An Analysis Of The Third Translation Boom In China From The Perspective Of Polysystem Theory

Polysystem theory has provided translation studies with a new angle, compared withthe traditional studies which made an isolate comparison between the source text and thetarget text. This theory combines translation with the cultural, social, and historicalfactors and lays a foundation for later theories. However, it seems polysystem theory hasnot received the deserved attention and many researchers have made oversimplified andsuperficial interpretations of the theory.With the development of Itamar Even-Zohar’s polysystem theory in China, manyresearchers interpret and examine its applicability within Chinese context. This theoryemphasizes the position of the translated literature within literary polysystem: if thetranslated literature maintains a primary position, translators will break the indigenoustraditional norms and adopt foreignization, leading translations to be adequate; while ifthe translated literature is in a secondary position, translators will seek the most suitable models for foreign texts and adopt domestication, making translated texts acceptable.Based on the statement, some people believe a translator should apply eitherforeignization or domestication. If the two strategies are adopted at the same time, then itproves polysystem theory has a limited explanatory ability. The thesis takes the thirdtranslation boom in China as a typical example to correct some misconception.Polysystem theory does not deny the co-existence of mutual competitive norms, but itdivides those norms into main norms and branch norms, which respectively serve fordifferent groups. In addition, the translated literature, as a system, has its own levels.Some literature holds a central position while others may be marginal.Before the May Fourth Movement in1919, the translated literature was in a marginalposition within Chinese literary polysystem which was relatively stable, so Yan Fu andLin Shu considered the target readers and applied domestication to make theirtranslations acceptable. After the new cultural Movement, people realized the deficiencyof traditional Chinese culture and the literary model couldn’t meet the demands of newdevelopment. As a result, translation gradually stepped into the center of polysystem,introduced western literary patterns and created new norms for Chinese literature.Therefore, Lu Xun and Qu Qiubai adopted foreignization to enrich the target culture. Butthe school led by Liang Shiqiu asserted traditional Chinese culture was rich enough andprotected feudal value and aesthetic flavor so their translation was domesticated.However, from Liang Shiqiu’s translation, we can find that he also adoptedforeignization as well as domestication. The co-existence of the two strategies was not inconflict with the polysystem, for it had main stream and branch stream. That is to say,foreignization belonged to main stream and domestication was the branch. Therefore, thethesis intends to correct some one-sided opinions and reach a comparativelycomprehensive understanding of polysystem theory.