A Comparative Study Of The Three Chinese Versions Of King Lear From The Perspective Of Manipulation Theory

The argument of who—among Liang Shiqiu, Zhu Shenghao and Bian Zhilin—did the best in their translation of Shakespeare's works has long been a hot topic, never ceasing. Liang was the first one finishing the complete drama works of Shakespeare; Zhu is the most famous Shakespearean translator in mainland China; Bian's version of "metrical verse translation" threw fresh insight into Shakespeare's translation, and became a milestone of translating Shakespeare's work in verse style. With the development of diversified translation theory, the arguments about "who did the best in the translation of Shakespeare's works" gradually subsided. Critics turn their focus onto the multi-angle studies of translations, such as descriptive studies on three translators, translation criticisms, and translation strategy studies. However, systematically comparative studies of the three translations are still barely seen.In recent years, manipulation theory of western cultural school has been increasingly accepted by Chinese scholars. As the representative of the school, Andrew Lefevere proposes that translation is a rewriting not created in vacuum. It is influenced by ideology, poetics and patronage, and in return, is a product of the influence of the three factors.In this thesis, by adopting manipulation theory as a theoretical frame, the author aims at a systematic comparative study of the three translations of King Lear, one of the four great tragedies of Shakespeare. Through the analysis and comparison of the three versions, the author finds that despite the fact that three translators are contemporaries, and even both Liang and Zhu did their translations in the same period, their translations were totally different. For Liang and Zhu, though their dominant social ideology remained the same, yet the translation strategies were not the same because of their different individual ideology. As for Bian, he started his translation in1950s when mainland Chinese was in an intense political situation, class struggle was still in full swing, and Marxism was prevalent throughout the whole country; therefore, his translation was manipulated by dominant ideology inevitably.After New Culture Movement when vernacular Chinese replaced classical Chinese, the dominant poetics remained basically the same in1930s and1950s. Yet, their translation styles and genres still varied from each other because of their different personal poetics.Besides, the study finds that patronage also played an important role in manipulating the three translations.The research shows that the translations of the three translators were really influenced by the three factors, and they were the product of the interplay of the three factors. We can hardly say that there is a version which is the best or the worst in absolute terms, as there exists rationality and historical necessity of each of the three translations. It is hoped that the present study can shed some fresh insight into the in-depth research of the translation of Shakespeare's works.