On The English Translation Of Chinese Four-character Expressions

In the modern translation theories, "equivalence" has often been used as the standard to evaluate translations. A translated text is assessed in terms of the extent to which the translated text is equivalent to the original text. Many scholars, at home and abroad, have discussed the equivalence in translation. The British linguist and translation theorist, Catford, was one of them. On the basis of the theory of Systemic-functional Grammar, he put forward the theory of translation equivalence. On the basis of equivalence, many translators put forward the theories of formal equivalence, dynamic equivalence, and functional equivalence. As to formal equivalence, some scholars have defined it in a rather narrow sense. According to Nida & Taber, formal equivalence is the "quality of a translation in which the features of the form of the source text have been mechanically reproduced in the receptor language." (1969/1982:201). This definition is lopsided and not applicable. For this reason, most translation theorists hold a negative point of view toward formal equivalence. In China, Shen Dan gives a more exact interpretation for formal equivalence, "formal equivalence means replacing the linguistic forms in the source language with the correspondent linguistic forms in the target language." (申丹, 1997) This interpretation solves the contradiction between content and form in translation and it is more applicable. The theory of dynamic equivalence is put forward by Nida. According to him, dynamic equivalence is the opposite of formal equivalence. Formal equivalence is source-oriented, while dynamic equivalence is receptor-oriented. A translation of formal equivalence always tries to keep the linguistic form of the original text and a translation of dynamic equivalence focuses attention on the convey of the original meaning and the receptor's response, not sticking to the linguistic form of the original text. Because his theory of dynamic equivalence has led to some misunderstanding, later, Nida replaced it with the theory of functional equivalence. Functional equivalence stresses the communicative function of translation. Translation is communication and it should attain the aim of communication. In translation, linguistic forms are as important as content. One cannot ignore linguistic forms while trying to transform content. From the statements above we can see that the theory of functional equivalence covers a wider scope.Four-character expressions are a kind of special language forms in Chinese. A good many four-character expressions are widely used in texts of different styles. Because these expressions are unique in forms, they often pose difficulties in being translated into English. But by analyzing the features and translation examples of the Chinese four-character expressions, we can see that in the translation of Chinese four-character expressions there does exist some principles which we can follow. On the basis of the theory of equivalence and the theory of contrastive analysis, this thesis has made a systematic analysis of the characteristics of the four-character expressions. And through the practice of translating the Chinese four-character expressions, this thesis has made a tentative probe into the principles for the English translation of the Chinese four-character expressions.The thesis is composed of four chapters. Chapter 1 is the literature review, which introduces the definitions or implications of equivalence, formal equivalence, dynamic equivalence and functional equivalence. And then it discusses the directive significance of the various theories of equivalence for the English translation of the Chinese four-character expressions.Chapter 2 deals with the main differences between Chinese and English from the aspect of contrastive analysis. The difficulties in the Chinese-English translation are usually directly related to the differences between the two languages. Therefore it is necessary to make a contrastive analysis of the two languages, so as to find out what the differences are. And this is helpful for us to find out the most suitable ways of translation. The analysis is carried out at two levels: the differences at macro-level and the differences at micro-level. At the macro-level, Chinese is paratactic while English is hypotactic; Chinese grammar is covert while English grammar is overt. At the micro-level, the differences between Chinese and English can be best seen in the contrast of the major elements in sentences of the two languages.Chapter 3 makes a systematic analysis of the Chinese four-character expressions. The analysis is carded out from four aspects: prosody, meaning, grammar structure and rhetoric devices frequently used in four-character expressions.On the basis of the theory and analysis provided previously, Chapter 4 discusses the translation of the Chinese four-character expressions by analyzing lots of examples and sums up some principles and rules for translating Chinese four-character expressions into English. And then it dwells on the equivalence in the translation of Chinese four-character expressions. This chapter is further divided into three sections. The first section enlarges on the translation of four-character expressions with single meanings. The second section enlarges on the translation of the four-character expressions with double meanings; the third section deals with the translation of the four-character expressions in parallel.The last part is the conclusion. Through our study, we have got to know that in the translation of the Chinese four-character expressions with single meanings, for the expressions with the pattern of Modifier +Noun, the equivalent pattern in English is Attribute + Noun or Noun + Attribute; for the expressions with the pattern of juxtaposition, except for the first group, in which the repetition of meaning causes the omission in translation, the translations and the origins are equivalent in grammar structures; for the expressions with the pattern of Subject + Predicate, the equivalent pattern in English may be Be + Adjective + Prep + Noun, Noun Phrase + Verb Phrase or Verb Phrase + Noun Phrase; for the expressions with the pattern of Verb + Object, the equivalent pattern in English is Verb Phrase + Noun Phrase. In the translating of the Chinese four-character expressions with double meanings, when reproducing the same image in TL, the translations are formal equivalents of the origins; when replacing the image in the SL with a standard TL image, translating metaphor by simile, or conversing metaphor to general meaning, the translations are functional equivalents of the origins. In the translating of the Chinese four-character expressions used in parallel, when translated literally, the translations are the formal equivalents of the origins; when translated freely or partly freely, the translations are functional equivalents of the origins.