Article 2 Page1

He Xianbin, who has a Ph.D. in English Linguistics and Literature, is Associate Professor in the English Department of Guangdong Polytechnic Normal University,China. Sponsored by China Scholarship Council, he is currently an academic visitor at the Centre for Translation and Intercultural Studies at the University of Manchester, UK. He has to his credit a number of published papers and articles over the decades in many conferences and seminars. His postal address is English Department, Guangdong Polytechnic Normal University, 293 ZhongShan DaDao, Guangzhou, China, 510665.

Abstract

Translator Studies has undergone a shift from focus on SC constraints to the manipulation by TC patronage. Translators play an active role in different phases of the activity and their agency has not been given due attention.Norms determine the suitability of translation. Non-compliance is not only possible but also necessary at times, though the behavior involves a price to pay. Norms and the translator's agency are two sides of every translation activity. The former lays down socio-cultural constraints on translating, and the latter is the source of creativity. Both adherence to and breach of norms require the translator's agency. Both the theory and praxis of translation would stand to benefit from a dialectical, rather than a mechanical, view of their relationship.

Norms refer to the translation of general values or ideas shared by a group - as to what is conventionally right and wrong, adequate and inadequate - into performance instructions, appropriate for and applicable to particular situations, specifying what is prescribed and forbidden, as well as what is tolerated and permitted in a certain behavioral dimension (Toury 1998: 15). Translation, as a social and cultural activity, is norms-governed. Norms are not to be understood as hard and fast rules though. Norms operate not only in translation of all kinds, but also at every stage in the translating event (Toury 1995: 58). John Dryden's metaphor of 'dancing on ropes with fettered legs' refers to the constraints imposed by the source text and by the linguistic-cultural ethos of the potential or intended target text as well as to the linguistic and cultural norms on translation.

On the other hand, as a highly creative task, translation sometimes requires the practitioners to move beyond norms. The relationship between translation norms and the translator's agency is hence paradoxical and complex. This paper is an attempt at clarifying the relationship between the two. The article begins with a review of the translator-studies literature, and after a discussion of the possibility and necessity of loosening up norms, investigates the translator's role in the different phases of translation. It perorates with the conclusion of a dialectical view of the relationship between translation norms and the translator's agency.

1. Change of Focus In Translator Studies

Concern with the 'how-to' in interlingual transfer determines the focus of traditional translator studies on the prerequisites for becoming a translator. In ancient Rome, Philo Judaeus (20 B. C (?) - 50 A.D (?)) and St Augustine (254-430) stressed the significance of 'God's inspiration' to Bible translation and argued that only the pious clergymen were qualified for the job. They prescribed that translators were but dictating tools and there was nothing creative at all in translation (Tan 1991: 28). In China, one of the first to have commented on translator qualifications was Yan Cong (557-610). In his translation treatise On Dialectic Translation, Yan listed eight conditions for a translator, half of which were about morality, and another half was about educational requirements. These include faithfulness to the Buddhist cause, modesty, discipline, a good command of the Sanskrit and Chinese, knowledge of the Buddhist scriptures and the Chinese classics, etc. (Chen 1992: 38). It was impossible for people in Yan's time to possess all the eight conditions, because Chinese 'translators' were typically monolingual then.

These source-oriented researchers are also interested in formulating all sorts of standards for translators to follow. Translators are required to imitate the authors, to the extent that the translations are so smooth in vocabulary, so idiomatic in phrase, so correct in construction, so smooth in flow of thought, so clear in meaning, and so elegant in style, that they do not appear to be translations at all, and yet at the same time fully transmit the message of the originals. Translators are considered servants of the 'master' authors and are expected to be absolutely objective and invisible.

Scholars in the Manipulation School initiated a target-oriented paradigm in translation studies. They were convinced that,

"from the point of view of the target literature, all translation implies a degree of manipulation of the source text for a certain purpose"

(Hermans 1985: 10)

Translations were one of the primary literary tools that larger social institutions - educational systems, arts councils, publishing firms, and even governments - had at their disposal to manipulate a given society in order to construct the kind of culture desired (Hermans 1985: 10). Translators are manipulators of the source texts and the target readers, and the manipulating tools of their patronage.

It follows that the paradigm shift in translation studies just means a change from emphasis on the constraints of the source texts and cultures to those of the target cultures. Hardly have translators shaken off the shackles of the source texts and authors when they are again chained by the target cultures. The translator's agency has not been given due attention.

2. Possibilities and Necessity of The Loosening up of Norms

Norms always imply sanctions, actual or potential, whether negative (to those who violate them) or positive (to those who abide by them). Within the group, norms also serve as a yardstick according to which instances of behaviour and/or their results are evaluated (Toury 1995:55/ 1998:17).

Acceptance of the idea that translation events are basically norm-governed does not entail the denial of free choice during an act of translation (Toury 1998: 20). Non-normative behavior is always a possibility. After all, it is the translator who decides how to behave, be that decision fully conscious or not. So far as the solution to specific problems is concerned, translators obviously have great power, for they are the only people doing the creative work of translation. Translators are manipulated by the patronage. But as the actual performers of the act of translating, they can at times move beyond the constraints.

Breaking norms may be closely related to the motivation of translation. As social agents, translators work in a certain context. They have certain goals to reach, personal or collective interests to pursue, and material and symbolic stakes to defend. Some translators are politically motivated and their very purpose is to subvert the dominant norms.

Ideological control of translation is strict in many societies. But some translators are defiant of or indifferent to the political or ethical norms of the target culture and remain faithful to the source text even if it is hostile or threatening to dominant political or ethical values. And for certain purposes, some would rather challenge the target culture ideological norms and face possible severe punishment.

For example, in the Medieval Period, the Bible was prohibited from being translated into vernacular languages. But the attempt of the church authorities finally failed. In the Middle East, similar things happened to the rendition of Koran. In China, during The Proletariat Cultural Revolution (1966-1976), ideological control went to the extreme. In the five years from May 1965 to November 1971, not a single translation of foreign literature was published. And in the remaining years of the 'cultural revolution', only a total of 34 translations got printed. But some people secretly translated Western literature, not to serve the dominant ideology, but just for the sake of translation, and their translations came out soon after the end of the 'cultural revolution'. (Ma 2003:65)

TOP | NEXT