On Translators’ Subjectivity From The Perspective Of Philosophical Hermeneutics

The present study, from the perspective of Gadamer’s Philosophical Hermeneutics,choosing two Chinese-translated versions of Jane Eyre in totally different eras, examineshow the two translators (Li Jiye and Huang Yuanshen) select their translation strategies andgive play to their translators’ subjectivity, and moreover explores whether the interpretationof the same original text by different translators in different times bears any difference andhistoricity.Based on the theory of Philosophical Hermeneutics, qualitative comparative studycombined with inductive and deductive methods reflected by the specific examples areemployed to compare and analyze the translators’ subjectivity of the two Chinesetranslated versions.The thesis holds that any text is produced with era marked features, so are the translatedversions. The translation works inevitably bears and reflects the characteristics of thetranslators’ own age in the aspects of language processing and social-cultural connotations.So translators are not invisible parts but the subjects, and their subjectivity can and must bebrought into play. Philosophical Hermeneutics has opened a new angle for translation study.It claims literary translation is interpretation, which is throughout all the process oftranslation. Its core principles (prejudice, historicity of understanding, fusion of horizons)fully support that translators’ subjectivity can exist and be exerted, and many translatedversions can coexist as well.By profound comparisons and analysis, some conclusions have been drawn in the end ofthe thesis:(1) The literary translated versions are not only the reflection or reproduction ofthe original texts, but also deeply permeated with the understandings and features of the very eras the translators are living in. Consideration only from any one aspect of the twoshould be avoided;(2) The translators’ prejudice and the historicity of understandingdetermine the historicity of translation, i.e. the historicity of translated versions;(3) Theretranslation of classical works becomes necessary due to the historicity of translatedversions;(4) The historicity of understanding doesn’t deny the objectivity of translation,instead it’s under the premise of objectivity. Actually, translation is a practice with thecombination of objectivity and historicity. Translation criticism should also adopt historicalview.