英语论文网

of two translations of The Merchant of Venice, it could befigured out the similarities and distinctions in particular of words, sentences and style,pointing to the conclusion of two different translation strategies.With the translation strategy of foreignization, Liang’s rendition is a mostfaithful and plain version, reproducing the original maximally in terms of word,punctuation, structure as well as the culture, which is expounded by the annotations inthe end. Bearing no deletion or abridgement, it even faithfully delivers the vulgarlanguage in the source text, for the purpose of providing a full and real picture ofShakespeare’s work to the Chinese readers. Good as faithfulness is, it willunavoidably undermine the fluency and literary charm of the translation as it retainsthe foreignness when rendered in a different language.Zhu’s translation, however, adopts the opposite strategy of domestication. Hisversion, full of literary talent, features on the poetic elegance and smooth andmagnificent language. Reading his translation is a feast for the ear, as it assimilatesthe original work to Chinese culture and way to speak, thus making it more acceptableand familiar to the public. But the overriding fluency more or less weakens thefaithfulness to the source text, for the obscure or vulgar words are often abridged orrewritten to achieve the fluency and decency.From the perspective of drama translation, Liang’s version is less intended forproduction on stage than for the literary system as printed text. Apart from theprominent faithfulness and a number of detailed annotations, Liang even wrotepreface to each translated play, giving his own introduction, understanding andanalysis of the play as a literatus. All of these are of great value to the future andfurther study of Shakespeare and his plays. Unlike Liang’s translation, Zhu’s isconceived for stage performance with the domestication method. Its melodiouslanguage, conversion of foreignness to get closest to Chinese culture and languagemakes it more suitable for stage performance. So it may well refer to these twotranslations as “page translation” and “stage translation” respectively.Speaking of drama translation, what can we learn from such a comparative studyof their translations? First, identify the translating skopos. Only with a clear purposecan the translator decide the strategy to be employed in the process. Since dramatranslation can be divided into page translation and stage translation, it is necessary todetermine the skopos in the first place—whether it is aimed for the literary text studyor the stage performance. Different skopos bring different preferences and priorities,thus leading to the second point of determining the translation strategy. If it’s pagetranslation for literature study, then it should adopt foreignization to keep theforeignness of the source text and introduce the original work and foreign culture in acomprehensive way. If it’s stage translation for performance, then it should takeperformability into consideration when translating and employ the strategy ofdomestication, to guarantee the fluency and familiarity to Chinese audience.All in all, with diligence, prudence and persistence, Liang Shiqiu and ZhuShenghao laid a solid foundation for the translation and study of Shakespeare inChina. Their translations with unique characteristics have their own merits. Liang’sfaithfulness and reservation of foreignness intrigues people to read the originalShakespeare, whi