Comparison Of Four English Versions Of Tao Te Ching: From The Perspective Of Translator's Subjectivity

Tao Te Ching is a classic oriental philosophical work featured with profound thoughts and ambiguous language. So its translation has always been the focus of the translators both in and out of China. It has been translated into many languages and has more than over 100 English versions since the first English version appeared in 1868. Because different translators have different comprehensions and interpretations even for the same text, they produce different translation versions. Moreover, because they live in different periods of time and have different social and knowledge backgrounds, they must consider the needs of the society and their implied readers to adopt their suitable translation strategies. In this thesis the author explores the implied reader concept of hermeneutics and the intertextuality concept of reception aesthetics to analyze the translator's subjectivity in the translating process of Tao Te Ching, and mainly focuses on the analysis of the display of translator's subjectivity.Hermeneutics at first regards translation as a limited interpretation of the source text, and then a recoding process. According to reception aesthetics the translation has three steps, i.e., reading, interpreting, and rewriting. The author here chose four English versions and their translators as the research objects, analyzing how the translator's subjectivity is displayed in the translating process of Tao Te Ching from three different stages that are divided according to the implied readers of hermeneutics and intertextuality of reception aesthetics. Different translators as readers have different understandings of the same original text. Translators as interpreters have different solutions to the same linguistic problems. Translators as rewriters have different translation strategies and purposes. In the four selected versions, Waley tries to use explaining words to make the readers understand the original meaning of the source text, but he is limited by his social background and his target language knowledge, then in many occasions he misunderstands the meanings of the sentences. Addiss and Stanley Lombardo aim to keep the beauty of the original form and basically they achieve their purpose, but what they do is not advocated because they just keep the form equal but fail in conveying the deep meaning of the ST. Gu Zhengkun, to some extent, has the same aim with Waley. So he also uses explaining words to translate the text, and sometimes he tries to keep the beauty of the original form. But he also fails in keeping the flavor of the ST. Xu Yuanchong does a better job here with his profound knowledge of the source and the target language and of the both cultures. He tries not only to keep the beauty of the form but also to render the underlying meaning of the ST. His attempt gives us a better view to translate this great work. That is we can convey the meaning and at the same time keep the original flavor of the ST. With the development of the society and the increasing understanding between China and foreign countries, we can believe there must be a need of readers to read the translations of this great Chinese work that are as much as close to the original text. So a successful translation of Tao Te Ching should meet the needs of the society and readers and have a better transmission of the original meaning and form. This demand requires the translators to display their translators'subjectivity actively.In conclusion, translator's subjectivity, including bilingual abilities, social background and translation strategies and so on, is the main cause for different translations of this great work. But the display of translator's subjectivity is not arbitrary, it must be governed by the source and target cultures and the source text. In order to spread the profound thought of Tao in Tao Te Ching and Chinese traditional culture, translators must try not only to convey the original meaning but also to keep the beauty of the form. That should be criteria to judge whether a translation of this great work is successful or not.