|
Abstract Reading the preface to a translated version is a significant approach for readers to capture a translator's translation philosophy,his or her translation practices,and the relationship between social circumstances and the translation itself.Meanwhile,there is no doubt that the preface written by a translator is of high theoretical value because a preface,as″a small text,″can directly reflect the reality in the″big social-cultural text.″The translation of Rickshaw Boy is a successful sample of Sino-western cultural communication and researching the prefaces of Rickshaw Boy in different English versions is bound to deepen our understanding about the translation practices of different translators.Currently,the most influential English versions of RickshawBoy are translated by King(in 1945),James(in 1979),Shi(in 1981)and Goldblatt(in 2010). However, only James and Goldblatt have written prefaces in their published translations.Given the fact,this paper compares James'preface with Goldblatt's so as to probe into the translation philosophy and the subj ectivity of these two translators.Based on a close reading of the prefaces,the paper clarifies how the differences between the two translators'subj ectivity lead to the different communication effects,academic values as well as market values of these two versions.Motivated by the target of academic research,James provided a translation which showed great respect for the original text,and aimed at maintaining the cultural information of the original novel.James'version is research-oriented and is of high academic value,but the abundant details in her preface may weaken the interest of common readers,which may hinder the popularization of this version.Compared with the translation of James,Goldblatt's version achieves a better balance between academic significance and market consideration.Goldblatt's preface indicates that his translation is driven by his personal interest in Lao She's creation and the ups and downs which this great Chinese writer underwent in his life.Moreover,Goldblatt also explained his translation strategy in his preface,which showed his consideration about readers'aesthetic acceptance. Furthermore,this study delves into the translators'subj ectivity reflected in the two English versions,proposing that the translations of James and Goldblatt represent two different types of translation practices driven by two different motives,i.e.,academic research and personal interest.The translation strategy of James has a strong academic research inclination.She frequently used abstract diction which indicated her reflection and j udgment about the novel and the social circumstances depicted in it.James was well aware of the realistic tendency of this reportorial novel so that she made in-depth analysis about its setting,plot,characters and theme within the framework of sociology and literature studies. She attempted to present an″encyclopedic″introduction about the original work in her preface.However,the preface of Goldblatt is rather″author-oriented,″for it attaches much importance to Lao She's life.Few comments about the literary significance of the original novel can be found in this preface and much room is left to readers to interpret the work by themselves.Last but not least,the paper argues that the subj ectivity of a translator is pre-determined by his/her historical and cultural backgrounds which are integrated into the translation practices of a translator.In fact,it is the personal pre-determined historical backgrounds that provide the translator with the so-called″j ustified prej udice″which contributes to a richer interpretation and a better popularization of the source text.
|
|
|
|
|
|
