Similarities in Liu Zhongde¡¯s and Peter Newmark¡¯s Translation Theory
by Sharp (HUANG XIN)

E-mail:Huang_sharp@sohu.com, huang_sharp@tom.com

Introduction£º1.Liu Zhognde (1914-- ) and Peter Newmark (1916-- ), as we all know, are the contemporary famous translation theorists and professors, having much experience in the translation teaching, practicing and studying. Both have ever commented on the translation work. Mr. Liu says that translation work is hard but still happy. While Mr. Newmark emphasizes, that ¡°translation is so horrible, but it is so enjoyable and satisfying.¡± (Newmark, 2001:224) Mr. Liu has ever translated the famous work Emma three times and says that there not exists the best version but exists a better one, which proves that translation is an endless process. 2. Either has written several books about translation. One of Mr. Liu¡¯s works is very important: Ten Lectures on Literature Translation in 1991, which made him known all over the nation; Mr. Newmark has written Approaches to Translation (1981), A Textbook of Translation (1988), and About Translation(1991), which are the most important representative works. By the way, these works have evoked worldwide repercussions.3. Both have their own theories, which can be called academic patents. Mr. Liu takes out the three translation principles: Faithfulness, expressiveness and closeness, and Newmark does Semantic Translation and Communicative Translation. The two have been the practical translators and already developed a school in translation theories of their own.
I. Similarities in the motivation and methods/ approaches to the translation
Motivation: 1.They devote all their lives to studying the translation theories in order to give service to the translation practice and form a better theoretical pattern and practical procedure in the translation fields. Mr. Liu decided to review Yan Fu¡¯s ¡°Faithfulness, Expressiveness and Elegance¡± after he had translated many kinds of literary works, so his arguments to the translatability of literary style are persuasive and reasonable. The striking characteristic of Newmark¡¯s translation theories is full of examples because he has engaged in translating work, esp. using English, French and Germany to translate for many years. Mr. Newmark says in his book Approaches to Translation, ¡°The motivation that I determine to compose a book is from my classes¡­¡± The laws of translation drawn from their long-term practice, which make the translating work become more efficiently. 2. They inquire into the concrete issues and problems coming up in the translation and conclude some specific skills. Liu Zhongde has summarized the methods how to translate English attributive clauses, the 12 skills how to keep target text be faithful to the original text and the approaches how to deal with the image-rendering and sentence-division in translation from Chinese into English¡­etc. Newmark does state the problems on metaphors, proper nouns, neologisms (new words) and the translation methods of scientific and technical texts. So the combination of theories and practice makes their translation theories be ¡°descriptive¡± and ¡°standard¡±.
Approaches: 1.They two have made efforts to create and form some new principles on the basis of their own experience and selecting and adopting the finest productions from the forerunners and linguistics. On the one hand, as far as Liu Zhongde is concerned, firstly, his Faithfulness, expressiveness and closeness, the three principles, shows that he had adopted and developed Yan Fu¡¯s ¡°faithfulness, expressiveness and elegance¡± and Tytler¡¯s ¡°three laws of translation¡±; secondly, his argument on the relationship between literal translation and liberal translation is influenced by Lu Xun; and the argument that he thinks the style is the subjects viewing the objects as a whole not a single word or a sentence is deduced from Mathew Arnold (British poet and critic, in 19th century). By the way, he has accepted Nida¡¯s theory of Common Core when he stated the translatability. On the other hand, two of Newmark¡¯s contributions to the translation theories are the semantic translation and communicative translation mentioned above, which are based on B¨³hler¡¯s and Jacobson¡¯s theories and are influenced by the semantic and the contemporary communicative theories of Nabokov. Furthermore, he has quoted the componential analysis and case grammar from linguistics into his arguments. Yang Shizhuo commented on Newmark¡¯s in his essay An Introduction to Peter Newmark¡¯s Translation Theories, that Mr. Newmark got these from the other translation theories in the western translation history. 2. Another similarity in the approaches is, they all try their utmost to study the problems in the translation in the objective, fair and academic attitude, and do not hold the point of view of binary opposition and monism in the translation schools. Liu Zhongde advocates the translation is a science as well as an art, which puts the quarrels between the school of science and the school of art to an end and unifies the static/captive description to the linguistic components and the dynamic studies to the translators. He also holds on the point that a qualified translator must have two points of view before he sets about his translation, one is literary point of view, and the other is linguistic point of view. Under the influence of language function(ÓïÑÔ¹¦ÄÜ)of B¨³hler, Newmark divides the texts into six types according to their content, such as expressive function, informative function and vocative function, etc., and advocated the translators should adopt to different translation skills determined by the above.
II. Similarities in the nature of translation
It is for a long time that the school of art and the school of science have been the most representative schools. Both Mr. Liu and Mr. Newmark hold that translation is a science as well as an art. Liu Zhongde says, ¡°Both schools have their strong points and weak points so far as literary translation is concerned.¡± ¡°Translation is not only a science with its own laws and methods but also an art of representation and re-creation.¡±(Liu Zhongde, 2003:12) Peter Newmark says, ¡°Translation is a skill and an art as well as a science.¡± in his book Approaches to Translation, and he also holds that the language can be divided into two, one is standard language, which must be translated under some specific laws; the other is non-standard language, which could be translated better only relying on the translators¡¯ personal abilities. So the former does show that translation is a science and the latter reflects the translation is an art. Newmark points out that: four levels for translators to do in translating work. Firstly, translation is a science, it is very necessary for the qualified translators to be good at the two languages at least (source language and target language), which are used to convey the information or express the ideas. On this level, the translator, of course, be sure to distinguish out the mistakes or distorted facts in the texts. Secondly, translation is a skill, which needs the translators to represent the thought, style¡­ with some specific methods in order to make the readers understand easily. Thirdly, translation is an art. The translators should have the abilities to differentiate the excellent works from the dross, so they have to utilize their creativities, intuition even the inspiration on this level. Finally, translation is an activity relating to one¡¯s (a translator) own spice. Comparing their arguments, we can conclude that they two have already unified the process and the outcome, subjects and objects, constant and variable, faithfulness and creativity in the translation.
III. Similarities in the principles of translation
Talking of the importance and double function of the criteria of translation, Liu Zhongde puts it quite well, saying that ¡°the criteria of translation function and as a plumb-line for measuring the professional level of translation and as a goal set for translators to strive after.¡± (Liu Zhongde, 2003:14) He proposes the three characters ¡°ÐÅ´ïÇС± (faithfulness, expressiveness and closeness), which are more comprehensive and practical. They may be defined as follows:
Faithfulness¡ªto be faithful to the content of the original;
Expressiveness¡ªto be as expressive as the original;
Closeness¡ªto be as close to the original style as possible.
From the principles, we can get the conclusion that Mr. Liu has pointed out the practical methods for the translators in content, expression and the style respectively, and advocated that a translator should put the original into the centre.
Newmark advocates that the principles of translation are accurate( ÄÚÈÝ׼ȷ£¬ÊÂʵ׼ȷ£¬·ç¸ñ׼ȷ) and economical(¼ò½à), the former refers that the translated version should be in accordance with the original, this argument is the same with the Liu Zhongde¡¯. Furthermore, he holds that only using the semantic translation and communicative translation, can a translator assure the version to be faithful (accurate and economical); also puts forward the way of back-translation to check whether the translated version is accurate or not. So he has advanced a new concept about the translation methods¡ªa correlation approach to translation(·­Òë¹ØÁª·¨), in 1994. The meaning is, generally speaking, ¡°the more important the language of the original or source language text, the more closely it should be translated.¡±(Liao Qiyi, 2001:192) He explains that the translator must reproduce the original in dealing with the prose, verse and novels, which are classified into the important. This is a second point to show that they are same in the principles of translation. In the same time, Newmark has the same idea with Mr. Liu by coincidence in the attitude to the source text¡ªthe former divides the process of translation into four levels: textual level, referential level, cohesive level and the level of naturalness. But he emphasizes the textual level¡ªthe textual level is the initial as well the final level in the translation. It is very interesting that the latter also holds that the original is not only the starting point and the basis of the translation but also the criteria and the parameter, which are usually used to comment on whether the translated version is excellent or not.
IV. Similarities in the approaches of translation
When they deal with the problem on the approaches of translation, they two ran back over the controversies (disputes) between the literal translation and the liberal translation in the history. Liu Zhongde makes a quite distinguish between the literal translation and the ¡°dead¡± or mechanical translation, and the liberal translation and the ¡°random¡± translation. He regards the literal translation as the primary or basic method because it will help to make the translation much easier to accomplish the following three purposes: (1). being faithful to the original in ideological, (2). reflecting the scene and flavor of the foreign country concerned and (3). absorbing the new ways of expression. Translation is a linguistic activity which demands objectivity instead of subjectivity from the translators and literal translation is effective means to achieve this end.(Liu Zhongde, 2003:59) Although he emphasizes his key methods¡ªsemantic translation and communicative translation, Newmark pays much attention to the literal translation. Esp. he arranges one chapter to illustrate the importance of the literal translation in his book A Textbook of Translation. Seeing from the ¡°V¡± description of the translation approaches, we can conclude that the literal translation is one of the most important components of his eight methods. He also says that the semantic translation only takes the advantage of the literal translation, word-for-word translation and faithful translation. (Liao Qiyi, 2001:171)
Talking about the relationship of the two methods, they two think that the two methods are indispensable and supplementary to each other with the literal translation as the primary and the free translation as the secondary and ought to be adopted in a flexible and realistic manner.
V. Similarities in the ways of translation criticism:
Liu Zhongde argues that the function of the translation criticism lies in helping improving the quality of the translation, summing up the translation experience so that it can promote the development of translation cause. And Newmark holds that ¡°translation criticism is an essential link between translation theory and its practice.¡± (Newmark, 2001:184). So they two stood in the same position to emphasize its importance.
Mr. Liu has the greatest esteem for Mao Dun¡¯s and Zheng Zhenduo¡¯s attitude and manner to the translation criticism¡ªobjective, learning from each other and aiming at helping others, and he does succeed in that. Mr. Newmark states, ¡°In this, good translation criticism is historical, dialectical, Marxist.¡± (Newmark, 2001:185) Liu Zhongde holds that: the first step, the translation critic should make the comments on the translated version from the literary angle to see whether the translator has transplanted the literature value, social value and the stylistic characters of the original; then, he also should review whether the translator has rendered the target language successfully to reproduce the thought and the style of the original in the aspect of linguistics. So his literary analysis and linguistic analysis are much same with the Newmark¡¯s functional approach and analytical approach besides the guiding ideology mentioned above.
By the way, after illustrating the five steps and three angles of translation criticizing, he points out that, ¡°Translation commentaries and criticisms are creative as well as critical and when you criticize a translation solution, you inevitably feel promoted to produce a better one, even when you feel your thought, your comprehension, is like a prisoner within your language.¡± (Newmark, 2001:229) Liu Zhongde stated that we¡¯d better put forward a new translated version to the original translator while we criticize the original translator. These words portray admirably that they two aim at promoting the translation cause by utilizing the translation criticism efficiently.



Works Cited:(Ommitted)