This article was downloaded by: [Nipissing University]

On: 09 October 2014, At: 18:10

Publisher: Routledge
Informa Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number:
1072954 Registered office: Mortimer House, 37-41 Mortimer Street,
London W1T 3JH, UK

Perspectives: Studies in
Translatology
Publication details, including instructions for
authors and subscription information:
http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/rmps20

‘Translator‐Centredness’
a
Hu Gengshen
a
Tsinghua University , China E-mail:
Published online: 28 Apr 2010.

To cite this article: Hu Gengshen (2004) ‘Translator‐Centredness’,

Perspectives: Studies in Translatology, 12:2, 106-117, DOI:
10.1080/0907676X.2004.9961494

To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/0907676X.2004.9961494

PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE

Taylor & Francis makes every effort to ensure the accuracy of all
the information (the “Content”) contained in the publications on our
platform. However, Taylor & Francis, our agents, and our licensors
make no representations or warranties whatsoever as to the accuracy,
completeness, or suitability for any purpose of the Content. Any
opinions and views expressed in this publication are the opinions and
views of the authors, and are not the views of or endorsed by Taylor
& Francis. The accuracy of the Content should not be relied upon and
should be independently verified with primary sources of information.
Taylor and Francis shall not be liable for any losses, actions, claims,
 proceedings, demands, costs, expenses, damages, and other liabilities
whatsoever or howsoever caused arising directly or indirectly in
connection with, in relation to or arising out of the use of the Content.

This article may be used for research, teaching, and private study
purposes. Any substantial or systematic reproduction, redistribution,
reselling, loan, sub-licensing, systematic supply, or distribution in any
form to anyone is expressly forbidden. Terms & Conditions of access
and use can be found at http://www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-
and-conditions
Downloaded by [Nipissing University] at 18:10 09 October 2014
 106

'TRANSLATOR-CENTREDNESS'
Hu Gengshen, Tsinghua University, China
hugs@mail.tsinghua. edu. cn

Abstract
This article presents a concept of 'translator-centredness' which challenges the
theories of the two poles of 'source text-centered' and 'target text-centered' that have
predominated in studies of translation. The concept is discussed on the basis of previ-
ous translator studies and from different perspectives on such factors as the basic tri-
Downloaded by [Nipissing University] at 18:10 09 October 2014

angle of 'source text-translator-translated text', differences in translations of the

same author or work, and translation practice, etc. By confirming the centredness of
translators in the chain of translational communication, the author argues that the
translator-centered concept would not only help legitimize the translator's central
status and dominant role in translating, but also serve as a theoretical prop to justify
the translator's subjectivity, creativity, and authority in the translation process. This
article, therefore, also becomes an exhortation to focus more on the 'realities' of
translation by positioning the translator central in translating.

Introduction
I have argued that "[a]s a first step, I attempt to develop a new model of
translation that is neither 'source-oriented' nor 'target-oriented', but 'transla-
tor-centred', by describing translation as adaptation and selection" (Hu 2003:
288). By introducing the concept of 'translator-centredness', I intend to pro-
vide to establish a basis for the central status of translators and their role in
translation in order to provide a sound basis for theoretical thinking about
what translators do in translating.
Translation history studies show that issues such as the function, status,
and subjectivity of translators have been discussed over and again for millen-
nia.
This article will present 'translator-centredness' as a concept which chal-
lenges theories based on 'source text-centeredness' and 'target text-
centeredness' and will argue that in the field of Translation Studies, there is a
need for more empirical study of the role of translators in real-life translation
activities. 'Translator-centredness' will be discussed from different angles,
such as Translation Studies and attitudes towards translators, and I shall term
such studies Translator Studies.

Translator Studies from a Translation Studies' angle

Translator Studies may be traced in the 'philological', the 'structuralist',
and the 'post-structuralist' periods.

0907-676X/04/02 0106-0117 $20.00 © 2004 Hu Gengshen

Perspectives: Studies in Translatology Vol. 12, No. 2,2004
 Gengshen: 'Translator-centredness' 107

In the Western world, the 'philological period' refers to the "traditional

era" of translation studies (Toury 1980: 16-17 as quoted by Chau 1984: 71).
This period can be regarded as 'pre-scientific' and was characterised by
"early enthusiasm for freedom in translating" (Nida 1993: 159). Studies pri-
marily focused on the 'translator's experience', 'esthetical equivalence', or
the end-effect. Translators enjoyed a freedom of choice in the process of
translation which served to call attention to translators' status and function.
However, around 1960, the focus was shifted towards a linguistic ap-
proach in Europe. The overall approach would often use words such as 'sci-
Downloaded by [Nipissing University] at 18:10 09 October 2014

entific', translating was 'objective', and attention was paid to morphological

and syntactical aspects. "The translator's primary concern with manageable
smaller units of language such as grammatical constructions, lexical items,
stylistic figures, and so on has directed the practice as well as the teaching of
translation towards how to solve the host of problems arising sure enough
from the contrasts and imbalances between source and target languages".
(Neubert 1995: 1016) The bias towards source texts, which could be labelled
as the 'structuralist period', meant that there were relatively few studies of
translators' function and role.
In the subsequent 'post-structruralist period', the emphasis was on being
'holistic'. Attention focused on the pragmatic functions or the macro-contexts
of translations. "The translator is the agent of a cultural practice that is con-
ducted under continuous self-monitoring and often with active consultation of
cultural rules and resources, ranging from dictionaries and grammars to other
texts, discursive strategies, and translations, both canonical and marginal."
(Venuti 1992: 11). Since the status of texts was weakened, there was more
discussion of translators' function and role.

Translator Studies based on views on translators

When the image, status, function, and role of translators are taken into ac-
count, statements in Translator Studies can classified as 'metaphorical imag-
ing', 'public appeal', and 'subjective involvement'.
In 'metaphorical imaging', the translators' profession is likened to another
profession of phenomena. This goes for "master of language" (Dryden as
quoted by Snell-Hornby 1988: 132),"expert" (Vermeer 1989: 174; Hatim
2001: 73), 'go-between', 'servant', 'traitor', etc. Comprising both positive
and negative overtones and being general and superficial, these figurative im-
ages nevertheless reflect societal views of the functions of translators.
The term 'public appeal' is applied to statements by translators and trans-
lation scholars that they are dissatisfied with the little attention that is paid to
 108 2004. Perspectives: Studies in Translatology. Volume 12: 2

translators' function and status. I shall quote two examples: 'The translator
and his personality have seldom been considered in theories of translation,
and it is mainly in more recent works that comments can be found ... there
are still some theoretical works in which the question of the translator is
hardly mentioned at all" (Sorvali 1996: 79); and "[in] the discussions of es-
sence and features of translation, not enough attention has been paid to the
important role played by translators in the process of translating" (Zhang
1997: 17-18).
Even in books which sport the word 'translator' in the title such as The
Downloaded by [Nipissing University] at 18:10 09 October 2014

Translator as Communicator (Hatim and Mason, 1997) do not deal systemati-

cally with translators' status and position. In this book, the authors deal with
many interesting and relevant themes such as: "unity in diversity, foundations
for a model of analyzing texts, interpreting: a text linguistic approach, texture
in simultaneous interpreting, politeness in screen translating, register mem-
bership in literary translating, form and function in the translation of the sa-
cred and sensitive text, cross-cultural communication, ideology, textual er-
rors, curriculum design, etc."(1997: v). Even though the authors once stated
that "the translator stands at the center of this dynamic process of communi-
cation, as a mediator between the producer of a source text and whoever are
its [target-language] receivers" (Hatim and Mason 1990: 223), and that "[t]he
translator is, of course, the 'receiver' and 'producer' of communication"
(Hatim and Mason 1997: 2), the translators drown in the vast ocean of a vari-
ety of texts and textual analyses.
By 'subjective involvement', I refer to modern theories in which transla-
tors' importance is highlighted. Generally speaking, these are views that pay
less heed to the source text as an 'objective text' and stress the translators'
understanding and interpretation of it. They speak of translators' "visibility"
(Venuti 1992) and "liberation" (Bassnett 1994: 11-15).
The above three attitudes are summarised in Table loverleaf.
On closer examination, it turns out that most of the literature based on the
above theories is not primarily concerned translators' behaviour, nor spe-
cially focused on the role of translators, nor systematically discussing the
translators' central placement in the chain of translational communication,
and do not deal with it in terms of theoretical thinking. The role, function,
status, subjectivity and so on of translators are only mentioned in passing.
This goes for many theories: Polysystem theory focuses on the interaction be-
tween literary systems, Skopos theory emphasises translation as a purposeful
activity (Nord 1997), and post-colonialist translation theories deal with ideol-
ogy, race, gender, power, and other issues with heavy political colorings.
 Gengshen: 'Translator-centredness ' 109

Table 1:
Translator Studies based on views of translators

Attitude to
Main Translation Theory Main trend
translators
Metaphorical Mainly linguistics-based theo- Overlooking translators'
imaging ries subjectivity
Downloaded by [Nipissing University] at 18:10 09 October 2014

General Mainly hermeneutics-based Recognizing translators'

appeal theories choice
Mainly theories of deconstruc-
Subjective Highlighting translators'
tion influenced by post-
involvement choices
colonialism thinking

In the US, Douglas Robinson published The Translator's Turn (1991).

Readers would believe that, given the title, the book would discuss the role of
translators, but in the foreword and acknowledgements, they are informed
that the title can be interpreted in many ways: (1) 'Language Turn' which
translators make from a source language to the target language; (2) 'Textual
Transformation'- the variety of creative turns translators take with regard to
the source text and target-language recipients; (3) 'Theorist's Turn' - the
translators' right to disregard exclusive rules and restrictions; and (4) 'Car
Driving', etc. (Robinson 1991: x-xvi, 261) The dominant role, central status,
and personal interpretation of the translator is not in focus.
In China, the translators' role has also been discussed in the past decades.
For example, Yang Wuneng points out that "[i]n the entire creative activity of
literary translation, the translator doubtlessly stands at the center, and plays a
most active role in the process" (Yang 1987: 3). And Xie Tianzhen states that
"[t]he creativity of literary translation shows a kind of translator's subjective
efforts to be close to and represent the source texts through his/her artistic
creation. The translator's subjectivity stands throughout the whole process of
translation" (Xie 1999: 137).
Going over these American and Chinese publications, we find that "few
systematic studies have been reported yet" (Mu 2003: 16). Some discussions
only briefly touch the topic, and most studies are confined to single perspec-
tive (e.g. a hermeneutic approach) or one single aspect (e.g. the status of lit-
erary translation).
Anthony Pym has commented that "very few historians put translators in
the focus of concern. Even if those who put forward 'cultural turn' like André
 110 2004. Perspectives: Studies in Translatology. Volume 12:2

Lefevere and Susan Bassnett, they only 'put it forward', but do not explain it
in a detailed way, nor point out the general causes behind translators" ( Pym
1998 as quoted by Kefei 2002: 31. "There are only impressionistic descrip-
tions of translators' strategies and transfer mechanisms but no theoretical re-
finery as yet" (Li 2001: 10).
Although American and Chinese thinking has emphasised translators' sub-
jectivity, 'power', and interpretation, there have not been any improvements
in translators' social status in the images of translation, within the field of
translation, and in society as a whole.
Downloaded by [Nipissing University] at 18:10 09 October 2014

Small wonder that there is dissatisfaction and criticism of current transla-

tion theories which fail to discuss the role and function of translators in
depth.
It could be argued that one reason why there is no adequate theory for the
translator's role in translation studies is that, in many parts of the world, there
are not enough studies of actual practice in translating and that Cay Dollerup
is right in stating that 'Translation Studies tends to generalise from far too lit-
tle material, and it does not really matter whether the approach is philologi-
cal, contrastive, or receptor-oriented; it does not even matter whether the
studies are confined to one work, one genre, or one language pair ... Transla-
tion Studies is in need of rethinking." (1999: 324)
It seems to me that, in general and not least in those parts of the world
where there is at present little empirical work, there should be more system-
atic research on translators' activities in order that we have more tangible
evidence of how translators work — notably outside Europe where little re-
search of this type appears to have been conducted — since this would raise
the status of translation in their own societies.

Discussion
I shall elaborate on this:
Virtually all Translation Studies scholars agree about the central role of
the translator, e.g. "Since the translator himself is the focal element in trans-
lating ... his role is central to the basic principles and procedures of translat-
ing". ( Nida 1964: 145) 'The translator, as the expert communicator, is 'at the
crucial center of a long chain of communication from original initiator to ul-
timate receiver of a message: a human link across a cultural frontier'"
(Schaffner and Kelly-Holmes 1995: 6).
My brief analysis highlights that translators may well be viewed from such
angles as 'metaphorical imaging' and 'general appeal, and 'subjective in-
volvement'. Nevertheless, such labelling may not further our understanding
 Gengshen: 'Translator-centredness' 111

of what actually goes in the world of translation and it does not improve the
status of translators. I am firmly convinced that theory is much better served
by being based on concrete, empirical, and perhaps even experimental evi-
dence. This is the point of this article, and if my examples are scarce and my
suggestions tentative, this is because a) there is relatively little research, and
b) that little empirical work is conducted outside Europe. Therefore, the arti-
cle also becomes an exhortation to focus more on the 'realities' of translation
work.
In the same fashion that Translator Studies can be viewed from different
Downloaded by [Nipissing University] at 18:10 09 October 2014

angles, translators' status and role can be seen from different perspectives.

The sequence of 'source text - translator - target text'

In terms of 'geographical location', translators are central in the chain of
translational communication in that they are readers, mediators, decision-
makers, adapters, and senders. There is no denying that a host of other per-
sons are also frequently involved in the production of a translation. Today
they are publishers, publishers' scouts, authors' agents, in-house editors who
revise translations before publication, commentators, and so on. These per-
sons, however, do not directly participate in the process of translating, al-
though they may influence the final product in terms of liberties allowed or
constraints imposed. Accordingly the role of the translators in translation is
unique. The importance of 'extra-translationaP factors can be illustrated by
reference to the successful Chinese translation of Buddhist Scripture which
lasted more than one thousand years from An Shigao (priait?!) in the 2nd
year of the Jianhe in the East Han Dynasty (A.D. 148) to the compilation of
the Han-Tibetan cross-reference book entitled Zhi-Yuan-Lu ( M j s i t ) com-
pleted in the 24th year of the Yuan-Zhi-Yuan in the Yuan Dynasty
(A.D.1287) (Chen 1992: 14, 78; Lin 1997: 1134, 1136). Some factors con-
tributing to the success were favourable working conditions, work ethics de-
manding that participants should not seek profit and fame, that translation
work was carefully assigned and closely coordinated, and that all transla-
tional products were checked, revised, polished, and proof-read. (Wang 1997:
4; Jin 2001: 36)

The author, the source text, and the translator

It has long been recognised that it is a fallacy to believe that the author's
intention is always clear and it has also been argued that once it is embedded
in a text, the author is, at least in the eyes of deconstructionist theorists,
"dead" (Barthes 1973).
 112 2004. Perspectives: Studies in Translatology. Volume 12: 2

Faced with a book for translation, a translator will be both a reader and a
writer, the former in terms of comprehending the source text and the latter in
composing the target text. Mildred L. Larson has expressed this somewhat
prescriptively in terms that are often echoed by practicing translators: "The
translator should read the source text several times asking himself, 'What was
the intent of the author as he wrote this particular text? What information
does he want to communicate, what mood, and what response did he expect
from the reader?' The goal of the translator is to communicate to the receptor
audience the same information and the same mood as was conveyed by the
Downloaded by [Nipissing University] at 18:10 09 October 2014

original document to the original audience" (Larson 1984:421).

A translator commissioned with a translation will read the book with the
task of translating in mind which, as the German author Günter Grass astutely
observes, means that "[translators are the keenest of readers. They discover
all the author's tricks, notice when he cheats and are aware of his absurdi-
ties". ( Grass 1984: 19 as quoted by Schaffner and Kelly-Holmes 1995: 7)
It is, indeed, possible to look further into the process of translating. One
obvious method which has been widely discussed, particularly in Germany
since the middle of the 1980, is Think-Aloud Protocols which, questionable
as the results may seem to some, at least focus interest on what translators are
able to tell about their work and the decisions they make. (e.g. Krings 1986;
and Honig 1995) There are other approaches, such as the Translog system
developed by e.g. Lykke Jacobsen (see Alves 2003) which measures intervals
and pauses in translators' typing and hence indicates what problems they en-
counter in their work.
Some work on Think-Aloud Protocols has been conducted in China by
Zhang Jian (2004) which shows that the method has a potential for yielding
interesting results if used with professional translators and advanced trainee
translators.

Differences in translations of the same author or work

Comparative studies of texts between the same language pair are also wor-
thy of investigation. In China, Tan Zaixi (2002) described an investigation of
Chinese translations of literary works into other languages in the past decades
and found the following three categories:

(1) Different translators have produced different translations of the same

original work (This is what happens most frequently the case);
 Gengshen: 'Translator-centredness' 113

(2) One and the same translator has translated different books by the
same author; and

(3) Translators have revised their own previous translation.

The importance of the translator is best illustrated when different transla-

tors have produced different translations of the same original because these
'different translated versions' are the outcome of the work and personality of
the translators and not due to the influence of e.g., publishers, readers, finan-
Downloaded by [Nipissing University] at 18:10 09 October 2014

cial considerations, etc. It is 'different' translators who produce 'different'

translated texts. The role of the translators is thus reflected in the resulting
translations although the translations in this study are both into and out of the
translators' mother tongue.
Results in other countries — mostly in Germany, UK, and Scandinvia - and
with other language pairs and other methods show and describe that translator
leave their own characteristic imprint on translations. It has been shown in
the syntax and style between English and Swedish with two contemporary
translators translating into Swedish by means of a careful linguistic analysis
(Gullin 1998); Mona Baker has shown similar differences between two trans-
lators working into English by a computational analysis (Baker 2001); Far-
zaneh Farahzad (2003) has demonstrated how translators are affected by their
ideological convictions in translations from English into Farsi; Cay Dollerup
and Maria Gran (2003) discuss how one and the same Danish translator of
cartoons targeted the text of American cartoons in different phrasings to-
wards children; Katrine Brensted and Cay Dollerup (2004) illustrate how
translators of the British Harry Potter books into five European languages
have dealt with the names of the characters in highly individual ways; and in
a longitudinal study spanning thousands of Danish translations of German
tales over a 170-year-period, it is concluded that "[t]ranslators leave their im-
print in the linguistic layer and in individual interpretations." (Dollerup 1999:
236) But it is also added that "although specific translations are individual
acts with individual imprints, all translations make their impact socially, and
contribute to national, indeed sometimes even directly to the international
cultural contexts." (317)
In my view these findings in China and in Europe vividly illustrate that the
translators' 'individual imprints' are worth intensive study by means of em-
pirical studies and Descriptive Translation Studies.
 114 2004. Perspectives: Studies in Translatology. Volume 12:2

Other perspectives
In addition to the areas discussed above, translators and their activities
might also be described from other perspectives such as 'translation criteria',
'cultural variety', 'translation history', and other themes in Translation Stud-
ies. Concrete and empirical studies in all languages can shed further light on
them.

Translator-centeredness
Peter Newmark asserts that "[translation theory is concerned with choices
Downloaded by [Nipissing University] at 18:10 09 October 2014

and decisions, not with the mechanisms of either the source language text...
or the target language text" (Newmark 1982: 19). And Andrew Chesterman
points out that "[t]ranslation is increasingly seen as a process, a form of hu-
man behaviour. A theory, therefore, should seek to establish the laws of this
behaviour". (Chesterman 1993: 2).
From the perspective of translators' behaviour, it is easily seen that adapta-
tion and selection are translation phenomena, and that translators adapt and
select in translating. I have focused on translators' adaptation and selection in
the process of translating. From this angle, translation can be seen as the
'eco-environment of translating'. This term refers to the worlds of the source
and target text and language. It comprises linguistic, communicative, cultural
and social aspects of translating, as well as the author, clients, and readers.
When we introduce the Darwinian principle of Natural Selection, the process
of translating can be described as the translator's adaptation to fit the specific
translational eco-environment and the translator's decisions about the degree
of the adaptation and the selection of the final target text. (Hu 2002; 2003;
2004)
This description positions the translator in a definition of translation. The
translation process is a cyclic alteration of the translator's selective adapta-
tion and adaptive selection. (Hu 2002: 98; 2003: 183-192)
We can then consider the process of translation from the perspective of
translator-centredness which serves as a theoretical core for the central role of
the translator in translating and is illustrated in Figure 1 (shown on top of the
next page).
The translator dominates the figure. Under 'translator', we find the se-
quential chain of translational communication: 'author', 'source text', 'adap-
tive and selective transfer', 'target text', 'readers...', constituting a process of
translating. In this process, 'adaptive and selective transfer' is the key link in
the translator's adaptation and decision-making. The word 'readers' is fol-
lowed by dots, implying that other agents and factors, such as publishers,
 Gengshen: 'Translator-centredness ' 115

Figure 1
An illustration of the translator's role in translating

Translator
Downloaded by [Nipissing University] at 18:10 09 October 2014

uthoi|->|source text)->|adaptive and selective transfeif>|target texq->|readers

K>
| Language] [communication! < > |culture| < > |society...|

financial support, and evaluators, are also involved. 'Language, communica-

tion, culture, society...' in the lowest frame indicate angles from which the
adaptive and selective transfer can be carried out. Other factors such as es-
thetical, philosophical, and humanistic considerations are part of 'society'
and should not be overlooked. In translation, all these factors form an inter-
locked entirety dominated by the translator.

Concluding remarks
This article has explored some current Translation Theories and finds that
they do not take into account the central role of the translator in tratnslation.
Therefore it argues that there is a need for such a concept as 'translator-
centredness'. Such translator-centredness
can be used as a guiding principle in cultures in which translators' activities
and role in cultural and national life is held in little esteem, both for empirical
and concrete Translator Studies as well as for theoretical thinking. This will
help legitimise the central role of translators in translation. It will also serve
to justify translators' creativity and authority in translation processes involv-
 116 2004. Perspectives: Studies in Translatology. Volume 12: 2

ing literature. When we accept their role as facilitators of the adaptation of a

text to its eco-environment of translating, this will balance the two poles of
'source-text centredness' and 'target-text centredness'. In many countries in
the world, placing the translator in the centre offers a new dimension to
Translation Studies as an academic discipline.

Works cited
Alves, Fabio (ed.). 2003. Triangulating Translation: Perspectives in process-oriented
research. Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins.
Downloaded by [Nipissing University] at 18:10 09 October 2014

Baker, M. Towards a Methodology for Investigating the Style of a Literary Translator.

Target 12. 242-266.
Barthes, R. 1973. The Death of the Author. Translated by S. Heath. Image, Magic,
Text. New York: Hill & Wang.
Bassnett, S. 1994. The Visible Translator. In Other Words 4. 11-15.
Bremsted, Katrine & Cay Dollerup. 2004. The names in 'Harry Potter'. Perspectives:
Studies in Translatology 12. 56-72.
Chau, S. S. C. 1984. Hermeneutics and the translator: The ontological dimension of
translating. Multilingua 2-3. 71-77.
Chen, F. K. 1992. On the History of Chinese Translation Theories. Shanghai: Shang-
hai Foreign Languages Education Press.
Chesterman, A. 1993. From 'Is' to 'Ought': Laws, Norms and Strategies in Transla-
tion Studies. Target 5. 1-20.
Chesterman, A. 1997. Memes of Translation: The Spread of Ideas in Translation The-
ory. Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins.
Dollerup, C. 1999. Tales and Translation: From Pan-Germanic narratives to shared
international fairytales. Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins.
Dollerup, C. & M. Gran. 2003. 'Loss' and 'gain' in comics. Perspectives: Studies in
Translatology 11. 197-216.
Farahzad, Farzaneh. 2003. Manipulation in Translation. Perspectives: Studies in
Translatology 11. 269-281.
Grass, G. 1984. A Tribunal of Translators. Translation 2.19.
Gullin, Christina. 1998. Översättarens röst. En Studie i den skönlitteräre översœtter-
ens roll [The translator's voice. A study of the role of the translator of fic-
tion. English summary pp. 261-2661. Lund: Lund University Press.
Hatim, B. & I. Mason. 1990. Discourse and the Translator. London & New York:
Longman.
Hatim, B. & Mason. 1997. The Translator as Communicator. London & New York:
Routledge.
Hu G. S. 2002. Translation Theory: Developments, Dissatisfactions and an Explora-
tion. Translation Quarterly 25. 80-104.
Hu G. S. 2003. Translation as Adaptation and Selection. Perspectives: Studies in
Translatology 11. 183-192.
Hu G. S. 2004. An Approach to Translation as Adaptation and Selection. Wuhan: Hu-
bei Education Press.
Honig, Hans. 1995. Konstruktives Übersetzen. Tübingen: Stauffenburg.
Jin M. 2001. On Translator's Subjectivity in the Process of Translating. Foreign Lan-
guages and Their Teaching 8. 34-37.
Ke F. 2002. Person-orientated Translation History Studies. Chinese Translators'
Journal 3. 31-32.
Krings, Hans P. 1986. Was in den Köpfen von Übersetzern vorgeht: Eine empirische
Untersuchung zur Struktur des Übersetzungsprozesses an fortgeschrittenen
Französischternern. Tübingen: Narr.
 Gengshen: 'Translator-centredness' 117

Larson, M. L. 1984. Meaning-based translation: A guide to cross-language equiva-

lence. Lanham, MD: University of America.
Li Y. X. 2001. Introduction to Textual Translation. Beijing: China Translation and
Publishing Corporation.
Lin H. T. et al. (eds.) 1997. A Companion for Chinese Translators. Wuhan: Hubei
Education Press.
Mu, L. 2003. The 'Discovery' and Study on Translation Subjectivity. Chinese Trans-
lators' Journal 1. 12-18.
Nida, E. 1964. Toward a Science of Translating. Leiden: E. J. Brill.
Nida, E. 1993. Language, Culture, and Translating. Shanghai: Shanghai Foreign
Language Education Press.
Neubert, A. 1995. Textlinguistics. In: Chan, S. W. & D. E. Pollard (eds.). An Ency-
Downloaded by [Nipissing University] at 18:10 09 October 2014

clopedia of Translation: Chinese-English and English-Chinese. Hong Kong:

The Chinese University Press. 1016-1028.
Newmark, P. 1982. Approaches to Translation. Oxford: Pergamon.
Nord, C. 1997. Translating as a Purposeful Activity: Functionalist Approaches Ex-
plained. Manchester: St. Jerome.
Pym, A. 1998. Method in Translation History. Manchester: St. Jerome.
Robinson, D. 1991. The Translator's Turn. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University
Press.
Schaffner, C. & H. Kelly-Holmes 1995. Cultural Functions of Translation. Clevedon:
Multilingual Matters.
Snell-Homby, M. 1988. Translation Studies: An Integrated Approach. Amsterdam:
John Benjamins.
Sorvali, I. 1996. Translation Studies in a New Perspective. Frankfurt am Main: Peter
Lang.
Tan Z. X. 2002. Three Relationships between Text and Translation. Foreign Langua-
ges and Their Teaching 7. 3-10.
Toury, G. 1980. In Search of A Theory of Translation. Tel Aviv: The Porter Institute
for Poetics and Semiotics, Tel Aviv University.
Venuti, L. 1992. Rethinking Translation: Discourse, Subjectivity, Ideology. London:
Routledge.
Vermeer, J. 1989. Skopos and Commission in Translational Action. Translated by A.
Chesterman. In: Chesterman, A. (ed.). Readings in Translation Theory. Fin-
land: Oyfinn Lectura.
Wang K. F. 1997. On Translation Culture. Shanghai: Shanghai Foreign Languages
Education Press.
Xie, T. Z. 1999. On Literary Translation Studies. Shanghai Foreign Languages Edu-
cation Press.
Yang N. W. 1987. A Loop of Interpretation, Reception, and Creation: with Reference
to Literary Translation. Chinese Translators' Journal 6. 3-6.
Zhang J. 2004. Inyestigating Translation Strategies and Units in the Translation Proc-
ess: A Think-aloud Protocol Study. [Unpublished MA Thesis of Tsinghua
University, Beijing, 2004.]