杜宇飛

【Abstract】Substitution is one of the major cohesive devices. Both English and Chinese use substitution. But due to the differences between the two languages， the translation methods adopted should vary according to the situation. This thesis aims to explore the different strategies that can be used in the translation of substitution from English to Chinese in different cases. A contrastive study between the two languages is crucial in this process.

【Key words】Substitution； cohesion； English-Chinese Translation

Introduction

Cohesive devices are very important in English texts. According to Halliday and Hasan （1976）， cohesion can be divided into two major categories： grammatical cohesion and lexical cohesion. Grammatical cohesion consists of reference， substitution， ellipsis， conjunction； and lexical cohesion refers to reiteration and collocation. This essay will only focus on the translation methods of substitution.

Substitution means “the replacement of one item by another” （Halliday and Hasan 1976：88）. The function of substitution is to make sentences succinct and clear. It is of great importance in the forming of both English and Chinese texts. What this paper does besides a summarization of the work done by former researchers is to extend the research of the translation of substitution， so that in case of a more complicated sentence structure， a more flexible strategy can be adopted. The aim is to achieve a natural translation， and broadening the ideas of translating substitutions.

Classification of Substitution and Normally Used Ways of Translating Them

As was mentioned above， the function of substitution is to avoid unnecessary repetition， thus making the sentence more succinct and concise. As one of the major cohesive device， it contributes to the binding of sentences and smoothness of the text.

Halliday and Hasan （1976） divided substitution into three groups： nominal， verbal and clausal.

Nominal substitution mostly involves the use of “one”， “ones” and “same” as substitution items. When used in substitution， they always function as the Head of a nominal group. In Chinese， there is no complete equivalent for the English substitution form “one”. Normally， this kind of substitution can be translated as “…的” or “…者”. For example：

ST： My axe is too blunt. I must get a sharper one. （Halliday and Hasan 1976）

TT： 我的斧子太鈍了。我得去買把鋒利的。

Here， “one” is translated as “鋒利的”. “鋒利的” is actually a use of ellipsis in Chinese. The full sentence should be “我得去買把鋒利的斧子?！?/p>

Here is another example where “one” can be translated as “…者”：

ST： The new books are quite useful， but the old ones are not totally useless as well.

TT： 新書十分有用，但是陳舊者也未必完全無用。

“者” here functions exactly as the “one” in the English text. But there is something to be noticed when translating substitution devices into “者”， that is， “者” indicates a classical style of writing.

In other cases， nominal substitution can be translated by using repetition in Chinese. This is because the Chinese language has a habit of using the same words to balance the sentence weight and to make the sentences more rhythmic. But English tends to avoid repetition as much as possible unless there is a special need， hence the use of substitution. For example：

ST： In a few moments a revolver was heard. They waited for a second one， but there was only silence.

TT：不一會兒，聽到一聲左輪槍響。他們等待第二聲槍響，但只有一片寂靜。

Here， “槍響” is mentioned again because of the rhyme of the sentence.

There is only one word for verbal substitution， which is “do”， including its morphological scatter “do”， “does”， “doing”， “did”， “done” and its inflection “do so”， etc. It is a substitution of a verb or a verbal phrase in the sentence. And since Chinese also have some verbs that share a similar function in the sentence， like “來”， “弄”， “搞”， “做”， etc.， this kind of substitution will mostly be translated to its Chinese counterpart. For example：

English： You are too busy to clean the room. Let me do it.

Chinese： 你太忙，沒有時(shí)間打掃房間。讓我來吧。（Chen and Li 2004： 67）

The “來” here can totally be substituted with another Chinese verb， like “弄” or “搞” or “做”， etc.

In other occasions， a method of repetition can also be used when translating verbal substitution， as in：

English： You think Joan already knows？ – I think everybody does. （Baker 2001：186）

Chinese： 你覺得瓊已經(jīng)知道了？——我覺得所有人都知道了。

Clausal substitution is another type of substitution in which the presupposed element is an entire clause. The most often used words are “so” and “not”. Corresponding to these， Chinese uses “（不）這樣”， “（不）這么”， “（不）是”， “不然”， and “要不”. So normally it is rather easy to find an exact equivalence in the Chinese language when translating this kind of substitution. For example：

English： Do you think he was too serious？ – Yes， I think so.

Chinese： 你看他是不是太認(rèn)真了？——不錯，我想是這樣的。（He 2002： 484）

Contrastive Studies of English and Chinese Language Structures Related to the Translation of Substitution

English as an orthographic language is very different from Chinese， whose characters are ideographic. Their difference in nature leads to their discrepancies in grammar and language structures.

Jiang Jiansong makes comparison between English and Chinese in six aspects： hypotaxis and parataxis， inanimate subject and animate subject， active and passive， stative and dynamic， contraction and extension， subject and topic. Among these， the most fundamental difference in English and Chinese grammar is that of hypotaxis and parataxis （Jiang 2002： 3）. That means the semantic meaning in English is largely embedded in its form， while that of the Chinese language is not. Another language feature of English is that its basic sentence structure is branching to the right， because it has plenty of morphological variations （Zhou 2003： 135）. And since Chinese has no morphological variations， it has to depend on semantic coherence and word order to arrange the sentence， so the branching pattern is comparatively flexible （ibid）. These two differences are both related to the translation of substitution.

As is suggested by many scholars， when translating English into Chinese， translators will normally break the grammatical structures of the original text， grasp the meaning only and then organize the meaning again in Chinese.

A Translation Comparison of a More Complicated Case

This sentence appears in a BBC cultural programme. The article is about the story of a lost paradise， Shangri-La.

English： The story of Shangri-La itself is a modern one， told by the English novelist James Hilton in his novel Lost Horizon （1933）. （Wood 2011）

The substitution element “one” here is hard to translate because of the descriptive element after the comma. It is a substitution of “story”. As was mentioned before， the basic sentence structure of English is branching to the right due to its strict form and grammar. But Chinese sentence structure is rather free， and a descriptive element like this does not exist in the Chinese language. So transferring meaning should be the priority in this task， while the form is comparatively less important. In this case， if the simple translation methods mentioned above would still be followed， a natural and fluent translation would not be achieved. An analysis of the sentence should be done here.

Overall this sentence has four layers of meaning that needs to be translated. The first meaning is： The story of Shangri-La itself is a modern one. The second meaning is： It is told by the English novelist James Hilton. The third meaning is： He told about it in his novel Lost Horizon. And the fourth meaning is： The novel is published in 1933. So if a translation can assemble these meanings together again in a natural Chinese language， it should be a good translation.

The following is the comparison of two different translations of this sentence.

Translation 1： 香格里拉是英國作家詹姆斯·希爾頓在他的小說《消失的地平線》（1933年出版）一書中所描繪的當(dāng)代人間天堂。

In this translation， the translator decides to move the descriptive element forward， and translate the substitution item “one” as “modern earthly paradise”. All the four meanings have been clearly stated in a fluent Chinese way. So this translation is rather good. The only problem is that the descriptive element is too long and creates foregrounding when read about it in Chinese. So it is a little unnatural.

Now lets take a look at the second translation.

Translation 2： 香格里拉是個現(xiàn)代故事，故事的作者是英國小說家詹姆斯·希爾頓。1933年他出版了一部小說《消失的地平線》，其中……

In this translation， the translator chopped the sentence into small segments which is totally different from the original sentence in form. The translator even breaks the boundaries of the sentence， and mixes the third and fourth meaning segments with the next sentence. So here for this translator， the translation unit has been broadening to a text level instead of a sentence level. This translation work reads more like an original Chinese talking， so it is more natural than the first one， and no foregrounding created either. The only loss is the form， which is not of great importance in the Chinese language.

Conclusion

Substitution is an important cohesive device both in English and in Chinese. But the uses of them are very different between the two languages. Normally the substitution item can be easily translated and an equivalent part is not very hard to find. However， sometimes when the sentence structure becomes more complicated， a flexible strategy should then be adopted. In whichever way， to achieve the transference of the meaning is the top priority of English-Chinese translation practice in most cases.

References：

[1]Baker，M.（2001）.In Other Words.1st edn.London：Routledge.

[2]Chen，H.and Li，Y.（ed.）（2004）A New Coursebook on Chinese-English Translation.Shanghai：Shanghai Foreign Language Education Press.

[3]Halliday，M.A.K.，Hasan，R.（1976）Cohesion in English.London：Longman.

[4]Jiang，J.（2002）Contrastive English-Chinese Studies and Chinese-English Translation.Changsha：Hunan Peoples Publishing House.

[5]Wood，M.（2011）Shangri- La[online]available from[1 December 2014].