| There exist many disputes in drama translation studies: translations for drama areliterary texts or acting texts; they are complete or incomplete; drama translation isperformance-oriented or reading-oriented, etc. Among the disputes, performability isan unavoidable topic as well as the reasons for the doubt whether performabilityshould be one of the principles in drama translation. This thesis is designed to provethat performability is never an illusion. It is both theoretically and practically possiblein drama translation.The notion of performability is introduced after the analysis of how the twoEnglish versions of Teahouse, respectively done by Ying Ruocheng and JohnHoward-Gibbon, are both readable and performable. It contains three concreterequirements: speakability, actability and acceptability, which are derived fromKowzan’s13distinct subsections in semiotic systems. The discussions on this notionhave developed into the theoretical polarization of readability and performability, withBassnett and Pavis respectively leading the two schools. Bassnett’s attitude towardsperformability has evolved from acknowledgement to refutation while Pavis insiststhat real drama translation takes place on the level of the mise en scene as a whole.To verify that performability is possible in drama translation, the author of thisthesis has collected evidence from two main channels---theory and practice.Theoretically, theater semiotics, the origin of this notion, assumes that written text isonly among the systems that constitute a drama, and a drama is at the same timerestricted by stage performance, without which a drama is incomplete. Bassnett’sdenial of perofrmability fails to prove that it does not exist in drama translation andmore important, her argument that unless by cooperating with performing staff,performability is too demanding for the drama translator implies the necessity ofperformability.Practically, many examples in the two English versions of Teahouse show thatthe two translators have managed to satisfy the requirements of performability and have characterized their translations with brevity, colloquialism, actability andindividuality. From these four perspectives, the author analyzes the two Englishversions respectively by Ying Ruocheng and Howard, summarizing the methods,techniques and focuses of their performance-oriented translations and suggestingsome improvements for both versions. The examples in both English versions that arein conformity with performability indicate that it is possible to make a dramatranslation performable, because that is still a work concerning about rightunderstanding, accurate wording and reasonable handling of cultural messages---itremains within a translator’s ability.However, there are occasions when culture translation contradicts withperformability: the translator has to ignore some culture terms or to change theoriginal style for the sake of performability. In such a circumstance, the loyalty to theoriginal texts is to some extent weakened. Here lies the limitation of performability.But if we accordingly discard performability, we may produce a translation moredeviant from the source text. Drama translation which is done for stage performanceis not only an interlingual transformation, but calls for speakability, actability andacceptability as well.Ying Ruocheng once complained in the preface to his translation for Teahousethat many existent translations are not suitable for performance, and that is whyperformers are in need of really colloquial translations. Such a comment rightdemonstrates the importance of performability in drama translation. It may bemeaningful if this thesis could contribute to the studies on drama translation and to thecareer of making more performable translations. |
