Perspectives

Evolving Dialogues between Western and Chinese Translation Theories

From Cicero and Horace’s early distinctions between literal and free translation, through the linguistic turn in the 20^th century, and finally to the recent progress of diverse schools, Western translation theories have evolved through a variety of paradigms and continually adapted to shifting linguistic and cultural priorities. For example, Eugene Nida’s linguistic approach emphasized dynamic equivalence as a bridge for cross-cultural communication (1964); Holmes’ tripartite classification of translation studies into descriptive, theoretical, and applied branches laid the foundation for systematic inquiry (1988); Vermeer’s Skopos theory introduced a purpose-driven approach to translation strategy (1989); the cultural turn led by Susan Bassnett and André Lefevere shifted the focus of translation studies to sociocultural dimensions (1990). These paradigms have served as catalysts for rich theoretical innovation, deeply influencing both academic research and professional practices in the field of translation.

Meanwhile, Chinese translation theories have likewise experienced profound developments, which was shaped by three major waves of translation activities. The first wave emerged during the Han and Tang dynasties. Most translators were monks who sought to promote the transmission of Buddhist scripture with the need to adapt the texts to Chinese cultural norms. The second wave gained momentum as a result of the growing interest in Western science and technology during the Ming and Qing dynasties. Motivated by practical concerns for national governance and social advancement, translators introduced a substantial body of scientific literature, contributing to the refinement of translation strategies that would later influence modern Chinese translation theories. The third wave began in the late 19th and early 20th centuries, as Chinese intellectuals grappled with the challenges of modernization and global engagement while striving to preserve their cultural heritage. This period reflected an ongoing dialogue between preserving cultural identity and embracing international perspectives. Throughout these waves, Chinese translation theories had consistently offered a perspective distinct yet complementary to Western models.

Driven by forces of globalization, “Western translation theories, from Nida’s initial linguistic approaches to the cultural turns of the late twentieth century, rapidly spread to other parts of the world, including China, albeit to various degrees” (Valdeón & Zhao, 2020: 648). The dialogue between Western and Chinese translation theories is more critical than ever. Localization in the Chinese context thus emerges as a site of theoretical innovation, offering alternative perspectives and enriching the discipline. For example, Wang Kefei’s tripartite categorization of translation studies (1997), Huang Zhonglian’s concept of variation translation tailored for specific audiences (1999), Xu Jun’s exploration of translation culture in a globalized world (2002), Hu Gengshen’s eco-translatology (2004), Zhou Lingshun’s translator behavior criticism (2013), as well as newly-emerging schools like transknowletology—all these are products of such dialogues. These examples highlight how Western paradigms have inspired Chinese theoretical innovations and enriched global discourse on translation studies.

Despite these developments, the dialogue between Western and Chinese translation theories has not been without challenges. Western paradigms may encounter limitations in Chinese contexts, where local traditions and socio-political realities demand re-contextualization. This also reveals the limitations of universalist frameworks and underscores the need for context-sensitive theoretical reinterpretations. This challenge is compounded by structural inequalities inherent in global academic publishing. As Pym (2010) observed, the dominance of English as the lingua franca marginalizes non-Western contributions, limiting their visibility and impact. Despite the growing recognition of Chinese scholars like the aforementioned, Chinese perspectives remain underrepresented in the global translation studies discourse, perpetuating a Eurocentric bias.

The dialogue between Western and Chinese translation theories highlights a both dynamic and complex relationship, one that has become increasingly multifaceted in the digital age. Advances in technology, including generative AI, machine translation, audiovisual translation, and software localization have reshaped the landscape of translation studies and raised new theoretical questions. At the same time, cognitive translation studies have gained prominence, providing valuable insights into the mental processes underlying both translation and interpreting. These developments necessitate a reexamination of established paradigms, particularly in terms of their applicability to both global and local contexts.

The evolving dialogues thus hold profound academic value between Western and Chinese translation theories. Translation has evolved into a global cross-linguistic practice in the contemporary era (Liu, 2019), and such interaction not only bridges theoretical gaps, but fosters a more inclusive and diversified global research agenda. By transcending localized applicability, this dialogue fosters the development of universally adaptable models that resonate across cultures, which enables innovative solutions to complex translation challenges, such as cultural mediation and ideological representation. Ultimately, this initiative seeks to advance both the theoretical sophistication and practical relevance of translation studies in a rapidly transforming world.

Against this background, this special issue aims to critically examine the dual and evolving dialogues between Western and Chinese translation theories. It seeks to explore the opportunities and limitations inherent in global circulation of Western theories, while highlighting Chinese contributions that challenge dominant paradigms. We welcome submissions addressing, but not limited to, the following themes:

• Analyses of specific texts, genres, or projects that embody the interaction between Western and Chinese translation theoriesComparative analyses of how translation theories address Chinese and global audiences
• Comparative analyses of how translation theories address Chinese and global audiences
• Comparative studies of the application of cognitive translation frameworks (e.g., working memory, decision-making processes, or problem-solving mechanisms) in Western and Chinese translation contexts
• Connections between translation studies and cultural studies, media studies, digital humanities, or sociolinguistics
• Tensions between universalist principles and culturally specific translation practices
• The dissemination and reception of Western translation theories in Chinese contexts, and vice versa
• The influence of global political, economic, and cultural shifts on the evolution of Chinese translation theories
• The integration of Chinese knowledge systems and cultural traditions into global translation discourses
• The reshaping of traditional translation theory by AI and digital tools in the context of multimodal and multimedia content

References

Bassnett, S. & Lefevere, A. (1990): Translation, history and culture. London & New York: Printer.

Holmes, J. S. (1988): “The Name and Nature of Translation Studies”, J. S. Holmes. Translated Papers on Literary Translation and Translation Studies. Amsterdam: Rodopi, 66-79.

Huang, Z. L. (1999): “On adaptation translation (translation variants)”. Journal of Foreign Languages, (3), 80-83.

Hu, G. S. (2004): Theory of Translation Adaptation and Selection. Wuhan: Hubei Education Press.

Liu, M. Q. (2019): Comparative Study of Chinese and Western Translation Theories. Beijing: China Translation and Publishing Corporation.

Nida, E. (1964): Toward a Science of Translating. Leiden: E. J. Brill.

Pym, A. (2010): Exploring Translation Theories. London: Routledge.

Valdeón, R. A, & Y. B, Zhao. (2020): “Literary translation research in China”. Perspectives, 28: 5, 645-658.

Wang, K. F. (1997): “On the classification of translation studies”. Chinese Translators Journal, (1), 11-13.

Xu, J. (2002): “Translation studies and the cultural perspective of translation”. Journal of Nanjing University (Philosophy, Humanities, and Social Sciences Edition), (3), 219-226.

Zhou, L. S. (2013): “Translation behavior and translator behavior in the criticism of translator behavior”. Foreign Language Research, (6), 72–76.