavily on another system or language for literary models [4]. Since translation could be fulfilled through the way of direct translation, why did indirect translation come into being? This could be explained by the following three reasons: a) In some limited conditions, there are no other choices but indirect translation, which could be used to introduce a text into a country of another kind of language. The limitations may be the difficulties of getting the original text or a translator mastering the language of the source text temporarily. b) In some special situations, indirect translation is much more convenient and meaningful than direct translation, so indirect translation could be employed. For example, in modern China persons like Kang Youwei, Liang Qichao, Zhang Zhidong and Lu Xun advocated indirect translation actively. They supported the introduction of western works into China from Japanese versions through indirect translation. Because many scholars had the experience of studying in Japan and understood the differences and similarities of cultural backgrounds between China and Japan, translating lots of western books indirectly from Japanese was very popular at that moment. c) With the consideration of benefit and saving time, some publishers may ask persons to translate indirectly, which is not very responsible for readers of the target language if the source text is

323 available. The proper attitude of a translator or a publisher towards translation should be strict. If the condition is not limited, direct translation should be taken with the help of indirect translation in order to deal with some translating problems. Indirect translation has played an important role in the translation history of China and is also used to assist our translation in some ways now. Though indirect translation is not as popular in China at present as it used to be in the past, it has had its own values in the process of translation development. Indirect translation has been very important in introducing cultures and technology from other countries into China, and it is meaningful to study indirect translation, which could be used for reference in some underdeveloped countries nowadays.

Different Periods of Indirect Translation in Chinese History It is very hard to define precisely when indirect translation emerged, but it could be sure that indirect translation was existent during the period of sutra translation in China [5]. Sutra might be translated into Chinese from Sanskrit version of India directly or from Hunnish after sutra had been transferred into Persia and then into China indirectly. For sutra translation, both direct translation and indirect translation were adopted at that time. There are mainly three prosperous periods of translation in Chinese history: (1) sutra translation before Tang Dynasty; (2) science translation between later Ming Dynasty and earlier Qing Dynasty; (3) western literature translation (after Opium War). Indirect translation has not been absent in each prosperous period of translation in Chinese history. Indirect translation has been widely used in the third prosperous period of translation, because: (1) facing the menace of some other countries, China has wanted to reform by imitating Japan; (2) the cultural similarities between China and Japan, indirect translation from Japanese was much more convenient than direct translation from the western works in the opinion of some important persons like Kang Youwei, Liang Qichao and Lu Xun; (3) there were many students studying in Japan during that period, and they did not study only Japanese, but also political systems, social structures and literature of the western world through Japan.

Theoretical Background Since indirect translation is a NORM-governed procedure and different literary systems will tolerate it to varying extents, in the discussion of indirect translation the two concepts of Norm and System should not be ignored [6]. Norms—a term frequently encountered in discussions of translational phenomena. A certain degree of confusion exists surrounding the use of a term. Translational writing on translation and some branches of modern Translation Theory have taken a basically and presented as guideline, or even rules, which a translator needs to follow in order to produce an acceptable translation. System—a term derived from the writings of the Russian Fromalists, a group of literary theorists active in the early part of the twentieth century. For the purposes of Translation Studies, a system is defined as “the network of relations that can be hypothesized for a certain set of assumed observables”; the “assumed observables” of these definitions are usually phenomena of a linguistic, textual, literary or cultural nature. In other words, a system is a “stratified entity [3] created by the dynamic interaction of all factors of a linguistic, textual, literary or cultural nature. It is a common consensus that culture has a great influence on translation. It is also true the other way round. Cultural communication is bidirectional and two different cultures are interacted and mutually restricted. Early Translation Studies and Polysystem Translation are two main schools studying translation and culture synthetically. Early Translation Studies was from Low Countries Netherlands and Belgium, scholars of which like James Holmes, Andre Lefevere and Susan Bassnett-McGuire became concerned with how meaning travels, how translation process affects the target language and its culture, how the source language and its culture develop; recently translation has been considered specially in relation to politics, history and social system. Though polysystem 2

324 was first proposed by an Israeli theorist Itamar Even-Zohar only in 1970s, it has already been accepted by quite a few scholars. Gideon Toury has adopted the polysystem concept and defined the translation norms which influence the translation decisions. Polysystem Translation has paid much attention to the fact that social norms and literary rules in the culture of the target language could govern a translator’s aesthetic presuppositions and then influence the translation decisions. Early Translation Studies—Translation (including literary translation and cultural translation) is associated with two cultural contexts in which their cultural content is conveyed in two different languages. Basically speaking, translation should be faithful the original text literally, but the process of translation could not be isolated from the influence of different cultures [7]. Culture is really a big to concept which is not easy to define. Culture is a complexity of knowledge, belief, arts, morality, laws, customs and other habits of a nation, etc. And recently the school of Early Translation Studies has paid much heed to politics, history and social system during translating. Polysystem Theory—The term polysystem denotes a stratified conglomerate of interconnected elements, which changes and mutates as these elements interact with each other. Polysystem’s Sources: (1) Russian formalism (literary studies, reacting against impressionistic criticism and positivistic fact-finding; (2) at the end of 1920s Czech Structuralists (aesthetic function and pragmatic functions)—Literary change then stems from a combination of intrinsic evolution and extrinsic intervention; (3) in the 1960s and 70s by semioticians in Russian (Culture as a whole is treated as a vast multi-level system, a “semiosphere” which organizes out existence at a conceptual level). Polysystem theory has benefited translation research by placing translation squarely in a larger field of cultural activity. It thus provides a way of connecting transition with an array of other factors in addition to source texts. In other words, it integrates translation into a broader sociocultural practices and processes, making it more exciting object of study and facilitating what was subsequently hailed as cultural turn in translation studies.

The Cultural Analysis of Indirect Translation in China Translation, whether as an activity or a product, carries certain cultural meanings. Possibility, forms and contents of translation depend on various factors in cultures of the source language and the target language. Translation results do not only enrich the national culture of the target language, but also reflect the understanding of the relationship between nations [8]. Culture is essential for the cross-cultural approach to translation. Indirect translation is one of translation methods also involves cultural aspects when it is adopted. Cultural similarities—During the third prosperous period of translation, indirect translation has been used widely. Many western books were translated into China from their Japanese versions rather than the original ones. China and Japan share a lot in culture. The way of indirect translation could help introduce new ideas and technologies into China at that time. The similar background knowledge and cultures might make indirect translation easier. Cultural differences—Some French works used to be translated indirectly from their English versions. For example, Balzac’s Eugenie Grandet was translated by Han Yunbo from its English version in 1944, Dumas’s Le Cornte de Monte-Cristo was translated by Jiang Xuemo from English in 1947, etc. China has many differences with the western world in culture. The English versions might omit knowledge when English and French have something in common, which has brought difficulties in indirect translation. These difficulties perhaps led to misunderstanding of readers receiving the version of indirect translation. Cultural compensation—Since translation could not keep everything the same with the original text, indirect translation may lose something more than direct translation. As either indirect translation or direct translation, the aim is to avoid losses of meaning, knowledge and cultural factors as much as possible. Cultural default means absence of relevant cultural background knowledge shared by the author and his/her intended readers [9]. If indirect translation is from a translated version with many cultural defaults, cultural compensation could be chosen for the target language readers to comprehend well with the added cultural knowledge.

325 Summary The application of indirect translation has been worthwhile with its own existent reasons and values in Chinese long translation practice. Though indirect translation may lose something of the original text, indirect translation could also show the target language readers excellent translated versions. Direct translation has to be taken as the first choice without limitations, but indirect translation should not be opposed and its important role in Chinese translation history should be estimated properly.

References [1] Edwin Gentzler. Contemporary Translation Theories. Shanghai: Shanghai Foreign Language Education Press, 2004. [2] Gideon Toury. Descriptive Translation Studies and Beyond. Shanghai: Shanghai Foreign Language Education Press, 2001. [3] Gideon Toury. In Search of Theories of Translation [M]. TelAviv, 1980. [4] Larry A. Samovar, Richard. Porter, Lisa A. Stefani. Communication Between Cultures. Beijing: Foreign Language Teaching and Research, 2000. [5] Lefevere, Andre. Translating Literature: Practiceand Theoryina Comaprative Context. NewYork, 1992. [6] Mark Shuttleworth, Moira Cowie. Dictionary of Translation Studies. Shanghai: Shanghai Foreign Language Education Press, 2004. [7] R. A. Hudson. Sociolinguistcs. Beijing: Foreign Language Teaching and Research, 2000. [8] Scollon, R. et al. Intercultural Communication: A Discourse Analysis. Beijing: Foreign Language Teaching and Research, 2000. [9] Susan Bassnett, Andre Lefevere. Constructing Cultures: Essays on Literary Translation. Shanghai: Shanghai Foreign Language Education Press, 2004.

326