1922 Mao Dun wrote in the article Literal Translation and Dead Translation: "Recently, quite a few people criticized literal translation; They don't mean "I don't understand" or "I look tired". We think literal translation seems more difficult, or there may be, but we will never understand it. Translation that you can't understand is literal translation, not literal translation.
1934, Mao Dun wrote in the article Literal Translation, Literal Translation and Deviation Translation: "Literal translation became an authority after the May 4th Movement. This is a "distorted translation" against Lin Qinnan. We say that Lin's translation is a' crooked translation', but in fact we don't mean to spoil him at all; We don't think the word' free translation' is suitable for Lin's translation, so we call it' crooked translation'. "
1980, Mao Dun recalled this past event in the preface of Selected Works of Mao Dun's Translation. He wrote: "Later, some translators arbitrarily added or deleted the original text without paying attention to the faithful' free translation' or even' crooked translation', which was even worse than Lin's translation."
Judging from the above situation, in the 1920s and 1930s, those who opposed literal translation were opposed to translations that were incomprehensible or seemed laborious. Those who oppose free translation oppose adding or deleting the original text at will and do not attach importance to the translation that is faithful to the original text.
Lu Xun also actively advocated literal translation.
Later, it was suggested that literal translation and free translation are the same thing and cannot be distinguished.
1946, Zhu Guangqian wrote in "On Translation": "The so-called literal translation refers to the literal translation of the original text, word for word translation, and the second order of the sentence remains unchanged. The so-called' free translation' means to express the meaning of the original text in Chinese, without completely following the text and order of the original text. Literal translation emphasizes loyalty to the original text, while free translation emphasizes fluency in the tone of the translated text. There is a heated debate about which translation is the most appropriate. In my opinion, the difference between literal translation and free translation should not exist at all. ..... If you want to express the meaning of the original text as much as possible, you must try to keep the sentence structure of the original text. Therefore, literal translation cannot be free translation, and free translation cannot be free translation. "
1953, Lin Handa wrote in the article Principles of Translation: "The correct translation is literal translation, that is, free translation. Dead translation is different from Hu translation, and dull translation is different from qu translation, which can be divided into two parts. It's all mistranslation. Correct translation cannot be divided into literal translation or free translation. "
From 65438 to 0959, Zhou wrote an article entitled On Literal Translation for foreign language teaching and translation. He wrote in his article: "Literal translation is neither dictionary translation nor dead translation or hard translation. It is a translation method that requires true free translation and accurate translation without losing the tone and context of the original text. In other words, literal translation at that time was true free translation. "
If people thought that literal translation was also free translation in the forties and fifties of last century, and the two could not be distinguished, then in the seventies and eighties, people analyzed literal translation and free translation respectively.
1982 Zhou wrote in Three Treatises on Translation that literal translation can be divided into three categories: the first category is transliteration and meaningless translation. For example, democracy is translated as "Demo Clasey" instead of "democracy". The second category is literal translation. For example, crocodile tears, translated as "crocodile tears", are not "hypocritical tears". The third category is translation according to the structure or word order of the original text, not according to China's language habits and word order. For example, "There you are," she said. Finally, he pointed out that "there seems to be a lot of such literal translation, but as far as an article or a book is concerned, there are few elements of literal translation."
1978 Xu Yuanchong also talked about literal translation and free translation in his article Several Contradictions in Translation. He said: "Literal translation is a translation method that puts loyalty to the original content in the first place, loyalty to the original form in the second place, and fluent translation form in the third place. Free translation, on the other hand, puts the content faithful to the original in the first place and the fluent translation form in the second place, rather than sticking to the translation method of the original form. " Finally, he drew five conclusions, which can be summarized as two points: first, when the same translation form and the original can express the same content as the original, it can be translated literally, and when it cannot be expressed, it can be translated freely; 2. When the expression of the original text is more accurate and powerful than the translation, it can be translated directly, and when the expression of the translation is more accurate and powerful than the original text, it can be translated freely.
1979, Wang Zuoliang wrote in the article Meaning, Style and Translation: "Literal translation should be decided according to the different situations of the original text. Free translation is free translation. An excellent translator can always take care of the overall situation, stick to the part and be faithful to the soul of the original. It is also convenient for readers to understand and accept. Good translation always has both literal translation and free translation: wherever it can be translated literally, it must be translated freely. "
From the above situation, translators in 1970s and 1980s analyzed and compared literal translation and free translation, and adopted an inclusive attitude. This shows that contemporary translators are more mature in theory than those in the 1920s and 1930s or even 1950s.
Abroad, colleagues in the translation field are also discussing this issue. Professor george steiner of Cambridge University advocates free translation. In his book After the Tower of Babel published in 1975, he developed the idea of free translation put forward by john dryden, a British scholar in17th century. He wrote: "The correct translation method should be neither literal translation nor imitation, but free translation. The so-called free translation means that the translator has a certain degree of freedom, and he should always see the author so as not to get lost, but mainly follow the author's meaning and not stick to words. He can extend the meaning of the author, but he can't change it. According to Dryden, this is the way Edmund Waller and Sidney Godolphin translated the fourth volume of Virgil's epic Aeneas in 1658. More importantly, Dryden himself adopted this method when translating the works of Yuan Qi, Horace, Ovid, Zhu Venal, Chaucer and others, and also expounded it when commenting on other people's translations (for example, the preface to Sylvia published by 1685). Through free translation,' the author's spirit can spread without loss. A good translation is like a sketch. Ideally, translation will not deprive the original text of its authority, but it can show us what it would look like if it were written in our language. "
Some foreign scholars have also expressed similar views. Do you agree with them?