A Cognitive Study of the C-E Translation of “Dao” and “Qing” in Wenxin Diaolong《文心雕龙》中“道”与“情”英译的认知研究文献综述

文献综述

文 献 综 述A Cognitive Study of the Translation of 'Dao' and 'Qing' in Wenxin Diaolong《文心雕龙》中道与情英译的认知研究1.IntroductionPolysemy, as a common linguistic phenomenon, has been a popular topic of discussion in linguistics. The complexity and diversity of the meanings of polysemous words bring many problems for our understanding and translation. However, studies on polysemous words have focused more on their interpretation and insights in teaching and less on the translation of these interesting words.This thesis focuses on the English translation of key terms in the Wenxin Diaolong, which is the first treatise with the most complete literary theory system in ancient China and implies the values of Chinese culture and the uniqueness of Chinese literature. In the book, Dao and Qing are chosen as objectives of this thesis because they are typical Chinese words with different meanings, depending on the situation.The thesis consists of five chapters. Chapter one presents the research background, research questions, organization of the thesis. Chapter two reviews previous studies on Wenxin Diaolong and its translation. Chapter three is the theoretical framework, in which development of cognitive translatology and polysemy will be introduced. Chapter four is the specific case study on the translation of Dao and Qing, which are divided into several types. The author of this thesis chose three full translations of Wenxin Diaolong, including Vincent Yu-chung Shihs version in 1959, Siu-kit Wongs version in 1999, Yang Guobins in 2003. On the basis of text analysis, it goes on to discuss the variation of the translations compared with the original text and the different characteristics of each translation. Then the thesis provides some reasonable explanation from a cognitive view. Chapter five comes up with the conclusion of the research, which summarizes the major findings, points out the limitations, and puts forward suggestions for future research. 2. Literature Review2.1 Review of previous studies on polysemyPolysemy has been studied for a long time since it is an interesting object. Scholars at home and abroad tried many different perspectives to study it. This chapter will provide a brief review of some previous studies on polysemy. Componential analysis is one of the common methods to analyze the meaning of words. The process of this specific analysis is to divide the meaning of words into the smallest elements. Therefore, it can clearly show the differences in word meanings, especially between synonyms and antonyms. However, scholars encountered problems when trying to apply componential analysis to the study of polysemous words. Sweetser (1990: 3) suggests that componential analysis cannot explain how the various senses are related, and it does not focus on the comprehensive understanding of the word meaning. Consequently, it is not a good idea to employ the componential methods to study polysemy.Later, some linguists proposed to analyze polysemy with the semantic field theory. They insisted that the meanings of words should be semantically correlated and form a complete network. In other words, the meanings of words should form a fixed system. However, with the development of history and society, the system is constantly changing. Additionally, new words are springing up as the worlds advancement. For example, there was no e-commerce when online shopping was not popular and there was no netizen when Internet was not constructed. At the same time, some old words become obsolete, such as washtub, which has been replaced by washing machine. For the same reason, the meanings of words and the relationships between them will also change, and the word meaning network will no longer have a high reference value. Therefore, semantic field theory failed to make a breakthrough in the study of polysemy (Wu Qianguang 1988: 94) .In 1995, Taylor made it clear that prototype theory can be used to explain polysemy, according to the analysis of different meanings of a polysemous word climb. He found that the different meanings are correlated by a meaning chain. He listed four sentences as example: The boy climbed the tree., The locomotive climbed the mountain., The plane climbed to 30,000 feet. and Prices are climbing day by day. (Taylor, 1995: 106-108). In Taylors analysis, he believed that the meaning chain plays an important role in explaining polysemy. There is a certain kind of connection between one meaning and others according to the basic attribute. In this way, a polysemous word is formed. To some degree, the basic attribute can be seen as the central meaning of this polysemous word. In other words, one can view word meanings from this perspective: a word with multiple meanings itself is a category. Within the category, there is a central meaning or prototype, together with some extensions of it. In Taylors example, the meaning of climb in the first sentence is to move from low to high with considerable effort, using four limbs. This is the most used meaning and the central meaning of the word climb. In the second sentence, the locomotive was also moving from low to high slowly because of the great resistance. While in the third sentence, the word 'climb' only means to rise, with no reflection of moving with great difficulties. The climb in the fourth sentence contains the meaning of upwards and slowly. Its obvious for us to conclude that all four examples have one common attribute: moving upwards. And that is the prototype of the meaning of climb. In this case, Taylor made clear the formation of polysemes and the relationship between different meanings. The above-mentioned theories have been introduced and applied to the study of Chinese polysemy by domestic scholars. Most of them, however, just focus on the study of modern Chinese polysemy. In contrast, they have paid less attention to polysemy in Chinese classics such as Wenxin Diaolong, let alone the translation of these polysemous words in them.Some studies have shown that polysemy is so common in Chinese classics. For example. Cong Lihong (2012) provided an overview of polysemy in ancient Chinese. Meanwhile, some studies on the translation of Chinese classics or the construction of word sense have also shed light on the translation of polysemy in classical Chinese. According to Wang Yin (2006: 13), word sense is the sum of propositional meaning and construal. He also argued that a polysemous word is a category in itself, which has central meaning and extensions. This view is similar to that of Taylor.Guo Shangxing (2010) explored some fundamental issues in the translation of Chinese classical literature. Such as the purpose and principles of translation. The purpose is to maintain the individuality and identity of the culture and at the same time to promote the positive competition between Chinese culture and other cultures. The principle of translation should be to maintain the individuality of culture and control the defects of culture to the smallest extent. Besides, the pragmatic effect should never be ignored. In this process, how to deal with the translation of polysemies is the core issue.Xia Tingde (2009) pointed out that the translation of Chinese classics is particularly difficult. He held the view that too many differences in language, culture, and way of thinking between ancient times and now, together with the differences between Chinese and western culture, make it so. To these differences, polysemy contributes a lot. It is not hard for us to conclude that only a few studies focus on the translation of polysemous words, and even fewer studies are concerned with Chinese classics. Therefore, there is still a long way to go for the research on the translation of polysemous words. That is why this thesis chooses to study the translation of two polysemous words, Dao and Qing, in Wenxin Diaolong. 2.2 Review of previous studies on Wenxin Diaolong and its translationWenxin Diaolong, written by Liu Xie, is a treatise with the most complete literary theory system in ancient China and implies the values of Chinese culture and the uniqueness of Chinese literature, which underscores the importance of translating Wenxin Diaolong for introducing ancient Chinese literary theories and establishing a Chinese discourse system in the world. As one of the greatest works of literary criticism in the history of Chinese literature, Wenxin Diaolong has attracted much attention worldwide.The translation of Wenxin Diaolong began over sixty years ago, mainly done by scholars abroad. For example, it was first translated into English by Vincent Yu-chung Shih and published in 1959. Because it is the pioneering full English-language rendition of Wenxin Diaolong, which surely deserves our attention. Beside Vincent Yu-chung Shih, the other representative translators who have translated Wenxin Diaolong to English include Siu-kit Wong et al (1999), Yang Guobin (2003), and Stephen Owen (1992). Except translating this master-piece, scholars focus on various aspects of this work, much of them from a cultural perspective. Also, thanks to the efforts of translators, the different versions of translation provide more sources for scholars to study from the perspective of cross-culture communication. Sheilds analyzed three aspects of Wenxin Diaolong, including cultural traditions, theory of literary creation, and rhetorical art, to introduce the work to readers (2003: 577-580). Zhang Shaokang amp; Li Zheng analyzed the connection between Wenxin Diaolong and Buddhism, on the basis of the cultural background at Southern Dynasties (2005). Liu Yin (2008) offered us an overview of the research status and development process of Wenxin Diaolong in the English-speaking world, which will not only facilitate the dissemination of Wenxin Diaolong and other literary treatises overseas but also provide a reference for Chinese scholars to study further. Yan Yuezheng (2014) studied the metaphor of artifacts and Chinese literary criticism, with Wenxin Diaolong as the core. Dai Wenjing (2018) took the interpretation and dialogue between Chinese and Western modern translators as the basis for a systematic review of the various English expressions of the title of Wenxin Diaolong. By analyzing the phenomenon of misinterpretation and enlightenment of American and Chinese translators, it explored the deep historical context and the path of cultural poetics behind the tension between the misinterpretation and enlightenment of others. On the basis of a review of the major achievements in the study of the English translation of Wenxin Diaolong, Hu Zuoyouamp; Wang Wenjun (2020) outlined the trajectory and current characteristics of the study of Wenxin Diaolong, as well as the main existing problems and future research directions. To provide an academic reflection and exploration of the path of 'going global' for traditional Chinese literary theory, Dai Wenjing (2020) clarified the genealogy of overseas English translations of Wenxin Diaolong and examined five important translations of Wenxin Diaolong with the help of WorldCat, the worlds largest online bibliographic database. In the process, Dai analyzed the translations and research practices as well as the issue of validity. Some keywords in Wenxin Diaolong have also been studied from certain perspectives. Chen Liangyun studied the meaning of Yin and Xiu in 1999. He held the view that Shensi is not the same as imagination or inspiration, nor is it the same as artistic conception, figurative thinking or spiritual activity, etc. It should be a literary thought when inspiration comes or when it is obtained (2004). Dai studied the translation of Fenggu, Qi, and Wen (2019, 2020, 2021), which are unique philosophical concepts in China. She found there are mistranslations in almost every version, because these concepts are abstract and have different meanings depending on the situation.According to CNKI, there are some studies about Dao or Qing in Wenxin Diaolong. However, most of them focus only on the Chinese original version of Liu Xie, and they only analyze these two keywords from the perspective of Chinese traditional culture. This thesis chooses to conduct a cognitive study of the translation of Dao and Qing in Wenxin Diaolong by making a comparative study of three renditions by Shih (1959), Siu Kit Wong et al (1999), and Yang Guobin (2003).ReferencesApresjan, J. D. (1974). Regular polysemy. Linguistics, 12, 5-32.Clark, E. V., 《文心雕龙》书名英译研究，《复旦外国语言文学论丛》，（02）:193-198。

戴文静（2020a），《文心雕龙》元范畴气的英译及其变异研究，《暨南学报》，42（08）：1-12。

戴文静（2020b），《文心雕龙》海外英译及其接受研究，《中国文学批评》，（02）：62-70。

戴文静（2021），《文心雕龙》核心范畴情的海外书写与误读，《贵州社会科学》，（05）:38-54。

戴文静，陈军（2019），《文心雕龙》元范畴文的英译变异现象研究，《社会科学研究》，（04）:189-194。

戴文静，顾明栋（2019），《文心雕龙》关键词在海外译介中的误读与悟读，《厦门大学学报》，（03）：37-45。

贺时纬（2021），杨国斌译《文心雕龙》的生态解读，《海外外语》，（17）：179-180。

胡作友，张丁慧（2019），《文心雕龙》英译中的文化翻译策略，《山东外语教学》，40（05）：99-108。

胡作友，常筱竹（2021），从《文心雕龙》英译看译者惯习、翻译规范与典籍复译，《西安外国语大学学报》，29（01）：78-83。