近年来翻译研究中的重要话题，如文化翻译、后殖民、女性主义、意识形 态、翻译的主体性和主体间性等，或多或少都与译者身份及其认同的问题有着 直接或间接的关联。身份的概念在翻译研究中虽被一再提及，却仍缺乏清晰的界定，有待深入探讨。 通过借鉴并整合社会心理学有关身份理论的假设和分析，本文在梳理评论相关研究成果的基础上对译者身份进行动态分析，由此提出译者身份的三种类型，即角色身份、群体身份和个人身份。本文首先从社会角色入手探讨译者的 角色身份和角色期待与阐释，以及翻译角色间的互动对话等相关问题，提出翻译主体间的角色互动以内部多重对话为主要形式，译者则通过角色扮演达成内部对话。随后，本文以性别身份为例探讨译者的群体身份，运用身份选择理论讨论在女性主义、性别与翻译结合的过程中出现的译者性别身份的不同表现形式，并特别考察了译者在翻译活动中的性别表演行为。再者，本文从译者主体创造性的角度出发讨论译者个人身份，以从事翻译活动的作家为例，系统阐述 了译者在再创作中表现出的与原作者之间创作与模仿的杂合冲突。随后，本文的重点转移至考察译者文化认同与民族国家的集体身份在翻译中的重新建构之间的关系，通过案例分析阐释译者在译文中表现出提升自我文化身份的倾向， 说明集体身份的改写与译者的个体认同的密切关系。此外，译者身份的社会期待与个体内化、身份杂合、多重身份的承诺和选择、身份表演、角色对话等一 系列相关问题本文亦有所涉及。 除了借鉴和改造社会心理学的身份理论并应用于翻译研究，本文还进行了大量的实证研究，包括D.H.Lawrence 的《狐》的三个中文译本的平行对比，美籍华裔作家谭恩美的《沉没之鱼》的中文译写现象和文本分析，《无题的风景》英译的译者注释分析，以及互联网自发翻译现象分析等，不仅作为对本文所提论点的有力支撑，同时还有助于扩展、深化和强化相关的理论话语。

1895－1911 年这一时期，是中国翻译史上第三次翻译高潮。现有的中国翻译史研究成果，由于受到各自的研究对象以及研究者自身的局限，均未能对这一断代史进行充分的研究。本文采取文化研究的视角，尝试建立一个新的理论模式――翻译社会学模式，即考察翻译场域中，翻译这一话语生产活动，如何在受到意识形态制约的 同时，通过不同途径（其中特别是通过主体性）获得各种资本，尤其是符号象征资本，对现有意识形态（尤其是主流意识形态）产生作用。在此基础上，对这一时期的文学翻译，特别是小说的翻译，加以研究。 本文认为：翻译这一社会行为，不仅是语言之间而是处在特定的历史语境之中的转换活动，因而势必会受到当时意识形态的制约；同时，翻译作为一种话语生产活动，亦会因此生产新的意识形态话语。由此，翻译与意识形态之间存在着一种互动关系。 本文采取纵横相结合的方法：首先从纵的即历史的跨度，考察这一时期翻译行为所处的社会文化语境，从文化史与思想史的高度，概述这一时期的翻译史特征，史论结合，以史为辅，以论为主。其次，截取其中某个时间横断面，对这一时期具有代表性的论者与译者，进行深入的个案分析（包括梁启超、林 纾、苏曼殊、周氏兄弟），希冀通过以点带面的方式，微观（文本分析）与宏观（文化研究）相结合，以微见著，从微观中看出宏观来，同时又能高屋建瓴， 从宏观解释微观，总结该时期的翻译活动的特征与规律。

翻译行为一直伴随人类活动。翻译理论却往往是“一堆意见”。翻译操控论正是这样一个值得争论的命题。 本文以翻译研究的语言学转向、文化转向和史学转向为背景，以赫曼斯的翻译操控论为理论架构，研究翻译过程中的意识形态作用，以便于理解翻译过程中的译者主体作用或操控行为。 本文拾起严复和鲁迅的老话题，是希望每次阅读都创造出不同于以往的历史主义的关怀和方法，以便在现在和历史的对话中加深对过去的理解，从中演绎出新意，进而服务于将来。在翻译实践中，严复和鲁迅实施两种截然 不同的翻译操控。本文通过具体的文本比对和译界传统的追溯研究，解读多元因素作用下的翻译实践，回答了前人(例如梁实秋)尚未解决的鲁迅硬译的缘由，贯穿了翻译的操控历史和历史在操控中进化的主题，同时也疏理了操控阵营的理论要点。赫曼斯所代表的操控学派缘起于具有激进倾向的因素作用研究，同时又强调中立描述的稳健立场。这为该派开展翻译规范研究和尝试普遍适用的理论假设提供了转机。鉴于意识形态缺乏恒定值，造成特殊性的普遍存在和普遍性的假想性质，操控学派中的因素论锐气渐弱，规范研究却力度渐强。籍此，本文在以下几个方面做了积极的论证。一、意识形态有若干特征，其关键特征是一时之态。理解意识形态的这种动态变化有利于减少意识形态的一时失态，促进意识形态的相互宽容和相互借鉴。二、本文将翻译操控论施诸严复和鲁迅的个案，界定了“信、达、雅”的“游移性、不确 定性、隐喻性、延异性”，从而揭示了“信、达、雅”变量的可选性、指导翻译实践的方向性和译者自主把握尺度的灵活性。三、在翻译操控论形成之前就有翻译的操控实践。只是在翻译中，操控乏力有碍交流，操控过度就超出了翻译范畴，操控适当才能有利于思想交流。本文指出，译员不操控等于不作为，不利于文本的认知、解读和阐释。查翻译操控论的未来走向，规范研究将促使翻译操控论转变激进立场，或者至少可以由规范研究来把握操控的信度和效度。

在基督教群體中，《聖經》向來被視為上帝的話，享有絕對的權威。 翻譯《聖經》的工作皆以忠於原文為首要目標。不同語言的《聖經》譯 本的數量早已成為古今中外譯本之冠。近一百多年來，基督教中文《聖經》的翻譯工作持續不斷，新的譯本相繼問世。這些譯本都宣稱以忠於原文為翻譯目的、比舊的譯本更忠實可信。然而《聖經》的原文早已遺失，不同譯本依據的源文又各有不同，譯本宣稱忠於原文的各種說法，不免有名不符實之嫌；而所謂忠信，亦是一個非常複雜的變動而相對的概念。本文擬採用描述性翻譯研究的方法，借用安德烈•勒菲弗爾 (André Lefevere) 的理論，嘗試從意識形態、詩學、贊助人三方面，探討聲稱以忠信為翻譯目標的當代《聖經》中文譯本在翻譯過程中對原文的操縱情況，揭示《聖經》中文譯本名為忠信、實為操縱的翻譯現象。

20世纪80年代之前，西方(后)现代主义文学在中国一直受到排斥，在中国翻译文学多元系统中处于边缘的位置，在50-70年代更被视为"颓废文学"、 "反动文学"。70年代末，中国开始译介(后)现代主义文学，但引起了激烈的论争。译介者运用种种阐释和翻译策略，终于使(后)现代主义文学"合法地"进入中国文学系统，并从文学系统的边缘走向比较中心的位置。(后)现代主义文学的翻译影响了八九十年代中国文学的发展面貌。(后)现代主义文学在当代中国的文化际遇，非常生动地说明，文学翻译并不是简单的语言转换行为，而是译语文化多元系统对外国文学的文化操纵和利用。 本文采取史论结合的方式，以埃文─佐哈尔(Itamar Even-Zohar)的多元系统论作为基本理论框架，以勒菲弗尔(André Lefevere)等人的理论作为探讨具体翻译现象的理论视点，在当代中国文化多元系统动态演进的时空中，分析意识形态、诗学、文学体制与文学翻译选择规范的形成和嬗变的关系，由此阐释(后)现代主义文学在中国50-70年代被边缘化，在80年代被中心化的意识形态和诗学原因。本文还从翻译文学经典形成的角度，考察(后)现代主义翻译文学经典对80年代中国文学创作以及意识形态和诗学的影响。最后，作者根据本文研究，对系统理论进行了反思，并对如何拓展翻译文学史研究空间，提出了个人的观点。

過去三十年，西方在女性主義思潮的帶動下，掀起了對語言性別主義的批判，同一時期，翻譯學朝文化研究的方向發展，使性別、語言與翻譯成為了互相影響、經常互相指涉的研究領域。本文採用描述性的研究進路，探討自由主義女性主義者所倡導的內包語言在基督教中文聖經譯本中的使用情況。 八十年代中，內包語言被引進到英文聖經翻譯，掀起了連串的討論。本文會在西方（尤其美國）學者的研究基礎上，從女性主義切入，釐清內包語言在聖經翻譯的語境中的本質，以及衍生出來的概念，然後將聖經主要的中文譯本 界分為傳統版本和內包版本。最後借用安德烈‧勒菲弗爾（André Lefevere）的理論，分析贊助者的意識形態如何支配中文聖經的內包版本。

The topic of my thesis is Arthur Waley and his translation of the Shijing, or The Book of Songs (1937), as Waley entitled it. The Book of Songs is especially noted for its philological ingenuity, anthropological insight and poetic appeal; during my preliminary research I discovered that there exists an interesting interplay between these three aspects of this translation. In this thesis, I hope to examine the textual and thematic hermeneutics of The Book of Songs. Waley did not read the Shijing as a scriptural text inscribed with sagely intention and authority; rather, he returned it to its folkloric origin, presenting the Shijing as an anthropological document of the lives of ancient Chinese people, an imaginative expression of the desires, beliefs and values of a primitive society, and a vivid mimesis of ancient life. Waley’s philological decisions were underpinned by this general interpretive orientation, informed by his understanding of the anthropological significance of the Shijing and guided by an attentive concern for poetic cohesion. The anthropological and poetic aspects were mutually implicated. The Book of Songs displays a keen interest in the common people, and Waley’s knowledge and insight in comparative anthropology enabled the Western reader to hear in this exotic text distant echoes from their own traditions. These anthropological underpinnings help to articulate and enrich the poetics of The Book of Songs. Waley’s overall design and the poetic language he employed bring forth these anthropological aspects in a poetic manner. The “folk” elements in the Shijing were foregrounded in The Book of Songs and deemed to be aesthetically interesting. The style and voice that Waley developed in his translation communicate the naive appeal of a folk aesthetic, and convey the compositional features and modes of experience of the “primitive” imagination. In Waley’s translation, the remote, difficult text of the Shijing is transformed into natural, evocative English poetry, and the philological, anthropological and poetic aspects of The Book of Songs coalesce into a Chinese aesthetic that is fresh and spontaneous, enjoying a pristine intimacy with Nature.

The debate over the translatability of poetry has been a long-standing issue for decades. Relatively few discussions, however, have focused on the concrete reasons of poetry being translatable (or untranslatable). Moving beyond traditional ways of elucidating the matter through theoretical argument, this study aims to investigate the question of poetry translation in a more solid, empirical manner by looking into linguistic and language-based aesthetic differences between Chinese and English, in particular their prosodic features and capacities. Part One seeks to answer the question “Why does poetry get lost in translation?” from a linguistic and language-based aesthetic perspective, using the English translations of Wen Yiduo’s 聞一多 (1899-1946) poems as a case study. This thesis, however, does not simply further expound the position that “poetry is untranslatable”. Rather, based on the discussion in Part One, Part Two attempts to show that neither the translator nor his/her translation needs to “get lost”, even though something always “gets lost” in the process. The rhetorical question “Why get lost in translation?” will lead to illustrations that translation strategies are more an active choice of translators than a mere passive reaction to obstacles encountered. The thesis points out that while present discussions of untranslatability seem to focus largely on fidelity to the source text, it may be the target text that matters more, as the target language literally sets a limit to what translation can achieve (and thus determines the degree of translatability of a text). Hence, while poetry translation may be more difficult than other types of translation, its nature is not categorically different from others, for all translations are constrained by the target language in the first place. Besides, translation needs to be viewed in terms of the purpose of cultural transmission — from the perspective of the target readers and culture. One may thus conclude that poetry, like anything else, is translatable, although the degree of difficulty might differ. Regardless of one’s theoretical perspective, issues of textual translation are language-based. Before one discusses issues of poetry translation, one must first understand issues of language, poetic language and poetics (including prosody). These are all what the present thesis aims at exploring. By re-evaluating the relationship between the source and target texts and discussing the factors (both linguistic and extra-linguistic) affecting translation, this study attempts to shed more light on poetry translation, and literary translation in general.

The purpose of this thesis is to explore the role of the translator and translation in the Nobel Prize in Literature through an illustration of the case of Howard Goldblatt’s translations of Mo Yan’s works. As the most significant international literary prize, the Nobel Prize in Literature is well discussed in media. However, insufficiently detailed attention has been given to the role of translation in the Prize. In many cases, the works that the Nobel judges evaluate are in fact translations, not the prize winner’s own words. Despite the importance of translation in the selection process, no research has ever examined the role played by translation or the translator in an author’s win of the Nobel Prize. The thesis will trace the history of the Nobel Prize in Literature with regard to translation, showing the growing importance of this linguistic act since the start of the prize. This thesis aims to show that a good translator was one of the most important factors behind Mo Yan’s win of the Nobel Prize in 2012. Without his excellent translators, including American translator Howard Goldblatt, Mo Yan may never have been able to present his works to the Western world, not to mention win the Nobel Prize and enjoy worldwide appreciation. A thorough analysis of this case will reveal the translator’s influence as well as how translation may affect the decision of who receives the Nobel Prize. Furthermore, examining the relationship between translation and the Nobel Prize in Literature can shed light on the role of translation in cultural exchange and world literature. With imbalanced cultural exchange between the West and the East, the role of Goldblatt is worth researching, as he successfully introduced Chinese literature to the world and served as a mediator linking up the two cultures. The research will be conducted using a descriptive approach by information gathering, statistical analysis and text comparison. By comparing the source text and translation of Mo Yan’s works from ideological and literary perspectives, the thesis will explain how Goldblatt’s translations might have affected the Nobel Prize panel’s impression of Mo Yan’s works, based on the criteria for the choice. Paratextual influences will also be analysed, such as the literary reputation of the translator. With the illustration of the case of Mo Yan, this research hopes to open up a new perspective on the studies of the Nobel Prize as well as translation.

The active scholarly contribution made by practitioners of theatre translation in the past decades has turned the research area into what is now considered a burgeoning field. Despite recent developments, it seems that performability, a long-discussed yet controversial concept in the study of theatre translation, would remain part of the practitioners’ discourse. Based on a historical survey of the production and reception of the translations of Anglo-American plays by Chinese actor-director Ying Ruocheng (1929-2003) in and around the 1980s, this study explores how the performability, or theatrical potential, of a translated playtext is constructed through the negotiation between/among the norms mainly operating on three levels—the textual, the theatrical and the socio-cultural—and the agency of the individuals involved. This thesis chooses to focus on Ying because he not only was one of the most successful theatre translators in contemporary Mainland China, but also seems to be an “impossible” ideal, considering his accomplishments in translating, acting, directing and as culture diplomat. Acknowledging that performability, which is essentially fluid and constructed, this descriptive-analytical survey will cover a whole range of possible activities involved in the production and reception of a translated playtext, and put the translator’s seemingly ideal status into perspective. The broadening of the scope of investigation is crucial to the outcome of this thesis, and recommendable to future researchers of theatre translation studies. In this study, translated playtexts and their stage productions are treated as the products of the receiving linguistic, theatrical and socio-cultural systems. The investigation begins with an evaluation of Ying’s practice against his stated translation principles to identify the textual and extra-textual factors that might have governed his work as a translator in reality. The discussion emphasises that performability cannot be realised through the textual medium only, before moving on to the exploration of the performers’ attempts to negotiate with his texts for theatrical enactment. The investigation, which examines the actions taken by the theatrical institution and individual actors in two separate chapters, draws attention to the roles of the translational, theatrical and socio-cultural norms and the power dynamics between the translator and his theatrical collaborators in their efforts to ‘ensure’ or create performability. The discussion is followed by an analysis concentrating on Ying’s role as a mediator within the production process and between the productions and the target environment, which is crucial to the achievement of both the immediate success of the productions and the transfer of repertoire. The study concludes that while a theatre translator and his or her theatrical collaborators are subject to various systemic constraints, the translator can find more power in his or her mediatory role as a bilingualist and biculturalist and promote the performability of the text.