Tao Te Ching is a work by Laozi, one of the greatest philosophers in Chinese history. Despite the large number of existing translations, it is still necessary to revisit, reinterpret and retranslate it for the need of changing readers and market. Previous translation studies of Tao Te Ching focused on the interpretation of important terms and concepts, the comparison of different versions to discuss translation strategies. Some researchers used corpus tools to compare overall stylistic differences, but ignored minute details reflected in translators’ word choice. Improving upon previous ones, this study uses corpus tools to comparatively analyze two English versions of Tao Te Ching translated by Lin Yutang and by James Legge. Their lexical diversity is calculated with a more reliable measure: moving average type/token ratio (MATTR). A wordlist is then made to extract 10 most frequent content words in the source text for detailed comparison of their translation. Similarities are found in both translations. First, they have a similar level of lexical diversity. Second, they share a degree of inconsistency of word choice when translating high-frequency words. Third, both combine the translation strategies of domestication and foreignization. Differences are found as well. First, Legge has a preference for explicitation and poetic effect. Second, Lin makes his choice more dependent upon the changing context.
| Published in | Humanities and Social Sciences (Volume 10, Issue 3) |
| DOI | 10.11648/j.hss.20221003.22 |
| Page(s) | 180-189 |
| Creative Commons |
This is an Open Access article, distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, provided the original work is properly cited. |
| Copyright |
Copyright © The Author(s), 2024. Published by Science Publishing Group |
Tao Te Ching, English Translation, Lin Yutang, James Legge, Corpus
| [1] | Wang, D. M., & Li, Q. Y. (2013). Laozi hanying fanyi pingxing yuliaoku jianshe [Laozi Chinese-English translation parallel corpus construction]. Shanghai Journal of Translators, (4): 60–64. |
| [2] | Zhao, Y. (2015). Jiyu yuliaoku de Daodejing liang yiben de fanyi fengge yanjiu [A corpus-based study on the translation style of two translations of Tao Te Ching]. Chinese Translators Journal, 36 (4): 110–13. |
| [3] | Mei, L. (2018). A Corpus-based Study on Polysemy in English Translations of Tao Te Ching. Chongqing: Southwest University. |
| [4] | Brezina, V. (2018). Statistics in corpus linguistics: a practical guide. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. |
| [5] | Malvern, D., & Richards, B. (2002). Investigating accommodation in language proficiency interviews using a new measure of lexical diversity. Language Testing, 19 (1), 85–104. |
| [6] | Covington, M. A., & McFall, J. D. (2010). Cutting the Gordian knot: The moving-average type-token ratio (MATTR). Journal of Quantitative Linguistics, 17 (2), 94–100. |
| [7] | Zhang, J., & Zhang, S. H. (2021). Dao De Jing. Beijing: Zhonghua Book Company. |
| [8] | Lin, Y. T. (1948). The wisdom of Laotse. New York: Random House. |
| [9] | Legge, J. (1891). The sacred books of China: the texts of Taoism. Oxford: Clarendon Press. |
| [10] | Benoit, K., Watanabe, K., Wang, H., Nulty, P., Obeng, A., Müller, S., & Matsuo, A. (2018). quanteda: An R package for the quantitative analysis of textual data. Journal of Open Source Software, 3 (30), 774. |
| [11] | Gu, Z. K. (2007). The book of Tao and Teh. Beijing: China Translation Corporation. |
| [12] | Xu, Y. C. (2012). Laws divine and human. Beijing: China Intercontinental Press. |
| [13] | Huang, H. D. (2004). Daojia, Daojiao yu Daoxue [Daojia, Daojiao and Daoxue]. Religious Studies, (04): 6–14. |
| [14] | Zhao, Y. C. (2021). Zhongguo gudai de “tianxia” “Zhongguo” guan [Ancient China’s view of “tianxia” and “Zhongguo”]. Journal of Social Sciences, (04): 148–163. |
| [15] | Yue, F. (2003). Bridging the East and the West—a research on the Scottish Sinologist James Legge. Fuzhou: Fujian Normal University. |
| [16] | Venuti, L. (2008). The translator’s invisibility: a history of translation. London and New York: Routledge. |
| [17] | Baker, M. (2010). Narratives of terrorism and security: ‘accurate’ translations, suspicious frames. Critical Studies on Terrorism, 3 (3): 347–364. |
| [18] | Vinay, J.-P., & Darbelnet, J. (1995). Comparative stylistics of French and English: a methodology for translation (J. C. Sager & M.-J. Hamel, Trans.). Amsterdam and Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publishing Company. |
| [19] | Girardot, N. J. (1999). ‘Finding the way’: James Legge and the Victorian invention of Taoism. Religion, 29 (2), 107–121. |
| [20] | Xin, H. J., & Gao, S. B. (2008). Diachronic description of Tao Te Ching in the English world. Journal of Nanjing Agricultural University (Social Sciences Edition), 29 (1): 79–84. |
APA Style
Chen Zhong, Wang Heyu. (2022). A Corpus-Based Contrastive Study of English Translation of Tao Te Ching. Humanities and Social Sciences, 10(3), 180-189. https://doi.org/10.11648/j.hss.20221003.22
ACS Style
Chen Zhong; Wang Heyu. A Corpus-Based Contrastive Study of English Translation of Tao Te Ching. Humanit. Soc. Sci. 2022, 10(3), 180-189. doi: 10.11648/j.hss.20221003.22
Share This Article
Twitter
Linked In
Facebook
Copy
Download@article{10.11648/j.hss.20221003.22,
author = {Chen Zhong and Wang Heyu},
title = {A Corpus-Based Contrastive Study of English Translation of Tao Te Ching},
journal = {Humanities and Social Sciences},
volume = {10},
number = {3},
pages = {180-189},
doi = {10.11648/j.hss.20221003.22},
url = {https://doi.org/10.11648/j.hss.20221003.22},
eprint = {https://article.sciencepublishinggroup.com/pdf/10.11648.j.hss.20221003.22},
abstract = {Tao Te Ching is a work by Laozi, one of the greatest philosophers in Chinese history. Despite the large number of existing translations, it is still necessary to revisit, reinterpret and retranslate it for the need of changing readers and market. Previous translation studies of Tao Te Ching focused on the interpretation of important terms and concepts, the comparison of different versions to discuss translation strategies. Some researchers used corpus tools to compare overall stylistic differences, but ignored minute details reflected in translators’ word choice. Improving upon previous ones, this study uses corpus tools to comparatively analyze two English versions of Tao Te Ching translated by Lin Yutang and by James Legge. Their lexical diversity is calculated with a more reliable measure: moving average type/token ratio (MATTR). A wordlist is then made to extract 10 most frequent content words in the source text for detailed comparison of their translation. Similarities are found in both translations. First, they have a similar level of lexical diversity. Second, they share a degree of inconsistency of word choice when translating high-frequency words. Third, both combine the translation strategies of domestication and foreignization. Differences are found as well. First, Legge has a preference for explicitation and poetic effect. Second, Lin makes his choice more dependent upon the changing context.},
year = {2022}
}
TY - JOUR T1 - A Corpus-Based Contrastive Study of English Translation of Tao Te Ching AU - Chen Zhong AU - Wang Heyu Y1 - 2022/06/27 PY - 2022 N1 - https://doi.org/10.11648/j.hss.20221003.22 DO - 10.11648/j.hss.20221003.22 T2 - Humanities and Social Sciences JF - Humanities and Social Sciences JO - Humanities and Social Sciences SP - 180 EP - 189 PB - Science Publishing Group SN - 2330-8184 UR - https://doi.org/10.11648/j.hss.20221003.22 AB - Tao Te Ching is a work by Laozi, one of the greatest philosophers in Chinese history. Despite the large number of existing translations, it is still necessary to revisit, reinterpret and retranslate it for the need of changing readers and market. Previous translation studies of Tao Te Ching focused on the interpretation of important terms and concepts, the comparison of different versions to discuss translation strategies. Some researchers used corpus tools to compare overall stylistic differences, but ignored minute details reflected in translators’ word choice. Improving upon previous ones, this study uses corpus tools to comparatively analyze two English versions of Tao Te Ching translated by Lin Yutang and by James Legge. Their lexical diversity is calculated with a more reliable measure: moving average type/token ratio (MATTR). A wordlist is then made to extract 10 most frequent content words in the source text for detailed comparison of their translation. Similarities are found in both translations. First, they have a similar level of lexical diversity. Second, they share a degree of inconsistency of word choice when translating high-frequency words. Third, both combine the translation strategies of domestication and foreignization. Differences are found as well. First, Legge has a preference for explicitation and poetic effect. Second, Lin makes his choice more dependent upon the changing context. VL - 10 IS - 3 ER -
Email: