Abstract
This paper reports on a translation project launched at Xi’an International Studies University (XISU) in 2017 that focuses on political news published by Hanban, which offers a platform for instructions and services for Chinese language and culture globally. Assisted by the metaphor identification method MIPVU (Metaphor Identification Procedure from Vrije Universiteit) and the data retrieval software HyConc, metaphors in the self-established corpus were efficiently and comprehensively identified. The metaphors were classified into 12 categories based on metaphorical images in the source domains. Next, an analysis of the cultural, communicative, and political characteristics or features of the metaphors was conducted under the framework of semiotics by using a diversity of images of the metaphors’ corresponding signifier and signified to trace the emergence, processing/understanding, and transformation of the metaphors through translation. Ultimately, three feasible translation techniques are proposed that are suitable for different types of metaphors: 1) preserving the metaphorical image, 2) preserving the metaphorical image with annotation, and 3) transforming the metaphorical image, in pursuit of providing reference for translators in related translation practice.
About the authors
Yi Sun (b. 1978) is a professor of English at the Foreign Linguistics and Applied Linguistics Research Center at Guangdong University of Foreign Studies. His major research interest is the interface study of metaphors in pragmatics, cognitive linguistics, comparative linguistics, and translation. He has published four monographs and over sixty academic articles, including “A diachronic analysis of metaphor clusters in political discourse – A comparative study of Chinese and American presidents’ speeches at universities” (2018).
Ruiyang Li is a postgraduate student of School of Advanced Translation and Interpretation at Xi’an International Studies University. His research interest is the interface study of metaphors in pragmatics, cognitive linguistics, comparative linguistics and translation.
Acknowledgements
This study is sponsored by the Center for Linguistics and Applied Linguistics, Guangdong University of Foreign Studies.
References
Alghbban, M. 2011. The translatability of metaphor: Study and investigation Bloomington: Indiana University.Search in Google Scholar
Al-Zoubi, M. 2009. The validity of compositional analysis in translating metaphor. Perspectives 17(3). 151–160.10.1080/09076760902957181Search in Google Scholar
Al-Zoubi, Mohammad, Mohammed Al-Ali & Ali Al-Hasnawi. 2007. Cogno-cultural issues in translating metaphors. Perspectives 14(3). 230–239.10.1080/09076760708669040Search in Google Scholar
Aristotle. 1984. Poetics Princeton: Princeton University Press.Search in Google Scholar
Aristotle. 2007. On rhetoric New York: Oxford University PressSearch in Google Scholar
Bassnett, S. 2002. Translation studies London and New York: Routledge.10.4324/9780203427460Search in Google Scholar
Chanda, I. 2012. Metaphor translation as a tool of international understanding. Comparative Literature and Culture 14(4). 1–8.10.7771/1481-4374.1996Search in Google Scholar
Dagut, M. 1976. Can “metaphor” be translated? Babel 22(1). 21–3310.1075/babel.22.1.05dagSearch in Google Scholar
Dascal, M. 1987. Leibniz: Language, signs, and thought Amsterdam: John Benjamins.10.1075/fos.10Search in Google Scholar
Dunn, J. 2013. Evaluating the premises and results of four metaphor identification systems. In A Gelbukh (ed.), Computational linguistics and intelligent text processing, 471–486. Berlin & Heidelberg: Springer.10.1007/978-3-642-37247-6_38Search in Google Scholar
Eco, U. & S. Nergaard 2003. Semiotic approaches: Routledge encyclopedia of translation studies Shanghai: Shanghai Foreign Language Education Press.Search in Google Scholar
Guo Jianhui. 2009. A semiotic perspective of metaphor translation. Journal of Sichuan International Studies University 1. 110-113Search in Google Scholar
Jakobson, R. 1959. On linguistic aspects of translation Cambridge: Harvard University Press.Search in Google Scholar
Kourdis, E. 2015. Semiotics of translation: An interdisciplinary approach to translation. In Petre Pericles Tryfonas (ed.), International handbook of semiotics, 303–320. Dordrecht: Springer Netherlands.10.1007/978-94-017-9404-6_13Search in Google Scholar
Lakoff, G. & M. Johnson. 1980. Metaphors we live by Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Search in Google Scholar
Lakoff, G. & M. Johnson. 1999. Philosophy in the flesh – The embodied mind and its challenge to Western thought New York: Basic Books.Search in Google Scholar
Li Youzheng. 2007. Introduction to theoretical semiotics table of contents Beijing: China Renmin University Press.Search in Google Scholar
Locke, J. 1690. An essay concerning human understanding. London: Collins.10.1093/oseo/instance.00018020Search in Google Scholar
Luo, Ying. 2018. La metáfora EL SER HUMANO ES UNA PLANTA en Sueño en el Pabellòn Rojo红楼梦 y su traducción al español: un análisis desde la perspectiva cognitiva [The metaphor HUMAN BEINGS ARE PLANTS in A Dream of Red Mansions and its translation in Spanish: An analysis from the cognitive perspective]. CÍRCULO de lingüística aplicada a la comunicación 74. 105–132.10.5209/CLAC.60516Search in Google Scholar
Morris, Charles W. 1938. Foundations of the theory of signs Chicago: University of ChicagoPress.Search in Google Scholar
Newmark, P. 1981. Approaches to translation Oxford: Pergamon Press.Search in Google Scholar
Newmark, P. 1988. A textbook of translation London: Prentice Hall.Search in Google Scholar
Newmark, P. 2001. Approaches to translation Shanghai: Shanghai Foreign Language Education Press.Search in Google Scholar
Pragglejaz Group. 2007. MIP: A method for identifying metaphorically used words in discourse. Metaphor and Symbol 22(1). 1–39.10.1080/10926480709336752Search in Google Scholar
Schäffner, C. 2004. Metaphor and translation: Some implications of a cognitive approach. Journal of Pragmatics 36(7). 1253–1269.10.1016/j.pragma.2003.10.012Search in Google Scholar
Schäffner, C. 2011. Metaphor in translation: Reflections on translation process research Birmingham: Aston University.Search in Google Scholar
Schäffner, C. & M. Shuttleworth 2013. Metaphor in translation: Possibilities for process research. Target 25(1). 93–106.10.1075/bct.72.08shuSearch in Google Scholar
Shutova, E. 2010. Models of metaphor in NLP. In Proceedings of the 48th Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics Uppsala, Sweden, 11 –16 July.Search in Google Scholar
Saussure, Ferdinand de. 1980. Course in General Linguistics Translated by Roy Harris. Chicago: Open Court.Search in Google Scholar
Steen, G．2010. A method for linguistic metaphor identification Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing Company．10.1075/celcr.14Search in Google Scholar
Steen, G. 2015. Developing, testing and interpreting Deliberate Metaphor Theory. Journal of Pragmatics 90. 67–72.10.1016/j.pragma.2015.03.013Search in Google Scholar
Stienstra, N. 1993. YHWH is the husband of His people: Analysis of a biblical metaphor with special reference to translation Kampen: Kok Pharos.Search in Google Scholar
Wang, Bin. 2003. Metaphorical terms for translation. Perspectives 11(3). 189–195.10.1080/0907676X.2003.9961473Search in Google Scholar
© 2020 Walter de Gruyter GmbH, Berlin/Boston
