A Comparative Study of State and Guojia from A Cross-disciplinary Perspective〔＊〕

Li Gengyan

（School of Foreign Languages Hubei University of Economics，Wuhan Hubei 430205）

Ⅰ.State and Guojia from the Perspective of Political Theories

The understanding of Guojia，Guo and Jia in the ancient Chinese language is analyzed as follows.

Guojia is understood as Guo includes dukes or princes under an emperor，while Jia refers to the manor owned by feudal seigniors.In the Book of Rites·Tangongshang，it is recorded，“The feudal emperor has been old，but his offspring is not prosperous and Guojia has been attacked by many disasters”.In Youliyun，it is recorded，“Guojia can be controlled in hands righteously；Guo are the feudal princes，and Jia are officers”.〔1〕

Guo also referred to（1）country and nation；（1）the ruling area of feudal emperor；（3）the territory within the political power of the feudal princes.〔2〕

Jia referred to（1）family，and house；（2）getting married and establishing a family；（3）household and manor.〔3〕

Therefore，Guo and Jia were not greatly different in political implications：one referred to dukes or princes under an emperor，and the other meant feudal officials.From this perspective，there seems to be no fundamental contradiction to use Guojia for translating state in terms of political implications.But the key is that Jia not only referred to feudal officers，and its ancient meaning was similar to that in the modern Chinese language，namely，“a social life community and population reproduction unit formed based on marriage，blood relationship，and adoption”〔4〕—this is almost its most basic meaning and also the most direct recognition of everyone on it.

Next，an important difference is briefly analyzed between Chinese and western political theories：the combination of China’s Guo and Jia，and the opposition between western home and state.The private sphere represented by home and the public sphere represented by state are deemed as two different aspects of human life，and the difference and opposition between the two sides are the premise and condition of deciding their own importance and integrity.〔5〕Many western languages including English were commonly originated from the ancient Greek culture.Therefore，only the opposition between home and state in the ancient Greek period is briefly introduced here.The city-state system was a Greek tradition，but also an infrangible trend of Greek political thoughts.〔6〕

Certainly，an emphasis on the difference and opposition between the private sphere and the public sphere in the western tradition does not mean the difference between the two sides is always respected and maintained strictly by people in the actual western life— this has been obvious to all in how to evaluate the government officials.〔7〕It is deniable that scholars tried to fundamentally change the division between the private sphere and the public sphere as well as a series of problems in the philosophy and politics，and they suggested thoroughly abolishing the thinking model of the binary opposition and underlining the integration between the public sphere and the private sphere or a multi-level division between all the spheres rather than private and public spheres.〔8〕

Chinese was entirely different：in the Confucian tradition，people were more inclined to understand human life as a complex，differently latitudinal network in which the difference between Guo and Jia and the importance or priority of activities in the public sphere compared with the private sphere were not deliberately stressed.〔9〕Some scholars think that Guo and Jia were thoroughly abandoned in Confucianism —the difference and opposition between the private sphere and the public sphere.〔10〕Many scholars even think，“The basic characteristic of the ancient Chinese politics lies in the highly-integrated ethical politics of Guo and Jia.”〔11〕

In fact，wordings about“cultivation of one’s moral character，governance of common people，administration of country，and stabilizing the society”had always existed in in the Confucian tradition，while the opposition between western home and state did not exist.The consideration in the Confucian thoughts on the conflict between Guo and Jia was totally different from that in the western world—contradiction or conflict was often produced in a specific external environment and not completely unavoidable or insurmountable，but an absolute conflict in the moral responsibility did not exist.Jia would not pose a threat to Guo，and the people’s care for Jia would not hinder the care for Guo，so the boundaries of Jia could be transcended without difficulties.〔12〕Moreover，the development of Guo was also promoted by Jia—the stability，harmony and development of Guo could be guaranteed through extending the very natural care for Jia to the sphere of Guo.Briefly，Jia was a microcosm of Guo，and Guo was an expansion of Jia.〔13〕

Seen from above，there were no any contradictions in the combined use of Guo and Jia，and this just reflected the differences between Chinese and western cultural traditions.Meanwhile，this was why Guo and Jia were put in an equal position in many Chinese folk adages such as“virtuous prime minister is missed by feudal ruler in the unstable period；agood wife is missed by husband in the poor period”，“the people’s livelihood gets harder if Guo is weak；an infant is born with bitter if Jia is poor”，“a few thieves and brigands will exist once Guo is prosperous；offspring is judicious once Jia is harmonious”，and “Guo can’t exist without a ruler；Jia can’t exist without a leader”.〔14〕However，these similar things were rare in English.

Ⅱ.Analysis on State ad Guojia from the Perspective of Linguistics

Why Guojia is used for translating“state”is briefly explained from the perspective of linguistics.In Chinese，Guojia is disyllabic and includes Guo and Jia；in English，“state”is only one word.For English，word is the basic unit—the phrases above word or the morphemes below word can’t be used as the basic unit.Almost no scholars proposed to use phrases as the basic unit of English；morphemes are the results of analysis—they can’t be immediately identified by the English-speaking people on the premise of not studying grammars.〔15〕But scholars are difficult to reach a consensus about what the basic unit is for Chinese.It is almost affirmatively said that character was the basic unit of the ancient Chinese without doubts，but difficulties will appear if character or word is identified as the basic unit of the modern Chinese.The difficulties and misunderstandings emerging in the process of using Guojia for translating“state”are correlated with the unstable attitude toward the basic unit.

Orderliness，such as phonological harmony and words in pairs，has always been emphasized in Chinese since the ancient times；monosyllable was preponderant in the ancient Chinese，while disyllable exists everywhere in the modern Chinese.〔16〕The practice that one character Guo is used for translating “state”does not conform to the idiomatic usage in the modern Chinese in most cases，and otherwise any doubts about using Guojia for translating“state”will never be eliminated.

At this time of cultural globalization，translators as cultural communicators must abide by the principle of giving priority to alienation and putting domestication in a secondary position.〔17〕The Chinese’s balance and rhythm beauty is just embodied in the disyllable orientation of the modern Chinese，and this is one of the Chinese characteristics in comparison with English.〔18〕Therefore，in the process of English-Chinese translation，using Chinese disyllable for translating English words conforms to the principle of translation and also shows a respect to the modern Chinese characteristics.

Through the above analysis，it can be asserted that the problem of using Guojia（a disyllable contaiing Jia）for translating“state”can’t be solved，but this point is unnecessarily stressed too much in the point view of the author.As mentioned above，the problem will always exist unless the ancient Chinese is used by the modern Chinese people again.But the problem actually is not as serious as it appeared for the first time，if the cultural traditions of both the source language and the target language are basically understood.Why do translators unnecessarily feel depressed in the face of this problem？This is because the solution is either totally making use of the ancient Chinese，or accepting the western culture and abandoning the traditional Chinese cultural tradition.However，such a solution is absolutely not acceptable for the Chinese national culture.

Ⅲ.Conclusion

In English and Chinese languages，the differences in the conceptual expressions and translations related society are caused by the different Chinese and western social and historical backgrounds.〔19〕In the process of translation，the perspective of the social culture can be taken into consideration first once such a concept appears，so that the translation and the original are equivalent as much as possible through a combination with the basic politics，especially the political ethics.Increasingly more people and even some people keeping the“superiority theory of western culture”for a long time have come to realize，“Translation is a cross-language，cross-cultural，and equal two-way communication；there is no good and bad distinction between cultures and they are just different”.In today’s era of economic globalization，the trend of cultural globalization is beyond doubts.As China’s political and economic power in the world has been recognized in the world，the fact that the Chinese language has gradually been popular in the world makes the people feel enough confident.In the process of English-Chinese translation，the characteristics of the Chinese culture and language can be fully respected by translators.Furthermore，such a practice lets westerners more willing to know and understand the Chinese culture，and helps the Chinese culture to be truly and comprehensively displayed on the world cultural stage.

〔1〕Fu Xueyi，Lianmian Dictionary，Beijing：Zhong Hua Press，1983，Vol.1，p.199.

〔2〕Zong Fubang，Chen Shirao，Xiao Haibo，Gu Xun Hui Zhuan，Beijing：The Commercial Press，2003，p.402.

〔3〕Zong Fubang，Chen Shirao，Xiao Haibo，Gu Xun Hui Zhuan，Beijing：The Commercial Press，2003，p.575.

〔4〕China Encyclopedia Dictionary Editorial Board，Chinese Encyclopedia Dictionary，Beijing：China Encyclopedia Publishing House，1999，Vol.3，p.2559.

〔5〕Steinberger，Peter J.，Public and Private，Political Studies，1999，Vol.47，p.292.

〔6〕Tian Zhongxun，Home and Cities— Discussion on the Ancient Political Organization Structures of China and the Western World，Journal of International Relations，2008（4）.

〔7〕Magnell，Thomas，Private Values in a Public Arena，Journal of Value Inquiry，2004，Vol.38，p.1.

〔8〕Grear，Anna，Theorizing the Rainbow？The Puzzle of the Public-Private Divide，Res Publica，2003，Vol.9，p.170.

〔9〕Dallmayr，F(xiàn)red，Confucianism and the Public Sphere：Five Relationships plus One？Dao：A Journal of Comparative Philosophy，2003，Vol.2，No.2，p.194.

〔10〕Foust，Mathew A.，Perplexities of Filiality：Confucius and Jane Addams on the Private/Public Distinction.Asian Philosophy，2008，Vol.18，No.2，pp.150-151.

〔11〕Liu Junjie，Analysis on the“Home-country Integration”and the Ancient Chinese Ethical Politics，The Social Science（Chinese Version）in Inner Mongolia，2006（6）.

〔12〕Tan，Sor-hoon，Between Family and State：Relational Tensions in Confucian Ethics，In Alan K.L.Chan（Ed.），Mencius：Contexts and Interpretations，Honolulu：University of Hawaii Press，2002，pp.171，173-174.

〔13〕Gu Zhengkun，The Human Universal Values in the 21st Century：Home— Country — Tianxia Doctrine.The People’s BBS，2013（7）.

〔14〕Sea Editorial Committee，Language Sea（Vol.2），Shanghai Literature and Art Publishing House，2000，p.1403.

〔15〕Pan Wenguo，Research on Character Standards and the Chinese，Shanghai：East China Normal U-niversity Press，2002，p.98.

〔16〕Lian Shuneng，A Contrastive Study of English and Chinese（Supplement），Beijing：Higher Education Press，2010，p.48.

〔17〕Li Qijiu，Li Shiqin，English Translation for the“Yu”Image of Chinese Classical Poetry under the Concept of“Cultural Translation”，F(xiàn)oreign Language and Foreign Language Education，2009（9）.

〔18〕Lian Shuneng，A Contrastive Study of English and Chinese（Supplement），Beijing：Higher Education Press，2010，p.48.

〔19〕Lin Wei，A Review of Conceptual Translation of“Civil Society”— Discussion on the Understanding and Expression of the Chinese and Western Worlds，Journal of Chinese Translation，2012（5）.