ISSN 1712-8358[Print]ISSN 1923-6700[Online]
https://www.doczj.com/doc/d410986380.html, https://www.doczj.com/doc/d410986380.html,
Cross-Cultural Communication
V ol. 11, No. 12, 2015, pp. 1-4DOI:10.3968/8037
On Inter-Subjectivity in Translation: The Chinese Poetry Translator Xu Yuanchong as a Case
LIN Zhiyuan [a],*
[a]
School of Foreign Studies, Henan Polytechnic University, Jiaozuo, China.*
Corresponding author.
Supported by Research Projects of the National Social Science Foundation of China (13BWW008).
Received 25 September 2015; accepted 18 November 2015Published online 26 December 2015
Abstract
Inter-subjectivity in translation studies provides a new perspective for studies of translators’ subjectivity. The author as the creating subject of the source text, the translator as the translating subject, and the reader as the reception subject, is all involved in the whole process of translation activity. The three subjects should interact with each other and give their inter-subjectivity a full play. A case study of the Chinese scholar Xu Y uanchong’s translation of classic Chinese poetry shows that the translator should play the role of a good learner who has to obtain a thorough understanding of the author and the source culture, and also play the role of a qualified teacher who imparts both form and content of the source text to target readers in an easier and more effective way. In a word, inter-subjectivity in translation studies requires cross-cultural understanding and cooperation among the author, the translator and the target reader beyond time and space.Key words: Inter-subjectivity; Translation studies; Classic Chinese poetry; Xu Yuanchong
Lin, Z. Y. (2015). On Inter-Subjectivity in Translation: The Chinese Poetry Translator Xu Yuanchong as a Case. Cross-C u l t u r a l C o m m u n i c a t i o n , 11(12), 1-4. Av a i l a b l e f r o m : h t t p //w w w.c s c a n a d a.n e t /i n d e x.p h p /c c c /a r t i c l e /v i e w /8037 DOI: https://www.doczj.com/doc/d410986380.html,/10.3968/8037
INTRODUCTION
During the past few decades, the issue of subjectivity in translation has aroused heated discussion in the academic circle, as a result of the cultural turn in translation
studies advocated by Susan Bassnett and Andre Lefvere (1990). Since then, the study focus of translators’ status has been transferred from a servant, whose master has been the source text, to a target text producer with a creative and treachery mind (Xu, 2003). In translation studies, much more attention has been drawn onto the role of the translator as the translating subject, from various perspectives such as social, cultural, literary, ideological, and psychological and so on. However, it is also quite essential that translation studies should not go to another extreme. In other words, there should be awareness that translator-centeredness that overstates the role of translator should be avoided As subjectivity in translation studies is attracting more and more attention from scholars, the issue of inter-subjectivity also begins to be a hot topic in translation studies. As we know, there are 3 main types of subjects involved in the translation process, namely, the author, the translator and the reader. Can all of them be viewed as the subjects of translation? How do the three interact with each other in producing a translated text of high quality? The present article tries to answer the questions, with the well-known Chinese poetry translator Xu Yuanchong as a case study. Poetry translation is generally acknowledged as the hardest form of literary translation, and the exploration of inter-subjectivity in poetry translation will surely have much significance in both theory and practice.
1. THEORETICAL FRAME
1.1 Subject and Subjectivity
To explore inter-subjectivity in translation, the definition of subject and subjectivity should be made clear in the first place. In philosophy, a subject is a being who has a unique consciousness and/or unique personal experiences, or an entity that has a relationship with another entity that exists outside of itself, called an “object”. In translation studies during recent years, the translating subject has
On Inter-Subjectivity in Translation: The Chinese Poetry Translator Xu Yuanchong as a Case
been clearly the translator while the text, either the source text or the target text, is the object. Compared with the traditional translation theory, subjectivity of the translator has been far more stressed. The productive Chinese translator Lin Shu is a case in point. As we know, he knew almost nothing about foreign language, but had produced nearly 200 translated books for Chinese readers in cooperation with his interpreters. He had fully exerted his subjectivity in the light of selection of the original, translation purpose, textual form and translation strategies (Yang, 2013). Therefore, studies of subjectivity of translators are quite essential in obtaining a full and objective description of translation practice.
However, some scholars insist that the author, the reader as well as the translator of all fall into the category of the translating subjects, and advocate that the roles of the three parties as translating subjects should be fully discussed. There still exists another view that the translator is the only translating subject, while the author is the creation subject and the reader the reception subject, which are also involved in the whole process of translation. It seems that the latter sounds more convincing, but the study of interrelationship between the author, the translator and the reader, which is the well-known “Davidson’s triangulation model” (Zhao & Zhu, 2013), will be worth discussing all the time.
1.2 Inter-Subjectivity in Translation
The author and the reader may not be the direct translating subjects, but like the author both of them are involved in the whole process of producing translated works. The author is the creator of the source text, which has provided the original content and meaning that the translator is to transfer or convey. In this sense, the author is the creation subject of the source text. In creation of the source text, the author must have fully exerted his subjectivity, such as his unique language style, individual understanding of current society, specially designed plots and constructions and so on. Therefore, it is a must for the translator to get a thorough understanding of almost anything related to the author and the source text. If the author is still alive, the translator would have to make a close contact with the author to get every detail of the source text that is helpful to the translation. If the author has already passed away, the translator would have to investigate every piece of work of his and also obtain a proper understanding of the society at the author’s time. In one word, the translator should try every means to find out the real meaning, function and style of each word and sentence so that he can correctly convey the original meaning of the source text.
A good understanding of the source text is a prerequisite to a good translation task. Consequently, there should be a close cooperation between the author and the translator.
According to the Reception Theory in translation studies, the reader is viewed as the reception subject. From the perspective of sociological translation studies, the whole translation process consists of preparing, producing and consuming procedures of the translated text. As a consuming or reception subject, the reader’s literary tastes, education background will have to be given serious consideration (Cronin, 2012). Therefore, to produce a good translated work requires a careful evaluation on the expected group of readers. Without any doubt, one can never produce a good translated work without good preparation of the target readers. That is why it is so important to fully stress the inter-subjectivity between the translator and the reader.
1.3 Poetry Translation
It is widely accepted that poetry is the hardest type of literature to be translated. Compared with other types of literature such as the novel, short story, essay, drama and etc., far more stress should be laid on the form in poetry translation, since the poetic form may well demonstrate the artistic beauty. At least, form and content should be given equal consideration in poetry translation. In the history of poetry translation studies, the issue of form and content has been heatedly discussed. Now it seems that scholars have reached a consensus that form and content are equally important so that neither of them should be given up for keeping the other. However, the translator has the right to make full use of his subjectivity and increase the readability without damage to the meaning of the source text (Gu, 2008). Considering the big difference between Chinese and English poetry, the translator is expected to keep the balance between content and form and take into full consideration both the poet’s intention of creation and target readers’ understandability.
2.A N I N T R O D U C T I O N T O X U YUANCHONG AND HIS ACHIEVEMENTS IN POETRY TRANSLATION
2.1 Xu’s Achievements in Translation of Classical Chinese Poetry
Mr. Xu Yuanchong, the professor and great translator from Peking University of China, is well-known for his extraordinary contribution to literary translation, particularly poetry translation. He has produced more than 120 translated works in Chinese, English and French, and has been praised as the best translator of classic Chinese poetry into English and French. On August 2nd, 2014, he was conferred the “Aurora Borealis” Prize by the Federation of International Translators, one of the highest awards in the international translation field. In classic Chinese poetry translation, he has made exceptionally good achievements. The source texts are all representative Chinese poetry including Book of Songs, Songs of Chu, poetry of different dynasties such as Han, Tang, Song, Yuan, Ming, Qing, and etc., Man Zedong’s poetry and so on. What is more, he has tried to put his translation theory into practice and focus on faithfulness to source texts
LIN Zhiyuan (2015). Cross-Cultural Communication, 11(12), 1-4
and gracefulness to target readers. Therefore, he has been enjoying great popularity at home and abroad.
2.2 Xu’s Poetry Translation Theory
Based on a large amount of translation practice for more than sixty years, Xu has developed a unique system of poetry translation theory, which represents the best contribution to the development of modern translation studies of China. Generally speaking, Xu’s translation theory can be summarized as an optimum theory which stresses that a translated text should be encouraged to compete with its source text and try to be better than that if possible. Specifically, the optimum theory can be illustrated from three points, namely, ontology, methodology and teleology (Xu, 2006).
For ontology, Xu has put forward the translation principle of three beauties, that is, beauty of the sense, beauty of sound and beauty of form. Beauty of sense is the first and foremost requirement for poetry translation, which means that the translated text should be faithful to the source text in meaning. Beauty of sound is the second most important principle among the three, which require the beautiful transfer of rhythm and rhyme in poetry. Beauty of form comes after the first two principles, which stress the rendering of literary forms such as the length of lines of poems, the number of lines in a stanza and etc..
For methodology, Xu has proposed three methods, namely, intensification, equalization and simplification. In poetry translation, usually the unique allusion and some proper nouns cannot be transferred in a literal translation, and flexible ways should be adopted to focus on the transfer of central meaning considering target readers’ acceptability. Specifically, translation will be rendered through the methods of addition, replacement and omission which mostly involve specification, substitution and generalization respectively.
For teleology, Xu has generalized the purpose of poetry translation as understandable, enjoyable and admirable to target readers. He insists that a good translated text should have at least readability for target readers, then be effective in arousing their reading interests, and finally if possible brings about keen enjoyment to them. It is implied that readers’ response is the standard to judge whether a translated text is good or bad.
3.A C A S E S T U D Y O N I N T E R-S U B J E C T I V I T Y I N P O E T R Y TRANSLATION BY XU YUANCHONG
The reason why Xu’s translation of classic Chinese poetry has been so successful mainly lies in the fact that Xu has properly dealt with the issue of inter-subjectivity, consciously and unconsciously. There should be a dynamic communication between the author or the poet, the translator and the reader. In this section, inter-subjectivity will be further discussed based on the analysis of Xu’s translation of classic Chinese poetry.
3.1 Between the Author and the Translator: The Translator as a Learner
In translation, the translating subject the translator should be actively interacted with the creative subject the author. Even though the author has been dead, the translator may be able to get a thorough understanding about the author’s writing style, purpose and techniques through various ways. In this sense, the translator should be a learner who will have to learn everything related to the author’s creation of the source text. As a well-known professor of China, Xu has had a profound knowledge about Chinese philosophy, history, literature, and particularly about the image-centered creation method of the classic Chinese poetry by which the poet’s emotion is usually blended with the depiction of scenery. The inter-subjectivity between Xu as a translator and the original poets is well embodied in his deep understanding of the poets and their poems. Take Xu’s translation of Wen Tingyun’s “Early Departure on Mount Shang” (商山早行) as an example:
商山早行
晨起动征铎, 客行悲故乡.
鸡声茅店月, 人迹板桥霜.
槲叶落山路, 枳花明驿墙.
因思杜陵梦, 凫雁满回塘.
Early Departure on Mount Shang
At dawn I rise, with ringing bells my cab goes,
But grieved in thoughts of my home, I feel lost.
As the moon sets over thatched inn, the cock crows; Footprints are left on the wood bridge paved with frost.
The mountain path is covered with oak leaves,
The post-house bright with blooming orange trees.
The dream of my homeland last night still grieves,
A pool of mallards playing with mild geese. (Xu, 2006, p.46)
This poem vividly describes homesickness and loneliness of a traveller far from his hometown by depicting a picture of a departure in a chilly early morning. It is one of the best representatives of traveling poems which are quite popular in ancient times of China. The poem first presents to readers an image of a horse-drawn carriage which is setting out, and points out the traveller’s lonely and nostalgic feeling. Then several other concrete images are listed to describe the scenery at the departure moment, such as “the crowing of the cock” (鸡声), “the thatched inn” (茅店), “the moon” (月), “people’s footprints” (人迹), “the wood bridge” (板桥), “the frost” (霜). In the original poem, six images are put together one after another without any conjunctive word, but they are well combined to produce so clear and vivid a picture about the traveler’s early departure that readers seem to have felt his strong loneliness, light sadness and the chill of the weather. In translation, Xu knows quite well about the poet’s intention and relations among the six images, and skillfully put them in a smooth and logical English sentence. Besides, the leaves of hu trees on the mountain road and flowers of orange trees by the
On Inter-Subjectivity in Translation: The Chinese Poetry Translator Xu Yuanchong as a Case
post-house remind the traveler of the dream last night, which further implies his missing about the homeland. Xu does quite well in stressing the homesick theme of the poem by replacing the hu trees with oak trees, since oak trees will easily arouse people’s misses for their hometown in the western world, especially if they are hung with red or yellow ribbons. In this sense, Xu is undoubtedly a good learner of the author and his text. 3.2 Between the Translator and Readers: The Translator as a Teacher
To judge whether a translated work is good or not, largely lies in the readers’ evaluation. From readers’ perspective, the translator has to take into consideration the readability in terms of theme, cultural elements and form of the poem. Therefore, to achieve this purpose, the translator should act as a good teacher to convey all the information to target readers in flexible ways. If target readers, as students, have difficulties in understanding the unique culture-loaded words, the translator as a teacher should try to use other teaching methods to make the lecture easier. Here is an example to show how Xu Yuanchong translates into English a poem “芙蓉楼送辛渐”written by Wang Changling.
芙蓉楼送辛渐
寒雨连江夜入吴,
平明送客楚山孤.
洛阳亲友如相问,
一片冰心在玉壶.
Farewell to Xin Jian at Lotus Tower
A cold rain dissolved in East Stream invades the night; At dawn you’ll leave the lonely Southern hills in haze. If my friends in the North should ask if I’m all right, Tell them I’m free from blame as ice in crystal vase.
(Xu, 2006, p.98)
It is apparent that this is a poem of farewell, one of the popular themes in ancient Chinese poetry. However, it is quite different from the ordinary one, since it does not focus on the description of sentimental emotions at parting but stress his clear conscience. Therefore, the last two lines are the focus of the whole poem. Yet, the last line contains a Chinese cultural element that may sound rather weird in English culture. The poet expresses his innocence and uprightness by using “an ice heart in a jade pot” as a metaphor. In Chinese culture, both ice and jade are used to symbolize purity and uprightness because of their transparency, while in English culture ice will be usually associated with silence or an awkward situation, and jade with wealth or ornament. To bridge the cultural gap, Professor Xu flexibly replaces the jade pot with the crystal vase and adds extra information “I’m free from blame” to explain the implied meaning. The result is that readers can get a better understanding of connotative meanings of this poem. Besides, there are several proper nouns in this poem such as “吴”, “楚山”, “洛阳”. If Xu had translated them literally into “Kingdom Wu”, “Mount Chu” and “Luoyang” without any explanation, target readers would have been very confused. What is more, poetic language is required to be as concise as possible and extra explanatory information could do nothing but destroys artistic beauty of the translated version. Therefore, at this moment the translator had better adopts the translation technique of domestication and only imparts the central meaning to target readers. In other words, Xu adopts the method of generalization to omit the translation of “吴”, and translate “楚山” and “洛阳” respectively into “Southern hills” and “the North” which only indicates the vague locations. In this sense, the translator should be able to play the role of a qualified teacher so that the hard lecture may be made easier for target students.
CONCLUSION
The author as the creating subject, the translator as the translating subject, the reader as the reception subject, are all involved in the whole process of translation. To some degree the author determines the production of the original meaning and form, the translator controls the transformation of the source text into the target text, and the reader reflects the reception of the translated text. To achieve a better cross-cultural communicative effect, the three subjects should cooperate well with each other and fully exert their inter-subjectivity in translation activities. The translator is expected to be a good mediator between the author and the reader to bridge the gap between the source and the target culture. Specifically, the translator should play the role of a good student who learns from the author about everything related to the source text, and meanwhile play the role of a good teacher who imparts to target readers the source knowledge in an easier way. The professor and translator Xu Yuanchong has set a good example in poetry translation. The cooperation of the author, the translator and the reader, and the fusion of different cultures will surely increase the quality of translated texts.
REFERENCES
Bassnett, S., & Lefevere, A. (Eds.). (1990). Translation, history and culture. London: Pinter.
Cronin, M. (2012). The rise of the reader and norms in twentieth-century English-language literary translation. Perspectives, 20(3), 375-385.
Gu, Z. (2008). Poetry translation in China: Historical achievements and contemporary conceptions. Chinese Translators Journal, 29(4), 34-38.
Xu, J. (2003). Creative treason and establishment of traditional subjectivity. Chinese Translators Journal, 24(1), 6-11. Xu, Y. (2006). The art of translation (2nd ed.). Beijing: China Intercontinental Press.
Xu, Y. (Trans.). (2006). 300 Tang poems. Beijing: China Translation & Publishing Corporation.
Yang, L. (2013). Translator’s subjectivity in Lin Shu’s translation. Cross-Cultural Communication, 9 (2), 27-30. Zhao. Y., & Zhu. H. (2013). On the inter-subjectivity in translation: viewed from “triangulation” model. Studies in Literature and Language, 6 (2), 1-7.
导读：8月2日，在柏林举办的第二十届世界翻译大会会员代表大会上，许渊冲教授荣获国际译联2014年“北极光”杰出文学翻译奖（FIT“Aurora Borealis”Prize for Outstanding Translation of Fiction Literature），成为第一位获此殊荣的亚洲翻译家。一起去看看许老的那些“神翻译”！ 关雎 Cooing And Wooing 关关雎鸠, By riverside are cooing 在河之洲. A pair of turtledoves; 窈窕淑女, A good young man is wooing 君子好逑. A fair maiden he loves. 参差荇菜, Water flows left and right 左右流之. Of cress long here, short there; 窈窕淑女, The youth yearns day and night 寤寐求之. For the good maiden fair. 求之不得, His yearning grows so strong, 寤寐思服. He can not fall asleep, 悠哉悠哉， But tosses all night long, 辗转反侧. So deep in love, so deep! 参差荇菜,
Now gather left and right 左右采之. Cress long or short and tender! 窈窕淑女, O lute, play music bright 琴瑟友之. For the bride sweet and slender! 参差荇菜, Feast friends at left and right 左右芼之. On cress cooked till tender! 窈窕淑女, O bells and drums, delight 钟鼓乐之. The bride so sweet and slender! 垓下歌 XIANG YU’S LAST SONG 力拔山兮气盖世， I could pull mountains down, oh! With main and might, 时不利兮骓不逝。 But my good fortune wanes, oh! My steed won’t fight. 骓不逝兮可奈何！ Whether my steed will fight, oh! I do not care. 虞兮虞兮奈若何！ What can I do with you, oh! My lady fair! 回乡偶书 HOME-COMING 贺知章 He Zhizhang
关雎Cooing And Wooing 关关雎鸠, By riverside are cooing 在河之洲. A pair of turtledoves; 窈窕淑女, A good young man is wooing 君子好逑. A fair maiden he loves. 参差荇菜, Water flows left and right 左右流之. Of cress long here, short there; 窈窕淑女, The youth yearns day and night 寤寐求之. For the good maiden fair. 求之不得, His yearning grows so strong, 寤寐思服. He can not fall asleep, 悠哉悠哉，But tosses all night long, 辗转反侧. So deep in love, so deep! 参差荇菜, Now gather left and right 左右采之. Cress long or short and tender! 窈窕淑女, O lute, play music bright 琴瑟友之.For the bride sweet and slender! 参差荇菜, Feast friends at left and right 左右芼之. On cress cooked till tender! 窈窕淑女, O bells and drums, delight 钟鼓乐之. The bride so sweet and slender! 垓下歌XIANG YU’S LAST SONG 项羽XIANGYU 力拔山兮气盖世，I could pull mountains down, oh! With main and might 时不利兮骓不逝。But my good fortune wanes, oh! My steed won’t fight. 骓不逝兮可奈何！Whether my steed will fight, oh! I do not
女性视角下看翻译主体性 西方的女性主义产生于18 世纪法国大革命，自此之后逐步演变成为一个庞大多元的体系。女性主义在理论界中被广泛重视起来，女性的主体意识也得到了前所未有的认识。翻译界的文化转向为翻译与其他学科之间的相互渗透提供了一个平台，为研究翻译打开了一扇不同以往视角的新窗。女性主义翻译理论就是在这一“文化转向”的大潮中兴起的一派译论。它以鲜明的女性主义政治诉求在繁多的翻译理论中显得格外醒目。西方女性主义翻译理论是20 世纪70 年代女性主义与翻译理论相互吸收，相互借鉴的结果，由此译者的主体性被凸显出来，同时，女性主义翻译理论也变得更加丰富。 1回顾之女性主义翻译理论与翻译主体性纵观中西方翻译史，女人和译者同时被归入话语的低等地位。译文被冠以“情妇”、“小女人”、“媒婆”、“不忠的美人”、“潘多拉”之喻等称呼，这些称谓无不表明了译文是从属于原文，是次要、派生以及被动的，如同女人从属于男人那样。以西方女性为例，16 世纪欧洲，女性不能够畅所欲言，不能自由得展示自己的才能，她们的言说与行为受到各方面严格的限制。在当时，女性只能被允许翻译工作，翻译的题材也只陷于宗教文本，而对于自主创作是得不到鼓励和支持的。在这种情况下，女性要想发表自己对社会、婚姻生活、政治上的见解，就必须通过翻译这个途径才可以实现，通过翻译加入个人的宣言，表达自己的诉求。18 世界的法国大革命浪潮使得自由平等的思想贯穿
了整个欧洲，西方妇女解放运动正式拉开了帷幕。三次妇女运动的浪潮，带动了女性主义对父权中心制更为深刻和激烈的批判意识。西方女性主义者从解构主义、后殖民主义中吸取养分，将女性视角引入翻译理论与实践之中，并且提出“女性的解放必须从语言开始”。 关于翻译译文与女性的地位长期的从属地位，Simon 批评道：无论被肯定还是遭谴责，翻译的女性气质是一个经久不衰的历史比喻。原作对于再生产的译本所具有的等级上的权威与阳性和阴性的意象连接在了一起，原作被视为强壮而具有生产力的男性，而译本则是低弱的派生的女性。正如女性的处境一样，翻译由此变得边缘化：“翻译被诬蔑为一种写作方式，为版权法所排挤，为学术界所不屑，并受到出版商、发行商、政府和宗教团体的层层盘剥。”翻译的女性化与其边缘化特征，体现了传统翻译关系二元对立的“主仆”关系。译文只是原文的模仿，它受制于原文的权力之下。由此，忠实性就变成了一部译作的好坏标准，对等于原作而言，忠实观主宰着翻译的标准。自20 世纪七八十年代以来，随着女性主义翻译理论的兴起，传统的翻译观面临了极大的挑战。传统译论中原作与译作的男一女、主一仆、中心一边缘二元对立在女性主义的翻译研究中不再存在，“带着镣铐跳舞” 的忠实观同样也遭到了质疑。女性主义翻译研究者重新对忠实做出了定义，认为“忠实既不是对作者也不是对读者，而是对写作 方案(writingproject) ――一项作者与译者都参与的方案而言 的! ”由此，译者主体性问题开始得到普遍而热烈的关注。
第33卷第6期湖南科技学院学报V ol.33 No.6 2012年6月 Journal of Hunan University of Science and Engineering Jun.2012 论翻译实践中的主体间性 李双玲 （湖南涉外经济学院，湖南 长沙 410205） 摘 要：近些年来，主体间性已成为翻译研究中的热门话题，但大多数的研究都停留在理论表面，并未将此理论运用到翻译实践当中。论文从主体间性的理论出发，通过具体例子来探讨文本翻译过程中原文作者、译者和目的语读者三个主体间的关系。只有相互作用的主体之间进行平等的交流和对话，才会取得成功的翻译。 关键词：主体间性；原文作者；译者；目的语读者；翻译实践 中图分类号：H059文献标识码：A 文章编号：1673-2219（2012）06-0161-03 主体间性指人与人之间相互作用、相互沟通、相互影响、相互交流的关系中体现出的内在属性，它是使不同主体之间相互理解成为可能的前提，是对不同主体而言的共同存在和共生关系。因此主体间性给翻译研究提供了全新的理论视 角。翻译是两种语言之间的对话、交流与协商的过程。在这种过程中，原文作者、译者、目的语读者都会参与到翻译活动中来。根据主体间性理论把翻译中的各个因素均看成主体是不无道理的。在讨论翻译实践中的主体间性之前，有必要先介绍一下翻译研究的主体间性视角。 一翻译研究的主体间性视角 传统的翻译观认为译者只是原文作者的仆人，只能如实的传递作者所欲之言，用中立客观的态度来进行语言转换活动，而作者则处于主体地位。直到解构主义学派的创建，译者才摆脱作者的阴影确定了其主体地位。译者之所以也处于主体地位，是有两个原因的：一是原文意义由于时间和空间的延隔而被“撒播”，所以成了一个无限开放的文本系统，而且“纯粹的文本意义和作者意图”是根本不存在的，译者不可能完全领会和译出作者的意图和思想[1]；二是“翻译的实质不是对原作品的意义的追索或还原，而是译者能动的理解诠释过程，是译者主体自身存在方式的呈现，同时也是译者在理解他人的基点上对自我本性的一次深化理解”[2]。在翻译的过程中译者的主观能动性也必然会体现在译文里面。因此，译者本身的文化身份和价值取向影响了其对文本的态 收稿日期：2012－04－02 基金项目：湖南省教育厅资助科研项目（项目编号10 C0888）。 作者简介：李双玲（1971－），女，湖南长沙人，湖南涉外经济学院讲师，硕士，研究方向为翻译学。度以及运用翻译的方法。同时译者自己本身所处的一个大的社会文化背景也会在译文中留下很深的印记。而另一方面对目的语读者而言，译者又不得不考虑到当下环境的语言流行趋势，对原文进行一定的再创造。 在翻译的过程中，译者是一个具有两面性的角色，首先，译者会从一个读者的身份来看文本，在看的过程中通过文本与作者交流，了解文本中所反映的时代背景和社会文化，并通过和原文作者的“交流”后分析文本的价值观念、审美取向和风格特点。这样译者就能深入的了解到文本的信息和想要传达给读者的思想。其次，译者又以一位译文创作者的身份来面对目的语读者。在译者了解了原文的内涵和意义的时候，再根据自身的经验、审美和对目的语的掌握能力，把原文进行语言转换，让目的语读者能过通过译文与原文的作者进行对话。因此译文就决定了原文在译文读者所处的文化领域中的传播效果和接受程度。所以，译者还应该尽量站在目的语读者的立场上，考虑到读者的要求，把自己从内容到形式与原作者感同身受的灵感启迪和思想冲击带给读者。 “我们在定义翻译主体的时候，显然要考虑到作者、读者的主体作用，但居于中心地位的是译者这个主体。在这个意义上说，我们可以把译者视为狭义的主体，而把作者、译者和读者视当作广义的翻译主体。”[3]因此，在翻译活动中，作者、译者和读者都是以主体身份参与进来的，三者之间围绕着文本进行交流和沟通。他们之间的关系是既相互制约又相对独立，这也就是翻译的主体间性。译者在这样的一种关系链条中扮演的是媒介和桥梁的角色，既不是作为原文作者的传声筒就低人一等，也不是因译文创作者的身份而高人一等，而是为了原文作者和译文读者的非共时性沟通的实现而存在的一个桥梁。 161
许渊冲唯美的诗文翻译汇总 20XX年8月2日许渊冲荣获国际翻译界最高奖项之一的“北极光”杰出文学翻译奖，系首位获此殊荣亚洲翻译家。下面是xx为大家整理的优秀英语作文素材，欢迎阅读与借鉴，谢谢! 金岳霖当年翻译《毛泽东选集》时，译到“吃一堑，长一智”，一时犯了难，不知如何下手。钱钟书遂支招，译作A fall into the pit,a again in your wit。译文跟中文一样对仗而且押韵，实在翻译中的上品了。 金岳霖有个学生，叫做许渊冲。 许渊冲，生于江西南昌。从事文学翻译长达六十余年，译作涵盖中、英、法等语种，翻译集中在中国古诗英译，形成韵体译诗的方法与理论，被誉为“诗译英法唯一人”，北京大学教授，翻译家。 在国内外出版中、英、法文著译六十本，包括《诗经》、《楚辞》、《李白诗选》、《西厢记》、《红与黑》、《包法利夫人》、《追忆似水年华》等中外名著。 20XX年8月2日许渊冲荣获国际翻译界最高奖项之一的“北极光”杰出文学翻译奖，系首位获此殊荣亚洲翻译家。 《大风歌》 ——刘邦
大风起兮云飞扬。 威加海内兮归故乡。 安得猛士兮守四方。 许渊冲译： A Great Wind Liu Bang A great wind came forth, the clouds rose on high. Now that my might rules all within the seas, I have returned to my old village. Where will I find brave men to guard the four corners of my land? 天净沙·秋思马致远(元) 枯藤老树昏鸦。 小桥流水人家。 古道西风瘦马。 夕阳西下。 断肠人在天涯。 许渊冲译： Tune: Sunny Sand Autumn Thoughts Over old trees wreathed with rotten vines fly
译者主体性在翻译中的体现 摘要：翻译是把一种语言所表达的思维内容用另一种语言表达出来的语言活动。在翻译中译者是最活跃，最重要的因素。译者对原语文本、翻译策略、译文风格的选择，充分体现了译者的主体性作用。译者主体性的发挥，是译文成败的关键。 关键词：译者主体性翻译 一．引言 翻译理论和实践是一个相互渗透、融会贯通的综合体。翻译是用一种语言形式把另一种语言形式里的内容重新表现出来的语言实 践活动。在翻译领域中，译者主体性这一的话题越发受到翻译学家的极大关注。译者在文学作品翻译中，始终处于原著，原作者，译著，读者之间。译者不再是传统翻译理论中被大家称作“透明人”的角色。译者是一个具有鲜活思维、文化立场、和价值观的独立个体，其主动性、能动性和创造性在从选择原语文本、制定翻译策略、追求翻译目的等整个翻译过程中发挥着举足轻重的作用。越是刻意忽略乃至否认译者的主体性地位，翻译理论的研究发展越会陷入举步维艰的境地。 二．译者主体性 针对文学翻译过程中凸显出来的“究竟谁是翻译主体”这一问题，翻译业界存在不同的看法和意见。许均（2003:10）凭借自己敏锐的学术眼光和多年的翻译经验将这一问题鲜明地归纳出来，他说：
“从目前收集到的国内外相关资料看，何为翻译主体大致有以下四种看法：一是认为译者是翻译主体，二是认为原文作者与译者是翻译主体，三是认为译者与读者是翻译主体，四是认为原作者、译者与读者均是翻译主体。针对这些说法各异的阵营，笔者同意第一个观点：赞同译者在翻译中是具有主体性地位这一说法。简言之：译者是翻译主体，原文作者是创作主体，读者是接受主体。主体性是作为哲学概念有法国哲学家笛卡尔提出的，他认为人的主体能动性是人类所有知识、活动和存在的中心。在翻译过程中译者作为翻译的主体，他所承载的具体翻译行为就是即将作品从源语转换为目标语的活动。我们较笼统地把翻译过程分为理解阶段、表达阶段和校对阶段。在这三个阶段中译者的主体性功能得到淋漓尽致的发挥。译者一方面扮演读者的身份，在阅读理解原著文本时对原著进行分解、填充和具体化；另一方面译者又扮演创造者的身份，并考虑译文读者的接受视野和程度，最终在新的文化环境里赋予了文本新的形式。使之与译文读者进行文化交流，在另一个文化氛围里延续了原作的生命。 译者在发挥主观能动性和创造性的同时需要把握好尺度。我们常把文学翻译家比作是在戴着镣铐跳舞——又要舞姿优美，又难免时时受到羁绊。因为文学翻译被归结为一种艺术再创造。但译者的创造必须在原著设定的界限里进行，必须忠实地再现原著的意和形。再则译者还要受到译文读者的制约，顾羁他们不同的接受能力，所
许渊冲唯美的诗文翻译汇总 导语：XX年8月2日许渊冲荣获国际翻译界最高奖项之一的“北极光”杰出文学翻译奖，系首位获此殊荣亚洲翻译家。下面是yuwenmi小编为大家整理的优秀英语作文素材，欢迎阅读与借鉴，谢谢! 金岳霖当年翻译《毛泽东选集》时，译到“吃一堑，长一智”，一时犯了难，不知如何下手。钱钟书遂支招，译作A fall into the pit,a again in your wit。译文跟中文一样对仗而且押韵，实在翻译中的上品了。 金岳霖有个学生，叫做许渊冲。 许渊冲，生于江西南昌。从事文学翻译长达六十余年，译作涵盖中、英、法等语种，翻译集中在中国古诗英译，形成韵体译诗的方法与理论，被誉为“诗译英法唯一人”，北京大学教授，翻译家。 在国内外出版中、英、法文著译六十本，包括《诗经》、《楚辞》、《李白诗选》、《西厢记》、《红与黑》、《包法利夫人》、《追忆似水年华》等中外名著。 XX年8月2日许渊冲荣获国际翻译界最高奖项之一的“北极光”杰出文学翻译奖，系首位获此殊荣亚洲翻译家。 《大风歌》——刘邦
大风起兮云飞扬， 威加海内兮归故乡。 安得猛士兮守四方。 许渊冲译： A Great Wind Liu Bang A great wind came forth, the clouds rose on high. Now that my might rules all within the seas, I have returned to my old village. Where will I find brave men to guard the four corners of my land? 天净沙·秋思马致远(元) 枯藤老树昏鸦， 小桥流水人家。 古道西风瘦马， 夕阳西下， 断肠人在天涯。 许渊冲译： Tune: Sunny Sand Autumn Thoughts Over old trees wreathed with rotten vines fly evening crows;
2003年7月第35卷 第4期外语教学与研究(外国语文双月刊) Foreign Language Teaching and Research (bimonthly )J uly 2003Vol.35No.4 翻译的主体间性与视界融合 Ξ 南京大学 许 钧 提要:近年的翻译研究关注译者主体意识和翻译主体性的探讨,取得了明显成果,凸现了译者在翻译活动中的中心地位。本文在此基础上,对如何看待译者在翻译活动中的中心地位,如何认识与把握并协调翻译活动中作者、译者与读者这三个主体间的关系,提出了自己的看法,认为各种关系的和谐是保证涉及翻译的各种因素发挥积极作用的重要条件。而积极、互动的主体间性使作者、译者和读者三者之间的和谐共存成为可能,也为从视界融合导向人类灵魂的沟通开辟了一条必由之路。 关键词:翻译、主体间性、视界、融合 [中图分类号]H31519 [文献标识码]A [文章编号]100020429(2003)04-029026 近年来,国内翻译界对翻译主体与翻译主 体性的研究越来越重视,通过研究与探讨,译者在整个翻译过程中的主体作用得以凸现。但同时,翻译界也更清醒地意识到译者主体地位的确立并不以排斥作者为前提,也不以否认读者的作用为目的;译者的主体作用不是孤立的,而是与作者和读者的作用紧密相联。现代阐释学尤其是伽达默尔的阐释理论与哈贝马斯的交往理论为这种认识提供了理论基础,翻译活动不再被看作一种孤立的语言转换活动,而是一种主体间的对话。本文在这一理论背景下,提出要正确认识翻译的主体性,有必要进一步探讨翻译的主体间性问题。 一 研究翻译的主体性,不能忽视翻译主体间的关系。于是需认识以下几个问题:如何看待译者在翻译中的中心地位?如何认识和把握翻译活动中作者、译者与读者这三个主体的关系? 杨恒达(2002)从翻译活动的任务和目的出发, 以哈贝马斯的交往行为理论为指导,从“主体间性”这一概念的内涵出发,探讨了上述问题。杨恒达把处理好多重的主体间关系,当作成功、出色的翻译的基本前提。他(2002)着重分析了译者与原作者、译者与读者的双主体间关系,以及译者与作者和读者的多主体关系,并提出:在翻译过程中,译者首先要否定自己,然后才能确定自身。为说明此问题,他把作者主体的可认知性定为翻译的前提。他援引哈贝马斯的话说:“我把达到理解为目的的行为看作是最根本的东西。”他认为对翻译来说,最根本的问题,也必须以达到理解为目的。而要在翻译中达到理解之目的,就“必须以确立作者主体的可认知性为前提”。就翻译的具体操作程序而言,虽然译者面对的是文本,但杨恒达不说“文本的可认知性”,而提出“作者主体的可认知性”,是因为文本不仅是作者主体的创造物,而且实际上是作者主体的一部分,对文本的理解 ? 092?Ξ本文为江苏省“十五”哲学社会科学规划重点课题研究成果之一。
译者主体性 译者是翻译的主体,也是民族文化建构的重要参与者。然而翻译主体在中国文化多元系统中长期遭到了遮蔽,出现了译者文化地位的边缘化现象。随着翻译研究的“文化转向”,翻译主体研究得到了应有的重视,并逐渐走向深入。 主体的本质表现在其能动性、受动性、为我性的特征中，这些特征构成了翻译主体译者的主体性。 传统译论：大体划分为“语言学前”和“语言学”两阶段。无论是“语言学前”阶段中译者所处的理想与现实差距的两难境地还是语言学阶段中作为翻译机器译者的状况，其哲学根源都在于二元对立认识论。二元对立认识论认为，思想作为客体的对立面，能够客观地反映客体，达到这种客观反映的工具就是语言。因此，准确性就成了当然的要求，因为这样才能保持客观、科学性。 译者主体性的理论分析：哲学解释学、权力话语和目的论与译者主体性三元素中的能动性、受动性和为我性。 哲学解释学与译者主体性中的能动性因素：哲学解释学是西方哲学中语言论转向后深刻影响翻译研究发展的一种理论，它改变了人文学中的科学观点，给我们带来了时间和历史的视角。根据解释学观点，理解的过程就是译者的视域和原文本的视域不断融合的过程。为了达到这种融合，译者必须发挥主观能动性，积极走出自身的视域，因此，理解的过程可以看作是译者不断努力寻求新视域的过程。译者的主体性在这个过程中因其主观能动性而突出出来。如果说解释学给翻译的启发仅仅局限于文本本身，那么权力话语理论将我们带入了更广阔的社会文化视角。 权力话语与译者主体性中的受动性：权力话语在社会文化视角中阐释译者主动性。权力话语理论认为，社会中任何行为都受到权力和话语的操控。因此，译者的翻译行为必然受到他所处时代的操控。这样，译者的主体性就主要表现为受动性。 目的论与译者主体性中的为我性：目的论充分论证了译者主体性中的为我性这一方面。这一理论的准则就是目的解释手段。这种理论认为任何翻译行为都以译者的各种目的为指导。为了达到这些目的，译者会调动他各种能力、采用不同策略来解决翻译中的各种困难。 译者主体性的内容本身就包括能动性、受动性和为我性三方面。换句话说，积极和消极方面的辩证结合是译者主体性本身的内在要求。偏重这三方面的任何一方面，都会导致对主
关雎 Cooing And Wooing 关关雎鸠, By riverside are cooing 在河之洲. A pair of turtledoves; 窈窕淑女, A good young man is wooing 君子好逑. A fair maiden he loves. 参差荇菜, Water flows left and right 左右流之. Of cress long here, short there; 窈窕淑女, The youth yearns day and night 寤寐求之. For the good maiden fair. 求之不得, His yearning grows so strong, 寤寐思服. He can not fall asleep, 悠哉悠哉， But tosses all night long, 辗转反侧. So deep in love, so deep! 参差荇菜, Now gather left and right 左右采之. Cress long or short and tender! 窈窕淑女, O lute, play music bright 琴瑟友之 .For the bride sweet and slender! 参差荇菜, Feast friends at left and right 左右芼之. On cress cooked till tender! 窈窕淑女, O bells and drums, delight 钟鼓乐之. The bride so sweet and slender! 垓下歌 XIANG YU’S LAST SONG 项羽 XIANGYU 力拔山兮气盖世， I could pull mountains down, oh! With main and might 时不利兮骓不逝。 But my good fortune wanes, oh! My steed won’t fight. 骓不逝兮可奈何！ Whether my steed will fight, oh! I do not care. 虞兮虞兮奈若何！ What can I do with you, oh! My lady fair!
许渊冲翻译理论及作品分析 外国语学院 115班 3号 冯奕璇 许渊冲翻译理论及作品分析
在上了名家名篇赏析这门课之后，我们都知道了在中国古诗词翻译中，许渊冲有“诗译英法唯一人”的称号，同时他还总结了自己的诗词翻译理论。下面就让我们分析一下许渊冲先生的翻译理论以及他的作品。 首先是许先生所提出的“三美”理论，“三美”即意美、音美、形美。所谓意美，就是在翻译时要体现出原作的内容美；音美即要求译文押韵、顺口、好听；形美则是对诗的行数长短整齐，句子对仗工整的要求。以他翻译的《关雎》为例，“关关雎鸠，在河之洲。窈窕淑女，君子好逑”译文为“By riverside are cooing. A pair of turtledoves. A good young man is wooing. A fair maiden he loves”，先说意美，关关雎鸠的意思是“关关鸣叫的水鸟”，许先生的译文中用了“cooing”这个单词来表示水鸟，运用了“拟声”的修辞手法，将水鸟鸣叫这一景象描写的惟妙惟肖，“拟声”的手法同时也表现出了原文《关雎》的活泼的感觉，而“turtledoves”既有斑鸠的意思，也有情人的意思，暗示了这首诗为一首情诗，符合原文的意境。许先生用“a good young man”而不是“gentleman”表现出了原文“民俗歌谣”的特点，洒脱，不拘泥于形式。再说音美，译文中第一句的词尾“cooing”和第三句的词尾“wooing”读音相似，第二句的词尾“turtledoves”和第四句词尾“loves”读音相似。在音节上，第一句为七个音节，第二句五个，第三句又是七个，第四句五个。一三句押韵，二四句押韵，读起来朗朗上口，符合“音美”这一特点。第三个特点是“形美”原诗中四字一句，对仗极其工整，译文中也维持在四到六词一句，共四行，和原诗相符。 以上就是我所认为的许渊冲先生的“三美”理论，除了“三美”理论之外，许先生还提出了另外一个著名的翻译理论“三化”理论。“三化”即“深化，等化，浅化”。“深化”就是原文为抽象、一般性的语言，译文则用形象、具体的语言对译，包括加词、分译等。“浅化”是原文为形象、具体的语言，译文则用抽象、一般性的语言对译，包括减词、“合译”等。“等化”基本上是采用直译的方法，原文为形象、具体的语言，译文也用相同形象、具体的语言。原文为抽象、一般性的语言，译文也保持相同抽象、一般性的语言，包括换词、“反译”等方法。以我们课上所学的许先生翻译的李商隐的《无题》为例。“相见时难别亦难，
ISSN 1712-8358[Print]ISSN 1923-6700[Online] https://www.doczj.com/doc/d410986380.html, https://www.doczj.com/doc/d410986380.html, Cross-Cultural Communication V ol. 11, No. 12, 2015, pp. 1-4DOI:10.3968/8037 On Inter-Subjectivity in Translation: The Chinese Poetry Translator Xu Yuanchong as a Case LIN Zhiyuan [a],* [a] School of Foreign Studies, Henan Polytechnic University, Jiaozuo, China.* Corresponding author. Supported by Research Projects of the National Social Science Foundation of China (13BWW008). Received 25 September 2015; accepted 18 November 2015Published online 26 December 2015 Abstract Inter-subjectivity in translation studies provides a new perspective for studies of translators’ subjectivity. The author as the creating subject of the source text, the translator as the translating subject, and the reader as the reception subject, is all involved in the whole process of translation activity. The three subjects should interact with each other and give their inter-subjectivity a full play. A case study of the Chinese scholar Xu Y uanchong’s translation of classic Chinese poetry shows that the translator should play the role of a good learner who has to obtain a thorough understanding of the author and the source culture, and also play the role of a qualified teacher who imparts both form and content of the source text to target readers in an easier and more effective way. In a word, inter-subjectivity in translation studies requires cross-cultural understanding and cooperation among the author, the translator and the target reader beyond time and space.Key words: Inter-subjectivity; Translation studies; Classic Chinese poetry; Xu Yuanchong Lin, Z. Y. (2015). On Inter-Subjectivity in Translation: The Chinese Poetry Translator Xu Yuanchong as a Case. Cross-C u l t u r a l C o m m u n i c a t i o n , 11(12), 1-4. Av a i l a b l e f r o m : h t t p //w w w.c s c a n a d a.n e t /i n d e x.p h p /c c c /a r t i c l e /v i e w /8037 DOI: https://www.doczj.com/doc/d410986380.html,/10.3968/8037 INTRODUCTION During the past few decades, the issue of subjectivity in translation has aroused heated discussion in the academic circle, as a result of the cultural turn in translation studies advocated by Susan Bassnett and Andre Lefvere (1990). Since then, the study focus of translators’ status has been transferred from a servant, whose master has been the source text, to a target text producer with a creative and treachery mind (Xu, 2003). In translation studies, much more attention has been drawn onto the role of the translator as the translating subject, from various perspectives such as social, cultural, literary, ideological, and psychological and so on. However, it is also quite essential that translation studies should not go to another extreme. In other words, there should be awareness that translator-centeredness that overstates the role of translator should be avoided As subjectivity in translation studies is attracting more and more attention from scholars, the issue of inter-subjectivity also begins to be a hot topic in translation studies. As we know, there are 3 main types of subjects involved in the translation process, namely, the author, the translator and the reader. Can all of them be viewed as the subjects of translation? How do the three interact with each other in producing a translated text of high quality? The present article tries to answer the questions, with the well-known Chinese poetry translator Xu Yuanchong as a case study. Poetry translation is generally acknowledged as the hardest form of literary translation, and the exploration of inter-subjectivity in poetry translation will surely have much significance in both theory and practice. 1. THEORETICAL FRAME 1.1 Subject and Subjectivity To explore inter-subjectivity in translation, the definition of subject and subjectivity should be made clear in the first place. In philosophy, a subject is a being who has a unique consciousness and/or unique personal experiences, or an entity that has a relationship with another entity that exists outside of itself, called an “object”. In translation studies during recent years, the translating subject has
中文名：许渊冲 国籍：中国 民族：汉 出生地：江西南昌 出生日期：1921年4月18日 职业：诗译英法惟一人 毕业院校：国立西南联合大学外文系。 主要成就：1999 被提名诺贝尔文学奖候选人 人物简介 许渊冲先生豪情满怀，名片上赫然印着“书销中外六十本，诗译英法唯一人”。 以后蒙先生多次惠赐大作，拜读之下，更知先生自诩“不是院士胜院士，遗欧赠美千首诗”乃一代大师的坦然心声，实属当之无愧， 生平经历 少年才俊，崭露头角 1921年4月18日，许渊冲生于江西南昌。他的母亲受过教育，擅长绘画，赋予了他爱好文学和追求美的天性。表叔熊适逸是翻译家，他将剧目《王宝钏》译成英文，在英国上演时引起轰动，并受到英国戏剧家萧伯纳的接见，使得年幼的许渊
冲对英语产生了强烈的兴趣，立下了学好英语的志向。他在当地最好的省立南昌二中上学时，英语就已出类拔萃，并在1938年以第7名的优异成绩考入了国立西南联合大学外文系。 西南联大虽然在1937年9月刚刚成立，在八年抗战期间环境极为艰苦，但是由于名师荟萃，学风民主，因而成为当时中国最好的大学之一，杨振宁甚至认为它可以算是世界一流的大学。在联大毕业的学生中，有获得诺贝尔物理奖的杨振宁、李政道，获得“两弹一星”功勋奖章的王希季、朱光亚、邓稼先等杰出的自然科学家，在文、史、哲等社会科学领域也名家辈出，许渊冲先生就是其中之一。1939年，他在读一年级的时候，就把林徽因的诗《别丢掉》译成英文，发表在《文学翻译报》上，这是他最早的译作。 求学经历 两年后，陈纳德上校率领美国志愿空军第一大队，来到昆明援助中国抗日。许先生和许多男同学一起报名服役，为美国空军担任翻译。在欢迎陈纳德将军的招待会上，翻译不知道该如何翻译“三民主义”一词，许渊冲当即站起来翻译到：“of the people ，by the people ，for the people（民有，民治、民享）”陈纳德将军听懂了。许渊冲在中学时喜欢集邮，他有一张美国邮票，左边印着林肯，右边印着孙中山，上面写的就是林肯的这句话。这是许渊冲第一次在外语口译中崭露头角。1948年，他到巴黎大学留学，得以精通法语，深入研究法国文学。期间留法学生组团去罗马，受到教皇接见，学生中只有他懂得意大利语，于是由他代表留学生讲话，可见他在语言方面的造诣之深。 在巴黎，许渊冲参加了留学生组织的“星期五学会”，热情地学习马克思主义，探讨救国救民的道路，认识到报效祖国才是真正的出路。1951年，他与数学家吴文俊、画家吴冠中等一起回国后，被分配在北京外国语学院法文系任教。 历经坎坷，忍辱负重 许渊冲性格豪放，心直口快而胸无城府。俗话说树大招风，言多必失，他因此在历次政治运动中备受磨难。早在50年代初期的“三反”运动中，他的蓬勃朝气就被说成是“个人英雄主义”和“名利思想严重”，前后做了7次检讨才勉强过关。接踵而来的肃反运动更是厉害，他由于在陈纳德麾下当过翻译，差点被打成国民党特务。
译者主体性的体现 ——《关雎》英译本的比较 摘要：《关雎》是《诗经》三百篇中为人熟知的诗篇，几乎人人能够出口诵读。本文主要从译者主体性出发，对《关雎》几个不同的英译本进行分析研究，指出文学翻译中译者主体性的充分发挥在译文的内容和风格两个方面的体现。 关键字：《关雎》；译者主体性；内容；风格 Abstract: Guanju is known to everyone in the Book of Songs, which is composed of more than three hundred poems. And almost everyone can read it without other people’s help. This paper mainly studies several different translated versions of Guanju in the terms of translator’s subjectivity, which reflects in the following two points: contents and style. Key words: Guanju; translator’s subjectivity; contents; style 引言 译者在翻译活动中起着举足轻重的作用，同时还是是连接两个国家、两种不同文化的友谊使者，然而长期以来，译者经常处于边缘地带，依附于原文作者；译者的翻译活动被视为是再生产，译文被看作是原文的附属品。因此，学者们开始重新考虑翻译这一问题，认为一切译文绝不仅仅是对原文简单的模仿，复制，而是一种再创造，是充分发挥译者主体性这一主要因素。 一．译者主体性 翻译过程中最积极、最主动的因素就是译者主体性。那么我们在探讨译者主体性之前，首先应该了解什么是翻译的主体：有些研究者认为译者是翻译的主体；有些却认为译者和读者才是，还有人认为译者、读者和作者都是翻译的主体。从