On The English Translation Of SAN ZI Jing From The Perspective Of Functional Equivalence Theory

San Zi Jing, as a traditional Chinese enlightenment textbook, is written with plain, simple words and catchy, rhyming lines. It gives a panoramic view of Chinese history, literature, philosophy, nature, education and ethic codes. Therefore, it not only has been passed down from generation to generation for hundreds of years in China, but also has been regarded as a textbook to learn about Chinese traditional culture and history in western world. A large number of English versions of San Zi Jing have come out since 19th century, while Giles’ and Wang Baotong’s translations are generally deemed as rather qualified, that’s why they are chosen as the study objects in this thesis. In order to analyze the achievements and failures, similarities and differences in English translations of San Zi Jing accomplished by translators from different historical and cultural background.In 1964, Nida, an American translator put forward the Functional Equivalence Theory, which provides a fresh view for translation studies in worldwide countries. Nida deems translation as not mere equivalence in meaning between the source text and target text, but also equivalence in style, culture and so on. The core concept of Functional Equivalence Theory is Functional Equivalence, referring to not only the equivalent content of message, but, in so far as possible equivalent of the form, which can be divided into four aspects: equivalent in lexicon, syntax, discourse and style. This thesis, applying Nida’s Functional Equivalence Theory as the theoretical guidance, as well as taking the unique style of San Zi Jing into consideration, discusses whether Giles and Wang Baotong have achieved equivalence on the levels of style, lexicon, syntax and culture, and compares the similarities and differences of the ways they appeal to in achieving functional equivalence between their translations and the source text, with the hope of shedding light on better English translation of San Zi Jing.Based on analyses on comparisons between the two translations, this thesis comes to the following conclusions:firstly, since Giles totally ignores equivalence in style, while Wang Baotong preserves the metric, neat lines of the original text to a large extent, which brings better literature appreciation for foreign readers. In this sense there are better equivalence between Wang Baotong’s translation and the source text, San Zi Jing. Secondly, both Giles and Wang Baotong adopt transliteration, free translation, annotation, etc. as to the translation of lexicon, syntax and culture-loaded notions. On the other hand, they adopt domestication and foreignization differently in their renditions. Unlike Giles’ emphasis on translation of specific characters, Wang Baotong tends to focus on coherence of the whole sentence, which renders the frequent application of omission and amplification in his translation. Nevertheless, both the two translators succeed in different degrees of functional equivalence between their translations and San Zi Jing on these three levels above. Thirdly, concluding from the comprehensive comparisons between Giles’ and Wang Baotong’s translations, equivalence in style and content are both significant in reproducing the literature features and enlightenment functions of San Zi Jing. Lastly, as there are many culture-loaded notions in San Zi Jing, both Giles and Wang Baotong inevitably make some mistakes in their translations, which should be a lesson that upcoming translators of San Zi Jing learn.