论文部分内容阅读
Chapter three is on missed connections： transporting French feminism to Anglo-America， which is an important part of the book. At the beginning of this chapter， the author puts forward two questions： “ How did French feminism take hold in America？” “Why and how did the threesome of Cixous， Irigaray and Kristeva come to represent the vanguard of feminist thinking？” During an approximately twenty-year period from the mid-1970s onward， an immense wave of intellectual enthusiasm arose in response to the thought of the women who became known as the French feminists. “French connections” opened Anglo-American feminism. Later， after lots of collision and integration， French feminism gradually took root in America. What’s more， the special conditions of intellectual debate in America， the academic seclusion and the relative isolation of ideas， and perhaps also the liberal ethos of pluralism contributed to creating a special home for deconstruction.
Then the author asks a question “Is phallogocentrique the translation of ‘male chauvinist pig’？” In this part， the author uses the above example to talk about the difference between American and French feminism.
In the following， the author talks about “In parallel： Derrideanism in America”. In this part， the author makes comparison between Cixous and Derrideanism in Anglo-America because Derrida had an early and major influence on Cixous’ writing.
Then the author talks about “Productive betrayals：Hélène Cixous”. The author gives a specific account of Hélène Cixous. At first， “Le Rire de la Méduse” is immensely influential in altering the course of language-centered theoretical debates in Anglo-American feminist circles， so this essay “represents” the writing of Cixous， and by extension， French feminism. Secondly， the work of Hélène Cixous is particularly complex in that it expresses concepts which are recognizably “theoretical” in poetic language. Thirdly， Hélène Cixous urges men to relinquish the attempt to master language and to embrace， instead， the plurality of languages Fourthly， Cixous’ translation strategy is consistent and coherent.
Later the author refers to some translation techniques—accretion and footnoting. There are many wordplays in Cixous’ writing and it is very difficult for Cixous’s translators to translate these wordlplays. Different translators have different ways to deal with it.
From this chapter， we know that French feminism borrows ideas from Derrida’s deconstruction theory and attributes women problems to language. The purpose of feminism translation is to make women appear in language， make language speak for women， and extend women speaking right. Feminism translation strategies advocate rewriting and call for intervention which is based on feminist values. One of the translation strategies is footnoting which feminists always use to introduce the original writing’s background and major ideas and to explain her own translation strategies and purposes. Feminist translation theorists put forward the concept of “feminist translator”， which acknowledges different comprehension and explanation caused by different gender. That means they emphasizes the effect of the translator. In the process of translation practices， many feminists boldly use new word、wordplays and so on to beyond the success of male dominated language and to create new space for female say. This not only enriches the original texts’ connotation， improves the translator’s subjectivity， but also affirms translators’ creativity in the process of translation.
So we can conclude that feminism theorists like Hélène Cixous， Luce Irigaray and Julia Kristeva make efforts to eliminate discriminations against women in translation theory and practice. What’s more， they redefine the relationship between the original text and the translation to make them enjoy equal status. In other words， feminist translators alter the traditional standard of translation， turning the loyalty theory of translation into the standard of feminist demands. Translators should not take the original or the reader as the leader， but should express the same feminist emotions.
References：
[1]Flotow，Luise von.2004 Translation and Gender：translating in the “Era of the Feminism”[M].上海：上海外语教育出版社.
[2]Simon Sherry Gender in Translation：Culture Identity and the Politics of Translation.London：Routledge，1996
[3]谭载喜.西方翻译简史[M].北京：商务书馆，1991.
[4]徐来.在女性的名义下“重写”[J].中国翻译，2004，（4）.
[5]张景华.女性主义对传统译论的颠覆及其局限[J].中国翻译，2004，（4）.
Then the author asks a question “Is phallogocentrique the translation of ‘male chauvinist pig’？” In this part， the author uses the above example to talk about the difference between American and French feminism.
In the following， the author talks about “In parallel： Derrideanism in America”. In this part， the author makes comparison between Cixous and Derrideanism in Anglo-America because Derrida had an early and major influence on Cixous’ writing.
Then the author talks about “Productive betrayals：Hélène Cixous”. The author gives a specific account of Hélène Cixous. At first， “Le Rire de la Méduse” is immensely influential in altering the course of language-centered theoretical debates in Anglo-American feminist circles， so this essay “represents” the writing of Cixous， and by extension， French feminism. Secondly， the work of Hélène Cixous is particularly complex in that it expresses concepts which are recognizably “theoretical” in poetic language. Thirdly， Hélène Cixous urges men to relinquish the attempt to master language and to embrace， instead， the plurality of languages Fourthly， Cixous’ translation strategy is consistent and coherent.
Later the author refers to some translation techniques—accretion and footnoting. There are many wordplays in Cixous’ writing and it is very difficult for Cixous’s translators to translate these wordlplays. Different translators have different ways to deal with it.
From this chapter， we know that French feminism borrows ideas from Derrida’s deconstruction theory and attributes women problems to language. The purpose of feminism translation is to make women appear in language， make language speak for women， and extend women speaking right. Feminism translation strategies advocate rewriting and call for intervention which is based on feminist values. One of the translation strategies is footnoting which feminists always use to introduce the original writing’s background and major ideas and to explain her own translation strategies and purposes. Feminist translation theorists put forward the concept of “feminist translator”， which acknowledges different comprehension and explanation caused by different gender. That means they emphasizes the effect of the translator. In the process of translation practices， many feminists boldly use new word、wordplays and so on to beyond the success of male dominated language and to create new space for female say. This not only enriches the original texts’ connotation， improves the translator’s subjectivity， but also affirms translators’ creativity in the process of translation.
So we can conclude that feminism theorists like Hélène Cixous， Luce Irigaray and Julia Kristeva make efforts to eliminate discriminations against women in translation theory and practice. What’s more， they redefine the relationship between the original text and the translation to make them enjoy equal status. In other words， feminist translators alter the traditional standard of translation， turning the loyalty theory of translation into the standard of feminist demands. Translators should not take the original or the reader as the leader， but should express the same feminist emotions.
References：
[1]Flotow，Luise von.2004 Translation and Gender：translating in the “Era of the Feminism”[M].上海：上海外语教育出版社.
[2]Simon Sherry Gender in Translation：Culture Identity and the Politics of Translation.London：Routledge，1996
[3]谭载喜.西方翻译简史[M].北京：商务书馆，1991.
[4]徐来.在女性的名义下“重写”[J].中国翻译，2004，（4）.
[5]张景华.女性主义对传统译论的颠覆及其局限[J].中国翻译，2004，（4）.