Visual Translation In Literary Texts

This dissertation focuses on visual translation in literary texts. From the perspectiveof visual cognition and perception, human culture can be classified into two kinds: textualculture and pictorial culture. As a due product of the development of human history, textualculture mainly features a systematic and accurate expression of ideas and concepts. Incontrast, aiming at imitation and imagination of the natural world, pictorial culture ischaracterized by its vividness and transparency. Anyway, both textual culture and pictorialculture resort to visual organs which endow us not only with an appreciation of thekaleidoscopic diversity of the nature but also with a cognitive perception of the world. Inrecent years, the study of visual culture has developed into an eye-catchingcross-disciplinary research field, and a study of visual translation in literary texts, whichincorporates language art, pictorial art and other visual artistic forms, can be naturallyenclosed into this field.Although mentioned much earlier, intersemiotic translation has always beenunder-researched. In the limited research about intersemiotic translation (including visualtranslation), there are largely four tendencies. The first tendency exclusively cares aboutinterlingual translation, because it is commonly regarded as “translation proper”, that is,translation in its strict sense. Importance attached to interlingual translation in traditionaltranslation studies, on one hand, reflects the historical achievements of translation studies,but on the other hand, betrays intrinsic limitations in research scopes and perspectives. Thesecond tendency deals with simplified intersemiotic translation which is completelyseparated from interlingual translation. The supporters claim that intersemiotic translationhas transcended the linguistic boundary and therefore belongs to the sphere of artisticcreation or performance. The third tendency is featured with an over-generalizedinterpretation of intersemiotic translation, which is well-grounded to some extent butseems to go to another extreme. The fourth tendency involves some exemplifications oftranslation of linguistic visual forms and related principles and strategies, but far awayfrom being systematic and globally-oriented. Compared with other research focuses andperspectives in translation studies, visual translation, esp., language-based visual translation, leaves much greater room for further study.This dissertation constructs a theoretical framework of visual translation in literarytexts by incorporating the theory of arbitrariness and motivation in general linguistics, thetheory of iconicity in cognitive linguistics, the theory of foregrounding in stylistics, thetheories of literal/liberal translation, formal/spiritual resemblance and formal/functionalequivalence in translation studies, the theories of visual aesthetics and receptive aesthetics,etc. Based on the demarcation between non-meaningful forms and meaningful forms, thisdissertation puts form into three categories. The first category of form is superficial andphysical and bears no relation with content. This category is further divided into two kinds:neither meaning-driven nor sprinkled with any aesthetic value; not meaning-driven butembedded with unique artistic features. The second category of form is conducive to theexpression of content and even is part of content. The third category of form is itself all thecontent intended, and in this case, form plays its utmost aesthetic role. For a completerepresentation of the aesthetic value in the source text, the translator is supposed to befaithful to the second kind of form in the first category, the second category of form andthe third category of form. This dissertation centers on translation of foregroundedlinguistic visual forms in literary texts which might as well be labeled forms in forms.Adopting a qualitative method, this dissertation encompasses various levels inliterary texts, such as graphological devices, grammar, vocabulary and text layouts, andillustrates the importance and feasibility of visual translation in literary texts.This dissertation, first of all, based on a demarcation between narrow-sensetranslation and broad-sense translation, initiates the concepts of visual form and visualtranslation, illustrates the research background and significance and the reason for thechoice of research texts, puts forward research hypotheses and clarifies the researchmethod and objective. Literature review makes an analysis of the past and present study ofintersemiotic translation (mainly visual translation), categorizes the study oflanguage-based visual translation and then points out its shortcomings. The theoreticalbackup includes discussions about monism and dualism, balance between form and contentin the disputes between Wen and Zhi, formal resemblance and spiritual resemblance,formal equivalence and functional equivalence, the historical reason for the under-emphasis on form, a more objective classification of form and a more rationalunderstanding of arbitrariness and motivation. On this theoretical basis, this dissertationmakes a multi-perspective case study of visual translation, including punctuation marks,graphological presentations of words or characters, visual repetition devices, long andshort lines/sentences, text layouts, etc. Finally, based on this case study, this dissertationdiscusses the requirements, difficulties and strategies of visual translation, and explores thepossibilities of creative visual translation and the acceptance on the part of readers andcritics.As the research shows, so far as written literary texts are concerned, linguistic visualforms, the most obvious and sensible, should first and foremost deserve the translator’sattention. Linguistic visual forms can be classified into two kinds: meta-linguistic visualforms and foregrounded linguistic visual forms. Transfer between two different languagesis itself a transfer between two meta-linguistic visual forms, and therefore, thesemeta-linguistic visual forms are the most backgrounded and can be well-nigh neglected. Incontrast, the translator is expected to pay close attention to those foregrounded linguisticvisual forms, because in literary texts they, in most cases, are not only meaning-driven butalso meaning-driving. These visual forms neglected, the original sense and significance ofthe source text will be deducted or at least weakened, thus a result far away from beingfaithful as hoped for. This is where lies one of the great differences between literarytranslation and non-literary translation.Some of the foregrounded linguistic visual forms are locally oriented, and some areglobally inclined. Confronted with these foregrounded linguistic visual features, thetranslator is supposed to free himself from the traditional linear thinking pattern and moveforward to planar and even spatial perspectives. That is to say, the translator should notonly read between the lines, but also watch the ways meaning is presented: across thewords or characters, and across the lines, and watch the meanings of these ways per se. Inthis sense, the translator does not work in the manner of the old-fashioned typewriter (leftto right); instead, he operates like a modern laser scanner: up and down, down and up, leftto right, right to left, or if necessary, he might as well lift his eyes from the sheet view andstand away for a more spatial outlook. Such a change will help reinforce the understanding and the perception of the aesthetic effects in the source text.Foregrounded linguistic visual forms are substantial and apt to catch reader’s eyes.Because of their physical existence, these visual signs are no longer covert, but fairly overtand transparent. Translation of these external linguistic forms attempts at a direct feeling ofthe source text and a direct touch to readers’ visual senses. This translation is very muchsimilar to that of pictures or images, and their biggest difference lies in whether thoseforms are verbal or non-verbal.Because of the tremendous differences in surface presentations between Chinese andEnglish, visual forms in literary texts are often labeled as “insurmountable obstacles”.Admittedly, there do exist such obstacles, but they, by no means, are so formidable anddefy any attempts of acceptable translation. Foregrounded linguistic visual forms are verypopular in realistic literature, modernist literature and post-modernist literature, in prose,poetry and drama, and both in English and in Chinese. In this sense, they are part of theuniversality of literary language. Fundamentally speaking, human beings share a similargeneral cognition of visual forms, and under some circumstances, the cognition is universal.This similarity and universality provides the translator with possibilities for visualtranslation and also leaves much room for imagination in the process of the transferbetween two systems of linguistic visual forms. The translator is expected not to beoblivious to these challenging visual forms. Instead, he should, with his aesthetic eyes, dohis utmost to discover and digest all visual beauties in the source text and then transmitthese beauties into the target text by capitalizing upon language potentials, aestheticmechanisms and creative capacities. The translator who undertakes literary translationought to be adept at resorting to respective advantages of both languages, and, along withthe achievements of previous translators, gradually perfecting translated works. In thisprocess, the translator can make full use of the interdisciplinary edges of translation studiesby incorporating linguistics, stylistics, aesthetics, literary criticism, poetics, visual rhetoric,etc., and all kinds of compensation strategies, such as general compensation strategies, thebest sensory compensation strategies and compensation strategies of global visualequivalence, for the intended maximized approximateness in terms of foregroundedlinguistic visual forms between the source text and the target text. This research, aiming at a full-scale exploration of the visual artistic functions oflanguage, is also a cross-boundary attempt in translation studies. On the basis ofinterlingual translation, translation studies can duly take into consideration intersemiotictranslation, or more precisely, intersemiotic translation in interlingual translation, which,like the multimodality within linguistic signs that is based on language but also transcendslanguage, embodies the best interaction of both expressive and artistic natures of linguisticforms. A further research into linguistic visual forms will draw more attention to the studyof form, thus enriching both the denotation and the connotation of the study of form inlinguistics, stylistics, literary criticism, translation studies, visual rhetoric and otherdisciplines. This research is also constructive to translation practice, either C-E or E-C,such as translation of Song Ci, Yuefu poems, stream-of-consciousness novels, visualpoems and Shakespearean dramas.This research has made some innovations so far: a pioneering introduction of theconcept of language-based visual translation; a more rational and objective classification ofform; a more systematic illustration of visual translation in literary texts; an integration ofrelevant theories in linguistics, literature, stylistics, translation studies, aesthetics, etc.,further extending the boundaries of translation research.