A Comparative Study Of Three English Translated Versions Of The Book Of Songs From The Perspective Of Philosophical Hermeneutics

As the first poetry anthology of our country, The Book of Songs incarnating splendid national culture is one of the classics of Confucianism which enjoys a high social and historical position. Thus it has long been a great attraction to translators at home and abroad. Various classical translated versions of this anthology provide an effective way for the spreading of Chinese culture. However, these translations are so different from each other despite their identical source text.Understanding is the premise of interpretation. Translation, whatever kind it may be, all relates to understanding and interpretation about the source text. So hermeneutics, as a science about understanding and interpretation, has an indissoluble bond with translation studies. Modern hermeneutics believes that translation is just a kind of understanding and interpretation. In literary translation hermeneutics serves as not only a method of textual analysis but also an artful form of understanding and a process of exposing hidden meanings. Gadamer, a representative of hermeneutics, holds that interpretation of any text should be categorized into the time system, thus there is no absolutely objective understanding of a text. What is most important is not the authorial intention of the original text but how we interpret the meaning in our own way. Understanding is historical, influenced by one's personal"prejudice"which constitutes his"horizon". And understanding is a process in which personal horizon fuses with the original horizon while literary translation means mutual communication and a dialog between the interpreter and the author through the media of text.The thesis attempts to do a comparative study of three English translations of The Book of Songs (versions by Waley, Pound and Wang Rongpei & Ren Xiuhua) based on Gadamer's theory of"historicity of understanding"and"fusion of horizons". It will analyze the different historical understandings of the three translators including their respective prejudice generated from social and historical background and their personal experiences, and also their translation strategies formed on such a foundation. Then through three sample poems it will compare the fusion of horizons between the three translators and the original writer. At last it draws a conclusion revealing the reason of one source text having diverse translations lies in that understanding is historical. The"ultimate translation"never exists and retranslation is inevitable.