Apr. 2009, Volume 7, No.4 (Serial No.

67) US-China Foreign Language, ISSN 1539-8080, USA

A study on domestication and foreignization in Chinese—English film

translation from the postcolonial perspective

ZHANG Guang-fa
(Department of Foreign Languages and Literature, Huaiyin Teachers College, Huai’an 223300, China)

Abstract: Different from traditional film translation studies which usually advocate domestication, the
author holds that foreignizing method in Chinese-English film translation is both theoretically reasonable and
practically feasible from the postcolonial point of view. It helps to resist against the cultural hegemony of
powerful culture and construct the cultural identity of less powerful culture.
Key words: post-colonialism; Chinese-English film translation; translation method

1. Introduction

In today’s translation circles, the translations accepted by mainstream translation norms more often than not
share such features as fluency, smoothness and transparency. The target text is free of the slightest trace of
translation and reads as if it had been written by the original author in the target language. The differences,
including the foreignness, strangeness, and otherness, are replaced by something familiar to the target reader.
While such replacement makes it easier for the target reader to understand translation, it minimizes the
foreignness of the target text. The above-mentioned translating strategy is actually what American translation
theorist Lawrence Venuti (1995) termed in his phenomenal The translator’s invisibility: A history of translation,
domesticating method, as opposed to another strategy, foreignizing method.

2. Domestication and foreignization in the postcolonial context

The origin of domesticating method and foreignizing method, firstly coined by Venuti in 1995, could be
immediately traced back to the essay, “Uber die verschiedenen Methoden des Ubersetzens” (On the different
method of translation) by an ancient German Linguist, Schleiermacher. He said that there are only two means for
translation: either the translator leaves the author in peace, as much as possible, and moves the reader towards him;
or he leaves the reader in peace, as much as possible, and moves the author towards him (Venuti, 1992, p. 42). In
his opinion, the first method means taking the reader over to the foreign culture and making him or her feel the
linguistic differences, while the second method means right the opposite, making the text recognizable and
familiar to the readers and thus bringing the foreign culture closer to the reader in the target culture. Venuti (1995,
p. 20) in his book, The translator’s invisibility called the first method foreignizing method, and the second one
domesticating method. He in this book studied domesticating method and foreignizing method in the context of
society, politics, ideology and history, criticizing the translation activities from 17 BC and revealing to us that
fluent translation has always been in a commanding position in the translation history in the western world. He

ZHANG Guang-fa (1981- ), male, M.A., lecturer of Department of Foreign Languages and Literature, Huaiyin Teachers College;
research field: translation theories and practice.

64
 A study on domestication and foreignization in Chinese—English film translation from the postcolonial perspective

said domesticating method dominates Anglo-American culture which recommends fluent translating. Under the
norms of fluency, the target text is free of the slightness trace of translation and is read as if it had been written by
the original author in the target language. The differences existing between the two languages are replaced by
something familiar to the target language reader. Such replacement makes it easier for the target language readers
to understand and to follow the translated texts, and it minimizes the foreignness of the target text. Foreignizing
method, however, seeks to restrain the ethnocentric violence of translation, and it is a strategic cultural
intervention in the current state of world affairs. Venuti as a matter of fact advocates foreignizing method which is
called resistance with the hope to revolt the suzerain culture in ex-colonized countries and regards it as a form of
resistance against ethnocentrism and racism, culture narcissism and imperialism.
Venuti (1998) in another book The scandals of translation: Towards an ethics of difference continues to
develop his opinion. He explains the necessity of the studies of translation theories from three perspectives, that is,
the relation between different language and culture systems, the properties of translation activities, and the role of
translators. He said “Translation wields enormous power in constructing representations of foreign cultures. The
selection of foreign texts and the development of translation strategies can establish peculiarly domestic canons
for foreign literatures, cannons that conform to domestic aesthetic values and therefore reveal exclusions and
admissions, centers and peripheries that deviate from those current in the foreign language…In creating
stereotypes, translation may attach esteem or stigma to specific ethnic, racial, and national groupings, signifying
respect for cultural difference or hatred based on ethnocentrism, racism, or patriotism” (Venuti, 1998, p. 67). He
said translation could never simply be communication between equals because it is fundamentally ethnocentric,
and to shake the regime of English, a translator must be strategic both in selecting foreign texts and in developing
discourses to translate them. And he preferred “minoritizing translation” to resist the assimilationist ethic by
signifying the linguistic and cultural differences of the text—within the major language.
As a kind of discourse practice, the foreignizing translation plays a strategic role in reconstructing national
identity, resisting cultural hegemony, and subverting the colonial ideology. So many postcolonial scholars
advocate the foreignizing method to retranslate the texts from the dominated cultures so as to reconstruct in the
western world the cultural identity of the dominated cultures and correct the cultural prototype misinterpreted by
the hegemony cultures. In the contrary, domesticating method colluding with the colonizer helps to enhance the
ethnocentric attitude, constructs and strengthens the imbalanced power relation. Thus the domesticating method
employed to translate the texts from weak cultures to strong cultures suffers from so much criticism.

3. Domestication and foreignization in film translation

In translation practice, foreignizing method is generally criticized by many scholars. And they argue that
though foreignizing method may be theoretically reasonable, but it can not necessarily be practically feasible. In
addition, translation history has revealed to us that domestic method has always predominated translation history.
Foreignizing translations are usually not in accordance to the norms of the target language, and therefore difficult
to be published and accepted. The author thinks that this may be reasonable for literary translation. Film
translation, however, is different from literary translation, and it has its own characteristics. Firstly audiovisual
works are different from literary works printed in papers. The audience receives two kinds of information from
audiovisual works, that is, audio information and visual information, while only visual information is available to
the readers of literary works. Besides, the audio information and visual information only stay in the screen for a

65
 A study on domestication and foreignization in Chinese—English film translation from the postcolonial perspective

very short time (subtitles usually stay in the screen for about two seconds). Readers get the visual information
through the words printed in paper, so the information is always available. Most scholars advocate the
domesticating method (MA Zheng-qi, 1997; ZHANG Chun-bai, 1998; QIAN Shao-chang, 2000), and they hold
that it is much easier for the audience to understand the subtitles and dubbing translated by keeping the classical
principle of faithfulness, expressiveness, and elegance. The author argues that though domesticating method is
acceptable in film translation, the foreignizing method is a better choice. This can be well illustrated by the
following example:
火云邪神：这种气势，难道就是人称神雕侠侣的……
包租公：杨过。
包租婆：小龙女。
Beast: Could you two be the fated lovers…?
Landlord: Paris.
Landlady: And Helen of Troy.
— (Kung Fu Hustle, 2004)

In this example, domesticating method is used to translate “杨过” and “小龙女” into “Paris” and “Helen of
Troy”, which can help the audience to overcome the obstacles of understanding, because Paris and Helen are two
very familiar images in western culture. As a matter of fact, domesticating method is frequently used in this film,
and this is probably one of the reasons why this film is so successful in American film market. The author holds
that it is much better to translate “杨过” and “小龙女” into “Yang Guo” and “Xiao Long-nv”. Firstly,
domesticating method in this example completely gets rid of Chinese culture and highlight western culture. And
this method can enhance the cultural hegemony of English. Secondly, “Paris” and “Helen of Troy” in western
culture are different images from “Yang Guo” and “Xiao Long-nü” in Chinese culture. As is known, Paris and
Helen are two famous characters in Greek mythology. In ancient Greece, Paris, Prince of Troy and Helen, Queen
of Sparta, two notorious lovers, ignites a war that will devastate a civilization. “Yang Guo” and “Xiao Long-nü”
are two characters in The legend of condor hero, a kung fu novel written by JIN Yong. They are two romantic
lovers who finally get married after experiencing so many sufferings. Their love indicates what true love is and is
thus cherished by Chinese readers. Thirdly, because these two persons has different connotations, the translation
may further affect English audience’ understanding of this film. We can learn from this film that landlord and
landlady’s love is comparable to Yang Guo and Xiao Long-nv’s love, and that is why they are so called in Jianghu.
Here is another example:
你们三个家伙这么能打
外面有的是门路
去卖艺啊!还窝在这里干嘛?
You’re such kung-fu masters.
Go take it on the road.
You belong in the circus, not here!
— (Kung Fu Hustle, 2004)

Here, “卖艺” means “street performance”. Chinese people often witness this kind of scene from TV or real
life. Generally speaking, the show takes place in the street. Usually one of the performers gives a shout with a
gong to attract more audience. After attracting a crowd, the players will show some acrobats or martial arts that
please the audience. After the show, every spectator is required to pay some money. Those who live on this way in

66
 A study on domestication and foreignization in Chinese—English film translation from the postcolonial perspective

old China is usually looked down upon. These activities require simple equipment. Sometimes, they even involve
no settings. The showings move from place to place and always take place in the busy street. But circus is a
western thing. The setting, players, activities are all different. Besides, in old China, “street performers” contains a
certain degree of contempt because only those who don’t have a decent job live on that. So what the landlady says
is insulting. We can translate it into “You belong to fucking street performers”. This translation both successfully
convey the denotation and connotation of “卖艺” in original language and introduce Chinese culture into English
culture, which will help to deconstruct the cultural hegemony of English.
Moreover, the instantaneous property of audio and visual information indicates to us that the foreignizing
method should be used carefully in film translation. Let’s go back to the first example. The translator uses the
domesticating method to translate “神雕侠侣” into “the fated lovers”, while he does not use the popularly
accepted version “the legend of condor hero”. To further prove that “the legend of condor hero” is not acceptable
in this context, we need to compare the following two version of “神雕侠侣”, “杨过” and “小龙女”: A. “the fated
lovers”, “Yang Guo” and “Xiao Long-nv”, B. “the legend of condor hero”, “Yang Guo” and “Xiao Long-nv”. The
author believes that in version A, “the fated lovers” can help readers to understand the relation between Yang Guo
and Xiao Long-nv. So this version is acceptable. In version B, however, translation of these four images is totally
not familiar to English audience. This proves partially that translator needs to be very careful when using
foreignizing method, not going from one extreme to the other. But it is acceptable in ordinary literary translation
to translate “神雕侠侣” into “the legend of condor hero”, because annotation can be added to help readers to
further understand it. Annotation in film translation, however, is almost infeasible because time and space of
actor’s lines are limited, so audience almost has no time to read these annotations. Thus the second version is not
acceptable.

4. Conclusion

In the globalization context, frequent exchanges between different cultures will bring some different elements
to each culture. Many scholars come to be worried that the pureness of their culture may be threatened by these
differences. If handled properly, however, these differences will help to enrich different culture and finally
promote its healthy development. Therefore, in film translation studies, we should advocate foreignizing method
to resist the cultural hegemony of powerful culture and construct the cultural identity of less powerful culture. In
this way, can the harmony in film communication be achieved?

References:
MA Zheng-qi. 1997. The principles of audiovisual translation. The Journal of Beijing Broadcast College, 5, 81-84. (in Chinese)
QIAN Shao-chang. 2000. Audiovisual translation, a new research field. The Journal of Chinese Translators, 1, 61-65. (in Chinese)
Venuti, L. 1992. Rethinking translation: Discourse, subjectivity, ideology. London and New York: Routledge.
Venuti, L. 1995. The translator’s invisibility. London and New York: Routledge.
Venuti, L. 1998. The scandals of translation: Towards an ethics of difference. London: Routledge.
ZHANG Chun-bai. 1998. A tentative research in audiovisual translation. The Journal of Chinese Translators, 2, 50-53. (in Chinese)

(Edited by Tina, Max and Maggie)

67