Thesis Submitted in Fulfillment of the Requirement for the Degree of Bachelor of Arts

June 1999

Abstract

‘信、达、雅’, a translation standard put forward by Yan Fu in the

19th century, has always been a practical rule to the translators.

In this standard, ‘信’ means ‘faithful (to the original)’. Obviously,

‘faithful’ is the most important among the three, and it is the first

responsibility to a translator. However, there are disparities between

one language and another – disparities in the lexicology, in the linguistic

structure or even in the tradition and culture. So ‘absolute faithfulness’

is impossible. And this article emphasizes on how to achieve the real

faithfulness in a possible sense – a faithful translation in good

formality with not only the original context, but also the original form

and style. To achieve such an effect we should do well in two aspects.

On the one hand, faithful to the original doesn’t mean to give an

equivalent correspondence to each word literally. While doing this we

should take these factors into consideration – idiomatic translation;

the false faithfulness resulted from obligatory categories; different

classifications in different cultures. On the other hand, faithful to

the original also requires the translator to bring to the readers the

feeling-tone of the original. In doing this we should pay enough

attention to the figures of speech as well as the sound effect. As

long as we observe these rules in translation, we will be able to bring

to the readers perfectly the same feeling as the original will give them.

Content

This thesis centers about the faithfulness in translation.

It comprises four major parts.

Part one introduces the importance of the faithfulness in translation.

Part two puts forward the difficulties concerning faithfulness

when we translate one language into another.

Part three explains at length how to achieve real faithfulness. This

part consists of two aspects.

On the one hand, faithful to the original doesn’t mean to give an

equivalent correspondence to each word literally.

On the other hand, faithful to the original also requires the

translator to bring to the readers the feeling-tone of the original.

Part four summaries the qualifications we should possess in the

respect of faithfulness.

‘There are translations and translations.’ The Chinese meaning is ‘有各式各样的

译本，有好也有坏’. It is a sentence that can’t be translated literally. Because

in English the word ‘translation’ has both its singular and plural forms, while

in Chinese no same case with ‘译本’. Translation has connections with a lot of

aspects, and a translator always has his own emphasis, so there are different kinds

of translations. ‘信、达、雅’, a translation standard which was put forward by Yan Fu

in the 19th century, has always been a practical rule to the translators. In this

standard, ‘信’ means ‘faithful (to the original)’. Since what a translator really

does is expressing other people’s idea in a different language, so the content of

his translation must strictly comply with that of the original. And it is very clear

that ‘faithful’ is the most important among the three, and it is the first

responsibility to a translator.

However, there are disparities between one language and another – disparities in

the lexicology, in the linguistic structure or even in the tradition and culture. And

to maintain that there is always an equivalent correspondence in one language that can

match the one in another is a naive thought. Take English and French for instance.

Although there is only one strait between them, although they have mutual influences

onto each other for about one thousand years, although English has loaned a lot of words

form French, the two peoples will at times meet difficulties in finding a equivalence

to the one in another language. The English have always said that in French there

isn’t an equivalence to the word ‘home’ or ‘gentleman’, while the French believe

that in English there isn’t an appropriate translation to the French expression

‘Rassemblement du Peuple Francais’ (the literal meaning is ‘法国人民大会党’).

Although English is the native language of both England and America, the same case

will at times happen to these two peoples. The American can’t find the British match

to their word ‘sissy’. And they always complain that the word ‘compromise’, a

derogatory term in their language, turns out to be a commendatory one in British

English. For hundreds of years, the American has invented a lot of new words, but

many of which don’t work in England. In 1922, the American writer Sinclair Lewis