A corpus-based study on imagery and symbolism in Goldblatt’s translation of Red Sorghum
Published online: 5 August 2019
https://doi.org/10.1075/babel.00099.che
https://doi.org/10.1075/babel.00099.che
Abstract
Research on Goldblatt’s translation of Red Sorghum has attracted more attention in recent years
after its author Mo Yan won the Nobel Prize for this work. This translation study has addressed the imagery and symbolism in this
classic Chinese work, an area that has yet to be investigated with the use of empirical data. The study employed the corpus-based
approach, and analysed the translation of images and symbols based on a parallel translation corpus of Chapters 1 and 2 found in
the text of Red Sorghum. Most important images and symbols are represented by 30 distinct nouns in the novel as
successfully translated into English as a result of the translator’s adoption of a literal translation strategy. A more focused
examination of a translation of the most prominent key word, sorghum, finds that the translator has faithfully adopted the imagery
and symbolism techniques in the source text whenever conveying the images and symbols of sorghum across cultures. Based on the
findings, this study argues that images and symbols in the source text may present themselves in the translation of novels if
translators adopt a source-oriented translation strategy. Our analyses of the translation of figures of speech, namely similes,
personifications and repetitions further highlight the importance of taking concert and literal translation strategies into the
realm of literary translation.
Keywords: cross-culture, imagery, symbolism, Goldblatt, Red Sorghum, figures of speech
Résumé
La recherche sur la traduction de Red Sorghum (Le Sorgho rouge en français) par Goldblatt a
attiré davantage l’attention ces dernières années après que l’auteur Mo Yan a remporté le prix Nobel pour ce roman. Cette étude de
traduction se penche sur l’imagerie et le symbolisme de cette œuvre classique chinoise, un domaine qui doit encore être étudié à
l’aide de données empiriques. L’étude utilise l’approche par corpus et, à partir d’un corpus de traduction parallèle des chapitres
1 et 2, analyse la traduction des images et symboles dans le texte de Red Sorghum. La plupart des images et
symboles importants sont représentés par 30 noms distincts dans le roman et ont été traduits avec succès en anglais grâce à
l’adoption par le traducteur d’une stratégie de traduction littérale. Un examen plus ciblé de la traduction du mot clé le plus
important – sorghum – révèle que le traducteur a fidèlement adopté les techniques d’imagerie et de symbolisme du texte source en
véhiculant les images et les symboles du sorgho à travers les cultures. En se basant sur les résultats, cette étude soutient que
les images et symboles dans le texte source peuvent apparaître dans la traduction de romans si les traducteurs adoptent une
stratégie de traduction orientée vers la source. Nos analyses de la traduction des figures de rhétorique, à savoir les
comparaisons, personnifications et répétitions, soulignent encore davantage l’importance d’intégrer des stratégies de traduction
littérale dans le domaine de la traduction littéraire.
Mots-clés : interculturalité, imagerie, symbolisme, Goldblatt, Red Sorghum, figures de rhétorique
Article outline
- 1.Introduction
- 2.Methodology
- 2.1Introduction to the novel and its translation
- 2.2Corpus construction
- 2.3Corpus access software
- 2.4Research procedure
- 3.Results and discussion
- 3.1Imagery and symbolism
- 3.2Simile
- 3.3Personification
- 3.4Repetition
- 4.Conclusion
References
References (45)
Agustia, Tri Sutrisna. 2012. “Three Approaches of Word Meaning of the Figurative Languages Translation”. AL-Ta Lim 19 (3): 237–244.
Arcos-Garcia, Francisco. 1996. “On Translating Figurative Language from English into Spanish: A Perceptual Problem”; Babel 42 (3): 158–165.
Baker, Mona. 1995. “Corpora in Translation Studies: An Overview and Some Suggestions for Future Research”. Target 7 (2): 223–243.
Biber, Douglas; Susan Conrad; and Randi Reppen. 1998. Corpus Linguistics: Investigating Language Structure and Use. Cambridge: CUP.
Boase-Beier, Jean. 2004. “Knowing and Not Knowing: Style, Intention and the Translation of a Holocaust Poem”. Language and Literature 13 (1): 25–35.
Brown, Stephen J. M. 1966. The World of Imagery; Metaphor and Kindred Imagery. New York: Russell & Russell.
Cheng, Mei; and Bingbing Li. 1997. “Cultural Transplantation and Transformation: Metaphor Translation of a Dream of Red Mansions”. Perspectives: Studies in Translatology 5 (2): 227–235.
De Sutter, Gert; Patrick Goethals; Torsten Leuschner; and Sonia Vandepitte. 2012. “Towards Methodologically More Rigorous Corpus-Based Translation Studies”. Across Languages and Cultures 13 (2): 137–143.
El Sadda, Hoda. 1992. “Figurative Discourse in Medieval Arabic Criticism: Introduction and Translation”. Journal of Comparative Poetics: 95–109.
Eynon, Terri. 2001. “Metaphor: The Impossible Translation?” British Journal of Psychotherapy 17 (3): 353–364.
Ge, Liangyan. 2002. “The Mythic Stone in Honglou Meng and an Intertext of Ming-Qing Fiction Criticism”. The Journal of Asian Studies 61 (01): 57–82.
Gerry, Chris. 2009. “Figurative Resonances between the Translation Work and Short Story Writing of Florbela Espanca”. Revista de Letras II (8): 271–293.
Ghanooni, Ali Reza. 2014. “A Cross-Cultural Study of Metaphoric Imagery in Shakespeare’s Macbeth”. Translation and Interpreting Studies 9 (2): 239–256.
Gibbs, Raymond W.; and Jennifer E. O’Brien. 1990. “Idioms and Mental Imagery: The Metaphorical Motivation for Idiomatic Meaning”. Cognition 36 (1): 35–68.
Hermans, Theo. 2014. “Images of Translation”. In The Manipulation of Literature (Routledge Revivals): Studies in Literary Translation, ed. by Theo Hermans, 103–135. London and Sydney: Croom Helm.
Honeck, Richard P. 1980. Cognition and Figurative Language. Mahwah (NJ): Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Hori, Masahiro. 2004. Investigating Dickens’ Style: A Collocational Analysis. Houndmills Basingstok: Palgrave Macmillan.
Huang, Xin. 2014. “Reading an Incomplete Nobel: Goldblatt’s Translation of Mo Yan’s Life and Death Are Wearing Me Out”. The AALITRA Review 91: 42–52.
Janssens, Maddy; José Lambert; and Chris Steyaert. 2004. “Developing Language Strategies for International Companies: The Contribution of Translation Studies”. Journal of World Business 39 (4): 414–430.
Jung, Carl G.; and Marie-Luise von Franz. 1964. Man and His Symbols. New York: J. G. Ferguson Publishing.
Jurczak, Paul M. 1997. “The Language and Metaphor of Jean Piaget”. Educational Psychology Review 9 (3): 311–318.
Lassen, Eva Maria. 1992. “Family as Metaphor: Family Images at the Time of the Old Testament and Early Judaism 1”. Scandinavian Journal of the Old Testament 6 (2): 247–262.
Laviosa, Sara. 2002. Corpus-Based Translation Studies: Theory, Findings, Applications. Vol. 171. Amsterdam: Rodopi.
Lefevere, André. 1992. Translation, Rewriting, and the Manipulation of Literary Fame. London: Routledge.
Littlemore, Jeannette. 2001. “Metaphoric Competence: A Language Learning Strength of Students with a Holistic Cognitive Style?” Tesol Quarterly 35 (3): 459–491.
Lotfipour-Saedi, Kazem. 1996. “Translation Principles vs. Translator Strategies”. Meta 41 (3): 389–392.
Orbach, Michael. 2012. “Behind Nobel Prize Winner Mo Yan, a Jewish Translator”. Tablet Magazine. [URL]
Parks, Tim. 2014. Translating Style: A Literary Approach to Translation-A Translation Approach to Literature. London: Routledge.
Phillips, Barbara J. 1997. “Thinking into It: Consumer Interpretation of Complex Advertising Images”. Journal of Advertising 26 (2): 77–87.
Pryluck, Calvin. 1975. “The Film Metaphor: The Use of Language-Based Models in Film Study”. Literature/Film Quarterly 3 (2): 117–123.
Riffaterre, Michael. 1985. “Transposing Suppositions: On the Semiotics of Literary Translation”. In Theories of Translation: An Anthology of Essays from Dryden to Derrida, ed. by Rainer Schulte; and John Biguenet, 204–217. Chicago (IL): Chicago University Press.
Saldanha, Gabriela. 2011. “Translator Style: Methodological Considerations”. The Translator 17 (1): 25–50.
Sinclair, John McHardy. 2004. How to Use Corpora in Language Teaching. Vol. 121. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Starcke, Bettina. 2006. “The Phraseology of Jane Austen’s Persuasion: Phraseological Units as Carriers of Meaning’”. ICAME Journal 301: 87–104.
Teilanyo, Diri I. 2007. “Figurative Language in Translation: A Study of JP Clark’s The Ozidi Saga”. Meta 52 (2): 309–326.
Vergari, Romina. 2015. “Translation Techniques and Interpretative Phenomena in the Greek Version of the Hebrew Bible: A Study of the Figurative Use of the Noun צֵל ‘Shadow’”. Quaderni Di Linguistica E Studi Orientali 11: 179–203.
Wikipedia “Red Sorghum” [URL]
Wong, Laurence. 2011. “Translating Shakespeare’s Imagery for the Chinese Audience: With Reference to Hamlet and Its Versions in Chinese and in European Languages”. Babel 57 (2): 204–225.
Yao, Xinyue. 2014. “Developments in the Use of the English Present Perfect: 1750-Present”. Journal of English Linguistics 42 (4): 307–329.
Zhang, Baohong. 2013. “On Weng Xianliang’s Art of Translating Images in the English Versions of Ancient Chinese Poems”. Translation Quarterly 681: 38–67.
Cited by (4)
Cited by four other publications
Gao, Yaoyao, Guijun Zhou & John Blake
Liu, Bin, Jing Wang & Le Sun
Meng, Lingzi & Feng Pan
This list is based on CrossRef data as of 14 november 2025. Please note that it may not be complete. Sources presented here have been supplied by the respective publishers. Any errors therein should be reported to them.
