Ideology and C-E Translation of Materials for International Publicity of China
|School||Nanjing Agricultural College|
|Course||English Language and Literature|
|Keywords||ideology materials for international publicity discursive strategies translation strategies|
The thesis tries to compare two English reports on China:one is "About China" from the website of Foreign Ministry of PRC(FMPRC), another is "Country Guide-News and background notes:China" from the website of Washington Post, and explore differences in discursive features between the two discourses as well as different discursive and translation strategies behind them. By highlighting ideological manipulation in publicity-oriented translation this thesis aims to help translators working for international publicity of China be aware of it and thus try to avoid negative influence caused by ideology in translation so as to improve international publicity of China.It takes on several characteristics in terms of discursive features of the two reports on China:Washington Post tends to report China negatively. Reports covers domestic confrontation, calamity made by human or nature, human rights problem, deficiency of social system and so-called spy activities abroad, with special attention to China’s military advance, implying "China’s threat" in rhetoric. By contrast, being an important showcase for international publicity, FMPRC website tends to report China positively, with emphasis put on publicizing traditional Chinese culture.Washington Post and Chinese website adopt different discursive and translation strategies in the two texts. When introducing China, Washington Post tends to adopt the discursive strategy of "re-perspectivization" and "agenda setting"; but FMPRC website tends to employ the strategy of hignlighting "good" news and backgrounding "bad" news on China. Concerning translation strategies, firstly, in translation of proper name of people, place and dynasty, Washington Post adopts Wade-Giles System; but the FMPRC website employs Chinese pinyin. Secondly, certain epithets are employed in both discourses to explain further for reader s’better understanding. Washington Post employs more derogatory adjectives or adjectives showing mystery, which may be related to "Orientalism". For example, Washington Post translates“夏朝’’(Xia dynasty) as "semilegendary Hsia dynasty" and“秦朝”as "semibarbarous Ch’in dynasty"; by contrast, it is positive on the Chinese website:for example, Chinese website translates“夏朝”as " China’s first dynasty, Xia" and interprets’‘秦朝”as "(Ying Zheng established) the first centralized, unified, multi-ethnic state in Chinese history under the Qin Dynasty". Thirdly, Washington Post and FMPRC website hold different interpretations on China. For example, on translating administrative division system of China, FMPRC translates as " At present, Chinawas divided into23provinces". However, Washington Post translates as "China comprises22provinces.[...]The country officially divides itself into23provinces, numbering Taiwan as its23d." To some extent such translation is unfavorable to maintain China’s national unity and territorial integrity.Ideological reasons behind these discrepancies are further explored from the perspective of Lefevere’s Manipulation Theory, in which three control factors are examined:patronage, translators’ideology and poetics. The research concludes that it is due to different ideology that Washington Post and FMPRC employ different discursive and translation strategy, sometimes even affecting the way to shape China’s international image. Thus it is significant for translators to be aware of ideological manipulation in publicity-oriented translation.