Zhao Ni

(School of Interpretation and Translation, Shandong University, Weihai, Shandong, 264209)

Abstract: In the field of translation, it has always been a hot topic to choose appropriate translation strategies for transmitting cultural content. The two main translation methods are domestication and foreignization, which have been the focus of debate since their appearance. This paper aims to analyze the choice of domestication and foreignization from a new angle, namely teleology.

Keywords: domestication, foreignization, teleology

1. Definition of domestication and foreignization

Domestication refers to the culture-oriented translation of the target language, that is, using uncommon expressions in the target language culture to transform them into familiar expressions, so that the translation can be easily understood by the target language readers. Foreignization is a kind of source culture-oriented translation, which strives to preserve the exotic atmosphere as much as possible in order to transfer the source language and culture to the target language.

2. Summary of the dispute between domestication and foreignization.

The dispute between foreignization and domestication can be regarded as an extension of the dispute between literal translation and free translation. Literal translation should not only follow the content of the source language, but also follow the form of the source language, which is called word-for-word translation. Translators engaged in literal translation are willing to sacrifice the formal elements of the target language, even the understandability of the target language text, in order to maintain the integrity of the source text they think. Those who favor free translation often choose to sacrifice the form of the source language in order to pursue the elegance and understandability of the target language. However, most scholars believe that literal translation and free translation are limited in content and form. When the two languages are very similar in structure, the problems of literal translation and free translation may not seem so acute.

There are some similarities between these two strategies: literal translation and foreignization emphasize the linguistic and stylistic features of the source text, and the target text translated by these methods may not be fluent in language and the content may not be familiar to the target readers, so they may feel strange when reading the translation, while free translation and domestication pay more attention to the target audience, because of fluent sentences, familiar expressions and cultural phenomena, and sometimes the target readers may not realize that they are actually reading the translated text of another culture. However, this does not mean that two pairs are just one pair. There are some differences between them. No matter whether literal translation or free translation is adopted, the translator mainly pays attention to the linguistic factors of the original text and tries his best to preserve the meaning of the original text in the translation. However, with the development of translation studies, many translators and theorists realize that translation is a much more complicated activity, involving various cultural, poetic, political and economic factors. Therefore, foreignization and domestication are a pair of new translation strategies, which are more complex and extensive than literal translation and free translation.

3. New method: teleology

In terms of specific literary works, which strategy is more appropriate? Which strategy, foreignization or domestication, can make the translation produce better results in the target readers? So far, no theory can give a clear answer to this question, and no theorist can completely deny one of them. Personally, I think that domestication and foreignization are just two different translation strategies, which should complement each other, because both methods play an irreplaceable role in translation practice. Strictly demanding the other party just pushes the strategy to the extreme. From the perspective of functionalism theory, these two strategies are reasonable if used in appropriate occasions.

3. 1 Summary of Skopos Theory

Translation, as a kind of translation behavior, like other human behaviors, must be guided by a certain purpose. In translation practice, the choice of strategies should not be decided by the text itself or the translator himself, but mainly by the purpose of translation. This purpose-oriented translation method is one of the central ideas of functionalism theory. The functional translation theory put forward by German scholars provides a new perspective for translation studies. German scholars are called "German School": Katarina Rice and her functional translation criticism, Hans. Vermeer's skopos theory and its extension, Hosta Holtz-Mantari's translation behavior theory and Christiane Nord's loyalty plus skopos theory. (Nord 200 1:4)

Functionalists pay attention to the function of text and translation, or to the purpose of translation in German. According to functional translation theory, namely Vermeer's Skopos Theory, there are three main principles in Skopos Theory, namely Skopos Principle, Coherence Principle and Faithfulness Principle. In functional translation theory, the first principle of any translation is "Skopos principle", that is, translation behavior is determined by its Skopos; That is, "the means to prove the purpose is justified" (Rice and Vermeer 1984: 10 1). Vermeer explained Skopos Theory as follows: The way of translation/explanation/speaking/writing should make your text/translation work with people who want to use it, and work exactly in the way they want it to work (Vermeer 1989a: 20). In the field of translation, we can distinguish three possible purposes: the general purpose pursued by the translator in the translation process, the communicative purpose pursued by TT in the target situation, and the purpose pursued by specific translation strategies or procedures. Nevertheless, the term "purpose" usually refers to the purpose of TT, (Nord, 200 1: 27-28), which is decided by the initiator of translation behavior. Although most translation behaviors have multiple purposes to achieve, or more than one purpose to achieve, they usually follow a hierarchical order. As a decision-maker, the translator should judge which specific purpose is most important to him in the process of translation. This also gives the translator a new perspective to decide what strategies to adopt in the whole translation process. The translator's task is to determine and use appropriate strategies to achieve his goal. As Vermeer said, the purpose of translation is that one must consciously and consistently translate according to certain principles of respecting the target text. The theory does not explain what the principle is, which must be decided separately in each specific case (1989b: 182).

Coherence rules are also called intra-textual coherence by functionalists. It requires the translation to be meaningful in the communicative environment that accepts it. It stipulates that translation should be acceptable in a sense, that is, it is consistent with the receiver's position (Reiss and Vermeer1984:113). Therefore, in the process of translation, the translator should carefully consider the target culture and make some changes to make the translation easy to understand. Otherwise, the translation may lose its meaning and become meaningless in the target culture.

Since translation is the provision of information about the original text, the translation must have some connection with the original text. Vermeer called this relationship "intertextuality coherence" or "faithfulness". This coherence exists between the source text and the target text, and its form depends on the translator's understanding of the source text and the translation purpose.

The core of Skopos Theory is that translation purpose plays the most important role in the translation process, or that "translation purpose determines the translation process". However, when the translation purpose is inconsistent with the original author's communication intention, the problem arises. Christiane Nord, another member of the German School, put forward her principle of loyalty, that is, the translator has obligations to both the source language and the target language. It refers to the translator's responsibility to the original author, target readers and other subjects involved in translation interaction. Nord emphasized that this term should not be confused with "faithfulness" or "faithfulness", which usually refers to the relationship between the original text and the translation. Loyalty is an interpersonal category, which refers to a social relationship between people. Loyalty requires the translator to be responsible for the target readers, but this does not mean that the translator must always do exactly what the readers expect. At the same time, translators should also have a sense of moral responsibility not to deceive readers.

4. Domestication and foreignization within the framework of teleology.

4. 1 the relationship between the two strategies

Under the framework of teleology, from the perspective of neo-functionalism, alienation and domestication are not contradictory. Since translation usually involves many purposes, different strategies must be adopted to achieve each purpose. Functional translation theory can guide him to choose more appropriate translation strategies in specific translation activities. Under the framework of functional translation theory, the client or sponsor should inform the translator of the detailed information about the behavior at the beginning, such as the expected function and audience of the target text. Considering all these factors carefully, the translator can choose foreignization or domestication.

If the purpose of translation is to broaden the horizon of the target readers and introduce the source culture into the target culture, the translator may choose alienation. In this way, the source culture can be transferred to the target culture, further enriching the target culture and language. However, this method is not suitable for all cases of text. The acquisition of cultural loyalty should not be at the expense of vague and broken language, which will lead to misunderstanding or reduce the readability of the target text. Therefore, translators should also consider localization factors when using foreignization strategies.

On the contrary, if the aim is to provide a smoother translation for ordinary readers, we should adopt the method of domestication. It will overcome cultural barriers and language barriers and provide a simple reading. Then the most important task for translators is to eliminate cultural conflicts, which may be obstacles in communication and lead to misunderstandings. The translator's job also includes understanding the connotation of some cultural elements in the source text. Therefore, successful communication can be achieved. However, domestication strategy also has its limitations. Sometimes it may not be appropriate, because translation should read like translation, keeping some foreign and exotic things. If it loses all the features of translation, it may also lose its function.

Therefore, these two strategies have their own advantages and disadvantages. They are far from omnipotent, and they can only achieve different goals by translating the outline. Alienation and domestication are actually dialectical and complementary.

Different participants play different roles, among which the expected TT receiver is very important. This is why in Vermeer's theoretical framework, one of the most important factors determining the purpose of translation is the addressee, who is the expected recipient or audience of TT, who has the world knowledge of a specific culture, their expectations and their communication needs. Any translation is aimed at the target audience, because translation means "producing the target text for the target purpose and the target audience in the target environment" (1987a:29).

Text is created by and for the receiver. Different recipients, even the same recipient, find different meanings from the same language material provided by the text at different times. What a translator can and should do is to translate a text that is at least meaningful to the target cultural recipients.

4.2 Case study

For example, for the two versions of A Dream of Red Mansions translated by Yang and his wife respectively, the two translators have taken different approaches to the cultural factors in the story. Yang and Dai Naidie Yang dedicate their translations to foreign readers who have some knowledge or at least a little knowledge of the culture of China and China. In short, the readers of Yang's translation are foreigners or experts who know Chinese and its culture. On the contrary, Hawkes' translation is for ordinary English-speaking readers, who may not know much about China. His main purpose is to bring happiness to western readers. Yang, and Hawksky adopted different translation strategies for their different translation purposes. Yang, Dai Naidie mainly adopted foreignization translation, while Hawkes adopted domestication translation. This difference in strategy can be reflected in the translation of various proverbs and idioms in the two versions.

For example:

Man proposes, God disposes; The plan is in people, but the result is in the sky.

Yang's version: Man proposes, God disposes.

Man proposes, God disposes.

Know people, know faces, but don't know hearts.

Yang's version: You can know a person's face, but not his heart.

Hawkes' version: Appearance is of course deceptive.

Clever daughter-in-law cooks porridge without rice.

Young's version:

Even the cleverest housewife can't cook without rice.

Hawkes' version:

Even the cleverest housewife can't make bread without flour.

Obviously, Yang's translation keeps the form, content, structure and even word order of the original as much as possible, making it closer to Chinese. Hawkes, on the other hand, abandoned the original form and gave it only implicit meaning, or replaced the cultural image with the cultural image of the target language. In this way, readers can easily understand this version.

However, this does not mean that Yang Xianyi and his wife will insist on literal translation of the original form and content regardless of the target readers, or Hawkes will always insist on strict domestication. For example:

Covet the land of Shu after seizing Gansu-greed for profit

Young's version:

The more you get, the more you want.

Hawkes' version:

One conquest breeds a desire for another.

The heart knows better than the stem, and the disease is not as good as the west.

Yang's version:

She looks more sensitive than Picken and more delicate than his Shih Tzu.

1 "Bigan" A prince who was famous for his cleverness at the end of Shang Dynasty.

2 "Xi Shi" is a famous beauty of ancient Yue State.

Hawkes' version:

Her heart is more than the martyred Bi Gan;

More painful than beautiful giving.

Bi Gan and Xi Shi are two historical figures that China readers are very familiar with. The former is a man with high IQ, while the latter is a beautiful woman. In a sense, they are almost China copies of Solomon and Venus in western culture.

In the above example, the two translators seem to conflict with their own translation methods, because Yang Xianyi and his wife gave clear and concise definitions, while Hawkes translated more literally and added detailed explanations. Their translation methods have not changed from beginning to end. In fact, they adopt different methods according to their own needs and translation purposes.

For example,

At that time, I just returned to the 93 rd issue, that is, if you don't go, Aunt Xue will have a hard time. (A Dream of Red Mansions)

It's the ninth day after the wedding. On this day, we should visit the bride's family. If they don't go, Zhou Rui's family will feel torn. (translated by Yang et al.)

Since the concept expressed by the source term is not lexicalized at all in the translation, the translator added some necessary information or explanations on the basis of the literal translation of $ TERM' s "Back to the 93rd Issue". In other cases, even if the translator intends to make the translation conform to the target language norms in terms of language form and expression, some items can be translated literally according to their foreign flavor, as long as these expressions have been accepted and recognized by the target readers.

5. Comments and conclusions

Functionalist translation theory emphasizes the expected functions of text and translation. Therefore, domestication and foreignization are not incompatible, but should be complementary. They are just two different translation strategies, and we should not take them to extremes: domestication does not mean that translators can adapt them at will, nor does foreignization mean word-for-word translation or static translation. What we should do is to strike a balance between the two, and choosing one does not deny the application of the other. Even if the translator adopts domestication strategy to make the translation easy to be understood by the recipient, he/she can still retain the original image related to the expression of specific cultural load; On the other hand, even if the purpose of translation is to preserve the exoticism and introduce foreign culture into the target language, some places that seem unnatural or even unacceptable to the target language readers and language must be modified. On the basis of comprehensive analysis of various factors involved in the translation process, translators follow domestication and foreignization, and they can decide which cultural factors should be retained and how, which factors should be accepted by the target culture and the degree of adaptation.

In other words, there is no need to say that one strategy is better than the other, as long as they can serve the expected function of the target text, they all have their own roles in translation.

philology

(1) Wang Dongfeng. Transformation and alienation: the intersection of spear and shield [J]. Chinese translation, 2002, (5).

(2) Guo Dongnv. On the Translation of Cultural Factors from the Perspective of Skopos Theory [J]. Journal of Hebei Institute of Technology, 2003, (5).

③ Guo Jianzhong. Cultural factors in translation: alienation and standardization [J]. Foreign languages, 1998, (2).

Wang Ping. Domestication and Foreignization: Translation Strategies of Reaching the Same Goal by Different Ways [J]. Journal of Fuzhou University, 2004, (1).

(5) Fan and Liu Quanfu. On the purpose of translation choice [J]. China translation, 2002, (1 1).

Meng zhigang. On the dialectical unity of foreignization and domestication in translation [J]. Journal of Xi International Studies University, 1999(4).

Eugene Nida, Language, Culture and Translation. Shanghai Foreign Language Education Press, 1993.

(8) North Christian. Translation is interpreted as a purposeful activity-functionalism. Shanghai Foreign Language Education Press, 200 1.