An Interpretation Of The Validity Of Lin Shu's Translation Of Uncle Tom's Cabin

Lin Shu, who did not know any foreign language, succeeded in translating at least 179 literary works into Chinese, which has long been an interesting phenomenon in the Chinese literary circle. Lin Shu's translation received warm applauses from its readers as well as severe criticism from the translation circle for its "unfaithfulness". Qian Zhongshu once remarked that "deletions and mistranslations are here and there" in Lin's versions (Qian Zhongshu, 1981: 23-24). Hei Nu Yu Tian Lu, a Chinese version of Uncle Tom's Cabin translated by Lin Shu, can be taken as a good illustration. According to the norm of "faithfulness", it is not a good version at all, because it is full of deletion, addition and rewriting, as other translated works by Lin Shu. But the fact is that it became the best seller as soon as it was published and aroused strong eco from its readers.This thesis, taking Hei Nu Yu Tian Lu as a case, explains this phenomenon with Gadamer's idea of the fusion of horizons. Translation is the output of understanding that is a process of fusion of horizons between a text and its readers. A translator's understanding of the original text is a process of fusion of horizons between the translator and the original text. A man has to understand a text from his own horizon that has the nature of historicity, so when we talk about a translator and his translation, we should take his time and his experience (family, education, personality etc.) into consideration.One of the roles of a translated version is a "match-maker" between the original text and the target readers. A good "match-maker" arouses the target readers' interest in the original text, while a bad "match-maker" refuses the target readers for the original text. If a translator wants his translation to be a good "match-maker", he has to cater for the horizon of the target readers so that his translation can be accepted by them. Most of Lin's versions can act as a good "match-maker" and are good versions. Part One is the introduction of this thesis. Part Two is a literature review in which studies on Lin Shu and his translation are briefly mentioned. Part Three is the theoretical frame work of this thesis. Subpart One is about understanding in the human sciences. Understanding in the human sciences is neither completely subjective nor absolutely objective, it is a kind of effective history instead, or the unity of the subjective and the objective. Subpart two is about the concept of fusion of horizons. Understanding of the tradition is a process of fusion of horizons. Whenever understanding happens, the reader and the text are having a talk. Each of them has a horizon of his own with him before the talk. He can only start from his horizon when talking, and can never shake it off. And then the characteristics of such a fusion are discussed: (1) the two horizons of the fusion have some parts not overlapped; (2) the two horizons have some parts overlapped; (3) such a fusion is an ever-changing process; (4) to what degree the fusion can reach is limited by the two horizons and the possibilities of their development; (5) at a point of time, there is always something unfused left; (6) it is unavoidable that there are some traces of unfused parts in the translated version because this version is only the product of the fusion of a limited time, while time is an endless river; (7) the fusion of horizons in a broad sense includes meeting, clashing and fusion of the two horizons. The horizon of a man is determined by his time and personal experience. The relationship between the fusion of horizons and the temporal distance is then discussed. Temporal distance is a positive condition of the fusion of horizons, because it is, according to Gadamer, not a yawning abyss but filled with tradition which provides us convenience to understand the text. Subpart Three is about the relationship between the original text and the translation. Translation is the representation of the original instead of its reproduction (copy).Part Four is an analysis of the translation of Hei Nu Yu Tian Lu. Subpart One is about the content of religion. Preservation of religious content: the crisis of Tom's religious belief is vividly depicted in the translation; "God" and "the lord" in direct citation are kept; the characters' citation from the Bible to express their feelings are kept; Tom's query why God permits the slave owners to torture their slaves remain in the translation. Deletion, reduction and alteration of religious content: the interpolation of the narrator is deleted; citation of the Bible at the beginning of a chapter is deleted; Tom's strong belief in God after his belief crisis is reduced; some parts of the original text are de-religionized; most of the content of the religious power is deleted; the religious content in the letter of George to his friends is also deleted. Subpart Two is about the content of politics: the slaveholders and slave-traders' kindness to the slaves is deleted; the misery of the slaves is strengthened by some additions; Lin Shu also adds something to show the necessity of struggle; Subpart Three is about the content related to sex and women: the description of the sexual appearance of women is deleted; the intimate address of a husband to his wife is omitted; description of the talent of women is often omitted; a woman can not have the virtue of a man; a woman should not be concerned with politics. Subpart Four is about translation related to the peculiarity of culture: some western imageries are changed into Chinese ones; cultural peculiarities are kept and explained. Subpart Five is about translation related to style: Zhanghui Style is not used in order to be faithful in style; most of the interpolations of remarks and detailed descriptions of the appearance of a character are deleted; some interpolations used to describe new scenes or to introduce new characters are reserved. Subpart Six is about translation related to the racial discrimination: the contrast between Eva and Topsy—discrimination against the black Topsy is deleted; the contrast between the full-blooded and mixed-blooded blacks is canceled, and they speak the same language in the translated version. Subpart Seven is the unchanged parts in the translation except the above mentioned: the plot and main content, most of the anti-slavery content and much of the religious content are reserved. The whole part is a preparation of materials for the next part: the clash of horizons and the fusion of horizons in the translation of Hei Nu Yu Tian Lu.Part Five is on the clash of horizons and the fusion of horizons in the translation of Hei Nu Yu Tian Lu. In Subpart One, the life of Mrs. Stowe and Lin Shu is introduced as a ground of the study of their horizons. In Subpart Two the clash of horizons and the fusion of horizons in the translation of Hei Nu Yu Tian Lu are discussed. They are about religious horizons, political horizons, cultural horizons, racial horizons and sexual horizons.Part Six is an argument that Hei Nu Yu Tian Lu is a good version. The arguments are: 1. every translator can not go beyond his horizon: his time and his experience; 2. the appearance of later versions is not the evidence that earlier versions are bad ones; 3. Hei Nu Yu Tian Lu makes easy the fusion of horizons between the translated version and the target readers; 4. Hei Nu Yu Tian Lu aroused strong reflection of the readers; 5. a good version should be a good "matchmaker", Hei Nu Yu Tian Lu is a good "matchmaker".Part Seven is the conclusion: when we talk about a translator and his translation, we should take his horizon into consideration; a good version should make easy the fusion of horizons between the version and the target readers; the reflection of the target readers should be one of the most important standards of a good version; a good version is a good "match-maker" between the original text and the target readers. Some problems for further study are proposed at last.