Intertextuality And Relevance In English Translation Of Classical Chinese Poetry

Intertextuality, proposed by Julia Kristeva in1969, is a common feature of text, which highlights the inter-dependence and interaction between one text and its inter-texts. Just as kristeva has stated, every text is constructed as a mosaic of citations and every text is an absorption and transformation of other texts. With its profound artistic conception and rich cultural connotations, classical Chinese poetry abounds with intertextuality. Meanwhile, intertextuality is also one essential aspect of artistic value and aesthetic flavor of classical Chinese poetry. However, in the English translation of classical Chinese poetry, the transference of intertextuality turns out to be a tough nut. Thus the translation of intertextuality in classical Chinese poetry is freshly talked about and a relevance-theoretic approach to this matter is hardly touched upon.D. Sperber and D.Wilson put forward the relevance theory, first applied by Gutt to the translation studies, who considers translation as an interlingual interpretive use in which the target text should resemble the original as much as possible. That is to say, faithfulness should be adhered to in translation, which demands that the optimal relevance of the original should be reproduced in the target text as much as possible. Additionally, in view of distinct cognitive environments between China and the West, the majority of intertextual references in classical Chinese poetry cannot find their positions in the western culture. Therefore, the translators are supposed to consider how to deal with such intertextulity to make the translated text close to the original optimal relevance.This thesis attempts to apply relevance theory to the translation of intertextuality in classical Chinese poetry. The author holds that intertextuality is manifested in classical Chinese poetry as allusions and archetype images. So far as the translation methods are concerned, they distinguish between the retention of intertextuality (literal translation, literal translation plus annotations) and the omission of it (cultural replacement, generalization, and paraphrase). Every method has its advantages and disadvantages. In terms of improving the relevance degree of the translated text, the omission of intertextuality seems to take the wind, but with respect to the transference of the original optimal relevance, literal translation plus annotations is a better choice. Admittedly, the translator should adjust the target text flexibly according to different situations. Furthermore, the author points out a series of problems arising in translating intertextuality of classical Chinese poetry, for instance, the cultural default, gap between communicative intention and informative intention, impairment of intended contextual assumptions, and loss of contextual complications. Finally, the author discusses what the translator should concentrate upon in an attempt to convey the optimal relevance of the original. Thus, by fully performing his subjectivity and making adaptations, the translator is required to replenish appropriate intertextual materials to the greatest possible degree, consider contextual effect and processing effort alike, integrate informative intention with communicative intention, as well as make intentions and expectations meet.