The Minimum Criterion Of Translation

Nowadays, with the increasing frequency of cross-cultural communication, more and more works have been and will be translated, so a minimum criterion of translation is needed to distinguish qualified translations from unqualified ones. But translation criterion is a topic frequently discussed, yet without reaching a consensus. There do exist lots of translation criteria, most of which are that of perfect or good translation and few of which have only slightly touched the lowest criterion, let alone explain it clearly. Though some have mentioned the concept of minimum criterion, they have not made clear what constitutes that criterion. All these give rise to the making of this thesis. We hold that equivalence in pragmatic meaning is just that criterion.The thesis consists of five parts.Chapter 1 serves as the introduction and states that a minimum criterion is needed to guide translation practice. This criterion should be one below which a translation would fail to function as it is supposed to, that is, the lowest or most rudimentary criterion which can distinguish a qualified translation from an unqualified one, and provide a starting point from which qualified translations can be compared in quality by measuring their extra merits.Chapter 2 makes a brief discussion on the notions of minimum criteria in translation history. Some representative statements in western translation studies and in traditional and contemporary Chinese translation studies are exemplified to show that most of the translators hold that there is an almost impossible ideal for the translator to strive after and all imply or even explicitly state that there is a lowest orminimum criterion to abide by in practice. What they have not madeclear is what constitutes that criterion, namely, what is the most indispensable quality that a qualified translation requires. Thus we tentatively put forward the notion of equivalence in pragmatic meaning as the minimum criterion of translation.Chapter 3 analyses and expounds in details what pragmatic meaning is and points out five sub-categories of pragmatic meaning, that is, illocutionary force, conversational implicature, figurative meaning, reference and emotional tone. Illocutionary force is the purpose of speaking that every sentence possesses and conversational implicature is the meaning indirectly expressed and comprehended by interactants of conversation with regard to the cooperative principle. Figurative meaning, the meaning signified by the use of figures of speech, is a special kind of conversational implicature, as it is used for emphasis or vividness by violating a certain type of maxim. Reference is the relation between the linguistic form and what it stands for in the real or fictional world, while emotional tone is the attitude the author holds toward a certain thing or person. Though people often associate pragmatics with conversational materials, these five categories can also be applied to the analysis of non-conversational such as literary works. Thus equivalence in pragmatic meaning can be used as the minimum criterion for all translations.Chapter 4 exposes the priority sequence of translation equivalence and draws the conclusion that equivalence in pragmatic meaning can and should be set as the rudimentary requirements of translation, without which the translated version would fail to carry out its communicative function. So when semantic meaning and pragmatic meaning cannot be retained simultaneously, priority should be given topragmatic meaning.The last part restates that equivalence in pragmatic meaning is the most rudimentary or indispensable quality that a qualified translation requires and renderings under this level are unqualified. It is the lowest one in degree of equivalence among all qualified ones. The proposition of this thesis does not rule out other criteria; instead, it is in accordance with them. We still hold there is a maxim criterion for the translator to pursue and we only emphasize that a translation should, at least, achie...