Translation And Interpretation Of Dianlun Lunwen In British And American Sinology

There are many translations of Dianlun Lunwen in British and American Sinology.From the emergence of E.R.Hughes’ s translation in 1951,by 2003,there are ten complete English translations,in addition to some excerpts.Although the influence of Dianlun Lunwen in British and American Sinology is not as strong as Lu Ji’s Wenfu,from the perspective of the number of translations,it has also attracted the attention of many British and American Sinologists.Therefore,its translation and interpretation in British and American Sinology can not be ignored.The most influential translations of Dianlun Lunwen in British and American Sinology include the translations of E.R.Hughes,Stephen Owen,Donald Holzman,Siu-Kit Wong and Ronald.C.Miao.These translators have different interpretations about the ideological and artistic aspects of Dianlun Lunwen.Through the analysis of the five translators’ interpretations about critical theory,style theory,genre theory and literary value theory in the original text,it can be found that the interpretation of style theory is the most difficult.Compared with other critical literary theories,translators are more difficult to convey the original meaning of style theory.In addition,among the five translators,Donald Holzman,Siu-Kit Wong and Ronald.C.Miao do better in the transmission of ideology of literary theory.By analyzing the five translators’ specific interpretations about the artistic aspects of parallel sentences,analogy and metonymy in Dianlun Lunwen,it can be found that translators tend to pay too much attention to form and ignore the original meaning.In addition,it can be found that on the whole,the translations of Stephen Owen,Ronald.C.Miao and Donald Holzman can better restore the style and color of the original text.Exploring the strategies of translators’ interpretation is conducive to further understand the situations about the success and failure of the translators’ interpretation of Dianlun Lunwen.According to what Friedrich Schleiermacher has said,strategies of interpretation mainly include reader-centered strategy and author-centered strategy.Siu-Kit Wong and E.R.Hughes mainly adopt the former strategy.The readability of their translation is very high,but such a translation is difficult to retain the style and form of the original text.In addition,the translator who adopts this strategy,even if he focuses on conveying the spirit and meaning,it is sometimes difficult to convey the meaning of the original text.Donald Holzman,Ronald.C.Miao and Stephen Owen mainly adopt the latter strategy.Their translations is more faithful to the original text,but sometimes they pay too much attention to the meaning of the original text,resulting in the reduction of readability of the translation.Even if they are author centered,they sometimes misunderstand the meaning of the original text.Above is an analysis of the translation interpretations of Dianlun Lunwen.In some translators’ works,besides translation interpretations,there are also interpretive interpretations that analyze the specific content.Among them,the most interesting interpretive interpretations are Stephen Owen,Christopher Leigh Connery and Gu Mingdong’s analysis about the theory of wenqi.Their understanding of wenqi is unique.Stephen Owen understands it as an ongoing something,Christopher Leigh Connery regards it as the qi in the evaluation system,and Gu Mingdong thinks that qi was a theory of totality.However,considered with several versions of Dianlun Lunwen,including abridged translations and complete translations,from a diachronic perspective,we can find that the situation about the interpretation of Dianlun Lunwen in British and American Sinology is like this.Dianlun Lunwen was initially interpreted in the 1950 s and1960s,got researchful interpretation in the 1970 s and 1980 s,and got a more in-depth interpretation in the 1990 s.In addition,in the 1950 s,the focus of translation and interpretation of Dianlun Lunwen shifted from Britain to the United States.