Manipulation Of Poetics And Ideology On The Reception Of Translated Works

In the 1980s, some western scholars proposed a'Culture Turn'of translation studies, which broke the deadlock translation studies found itself in under the traditional intra-textual paradigm, extended the studies into such wider extra-textual realms as history, culture, politics, etc. and as well broadened the horizon of translation studies. Inspired by this trend, this thesis sets out to make a contrastive study of different receptions of the two Chinese versions of Evolution and Ethics written by Thomas Henry Huxley in their respective historical periods from a macroscopical perspective.In the framework of Lefevere's Rewriting theory, this thesis probes into how ideology and poetics manipulated the reception of Tianyan Lun (1898) and Jinhua Lun yu Lunli Xue (1971) in their respective historical periods. It is revealed that there was a conflict between poetics and ideology dominant in the late Qing Dynasty in terms of their manipulation over the reception of Tianyan Lun at the time. On the one hand, influenced by the dominant poetic norms promoted by the Tongcheng School, the 'allusiveness and abstruseness'and'elegance'manifested in Tianyan Lun restricted its readership to a coterie of literati and a few intellectuals, which in turn exerted certain negative influence over its spread in the late Qing society. On the other hand, however, manipulated by the ethos of'national salvation', the contents rewritten by the translator met the ideological expectation of the whole receiving culture, which ultimately facilitated its resounding success in the late Qing society.As regards Jinhua Lun yu Lunli xue, it is found that both the dominant ideology and poetics in the 1970s exerted negative influence over its reception yet differed in degree. Influenced by'rigid translation'dominant in the discourse of translation at the time, the mundane language together with europeanized long sentences used in that vernacular version exerted negative influence over its acceptance among the Chinese readers to a certain extent. However, the decisive element in its little reception at the time lies in the manipulation of dominant ideology. In the light of Marxism, the latter part of its original work was proved idealistic, which departed from the dominant ideology of the 1970s. Consequently, such a label as'For Critical and Referential Purpose Only'that was attached to the 1971 version, though published openly, resulted in its little reception in China in the 1970s to a large extent.In conclusion, it is revealed that the manipulation of ideology outweighs that of poetics and in case of conflicts between the two factors, ideology always occupies the dominant position while poetics is subordinated to and accordingly manipulated by it, to a large extent. Moreover, whenever a reform or revolution occurs in a given social and historical context, poetics lags behind the ideology in producing corresponding changes. Therefore, a conclusion may be drawn that ideology plays a fundamental role in the manipulation of the reception of translation works, while poetics, despite its indispensable nature, occupies only a subordinate position.