On Translation Three—Beauty of Ancient Chinese Poems into English

黃皓

中圖分類號(hào)：G633.41 文獻(xiàn)標(biāo)識(shí)碼：B文章編號(hào)：1672-1578（2017）09-0100-02

By "beautifullization" I mean a translated verse should be as beautiful as the original in sense， in sound and in form. The beauty in sense is to express the original meaning accurately； the beauty in sound refers to beat and tone， and rhyming-scheme； the beauty in form means the length and symmetry of each line.

The ancient Chinese poems primarily include a poem with seven characters to a line and a poem with five characters to a line； the first may be translated in Alexandrine style， 12-syllable iamb each line， and the second may be translated in Heroic style， 10-syllable iamb each line. As early as 1898， Herbert A Giles published his rhymed translations of Tang poems， of which Lytlon Strachey said"the poetry is it is the best that this generation has known，" and that is "holds a unique place in the literature of the world.""through its mastery of the tones and depths of affection". Later， Arthur Waley said in his translations from the Chinese. "If one uses thyme， it is impossible not to sacrifice sense to sound，" and he translated Tang poems into free verse. Thus began the controversy between rhymed version and free version in the translation of Chinese poetry. Generally speaking， the free translation emphasizes faithfulness to the original while the rhymed version， the beauty of the translated verse. Therefore， the controversy between these two types of translation may be said to be contradiction or conflict between faithfulness or truth and beauty. For instance， we may read the following versions of Li Bai's Farewell to a Friend. The first version is a word for word translation or transliteration， the second is more faithful to the original in word while the third is more beautiful and poetical than the second.

（1） blue hill traverse north wall

white water wind east town

this place once for part

lonely thistledown thousand miles journey

float cloud roam son idea

fall sun old man feeling

wave hand from here go

sough spot horse neigh

（2） Green hills range north of the walled city，

The White River curves along its east.

Once we part here you'll travel far alone

Like the tumbleweed swept by the autumn wind.

A floating cloud-a wayfarer's feeling from home，

The setting sun - the affection of an old friend.

Waving adieu， as you now depart from me，

Our horses neigh， loath to part from each other.endprint

（3） Blue mountatins bar the northern sky；

White water girds the eastern town.

Here is the place to say goodbye；

You'll drift like lonely thistledown.

With floating cloud you'll float away；

Liking parting day I'll part from you.

You wave your hand and go your way；

Your steed still neighs， "Adieu， adieu！"

If we compare these versions， we may say the second is faithful to the original so far as words are concerned， and the third is as balanced as the first so far as lines are concerned. If we compare their diction， we may find "range" is it geographic term and "curve" a geometric one， and they are not so beautiful as "bar" and "gird"， for the one may be found in Keats' verse "while barred clouds bloom the soft dying day." And the other may remind us of Edmund Waller's poem On a Girdle. What is more important is the third couplet. In the second version "feeling" and "affection" are used， these two words are rather prosaic. In the third we can find no such words but the repetition of "float" and "part"， which cannot be found but implied in the original and which make the version more poetical. The same is true of the "adieu" in the last verse. These may be called creative translation or recreation. In the fourth line of the second version we find the tumbleweed "swept by the autumn wind"， which cannot be found in the original either， can it be called creative translation？ If the poet compares his friend to tumbleweed "swept by the autumn wind"， he implies that the friend is forced to leave the place， which is not the case. So I think the "swept" phrase should be considered as mistranslation. The differences between mistranslation and creative translation lies in whether the translator makes his version better or worse. A creative translator should make his reader understand and enjoy his version and even delight in it.

The difference between faithful translation and creative translation may be considered as contradiction between truth and beauty， or between science and art. Sometimes there is unity between them， that is the reason why keats says. "Beauty is truth， truth beauty". But more often than not there is more contradiction than unity so far as verse translation is concerned. For instance ，a conplet of Du Fu may be translated as follows：

（1） word for word transliteration：

literature piece thousand ancient affair

gain loss inch heart know

（2）a piece of literature is meant for the millennium.endprint

But its ups and downs are known already in the author's heart.

（3）A poem may long， long remain.

Who knows the poet's loss and gain？

（4）A verse may last a thousand years.

Who knows the poet's smiles and tears！

When we compare these four versions， we may find "a piece of literature" and "loss and gain" faithful to the original in words， and in these two cases may we say that there is unity between truth and beauty or between science and art. As Rokert Frost said， poetry is "saying one thing and meaning another，" so when Du Fu said "a piece of literature，" he meant a poem or verse， for he did not write much prose but poetry. So "a piece of literature" may be particularized into "poem" or "verse" here. As to "gain and loss，" this phrase may either be generalized into "ups and downs" or particularizd into "smiles and tears." Here we see more contradiction than unity in verse translation.

From the above examples we may conclude that the science school of translation emphasizes truth， that is ，translation should be faithful to the original in word， in form and in sense， while the art of school emphasizes beauty， that is ，a translated verse should be as beautiful as the original in sense ，in sound and in form. When a faithful version is not beautiful， we may use the methods of equalization （for example， milliennium）， generalization （long，long ）， and /or particularization（a thousand years） in order to make the reader understand and enjoy the version and delight in it. Poetry ， said Coleridge ，is "the best words in the best order." If the equivalent in the translated text is not the best word， we may sacrifice the equivalent to the best，that is to say， we may make the fullest possible use of the best expressions in the target language.

In a certain sense， we may even say that literary translation is rivalry between the source language and the target language， to see which can better express the original idea. "Art of beantifulization and creation of the best as in rivalry". By "ization" I include equalization， generalization and particularization； by "ion" I imply comprehension， appreciation and admiration， by "creation" I understand the translator should be creative as the author of the original metamorphosed， writing and creating in the target language； by "the best" I mean an art of competition to see which version can better express the original idea， and make the reader understand and enjoy the poetry and delight in it .endprint