On The Intersubjectivity Of Translation From The Perspective Of Philosophical Hermeneutics

This research takes the perspective of philosophical hermeneutics and selects two English versions of Sikong Tu's Shipin as an example to reveal the nature of the intersubjectivity of translation, i.e. "the fusion of horizons", which is the core notion of philosophical hermeneutics and contains three propositions:1) Translation is not translator's monologue.2) Intersubjectivity means not only the creativity of different subjects (author, translator and readers), but also the dialogue and compromise among them.3) The process of translation is the process of seeking harmony among different subjects.For demonstrating the above propositions, we first study the evolution of translator's status in the context of the paradigm shifts of translation studies. After a review of the evolution of translator's status from low to unprecedentedly high throughout philological, structuralist and deconstructive paradigms, we point out the necessity of drawing our attention from the subjectivity to the intersubjectivity of translation. We think either neglecting or overemphasizing the translator just means going from one extreme to the other. Translation is not translator's monologue, but his dialogue with the author and the readers. We call this dialogue the intersubjectivity of translation.Second, after a brief introduction to the key notions of intersubjectivity and philosophical hermeneutics, we try to reveal the relationships between these two theories, and between them and translation. The core notion of philosophical hermeneutics is "the fusion of horizons"; and the main thought of intersubjectivity is the harmonious dialogue between different subjects. Our selection of philosophical hermeneutics as a perspective to illustrate the intersubjectivity of translation is based on the following considerations:1) The communication in translation is a diachronic and asymmetrical one, different from that in real life. Gadamer's philosophical hermeneutics provides such a good mode for interpreting this kind of communication.2) "The fusion of horizons" as the core notion of philosophical hermeneutics reveals the nature of the intersubjectivity of translation, which is also the nature of translation.Third, we demonstrate the proposition:The nature of the intersubjectivity of translation is "the fusion of horizons". We think translation is interpretation, or rather, "the fusion of horizons", which is not a simple addition of two horizons, but produces a new horizon. Thus the intersubjectivity contains the creativity of different subjects. However, this creativity is based on the dialogue and compromise among them. This kind of interactive relationship is determined by the "legitimate prejudice" that understanding is based on, the determinacies in a text and "the translator's shared horizon". Therefore, the nature of translation is not only interpretation, but also finite interpretation.In the last chapter, we select Sikong Tu's Shipin as an example for case study, which embodies the special discourse of classical Chinese poetry and literary theory. First, we have a general look at the different purposes, target readers each version aims at, and the different strategies each version adopts correspondingly, so as to build a platform for a comparative analysis. Then we conduct the analysis of the two versions in four typical aspects:1) translating the titles; 2) translating the conceptual terms; 3) reestablishing the perspectives; 4) reconstructing the poetry. Through such an investigation, we draw the following conclusions:1) Horizon gaps exist between different subjects, cultures and languages. In order to realize the ideal degree of interpretation, a translator should consult all the horizons in the process of translation.2) The two translators reconstruct Shipin according to their own understandings. The translations' horizons are not the replica of the original's, let alone the author's.3) Shipin though is notorious for its elusiveness and vagueness, the incomprehensible are the parts, and the impression of the whole is clear. Therefore, based on "the translator's shared horizon", the new horizons produced by the two versions never deviate too far from the text's horizon.