A Contrastive Study On Three Versions Of Liaozhai From The Perspective Of Descriptive Translation Study

This contrastive analysis of the three translations of Liaozhai (Giles, Yang Xianyi, and Mairs), on the basis of crucial theory Three Norms of Descriptive Translation Study (DTS), analyze and focus on the differences of the versions through quantitative and qualitative research. It is a challenging task to employ DTS on the translation of Chinese classic literature.As one of the well-known stories in Chinese classic literature, Liaozhai not only includes Chinese traditional culture and civilization but also the typical features of in ancient China. The three versions in this thesis were translated in different historical periods spanning for almost one hundred years. The versions show many differences in various aspects, since their translators have different social status and personal experiences makes many differences in their works. Therefore, this thesis supposes that such differences in renderings were resulted of the social backgrounds and individual experiences of these translators.This thesis studies on the three versions of Liaozhai under the guidance of the Three Norm (preliminary norms, initial norms and operational norms). Firstly, preliminary norms emphasize on the general social and culture backgrounds and the individual educational experience of the translators. And then, in terms of initial norms, it explores the different general strategies in different versions. Because every translator has a general choice before translation:acceptability by the target readers or adequacy to the original texts. At last, referring to the operational norms, under the operational norms, some detailed analysis is done at lexical and syntactic levels.The study finds out that, firstly, in the light of DTS, objective views on different selections of the translators are approached. Secondly, the differences in texts and various strategies of the three translators were closely related to their social backgrounds and individual experiences. At last, from the angle of diachronic analyses, the three versions of Liaozhai translated in different periods show that the later one is fully and better improved than the earlier ones both in meaning and forms. Because of its time limitation, this study only covers a small number of versions of Liaozhai. Therefore, it would be imperative and necessary for a further study on more versions, or in different views.