The Reframed "National Character"in The Chinese Context: A Study On Framing In Chinese Versions (1995-2010) Of Chinese Characteristics

Chinese Characteristics was written by an American missionary ArthurHenderson Smith. Since its publication, the book has been exerting great impacts onboth western and Chinese audiences. It has also played a role in the emergence ofsuch key concepts as “guomin xing”(国民性) and “minzu xing”(民族性) in modernChina. Its first Chinese translation was issued by Zuoxin she (作新社) in1903.However, little has been said on its Chinese versions, especially the height oftranslation starting in the1980s and continuing well into the2000s. Considering theimperialistic and missionary nature of the source text as well as the far-reachingimpacts of the Chinese versions on Chinese reality, it is worthwhile to carry out acomprehensive and detailed study on the English original and Chinese versions.Based on the narrative theory, this thesis takes Chinese versions (1995-2010) ofChinese Characteristics as a case to do a tentative study on acts of framing involvedin the production of translation.Framing in the thesis refers to discursive practices initiated by translators andother agents to anticipate and guide readers’ interpretation of the source narrative.The thesis first discusses framing in the1995Chinese version of ChineseCharacteristics. For the purpose of participating in the collective elaboration of“modernization” in the1980s, translators and other agents producing the versionevoke the concept of “modern” and “Lu Xun” to legitimize and appropriate thesource narrative. In contrast, even though translators and other agents of Chineseversion (1998-2010) of Smith’s book pick up on the construction of “modernization”,they do so by contesting rather than accentuating Smith’s narrative. To explain, byapplauding improvements of national character brought about by “modernization”while criticizing emerging problems in “modernization” as defects in nationalcharacter, versions of this period supersede the essentialist notion of “nationalcharacter” in Smith’s narrative. In the meantime, the larger narrative of “imperialism” and “evangelism” circumscribing Smith’s narrative are alsoconsiderably undermined. The third chapter initiates a comparative study of framingactivities in the1995version and versions of the1990s and2000s. Through such acomparison, not only the conclusions reached in Chapter One and Chapter Two areanalyzed, it is also further illustrated that translation is best understood as a form ofrenarration in which translators, editors and other agents of Chinese versions ofSmith’s book are recognized as concrete political agents responsible for variousframing activities.This thesis aims to make the following contributions: first, we hope to directattention to the process of translation and accounting for concrete translationalchoices in wider social and political contexts. Second, we hope that it will be asupplement to the textual exploration of “translingual practices” without losing sightof translation versions. Third, we hope that it will call for more translation studiescarried out in a narrative framework.