从阐释学视角看《名利场》两种译本的译者主体性本科毕设论文

上海海事大学SHANGHAI MARITIME UNIVERSITY硕 士 学 位 论 文MASTER DISSERTATION学校代码：10254 密 级：论文编号：论文题目： 从阐释学视角看 《名利场》两种译本的译者主体性 学科专业： 外国语言学及应用语言学 作者姓名：指导教师：完成日期：论文独创性声明本论文是我个人在导师指导下进行的研究工作及取得的研究成果。

论文中除了特别加以标注和致谢的地方外，不包含其他人或其他机构已经发表或撰写过的研究成果。

其他同志对本研究的启发和所做的贡献均己在论文中做了明确的声明并表示了谢意。

作者签名：日期：论文使用授权声明本人同意上海海事大学有关保留、使用学位论文的规定，即：学校有权送交论文复印件，允许论文被查阅和借阅；学校可以上网公布论文的全部内容或部分内容，可以采用影印、缩印或其他手段保存论文。

保密的论文在解密后遵守此规定。

作者签名：导师签名：日期：A Discussion on Translator’s Subjectivity from the Perspectiveof Hermeneutics——Based on Two Chinese Versions of Vanity FairByZhang JunUnder the Supervision ofProfessor Han ZhonghuaA Thesis Submitted to the College of Foreign Languages ofShanghai Maritime Universityin Partial Fulfillment ofthe Requirements for the MA DegreeShanghai Maritime UniversityMay, 2010AcknowledgementsAt the moment when I complete the thesis, I can not help expressing my deep and great appreciation for those who helped me and gave me kind instructions on conceiving this thesis.First and foremost, I owe a great deal to Professor Han Zhonghua, my supervisor, for his patient tutorship, invaluable suggestions and guidance. It is quite fair for me to say that this thesis can never be achieved without his generous support and professional comments.I am extremely grateful not only for his inspiring encouragement but also for his objective criticism, which helped me a lot in improving this thesis. During the process of working on this thesis, I was once again deeply impressed by his earnest academic attitude, incisive viewpoints as well as his inexhaustible enthusiasm in academic study, which set a model for my future research.I also want to express special thankfulness to Professor Wang Dawei, Professor Zheng Lixin, Professor Weng Fengxiang and many other distinguished scholars in my university, for their instructional lectures, the influence of which will be felt all my life.Last but not least, it is necessary for me to express my sincere gratitude to my parents, some of my relatives, my classmates, and my friends. I thank them from bottom of my heart for their understanding and permanent support throughout my academic study.毕业设计（论文）原创性声明和使用授权说明原创性声明本人郑重承诺：所呈交的毕业设计（论文），是我个人在指导教师的指导下进行的研究工作及取得的成果。

尽我所知，除文中特别加以标注和致谢的地方外，不包含其他人或组织已经发表或公布过的研究成果，也不包含我为获得及其它教育机构的学位或学历而使用过的材料。

对本研究提供过帮助和做出过贡献的个人或集体，均已在文中作了明确的说明并表示了谢意。

作者签名：日期：指导教师签名：日期：使用授权说明本人完全了解大学关于收集、保存、使用毕业设计（论文）的规定，即：按照学校要求提交毕业设计（论文）的印刷本和电子版本；学校有权保存毕业设计（论文）的印刷本和电子版，并提供目录检索与阅览服务；学校可以采用影印、缩印、数字化或其它复制手段保存论文；在不以赢利为目的前提下，学校可以公布论文的部分或全部内容。

作者签名：日期：学位论文原创性声明本人郑重声明：所呈交的论文是本人在导师的指导下独立进行研究所取得的研究成果。

除了文中特别加以标注引用的内容外，本论文不包含任何其他个人或集体已经发表或撰写的成果作品。

对本文的研究做出重要贡献的个人和集体，均已在文中以明确方式标明。

本人完全意识到本声明的法律后果由本人承担。

作者签名：日期：年月日学位论文版权使用授权书本学位论文作者完全了解学校有关保留、使用学位论文的规定，同意学校保留并向国家有关部门或机构送交论文的复印件和电子版，允许论文被查阅和借阅。

本人授权大学可以将本学位论文的全部或部分内容编入有关数据库进行检索，可以采用影印、缩印或扫描等复制手段保存和汇编本学位论文。

涉密论文按学校规定处理。

作者签名：日期：年月日导师签名：日期：年月日教研室（或答辩小组）及教学系意见摘要《名利场》是十九世纪英国批判现实主义作家萨克雷(William Makepeace Thackeray 1811-1863)的成名之作，“也是他生平著作里最经得起时间考验的杰作”(杨绛, 1997)。

在《名利场》的诸多中译本中，女翻译家杨必的译本一向深受读者青睐，也是难得看到的佳译。

事隔多年后，湖南师范大学彭长江教授面临着更多、更大的困难重译了《名利场》，但其措辞及语言风格方面都与“杨译”大不相同。

随着《名利场》中译本的不断增多，对不同译本的品评文章也源源不断。

然而，评论者多集中于语言层面的分析，从文化空缺或“归化、异化”上入手，但从译者及其译者主体性角度出发的研究至今仍较少见。

译者的主体性在翻译史上经历了一个由朦胧到凸显的过程。

20世纪70年代以来，西方翻译理论出现了“文化转向”，运用后结构主义理论对文本的意义进行阐述。

译者的主体性及其在翻译过程中所起的主体性作用逐渐受到西方翻译理论界的广泛关注，我国对译者主体性的研究也在日益加深。

译者主体性在国内外已得到了应有的重视。

阐释学（Hermeneutics）是20 世纪60 年代后盛行于西方的哲学和文化思潮。

任何翻译都由理解开始，阐释学理论正是基于对意义的理解与阐释的一门学科。

翻译阐释学派强调翻译和理解之间密不可分的关系，对理解的作用和方式进行不同的阐释。

翻译活动也从传统的原作者“独白”和无限度的读者阐释，走向了原作者、文本译者、译文与译文读者之间的积极对话。

在翻译的过程中，译者处于整个对话活动的中心位置, 扮演着读者和译文作者的双重角色。

阐释学视角给翻译研究注入了新的活力，带来了新的研究视角。

鉴于译者的主体地位在当今文化语境下已得到越来越多的关注，本文拟运用阐释学相关理论，重新审视和研究译者的主体性作用。

本文拟以翻译阐释学理论为基础，以萨克雷的名作《名利场》的两个权威中文译本为语料，运用斯坦纳的“翻译的四步骤”，伽达默尔的“偏见”、“视域融合”等阐释学基本观点，通过实证分析，对萨克雷的《名利场》的两个中文译本进行对比研究，藉以考察译者主体性在文学翻译过程中的表现。

本文共分五章。

第一章对萨克雷，其名著《名利场》及《名利场》的两个权威版的中译本做简要的介绍。

第二章对“译者主体性”问题和“阐释学”理论及相关的研究现状进行较为详细的介绍和说明，阐明什么是“译者主体性”、“阐释学”经历了怎样的发展行程，以及它是如何与“译者主体性”相结合的。

第三章和第四章是本文的重点。

这两章以《名利场》的两个不同中文译本为案例，以从中所选取的大量文本实例为实证，运用阐释学的核心理论对“译者主体性”进行深入和充分的讨论。

其中，第三章以乔治·斯坦纳的“翻译四步骤”理论为依据，对《名利场》的两中译本的译者主体性的发挥进行对比分析与关照，即译者在经历“信赖”、“侵入”、“吸收”和“补偿”这四个翻译步骤的过程中所体现出的译者主体性。

第四章，根据伽达默尔的“视域融合”理论，从译本本身的不同特征，如译者的翻译策略、语言风格、艺术标准及文化传真度等，探讨《名利场》两中译本的译者主体性。

第五章为结论，即：在阐释学理论的视域下，翻译过程应当理解为译者能动的阐释原文的过程，译者主体性的发挥具有其合法性和一定的局限性。

传统译论中有关译者的理论很难指导译者在翻译实践中充分调动自己的主体性，而结合阐释学相关理论对译者主体性及其实际作用进行研究，则能够较好地解决这个问题。

本文以阐释学理论与传统翻译理论相结合作为立论基础，旨在能从阐释学角度出发，为《名利场》的两个权威中文译本的译者主体性的解读，提供一个较新的视角。

笔者希望本文能具有一定的理论意义，并能为文学翻译研究和翻译实践提供一点儿切实可行的参考。

关键词：《名利场》; 译者主体性; 阐释学; 翻译四步骤; 视域融合ABSTRACTWilliam Makepeace Thackeray, one of the greatest critical realist writers of England in the 19th century, reached his peak of popularity with the publication of his masterpiece Vanity Fair.It is “his most famous work in his literary career, which can certainly stand the test of time,” cl aimed Yang Jiang in 1997. Among the Chinese versions of Vanity Fair, the most widely acclaimed one is translated by Yang Bi, a well-known female scholar in China, and her version, regarded as the most authoritative one, has enjoyed great popularity among the Chinese readers ever since its publication. Confronted with more challenging difficulties though, Professor Peng Changjiang from Hunan Normal University re-translated the novel a few decades later, making innovations in terms of linguistic performances, rhetorical properties, and so on.As the number of the Chinese versions of Vanity Fair grows, articles commenting on different translations accordingly are coming forth endlessly. However, most of the comments and researches concerned are focused on the l evel of linguistic aspects, on “foreignization or domestication”，or on the basis of the cultural gap. It is still rare to see discussions and researches on comparison between the different versions from the perspective of translator’s functions or translat or’s subjectivity. As we all know, the development of the theory of translator’s subjectivity underwent various stages from being obscure to its being on the foreground of today. Since 1970s, translation theories in the western world began to take a “Cultural Turn”. There has been a tendency of applying post-structuralism to the interpretation of texts. As a result, the theory of translator’s subjectivity and its leading role in the process of translating has aroused great concern among the translation theorists. Scholars in China have also paid increasing attention to this theory. At present translator’s subjectivity as a translation theory has achieved its deserving stature.Hermeneutics as a philosophical and cultural ideology was prevalent in the West in the late 1960s. Since any translation begins with the understanding,Hermeneutics is exactly such a branch of learning that is established on the basis of understanding and hermeneutical exegesis and interpretation of the textual and contextual meanings of the texts in question. Hermeneutics, as viewed from the aspect of the translation theory, emphasizes that there is an inseparable relationship between translation and comprehension. It illustrates the how and the why understanding and interpretation occurs from quite a different perspective. Thus the perception of the translating process begins to change from the writer’s own monologue and the targeted reader’s infinitive interpretation to an active dialogue between the original writer, the translator, the translation and the reader. In the light of the hermeneutical view, the translator becomes the interlocutor playing the double-role as both the reader of the source language text and the writer of the target language text. Hermeneutics, to some extent, has injected new vitality into the study of translation theories from a brand new perspective.In view of the situation in which more and more emphases are placed on translator’s subjectivity, this thesis aims at conducting a re-investigation into the theor y of translator’s subjectivity from the perspective of Hermeneutics. By way of applying some core concepts of Hermeneutics, such as George Steiner’s “Fourfold Hermeneutic Translation Motion Theory”, and Gadamer’s Hermeneutic theories, including his theorie s of “Fusion of Horizons”, “Prejudice”, “Fore-Understanding”, and through the adoption of large quantities of factual instances taken from the two authoritative Chinese versions of William Makepeace Thackeray’s masterpiece Vanity Fair chosen for the intended comparative study, the author of this thesis aims to carry out a tentative analysis on translator’s subjectivity in the act of translating literary works.The whole thesis consists of four chapters. Chapter One is a brief introduction to Vanity Fair，its original writer – William Makepeace Thackeray, as well as to the two translators and their translations. Chapter Two serves as the theoretical frame offering a detailed study of relevant theories of translator’s subjectivity and Hermeneutics. It involves the histories of the two theories and how Hermeneutics isapplied to the study of translator’s subjectivity. Chapter s Three and Four function as the core part of the thesis, aiming at carrying out ample and in-depth analyses on a great wealth of examples taken from the two Chinese translation versions being discussed from hermeneutical perspective. Chapter Three deals with the comparison between the two Chinese versions with a view to bringing forth translator’s subjectivity by applying George Steiner’s Fou rfold Hermeneutic Translation Motion Theory, which explores into translator’s subjectivity embodied in the whole translation process that comprises the four necessary steps, namely “trust”, “aggression”, “incorporation” and “compensation”. Chapter Four bri ngs forth the presentation of translator’s subjectivity as displayed in the two Chinese versions from different aspects on the basis of Gadamer’s “Fusion of Horizons” Theory, which concerns translators’ strategy and approaches, their linguistic performance, artistic style and the degree of fidelity in cultural transmission. A conclusion is drawn at the end of the thesis, that is, translation, from the perspective of Hermeneutics, should be viewed as an active understanding and interpretation of the actual m eaning of the original writing. Translator’s subjectivity in the act of translation is legitimate although there are certain limitations.The traditional theory of translation can hardly activate the subjectivity of the translator into full play in their translating practice; nevertheless, when combined with the relevant theories of Hermeneutics, we may have ways to solve the problem. The aim of this thesis is to provide some new approaches to the understanding of the mechanism and the legitimate position o f translator’s subjectivity as displayed in the two authoritative Chinese versions of the classical work of Vanity Fair on the basis of the theory of Hermeneutics. It is the proper writer’s hope that this thesis can be of certain theoretical value with its supply of the reliable and pragmatic reference to the study and practice of translating literary works.KEYWORDS:Vanity Fair, translator’s subjectivity, Hermeneutics, Fourfold Hermeneutic Translation Motion, Fusion of HorizonsCONTENTSPreface (1)ChapterⅠIntroduction (4)1.1 An Introduction to Vanity Fair and its two Selected Chinese Versions (4)1.1.1 A Summary of the Novel——Vanity Fair (4)1.1.2 The two Complete Chinese Versions and Their Translators (5)1.1.2.1 Yang Bi’s Translated Versio n of Vanity Fair (5)1.1.2.2 Peng Changjiang’s Translated Version of Vanity Fair (7)1.2 Research Methodology (8)1.3 Research Significance (8)1.4 Layout of the Thesis (9)Chapter ⅡHermeneutics and Translator's Subjectivity (10)2.1 Hermeneutics (10)2.1.1 Origin and Development of Hermeneutics (10)2.1.1.1 Origin of Hermeneutics (10)2.1.1.2 Development of Hermeneutics (11)2.1.2 Some Core Concepts of Modern Hermeneutics (12)2.2 Subjectivity of Translator (13)2.2.1 Definition of Translator’s Subjectivity (13)2.2.2 Subjectivity of Translator from Invisibility to Visibility (14)2.2.3 Distinction Between Translator’s Subjectivity and Translation Subjectivity. (16)2.3 Enlightenment from Hermeneutics on Translator’s Subjectivity (17)2.3.1 Validity of Translator’s Subjectivity from the perspective of Hermeneutics (17)2.3.1.1 George Steiner’s Fourfold Hermeneutic Translation Motion Theory and its Theoretical Support to the Validity of Translator’s Subjectivity (17)2.3.1.2 Gadamer’s Hermeneutic Theory, Including His Theories of “Fusion of Horizons”, “Prejudice”, “Fore-Understanding”, and Their Support to the Validity of Translator’s Subjectivity (20)2.3.2 Avoidance of Excessive “Prejudice”——Limitation of Translator’s Subjectivity (22)Chapter Ⅲ A Comparative Study of Translator’s Subjectivity Based on the Two Chinese Versions of V anity Fair——from the Perspective of “Fourfold Hermeneutic Translation Motion Theory” (24)3.1 Translators’ Trust (25)3.1.1 Translators’ Cultural Background (25)3.1.2 Tran slators’ Translation Motive (27)3.2 Translators’ Aggression (29)3.2.1 Translators’ Aggression in Different Personality (29)3.2.2 Translators’ Aggression as Different Gender (31)3.2.3 Translators’ Understanding and Judgment of the Source Text (34)3.3 Translators’ Incorporation (35)3.3.1 Linguistic Absorption of the Style in the Original Work (35)3.3.2 Aesthetic Acceptance of the Original Work (37)3.3.3 Absorption of Cultural Consciousness of the Original Work (39)3.4 Translators’ Compensation/Restitution (40)3.4.1 Discrepancy Between Different Cultures and Losses in Translation (40)3.4.2 Compensation by Choice of Words (42)3.4.3 Compensation by Sentence Rearrangement (43)3.4.4 Re-creation of Image of the Characters and Preservation of Figures of Speech (46)Chapter ⅣPresen tation of Translator’s Subjectivity Based on the Two Chinese Versions of V anity Fair——from the Perspective of Gadamer’s Theory of “Fusion of Horizons” (51)4.1 Translators’ Strategy and Approaches (52)4.2 Fusion of Language Style (58)4.3 Degree of Fidelity in Cultural Transmission (63)Conclusion (69)Bibliography (72)PrefaceIn the development of translation studies, translator’s subjectivity has undergone such a process of change from that of being invisible to that of being widely cognizant. It was not so conspicuous among the whole academic circle until the 1970s when the “Cultural Turn” came into being. From that time on, translator’s subjectivit y has been given increasing attention on the part of both the translation theorists and translation practitioners.Vanity Fair, the renowned novel written by William Makepeace Thackeray, has made a name for itself since its publication. As one of the greatest critical realist writers of the 19th century in England, William Makepeace Thackeray drained his ironic power to describe all sorts of characters in the novel such as the sharp Bechy Sharp, the amiable Amelia, etc. The sarcastic tone, the incisive expression together with the humorous style distinguished this classic from its contemporary works, which has vividly depicted all forms of ugliness existed in the upper-class society in England in the 19th century. Meanwhile, the uniqueness of the classic as well as the great linguistic gap between two cultures becomes a huge barrier to the translation of the novel. Translators in China have made strenuous efforts to try and adopt different methods in order to vividly reproduce it in Chinese for the benefit of the Chinese readers, and their endeavors in the work have demonstrated an obvious manifestation o n translator’s su bjectivity.As the process of translation or interpretation begins with the understanding of the text in question, there is naturally a connection between Hermeneutics and translation theories, for it is exactly such kind of theory that calls for understanding and interpreting the meaning of the text. Hermeneutics, a method of textual analysis, has gone through three phases, namely, classic, general, and modern Hermeneutics (including ontological and philosophical hermeneutics). It bears a close relationsh ip with translator’s subjectivity, especially some of its core concepts such as George Steiner’s Fourfold Hermeneutic Translation Motion Theory, Gadamer’s Hermeneutic Theory of “Fusion of Horizons”, “Prejudice” and “Fore-Understanding”. According to George Steiner’s FourfoldHermeneutic Translation Motion Theory，a translation cannot be achieved only when it is composed after the translator undergoes four necessary phases, namely, trust, aggression, corporation and compensation. None of the four steps can operate independently to produce the desired effect without involving translator’s subjectivity for the reasons that, in the first place, a text would not be chosen for the act of translating if the translator does not have faith in the translatability of the text. And then, during the process when the translator penetrates into and tries to make sense of the text, he unavoidably injects his own subjective factors into his comprehension. Thirdly, the ultimate aim of aggression is corporation, which is more or less mixed with translator’s subjectivity. Thus, compensation is indispensible to make up for the discrepancy caused by the cultural gap and translator’s subjectivity. Gadamer’s Hermeneutic Theory of “Fusion of Horizons”, “Prejudice” and “Fore-Understandi ng” has unveiled the essence of translation that in order to do translation, the translator should first of all act as a reader, then as a writer. In line with Gadamer’s theory of “Fusion of Horizons”, there are two different horizons in the translator’s p rocess of understanding and interpreting the original work as a reader: one is the text’s horizon; the other is the interpreter’s horizon. When creating a literary work, the author carries his/her own primary horizon, while the interpreter has his/her own special horizon conceived in his/her specific era and cultural and cognitive environment. Thus the fusion of horizon takes place when the interpreter begins to understand the original work. As a result, a brand-new horizon appears which is higher than both of the previous two. Due to his/her “fore-understanding”, the translator’s comprehension of the source language text is a historical activity, which is limited by the translator’s historical conditions, hence some “prejudice” is somewhat unavoidable. According to Gadamer, there is a distinction between “reasonable prejudice” and “illegal prejudice”, the former one can be retained, while the latter ought to be eliminated.Since the traditional translation theory can hardly activate the subjectivity of the translator in his/her translating practice, though, it may not be so difficult as to settle the issue with the relevant theories developed in Hermeneutics. One the other hand, although there are innumerable comments on the two authoritative Chinese versions of Vanity Fairtranslated by Yang Bi and Peng Changjiang, most of them are focused on the issues such as “foreignization or domestication”, Skopos-theory, cultural gap or some other topics. It is rare to see discussions on how translators’ subjectivity fu nctions in the translation process, especially in translating literary works. Therefore, the writer of this thesis hopes that through this endeavor of investigation and exploration, she could come out with some findings that could shed new light on the rol e translator’ subjectivity plays in the act of translation, especially in the translation of literary works, by means of a comparative study on the two Chinese versions of Vanity Fair in terms of the two translators’ subjectivity shown in their respective versions from the perspective of Hermeneutics.ChapterⅠIntroduction1.1An Introduction to V anity Fair and its two Selected Chinese VersionsBefore we unfold the discussion on the main concerns of this thesis, let us have an overview of the classical novel, entitled Vanity Fair, and its two authoritative Chinese versions.1.1.1 A Summary of the Novel——V anity FairVanity Fair is one of the most famous classics in English literature, which is written by William Makepeace Thackeray (1811–1863), a well-known British writer in the 19th century. Being a journalist for many years, William Makepeace Thackeray wrote a lot of novels, most of which are often regarded as upper-class social descriptions, comparing favorably with Dickens's panoramic depiction of lower-class Victorian society. Among his well-known novels, Vanity Fair is Thackeray's luxuriant social satire that exposes the furious flauntiness and corruption prevailing in England during the turmoil of the Napoleonic wars. The novel led the writer to an immediate rise to his fame when it came out at the beginning of 1847.Vanity Fair is a novel without a hero that satirizes society in the early 19th-century England. The term “Vanity Fair” originates from the allegorical novel The Pilgrim’s Progress, published in 1678 by John Bunyan where there is a town fair held in a village called Vanity. The plot of the story develops between two girls, Bechy Sharp and Amelia Sedley, who are good friends with quite different characters. The former is clever and sharp, while the latter is kind and amiable. Bechy tries all kinds of means to squeeze into the upper ten, but drifts about miserably in the end. Meanwhile, although Dobbin marries Amelia, and always treats her with great kindness, he never fully regains the love that hehas once had for her. The novel is now remembered as a classic of English literature, though some critics claim that it has structural problems.1.1.2The two Complete Chinese Versions and Their TranslatorsYang Bi’s translation of Vanity Fair has been widely acclaimed for a long period ever since it was published in 1959. Peng Changjiang’s version also enjoys great popularity after its publication. Both of them carry with their own uniqueness in terms of their aesthetic perceptions and distinctive emphases on the work.1.1.2.1 Y ang Bi’s Translated Version of V anity FairYang Bi’s choice of Vanity Fair derives not only from the inspiration of Fu Lei, but also from that of Qian Zhongshu, her brother-in-law. After the successful publishing of Castle Backrent, Fu Lei suggested that it would benefit her a lot if she could translate some books by famous writers. So Yang Bi asked for advice from Qian Zhongshu. It occurred to Qian that the former translation of Vanity Fair needed improvement, therefore, he suggested that she could translate this distinguished novel for a second time. Thus, Yang Bi began her translation in 1953, meanwhile, she was an associate professor in the Foreign Languages Department, of Fudan University. She finally fulfilled this arduous task due to her devotion of all her spare time to translating this novel. T he People’s Literature Publishing House was quite satisfied with her translation, when the book was to be republished in 1959. Later on when asked whether she would like to revise her own translation, Yang Bi replied, “Not a single word to be revised” (Yang Jiang，1997), because she was too weary to do anything. So Yang Bi’s decision to translate Vanity Fair, was mostly out of the encouragement of Fu Lei and Qian Zhongshu, the two special directors in her translating career.Since Yang Bi’s translation of Vanity Fair has been extremely popular among Chinesereaders, there have been innumerable scholars who have exerted commendatory comments on the book. Most of them focus their attention on Yang Bi’s translation of Vanity Fair in the perspective of linguistic level, such as on the lexicon, on the syntax, on the context, etc. Xu Yuanchong says, “In my opinion, there are three famous translated works in the translation field of China in the 20th century, that is, A Complete Edition of Shakespeare’s Plays by Zhu Shenghao, Selections from Balzac by Fu Lei, and Vanity Fair by Yang Bi.” (Xu Yuanchong，2004：214) Chen Rongdong claims that “Yang Bi and Fu Lei are claimed to be two re presentative translators belonging to the School of Art ”(Cheng Rongdong，1997:96). Sun Zhili evaluates Yang Bi’s translation of Vanity Fair as “Her translation is faithful and expressive, also it is very elegant. Her translation is interesting and easy to understand, and readers can get the same ‘illumination, motivation and beauty’ as they read the original. ”(Sun Zhili, 1996:150) Huang Yuanshen (黄源深) commentates in his article “Talent in Translation” that “Yang Bi’s version has a particular kind of inspiration and talent that nobody else has ever matched.” (quote from Li Weihong，2002：2) He continues to declare that “Yang’s translation is so smooth, so natural, and so appropriate that it is definitely not a kind of effect that the translator intended to ‘make’, but, rather, it is a Vanity Fair that Thackeray wrote in excellent Chinese.” (quote from Li Weihong，2002：2) Yang Bi left only two translated works behind her, Castle Backrent and Vanity Fair. She was an outstanding woman translator, and just as Nan Mu (南木) points out, “Yang Bi’s version of Vanity Fair is really a great translated work and it is worth reading.” (quote from Luo Xinzhang, 1984:850) All in all, most scholars agree that Yang Bi’s translation of Vanity Fair takes full consideration of the target language, which does not read like a translation. Yang Bi’s translation of Vanity Fair has enjoyed a great fame, it has an expansive influence not only on a great number of Chinese readers but also many scholars. As Sun Zhili puts it, “When I first took to literary translation, it was Yang Bi’s version of Vanity Fair that I took as the example of my own translating practice.”(Sun Zhili, 1999:128)1.1.2.2 Peng Changjiang’s Translated Version of V anity FairRetranslated in 1994, Peng Changjiang’s version of Vanity Fair came out decades after Yang’s. And as the translator s ays, the significance of the new translation lies in the innovation of the translation itself and the approach to the style of the original. He achieves that, which can be justified in his Chinese version of Vanity Fair. The reason why Ms Yang Bi is successful lies in that she has processed the original bravely, integrated it with target language, and transferred it into corresponding target text appropriately while bearing the ove rall background in mind. On the contrary, Peng Changjiang’s version is the carrying-on, development and refurbishment of the former work in some aspects. Confronted with more difficulty and pressure, he retranslates this great classic, aiming to be brave enough to break through former achievements as well as himself to make certain advancement. Just as the translator himself claims, the significance of the new translation lies in the newness of the translation itself and attainment of the style and taste in the original.Both the two Chinese versions of Vanity Fair have their own distinctive characteristics. Although Yang Bi’s translation enjoys a high level of popularity, Peng Changjing’s version makes some improvements over Yang Bi’s, after all, the latter is produced about forty year later. Nan Mu asserts “The Chinese version by Yang Bi reads very smooth, words being carefully chosen and sentences well arranged. Both the rich content and the humorous artistic style of the original are gratifyingly reproduc ed.” (Nan Mu,1984) Meanwhile, Peng Changjiang’s version is faithful, natural, idiomatic, and vividly recreate s the artistic value and aesthetic effect of the original book. Peng’s version appeared in the year of 1995, almost 40 years later than that of Ya ng’s version. Peng Changjiang’s understanding of Vanity Fair evidently surpasses that of Yang Bi’s with the advance of the times. His means of expression in translating is more diversified and has achieved satisfactory effect (Yi Bo’an, 2000:No.4). However, no matter how close the translators reach to the original style, a perfect reproduction of the meaning of the original work and aesthetic standard is beyond possibility, for a translator is bound to leave his/her subjective trace in the translation. Nida。