Mo Yan's ?Frog? In English And French Translation:A Comparison Of Culturally-loaded Words

The first time ? read "Frog," Howard Goldblatt's translation of Mo Yan's "Wa," ? was surprised,sometimes even shocked,that he would dare to totally transform or delete some information.This was in complete opposition to the kind of translation ? had been taught to do in France.In a class on the translation of contemporary Chinese literature,? learned that it was best to stay as close as possible to the original text.My teacher,Chantal Chen-Andro,has translated many works from Mo Yan,including his famous novels "La dure loi du karma"(Life and Death Are Wearing Me Out),"Le Supplice du Santal"(Sandalwood Death),and"Grenouilles"(Frog),which on one side revealed a new aspect of Mo Yan's personality and art,and on the other helped him win the Nobel Prize for literature in 2012.Howard Goldblatt's approach to translation is quite different from Chantal Chen-Andro's,and this is why ? started to doubt the idea that a good translator should be "faithful" to the original text.To resolve this difference ? decided to compare the English and the French translated texts.In this process ? looked at translations in other languages as well.? came to realize that many translations are not directly translated from the Chinese texts,but often are translated from English—and sometimes French translations.In order to spread Chinese culture abroad some scholars propose to reinforce this tendency by translating first into English,and then translating into other languages from the English adaptation.Many works from Mo Yan have found their way to readers using this indirect method,but in this respect "Wa" stands apart.Since it has been translated directly into many languages,it is useful for trying to understand different approaches to translation.The differences between the English and French translations are manifest in many areas:the interpretation of the work in general and of some paragraphs in particular,the strategies used,and the relative freedom that a translator allows for "rewriting" the text.What are the reasons for the discrepancies between the two translations?Are the differences imputable to local or national translation traditions,to pressures imposed upon the translator by publishing houses,to the necessity of adapting to local tastes to be popularly accepted,or finally to the personal literary preferences of the translator?In the process of analyzing these differences,the necessity of localization of the translation becomes more obvious.Chantal Chen-Andro generally advocates faithfulness to the original text,making ample use of literal translations and explanatory footnotes.Howard Goldblatt,on the other hand,is an active advocate of faithfulness to the reader,translating in a way that makes the story easy for his non-Chinese audience to understand without breaking up the text with explanations.The fact that the two translations differ so frequently and obviously is a sign of how much cultural adaptation is involved in translation,.and it highlights the importance of direct translation from Chinese or any source text to the target language to avoid the "contamination"of the text by an intervening culture.This thesis can help students realize the special characteristics of the category "literature translation." It is an expressive endeavor and not an informative translation type.To make it possible for the reader to identify with the protagonists in a novel,it is essential that the translator not put too many obstacles in the reader's path.Students learning Chinese or doing translations should realize that making changes and adapting the text to the target culture enables the foreign reader to understand the author's message in a way that is similar to Mo Yan's communication with his Chinese readers,that without intracoherence in the target language there is no real understanding,and therefore no translation.? hope that this thesis can inspire translators to explore new ways of translating Mo Yan in their own language,and that it can open the minds of readers of translated literature to reconsider their reading habits and preferences to include more adapted translations.And this applies to reading Mo Yan or reading Laozi.The translation that uses a language the reader naturally speaks is not a bad translation;on the contrary,it is wrong to expect that if ? read Chinese literature it has to be unusual and exotic,or written in a stilted style,very difficult to read because of too many literally translated passages.Language learners often don't learn about taboo words in the classroom,but they are part of natural language and a student should learn how to handle them.This thesis shows two different approaches to dealing with numerous taboo expressions.One uses euphemistic,tactful and distanced language,or simply erases what would be considered too rude in the target culture.The other approach uses taboo words directly,like Mo Yan himself does,and does not attempt to make the language more "civilized" Both approaches are useful depending on the target readership.