The Translator’s Subjectivity:Perspective Of Paradigm Shift

Translation paradigm can be defined as a concept system that is widely accepted and observed by the members of a translation community. Following the paradigm as a common faith and an action guide, the community gradually establishes its distinctive research tradition, theoretical position, academic objective, analytical approach, and term system. The evolution of translation paradigm is closely related to the construction of the translator’s subjectivity. The current thesis is intended to place the translator’s subjectivity into the horizon of translation paradigm shift, so as to probe into the trend and the siting of the translator’s subjectivity by locating the intrinsic logic and deep mechanism of the paradigm evolution.The translator’s subjectivity was still an ambiguous concept during the classic period of translation study in that there were no systematic theories or common paradigms. With regard to the west, the thesis chooses three typical periods:the Roman Empire, the Renaissance and the translation study after the18th century. As to the religious translation, the translator, awed by the "Word of God" at the outset, had to dance to the original’s tune, and began to enjoy limited freedom with the rise of national language translation. The study shows the general pattern of change in the translator’s subjectivity to be one from anonymity to prominence. As to the secular literature translation, the translators during the Roman Empire tended to loot and appropriate the original to enrich their own culture; the translators during the Middle Ages translated according to their own personal preferences; the translators during the Renaissance viewed the act of translation an exploitation of the original; the attitude to translation underwent a dramatic change in the18th century, the academia began to acknowledge the equality between European languages and to tolerate cultural differences, translation theorists advocated the respect for and transplantation of the foreignness of the original, and the translator’s subjectivity was hereby depressed. With regard to China, the thesis centers on three translation booms:the Buddhist scripture translation, the Western Learning translation and the translation history since the May Fourth Movement. In general, Chinese translators in different periods bore in mind explicit motives, showed self-determinative consciousness concerning the selection of source texts and translating methods, and participated in the construction of national cultures by transplanting new ideas, enlightening the people and reforming the traditional literature via translation.Linguistic paradigm freed itself from the confusion and disorder of the classical period by applying the theoretical models and research methods of the modern linguistic theories ranging from structural grammar to transformational-generative grammar and systemic grammar. However, linguistic paradigm placed too much emphasis upon the study of language form and text structure while excluding the humanistic and social factors in the translation process, which resulted in the translator’s invisibility. Facing great challenges from DTS and Cultural Studies in the1970s, the linguistic paradigm had to resort to functional, cognitive and pragmatic dimensions to revise and replace the original rule system. The thesis holds that the text-centered theory guided by the Scientism constitutes the philosophical foundation of linguistic paradigm, and accounts for the translator’s invisibility.Translation Studies, the forerunner of the cultural paradigm, replaced the prescriptive approach with a descriptive approach to examine the impact of target culture on the translated texts, in the process of which the cultural attributes of translation and the translator’s identity were highlighted. Driven by the trend of Cultural Studies, translation studies experienced its "Cultural Turn" in the1980s, which revealed the cultural functions and cultural attributes that have long been neglected. Feminist and post-colonial translation theory discovered the asymmetrical power relations hidden in translation and the important role translation plays in the construction of cultural subjects. Translation proved to be a tool for the translator to express cultural appeals, strive for discourse power, and reshape cultural identities. The cultural paradigm succeeded in switching from prescriptive approach to descriptive approach, from ST to TT, from form to function, from text to culture. Accordingly, the translator’s subjectivity received more attention than ever. However, cultural paradigm regarded the external study as the whole, discarding the language properties and internal study of translation and blurring the boundary between cultural studies and translation studies. Furthermore, the Postmodernism on which the cultural paradigm based itself is irrational and subversive in nature, lacking a constructive perspective, which, therefore, cannot guarantee the universal validity of understanding and interpretation as well as the rationality of translation action.The subjectivity cannot be reasonably sited by the language and logic analysis advocated by the Scientism, the irrational elements by the Irrationalism, or the discrepancy and individuality by the Postmodernism. In the field of translation studies, from classic period of translation study to linguistic paradigm to cultural paradigm, the subject-object relationship in translation remained in a state of imbalance. Therefore, we have to transfer translation from the world of language and consciousness to the lifeworld. Only from the perspective of social communication and social practice can the universal validity of understanding and interpretation be established, and the translator’s subjectivity reasonably sited.The Theory of Communicative Action developed by Jiirgen Habermas associates the intersubjective communication with the validity claims of speech act, and views the concept of reaching mutual understanding as an intersubjective interaction governed by social norms through the medium of language. Based on The Theory of Communicative Action, the thesis reflects on the radical tendencies of linguistic and cultural paradigm, and holds that translation rationality means that translation has to involve three dimensions of the lifeworld: the objective world, which stands for facts independent of human thought; the social world, composed of intersubjective relationships; and the subjective world of private experiences, and at the same time to fulfill the validity claims of propositional truth, normative Tightness, and subjective truthfulness. In addition, the thesis is intended to establish a comprehensive research pattern covering objective, social and subjective dimensions.Starting from a relationalist methodology, Pierre Bourdieu’s Theory of Practice seeks to dismiss the binary opposition between subjectivism and objectivism, and views social practice a dynamic product resulting from the interaction between field, capital and habitus. The Theory of Practice sheds new light upon the study of translator’s subjectivity. On the one hand, translation is redefined as a socially regulated activity, which can bridge the gap between language-oriented and culture-oriented research approach. On the other hand, the translator is viewed as a social individual, whose translation practice and subjectivity can be reasonably analyzed and sited through an integrated study of habitus, fields/norms and capital. In the light of Bourdieu’s Theory of Practice, the thesis reconsiders the binary oppositions between objectivist and subjectivist research method in the field of translation studies, and outlines the feasible research approaches, which include the positioning of translation field, the double construction between translator’s habitus and translation fields/norms, an interpretation of translator’s conceptions of translation from the perspective of cultural capital, and the translator’s adaptation and selection in the distribution of cultural capital.