從歷史事件看英語(yǔ)典故的文化內(nèi)涵與翻譯及從女王口音變化看英國(guó)社會(huì)階層的變遷

OnCultureConnotationsandTranslationofEnglishAllusionsfromthePerspectiveofHistoricEventsAbstract:Allusionsareessentialelementsinliteraturelanguage.Englishallusionshaverichsourcesinhistory.Todayeverysideofsociallifebecomesaconstantproviderofallusions.Asfarasculturalglobalizationisconcerned,theintegrationanddiversityofculturemakeapossiblecoexistenceofdifferentcultures.Translationbecomesameansofculturalspreadingandilluminating,whichleadstothetendencyofforeignizationintranslatingEnglishallusions.Inthispaper,thetranslationofEnglishallusionsisgoingtobediscussedmainlyfromtheperspectiveofhistoriceventsbymeansofforeignizationwithinterpretativecompensationinordertodealwithcross-culturecommunicationinanappropriatewayandunderstandculturalconnotationsofEnglishallusionsproperlyandfinallyreconstructtheminthetargetlanguage.KeyWords:Englishallusions;connotation;culturalturn;foreignization;historicevents從歷史事件看英語(yǔ)典故的文化內(nèi)涵與翻譯摘要：典故是文學(xué)語(yǔ)言中不可或缺的元素，英語(yǔ)典故歷史悠久,來(lái)源廣泛，新的典故隨著社會(huì)文化生活的發(fā)展還在不斷出現(xiàn)。在全球化的大背景下，文化趨同成為不可避免的趨勢(shì)，翻譯實(shí)際上已經(jīng)成了一種傳播和文化闡釋，這就使英語(yǔ)典故的翻譯傾向了異化。本文以典故的歷史事件翻譯為例說(shuō)明譯者需借助異化加注釋補(bǔ)償才能正確理解典故的文化內(nèi)涵，更好地進(jìn)行跨文化交流，并對(duì)其進(jìn)行源語(yǔ)文化重構(gòu)。關(guān)鍵詞：典故；文化內(nèi)涵；文化轉(zhuǎn)向；異化翻譯；歷史事件CONTENTSIntroduction 11.TranslationStudiesinChinaandAbroad 21.1CulturalTurninTranslationStudies 21.2DomesticationandForeignization 21.3TranslationStudiesinChina 42.CultureConnotationsofEnglishAllusions 52.1TheDefinitionofEnglishAllusionsandSomeCommonTypes 52.1.1TheDefinitionofEnglishAllusions 52.1.2SomeCommonTypesofAllusions 52.2HistoricEventsinEnglishAllusions 62.2.1TheDefinitionofHistoricEvents 62.2.2FormsofMetaphor 72.2.3NationalFeatures 83.MethodsandSkillsofAllusions’Translation 83.1ForeignizingStrategies 93.1.1LiteralTranslationwithRetainingtheFigure 93.1.2ParaphrasewithRetainingtheFigure 103.1.3AnnotationwithRetainingtheFigure 113.2DomesticatingStrategies 123.2.1FreetranslationwithChangingtheFigure 123.2.2FreeTranslationwithRemovingtheFigure 134.Conclusion 15Bibliography 17Introduction21stcenturyisaglobalizingcentury.Undoubtedly,globalizationisacommonphenomenonwithinthefieldofeconomyandfinancefirst,butnowculturescholarshaverealizedthateconomicglobalizationisboundtobringdifferentculturesintoglobalization.Inthecaseofculturalglobalization,theintegrationanddiversityofculturemakeapossiblecoexistenceofdifferentcultures.Sinceworldculturalstructureisnowtakingonacomplexandvaryingphase,translation,asanessentialmeansofinterculturalcommunication,isnotonlyalanguagerendering,butfurthermoreaculturalconstructingmeansthathasstrongersocialcompetenceinculture.Also,translatorsarerequiredtobeconsciousofcross-culturalcommunication.Tofullyrealizeitsrealfunction,translationmustbecarriedonculturalturnbybringingintoculturalcontext.ThefamousAmericanSinologistProfessorJohnDeeney,oncesuggestedthateverylanguageacquireditslifeandnutritionfromculture,soweneednotonlypayattentiontohowtotranslatealanguageintoanotherbutalsohavetostriveforconveyingthecustomofthinkingpatternsandexpressingemotionsbetweentwocultures(BiculturalismandTranslation).WangZuoliangpointsoutthatthemostdifficultyinthetranslationprocessisthedisposalofdistinctionsoftwocultures,whichissimilartotheopinionheldbytheoutstandingAmericantranslationtheoreticianEugeneA.Nida.Hebelievesthattranslationisthecommunicationbetweentwocultures.Foragenuinesuccessfultranslator,tobefamiliarwithtwoculturesismoreimportantthantomastertwolanguages,becausewordsaremeaninglessunlessputinanappropriateculturalbackground.Inordertodealwithcross-culturecommunication,weshouldunderstandculturalconnotationsofEnglishallusionsproperlyandthenreconstructthem.Inthispaper,thetranslationofEnglishAllusionsisgoingtobediscussedmainlyinrelationtohistoricevents.1.TranslationStudiesinChinaandAbroad1.1CulturalTurninTranslationStudiesUptillnowthetermTranslationStudieshasbeencoinedformorethan30years.Twomeaningfulturns--theculturalturninTranslationStudiesandthetranslationturninCulturalStudieshavebeenmergedintowesterntranslationfields.TheInternationalTranslationSeminar,convenedintheUniversityofWarwick(England,1989),markedaturningfromtranslationstudiesintoculturalstudies.In1990,SusanBassnettandAndreLefevereformallyposedtranslationturnforthefirsttimeasadirectionoftranslationstudiesintheirworkTranslation,HistoryandCulture.Scholarswhohadbeendealingwithtranslationstudiesatthattimeweredeeplyenlightenedandinspired.Itwasthebeginningofabreakthroughintranslationstudies.Andfinallyanewschoolappearedinthefieldoftranslationstudies--CulturalSchool.Later,SusanBassnettandAndreLefeverepublishedanotherbookConstructingCulture--EssaysonLiteraryTranslation.Theypointedouttranslationstudieswereactuallycross-culturalstudies.Moreover,Bassnettcomparedeachlanguagetotheheartofaculturalorganism.Theintimaterelationbetweentranslationandculturewasdeterminedbytherelationbetweenlanguageandculture.Shemaintainedthattranslationshouldnotbedealtwithseparatelywithinlanguagecontentandculture,justliketheheartcouldnotbeisolatedfromotherpartsofthebodyduringheartsurgery.(BassnettandLefevere2001)1.2DomesticationandForeignizationHowever,translatingwiththepurposeofcross-culturalcommunicationinvolvesmoreintwoculturesthanintwolanguages.Diversitiesindifferentculturesmakeitdifficulttoreconstructthesourcecultureintranslation.Schleiermach,aGermantheologistandphilosopherinthelate18thcentury,deliveredathesisin1813,inwhichheputgreatemphasisontherelationshipbetweentranslationandunderstanding.Hebelievedthatthereweretwosituationsoftranslation.Onewastogetthereaderclosetotheauthor,andtheother,onthecontrary,wastopushtheauthorclosetothereader.Intheformercase,thereaderisclosetotheauthor'scontext,sothatheorsheisabletotastethetoneandmoodofforeigncountries.Accordingtotheabovetwosituations,Schleiermacherposedauthor-centeredtranslationandreader-centeredtranslation,whichmadeabreakthroughtotheboundaryoftraditionalliteraltranslationandfreetranslation.Schleiermacher'stheoryinfluencescomingscholarsgreatly.LawrenceVenuti,whoisProfessorofEnglishatTempleUniversity,isoneofthem.Helocatesalternativetranslationtheoriesandpracticeswhichmakeitpossibletocounterthestrategyoffluencyaimingatcommunicatinglinguisticandculturaldifferencesinsteadofremovingthem.Venutifirstposedthetheoryofdomesticationandforeignizationin1995,whichwasobviouslyenlightenedbySchleiermacher.HecommentedinhisbookTheTranslator'sInvisibilityEugeneA.Nidaadvocates"functionalequivalence"(or"dynamicequivalence"),heoncesaidthattherewillbeatypeoflossofsemanticcontentinmanytranslations,buttheprocessshouldbedesignedsoastokeepthistoaminimum.Nidaalsoholdsthepointthattranslatorsareusedtotakingparticulardelightinbeingabletoreproducestylisticspecialtiesintranslation.However,thefocusintranslationhasshiftedfromtheoldformofthemessagetotheresponseofthereceptor(TheTheoryandPracticeofTranslation).(Nida1969).InApproachestoTranslation,Newmarkwrote:Incommunicativeasinsemantictranslation,providedthatequivalenteffectissecured,theliteralword-to-wordtranslationisnotonlythebest,itistheonlyvalidmethodoftranslation.Thisissoabsolutethatonlywhenitcomestocertainsituationscanitbeeffective.(Newmark2001)Foreignizationisasourcecultureorientedtranslationstrategy,whichhasitsownadvantagesinregardtotranslationessence,translationpurposeandthedemandofreaders.Sinceforeignizationmakesitpossibletokeeptheabundanceofculture,respectthedifferencesofculture,protectanddevelopvariousethniccultures,itbecomesanirresistibletrendoftranslationintheculturalglobalizationcontext.CulturaldifferencesdemandforeignizationofEnglishallusionintranslationtheory,becausetherearedifferencestovaryingextentamongculturesofworldwidenationswhichcausedthedifferencesofethno-specifiedmeaning.Thereis,ofcourse,limitationtotheapplicationofforeignization.Translatorswhoapplyforeignizationarenotabletoexceedneithertheordinarylimitationofthetargetlanguageculture,northeboundaryofreaders’cognition.IfforeignizingcouldnotconveytheoriginalthoughtsofEnglishallusions,theChinesemannerofwritingcanbetakenintoconsideration,whichmeanstodomesticatetheoriginaltosomeextent.Forinstance,theallusion“totakeFrenchleave”referstoacustominthe18thcenturyinFrancethattheattendingguestsleftabanquetwithoutnoticingthehost.Atranslationof“法國(guó)式離開”tothatallusionwouldbesoconfusing.WhileacorrespondingmetaphoricmeaningcanbefoundinChinese,itissuggestedtotranslate“totakeFrenchleave”into“不辭而別”.1.3TranslationStudiesinChinaLookingthroughthehistoryofChinesetranslation,therewerefourphasesofsignificantinfluence.ThelatestonewastheliterarytranslationfromtheestablishmentofThePeople'sRepublicofChinatoCultureRevolution.Artisticandcreativetranslationwastheleadingtheoryofforeignliterarytranslationatthattime,“spiritualresemblance”raisedbyFuLeiandPrincipleof“Transmigration”raisedbyQianZhongshuwerehonoredasstandards.Duringthatperiod,translationservedasaculturalstrategyforideology,therefore,domesticationbecametheleadingstrategythen.AsfarasSunZhiliisconcerned,thefirsthundredyearsofforeignliterarytranslationinChinabasicallygavefirstplacetodomestication,exceptforthedecadeaftertheMay4thMovement.InSun’sworkLiteraryTranslationofChina–ATrendfromDomesticationtoForeignization,hearguedthatforeignizationwouldtakethefirstplaceinliteraltranslationinthe21stcenturyandexpresstheforeignnessofthesourcelanguagetothelargestextent.AccordingtoSunZhili,duringtheperiodofthereformandopening-uptothemiddleofthiscentury,therewouldhavebeenanotherpeakinliteraltranslation.Andforeignization,withdomesticationdemotedasitssupplement,wouldbecomedominant.(SunZhili2002)Inrecentyears,socialenvironmentandpoliticalcivilizationhavebeenimprovedgreatlyinChina,readers’growingeagertoknownewlanguageformsandstrongculturalatmospherecouldnotbecontentedbydomestication.Thus,inthefieldofTranslationStudies,largequantitiesofnewtheoriesandmethodshavebeenintroducedintoChina,includingviewsandmeansofculturalstudies.Scholarsstarttoposequestionsonliteralinterpretationoftraditionaltranslation,consideringthattranslationisnotamererenderingbetweentwolanguages.Theremustbeabrandnewandoverallcomprehensionofthetermtranslation:graduallyexpandingfrommerelyliteraltranslationtothetranslationofconnotation(renderinginformanddynamicinterpretationinconnotation).Translationisaculturalproblemitselfespeciallywhenconcernedwithinteractivitybetweentwocultures.2.CultureConnotationsofEnglishAllusions2.1TheDefinitionofEnglishAllusionsandSomeCommonTypes2.1.1TheDefinitionofEnglishAllusionsLanguageisthekeystoneofculture.Withoutlanguage,culturewouldnotbepossible.Atthesametimelanguagereflectsculture;differentcultureshavedifferentconnotations.TherearealotofallusionsintheEnglishlanguage.InEnglishthewordallusionmeans“animpliedorindirectreference,especially,whenusedinliterature.”(Webster’sNewCollegiateDictionary)Thosewordsrefertosomeparticularpeopleorstoriesthatpeoplequotedwhentheyaretalkingorwriting,allofwhicharefrommythology,fairytales,legend,allegory,folkcustoms,religious,masterpiecesandsociallives,etc.Theyuseallusionstomergetheirnarrationamorevividone.Acceptedthroughcommonpracticeallusionshaverichnationalcolors,andcovercharacteristicsofprofoundconnotationandextension.2.1.2SomeCommonTypesofAllusionsAccordingtothedefinition,allusionscanbedividedintoseveralcommontypesbelow:Historicevents,legendandmythology,allegory,folkcustoms,proverbs,namesofanimalsandplants,namesofpeopleandplaces,militaryterms,andthegraduallyinfluencingpop-cultureetc.However,theyareusuallydifficulttotranslateappropriatelyandideallymainlybecauseoftheculturaldifferencesbetweenEnglishandChinese.Englishallusionscontainwealthyculturalinformation,plentyofculturalcharactersandbackgroundsofrichsourcesandculturalconnotations.TheoriginoftheEnglishallusionscanbetracedbacktoancientGreekandRomancivilization.GreekandRomanmythologyprovidedEnglishwithrichsourcesofallusions.TheBibleisanotherimportantsourceofallusions.Folkstories,talesandlegendshavefurtherenrichedEnglishallusions.TodayeverysideofsociallifebecomesaconstantproviderofallusionsintheEnglishlanguage.Onlythroughtracingbacktheirsources,canwehaveadeepunderstandingoftheirdistinctivenationalcharacterandtranslatethemintoChineseproperly.2.2HistoricEventsinEnglishAllusions2.2.1TheDefinitionofHistoricEventsNumerouseventstookplaceinhistory.Lateron,theaftergenerationsusuallytoldthecontentofthosehistoriceventsinsimpleexpressions,whichslowlybecameonetypeoftheallusionsbycontinuoususage.Example1:CharlesManson,acultleader,leda“family”ofdriftersandhippiesinacommunityoutsideLosAngeleswheretheypracticedfreelove,drugexperimentationandheldpseudo-religiousriteswithMansonasthecentralfigure.OnthenightofAugust9,1969,MansonsentfourmembersofhisculttotheBeverlyHillshomeofdirectorRomanPolanski,andbrutallymurderedhispregnantwifeSharonTate(anactress)andotherfourpeople.What’smore,theyevencruellyusedthevictims’bloodtoscrawlmessagessuchas“Pig”and“War”onthewalls.Twonightslater,Manson’sfollowerswenttoanotherhomeandkilledtwopeople.Fortunately,allthekillersincludingMansonwerecaughtinOctoberof1969andsentencedtodeath.TheSupremeCourtoutlawedthedeathpenaltyandgavethemlifesentencesinstead.Fromtimetotimeheisinterviewedforprimetimenewsprograms.MansonclaimedthathehadbeeninfluencedbytheBeatle’s1968song“HelterSkelter”.In2005,afilmnamedCharlesMansonwascreated.NowMansonissynonymouswithpsychoticcrime.2.2.2FormsofMetaphorAllallusionshavetheirmetaphoricmeaningstoevoketheassociationandextendthesemanticthroughvariousvehicles.MetaphorsofHistoriceventsaregenerallyformedbypeople(forinstance,CharlesManson:psychoticcrime);time(911:terrorismattack);event(meetone’sWaterloo:adecisivedefeat)orthesiteswheretheytookplace(Dunkirk:adifficultsituation).Example2:Take“BayofPigs”forinstance,itisthesiteoftheinvasionofCubabyanti-CastroCubanexileslivingintheUnitedStatesofAmericaonApril25,1961.ThiscounterrevolutionaryattemptedbyPresidentJohnF.Kennedy,waseasilyrepulsedbytheCubanmilitary,partlybecauseKennedyfailedtogiveairsupportaspromisedtotherebels.Themetaphorof“BayofPigs”istheplacetheeventhappened.Itisnowusedasanexampleofanembarrassing,ill-conceivedmilitaryventureorfiasco.Example3:AnotherexampleisD-day,whosemetaphoristhedateoftheevent.InJune6,1944,theAlliedinvasionofEuropelandedontheNormandybeaches,openingthelong-awaitedSecondFrontinWorldWarⅡ.D-daynowgenerallyrefersto“thedayoflaunchinganewenterprise.”Forexample:AsD-dayapproacheswestillweren’treadyformovinghouse.(日子快到了，我們還沒準(zhǔn)備好搬家。)Inthissentence,D-daysimplyreferstoabigday.Sometimes,thereareallusionsthathavecorrespondencesinChineseinformsofmetaphor,vehiclesandmetaphoricmeanings.Example4: “burnone’sboat”and“破釜沉舟”.However,thiskindoffullcorrespondingallusionsisaminority,mostallusionsarefundamentallycorrespondingorpartly.Somearenotcorrespondingatallbecauseofthedifferenthistoricalsourcesandaliennationalfeatures.2.2.3NationalFeaturesOntheviewofcommunicatingeffect,communicationisbestoptimizedonlywhentransmitterandreceiversharethesameknowledgeandculturalbackgrounds.Languageitselfisnotonlyanimportantcomponentofculturebutalsothecarrierofculture.Everylanguageisaproductofculturaldevelopmentofacountryornation,whichhasalonghistoricalbackgroundandrichculturalconnotations.Eachcountryornationownsitsuniquedevelopinghistory,socialsystems,religiousbeliefs,folkcustomsetc.,allofwhichaccumulatedandconcentratedonadeeplayeroflanguageculture.Toreflecttheseconceptionsandthings,therearecertainvocabularylikeidiomsandallusionsthatarecalledculturally-loadedwords.Theculturalmessagestheycarryoftenreflectanation’sculturaltraditionandtheirmentalitythataccumulatedalongtimeago.Thus,theimpliedinformationofculturally-loadedwordsisknownasaculturaldefaultforforeignreaders.InLuYing’sessayOnOptimizingForeignization,shediscussesthemeritsandlimitationsofforeignizationincross-culturaltranslationandbelievesthatsimpleforeignizationwithoutfigurationcouldnoteasilysolvetheproblemofculturedefault.Moreover,shemaintainsthatdomesticatingstrategyismoredesirableinlanguageaspectandforeignizingstrategyintheculturalaspect.Allusionsarejustliketheepitomeofnationalcultures.Thusnationalfeaturesareclearlyembodiedinusageofallusions’vehiclesandformsofmetaphor.Theprincipleofallusions’translationistoreappearthenationalfeaturesoftheEnglishlanguageand,atthesametime,beapttobeunderstoodandacceptedbyChinesereaders.Specificmethodsandskillsofallusions’translationwillbediscussedinChapter3.3.MethodsandSkillsofAllusions’TranslationTherearesimilaritiesandsamenessofallusionsbetweenEnglishandChineseintheaspectssuchasorigins,formsofconstruction,andmetaphors.TheEnglishandChineselanguagescarrytheirowndistinctnationalfeaturesduetotheirvastdifferencesinthedevelopmentofhistory,eco-environment,religiousbeliefs,nationalcustomsetc.Themetaphoricimagesusedinallusionsareutterlydifferent,whichembodynationalculturaldifferences.Mostallusionsusewordswithrichcharacteristicfigures.Thetranslationprocessissuggestedtotaketwopairsofcontradictions,vehicleimagesconcurrentlywithlanguageexpressions,intoaccount.Therefore,ingeneral,thekeytoasuccessfultranslationofallusionistodealwiththecontradictionofimageandlanguage.Domesticationorforeignizationisdeterminedtobeadoptedbytheaimoftranslation.IfatranslatorintendstointroducetheEnglishlanguageculturetoChinesereaderssothattheycanabsorbthequintessenceofforeignliterature,andputnewliteraryformsorexpressingwaysintoChinese,foreignizationisobviouslyabetterchoiceseenfromtheaspectofreconstructingtheEnglishlanguageculture.Therearesomemethodsandskillsoftranslatingallusionsintroducedasfollows,allofwhicharebasedonhistoriceventsofallusions.3.1ForeignizingStrategies3.1.1LiteralTranslationwithRetainingtheFigureLiteraltranslationisbeneficialtoretainthefigureandnationalfeatureoftheEnglishlanguage.SomeEnglishallusionsarespreadingsofarandwideintheworldrangethattheybecomehouseholdwords.Actually,manycultural-loadedwordshavebeenextensivelyusedinChinesethroughliteraltranslationalltheseyears,permeatedandmixedintoChineseculture.Example5:Meetone’sWaterloo:InBelgiuminJune18,1815,theBritishandPrussians,ledbyArthurWellesleywhowaslatertobenamed“DukeofWellington”,defeatedtheFrenchunderNapoleonBonaparte.Napoleonabdicatedasemperorafewdaysafterthisfinaldefeat,andafewweekslaterhewascapturedandsentintoexile.Lateron,themeaningofthisallusionisbroadenedtoreferto“toencounterone’sultimateobstacleandtobedefeatedbyit”.Meetone’sWaterlooisfrequentlyusedinsportscirclesnowadays.EveninaChinesesportsnews,thereportermightuse“滑鐵盧”,thegenerallyacknowledgedtransliterationof“Waterloo”,totellthedecisivedefeatofateamorsomebody,especiallyinvolvedwithEuropeansoccermatches.Forinstance:Afterwinningfivegamesinasuccession,RealMadridmetitsWaterloo.連勝五場(chǎng)比賽后，皇家馬德里慘遭滑鐵盧，一敗涂地。(Paraphrase)AimingatretainingthedistinctfiguresinallusionsandwritingstyleoftheEnglishlanguage,literaltranslationexpressesnotonlytheliteralmeaningbutalsotheimpliedmeaning.Thisallusionisfrequentlyusedinsportscirclesnowadays.EveninaChinesesportsnews,thereportermightuse滑鐵盧,thegenerallyacknowledgedtransliterationof“Waterloo”,totellthedecisivedefeatofateamorsomebody,especiallyinvolvedwithEuropeansoccermatches.Also,thetransliterationofWaterloois滑鐵盧,thecharacter滑hasanimpliedmeaningofslippingup,indicatingthemeaningofadecisivedefeatinthisallusion.Sointhissentence,paraphrasing“metitsWaterloo”to“慘遭滑鐵盧，一敗涂地”isnotnecessary,aliteraltranslationasfollowsisenough:連勝五場(chǎng)比賽后，皇家馬德里慘遭滑鐵盧。(Literaltranslation)3.1.2ParaphrasewithRetainingtheFigureParaphraseisonekindofdescriptivetranslation.Tobeviewedfromthepracticalsenseoflanguagetransformation,paraphrasedoesnotonlyclarifylanguageandliterature,itisalsocapableof“reborn”.Paraphrasedoesnotexplaintheoriginaltextwordbyword,butratherbeameanstoexplaindirectlytoChinesereadersthemeaningoftheoriginaltextundercontext.KeeptheallusionsoftheEnglishlanguage,andaddsomeparaphrasticwordswhentranslating.ThefigureofEnglishisretainedinthisway,whiletheoriginalintentionisconveyedcompletelyandtranslators’freedominexpressingisassuredbetter.Chinesereaderscaneasilyunderstandtheconnotationofallusion.Also,figuresofspeechintranslatingareefficientlyincreasedtosomeextent.Example6:TaketheWatergateScandal,forexample.WatergateScandalisapoliticalscandal(1972-74)oftheNixonAdministration.ItwasnamedafterthebuildinginWashington,D.C.thathousedtheDemocrats Forexample: ThisistotallyaChineseWatergate. 這完全是中國(guó)的水門事件。(Literaltranslation)MostpeopleintheworldhavelearntabouttheWatergateScandal,butaliteraltranslationmightconfusesomeChinesereaderswhohaven’tlearntworldhistoryorjustdonotcareaboutpolitics.Sinceannotationseemsunnecessaryinthissentence,andthereisn’tacorrespondingmetaphorinChinesetotheallusion,wecanparaphraseitandadditsmetaphoricmeaning“politicalscandal”intothesentence:這一政治丑聞簡(jiǎn)直是中國(guó)版的水門事件。(Paraphrase)3.1.3AnnotationwithRetainingtheFigureRetainingthefigureoftheEnglishlanguageintranslatingseemstobeeasy.Butduetoculturaldifferences,someconnotationsofallusionareratherdifficulttobeunderstoodbyChinesereaders,especiallythosecontainingahistoriceventthatisunknownorunfamiliartoforeigners.AnthonyAppiah,fromtheAfrican-cultureResearchCenterofHarvardUniversity,usedtosuggestfromtheaspectofpoliticalculturethatalltheculturalinformationimpliedinsourcelanguageshouldbeexplainedwithannotationortermtablesduringtranslation.Example7:TheChappaquiddickincidentisacaseinpoint.