Perspective Translation Studies (Volume 2)

Author: Wang Ning, Chinese Edition Editor-in-Chief
Publisher:
Publishing Date: 2004-10-01
Features: Studying translation from a cultural perspective is no longer a novel topic, but incorporating translation studies within the framework of cultural studies has only been the case since at least the 1990s. I still clearly remember, in the spring of 1991, as I was about to complete my postdoctoral research at Utrecht University in the Netherlands, I unexpectedly had the opportunity to participate in a translation studies workshop hosted by Leuven University in Belgium. The instructors were the renowned Belgian scholar José Lambert and the British scholar Susan Bassnett, both prominent figures in translation studies and comparative literature. Both scholars approached translation studies from the perspective of comparative literature, so we had a lot in common. Moreover, as both were major advocates of the cultural turn in translation studies, this further piqued my interest in conducting translation research from a cultural perspective. It can be said that this was the initial starting point for me entering the field of translation studies from comparative literature and cultural studies. Another event that sparked my interest in translation studies occurred in 1994. At the invitation of the master of psychoanalytic criticism, Norman Holland, the editor-in-chief of this journal, Kay Dollerup, organized the "11th International Conference on Literature and Psychoanalysis" at Copenhagen University. My paper was accepted by the conference organizers, which made my first trip to Denmark possible and initiated a long-term collaboration between me and Professor Dollerup and the journal Perspectives. In 1996, at his invitation, I edited an issue of Perspectives on Chinese translation studies, which had a certain impact in the international translation studies field. From then on, I regarded translation studies as a "third field" alongside my work in comparative literature and literary theory. However, from the beginning, unlike Dollerup's linguistics-reading response-oriented translation studies, I determined my own perspective on translation: incorporating it into the broader context of cultural studies. This is also the reason why I can engage in dialogue with Dollerup, learn from each other, and why I still discuss the cultural construction and cultural translation in translation studies in many contexts today.
Indeed, in today's globalized era, the role of translation has become increasingly important. And conducting translation studies from a cultural perspective is a cutting-edge theoretical topic in international academia. In this regard, scholars such as Jacques Derrida of France, Wolfgang Iser and Horst Turk of Denmark, José Lambert of Belgium, Susan Bassnett of the UK, Hillis Miller of the US, Homi Bhabha, Anne Lefevere, Ouyang Zhen, and Thomas Beebe have conducted profound research and published extensively in this field. Without a doubt, their research findings have laid a foundation for Chinese scholars to conduct further in-depth cross-cultural research between the East and the West. However, except for Ouyang Zhen, a sinologist who is proficient in Chinese culture, the research examples of the aforementioned scholars are all drawn from their own cultural contexts, making their conclusions difficult to call comprehensive and perfect.
Nevertheless, compared to international academia, translation studies in China are still in its early stages. Most translation researchers remain trapped in the shallow discussion of Yan Fu's three principles of faithfulness, expressiveness, and elegance, and have not consciously incorporated translation studies into the context of cultural studies in the globalized era. As a result, few substantial research monographs that can engage in equal dialogue with international academia have emerged so far, with only scattered papers appearing in various domestic journals and collections. Given the current narrow and purely linguistic of translation studies, reflecting on translation studies from a globalized perspective holds significant importance. On one hand, it can fill the research gap in this field in China. On the other hand, it can allow Chinese scholars to discuss their research achievements with international peers, thereby achieving equal dialogue with international academia. Since I have always maintained a stance on cultural translation, I believe that examining the impact and role of globalization in the cultural sphere from a cultural dimension should naturally regard language as a carrier of cultural transmission. And examining translation from a cultural perspective is precisely an effective attempt to combine the empirical research of linguistics, the humanistic interpretation of culture, and the case analysis of translation texts. The ultimate goal is to achieve theoretical construction in translation studies, an emerging and immature marginal discipline.
As mentioned above, in the current context of globalization, the function of translation is becoming increasingly important, and accordingly, the definition of translation should also evolve. As a discipline situated at the intersection of humanities, social sciences, and natural sciences, translation studies should have its own way of existence. Some of my academic peers and I have been calling for the birth and development of translation studies as a scientific discipline. Since I believe that in the era of globalization, the dissemination of information and the rise of mass media have made the relationship between globalization and culture particularly close, translation is undoubtedly a tool for information dissemination. Therefore, the study of translation should also break free from the constraints of narrow linguistic and textual levels and be placed in a broad cross-cultural context. Only in this way can the conclusions drawn have universal methodological implications for other disciplines.
It follows that one of our urgent tasks is to make a new understanding and interpretation of the established meaning of the term "translation": gradually expanding it from a mere formal translation (conversion) to a translation of cultural connotations (formal conversion and active interpretive agency), thus recognizing that the study of translation itself is a cultural issue, especially involving the interactive relationship and comparative study of two cultures. The rise and fall of translation studies are undoubtedly closely related to the status of cultural studies.
When discussing the relationship between translation and culture, we inevitably think of the irreplaceable role translation has played in advancing the modernization process of Chinese culture and constructing the discourse of Chinese literary criticism. As is well known, Chinese literature has been deeply influenced by Western literature over the past century, to the extent that many scholars adhering to traditional concepts believe that the history of modern Chinese literature is a history of Western cultural colonization of Chinese culture. They are particularly opposed to the May Fourth Movement because it marked the beginning of modern Chinese literature and the modernization of Chinese culture. During the May Fourth Movement, a particularly important phenomenon was the large-scale translation of foreign literary works, especially Western literary works, and cultural academic trends and theories into Chinese. Lu Xun's slogan of "cultural relativism" indeed played a significant role in promoting the spread of Western learning to the East.
As we all know, when discussing his own novel writing, Lu Xun frankly stated that his novel writing began only after reading about a hundred foreign novels and some medical knowledge, with no other preparation. Of course, this statement later became the target of conservative forces, who accused Lu Xun of being a representative of "Westernization." Other key figures of the May Fourth Movement, including Hu Shi and Guo Moruo, destructively deconstructed traditional Chinese literature through the large-scale translation and introduction of Western literary works, thus forming a modern Chinese literary canon. Therefore, translation has played a very important role in the history of modern Chinese literature. Hence, I believe that translated literature is an integral part of modern Chinese literary history. From the perspective of comparative literature, modern Chinese literary history is, to some extent, a history of translated literature. And studying translation is also an important aspect of cultural studies. In other words, translation is, after all, a cultural phenomenon. The concept of translation we propose today is no longer a mere technical form of converting one language into another but rather a transformation from one form to another, from one culture to another, mediated by language.
Given this, some Western scholars argue that if the "cultural turn" in translation studies emerged in the early 1990s, then at this stage, a "translation turn" should be called for in cultural studies, as any cross-cultural research involving two or more cultures is, in essence, a form of translation. Thus, translation has actually become a form of cultural transmission and interpretation. Especially in the current era of globalization, machine translation cannot convey the profound aesthetic implications of literary works. Many of us now have "quick translation tools" and think they can solve many problems. However, if you use them to read literary works, you will encounter obstacles everywhere, because literary works contain rich aesthetic connotations and cultural meanings that cannot be translated by machine. It must be done through the human mind, and the cultural cultivation and literary knowledge of this person determine the depth of expression.
Therefore, literary translation is sometimes boundless, especially under the current circumstances. Our literary and cultural translation should transform its inherent functions. In the past, we did not translate a lot of foreign literature into Chinese. Now, since many people can already read foreign languages (mainly English) originals directly, our focus should shift from foreign-to-Chinese translation to Chinese-to-foreign translation. That is, we should translate the best of Chinese culture and Chinese literature into major world languages—English—to reach a broader readership worldwide. I think this is also another direction in which globalization operates in culture.
China's successful bid to host the 2008 Olympics is, in my opinion, a great victory for our culture. How is this cultural victory expressed? It is not expressed in our Chinese language but in English. He Zhenliang, as the spokesperson of Chinese sports in international sports circles, is fluent in both English and French, especially when he passionately expresses the hospitality of the Chinese people and their aspirations for the Olympics in English and French, moving the Olympic judges and forcing those who do not understand Chinese to vote for China. From this successful example, what have we lost? Nothing. Instead, we have gained more supporters.
Therefore, in academic research, I have always advocated that on one hand, we should vigorously introduce and promote the achievements of international academia. On the other hand, we should do our utmost to introduce the research achievements of Chinese scholars to international academia, thereby giving a strong voice to Chinese humanities scholars. This is also one of the reasons why we collaborated with Dollerup to co-found the journal Perspectives. Among all translation studies journals published in the West, Perspectives is one of the few that publishes the most articles by Chinese scholars, which is also related to Dollerup's broad-mindedness and his global consciousness against Western centrism.
To make more Chinese scholars familiar with this journal and to use this English platform to voice the voices of Chinese scholars, we decided to introduce this journal and publish it in its original form, with reviews by the editorial board of our journal. I believe that the publication of this journal can complement China Translation and accelerate its internationalization process, ultimately becoming a source journal for the international authoritative indexing system A＆HCI (Arts & Humanities Citation Index).
Finally, I would like to point out that in our cultural studies, we must also distinguish between internationalization and Westernization. I have pointed out on many occasions that when we mention internationalization, some people think it might be another form of comprehensive Westernization. In my view, the current Chinese literature and cultural academia must move towards the world not just by aligning with the West but by engaging in dialogue with the most advanced and representative front theories internationally. Only in this way can Chinese cultural studies develop in a healthy direction. Of course, we must also recognize that the massive influence of globalization in the field of mass media has put tremendous pressure on people outside the world, meaning that in the future, if you want to survive effectively, not knowing English will make it difficult to take a single step. You simply cannot access information from the internet, as it is said that more than 90% of internet information is disseminated in English. Therefore, if you want to obtain information, you cannot wait for others to translate it for you. If you rely solely on others to translate, you will miss out on a lot.
In the past, Bacon said, "Knowledge is strength." Later, the French post-structuralist theorist Foucault said, "Knowledge is power." I have modified this into the slogan: "Knowledge is riches." Indeed, in the current era of globalization, knowledge can be transformed into the form of information, and information is a form of wealth. Therefore, if you cannot obtain information in a timely manner, it is equivalent to losing a lot of wealth.
In this context, in the field of literary theory and criticism, such concerns have also emerged: some people believe that Chinese literary and cultural criticism have lost their voice, that Chinese academia suffers from a "dysphasia," meaning that there are very few Chinese scholars who can speak for themselves on international forums. In the field of humanities and social sciences, the voice of Chinese people is almost inaudible, or even when it is heard, it is very faint. So what is the cause of this situation? Of course, many people think it is the language we use, but I don’t think it’s entirely a language problem. First, have we raised the current cutting-edge topics in the field of international humanities and social sciences? Second, can we express them accurately and fluently, or are we only engaging in dialogue with international academia at a partial level? If we engage in dialogue with international peers at different levels, such dialogue cannot achieve the desired effect. Of course, language is involved in this, but the truly excellent literary works, even if written in Chinese, will be translated into English by Western sinologists and retold, expressed, or presented in English, or they can actively seek dialogue with you.
Therefore, on the other hand, we must also admit that this phenomenon of "dysphasia" exists to a significant extent, meaning that the consequences are that the long history and rich legacy of Chinese culture and literary theory and criticism are not known to the world, except for a few sinologists. We know that sinology is very marginal in international academia. Many universities in Europe do not have departments of Chinese language and literature, and in the US, only a few major universities in East Asian studies and more colleges offer courses in Chinese, while very few universities teach Chinese literature and culture. For many foreigners, the reason they study Chinese is not to understand Chinese literature and culture but simply to do business with China, so after learning a little Chinese, they immediately switch to other fields of economy and business. Those who truly stay in the field of literature are very few.
Therefore, if we do not take an active stance to engage in dialogue with the forefront of international academia but passively wait for Western sinologists to discover the excellent works of Chinese culture and literature, we will undoubtedly fall behind. The result is that we will be in a state of "dysphasia." On the other hand, the deep penetration of Western culture into our critical discourse through the mediation of English is indeed a sad state of affairs, but it also inspires us to strive forward. That is, if we start from a Marxist perspective, cultural development does not necessarily have to be proportional to economic development. It does not mean that culture will necessarily flourish in economically developed places. Economically developed countries and regions may not produce excellent cultural and artistic works, but they may produce immortal artistic treasures in countries and regions with relatively backward economies but highly imaginative artists. For example, the explosion literature of Latin America, the rise of Gabriel García Márquez and Jorge Luis Borges, and their impact on writers in the world, such as the, is a clear example.
In recent years, the rise of Chinese-American literature in the US has also attracted the attention of mainstream literary critics and has been included in the history of American literature. Of course, a large part of this Chinese-American literature relies on the mediation of English, because otherwise, it could only be disseminated within the Chinese-American community. Therefore, to move from the periphery to the center and influence the mainstream literary circles, they had to temporarily use their language and write in English. I believe that our language is merely a medium. If we use Western languages to express Chinese ideas and cultural concepts, will it not be more effective in influencing the ideas of Westerners?
Therefore, in cultural studies (including translation studies), aligning with international academia does not mean aligning with the West but means engaging in dialogue with the West. Of course, through this dialogue, we can gradually achieve bidirectional exchange in theory and academia, and in this process, Chinese scholars can gradually exert an implicit influence on Western scholars.
In the era of globalization, almost everyone is learning English and trying to use this globally recognized language to express their voices. So what can our humanities and social sciences scholars do? As we all know, in the field of natural sciences, our scientists have been very consciously publishing their research findings in English in international authoritative journals. However, in our Chinese humanities and social sciences field, a considerable number of scholars still cannot communicate directly with international scholars and largely rely on translation as a mediator.
We know that some things are untranslatable, such as classical Chinese poetry and some works that are highly implicit and require great skill. Because things like these lose their essence in the process of translation. Therefore, if we want to enable Chinese humanities and social sciences to rapidly enter the forefront of international research, to a large extent, we also have to rely on the mediation of English.
I believe that when engaging in exchanges with international academia, even if we sometimes use the globally used language—English—the content and perspectives of the topics are Chinese, that is, local. This does not mean that our culture will be colonized by Western culture. On the contrary, it will be more effective in gradually introducing some perspectives of Chinese cultural academia to the world, thereby, on one hand, making the voices of Chinese humanities scholars stronger on international forums, and on the other hand, allowing more people to understand China and the profound and vast culture of China.
In this regard, the efforts made by Chinese cultural studies and translation studies should be recognized in a realistic manner.
This book is compiled from the content of four issues of the 2003 volume of the renowned academic journal Perspectives: Studies in Translatology. Perspectives: Studies in Translatology was founded in 1993 as an English quarterly, sponsored by the Translation Research Center of the English Department at Copenhagen University in Denmark, with the editor-in-chief being the internationally renowned translation scholar Kay Dollerup. Since 2002, it has been co-sponsored by the English Department of Copenhagen University and the Foreign Languages Department of Tsinghua University. As one of the influential academic journals in the field of international translation, it is one of the few source journals for the international authoritative indexing system A＆HCI (Arts & Humanities Citation Index), with an article acceptance rate of over 80%. The journal is characterized by its novel perspectives, cross-cultural and interdisciplinary approach, revealing the nature and tasks of translation studies from different angles.
This book is compiled from the content of four issues of the 2003 volume of the renowned academic journal Perspectives: Studies in Translatology. Perspectives: Studies in Translatology was founded in 1993 as an English quarterly, sponsored by the Translation Research Center of the English Department at Copenhagen University in Denmark, with the editor-in-chief being the internationally renowned translation scholar Kay Dollerup. Since 2002, it has been co-sponsored by the English Department of Copenhagen University and the Foreign Languages Department of Tsinghua University. As one of the influential academic journals in the field of international translation, it is one of the few source journals for the international authoritative indexing system A＆HCI (Arts & Humanities Citation Index), with an article acceptance rate of over 80%. The journal is characterized by its novel perspectives, cross-cultural and interdisciplinary approach, revealing the nature and tasks of translation studies from different angles.
Target Audience: English professionals, translation practitioners.