从关联理论角度看《红楼梦》中歇后语的翻译 59页

硕士学位论文论文题目从关联理论角度看《红楼梦》中歇后语的翻译研究生姓名罗婉指导教师姓名杜争鸣专业名称外国语言学及应用语言学研究方向翻译理论与实践论文提交日期2013年5月 AStudyoftheTranslationofXiehouyuinHonglouMengfromthePerspectiveofRelevanceTheoryByLuoWanUndertheSupervisionofProfessorDuZhengmingSubmittedinPartialFulfillmentoftheRequirementsFortheDegreeofMasterofArtsSchoolofForeignLanguagesSoochowUniversityFebruary2014 i ii ACKNOWLEDGEMENTSMyspecialandheartfeltthanksfirstgoestomysupervisor,ProfessorDuZhengmingforhisilluminatingguidance,incessantencouragementandthought-provokinginstructionswithoutwhichthisthesiswouldhardlyhavebeenpossible.Also,IwouldliketoextendmysinceregratitudetoalltheteachersatSchoolsofForeignLanguagesinSoochowUniversity,especiallyProfessorWangRongpei,ProfessorWanghong,ProfessorFangHuawenandProfessorDingWanjiang,whoselectureshaveevokedmyinterestintranslationandbroadenedmyhorizoninthefieldoftranslation.Finally,Iamgreatlyobligedtomyfriendsandmyparentsfortheirmeticulouscareandwhole-heartedsupport.W.Luoiii AbstractSperber&Wilson’sRelevanceTheoryholdsthatlanguagecommunicationisanostensive-inferentialprocessduringwhichtheaudiencecaninferfromthestimulusproducedbythecommunicatorwhathiscommunicativeintentionis.Similarly,asaspecialformofcommunication,translationprocessisalsocharacterizedbyostensive-inferentialnatureinvolvingthreeparties:theoriginalwriter,thetranslatorandthetargetreader.Thetranslatorissupposedtoplaythedualrolesofareaderandacommunicator.Inordertopromoteasuccessfulcommunication,thetranslatorshouldalsotakeintoaccounttheinformativeintentionoftheoriginalwriterandtheexpectationofthetargetreader,thusachievingoptimalrelevancebetweentheauthorandthereader.HonglouMengisanepitomeofclassicalnovelsinChineseliterature.ItsEnglishtranslationthereforeplaysamonumentalroleinitsbeingwidelyacceptedacrosstheworld.Xiehouyu(XHY),asadistinctivelinguisticforminthenovel,isofvitalsignificanceinportrayingthecharacters’personalities,deepeningthethemeofthenovelaswellasdingtotheartisticeffectofitslanguage.ThroughadetailedcomparativeanalysisofthetwocompleteEnglishversionsofHonglouMeng,thisthesisisdevotedtothetranslationofXHYfromtheperspectiveofRelevanceTheory.Moreover,qualitativeanalysis,togetherwithcontrastiveanalysis,theoreticalinterpretationandexampleillustrationisadoptedinthisresearchtohelpillustratehowoptimalrelevancecanbeachievedbetweentheoriginalwriterandthetargetreaderandwhatstrategiesatranslatorcanadoptinthetranslationofXHYsinHonglouMeng.Keywords:HonglouMeng,XHY,RelevanceTheory,Translationiv 摘要Sperber&Wilson创立的关联理论认为语言交际是一个明示推理的过程，在此过程中受众可以从交际主动方的明示信号中推出其交际意图。同样，翻译作为一种特殊的交际行为也带有明示推理的特点，并且这个明示推理过程由原作者，译者，读者三方共同参与。在此过程中，译者既是读者也是交际者。为了促成作者和读者之间的成功交际，取得双方之间的最佳关联，译者需要充分了解原作者的交际意图以及读者的阅读预期。《红楼梦》是中国文学史上的经典小说。《红楼梦》的翻译对于其在世界范围内的传播起了重要作用。歇后语是《红楼梦》的一大特色，对于刻画人物性格，深化小说主题以及增强语言特色有着深远的意义。本文以TheYangsandDavidHawkes两个英译本为例,采用定性分析，对比分析，理论阐释以及例证说明等研究方法，试图从关联理论的视角来研究《红楼梦》中歇后语的翻译，旨在探讨译者如何运用不同翻译策略在原文作者以及译文读者之间取得最佳关联。关键词:红楼梦、歇后语、关联理论、认知语境、明示-交际过程、翻译v TableofContentsACKNOWLEDGEMENTS....................................................................................................iAbstract.................................................................................................................................iv摘要....................................................................................................................................vTableofContents....................................................................................................................iChapterOneIntroduction......................................................................................................11.1BackgroundoftheResearch.....................................................................................11.1.1HonglouMenganditstranslation...................................................................11.1.2XHYsinHonglouMeng.................................................................................21.1.3Majortheoryappliedinthisstudy..................................................................21.2StudyAimsandSignificance....................................................................................31.3StructureoftheThesis..............................................................................................3ChapterTwoRelevanceTheoryandTranslation...................................................................52.1Relevance-theoreticalApproachtoTranslation........................................................52.1.1Translationasacommunicativeandinterpretiveprocess...............................52.1.2Translator’stworolesinthetranslationprocess.............................................62.1.3Translationasaprocessinpursuitofoptimalrelevance................................82.2EarlyStudiesoftheTranslationofSpecialandFolkLanguagePatternsinHonglouMeng.............................................................................................................................10ChapterThreeXHY&XHYsinHonglouMeng..................................................................143.1AGeneralSurveyofXHY......................................................................................143.1.1Thedefinition................................................................................................143.1.2Thefeatures...................................................................................................153.1.3Thefunctions................................................................................................163.2XHYsinHonglouMeng.........................................................................................173.2.1ThesignificanceofXHYsinHonglouMeng...............................................173.2.2FeaturesofXHYSinHonglouMeng............................................................18 3.2.3TheclassificationofXHYsinHonglouMeng..............................................20ChapterFourApplicationofRelevanceTheorytotheStudyofXHYsinHonglouMeng.224.1AnAnalysisontheTranslationofXHYsbasedonRelevanceTheory..................224.1.1Thetranslatorasareaderofthesourcetext..................................................224.1.2Thetranslatorasacommunicatorbetweentheoriginalwriterandthetargetreaders....................................................................................................................254.2AComparativeStudyoftheTranslationofXiehouyuintheTwoVersionsofHonglouMeng..............................................................................................................264.2.1XHYsintheformof“description+explanation”..........................................274.2.2XHYsintheformof“explanation+description”........................................344.2.3XHYsintheformof“onlydescription”.......................................................344.2.4XHYsintheformof“onlyexplanation”......................................................394.2.5XHYsinotherforms.....................................................................................404.2.6Aconcisesummary.......................................................................................42ChapterFiveConclusion......................................................................................................44References............................................................................................................................46 ChapterOneIntroduction1.1BackgroundoftheResearch1.1.1HonglouMenganditstranslationHonglouMengwrittenbyCaoXueqinintheQingDynasty(1683-1840),istheepitomeofclassicalnovelsinChineseliterature.WiththeJiafamilyasitsbackground,thenovelgivesanexhaustiveaccountofthelifeofthisnoblefamilyandmakesafullexploitationintotherootcausesofthefamily’svicissitude.Thenovel,withthelovetragedybetweenJiaBaoyuandLinDaiyuasitswritingclue,exposesthecorruptionoffeudalsocietyanditsfateofbeingburiedinhistoricalruins.Asamatteroffact,HonglouMengisthebestclassicalnovelrepresentingtheperfectcombinationofprofoundthoughtsandexquisiteart.Withitsimpressivenarration,fascinatingplots,distinctiverepresentationofcharactersandlivelylanguage,HonglouMengisrecognizedasoneoftheFourGreatClassicalNovelsofChineseliteratureandhasbeenwell-knowninalmosteveryChinesehouseholdforhundredsofyears.TheenormouspopularityofHonglouMenginChinahasattractedtheinterestofagreatmanyscholarsabroadandthushasbeentranslatedintomorethantenlanguagesworldwide(Y.F.Liu,2008).Amongvarioustranslationversions,ADreamofRedMansiontranslatedbyYangXianyiandhiswifeGladysYangin1978andTheStoryoftheStonebyDavidHawkesandhisson-in-lawJohnMinfordin1973receivethemostrecognition.1 1.1.2XHYsinHonglouMengOneofthemostdistinguishedfeaturesofHonglouMengistheimpressiveXHYsinitslanguage,whichhasarousedintenseinterestoftranslationscholarshomeandabroad.MostoftheseXHYsaresetphrasesorsentencesandareuniqueingrammaticalstructureandareofspecificmeanings.Theyhavegreatsignificanceinportrayingthecharactersandunfoldingtheplotofthenovel.Asaninherentpartofthenovel’slanguage,XHYisrichlyloadedwithChineseculture,whichposesgreatdifficultyonitstranslation.Uptillnow,variousstudiesonthetranslationoftheseXHYshavebeenmadeandtheanalysesarebasedondifferentperspectivesrangingfromtheoriginofXHY,itsstructure,denomination,categorizationtoitsrhetoricfunction.Theseperspectives,howeverdifferent,provethatthepropertranslationofXHYsinHonglouMengplaysacrucialroleinthetranslationofthewholenovel.WhatinformationiscontainedinXHYandhowtosuccessfullyconveytothereaderinacertaincontextarethetwoquestionsrequiringtobeconsideredbytranslatorsduringthetranslationprocess.1.1.3MajortheoryappliedinthisstudyRelevancetheoryisacognitivepragmatictheorythattakescommunicationas“anostensive-inferentialprocessduringwhichthecommunicatormakesmanifesttotheaudiencehisintentionandtheaudiencemakesinferenceaboutthecommunicator’sintention”(Sperber&Wilson,2001,p.54).Thesuccessofthecommunicationdependsonthedesiretoreachoptimalrelevancebyboththecommunicatorandtheaudience.Astranslationcanberegardedasaspecialkindofcommunicationactivity,relevancetheoryispowerfulinexplainingthenatureoftranslation.Accordingtorelevancetheory,translationisanostensiveandinferentialprocessofinter-lingualinterpretationandakindoflanguagecommunicationamongthreeparticipants:theoriginalwriter,thetranslatorandthereader.Thetranslatorshouldhaveafullgraspoftheintentionoftheoriginalwriterandtheexpectationofthetargetreader.Relevancetheoryoftranslationdealswithsituationsinwhichthetranslatorshouldconsidernotonlythemeaningoftheoriginalinformation,butalsotheforminwhichthe2 meaningispresented.Thetranslatorneedstoinfertheoriginalwriter’simplicitintentionsoastomeetthereaders’expectation,thusachievingoptimalrelevance.Fromthispointofview,relevancetheoryprovidesafeasibleperspectivetothestudyofthetranslationofXHYsinHonglouMeng.1.2StudyAimsandSignificanceThisthesisistoinvestigatethetranslationofXHYundertheframeworkofrelevancetheory.Themainmethodologyadoptedinthisstudyisqualitativeanalysis.Specificmethodsincludingcontrastiveanalysis,theoreticalinterpretationandexampleillustrationsareusedintheresearch.AlltheexamplesforthisstudyarecollectedfromHonglouMenganditstwocompleteEnglishversions.TheChineseversionadoptedinthisstudyisthethirdeditionofHonglouMengpublishedbyJiangsuPublishingHouseofAncientBooksin1998.ThetwoEnglishversionsusedare:ADreamofRedMansiontranslatedbyYangXianyiandhiswifeGladysYangin1978andTheStoryoftheStonebyDavidHawkesandhisson-in-lawJohnMinfordin1973.ThroughadetailedanalysisofXHYsandtheirtranslationsinthetwocompleteEnglishversions,thisstudyattemptstoanswerthefollowingtwoquestions：-HowtoachieveoptimalrelevancebetweentheoriginalwriterandthetargetreaderinthetranslationofXHYsinHonglouMeng?-whatstrategiescouldbeadoptedinthetranslationofXHYsinHonglouMeng?ItishopedthatthisstudymaybehelpfultothetranslationofXHYinotherChineseclassicsandcandrawmoreattentiontotheresearchofthetranslationofChineseclassics.1.3StructureoftheThesisThethesisconsistsoffiveparts,eachpartplayingacrucialroleintheconveyanceofsignificanceofthethesis.ChapterOneisanintroductiontothebackgroundoftheresearch,itsstudyaimsand3 significanceaswellasitsbasicstructures.Inthischapter,variousresearches,homeandabroad,onthetranslationofHonglouMengareinvestigated.Also,majortheoryappliedtothisstudyalsogetstouchedupon.ChapterTwogivesanexhaustiveexplanationoftherelevance-theoreticalapproachtotranslationandearlystudiesofthetranslationofHonglouMeng’sspecificandfolklanguagepatterns,amongwhichXHYsarevitallyimportanttotheconveyanceoftheartisticeffectofitslanguage.ChapterThreeprobesintotheXHYsinHonglouMengfromthreeaspects:thesignificance,thefeaturesaswellastheclassificationofXHY.ItisofgreatnecessitytoconductasurveyofvariousXHYsinHonglouMengastheanalysisofthetwoversionsoftranslationofXHYsinchapterfourisbasedontheclassificationmadeinthischapter.Chapterfouristhemostsignificantpartinthewholestructureofthethesis.Here,relevancetheoryisappliedtothecomparativestudyofthetranslationofXHYsinthetwoEnglishversionsofHonglouMeng.ChapterFiveisaconclusionconcerningthefindingsandlimitationsofthestudy,aswellassuggestionsforfutureresearch.4 ChapterTwoRelevanceTheoryandTranslation2.1Relevance-theoreticalApproachtoTranslation2.1.1TranslationasacommunicativeandinterpretiveprocessIntheframeworkofrelevancetheory,languagecommunicationisanostensive-inferentialprocessinwhichthecommunicatormakesmanifesttotheaudiencehisintentionandtheaudiencemakesinferenceaboutthecommunicator’sintention.Inthissense,translationcanbeseenasacommunicativeprocesswiththetranslatorbeinginvolvedintworoundsofcommunication:communicationwiththeoriginalwriterandcommunicationwithtarget-textreader.Therefore,inordertomakeforasuccessfultranslation,thetranslatorissupposedtotakethetworoundsofcommunicationintoexhaustiveconsideration.Yet,atranslatorshouldbearinmindthattheprocessofcommunicationdoesn’tmerelyinvolvethenotionofencodinganddecodingamessage,whoseweaknessliesinthatthetranslatoristreatedonlyasadecoderandre-encoderofmessagesseekingtorelaythemintactaftermakingadjustmentsforinformativeness,dependingontherelativeun-predictabilityofitemsinthesourceandtargetlanguage(MonaBaker,2004,P.30).Strictlyspeaking,thismodelofcommunicationallowsthesocialcircumstancesoftextproductionandreceptiontobeoverlookedandatthesametime,implicitlyviewsmeaningasaquantitativeentitytoberelayedintactfromsourcetotargetlanguage.ThusinlinewithSperber&Wilson’srelevancetheory,viewingtranslationasacommunicativeprocess,ineffect,meanstakingcognitivecontextasthepillarfactor.Inaddition,relevancetheoryclaimsthattherelationshipbetweenwhatwesayandthethoughtweintendtocommunicateisoneofinterpretiveresemblance.Inotherwords,wedonotnecessarilysaywhatwethink,butmoreoftenthannot,whatwesayinterpretivelyresembleswhatweintendtocommunicate(Ernest-August,Gutt,2004,P.36).Therefore,accordingtorelevancetheory,thereexistsinterpretiveresemblancebetweenthoughtsandutterances.Astranslationisacommunicativeprocessconsistingoftworoundsof5 communicationwhichunavoidablyinvolvethoughtsandutterances,“atranslationwouldbeareceptorlanguagetextthatinterpretivelyresembledtheoriginal”(Ernest-August,Gutt,2004,P.105).InGutt’sview,ininterpretiveuse,theprincipleofrelevanceispresumedtoproduceadequatecontextualeffectswithoutgratuitousprocessingeffort.InlinewithGutt’sview,Sperber&Wilsonhave,infact,statedthatininterpretiveuse“thespeakerguaranteesthatherutteranceisafaithfulenoughrepresentationoftheoriginal:thatis,resemblesitcloselyenoughinrelevantrespects”(Sperber&Wilson,1988,P.37).Moreover,Guttholdsthatinordertomaketheintendedinterpretationsofthetranslationresembletheoriginal,atranslatorshouldmakethetranslationadequatelyrelevanttotheaudienceormakeitoffercontextualeffects.Furthermore,heputsforwardthat“thetranslationshouldbeexpressedinsuchamannerthatityieldstheintendedinterpretationwithoutputtingtheaudiencetounnecessaryprocessingeffort”(Gutt,2004,P.107).Sincetheconsistencewiththeprincipleofrelevanceisalwayscontext-dependent,translationasaninterpretiveuseundertheframeworkofrelevancetheoryisalsocontext-determined.Hence,atranslatorshouldcomprehendthecognitivecontextofthetargetreaderandmakeanassumptionaboutwhatisrelevanttothetarget-textreader.Onlybysuchdoingcanheexpecttoproduceatranslationthatisinconsistencewiththeprincipleofoptimalrelevance.Inaword,fromtheperspectiveofrelevancetheory,translationisacommunicativeandinterpretiveprocesstakingintoaccountsuchfactorsasthecognitivecontextofwhathasalwaysbeensaid,theinterpretiveresemblancebetweenone’sthoughtandutteranceandtheexpectationofthetargetreader,etc.2.1.2Translator’stworolesinthetranslationprocessRelevancetheoryclaimsthatcommunicationisanostensive-inferentialprocess.Asaspecialformofcommunication,translationisjustifiablyanostensive-inferentialprocess.Aswehavementionedearlier,communicatorcruciallycreatesanexpectationofoptimalrelevancewhichmeansthatasanostensive-inferentialprocess,translationissupposedtofulfillthepurposeoftransferringtheoptimalrelevance.Inordertofulfillthispurpose,thetranslatorshouldmakeeveryefforttoconveytheoriginalwriter’sintentionandmeetthe6 expectationofthetargetreader.Inotherwords,thetranslatorisengagedintworoundsofostensive-inferentialprocessesinvolvingthreeparticipants:theoriginalwriter,thetranslatoraswellasthetarget-textreader.Inthefirstroundofostensive-inferentialprocess,theoriginalwriterproducesthestimulusandthetranslatorwillinferfromthestimuluswhattheoriginalwriter’sintentionsisbymeansofmutuallysharedcognitiveenvironmentundertheguidelineoftheprincipleofrelevance.Bysodoing,successfulcommunicationbetweentheoriginalwriterandthetranslatorcanbeachieved.Afterthat,thetranslatorisinvolvedinthesecondroundofostensive-inferentialprocess.Here,theroleofthetranslatorisnotonlyareaderofthesourcetextbutatransmitterresponsiblefortheconveyanceoftheoriginalwriter’sintentiontothetarget-textreader.Asanostensive-inferentialprocess,thissecondroundofcommunicationrequiresthatthetranslatorconveythestimulushehasobtainedfromthesourcetexttothetarget-textreader.Sincethestimulusproducedbytheoriginalwriterinthefirstroundofcommunicationisofostensivenature,thetranslatorwhentransmittingitissupposedtomakesurethatthisostensivestimulusmustattractthetarget-textreader’sattentionandatthesametimeconveytheoriginalwriter’sintention.Asismentionedbefore,intheframeworkofrelevancetheory,asuccessfulcommunicationcan’tbedeprivedofthemutually-sharedcognitiveenvironmentbetweenthecommunicatorandtheaudience,whichmeansthatthetranslator,whenengagedinthesecondroundofostensive-inferentialprocessshouldtakethetarget-textreader’scognitiveenvironmentintoaccount.Thusthereaderofthetargetlanguagecanbeexpectedtoinferfromtheostensivestimuluswhattheoriginalwriter’sintentionis.Ingeneral,relevance-theoreticalapproach,claimsthatduringtranslation,thetranslatorplaysthedualrolesofbothareaderandacommunicator,whichbreaksthroughthetraditionaltheoriesthatconsiderthetranslatortobeaninvisibleman,acompleteservantofthesourcetextormerelyapersonmeetingtheneedofthetarget-textreader.Inthissense,relevance-theoreticalapproachmakesaleapforwardintreatingthestatusofthe7 translator.2.1.3TranslationasaprocessinpursuitofoptimalrelevanceIntheframeworkofrelevancetheory,thesuccessoflanguagecommunicationisdeterminedbyoptimalrelevance.Thecentralclaimofrelevancetheoryisthathumancommunicationcruciallycreatesanexpectationofoptimalrelevance,anexpectationonthepartofthehearerthathisattemptatinterpretationwillyieldadequatecontextualeffectsatminimalprocessingcost(Ernest-AugustGutt,2004,P.32).Inotherwords,thewaythecommunicatorchoosestoexpresshisthoughtisoptimallyrelevanttohisintentions.Meanwhile,theaudienceassumesthatheisnotputtoanygratuitousexpenditureofprocessingeffort.Asaspecialformofcommunication,translationinvolvestworoundsofostensive-inferentialprocesses.Inthefirstroundofcommunication,thetranslatorplaystheroleofareaderwhosepurposeistosearchforoptimalrelevancefromthesourcetextbymeansofinference.Insearchofoptimalrelevance,thetranslatorshouldselecttheactualspeaker-intendedassumptionsfromamongalltheassumptionshecouldusefromhiscognitiveenvironment.Therefore,heturnsfirsttohighlyaccessibleinformationlookingforadequatecontextualeffects.Iftheuseofthisinformationdoesyieldcontextualeffectsadequatetotheoccasioninawaythattheoriginalwritercouldhaveforeseen,thenthetranslatorwillassumethathehasusedtheoriginalwriter-intendedcontextualinformation.Ingeneral,asareaderofthesourcetext,thetranslator,whenlookingforadequatecontextualeffectshastopayattentiontovariousaspectssuchasthebackgroundknowledgeofthesourcelanguagetext,itsculturalimplicationandthecognitiveenvironmentoftheoriginalwriter,etc.Afterfulfillmentofthefirstroundofcommunication,thetranslatorchangeshisrolesfromareadertoacommunicatorresponsibleformakingtheoriginalwriter’sintentionsandtheexpectationofthetarget-textreadermeet.AccordingtoSperber&Wilson,seekingoptimalrelevanceisaprinciplecarefullyobservedbythetwopartiesinacommunication.Therefore,duringthisprocess,thetranslator,althoughwithhisrolechangedstillhasthe8 responsibilitytoseekoptimalrelevance.Sincetheoptimalrelevancehasalreadybeenobtainedbythetranslatorinthefirstroundofostensive-inferentialprocess,theaspectneedstobeconsideredishowtotransfertheoptimalrelevancetothetarget-text.Inotherwords,thetranslatorshouldmakeeveryefforttohavetheoptimalrelevanceobtainedrecognizedbythetarget-textreader(Sperber&Wilson,1986,P.161),whichisthemostchallengingthingforatranslatorinasuccessfultranslation.InGutt’smind,thetranslator’sresponsibilitybeginswiththeformationofhisinformativeintention.Infact,thetranslatorneedstoclarifyforhimselfwhathecanreasonablyexpecttoconveybymeansofhistranslation(Ernest-August,Gutt,2004,P.190).Insuchsituations,thetranslatorwillhavetoconsiderthedegreeofresemblanceofthereceptorlanguagetextwiththeoriginalinanotherlanguage.Asismentionedearlier,communicabilityrequiresthatthereceptorlanguagetextresembletheoriginalcloselyenoughinrelevantrespects.Therefore,thetranslatorneedstolookatboththecontextualeffectsandtheprocessingeffortmadebytheaudience,whichrequiresthathechoosebetweenindirectanddirecttranslation.Guttputsforwardthatthereexistsclosecorrespondencebetweendirecttranslationanddirectquotationthatdependonresemblanceinlinguisticproperties.Similarly,indirecttranslationdefinedasinter-lingualinterpretiveusebearscloserelationswithindirectquotationwhichdependsonresemblanceincognitiveeffects.Inotherwords,directtranslationlikedirectquotationpreservesexactlywhatwassaid,whereas,indirecttranslation,likeindirectquotationgivesanindicationofwhatwasmeant.Atranslatormaychoosebetweenthesetwokindsoftranslationstrategyifhewantstohavetheoptimalrelevancerecognizedbytheaudience.Ingeneral,asaninferentialreaderinthefirstroundofcommunicationandanostensivecommunicatorinthesecondroundcommunication,thetranslatorshouldfirstgettoknowtheoriginalwriter’sintentiontoformhisowninformativeintention,which,ineffect,isaprocessinpursuitofoptimalrelevance.Then,thetranslator,withthepurposeofmakingintentionsandexpectationsmeetinhismind,transferstheoptimalrelevancetothereceptorlanguagetext.Duringthisprocess,9 thecognitiveenvironmentofthetargettextreadershouldbetakenintoconsiderationasthemutuallysharedcognitiveenvironmentbetweentheoriginalwriterandthetargetreaderisquitecrucialtoasuccessfulcommunicationbetweenthetwoparties.Lastbutnottheleast,thetranslatorcanadoptdifferenttranslationmethodstoguaranteethathisversionproducesadequatecontextualeffectswithoutunnecessaryprocessingeffortbythetargetreader.2.2EarlyStudiesoftheTranslationofSpecialandFolkLanguagePatternsinHonglouMengHonglouMeng,asoneoftheFourGreatClassicalNovelsinChineseliteraturehasbeenwell-knowninalmosteveryChinesehouseholdforhundredsofyears.Eversinceitcameintobeing,itsenormouspopularityhasattractedtheinterestofagreatmanyscholarshomeandabroadandthushasbeentranslatedintomorethantenlanguagesworldwide.Thankstovarioustranslationversions,laterresearchersareabletoconductdifferentresearchesrelatedtothetranslationofHonglouMeng.Amongvariousresearches,thosebasedonADreamofRedMansionsbyYangXianyiandGladysYangin1978andTheStoryoftheStonebyDavidHawkesandJohnMinfordin1973provetobethemost.AbooknamedOntheTranslationofHonglouMenggivesusapanoramicviewoftheartemployedinHonglouMeng’stranslationfrommanyaspects,amongwhichspecialandfolklanguagepatternssuchasproverbs,allusions,setphrases,puns,ChineseXHY,etcaresingledoutrespectivelyfordetaileddiscussion.Inadditiontothisbook,therearemanyotherarticlesconcerningthetranslationofHonglouMeng’sspecialandfolklanguagepatterns.Thosearticles,thoughhavingtheirownlimitations,providelimitlessinspirationandenlightenmentforthewritertocontinuethisresearch.Belowisasummaryoftheresearchesrelatedtothosespecialandfolklanguagepatterns:10 ResearchesRelatedtotheTranslationofSpecialandFolkLanguagePatternsinHonglouMengNameThesisandDateResearchContentEvaluationofpublicationandSignificanceAComparativeThedimensionsofImageThecomparativeStudyofEnglishTheory:ProfileOrganization,analysisfromtheTranslationofProminence,PerspectiveandperspectiveofImageHeXiaoqinXiehouyuinHongAbstractionareemployedtoTheoryisquitenewandLouMenganalyzethedifferentlinguisticnovel.However,the2012.6expressionsintheirversionsofanalysisdoesn’tcoverXiehouyu.differentformsofXiehouyuPunTranslationof1.ThethesisattemptstomakeaHongLouMengincomparativeanalysisofpunTwoEnglishtranslationinthetwocompleteThethesisVersionsfromtheEnglishversionsofHongLouemphasizesthatpunXiaLeiPerspectiveofMengfromtheperspectiveoftranslationshouldtakeRelevanceTheoryRelevanceTheory.suchfactorsascontext2012.52.RelevanceTheoryisofandthewriter’sintentionguidingsignificanceintheintoconsideration.evaluationofpuntranslationinthetwoversions.IdiomTranslationThecombinationofQuantitativeanalysisqualitativeanalysisandinADreamofRedtogetherwithqualitativequantitativeanalysisMansions----AanalysisisadoptedinthethesismakestheresearchmorePanMinStudyFromthetosummarizethetranslationexhaustive.However,thestrategiesifidiomsinHongLouchoiceofonlyonePerspectiveofMengundertheframeworkofEnglishversioninsteadRelevanceTheorySkoposTheory.oftwoormoreversions2011.3makesthethesislesspersuasive.IdiomTranslationTheresearchinHongLouMengperspectiveisnovelandfromthe1.TheresearchonidiomuniqueinshowingthatPerspectiveoftranslationisconductedfromidiomtranslationcan’ttheperspectiveofaestheticsofAestheticsofbeseparatedfromthereception.ZouNingReception.tworoundsofreception2.Thethesismakesitclearthat2011.1tworoundsofreceptionprocessofthetranslator.processesareemployedduringHowever,withoutidiomtranslation.enoughexamplestosupporttheanalysis,thethesisseemslesspersuasive.11 FolkAdagesinAThethesisemploystheTheanalysisisDreamofRedtheoryofmanipulationschooltonovelanduniquewithMansionsundershowhowtheYangstranslatesoundtheoreticalLiuChangtheManipulationtheidiomsinHongLouMengframework,butthethesisofIdeologyandundertheguidanceofideologydoesn’temployenoughPoeticsandpoetics.examplesand2009.11comparativeanalysis.DomesticationandThethesismakesanForeignizationinexhaustiveanalysisastotheTranslationofThethesistriestoanalyzetheemploymentofIdiomsinHongthetranslationmethods:domesticationandLouMengdomesticationandforeignizationemployedLiuJinhui2006.8foreignizationemployedbythebytheYangsandDavidYangsandDavidHawkes.Hawkes.However,theresearchdoesn’tmakeasummaryofthetranslationofdifferentkindsofidioms.TheTranslation1.ThethesistriestobringoftheCulturaltranslationstudiesundertheContentofthegreatercontextofculturalstudy.ThediscussionofChineseIdiomsin2.ItmakesacomparativeidiomtranslationfromFanMinHongLouMenganalysisofidiomtranslationinculturallevelonly2005.11thetwocompleteEnglishrendersitlessversionsofHongLouMengandexhaustive.tentativelyoffersadviceonthetranslationofsomeidioms.IdiomTranslation1.ThethesistriestoexploretheTheresearchoffersinHongLousignificanceofhermeneuticsinareasonableexplanationMeng----AthetranslationofidiomsinastothephenomenonofHermeneuticHongLouMeng.culturalfiltrationintheYuJianglingAccount2.Itholdsthatdifferentoriginalversion.2004.6interpretationoftheoriginalHowever,thethesisworksbydifferenttranslatorsdoesn’texploretheandreaderscontributetotheirspecifictranslationdifferentviewsofliteraturestrategiesofidioms.translation.Fromtheabovetable,wecanseethatdifferentresearchershaveconducteddifferentresearchesonthetranslationofspecialandfolklanguagepatternsinHonglouMengbasedonsuchtheoreticalframeworkasrelevancetheory,skopostheory,hermeneutics,reception12 aesthetics,culturemanipulation,etc.However,despitetheresearchers’greateffortstoanalyzethetranslationofthosespeciallanguagepatterns,fewmakeexhaustiveexplorationofChineseXHY,which,asadistinctivelinguisticforminthenovel,playsasignificantroleinportrayingthecharacters’personalities,deepeningthenovel’sthemeaswellasaddingtotheartisticeffectofitalanguage.Therefore,adetailedresearchonthetranslationofthoseXHYsisoffar-reachingsignificance.Basedonearlystudiesanalyzedabove,thispaperoffersarelevance-theoreticalapproachtothetranslationofHonglouMeng’sXHYs.ItishopedthatthisstudymaybehelpfultothetranslationofXHYinotherChineseclassicsanddrawmoreattentiontotheresearchofthetranslationofChineseclassics.13 ChapterThreeXHY&XHYsinHonglouMeng3.1AGeneralSurveyofXHY3.1.1ThedefinitionChineseXHYisanimportantpartandauniquefeatureofChinesevocabulary.Itoriginatesfromdailyexperienceofordinarypeopleandisthecrystallizationofpeople’scollectivewisdom.DespitenumerousresearchesconductedbyChinesescholars,noconsensushasbeengaineduptillnowastothedenominationofXHY.AccordingtoFangMengzhi,xiehouyuismadeupoftwoparts,thefirstpartofwhichislikeadescriptionofariddlewhilethesecondpartservesastheanswertotheriddle.Fangholdsthatonsomeoccasions,thelatterpartisomittedandmostXHYadoptmetaphoricaldevice.BasedonthedefinitionproposedbyProfessorFang,JinHuikang&GuoJianzhongputforwardthatiftranslatedliterally,XHYequals“restendingsayings”,since“xie”means“rest”,thatis,restingforawhileandthenutteringthelatterpart.InXiehouyu,“resting”isillustratedbythesymbol“—”.Someotherscholarstendtotranslatexiehouyuas“example-explanationsayings”,whichisaproperembodimentofitsstructure.ProfessorRohsenowmakesacombinationoftheabovetwotranslationversionsandtranslatesxiehouyuas“Chineseenigmaticfolksimiles”which,intheviewofGuoJianzhong,reflectsthestructuralandsubstantivefeatureofChinesexiehouyuinageneralsense.However,anotherscholarHanQingguoholdsthatRohsenow’stranslationcan’tstandclosescrutinyasnoteveryxiehouyuischaracterizedbysimile.Inaddition,someotherscholarsputforwardsuchtranslationas“quiz-cracks”whichalsoneglectsafactthatxiehouyuisdistinctivelydifferentfromaquizorariddleinthatthelatterisdesignedtoamusepeopleortoexercisepeople’sintelligenceorcapabilityofinferencebasedonguessandisusedmoreforamusementthanforordinarycommunication.InChinese-EnglishDictionarypublishedbytheCommercialPress,xiehouyugetsitstranslationas“atwo-partallegoricalsaying,ofwhichthefirstpart,alwaysstated,isdescriptive,whilethesecondpart,sometimesuntranslated,carriesthe14 message”.ThistranslationismorelikeaexplanatorydescriptionthananEnglishdenomination.SincedifferentscholarsholddifferentopinionsastothedenominationofChinesexiehouyu,theauthortendstoadopt“xiehouyu”,capitalizedandabbreviatedasXHYinthisthesis.3.1.2ThefeaturesAsaspecialpartofChineselanguage,XHYhasitsowndistinctivefeatures.Firstofall,XHYisofcolloquialstyle.AsXHYoriginatesfromdailyexperienceofordinarypeople,itcan’tbeseparatedfromcolloquialfeatures.Beingcolloquialinstyle,itconveysvariousinformationthatareeasytounderstandandremember.IntheclassicalnovelHonglouMeng,aboutonehundredandeighty-threeXHYsareadopted,amongwhichonlyfiveoccurintheauthor’snarrationandtherestappearinthedialoguesofdifferentcharacters,whichbringsthecolloquialstyleofXHYintofullplay.AnotherdistinctivefeatureofXHYisitsvividnessanddescriptiveness.XHYcaneasilyimpressothersasitisvividandconcreteandisindispensablefrompeople’sdailylife.Besides,aXHYisalwaysusedtobetterconveywhatthespeakerwantstocommunicate.Forexample,whenwewanttoexpressthehatredtowardsomethingthataregreatlyharmful,wecanadopttheXHY“Aratcrossingthestreetischasedbyall”.Sincerateasilyconjuresupanunfavorableimageinone’smind,thisXHYisquitesuitabletothespecificsituationandisfullofdescriptiveness.Moreover,mostXHYsarecharacterizedbyhumor.Theytendtoadoptextraordinarymodetorelatetoeachotherthetwothingsthataretotallydifferentthusmakinghumorouseffectstrongandimpressive.Inaddition,alotofXHYsaretheembodimentofsuchthinkingmodesasdivergentthinking,negativethinkingreflectingcloserelationsexistingbetweenlanguageandthinking.Forexample,inXHY“七窍通六窍—一窍不通”,theformerpartalonemakesonethinkthatsuccessisaroundthecorner,whicharousespositiveexpectationinthemindofthereaders.However,thelatterpartwiththemeaningofbeingignorantofeverythingformsasheercontrast,thusconveyingastrongsenseofhumor.Furthermore,XHYdoesn’thavefixedstructures.Nomatterwhatthestructureis,it15 aimsatcommunicatingtheintentionofthecommunicator.ThisfeatureendowsXHYwithgreatadaptability,whichinturn,enablesthemtoberenewableandleavesmuchroomforfurtheradjustment.Inaddition,XHYisrichlyloadedwithcultureelements.Sincetheybearcloserelationtodailylife,XHYiswithoutdoubtgreatlyinfluencedbyculture.Ineffect,XHYcoversvariousaspectsofculturerangingfromthehabits,tradition,customstomorallaws,belief,religion,etc.Ingeneral,XHYisaspecial&uniquelanguageformcharacterizedbycolloquialstyle,vividness,humor,flexibilityandculture-loadedelements.ThesefeaturesendowXHYwithgreatvitalityworthyofbeingstudiedexhaustively.3.1.3ThefunctionsGenerallyspeaking,XHYperformstwotypesoffunctions:linguisticfunctionsandpragmaticfunctions.LinguisticfunctionsbeingencodedandcontextindependentarerealizedbyXHY’snaturalstructureandformation.AlotofresearchersconsiderXHYtobefigurativeexpressionswhichcanachievesuchfundamentalrhetoricaleffectasvisualization.Thiseffectismainlydeducedfromvividimagesorallusionsofthefirstpartthatservesasalinguisticbackgroundforthepeopletoenvisagethepicturedepicted.Therichenvisagementisresourcedfromallstrataoflifewiththehelpofwhich,theintendedmeaningofXHYisobtainedinaneffectiveway.OnepointworthytobeelaboratedonisthatthoughanovelpictureisprovidedinthefirstpartofXHY,successfulcommunicationliesintheintelligentinterpretationofthesecondpart.Inotherwords,therhetoricaleffectconcerninglinguisticfunctionsofXHYisreachedthroughtheintegrationofthetwoparts.Inadditiontoproducingrhetoricaleffect,thelinguisticfunctionsofXHYalsoenableittoactasanindependentsentenceorappearasasentencecomponent(D.Z.Wen.,&J.Zhou,2000:P150-151).ThisflexibleroleplayedbyXHYinlinguisticsfacilitatesittobetterconveytheintendedmeaningofthecommunicatorthuspromotingasuccessfulcommunication.16 PragmaticfunctionsrefertothosefunctionsofXHYrealizedinreallifeinteractionsthatarecontext-dependentandarecloselyrelatedtothewayweinterpreteverydayexchanges.Inthissense,relevancetheory,asacognitiveapproachtohumancommunicationhasgreatexplanationpowerinthecomprehensionofXHY.AsismentionedinChapterTwo,inthecourseofaconversationalinteraction,thecommunicator’scognitionisgearedtotheaudience’ssearchforrelevanceintheincomingverbalstimuliandinferenceisoftenadoptedduringtheprocessofsearchingforrelevance.Intheframeworkofrelevancetheory,thefirstpartofXHYisostensivestimuluswhichprecipitatestheaudiencetoretrievefromtheirmemoriesthemostrelevantbackgroundknowledgesothatthesecondpart,whichcarriestheintendedmeaningofXHY,canbeconstruedwithoutmucheffort.3.2XHYsinHonglouMeng3.2.1ThesignificanceofXHYsinHonglouMengHonglouMeng,asoneofthefourGreatClassicalNovelsofChineseliteratureiswell-receivedbothathomeandabroad.AsoneofthemostdistinguishedfeaturesofHonglouMeng,XHYshaveattractedtheattentionofmanyresearchers.Indeed,HonglouMengbringsXHYsintofullplaywhich,inasense,contributestotheimpressivenessandvividnessofitslanguage.Specificallyspeaking,thesignificanceofXHYsinHonglouMengliesinthreeaspects:Firstly,theemploymentofXHYsdeepensthethemeofthenovel.Forexample,“千里搭长棚—没有不散的筵席”and“树倒猢狲散”appearseveraltimesinthenovelandareindeedtheembodimentofitstheme—“Arichhouse,allitsmembersatpeace,isruinedatlastandscattered”(家富人安宁，终有个家亡人散各奔腾)and“Whenthefoodisgonethebirdsreturntothewood,allthat’sleftisemptinessandagreatvoid”(好似食尽鸟投林，落了片白茫茫大地真干净).InChapter75,Tan-chunsmilesmockinglyatLadyWang’ssearchoftheGarden.Quitegrieveanddeplorable,sheemploysXHY“alllikegame-cocksfightingtofinisheachotheroff”（一个个就像乌眼鸡，恨不得你吃了我，我17 吃了你）toexposetheruthlessrelationshipamongthefeudalfamilymembers.Secondly,theadoptionofXHYsinHonglouMengremarkablyaddstotheartisticeffectofitslanguagebymakingitmorevivid,meaningfulandconcise,whichnotonlycapturestheaudience’sattentionbutalsofacilitatestheirunderstandingprocess.Forexample,inchaptersix,GrannyLiu,drivenbynecessity,isreducedtoturningtotheJungMansionforhelp.WhenhearingLadyWangventinghergrievances,sherespondswithaXHY“瘦死的骆驼比马大”vividlydisclosingthegapbetweentherichandthepoor.InChapterThirty,LadyWang,followingtheorderofLadyDowagercomestopatchthingsupbetweenJiaBaoyuandLinDaiyu.Seeingthattheyhavebeenalreadyapologizingtoeachother,shedescribedthesituationtoLadyDowagerwithaXHY“黄鹰抓住鹞子的脚—两个都扣了环了”,whichvividlygivesfullexpressionoftheintimaterelationshipbetweenJiaBaoyuandLinDaiyu.Inadditiontotheabovetwoexamples,therearemanyotherXHYsadoptedbytheauthortoenhancetheartisticeffectofthenovel’slanguage,suchas“狗长尾巴尖的好日子”(usedbyLiWantorefertoLadyWang’sbirthday);“癞蛤蟆想吃天鹅肉”（usedbyPing-ertomakefunofJiaRui);“可着头做帽子—要一点富余的都不能”(usedbyYuan-yangtodescribethefinancialsituationoftheJungMansion,etc.Lastbutnotleast,personalitiesofthecharactersinthenovelgetdepictedincisivelywiththeemploymentofalotofXHYs.Forexample,inchaptersixty-five,whenintroducingthepersonalityofLadyWangtoSecondSister,Hsing-erhemployed“上头一脸笑，脚下便使绊子；明是一盆火，暗是一把刀”,avividexpressionofLadyWang’sdouble-facedtactics.Inchapterforty-six,JiaShewantedYuan-Yangtobehisconcubine,whichisflatlyrefusedbyYuan-YangwitharhetoricalXHY“牛不喝水强按头”,reflectingherstrongself-esteemanddetermination.Suchexamplesaretoonumeroustoenumerateinthisnovelandtheyremarkablyenhancetheimpressivenessofthenovel’scharacters.3.2.2FeaturesofXHYSinHonglouMengStatisticsindicatethattherearearound180XHYsinHonglouMeng,eachofwhichperformsitsownfunctions.TheseXHYsareofdistinctivefeaturesenablingthemtobetter18 conveytheintendedmeaningofthecommunicator.Asaspecialformoflanguage,XHYsinHonglouMengareofgreatdiversitywithoutfixedstructures.ThecontentoftheseXHYscovermanyaspectsrangingfrommarriage,occupation,religion,clothing,cookingtoanimalhabits.Forexample,“嫁出去的女儿—扑出去的水”(marriage);“卖油的娘子水梳头”(occupation);“和尚无儿孝子多着呢”(religion);“谁家没有个碟小碗大—磕着碰着的?”(cooking);“黑母鸡,一窝儿”(animalhabits).Moreover,XHYsinHonglouMengfallintodifferenttypes,concerninghomophone,metaphor,hyperbole,contrast,metonymy,etc.Forexample,“宋徽宗的鹰,赵子昂的马—都是好画儿?”(“画”ishomonymouswith“话”;“没药性的炮仗—只好装幌子罢了”(“炮仗”inthisXHYisametaphorreferringtothosewhoarenotwarmandsincere);“千里搭长棚—没有个不散的筵席”(“千里”)meaningathousandmilesisahyperbole.Commonsensetellsusthatashedofathousandmilesdoesn’texistatall);“瘦死的骆驼比马大”(thesizeofacamelandahorseistotallydifferentandtheyareincontrastwitheachother);“谁家没有个碟小碗大，磕着碰着的?”(Hereametonymyisadoptedwith“碟”and“碗”usedtorepresentcontainers).Differentintypesastheyare,XHYsinHonglouMengarealsoflexibleinstructure.Ingeneral,XHYscanbedividedintotwoparts“description+explanation”.However,inHonglouMeng,thisbasicstructureisadjustedwithconsummateskillsandgreatease.“description+explanation”,“explanation+description”,“onlydescription”,“onlyexplanation”and“XHYsinotherforms”areallderivativesofthebasicstructure.Inadditiontoflexibility,XHYsinHonglouMengarealsoofcolloquialstyle.MostoftheXHYsappearintheconversationsofvariouscharactersgivingfullexpressiontothepersonalitiesofdifferentcharacters.OnepointworthytobenotedhereisthatthedistributionofXHYsintheconversations,tosomeextent,dependsonthecharacters’cultivation,educationandlivingbackground,whichensuresfulldisplayoftheirdifferentsortsofpersonalities.Lastly,someXHYsinHonglouMengareevidentlyconnectedwithcustomand19 traditionofthattime.Forexample,intheXHY“状元痘儿灌的浆儿又满—是喜事”,“状元痘儿”actuallyreferstochickenpoxwhichwasthenregardedasagoodsign.“嫁出去的女儿，泼出去的水”isanotherXHYreflectingafactthatinfeudalsociety,onceadaughterismarried,shebelongstoherhusbandanddoesn’thavemuchconnectionwiththoserelativesofhermaidenhome.Inthissense,XHYsinHonglouMengarecarriersofsocialideas,socialvaluesaswellassocialcustomoffeudalsociety.3.2.3TheclassificationofXHYsinHonglouMengThereisnotageneralconsensusamongscholarsontheclassificationofXHYsinHonglouMengasdifferentresearchershaveoffereddifferentwaystoclassifytheseXHYs.AccordingtoProfessorShaoZhihong,XHYsinHonglouMengfallintotwogroups:metaphoricalandpunnyones.ProfessorShao’sclassificationisbasedontherelationshipbetweenthefirstandthesecondpartofXHY.(Z.H.Shao,2005).BasedonthestructuresofthoseXHYsinHonglouMeng,HeZhongyingputthemintofivecategories:“description+explanation”,“explanation+description”,“onlydescription”,“onlyexplanation”and“XHYsinotherforms”.Bothclassificationsarewidelyadoptedinlaterresearchers.However,ProfessorShao’sclassificationismadeinabroadsenseandisnotthatspecificandintuitivecomparedwiththatofHeZhongying.InordertogiveadetailedanalysisofthetranslationofXHYswithdifferentstructuresinHonglouMeng,thispaperadoptsHeZhongying’sclassification.Forconvenienceofdiscussion,alistofXHYswithdifferentformsbasedonHeZhongying’sclassificationaregivenasfollows:1、XHYswiththeformof“description+explanation”:守多大碗,吃多少饭；瘦死的骆驼—比马大；丈八的灯台—照见人家,照不见自己的；狗咬吕洞宾—不识好歹；千里搭长棚—没有不散的筵席；谁蒸下馒头等你—怕冷了不成？；既没人吃生姜，怎么这么辣辣的呢？；金簪儿掉在井里头—有你的，只是有你的；打细算盘—分斤掰两；聋子放炮仗—散了罢；天下老鸹一般黑—一般黑；兔死狐悲—物伤其类；没烧糊洗脸水—有什么不是？；梅香拜把子—都是奴才；亲婶子找野老儿—多得一个叔叔；仓老鼠问老鸹去借粮—守着的没有，飞着的倒有；提着影20 戏人子上场儿—好歹别戳破这层纸；偷来的锣鼓儿—打不得；癞狗—扶不上墙；妻贤夫祸少—表壮不如里壮；胳膊折了—在袖子里；耗子尾巴上长疮—多少脓血儿；天网恢恢—疏而不漏；墙倒众人推；临阵磨枪—不中用；百足之虫，死而不僵；趁热灶—一汽炮制熟烂；嫁出去的女儿—泼出去的水；留得青山在—依旧有柴烧；谁家没有和碟大碗小—磕着碰着的呢？；黄鹰抓住鹞子的脚—两个都扣了环了2、XHYswiththeformof“explanation+description”没良心的东西—过了河儿就拆桥；没才干，没口齿—锯了嘴子的葫芦3、XHYswiththeformof“onlydescription”拉硬屎；胳膊折了往袖子里藏；三日打鱼，两日晒网；打着灯笼没处找去；癞蛤蟆想吃天鹅肉；树倒猢狲散；坐山看虎斗；借刀杀人；引风吹火；站干岸儿；推到油瓶不扶；摇车儿里的爷爷，拄拐棍你骆驼的孙子；水晶心肝玻璃人儿；狗长尾巴尖的好日子；司马牛之叹；牛不喝水强摁头；六国贩骆驼；烧糊了的捲子；一个巴掌拍不响；大海里捞针；水来伸手，饭来张口；苍蝇不抱没缝的蛋；顶梁骨走了真魂；井水不犯河水；可着头做帽子；得陇望蜀；卖油的娘子水梳头；虎头上捉虱子；人是地行仙；含着骨头露着肉；躲过了风暴又遭了雨4、XHYswiththeformof“onlyexplanation”人财两空；中看不中吃；求人不如求己；清的清，白的白；怀着鬼胎5、XHYswithotherforms人家给个棒槌，我就认作针了。（homophonicpun）交杯盏儿还没吃，倒上了头了。（homophonicpun)什么“好话”！宋徽宗的鹰，赵子昂的马，都是好画！（homophonicpun）大萝卜还用屎浇？（homophonicpun）苦海回头（苦海无边，回头是岸）哪个耗子不偷油？（偷油的耗子—手脚不干净）21 ChapterFourApplicationofRelevanceTheorytotheStudyofXHYsinHonglouMeng4.1AnAnalysisontheTranslationofXHYsbasedonRelevanceTheoryIntheframeworkofRelevanceTheory,translationinvolvestworoundsofostensive-inferentialprocesses.Inthefirstroundofostensive-inferentialprocess,thetranslatorplaystheroleofareaderwhosepurposeistosearchforoptimalrelevancefromthesourcetextbymeansofinferencethusgettingtoknowtheoriginalwriter’sintention.Inthesecondroundofostensive-inferentialprocess,theroleofthetranslatorchangestoacommunicatorresponsibleformakingoriginalwriter’sintentionsandtheexpectationofthetargetreadermeet.4.1.1ThetranslatorasareaderofthesourcetextAccordingtorelevancetranslationtheory,duringtranslation,oneofthemostimportanttasksforatranslatoristobeinformedoftheoriginal’swriter’sintention.However,itisalwaysdifficulttointerprettheauthor’sintentiontothefullestextentbymeansofinferenceespeciallytothoseclassicswrittenhundredsorthousandsyearsago.Therefore,whatcontemporaryreaderscandoistomakeassumptionswiththehelpofpreviousresearchersandtheirownunderstanding.AsfortheuseofthoseXHYsinHonglouMeng,wecanalsomakeinferenceabouttheauthor’sintention.SimilartothesignificanceofXHYsinHonglouMeng,thefirstandforemostconsiderationoftheoriginalauthortouseXHYsistoportraythepersonalitiesofthecharacters.AnyonewhohaseverreadthenovelknowsthatinHonglouMeng,therearealotofcharacters,thestatusofwhomrangefromthenobilitytothepopulace.Differentstatusendowthosecharacterswithdistinctivelydifferentpersonalities.Asisknowntousall,languageisasystemofarbitraryvocalsymbolsusedforhumancommunication.Since22 itiscloselyrelatedtocommunication,languagenaturallybecomesamediumofreflectinghuman’scharacteristics.Asaspecialformoflanguage,XHYscanalsobemadegooduseoftoconveydifferentcharacters’personalities.InHonglouMeng,theauthoradoptsaboutonehundredandeightyXHYstoportrayvariouscharactersfromtwodifferentangles:oneisinadirectway,thatis,XHYsappearinthedailytalksofthosecharactersthemselves,theotherisinanindirectwaywithXHYsemployedbyotherstocommentoncertaincharacters.Beitthedirectwayorindirectportrayal,XHYsinthisnovelgiveafullexpressionofcharacters’personalitiesendowingthemwithdistinguishedfeatures.Asaspecialformoflanguage,XHYsarealsousedbytheauthortoaddtotheartisticeffectofthelanguage.AgoodnovelalwayssurpassesotherseitherinitspenetratingthemeorinitsdistinctivelanguageandHonglouMengisreallyacaseinpoint.Theauthor,beingawareofthefactthattheaudience’sattentionspanisshort,employsalotofXHYstobettercapturetheirattentionwhilemakingthenoveldynamicandimpressive.Furthermore,theauthoremploysvariousXHYstoenhancethestrongsmackofeverydaylife.Asanovelofcriticalrealismcloselyrelatedtoworldlyaffairs,HonglouMengcan’tbeseparatedfromfactualness.Inordertoretaintheflavoroflife,theauthor“用《春秋》的法子，把世俗粗话撮其要，删其繁，再加润色，比方出来，一句是一句”（Chapter42）。Originatingfromthedailyexperienceofordinarypeople,XHYisthecrystallizationofpeople’scollectivewisdom.Therefore,whenusedintheclassicalnovelHonglouMeng,theyenablethenoveltobefulloflifeandbemorerealistic.Asareaderinthefirstroundofostensive-inferentialprocess,thetranslatorissupposedtofigureouttheintentionoftheoriginalwriterbasedonthoseassumptionsinferredfromthestimulusintendedbythewriter.Duringthisprocess,thesharedcognitivecontextbetweentheoriginalwriterandthetranslatorplaysacrucialroleinpromotingasuccessfulcommunication.Actually,thecoverageofthiskindofsharedcognitivecontextdependslargelyonthetranslator’sowncognitivebackground,suchasthegraspofthesourcetextlanguage,theawarenessofthesourcetextculture,themasteryofthesocial23 backgroundagainstwhichtheauthorcomposedhisworks,etc.YangXianyi(1915-2009)wasborninTianjin,ChinaandhisfirstlanguageisChinese.Whenhewas20yearsold,hefurtheredhisstudyinOxfordUniversitywherehemethiswifeGladysMargaretTaylor,anEnglishgirlmajoringinChinese.Aftergraduation,theyreturnedtoChinaanddevotedtheirwholelifetothetranslationofChineseclassicalliterature,amongwhichADreamofRedMansionshaswongreatpopularityandhasbeenwell-receivedbothhomeandabroad.BeingaChinesescholar,YangXianyihasafullgraspoftheChineselanguageandculture.SeveralyearsofstudyingandlivingabroadendowedhimwithagoodawarenessofEnglishlanguageandcultureandthesameistrueofhiswifeGladysYang.Therefore,theyareindeedaperfectmatchintranslatingHonglouMeng—oneoftheFourGreatClassicalNovelsinChineseliterature.DavidHawkes(1923—2009）wasborninLondon.HemajoredinChineseinOxfordUniversitywhenhewas22yearsold.In1948,hewasadmittedbyPekingUniversityasapostgraduatetostudyChinese.Asafamoussinologist,HawkesmadegreatachievementinhisstudyofChineseliterature.HisunderstandingofChineselanguageandcultureisoneofgreatincisivenessandcognition.What’smore,asanativespeakerofEnglish,heisabletoexpresswhathehasgraspedfromtheoriginaltext.TheabovetwofactorscombinetomakeforDavidHawkes’successfultranslationofHonglouMeng,thefirst80chaptersofwhichwaspublishedin1973,1977and1980respectively.Thelast40chaptersweretranslatedbyHawkes’son-in-lawJohnMinford,alsoasinologist.Therefore,thesuccessofcompleteversionofHonglouMengowestotheconcertedeffortsofbothDavidHawkesandJohnMinford.Ingeneral,theYangs’versionisagreatsuccessinChina,whileHawkes’versiontakesleadinthewesternworld.AmongthefourstranslatorsofHonglouMeng,exceptYangXianyi,noneoftheotherthreeisnativeChinese.Still,allofthemarewellequippedwithnotonlythereadingskillsofChineselanguagebutalsotheincisiveunderstandingofChineseculture.However,asChineseisnottheirnativelanguageandtheywereeducatedinawesternstylefromtheverybeginning,misunderstandingoftheoriginalworksis24 inevitable.4.1.2ThetranslatorasacommunicatorbetweentheoriginalwriterandthetargetreadersIntherelevance-theoreticalview,thewholeprocessoftranslationneedstofulfilltworoundsofostensive-inferentialprocessesincommunication.Therefore,theinferenceoftheoriginalwriter’sintentionisonlythefirststepofthewholetranslationprocess,onthebasisofwhichthetranslatorconveystothetargetreaderwhattheoriginalwriter’sintentionisinthesecond-roundofostensive-inferentialcommunicationprocess.Here,thetranslator’sroleturnsfromareaderintoacommunicatorwhichmeansthetranslatorisobligedtocommunicatetothetargetreaderwhathehasachievedfromthestimulusintendedbytheoriginalauthor.Likewise,thetargetreader,expectingtounderstandtheoriginalworkscanonlymakeidealizedassumptionsinaccordancewithhiscognitiveenvironment.Infact,duringpracticaltranslationprocess,thetranslator’sowninitiativemayenablehimtoneglectsomeoftheoriginalauthor’sintentionsandaddhisownintentionsforthesakeofspecificpurpose.Moreover,inordertosparemuchprocessingeffortofthetargetreaders,thetranslatormakeshisownassumptionsofthereaderwiththehelpoftheirsharedcognitiveenvironment.ThereisnothinglikeaprefaceintheYangs’versionofHonglouMengforustodirectlyknowitsintention.Still,manyscholarshavemadevariousresearchesonthebackgroundoftheYang’stranslation,whichrevealthattheYangs’translationwasinitiatedbythegovernmentandthuswasrestrainedbytheofficialnormsofdifferentfields.Moreover,thepracticalpublishingaimofitspublisher—ForeignLanguagesPressisthepromotionofChinesecultureitselfratherthepromotionofitsstatusinthepoly-systemsofworldculture.ZhangNanfengwroteinhis《中西译学批评》:“China’stranslationnormsmaketheYangsputmuchemphasisonadequacyinsteadofacceptability”.Similarly,DavidHawkeswroteintheprefacetohistranslationofHonglouMeng:“TheYangs’versionputsoverdueemphasisontheso-called‘fidelity’”.Fromthesequotations,wecaninferthatinitiatedbythegovernment,thetranslationofHonglouMengbytheYangsis25 supposedtoservetheinterestofthecountryandtopromoteitsculture.Therefore,theYangs’versionmaywellbeintendedforaveragereaderstoexperiencethesenseoftheoriginalnovelwithoutlossofthestory.DifferentfromtheYangs,DavidHawkesisnotacivilservantofitscountrythustakingnoresponsibilitytopromoteHonglouMengtotheoutsideworld.HewentabouttranslatingHonglouMengjustforpleasure,whichensuresthatapartfromadequacy,theacceptabilityoftheversioniswhatDavidHawkescaresmostabout.HewroteintheprefacetohistranslationofHonglouMeng:“Although,thisis,inthesenseIhavealreadyindicated,an“unfinished”novel,itwaswrittenbyagreatartistwithhisverylifeblood.IhavethereforeassumedthatwhateverIfindinitisthereforapurposeandmustbedealtwithsomehoworother.Ican’tpretendalwaystohavedonesosuccessfully,butifIcanconveytothereadereventheafractionofthepleasurethisChinesenovelgivestome,Ishallnothavelivedinvain.”Fromthesewords,wecaninferthatDavidHawkes’versionismainlyintendedforaveragereaderstoexperiencetheenjoymentofreadingHonglouMeng.Inordertoconveythiskindofenjoyment,hemainlyadoptsfreetranslationwithgreateffortsonacademicconsiderations.Thatistosay,thereadersareexpectedtoreadsomethingquiteacceptablewithoutthefeelingofreadingsomethingratherexotic.Ingeneral,bothversionsareintendedforordinaryreaderswithlittleknowledgeofChinese.Thetranslatorsadoptdifferenttranslationstrategiestomaketheintentionoftheoriginalauthorandtheexpectationofthetargetreadersmeet.However,differenttranslationbackground,tosomeextend,influencestheirconveyanceofoptimalrelevancetothetargetreaders.4.2AComparativeStudyoftheTranslationofXiehouyuintheTwoVersionsofHonglouMengInthissection,wearegoingtoinvestigatethetranslationofXiehouyuinthetwo26 versionsofHonglouMengfromarelevance-theoreticperspective.BymakingacomparativestudyofthetwocompleteEnglishversionsofXiehouyu,weareabletogetfamiliarwiththetranslationprocessesofthefourtranslatorsandthetranslationstrategiestheyhavechosenaswellasthereasonforthemtomakesuchchoices.Bysodoing,wecandrawsomeinspirationtoguidefutureresearchonthetranslationofXHY.Theanalysisiscarriedoutaccordingtothecategoriesbuiltinchapterthree.Asisdiscussedearlier,thistypeofcategorizationisbasedonthestructureofXHYfortheconvenienceofdiscussion.First,XHYswithconventionalforms(thatis,E+D,D+E,OnlyE,OnlyD)arediscussed.Then,someotherformsarealsotakenintoaccount.Finally,thereisaconcisesummaryoftheanalysis.4.2.1XHYsintheformof“description+explanation”InHonglouMeng,thereareabout180XHYs,amongwhicharoundonesixthoccurwiththeformof“description+explanation”.Example1:刘姥姥：“咱们村庄人家儿，那一个不是老老实实，守多大碗，吃多大饭呢！”（第六回）TheYangs’Version:Eataccordingtothesizeofourbowl.DavidHawkes’Version:Cutdownourappetitesforourownmeasure.Inthisexample,theYangsandDavidHawkesadoptdifferenttranslationstrategieswiththeformertranslatingitdirectlywhilethelatterdoitfreely.ThisXHYissaidbyGrammyLiutodescribeherlivingcondition.InChinese,whenwewanttoexpressthatoneshoulddosomethingaccordingtohis/herownability,weusuallyemployXHY“守多大碗—吃多大饭”.Inabroadsense,“碗”heremeansone’spresentsituation,while“饭”canbeinterpretedtobeone’sdesireorappetites.Therefore,“碗”and“饭”inthisXHYserveasthemetonymy,withthefigurativespeechofwhich,theauthorintendstoconveytothereadersthatGrannyLiuisasimplehonestfolkwhodoesn’thavemuchdesireandappetite.TheYangs’version“Eataccordingtothesizeofourbowl.”thoughadoptingthestrategyofdirecttranslationdoesn’tcomplywiththeexactorderofthestructure27 “Description+Explanation”.Rather,itputstheexplanationpart“吃多大饭”beforethedescriptionpart“守多大碗”toemphasizethatthesecondpartofthisXHYiswhattheoriginalauthorintendstoconvey.Similarly,DavidHawkes’versionalsochangestheorderofthisXHYtoexpressthesamemeaning.TheirdifferenceliesinthatDavidHawkes’versionisn’tconfinedtotheliteralmeaningof“饭”itselfbutratheremploysanEnglishword“appetite”tosymbolizeone’sdesireorambitionwhichfullyconveysthehiddenmeaningbehindthisXHY.Inthissense,comparedwiththeYangs’version,DavidHawkes’versionrequireslessprocessingeffortofthetargetaudiencetoread,understandandappreciate.Example2:(刘姥姥）喜得眉开眼笑道：“我们也知道艰难的，但只俗语说的，‘瘦死的骆驼—比马还大’呢......”（第六回）TheYangs’Version:Astarvedcamelisbiggerthanahorse.DavidHawkes’Version:Astarvedcamelisbiggerthanafathorse.“瘦死的骆驼比马大”isusedheretoformasheercontrastinlivingconditionsbetweentherichandthepoor.Commonsensetellsusthatacamelismuchlargerinsizethanahorse,whichisafactworldover.Therefore,whetherinwesterncountriesorineasternareas,thisfactwillneverchange.Moreover,theoriginalauthor’sadoptionofChineseXHY“瘦死的骆驼比马大”isprobablyoutoftheconsiderationthatboth“骆驼”and“马”areanimalimagesthatcaneasilyevokerelatedknowledgeinthetargetreaders’mind,whichtosomeextent,lowersthereaders’processingefforttotheminimum.Similarly,toretainthetwovividanimalimages,boththeYangsandDavidHawkesemploydirecttranslation,inwhichthetranslatorspursueacompleteinterpretiveresemblancebetweenthetranslationandtheoriginalversionsandpresumethatthetranslationwillbeinterpretedbythetargetaudiencewithlessprocessingeffort.Example3:(奶母）李嬷嬷因叹道：“那宝玉是个‘丈八的灯台，照见人家，照不见自己’的。”（第十九回）28 TheYangs’Version:Aten-footlampstandthatshedslightonothersbutnoneonitself.DavidHawkes’Version:Asix-footlampstandthatlightsupothersbutstaysdarkitself.“丈八的灯台，照见人家，照不见自己的”isusedasametaphorbyNannyLitocomplainthatJiaBaoyuisstrictwithothersespeciallyinbeingcleanandtidyofone’sroomwhileleavinghisownroomsturnedtopsyturvybythemaids.InthisXHY,“丈八的灯台”isadescriptionand“照见人家，照不见自己”isanexplanationwhichiswhattheoriginalauthoractuallyintendstoconvey.BoththeYangs’andDavidHawkes’versionsretaintheoriginalimage“灯台”tomakethetargetreadershaveacleareranddeeperunderstandingofJiaBaoyu’sdistinctivelydifferentpersonality.Besides,“灯台”isfamiliartobothEnglishandChinesereaders.Therefore,itiswithintheaudience’scompetencetoworkoutanyinplicatureinherentinthisXHY.Whilebothversionsemploydirecttranslation,theydiffergreatlyindealingwiththeChinesevocabulary“丈八”.TheYangs’versionis“ten-foot”whiletheDavidHawkesrendersitas“six-foot”.InancientChina,thelengthof“丈八”isonlyahalfofthelengthof“丈”.AccordingtothemeasurestandardforlengthintheMingandQingDynasties,one“丈”isequaltoabouttenfeet.Thus,“丈八”actuallymeansfivefeetorso.Therefore,inthiscase,DavidHawkes’versionismoreaccurate.Example4:凤姐故意用手摸着腮，诧异道：“既没人吃生姜，怎么这么辣辣的呢？”（第三十回）TheYangs’Version:Inthatcase,whyaresomepeoplesoredintheface?DavidHawkes’Version:Ifnoone’sbeeneatingrawginger,thenwhyaretheylookingsohotandbothered?ThisXHYisaderivationofitsoriginalform“暑天吃生姜—辣辣的”，whichfallsintothegroupofXHYwiththestructureof“Description+Explanation”.ThisXHYissaidbyWangXifengtorefertothesituationwhereJiaBaoyu,LinDaiyuandXueBaochaiareindisaccordwithoneanother.IndealingwiththisXHY,theYangs’versionomitsthe29 “description”partandretainsthesecondpart“辣辣的”,whichisthesemanticfocusofthisstructure,whileDavidHawkes’versionomitsneitherthedescriptionpartnortheexplanationpart.Intheoriginalcontext,“辣辣的”goesbeyonditsliteralmeaningandisusedtodescribeone’sexpressionofbeingalittlebitangry.InEnglish,whenwewanttoexpressthatsomebodygetsbotheredandislowinspirit,weusuallyadoptsthephrase“beredintheface”.ThoughDavidHawkes’versionbringsoutthedualmeaningofbeinghotandbotheredinherentinthisXHY,itislessconciseandvividcomparedwiththatoftheYangs.Specifically,theword“red”asacoloreasilyconjuresupinthereaders’mindanimageofpepperthatishotandspicy.Inaddition,inwesternculture,“red”isoftenrelatedto“angry”.Hence,theYangs’version,beingvividandconciserequiresnoextraprocessingeffortofthetargetaudience.Example5:金钏儿笑道：“‘金簪儿掉在井里头—有你的，只是有你的’。”（第三十回）TheYangs’Version:Agoldpinmayfallintothewell,butifit’syours,itremainsyours.DavidHawkes’Version:Yoursisyours,whereveritbe.AcarefulcomparisonofthetwoversionsrevealsthattheYangsretainthecompletestructureofthisXHY,omittingneitherthedescriptionnorexplanationpartwhileDavidHawkesmerelykeepsthelatterpart,whichiswhattheXHYactuallyintendstoconvey.ToEnglishreaders,thegraspoftheessenceofthesecondpartismuchmoreimportant.Inthissense,bothversionsarereallyacceptableinconveyingtheintentionoftheoriginalauthor.Tosumup,asfortheYangs’version,theimageof“金簪儿”isretainedandfullyconveyed,yetthetranslationislessconcisecomparedwiththatofDavidHawkes.Example6李纨笑道:“......真真泥腿光棍，专会打细算盘，分斤掰两的。”（第四十五回）TheYangs’Version:tight-fistedmoney-grubber.DavidHawkes’Version:Standhagglinginthemarketplacewithalittleabacusupone30 sleevetodotheircalculationson.“打细算盘—分斤掰两”isusedbyLiWantodescribethefactthatWangXifengisgoodathagglingovereveryounce.Inconveyingtheintendedmeaningoftheoriginalauthor,thetwoversionsemploydifferenttranslationstrategies,indirectanddirectrespectively.“算盘”isatypicalChinesecalculationtool,whichisunfamiliartomoseEnglishreaders.Therefore,thedescriptionpartofthisXHYisisoflittlesignificancetothemandthuscanbeomittedintranslation.TheYangs’version“tight-fistedmoney-grubber”thoughleavingouttheimage“算盘”(abacus)ismoreacceptableandclearerinexpressingtheintendedmeaning.However,DavidHawkes’version,thoughretainingtheoriginalimage“算盘”doesn’tbringoutintendedmeaninghiddeninthisXHY.Moreover,foranEnglishreaderhavinglittleknowledgeofthistraditionalChinesecalculationtool,theretainingofimage,however,requiresunnecessaryprocessingeffort.Therefore,inthiscase,theYangs’versionissuperiortothatofDavidHawkesinconveyingtheintentionoftheauthor.Example7：芳官一行哭，一行便说：“......‘梅香拜把子，都是奴才’罢咧，这是何苦来呢？”（第六十回）TheYangs’Version:Weareallbirdsofafeather—allslaveshere.DavidHawkes’Version:Allofushereareboughtgoods.LikethoseXHYsanalyzedabove,“梅香拜把子都是奴才”isalsomadeupoftwoparts:descriptionpart(梅香拜把子）andexplanationpart(都是奴才）.“梅香”inChineseisonlyanamereferringtosomebodyofhumblestatus.InthisXHY,theauthor’sintentionliesinthesecondpart,whichistranslatedbytheYangsandDavidHawkesas“allslaveshere”and“allofushereareboughtgoods”respectively.Bothversionsbringouttheintentionoftheoriginalauthorandatthesametimeposenoextraeffortonthepartofthetargetreader.Inaddition,acarefulperusaloftheYangs’versionrevealsthatitisaparodyofanEnglishproverb—birdsofthesamefeatherflocktogether.Therefore,toEnglishreaders,theYangs’versionismorefamiliarandisthusmoreunderstandableand31 acceptable.Ingeneral,bytransformingChineseimage“梅香”intoanEnglishproverb,familiartothetargetreader,theYangsversionprovidesasharedcognitiveenvironmentforitsreaders.Example8:柳氏啐道:“......这可是‘仓老鼠问老鸹去借粮，守着的没有，飞着的倒有’。”（第六十一回）TheYangs’Version:Theratinthebarnaskedacrowforgrainasifabirdonthewinghadsomewhiletheratlivinginthebarnhadnone.DavidHawkes’Version:Thegranaryrataskedthecrowforcorn,haveaskinghave-not.ThisXHYisanotherexampleoftheformof“description+explanation”.Inthiscontext,itisemployedasanironybyMrsLiutosatirizethesituationwherethehaveaskhave-not.Twoimagesareadoptedherewithonebeingtheratandtheotherbeingthecrow.Bothimagesareretainedintheabovetwoversionstosetabackgroundforthetargetreaderstoinfertheintendedmeaningofthesecondpart.However,theYangs’versionisonlyaliteraltranslation,whichdoesn’tdisplaytheessenceoftheexplanationpart.Incontrast,DavidHawkes’versionisacombinationoffreetranslationandliteraltranslation.Thatis,fortheformerpart,itemploysliteraltranslation,whileforthelatterpart,itadoptsfreetranslationtobringouttheintendedmeaninginherentinthiscontext.Therefore,inthiscase,DavidHawkes’versionismoreaccurateandconciseinconveyingtheoriginalwriter’sintention.Eaxmple9:贾母道：“我不信，不然就是你闹了鬼了。如今你还了得，‘羊群里跑出骆驼来了’，就只你大，你又会做文章了！”（第八十八回）TheYangs’Version:Acamelinaflockofsheep—beingtheeldestDavidHawkes’Version:AcamelamongsheepHere,LadyDowagerusesthisXHYasanironytocomplainthathergrandson—JiaBaoyuisgettingabovehimselfnowadays.Withtheformof“description+explanation”,32 thisXHYintendstoconveythemeaningofthesecondpart.Indealingwiththetranslationof‘羊群里跑出骆驼—就只你大’,theYangs’versionemploysdirecttranslationwithoutomittingonepartortheother,whichfullyexpressestheoriginalauthor’sintention.Similarly,DavidHawkeskeepsthetwoimages‘camel’and‘sheep’inhistranslationbutleavingoutthesecondexplanationpart.Acarefulperusalofhisversionshowsthattheomissionof‘beingtheeldest’won’tposemuchpressureonthetargetreadersasthecontrastivesizebetweenthecamelandthesheepisself-evident.Asapointoffact,inexample2,wehavemadeananalysisoftheXHY“瘦死的骆驼比马大”,whichalreadyexplainsthefactthatastarvedcamelislargerthanafathorse,letalonethecontrastivedifferenceinsizebetweenacamelandasheep.Hence,DavidHawkes’version,thoughomittingthesecondpart,reallyembodiesthesayingthat“Brevityisthesoulofwit”.Ingeneral,bothversionssuccessfullyconveystheoriginalwriter’sintentionwhiletakingthetargetreaders’sharedcognitiveenvironmentintoconsideration.Example10:出了园门，到了贾母跟前，凤姐笑道；“......赶我到那你说和，谁知两个人在一块儿对赔不是呢，倒像‘黄鹰抓住鹞子的脚’—两个都‘扣了环了’！那里还要人去说呢？”说的满屋里都笑起来。（第三十回）TheYangs’Version:Clingtogetherlikeaneaglesinkingitstalonsintoahawk.DavidHawkes’Version:Likethekiteandthekestrelholdinghands：theywerepositivelylockedinaclinch.‘黄鹰抓住鹞子的脚’—两个都‘扣了环了’isusedtoportraythepsychologyofthetwocharacters—JiaBaoyuandLinDaiyu.Itisreallypenetratinginshowingtheintimaterelationshipbetweenthetwoandatthesametimeisinlinewiththesharp-tonguedtoneofXifeng.Inthisexample,bothversionsgivealiteraltranslationtothetargetreaders.TheirdifferenceliesinthatDavidHawkes’versioncomplieswiththeoriginalstructureofthisXHYwhiletheYangs’versionmakesaslightchangeofthestructureformandputstheexplanationpartbeforethedescriptionparttolayemphasisonthemeaningof“clingingtogether”,whichiswhattheauthoraimsatconveyingtothereaders.Furthermore,thetwo33 versionsdifferindealingwiththeChinesevocabulary“鹞子”withtheYangs’versiontranslatingittobe“ahawk”andDavidHawkes’versionrenderingittobe“thekite”.Infact,kitehadanothernameof“纸鸢”and“鹞子”inancientChina.So,inthisaspect,DavidHawkes’versionismoreaccurate.However,toEnglishreaders,thecontextualeffectisthesame,whetheritbe“hawk”or“kite”.Therefore,bothversionsconveytheintentionoftheauthortothetargetreadersinasuccessfulway.4.2.2XHYsintheformof“explanation+description”Example11:凤姐儿听说这话，哭着搬着尤氏的脸，问道：“你但凡是个好的，他们怎敢闹出这些事来？你又没才才干，又没口齿，锯了嘴子的葫芦，就只会一味瞎小心，应贤良的名儿。(第六十八回）TheYangs’Version:Youarestupidanddumbasagourdwithitstipswanoff.DavidHawkes’Version:forallthegoodsensethatevercomesoutofyourmouthyoumightaswellbeabottle.ThisisaspecialformofXHYwiththestructureof“explanation+description”.Inthiscase,byusing“没才干，没口齿—锯了嘴子的葫芦”，XifengmeanstoexpressthatMadamYuisquitestupidanddumbandlacksthetalentandgoodqualitiespossessedbyher.Xifengisasharp-tonguedpersoninHonglouMengandthusitisrathernormalforhertofrequentlyfindfaultwithothersorcriticizethoseconsideredtobeinferiortoherinsocialstatus.AsforthisXHY,bothversionstakeWangXifeng’scharacteristicsintoconsiderationandadoptfreetranslationstrategy.Nevertheless,DavidHawkes’versionisn’tasintelligibleasthatoftheYangsfortheformerdoesn’texpressWangXifeng’sshrewdnessandsharptongued-nesstothefullcontentwhilethelatter,bylayinggreatemphasisontheexplanationpart“没才干，没口齿”fullyconveystheoriginalauthor’sintention.Therefore,throughaglimpseoftheYangs’version,thetargetreadersareabletofurthergettoknowXifeng’scharacteristicswithmuchease.4.2.3XHYsintheformof“onlydescription”Example13:34 (薛蟠)偶动了龙阳之兴，因此也假说来上学，不过是“三日打鱼，两日晒网”白送些束脩礼物与贾代儒，却不能有一点收益，只图结交些契弟。（第九回）TheYangs’Version:likeafishermanwhofishesforthreedaysandthensunshisnetfortwo.DavidHawkes’Version:Onedayfishingandtwodaystodrythenets.“三日打鱼，两日晒网”isthedescriptionpartoftheXHY“三日打鱼，两日晒网—不务正业”，whichisusedinthiscontexttodescribethefactthatXuePanisapersonwhojustidlesanddoesnodecentworkeveryday.IndealingwiththisXHYwithouttheexplanationpart,bothversionschoosetotranslatetheformerpartwhileleavingoutthelatterone.Asamatteroffact,thedescriptionpartitselfisenoughtoconveytheintendedmeaningofthesecondpart.Fortargetreaders,itisquiteeasytounderstandtherealmeaningbehind“三日打鱼，两日晒网”,sincethereexistsbetweenthetranslatorsandthetargetaudiencethesheercontrastintimebetween“三日”and“两日”.NowthattheoriginalwriteradoptsthisXHYtofullyexpressXuePan’sidlenessandlaziness,thetotaltimeconcernedhereisthreedays,amongwhichtwodaysarespentdryingthenetandonlyonedayisusedtofish.AsfortheYangs’version,afishermanfishingforthreedaysandsunninghisnetfortwocan’tbelabeledasanextremelylazyman.Hence,DavidHawkes’versionbetterconveystheoriginalauthor’sintentionascomparedwiththatoftheYangs.Example14:平儿说道：“‘癞蛤蟆想吃天鹅肉’，没人伦的混账东西，起这样念头，叫他不得好死!”（第十一回）TheYangs’Version:atoadhankeringthetasteofswan.DavidHawkes’Version:Thetoadonthegroundwantingtoeatthegooseinthesky.Inthiscase,theremainingexplanationpartfor‘癞蛤蟆想吃天鹅肉’is“异想天开”meaningcravingforsomethingthatcan’tbeachieved.Commonsensetellsusthatthetoadandtheswanbelongtotwototallydifferentanimals.Foronething,theformerisquiteuglyinappearancewhilethelatterisverybeautifulandelegant;fortheother,thetoadlivesonthegroundwhiletheswanbelongstothesky.Therefore,itisveryabsurdfora35 toadtohankerthetasteofaswan.ThoughbothversionsleaveoutthedescriptionpartoftheoriginalXHY,thetargetreaderswon’tfeelmuchdifficultyinunderstandingthemeaningbehindit.TheYangs’versionisquiteshortandconciseinconveyingtheoriginalwriter’sintention.DavidHawkes’version,thoughlongerinstructurefallsintothetypeof“Everywordcounts”.Thedistinctivecontrastbetween“ontheground”and“inthesky”intendstotellthetargetreadersthatanyonecravingforsomethingimpossibletoachieveisdestinedtoendinidlenessandfailure,whichisthereflectionofthefateofJiaRui.Ingeneral，DavidHawkes’versiontakesoptimalrelevanceintoaccountandmakesaninferencethataremostrelevanttothecontext.Example15:凤姐道：“......你是知道的，咱们家所有这些管家奶奶，那一个是好缠的？错一点儿他们就笑话打趣，偏一点儿他们就指桑骂槐的抱怨，‘坐山看虎斗’，‘借刀杀人’，‘引风吹火’，‘站干岸儿’，‘推到了油瓶不扶’都是全挂子的本事。”(第十六回）‘坐山看虎斗’TheYangs’Version:Sitonahilltowatchtigersfight.DavidHawkes:Version:Sitonthemountain-topandwatchthetigersfight.‘借刀杀人’：bothversions:murderwithaborrowedsword.‘引风吹火’：TheYangsVersion:Borrowwindtofanthefire.DavidHawkesVersion:Helpwindtofanthefire.‘站干岸儿’:TheYangsVersion:Watchingpeopledrownfromadrybank.DavidHawkesVersion:Lookonsafelyfromthebankwhileyouaredrowningintheriver.‘推到了油瓶不扶’:TheYangsVersion:Nan:Nottroublingtorightanoilbottlethat’sbeenknockedover.DavidHawkesVersion:Thefallenoil-bottlecandrainaway,theyarenotgoingtopickitup.36 TheabovefourXHYsarerespectivelythedescriptionpartsof‘坐山看虎斗—走收其利’，‘借刀杀人—不露痕迹’，‘引风吹火—费力不多’，‘站干岸儿—不沾湿（事）’，‘推到了油瓶不扶—懒到家了’.IndealingwiththeseXHYs,bothversionsarealmostthesameandbothofthemjustretainthefirstpartswhileleavingoutthesecondparts.Thereasonwhybothversionschoosethesametranslationstrategyisthatthereexistssharedcognitiveenvironmentbetweenthetranslatorsandthetargetaudienceastotheinterpretingbackgroundof‘坐山看虎斗’，‘借刀杀人’，‘引风吹火’and‘站干岸儿’.Thatis,thedescriptionpartsthemselvesarevividandinterpretiveenoughtoconveytheoptimalrelevancenecessaryforthetargetreaderstograsptheintendedmeaninghiddenbehindthesedescriptionparts.Example16:李纨笑道：“真真你是个水晶心肝玻璃人儿。”（第四十五回）TheYangs’Version:There’strueperspicacityforyou.DavidHawkesVersion:Aheartofcrystalinabodyofglass,youcanseethrougheverything.Inthiscase,“水晶心肝玻璃人儿”isthedescriptionpartoftheoriginalXHY“水晶心肝玻璃人儿—纯净透明”.InsteadofbeingusedasanappreciativetermtoportrayWangXifeng’spersonality,thisXHYisactuallyadoptedasaderogatoryonetoexpressXifeng’sextraordinaryastuteness.IndealingwiththisXHY,theYangsandDavidHawkesputforwarddifferentversionswiththeformergivingprioritytotheexplanationpartwhilethelatteremphasizingbothparts.Despitetheirowndifference,thetwoversionshavesomethingincommoninthatbothofthemchoosetoretaintheexplanationpartomittedintheoriginalcontext.Inotherwords,fortargetreaders,descriptionpartaloneisn’tsointerpretiveenoughastoconveythemeaningbehindit.IfthesecondpartofthisXHYisalsoleftoutinbothversions,itislikelythatthetargetaudiencewillhavedifficultyunderstandingintentionoftheoriginalwriter.However,accordingtorelevancetranslationtheory,theintentionconveyedbythetranslatorissupposedtobeostensiveenoughforthetargetreaderstomakeinferenceofoptimalrelevance.Therefore,inordertopromote37 successfulcommunication,boththeYangsandDavidHawkesretaintheexplanationpartintheirversions.Ingeneral,theYangs’versionismoreconciseinstructureandDavidHawkes’versionismorecompleteinmeaningandisclosertothesourcetextinstructure.Example17:宝钗笑道：“我虽有个哥哥，你也是知道的。只有个母亲，比你略强些，咱们也算是同病相怜吧。你也是个明白人，何必作‘司马牛之叹‘？”（第四十五回）TheYangs’Version:Lamentingone’slackofabrother.DavidHawkes’Version:AllmenhavebrothersonlyIhavenone.TheoriginalXHYinthiscontextis“司马牛之叹—无兄无弟”.ForChinesereaders,thedescriptionpartalonegetsacrosseasilyas“司马牛”isafamouspersoninancientChinahistoryknowntoalmosteveryChinese.However,theEnglishreaders,unfamiliarwithChinesehistorywillhavedifficultyunderstandingthefirstpart.Inconsiderationofthecognitiveenvironmentofthetargetreaders,bothversionstranslatetheexplanationpartandleaveoutthefirstpart.Astheadoptionof“司马牛之叹”bytheoriginalwriteristolamentLinDaiyu’sstatusquoandshowpitytoherunfortunatedestiny,itisunnecessaryfortranslatorstoretainthedescriptionpartthatisunfamiliartothetargetaudience.Thoughafootnoteisenoughtosolvetheproblemabove,itwillposeextraloadtotargetreadersduringtheirinterpretationprocess.Nevertheless,intheframeworkofrelevance-inferentialtranslationtheory,maximalrelevancemeansthatinutteranceinterpretation,thelargestcontextualeffectsareachievedwiththeleastprocessingefforts.Fromthisperspective,there’snoneedtoretainthefirstpartinthiscontextandtheexplanationpartitselfissufficienttoconveytheoptimalrelevance.Example18:湘云笑道：“得陇望蜀，人之常情。”（第七十六回）TheYangs’Version:It’sonlynaturalformantohankerformore.DavidHawkes’Version:Oneconquestbreedsappetiteforanother.38 “得陇望蜀—贪心不足”isaXHYoriginallyusedtomakeanallusiontoLiuBei—afamoushistoricalfigureintheThreeKingdoms(220A.D.—280A.D.)whocravesforthecountryofShu(蜀国)afterconqueringthecountryofLong(陇).SimilartoExample17,LiuBeiandhislife-storyisalsounfamiliartoEnglishreaders,thustherebeingnonecessitytoretainthisallusion,letaloneaddingafootnotetoexplainit.Bothversionstakethetargetreaders’cognitiveenvironmentintoaccountandatthesametimemakeproperinferenceoftheexpectationofthetargetaudience.Ingeneral,inordertomaketheoriginalauthor’sintentionandthetargetreaders’expectationmeet,thetwoversionschoosetoomitthedescriptionpartwhichiswhattherelevancetheoryadvocates.4.2.4XHYsintheformof“onlyexplanation”Example19:贾琏连忙也立起身来，说着向鸳鸯道：“......俗语说得好。‘求人不如求己’。说不得姐姐担个不是，暂且把老太太查不着的金银家伙偷着运出一箱子来，暂押千数两银子，支滕过去。......”（第七十二回）TheYangs’Version:It’sbettertoaskofone’sownfolkthanofoutsiders.DavidHawkes’Version:Self-helpisthebesthelp.Example20:那两个婆子见没人了，一行走一行谈论。这个笑道：“怪道有人说他们家的宝玉是相貌好里头糊涂，中看不中吃，果然竟有些呆气。TheYangs’Version:Downrightcracked.DavidHawkes’Version:Likeabadfruit—goodtolookatbutrotteninside.Example21:却说五儿被宝玉鬼混了半夜，又兼宝钗咳嗽，自己怀着鬼胎，生怕宝钗听见了，也是思前想后，一夜无眠。BothVersions:Haveaguiltyconscience.TheabovethreeXHYs‘求人不如求己’，‘中看不中吃’，‘怀着鬼胎’respectively39 leaveout‘菩萨拜观音’，‘墙上画饼’and‘阎王奶奶害喜病’.Asforexample21,bothversionsadoptfreetranslationwithoutretainingthefirstpart.Since“阎王奶奶”isoneofthetwocharacterscontrollingone’slifeanddeathinChinesemythologyunfamiliartowesternaudience,thereisnoneedtoaddtheseelementsoftypicalChinesecharacteristicstothecognitiveenvironmentofthetargetreaders.Moreover,“怀着鬼胎”can’tbeinterpretedinitsliteralsenseforthetargetaudiencewillonlyfeelmorepuzzled.Thusconsidering,theYangsandDavidHawkesgiveexactlythesametranslation“Haveaguiltyconscience”toproperlyconveytheintentionoftheoriginalwriter.Astoexample19,theYangs’versionchoosesliteraltranslationwhileDavidHawkes’versionadoptsfreetranslation,bothofwhichleaveoutthefirstpartofthisXHYprobablyoutofthesameconsiderationexplainedinexample21.Thoughdifferentintranslationstrategies,bothversionsmanagetocommunicatetheintendedmeaninginherentinthiscontext.Inexample20,“中看不中吃”inChinesemeansthatsomeoneorsomethingthoughattractiveinappearance,isofnopracticaluse.TheYangs’versiondigsouttheessenceofthisXHYwithfreetranslationstrategy.Incontrast,DavidHawkesemploysametaphorcomparingBaoyutoabadfruitwhichisgoodtolookatbutrotteninside.Thismetaphorisquitevividandexpressivethusyieldingadequatecontextualeffectsfortargetreaderstomakeproperinferenceaboutthecommunicator’sintentionwiththeleastprocessingeffort.4.2.5XHYsinotherformsExample22:凤姐道：“我那你管得上这些事来！见识又浅，嘴又笨，心又直，人家给个棒槌，我就认作针了。”（第十六回）TheYangs’Version:Getholdofthewrongendofthestick.DavidHawkes’Version:Takearamrodforaneedle.ThisXHYdoesn’tfallintoanygroupsmentionedaboveintwoaspects.First,itcontainsadetachedXHYwhoseoriginalexpressionis“棒槌人针—粗细不分”(Takingwoodenclubasaneedle—confusingthicknesswiththinness)or棒槌认针—缺心眼(treadinganeedlethroughawoodenclub—lackinganeyeinside).Second,“针”(needle)40 sharesthepronunciationwith“真”(totakesomethingserious)inChinesepinyin,whichfurtherdeterminesthatitisahomophonicpun.Beingashrewishandsmartladywithaglibtongue,WangXifengemploysthesewordstoshowoffhercapabilityinanironicwayandimplyaflavorofself-ridicule.However,boththeYangs’version“Gettingholdofthewrongendofthestick.”andDavidHawkes’version“Takeramrodforaneedle.”mean“Tototallymisunderstandsomethingorsomebody”.Itisobviousthattheauthorandthetranslatorsdon’tmakethesameassumptionsaboutthisXHY.Moreover,thetranslatorsmakesomeadjustmentabouttheaccessibilityoftheoriginalassumptionstohelpthetargetlanguagereadersshortentheirinferentialdistance.Therefore,bothversionscan’tbecountedasfaithfultranslationasthetranslatorsdon’tconveytheoriginalinformativeintention.Example23:晴雯忙忙走进来取钱，一看见它两个便冷笑道：“哦！交杯盏儿还没吃，倒上了头了!”（第十二回）TheYangs’Version:Youhaven’tyetdrunkthebridalcupbutalreadyyou’redoingherhair.DavidHawkes’Version:Doingherhairalready—beforeyou’veevendrunkthemarriage-cup.Example24:贾琏道：“大萝卜还用屎浇？”（第一百一回）TheYangs’Version:Youdon’thavetoteachmethat.DavidHawkes’Version:Stopteachingyourgrandmothertosuckeggs.SimilartotheXHYanalyzedabove,case23and24witnessanothertwoexamplesofhomophonicpuns.Inexample23,“倒”canbeinterpretedas“tobeonthecontrary”or“topoursomething”inChinese.AstothespecialformofXHY,bothversionsemploythefirstinterpretationandadoptfreetranslationstrategy.Inexample24,“浇”(towatersomething)sharesthepronunciationwith教(toteach).Also,freetranslationisadoptedtodealwiththisdistinctivelydifferentXHY.Thoughthehiddenmeaningsinherentintheabovetwo41 examplesgetexpounded,thedistinctivefunctionandflavorofthesespecialformsarelost.Inotherwords,withoutmentalrepresentationoftheparticularformintheabovetwocases,thetargetreaderscanonlygetapartialunderstandingoftheoriginalwriter’sinformativeintention.However,it’sadifficulttasktoconveythemeaningcarriedbyboththeformandthecontent.Inmostcases,there’snootherbetterchoicebuttoleavetheformbehind,whichisfurtherembodiedintheYangs’andDavidHawkes’versions.Example25:那黛玉此时心里竟是油儿，酱儿，糖儿，醋儿，倒在一处的一般，甜苦酸咸竟说不上什么味儿来了。(第九十六回）TheYangs’Version:Daiyufeltasifherheartwerefilledwiththemixtureofoil,soy,sugar,andvinegar—sosweet,bitter,painfulandsharpthatshecouldn’tputhersensationsintowords.DavidHawkes’Version:Daiyu’sheartfeltasthoughoil,soy-saucesugarandvinegarhadallbeenpouredintoitatonce.ThiscaseisadetachedformoftheoriginalXHY“打翻了五味瓶—什么味儿都有”,whichisusedinthiscontexttoportrayDaiyu’scomplexsensations.Inordertoconveytheinformativeintentionofthesourcetext,bothversionschoosetoretaintheimagesof“oil(油)”,“soy-sauce(酱油)”,“sugar(糖)”and“vinegar(醋)”whicharemoreexpressiveandvividcomparedwiththeoriginalXHY.TheirdifferenceliesinthattheYangs’versionadoptsfreetranslationstrategytodealwith“甜苦酸咸竟说不上什么味儿来了”whichinsteadisleftoutbyDavidHawkes.Ingeneral,theYangs’version,beingmorerelevantandexpressivenotonlytransferstheoriginalinformativeintentionfaithfullybutalsoshortenstargetreaders’inferentialdistanceingraspingtheintendedmeaning.4.2.6AconcisesummaryFromtheaboveanalysisoftheexamplesofXHYsinthetwowidelyacceptedversions,wecanseethatrelevancetheoryhasstrongpowerinexplainingthetranslationofXHYsinHonglouMeng.Inthefirstroundofostensive-inferentialprocess,thetranslatorplaystheroleofareaderoftheoriginalwork.He/sheissupposedtotakeadvantageofthe42 sharedcognitiveenvironmentexistingbetweenhim/herandtheoriginalwritertomakeproperinferencesoftheauthor’sintention.Then,inthesecondroundofostensive-inferentialprocess,he/sheservesasacommunicatorwhosetaskistocommunicatetheinferenceacquiredinthefirstprocessinamostrelevantway.Duringthisprocess,he/sheshouldalsotakesthetargetaudience’sexpectationandcognitivecontextintoaccount.However,differentculture,differentcognitivelevelsaswellasdifferenttranslationpurposessometimescontributetodifferenttranslationversionsthatfailtomaketheintentionoftheoriginalwriterandthetargetaudiencemeet.43 ChapterFiveConclusionHonglouMengisashiningpearlinthesplendidChineseliteraturehistory.ThetranslationofHonglouMengthereforeplaysamonumentalroleinitsbeingwidelyacceptedacrosstheworld.XHY,asadistinctivelinguisticforminthenovel,playsasignificantroleinportrayingthecharacters’personalities,deepeningthenovel’sthemeaswellasaddingtotheartisticeffectofitslanguage.TheabundantfeaturesandsignificanceembodiedinXHYmakeitachallengingtaskfortranslatorstofullyconveytheintentionoftheoriginalwriter.ThisthesisfocusesonthetranslationofXHYsinHonglouMengbasedonRelevanceTheory.IntheframeworkofRelevanceTheory,translationisanostensiveandinferentialprocessofinter-lingualinterpretationandakindoflanguagecommunicationamongthreeparticipants:theoriginalwriter,thetranslatorandthereader.Inordertomakeforasuccessfultranslation,thetranslatorshouldhaveafullgraspoftheintentionoftheoriginalwriterandtheexpectationofthetargetreader.AsforthetranslationofXHYsinHonglouMeng,thefirststepforthetranslatoristomakeouttheintentionsoftheauthorinthecontextbymakingfulluseoftheirsharedcognitiveenvironment.Then,thetranslatorissupposedtoconveytheintentionsinferredinthefirststeptothetargetlanguageaccordingtohis/herownassumptionsofthecognitivecontextandtheexpectationofthetargetaudience.Duringthesecondprocess,thetranslatorcanemploydifferenttranslationstrategiestomakesurethatthetargetaudienceisabletograsptheintentionoftheoriginalwriterwithlessprocessingeffort.Inaddition,thisthesisalsoshowsthatdifferentculture,differentcognitivelevelsaswellasdifferenttranslationpurposessometimescontributetodifferenttranslationversionsthatfailtomaketheintentionoftheoriginalwriterandthetargetaudiencemeet.AlthoughthisthesisemploysmanyexamplestoexplorethewayofthinkingadoptedbythetranslatortoachieveoptimalrelevanceofXHYsbetweentheoriginalwriterandthetargetreader,itstillhassomelimitations.Inthefirstplace,forthoseXHYsfailingto44 conveyoptimalrelevance,thisthesisdoesn’tputforwardanypropertranslationversionseither.Then,mostresearchesonthissubjectareconductedbyChinesescholarsandthethesiswillbemorepersuasiveifmoreforeignresearchliteraturecanbefoundandappliedtoit.Finally,thecomparativeanalysisadoptsthetwowidelyacceptedEnglishversionswithouttouchingonsomeotherversionsandtheresearchwillbemoreprofoundifmoretranslationversionscanbetakenintoaccount.Ingeneral,thisstudyprovidesapanoramicviewforthetranslationofXHYfromtheperspectiveofRelevanceTheoryandfutureresearchonthissubjectcanbebroadenedtootherclassicsbothhomeandabroad.45 ReferencesBaker,M.(2004).RoutledgeEncyclopediaofTranslationStudies.Shanghai:ShanghaiForeignLanguageEducationPress.Gutt,E.(1991).TranslationandRelevance:CognitionandContext.Cambridge:BasilBlackwell.Gutt,E.(2004).TranslationandRelevance:CognitionandContext.Shanghai:ShanghaiForeignLanguageEducationPress.Hawkes,D.,&Minford,J.(1973-1986).Thestoryofthestone.Harmondsworth:PenguinBooks.Hawkes,D.(2000).TheStoryoftheStone:ATranslator’sNotebooks.Hongkong:LingnanUniversity.Shuttleworth,M.,&Cowie,M.(2004).DictionaryofTranslationStudies.Shanghai;ShanghaiForeignLanguageEducationPress.Simpson,J.(2001).OxfordConciseDictionaryofProverbs.Shanghai:ShanghaiForeignLanguageEducationPress.Sperber,D.,&Wilson,D.(2001).Relevance:CommunicationandCognition.Beijing:ForeignLanguageandResearchPress.Cao,X.Q.&Gao,E.[曹雪芹,高鹗],2001,红楼梦(第1版).江苏:江苏古籍出版社.Fan,M.[范敏],2001.《红楼梦》中习语文化内容的翻译.中国知网.Feng,Q.H.[冯庆华],2006,红楼译坛—《红楼们》翻译艺术研究.上海；上海外语教育出版社。Gao,L.D.[高立东],2006.歇后语的构成方式及特点.社会科学家(10):321-322.Huang,J.L.[黄继兰]，2008.从关联理论视角探讨《红楼梦》中习语的英译.中国知网.He,X.Q.[贺小琴],2009,《红楼梦》中歇后语英译的对比研究.中国知网.Ji,W.X.[冀文秀],2007,《红楼梦》歇后语运用的特点和效用.中国国学网.Liu,B.H.,&Xue,Z.T.[刘葆花，薛振田],2010,《红楼梦》中歇后语的关联性解读.学苑撷英(9):103-104.46 Liu,S.J.[刘淑娟],2011,歇后语的新分类与英译—关联理论原文本意图翻译观阐释.中国知网。Liu,Y.F.[刘雅峰],2008,《红楼梦》两英译本是视角下的汉语歇后语翻译研究.湖州师范学院学报(6):100-103.Shao,Z.H.[邵志洪],2004,汉英对比翻译导论[M].上海:华东理工大学出版社.Tang,K.[唐凯],2007,中英翻译视角下的歇后语分类及其应用.中国知网.Wan,M.Z.[万敏珍],2010,CPM视角下的汉语歇后语认知机制解读.中国知网.Xia,L.[夏雷],2012.从关联理论看《红楼梦》两英译本中的双关语翻译.中国知网.Yang,X.Y.,&Yang.G.[杨宪益,戴乃迭],1978,ADreamofRedMansions.Beijing:BeijingForeignLanguagesPress.47