Translation and Metaphor:

An Elaboration of James Holmes' Translation Process Model

Using Contemporary Metaphor Theories
and an Examination of His Translation-Descriptive Model
with a Case Study of the "Xiaoyaoyou"

Metaphor in the Zhuangzi

WONG Suzanne Shu-Shan

A Thesis Submitted in Partial Fulfillment

of the Requirements for the Degree of
Master of Philosophy
in
Translation

The Chinese University of Hong Kong

August 2005

The Chinese University of Hong Kong holds the copyright of this thesis. Any person(s)
intending to use a part or whole of the materials in the thesis in a proposed publication must
seek copyright release from the Dean of the Graduate School.

l^hnm
UNIVERSITY

m )|)

V^BRARy SYSTEM^^

Abstract of the thesis entitled:

Translation

and Metaphor:

Using Contemporary

An Elaboration

Metaphor

Theories

of James

Holmes'

and an Examination

Model with a Case Study of the "Xiaoyaoyou" Metaphor

Translation
of His

Process

Model

Translation-Descriptive

in the Zhuangzi

.
J
Submitted by WONG Suzanne Shu-Shan
for the degree of Master of Philosophy in Translation
at The Chinese University of Hong Kong in August 2005.

This thesis is divided into two parts. The first part presents an attempt to elaborate
James Holmes' translation process model with the findings and theories developed by
cognitive linguists and metaphor theorists. In the second part, we proceed to translation
description and analysis. After a review of Holmes' translation-descriptive model, the
translation of complex metaphors will be discussed, and we will see how the meaning of the
metaphor is manifested as information structuration reverberating throughout the text. Using
Zoltan Kovecses' scope theory of metaphor, we will analyze the xiaoyaoyou

metaphor in the Zhuangzi and abstract a source-text map of the mataphor. The works of four
English translators, namely Herbert Giles, Fung Yu-lan, Burton Watson and A.C. Graham,
will then be examined.

Table of Contents

Introduction

PART ONE
Translation

Process: A Metaphorical

Mappina

Approach

Chapter One
James Holmes' Two-Map Two-Plane Text-Rank Translation Process Model
1.1
1.2
1.3
1.4
1.5
1.6
1.7

Process-oriented
Descriptive Translation Studies
The serial and structural planes in text processing
Text maps and information continuums
Correspondence
and counterparts
Translator's poetics
Gideon Toury's cultural-semiotic
approach to translating
Summary

Chapter Two
Metaphor and Translation

2.1 Metaphor and translation

2.2 Metaphor: from linguistic anomaly to cognitive
2.31. A. Richards: interaction and connection
2.4 Paul Ricoeur: innovation and rapprochement
2.5 Cognitive linguistics: metaphorical mappings
2.5.1 Cognitive matrix and polysystem
2.5.2 Analogy and correspondence
2.6 Hermeneutics:
fore-knowledge
and fusion
2.7 Summary

Chapter Three
The Contemporary Theory of Metaphor

3.1 Metaphor comprehension

and production
3.2 Brief history and major theorists
3.2.1 Max Black
3.2.2 George Lakoff
3.2.3 Mark Turner and Gilles PduconniGf
3.3 The structure of thought
3.4 From text to concept
3.5 Cross-domain mapping
3.6 Conceptual blending
3.7 Summary

Chapter Four
An Elaborated Translation Process Model
4.1 Purpose

of the model

assimilation

4
6
7
9
12
14
17

18
19
21
24
27
29
32
34
37

38
39
40
41
43
44
47
52
56
59

60

4.2 The serial and structural planes in text processing - diachronic image and synchronic
models
61
4.3 Text maps and information continuums - the linguistic, literary and
socio-cultural
dimensions
62
4.4 Correspondence and counterparts the blended target-text map
65
4.5 Translator's poetics factors affecting mapping and blending
68
4.6 Summary
73

PART

TWO

Translation

Description:

Mao Analysis

of Complex

Metaphors

Chapter Five
Translation-Descriptive Process: a Map Analysis Approach

5.1 James Holmes' model of the translation-descriptive

process
5.2 Translation description of complex metaphors from a map analysis approach
5.3 The translation and translatability of metaphors
5.3.1 Peter Newmark the criss-crossed area of sense
5.3.2 Raymond van den Broeck information structuration in literary texts....
5.4 The resonance of the whole of language
5.5 Map analysis: the scope of metaphor
5.6 Summary

77
80
81
82
84
87
91
95

Chapter Six
Case Study: English translations of the xiaoyaoyou (metaphor in the Zhuangzi

6.1 Tao and metaphor: The Zhuangzi and its language

6.2 The scope of the xiaoyaoyou metaphor in the Zhuangzi
6.2.1 The metaphorical structuration of the xiaoyaoyou metaphor
6.2.2 The meaning foci of the xiaoyaoyou metaphor
6.2.3 The overarching metaphor, main meaning focus and central
xiaoyaoyou
6.3 Translations of the xiaoyaoyou metaphor
6.3.1 You
6.3.2 Cheng ()and other riding-related words
6.3.3 Xlaoyao (MM)
6.3.4 Xiaoyaoyou (M)
6.4 Linguistic, literary and socio-cultural mappings from source to target
6.5 Observations: hermeneutic sensitivity

97
99
101
104
mappings of
106
107
109
116
119
120
125
127

Conclusion

130

Bibliography

133

Appendix 1

137

Introduction

To translate and to understand and use metaphors both require a sharp eye
that can discern sameness and difference between two networks of meaning and an
exquisite mind that can manipulate and maneuver the networks to reveal a new
relation of meaning. James Holmes (1988b) calls this network of meaning a text map,
which is a dynamic and multi-dimensional matrix of linguistic, literary and socio-cultural
features of the text and their respective information continuums. In addition to the eye
for resemblance among dissimilars, both translating and metaphorizing demonstrate
the mind's acumen to highlight salient and relevant features and downplay impertinent
ones when negotiating two very different knowledge structures. Translation, according
to Holmes, is making hierarchical correspondences between the source-text map and
target-text map on the structural, meta-textual plane.
This thesis is inspired by Holmes' two-map two-plane text-rank translation
process model and further enlightened by the contemporary metaphor theories that
strive

to

understand

human

conceptualization

through

studying

metaphor

comprehension and production. The former succinctly and accurately enunciates the
cornerstones of translation process research, which coincide with the concerns of the
latter as they try to unlock the organization and movement of human thought.
The first part of this paper presents an attempt to elaborate James Holmes'
translation process model with the findings and theories developed by cognitive
linguists and metaphor theorists. In Chapter One, we will review Holmes' two-map twoplane text-rank model and discuss how he has positioned process-oriented descriptive
translation studies on the cognitive track. In Chapter Two, we will trace the thinking on
metaphor from its linguistic, rhetorical beginnings to the modern cognitive approach
and point out some common concerns and assumptions shared by metaphor theorists

and translation scholars.

In Chapter Three, we still steer into the depths of

contemporary metaphor theories and discuss the findings and theories regarding the
structure of thought, the formation of textual concept, cross-domain mapping and
conceptual blending. In the last chapter of Part One, we will borrow these hypotheses
and models to elaborate on the cognitive aspects in Holmes' translation process model.
In the second part of the paper, we proceed to translation description and
analysis. In Chapter Five, we review Holmes' translation-descriptive model, which
underlines his holistic approach to language, text and translation description and
analysis. The translation of complex metaphors will be discussed, and we will see how
the meaning of the metaphor is manifested as information structuration reverberating
throughout the text. In Chapter Six, using Kovecses' scope theory of metaphor, we will
analyze the xiaoyaoyou (metaphor in the Zhuangzi and abstract a source-text
map of the mataphor. The works of four translators, namely Herbert Giles, Fung Yu-lan,
Burton Watson and A.C. Graham, will then be examined and compared in terms of the
overall effect of the translation as well as the linguistic, literary and socio-cultural
elements at play during correspondence.

PART ONE
Translation

Process:

A Metaphorical Mapping

Approach

Chapter One
James

Holmes' Two-Map Two-Plane Text-Rank

Translation

Process

Model

1.1 Process-oriented

Descriptive

Translation

Studies

In the discipline-delineating paper "The Name and Nature of Translation

Studies," James Holmes (1988a) divides the field of "translation studies" into two main
research branches: descriptive translation studies and theoretical translation studies.
With precocious vision for the development of the discipline, Holmes offers an
insightful analysis of the constitution of the field of translation studies. His delineation
embraces all the worthwhile pursuits that can contribute to a better and fuller
understanding of translation and translating, while allocating to each sub-discipline its
appropriate role and a pertinent set of problems, approaches and objectives. While
descriptive translation studies sets out to describe the phenomena of translation and
translating in terms of product, function and process, theoretical translation studies
strives to establish general principles with which to explain and predict these
translation and translating phenomena.''

1 Holmes (1988a). According to Holmes, descriptive translation studies (DTS) is further divided into three substudies, namely product-, function- and process-oriented DTS. Product-oriented DTS should begin with textfocused description of individual translations, which should then be followed by comparative translation
description and corpus study (according to period, language, and/or text and discourse type). Function-oriented
DTS should describe the function of translations in the recipient socio-cultural situation - it is a study of contexts
rather than texts. Process-oriented DTS should investigate the act of translation, that is, what takes place in the
translator's mind during translation. Theoretical translation studies, on the other hand, are mostly partial or
specific in their scope. Holmes identifies six main foci in theoretical translation studies: medium, area, rank, text or
discourse type, time, problem. Towards the end of the article, Holmes adds the category "applied translation
studies," which covers teaching, translation aids, translation policy and translation criticism.

Within the scope of descriptive translation studies (DTS), process-oriented DTS

is the sub-branch that concerns itself with the complex act of translation, that is, the
mental operations of the translator during the act of converting the source text into the
target language. Admitting that there had been little attempt at a systematic study of
the translation process, Holmes takes up this task of examining the act of translation in
"Describing Literary Translations: Models and Methods." (1988b) He is convinced that
"the nature of the [translation] product cannot be understood without a comprehension
of the nature of the process"^ and that translation scholars engrossed in text-oriented
analyses without considering the actual process through which the translator has
produced a more or less matching text from one language to another are missing the
big picture. This handicapped methodology of studying products without taking
process into account can only yield "haphazard,... piecemeal,... normative"^ research
output. Holmes, before offering his own model of the translation process, warns that
translation scholars "must develop an adequate model of the translation process
before they can hope to develop relevant methods for the description of translation
products'4
That Holmes prioritizes process studies over product studies within DTS
indicates his belief that the crux of translation studies lies in the relation between the
original text and the translated text (while literary studies can devote all its energies to
textual analysis because of the originality of the texts at hand) and that in order to
understand this relation, attention must be paid to the process which has engendered
this relation. To study translation without first looking at the procreative process of
translating is like studying genetic diseases without an understanding of DMA crossing
and mutation.

2 Holmes (1988b) p81

3 ibid p81
4 ibid p82

1.2 The serial and structural

planes in text

processing

Holmes' proposal of a two-map two-plane text-rank translation model (1988b)

was a trailblazer in the field of translation process studies. Models for automatic
translation developed in the late 1940s and early 1950s hypothesized the translation
process as a linear word-by-word conversion operation. In the late 1960s and early
1970s, Eugene Nida (1964) proposes his theory of kernel sentences, which analyzes
texts in sentential units. Holmes recognizes the shift from lexical rank to sentence rank
as a significant step towards sophistication in formalizing models of the translation
process, but laments that in the basic premise underlying these models, text remains a
serial string of units.
The groundbreaking thesis in Holmes' translation model is that textual
processing is both serial and structural that after one has read a text in time, one retains an array of data about it
in an instantaneous form.... [T]he translation of texts... takes place on
two planes: serial plane, where one translates sentence by sentence,
and a structural plane, on which one abstracts a "mental conception" of
the original text, then uses that mental conception as a kind of general
criterion against which to test each sentence during the formulation of the
new, translated text.
In addition to the temporal linear concatenation of words or sentences, understanding
and translating a text also requires a kind of instantaneous insight into the meaning of
the text. On the serial level, the translating mind is deciphering words one by one, unit
by unit, line by line, like a scanner working its way dutifully through a text. However,
this linear processing alone will not yield meaning because, as we will discuss in more
details later, texts form an underlying network of meaning where words evolve together
and meaning is dynamically and organically created. Therefore, on a higher level, the
translating mind must capture and comprehend the text as an instantaneous insight of
meaning, a unified concept - what Holmes calls "an instantaneous form" or "a mental
conception." Without an inner mechanism to abstract and arrest sense, the extrinsic
5 ibid p82-83

flow of symbols becomes meaningless. Without a mental structure to marshal and

massage the textual data, linguistic forms will manifest an anarchically overwhelming
number of possible meanings and never yield conceptual coherence.

Holmes'

articulation of the structural plane in the act of translating elevates translation from a
serial and linear word-by-word information processing task to a meta-textual structural
operation that involves holistic interpretation and conceptual comprehension, and
paves the way for a cognitive approach to translation process studies.

1.3 Text maps and information

continuums

Holmes further develops the idea of an abstract text-rank mental concept on

the structural plane. To read and understand a text, that is, to follow its linear
sequence and perceive its overall picture, the translator must abstract from the text a
"map" or "mental conception," which is:
a conglomerate of highly disparate bits of information. In the first place,
as a map of a linguistic artifact, it will contain information, at a variety of
ranks, regarding features of the text in its relation to the linguistic
continuum within which (or violating the rules of which) it is formulated,
that is, contextual information. Secondly, as a map of a literary artifact, it
will contain information, at a variety of ranks, regarding features of the
text in its relation to the literary continuum within which (or rebelling
against which) it is formulated, that is, intertextual information. And third,
as a map of a socio-cultural artifact, it will contain information, at a variety
of ranks, regarding features of the text in its relation to the socio-cultural
continuum within which (or transcending which) it is formulated, that is,
situational information? (italics added)
Notice how Holmes depicts the mental map as "a conglomerate," that is "a composite
mass or mixture" or "a diversified corporation."^ Notice also how each conglomerate
comprises information, on a variety of ranks, about the relation between textual
features and their extra-textual continuums.

6 ibid p84-85
7 Definitions taken from the Merriam-Webster Online Dictionary.

The mental conception, according to Holmes' hypothesis, is a diverse and

dynamic, hierarchical and multi-dimensional structure which maintains an overall
organic congruity out of the incongruous and discordant bits of information. This map,
as indicated in the above quote, is a composite collection that includes both textual

and extra-textual knowledge. In other words, the translating mind entertains a

conglomerate of possibly contradicting textual information and general knowledge,
processing incoming linguistic features by juxtaposing them against an underlying
landscape of encyclopedic knowledge, maneuvering both for an understanding of the
text at hand.
The inclusion of contextual, intertextual and situational elements in theorizing
about translation is not new, but Holmes' map model has not only located this
conglomerate of information in the mind of the translator but also suggested that the
recognition and re-configuration of these textual and extra-textual elements is a key
process in the act of translation. Holmes also highlights the fact that maps contain
information about the linguistic, literary and socio-cultural features of the text "in
relation to" the respective contextual, intertextual and situational continuum. In other
words, new information is processed in relation to the translator's existing knowledge
repertoire about languages, literatures and cultures.
Although Holmes does not explain in detail the mode of interaction between
new information and existing knowledge during the formation of mental conception, his
text map theory has without a doubt pinpointed a fundamental issue in translation
process studies: how the mind processes new particular information in accordance to
broader contextual and commonplace knowledge with the purpose to decipher
meaningful messages. It is a cognitive operation that we perform seamlessly and
unconsciously, the mechanisms of which have fascinated a wide range of researchers.
Holmes' proposal of text maps and information continuums has proved its validity by
coincidences with theories developed in the fields of hermeneutics, psychology and
cognitive linguistics on the human capacity for ad hoc on-line construction of meaning.

These theories of fusion, apperception, fusion, mapping and blending will be

introduced in Chapter Two and Chapter Three.

1.4 Correspondence

and

counterparts

To further explain the specific phases involved in translation and the processes
through which the translator's source-text map and target-text map are derived,
Holmes introduces three sets of rules:
Of the three rules sets, the first, that of derivation rules (DR), determines
the way in which the translator abstracts his map of the source text from
the text itself, and the third, that of projection rules (PR), determines the
way in which he makes use of his map of the prospective target text in
order to formulate the text, while the second, that of correspondence
rules (CR) or matching rules (MR) - or, if one prefers, equivalence rules
(ER) - determines the way in which he develops his target-text map from
his source-text map. It should be noted that the first of the three phases
described here the translator shares with every reader of literary texts,
the third with every writer; the second, however, that of developing a
target-text map from his source-text map by means of correspondence
rules, is a uniquely

translational

(or least a specific

kind of

metatextual)

operation, and as such deserves our special attention? (italics added)

Source-Text MAP
Rules Plane I Meta-Textual Operation
(Translator's Poetics)
(conglomerate of
linguistic, literary
socio-cultural info)
r

Structural Plane

Correspondence Rules

Target-Text MAP

(choices about
form, function,
meaning)

(guide for
formulating
target text)

(Derivation Rules II Reading)

Textual Pi^cessing

->

(Projection Rules // Writing)

I
Formulation of TL

Reception of ST

S e r i a l Plane
Textual Plane

FIGURE

1r
Source-Language Text

1. James Holmes'

Two-Map

Two-Plane

Target-Language Text

Text-Rank

Translation

Model

^ Holmes (1988b) p84

Reading is a configurative process through which source-text features are abstracted

and composed into a source-text map, where projection is an act of disassembly
where a target-text map is serialized back into text. If reading (derivation) and writing
(projection) take place on both the serial and structural planes in Holmes' model
(Figure 1), then translation (correspondence, matching and equivalence) happens
uniquely on the structural level of metatextual operation and is essentially a map
manipulation and mental re-cofiguration exercise.
Cognitive scientist Gilles Fauconnier (1997), in arguing that languages prompt
(but do not contain) meaning by activating a series of mental mappings and meaning
constructions, acknowledges the revelatory power of translation into how the human
mind interprets. Taking languages as prompting systems for meaning construction and
assuming background knowledge as mostly pre-organized by cultures, Fauconnier
postulates that
good translation... requires a quasi-total reconstruction of the cognitive
configurations prompted by one language and a determination of how
another language would set up a similar configuration with a radically
different prompting system and prestructured background knowledge.
If reading and writing require only one meta-textual operation of cognitive configuration
(what Holmes calls abstracting map from text) or textual serialization (what Holmes
calls projecting map to text), then translation demands an additional cognitive process
during which the source-text map, or cognitive configuration, derived from the source
text, is re-mapped, or re-configured, into a target-text map according to the prompting
system of the target language and culture before it is serialized back as target text.
The mystery and miracle of the translation process lies in re-mapping and reconfiguration, in making the two maps or configurations commensurate, if not equal. In
"On Matching and Making Maps: From a Translator's Notebook," Holmes (1988c)
examines this issue from the perspective of a practicing translator, and announces that:
'Equivalence', like 'sameness', is asking too much. The languages and
cultures to be bridged, however close they may sometimes seem, are too
9 Fauconnier p188-189

10

far apart and too disparately structured for true equivalence to be

possible.^ (italics added)
Like Fauconnier, Holmes has as his premise the observation that each language and
culture, or culturally-determined knowledge system, is an idiosyncratic structure with
its unique lexical-semantic pairs and cue-effect relations. The search for "over-all
sameness or equivalence [or] even local equivalence at the level of words or turns of
phrase, rhythms or metres, images or musics, across such disparately structured
linguistic and cultural prompting systems is a vain task - like searching for Tokyo JR
stations on the London tube map.
Holmes suggests that translation should instead be a search for "counterparts"
or matchings," for:
words, turns of phrase, and the rest, fulfilling functions in the language of
the translation and the culture of its reader that in many and appropriate
ways are closely akin (though never truly equivalent) to those of the
words etc. in the language and culture of the original and its reader^^
(italics added)
Although Holmes remarks in another article that corresponding is making choices
among form, function and

meaning,""3

it would be too narrow-minded of us to take his

meaning of "fulfilling functions" here in that sense. The functions of the words and text
to be transferred from source to target are their ways of prompting the construction of
meaning through the nodes and links in the linguistic and cultural structures.
The source text sets in action a selective and synthetic process of map
abstraction, which takes in account context, intertext and situation and produces as a
result a specifically configured network of meaning (map) for the source text at hand.
The translated text is an attempt to re-configure this network of meaning using a
different system of linguistic, literary and socio-cultural prompts. Although JR stations
are not to be found on the tube lines, the translator can still, through extensive
knowledge, rich experience and careful studies of the two metro systems, recognize
1 Holmes (1988c), p53-54
11 ibid p54
12 ibid p54
13 Holmes (1988b) p85

11

the matching stations which, for their focal location on the network, switching role in
the circuit, interchange connections with other routes and so on, can be said to be
counterpoints on the two maps, serving similar functions of relaying the message
through the intermediary nodes and links.
"Translations are maps, the territories are the originals,"""* Holmes concedes.
The map can never be the spurs and valleys, the fauna and flora, but a good map can
assemble a multi-dimensional picture that is as closely akin as possible to every twist
and turn in the original territory. A carefully and comprehensively charted map can
reverberate the linguistic, literary and socio-cultural substratum of source text and can
prompt the target reader to configure a network of meaning that closely corresponds to
that of the source text.

1.5 Translator's

poetics

However, if translations are maps of the original territory, then there can be no
definitive maps. Although Holmes emphasizes that his models and hypotheses are
based on the assumption of an ideal reader/translator ("someone who is skilled and
experienced"''), he inevitably admits that what determines how the map will be drawn
is "the translator's poetics."'' For Holmes, the translator's poetics refers to the way the
individual translator chooses (consciously or unconsciously) to interpret the source text
and seek counterparts in the target language as well as the varying emphases he/she
gives to different textual and extra-textual elements. Holmes risks denouncing the
translation process as ultimately a subjective exercise impossible for empirical
examination when he proclaims that:

Holmes (1988c) p58

Holmes (1988b) p84
16 ibid p87

15

12

In seeking "counterparts" or "matchings", the translator is constantly

faced by choices, choices he can make only on the basis of his individual
grasp (knowledge, sensibility, experience...) of the two languages and
cultures involved, and with the aid of his personal tastes and
preferences.17
The translator has consciously or unconsciously established [the
correspondence rules] on the basis of his cofrontative knowledge of [the
source and target] languages, literatures and cultures.''
Holmes, as a seasoned translator and serious scholar, is unafraid in admitting
that the translated

end-product depends

on the

knowledge,

experience

and

preferences of the individual translating mind. What he calls map abstraction and
correspondence are complex, unobservable, even unconscious operations, which
nevertheless play an undeniable role in the translating process. Unlike many scholars
who, despite recognizing the importance of the translating process taking place in the
black box of the translator's mind, concentrate their efforts on more observable and
tangible facts and phenomena, Holmes throws down the gauntlet and challenges
himself and other translation scholars to discover the translator's text maps and
correspondence rules, in order to describe the relationship between the translated text
and its original.
Holmes offers one important observation in advance: correspondences form a
hierarchy. Every choice the translator makes along the way will modify the mapscape
of meaning, tilting it one way or another, opening options on one side while also
closing choices on the other.
There is a certain interdependence among correspondences: the choice
of a specific kind of correspondence in connection with one feature of the
source-text map determines the kind of correspondence available for
another or others, indeed in some cases renders correspondence for
certain further features infeasible or even unattainable.''
In this hierarchy, making a certain choice will give birth to a lineage of choices and
denounce the legitimacy of other choices at the same time. The principles at work here
are similar to what cognitive linguist George Lakoff (1979/1993) calls inheritance and
7 Holmes (1988c) p54
18 Holmes (1988b) p85
19 ibid p86

13

invariance, which will be discussed in greater details in Chapter Three. As the

interdependent relationships among correspondences can only be observed when the
translator's poetics is taken as a whole, as "a macrostructure," Holmes' translation
process model shares with cognitive linguistic theories the assumption that the human
faculty for corresponding and mapping (what we will soon come to see as the same
faculty for metaphorizing) is a dynamic and organic system with an overall structure
and a set of governing principles.

1.6 Gideon Toury's cultural-semiotic

approach

to

translating

Let us take a look at what another translation scholar, deeply influenced by

Holmes' descriptive translation theories, has offered as his description of the
translation process. From a cultural-semiotic perspective, Gideon Toury

(1986)

considers translating as "a series of operations whereby one semiotic entity is

transformed into, and replaced by, another entity, pertaining to another ... semiotic
system."20 Translating is "a four-stage process of decomposition ... selection of
features ... transfer of features [and] re-composition."According to Toury, the source
entity is decomposed into its constituent features, whose value in terms of relevance to
the source entity is assigned. The relevant features will be selected and transferred
over a semiotic border, after which they will be re-composed according to relevancy to
form the target entity. The more features of the initial entity that can be retained
"invariant under transformation"^^ in the target entity, that is, the more features of the
initial entity that can be reconstructed in terms of the recipient system, the higher the
translatability. An optimal process of translation will aspire at "the retention of the

2Toury (1986) p i 112

21 ibid p1114
ibid p1113

14

greatest and most central invariant core despite the differences in language and in
textual tradition.
This transfer of core features, like Holmes' mapping and matching, is the
definitively translational process in Toury's proposal, which Toury (1985) discusses on
other occasion:
Translations should therefore be regarded as functions which map
target-language utterances, along with their position in the relevant target
systems, on source-language utterances and their analogous position....
Thus, the actual subject-matter for descriptive studies within DTS
consists first and foremost of functional-relational concepts (rather than
their surface textual-linguistic representations), such as textual elements
or linguistic units in relation to their positions in the translated utterances
as systemic wholes; the translated utterances in relation to the target
system(s) in which they are situated; or, finally, the translated utterances
in relation to the utterances established as their... sources.^'*
The goal of systemic studies under DTS, in Toury's opinion, will be to identify and
describe the relationships between counterpart pairs, refer these relationships to the
overall concept of translation underlying the corpus and finally to discover the set of
norms and constraints that has been adopted by the translator.
Despite its target-oriented approach, Toury's analysis of the translation process
bears constitutive similarities to Holmes' model. First, it distinguishes

between

functions and functors, that is, between concepts and linguistic representations or
surface realizations. The premise that functors fulfill functions which "do not owe their
own existence to functors [and which] can have an indefinite number of functor
r e a l i z a t i o n s , " 2 5

runs parallel with Holmes' distinction of the structural and serial planes

and furthermore with cognitive scientists' advocacy of linguistic forms as merely

prompts for concept formation. Second, Toury envisions languages and cultures as,
like Holmes' linguistic, literary and socio-cultural continuums, systemic wholes across
which ad hoc relational notions are built during the act of translation. Third, Toury's
"functional-relational concepts" are constructed in a relational method, the way

ibid p1117
Toury (1985) p20-21
ibid p21

15

features in Holmes' conglomerates are regarded "in relation to" the continuum. Fourth,
Toury also believes that counterpart pairs form "a hierarchy of relationships,"^ the
totality of which will yield an indication of the overall translation relationships pertinent
to the entire corpus under study, what Holmes calls the translator's poetics. Both
approaches therefore share the tenet that translation is a conceptual cross-systemic
relational and hierarchical transference.
However, in Toury's argument, no explicit emphasis is placed on the metatextual or cognitive aspect of the translation process. Developed from a semiotic pointof-view, Toury's theory lacks the structural vision of Holmes' model. Toury's
decomposition/re-composition translating process may seem to hint at a mental reconfigurative operation, but is really a reiteration of translation as a decoding-encoding
process. Besides, his depiction of selected features being transferred over a semiotic
border and then re-composed according to the recipient system is derived from a
concept of translation as serial symbol manipulation.
Although Toury admits that when no target-language substitute is possible for a
source-text phrase, the translator needs to move to a higher-order source-language
unit until a substitute can be found, this reconstruction process remains on the
semanto-syntactic leveP and never reaches the height of cognitive construction and
mental re-configuration. Without an articulation of the third dimension of text maps,
mental conceptions and instantaneous insight, Toury's description of the translation
process falls flat and short of addressing the essential process of moving knowledge
and making meaning that is involved in the act of translation.

26 ibid p36
27 ibid p30-31

16

1.7 Summary

Holmes' two-map two-plane text-rank translation model has hit the bull's-eye. It
recognizes the vitality of instantaneous insight and hence the structural, meta-textual
operation involved in translating. It advocates the idea of text maps and mental
conceptions,

which are conglomerates

of linguistic,

literary and

socio-cultural

information about features in the text as well as the extra-textual

knowledge

presupposed by these textual features. It has therefore liberated translation from a

serial, one-to-one search for equivalence and brought it forward as a dynamic and
organic process of mental map re-configuration along counterparts and matchings. It
also proposes that, despite the fact that translation decisions are made based on the
individual translator's knowledge and experience, the fabric of correspondences does
and should form an integrated hierarchical network. The question Holmes leaves us is
"exactly how the translator makes these [correspondence] choices at the level of the
macrostructure, selecting certain counterparts and rejecting o t h e r , w h i c h this paper
will attempt to answer with help from cognitive linguistics and metaphor theories.

Holmes (1988c) p55

17

Chapter Two
Metaphor and Translation

2.1 Metaphor and

translation

When the mind is trying to understand, for example, e.e. cummings' lines "For
life's not a paragraph / And death I think is no parenthesis" and when it is seeking
Chinese translations for English phrases such as "to bite the hand that feeds you," "to
have your foot in your mouth" and "to put your tongue in your cheek," very similar
mental activities are going on.
First of all, two sets of knowledge structures must be activated. In the case of
understanding

metaphorical

poetry, the reader's existing

knowledge

structures

regarding 1) the source domain of text and writing and 2) the target domain of life and
death will be brought to mind. In the case of translating, the translator's existing
knowledge structures regarding 1) English idioms and 2) Chinese expressions will be
summoned to work.
Next, a complex process of assessing similarity and dissimilarity between the
two structures with the purpose to understand the metaphor or to find equivalent
phrases in the target language will be conducted. In the case of poetry, possible
resemblances between life and paragraph as well as death and parenthesis will be
experimented with in order to make sense of the unconventional juxtaposition made by
the poet. In the case of translation, how similar and dissimilar a pair of EnglishChinese translation is will be evaluated so that the most closely akin equivalent can be
found. In both cases, the more skilled and experienced the

reader/translator

is, the

more multi-dimensional (along linguistic, literary and socio-cultural dimensions) will be

18

his/her examination of similarities and dissimilarities, and the more contextual,

intertextual and situational factors will also be taken in account.
Last, the reader will discover an analogous relationship between life/death and
text/writing that has never been apprehended before. The translator might also find
new correspondences between his/her two sets of linguistic, literary and socio-cultural
knowledge structures and see new possibilities for expressing a concept embedded in
the source structure in terms of the target structure.
We have briefly looked at how metaphor, like translation, is also a carrying
across from a source domain to a target domain, the process of which entails intricate
knowledge structures, requires the perception of similarity in dissimilars (and viceversa) and culminates in a hierarchical construction of new relations. Let us embark on
a journey in search for further evidence on the congeniality between translation
process and metaphor comprehension.

2.2 Metaphor:

from linguistic

anomaly to cognitive

assimilation

The word "metaphor" has its origins in the Greek word metapherein meaning
"transfer," with meta meaning "beside, beyond" and pherein meaning "to bear or to
carry," and is used to describe the bearing across or carrying over of things from one
domain to another.
This cross-domain metaphorical transfer was long considered nothing more
than an alternative denominational devise or a frivolous rhetorical trope. Aristotle in

The Poetics defined metaphor as "giving the thing a name that belongs to something
else."29 Hobbes in The Leviathan called the metaphorical application of wordsthe
inconstant use of words in other senses than they are ordained foran abuse of

29 Aristotle 1457b 6-9.

19

speech for deception.

Locke in his Essay

Concerning

Human

Understanding

discussed the figurative and ornamental use of words and concluded that, despite the
pleasure and delight it offers, such rhetoric is a powerful instrument of error and deceit
"perfect cheats" for nothing else but "to insinuate wrong ideas, move the passions,
and thereby misleading the judgmet.3i
Along the same line, however, Aristotle also remarked that the command of
metaphor is a mark of genius, for to make good metaphors implies "an intuitive
perception of similarity in dissimilars."^^ After disparaging metaphors, Locke observed
the important fact that metaphors arise from "the transfer of obvious sensible Ideas ...
to more abstruse Significations" and "stand for Actions and Notions quite removed
from sense, ... for Ideas that come not under the cognizance of our senses." Giving
examples such as imagine, apprehend,

comprehend words taken from "the

operations of sensible Things" and applied to "certain modes of Thinking" Locke

illustrated our dependence on words denoting concrete physical things for the
articulation of abstract concepts and further implied that our concept formation has its
roots in this kind of metaphorical

t r a n s f e r e n c e ?

Shelley also remarked that "language

is vitally metaphorical [and] marks the before unapprehended relations of things and
perpetuates their apprehension."

Coleridge portrayed the universal mode of

imagination as metaphoric exchanges by which the individual life and its world grow
together. Philosophers and poets alike, expounding human understanding or
celebrating the faculty of imagination, have recognized the metaphorical nature and
the perspective- and world-creating characteristics of human thought.
Whether metaphor is a hyperbolic rhetorical device or a fundamental mental
mechanism should be subsumed under the bigger question of the relationship
between language and reality. Andrew Ortony (1993) analyzes this question in his
^ Hobbes Part 1, Chapter 4.
31 Locke Book III, Chaoter 1G
32 Aristotle 1459a 3-8.
33 Locke III, i, 5
34 Shelley, "A Defence of Poetry."
35 Coleridge, "The Statesman's Manual."

20

introductory essay to second edition of the anthology Metaphor and Thought. Ortony
explains that from a non-constructivist point-of-view, reality is literally describable and
explicable, precise and unambiguous; cognition is therefore simply apprehending
things the way they are and language is a stable semiotic system for word-thing
denominations. Metaphors, in this view, are but aberrant and negligible frills that
violate normal literal usage. From a constructivist perspective, however, there is no
directly observable and describable objective world, but only mentally constructed
realities. Cognition is therefore a subjective process using language and knowledge to
construct realities. The lexical-semantic relationship in language becomes fluid and
flexible, subject to the user's creative spinning. Metaphor, in this sense, is not only a
linguistic phenomenon but also a cognitive operation essential for the construction of
meaning and for thinking and talking about the world.
From I. A. Richards and Paul Riceour to Max Black and George Lakoff,
metaphor has been adopted as the key to describing and understanding the
conceptual structure and the cognitive process of the human mind. James Holmes'
translation process model, like the contemporary theories of metaphor, has also
catapulted from the literal and linguistic delimitation of its predecessors to a
constructivist and cognitive approach in order to address the puzzling phenomenon of
the organization and movement of thought in both the translating and metaphorizing
mind.

2.3 I. A. Richards: interaction

and

connection

An influential literary critic with linguistic and psychological interests, I. A.

Richards can also be attributed as the forerunner in modern metaphor research and
cognitive linguistics. In the series of lecture on rhetoric delivered in 1936, including
"Metaphor" and "The Command of Metaphor," Richards dismantles the traditional

21

notion of metaphor and establishes the framework of a more profound and profitable
approach to metaphor studies. Instead of dismissing metaphor as a deviation from the
norma mode of working in languages or a happy trick of shifting and displacing words,
Richards claims that metaphor is not only a constitutive form and omnipresent principle
of language but, more important, a definitive process in human thought. Richards
considers our linguistic capacity for metaphorical manipulations one strand in the
overall fabric of human cognition, and makes the groundbreaking announcement:

"thought is metaphoric, and proceeds by comparison, and the metaphors of language

derive thereof."^
Metaphors in language, therefore, are not just word games, but verbalized
manifestations of complex thought processes. In asking how metaphors work,
Richards is seeking to understand "how thought and feeling and all the other modes of
the mind's activity proceed"^^ how the mind adapts to the world; how we learn to live
in the world. With Richards, the study of metaphor takes on a cognitive meta-linguistic
perspective. To develop a modern theory of metaphor, Richards urges researchers to
proceed from merely marveling at the fantastic products of our metaphorical mind to
reflecting on the cognitive skill that has produced them. By making explicit the process
through which we effortlessly or even unconsciously use and understand metaphorical
language, it is hoped that we can "translate more of [this] skill into discussable
science." 38 Metaphorical language, to Richards and to the successive cognitive
linguists, holds one of the keys to the mysterious workings of the mind.
To facilitate research, Richards introduces the technical terms "tenor" and
"vehicle" to describe the two components in a metaphor. Richards then uses the term
"ground" to describe the tangent on which the two components, put together in a
metaphor, interact to yield meaning. Take the example of Shakespeare's famous
comparison of life to a walking shadow and a poor player, and we can see
36 Richards p94
37 ibid p95
38 ibid p94

22

that "shadow" and "player" are the vehicles that serve to carry the tenor "life" across.
Then, to understand Macbeth's lament that "Life's but a walking shadow, a poor
player," we need to discover common ground between life and acting, perhaps in
terms of their brevity, futility, illusion of reality and inevitable final curtain.
The pivotal idea is that the life of the metaphor comes not from the sum of the
two components but from the interactive relation, the consummative whole, born
between them.
The co-presence of the vehicle and tenor results in a meaning (to be
clearly distinguished from the tenor) which is not obtainable without their
interaction... [V]ehicle and tenor in co-operation give a meaning of more
varied powers than can be ascribed to either.^
Richards' interaction theory has eradicated the traditional view that the vehicle is
nothing more than an inessential embellishment of the tenor which is otherwise
unaffected by it, and articulated the central theme in metaphor research: the different
relations and modes of interaction between tenor and vehicle. In addition to discussing
likeness and resemblance as one mode of metaphorical interaction, Richards also
points out that disparity, putting two remote far-fetched objects together in a sudden
and striking fashion, creates tension that invigorates poetic metaphors. In poem 1445,
for example, Emily Dickinson writes "Death is the supple Suitor / That wins at last ~ / It
is a stealthy Wooing / ...." The metaphorical relation hereby created between death
and seduction is interactive and feeds new life to both the vehicle and tenor, adding a
touch of eroticism to death while infusing a strand of violence and morbidity into
sensual pleasure. We can also see from this example the forcefulness and resonance
conveyed by a jarring and unsettling poetic metaphor.
The match-maker behind all the different relations and modes of interaction is,
of course, the mind:
The mind is a connecting organ, it works only by connecting and it can
connect any two things in an indefinitely large number of ways.... In all
interpretation we are filling in connections.... The reader will try out
various connections, and this experimentation with the simplest and the
39 ibid plOO

23

most complex, the most obvious and the most recondite collocations
alike - is the movement which gives its meaning to all fluid
l a n g u a g e )

It is this fluid movement of the connective and constructivist mind, this continuous
figuration and re-configuration of thoughts, propelled by context and experience for the
construction of meaning, that is at work, not only during the production and
comprehension of metaphors, but also in the general act of reading, understanding
and translating. Richards' interaction theory of metaphor, more dynamic and organic
than the traditional comparison and substitution analyses, has positioned metaphor
studies on a higher and broader plane for future research on language and cognition.

2.4 Paul Ricoeur: innovation

and

rapprochement

In The Rule of Metaphor, French philosopher Paul Ricoeur (1978/1994a) states

that "metaphor is defined in terms of movement.4i In a metaphor, where two terms
from logically remote spaces are placed in proximity, there is a move or shift in logical
distance, from far to near, which results in a transfer of meaning, a change of distance
between meanings within a logical space, a restructuration of semantic fields, and a
new meaning. In his important article on metaphor theories, "Metaphorical Process as
Cognition, Imagination, and Feeling," Ricoeur (1978/1986b) states that the conundrum
in metaphor research is the innovation proper to "this transition from

literal

incongruence to metaphorical congruence between two semantic fields.'"*^

Ricoeur's

concern

with

metaphor

is

semantic

and

hermeneutic.

his

transpositional movement is not a substitutive process for filling a lexical lacuna or

decorating discourse but a semantic innovation where several semantic fields intersect
and interact for the construction of a new meaning. The production of meaning is

4ibid p125
Ricoeur (a) p17
Ricoeur (b) p427

24

"borne by the whole utterance"*^ not just the noun and the verb but all meaningful
linguistic entities and their corresponding systems of connotations and commonplaces.
While the connotative possibilities of words are endless, the human mind's innovative
power to create new contextual meaning is also limitless. Metaphor users build bridges
between seemingly incompatible words to make new pertinence, perceiving new
relations and parallel paradigms and pushing the frontier of non-sense further back.
Rapprochement (French for bringing together, reconciling, coming nearer) is what
Ricoeur calls the mental mechanism that makes distant things appear close and
reveals "a generic kinship between heterogeneous ideas.4 in other words, without
rapprochement, we cannot imagine any combination of things or conjunction of ideas
beyond the conventional boundaries and categorizations.
To

uncover

this

innovative

process

of

rapprochement

that

produces

metaphorical meaning, Ricoeur proposes a semantics of metaphor. To complete his

semantics

of metaphor,

Ricoeur recognizes the

necessity

of

looking at the

accompanying factors extrinsic to the informative kernel of metaphor, namely,

imagination and feeling, and of assigning to these psychological features their
semantic roles and functions in the metaphorical process. In his argument, the
imagination is understood as "seeing," as "insight," which consists of
the instantaneous grasping of the combinatory possibilities offered by the
proportionality [between the terms of the metaphor] and consequently the
establishment of the proportionality by the rapprochement between the
two ratios.45
This insight into likeness is what effects the logical shift and transcategorical
restructuration of semantic fields. However, the new pertinence in the restructuration
does not eradicate the previous incongruence, which resists while yielding to
rapprochement. In the new union, the previous mismatch subsists.
"Remoteness" is preserved within "proximity." To see the like is to see
the same in spite of, and through, the different.... Imagination,
43 ibid p426
44 ibid p426
45 ibid p427

25

accordingly, is this ability to produce new kinds by assimilation and to

produce them not above the difference, as in the concept, but in spite of
and through the differences. Imagination... remains caught between
distance and proximity, between remoteness and nearness.
The provocative authenticity of the metaphor disappears once this tension between
sameness and difference is smoothened out and becomes hackneyed, as in the case
of dead metaphors. In fact, for the metaphor to maintain, one must see the new
compatibility through the previous incompatibility. Let us take the word "edge" for
example. The expression "cutting edge" as in "Jack's company is at the cutting edge of
nanotechnology" can, unless a pun is intended, be considered a dead metaphor
because the image of an edge is no longer evoked for this expression to be produced
and understood. In A Room of One's Own, Virginia Woolf writes, "The beauty of the
world has two edges, one of laughter, one of anguish, cutting the heart asunder." In
this case, the metaphor is very much alive, because the stabbing incompatibility
between beauty and knife-edge cannot be soothed, yet the poignant beauty of the
world is now and will forever be seen through the image of a sharp, cold blade.
The metaphorical imagination has "a kind of figurability""^ that is both literal and
metaphorical, serial and structural, associative and abstract,. To imagine is to display
similar and disparate relations simultaneously, to configure and re-configure in a
kaleidoscopic way. For Ricoeur, language is not an arbitrary system of differential
denotation, but a manifestation of the metaphorical innovation and rapprochement of
the imagination. Metaphor, in addition to its rhetorical and poetic prowess, reflects the
shuttle action of the weaving loom at the back of the mind and therefore "allow[s] us a
glance at the general procedure by which we produce concepts.'"'

46 ibid P427-428
ibid p425
48 ibid p428

26

2.5 Cognitive linguistics:

metaphorical

mappings

For cognitive linguists, language is indeed a peephole into the workings of the
mind. Cognitive linguistics emerged in 1980s as a less formalistic and more integrative
approach to the study of language in the context of conceptualization and cognitive
processes. Cognitive linguists study the motivation patterns in linguistic utterances with
the purpose not only to understand language but also to uncover the patterns of the
mind, in particular its conceptual structure and organization. Unlike Chomskyian
linguists, cognitive linguists do not support the idea of an autonomous language faculty.
Instead, they believe that language use is a reflection or specialization of generalpurpose cognitive abilities and operates in unison with the more general phenomena of
cognition, drawing from cognitive abilities such as "conceptualization, construal,
categorization and subjacent knowledge

s t r u c t u r e s ,

Cognitive linguists, adopting a

constructivist approach to language and reality, concur that experiences are always
filtered

by

perceptual

senses

and

construed

by

cognitive

processes.

As

consequence, language cannot be taken as a direct description of the real world, but is
rather an encoded description of a particular individual's, society's, culture's or era's
apprehension or comprehension of reality. Furthermore, what language encodes is not
thought in its complex entirety, but rudimentary prompts or instructions to the
conceptual system for the construction of ideasAccording to cognitive linguistics,
therefore, any theory of language that does not attempt to integrate language into the
overall mental fabric of concept formation and cognitive processes remains incomplete
and insufficient.
For cognitive linguists, the three major powerhouses of the human mind,
namely, perception, cognition and language, are intimately related, forming an
interactive continuum:

Hilferty p i
Evans & Green p7

27

The body and its perceptual processes serve as an important source of

grounding for concept formation and imaginative reasoning, especially,
metaphor and metonymy. Basic cognitive abilities, such as prototype
categorization or the imposistion of figure/ground alignment, are also
held to play a pivotal role in linguistic competence
Our being in the world in erect embodiment has irrevocably informed and reinforced
our perception and experience of the physical world

These perceptual

and

experiential data in turn serve as the building blocks of our primary concepts, giving us
what Lakoff and Johnson (1980) call the image schemas of IN vs. OUT, UP vs. DOWN,
SOURCE-PATH-GOAL etc. that are then manifested in language. Human thought,
however, would be extremely narrow-minded if limited to sensory and bodily
experiences. The way we conceptualize the abstract and nonphysical is necessarily in

terms of the concrete and physical, which is why we describe LIFE AS A JOURNEY,
ARGUMENTS

AS

BUILDINGS,

UNDERSTANDING

AS

SEEING,

etc.. ^^ This

distinctively human ability to extend, manipulate and cross-breed ideas is what

cognitive linguists call the imaginative mapping processes, the most significant of
which are metaphor, metonymy and blend?
In a nutshell, metaphor is the mapping of a source domain onto a target
domain (in this case of the "nutshell," the mapping of the gist of an idea to the kernel of
a nut). It is a cognitive mechanism whereby the frames of one experiential domain are
partially mapped or projected onto a different experiential domain, so that the target
domain is partially understood in terms of the source domain. When we describe life as
a journey, for example, the target domain of life is partially understood in terms of the
source domain of journeying. This means that features of the source domain, such as
the beginning, path and destination of a journey, are mapped onto target domain, so
that life is perceived now as a pathway that has a beginning and end. The ontological
and epistemic correspondences involved in metaphorical mappings are generative of

51 Janda p12
Lakoff & Johnson p46-51
53 ibid

28

new perspectives of reality, without which we will be entrapped in our embodied

perception.
Rene Dirven in the introductory note to The Ubiquity of Metaphor says that
metaphor is "a constitutive factor of all mental constructions and reconstructions of
reality.... part of the deepest and most general process of human interaction with
reality [for] assimilating and adapting to the world."54 Cognitive linguists are convinced
of the pervasive universality and vitality of the metaphorical processes in human
cognition. They also recognize its robust ubiquity in language, but are aware that "the
ways in which these metaphorical extensions are realized and conventionalized are
highly language-specific."55 in other words, metaphorical conceptualization is common
across all cultures, but each language has developed its own system of metaphorical
COV6tios.
Cognitive linguistics, as an inter-disciplinary approach to the study of language
and cognition, pay close attention to real language data and readily take into account
contextual and cultural factors in their research. It has proven to be fertile ground for
the production of stimulating and revealing work on language and mind, and
researchers are digging deeper and deeper towards the roots of human distinction. In
the following two sub-sections, we will take a look at the basic tenets of cognitive
linguistics and see how they might coincide with the main concerns in translation
studies for potential cross-fertilization.

2.5.1 Cognitive matrix and

polysystem

To understand any utterance, the mind needs to access one or more spheres
of knowledge, or cognitive domains, which are mental organizations of world
knowledge that can include "a potentially open-ended assembly of information, ranging

54 Dirven and Paprotte p viii

55 Janda p12

29

from empirical certainties and axiomatic background assumptions to crass errors,

flights of fancy, and superstitions."^ Contrary to the classical theory of categorization,
such cognitive categories of encyclopedic knowledge do not have clear boundaries
and its members demonstrate family resemblances but do not share a conjunction of
necessary and sufficient features. Cognitive domains are instead radial in structure,
with some members being more prototypical and representative than others. There are
also multiply motivated category members which "fit into a given category in more than
one place... and/or are related to the prototype in more than one

way."57

Furthermore,

cognitive domains form a hierarchical matrix, with subordinate and superordinate

levels, distributing and connecting all information.
In addition, most cognitive domains presuppose other cognitive domains.
According to the profile/base framework, the base is "the underlying matrix of cognitive
domains that is required or evoked in comprehending a given e x p r e s s i o n . I n other
words, the base acts as the conceptual context for the profile and provides "the
necessary backdrop of encyclopedic information"^ for the construction of meaning.
The profile, on the other hand, is also important as the highlighted substructure within
the base designated by the expression without which no correct reference can be
recovered. When we read in the news "The President was dealt a weak hand in the
negotiation with the guerilla leader, who had an ace up his sleeve all the time," if we
cannot recognize and evoke the base domain of card-playing that is presupposed by
the profile of political negotiation, we will probably fail to appreciate the precarious
situation the President is in. The alignment and interplay of base and profile,
background and foreground, implicit and explicit knowledge structures or what Gestalt
psychologists call ground and figure, plays a decisive role in the construction of
meaning.

Individual

and

cultural

differences

between

the

configuration

and

^ Hilferty p13
Janda p11
58 Hilferty p22
59 ibid p23

30

sophistication of knowledge structures serve to explain why different people "construe"

the same sentence differently.
Cognitive linguists conceive of human thought as a multi-dimensional and
dynamic system forming an intricate and elastic web of prototype and entailment
relationships. Metaphorical processing relates cognitive domains and induces crossdomain transfers, and scholars have been keen to study the structure of the cognitive
domains as well as the formation of cross-domain relationships.
Translation has also been conceived as a cross-domain transfer and studied in
terms of the norms and constraints governing such transfers. The "polysystem" theory
proposed by Itamar Even-Zohar (1978, 1979) is an apt articulation of such a systemic
approach to studying translation and is applicable from the semiotic to cultural level.
Like the cognitive matrix, polysystems are multi-dimensional and dynamic, with radial
and hierarchical structures. According to the "polysystem" theory, text is never
autonomous, but always enmeshed in a myriad of relationships, a multiplicity of
intersecting and overlapping paradigms and systems. Within the poly system, some
systems occupy a prominent position, while others are relegated to the peripheral
locations, and conflicts arise from the contention for the central position. Systems
therefore maintain "hierarchical relations, which means that some maintain a more
central position than others, or that some are primary \Nh\\e other are secondary.^^
Further to his "polysystem" theory, Even-Zohar postulates that "translational
procedures between two systems (languages/literatures) are in principle analogous,
even homologous, with transfers within the borders of the system"^ and proposes to
discuss translation in terms of transfer. Recognizing translation as a phenomenon of
transfer and systemic manipulation, Even-Zohar reinstates the objective of translation

Even-Zohar (1978) p16

61 Even-Zohar (1979) p73

31

studies as the discovery of the governing relations between source and target and the
hierarchy of semiotic constraints of transfer.^

2.5.2 Analogy and

correspondence

The crux in both metaphorical and translational transfer is making analogies or

finding correspondences. The apprehension of the metaphorical relation is a cognitive
problem of forming a novel conceptual entity from apparently disparate parts and
entails concepts of "similarity, relation, integration and novelty,"^ according to Allan
Pavio and Mary Walsh (1979/1993). The practice of translation, however deviant and
rebellious, can never break free from the question of correspondence between two
texts.
The recognition of identity and similarity between objects and concepts, a
psychological/cognitive process that we appear to perform effortlessly, indeed almost
inadvertently, however, has continued to evade attempts by scholars in different
disciplines to make it explicit for definition and prediction. In psychology, the
recognition of similarity is a theoretical puzzle that has attracted a lot of interesting
research.

In

studying

the

psychological

processes

involved

in

metaphor

comprehension and production, Pavio and Walsh ask a series of questions: If one
takes similarity to be formal similarity calculated in terms of the number of shared
attributes or identical elements between two entities, then how does the mind gauge
the degree of identity? If one adopts a relational approach to similarity, then the
different types of relation (effect, function, proportion, etc.) and hence the different sets
of criteria for measuring these relational similarities must also be taken into account'*
In translation, it is widely acknowledged that no absolute correspondence between

ibid p76-77
63 Paivio & Walsh p309
64 ibid p309-310

32

texts of different languages is ever possible, yet the quest for the closest possible
equivalent has never ceased to be a theoretical and practical pursuit.
Upon the groundwork of cognitive linguistics, scholars have been working to
build a cognitive poetics for literature, which studies literary texts as products of
cognizing minds. The first question to address is the metaphorical or analogical
mappings manipulated by the literary mind. Margaret Freeman (2000), in her attempt
to develop a cognitive theory of literature, postulates three levels of cognitive skills in
the making of analogies: 1) attribute mapping, which perceives similarity between
objects, 2) relational mapping, which pays attention to relations between objects, and 3)
system mapping, which recognizes the patterns created by object relations and
enables generalization to more abstract structures.
systemic

model of similarity

is intellectually

This kind of geometric and

appealing, but fails in terms of

mathematical accuracy. Amos Tversky (1970), a pioneer in cognitive science, puts

forth an account of similarity based on feature matching, where "the degree of
similarity between two objects is a weighted function of their intersecting features
minus a weighted function of the features distinctive to one and of the features
distinctive to the other." In the field of translation, Eugene Nida (1964) expounds the
principles of correspondence in Towards a Science of Translating and highlights two
types of equivalence: formal and dynamic. Formal or structural equivalence calls for
close approximation to the form and content of the message, so that the "message in
the receptor language should match as closely as possible the different elements in
the source language."^ Dynamic equivalence is concerned with effect, impact and
response of the receptor to the message and strives for a dynamic relationship
between receptor and message that should be "substantially the same as that which
existed between the original receptors and the

m e s s a g e .

65 Freeman p254
Ortony p346
67 Nida p159
68 ibid

J J

The above examples serve to illustrate that metaphorical mappings in cognitive

linguistics and correspondence principles in translation theories are both preempted by
the question of sameness and difference. Metaphor and translation are both enabled
by the human mind's amazing ability to spot similarities and dissimilarities and evoke
complex cross-domain transfer. Yet the dynamics of this transfer remains a mystery.
Researchers on language and cognition, including cognitive linguists, have taken up
the issue of metaphorical mappings and offered different accounts and hypotheses of
the

transfer

mechanism,

which

are

enlightening

for

the

studies

of

human

understanding, text processing, and translation alike.

2.6 Hermeneutics:

fore-knowledge

and fusion

It is worthwhile to pause here and consider the philosophy of understanding

developed in hermeneutics. In Truth and Method, Hans-Georg Gadamer (1960)
elaborates and consolidates the philosophies of his predecessors, including Frederich
Schleiermacher and Martin Heidegger, to develop a theory of interpretation based on
fore-knowledge and fusion. George Steiner in his book on translation After Babel
(1975) adopts the hermeneutic motion for a fourfold act of appropriative transfer of
meaning in translation. As we continue, the similarities between cognitive linguistics
and hermeneutics on the organization and movement of thought during textual
comprehension, though expressed and evinced very differently, will begin to emerge.
Text is a manifestation of a matrix of meanings. Cognitive linguists visualize it
as a cluster of encyclopedic knowledge structures. Holmes (1988b) calls it a
conglomerate of linguistic, literary and socio-cultural backgrounds of the text. In his
philosophical

hermeneutics,

Gadamer

summons

these

"backgrounds"

to

the

foreground and elevates them as the precondition for understanding. Traditions situate
us in the world, and it is only from this situatedness that the act of understanding can

34

take place. We never approach and understand texts from a vacuum. We always bring
to it, consciously

or unconsciously, our pre-existent

mindset of

expectations,

experiences and prejudices. Our pre-constmctions about the world, "a commonality of
fundamental, enabling prejudices,"are prerequisite for productive understanding.
Without such fore-knowledge or pre-judgments about ourselves and our world, we will
not be able to see how the text stands in relation to our world and the author's world
and to understand it in context. According to Holmes, we always regard a linguistic,
literary or socio-cultural feature in the text in relation to its historical continuum. We
create meaning by juxtaposing the present text against previous experiences of
reading and being in the world. Indeed, this venture of creating meaning is propelled
by an initiative trust in the meaningfulness of the text, that it will cohere with other parts
of our knowledge structures and make sense. This act of trust, in George Steiner's
words,
is underwritten by previous experience,... derives from a sequence of
phenomenological assumptions about the coherence of the world, about
the presence of meaning in very different, perhaps formally antithetical
semantic systems, about the validity of analogy and parallel, ... [and]
concentrates to the human bias towards seeing the world as symbolic, as
constituted of relations in which this can stand for 'that', and must in fact
be able to do so if there are to be meanings and structures/
Making meaning is forming new relations of analogies and parallels across knowledge
structures,

cohering new information to existing knowledge backgrounds,

and

reconfiguring the entire cognitive matrix to accommodate and appropriate the present
text.
The historical horizon is therefore never absolutely bound to any standpoint but
always in motion, just as cognitive domains are not delimited and closed, but
constantly undergoing adjustments and assimilations. During the act of understanding,
the present horizon is continually being transformed as we continually adapt to and
accommodate new developments in the text. What cognitive linguists call interaction,

69 Gadamer p295
70 Steiner p299

35

innovation and metphorical mapping, Gadamer describes as a fusion of horizons,

where past and present, source and target, are constantly blending and bleeding into
each other to create something of living value. Understanding is a dialectic of renewal
and rejuvenation, where "[once] the historical horizon is projected, it is simultaneously
superseded."71 Using a more visceral vocabulary, George Steiner portrays this fusion
of horizon as aggressive and incorporative. Like a mode of attack, understanding is
encirclement and ingestion - appropriative, incursive, extractive, invasive, exhaustive
- a n d then import and embodiment, intake and incarnation/^
To avoid destructive domestication of the text and to remain open and sensitive
to its otherness, we should become aware of our fore-structures of traditions and
prejudices in relation to the text, critically examine and test their legitimacy and
constantly revise them so that the text can assert its own truth against such foremeanings. This way, acts of translation will add to our means and we can come to
"incarnate alternative energies and resources of feelings."^ We are no longer bound to
any one standpoint or a fixed set of traditions and values, but can acquire new
standpoints and worldviews for relating to the text. With a wider horizon, we gain a
superior breadth of vision and rise to a higher universality where we can "look beyond
what is close at hand... see it better, within a larger whole and in truer

p r o p o r t i o n . 7 4

For translators, the width of vision is earned by an expansive knowledge matrix of

linguistic, literary and socio-cultural information and experience, while the height of
vision is gained by the meta-textual insight or imagination that engages the source and
target texts in intricate correspondence and configuration.

71 Gadamer p307
72 steiner p300
73 ibid p300
ibid p305

36

2.7 Summary

In this chapter, we looked at how philosophers, cognitive linguists and

translation scholars approach the question of understanding and how their work
converges to address the rudiments of human cognition: the organization and
movement of thought. First, it is generally agreed that the cognitive structure of the
human mind is systemic and dynamic in nature, forming a radial and hierarhical matrix.
For understanding to take place, base cognitive domains or foreknowledge structures
are presupposed and activated. In translation, this semantic structure consists of
mental maps, which are conglomerates and continuums of linguistic, literary and sociocultural information.
Second, textual understanding is a dialectic and dynamic movement of transfer.
Richards calls it interaction, Ricoeur names it rapproachement, Gadamer uses fusion,
and cognitive linguists coins the phrase cross-domain metaphorical mapping. They all
view this transfer as making analogies

and parallels across similarities

and

dissimilarities. In Holmes' translation process model, this inter-textual mapping and

corresponding process is singled out as the defining translational act. Details of the
transfer, unfortunately, were not furnished. In the next chapter, we will review the
different theories and hypotheses about the mode of this interactive and innovative
transfer produced by modern metaphor research, with the purpose of borrowing them
to fill in blanks in Holmes' model.

37

Chapter Three
The Contemporary Theory of Metaphor

3.1 Metaphor comprehension

and

production

In Chapter One, we examined Holmes' two-map two-plane text-rank translation

process model, in which translation is essentially a transfer process involving mental
map correspondence and configuration. In Chapter Two, we reviewed the way human
cognition, in particular abstract thought and concept formation, is enabled by
analogical

cross-domain

mappings.

Correspondence

and

analogy

both

entail

juxtaposing incoming new information against existing knowledge and teasing out
resemblances and disparities, and require extraordinary mental acumen and agility. In
translation, we make a matching target text against the original source text and also
against the existing target-text language and culture. In understanding, we ingest new
information or experience only by likening it to something we already knew, by fitting it
in to an epistemic or experiential category already established, all the while sorting out
the similarities and noting the dissimilarities. The human mind very rarely invents anew
or creates from vacuum; it runs by analogy and induction, borrowing and lending,
merging and consolidating.
Metaphor is the epitome of such a process of describing one thing in terms of
another, understanding one topic in the language of another, holding a new idea on
the template of an old one, or carrying a tenor in a Trojan vehicle, and has therefore
been denounced by some as disguise and deceit. Yet, how does the human mind see
through the falsity and moreover detect a new version of truth in the metaphor? In
other words, how does the mind recognize the sameness, resolve the difference, and

38

grasp "the significance of a metaphorical r e l a t i o n " M e t a p h o r theorists, including

cognitive linguists and scientists, have come to believe that answers to these
questions on metaphor comprehension and production will reap quintessential insights
into the human conceptual system and cognitive operations, which will in turn help us
gain a fuller understanding of the translation process.

3.2 Brief history and major

theorists

In September 1977, a multi-disciplinary conference on metaphor and thought

drew a group of leading philosophers, psychologists, linguists and educators to the
University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign. Presenters at the conference included Max
Black, Howard Gardner, George Lakoff, George Miller, Michael Reddy, John Searle,
and

Robert

Sternberg,

and

paper

topics

covered

the

linguistic,

conceptual,

psychological, educational as well as socio-political aspects of metaphor. In February

1978, the University of Chicago Extension sponsored a symposium called "Metaphor:
The Conceptual Leap" and invited preeminent philosophers to a three-day festival of
metaphor musings. Speakers and panel members included Wayne Booth, Donald
Davidson, Paul de Man and Paul Ricoeur, and the lectures and discussions ranged
from epistemology and religion to art and the imagination. Consequent to the
conferences, Metaphor and Thought, edited by Andrew Ortony, and On Metaphor,
edited by Sheldon Sacks, were published in 1979. In 1985, Jean-Pierre van Noppen
a n d S a b i n e de K n o p compiled Metaphor:
w h i c h w a s followed in 1990 b y Metaphor

a bibliography
II: a classified

of post-1970
bibliography

publications,
of

publications

from 1985-1990a volume containing more than 3,000 references. In early 2005,
Bibliography of Metaphor and Metonymy, compiled by Sabine de Knop, Rene Dirven
et al., was launched. This online database, to be updated on an annual basis, will
75 Paivio & Walsh p309

39

cover a wide variety of publications on metaphor, metonymy and other figurative

language from 1990 onwards and will contain an approximate 4,000 records in its
initial release.
From the 1970s onward, metaphor's appeal to scholars and thinkers has
exponentially increased and its horizon continually expanded, from the philosophy of
language, philosophy of science and cognitive science to linguistics, psychology,
sociology, education and artificial intelligence. Metaphor, once liberated from literality,
has provided a new paradigm for the discussion of the age-old issues of mind, reality
and language, knowledge, learning and creativity, and ultimately self, religion and
transcendence. We wni trace the contemporary development of metaphor theories via
the work of four major theorists in the following sub-sections, before surveying their
and other scholars' theories and models regarding the conceptual structure, textual
processing, mapping and blending.

3.27 Max Black

Max Black (1909-1988), highly talented in chess and music, was trained in
mathematics and philosophy at Cambridge and London, and became professor in
philosophy at Cornell University in 1946. He made momentous contributions to the
philosophy of language, the philosophy of mathematics and science, the philosophy of
art, conceptual analysis as well as metaphor theories. In 1962, he published the
seminal work for metaphor studies Models and Metaphors, where he presented his
interaction view of metaphor.
The interaction view is an elaboration and expansion of the work of 1. A.
Richards. Before its introduction, metaphor could only be discussed in terms of
substitution or comparison. According to the substitution view, a metaphorical
statement can be readily replaced by a set of literal sentences. In the comparison
approach, metaphor is taken simply as an abbreviated simile. The interaction view,

40

however, claims that metaphor is a cognitively irreducible phenomenon that cannot be

paraphrased into literal language or restored as a comparative statement. Looking
beyond the linguistic manifestation of metaphorical statements, Richards and Black
discover the conceptual dimension of metaphors and the cognitive complexities
involved in using and understanding metaphors. Metaphor does not work on the plane
of word combination, but on the plane of conceptual interactions underlying language.
Combination is a purely compositional arrangement of concepts, which does not
change the meaning of either concept. Metaphor, as argued by Richards and Black,
transcends simple combination because it is an interactive process between concepts
where attributes normally applied to one will be applied to the other, leading to an
approximation and interchange of predications and associations between the two.
Metaphor therefore gives rise to a new conceptual structure that is more complex and
dynamic than an aggregate conceptual structure resulting from literal composition or
simple combination.
According to lack's interaction view (1979/1993), a metaphorical statement
has two components: the primary subject (tenor) and the secondary subject (vehicle).
The secondary subject is a complex of associations and implications, a relevant set of
which will be selected and projected upon the primary subject. The isomorphic,
analogous or structural mapping of the primary and secondary implicative-complexes
will induce interactive changes and re-configurations in both complexes. Metaphor, as
an interaction between concepts, therefore leads to "shifts in meaning of words" and
"conceptual innovation.

3.2.2 George

Lakoff

George Lakoff teaches linguistics at the University of California, Berkeley, and

is a leading scholar on cognitive linguistics, in particular conceptual analysis, cognitive
76 Black p27-28

41

social science and the neural theories of language. In 1980, he set forth his theory of
conceptual metaphors in Metaphors We Live By (with Mark Johnson), making a
persuasive argument for the metaphorical nature of human conceptual systems and
the formative and transformative impact of metaphors on our perception of the world.
In 1987, with Women, Fire and Dangerous Things, Lakoff laid down his philosophy of
experiential realism through an examination of concept categorization and cognitive
models (prepositional, image-schematic, metaphoric and metonymic). The human
conceptual system, according to experiential realism, is embodied - all human thought
and abstract reason has its roots in our sensori-motor interactions with the
environment. The idea of an embodied mind that is also capable of metaphorical
conceptualization of abstract thought was further enunciated in Philosophy in the Flesh
(with Mark Johnson, 1999).
Lakoff is also interested in the application of cognitive semantics to the social
sciences, with the purpose to reframe social and political issues for public rethinking.
He has blown the whistle to alert progressives to beware of the framing used by
conservative politicians in discussing tax, war, same-sex marriage and other social
and political issues. In his view, how the public debate is framed, that is, what kind of
metaphorical system and conceptual framework is implicated by the language used in
debate, has profound reverberations on public opinion because frames are more
powerful than facts in influencing our thought. terms of the neural foundations of
conceptual systems and language, Lakoff and his collaborator are seeking to develop
biologically-motivated structured connectionist systems, including a neural theory of
grammar, that can model the learning process of conceptual systems and natural
language processing.
In 1993, Lakoff consolidated his ideas on conceptual metaphors in the article
"The Contemporary Theory of Metaphor" and stated that
the locus of metaphor is not in language at all, but in the way we
conceptualize one mental domain in terms of another. The general

42

theory of metaphor is given by characterizing such cross-domain

m a p p i n g s . 7 7

Lakoff claims that cross-domain mappings happen not only in the literary, poetic
sphere but also in the ordinary, conventional aspects of human life. Metaphor is an
archetype of the human mind and metaphorical mapping is a potent framework that
can help researchers better understand language processing, concept learning,
abstract reasoning as well as political propaganda.

3.2.3 Mark Turner and Gilles

Fauconnier

Mark Turner is professor of cognitive science at Case Western Reserve

University. He has published extensively on conceptual integration and its role in
language and grammar as well as on topics such as counterfactual reasoning,
conceptual

and

linguistic

systems,

poetics,

style

and the imagination.

Gilles

Fauconnier has been professor at the Department of Cognitive Science at the

University of California, San Diego since 1988. His major publications include Mental
spaces:

Aspects

of meaning

construction

in natural language

(1985) and Mappings

in

thought and language (1997). In 2002, Turner and Fauconnier published The way we
think:

Conceptual

blending

and

the

mind's

hidden

complexities

and

pinpointed

conceptual blending as the exceptional mental quality that had enabled the human
race to evolve into the highly intelligent and innovative beings we are today.
The theory of conceptual blending combines the ideas of interaction, mapping
and projection, and takes them one step further to formulate a more intricate approach
to

studying

mental

mechanisms

and meaning constructions.

For Turner

and

Fauconnier, the models of cross-domain mapping have proven to be insufficient in

explaining a large amount of linguistic phenomena that are not simply analogical or
metaphoric but that also involve simulation and creation. They therefore argue that the

77 Lakoff (1979/1993) p203

43

two-domain model is actually part of a larger and more general many-space model,
which involves at least four mental spaces (two input spaces, one generic space and
one blended space). According to this many-space model of conceptual integration
and multiple projections, the mind blends a rich, new space with an emergent structure
that is not directly available from the input domains. The cognitive operations
underlying the productive and creative blending process are "identity, integration and
i m a g i n a t i o n . " 7 8

The recognition of identity and opposition, sameness and difference,

provides the material for the elaborate and dynamic integration work of the mind. With
a final and pivotal zest of imagination, the human brain becomes the turbo-simulator
that can imagine the counterfactual and invent the impossible.
Upon their theory of conceptual blending, Turner and Fauconnier also
investigate the process of blending at the level of linguistic expression. Our elaborate
formal systems (language, mathematics, music, art) are prompts for the construction of
meaning. Language is not a container or conveyor of meaning, but a polished and
powerful system of cues and instructions that evoke mental space configurations and
projections. The relationship between grammatical forms and conceptual integration,
that is, how the hearer unpacks minimal linguistic cues to reach large conceptual
arrays over which to perform blending, as well as the language- and culture-specific
default frames that restrict blending, are what Turner, Fauconnier and other cognitive
linguists are striving to uncover.

3.3 The structure

of thought

In George Lakoff s experientialist approach to human cognition (1987), thought

is both embodied and imaginative/ First, meaning is characterized by embodiment,

78 Fauconnier & Turner p6

79 Lakoff (1987piii

44

that is, in terms of "our collective biological capacities and our physical and social
experiences as beings functioning in our environment. Kinesthetic image-schematic
structures, such as CONTAINERS, PATHS, LINKS, FORCES, BAU\NCE, UP-DOWN,
PART-WHOLE, recur in our everyday bodily existence and movement in the world.
These recurring dynamic patterns of our perceptual interactions and motor programs
serve as mediation between perception and conception and give coherence and
structure to our experience. However, sensorimotor concepts make up only a small
part of our conceptual system. Most of our thoughts are abstract. Reason is abstract.
Lakoff argues that abstract concepts and abstract reason also arise out of bodily
experience, but are further enhanced and engineered by imaginative metaphoric and
metonymic projections.^
In addition to its experiential and imaginative aspects, Lakoff also stresses the
ecological structure and gestalt properties of thought. It is a system with an overall
inter-related structure, where effects cannot be localized - something in one part of the
system affects things elsewhere in the system.^ William Croft (2002) calls this the
conceptual unity of domain, where the meaning of the whole also affects the meaning
of the

p a r t s

83 in other words, when one feature in the picture changes, its relation with

other features also changes, and with the domino effect the whole picture eventually
takes up a new outlook. Similarly, if the picture is perceived from a different angle or
under a different light, all its features, like those in an optical illusion, will assume
different appearances. Thought is not a mental file cabinet of concepts that are
statically stored and retrieved, and human cognition does not operate by mechanical
algorithm; instead it is always organic and dynamic and maintains a complex multidimensional wholeness.

ibid p267
31 ibid p267-268
ibid p95
83 Croft p 162

45

Lakoff thus envisions the cognitive schema as a network of nodes and links,
interwoven and interactive with other schemas in the conceptual system. Black, in his
interaction

view of

metaphor

(1979/1993),

depicts concept as "a system

of

relationships" or "a set of associated implications, comprised in the implicative

c o m p l e x , " 8 4

in which there are nodes for correlation and correspondence. Sternberg,

Tourangeau and Nigro (1979,1993) put forth a theory of representation in metaphor, in

which they further develop this idea of a networked and multi-dimensional conceptual
structure. Their research on metaphor generation, comprehension and appreciation
grew out of theories and hypotheses on induction and analogical reasoning. They refer
to work by Rumelhart and Abrahamsom in 1973, who assumed that
information can be represented by means of a multidimensional
"semantic space" in which each dimension represents some graded
characteristic of the set of concepts under consideration.... [that] each
term of an analogy problem can be represented by a point in this threedimensional s p a c e
To describe the hierarchical complexities involved in metaphor comprehension,
Sternberg et al. recognize the necessity of ordering the spaces according to their level
of abstraction in the overall conceptual structure.
Imagine an array of "local subspaces" comprising sets of terms.... Each
local subspace represents the terms within it as points with coordinates
on each of several dimensions. Each of these local subspaces might also
be viewed as of roughly the same order (level of abstraction), and as of a
lower order than a higher-order hyperspace that contains the lower-order
subspaces as points embedded within it. Thus, the points of the higherorder hyperspace map into the lower order subspaces....
This
hyperspace can, in turn, be viewed as one of multiple subspaces of
some still higher-order hyperspace. (italics added)
But how is the whole structure inter-connected? On the vertical axis, what restricts the
subspaces that map into one hyperspace? On the horizontal axis, what determines
which

subspace

is

linked

to which

same-level

subspace?

The

question

of

categorization and similarity returns here, and Sternberg et al. address it by requiring
all local subspaces to have "at least one corresponding dimension if they are to be of
Black p27,28
85 Sternberg, Tourangeau & Nigro p278
86 ibid p280-281

46

the same order and of a common hyperspace."^ But the question remains because
dissimilarities and resemblances between concepts must first be identified and rated
before corresponding dimensions can be assigned. Sternberg and his collaborators
decide to adopt the semantic differential and factor analysis method, formulated by
Osgood, Suci and Tannenbaum in The Measurement of Meaning (1957) for achieving
uniform dimensions across domains. The terms in each subspace are represented as
coordinates along three dimensions, at least one of which will be common across the
same-level subspace and in the hyperspace. As a result, we have a hierarchical, multidimensional and inter-connected conceptual structure.
Whether there is any neurological, biological, experiential or logical foundation
to these theories and models or not, it does appear that, given our physical
experiences with the world and our mental mechanisms of conceptualizing and
imagining this world, this picture of a systemic, hierarchical, multi-dimensional and
interactive conceptual network is the most tenable one upon which to base further
cognition and metaphor research.

3.4 From text to concept

Having discussed conceptual organization and representation, we must now

investigate the conceptual changes and configurations induced during reading and
understanding before progressing to look at the duplex dynamics involved in metaphor
and translation. And to investigate reading and understanding, we inevitably return to
the question of language and thought, text and concept.
Cognitive scientists generally agree that language is a tool for expressing and
forming concepts, but it does not contain meaning and is not the concept itself. Gilles
Fauconnier (1997) rests his theory of mental mapping and blending on the credo that
87 ibid p281

47

linguistic

forms

and

symbols

prompt

the

construction

of

appropriate

space

configurations and viewpoints. Words are shorthand instructions that cue the hearer to
activate the relevant knowledge schemas, locate the pertinent correlations and
configure the cognitive cluster. A simple linguistic form can prompt the construction of
a highly complicated meaning, and a language already has all the grammatical forms it
needs to express almost any conceptual construction of meaning. Natural language is
a culturally developed means that is powerful while maximally economic in "triggering
complex projections of structure across discourse domains." Language has been
designed to yield huge amounts of structure:
Some words and grammatical constructions bring with them an array of
background knowledge, including frames, cognitive models, default
assumptions, encyclopedic information;... if [a word] does not identify the
particular function and mapping, it is inferred on the basis of context plus
background knowledge and models;... expressions... bring in complex
mappings and connections for their interpretation, even though such
mappings are not indicated by words in the sentence;... extensive
projection mappings are also set up, using very few words.
Language

is

system

of

implications

and

instructions,

entailments

and

presuppositions, brief superficial manifestations that conjecture extensive underlying

cognitive constructions. Words and phrases are but "the skeleton of expression, hints
of meaning, light touches of a skilful sketcher's pencil, to which the appreciative sense
and sympathetic mind must supply the filling up and colouring. What words encode
is not meaning, but instructions for the imaginative construction of meaning in context.
The question then is what takes place during the process of reading and
understanding a text that allows linguistic forms and symbols to lead to the activation
and construction of complex cognitive structures and projections. How does the mind,
as a systemic conceptual structure, process new textual information and come to
terms with it? How does text become concept?

88 Fauconnier p101
89 ibid p70
go Whitney p407

48

Adopting an apperceptive approach to reading and understanding, George

Miller (1979/1993) suggests "that an attended experience is brought into relation with
an already acquired and familiar conceptual system... that new things are learned by
being related to things already k n o w n . W h e n a person reads and understands a
passage, the new information encountered must be related both to his/her "store of
general knowledge" and to his/her "internal representation of the passage itself." ^^ The
new information will become part of the old information to which further information can
be added. This way, a textual concept, or what Holmes calls a text map or mental
conception of the text, is formed.
According to Miller's image/model theory, two processes take place during
reading for the formation of the textual concept. One is a constructive and particular
process of memory imaging, which constructs a particular record of the information
contained in a particular passage. The resultant memory image is a single
representation of a scene whose particularities correspond closely to the particularities
of the passage. The other process is a selective and abstract one of semantic
modeling, which selects a set of all possible states of affairs in which all the
information in the memory image for that text is true. As new information is added to
the image, the set will be narrowed down to a smaller set of possible states of affairs
compatible with the image. These possible states of affairs are all the possible
continuations of the passage, the potential but as yet unimagined images. They
contain alternative representations that are compatible only with the text and
incompatible with one another. The resultant semantic model for a text, then, is a
whole set of representations of alternative states of affairs which do not contradict the
information in the memory image but may contain extra information implicated by not
depicted by the text.
The memory image serves as a mental surrogate for the descriptive
passage itself. It is a historical record, accurate just to the extent that it
91 Miller p357
92 ibid p358

49

contains all, and only, the information in the passage. The [semantic]
model, on the other hand, keeps the mind open to future possibilities....
The constructive process preserves the particular criteria given by the
passage for the selection of an abstract model consisting of all the
potential states of affairs that could satisfy those criteria.^
The reader's "concept" of the text is the combined image/model that emerges during
reading, and the constructive/selective processes involved is the "synthesis" of that
concept.

The linear historicity of memory images and atemporal abstraction of

semantic models remind us of Holmes' differentiation of the serial and structural

planes in textual processing. Miller's image/model theory, however, is more elaborate
and sophisticated, and offers an apt account of the dual process of reading one word
and painting a thousand pictures of it in the mind. It also convincingly describes the
interactive fusion between serial image construction and structural model selection,
that is, between text and mind.
While reading and remembering the text, how does the reader also understand
it? A simple answer is that "readers must relate the textual concept they are
synthesizing to their general store of knowledge and belief. But what kind of relation
should be sought between the text and the reader's existing knowledge structures?
Whether the relation should be based on universal truth conditions (and verifiability) or
on contextual truth conditions, where we seek only to understand this particular
author's grounds for using such words and sentences in this particular text, is
debatable and also depends on the type of text. However we define truth, our pursuit
for it is unrelenting. The human mind has an untiring urge to make meaning. In doing
so, it assumes that what the author said is true in the state of affairs he/she is
describing. This truth assumption is what Steiner calls the trust in the meaningfulness
of the text. However, in order to find meaning in the text, we must relate the textual
concept as closely as possible to our general store of knowledge and belief in such a
way that its truth conflicts as little as possible with our conception of the real world.
93 ibid p362-363
94 ibid p363
95 ibid p364

50

When we encounter contradictions in trying to relate the textual concept to our general
knowledge, we do not quit and pronounce the text false and nonsensical, yet we
cannot tolerate jarring discrepancies to our general knowledge.
In order to find a compromise between the requirements of the truth
assumption and the need to relate the textual concept as closely as
possible to general knowledge and belief, the reader must search for
resemblances between the textual concept and genera knowledge.
We can see the parallelism between this process of relating the world of the text to the
world of reality and Holmes' map abstraction where features of the text are regarded in
relation to the existing information continuums. What Miller adds and emphasizes here
is the apperceptive nature of understanding and the search for analogies and
resemblances between textual concept and encyclopedic knowledge to enable
adjustment, accommodation and eventually comprehension.
Understanding metaphor requires a similar but more meticulous and audacious
process of finding resemblances. Miller continues to write that
metaphors characteristically pose apperceptive problems: either they
assert something that strains the reader's truth assumptions, or they
seem to bear no apparent relation to the reader's textual concept. This
apperceptive problem is reduced if there is a resemblance between the
reader's concept of reality and what the author has written.... These
resemblances... are the grounds for the metaphor.^
Suppose we have been reading about computer components and come across the
metaphor "The CPU is the brain of the computer." For a moment, our assumption of
the truthfulness or meaningfulness of the text is strained because we know for sure
that a computer is a non-living thing and cannot possess a brain. The textual concept
we have been developing, probably full of parts and plugs, RAMs and ROMs, cannot
seem to fit in the image of gray matter. We know what a brain is and we have so far
been following what was written about computer parts, so what we need to resolve
now is the relation between brain and CPU. Based on what we know about brains and
what the text has been telling us about computers, we search for resemblances

96 ibid p373
97 ibid p373

51

between a brain and a CPU. A wide range of features can be said to characterize the
brain - it secretes hormones that can alter emotional state, it needs oxygen in order to
function, it is divided into the left and right hemispheres, so on and so forth. Out of all
these features, we seem to be able to pinpoint the fact that the brain acts as the body's
command center, processing information and executing decisions, as the most
relevant and salient feature to be transferred to the CPU. According to Miller, the
relatum (brain) is old information, the referent (CPU) is the current topic, but it is really
"the relation of similarity between them [that is] new information. it is this new
relation that requires appreciation and comprehension.
If metaphor is using the relatum to talk about the referent, then the task of
understanding metaphor is to decide how they relate to each other, that is, which
attributes and features of the relatum, in their similarity or relevance to the
corresponding attributes and features of the referent, ought to be identified and
transferred to the textual concept so that it coheres with the reader's existing
conception of reality while honoring what the author has written. In translation, a
similar process is in action, where the source text is existing information, the target text
is the current topic, and it is really the relation of similarity between them that demands
the translator's attention. The task of the translator is to decide how source and target
texts relate to each other, that is, which attributes and features of the source-text map
should be identified and transferred to target-text map and how they need to be reconfigured in the target-text map for the parallel construction of the translated text.

3.5 Cross-domain

mapping

The mental mechanism of this transference, this dynamic search for grounds
according to analogies and

resemblances, continues to amaze and

bewilder

98 ibid p371

52

researchers. Upon their theory of representation, Sternberg et al. (1979/1993) further

develop a theory of information processing during metaphoric transference between
semantic spaces. The model is based on the componential theory of analogical
reasoning and comprises encoding, inference and mapping. First, encoding is
identifying the tenor and vehicle of the metaphor and locating them in their respective
local subspaces. Pinpointing the location of the terms in the existing semantic spaces
already entails relating the terms to encyclopedic knowledge as well as recognizing
and retrieving all the relevant attributes and values. Second, inference selects and
constrains the dimensions in the respective subspaces that are likely to be relevant. To
do this, the relation between the terms must first be determined, that is, resemblances
and similarities must first be sniffed out.
Then comes mapping, the heart of metaphoric manipulation. In Sternberg's
theory, mapping is computing the superimposed within-subspace distance and the
between-subspace

distance

between tenor and vehicle. Superimposed

within-

subspace distance is the difference between the positions occupied by each term
within each domain. By superimposition, one can imagine and calculate the distance
between two points that are actually in different subspaces. Between-subspace
distance is the distance between a pair of semantic spaces or cognitive domains, that
is, the distance between corresponding points in an appropriate hyperspace. If
metaphor generation and comprehension follows the logic of solving induction or
analogy problems, then it is essentially a search for an ideal point in the semantic
space by the construction of new vectors, which according to different types of
problems can be either parallel to or collinear with the first vector and also equal to it in
length and direction. in simpler words, metaphoric mapping is perceiving "a
correspondence between a term located at a particular point in one local subspace
and some other term located at a corresponding point in another local subspace.i

99 Sternberg et al. p282, 288, 292

ibid p293

53

According to Aristotle, this command of metaphor is a mark of genius. How is it done?

How does the mind spot likeness between remote domains scattered in faraway
corners of the cognitive matrix? How does the imagination survey the semantic
spheres, comb out the similarities and differences, and then re-configure and re-orient
the complexes to say "I'll drink life to the lees""*^ or "1 have measured out my life with
coffee spoonsi2 and make perfect sense?
Sternberg et al.'s theory concludes at computing vectors and distances
between points and dimensions in subspaces. It is certainly one way to conceptualize
the mental structure and cognitive processes involved in analogical and metaphorical
thinking, but it does not account for the interactive movement in such processing. In
Black's interaction view of metaphor, ad hoc constructions and reciprocal changes are
necessary for comprehension generation:
(a) the presence of the primary subject (tenor) incites the hearer to select
some of the secondary subject's (vehicle's) properties; and (b) invites
him to construct a parallel implication-complex that can fit the primary
subject; and (c) reciprocally induces parallel changes in the secondary
subject.ia3
Black further classifies the structural correspondences between two implicationcomplexes as "(a) identity (b) extension, typically ad hoc, (c) similarity, (d) analogy, or
(e) metaphorical coupling (where the original metaphor implicates

subordinate

metaphors).i4 Metaphorical mapping, however, is never a total transfer; otherwise,

the tenor will become the vehicle. In understanding one thing in terms of another, an
intricate process of selecting, highlighting, suppressing, organizing and projecting is
needed for parallel constructions.
In Metaphors

We Live By (1980), Lakoff and Johnson announce that "our

ordinary conceptual system, in terms of which we both think and act, is fundamentally
metaphorical in

nature"*

and illustrate their point by parading a large number of

Alfred Tennyson's "Ulysses"

T.S. Eliot's "The Lovesong of J. Alfred Prufrock"
103 Black p28
104 ibid p29
i5 Lakoff & Johnson p3

54

everyday, conventional metaphors and showing how they have shaped the way we
think, act and perceive the world. In "The Contemporary Theory of Metaphor"
(1979/1993), Lakoff reiterates that this extensive system of metaphors structures our
conceptual system, including abstract thoughts and even emotions. Metaphor is a
mapping from a source domain to a target domain, where there are conceptual
correspondences, according to which entities in the target domain correspond
systemically to entities in the source domain. These cross-domain mappings are highly
systematic

and tightly structured. They are partial and never total,

involving

highlighting and hiding. Lakoff proposes some general principles governing such
mappings and transfers:

The Invariance Principle. Cross-domain correspondences are constrained by

the preservation of the inherent cognitive topology of the target domain. Since the
image-schematic structure inherent in the target domain cannot be violated, the
inherent target domain structure automatically limits the possibilities for mappings.
Knowing the overriding dominance of the target domain structure helps researchers
understand why only certain correspondences are selected for projection during
metaphorical m a p p i n g

Inheritance hierarchies. Metaphorical mappings take place in the gestalt of the

cognitive matrix and do not happen isolated from one another. They are organized in
hierarchical structures, in which subordinate mappings in the hierarchy inherit the
structures, attributes and features of the super-ordinate mappings.

Inheritance

hierarchies are vital for conceptualizing abstract ideas through physical experience.
They provide indirect experiential bases for a metaphorical mapping lower in a
hierarchy to inherit its experiential basis indirectly from a mapping higher in the
h i e r a r c h y .

107 Fauconnier,

i n

studying structural mappings

i n

t h o u g h t

a n d

language,

identifies a variety of ways to build and transfer structures across mental spaces. One

Lakoff (1979/1993) p215-216

107 ibid p222, 241

55

of the mechanisms is "downward spreading," or "optimization," where relevant

structure not explicitly contradicted is transferred from parent to child.''

Simultaneous mappings. It is possible for a phrase or sentence to make use of

more than one metaphorical mappings at once. Each metaphor is mapped partially
and will characterize different aspects of the target domain. Simultaneous mappings
enable metaphorical pluralism, where a multiple metaphor evolves from primary
atomistic metaphors to encapsulate complex philosophical concepts. The simultaneity
in mapping also evinces the dynamic, non-sequential, non-algorithmic nature of
metaphors.109

3.6 Conceptual

blending

When concepts interact for generating and comprehending metaphors, there is

synthesis, transformation and growth. Richards observes that the collocation and
interaction of the tenor and vehicle gives rise to a meaning that is a multiplicity rather
than simple summation of the two, that is "of more varied powers than can be ascribed
to either." Black, following the interaction tradition, highlights the conceptual
innovation and imaginative effort demonstrated by the metaphor thinker.
Why stretch and twist, press and expand, concepts in this way - Why try
to see A as metaphorically B, when it literally is not B? Well, because we
can do so, conceptual boundaries not being rigid, but elastic and
permeable and because we often need to do so, the available literal
resources of the language being insufficient to express our sense of the
rich correspondences, interrelations, and analogies of domains
conventionally separated; and because metaphorical thought and
utterance sometimes embody insights expressible in no other fashion.i
Through these playful experiments of imaginative pairings, new relations, aspects and
insights are generated.
i8 Fauconnier p112
ibid p219
110 Richards p100
111 Black p33

56

In The way we think: Conceptual

blending and the mind's hidden

(2002), Turner and Fauconnier consolidate the ideas of mapping,

complexities

inheritance,

invariance, simultaneity as well as integration and creativity in metaphorical mappings

to develop a model of conceptual blending. According to their theory, the blend inherits,
in partial fashion, the relevant conceptual features and structures from the input
spaces and then cultivates them into a new emergent structure that cannot be
obtained by simply combining the inputs. BuHding such a conceptual integration
network involves
setting up mental spaces, matching across spaces, projecting selectively
to a blend, locating shared structures, projecting backward to inputs,
recruiting new structure to the inputs of the blend, and running various
operations in the blend itself.''^^

Mental spaces are small conceptual packets constructed as we think and talk,
for purposes of local understanding and action. They are connected to long-term
schematic knowledge called "frames" and to long-term specific memory, but can be
dynamically modified as thought and discourse unfold. A conceptual integration
network can have several input spaces and even multiple blended spaces.

Matching

and counterpart

connections

refer to partial matching between

counterparts in the input mental spaces. These counterpart connections can be

connections between frames and roles in frames, connections of identity, analogical
connections, or metaphoric connections.
The generic space captures the common elements or structures shared by the
inputs and, in turn, map them back onto each of the input. An element in the generic
space will be mapped onto paired counterparts in the input spaces.
The blended

space is the new space onto which elements, relations and

structures from the input spaces are selectively projected.lends

contain the generic

structure captured by the generic space as well as more specific structures that do not

112 Fauconnier & Turner p44

57

exist in either input space. Hence, an emergent structure arises in the blend that is not
transferred there directly from any input.
The new structure is blended by the creative process of

composition,

completion and elaboration. Blending can compose counterpart elements from the
input spaces to provide relations that do not exist in the separate inputs. Counterpart
elements can, for instance, be composed by being projected onto the same element in
the blend, thereby fusing two counterpart elements into one in the blend. Completion
entails the recruitment of extensive background knowledge and structure in conceptual
blending. Pattern completion, for instance, means that we see only some parts of a
familiar frame of meaning but automatically and unconsciously infer and recruit much
more of the frame to the blend. Additional structure is brought to the blend in this way.
Elaboration is treating the blend as a scenario simulation and running it imaginatively
according to principles established by the blend and background structures recruited
by completion. The infinitely many possible lines and directions for elaboration attest
the boundlessness of our imagination. The creative power of blending is derived from
the open-ended nature of completion and elaboration, which recruit new structures and
extensions for the blend. However, it should be kept in mind that blending seeks
equilibrium and operates in effectively unlimited but highly principled ways that are to a
large extent specified by the context and purpose of the blend.
Blending mobilizes all the faculties and functions of the human mind, from
physical

experiences,

long-term

memories,

general

knowledge

to

mapping

mechanisms such as construction, selection, preservation, optimization, inference,

analogy, conflation, completion and elaboration or what Ricoeur calls the epoche of
the human imagination to attend many possible worlds at the same time.

113 ibid p40-50

58

3.7 Summary

In this chapter, we have followed the arguments of several metaphor theorists

and looked at how they visualize and represent the human conceptual system, how
they explicate the conceptual configurations during reading and understanding a text,
and how they theorize about the conceptual transfer during metaphor generation and
comprehension. Alongside, we have also traced the growth of contemporary metaphor
theories from two-space domain mapping to many-space conceptual blending, from
interaction and innovation to composition, completion and elaboration. Whether we are
looking at Black's implicative complex, Lakoff's conceptual metaphors, Turner and
Fauconnier's blended space, Sternberg et al.'s ordered subspaces or Miller's
image/model synthesis, we begin to notice three recurrent mental processes that
animate the metaphorical process, however it is modeled: 1) the acumen to discern
sameness and difference and the agility to infer connections, match counterparts and
relate one thing in terms of another, 2) the connoisseurship to appreciate the salient
and relevant features and downplay the ineligible and impertinent ones and 3) the
creativity and resourcefulness to bring in extra knowledge structures and conceptual
frames to deepen and widen the scope of the metaphor. These abilities and qualities,
coincidentally, are what Holmes' skilled and experienced ideal translator should also
possess. In the following chapter, we will attempt to transfer the insights we have
hereby gained to the study of translation.

59

Chapter Four
An Elaborated Translation Process Model

4.1 Purpose of the elaborated

model

Translation is a relational act. In order to analyze the relation between the

source and translated texts with more depth and thoroughness, we must take into
account the translation process through which the translated text has come to being.
Holmes has taken up the challenge and drew up a translation process model, using his
experience and expertise as a literary translator and his intellectual caliber as a
scholar. His two-map two-plane text-rank translation process model (Figure 1)
highlights the meta-textual and cognitive aspects of translation. The constituents laid
down in Holmes' model, such as the serial and structural planes, text map, information
continuum, correspondence and counterparts have coincided with what philosophers,
psychologists, cognitive scientists and linguists have converged to agree to be the
central cognitive elements in understanding and innovation. After looking at Holmes'
model, cognitive linguistics and metaphor theories, we have found astounding
similarities among these three endeavors which, using different subject-matters but
following the same route, all seek to unlock the secret of the human thought and
imagination.
In this chapter, it is hoped that findings and theories from metaphor research
on the mental mechanisms induced during reading, understanding and metaphorizing
can be applied to expand Holmes' precise and concise model to a fuller and more
dynamic scale and to better reflect the interactive movement involved in translation
and cognition. It is also hoped that a more detailed translation process model can

60

provide scholars with a more concrete set of vocabulary to describe and explain
translation phenomena such as domestication, foreignization, literal translation and
sense translation.

4.2 The serial and structural

synchronic
models

planes in text processing

- diachronic

image and

One of Holmes' assertions is that translation takes place on two planes: serial
and structural. On the serial plane, the translator translates word by word, sentence by
sentence, whereas on the structural plane, he/she abstracts an array of data about the
text and entertains a mental concept of it. In Holmes' model, linear language is neither
received as meaning nor decoded for the extraction of the original message. It merely
prompts the structural mind to begin a series of meaning abstraction and construction.
Holmes acknowledges the cognitive contribution to reading and understanding a text,
but does not go into the details of how the mind interacts with the text on the two
planes, that is, how the translating mind proceeds linearly and incrementally along the
lines of the source text and at the same time rises above the text, juggles the incoming
information and casts up various conceptions and conjectures about the text.
Borrowing from Miller's theory of image/model textual concept, we are now in
the position to discuss the nature of serial and structural textual processing as well as
the interaction between the two planes in more depth. On the serial plane, text
processing is linear, specific and accumulative. It pledges its allegiance to the text at
hand and records accurately and historically all, and only, the information contained in
it. It is the mind's method of taking a text into account and keeping its track record. On
the serial plane, the translator receives the text and accumulates a diachronic image of
the text.
On the structural plane, text processing becomes geometric, generic and
manipulative. Because a text can never say all that can possibly be said about its

61

subject matter, whether it be a person, a place, an event, an emotion or a concept, it

inevitably leaves a universe of unuttered possibilities for the translator to figure out. It
is often crucial for the translator to sense the nuance of the unsaid in order to fully
understand the passage. Cued by the serial text, the imagination must now configure a
set of all the possible scenarios that can supplement but not contradict the information
contained in the text. In a pictorial way, we can see these scenarios as simulations of
all the probable ambience, backdrop or appoggiatura that can accent or embellish the
image. In a geometric sense, we can say that these are the set of semantic models
prompted by the language of the text. On the structural plane, the translator completes
and elaborates the serial image, and simulates a synchronic array of all the possible
semantic models implicated by the text.
During reading, there is continuous interaction between the serial and structural
planes, so that new additions to the diachronic image will qualify and disqualify certain
scenarios for further consideration in the synchronic array of semantic models, and the
translator's predilection for certain scenarios or models may in turn modify the way
he/she continues to construct the diachronic image. From the synthesis of the
diachronic image and synchronic models, a mental conception of the text is formed.

4.3 Text maps and information

cultural
dimensions

continuums

- the linguistic,

literary and socio-

For Holmes, this mental conception or text map comprises a conglomerate of

bits of linguistic, literary and socio-cultural information. These linguistic, literary and
socio-cultural features of the text are regarded in relation to its respective continuum,
that is, they are evaluated as parts in the whole of the relevant system. Here, Holmes
acknowledges the role of general encyclopedic knowledge as the prerequisite forestructures for understanding and translating texts. He takes for granted that the ideal
translatornatively fluent in the two languages, well-versed in the two literatures and

62

familiar with all the idiosyncrasies of the two societies and cultureswill be able to
relate the various features of the text to the relevant continuum and, more important,
position them in their appropriate places within the system in an effortless manner.
What Holmes assumes the perfect translator to do in a flash requires some flexing and
straining of the mental muscles and, for our purpose, some explication.
Relating incoming textual information to existing knowledge structures so that
the new information can be accepted and assimilated is an arduous task and a key
process in textual processing. Miller describes this process as a search for grounds of
analogies and resemblances between the textual concept and general knowledge. The
breadth of the translator's source knowledge, as Holmes concedes, will to a very large
extent determine the sophistication of the translation product. To highlight the role of
the translator's existing source knowledge (linguistic, literary and

socio-cultural

information continuums) in the formation of the source-text map, it will be denoted as a

separate element in the elaborated model. The translator's knowledge of the source
language, literature and socio-culture will interact with the incoming textual information
to form the source-text map.
Using the theories of representation and information processing developed by
Sternberg et al., let us attempt a more diagrammatic way of describing this process.
The translator's source knowledge is a mental topology made up of semantic
subspaces and hyperspaces. Let us imagine language, literature and socio-culture as
the three main dimensions in each subspace. each subspace, at least one of these
dimensions wni be linked to another subspace and to a hyperspace. Hence, we have a
cognitive landscape that is inter-connected via the linguistic, literary and socio-cultural
dimensions. The translator registers incoming information by identifying the subspace
to which it belongs and deciding its positions on the linguistic, literary and sociocultural dimensions in that subspace. As more textual data are registered, the
translator will begin to recognize salient features and their common within-subspace
positions on the corresponding dimension in different subspaces. In registering new

63

information or recognizing salient features, the translator is continuously relating

incoming textual data to his/her existing knowledge systems. The source-text map is
configured by allocating new textual information to their appropriate positions on the
linguistic, literary and socio-cultural dimensions in the translator's source knowledge
structures and by highlighting the salient features that run across the semantic spaces.
Let us take the example of the word "blind" in the opening sentences of James
Joyce's short story "Araby":
North Richmond Street, being blind, was a quiet street except at the hour
when the Christian Brothers' School set the boys free. An uninhabited
house of two storeys stood at the blind end, detached from its neighbors
in a square ground. The other houses of the street, conscious of decent
lives within them, gazed at one another with brown imperturbable faces.
"Blind," appearing twice in the first three sentences of a short story, is an adjective not
only to describe North Richmond Street but to set the tone for the story. On the
linguistic dimension, "blind" in collocation with "street" or "end" is conventional usage,
but the syntactical construction in the first sentence that reverses the usual order of
"blind street" and intercepts it with the gerund form of the verb-to-be ("being") is
peculiar

and

purposeful.

On

the

linguistic

dimension,

we

should

note

this

unconventional formulation of a conventional phrase. When rendered into Chinese,

this piece of meandering English syntax w.ill prove too unnatural to be retained. On the
literary dimension, "being blind" is used as a personification device. If a street is
likened to a blind person, what does it tell us about it? Blindness, in the Western
literary tradition, usually carries with it a kind of aloofness and apathy, detached from
the desires and emotions of the human world and connected to a metaphysical order
of things. On the literary dimension, we should take note of the personification
technique and the implied indifference of the neighborhood, both of which are
reinforced in the phrase "set the boys free." "Blind" and "set free" therefore share a
common literary dimension in terms of personification and a stone-coldness to the
passions of youth. In the Chinese literary tradition, blindness more often denotes a

64

kind of helplessness than detachment and will require certain adjustments or additions
in order to transmit the impact of Joyce's personification. On the socio-cultural
dimension, a blind street will remind us of dead-ends with no throughway. Urbandwellers will probably have experienced the "deadness" of a blind street and bring into
the picture the image of being stuck, walled in, sealed off, defeated and forced to turn
back. In Chinese, there is the readily available phrase "dead alley," but is it a legitimate
match for Joyce's "blind street"? Or, we should ask, how good a match is it?

4.4 Correspondence

and counterparts

- the blended target-text map

The formation of the source-text map only reflects the reading process in the
act of translation. In Holmes' model, what follows is correspondence, the uniquely
translational

operation

that

deserves

special

attention.

Holmes

defines

correspondence not as seeking equivalence and sameness, but as a search for

counterparts and matchings. It is the function of the words and phrases of the source
text to prompt the construction of conceptual networks that should be transferred from
source to target. In other words, the target-language counterparts should be able to
prompt the configuration of target-text map that matches that of the source-text map.
In this core translation process of correspondence, the source-text map, the
translator's target knowledge as well as the correspondence principles of the
translator's poetics will come into play.
In Holmes' model, correspondence is a mapping process from source-text map
to target-text map, with the correspondence rules forming a hierarchy of choices. I will
amplify this re-mapping and re-configuration process and visualize it as a blending
process, where the newly obtained source-text map and the translator's existing
knowledge structures of the target language, literature and socio-culture will serve as
input spaces, and the translator's poetics will operate as governing principles for

65

blending. This way, we can emphasize the role of the translator's target knowledge
structures during the formation of the target-text map as well as a series of
constructive and creative processes that co-operate to blend a new, emergent
structure in the target-text map.
First, there will be partial mappings between counterparts in the source-text
map and the translator's target knowledge structures, both represented as semantic
spaces with linguistic, literary and socio-cultural dimensions. A generic space will then
be formed that captures the common attributes and structures shared by the two input
spaces. These shared attributes and structures will be selectively projected to a new
blended space, which will also foster elements and relations that are not directly
inherited from either input space. This new emergent structure forms the blended
target-text map.
In translation, the inherent disparities between the source and target languages,
literatures and socio-cultures make inevitable the lack of total compatibility between
the source-text map and the translator's target knowledge structures. Holmes' twomap correspondence model seems to have glossed over the creative complexities
involved in the translation process. This choreography of maneuvers begins when the
translator identifies a salient and relevant feature of the source-text map, locates its
corresponding co-ordinate in his/her target knowledge structures and, upon finding a
lexical or conceptual lacuna, returns to the source-text map to survey the topology of
attributes and relations that have intersected to promote the feature. He/she then
maneuvers the configuration of the target text-map so that a closely akin topology of
attributes and relations can emerge to cultivate a counterpart feature in the blended
target-text map.
The art of translation lies in this handiwork of maneuvers, of re-configuring the
semantic network of the source-text map in terms of linguistic, literary and sociocultural dimensions of the target knowledge structures. Between two inherently
disparate and incompatible

systems, where identical attributes and analogical

66

structures more often than not do not exist, the translator has to adjust, conflate,
extend and even fabricate in order to find a counterpart word or phrase for the target
text. To describe this re-configurative translation process, let us borrow the creative
blending process of completion and elaboration from the conceptual integration theory.
Completion is the recruitment of background knowledge and structure to the
blend to fill in information or make connections not specified in the source. Because
human thought is organized in a cognitive matrix of semantic spaces and conceptual
frames, and new information is understood by being assimilated into an existing
knowledge structure, we perform completion inadvertently and effectively most of the
time.
Elaboration is to simulate or imagine certain aspects or details that are
compatible with but not specified in the source. As the mind is an interconnected
network of concepts, when one point in the network is activated, the association is free
to go along any of the connecting routes (or even jump tracks).
Completion and elaboration associative, imaginative and open-ended in
principle however, are kept from running astray or amok by textual, contextual and
situational constraints. In Miller's textual concept synthesis, semantic modeling is a
similar process of completion and elaboration, where the mind always runs the extra
mile to patch a gap, forge a connection or even assemble a new constellation. We see
that translation requires a kind of fusing, mapping, blending, semantic modeling and
meaning configuration in order to buttress a corresponding counterpart.
Completion and elaboration, or what Antoine Berman (1985/2000) calls
clarification and expansion and denounces as the ethnocentric, annexationist and
deforming tendencies in translation, nevertheless "forms part of the translator's being"
and "[determines] the desire

to

t r a n s l a t e . "

Clarification refers to the translator's

attempt to define and complete the indefinite and incomplete; expansion is unfolding
what in the original is folded, inflating, stretching and elongating. Berman condemns
114 Berman p286

67

over-translation but admits that these tendencies of clarification and expansion are
"inherent in translation, to the extent that every translation comprises some degree of
e x p l i c i t a t i o n . i i 5

erman castigates clarification, expansion and other deforming tendencies in

translation, claiming that they destroy the foreignness of the source text, dim its
essence and dilute its richness and multiplicity. The polylingualism of a text, however,
does not need to be compromised even if the act of translation involves completion
and elaboration. If the translator is attentive to the linguistic, literary and socio-cultural
features of the source text and, more important, appreciative of its underlying network
of meanings, that is, "its signifying process and mode of expression,"''^ he/she will
labor to transplant not just the trunk and tree-top but also the substratum of roots and
nutrients of the source-text to the target text. To do so, the translator must blend a
corresponding network of meaning in the target-text map, with the counterpart nodes
and links, attributes and relations, that can prompt a matching process of meaning
construction for the target readers.

4.5 Translator's

poetics - factors affecting

mapping and

blending

In analyzing the relation between the original text and its translated version, we
strive to uncover the translator's poetics the features considered salient and
relevant by the translator, the different weights placed on linguistic, literary and sociocultural factors, the background knowledge brought to the text, and sometimes even
imaginative

fabrications

necessary

to

complete

the

picture.

This

is

not

straightforward task. The translator's poetics his/her text maps and correspondence
rules operates on the metatextual plane above and between the source and target
115

i b i d

p 2 8 9

116 ibid p291

68

texts, and can be deduced mainly from studying the relation between source and
target texts. The translator's preface and notes also provide indication of the general
translation approach adopted by the translator, but theory and practice do not always
merge. How the translator chooses counterparts is also largely circumscribed by the
individual's knowledge of the two languages, literatures and cultures, sensitivity to
tones and undertones, virtuosity to command the text as a whole as well as his/her
personal style, predilection and worldview.
With the help of the three-dimensional text map on which new information is
received, registered and then related to the existing knowledge network, we can now
observe at least four sets of decisions made by the translator that act as variables in
the translation process.
First, how to register the textual information. While reading, the translator has to
decide on which dimension in the semantic space to place the new information - if
he/she considers a particular dimension more salient and relevant, then more
information will be positioned in relation to that dimension. The translator will also need
to gauge the degree of salience and relevance of that piece of information in relation to
the selected dimension and decide its placement on that dimension.
Second, what kind of semantic model to draw from the textual image. The
translator must evaluate the context, situation and purpose of the text and then make
allowance for the constraints they place on what can be inferred and implicated in the
semantic models. The kind of background frames and general knowledge mobilized by
the translator

during

reading and translating will determine the way

he/she

comprehends the context, situation and purpose of the text and the way inference and
connections are made.
Third, on which plane to seek resemblance between source-text map and
target-text map. Text maps are hierarchical and multi-dimensional networks of
meanings, which means that the order or level of abstraction of the source-text map at
which the translator decides to drill for counterparts will determine the kind of features

69

and structures that will be transferred to the target text. A translator who digs in at a
subtextual level, for instance, will produce a translated text that is conventionally called
literal," while a translator working on a relatively hypertextual plane will produce a
more paraphrastic translation.
Fourth, how much of the source and target knowledge structures to preserve in
the target-text map. In general, when the translator chooses counterparts for the target
text, he/she will follow the native structure of the target language and culture and avoid
violating the target norms. If the translator projects as much of the target structures to
the translated text as possible, the product is a highly naturalized and domesticated
text. If the translator decides to preserve the source structures, thereby departing from
and violating the target norms, the result will be a foreignizing work of translation.
Violations of target norms are highly visible and should bear intended significance.
The last point illustrated how translation is not all up to the individual. Cultural
norms and templates also play an important role in the translation process. Culture, as
a set of guidelines to structure the behavior of its members, bears down upon the
individual translators range of correspondence choices. Lakoff and Johnson (1980)
note that different cultures will evolve and consolidate different ways of metaphorical
conceptualizations.

117 Turner and Fauconnier (2002) also point out that cultures

develop blending resources, templates and methods to specify the general form of
projections, compositions, completions and elaborations in advance so that they do not
need to be invented anew.''^ Translating cultures will develop norms and traditions
that are expected to be followed when rendering foreign texts into their mother tongue.
These norms persist and proliferate by means of translation training and criticism.
Norms, however, are not stable and can become outdated and dislodged by more
fashionable trends.

7 Lakoff & Johnson, p24

118 Fauconnier & Turner p72-73

70

Continuing with our example from "Araby," let us look at four Chinese
translations of the opening sentences and focus on how "blind" ("North Richmond
Street, being blind.... An uninhabited house of two storeys stood at the blind end...")
was rendered.
1.
_

1970:
2.

1984:
3.

1999:
4.

2000:
The Chinese word for "blind" appeared nowhere in the eight instances where "blind"
was used by Joyce in the original. In two of the four translations, the translators gave
explanations of blind street and blind end instead. In examples 2 and 4, "being blind"
was translated as (one end of which is not a throughway) and
(with no exit) respectively, while "blind end" was rendered as h
(te street's utmost
end) and "(the end of the street that had been blocked) respectively. In
the other two translations, the translators chose the pret-a-porter Chinese phrase "
(dead alley) as the counterpart for North Richmond Street's being blind. What about
the second "blind" in "blind end" then? In Chinese, there is the collocation of dead-alley
("'but not dead-end (").In example 1, "blind end" was simply translated as
" (the utmost end of the street), which leaves its predecessor " (dead alley)
isolated without allies in rallying a blind/dead/cold image for North Richmond Street. In

71

example 3"blind end" was rendered as " (the rear part of the street that was
sealed dead), echoing the deadness in the earlier "(dead alley).
Of the four translators, only the one in the third example observes and respects
Joyce's deliberate repetition of "blind." In repeating dead), the translator
recognizes the salience and relevance of Joyce's repetition of "blind" in the source-text
network of meaning. The translator therefore makes a conscious effort to configure a
target text that replicates these landmark prompts of the source-text map, while also
retaining the texture of the target language. "Blind street" and (dead alley) are
accepted lexical combination in both languages;" retains the literary effect of
personification in "blind street;" both terms are socio-culturaily equivalent in terms of
conveying information about the premature closure of alleys and streets to their
respective audience. Yet blindness is not death. A blind eye, watching but completely
disinterested, almost disgusted, is more haunting than a non-living thing. We read on
and discover that the houses of the blind street "gazed at one another with brown
imperturbable faces." Sight and blindness, surveillance and unconcern, criss-cross in
the first three sentences to paint a chilling picture of North Richmond Street, where it
seems that the boys from the Christian othersSchool are kept captive by some
intangible, unsympathetic authority. Yet, this mesh of sensations is irreparably lost in
the Chinese versions because "blindness" is never conveyed. A skilful reader will be
able to register the salient and relevant attributes of the word "blind" on the optimal
positions on the linguistic, literary and socio-cultural dimensions of the source-text map.
With an appreciative sense and sympathetic mind, he/she might also simulate a scene
on North Richmond Street, where a rush of footsteps of schoolboys fleeing the school
(but really going nowhere) is quickly engulfed by the imprisoning quietness, the twostorey house stands apart like an outcast in limbo, and the other houses, facing one
another in their blind gaze, seem to take on a confrontational expression (or is it a
sneer?) To configure such a sophisticated source-text map in terms of the target

72

linguistic, literary and socio-cultural structures, it seems that the translator just cannot
have his/her cake and eat it too.

Source
Knowledge Structures

Rules Plane I
Meta-textual Plane
(Translator's Poetics)

Target
Knowledge Structures

Structural Plane

Source-Text MAP^
(three-dimensional
semantic spaces with
linguistic, literary and
socio-cultural features)

Correspondence Decisions
Blending, Re-mapping
Re-configuration

Target-Text MAP
(guide for
formulating
target text)

(Derivation Rules II Reading)

Abstraction, Semantic Modeling
Completion, Elaboration
Textual Processing
Plane

(Projection Rules II Writing)

(Image I Model Synthesis)

|
Reception of ST
Construction oT Diachronic Image

Formulation of TL

Serial Plane
Textual
Plane

T
Target-Language Text

Source-Language Text

FIGURE

2. An Elaborated

Translation

Process

Model

4.6 Summary

In this chapter, we presented a more detailed version of Holmes' translation

process model (Figure 2). This elaborated model enables us to better identify the
different elements, especially cognitive ones, that contribute to translating, and to
better visualize and articulate the complex cognitive processes that take place during
translation. We can thereby take into account the cross-language cross-culture
conceptual maneuvers performed by the translator, and describe and compare
different translating and translation phenomena in a more comprehensive and

73

systematic manner. Our elaborations on James Holmes' translation process model can
be summarized as follows:

On the serial plane, the translator receives the text and accumulates a diachronic
image of the text.

On the structural plane, the translator completes and elaborates the serial image,
and simulates a synchronic array of all the possible semantic models implicated by
the text.

From the synthesis of the diachronic image and synchronic models, a mental
conception of the text is formed.

The translator's knowledge of the source language, literature and socio-culture will
interact with the incoming textual information to form the source-text map.

The source-text map is configured by allocating new textual information to their

appropriate positions on the linguistic, literary and socio-cultural dimensions in the
translator's source knowledge structures and by highlighting the salient features
that run across the semantic spaces.

In the core translation process of correspondence, the source-text map, the

translator's target knowledge as well as the correspondence principles of the
translator's poetics will come into play.

Re-mapping and re-configuration in translation is a blending process.

During blending, completion and elaboration will take place. Completion is the
recruitment of background knowledge and structure to the blend to fill in
information or make connections not specified in the source. Elaboration is to
simulate or imagine certain aspects or details that are compatible with but not
specified in the source.

The translator maneuvers the configuration of the target knowledge structures, so

that a closely akin topology of attributes and relations can emerge to cultivate a
counterpart

feature

in

the

blended

target-text

map.

The

target-language

74

counterparts should be able to prompt the configuration of target-text map that

matches that of the source-text map. To do so, the translator must respect the
text's underlying network of meanings, that is, "its signifying process and mode of
expression."

During translation, the translator makes at least four sets of decisions: 1) how to
register the textual information, 2) what kind of semantic model to draw from the
textual image, 3) at which plane to seek resemblance between source-text map
and target-text map, and 4) how much of the source and target knowledge
structures to preserve in the target-text map.

Cultural norms and templates also play an important role in the translation process.

75

PART TWO
Translation

Description:

Map Analysis of Complex Metaphors

76

Chapter Five
Translation-Descriptive Process: a Map Analysis Approach

5.1 James Holmes' model of the translation-descriptive

process

Holmes claims that it is only with an understanding of the translation process

that translation products can be studied to yield comprehensive and fruitful results.
After establishing the two-map two-plane text-rank translation process model (1988b)
which unfolds the compact and complex textual and meta-textual processing during
the act of translation to lay out its different elements, planes, maps and rules, Holmes
proceeds to discuss the central task in descriptive translation studies to analyze and
describe the relationship between the source and target texts. Based on his translation
process model, Holmes suggests that to uncover the source-target relationship, the
translation analyst must
determine the features of the translator's two maps and to discover his
three systems of rules, those of derivation, projection, and, above all,
correspondence in other words, the translator's poetics:i
During translation, the translator develops his source-text map and target-text map by
applying derivation, correspondence and projection rules, which include the formation
of textual concept and the recruitment of source and target general knowledge. The
task of translation scholars, who are given only the source and target texts, is to
retrace the footsteps of the translator to find out how he/she has applied the rules,
especially correspondence rules, and developed the two text maps. Differences in
translations of the same source text can be better analyzed and enunciated by
comparing the different ways in which the translators have applied the three sets of
rules and developed the text maps.
119 Holmes (b) p87

77

In Holmes' original translation process model and the present paper's

elaboration on it, text maps are visualized as conglomerates or semantic spaces with
linguistic, literary and socio-cultural dimensions, and correspondence rules are
postulated as maneuvers to accommodate incoming information in the existing
knowledge structures. Therefore, in re-discovering the translator's two maps and three
systems of rules, the translation scholar will have taken into account a wide range of
linguistic, literary and socio-cultural factors, from the translator's personal predilection
and ideological stance to grammatical constructions, literary traditions and cdtural
norms.
In his translation-descriptive model, Holmes has laid down the steps and
methods that should be followed by translation scholars in discovering and describing
the source-target relationship. First, the analyst will apply a set of derivation rules to
the source and target texts to obtain the source- and target-text maps. Then, with the
aid of a set of comparison rules, the analyst can "compare the two maps in order to
determine the network of correspondences between their various features,12 After
comparing the features in the two maps, the analyst will make use of a set of
abstraction rules to "derive a set of correspondence rules and a correspondence
hierarchy from the network of correspondences.
This is of course easier said than done, and Holmes admits it himself. 122 if
translation is produced by a string of subjective judgments, then the analysis of
translation is carried out via a series of guesswork that can be just as subjective. If we
appreciate the uniqueness of each individual's experience and knowledge and hence
their way of reading and understanding, then we cannot ask for complete compatibility
between the translator's and the analyst's text maps. When the analyst compares
maps, determines the correspondence network, and derives the correspondence rules
and hierarchy, his/her general knowledge and analytical skill as well as any personal
ibid p87
121 ibid p88
122 ibid p87

78

preference or theoretical inclination will also influence the outcome of the analysis.
Holmes admits that "there is great danger that the results of [the] analysis will be highly
subjective and so of little value to other scholars" and stresses the pursuit of "a high
degree of intersubjectivity.
No textual analysis can claim to be exhaustive, and for translation analysis the
selection of features for comparison will play an important role in anchoring the
analysis and in achieving intesubjectivity and validity. Holmes suggests two basic
working methods: ad hoc selection of distinctive features and a required repertory of
features. In the first method, the analyst will study the two texts and then derive from
them a list of distinctive features which strike him/her as significant and deserving of
comparative analysis. A hierarchical ordering of the features will also be determined. A
well-trained analyst will bring to the analysis
a detailed knowledge of linguistic, literary, and socio-cultural theory such
that he can identify contextual, intertextual, and situational elements in
the texts in a manner acceptable to other scholars, and this... will provide
at least a modicum of intersubjectivity to his application of linguistic,
literary, and socio-cultural research methods.
The second method will circumvent the problem of ad hoc feature selection by
"determining beforehand a required repertory of features always to be analyzed,
regardless of what specific text is

involved."i25

An extensive repertory can assure a

higher degree of intersubjectivity to the results

The difficulty in adopting the second method is to get scholars to agree on a
universally applicable repertory. Seemingly an impossible task, the development of this
repertory should be a major focus of research and discussion for scholars interested in
translation description, says Holmes. The required repertory, needless to say, should
be sufficiently complete and comprehensive, while its structure should also be complex
enough in order to accommodate a number of parametric axes:

I 2 3 ibid p88-89
ibid p89
125 ibid p89

79

Among these a major one, of course, is the axis microstructuremesostmcture-macrostructure (from grapheme/morpheme via lexeme,
sentence, and suprasentential units to text; in verse moreover via line,
stanza, and suprastanzaic units). But other axes intersect this one,
notably that of form-meaning-function (morphologue-semasiologueanalogue) and that of (linguistic) contextuality - (literary) intertextuality
(socio-cultural) situationality, and these axes too would have to be
incorporated. 126
From Holmes' translation process model and translation-descriptive model, we can
see his ambition to devise a method that can systematically and comprehensively
account for all the elements in various translating and translation phenomena. From
the smallest unit of grapheme/morpheme to the macrostructure of texts (and the
metatextual plane of mental conception), from semiotics, semantics to pragmatics,
from language, literature to socio-culture, Holmes leaves no stone unturned and has
undoubtedly succeeded in laying down the cornerstones for descriptive translation
studies. Holmes' project is admirable in its perfectionist pursuit and its forth sight in
recognizing the niche and forte of translation studies - the privilege to study two
corresponding texts and the various phenomena that happen when one set of linguistic,
literary and socio-cultural configuration is expressed using a very different cast of
elements and structures.

5.2 Translation

Holmes'

description

theories

of complex metaphors from a map analysis

of text

maps,

conglomerates,

information

approach

continuums

(linguistic, literary and socio-cultural) and correspondence hierarchy and rules

demonstrate his insistence that texts should be studied and translated as a unified and
structured whole. The scale of the present paper, however, cannot pretend to be able
to answer Holmes' call for descriptive translation research. In fact, to follow Holmes'
lead,

that is, to derive the source-text and target-text maps, determine the

126 ibid p90

80

correspondence hierarchy and discover the correspondence rules in a thorough

manner that accounts for the linguistic, literary and socio-cultural

dimensions

emanating throughout a text, is a Herculean task. The analysis will need to be

performed on the microstructural, mesostructural and macrostructural levels of the text
and will require not only all-rounded expertise but also intricate design and coordination.
Instead of conducting a full-fledged exercise on text map abstraction and
correspondence rules derivation, the rest of the paper will focus on only one specific
feature of a text a complex metaphor. Adopting a structural and textual approach,
we will see how the meaning of a complex metaphor is structurated throughout the
entire text. By analyzing the textual structuration of the complex metaphor, we can
derive its map and then proceed to look at whether translators can re-configure maps
in the target texts that can display similar lexical linkages and structural relations as
the original text map's. Albeit on a much smaller scale, this discussion can still hope to
live up to Holmes' spirit by approaching translation description from a structural and
textual point-of-view.

5.3 The translation

and translatability

of metaphors

Metaphor translation has never ceased to fascinate translation scholars. The

ubiquity of metaphors across languages and cultures, the language- and culturespecificity of metaphors, the penetration of metaphors into casual conversations and
the power of poetic or political metaphors to please, plead and provoke all these
have caught the attention of translation scholars who see metaphor translation as the
prototypical case of translation.
If we oversimplify and regard the vehicle of a metaphor as form and the tenor
as content, then translating metaphors exemplifies the impossibility to retain full

81

meaning without transferring the form as well. This then leads us to the question of
literal translation versus paraphrasing. (the cat weeps for the rat) and
"crocodile tears" are typical examples. While the literal translation of metaphors would
be ideal in remaining loyal to both the vehicle and tenor, it is often a failure in terms of
making sense to the target readers, whereas cultural loss is inevitable when a targetlanguage stock expression is adopted. We are thus reminded of the onus of translation
transferring across linguistic and cultural boundaries _

and of the absurdity of a

conventional metaphor when it is rendered into a foreign language. Let us look at two
more Chinese idiomatic expressions, (the boat has already been made into
a boat" and " (the grains have already been cooked into rice). Whether the
vehicle of the metaphor should be retained or substituted by target-language
equivalents (such as "the die is cast" or "no use crying over spilt milk") and whether the
entire metaphor should be paraphrased or even deleted will depend on the strategy or
orientation of the translator. A foreignizing translation will probably preserve the
source-language vehicle, however aberrant it may seem in the target-language text,
and risk confusing and upsetting its readers, while a domesticating translation will
replace the original metaphor with one that is well established in the target language
and run the danger of cultural loss, when the images of wood, boat, grains and rice will
be replaced by those of cast dies and spilt milk.

5.3.1 Peter Newmark - the criss-crossed

area of sense

In the article "The translation of metaphor" (1985), Peter Newmark identifies eight
methods in handling metaphors in translation, which range from directly transferring
the source image to the target text to simply deleting the m e t a p h o r . F o r the middle-

127 Newmark (1985) p304-311. Newmark's eight methods are:

1) Reproducing the same image in the TL, provided the image has comparable frequency and currency in
the appropriate register. The more universal the sense, the more likely the transfer.
2) Replacing the image in the SL with a standard TL image which does not clash with the TL culture.

82

ground method of converting metaphor to sense, Newmark makes an insightful remark

that "the sense must be analyzed componentially, since the essence of an image is
that it is pluridimensional - otherwise literal language would have been used."''^ His
observation captures the quintessence of metaphors the multiplicity of meaning that
evolves from the coming together and crossbreeding of two already complex
conceptual domains.
In The textbook for translation (1988), Peter Newmark devotes one chapter to
the discussion of metaphor translation, in which he further explores the question of
sense. While Sternberg et al. in their semantic space model (1979/1993) picture the
analogous relation between the two terms of a metaphor as a superimposed withinsubspace distance, Newmark visualizes the resemblance demonstrated by the vehicle
and tenor in a metaphor as "a common semantic area between ... the image and the
object." 129 One of the problems in understanding and translating a metaphor is
therefore "to decide how much space to allot to the criss-crossed area of sense.
Sense, as the semantic area overlapping image and object, often consists of more
than one sense component, especially in the case of creative original metaphors. In
what aspects, for instance, does life overlap with a paragraph, a poor player, a coffee
spoon? Besides its aesthetic ability to please, delight and surprise, a metaphor also
serves the cognitive purpose of describing its object "more comprehensively and
concisely than is possible in literally or physical language.i3i The power of metaphors
lies in this ability to compress a universe into a verse. Theoretically, the criss-crossed
area of sense can be continuously extended and deepened to yield an endless

3)
4)

Retaining the image and translating by simile, thereby modifying the shock of a metaphor.
Translating by simile plus sense. This Mozart method is a compromise procedure, which combines
communicative and semantic translation in addressing itself both to the layman and the expert when
there is a risk that the simple transfer of the metaphor will not be understood by most readers,
5) Converting metaphor to sense.
6) Modifying the metaphor.
7) Deleting the metaphor.
8) Retaining the metaphor, but combining it with sense.
128 ibid p309
129 Newmark (1988) p104
13ibid p i 05
ibid p104

83

number of sense components. Yet, given a well-formed metaphor, readers and

translators do seem to be able to make use of the contextual information and their
extra-textual knowledge to grasp the gist of the metaphorical statement. How have
they componentially analyzed the sense of the metaphor? How should translation
analysts recover the translator's componential analysis (or text map) of a metaphor?

5.3.2 Raymond Van Den Broeck - information

structu ration in literary texts

In the article "The limits of translatability exemplified by metaphor translation"

(1981), Raymond Van Den Broeck makes an attempt to build a theoretical framework
that can describe and explain the translation of metaphors. To being with, he identifies
three types of metaphors:
1.

lexicalized / dead metaphors, where the literal meaning has died out entirely
or the literal and transferred meanings have diverged psychologically to the
extent that no connection is felt between them anymore, examples given
include in the face of, beforehand

2.

and

everybody,

traditional / conventional metaphors, which are institutionalized and shared

by a literary school or generation, such as the Homerian expression of rosyfingered

3.

dawn, and

private metaphors, which refer to the bold, innovative creations of individual

poets.132

Following this, three modes of metaphor translation are investigated,

namely

translation sensu sthcto, substitution and paraphrase.^^^

13: Broeck p75

133 ibid p77. The details of the three modes of metaphor translation, according to Van Broeck, are as follows;
1) Translation "sensu stricto" - both the SL tenor and SL vehicle are transferred into TL
(a) if the vehicles in SL and TL correspond (cultural overlap), the resulting TL metaphor will be idiomatic;
(b) if the vehicles in SL and TL differ, the resulting TL metaphor may be either a semantic anomaly or a
daring innovation.

84

roeck then proceeds to explore the problem of translatability arising from

particular occurrences of metaphors in texts. He notes that private metaphors,
however novel and audacious, remain largely embedded in the metaphorical traditions
and "cannot be accounted for without reference to the system (linguistic, socio-cultural,
literary), even though they may be related to it in a negative way."''^'* In other words,
like the way new textual information is processed in terms of the existing knowledge
structures, metaphors are also understood and translated in (positive or negative)
relation to the established linguistic, literary and socio-cultural systems. The status of a
metaphor is therefore "not a static but a dynamic one,"''^^ and the translation of
metaphors in texts must be examined from a "syntagmatic" or "paradigmatic"
perspective.
To support a systemic approach to describing metaphor translation, Broeck
reiterates the principle of artistic structuration in literary texts:
Literary texts manifest structured information on at least three levels: a)
on the linguistic level, i.e., the level of natural language in which they are
formulated {contextual information; b) on a situational pragmatic level, in
that they are situated in space and time and form part of a system of
socio-cultural norms and conventions {socio-cultural information); c) on
the literary-aesthetic level in as much as they are structured according to
the rules and standards of a literary tradition {intertextual information).''^^
We can see that Broeck has adopted Holmes' text-rank perspective and views texts as
a dynamic and multi-dimensional web of information on language, literary tradition and
socio-cuKural situation. Metaphor and the translatability of metaphor, in accordance
with the principle of structuration, can therefore be analyzed on three dimensions. On
the linguistic level, when a morphological, phonological or grammatical particularity of

2)

3)

Substitution - the SL vehicle is replaced by a different TL vehicle with more or less the same tenor. SL
and TL vehicles are more or less translational equivalents in that they share a common tenor; but the
alteration of vehicle will cause cultural loss.
Paraphrase - the SL metaphor is rendered by a non-metaphorical expression in TL, resulting in plain
speech or commentary.

134 ibid p79

135 ibid p75
1 ibid p76
137 ibid p79

85

a language forms an integral part of a metaphorical statement, it poses difficulties for

translation. On the level of socio-cultural situation, a metaphor may play upon some
accumulated cultural experience of the members of the language-community or an
institutionalized semantic association of an item in their lexicon. The more culturally
specific is this experience or association, the less immediately translatable is the
metaphor. On the literary level, a poetic metaphor may allude to the existing symbolic
traditions or shared literary codes of the original readers. If the same level of familiarity
cannot be assumed for the target audience, then translation requires extra effort and
explicitation.138
Metaphor is therefore not simply a vehicle-tenor pair, but "several levels of
signification [that] exist simultaneously. The richness of the sense components of a
metaphor is reflected in the multitude of levels and dimensions in the sub-stmctures of
linguistic, literary and socio-cultural signification. Broeck therefore expounds the basic
law of metaphor translatability as such:
Translatability keeps an inverse proportion with the quantity of
information manifested by the metaphor and the degree to which this
information is structured in the text. The less the quantity of information
conveyed by a metaphor and the less complex the structural relations
into which it enters in a text, the more translatable this metaphor will be,
and vice versa.
When the sense of a metaphor is distributed on various levels along different
dimensions throughout the text, its translation is no longer a simple problem of
retaining the source image or substituting it with a target equivalent, but one of restructuring or re-configuring the target text in order to accommodate the quantity and
complexity of these structural relations.

ibid p80-81
139 ibid p82
14ibid p84

86

5.4 The resonance

of the whole of language

In his translation process model and translation-descriptive model, Holmes

highlights the structural plane in text comprehension and translation. Although a text is
manifested as a serial string of phonemes and lexemes, its signification goes far
beyond the arbitrary phonetic- and lexical-semantic pairings. Meaning is not delivered
by the words, but emerges through a dynamic intercourse where words echo each
other and evolve with each other. It is important to understand that Holmes' approach
to language, text and translation is holistic and dynamic. His theories of text maps,
conglomerates, information continuums (linguistic, literary and socio-cultural) and
correspondence hierarchy demonstrate his insistence that texts should be studied and
translated as a unified and structured whole.
Antoine Berman reprimands translations that disregard or misread the intricate
networks of signification in the text and destroy its systematic nature through
rationalization, clarification and expansion. In the "lexical texture"""*^ of a literary work,
words and phrases that are distributed far from each other can correlate to establish
an underlying text that adumbrates an idea or theme. Berman claims that "signifiers in
themselves have no particular value, that what makes sense is their linkage."'''*^ The
magical mutiplicity of literary texts lies in this "hidden dimension, an 'underlying' text,
where certain signifiers correspond and link up, forming all sorts of networks beneath
the 'surface' of the text itself." The kernel of a text more often lies in the undertext
between the words than in the words themselves. Translators must delve in this subtext of lexical linkages in order to retain and recast the original's network of meanings
for the target audience.
I. A. Richards, recognizing that the power of language rests in its inner
systemicity and organicity, proposes a theory on the interanimation of words. Not only
141 Berman p292
142 ibid p293
143 ibid p292

87

do individual words in an utterance interact and influence how each other is

interpreted, "words which are not actually being uttered and are only in the
b a c k g r o u n d

also contribute to word meanings. Working on the level of morphemes,

Richards suggests that the meaning of a word is supported by other words sharing the
same morpheme in the background of the reader's mind. When the reader encounters
a word, other words with a morpheme that sound alike, sound the same or even
overlap in meaning, are to different extent activated in the back of the reader's mind.
The extension of interanimation depends on the reader's experience and familiarity
with the language, and different languages give rise to different structures of semanticphonetic associations. Translation, taking into account the phantom undertext of
semantic-phonetic associations, becomes a daunting task:
In translation, for example, the expressive word in another language will
not necessarily sound at all like the original word. It will be a word that is
backed up by other words in a somewhat analogous fashion. Evidently
again, a proper appreciation of the expressiveness of a word in a foreign
language will be no matter of merely knowing its meaning and relishing
its sounds. It is a matter of having, in the background of the mind, the
other words in the language which share morphemes with it.""*
Rhymes, assonance, alliteration and puns are paragon exmaples of the impact of
semantic-phonetic associations on molding meaning. The phenomenon evinces the
fact that, for attentive and sensitive readers, words that are not uttererd, not even
consciously thought of, do linger at the back of the mind during understanding.
Richards draws the conclusion that "a phrase may take its powers from an immense
system of supporting uses of other words in other contexts.
Word meaning is therefore not clear-cut and static, but fuzzy, fluid and flexible.
The meaning of a word cannot be designated independently and definitely but is
always composed by an ad hoc fusion of subtextual, textual and meta-textual
knowledge structures. The German philosopher Gustav Gerber believes that there is
no literal meaning of a word, but that all words are figurative and pictorial and can be
Richards p57
ibid p 6 2
146 i b i d p 6 5

88

understood only "in the co-text of the discourse and the context of the situation.i47 Karl
Buhler, a German psycholinguist who studied the psychology of language processing
and metaphor comprehension, observes that human beings do not look at objects in
isolation, but always in terms of the network of objects and relations in which they
stand. Language cannot be understood by linking words with things in a vacuum. Word
meaning

only

emerges

from

"an

integration

of

symbolic

and

encyclopedic

knowledge,"148 where new textual information is situated in the existing epistemic and
conceptual structures. The real meaning of a word emerges only when it is used in
discourse, and receives specification and structuring through interacting with cotext,
intertext and situation.
In The Theory of Speech and Language (1951), Alan H. Gardiner investigates
word meaning in relation to the situation of discourse. For Gardiner, the meaning of a
word in a language is not pre-defined but derived from usage. The range of possible
meanings of a word is an accumulation of its former applications in specific situations
to refer to particular things. This "area of

meaning""^

js constantly changing, as every

new application fuses with the former applications and changes the potential meaning
of the word. But if words are areas of meaning with unstable boundaries, then how do
listeners know exactly what the speaker means? When a word is used in a specific
situation, the entire range of its established semantic usage is implicated. Then the cotext and context will, like "a circle of l i g h t guide the listener through this field of
possible meanings to the actual thing-meant. In this view, a word carries with it not a
definition, but a historical heritage of past and possible applications, which provide the
building blocks for new applications and meanings.
Because of its seeming stasis and finitude, language has been depicted as
either imperfect expression of thoughts or forestalled restriction on thoughts. The

147 Nerlich & Clarke p566

Nerlich & Clarke p578
Gardiner (1952) p11
150 ibid p12

89

morbid strand of deconstructionism and post-modernism dwells in the arbitrary

relationship between the signifier and the signified, laments the ever-expanding void
between word and thought, and mourns the incessant dissipation of meaning. In
hermeneutics, however, our use of language is never an exceptional, exclusive and
eccentric utterance but always formulated and understood in relation to the whole of
linguistic, literary and socio-cultural traditions. Gadamer believes that the general
concept of the word is continually being enriched and expanded with each particular
usage. Albeit the fact that speaking requires the use of pre-established words with
general meanings, the present and particular thought is not subordianted or subsumed
under a conventional meaning. Instead, each time when a general concept of a word is
applied to a particular perception, there is "a constant process of concept formation ...
by means of which the life of a language develops.''^
The significance of a word is only achieved in its relation to the text, language,
literature and socio-cultural history as a whole. The utterance, although imperfect in its
expressiveness and specificity, is therefore able to bring "a totality of meaning into play,
without being able to express it totally."''^ The finitude of the word embodies the
infinity of the unsaid. Taking this broader and deeper view of languagehermeneutics
thinkers maintain their faith in the word and claim that
all human speaking is finite in such a way that there is laid up within it an
infinity of meaning to be explicated and laid ouV^^
Gadamer calls this interplay between the said and unsaid, the finite and infinite,
generality and particularity, past and present the ideality of the word. The form of the
word, while alienating and estranging, is also what allows accessibility to meaning
across time and space. Being a non-essential representation for thought, the semiotic
sign seems to dilute or even distort the original concept. Yet it is exactly this distance
that allows its content to be expressed and understood in relation to any new situation.

151 Gadamer p429

152 ibid p458
153 ibid p458

90

What has been formally fixed in writing can detach itself from the contingency of its
origin and its author and make itself "free for new relationships."'''* Word is dialectic
and holds an inner dimension of multiplication:
Every word breaks forth as if from a center and is related to a whole,
through which alone it is a word. Every word causes the whole of the
language to which it belongs to resonate and the whole world-view that
underlies it to appear. Thus every word, as the event of a moment,
carries with it the unsaid, to which it is related by responding and
summoning, i
The resonance of the whole of language and the infinity of the unsaid lie not in
the word per se, but in our memory, understanding and interpretation of the word.
Despite the arbitrariness and fossilization of the signifier, the act of writing and reading
rises above the schematization of language and remains meaningful and playful.
Gadamer credits our hermeneutical capacity as the regenerative force in language use.
The interpretive mind takes a text as a whole, reads it structurally and dynamically,
and sees meaning multi-perspectivally, thereby making it possible for one word to
mean infinitely more than what it can say.

5.5 Map analysis:

the scope of metaphor

When we approach translation from a textual and structural point-of-view and

seek to preserve the resonance of the original sub-text, we will begin to see that
metaphor translation goes far beyond the translation of a vehicle and a tenor. With
respect to the intricate undertext woven by the author to convey the overall meaning of
a central metaphor as well as the complex meta-textual processing performed by the
reader/translator to untangle the thick textual undergrowth, the study and description of
metaphor translation should take on a broader scope. It should adopt a method that
can account for the sense components distributed throughout the structuration of the
ibid p395
155 ibid p458

91

text, which merge to configure the meaning of the metaphor, in other words, the textual
map of the metaphor.
Zoltan Kovecses, a linguist and metaphor theorist, has been developing an
integrated system that explains human emotions (such as anger, pain, pride, love and
happiness) as products of embodied experiences, metaphorical language and thought
as well as cultural models. In the article "The scope of metaphor" (2000), Kovecses
puts forth three interlocking notions for the analysis of metaphorical language and
thought. They are 1) the scope of metaphor, 2) main meaning focus and 3) central
mapping(s). His theory provides an excellent framework for the analysis of complex
metaphors, especially those which make use of a series of physical source domains
(vehicles) for the expression of an abstract concept.
It is generally recognized that a target domain (tenor) can be described by a
wide range of source domains. This is apparent when the abstract concept has
different aspects and features, and no single source can exhaust all of them. What
Kovecses observes is that there are source concepts which can serve to characterize
a number of distinct targets. He calls "the full range of cases, that is, all the possible
target domains, to which a given specific source concept (such as war, building, fire)
applies,,i56 the scope of metaphor. In the article, he looks at the source domain of
"buildings" as it applies to the target domains of theories, relationships, career,
company, economic systems, social groups and life, and notes that all these target
domains can be subsumed as special metaphorical subcases under the overarching
metaphor of COMPLEX ABSTRACT SYSTEMS ARE BUILDINGS.''^
Kovecses also notices that all the sub-ordinate metaphorical expressions
reflect a major theme or orientation of the generic metaphor, in this case, the creation
of a strong and stable complex system. Each source, he concludes, is associated with
a main meaning focus that is mapped onto the target. The meaning focus is not

156 KCvecses p80

157 ibid p80-81

92

randomly selected but "is constituted by the central knowledge that pertains to a
particular entity or event within a speech community."''^ In other words, a community
of speakers agrees upon a set of predetermined conceptual materials that can be
applied to the range of target domains. This set of predetermined conceptual materials
make up the central knowledge related to an entity of event. Referring to Ronald
Langacker's characterization of central knowledge, Kovecses defines it as "knowledge
(about an entity or event) that is conventional, generic, intrinsic, and

characteristic.

In other words, a set of concepts is agreed by a community of speakers to be central

to a specific source domain and thereby comprises its main meaning focus.
Different aspects and features of the generic metaphor will give rise to a range
of submetaphors, which are mapped onto the target by means of basic constituent
mappings. In the examples of COMPLEX SYSTEMS ARE BUILDINGS, Kovecses
draws up at least six submetaphors:
(a) building
complex system
(b) making the building
creating or developing the system
(c) the foundation of the building
the basis of the system
(d) the maker of the building
the creator of the system
(e) the strength of the building
the stability or strength of the system
(f) physical structure

abstract structure

Of these, Kovecses identifies (b), (e) and (f) as central mappings because they map
the main meaning focus (i.e. the creation of strong and stable complex system) onto
the target. He further defines central mappings in the following way:
(1) Conceptually, central mappings lead to the emergence of other
mappings, either constituent basic mappings or metaphorical entailments.
(2) Culturally, central mappings reflect major human concerns relative to
the source in question.... (3) Motivationally, they are the mappings that
are most motivated experientially - either culturally or physically. (4)
Linguistically, they give rise to metaphorical linguistic expressions that
dominate a metaphor.
In another example, Kovecses observes that the scope of the source domain of "fire"
includes many emotion concepts, such as anger, love, curiosity, desire and ambition.
158 ibid p82
159 ibid p82
ibid p83
161 ibid p83-84

93

They can be generalized by assuming the overall metaphor EMOTION IS HEAT OR

FIRE. The main meaning focus of this metaphor is emotional intensity. Among the
basic constituent mappings of this metaphor, "the heat of fire

the intensity of the

situation" is central because (1) conceptually, most of the metaphorical entailments of

this metaphor follow from or are based on this particular mapping, (2) culturally, a
major human concern with fire is its intensity, (3) the linguistic applications of this
source domain reflect intensity as a main meaning focus, and (4) a very clear
experiential basis for this mapping is the body heat we produce when we engage in
intense situations.''^
In Kovecses' framework, metaphorical mappings are laid out in a hierarchical
and

radial structure, with a generic metaphor entailing subordinate levels of

metaphorical entailments and with the main meaning of a metaphor radiating from a
central theme. Furthermore, the analysis of the meaning focus or central knowledge of
a metaphor embraces the conceptual, cultural, linguistic as well as experiential
relevance of a metaphor. This framework of metaphorical mappings is ideal for the
analysis of texts where an abstract concept is expressed through a complex metaphor
which may not be explicitly expressed in the text and is configured by a series of
submetaphors, each providing access to one aspect or feature of the main theme of
the overarching metaphor. By surveying the scope of the metaphor in the text, the
analyst will obtain a metaphoric structuration of the text. Then, through an
understanding of the existing knowledge structures of the linguistic community, the
analyst can identify the main meaning focus of the complex metaphor and its different
aspects and features. Lastly, by studying how the meaning focus (or foci) is (or are)
mapped onto the target domain, the analyst can abstract a map of the complex
metaphor with a hierarchy of metaphorical mappings. When this framework is applied
to the study of translated texts involving complex metaphors, the source-text map can
be juxtaposed with the target-text map(s) for comparison, and any discrepancy in
162 ibid p89

94

correspondence should be analyzed according to the linguistic, literary and sociocultural differences between source and target knowledge structures and, in some
cases, any personal, practical or ideological concerns on the part of the individual
translator.

5.6

Summary

In this chapter, we developed a structural and textual approach to study and

describe the translation of complex metaphors. We looked at Holmes' model of
translation-descriptive process, which is based on his translation process model and
advocates a map analysis and comparison method for descriptive translation studies.
We suggested an attempt to apply Holmes' theories on the translation description of a
complex metaphor whose sense components and meaning foci are dispersed along
the text. We then followed Newmark's and Broeck's discussions of metaphor
translation and found that both translation scholars acknowledge the necessity to
analyze metaphor translation in a multi-dimensional and paradigmatic manner.
Following the notion of information structuration in texts, we spent some time to review
what linguists, psychologists and philosophers have said about the dynamic and
organic nature of language. From the lexical undertext to the interanimation of words,
from the interaction between past applications and current thing-meant to the ideality
of the finite word to implicate the infinity of its language, we came to see that it is the
mind's structural acumen that has endowed language with fluidity, regeneration and
creativity.
Lastly, we looked at Kovecses' theory of the scope of metaphor and found it an
ideal framework for the analysis of complex metaphors that are manifested in a text as
a series of submetaphors that map the main meaning focus from the source domain to
the target domain. Once we have discovered the network of metaphorical mappings in

95

the source and target texts, we can proceed to compare the source-text map and
target-text map, with reference to the difference in the linguistic, literary, socio-culturai
knowledge structures.

96

Chapter Six
Case S t u d y : E n g l i s h t r a n s l a t i o n s of the xiaoyaoyou
the

( ) m e t a p h o r in

Zhuangzi

6.1 Tao and metaphor:

The Zhuangzi and its language

The poetic language of the Zhuangzi, a founding text in the Taoist tradition of
thought, has been bemoaned by some scholars as an obstruction to analyzing its
philosophical concepts. There are those who, at first determined to de-mystify the text,
came to the end of the rope and dismissed the Zhuangzi as a book of poetry, not
philosophy. The author of the Zhuangzi is no doubt one of the most delightful and
fanciful writers in Chinese literature, transporting its readers from earth to heaven and
across the seas in majestic swoops. But underneath the playful language often in the
form of anecdotes, parables, fables and myths is there a coherent philosophical
system that is worth deciphering? If so, why did the philosopher choose poetry as the
means of expressing these philosophical concepts and thereby risk misunderstanding
and usettlemenr?
The reason lies in the first words of the Tao Te Ching, the predecessor of the

Zhuangzi: "The tao that can be spoken of is not the constant tao."(".)This
mistrust in language is echoed in many places in the Zhuangzi. In the "Knowledge
Travels North"(""chapter, it is thus said, "The tao cannot be said. Said, it is not
[the tao]."(".Having said that, the Tao Te Ching and the Zhuangzi
then went on to give us the most lyrical musings and full-bodied renditions of the way
of the tao. We sense how the authors both loathe and long for language - loathe its

97

arbitrariness, argumentativeness and petrifaction, its rationality, conventionality and

finitude, yet long for the infinite proliferation and creativity at its heart. The philosophy
of the tao cannot be accessed and analyzed using direct mundane language. It is
always just alluded to, hinted at, referred to, via word-pictures:
[T]he Chuang-tzu's ideas and concepts are not simply and plainly stated in
neat, verbal formulas.... Instead, the Chuang-tzu employs word-pictures,
preferring to portray its concepts with images rather than define them with
words.... Metaphors and analogies, long recognized as important to early
Chinese thinking, are discovered to be indispensable when trying to
interpret the Chuang-tzu's world vision.
The wonderful images, analogies and metaphors, stimulating different aspects of the
imagination, then cohere and configure to form a world-picture in the mind's eye.
As one reads and rereads the book, there emerges a vision of how the
various ideas were imagined. A larger world-picture, a Weltanschauung,
develops within which individual philosophical concepts take shape and
become intelligible.
The tao cannot be gleaned from the surface of the language. The Taoist poetphilosophers have burrowed it deep inside the network of the text.
[T]he exact understanding of most of [Chuang-tzu's] ideas, we will see, lies
buried, so to speak, in the parable and imagery of the text, and must be
salvaged from them.... This understanding of the world, in terms of a set of
interpenetrating images and pictures, bears little resemblance to the
systematic, logical elaboration of ideas to which we are accustomed.''^
The Taoists realized that it is self-defeating to talk about the tao in a logical or positivist
manner. The way to the tao is a self-enlightenment process, and it cannot be led step
by step by the hand. Rather, what is given is only a map, an ambience of pictures
about how the tao is like, leaving the students to make their own journey. It is only with
metaphorical language, which can express abstract concepts in vivid, physical images
yet leaving ample room for discovery and realization, that the reader can come to
imagine and experience a personally relevant tao.

163 Oshima p64

98

6.2 The scope of the xiaoyaoyou

metaphor in the Zhuangzi

Novel, abstract concepts are often inexpressible without referring to known,

physical objects. Therefore, electricity is understood in terms of currents, atoms are
visualized as particles with hooks and holes, the body is compared to a machine and
the mind to a computer. The picture conjured is so concrete and visceral and the
subject proper so vague and intangible that the metaphor often becomes determinative
in our understanding of the concept. In "A metaphorical analysis of the concept of mind
in the Chuang-tzu" (1983), Harold Oshima consistently discovers the concept of mind

{hsin /ilin "a metaphorical nest"'''* of images of winds, water, fluids, mirror and light.
He concludes that the concept of mind in the Zhuangzi was shaped, substantiated and
understood through the use of these metaphors. Edward Slingerland (2004) performs
a metaphorical analysis on the concept of self in the Zhuangzi and discovers that
"conceptions of the self portrayed in this text are based on a relatively small set of
interrelated conceptual metaphors."^ He also finds a host of source domains that are
similar across the classical Chinese of the Zhuangzi and the modern American English,
and speculates that there is "a high degree of cross-cultural similarity with regard to
deep conceptual

s t r u c t u r e s . "

Whether for independent study of its philosophical

concepts or comparative thought, both scholars have found it revealing and rewarding
to dig deep into the metaphorical structures of the Zhuangzi.
The metaphor of "far and leisurely traveling" {xiaoyaoyou also plays a
paramount role in the philosophy of the Zhuangzi. In fact, it is the title of the opening
chapter of the book. The image of saints and worthies rising above the hustle and
bustle of vulgar life, riding the mists and winds and wandering in eternal oneness and
nothingness pervades the Zhuangzi. It is through this sensorimotor experience of

164 ibid p71

165 Slingerland p322
ibid p336

99

spatial traveling -

one of the most basic and universal actions we perform as

embodied beings - that we come to understand the abstract concept of the tao.
Scholars acknowledge the centrality of xiaoyaoyou as a metaphor for spiritual
enlightenment in the Zhuangzi. In his book on the aesthetics of xiaoyaoyou, Wang Kai
(2003) reads xiaoyaoyou

as a journey towards spiritual freedom, during which the

heart/mind is emptied through negation, release of toil, purification, liberation and

transcendence

167 and becomes empty, quiet and very s t i l l . T h e

differentiation

between self and other vanishes, and the self becomes one with the tao, merges with
the natural, complies with the great change, returns to the great circulation of change
in heaven and earth, and is in communion with the spirit of heaven and e a r t h . T h e
spirit is free, not-doing but simply following the course of nature, and can therefore
treat life and death as game, play, spiel.At

the zenith of xiaoyaoyou, we find a spirit

bathed in heavenly b l i s s . I n their study of the Zhuangzi and Chinese culture, Bai
ensong and Wang Lisuo (1995) also see xiaoyaoyou as a quest for spiritual freedom,
where the self returns to its nature and transcends itself, and hence overcomes the
limits of time and space and enters into eternity.''^^ Li Rizhang (2000), in his book on
x/aoyao and the quest for the original and genuine self, describes being at one with the
universe as assuming a greater self and resuming the primordial

chaos.

167 Wang p1-9. Negation (release of toil (purification (liberation (and transcendence
168 ibid p1-9. Empty, quiet (and very still ().
169 (bid p228-254. The differentiation between self and other vanishes (),and the self becomes one with
the tao ()merges with the natural ()complies with the great change ()returns to the
great circulation of change in heaven and earth ()and is in communion with the spirit of heaven
and earth ().
170 ibid p228-254. Free() not-doing but simply following the course of nature ()and can treat life and
death as game, play or spiel ().
171 ibid p228-254. Heavenly bliss ().
Bai & Wang p 17-30. The self returns to its nature (and transcends itself (
)and hence overcomes the limits of time and space and enters eternity (
).
I 7 3 U P89-100. Greater self (and resuming the primordial chaos ().

100

6.27 The metaphorical

structuration

of the xiaoyaoyou metaphor

From riding and merging with heaven and earth to the unloading of reason and
passion, from the playful attitude to the destination of non-action and oneness, the
source domain of xiaoyaoyou has a wide scope in the Zhuangzi. In other words,
different aspects of the image of wandering far and free are mapped onto different
aspects of spiritual enlightenment. To translate the Zhuangzi and convey its
philosophy via another language, it is essential that this key metaphorical system be
preserved. We will now proceed to recover the scope (or text map) of the xiaoyaoyou
metaphor in the Inner Chapters of the Zhuangzi and then compare how four different
translators have configured it in their English translations. First, let us look at the
context in which "wandering" {you )"far and leisurely" {xiaoyao and other
words related to the spatial movement are used in the Inner Chapters of the Zhuangzi.
Please refer to Appendix 1 for English translations.

1.

/
Chapter One

2.
a

/
Chapter One
P21

3.

/
Chapter One

p14

p27. 30

4.
a

/
Chapter Two
P 46

101

5.

/
Chapter Two
P81

6.

/
Chapter Two

7..

/
Chapter
Three
P94|96

8.

/
Chapter Four pll7

9.

/
Chapter Four p123

10.

/
Chapter Four p138

11.

/
Chapter Five p145

12.

> /
Chapter Five p150

13.

> /
Chapter Five p162

14.

/
Chapter Six p190

p84

102

15.

/
Chapter Six pl 93

16.

/
Chapter Six p193

17.

/
Chapter Six p193

18.

/
ChapteSix p193

19.

/
Chapter Six p202

20.--

/
Chapter Six p202

21.

/Chapter
Seven p215

22.

/Chapter
Seven p215

23.

/Chapter
Seven p217

24.

/Chapter
Seven p227

TABLE 1. Use of "wandering" Nou and "far and leisurely" (x\aoyao

and other words related to spatial movement in the Inner Chapters of the Zhuangzi

103

6.2.2 The meaning foci of the xiaoyaoyou metaphor

In his study of xiaoyaoyou in the Zhuangzi, Li Rizhang discovers two recurring

sentence structures that are used to express the xiaoyaoyou metaphor:
1.

"Riding on... and wandering in...."(......()......)

2.

"Wandering in...."(or .).""?*

More information is provided by the first sentence type, which comprises not only the
wandering and the destination of the wandering, but also tells us about the mode of
the wandering. Li suggests that the first structure ustrates the classic syntax for
expressing the xiaoyaoyou metaphor in the Zhuangzi. Examples of this structure are
quote numbers 1, 2, 5, 9, 15, 21 in Table 1.
The analysis of the sentence structures prompts Li to identify three main
elements in the xiaoyaoyou metaphor:
1.

the mode of the wandering

2.

the wandering

3.

the destination of the wandering.

For our purpose, we will specify the second element as the attitude of the wanderer.
We can now proceed to analyze the 24 quotes on you or xiaoyao from the Zhuangzi in
terms of these three meaning foci:
The mode of the wandering:
1)
2)
5)
6)...
9)
21)

L i p96-103

104

The attitude of the wanderer:

1)...?
2)...
3)...
5)
6)
7)
8)
9)
10)(
13)
18)
19)
20)...
23)
The destination of the wandering:

1)
2)
3)
5)
6)
9)
11)
12)
14)
15)
18)
21)
22)
23)
24)
First, for the mode of the wandering, the xiaoyaoyou metaphor uses images of riding
on clouds, mists, sun, moon, birds and dragons as well as on the truth of heaven and
earth ()the changes of the six breaths (")things (and
things-as-they-are ().Li interprets "riding on" as "merging with." The image of
riding on the universe therefore implies embracing, harmonizing with and becoming
one with the myriad of things. Second, the attitude of the wanderer pivots on the image
of xiaoyao as well as the oval, yawn-like sound of the two rhyming vowels. The

105

wanderer rises above the so-called benevolence (and righteousness (and

looks down upon the common pursuit of praise and prestige. To experience

xiaoyaoyou, the wanderer must undergo a process of forgetting and letting go in order
to recover the true self. Xiaoyao is a state of absolute freedom (and genuine
being of non-being ("')because one is in one's element and lives at large. Third,
the destination of the wandering is a place beyond the dust and grime (h)
without beginning or end (") where the world seems to come to nonexistence ("").Yet at the still point (")there the harmony is.(
The way has led to the tao - the primordial chaos ("where we dwell in
things-as-they-are and act with non-action {wuwei A l t h o u g h the metaphor of

xiaoyaoyou is built around the image of spatial traveling, it is not about galloping (
after a goal. In its essence, it is a reflective enlightenment ('')which calms and
collects the bickering and conflicting heart/mind to a still oneness a stillness that
moves perpetually and a oneness that embraces all.

6.2.3

The overarching

metaphor,

main

meaning

focus

and central

mappings

of

xiaoyaoyou
Following Kovecses' scope framework, we can say that xiaoyaoyou is the
expression of the overarching metaphor of REACHING THE TAO IS FAR AND
LEISURELY WANDERING, whose main meaning focus is "learning to act with nonaction by letting go the self and becoming one with the universe." We can identify three

175 Slingerland takes wu wei effortless action) as the overarching metaphor that expresses the Zhuangzian
idea) of a lack of forced motion. "Wu wei is sometimes used in its literal sense of 'absence of doing,' and could
thus in certain situations be rendered as no-doing or 'inaction.' More commonly, however, wu wei involves quite
a bit of 'doing and in such contexts it must be understood metaphorically." (p336) He also discovers a series of
sub-metaphors for wu wei in the Zhuangzi, many of which are related to spatial movement "Although the term wu
wei itself only appears a few times in the 'Inner Chapters' of the Zhuangzi, it can serve as a general expression
for a host of metaphors having to do with a lack of exertion: 'being at ease' {an )'wandering' or 'playing' (you
)'following' {yin m or suifM) or 'leaning upon' (y/.)'flowing with' {shun H i ) , and 'riding upon' {cheng ).'
(p336)

106

constituent sub-metaphors for the xiaoyaoyou metaphor, with the following central
mappings:
(a) the mode of the wandering

relationship with the universe

(b) the attitude of the wanderer

state of the self

(c) the destination of the wandering

spiritual enlightenment

By abstracting a metaphorical map of xiaoyaoyou as it is structurated through the text,

we have gained a more dynamic and organic picture of the central metaphor for
spiritual enlightenment in the Zhuangzi.

6.3 Translations

of the xiaoyaoyou

metaphor

The textual richness of the Zhuangzi serves as an inexhaustible source for new
interpretations and translations. Starting from the end of the 19"" century, translators
have been translating the Zhuangzi into European languages. English translations
include those done by Frederic Henry Balfour (1881), Herbert Giles (1889), James
Legge (1891), Fung Yu-lan (1933), Arthur Waley (1939), Hu Tse Ling (1939), Lin
Yutang (1942), E. R. Hughes (1942), James Ware (1963), Burton Watson (1964),
Feng, Gia-fu and Jane English (1974), and A. C. Graham (1981). For our current study,
the English translations of Giles, Fung, Watson and Graham have been chosen for
their completeness and thoroughness.
Giles (1845-1935) taught Chinese at Cambridge University and once served as
an H.B.M. consul at Ningpo. He published many books on Chinese history, civilization
and religion, mainly for readers whose knowledge about China was minimal. Wellversed in Indo-European literature, Giles approached the Zhuangzi guided by the
belief that parallelisms of thought between East and West can be found. He was also
keen to make the subtle and obscure allusions in the book comprehensible to the

107

English readers, and therefore interlaced his own running commentary into the body of
the translated text.
Fung (1895-1990) is a major figure in modern Chinese thought. He is not only
a acclaimed historian of Chinese philosophy, but also a prominent philosopher
himself. After finishing his studies at Peking University, Fung continued his studies at
Columbia University, where he obtained his doctorate in 1924. He said in his preface
that his purpose for translating the Zhuangzi was to do justice to its philosophical spirit
of the author.
So far as the English translations of Chuang TzCi are concerned, they
may be good and useful from a literary or linguistic point of view. But in
their interpreting Chuang Tzu, they do not seem to have touched the true
philosophical spirit of the author. In other words, they are successful in
the literary or linguistic aspect, but not in the philosophical.^^
To utilize previous scholarship in illustrating the philosophy of the Zhuangzi, Fung also
translated a large part of Kuo Hsiang's canonical commentary.
Watson (1925- ) taught Chinese and Japanese language and literature at
Kyoto University, Columbia University and Stanford University. He is a proliferate and
widely recognized translator from Chinese and Japanese, and is known for the natural
ease and quiet eloquence of his language. Watson is highly appreciative of the poetic
and imaginative force in the Zhuangzi and is determined "to stick as closely as
possible to the precise wording and imagery of the

Chinese"""

jn order to preserve the

poetry. Footnotes are occasionally added as supplement and explanation. In his efforts
to render the literal meaning of the original, Watson hopes not to blur, as he thinks
previous translations sometimes do, the beauty of the images in the work he calls one
of the greatest poems of ancient China.
Graham is dissatisfied with the previous translations because of their coherent
and integrated prose style. Graham argues that the Zhuangzi cannot be treated as a
book written in prose, divided into chapters and composed of paragraphs, and accuses

176 Fung pv
177 Watson p19

108

the other translators of mending the originally disjointed, mutilated and sometimes
unintelligible text, "disguising the breaks, blurring the differences, assimilating the
verse to the prose, in order to sustain the illusion of a smooth flow." This approach has
forced translators into a defensive stance and to "break down now and then and write
nonsense." 178 To break out of the crippling convention of complete, sentence-bysentence prose translation, Graham pays close attention to the form of the text and
devises a corresponding form in English for the rhymed quatrains, impromptu songs,
didactic verses, aphorisms, and formulations in the original. Not willing to compromise
the magic and enigma in the Zhuangzi for readability, Graham allows in the ideal
translation for some items to be delightful and illuminating and others to be "elliptical,
difficult and enigmatic."

In fact, Watson also warns his readers of intermittent

befuddling passages in the book. We can see that the latter two translators express
less eagerness to make sense out of the work and preach its philosophy. They seem
to just want their readers to enjoy a ride on the wings of the Zhuangzi.

6.3.1 You

You ( " a p p e a r s 23 times in the text of the Inner Chapters of the Zhuangzi. Let
us now look at how the four translators handle this particular word. The numbers in
brackets in front of the Chinese original refer to quotes in Table 1.

(1)

roaming through the realms of For-Ever (Giles p29)

makes excursion in the infinite (Fung p33-34)

wandered through the boundless (Watson p26)

178 Graham p30

179 Graham p32

109

travel into the infinite (Graham p44-45)

(2)

roams beyond the limits of mortality (Giles 31)

rambled beyond the four seas (Fung 37)

wanders beyond the four seas (Watson 27)

roams beyond the four seas (Graham 46)

(5)

pass beyond the limits of this external world (Giles p44)

ramble at ease beyond the seas (Fung p60)

wanders beyond the four seas (Watson p41)

roams beyond the four seas (Graham p58)

(6)

roams beyond the limits of this dusty world (Giles p44)

roams beyond the limits of this dusty world (Fung p60)

wanders beyond the dust and grime (Watson p42)

roams beyond the dust and grime (Graham p59)

(7)

... it remains only to insert that which is without thickness into such an
interstice. By these means ther interstice will be enlarged, and the blade will
find plenty of room. (Giles p49)

If we insert that which is without thickenss into an interstice, there is

certainly plenty of room for it to move along. (Fung p68)

If you insert what has no thickness into such spaces, then there's plenty of
room - more than enough for the blade to play about in. (Watson p47)

... if you insert what has no thickness where there is an interval, then, what
more could you ask, of course there is ample room to move the edge about.
(Graham p64)

(8)

If you can enter this man's domain without offending his amour proper...
(Giles p54)

110

Enter this man's service, but do not contend for fame... (Fung p80)

You may go and play in his bird cage, but never be moved by fame...
(Watson p54)

You are capable of eterinq and roaming free inside his cage, but do not be
excited that you are making a name of yourself... (Graham p68)

(9)

Therefore let yourself be carried along without fear (Giles p57)

Let your mind make excursion with whatever may happen (Fung p85)

Just go along with things and let your mind move freely (Watson p57-58)

Besides, to let the heart roam with other things as its chariot (Graham p71)

(10)

When orders came down for a conscription, the hunchback stood

unconcerned among the crowd. (Giles p61)

When the government was calling out soldiers, he wandered among them
and there was no need to hide himself. (Fung p91)

When the authorities call out the troops, he stands in the crowd waving
good-by. (Watson p62)

If the authorities are press-ganging soldiers the cripple strolls in the middle
of them flipping back his sleeves. (Graham p74)

(11)

directs his whole mind towards the very climax of virtue (Giles p64)

dallies with the harmony of virtue (Fung p98)

lets his mind play in the harmony of virtue (Watson p65)

lets the heart go roaming in the peace which is from the Power (Graham
p77)

(12)......

He who should ^ut himself in front of the bull's-eye when Hou Yi was
shooting, would be hit. If he was not hit, it would be destiny.... At any rate I
have been with him nineteen years without being aware of the loss of my
toes.... eqaqed in studying the internal. (Giles 65-66)

111

When men are wandering within the range of ls arrow, the middle of the
field is the place where they would be hit. If they are not hit, that is
destiny.... I have been with him for nineteen years without being aware of
the loss of my foot.... making excursion in the inner world. (Fung 100-101)

If you play in front of Archer Yi's target, you're right in the way of arrows,
and if you don't get hit, it's a matter of fate.... The Master and I have been
friends for nineteen years and he's never once let on that he's aware I'm
missing a foot.... wandering outside the realm of forms and bodies.
(Watson 66-67)

To stray within the range of archer Yi's bow and not be hit is destiny..... I
have been going around with the Master for nineteen years now, and was
never aware that I'm a man with a chopped foot.... roaming now on the
inside of the flesh-and-bone. (Graham 78)

(13)...

And thus with the truly wise

(Giles 69)

The sage, therefore, has another place for his excusion. (Fung 106)

So the sage has his wanderings. (Watson 71)

Hence, wherever the sage roams

(Graham 82)

(15)

mount to heaven, and roaming through the clouds

(Giles p80)

mount to heaven and roaming through the clouds

(Fung p123)

climb up to heaven and wander in the mists

climb the sky and roam the mists

(Watson p82)

(Graham p89)

(16)

These men...travel beyond the rule of life. I travel within it. (Giles p81)

They travel outside the human world... I travel within it. (Fung p124)

Such men as they... wander beyond the realm; men like me wander within
it. (Watson p83)

They are the sort that roams beyond the guidelines... I am the sort that
roams within the guidelines. (Graham p89)

(17)

112

They consider themselves as one with God, recognizing no distinctions

between human and divine. (Giles p81)

They are companions of the Maker of things, and make excursion with the
unity of the universe. (Fung p124)

Even now they have joined with the Creator as men to wader in the single
breath of heaven and earth. (Watson p83)

They are at the stage of being fellow men with the maker of things, and go
roaming in the single breath that breathes through heaven and earth.
(Graham p90)

(19)

what do you in this free-and-easy, care-for-nobody,

neighbouitiood? (Giles p84)

topsy-turvy

how would you be able to wander on the road of freedom and ease, of
aimless and unregulated enjoyment, and of ever-changing evolution? (Fung
p127)

Now how do you expect to go wandering in any far-away, carefree, and asyou-like-it paths? (Watson p86)

how are you going to roam that free and easy take-any-turn as-you-please
path? (Graham p91)

(20)...

He is whom you should seek. (Giles p84)

In him make an excursion. (Fung p128)

It is with him alone I wader. (Watson p86)

It is over this that you have to roam. (Graham p91)

(21)

soar beyond the cardinal points, to the land of nowhere (Giles p87)

proceed beyond the world, wander in the and of nowhere (Fung p135)

beyond the six directions, wandering in the village of Not-Even-Anything

(Watson p90)

beyond where the six directions end, to travel the realm of Nothingwhatever
(Graham p95)

113

(22)

Resolves your mental energy into abstraction, your physical energy into
inaction. (Giles p87)

Make excursion in pure simplicity. Identify yourself with nondistinction.

(Fung p135)

Let your mind wander in simplicity, blend your spirit with the vastness
(Watson p91)

Let your heart roam in the flavourless, blend your energies with the
featureless (Graham p95)

(23)

It is based upon the baseless, and travels through the realms of Nowhere.
(Giles p88)

The philosopher-king is he who stands within mystery and makes excursion

into the nonexistent. (Fung p136)

He takes his stand on what cannot be fathomed and wanders where there
is nothing at all. (Watson p92)

He is one who keeps his foothold in the immeasurable and roams where
nothing is. (Graham p96)

(24)

Full allowance must be made for others, while remaining unmoved oneself.
(Giles p90)

Identify yourself with the infinite. Make excursio into the void. (Fung p141)

Embody to the fullest what has no end and wander where there is no trail.
(Watson p94-95)

Become wholly identified with the limitless and roam where there is not
foreboding of anything. (Graham p98)

Already, we sense that Watson and Graham are more consistent in their translations,
and while Fung also tends to translate you in one way more than another, Giles seems
not to have taken recurrence of the word into consideration in his translation. Below is
the statistics of how the four translators have rendered the single word you. The
umbers in brackets indicate the number of times the word is used in the translation.

114

Giles
Nil
(14)
Roam (4)
Travel (3)
Pass (1)
Stand (1)
-

Fung

Watson

Make an excursion (9)

Wander
(4)
Ramble
^
Roam
(2)
Travel
(2)
Move along
Q)
Dally
(1)
Nil

Table 2. Translations

(1)

Wander
(16)
Play
(4)
Move freely (1)
Stand
(1)
_ Been friends (1)

Graham
Roam
(17)
Travel
(2)
Move about
(1)
Stroll
(1)
Stray
(1)
Going around with (1)

of the word you (in the Inner Chapters of the Zhuangzi

Graham has been particularly consistent in using "roam" to render you, except in quote
(1) where he uses "travel" instead. Watson, too, does not stray from the use of
"wander" in translating you, except in quotes (9) and (11) where he uses "move freely"
and "play" in its lieu. "Play," appearing four times in his translation, contributes to the
light-hearted and carefree tone in Watson's work. Fung seems undecided about the
use of "making an excursion," which is applied half the times when translating you,
while the other half of the time he experiments with "wander," "ramble," "roam,"
"travel," "move" and "dally." It should be noted that Graham and Watson never fail to
translate you, and Fung only misses it once. Giles, on the other hand, has been too
carefree, if not careless, in treating the reverberation of the word you in the Zhuangzi.
He leaves the image of spatial movement out of the picture 14 out of the 23 times it
appears, sometimes gliding over it, sometimes paraphrasing it into an abstract mental
action like "direct the mind towards (the whole of virtue)" and being "engaged in
(studying the internal)."

115

6.3.2 C h e n g ( and other riding-related

words

We discussed earlier the syntax used for expressing the xiaoyaoyou metaphor,
namely 1) "Riding on... and wandering

in...."(............)and

2) "Wandering in...."(or ...). "Riding on"

{cheng ) i s used in collocation with you four times in the text of the Zhuangzi,
contributing to the image of moving across space as well as forwarding above ground.
Let us take a look at the translations of cheng as well as other riding-related words, all
appearing in the same sentence with you..

(1)

But had he been charioted upon the eternal fitness of Heaven and Earth,
driving before him the elements as his team, while roaming through the
realms of For-Ever. (Giles p29)

But suppose there is one who chariots on the normality of the universe,
rides upon the transformation of the six elements, and thus makes
excursion in the infinite. (Fung p33-34)

If he has only mounted on the truth of Heaven and Earth, ridden the
changes of the six breaths, and thus wandered through the boundless.
(Watson p26)

As for the man who rides a true course between heaven and earth, with the
changes of the Six Energies for his chariot, to travel into the infinite.
(Graham p44-45)

(2)

... riding on clouds with flying dragons for his team, roams beyond the limits
of mortality. (Giles 31)

rode on clouds, drove along the flying dragons, and thus rambled beyond
the four seas. (Fung 37)

climbs up on the clouds and mist, rides a flying dragon, and wanders
beyond the four seas. (Watson 27)

rides the vapour of the clouds, yokes the flying dragons to his chariot, and
roams beyond the four seas. (Graham 46)

(5)

116

would mount upon the clouds of heaven, and driving the sun and the moon
before him, would pass beyond the limits of this external world. (Giles p44)

would mount upon the clouds of heaven, would ride on the sun and moon,
and would thus ramble at ease beyond the seas. (Fung p60)

rides the clouds and mists, straddles the sun and moon, and wanders
beyond the four seas. (Watson p41)

yokes the clouds to his chariot, rides the sun and moon and roams beyond
the four seas. (Graham p58)

(9)

Therefore let yourself be carried along without fear (Giles p57)

Let your mind make excursion with whatever may happen (Fung p85)

Just go along with things and let your mind move freely (Watson p57-58)

Besides, to let the heart roam with other things as its chariot (Graham p71)

(21) a

Borne o light pinions I can soar beyond the cardinal points, to the land of
nowhere, in the domain of nothingness. (Giles p87)

I would mount on the bird of ease and emptiness, proceed beyond the
world, wander in the land of nowhere, and live in the domain of nothingness.
(Fung p135)

I'll ride on the Light-and-Lissome Bird out beyond the six directions,
wandering in the village of Not-Even-Anything and living in the Broad-andorderless field. (Watson p90)

I shall ride out on the bird which fades into the sky beyond where the six
directions end, to travel the realm of Nothingwhatever and settle in the wilds
of the Boundless. (Graham p95)

Cheng ()yu ()qi (.all mean to ride and more specifically to ride on
horses or vehicles that are pulled by horses. To this extent, it is understandable why all
the translators, with the exception of Watson, find the word "chariot" appropriate for the
English text. Fung uses "chariot" only once, while Graham applies it much more
consistently (four times) and Giles uses "chariot" once and "team" (referring to the
team of horses pulling the chariot) two times. We should be wary here of the
connotation in using "chariot" in a philosophical discourse on the soul and spirit - to a

117

Western reader, it inevitably brings to mind the Platonic image of the charioteer and
his team of horses. In Phaedms, Plato compares the soul to a winged charioteer and
his team acting together:
First of all we must make it plain that the ruling power of us men drives a
pair of horses, and next that one of these horses is fine and good and of
noble stock, and the other the opposite in every way. So in our case the
task of the charioteer is necessarily a difficult and unpleasant business.
(246b-c)
The gods, on the other hand, drive a team of noble horses, and can therefore go easily
along the steep path leading to the summit of the arch which supports the outer
heavens. The image of the mortal charioteer caught between two horses, one
shameful, the other lustful, is deeply rooted in the Western consciousness. Freud
returns to it in his exposition of the id, ego and super-ego. The charioteer allegory
presents a picture of a divided and tormented soul who endures a lot of rein-tugging
and bridle-jerking on its path towards morality. In Phaedms, the charioteer is shown
subjugating appetite and lust in a very unpleasant way:
The driver... falls back like a racing charioteer at a barrier, and with a still
more violent backward pull jerks the bit from between the teeth of the
lustful horse, drenches his abusive tongue and jaws with blood, and
forcing his legs and haunches against the ground reduces him to torment.
(254c-d)
Although it can be argued that both the Taoists and Plato strive towards eradicating
difference and soaring in harmony, we must remember that the method suggested in
the Zhuangzi is one of letting go, following the nature of things-as-they-are and finding
genuine being in oneness with the universe. There are no reins of control or bridles of
restraint to be found in the xiaoyaoyou philosophy of the Zhuangzi. The use of "yoke"
by Graham (quotes 2 and 5) is out of sync with the original Zhuangzi. Driving a yoked
team on a chariot implies intention, volition and manipulation and is far from roaming.
Watson's use of "ride," "mount on," "climb up on" and "go along with" (as well as
Giles's use of "borne on" in quote 21 are much more suited to convey the breeziness
on the magic carpet ride.

118

6.3.3 Xiaoyao (M)

Now let us turn to the first two words in the xiaoyaoyou metaphor. Xiaoyao
appears only two times in the text of the Inner Chapters, with yao appearing one more
time in combination with another character (see quote 19). The two instances of

xiaoyao appear in correspondence to panghuang ()which means strolling in the

ancient Chinese of the Zhuangzi. It is interesting to note that the panghuang / xiaoyao
pair is used as adverbs in quote (3) but as verbs in quote (16), evincing the chameleon
quality of the Chinese language.

(3)

Why not plant it in the domain of non-existence,

Beyond the limits of our external world. Referring to the conditions of mental
abstraction in which alone true happiness is to be found
whither you might betake yourself to inaction by its side, to blissful repose
beneath its shade? (Giles p33)

Why do you not plant it in the domain of nonexistence, in a wide and barren
wild? By its side you may wander in nonaction; under it you may sleep in
happiness. (Fung p40)

Why don't you plant it in Not-Even-Anything Village, or the field of Broadand-Boundless, relax and do nothing by its side, or lie down for a free and
easy sleep under it? (Watson p30)

[W]hy not plant it in the realm of Nothingwhatever, in the wilds which spread
out into nowhere, and go roaming away to do nothing at its side, ramble
around and fall asleep in it shade? (Graham p47)

(18)

They stroll beyond the dust and dirt of mortality, to wander in the realms of
inaction. (Giles p81)

Unconsciously, they stroll beyond the dirty world and wander in the realm of
nonaction. (Fung p124)

M y they roam beyond the dust and dirt; they wander free and easy in the
service of inaction. (Watson p83)

Heedlessly they go roving beyond the dust and grime, go rambling through
the lore in which there's nothing to do." (Graham p89-90)

119

Panghuang is rendered as wandering, relaxing, roaming, roving and strolling, while

xiaoyao is translated as such:
Giles

Fung

Watson

Graham

Blissful

In happiness

Free and easy

Wander

Wander

Wander
easy

Rambling
around
Go rambling

Table 3. Translations

free

and

of the word xiaoyao (in the Inner Chapters of the Zhuangzi

Again, we see the consistency of Watson's and Graham's translations. Quote 3 comes
from the first chapter of the Zhuangzi and all four translators have to some extent
synchronized the translation of xiaoyao in the chapter title with that in the text.

6.3.4 Xiaoyaoyou (

Xiaoyaoyou appears as such only once in the Inner Chapters of the Zhuangzi
and that is as the chapter title in the first chapter. Here is how the chapter name

xiaoyaoyou has been rendered by the four translators:

Giles: "Transcendental Bliss"
Fung: "The Happy Excursion"
Watson: "Free and Easy Wandering"
Graham: "Going Rambling without a Destination"
Except for Giles's, all the translations retain the meaning of spatial movement
("excursion," "wandering" and "rambling"). Considering how Giles often leaves out the
meaning of you in the text, this comes as no surprise. However, roots of the word
"transcendental," (trans- over or beyond + scandere to climb) suggest that Giles might
have been trying to incorporate more than just religio-philosophical meanings into the
word. The Oxford English Dictionary defines "transcend" as to climb over, pass over or

120

go beyond both physical and non-physical obstacle or limit. Thus, seas and mountains
as well

as

knowledge

and the universe

can be transcended.

In theology,

transcendence describes a deity that is above and independent of the universe. In

terms of philosophy, transcendental means different things in the Aristotelian and
Kantian traditions. Transcendentia refer to predicates that transcend the Aristotelian
categories, that is, that are neither categories nor fall under any one category, but can
be

predicated

Something,

in all the categories. The six transcendentia

One,

True,

Good

{ens,

res, a liquid,

are Being,

v um, verum,

bonum).

Thing,
In the

philosophy of Kant, the transcendental is that which can never be derived from
experience but yet presupposes experience. It concerns the origin of our ideas and is
an a pn'oA/element in experience and knowledge. In the early

century, a school of

thought called transcendentalism that centered around Emerson gained circulation in

the New England states. The literary, political and philosophical movement advocates
an appreciation of intuition, insight and imagination as well as piety towards nature. It
is therefore not too far-fetched to relate the tao to the transcendental, both being
unempirical and metaphysical yet prerequisite for and omniscient in our sensorimotor
experience of the world. In fact, the image of climbing over and ascending beyond in
the word "transcendental" coincides with the Zhuangzian ascent beyond squalor and
self-conceit. It is not within the scope of this paper to conduct a comparative thought
analysis on the transcendental and the tao, and even when it is done, we stili cannot
be sure how much of it was meant by Giles. But we can certainly agree that Giles, in
choosing a word that is already loaded with theological and philosophical implications
for the Western readers, makes a conscious effort to transport the tao from East to
West using a readily available vehicle in the source culture. In the parable about K'un
('and P'eng (F) Giles translated the big fish into the Biblical Leviathan and the big
bird into Rukh, a mythical bird in Persian literature. As one of the earliest English
translators of the Zhuangzi and a promoter of Chinese culture to the West, Giles can

121

understandably seen to be biased towards the target reader's knowledge structures in

his translation.
The use of "excursion" in Fung's translation of you runs along the same line.
Like "transcendental," "excursion" is also Latinate, comprised of ex- out and currere- to
run. The ED defines it as an action of running out, escaping from confinement,
deviating from a definite course and as vagaries, escapades and pleasure trips. These
meanings of "excursion" pose no fundamental conflict with the Zhuangzian xiaoyaoyou.
However, Fung's translation will inevitably prompt a well-versed target reader to recall
Wordsworth's long poem The Excursion and wonder about similarities and parallelisms.

The Excursion, published in 1814, is a complex poem that was originally meant to be
part of a larger body of work called The Recluse. The poem proceeds as a religious
and philosophical conversation between four persons, the Wanderer, the Poet, the
Solitary, and the Parson. The Romantic poets and Taoists share an awe and
admiration of Nature and both long for enlightenment by "natural wisdom."
...But he had felt the power
Of Nature, and already was prepared,
By his intense conceptions, to receive
Deeply the lesson deep of love which he,
Whom Nature, by whatever means, has taught
To feel intensely, cannot be receive. (Book I lines 191-196)
The Zhuangzi and The Excursion were both written in a period of political upheaval
and disillusionment (the Warring States Period in China and the French Revolutions in
Europe), and might really be poetic expressions of kindred spirits. Is Fung, familiar with
Western philosophy, consciously making a comparison between the two? Literary
allusions found in translations can be intentional or accidental. In the case of
accidental allusions, target readers will be distracted by a misleading cue that
inadvertently prompts them to activate an irrelevant knowledge domain. When the
translator uses a literary allusion on purpose, the dilemma is between the pleasure of
presenting contiguity between source and target and the danger of creating a puzzle
with too many bits that do not fit. The "excursion" allusion, whether intended or not,

122

does foreground the literary tradition of English Romanticism, some features and
dimensions of which are not congenial to the Zhuangzi.
Compared to Fung's translation of "make an excursion," Watson's "wandering"
and Graham's "roaming" and "rambling" sound much less burdensome and purposeful.
The OED treats "wander/, "roam" and "ramble" as synonyms. The three words all have
Germanic roots and refer to moving hither and thither in a casual or leisurely way,
without fixed course, direction or aim. Both "wander" and "ramble" are also used
figuratively to describe thoughts and words that digress and become incoherent or
delirious. "Ramble," in general, retains its frolicsome free-spirited tone, while "wander,"
as a word much used by Milton in Paradise Lost, sometimes takes on a dark,
despondent tone. "And when Night / Darkens the Streets, then wander forth the Sons /
Of Belial." (Book I 500-503) "On th' Aleian Field I fall / Erroneous there to wander and
forlorn." (Book VII 19-20) In the last lines of Paradise Lost, Adam and Eve are
banished from paradise and wander into the world.
The World was all before them, where to choose
This place of rest, and Providence thir guide:
They hand in hand with wandring steps and slow,
Through Eden took thir solitary way. (Book XII 646-649)
Here, Milton is alluding to a line in Psalm CVII, "They wandered in the wilderness in a
solitary way." Thus, compared to its synonyms in the English language, "wander" does
bear the stigma of having erred and sinned. This undertone, however, is not inherent
and can be neutralized. Now if we take "wander," "ramble" and "roam" as synonyms,
which is the most suitable translation for you? On the phonetic level, the mono-syllabic
"roam" is closest to you. Although Graham uses "roam" extensively in the text, he
reverts to "ramble" for the chapter title. Incidentally, James Ware translated the chapter
title xiaoyaoyou as "Let Fancy Roam." Both yao and "roam" have an open, rounded
vowel sound. "Roam" has a rolled consonant, while the semi-consonant in yao gives it
a raised and spread sound. Both sounds convey the roominess of a faraway fanciful
landscape.

123

Let us return to xiaoyao. From Giles's "bliss" to Fung's "happy," from Watson's
"free and easy" to Graham's "without a destination," we hear a decrescendo in
solemnity. According to the OED, the meaning of "bliss," originally referring to earthly
blitheness, gladness and enjoyment, has been influenced by that of "bless" since an
early period and has therefore grown to mean the beatitude of the blessed in heaven.
Giles's "transcendental bliss" is a state of perfect joy and delight, to be found beyond
our earthly existence. "Happy," used by Fung, does not have the religious ring of
"bliss." An adjective derived from "hap," "happy" originally means having good hap or
fortune and being favored by external circumstances. Nowadays, it generally means
"having a feeling of great pleasure or content of mind, arising from satisfaction with
one's circumstances or condition." {OED) Both "blissful" and "happy" describe a state
of mind that is indebted to extrinsic elements. Watson's "free and easy," on the other
hand, is inherently about movement, the momentum of which comes from within the
mover. "Free," with its roots in Old English freon to love, primarily means "dear." It is
used to distinguish kinsmen from slaves and develops the meaning of not in bondage.
The OED gives two definitions of "free" as follows:
5. a. At liberty; allowed to go where one wishes, not kept in confinement or
custody....
8. a. Of actions, activity, motion, etc. Unimpeded, unrestrained, unrestricted,
unhampered. Also of persons: unfettered in their action.
"Easy," (from Old French aiser to put at ease) refers to freedom from (physical) effort,
constraint and difficulty and from (mental) anxiety and apprehension. The phrase
"easy-going" highlights the fact that ease is a quality best displayed during action and
motion. Watson's translation of xiaoyaoyou into "free and easy wandering" has
therefore matched three movement-related Chinese characters (all formed with the
radical "boat") to three movement-related English words to convey the sway and
saunter along the winding way. In addition, the repeated e sound (long "ee" sound) in
"free" and "easy" can be said to be a phonetic counterpart to the rhyming of xiao and

yao. As for Graham's translation, "without a destination" is a sense already expressed

124

by "rambling." It serves as an emphasis, but does not add much. More important,
"without a destination" is not a theme in Taoism, since ultimately, enlightenment by the
tao is the destination of xiaoyaoyou.

6.4 Linguistic,

literary and socio-cultural

mappings from source to target

The xiaoyaoyou metaphor in the Inner Chapters of the Zhuangzi is a central,

complex metaphor that is essential in expressing the enlightenment to be pursued in
the tao. As a central, complex metaphor, the xiaoyaoyou metaphor has a wide scope
in the text and its meaning is structurated throughout the text. This is to say that the

xiaoyaoyou metaphor is not a one-time occurrence in the text, but forms a far-reaching
network of movement-related images (involving the mode of wandering, the attitude of
the wanderer and the destination of wandering) that evoke, hint at, point to, but never
state or define the way of the tao. With the help of the scope theory of metaphor, we
analyze the xiaoyaoyou metaphor by deriving its source-text map. We then proceed to
look at the English renditions of the 23 occurrences of yao ()other riding-related
words such as cheng ()yu () qi (as well as xiaoyao (and the chapter
title xiaoyaoyou ().To consolidate the earlier discussion of particular features in
different translations, let us focus on the linguistic, literary and socio-cultural mappings
from source text to target text in the translation of the xiaoyaoyou metaphor.
On the lexical level, we note that Watson and Graham never once glanced over
the word you out of its 23 occurrences, while Giles neglected to translate it 14 times
and sometimes paraphrased it into a mental action instead. We can therefore say that
on the lexical dimension, Giles failed to map yao from source to target and therefore
did not render in the target text a lexical configuration that corresponds to that in the
source text. Xiaoyaoyou is an essential and recurring metaphor in the book, and as

125

such deserves the lexical loyalty and systematic consistency demonstrated in

Watson's and Graham's translations. The overall effect is one that highlights the
relevance and salience of the image (vehicle) of the metaphor and creates the
necessary nodes and links for target readers to re-configure the scope of the metaphor
as well as its network of meaning.
On a phonetic level, we deliberate among the synonyms "wander," "ramble" and
"roam" for the translation of you and highlight a similar phonetic feature shared by the
English word "roam" and the Chinese yao - both have an open, rounded vowel sound.
We also note that for the translation of the rhyming x/aoyao, Watson's rendition of "free
and easy," with the repeated e sound, ensures correspondence between the sourcetext and target-text configurations on the phonetic dimension.
On the literary level, we discuss the allusions to Wordsworth and Milton in the
use of "excursion" and "wander" in the translation of you and the possible literary and
philosophical reverberations. The extent of literary allusions that are identified and
deemed significant by the translation analyst hinges upon his/her existing knowledge
structures. The possible controversy among translation scholars over such claims of
intertextual relations and the difficulty to prove the translator's original intention of
making an allusion demonstrates the problem of subjectivity in translation description.
On the socio-cultural level, we first look at the use of "chariot" to translate ridingrelated words like cheng, yuqi in the original and further expound how this will conjure
in an educated Western reader's mind the image of the charioteer in Phaedrus. Is the
image of Platonic charioteers yoked to a lustful horse and a noble horse straddling to
strike a balance a counterpart for that of Taoist saints riding on winds and clouds in
search of the tao? That is, does the target-text feature serve to create a corresponding
network of meaning on the socio-cultural dimension of the target-text map that is
similar to that in the source-text map? This is debatable because the Zhuangzi
encourages unloading the self of earthly pursuits and emotions while the element of
restraint and repression runs strong in Plato.

126

Another example of socio-cultural mapping is in Giles' use of "Transcendental

Bliss" for the chapter title Xiaoyaoyou. Giles is the first English translator of the

Zhuangzi and his objective was to introduce Eastern religion to Western readers. It is
highly likely that his inclination during translation is to locate as many corresponding
features on the socio-cultural dimension of the target-text map as possible. As a result,
linguistic features in the source text (like the recurrence of the word you) is readily
glossed over while words and expressions with religio-philosophical overtones are
frequently used for the translated text.
On a much smaller scale than the one envisioned by Holmes, we carried out a
map comparison exercise. Although only focusing on one specific feature of the text of
the Zhuangzi, we find the approach suitable and systematic. We can draw the
conclusion that the agenda of the translators greatly influences the linguistic, literary
and socio-cultural mapscape of the translation product. Translators who are keen to
import the foreign text to the target-text soil, such as Giles, magnify the socio-cultural
dimension of the mapping and search for counterparts in this direction. Translators
whose urge is to capture the language and poetry of the original, like Watson who
translated the Zhuangzi for university students in East Asian Studies, place a stronger
emphasis on the linguistic dimension of the mapping and do not digress from the
textuality of the original.

6.5 Observations:

hermeneutical

sensitivity

In the search for counterparts between source and target, linguistic, literary and
socio-cultural factors come into play. On the linguistic level, we have seen how lexicon
and phonetics make subtle but formative contributions to the meaning-making process.
O the literary level, allusions and symbols travel with an entourage of canons and
scholarships and must be invited with prudence. On the socio-cultural level, norms and

127

traditions are often so deeply rooted that translators are not aware of their influence on
his/her understanding and translation of a text. In this regard, the translation of
philosophy poses one of the greatest challenges. In the article "Translating Chinese
Philosophy" (1995), Roger Ames warns against cultural chauvinism and reductionism
in translating Chinese philosophy into English and other Indo-European languages. He
observes

that

translators

approaching

Chinese

philosophy

with

Eurocentric

presuppositions and universalizing assumptions produce translated texts that are

"freighted with a cosmology not its

This interpretive problem stems from the

translator's blindness to the fundamentally different world-view of the target culture.

This blockade causes translators to disguise and obscure the radical differences and
render the Chinese world-view as a deceptively familiar but inferior variation on a
Western theme. In foregrounding the prominence of the target-culture philosophies,
translations
serve clarity in highlighting what makes sense in [their] own conceptual
vocabulary only to bury the unfamiliar implications which in themselves
are the most important justification for the translation.^''
Ames

therefore

calls for "vigilant hermeneutical

sensitivity to stave off facile

comparisons and preserve a greater degree of difference among cultures. From his
knowledge of the Chinese language and Chinese philosophy, Ames gives the example
of tian (and its multitude of meanings. Most translators select one meaning as
deemed appropriate for the context. But Ames suggests that
with the appearance of any given term in the text, with varying degree of
e m p h a s i s , the full seamless

range of meaning

is introduced.... [I]t is this

effort to reconstitute the several meanings as an integrated whole and to

fathom how the character in question can carry what for us might well be
a curious, often unexpected, and sometimes even incongruous
combination of meaning that leads us most directly to a recognition of
difference.183 (italics added)

180 Ames p731

181 ibid p744
182 ibid p734
183 ibid p741

128

This undifferentiated range of meaning that should be respected and rendered during
translation shows how knowledge is structured in an organic and dynamic ways and in
different ways in different languages and cultures. Translators entertain two sets of
linguistic, literary and socio-cultural knowledge structures, and in most cases the target
set

is

more

familiar

and

therefore

richer

and

more

complex.

During

the

correspondence process, one is therefore tempted to let the source knowledge

structures run the completion and elaboration process, resulting in a familiar translated
text that transcends the original. To counteract this tendency, some translators turn off
the engine of their target knowledge structures and let themselves be led by the wits
and whims of the source text as it goes. The result is a foreignized translated text that,
however, seems to be rambling

without a destination. To remain open to the

differences of the source text, without letting the text go tumbling into nothingness, the
translator should steer a free and easy course. Without restraints, the translator can
appreciate the otherness of the source text and become aware of his/her own forestructures of traditions and prejudices. Translators not bound to any one standpoint or
a fixed set of traditions and values can acquire new standpoints and worldviews for
relating to the text. This free, easy, unassuming attitude will help the translated text
assert its own truth and creates its own world for the readers. Like the Zhuangzian bird,
the translator needs to fly far and soar high in order to see the big picture.

129

Conclusion

In the first part of the paper, we made use of the theories developed in
cognitive linguistics and metaphor theories to expand on the cognitive aspects of
Holmes' two-map two-plane text-rank translation process model. We discovered that
metaphorical mappings in cognitive linguistics and correspondence principles in
translation theories are both preempted by the question of sameness and difference.
Hence, we identified three mental processes common to both translating and
metaphorizing: 1) the acumen to discern sameness and difference and the agility to
infer connections, match counterparts and relate one thing in terms of another, 2) the
connoisseurship to appreciate the salient and relevant features and downplay the
ineligible and impertinent ones and 3) the creativity and resourcefulness to bring in
extra knowledge structures and conceptual frames to deepen and widen the scope of
the metaphor.
Furthermore, using models and theories developed by metaphor scholars to
visualize how the mind conceptualizes the relation between the tenor and vehicle of a
metaphor, we observed four sets of decisions made by the translator. These
translation decisions will shape the translator's poetics, that is, his/her text maps and
correspondence rules. They are 1) how to register the textual information, 2) what kind
of semantic model to draw from the textual image, 3) on which plane to seek
resemblance between source-text map and target-text map, and 4) how much of the
source and target knowledge structures to preserve in the target-text map.
After we elaborated Holmes' translation process model with research results
from metaphor theories, we postulated that during translation, the source text sets in
action a selective and synthetic process of map abstraction, which takes in account
context, intertext and situation and produces as a result a specifically configured
network of meaning (map) for the source text at hand. The translated text is an attempt

130

to re-configure this network of meaning using a different system of linguistic, literary

and socio-cultural prompts. In translation, the translator maneuvers the configuration of
the target knowledge structures along the linguistic, literary and socio-cultural
dimensions, so that a closely akin topology of attributes and relations can emerge to
cultivate a counterpart feature in the blended target-text map. The target-language
counterparts should be able to prompt the configuration of target-text map that
matches that of the source-text map. To do so, the translator must respect the text's
underlying network of meanings, that is, the text map which comprises conglomerates
of textual features as well as continuums of extra-textual information.
Holmes'

theories

of text

maps,

conglomerates,

information

continuums

(linguistic, literary and socio-cultural) and correspondence hierarchy demonstrate his

insistence that translated texts should be studied and analyzed as a unified and
structured whole.
In the second part of the paper, we proceeded to Holmes' translationdescriptive model. For Holmes, the task of translation scholars is to compare the
different ways in which the translators have applied the three sets of correspondence
rules and developed the source-text and target-text maps. We chose the translation of
complex metaphors as our focus and drew from Kovecses' scope method of analyzing
complex metaphors to conduct a map analysis of the xiaoyaoyou metaphor in the

Zhuangzi.

We looked at Newmark's explication of a metaphor's sense components

and roeck's principle of artistic structuration in literary texts in relation to metaphor

translation. When the sense of a metaphor is distributed on various levels along
different dimensions (linguistic, literary and socio-cultural) throughout the text, its
translation is no longer a simple problem of retaining the source image or substituting it
with a target equivalent, but one of re-structuring or re-configuring the target text in
order to accommodate the quantity and complexity of these structural relations.
Overall, our approach has largely been macroscopic, focusing in Part One on
the

philosophical

compatibilities

between

translation

process

studies

and

131

contemporary metaphor theories, and then on an elaboration of Holmes' theoretical

model. In Part Two, our emphasis was textual and structural, focusing on the scope
and structuration of a complex metaphor in a text.
The comprehensiveness and thoroughness pursued by James Holmes in his
translation process studies and translation-descriptive analyses is daunting. Although it
cannot be fulfilled within the scope of this paper, it is an endeavor never to be forsaken.
Due to limited resources, this paper has not been able to approach its topics from a
microscopic perspective. Both the translation process and translation-descriptive
process can be illustrated and further improved and expanded with the aid of linguistic
theories.

Fauconnier and Turner use cognitive grammar to demonstrate their

conceptual blending theories, and their method can no doubt be adopted by translation
studies. Systemic functional grammar, developed by M. A. K. Halliday, may also
provide the missing link between language and thought in terms of textual metafunction and may be used a template for translation analysis comparison. It is hoped
that future work and collaboration with linguists and grammarians can furnish the
current theories and models with detailed linguistic analyses.
Nevertheless, as an initial attempt to pair translation studies with metaphor
theories and cognitive linguistics, this research undertaking has been rewarding.
Fundamental similarities between the basic concerns and tenets of translation
scholarship and metaphor theories are discovered. Fruitful applications of metaphor
theories to translation process studies are implemented. Metaphor theories in cognitive
linguistics provide a new paradigm that has proven to be enlightening for comparative
thought and cultural studies and translation process studies. The congeniality
between translation and metaphor is too appealing for the opportunity for collaboration
to be missed, and a lot of interesting and insightful work remains to be done in this
cross-domain research area.

132

Bibliography
Ames, Roger T. 1995. "Translating Chinese Philosophy" in Chan, Sin-Wai and Pollard, David E.
(eds.), An encyclopaedia

of translation:

Kong: Chinese University Press.

Chinese-English,

English-Chinese,

731-746. Hong

Berman, Antoine. (1985) 2000. Venuti, Lawrence (tr.) "Translation and the trials of the foreign"
In Venuti, Lawrence (ed.) The Translation Studies Reader, 284-297. London and New York:
Routledge.
Black, Max. (1979) 1993. "More about metaphor" In Ortony, Andrew (ed.), Metaphor and
Thought (26 ed.), 19-41. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Dirven, Rene and Paprotte, Wolf. 1985. The ubiquity of metaphor: metaphor in language and
thought. Amsterdam: J. Benjamins.
Croft, William. 2002. "The role of domains in the interpretation of metaphors and metonymies"
In Dirven, Rene and Porings, Ralf (eds.), Metaphor and metonymy in comparison and contrast,
161-206. Berlin; New York: Mouton de Gruyter.
Evans, Vyvyan and Green, Melanie (in press). Cognitive Linguistics: An Introduction.
Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press.
Even-Zohar, Itamar. 1978. Papers in historical poetics In Hrushovshi, Benjamin and EvenZohar, Itamar (eds.) Papers on Poetics and Semiotics 8. Tel Aviv: University Publishing
Projects.
. 1979. "Polysystem Theory" in Poetics Today ^979 i. 1-2.
Fauconnier, Gilles. 1997. Mappings in Thought and Language. Cambridge: Cambridge
University Press.
Fauconnier, Gilles and Turner, Mark. 2002. The way we think: Conceptual blending and the

mind's hidden complexities. New York : Basic Books

Freeman, Margaret. 2000. "Poetry and the scope of metaphor: toward a cognitive theory of

literature" In Barcelona, Antonio (ed.) Metaphor and metonymy at the crossroads: a cognitive

perspective, 253-283. Berlin; New York: Mouton de Gruyter.

Gadamer, Hans-Georg. (1960) 1994. Truth and Method {26 ed.).New York: Continuum.
Gardiner, (Sir) Alan Henderson. 1951. The theory of speech and language. Oxford:
Clarendon.
. ms. 1952. "The concept of situation." Paper given at the
School of Social Anthropology, 30'" January, 1952, Griffith Institute, Oxford: AHG/45.
Holmes, James
( a ) 1 9 8 8 . " T h e N a m e a n d N a t u r e of T r a n s l a t i o n S t u d i e s " In Translated!

Papers

on

Literary

Translation and Translation Studies, 66-80. Amsterdam: Rodopi.

(b) 1988. "Describing Literary Translations: Model and Methods." In Translated! Papers on
Literary Translation and Translation Studies, 81-91. Amsterdam: Rodopi.

(c) 1988. "On Matching and Making Maps: From a Translator's Notebook." In Translated!

Papers on Literary Translation and Translation Studies, 53-64. Amsterdam: Rodopi.

1jj
1 1

Hilferty, Joseph. "Cognitive Linguistics: An Introductory Sketch" In International Cognitive

Linguistics Association website: http://www.cognitivelinguistics.org/index.shtml.
Janda, Laura. 2000. "Cognitive Linguistics: SLINGSK Workshop Position Paper" In
International Cognitive Linguistics Association website:
http://www.cognitivelinguistics.org/inclex.shtml.
Kbvecses, Zoltan. 2000. "The scope of metaphor" In Barcelona, Antonio (ed.) Metaphor and
metonymy at the crossroads: a cognitive perspective, 79-92. Berlin; New York: Mouton de
Gruyter.
Lakoff, George. 1987. Women, Fire and Dangerous Thins: What Categories Reveal About the
Mind. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
. (1979) 1993. "The contemporary theory of metaphor" In Ortony, Andrew (ed.),
Metaphor and Thought (2d ed.), 202-252. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Lakoff, George and Johnson, Mark. 1980. Metaphors We Live By. Chicago and London: The
University of Chicago Press.
Miller, George. (1979) 1993. "Images and models, similes and metaphors" In Ortony, Andrew
(ed.), Metaphor and Thought (2cl ed.), 357-400. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Newmark, Peter. 1985. "The translation of metaphor" In Dirven, Rene and Paprotte, Wolf,

(eds). The ubiquity of metaphor: metaphor in language and thought. Amsterdam: J. Benjamins.

. 1988. A Textbook of Translation. Prentice Hall International (UK).

Nerlich, Brigitte and Clarke, David D.. 2002. "Blending the past and the present: Conceptual
and linguistic integration, 1800-2000" In Dirven, Rene and Porings. Ralf (eds.), Metaphor and
metonymy in comparison and contrast, 555-593. Berlin; New York: Mouton de Gruyter.
Nida, Eugene. 1964. Toward a science of translating: with special reference to principles and

procedures

involved in Bible translating. Leiden: E.J. Brill.

Ortony, Andrew.
(a) (1979) 1993. "The role of similarity in similes and metaphors" In Ortony, Andrew (ed.),
Metaphor and Thought (2n ed.). 342-357. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
(b) 1993. "Metaphor, language and thought" In Ortony, Andrew (ed.), Metaphor and Thought
(2n ed.). 1-18. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Osgood, Charles, Suci, George, J & Tannenbaum, Percy H.. (1957). The measurement of
meaning.

Urbana ; University of Illinois Press.

Oshima, Harold H. 1983. "A metaphorical analysis of the concept of mind in the Chuang-tzu."
In Victor Main, (ed.), Experimental Essays on Chuang-tzu, 63-84. Honolulu: University of
Hawai'i Press.
Pavio, Allan and Walsh, Mary. (1979) 1993. Psychological processes in metaphor
comprehension and production" In Ortony, Andrew (ed), Metaphor and Thought (2d ed.), 307328. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Richards, Ivan Armstrong. (1936) 1965. The Philosophy of Rhetoric. New York: Oxford
University Press.
Ricoeur, Paul.
(a) <1978) 1994. The Rule of Metaphor: Multi-disciplinary studies of the creation of meaning in
language. London: Routledge.
(b) (1978) 1986. "The Metaphorical Process as Cognition, Imagination, and Feeling" In (eds.)
Adams, Hazard and Searle, Leroy, Critical Theory Since 1965. Tallahassee, University of
Florida Press.

134

Slingerland, Edward. 2004. "Conceptions of the self in the Zhuangzi: Conceptual metaphor
analysis and comparative thought." In Philosophy East & West Volume 54, Number 3 July 2004
PP322-342.

Steiner, George. 1975. After Babel. London, New York: Oxford University Press.
Sternberg, Robert J., Tourangeau, Roger and Nigro, Georgia. (1979) 1993. "Metaphor,
induction and social policy: The convergence of macroscopic and microscopic views" In Ortony,
Andrew (ed.), Metaphor and Thought (2d ed.), 277-306. Cambridge: Cambridge University
Press.
Toury, Gideon. 1985. "A Rationale for Descriptive Translation Studies," in T. Hermans (ed)
The Manipulation

Press.

of Literature: Studies in Literary Translation, 16-27. New York: St. Martin's

. 1986. "[Translation]: A Cultural Semiotic Perspective," in T.A. Sebeok (ed)

Encyclopedic Dictionary of Semiotics, 1111-1124. Berlin; New York; Amsterdam: Mouton de
Gruyter.
Tversky, A m o s et.al" 1970. Mathematical psychology: An elementary introduction.
Englewoods Cliffs, N.J.: Prentice-Hall.
Van Den Broeck, Raymond. (1981) "The Limits of Translatability Exemplified by Metaphor
Translation" in Poetics Today, Vol. 2:4 (1981), 73-87.
Whitney, William Dwight. 1867. Language and the study of language. New York: Charles
Scribner, Armstrong & Co.
Bai Bensong, W a n g Lisuo) 1995 '(Xiao
yao zhi zu "Zhuangzi" yu Zhongguo wen hua Xiao yao zhi zu : "Zhuangzi" yu Zhongguo wen hua)
(Kaifeng shi Henan da xue chu ban she ; Henan sheng xin
hua Shu dian fa xing)
Li Rizhang)2000 (Zhuangzi xiao yao jing de li yu wai)
(Gaoxiong Shi Li wen wen hua shi ye gu fen you xian gong si)
(Wang Kai) 2 0 0 3 : ( X i a o yao you: Zhuangzi mei xue de xian
(Wuchang Wuhan da xue chu ban she)

dai Chan shi)

AM Translations of Dubliners:
MDubolin

ren) 1970 Trans. Xian dai wen xue za zhi she)

(Taibei Chen zhong chu ban she)

m^MDubolin
ren)1984Trans. Sun Liang et al)
(Shanghai Shanghai yi wen chu ban she)
MmSMDubolin
ren)1999(Trans.
Ma Xinlin et al)(Taibei

shi; Mao lou ying chu ban she you xian gong s i )

(Dubolin ren) 2000 (Trans. Du Ruozhou)Taibei Shi:

Zhi wen chu ban she)

The Zhuangzi

(Annotated by Chen Guying)1993.(Zhuangzijin zhujinyi)

(Taibei Taiwan shang wu yin shu guan)

135

Translations of the Zhuangzi:

r u n g , Yu-Lan. 1933 (1964). cnaung-rzQ A New seiectea nanstamn

the Philosophy of Kuo Hsiang. New York: Paragon Book.

wftn an Exposition or

Giles, Herbert A. 1889. Chuang Tzu: Taoist Philosopher and Chinese Mystic. London: Ruskin
House.
Graham,

A.C.. 1981. Chaung-tzu: The Seven Inner Chapters and other writings from the book

Chuang-tzu. London: George Allen & Unwin.

Watson, Burton. 1968. The Complete Words of Chuang Tzu. New York and London: Columbia
University Press.

136

Appendix I: Bilingual Version of Table 1, Using Burton Watson's Translation

1./

Chapter One
p14
If he had only mounted on the truth of Heaven and Earth, ridden the
changes of the six breaths, and thus wandered through the boundless,
then what would he have had to depend on? p26

2./
_Chapter One
p21
There is a Holy Man living on faraway Ku-she Mountain, with skin like ice
or snow, and gentle and shy like a young girl. He doesn't eat the five
grains, but sucks the wind, drinks the dew, climbs up on the clouds and
mist, rides a flying dragon, and wanders beyond the four seas. By
concentrating his spirit, he can protect creatures from sickness and plague
and make the harvest plentiful. p27

3./

Chapter One
p27, 30
fj^

Now you had a gourd big enough to hold five pisculs. Why didn't you think
of making it into a great tub so you could go floating around the rivers and
lakes, instead of worrying because it was too big and unwieldy to dip into
things. Obviously you still have a lot of underbrush in your head. p29
Now you have this big tree and you're distressed because it's useless.
Why don't you plant it in Not-Even-Anything Village, or the field of Broadand-Boundless, relax and do nothing by its side, or lie down for a free and
easy sleep under it? Axes will never shorten life, nothing can ever harm it.
If there's no use for it, how can it come to grief or pain? p29-30
4. /

Chapter Two
p46
Once a man receives this fixed bodily form, he holds on to it, waiting for
the end. Sometimes clashing with things, sometimes bending before them,
he runs his course like a galloping steed, and nothing can stop him. Is he
not pathetic? Sweating and laboring to tne end of his days and never
seeing his accomplishment, utterly exhausting himself and never knowing
where to look for rest - can you help pitying him? p33

5.I/

137

Chapter Two

P81
The Perfect Man is godlike. Though the great swamps blaze, they cannot
burn him; though the great rivers freeze, they cannot chill him; though swift
lightning splits the hills and howling gales shake the sea, they cannot
frighten him. A man like this rides the clouds and mist, straddles the sun
and moon, and wanders beyond the four seas. Even life and death have
no effect on him, much less the rules of profit and loss. p41-42

6./

Chapter Two
p84

The sage does not work at anything, does not purpose profit, does not
dodge harm, does not enjoy being sought after, does not follow the Way,
says nothing yet says something, says something yet says nothing, and
wanders beyond the dust and grime. p42

7.H./

Chapter Three
p94,96

Follow the middle... go along with the natural makeup... and follow things
as they are... If you insert what has no thickness into such spaces, then
there's plenty of room more than enough for the blade to play about in.
p46,47

8./
fiChapter
Four
1
1
7
P

You may go and play in his bird cage, but never be moved by fame. If he
listens, the sing; if not, keep still. Have no fate, no opening, but make
oneness your house and live with what cannot be avoided. Then you will
be close to success. If is easy to keep from walking; the hard thing is to
walk without touching the ground. It is easy to cheat when you work for
men, but hard to cheat when you work for Heaven. You have heard of
flying with wings, but you have never heard of flying without wings. You
have heard of the knowledge that knows, but you have never heard of the
knowledge that does not know. Look into the closed room, the empty
chamber where brightness is born! Fortune and blessing gather where
there is stillness. But if you do not keep still this is what is called sitting
but racing around. p54

9.
Just go along with things and let your mind move freely. Resign yourself to
what cannot be avoided and nourish what is within you this is best. p5758

/
Chapter
Four
p123

138

10./
Chapter
Four

P138
There's Crippled Shu chin stuck down in his navel, shoulders up above
his head, pigtail pointing at the sky, his five organs on the top, his two
thighs pressing his ribs. By sewing and washing, he gets enough to fill his
mouth; by handling a winnow and sifting out the good grain, he makes
enough to feed ten people. When the authorities call out the troops, he
stands in the crowd waving good-by. p62

11./

Chapter
Five
p145

If you look at them from the point of view of their differences, then there is
liver and gall, Ch'u and Yueh. But if you look at them from the point of view
of their sameness, then the ten thousand things are all one. A man like
this doesn't know what his ears or eyes should approve he lets his mind
play in the harmony of virtue. p65

12./
Chapter Five
P150

To know what you can't do anything about, and to be content with it as you
would with fate only a man of virtue can do that. If you play around in
front of Archer Yi's target, you're right in the way of the arrows, and if you
don't get hit, it's a matter of fate. There are lots of men with two feet who
laugh at me for having only one. It makes me boil with rage, but I come
here to the Master's place and feel calmed down again and go home. I
don't know whether he washes me clean with goodness, or whether I
come to understand things by myself. The Master and I have been friends
for nineteen years and he's never once let on that he's aware I'm missing
a foot. Now you and I are supposed to be wandering outside the realm of
forms and bodies, and you come looking for me inside it - and you're at
fault, aren't you? p66-67
13.
So the sage has his wanderings. For him, knowledge is an offshoot,
promises are glue, favors are patching up, and skill is a peddler. p71
14.
So now I think of heaven and earth as a great furnace, and the Creator as
a skilled smith. Where could he send me that would not be all right? p82

/
Chapter Five
p162

/
Chapter Six
pi90

139

15./

Chapter
Six
p193
Who can join with others without joining with others? Who can do with
others without doing with others? Who can climb up to heaven and wander
in the mists, roam the infinite, and forget life forever and forever? p82

16.
Such men as they ... wander beyond the realm; men like me wander
within it. p83

17.
Even now they have joined with the Creator as men to wander in the
single breath of heaven and earth. p83

/
Chapter
Six
Pl93

/
Chapter
Six
p193

18./

Chapter*
Six
p193
They borrow the forms of different creatures and house them in the same
body. They forget liver and gall, cast aside ears and eyes, turning and
revolving, ending and beginning again, unaware of where they start or
finish. Idly they roam beyond the dust and dirt; they wander free and easy
in the service of inaction. p83

19./

Chapter
Six
p202
Yao has already tattooed you with benevolence and righteousness and cut
off your nose with right and wrong. Now how do you expect to go
wandering in any far-away, carefree, and as-you-like-it paths? p85-86

20.
/

Chapter
Six
p202
This Teacher of mine, this Teacher of mine - he passes judgment on the
ten thousand things but he doesn't think himself righteous; his bounty
extends to ten thousand generations but he doesn't think himself
benevolent. He is older than the highest antiquity but he doesn't think
himself long-lived; he covers heaven, bears up the earth, carves and
fashions countless forms, but he doesn't think himself skilled. It is with him
alone I wander. p86

140

21.

/Chapter Seven
p215
I'm just about to set off with the Creator. And if get bored with that, then
I'll ride on the Light-and-Lissome Bird out beyond the six directions,
wandering in the village of Not-Even-Anything and living in the Broad-and
Borderless field. p90

22.
Let your mind wander in simplicity, blend your spirit with the vastness,
follow along with things they way they are, and make no room for personal
views - then the world will be governed. p91

/Chapter Seven
p215

23.

/Chapter Seven
p217
The government of the enlightened king? His achievements blanket the
world but appear not to be his own doing. His transforming influence
touches the ten thousand things but the people do not depend on him.
With him there is no promotion or praise - he lets everything find its own
enjoyment. He takes his stand on what cannot be fathomed and wanders
where there is nothing at all. p91-92

24.

/Chapter Seven
p227
Do not be an ambodier of fame; do not be a storehouse of schemes; do
not be an undertaker of projects; do not be a proprietor of wisdom.
Embody to the fullest what has no end and wander where there is no trail.
Hold on to all that you have received from Heaven, but do not think you
have gotten anything. Be empty, that is all. p94-95

141

:.
r

m:

'...

I
h

CUHK

Libraries

004278917