Differences Of Translator’s Subjectivity In Two Versions Of Emma

In the1970s, the "cultural turn" emerged in the western translation field, which propelled the shift from the linguistic perspective to the cultural perspective and from the source language to the target language. Within such a context, the importance of translator became more obvious, the translators were lifted out of their marginalized status and they began to pay more attention to the translator’s subjectivity.Emma is the most mature one among Jane Austen’s novels whether in terms of contents or style. Since the1940s, there have been several translated versions of Emma in China, among which Liu Zhongde’s in the Republic of China and Sun Zhili’s in the1990s are the representative ones. The former studies about its different versions focus on analyzing the different translation methods from linguistic perspective and there are no systematic studies on the factors affecting translator’s subjectivity. On the basis of related theories about translator’s subjectivity, the thesis compares the two versions from the perspective of the selection of original work, language and culture, and further analyzes the factors affecting translator’s subjectivity. The social and cultural background, the translator’s translative thinking, and readers’reception have significant impacts on translator’s subjectivity.The introduction gives clear accounts of aim and significance of the thesis. Chapter two is the literature review, which discusses the studies about translator’s subjectivity at home and abroad and the studies about versions of Emma. In chapter three, based on the forerunner’s achievement, the thesis analyzes different understanding about translator’s subjectivity and reveals its connotation and characteristics. Chapter four analyzes the manifestation of subjective dynamics, purposiveness and passiveness by comparing the two versions by Liu Zhongde and Sun Zhili. For example, the subjective dynamics is shown by choosing the original work and the ways of expressing; different adoption of translation strategies reflects translator’s purposiveness; and the constraints from society’s ideology and personal factors reveals the translator’s passiveness. The last part is the conclusion of the thesis.Hence, by comparing the two versions, the thesis proves that the translator still manifests his subjective dynamics to achieve his translation purpose although he is constrained by many factors and also shows that in the process of translating literary works, the society’s ideology, translator’s personal factors and readers’horizon of expectation should be taken into account in order to achieve the goal of cultural exchange.