On The Subjectivity Of The Translator In The Non-literary Translation

At the very beginning of translation studies, translators, as the main part of translation activities, have been marginalized. On the one hand, the traditional translation theories focus more on source texts and cultures, and translators are regarded as"servants"to the source texts; on the other hand, influenced by the school of Linguistics, translation is confined to a kind of activity focused merely on transferring one language to another, making the study of target texts lean to a pure analysis of equivalence and a comparison at the level of language. Therefore, the reality and importance of the subjectivity of translators in translation activities have been neglected. Later, with the rise of functionalism and the"Cultural Turn"of translation studies, translation theories turn to the target texts and cultures, providing a new perspective of translation studies and making the subjectivity of translators an issue that matters.In China, the attention to the subjectivity of translators can be traced back to the 1930s, when discussions of the creativity of literary translation took place. More discussions about the issue are seen in research papers published in recent years. Inspiring though, all these studies are conducted under the framework of literary translation. Although literary translation is indispensable for the promotion of communications between different cultures, non-literary translation accounts for a larger part of translation activities. It covers a full range of areas, including politics, economy, law, technology, and plays an important role in daily operations of international organizations and multinational corporations, as well as the communications of research institutions and non-governmental organization.Literary translation and non-literary translation are distinguished in terms of objects, nature, goals and operating methods. For example, the subjectivity of translators in literary translation refers to a kind of artistic recreation, while it means in non-literary translation a control of the source texts. Translators have to get rid of the restrictions of their mother languages and find the core information of the source texts, for the purpose of achieving an efficient communication. Meanwhile, literary translation cares more about the source texts, and follows the principle of"faithfulness, expressiveness and elegance", while non-literary translation gives the priority to the goals of translation activities and the function of target texts. To discuss the subjectivity of translators, we have to distinguish these two fields.This paper aims to change the situation of current translation studies which apply standards for literary translation to all translation activities. Through a comparison of literary translation and non-literary translation, this paper is about to study the subjectivity of translators in non-literary translation. Main questions the paper puts forward include: 1. what is the subjectivity of translators; 2. what is the difference between non-literary translation and literary translation; 3. in non-literary translation, how does a translator perform subjectivity and control the translation process.There are mainly two methods applied in this research, one is a review of related history and theories, and the other a description method. The subjectivity of translators will be interpreted through comparison, analysis and examples.This paper consists of four chapters plus an introduction and a conclusion. The introduction presents the facts and reasons of the marginalized status of translators. Chapter one introduces"Subjectivity"from the aspect of philosophy and defines"subjectivity of translators", with a review of relevant research approaches and an analysis of their limitations. Chapter two reviews the subjectivity of translators in literary translation. Chapter three presents non-literary translation and compares it with literary translation. Chapter four discusses the subjectivity of translators in non-literary translation and how it is embodied at the level of practical operation. A conclusion is given to those questions to be solved with a hope that translation theorists and practitioners will attach more importance to non-literary translation and relevant researches will be done at the level of theoretical study and practice.