On Representation Of Literariness And Tanslator’s Subjectivity

The study on the relationship between the representation of literariness andtranslator’s subjectivity in literary translation is a topic of innovation, even though theformer has been an old issue of controversy. It is generally acknowledged that literarytranslation has been always accompanied by the debate of literariness representation.Literariness, however, as both a concept and an object of study, was initiated in the20th century by Roman Jacobson, an influential representative of Russian formalism.He maintained that the object of literary study is not literature but ‘literariness’, bywhich literary works can be distinguished essentially from non-literary works. Theinterpretation of literariness involves a dynamic and fluid process, in which meaningsare constructed in specific and historical context. Furthermore, the meanings are to beextended and enriched in accordance with ideology, historical background, verbalcommunication, reader response and a series of dynamic factors. The nature ofliterary translation requires the translator to construct its literariness as well as toconvey its basic meaning. In the process of translation, the translator should examinethe differences between Chinese and Western poetic specifications, identify theorientation of poetics, use the combination of translation strategies, and bring thetarget language advantages into full play to ensure the conveyance and recreation ofliterariness. The connotations of literariness are versatile. From the perspective ofform, literariness involves linguistic, rhetoric, stylistic connotations etc., and from theperspective of such subject factors as the context, the author and the reader, itinvolves writer style, translator style, cultural, social, and contextual connotations etc.All these connotations contribute to the meanings and aesthetic values of literariness.Translation cannot be done without its subject in the sense that the translatorparticipates in almost every phase of translation such as understanding andinterpreting the source text, expressing and creating the target text, etc. In the wholeprocess of translation, the translator plays a crucial and positive role. The subjectivityof literary translation reflects itself in the various stages of translation process. Thewhole literary translation process is translator-centered, as can be seen in selecting thesource text, preparing before translation, reading over the source text, and adopting translation principles and strategies. It is through the translator’s judgments on theenvironment, his orientation in cultural values, his attitudes towards ideologies andhis translation principles that the original can achieve its representation in form,meaning, culture and aesthetic values. The translator’s subjectivity is to be exhibitedin different aspects such as historical background, ideology, social culture, translationthoughts, personal temperament and style etc.Representation of literariness and translator’s subjectivity are two of the mostimportant factors in literary translation, and therefore decide the quality of translatedworks. Representation of literariness is both the aim of translation and the means toreflect the translator’s subjectivity. The relationship between them is complementaryand interactive to each other in dynamic ways. A perfect integration of the two factorsensures the full success of a literary translation. This dissertation focuses on theirdynamic relationship and explores it along such a wide range of dimensions andperspectives as the representation of defamiliarized languages, religion and culturalvalues, ideology, social systems, and aesthetic values, etc.Based on the previous understandings and explications, the dissertation analyzesthe relationship between the representation of literariness and translator’s subjectivityby comparing the three Chinese versions of Jane Eyre (translated by Li Jiye, ZhuQingying and Huang Yuanshen respectively). The findings fully illustrate theimportance of this dynamic relationship to literary translation. The study alsoelaborates on the role of the translator’s subjectivity in the representation ofliterariness and their relationship from such perspectives as historical background,ideology, social values, translation thoughts, aesthetic orientations, individual style,and linguistic characteristics, etc.By comparing the three Chinese versions, we come to such a conlusion.Generally speaking, from the perspective of the translator’s subjectivity, we recognizethat Li’s ranslation is the least both in degree and scope, while Huang’s fully takeadvantage of the translator’s subjectivity with Zhu’s somewhere in-between. With therespect to the representation of literariness, Li’s show s least, Zhu’s more, yet Huang’sreflects most and achieves the best effect. From this, we can see the representation of literariness is consistent with subjectivity in the degree and scope. The representationof literariness has positive relationship with the translator’s subjectivity. Therepresentation of literariness depends on the translator’s subjectivity in the degree andscope. The more fully the translator’s subjectivity is reflected, the better theliterariness can be represented.This study is characterized by the following objectives and contributions. First, itanalyzes the previous discussions and debates and establishes a framework regardingthe nature of literariness and the representation of literariness in literary translations.Second, it reviews previous studies of translator subjectivity and highlights the greatimportance of translator’s subjectivity in literary translation. Third, it explores therelationship between representation of literariness and translator’s subjectivity and todiscuss the significance of doing so in literary translation research. Fourth, itsystematically compares and analyzes the relationship of the two by examining threeChinese translated versions of Jane Eyre in three different historical backgrounds.Fifth, by offering the case study, the dissertation provides a new perspective of literarycriticism, referring to the relationship between literariness representation andtranslator’s subjectivity. Sixth, the current study also intends to alert the professionaltranslators to the fact that taking the relationship between literariness representationand translator’s subjectivity into account is of great priority in conveying originalmeaning and reproducing both literariness and aesthetic values, thus improving thequality of translated works in the process of literary translation.