Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-t8hqh Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-20T06:36:39.607Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Visibility and Invisibility of the Translator in H.A. Giles’s A History of Chinese Literature

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  22 April 2020

Peina Zhuang  and
Yina Cao
Peina Zhuang
Affiliation:
College of Literature and Journalism, Sichuan University, 24 Yihuan Road, Chengdu610064, People’s Republic of China. Email: [email protected]
Yina Cao
Affiliation:
College of Literature and Journalism, Sichuan University, 24 Yihuan Road, Chengdu610064, People’s Republic of China. Email: [email protected]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

The writing of literary history, generally speaking, is a matter of selecting and organizing literary works according to aesthetic judgement and historical values. If one writes the literary history of a foreign culture, however, at least if one wants to include samples of literary works, one must contend with the issue of translation, not only in the sense of having to choose which source texts to translate but also in that of choosing among existing translations or of translating oneself. The dual role of a historian and a translator is a challenging and complicated balancing act, as proven in the case of H.A. Giles (1845–1935), whose 1901A History of Chinese Literature is the first Chinese literary history ever written in English. As one of the then leading sinologists in Europe, Giles had contributed tremendously to the dissemination of Chinese literature by way of smooth translations that appealed to his English readers, but which also formed an obstacle for the reader’s proper understanding of the history of Chinese literature. The evidence for this comes from his misguided take on the dual aspects of visibility and invisibility of the translator’s identity in writing about a foreign literature.

Type
Focus: Through Chinese Eyes
Information
European Review , Volume 29 , Issue 4 , August 2021 , pp. 523 - 533
Copyright
© 2020 Academia Europaea

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Ball, JD (1901) Dr. Giles’s history of Chinese literature. The China Review 25(4), 207–210. https://hkjo.lib.hku.hk/archive/files/29631fc9446705975f937cda8bbd1d5d.pdf Google Scholar
Brandes, G (1997) Main Currents in 19th Century Literature. Trans. Zhang, DZ. Beijing: People’s Literature Press.Google Scholar
Cao, SQ (2013). Variation Theory of Comparative Literature. Heidelberg: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chavannes, E (1895–1905) Les Mémoires Historiques de Se-ma Ts’ien (5 vols). Paris: Éditions Ernest Leroux.Google Scholar
Eagleton, T (2004) Literary Theory: An Introduction. Oxford: Blackwell Publishers.Google Scholar
Fang, WG (2014) On the investigation of the western concept ‘literature’. Dushu 5, 9–15.Google Scholar
Giles, HA (1884) Gems of Chinese Literature. Shanghai: Kelly & Walsh; London: Bernard Quaritch.Google Scholar
Giles, HA (1901) A History of Chinese Literature. New York: D. Appleton and Company.Google Scholar
Giles, HA (1922) Gems of Chinese Literature. Shanghai: Kelly and Walsh, Limited.Google Scholar
Giles, HA (1973) A History of Chinese Literature. Tokyo: Charles E. Tuttle Company.Google Scholar
Legge, J (1861-1872) The Chinese Classics (5 vols). London: Trubner.Google Scholar
Leitch, V (2001) The Norton Anthology of Theory and Criticism. New York: W.W. Norton and Co.Google Scholar
Palmer, DJ (1956) The Rise of English Studies. London: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Venuti, L (2008) The Translator’s Invisibility: A History of Translation. London and New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
Wang, GW (2003) Commentaries on Lyrical Work. Hunan: Yuelu Publishing House.Google Scholar
Wang, SJ (2002) A new interpretation of Gao Zhu’s ‘Qingmingri Duijiu’. Journal of Hebei University 27(3), 20–22.Google Scholar
Wylie, A (1867) Notes on Chinese Literature. London: Shanghai, American Presbyterian Mission Press.Google Scholar
Yang, ZM (2002) Longman Dictionary of Contemporary English, 3rd edn. Beijing: Foreign Language Teaching and Research Press.Google Scholar
Yu, Y (2010) On the appreciation of the poem Qiannong and Chengzhuo. Hubei Social Sciences 8, 129–131.Google Scholar
Zhang, H (1992) Chinese Literature in Britain. Guangzhou: Huacheng Publishing House.Google Scholar
Zhang, GG (1995) The history and status quo of sinology studies in Cambridge. Trends of Recent Researches on the History of China 3, 89–95.Google Scholar
Zhao, YH (2016) Semiotics: Principles & Problems. Nanjing: Nanjing University Press.Google Scholar
Zhao, YR (1968) Language and Symbolic Systems. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Zhuang, PN (2017) On translation of literary terminology as cultural sign: with focus on translation of literary terms in History of Chinese Literature . Cultura. International Journal of Philosophy of Culture and Axiology 14(1), 43–58.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Zottoli, A (1879–1883) Cursus Literaturae Sinicae. Shanghai: Typographia Missionis catholicae.Google Scholar