The Double Nature of Literary Translation Ⅰ. Introduction New tendency: combination of two theories Ⅱ. Translation i

The Double Nature of Literary Translation
    Good morning, today’s lecture is the very first of a series of lectures on translation, so I’d like to spend some time discussing a very basic issue: nature of literary translation.
    Various definitions have been given to translation. Among them two definitions are most important. One is translation is a science and the other is translation is an art. The two definitions represent two schools— the school of science and the school of art. In my opinion, both schools have their strong points and weak points so far as literary, translation is concerned. Now there is a tendency to combine their theories into a comprehensive one. As a matter of fact, literary, translation has a double nature. That’s to say, on one hand, it is a science with its own laws and methods, and on the other, it is an art. Now let’s have a further discussion of its double nature.
    (1) First, we say translation is a science, because it has its own laws and methods. It should (2) reproduce the message of the original by means of the transformation of linguistic equivalence. It focuses on the study of description of the process of translation, and the structures and forms of language (3) so as to reveal the objective laws inherent in translating. Take the translation between English and Chinese for example. If we want to translate well, we must be entirely familiar with the content of the original and all the knowledge it concerns. In addition, we should have a comparatively comprehensive and thorough study of English and Chinese so that we may do our work with high proficiency.
    Although Chinese and English have their respective characteristics still we can do the translation between them. It is because language reflects the objective existence that is common to both English and Chinese. But at the same time we must admit that languages are quite different in characteristics and usage. This is the problem that troubles the translators. If one wants to be a qualified translator, one should have a penetrating study and careful comparison of the similarities and differenees between these two languages so that one may find the corresponding laws and methods in the translation between them, do translation effectively and ensure the quality of translation. Anyhow, it will never do for one to translate word for word and mechanically adhere to the superficial similarities in words, phrases and grammatical structures. He must follow the scientific process from thorough understanding to accurate representation. The procedures are, first, the translator must (4)　comprehend the
content and style of the whole work before he sets his pen to paper, and then, creatively (5＆6) reproduce the original as it really is by using the corresponding laws and proper methods of translation in a flexible way so that the translation may be lifelike as well as intelligible.
    (7) Now let’s turn to the point of translation as an art. This means (8) translation re-creates a literary work by using expressions of another language. It emphasizes the effect of translation.
    There are quite a lot of people who lack a correct understanding of this. A popular fallacy is that translation is far easier than creation. Since such misunderstanding exists, it is necessary and worthwhile for us to discuss the following question: Is translation really far easier than creation?
    Writing is rather hard. That’s quite true. Not everybody can write satisfactorily. A writer should have had rich experience in life and accumulated a great deal of source material. What’s more, he should be good at generalization and creation. Only thus, it is possible for him to produce a satisfactory, work. And translation is not so easy as some non-professionals think it to be. We may state that it is rather difficult. A quailfled translator must possess the following three qualifications:
    First, he must be at home in the two languages concerned and quite familiar with their characteristics, similarities and differences.
    Secondly, he must have (9) a thorough understanding of the content, artistie features and style of the original and the historical background in which it was written.
    Thirdly, he must (10) know very well the basle principles and methods of translation and is experienced in practice.
    The difficulty in translation just lies in the fact that both the content and the style are already existent in the original and as a result, the translator will have to do his best to reproduce them as they are in quite a different language. However great the obstacles are, the translator can do nothing but manage to overcome them one by one. He must understand the content and style of the original thoroughly and profoundly, and then creatively and accurately reproduce it with the aid of his outstanding art of translation. Sometimes the translator is even forced to produce coinages. Thus it can be seen that the process of translation is actually a process of re-creation and reproduction.  Creation and translation have their respective difficulties and prerequisites. How can we favor one and disfavor the other?
    In accordance with what we have discussed in the above, now we can come to the following eonclusions: Whether a work of translation is good or bad, readable or not, it has nothing to do with translation itself; rather, it depends on the artistic level and technique of the translator. Whoever has a good command of translation both in theory and technique can, of course, offer satisfactory translations. It is because, as pointed out at the very" beginning of this lecture, translation is not only a science with its own laws and methods but also an art of reproduction and re-creation.