摘 要

本文以德国功能派的目的论为切入点，通过对具体译本选段的分析，对傅东华在《飘》的汉译本中的翻译策略进行分析，指出从目的论看，这些策略的运用与傅东华的翻译目的有关，而其翻译目的又受当时的社会文化背景影响，因此应该将傅东华的《飘》汉译本置于客观的历史背景下进行研究, 为傅译本中的翻译现象提供合理解释。

关键词：目的论；《飘》；傅东华汉译本

Contents

1. Introduction 1

2. The translation strategies in Fu Donghua’s version 3

2.1 Omission 3

2.1.1 Deletion of large paragraphs’ psychological description and environment description 3

2.2 Demestication 4

2.2.1 Extensive use of cultural vocabulary of Chinese characteristics 4

2.2.2 The names of people and places in Chinese style 5

2.2.3 Colloquialization 6

2.2.4 Four-character structure 7

2.2.5 Translating long sentences into short sentences 8

3. Conclusion 8

Works cited 10

Bibliography 11

An analysis of Fu Donghua’s Translation Strategies in Gone with the Wind from the Perspective of Skopos Theory

Introduction

Margaret Mitchell’s masterpiece Gone with the Wind since its debut in 1936 has always been a bestseller. Not only in America but also in other countries over the world was it popular among its readers. It is in 1940 that this novel was introduced into China with its Chinese version translated by Fu Donghua. This version has towered in the circles of translation for nearly half a century and enchanted generations of readers. Although there’re several new versions now, Fu’s version is still the most favorable one. One reason is the extensive use of domesticating method apart from Mr. Fu’s graceful writing and idiomatic expression. He got all names of people and places dressed in “Chinese costume” so as to make them familiar to Chinese readers. Idioms in the book like “xi er gong ting”, “gou zhan ma cao” made it easy for Chinese readers to understand. With regard to the translation methods, Fu’s explanation couldn’t be clearer. Fu expressed in the prologue: “After all, translating books like this is different from translating classics”(傅东华1979). Many western expressions will be dull if I translate them word for word. For example, names of people and places, I add characteristics of Chinese language to them. I just hope it is intelligible to all the readers. As for dialogues, I strive to make the translations sound like Chinese. I use our local idioms to replace many humorous, tart and nasty idioms, to realize vivid effects. I delete some verbose description and psychoanalysis making readers feel bored and not very relevant to the development of plot without hesitation, but such paragraphs are rare. Anyhow, we are aiming at being faithful to the taste and spirit of the whole book, rather than the insignificant details. I’m grateful to the critics if they find faults with me and accuse me of making mistakes in translating a word or a sentence.” Thus it can be seen the translator was clear-headed about his translation methods. Fu had a clear sense of purpose rather than making mistakes unknowingly. Such conclusion can be drawn from the above-mentioned discussion that the historical background and the purpose determine Fu’s translation method. Fu succeeded in meeting the need of target audience. However, the most controversial element in this version is “the use of domesticating method” too. Some think Mr. Fu’s work was not up to standards of literary translation. The most important element in literary translation is faithfulness to the original, while Fu’s extensive use of domesticating method in the book caused loss of the original’s culture traits, which apparently deviated from a serious translator’s practice. Both of the two contrary arguments can be traced in Fu’s version.  However, the flaw cannot blot out Mr. Fu’s solid foundation of translation and excellent use of the domesticating method. One may find it a dilemma to translate idiomatically and accurately without a loss of “unfaithfulness”. Besides, the critics argue that there are too many deletions in his translation. Most comments on his translation are without the guide of a systematic, scientific theoretic frame considering translation purpose as well as specific social-culture background of China and requirements of Chinese readers.

German translation critic Katharinna Reiss first put forward Skopos theory. From the perspective of translation purpose, translation is not merely the process of mechanical translation between different languages, the translator should consider how to achieve the specific purpose of translation activities. It can be said that translation is not just the copy of the original text in another language, but actually an intercultural communication behavior producing text according to the target language scene(Nord 2001). The recipient and the target language serve certain purposes. Translation must meet three principles: the principle of purpose, the principle of coherence and the principle of loyalty. Vermeer thinks the highest principle of any translation is the skopos rule(Vermeer 1996). So the translator in the translation process can use a variety of methods, in order to achieve the purpose of translation, any means is acceptable. Below is the analysis of the influence of Fu’s purpose of translation and the functions to achieve in those days in the process of translation in Fu’s version, the omission mainly refers to the deletion of long paragraphs of psychological description and environment description and the domestication partly refers to its extensive use of cultural vocabulary of Chinese characteristics as well as the name of people and places in Chinese style.

This thesis analyzes the translation strategies omission and domestication demonstrated in Fu’s version according to Skopos theory in order to give an objective and fair evaluation of Fu’s translation.

The translation strategies in Fu Donghua’s version

Omission

Omission is a translation method of deleting words or sentences inconsistent with the way of thinking and ways of expression in the target language.

2.1.1 Deletion of large paragraphs’ psychological description and environment description

EX1:

The original:

The sudden overturn of the Republicans did not bring joy to everyone. There was consternation in the ranks of the Scallawages, the Carpetbaggers and the republicans. The Gelets and Hundons, evidently apprised of Bullock’s departure before his resignation became public, left town abruptly, disappearing into that oblivion from which they had come. The other Carpetbaggers and Scallawags who remained were uncertain, frightened, and they hovered together for comfort, wondering what the legislative investigation would bring to light concerning their own private affairs. They were not insolent now. They were stunned, bewildered, afraid（Margaret 1998）.