Translator And Transnational Eco-environinent Theoretical Exploration Into Literary Translator Criticism

Translator is the practitioner of translating process and activities of literary translators have embraced an abiding concern from the translation critics. The present dissertation probes into the theoretical phase of literary translator studies based on two basic assumptions:1) eco-translatological thoughts can be employed in translation criticism; and2) cases of literary translator criticism need theoretical guidance. It endeavors to put forward a maneuverable model of literary translator criticism and provide theoretical support for literary translator studies through reinterpreting the major arguments and concepts in Eco-translatology, including mainly "translator-centeredness" and "translational eco-environment", and integrating relevant parts in them and the trends and call within translation criticism.The dissertation consists of seven chapters, in addition to Introduction and Conclusion. Introduction explicates the motivation, hypotheses, objectives and structure of the present study. Chapter One is a literature review of the current studies in both translation criticism and Eco-translatology to prepare for the coming integration of these two fields and most importantly the identification of literary translator criticism. In the first two sections, it provides a panorama of major findings in translation criticism (hereafter abbreviated as TC). It displays firstly previous discussions on TC theoretical construction and interrelations of TC sub-branches and then presents the pluralistic trends in this field in terms of research objects, criticizing criteria, principles and methods. What has been highlighted is the fact that the translator is now one criticizing object enjoying quantitative prominence just second to the translated texts (hereafter abbreviated as TT). The latter half of this chapter is an introduction and critical review of the main arguments, developments and application attempts of Eco-translatology. Findings in this ecological approach to translation studies are displayed in a comprehensive manner and their merits and faults are illuminated in a brief way. In view that Eco-translatology itself is under investigation, the ensuing two chapters are hence dedicated to the reinterpretation of its keynote concepts and arguments concerned to extract instructions to literary translator criticism.Chapter Two focuses on the translator in an Eco-translatological context."Translator-centeredness", a disclosure of the central role of translator in translating process, is a notion inherited and derived from translator studies. Situating the translator in translating process and translational eco-environment, it sets up a power triangle of the translator together with the source and target texts. This notion ushers in four working mechanisms centering on the translator which should be understood as a descriptive system of translator's activities along the progression of the extended translating processes-"pre-event prevention" as the preparing mechanism,"multi-dimensional adaptation and transformation" as the acting mechanism,"degree of holistic adaptation and selection" as the evaluating mechanism and lastly "post-event penalty" and "survival of the fittest" as the checking mechanism."Translator-centeredness" is consequently decoded more as a research stance of being translator-oriented and the working mechanisms provide us a more comprehensive description of translator's activities for its incorporation of both passive adaptation and active selection.On the other hand, in view that translator qualities, i.e., translation competence, have been skated around though argued as one parameter in the evaluating mechanism in Eco-translatology, a discussion of translation competence in light of this reinterpreted "translator-centeredness" follows, based on the findings of empirical-experimental research carried out by PACTE (Process in the Acquisition of Translation Competence and Evaluation). Seven subcompetences are suggested, namely, professional, bilingual, sociocultural, communicative, psychological, stylistic and strategic subcompetences, which will constitute the major content or parameter of literary translator criticism. This chapter is concluded with the implications of "translator-centeredness"-it reinforces the rationality of translator studies and lends Eco-translatology the power of serving as a possible theoretical basis to resort to when conducting studies on literary translators, with the illumination of the central role of the translator and the working mechanisms. In Chapter Three,"translational eco-environment", another keynote concept of Eco-translatology, is elaborated on. Based on an etymological analysis, the present dissertation expands the scope of translational eco-environment to cover the translator to clear up the detaching suspicion aroused by its original definition, and then discusses the affiliation of translator to translational eco-environment and their interaction. Then a construction analysis comes in to clarify the components of translational eco-environment and a discussion of its characteristics display its nature of being a multidimensional, dynamic and evolving complex, which distinguishes itself from the notion of "context" Holistic and coevolving principles are strengthened with this umbrella term and no factor of translation is hence to be evaluated or studied as isolated or stationary, which are highly implicative to translation criticism.Chapter Four opens with an endeavor to cast light on the essence of literary translator criticism by differentiating between translator studies, studies of expert translators and translator criticism. Literary translator criticism is clearly defined and located into the "applied" extensions of Translation Studies. Then it is pointed out that statistics highlight, however, the scarcity of theoretical explorations into literary translator criticism in contrast to the volume of case studies on literary translators, though they rank just second in number to those of TT criticism. In addition, theories targeting at TT criticism cannot satisfy the need for evaluating a subjective translator, and moreover, the construction of the Science of Translation Criticism sheds more light on this scarcity and imbalance. There emerges hence a pressing need for the theoretical construction of literary translator criticism.Theoretical explorations in translation criticism will resort to the findings in the "pure" side of Translation Studies. Eco-translatology cuts itself in here for its strength of being a theory of translator in essence which not only explicates a translator-oriented stance but also proposes a series of working mechanisms to describe the translation-related activities of the translator. Moreover, its argument for the inseparability of translator and his/her translations and its proposal of a multidimensional framework recommend holism and its emphasis on interactive changes illuminates its co-evolving principle. Common grounds in terms of research focus, principles and methodology between Eco-translatology and literary translator criticism are believed to ensure the fusion between these two lines within translation studies and pave the way for the ensuing theoretical explorations and model construction in literary translator criticism through reliance on rational parts in Eco-translatology.Theoretical issues of literary translator criticism to make up the criticizing model fall into Chapters Five and Six:the former probes into the principles, methods, contents and criteria and the latter elaborates on the procedures, translation competence assessment and significance of literary translator criticism. Chapter Five begins with an argument that the principles of literary translator criticism a two-graded system:objectivity and holism are two prevailing and general principles to incorporate four sub-principles, i.e., interpretivism, macroscopic view integrated with microscopic view, diachronic perspective and emphasis on individuality. Research methods significant for literary translator criticism, besides those inherited from TT criticism, are documentation, interviews and questionnaire surveys which focus more on the translators than on the translations. What constitute the core content or parameter of literary translator criticism are the subcompetences of the translator, and criticism of the literary TTs and that of the socioculture centered on the literary translator are two supportive parameters, rendering the criticism a holistic one in its true sense. In view of the diversity of research contents, the criteria of literary translator criticism should be more open and multidimensional than those of TT criticism.In Chapter Six, a five-step plan has been designed for guiding the case studies of literary translator criticism, moving from the introduction of the translator's life history to that of his translating experiences and thoughts, to the assessment of his/her masterpiece translation(s) and finally to the evaluation of and location of this translator in the TL socioculture. Ways and manners of interpreting the translation-related activities of the literary translator and assessing his/her translation competence have been displayed. Prerequisites of literary translator criticism have been argued to involve subjective qualities of the critics and objective conditions and the significance of literary translator criticism is mainly embodied by its bridging the theory and practice, locating literary translators and illuminating translation teaching. Chapter Seven is a case study of Xu Chi as a literary translator. The life, educational and translating experiences of this established writer of contemporary Chinese literature are addressed, his translating activities and thoughts on literary translation and translatability are scrutinized, his Chinese translations of Walden are analyzed and compared and his literary translation competence is assessed. Xu Chi is finally labeled as a pioneering and qualified literary translator in contemporary Chinese socioculture. Under the guidance of the model newly formulated, it is a comparatively comprehensive and objective study of Xu Chi to shed light on both the achievements and defects of Xu Chi as a literary translator.In Conclusion, the major contribution of this dissertation is generalized to be the exploration of a tentative model for literary translator criticism, including:1) interpreting "translator-centeredness" to be a translator-oriented stance and expanding the scope of translational eco-environment;2) defining literary translator criticism as the analysis and evaluation of activities of literary translators and locating literary translator criticism as a sub-branch of literary translation criticism;3) exploring the principles, methods, contents and procedures of literary translator criticism; and4) conducting a case study of Xu Chi as a literary translator. Lastly, significance and limitations of this tentative research are stated and suggestions for future research are offered.