The Retranslations of Jianjia in Thebook of Songs

The Retranslations of Jianjia in theBook of Songs:

A Perspective of Hermeneutic Fusion of Horizons

A Thesis

Submitted to

The College of Distance Education of

ShanghaiInternationalStudiesUniversity

In partial Fulfillment of

The Requirement for

The Degree of Bachelor of Arts

By

Gu Yiqing

Under the Supervision of Professor Wu Qiyao

March 2011

1

Acknowledgements

I owe a debt of individuals who have contributed a lot to this thesisofmine.

First of all, I am deeply grateful to my supervisor, Prof. Wu Qiyao, who patiently motivated me to conceive and develop the idea of the thesis.The careful guidance and mentoring he hasprovided to me reflect his generous spirit and unending commitment to his profession. He leaves me a lifetime unforgettable memory of his erudition, benevolence,patience, intelligence, diligence and a good sense of humour.

My heartfelt thanks also go toProf. Wu Yun, who has been a constant source of support and encouragement throughout this writing process as well as my entire BA education, which have given me invaluable enlightenment on the nature of translation.Without her spurringand inspiring supervision, Iwouldn’t have been able to carry out my research and writing.

I am similarly indebted toProf. Luo Ping, Doctor Gu Qiubei, Doctor Liu Siyuan and my friends, Cherry Cai and Elvis Hu, who either offered me literature assistance or frequently enlightened me with witty comments and advice.I would also extend my gratitude to the authors whose studies I have cited and quoted in my thesis.

Besides, I wish to thank all the professors, lecturers and my classmates in the Translation and Interpreting Department at ShanghaiInternationalStudiesUniversity, for enrichingmy knowledge in translation, philosophy and literature.

Last but not least, my heartfelt thanks go to my beloved parents, whose love,encouragement and patience are what I cherish the most in my whole life. Once again I’dlike to express my sincere gratitude to many people that have made this thesis possible.Thank you all for your advice,wisdom and compassion.
Abstract

Gadamer’s hermeneutic theory of “Fusion of Horizons” plays an inspiring role in both translation practice and theory. Not only does it offer usa certain methodology leading toreasonableunderstanding of the original text and appropriate expression in the target language, but also it advances us toexplain and put into practice the dialectical unity of the subjectivity in understanding and objectivityin interpretation.

In the light of hermeneutics, the horizon of a text will never be fixed. In interpreting thetext, differenttranslators will be inevitably influenced by their distinctivepersonal endowment,historicalconditions, social ideologies, cultural conventions, aesthetic psychologies as well as varied expectations of their readers. The inter-subjectivity of a translator should be brought into full play to fuse anew horizonwhich can coverthe past and the present, the self and the otherness. Therefore, the life of the original text will be transferred and expanded further in the foreign cultural contexts, starting with a fresh historical record of reading and acceptance.

As the earliest existing anthology of ancient Chinese poetry, the Book of Songsushered in a profound and brilliant landscape of Chineseliterature. Jianjia, one of the most favourable poems in this classic, reflects fully the sentimentality of Chinese people. With its ambiguity in characters andsubtlety in conception, it has called upon numerous readers and scholars to look and imagine from the brief and repeated text to the fullness of its circumstance. This classical lyric gave rise to a vista of English translations vastly different in wording, structure and connotation, which highly suggests the seemingly insurmountable difficulty involved in its translation.

Taking the approach of a case study, this thesis,in the light of hermeneutic theory of “Fusion of Horizons”, probes into the validity of hermeneuticdiversity in the four selected English translations from meaning, rhetoricstyle and cultural contexts. This thesis reflects the historicity of understanding and the significance of retranslation. It also provides a point of reference in discussing ways of rendering Chinese classics.

Keywords:Hermeneutics, Fusion of Horizons, Book of Songs, Jianjia, Retranslation

摘要

迦达默尔在哲学诠释学中所提出的“视界融合”理论对翻译实践和理论研究有着极为重要的启示意义，不但为恰当地理解出发语、表达归宿语提供了方法论依据，同时也有助于解释与落实理解的主观性与阐释的客观性之间的辩证统一。

在哲学诠释学看来，文本永远都呈现一个开放的结构，在与文本的对话中，不同译者受到个人修养、历史境遇、社会意识形态、文化陈规、审美心理、期待视野等影响，必然会受到不同程度的主观制约。以此观照，唯有充分发挥译者的主体间性，融合出一个贯通今古、兼顾他人与自我的更大视界，真正做到“从心所欲不逾矩”，才能令异域的文本在新的文化语境中获得新生。

作为中国第一部诗歌总集，《诗经》承载着中华民族的文脉渊源。而《蒹葭》这一“千古伤心之祖”，以其耐人寻味的意蕴、朦胧渺远的意境、深沉低回的情感和蕴含其中对至真至美的向往与精神追求，引发了人们的无限遐思。众多复译版本的陆续出现，不同角度的翻译探索与尝试，以及译本水平的逐步提高，这些都从侧面反映了这首古典诗歌的翻译难度。

纵观《蒹葭》的四个译本，从理雅各对文本训诂的虔诚考证，到阿瑟·韦利对诗歌本质的纯粹探索；从埃兹拉·庞德对异域意象的生动捕捉，到许渊冲对中西差异的深入体察，都各自有其鲜明的特点和存在的合理性，在译介的过程中肩负着不同的历史使命。

本文试用诠释学“视界融合”理论，以《诗经》中的名篇《蒹葭》为个案，探讨和分析不同历史时期和社会背景下产生的四个英语译本对原文的诠释，从语义、修辞风格和文化语境等三个方面，解读不同译本对艺术作品内涵理解多元化的特征及其时代局限，进而印证了理解的历史性和复译的必要性。同时，本文也试图为典籍英译提供具有方法论意义的参照。

关键词：诠释学，视界融合，诗经，蒹葭，复译

1

Contents

Acknowledgements...... i

Abstract (English)...... ii

Abstract (Chinese)...... iii

Introduction...... 1

Chapter 1 Theoretical Exploration of Hermeneutics and Translation...... 2

1.1Philosophical Hermeneutics and Its Historical Origins...... 2

1.2Historicity of Understanding and the Significance of Retranslation...... 3

1.3Fusion of Horizons and Its Application in Translation...... 5

Chapter 2Comparison of the Four EnglishTranslations of Jianjia...... 7

2.1 Four Translators and Their English Translations...... 7

2.1.1 A Brief Account of the Four Important Translators...... 7

2.1.2 APresentation of the Four Translation Versions...... 9

2.2Different Translation Strategies in the Four Versions...... 12

2.2.1Different Interpretations on the Theme of Jianjia...... 12

2.2.2 DifferentRhetoric Styles of the Four Versions...... 14

Chapter 3Manifestations of Fusion of Horizons in Translating Jianjia.....15

3.1Fusion of Horizons in Terms of Meaning...... 15

3.2Fusion of Horizons in Terms of Rhetoric and Style...... 17

3.3Fusion of Horizons in Terms of CulturalContext...... 18

Conclusion...... 20

Bibliography...... 21

1

上海外国语大学网络教育学院毕业论文

Introduction

Shī Jīng（《诗经》）, known asBook of Songsor the Odes, is the earliest existing anthology of ancient Chinesepoetry and the oldest cherished literary work in Chinesehistory. It ushered in a profound and brilliant landscape of Chineseliterature, exerting a far-reaching influence upon the development of Chinese culture.Itsantiquityandaesthetic value makeita peerofHomer’s epics.Harvard sinologistStephen Owen（宇文所安）praised it as “the classic of the human heart and human mind”. (cf. Waley, 1996:1)

The collectionof 305 pieces comprises three genres: “Fēng（风）, the Airs of the States”, “Yǎ（雅）, the Odes of the Kingdom”, and “Sòng（颂）, the Temple Hymns”.Jiān Jiā（《蒹葭》）in Qín Fēng, Odes of Qin（《秦风》）, one of the most favoured poems in this classic, has been hailed as “the very beginning oftragic expression”（千古伤心之祖）in the development of Chinese poetry.

Jianjia, in Chinese, means “reed”.（芦苇）French mathematician Blaise Pascal (1964)once put it, “Man is but a reed, the mostfeeble thing in nature, but he is a thinking reed.” This statement can be regarded as the epitome of Western Philosophy that emphasizing on logical thinking. However, in China, the reed is emotional, which has been already “planted” in the poem Jianjia thousands of years ago. The imagery of gradually dried-up and withering reeds in the autumn depicts one of the traditional Chinese aestheticpsychologies, reflecting the “will to life” of Chinese nation as well as itspoetic state of existence.Due to its ambiguity in characters andsubtlety in conception, this beautiful poem has called upon numerous translators and scholars to study and interpret throughout the history.

This thesis intends to conductan intensive and effective case study of the four English translations of the poem Jianjia inthe light of philosophical hermeneutics and Gadamer’stheory of “Fusion of Horizons”. Meanwhile, thisthesis examines the significance and necessity of retranslation in the process of historical development.
Chapter One

Theoretical Exploration of Hermeneutics and Translation

1.1Philosophical Hermeneutics and Its Historical Origins

As an essential part of the scholarly disciplines, hermeneutics can be generally defined as the study of both theory and practice of understanding and interpretation.

Hermeneuticshasa time-honoured history in the West. The term “hermeneutics”, a Latinized version of the Greek “hermeneutike” (ἑρμηνευτική),is possibly originated from Hermes, the mythological Greek deity whose role is the messenger of the Gods.He is also considered to be the inventor of language and speech.Hence “the business of the hermēneús [interpreter] was…translating something foreign or unintelligible into the language everybody speaks and understands.”(Gadamer, 2007)

Originally, hermeneutics is designated to govern a valid reading and explanation of the biblical text and decrees of Omniscience. The first modern use of the term is in Sacred Hermeneutics, or a Method of Explicating Sacred Scripture (1654) by Johann Dannhauser.“Since that time theological-philological hermeneutics has been sharply distinguished from juristic hermeneutics.” (Gadamer, 2007)

The 19th century witnessed the shift towards “generalhermeneutics”. Expanded byFriedrich Schleiermacher and Wilhelm Dilthey, it serves as a methodology for the human sciences that aims towardunderstanding in contrast to the methodology of the natural sciences that aims at explanation. (Vessey, 2006)Schleiermacher put forward that“every problem of interpretation is a problem of understanding”.As hebelieved, theinterpreter“mustputhimselfbothobjectivelyand subjectively in the position of the author.Ontheobjectivesideby knowingthe language asthe author knewit and onthe subjective side byknowingtheinnerand outeraspects ofthe author’s life. Thesetwosides can be completed onlyin the interpretation itself”.(Schleiermacher, 1988) Therefore, the interpreter’s subjectivity, accompanied by creativity, is signified in the process of interpretation.

Up to the 20th century, hermeneutics has been developedfrom a methodology of interpretation into a philosophical theory.This remarkable ontologicalturnwas triggered by Martin Heidegger whose ideas were mainly recorded inhis masterpieceBeing and Time (Sein und Zeit, 1927). Heidegger argued that human beings (or rather, Dasein) are related to their surroundings through understanding, and all understanding is interpretive.As Canadian philosopherCharles Taylor once put it, “we are essentially self-interpretingbeings”(Taylor, 1985). Hermeneutics, then, as the study of interpretive understanding, becomes both the means for self-understanding and the model for how humans interact in their environment(Vessey, 2006).

Heidegger’s achievements were carried on by his student Hans-Georg Gadamer. In Truth and Method(Wahrheit und Methode, 1960), Gadamer claimed that “the universal aspect of hermeneutics as a realm of philosophical inquiry is that language is the being of everything which can be understood.”According to Gadamer, language opens up a world to us–a distinctively human world.Language is neither a tool to be used and discarded nor a stumbling block between us and reality; rather it is the medium through which reality comes into focus.(R.Nielsen, 2009)Therefore, as hemaintains, hermeneutics doesn’t merely pay attention to the methodof interpretationbut it is an ontological relationship between an interpreter and a language which is to be interpreted.

Since then, hermeneutics has become a distinguished school in the humanitarian studies, stirring a favour of it in suchinterdisciplinary fields as philosophy, literature, aesthetics, sociology, laws and translation studies which has deeply changed people’s minds and outlooks towards the whole world.

1.2Historicity of Understanding andthe Significance of Retranslation

Gadamer points out that we can never step outside of our tradition; all we can do is try to understand it. Thiselaborates the idea of the historicity of understanding.His notion that each interpretation is an effect of effective-history gives philosophical hermeneutics a historical dimension.

Since human beings exist as a historical reality, we are incapable of escaping the influence of history. The translator, as an interpreter, understands from nowhere but his own social background, cultural stance,aesthetic habits, genderidentity as well aspersonal experiences.Thus his understanding of the original text is not limited in the mere understanding of “language” itself.

In the eyes of Gadamer, “a literaryworkdoesnot pop intotheworldasafinishedandneatlyparcelledbundleofmeaning:ratheritsmeaningdependsonthe historicalsituationoftheinterpreter.Sincetheinterpreter’shorizonofunderstanding is notfixed, so is themeaningofaliterarywork.”（陈宏川, 2002:51）

Jean-Paul Sartre, the most distinguished French existentialist philosopher in the 20th century, once put forward a brilliant statement on the historicity of understanding. In his own words: (Sartre, 1988:71-72)

Thus, the reader I am addressing is neither Micromégas nor L'Ingénu; nor is he God the Father either. He has not the ignorance of the noble savage to whom everything has to be explained on the basis of principles; he is not a spirit or a tabula rasa. Neither is he the omniscience of an angel or of the Eternal Father. I reveal certain aspects of the universe to him; I take advantage of what he knows to attempt to teach him what he does not know. Suspended between total ignorance and omniscience, he has a definite stock of knowledge which varies from moment to moment and which is enough to reveal his historical character. In actual fact, he is not an instantaneous consciousness, a pure timeless affirmation of freedom, nor does he soar above history; he is involved in it. Authors too are historical. And that is precisely the reason why some of them want to escape from history by a leap into eternity. The book, serving as a go-between, establishes an historical contact among the men who are steeped in the same history and who likewise contribute to its making.

As for translation, we always cherished a hope that our own understanding and interpretation was comprehensive and absolutelyperfect by which a total conviction was possible to breedbetween the readerand the author. However, the existence of the historicity of understandinglet us be fully consciousfor the fact that no one can create an exception to escape the historical context and finally leap into eternity. We are destined to be subject to the time limitation. Each understanding is only based on a very brief moment of history.

Meanwhile, human languageexperiences an inconspicuous historical evolution. It is inevitable that the historical distance between the birth of the original text and its translation spans a certain long time. Due to the individual variabilityof cognitive structure, the differencesbehind each social backgroundand evolving contextmay result inmisunderstanding, leading to the many difficulties in translation. However, the errors made by our predecessors should be regarded as signs of times. There is always something worth learning from the past interpretations and from past generally. This furtherclarified the significance and necessity of retranslation.

Translation, in Qian Zhongshu’s words, is indeed “the transmigration of souls”. （钱锺书, 1981）In the process of translating, the linguistic and cultural context on which the original text is dependent should be reconstructed in another language. Due to the changes of languages, cultures and readerships, the reconstruction, undoubtedly, must be faced up tocritical challenges from different aspects, including linguistic distinctions, social and culturalconventions,and even psychological evaluations, both subjectively and objectively.

As Jacques Derrida put it, “Even the most faithful translation of the original is infinitely far from the original, infinitely different from the original works. Because the translation in a new body, new culture, open the text of the new history.”(Derrida, 2001)With the publication of each new translation, the lifeof the originalwillbe transferredand expandedbefore each new readershipthat are housed in different social institutions, thus opening a new historical record of reading and acceptance.

For those reasons, retranslation, as a common phenomenon, deserves to be valued. Each new translation provided us with a new possible approach towards the original. And hence we ought to adopt an objective and dialecticalattitudein evaluating those pervious translations.

1.3Fusion of Horizonsand Its Application in Translation

Gadamer uses the concept of horizon to speak of how comprehension takes place. The“horizon” is defined as, “…the range of vision that includes everything that can be seen from a particular vantage point.” (Gadamer, 2004:301)

In the light of hermeneutics, each understanding or interpretation is mediated by pre-understanding:prejudice, “a judgement which precedes enquiry” (Kant, 1953). In other words, understanding always begins with an already given horizon which is imposed by our historical conditions. Similarly, it’s for sure that the text itself has its own horizon because it was created by the author in a certain past moment. In this connection, a dynamic conversation between the author and the interpreterneeds to be acquired. And this dialogical process results in a fusion of horizons.

Gadamer (1975:258)asserted that, “Understanding is not to be thought of so much as an action of one’s subjectivity, but as the placing of oneself within a process of tradition, in which past and present are constantly fused.”Through the fusion of horizons, a new and broader horizon will be generated, thus realisingthe dialectical unity of boththe interpreter’s subjectivity and the text’s objectivity.

In terms of translation, Gadamer’s theory of “fusion of horizons” brings to lighta harmonious relationship between the author, the translator andreaders. The process of understanding and translation can be illustrated as follows:

Author → Original Text →Interpreter(Reader) → Interpretation

Author →Text (ST) → Translator(Reader A) → Translation (TL) → Reader B

Generally speaking, despite of the transition from ST (source language) into TL (target language), translation shares the same nature with interpretation in regards of process.And, meanwhile, readers also play an important and even decisiverole in the whole process of translation.

Based on Gadamer’s theory, Hans Robert Jauss, who defined literature as a dialectic process of production and reception, proposed the concept of “horizon of expectation” (Erwartungshorizont). Jauss thinks that readers have a certain mental set from which perspective each reader, at any given time in history, reads. For readers of the source language, there exist at least two horizons, namely, horizon of readers at its first publication as well as horizon of the current readers. When the translated text is introduced into target language, also thehorizon of TL readers should not be ignored.

Thus,a translator, as a special reader (Reader A) of an original text, ought to fuse a new horizon that is broad enough to coordinate all the horizons of the author, the three different readerships and him/herself.It is due to this factthat the philosophical concept of inter-subjectivityhas become a guiding principlein translation studies.

Chapter Two

Comparison of the Four English Translations of Jianjia

2.1 Four Translators and Their English Translations

The four selected versions in this thesis are the most representative among all the English translations. To some extent, the four translators with totally different social backgrounds and cultural identities cancomprehensively and chronologically embody the different interpretations and translation principlesapplied to this poem.

2.1.1 ABriefAccount of the Four Important Translators

Fewscholars wouldnotrecognize the nameofJames Legge (A.D. 1815-1897)（理雅各）, a British missionarywho came to China in 1839. His voluminous translations ofthe Confucian canon and early Western sinological sources earned him a reputation as a world-class Chinese scholar in the nineteenth century.

With his will for scholarly endeavours, he became the first one that provided the Englishtranslation of the Book of Songs in its entirety. However, both his prose version, The Book of Poetry (1871, 1879) and metrical version, The Shi King (1876) follows too strictly to the literal meaning of the original lines of this poem that fails to keep its poetic beauty.

James Legge’s translated pieces quoted in this thesis are from The Chinese Classics. vol.4: The Shi King published by Lane Crawford & Company in 1871.

Arthur Waley(A.D. 1889-1966), widely known for his many outstanding translations of Chinese literature into English, was regarded as the greatest English orientalist and sinologist in the first half of the twentieth century.It was because of his excellent translations that the Chinese literature became more easily to be accepted by readers in the West.