英语论文网

e original one.As one of Wilson's student, Emst-August Gutt introduced relevance theory intotranslation field firstly and put forward a new theory: relevance-theoretic translationbased on that. In 1991, Gutt's great works--- Translation and Relevance: Cognitionand Context was published to public. He states his points in his book that thetranslation activity should be a language text for the receptor which has someresemblance to the original one (Gutt, 1991:100). Based on this theory，the nature oftranslation is an interpretive use of language, and its aim is to achieve optimalrelevance like any other communicative activities.Not only in broad，many Chinese scholars also gradually focused their attentionon relevance and translation, such as He Ziran, Lin Kenan, Zhao Yanchun，JiangWangqi, Wang Jianguo. A large amount of papers and research fruits are publishedbased on relevance theory. Here are some renowned papers: A Review of Relevance:Communication and Cognition (Shen Jiaxuan( 1988)， which first introducedRelevance Theory to China; On Relevance Theory ( Qu Weiguo,1993). The renownedscholar Zhao Yanchun indicated three important effects of relevance theory: directFortress Besieged，a great work written by China's great scholar Ch'ienChung-shu, has been acclaimed by public as “one of modem China's two best novels，，in literary history. It was first translated into English version by Jeanne Kelly, anAmerican writer and Nathan k, Mao, a Chinese-American scholar. In 1979, its Englishversion was first published by Indiana University Press. Since it published, it arouseduniversal popularity at home and abroad. Excepting the popular praise, translatingsuch a great works would also aroused criticism necessarily. Among most of thesecriticisms，the mainly concentration comes to its translation method, such asmistranslation, inadequacies and rigid cultural transplantation. Even many scholarscriticized some errors and weaknesses directly in itFor instance，the scholar Dennis T. Hu (Hu Dingbang) pointed out severalweaknesses in its first three chapters, like misinterpretation and inadequacy translation,which reduce the great charms of original text even Chinese brilliant culture.According to Hu, the English version has a heavy Chinese language flavor which isnot pure English. He also considers it poorly introduced Mr. Ch'ien Chung-shu towestern world: “Only Mr. Qian himself can be qualified to translate his own works.”(Zhang Quan, 1991: 76-89)Not only abroad, but the scholars in China also gave similar comments. Twofamous scholars criticized this English version directly. One is Hong Kong's famousscholars Sun Yifeng. He once commented the English version as a misunderstandingof the original one, which has the rough language, grammar and style. And the biggestproblem is the Chinese flavor tendency language. He also listed several problems asmisinterpretation and misuse of the words, saying that "impure English with Chineseflavor.，，(Sun ^feng, 1995: 31-36) The other one Xi Yongji, who pays much attentionto the simile translation in Fortress Besieged. He also quite agrees with HuDingbang's criticism and thinks it objectively. But he demonstrates the pioneeringsignificance of this first English version. ( Xi Yongji, 2001:269-317)Although these existing negative comments show that the English version ofFortress Besieged hasn't got popular affirmation since its errors, Chinese-likeexpression and translation strategies, we should judge it objectively. It is