A Comparison Of Repetition And Substitution In The Chinese And English Texts Of Hong Lou Meng

With the continuous globalization of economy and the increase of inter-cultural communication, Chinese-English literary translation and EFL literary writing is thriving and needs to be guided by a better understanding of the similarities and differences between Chinese and English literary texts in the use of such cohesive measures as substitution and repetition. At the same time, studies of the differences between Chinese and English texts including literary texts in coherence and cohesion are witnessing a rapid growth in quantity and in quality. While such comparative studies have obtained gratifying results, they are not free of inadequacies or limitations. Most of them tend to adopt methodologies that are macroscopic and purely theoretical, thus neglecting the empirical scrutiny of such microscopic aspects as the frequency and occasion of using substitution and repetition in Chinese and English literary texts.In view of the practice of Chinese-English literary translation and EFL literary writing, targeted to the weaknesses in the comparative studies of Chinese and English literary works, the present study aims to make a comparison of the frequency and occasion of the use of such cohesive devices as substitution and repetition in Chinese and English literary works, in the light of the common views regarding the differences in thinking patterns between Eastern and Western cultures accessible in comparative cultural, philosophical and linguistic research and translation studies, on the basis of M.A.K. Halliday’s theory of cohesion and existing theories about the differences in coherence and cohesion between Chinese and English texts in general, employing the Chinese version of Hong Lou Meng and its English version by David Hawkes and John Minford as data, and through an integrated methodology incorporating both theoretical deduction and empirical procedures, both quantitative and qualitative analysis and both macroscopic and microscopic perspectives. Through data analysis and discussion, the study achieves the following findings:(1) Both similarities and differences exist between the Chinese and English texts of Hong Lou Meng in the occasions of their use of repetition and substitution. Both texts tend to use repetition between sentences. While the Chinese text tends to use repetition when it aims to achieve the effect of stress and vividness and substitution on the occasion of normal related content, the English text tends to use repetition when it tries to achieve the effect of stress and rhetoric but substitution on other occasions.(2) Some differences exist between the Chinese and English texts in the frequency of their use of repetition and substitution. While the Chinese text uses substitution much less frequently than the English text, it uses repetition much more frequently than the English text.(3) The main causes of these similarities and differences between the Chinese and English texts in the occasion and frequency of using substitution and repetition are the similarities and differences in language features and thought patterns between the users of Chinese and English.This study may hopefully possess certain practical and theoretical value. On the practical level, this study may help to improve Chinese-English literary translation and EFL literary writing by providing a better understanding about the similarities and differences between Chinese and English in the use of substitution and repetition. Meanwhile, this study may help to compensate for the shortcomings in the comparative studies of Chinese and English literary works by avoiding the problem of relying too much on macroscopic theoretical speculation and neglecting empirical scrutiny of microscopic aspects.