1.Introduction

Biancheng, written by Shen Congwen, has a far-reaching influence in the literary field. It is mainly about the romantic story among Cuicui (the heroine), Tianbao and Nuosong (the two protagonists): Cuicui lived with her grandfather in Chatong. The two brothers, Tianbao and Nuosong, fell in love with her. By singing songs, Nuosong won her heart and Tianbao failed. However, Tianbao died on the way leaving. After being told the news, Nuosong left Chatong and Cuicui’s grandfather fell ill and died at a rainy night. In the end, after burying her grandfather, Cuicui waited for Nuosong in hope day by day. Through this tragedy, guided by his aesthetic ideology of love and beauty, Shen Congwen depicts the beauty of nature and humanity. Meanwhile, he draws great attention to the simplicity and purity of the border town and the locals. In his eyes, Chatong is Utopia and Cuicui is the embodiment of perfection. From the perspective of culture, the novel is filled with typical Chinese characteristics. Hence, by comparing different versions of translation and analysing their advantages and disadvantages from different angles, the article may help translators and foreign readers have a better understanding of Chinese culture.

2.Background

From the perspective of translation, each of the four translation versions of Biancheng has its own merits. Among the different versions, Gladys Yang’s is praised more due to its readability while Kinkley’s is spoken highly because of its restoration of Chinese culture. To some degree, the two merits relate to two famous translation strategies, domestication and foreignizaion. The following paragraphs give a brief introduction to the background of the two translators, their two versions and the two translations strategies.

2.1.Translators and Their Translation Versions

Gladys Yang, who originally named Gladys B.Tayler, is a renowned British translator. Out of her enthusiasm for Chinese traditional culture, she devoted herself to translating Chinese literary works. Through her whole life, together with her husband, Yang Xianyi, she translated a wide range of Chinese classics. In 1962, she published her translation of Biancheng, The Border Town. Her translation focuses on three major points: being creative in translation, conforming to the readers’ consciousness, and adapting to the current policy [1]. Due to this, when it comes to her translation of Border Town, a domestication strategy is more frequently noticed.

Jeffrey C. Kinkley is a famous American translator and sinologist. Kinkley has been studying Shen Congwen and his works since 1972 and has achieved a dominant position in this field. In 1977, Kinkley finished his doctoral dissertation Shen Ts’ung-wen’s Vision of Republican China. Ten years later, it is revised and adapted for a biography, The Odyssey of Shen Congwen. In his early career, he translated a wide range of Chinese contemporary novels as well as studying Shen’s works. Afterwards he started to translate Shen’s work. In 2009, he published his translation of Biancheng, The Border Town. His translation style in Border Town is being informational and expository [2]. Based on this, when it comes to his translation of Border Town, one may find that he prefers adopting foreignization strategy.

2.2.Translation Strategies and Methods of Domestication and Foreignization

In 1813, Germany renowned theologian and philosophy Friedrich Daniel Ernst Schleiermacher pointed out a concept in On the Different Methods of Translation: there are two kinds of translation methods, one is to allow authors to stay immobile as much as possible and guide readers to get close to authors’ purposes and intentions; the other is to allow readers to stay right where they are, and guide authors to get close to the readers’ intentions [3]. Inspired by him, in 1955, the famous American translation theoretician Lawrence Venuti presented and promoted the concept of domestication and foreignization in The Translator's Invisibility: A History of Translation. According to his book, a domesticating method refers to an ethnocentric reduction of the foreign text to target-language cultural values, bringing the author back home, and a foreignizing method refers to an ethnodeviant pressure on those values to register the linguistic and cultural difference of the foreign text, sending the reader abroad [4]. Due to their properties, domestication strategy and foreignizaion strategy play different roles in translation. However, in the process of translation, considering the combination of cultural connotations and readability, translators cannot abide strictly by one translation strategy or adopt one translation method. Hence, translation works that entirely see source language or target language as destination does not exist. Excessive domestication or foreignization in translation will lower the quality of translation works. On the contrary, moderate domestication or foreignization in translation will add exoticism as well as readability. Based on Venuti’s concept, Chinese translation theoretician, Xiongbing subdivides the different translation methods guided by domestication strategy and foreignization strategy. He points out that translation methods guided by foreignization translation strategy can be classified into four categories: zero translation, transliteration, word-for-word translation and literal translation. Similarly, translation methods guided by domestication translation strategy can be classified into four categories: free translation (paraphrase and idiomatic translation), imitation, variation translation and recreation [5].

3.Case Analysis

Biancheng contains various Chinese-style elements on both the word level and the sentence level, for which different translators have selected different translation strategies and methods to satisfy different purposes. This section will focus on how the representative original texts, on both word level and sentence level, are handled in the two English versions, exploring which strategy between domestication and foreignization the translators have adopted and further analyzing the translation methods used under the selected strategy.

3.1.On the Word Level

In this section, the author makes a comparative analysis of Gladys Yang’s translation and Kinkley’s on the word level, including the translation of names, places and cultural-loaded words.

3.1.1.Translation of Names

Names in a Chinese novel are of great significance and commonly considered as a hint of the identification, personality or destiny of the characters, but comparatively, such a connection is less frequently seen in English novels. Hence, with different angles, translators may choose different ways to rebuild the names in English.

Original: 翠翠

Gladys Yang: Emerald

Kinkley: Cuicui, or Jade Green

“翠翠” is the name of the heroine, who is a ferryman’s granddaughter. The old ferryman named his granddaughter after the colour of bamboo. Gladys Yang adopts domestication strategy and uses the method of idiomatic translation. On the one hand, it is readers-friendly. By translating “翠翠” as “Emerald”, Gladys Yang reforms the relevance between the name and the colour of bamboo. On the other hand, it is text-friendly. The English meaning of “Emerald” equals to the Chinese meaning of “翠翠”. Hence, Gladys Yang’s translation functions the same as the original text. Guided by a combination of foreignization strategy and domestication strategy, Kinkley combines transliteration method and idiomatic translation method. Compared to Gladys Yang’s version, his version is more readers-friendly and text-friendly. Firstly, word-for-word translation keeps a portion of the styles of the original text. In this context, readers will realize that they read a Chinese novel and thus be able to enjoy the exotic flavour. Secondly, idiomatic translation functions as an explanation. Although “Cuicui” is the closest translation to the original text, readers may feel confused in the process of reading. With the added translation “Jade Green”, he clarifies what “Cuicui” means and makes the name comprehensible to English readers.

Original: 傩送, 天保

Gladys Yang: Nuosong; Tianbao

Kinkley: Tianbao (Heaven-protected); Nuosong (Sent by the Nuo Gods)

“天保” and “傩送” are names of the two protagonists, who are sons of the wharf-master. The elder son is called “天保”, which represents that God will protect and bless him. The younger son is called “傩送”, meaning that he is the chosen one sent by the Nuo Gods. By adopting foreignization strategy and using the method of transliteration, Gladys Yang keeps the original forms of names. However, the translation does not provide clear explanation of the meaning behind the names. Due to a lack of knowledge about Chinese names, readers may be unfamiliar with the translation, let alone the cultural connotation. Compared with Gladys Yang’s translation, Kinkley’s version is much more understandable and digestible. Guided by foreignization strategy and domestication strategy, together with a combination of transliteration method and free translation method, he not only fully remains the original style, but also successfully convey the meanings. Consequently, readers are able to comprehend the cultural connotation of the two names.

Original: 岳云

Gladys Yang: Yue Yun

Kinkley: Yue Yun, that most handsome warrior of the Song dynasty a thousand years earlier

“岳云” conveys three different meanings in the original text. First, it is a nickname that people gave to Nuosong, which conveys their admiration of his beauty. Second, it is a name of a character in Drama. Third, it is a name of a historical figure. Still, Gladys Yang adopts foreignization strategy and uses the method of transliteration translation. Although she keeps the original forms of names so that readers can see how they are pronounced originally and appreciate the exoticism, the deeper meaning of the names are not represented successfully. Comparatively, Kinkley provides a different solution. With a combination of foreignization strategy and domestication strategy and a combination of transliteration method and variation translation method, he makes a brief introduction to the figure’s identity and status. Due to this addition, his translation is culture-friendly and history-friendly as well as readers-friendly and text-friendly.

Original: 黄狗.

Gladys Yang: Brownie, the dog

Kinkley: the yellow dog

“黄狗”, the yellow dog, is also a protagonist in this novel that plays an imperative role in driving the plot forward. The two translators draw an entirely different picture in their own way. Gladys Yang adopts domestication strategy and the method of variation translation and translates “黄狗” as “Brownie, the dog”. Brownie, a common name of dogs in English, represents friendliness and meekness. She sees the yellow dog as a character and builds a bridge between the readers and the author. Moreover, by doing so, the yellow dog are allowed to catch more attention and become alive. Unlike Gladys Yang, Kninkley does not pay much attention to the little creature. He simply translates it as “the yellow dog” and makes no further explanation. Although his version is plain and simple, it makes reading easier.

3.1.2.Translation of Places

Places, one of the three elements in novels, are also of great importance. Different places represent different cultures. Nevertheless, names of places in English and Chinese differ from each other. Hence, the translators may choose different strategies and methods to translate the names of places in English from different perspectives.

Original: 茶峒

Gladys Yang: Chatong

Kinkley: Chadong

According to the novel, “茶峒” is a typical Chinese border town located in the West Hunan. Gladys Yang and Kinkley adopt the same translation strategy--domestication. By using transliteration method, Gladys Yang and Kinkley translate “茶峒” as “Chatong” and “Chadong”. Seemingly, little difference lies between them. However, there are many differences between Gladys Yang’s and Kinkley’s translation. Firstly, Gladys Yang’s version is based on English pronunciation while Kinkley’s based on Chinese pronunciation. Obviously, for readers, the former is more readable than the latter. Secondly, Kinkley’s version is accurate while Gladys Yang’s not. In Chinese, there are both “Chadong” and “Chatong”. However, they two does not euqal. If those who read Gladys Yang’s version are interested in “茶峒” and plan to search relevant information on Chinese websites, they may be misled. Because “Chadong” and “Chatong” are like chalk and cheese in Chinese.

Original: 酉水 白水

Gladys Yang: the You, White River

Kinkley: You Shui, Bai Shui or White River

“酉水” and “白水” are the names of two rivers in Chatong. Gladys Yang adopts domestication strategy and the method of idiomatic translation. She translates “酉水” and “白水” as “the You” and “White River” according to codes of English language. By this token, her version is readable and understandable for readers. For “酉水”, Kinkley adopts foreignization strategy and uses transliteration method to translate. Although it is the same as the original text, the translation “You Shui” is inaccessible to readers. Therefore, “You Shui” is text-friendly rather than readers-friendly. For “白水”, Kinkley adopts domestication strategy and foreignization strategy, together with transliteration method and literal translation method to translate. He keeps the form of the original text and makes a brief explanation, translating “白水” as “Bai Shui” and “White River”. Compared with his version of “酉水”, his version of “白水” is more readers-friendly than text-friendly.

3.1.3.Translation of Culture-loaded Words

Culture-loaded words refer to the words, phrases and idioms that mark the unique things in a certain culture. These words reflect the unique way of activities gradually accumulated by a specific nation in the long historical process, which is different from other nations [6]. Due to their property, culture-loaded words are an obstacle that translators will meet in the process of translation. Hence, different translators may choose different strategies and methods to translate the culture-loaded in English from different aspects.

Original: 厘金局

Gladys Yang: revenue bureau

Kinkley: likin transit-tax bureau

“厘金局” is a government agency in Qing dynasty, which equals to a tax bureau now. It is empowered to levy tax on imported and exported items. In comparison, Gladys Yang’s version is accurate with modern and domesticated characteristics while Kinkley’s is detailed with traditional and foreignized characteristics. By using idiomatic translation method, Gladys Yang explains the meaning of “厘金局” straightforwardly to the readers. Kinkley, however, based on transliteration method, explains the meaning of “厘金局” further by addition method. He keeps the Chinese style and makes an explanation in English. Although Gladys Yang’s version is brief and clear, Kinkley’s version keeps a balance between the source language and target language and satisfies both sides. Original: 迎亲送女的曲子

Gladys Yang: a wedding tune

Kinkley: the melodies of bridal processions, in which the groom went to the bride’s house and brought her home

“迎亲送女的曲子” is a tune that plays in weddings, especially when the bridegroom comes to the bride’s home and brings her back. As can be seen from these several lines, there is a sharp contrast between Gladys Yang’s and Kinley’s version. Guided by domestication strategy and idiomatic translation method, the former conveys the meaning straightforwardly by using an idiomatic expression. On the contrary, guided by domestication strategy and paraphrase method, the latter explains the tune in details. Obviously, the former is brief with more readability while the latter is detailed with less readability.

Original: 廿丈

Gladys Yang: twenty foot

Kinkley: twenty zhang, two hundred feet

In Chinese, “廿” is a number that means twenty and “丈” is a measure of length (3.3333333 meters). Gladys Yang uses idiomatic translation method and translates it incorrectly. One foot equals 0.3048 meter, about an eleventh of zhang. Unlike Gladys Yang, guided by both domestication strategy and foreignization strategy, together with transliteration method and idiomatic translation method, Kinkley offers two options to readers. On the one hand, it guarantees the accuracy of target language. On the other hand, it guarantees the spread of Chinese culture in source language.

3.2.On the Sentence Level

In this section, the author makes a comparative analysis of Gladys Yang’s translation and Kinkley’s on the sentence level. The analysis focus on conversations and cultural-loaded sentences.

3.2.1.Translation of Conversations

Conversations play both an abstract and a concrete role in novels, and their functions vary significantly in Chinese and English. Conversations in Chinese novels are commonly considered as the representative of euphemism, with numerous connotations behind them. Conversations in English novels, however, are less likely to be euphemistic. Hence, guided by different translation strategies and methods, translators may present the conversations of the original text differently.

Original: 我有了……谁要这个 [7]！

Gladys Yang：I'm paid for...I don't want your money [8]!

Kinkley：I’m paid...Who needs this charity [9]?

Original: 大哥，不吸这个吗 [7]？

Gladys Yang：Care for a smoke, brother [8]?

Kinkley：Elder Brother, won't you try these [9]?

Original: 吃甜酒？又不是小孩子，还问人吃甜酒 [7]！

Gladys Yang：Sweet wine? What do you take me for--a child [8]?

Kinkley：Sweet wine, for the likes of me? Do I look like a child? Sweet wine, you say [9]!

In the first example, by replacing the subject “who” with “I”and explaining the meaning of “这个” directly, Gladys Yang translates “谁要这个！” as “I don't want your money!”. By changing the original declarative sentence into a rhetorical question, Kinkley expresses the meaning indirectly. In the second example, Gladys Yang omits the subject “you” and explains the meaning of “这个”. Moreover, she changes the original negative sentence into an affirmative sentence and makes her translation brief to readers. Kinkley, however, keeps the original form and makes no explanation to “这个” in the process of translation. His indirect expression is in accordance with euphemisms in Chinese. In the third example, Gladys Yang omits “还问⼈吃甜酒！” and makes the translation short and clear. Compared to her version, Kinkley adds the subject and translates “吃甜酒?” as “Sweet wine, for the likes of me?” Besides， he changes the original declarative sentence into a rhetorical question, making the conversation indirect. From the examples above, we may conclude that Gladys Yang concentrates on target language and readers while Kinkley focuses on source language and original text. Guided by domestication strategy and idiomatic translation method, Gladys Yang omits the euphemisms and conveys the connotations straightforwardly. From the perspective of readers, her version is readable and digestible. Being able to digest the points, readers will be more willing to read and then study further. However, from the perspective of original text and source language, her version is less recommendable. On the one hand, from the perspective of original text, Gladys Yang’s version changes the core of this novel, since the euphemisms she omitted represent the simplicity and purity of the locals and are both a symbol of this novel and an embodiment of the author. Once the euphemisms are omitted, the simplicity and purity of the novel will be removed as well. As a result, the core of the novel will be spoiled and then lose its value to some degree. On the other hand, from the perspective of source language, Gladys Yang’s version changes the core of Chinese culture. In China, people speak and think highly of etiquette, and as a kind of etiquette, euphemisms are thus of great significance. With euphemisms, people treat each other friendly and gently. However, Gladys Yang’s version converts the indirect etiquette into a direct one. As a result, cultural connotations are changed and then disappear. But considering it from a different angle, some English readers may be expecting the characters' behaviours to fit their own culture, since they are reading a translation in their language. Or, if they are only familiar with their own culture and not with Chinese culture, a direct translation may lead to their confusion or even cultural shocks. It is possible that Yang adopted such a strategy with consideration on this issue. Hence, whether the translation is good or not depends on which aspect we pay more attention to, and this also suggests the difficulties that lie in cultural translation. Compared with Gladys Yang, Kinkley conveys the meaning of the original text as much as possible. Guided by foreignization strategy and literal translation method, Kinkley keeps the euphemisms and conveys their connotations from various angles. In comparison, Gladys Yang’s version is recommended to read while Kinkley’s is recommended to study.

3.2.2.Translation of Culture-loaded Sentences

As a typical Chinese novel, Border Town inevitably involves Chinese culture-loaded words related to Chinese folk culture, religious culture, etc. As an indispensable part in intercultural communication, the translation must be taken seriously. Hence, translators are expected to try their best not to omit the embodied cultural information. Therefore, in the process of translation, translators must consider the differences between Chinese and English cultures and select appropriate translation strategies and methods to accurately achieve transition of cultural information.

Original:悖时砍脑壳的 [7]！

Gladys Yang：To hell with this hooligan [8]!

Kinkley：Damned low-life! You're headed for the executioner [9]!

This sentence is a curse that represents folk culture, which means that somebody will be doomed to death. Gladys Yang adopts domestication strategy and idiomatic translation method and expresses the meaning directly. She replaces the original meaning with an idiomatic expression “to hell with” and points out the meaning straightforwardly. In comparison, guided by domestication strategy and foreignization strategy, Kinkley combines idiomatic translation method and literal translation method and provides readers a chance to understand fully as well as studying further. Despite Kinkley’s comprehensive translation, Gladys Yang’s version is more readable and briefer.

Original: 又要马儿不吃草，又要马儿走得好，唉，这两句话恰是古人为我说的 [7]！

Gladys Yang：I want to eat my cake and have it. That’s me [8]!

Kinkley：I want a horse I don’t have to feed, but I want it to run fast, too! The ancestors must have thought up that saying just for me, to show that you have to feed a horse to make it run fast [9]!

This sentence is an exclamation that represents folk culture, and it means that people cannot do things with no effort. From this example, we may find the great difference between Gladys Yang’s and Kinkley’s translation. Through domestication strategy and idiomatic translation method, Gladys Yang replaces the original meaning with two idiomatic expressions and shortens the lengthy saying and the exclamation in the original text. Kinkley, however, combines domestication strategy and foreignization strategy, idiomatic translation method and literal translation method and makes a lengthy explanation. According to the number of words, Kinkley’s version is twice the length of the original text and three times the length of Gladys Yang’s version. Hence, Kinkley’s translation is lengthy and difficult while Gladys Yang’s is brief and simple.

Original: 八面山的豹子，地地溪的锦鸡 [7]。

Gladys Yang：Brave as a panther, handsome as a cock [8].

Kinkley：The Leopard of Bamian Mountain, the Golden Pheasant of Didi Stream [9]!

This sentence is a compliment that represents folk culture. It means that somebody have the virtues of the leopard of Bamian Mountain and the golden pheasant of Didi Stream. Guided by domestication strategy and paraphrase method, Gladys Yang points out the connotation straightforwardly. In the process of translation, she omits secondary information like names of places and keeps primary information like names of animals. Moreover, based on her own understanding, she paraphrases the original text and makes a brief introduction to these animals’ virtues. In comparison, guided by foreignization strategy and literal translation method, Kinkley keeps all elements in the original text. From the perspective of original text and source language, his version is faithful. However, from the perspective of readers and target language, his version is found obscure. Readers may not understand the two images, the leopard of Bamian Mountain and the golden pheasant of Didi Stream, let alone their connotations. Hence, Kinkley’s translation is text-friendly while Gladys Yang’s is readers-friendly.

Original:牛肉炒韭菜，各人心里爱 [7]。

Gladys Yang：Every man to his taste [8].

Kinkley：People eat what they like, even beef with chives [9].

This sentence is an idiom that represents folk culture. It means that people have their own likes and dislikes. By combining domestication strategy and idiomatic translation method together, Gladys Yang transmits the connotations to readers. She replaces the original text with an idiomatic expression in English and conveys the meaning. Kinkley adopts foreignization strategy and literal translation method and keeps all elements. From all perspectives, his version satisfies all sides. In comparison, Gladys Yang concentrates on the transmission of the meaning while Kinkley focuses on the details on the original text.

Original:无事不登三宝殿，坐了一定就有话说 [7]！

Gladys Yang：You wouldn't have made the trip without some reason [8].

Kinkley：They say one doesn’t go to the Temple of the Three Buddhist Treasures without a good reason. If you sat down there you must have had something to say [9]!

This sentence is an old saying that represents religious culture. It means that people do things for a reason. Guided by domestication strategy and paraphrase method together, Gladys Yang omits the religious elements and points out the connotation straightforwardly. Moreover, she integrates the two sentences and shortens the length according to codes of English language. Kinkley, however, adopts foreignization strategy and word-for-word translation method for the term “三宝殿” and keeps all elements. He not only presents the original religious meaning, but also explains it. His translation thus is characterized with typical Chinese features. But still, his version is much longer than the original text and Gladys Yang’s version and makes reading more difficult.

4.Differences Between the Versions and Possible Reasons

From all the examples that have been analysed above, the differences between Gladys Yang’s version and Kinkley’s version have been revealed: in the process of translation, Gladys Yang prefers adopting domestication strategy and using translation methods guided by the strategy. Kinkley, however, prefers adopting foreignization strategy and a combination of the two and using translation methods guided by them. Besides, Gladys Yang concentrates on original meanings more while Kinkly focuses on cultural connotations more.

The reasons why such differences exist in the two versions of translation may come down to one reason: translators’ identities. Gladys Yang enjoys great reputation as a litterateur and translator, who had an educational background of French language and literature in University of Oxford and then changed to Chinese language and literature. Influenced by her husband, Yang Xianyi, she fell in love with Chinese culture and devoted herself to it. Meanwhile, she had a long career as a translator and translated a wide range of Chinese literary works. Therefore, she concentrates more on translation rather than study. However, Kinkley is more of a scholar than a translator. So far, it has been 51 years since he studied Shen Congwen’s works. Through his career, Kinkley focuses more on studying rather than translating. In the interview with Doctor Zhang Bei, he clarified that he actually began his career as a translator of contemporary Chinese fictions rather than of Shen Congwen's works [10]. Meanwhile, he mentioned that he would continue his study on Shen Congwen’s works after finishing all research projects. Hence, he focuses more on study rather than translation.

Due to the differences of their identities, Gladys Yang’s and Kinkley’s styles and aims of translation differ from each other. Firstly, Gladys Yang’s style is being creative in translation, conforming to the readers’ consciousness, and adapting to the current policy while Kinkley’s is being informational and expository. Hence, in the process of translation, Gladys Yang tends to adopt domestication strategy with short, brief, and straightforward explanation while Kinkley prefers to adopt foreignization strategy with long, comprehensive, culture-loaded explanation. Secondly, as a translator, guided by her translation thoughts, Gladys Yang aims to get close to readers’ intentions. In comparison, as a scholar, guided by his academic thoughts, Kinkley aims to explain author’s purposes and intentions. Therefore, to satisfy readers’ needs, Gladys Yang adopts more domesticated translation; to keep author’s style, Kinkley adopts more foreignized translation and a combination of two domesticated translation and foreignized translation.

5.Conclusion

From the perspective of domestication and foreignization, this article finds that Gladys is more inclined to apply domestication strategy while Kinkley is more inclined to adopt foreignization strategy in the translation of Border Town. By adopting domestication strategy and methods guided by it, Gladys Yang concentrates more on readers and target language; by combining foreignization strategy and domestication strategy and methods guided by them, Kinkley focuses more on readers and target language. Meanwhile, by analysing all examples above, this article concludes that the various application of translation strategies and methods is influenced by translators’ identities, styles and aims. Each version has its own focus and introduces Chinese culture in its way. By comparing the two versions, the article may help open a new door for readers and translators to understand Chinese culture and study further.