A Parallel Corpus-based Study Of The Modality System In Hong Lou Meng And Its Three English Translations

Modality is a major semantic category for realizing interpersonal metafunction, which is one of the three metafunctions in systemic functional linguistics(SFL). As an important lexicogrammar resource, modality plays a significant role in various types of discourse, and it has always been a focus and hotspot in linguistic research. With strong interpersonal interaction, translating is a process of cross-cultural communication via the participation of the author, the translator and the reader. In other words, modality is an important resource in translation studies for looking into the interpersonal interaction in texts. However, the study of modality in translation studies has been neglected. Since the Chinese classic Hong Lou Meng has rich modality expressions which vividly show readers the relationship between its characters and their exquisite personality, it is a good choice to consider modality in the classic and its translation.Based on a Chinese-English parallel corpus, the present study hence concerns itself with a systemic functional approach to the modality system in Hong Lou Meng and its three English translations. It specifically aims to answer the following questions:(1) What are the features of the modality system of Hong Lou Meng?(2) What are the differences in the realization of the modality system between Hong Lou Meng and its three English translations?(3) What are the characteristics of the modality system in the three English translations? The three English translations in the corpus are The Story of the Stone by David Hawkes and John Minford, The Dream of the Red Chamber by Bencraft Joly and A Dream of Red Mansions by Hsien-yi Yang and Gladys Yang.We first summarize the types and realization patterns of all the modality resources in Hong Lou Meng according to the theory of modality system in systemic functional linguistics and the characteristics of Chinese modality expressions; then we explore the characteristics of the modality system in the original work, and compare and analyze the differences in modality system between the original work and the three English translations through quantitative and qualitative analysis. Next, we annotate attributes of modality and the related attributes at the clause level, and retrieve the annotated modality discourse by using ParaConc and AntConc in the parallel corpus. Lastly, we compare and analyze features of modality system among the three translations based on the quantitative results, from the perspectives of the relationship between tenor parameters and the use of modal expressions and the translator’ style. The findings are summarized as follows.Firstly, the characteristics of the modality system of Hong Lou Meng are as follows.(1) The realizations of the modality system are relatively fewer than those in English, usually by modal verbs or modal particles, and they are inert in the parts of speech and syntax. The original work realizes the difference in the scale of modal meaning through modal adverbs modifying modal verbs, and the modal meaning is specified by the accumulation of modal verbs and modal adverbs in an indirect or a continuous way. The thought habit of comprehensive understanding cannot find a clear realization in its grammar, and the value and orientation of the modality in original work are vaguely realized. Where the orientation and the value are concerned, the modality system in the original work is realized with stronger subjectivity and higher values, and the orientation of modality metaphor is more of explicit subjectivity.(2) While the modality system in the original work has modalization and modulation as its subsystems, the modalization can be subclassified into epistemic modality and usuality modality: the former subsumes possibility, probability and certainty modality; and the latter includes occasional, normal and frequent modality. Modulation can be subclassified into deontic, inclination and ability modality. Deontic modality can be subclassified into permission, obligation and necessity modality. Choosing in the inclination modality, three subsystems will be involved, i.e. normal, keen and determination inclination. Ability modality has ability, condition and purpose modality as its subsystems.(3) Four types are summarized in the realization of modality system in the original work: separated modality, modal recursiveness, interpersonal grammatical metaphor and modal particle. The modal recuisiveness includes continuous modality, modality accumulation, accumulation of modality and modal particle.Secondly, the characteristics of the realization of modality system in the three English translations of Hong Lou Meng are as follows.(1) There are six types of realization of modality system in the three English translations of Hong Lou Meng: separated modality, modal recursiveness, extended predicators, interpersonal grammatical metaphor and nominalizations.(2) The modality system in the English translations is distinctively scaled, with a distribution graded from possibility to certainty of the proposition, or from the necessity to permission of the proposal. Different modality of different scale has a corresponding value and orientation, whereby the speaker expresses his/her different attitudes in different context.(3) The realizations of modality system in the English translations form a cline, with the subjective and objective as two ends.Thirdly, a comparative analysis of the modality systems in Hong Lou Meng and its English translations reveals their significant difference. The diversity of the realizations of the modality in the original work and its translated translations varies in degree: the latter is more diverse than the former. Especially, the modal recuisiveness in original work is more diverse than that in English translation. The subjective orientation of modality in English translation is stronger than that in original work. The modal value in original work is higher than that in English translation.Fourthly, the characteristics of the modality system in the three English translations of Hong Lou Meng can be summarized as follows. In Hawkes’ s translation, obvious difference in implicit orientation and high value of modal expressions appears only in an interaction of equal relationship which involves high affective and frequent contact. The subjective, implicit orientation and high value of modal expressions are quite similar in other parameters of tenor. The similarities result in a larger deviation from the modality of original work. When different tenor parameters are involved, the subjective, implicit orientation and high value of modal expressions in Joly’s translation and those in the Yangs’ translation show obvious differences, but the variation trend is basically consistent with that of the original work.In terms of translator’s style, Hawkes uses adaptation method under the domesticating strategy, and he does a lot of creative work on the basis of faithfulness to the original work. In Hawkes’ translation the modal expressions are more idiomatical than those in the other two translations. In order to achieve the translation purpose of pragmatism, Joly adopts foreignizing strategy, resulting in the complexity of modal expressions. Moreover, Joly often uses translation method like extremely literal translation, making the translation much more faithful. The Yangs’ translation embodies imitation method under the foreignizing strategy and the concept of cultural translation. The Yangs’ translation is more concise than the other two translations, and the clause, clause complex, paragraphs are basically identical with that of the original work.In terms of equivalence of interpersonal function, the cultural context of the target language in Hawkes’ translation is not identical with that of the original work, and the communication intensions construed in the original work are incomprehensible to the target readers. All these result in a lack of equivalence of interpersonal function. While in Joly’s translation the interpersonal metafunction is most equivalent to the original work, and the coherence of interpersonal metafunction is higher than that in the Yangs’ translation. However, equivalence of interpersonal metafunction in specific modality context of cultural connotation in Joly’translation is lower in degree than that in the Yangs’ translation. The degree of equivalence of interpersonal metafunction in the situational context with specific cultural connotation in the Yangs’ translation is higher than that in Joly’s translation.The present study is expected to enrich the modality study in SFL and to enhance the appliability of SFL. The study acts on a new paradigm combining corpus linguistics and translation studies. Modality analysis can reveal the implied communicative intention, interpersonal relationship, mutual emotion and attitude in both the original work and its translations. This research may support studies of meaning construal in translation.