论文部分内容阅读
【Abstract】: Pearl S. Buck’s All Men are Brothers is very great. She loved China and Chinese culture and introduced firstly Shui Hu Zhuan to the world. She gave her readers a very interesting and different story.
Sidney Shapiro’s Outlaws of the Marsh is very wonderful. As a man, as an English lawyer and later as a Chinese and a translator. He relived Shui Hu Zhuan in English world.
【Key words】: All Men are Brothers, Outlaws of the Marsh, comparison
Israeli translation theorist Gideon Toury says: A translation is taken to be any target-language utterance which is presented or regarded as such within the target culture, on whatever ground. And German translation theorist Christian Nord gives this definition: Translation is the production of a functional target text maintaining a relationship with a given source text that is specified according to the intended or demanded function of the target text. Toury emphasizes the culture while Nord gives more emphasis to the pragmatic approach, that is to fulfill the function through the text. And English famous scholar M.A.K. Halliday says: translation is, in fact, an extremely complicated and difficult task. It is far from being the simple, obvious exercise it is sometimes described to be. In its usual form it is appropriate more to the advanced stages of a university special degree course, when literary and historical styles are studied, than to the early stages of acquiring practical skills in a foreign language. So we can generalize with three words about the above: “faithfulness”, “expressiveness” and “elegance”.
We know that “Shui Hu Zhuan” is a very famous book written by Shi Naian in Ming dynasty and precious cultural inheritance in China. Shui Hu Zhuan is considered as a great classic in Chinese literature, and as the first novel to explore the subject of peasant uprisings in feudal China. It is a work of timeless philosophical and artistic value. It tells the epic story of the birth, rise and decline of a rebel peasant array during the end of the Northern Song Dynasty (960-1127), thus outlining the general progress of peasant revolts from their initial inception to their eventual defeat.
We know also that there are many translators in the world who want to introduce this famous book to their own countries. In these translators there are two more important persons—Pearl S. Buck 1892 – 1973, and Sidney Shapiro1915 – . Pearl S. Buck translated this book into English—All Men Are Brothers and Sidney Shapiro—Outlaws of the Marsh..
Now, let’s compare these two versions from Pearl S. Buck and Sidney Shapiro:
From these two English versions we can see different translation methods and learn how to better express “faithfulness”, “expressiveness” and “elegance” from source text into target text.
a) “faithfulness”
Let’s look at the example in the chapter of “扑天雕双修生死书 宋公明一打祝家庄”:
话说当时杨雄扶起那人来,叫与石秀相见。石秀便问道:“这位兄长是谁?”杨雄道:“这个兄弟,姓杜,名兴,祖籍是中山府人氏,因为他面颜生得粗莽,以此人都叫他做鬼脸儿。”
(Pearl S. Buck translated):
At the time when Yang Hsiung lifted up that man and Shih Hsiu saw him then Shih Hsiu asked, saying, “Who is this brother?”
Yang Hsiung answered, “this brother is surnamed Tu and his name is Hsing, and his ancients were men of Chung Shan Fu. Because his face is so coarse and wild men all call him the Devil Faced.
(Sidney Shapiro translated):
Yang Xiong raised the man to his feet and called Shi Xiu over.
“Who is this brother?” asked Shi Xiu.
“Du Xing is his name. He’s from the prefecture of Zhongshan. Because of his crude features everyone calls him Demon Face.”
Another example:
我三个连夜逃走,不提防背后赶来。我弟兄两个搠翻了他几个,不想乱草中间,舒出两把挠钩,把时迁搭了去。我两个乱撞到此,正要问路,不想遇见贤弟。
(Pearl S. Buck translated):
We three then escaped by night nor did we trouble ourselves that behind us would come pursuers. We two brothers stabbed several of them, but we did not think that out of the grass there would be thrust forth two barbed spears and that they would hook Shih Ch’ien away. We two ran higher, then, and were about to ask the way, and we did not think to meet you, Good Brother!
(Sidney Shapiro translated):
Pursuers caught up with us and we two knocked down several, but a couple of hooked poles reached out of the thicket and dragged Shi Qian away. We barged around until we came here. We were just about to ask for directions when you unexpectedly arrived, brother.
The examples can tell us Mrs. Buck’s sentences are too long and she always wants to translate every Chinese word into English. She makes her target text too more faithful from the source text. But sometimes, too more faithfulness is too stuffy and complex to read. And Mr. Shapiro can master main idea of Chinese sentences and understand them and translate them into very good English sentences. I think personally that Mr. Shapiro has so perfect understanding of “Shui Hu Zhuan” because he has a very perfect Chinese wife—Feng Zi who gave him the great help in Chinese. And because of the learning of Chinese, they both could meet each other.
b) “expressiveness”
Here is the chapter of “武松打虎”. For example:
武松来到景阳冈,远远见酒家杏黄旗上写道:“三碗不过岗”
“If you drink three cups of wine you will be unable to cross the mountain ridge.” (translated by Pearl S. Buck)
“Three bowls and you can't cross the ridge”(translated by Sidney Shapiro)
From the comparison, we can see that “bowls”is much better than “cups”. “Bowls” can express Wu Song’s character very well while “cups”is too small and elegant to drink the wine for a coarse man like Wu Song. At the same time, “Three bowls”is shorter than “If you drink three cups of wine” and “you can’t ” is cleaner than “you will be unable to”.
Another example:
武松道,休要胡说!没地不还你钱,再筛三碗来我吃!
“Don't talk nonsense,” said Wu Sung,“I won't cheat you. I'll pay you, so bring me three more cups of wine.”(translated by Pearl S. Buck)
“Poppycock! I am paying, aren't I? Pour me three more bowls。” (translated by Sidney Shapiro)
Poppycock is slangy English. That it is said by Wu Song is very fit for his character. While “Don’t talk nonsense” is said better by the man who has read more books.
Here are only two examples but we can see clearly that the expressiveness of Pearl S. Buck’s version is worse than Sidney Shapiro’s. I think this is because of their different English knowledge experiences. Mrs. Buck spent her childhood in China and she had no good chanceand environment to learn the best pure English. But Mr. Shapiro was a lawyer in U.S.A. before he came to China when he was 31 years old. He has very perfect and logical English system in his mind.
c) “elegance”
For example, the sentence in the chapter of 鲁达上山 is so:
(鲁智深在五台山出家后,不学坐禅,选了中间的禅床倒头便睡)禅和子叹气道“善哉!”鲁智深便道:“团鱼洒家也吃,甚么‘鳝哉’!”禅和子道:“却是苦也!”鲁智深便道:“团鱼大腹,又肥甜了好吃,那得苦也?”
Here, “善哉”and “鳝哉”are homophonic in Chinese. Normally, it is very hard to be translated. Firstly
let’s have a look at these sentences from Pearl Buck’s version:
A priest exclaimed, "What a calamity!"
Lu Ta shouted, "Even a tortoise I shall eat; what calamity will there be?"
The priest replied, "Of course there will be a calamity."
Lu Ta said, "A tortoise has a big belly, but the fat is sweet and nice to eat, so why should there be a calamity."
From the above we can’t clearly understand what the translator wants to say. From “calamity” to tortoise makes man a little puzzle. And the structure is not connected and compact. The below is from Mr. Shapiro’s version:
"Evil!" exclaimed the monk.
"What is this talk about eels? It's turtles I like to eat."
"Oh, bitter!"
"There is nothing bitter about them. Turtle belly is fat and sweet. They make very good eating."
There is the homophonic in Chinese of “善哉”and “鳝哉” and there is also Mr. Shapiro’s understanding of “Evil” and “Eels”. It’s very wonderful and very elegant!
Please look at another example about the description of Gao Qiu at the beginning chapter:
“这人吹弹歌舞,刺枪使棒,相扑玩耍,亦故胡乱学些诗书辞赋;若论仁义礼智,行信忠良, 却是不会。”
(version from Pearl S. Buck):
He could play well on wood or string instruments, but was no good at poetry or literature. If there was a discussion of benevolence, justice, propriety, wisdom or virtue he was unable to take part.
Mrs. Buck translated “若论” as “if” and “胡乱学些诗书词赋” into “was no good at poetry or literature”.
But Mr. Shapiro translated them so:
In addition to his skill with weapons, Gao Qiu could play musical instruments and sing and dance. He also learned a bit about peotry and versifying. But when it came to virtue and proper behavior, hedidn't know a thing.
Mr. Shapiro used “In addition to…” to understand Gao Qiu’s skills and “learned a bit…” for “胡乱学些…”. So I think Sidney Shapiro’s translation is much more elegant than Pearl S. Buck’s.
As lawyer, Sidney Shapiro has much more perfect, logical, strict and concise English system than a normal English person. This is why he can give us a better “Outlaws of Marsh” than others.
From these two English versions we can also summarize generally that Pearl S. Buck uses foreignizing method while Sydney Shapiro uses domesticating method. Now let’s know what is foreignizing method and domesticating method.
"Domesticating translation" and "foreignizing translation" are the terms coined by L. Venuti (1995) to describe the two different translation strategies. The former refers to the translation strategy in which a transparent, fluent style is adopted in order to minimize the strangeness of the foreign text for target language readers, while the latter designates the type of translation in which a target text "deliberately breaks target conventions by retaining something of the foreigness of the original" (Shuttleworth &Cowie, 1997:59). The roots of the terms can be traced back to the German philosopher Schleiermacher’s argument that there are only two different methods of translation, " either the translator leaves the author in peace, as much as possible, and moves the reader towards him; or he leaves the reader in peace, as much as possible, and moves the author towards him" (Venuti, 1995: 19-20). The terms "foreignization" and "domestication" may be new to the Chinese, but the concepts they carry have been at least for a century at the heart of most translation controversies. Lu Xun (鲁迅) once said that "before translating, the translator has to make a decision : either to adapt the original text or to retain as much as possible the foreign flavour of the original text" (Xu, in Luo, 1984: 315).
Mrs. Buck hopes her readers to touch the foreign cultures and her goal is to improve the communication between west and east cultures. But Mr. Shapiro’s purpose is to make the target text easier to read for his readers. His readers are central and he, as the first reader of the source text, hopes his readers have the clear understanding of the foreign culture. Here are several examples and we analyze them to compare the both methods.
(1)如有毫厘昧心,天诛地灭。(施耐庵 罗贯中, 1992: 410)
If there has been the least dishonesty may Heaven strike me and Earth destroy me(Buck, 1933:816)
If they’re so much as a penny off, may Heaven strike me dead.
“毫厘昧心”means that somebody loves money very much or does evil. Then “天诛地灭”means that he will be killed by heaven and earth. Only these eight Chinese can express Shi Xiu’s loyal heart to Yang Xiong. Here,we can clearly see the foreignizing method from Mrs. Buck’s sentence “least dishonesty” and “Heaven strike me and Earth destroy me”. She not only stays her loyalty in source text but also keep its cultural elements. Mr. Shapiro uses “penny” to fit his readers’ feelings for them much easier to understand the target text.
(2)正是叫俺望梅止渴,画饼充饥。(施耐庵 罗贯中, 1992: 456)
It is as though you made my mouth water to quench my thirst;
It is as though you gave me the picture of a loaf and bade me be fed.(Buck, 1933:912)
Slake my thirst looking at a sour plum or assuage my hunger with a drawing of a muffin. (Shapiro, 1980:1545)
Mrs. Buck works hardest to keep the most maximal sentences and structures of the source text. So we can see that foreignizing method is very useful when Chinese culture and language should be introduced to foreigners. But Mr. Shapiro’s “plum” and “muffin” can show his domesticating method in order to make his readers to understand the story well.
Summary:
Generally, Pearl S. Buck’s All Men are Brothers is very great. She loved China and Chinese culture and introduced firstly Shui Hu Zhuan to the world. Although in this book, her understanding was not enough, her English words were not very beautiful and her many sentences were a little long, she gave her readers a very interesting and different story.
Sidney Shapiro’s Outlaws of the Marsh is very wonderful. As a man, as an English lawyer and later as a Chinese and a translator, he had a very enough understanding for Shui Hu Zhuan. He relived Shui Hu Zhuan in English world. In my heart, I love Sidney Shapiro’s Outlaws of the Marsh more.
Reference:
1, 《水浒传》施耐庵 罗贯中, 1992
2,《Outlaws of the Marsh》Sidney Shapiro, 1980
3,《All Men are Brothers》Pearl S. Buck, 1933
4,赛珍珠传 http://baike.baidu.com
5,沙博理传 http://you.video.sina.com.
Sidney Shapiro’s Outlaws of the Marsh is very wonderful. As a man, as an English lawyer and later as a Chinese and a translator. He relived Shui Hu Zhuan in English world.
【Key words】: All Men are Brothers, Outlaws of the Marsh, comparison
Israeli translation theorist Gideon Toury says: A translation is taken to be any target-language utterance which is presented or regarded as such within the target culture, on whatever ground. And German translation theorist Christian Nord gives this definition: Translation is the production of a functional target text maintaining a relationship with a given source text that is specified according to the intended or demanded function of the target text. Toury emphasizes the culture while Nord gives more emphasis to the pragmatic approach, that is to fulfill the function through the text. And English famous scholar M.A.K. Halliday says: translation is, in fact, an extremely complicated and difficult task. It is far from being the simple, obvious exercise it is sometimes described to be. In its usual form it is appropriate more to the advanced stages of a university special degree course, when literary and historical styles are studied, than to the early stages of acquiring practical skills in a foreign language. So we can generalize with three words about the above: “faithfulness”, “expressiveness” and “elegance”.
We know that “Shui Hu Zhuan” is a very famous book written by Shi Naian in Ming dynasty and precious cultural inheritance in China. Shui Hu Zhuan is considered as a great classic in Chinese literature, and as the first novel to explore the subject of peasant uprisings in feudal China. It is a work of timeless philosophical and artistic value. It tells the epic story of the birth, rise and decline of a rebel peasant array during the end of the Northern Song Dynasty (960-1127), thus outlining the general progress of peasant revolts from their initial inception to their eventual defeat.
We know also that there are many translators in the world who want to introduce this famous book to their own countries. In these translators there are two more important persons—Pearl S. Buck 1892 – 1973, and Sidney Shapiro1915 – . Pearl S. Buck translated this book into English—All Men Are Brothers and Sidney Shapiro—Outlaws of the Marsh..
Now, let’s compare these two versions from Pearl S. Buck and Sidney Shapiro:
From these two English versions we can see different translation methods and learn how to better express “faithfulness”, “expressiveness” and “elegance” from source text into target text.
a) “faithfulness”
Let’s look at the example in the chapter of “扑天雕双修生死书 宋公明一打祝家庄”:
话说当时杨雄扶起那人来,叫与石秀相见。石秀便问道:“这位兄长是谁?”杨雄道:“这个兄弟,姓杜,名兴,祖籍是中山府人氏,因为他面颜生得粗莽,以此人都叫他做鬼脸儿。”
(Pearl S. Buck translated):
At the time when Yang Hsiung lifted up that man and Shih Hsiu saw him then Shih Hsiu asked, saying, “Who is this brother?”
Yang Hsiung answered, “this brother is surnamed Tu and his name is Hsing, and his ancients were men of Chung Shan Fu. Because his face is so coarse and wild men all call him the Devil Faced.
(Sidney Shapiro translated):
Yang Xiong raised the man to his feet and called Shi Xiu over.
“Who is this brother?” asked Shi Xiu.
“Du Xing is his name. He’s from the prefecture of Zhongshan. Because of his crude features everyone calls him Demon Face.”
Another example:
我三个连夜逃走,不提防背后赶来。我弟兄两个搠翻了他几个,不想乱草中间,舒出两把挠钩,把时迁搭了去。我两个乱撞到此,正要问路,不想遇见贤弟。
(Pearl S. Buck translated):
We three then escaped by night nor did we trouble ourselves that behind us would come pursuers. We two brothers stabbed several of them, but we did not think that out of the grass there would be thrust forth two barbed spears and that they would hook Shih Ch’ien away. We two ran higher, then, and were about to ask the way, and we did not think to meet you, Good Brother!
(Sidney Shapiro translated):
Pursuers caught up with us and we two knocked down several, but a couple of hooked poles reached out of the thicket and dragged Shi Qian away. We barged around until we came here. We were just about to ask for directions when you unexpectedly arrived, brother.
The examples can tell us Mrs. Buck’s sentences are too long and she always wants to translate every Chinese word into English. She makes her target text too more faithful from the source text. But sometimes, too more faithfulness is too stuffy and complex to read. And Mr. Shapiro can master main idea of Chinese sentences and understand them and translate them into very good English sentences. I think personally that Mr. Shapiro has so perfect understanding of “Shui Hu Zhuan” because he has a very perfect Chinese wife—Feng Zi who gave him the great help in Chinese. And because of the learning of Chinese, they both could meet each other.
b) “expressiveness”
Here is the chapter of “武松打虎”. For example:
武松来到景阳冈,远远见酒家杏黄旗上写道:“三碗不过岗”
“If you drink three cups of wine you will be unable to cross the mountain ridge.” (translated by Pearl S. Buck)
“Three bowls and you can't cross the ridge”(translated by Sidney Shapiro)
From the comparison, we can see that “bowls”is much better than “cups”. “Bowls” can express Wu Song’s character very well while “cups”is too small and elegant to drink the wine for a coarse man like Wu Song. At the same time, “Three bowls”is shorter than “If you drink three cups of wine” and “you can’t ” is cleaner than “you will be unable to”.
Another example:
武松道,休要胡说!没地不还你钱,再筛三碗来我吃!
“Don't talk nonsense,” said Wu Sung,“I won't cheat you. I'll pay you, so bring me three more cups of wine.”(translated by Pearl S. Buck)
“Poppycock! I am paying, aren't I? Pour me three more bowls。” (translated by Sidney Shapiro)
Poppycock is slangy English. That it is said by Wu Song is very fit for his character. While “Don’t talk nonsense” is said better by the man who has read more books.
Here are only two examples but we can see clearly that the expressiveness of Pearl S. Buck’s version is worse than Sidney Shapiro’s. I think this is because of their different English knowledge experiences. Mrs. Buck spent her childhood in China and she had no good chanceand environment to learn the best pure English. But Mr. Shapiro was a lawyer in U.S.A. before he came to China when he was 31 years old. He has very perfect and logical English system in his mind.
c) “elegance”
For example, the sentence in the chapter of 鲁达上山 is so:
(鲁智深在五台山出家后,不学坐禅,选了中间的禅床倒头便睡)禅和子叹气道“善哉!”鲁智深便道:“团鱼洒家也吃,甚么‘鳝哉’!”禅和子道:“却是苦也!”鲁智深便道:“团鱼大腹,又肥甜了好吃,那得苦也?”
Here, “善哉”and “鳝哉”are homophonic in Chinese. Normally, it is very hard to be translated. Firstly
let’s have a look at these sentences from Pearl Buck’s version:
A priest exclaimed, "What a calamity!"
Lu Ta shouted, "Even a tortoise I shall eat; what calamity will there be?"
The priest replied, "Of course there will be a calamity."
Lu Ta said, "A tortoise has a big belly, but the fat is sweet and nice to eat, so why should there be a calamity."
From the above we can’t clearly understand what the translator wants to say. From “calamity” to tortoise makes man a little puzzle. And the structure is not connected and compact. The below is from Mr. Shapiro’s version:
"Evil!" exclaimed the monk.
"What is this talk about eels? It's turtles I like to eat."
"Oh, bitter!"
"There is nothing bitter about them. Turtle belly is fat and sweet. They make very good eating."
There is the homophonic in Chinese of “善哉”and “鳝哉” and there is also Mr. Shapiro’s understanding of “Evil” and “Eels”. It’s very wonderful and very elegant!
Please look at another example about the description of Gao Qiu at the beginning chapter:
“这人吹弹歌舞,刺枪使棒,相扑玩耍,亦故胡乱学些诗书辞赋;若论仁义礼智,行信忠良, 却是不会。”
(version from Pearl S. Buck):
He could play well on wood or string instruments, but was no good at poetry or literature. If there was a discussion of benevolence, justice, propriety, wisdom or virtue he was unable to take part.
Mrs. Buck translated “若论” as “if” and “胡乱学些诗书词赋” into “was no good at poetry or literature”.
But Mr. Shapiro translated them so:
In addition to his skill with weapons, Gao Qiu could play musical instruments and sing and dance. He also learned a bit about peotry and versifying. But when it came to virtue and proper behavior, hedidn't know a thing.
Mr. Shapiro used “In addition to…” to understand Gao Qiu’s skills and “learned a bit…” for “胡乱学些…”. So I think Sidney Shapiro’s translation is much more elegant than Pearl S. Buck’s.
As lawyer, Sidney Shapiro has much more perfect, logical, strict and concise English system than a normal English person. This is why he can give us a better “Outlaws of Marsh” than others.
From these two English versions we can also summarize generally that Pearl S. Buck uses foreignizing method while Sydney Shapiro uses domesticating method. Now let’s know what is foreignizing method and domesticating method.
"Domesticating translation" and "foreignizing translation" are the terms coined by L. Venuti (1995) to describe the two different translation strategies. The former refers to the translation strategy in which a transparent, fluent style is adopted in order to minimize the strangeness of the foreign text for target language readers, while the latter designates the type of translation in which a target text "deliberately breaks target conventions by retaining something of the foreigness of the original" (Shuttleworth &Cowie, 1997:59). The roots of the terms can be traced back to the German philosopher Schleiermacher’s argument that there are only two different methods of translation, " either the translator leaves the author in peace, as much as possible, and moves the reader towards him; or he leaves the reader in peace, as much as possible, and moves the author towards him" (Venuti, 1995: 19-20). The terms "foreignization" and "domestication" may be new to the Chinese, but the concepts they carry have been at least for a century at the heart of most translation controversies. Lu Xun (鲁迅) once said that "before translating, the translator has to make a decision : either to adapt the original text or to retain as much as possible the foreign flavour of the original text" (Xu, in Luo, 1984: 315).
Mrs. Buck hopes her readers to touch the foreign cultures and her goal is to improve the communication between west and east cultures. But Mr. Shapiro’s purpose is to make the target text easier to read for his readers. His readers are central and he, as the first reader of the source text, hopes his readers have the clear understanding of the foreign culture. Here are several examples and we analyze them to compare the both methods.
(1)如有毫厘昧心,天诛地灭。(施耐庵 罗贯中, 1992: 410)
If there has been the least dishonesty may Heaven strike me and Earth destroy me(Buck, 1933:816)
If they’re so much as a penny off, may Heaven strike me dead.
“毫厘昧心”means that somebody loves money very much or does evil. Then “天诛地灭”means that he will be killed by heaven and earth. Only these eight Chinese can express Shi Xiu’s loyal heart to Yang Xiong. Here,we can clearly see the foreignizing method from Mrs. Buck’s sentence “least dishonesty” and “Heaven strike me and Earth destroy me”. She not only stays her loyalty in source text but also keep its cultural elements. Mr. Shapiro uses “penny” to fit his readers’ feelings for them much easier to understand the target text.
(2)正是叫俺望梅止渴,画饼充饥。(施耐庵 罗贯中, 1992: 456)
It is as though you made my mouth water to quench my thirst;
It is as though you gave me the picture of a loaf and bade me be fed.(Buck, 1933:912)
Slake my thirst looking at a sour plum or assuage my hunger with a drawing of a muffin. (Shapiro, 1980:1545)
Mrs. Buck works hardest to keep the most maximal sentences and structures of the source text. So we can see that foreignizing method is very useful when Chinese culture and language should be introduced to foreigners. But Mr. Shapiro’s “plum” and “muffin” can show his domesticating method in order to make his readers to understand the story well.
Summary:
Generally, Pearl S. Buck’s All Men are Brothers is very great. She loved China and Chinese culture and introduced firstly Shui Hu Zhuan to the world. Although in this book, her understanding was not enough, her English words were not very beautiful and her many sentences were a little long, she gave her readers a very interesting and different story.
Sidney Shapiro’s Outlaws of the Marsh is very wonderful. As a man, as an English lawyer and later as a Chinese and a translator, he had a very enough understanding for Shui Hu Zhuan. He relived Shui Hu Zhuan in English world. In my heart, I love Sidney Shapiro’s Outlaws of the Marsh more.
Reference:
1, 《水浒传》施耐庵 罗贯中, 1992
2,《Outlaws of the Marsh》Sidney Shapiro, 1980
3,《All Men are Brothers》Pearl S. Buck, 1933
4,赛珍珠传 http://baike.baidu.com
5,沙博理传 http://you.video.sina.com.