| Sequel to the Classic of Tea was written by Lu Tingcan in the Qing Dynasty,which inherited the structure of The Classic of Tea by Lu Yu in the Tang Dynasty;also in three volumes with ten chapters,but its length being nearly ten times.Sequel to the Classic of Tea cited copiously by way of corroboration of various tea classics that emerged between the two dynasties with clear classification and detailed elaboration.Entitled as a “sequel”,it was in fact an independent work with profound academic and historical values.So far,Jiang Xin and Jiang Yi’s translation published in 2009 is the only cover-to-cover translation.And a new version,Sequel to Tea Sutra translated by Aaron Fisher,started to publish Chapter One to Chapter Six on Global Tea Hut from2019,injecting fresh vitality into English translation of tea classics,with strategies and style under the western thinking mode.Two procedures are needed in translating classics: intralingual and interlingual.A translator’s “understanding” initiates the translation and acts as the key to the accuracy and fluency of the version.Gadamer’s hermeneutic theory reveals the essence of human understanding,which provides a philosophical explanation for this understanding and many phenomena in translation could be illustrated via it.Based on the three principles of Gadamer’s hermeneutics theory,namely “historicity of understanding”,“fusion of horizons” and “effective history”,this thesis selects representative examples from Chapters Two,Five and Six of Sequel to the Classic of Tea as corpus and qualitative analysis and descriptive studies as main methods to compare the examples of the two English versions.The aim of this thesis is not to find out which version is better,but to provide a hermeneutic approach for the study of tea classic’s translation,which is conducive to explore the hidden reasons of differences between the two English versions.It points out that Jiang Xin,Jiang Yi and Fisher’s translations both have their own characteristics and shortcomings.Through this study,it is found that the hermeneutic reasons for different versions of the same work are as follows: A translator’s understanding of the source text depends on and is subject to the “historicity of understanding";The process of translating is the process of “fusion of horizons” among the source text,the translator and the target readers.Translator’s subjectivity is best manifested in it.“Effective history” emphasizes the infinity of a text’s meaning which calls for translators in new cultural and historical conditions to develop and create the translation in form and content.In view of “historicity of understanding”,this thesis compares the translation of classics’ titles and introductory texts,which indicates that translators are influenced by their pre-understanding or prejudice.Poetry and cultural texts are analyzed ground on “fusion of horizons”.It attempts to reveal how translators bring their horizons to seek fusion with that of the source text and then further on with the target readers’ horizons.Jiangs’ translation mostly retain the original form and style with much attention to aesthetic structure,the use of figures of speech,applying strategies such as explicitation,addition,reorganization of sentences and perspective conversion etc.Fisher’s translation is concise,straightforward and smooth,using the combination of long sentences and short sentences pattern,emphasizing logical cohesion,mainly adopting literal translation to preserve the original image,which shows respect to the source text to the greatest extent.“Effective history” underlines the necessity of re-translation and multiple versions,including the revision and refinement for a previous version by the same translator and a new translation after the existing version by new translators.In this part,the author of this thesis also puts forward some suggestions to modify some translations from her own horizon. |
PDF Full Text Request