Narrative Representation In Fiction Tramslation

Qi Wang,a novel by Chinese novelist and screenwriter Ah Cheng that was first published in Shanghai Literature in 1984,was hailed as one of the most remarkable representative works of Root-seeking literature of the 1980s when it was first released.The short story follows the perspective of an Educated Youth,narrating how “I”witnessed Wang Yisheng,an Educated Youth,transformed from an obsessive chess player into an enlightened chess master.With its unique literary and artistic value,it was not long before Qi Wang was translated into English.Up to now,there have been three English versions of Qi Wang published,all of which shed light on China at that time,the spiritual world of Chinese people,and the Root-seeking literature.Because of the disorganization of narrative time,the first-person narrative perspective,and the unique narrative language,Qi Wang has long experienced heated discussion ever since its publication.Yet,by scrutinizing the research available,we discovered that much consideration had been given to the work’s theme,writing style,cultural connotation,and traditional Chinese Taoism and Confucianism.Scholars seem to have shown inadequate attention to its English translations,especially the unique narrative features in the fiction.Owing to its textual relationship with fiction,narratology has been increasingly acknowledged as a source of insight in fiction translation criticism in recent years.It’s also crucial for elucidating the contrast between form and content.Given this,drawing on Genette’s narratology,this thesis compares the Chinese version of Qi Wang with Jenner’s translation and Mc Dougall’s revised translation to examine whether the narrative features of the original text are effectively represented in these two English translations.If not,what are the possible reasons for the lack of or distorted narrative representation?Based on a narrative comparison of the original text and two English translations,it has been concluded that Jenner’s translation is more concise in its linguistic expression.In contrast,Mc Dougall’s version is more diversified in its wording.The narrative effects of the original text are also reproduced differently in the two translations,particularly in the three aspects below.In terms of narrative time,Jenner’s translation keeps the message’s simplicity and implicit expression,whilst Mc Dougall’s translation emphasizes the repetition and scenes’ details.Second,both translators have kept two narrative indications in the original text,namely,the internal focalization with first-person and the external focalization with first-person,and Mc Dougall’s translation is more rigorous in terms of the handling of details.In terms of narrative discourse,Jenner’s translation omits numerous elements in the pursuit of concise lines,whilst Mc Dougall’s translation adds more details based on the translator’s understanding,resulting in both versions deviating from the original text’s narrative distance.The following perspectives can account for the variations between these two English translations: the first is different channels of their translations,and the second is different target readers.