Chinese-English Dictionary Translation: Text Linguistics Perspective

This dissertation is a study of Chinese-English dictionary translation from the perspective of text linguistics. Specifically, I argue that the dictionary as text should follow the seven standards of textuality proposed by Beaugrande & Dressier (1981) and attempt to see how this theory can be applied to C-E dictionary translation.Six chapters, an introduction and a conclusion make up this dissertation. The introduction elaborates on the purpose, rationale and scope of study of this research. In addition, a literature review from the perspective of the interdisciplinary study between lexicography and linguistics, translation studies, and text linguistics in particular is made.Chapter 1 discusses the concept of the dictionary as text. First, I discuss the relationship between dictionary compilation and some major linguistic theories (sociolinguistics, structuralism, transformation-generative grammar, cognitive linguistics and corpus linguistics), in an attempt to see what linguistic theories can offer to lexicographic practice. The incompetence of these theories in solving problems in C-E dictionary translation naturally leads to a discussion on text linguistics. After an elaboration on text linguistics in general and a critical comment on the two prevalent conceptions: the dictionary as a reference tool and as communication, I conclude that text linguistics is capable of providing a framework for systematic studies of C-E dictionary compilation.Chapter 2 probes into the relationship between C-E dictionary translation and cohesion and coherence. It argues that cohesion in a lexicographic text is mainly reflected in cross-referencing, though other types of cohesive devices can also be detected. Coherence, on the other hand, is embodied in the consistency of the content of the dictionary. Accordingly, the compiler is advised to strive to achieve consistency in entry selection and arrangement, entry translation, stylistic markers, explanatory equivalents, the part of speech and multiple versions of translation, in order to achieve coherence.Chapter 3 is concerned with the relationship between C-E dictionary translation and acceptability. I argue that the acceptability of a bilingual C-E lexicographic text lies in the acceptability of its translation. Specifically, two issues deserve our attention: (1) how to ensure the accuracy and idiomaticity of the translation, and (2) how to lookat the acceptability of neologism translation. On the first issue, I propose four solutions: (1) meaning analysis, (2) reverse translation, (3) Internet-assisted C-E dictionary translation and (4) enhancing the role of English proofreaders. On the second issue, apart from a discussion on the relevant translation strategies, I put forward four points of attention: the translated version should conform to the English way of expression, take into account cultural factors, be connotatively appropriate and politically sound. Since neologism translation is a task that anticipates various problems, I also make a critical survey of the translations in Xinhua Neologisms Dictionary in the form of an appendix so that readers can have a better understanding of neologism translation.Chapter 4 explores the relationship between situationality and C-E dictionary translation. In my view, situationality emphasizes the specific meaning a piece of information assumes in a specific context. Under this title, the following issues are discussed: (1) contextual information reconstructuring, (2) semantic complementarity in C-E dictionary translation, (3) the representation of grammatical information and (4) the institution of usage columns. I argue that C-E dictionary translation also needs the help of contextual information and the compiler as translator should reconstruct logical and idiomatic contextual information for the entry he translates. The second issue arises due to the fact that it usually takes several English words to define the meaning of a Chinese entry, each of which expresses only one shade of its meaning. My point is that the compiler should pay attention to this characteristic of entry translation and strive to present its full range of meaning. The third issue is approached from two perspectives. One is the presentation of the grammatical information of the source language entry in C-E dictionaries for comprehension and the other is the presentation of the grammatical information encoded in the target language translation. The former provides contextual information to dictionary users and makes it easier for them to understand and learn the source language and the latter is a convenience to translators since this may save their time in consulting English dictionaries for proper usage. The last issue is about the institution of usage columns in C-E dictionaries. I argue that usage columns, if properly instituted, will greatly enhance the practicality of the dictionary.Chapter 5 discusses the relationship between intertextuality and C-E dictionary translation. In my opinion, the encyclopedic nature of C-E dictionaries determines that many of their entries and illustrative examples are highly intertextual. Based onthis knowledge, I argue that C-E dictionaries for translation should not include too many literary examples, since (1) they are highly intertextual and constitute a threat to dictionary .translators and (2) they are impractical. Moreover, the compiler as translator should not practice plagiarism in the name of intertextuality. He should make innovations in translation while "inheriting" what is correct and idiomatic from existing C-E dictionaries.Chapter 6 is an exploration of the relationship between intentionality and C-E dictionary translation. By intentionality in dictionaries, I mean that the dictionary should strive to fulfill its compilers' intentions, i.e. the goal(s) of the dictionary set by the compilers. Guided by this recognition, I first of all discuss the fallacy of two prevailing conceptions in C-E dictionary compilation that the bigger the dictionary the better it is and that the dictionary is supposed to serve multiple purposes. Then, I classify C-E dictionaries into four types from the users' perspective, i.e. translation-oriented C-E dictionaries, C-E dictionaries for English language learning, for the introduction of Chinese culture, and for the learning of the Chinese language by non-native speakers. Finally, I argue that different types of C-E dictionaries require different treatments of its entries in terms of translation.The conclusion consists of a short summary of my research in the dissertation and its limitations, as well as a number of suggestions for further research.