Intertextuality And Translation

The concept of intertextuality is a buzzword in modern literary theory in the wake of structuralism and post-structuralism. It was introduced by French critic, semiotician, psychoanalyst Julia Kristeva in the 1960s. In its narrow sense, intertextuality refers to the relation of a text to (all) other texts which it has alluded to, quoted in, adapted from, drawn upon, parodied and so on. In a much broader sense, it is considered as "a designation of its participation in the discursive space of a culture: the relationship between a text and the various languages or signifying practices of a culture and its relation to those texts which articulate for it the possibilities of that culture"1.Intertextuality has a hybrid nature. It is at once an abstract concept of the interrelatedness of a text under discussion with other texts and is applicable to concrete passages of the text. Due to the fact that intertextual reference constitutes real challenges to the practicing translators, plus the awareness of the affinity between this notion and the nature and process of translation, a connection was drawn between the two as early as the 1970s2.According to available materials, it is found that academic explorations on intertextuality and translation have progressed substantially in the new century. A brief survey of the recent studies in China has shown that a majority of the journal essays and theses focus on how to tackle intertextual reference in the translation of a particular text type, failing to recognize intertextuality as an omni-present textual phenomenon. Besides, a marked split between theory and practice can be seen in these papers.The aim of this paper, therefore, is to bridge the yawning gap between theory and practice by combining a theoretical exploration of the relation between intertextuality and translation and a study of the transfer of intertextual reference in practice. With redefinitions of 'text' and 'meaning' as a cutting point, this paper intends to show that the open, dynamic, discursive, pluralistic, and heterogeneous way of thinking advocated by intertextual theorists will shed light on a number of issues of translation, such as the process and nature of translation, translation criterion, etc. Though acclaimed as a distinct method of textual analysis, the theory of intertextuality is far from being flawlessly perfect. Full awareness should be raised to the inspirations intertextuality has given to translation and at the same time its limitations and demerits. Only by adopting a critical point of view can we promote the development of translation theory and practice in a healthy way.In addition to introduction and conclusion, the paper falls into five chapters. The introduction surveys the development of translation studies since the 1970s and states the purporses of the paper.Chapter 1 sketches out the theory of intertextuality with a host of theorists involved by returning to its roots and running down its historical developments.Chapter 2 examines the study of intertextual theory in the field of translation, drawing particular attention to Hatim & Mason's intertextual-based translation theory.Chapter 3 points out the innate affinity between intertextuality and translation and considers the intertextual nature of translation.Chapter 4 revisits some long-standing issues and debates of translation, such as the dichotomies of original/translation, translatability/Untranslatability, from the perspective of intertextuality.Chapter 5 concerns the transfer of intertextual reference in practice, arguing that a translator is justified to adopt flexible translation strategies to convey the cultural implications embedded in intertextual reference.The conclusion reviews the aforementioned issues and suggests the adoption of a critical attitude toward the theory of intertextuality and its application to translation.