《围城》翻译之浅见

惠文涛

【摘 要】尽管中文本的《围城》在中国取得了重大的成功。但是由Jeanne Kelly和Nathan K. Mao合著的译本却并未使其成为世界经典。作者采用文本和风格两部分来分析研究《围城》原作和译本的一些得与失。本文的全部归旨是希望通过这一系列讨论为《围城》今后的翻译提供参考。

【关键词】《围城》 风格 翻译标准

【中图分类号】H159 【文献标识码】A 【文章编号】1006－9682（2009）02－0076－02

Ⅰ．Introduction

Qian Zhongshu ranks among the foremost and prominent twentieth-century Chinese novelist, and his novel Fortress Besieged （Wei-cheng） was an immediate success after its first publication in 1947, and has long been hailed as one of the greatest twentieth-century Chinese novels. Lately, a piece of news written by Julia Lovell from Guardian （2005） has brought it back to the limelight of literary world, though not the way a classic should have expected. Fortress Besieged is a fairly uncontroversial choice. Ribald, sarcastic, set against the drop-curtain of wartime China, its pages populated by young westernized Chinese harried by their traditional families, Fortress Besieged has everything for a great novel. It ought to stand a better chance of reaching into the hearts of Anglophone readers than many other works of modern Chinese fiction. The truth is not so. Such a hurrah of modern Chinese literature stirs few ripples in the pond of Anglophone readers. As the report states, the translation which is, for the most part, competent ‘hardly reproduces the dazzling, spiked wit for which the original is renowned; and dialogue, in particular, is wooden and unidiomatic（Julia Lovell 2005）. Through a brief analysis on the original text and the translation, a discerning and selective translator may get some inspiration, assimilating the good parts while casting aside the bad ones.

Ⅱ．The Principles of Translation

Let us first look at the history of Western translation studies. Up to the eighteenth century, Alexander Fraser Tyler（1790，P167）describes in Essay on Principles of Translation a good translation to be, that, in which the merit of the original work is so completely transfused into anther language, as to be a distinctly apprehended, and as strongly felt, by a native of the country to which that language belongs, as it is by those who speak the language of the original work. The epitome of modern translation theories is represented by the theory of “dynamic equivalence” and “functional equivalence”, pointing out that the receptors of the message in the receptor language （Nida 1969）.

Then, in retrospect to the history of Chinese translation, the well-known three-character principles put forward by Yan Fu, faithfulness, expressiveness and elegance （“信、达、雅”）, has long been enshrined as the very motto of every Chinese translator. Fu Lei attaches much importance to “what is aimed for is not affinity in shape but likeness in spirit.” In conclusion, as the genius and character of language is confessedly very different, it has hence become a common opinion, that it is the very duty for a translator to attend to sense and spirit of his original, to make himself perfectly master of his authors idea, and to communicate them in those expressions which he judges to be best suited to convey.

Ⅲ．A Textual and Stylistic Comparison between the Original and Translation

1．The Analysis of Wording

One basic way of looking at translation is lexical, so it is the chief concern for translators to get the words right first. As is illustrated in A Textbook of Translation, Peter Newmark（1988, p.73）makes this quite clear, “All the same, we do translate words, because there is nothing else to translate; there are only the words on the page; there is nothing else there.” As a general point about translation is that, in principle, since corresponding SL and TL words do not usually have precisely the same semantic range （though many do in cognate languages）, you are over-or under-translating most of the time. As is further explained by Peter Newmark（1988, pp.34-35） that we must remember that the great number of words in one language include and overlap in varying degrees of meanings the words they appear most obviously to translate into another language, and therefore more often than not they are translated by several different more specific words. This illustrates one of the main problems in translation, the enforced shift from generic to specific units or vice versa. According to the said theory, deficiencies of this kind can be easily found in the book.

Example 他那时窘得似乎甲板上人都在注意他，心里怪鲍小姐太做得出，恨不能说她几句。……方鸿渐从此死心不敢妄想，开始读叔本华，常聪明地对同学们说：“世间哪有恋爱？压根儿是生殖冲动。”（第一章，P7～8）

At that moment he was so embarrassed that it seemed to him that everybody on deck was watching him. Inwardly he blamed Miss Pao for being too overt in her behavior and wished he could have said something to her about it.…From then on, he buried his feelings and dared not indulge in vain hopes. ¬He began reading Schopenhauer and would often say wisely to his classmates, “Where is romantic love in the world? Its entirely the reproductive urge.” （Chapter 1，P8～10）

The word“说”（literally：say）shows up twice in the same paragraph, and both times the translators use the same word“say”. Although it is grammatically and lexically adopted, non-Chinese readers can hardly tell the different emotional effects of these two “说”within the contexts, which can be easily discerned in the words of original works. In the first sentence, the word“说”（say）is actually correlatively equivalent to the word“怪”（blame）, so it means expressing ones unhappy feelings; In the second sentence, it means preaching or haranguing ones idea to the public. So the following version satisfactorily reproduces both the literal meaning and the extended meaning：

At the moment he was so embarrassed that it seemed to him that everybody on deck was watching him. Inwardly he blamed Miss Pao for being too overt in her behavior and wished he could have complained to her about it…He began reading Schopenhauer and would often preach presumptuously to his classmates, “Where is romantic love in the world? Its entirely the reproductive urge.”

2．The Analysis of Style

The significance of style is clearly noted in The Theory and Practice of Translation（Eugene A. Nida & C.R. Taber 1969）：though style is secondary to content, it is nevertheless important. In trying to reproduce the style of the original one must beware of producing something which is not functionally equivalent, which means that reproducing style, even on a formal level, may not result in an equivalence, and it is functional equivalence which is required, whether on the level of content or on the level of style.

（1）Classic Chinese

The authors knowledge of Chinese classics and Pidgin English unquestionably helps him to better caricature Mr. Fang Tung-weng, the protagonists father, and Mr. Jimmy Chang, a Shanghai comprador. In the case of the former, his every thought is an allusion, a proverb, or a quote from the classics, as evidenced in the following letter advising his son to pay more attention to school work:

吾不惜重资，命汝千里负笈，汝埋头攻读之不暇，而有余闲照镜耶？汝非妇人女子，何须置镜？惟梨园子弟，身为丈夫而对镜顾影，为世所贱。吾不图汝甫离膝下，已濡染恶习，可叹可恨！且父母在，不言老，汝不善体高堂念远之情，以死相吓，丧心不孝，于斯而极！……（第一章，P8）

Through the style of writing in this letter, it is self evident that Fang Tung-weng is the man himself: allusive, self-righteous, prejudiced, traditional, and pedantic. The success of the portrait of Fang Tung-weng is due, to a large extent, to the authors understanding of the empty posturings of the traditional country squire whose ideas are those of the imperial past though he lives in the modern twentieth century. However, the way of expression in classic Chinese is not fully conveyed in the translation, in which the original flavor is largely lost.

（2）Pidgin English

Qian Zhongshus portrait of the Changs is precise, especially Jimmy Chang. His speech has a special characteristic, he likes to sprinkle his Chinese with meaningless English expressions. It isnt that he has new ideas, which are difficult to express in Chinese and requires the use of English. The English words inlaid in his speech can not even be compared with the gold teeth inlaid in ones mouth. A better comparison would be with the bits of meat stuck between the teeth-totally useless. And he imitates the American accent down to the slightest inflection. He uses American slang words and expression, such as headache for wife, States short for United States, dough for money. By this it brings this little scene so splendidly to life is the way the author captures the pidgin English around him, so that Jimmy Chang becomes not a dim personification, not a stock figure of allegory, but a genuine flesh-and-blood comprador living in the great metropolis—Shanghai:

张先生大笑道：“我不懂什么年代花纹，事情忙，也没工夫翻书研究。可是我有hunch；看见一件东西，忽然what dyou call灵机一动，买来准O.K.。他们古董客都佩服我，我常对他们说：‘不用拿假货来fool我。O yeah，我姓张的不是sucker，休想骗我！ ”关上橱门，又说：“咦，headache——”便按电铃叫用人。（第二章，P45）

Mr. Chang laughed heartily and said, “I dont know anything about period designs. Im too busy to have time to sit down and study it. But I have a hunch when I see something, and a sudden—what dyou call?—inspiration comes to me. Then I buy it and it turns out to be quite OK. Those antiques dealers all respect me. I always say to them, ‘Dont try to fool me! ”He closed the cupboard and said, “Oh, headache” then pressed an electric bell to summon the servant. （Chapter 2，P44）

In such a short paragraph, Jimmy Chang intercepts five English words, and even American slangs, into the conversation. In the original version, Chinese and English are mingled together, and thus readers of the Chinese language can easily tease out the humor produced by this effect. However, in the translation, the Chinese words no longer exist, thus does the original flavor either.

Ⅳ．Conclusion

“Translator is traitor.” In translation it is certain that the problem of the deviation from the original works occurs. In the daily communications we adopt literary translation. But when we are tackling the problem of translating literature works, this way is by no means satisfactorily enough. It is required that translators should precisely reproduce the meaning, the manner and the style that the original texts convey in the perspective of culture. In other words, the “shape” and “spirit” must be retained hundred percent in the translation texts.

Bibliography

1 Chien Chung-shu, Translated by Kelley, J & Mao, NK 2003, Fortress Besieged, Foreign Language Teaching and Research Press, Beijing

2 Lovell, J 2005, Great leap forward, Guardian Unlimited, viewed 14 July 2005,

3 钱钟书.围城.钱钟书集.三联书店，2002

4 申雨平.西方翻译理论精选.外语教学与研究出版社，2002