On The Dilemma Of Translation

Translation is no easy thing.Translators have always been falling into the dilemma between the practical requirements and translating standards since it's so subtle a matter to be faithful to the original as well as meet the reader's various requirements. Is faithfulness the basic factor for effective translation? How to define faithfulness in translation? Does the translator's recreativeness just overstep the writer's authority and flirt the reader's needs? What is the reasonable core of recreation ? Faithfulness and recreation are two controversial parts that are always puzzling the translating world . How to reach the harmony of the two sides goes to the heart in the research of translation.The paper analyses the nature of translation based on relative documents and chronological scale. Depending on the common and various characters of a language, the paper tries to give a cool thinking of the fashionable thranslating ideas such as "faithfulness", "intranslatablity" and "language decision" . Finally, it comes to the points as following:Faithfulness and recreation are actually two opposite ideas of language—conventional idea of language as a tool and modern idea of language as subjectivity. The former has been established based on the identity of the matter world and human mind whereas the latter relys on the varieties of the natures of the world. Modern translating concept regards that a sharp gap esists from person to person and from race to race. These theorists hold the idea that it can only be in our dream to realize the unity of human's minds and societies. However, the key point is: the translation,on the purpose of effective communication, realize the presentation of the two cultural differences just by approach of their common characters. Humans' unity links their thinkings and feelings while human's varieties richen their life and ideas. The gaps around the world can be removed through translation. At present, the research of translation is going too far from the original text and writer and turn to other factors such as the process of translation, the translator's social circumstances , cultural identity, political viewpoint, religious belief and moral orientation, etc. The deconstructive translating ideas such as powerful discourse, feminism, post-colonism and post-imperialism have decentralized the original text andwriter, deconstruct their authority and advacate the variety of cultures. The colorful research modes have broadened the translator's research scale and enlightened him or her out of the narrow mind of their studies. However, when the translator is entitled as the subject of translation and colored by his or her idea of race, politics and power, his or her interference of the natural meanings into the origin perhaps will become inavoidable.The paper finally comes to the following conclusions:1. Languages hold identity in nature which is the premise for cultural transmission and discourse. Refusing the identity of languages and exaggerating their differences will possiblly bring about endless irrational opinions such as intranslatablity, hypocritical faithfulness, recreative translation and meaning production.2. The basic duty of translation is interpreting the original text. The recreation should be treated as representing the identical context of the original version. It's quite a must to differentiate recreation and tranlation. Any ambiguous understanding of the two will possibly help to mistake the two for each other.3. Being Faithful to the origin and writer is the most difficult thing, but is the basic standard for a translator. However, when "Faithfulness" has been substituted by translator's rewriting and recreating, the basic rules of translation is overstepped and thrown away.4. Faithfulness is the ethic and guide of translation. But, when its practical characters are theorized, translation will be treated as doctrine. So, there is no golden rules suitable for any individual or any time. Translation is just the process of relative interpretation. Translation doesn't mean highlighting the subjectivity of the writer, translator, reader,editor, seller or any one else. It really means pursuing the same and accept the varieties.