On The Necessity Of Retranslation Of Literary Classics By The Same Translator In Light Of Dynamic Equivalence

Retranslation of literary classics is a fairly common phenomenon. Retranslation mainly includes four types of translation:intermediate translation, back translation, multi-translations by different translators, and retranslation of the same literary work by the same translator. The study in this paper focuses on the last type.French translation theorist Henry pointed out that translation can expand the space of a literary work, while retranslation can extend the duration of a literary work. In this paper, the author does research mainly from the following aspects:in retranslation, whether the translator interprets the ST with a deeper understanding, whether he can rectify his mistakes of the former translation, and whether his retranslation is closer to the source text. Based on these topics, the necessity of retranslation can be confirmed.However, most of the studies on retranslation in China concentrate on the reasons and necessity of retranslation by applying translated versions by different translators. Different from the previous studies, in this thesis the author attempts to make a descriptive study of the translated versions by the same translator in different periods—the 1982 version and 1993 version of Emma translated by Professor Liu Zhongde, with Eugene A. Nida's dynamic equivalence theory as a theoretical framework. The significance of the study lies in its enhancement of the development of translation theories and practice, translation criticism and comparative literature.The core of dynamic equivalence theory is "functional equivalence". According to "functional equivalence", translations of works should be equivalent with original literary classics in terms of function, rather than stiff equivalence in terms of surface meaning. He pointed out that, "Translating is a process of using closest natural equivalent language in terms of content and form to represent the meaning in source language." By means of judging the response of target-readers and that of source-language readers, the author will find they are substantially similar. By analysis, the author will prove that retranslation of literary classics is necessary.Prof. Liu translated Emma for the first time in 1944. In 1982, he just revised a little after proofreading once. He adopted the method of literal translation in the 1982 version, which made some expressions unidiomatic. Later, he retranslated Emma in 1993. In this thesis, the author makes a comparative study of 1982 and 1993 versions. In Chapter 4, the writer introduces the background of the retranslation at first. By means of comparative study of the former translation and retranslation, four types of improvements will been discovered. In the retranslation, Prof. Liu amended inaccuracies which can cause readers'misunderstanding, chose words in accordance with language of novel and custom expression in modern society, got rid of the boundary of literal translation to make the expressions idiomatic, and made revisions after deeper understanding of the ST. Except for the improvements, this paper also includes the weakness which still appeared in the retranslation.