Introduction: Setting the Terms

James St. André and Peng Hsiao-yen

Just as we might say that translations re-create a written text in another language, so too we can say that, in so doing, the translator re-presents a cultural artifact to a new audience. The question then becomes, what is represented, by whom, and for what purpose? How are images of the self and the Other shaped through translation? As part of that process of re-presentation and image-shaping through translation, knowledge is also transferred and transformed. Recent scholarship (Tymoczko 1999; Tymoczko and Gentzler 2002; Bandia 2008) has made it clear that the imbalance of power relations often plays a key role in this process. The issues involved include: Who decides what kind of knowledge to disseminate or to acquire? How does knowledge disseminated reinforce colonial powers and build up images of civilizations or empires? How does knowledge acquired through translation cater to the needs at home or resolve domestic crises? This volume brings together some of the latest research by scholars from the UK, Taiwan, and Hong Kong to examine these issues in relation to the history of translation between China and Europe from the nineteenth to the twenty-first century. The essays are arranged roughly in chronological order to give a sense of the development over time of the relation between China and Europe. Although covering a broad time span, they are tied together by a number of recurrent themes that traverse them; before we turn to the individual essays, we will sketch out some of those connections. 2QHRIWKHPRVWVWULNLQJLVVXHVZKLFKHPHUJHGIURPUHDGLQJHDFKRWKHU¶V work and our discussion was the role of intermediate, or pivot languages, in the transmission of knowledge between Europe and China. Traditionally, translation studies has tended to focus upon, and value more highly, direct translation from language A to language B, while relay translation (the translation of a text from language A to language B, and then from language B to languages C, D, E, and so forth, where B is said to act as the pivot language) has been slighted. Gambier (1994) helpfully distinguishes relay translation from retranslation, defined as the translation of the same text into

James St. André and Peng Hsiao-yen the same language two or more times. St. André (2009) discusses the existing prejudice within both the translation profession and within translation studies; interestingly, one of the most common metaphors for relay translation is µ&KLQHVHZKLVSHUV¶DFKLOGUHQ¶VJDPHLQZKLFKDPHVVDJHLVUHSHDWHGIURP one person to the next until at the end it is totally unrecognizable. Relay WUDQVODWLRQ KRZHYHU LV FHUWDLQO\ QRW DV OLJKW DQG LQQRFHQW DV D FKLOGUHQ¶V game in a colonial context. Pei-Yin Lin contends that while the Japanese FRORQL]HUV¶ LGHRORJ\ KDV EHHQ UHOD\HG IDLUO\ successfully through nationalizing the tale about an Atayal girl, subsequent endeavours of relay translation meant to reinforce colonial dominance are not unequivocally fulfilled. Although the role of pivot languages in Chinese-European interaction has been noted by a certain number of studies (Liu 1995 and He 2001), the present volume shows evidence of the almost continual and heavy reliance on first Japanese, then later Russian and English, for the flow of information between China and Europe. This has meant that most texts written in other languages have passed through these three languages on their way to China. Max K. W. Huang, for example, traces the influence of Japanese on the growth of new vocabulary in the late Qing. While this in and of itself is not that surprising, given the number of Chinese studying in Japan at this time, what is quite surprising is that the cultural capital of Yan Fu, who often coined competing terminology, was insufficient to overcome this influence, despite the hostility felt by many Chinese against the Japanese after the Sino- -DSDQHVH ZDU RI  $V D UHVXOW PRVW RI loanwords. Joyce C. H. Liu also discusses the role of Japanese in the process of introducing Western ethical discourse into Chinese. Peng Hsiao-yen, while tracing the appropriation of Japanese loanwords deriving from European sources to describe emotions and sensations, points out that loanwords from Japan, though preceded by the translated terms concocted by Western missionaries, became prevalent due to Japanese instructors who ZHUH KLUHG WR KHOS HVWDEOLVK &KLQD¶V PRGHUQ HGXFDWLRQ V\VWHP +VLDQJ-yin 6DVKD&KHQ¶VHVVD\RQWKHWUDQVODWLRQVRI.ROORQWDLUHYHDOthat, slightly later, even after the rise in influence of the Soviet Union, a number of translations from Russian continued to be made through English or Japanese pivot translations, giving rise to different interpretations of the same Russian text depending on which source was used. In terms of oral interpretation, Southern Chinese dialects (Cantonese, Hokkien, and Shanghainese) have also played an important role as pivot languages. While the role of Japanese, English and Russian as pivot

12