Inquiry Into Translators' Faithfulness

In translation circle, it's beyond dispute that "faithfulness" is the highest criterion for translation. "Faithfulness" means that the translator can objectively transmit both the form and the content expressed in the original text. But the reality is: A heated debate between "literal" and "liberal" translation has run through the whole history of Chinese translation since Dao An raised "five distortions and three difficulties" for ancient Buddhist Scripture translation; since Marcus Tullius Cicero (106-43 B.C),the first western translating theorist, divided translation into two categories: "as interpreters (ut interpres) " and "as orators (ut orators) ", the western translation history has ever been permeated with the problem centered on "literal" and "liberal", "word for word" and "free", "faithful" and "unfaithful" translation. "As interpreters (ut interpres) " refers to translation without creativity; "as orators (ut orators) " refers to translation with creativity which can compete with the original. To be faithful, the translator should objectively transmit both the form and the content expressed in the original text; to be faithful, the translator shouldn't cut apart "form" and "content" and choose to be loyal to either of the two. Harboring this confusion, the author of the dissertation has earnestly checked almost all aspects connected with translation to verify whether they satisfy the conditions for faithful translation and finally cast her doubt on translators' faithfulness. The dissertation consists of an introduction, seven chapters and a conclusion: In introduction, the author mainly deals with our predecessors' exposition of translators' faithfulness and the points neglected by them; gives a general survey of some basic principles involved; provides the author's research methods; makes clear the author's line of thinking in organizing the dissertation; points out the meaning of researching this problem. The author of this dissertation has listed some generally accepted conditions for faithful translation in chapter â… , including successful "two acts of communication", accurate grasp of the original author's intention and no subjective obtrusion of the translator and checked almost all aspects connected with translation to verify whether they satisfy these conditions for faithful translation through chapterâ…¡ to chapterâ…¥ and finally cast her doubt on translators' faithfulness. First, the translator is restricted by many factors, such as target readers, the demand of market, and different uses of the text, etc. even before he sets out to work. It seems that the translator's mission is not just to convey the author's intention. Second, any text is produced under a certain context and its meaning is fixed by it. When the translator tries to understand the text, he can't duplicate the context on which the text depends and so he can't accurately grasp the author's intention. In addition, according to Gadamer's hermeneutics, the translator's (reader's) pre-structure or pre-understanding unavoidably obtrudes in the process of understanding the text and meaning is only a product of the process of "fusion of visions". It's obvious that the translator's subjectivity obtrudes his understanding of the text. Third, the translator is restricted by the target reader's cognitive ability when he transfers the meaning he extracts from the original text to the target text. If he overestimates the target reader's cognitive ability, he tends to excessively alienate his translation, which will lower the target reader's acceptability and fail the translator to attain the translating aim; If he underestimates the target reader's cognitive ability, he tends to excessively adapt his translation, which will promote the target reader's acceptability but greatly deviate from the original culture. Translators' unfaithfulness is further deepened by the imprecision in estimation of target reader's cognitive ability. Fourth, as a way of subjectiv...