A Study Of English Versions Of Zhong Yong In Light Of Postcolonial Translation Theory

Zhang Yong, along with Lim Yu, Meng Zi and Da Xue, make up the Four Books which have made extremely profound influence on shaping characteristics of Chinese people. They are excellent representatives of Chinese traditional culture. Among various translation versions of Zhang Yong. Ku Hungming’s and James Legge’s English versions acquire wide appreciation since Zhong Yong was translated in the middle of16th century.However, there exist numerous disputes on these two versions which are embodied in the following three aspects:translation motivation, translation strategy and translation effect. Postcolonial translation theory, arising in1980’s, provides a new light to the English translation of Zhong Yong by bringing translation activities back into its real and particular historical background.The study, based on the perspective of postcolonial translation theory, compares Ku Hungming’s ans Legge’s versions of Zhong Yong in their translation motivation, translation strategy and translation effect. The comparison finally illustrates the rationality of the two versions’ co-existence. Ku’s translation has not only broken the monopoly secured by the westerners in the field of "introducing Chinese learning into the West" for hundreds of years, but also contributed much to the promotion of the cultural exchange between China and the West in the modern history. His version was printed repeatedly and widely accepted and appreciated by the West. His translation of the Confucian classics is actually an attempt to reconstruct the Chinese national cultural identity in the world. Legge’s aim of translating Zhong Yong is to make it as a guiding tool for the western intruders to strengthen their cultural hegemony and ideology colonization in China. But it is widely believed that Legge’s translation is of high academic value.The major findings this study presents are, firstly, what the previous scholars focus on is the text itself but they ignore other factors. Postcolonial translation theory, however, concerns with power differentials and power struggles between different cultures; secondly, postcolonial translation theory itself is not in adequate perfection. For example, the study, by comparing Ku’s and Legge’s versions of Zhong Yong, has proved that domestication strategy and foreignization strategy can not and should not be defined as a channel to colonization or a channel to decolonization simply and arbitrarily. And ’"resistance" or "foreignalization" are not the only ways to keep the characteristics of "other" culture. It is quite necessary to take some other factors into consideration like the translator’s cultural identity, his translation motivation and more importantly, his translation effect; thirdly, some one-sided theories in postcolonial translation need avoiding.The comparison between Ku’s and Legge’s English versions of Zhong Yong is helpful in studying the translation of Chinese classics more objectively and sufficiently, and it is expected to shed light on the research into future translation of Chinese classics. Besides, as China today is definitely a large culture-exporting country, it is worth learning from Kirs effective domestication strategy in translating Zhong Yongio transmit Chinese civilization.