Deconstruction translation theory
and vagueness of language
解构主义的翻译观与语言的模糊性
Yue Jiang
蒋 跃
Xi’an Jiaotong University
西安交通大学外国语学院
1.0 Introduction
• Deconstruction translation theory
• Vagueness of language
• Research questions:
– What does D have to do with V?
– So what?
Previous research
①
②
③
④
⑤
⑥
⑦
⑧
⑨
⑩
王宁. 后结构主义与分解批评.[J].文学评论 1987(6).
王东风．解构“忠实”—翻译神话的终结 [J]. 中国翻译, 2004 (6).
郭建中. 韦努蒂及其解构主义的翻译策略 [J]. 中国翻译, 2000 (1).
刘军平. 解构主义的翻译观 [J]. 外国语，1997 (2).
孙宁宁. 解构主义与翻译综述 [J] 河海大学学报, 2001(9) 68-72.
Timothy Williamson. Vagueness [M]. London & New York:
Routeledge, 1994.
王宁. Derrida与解构批评的启示：重新思考 [J]. 清华大学学报
（哲学社会科版），2005(2).
Kathleen Davis. Deconstruction and Translation [M].
Manchester：St. Jerome Publishing，2001: 36-37.
Edwin Gentzler. Contemporary Translation Theories. London &
New York: Routledge, 1993.
Lawrence Venuti. ed. Rethinking Translation. London & New
York: Routledge, 1992.
2.0 Background
2.1 Deconstruction Translation Theory (DTT)
2.1.1 Essence: deconstructs binary contrast ,
logocentrism and source texts
2.1.2 Definition: deconstructs closed
structures, dispels the center and origin,
eliminates the binary contrast, opens the
original texts to readers by disregarding
the boundaries.
2.0 Background
2.1.2 Representatives
Jacque Derrida (1967/1972)
Michael Foucault (1928-1984)
Roland Barthes
Lawrence Venulti (1990s)
2.0 Background
• 2.2 Vagueness of language
• 2.2.1 Essence: Vagueness is an intrinsic
property of natural language
• 2.2.2 Definition: the unclear boundaries or
overlapping upper or lower extensions
between words and concepts that are
adjunct to each other in terms of degree or
grade.
2.0 Background
• 2.2.3 Representatives
– Pierce (1902)
– Zadeh (1965)
– Williamson (1994)
– Lakoff (1971)
3.0 Comparison
• 3.1 Both deconstruct logocentrism
• 3.2 Both deny a clear-cut boundary
between entities (gradual change in the
grade of membership)
• 3.3 Both find language is unstable and
variable
• 3.4 Both argue for indeterminacy and
opening of language and source texts
3.0 Comparison
• 3.5 Both agree that language and source
texts are unstable and variable
• 3.6 Kempson’s categories of vagueness
(1977) can be found in almost all DTT in
different terms, such as referential
vagueness, indeterminacy, lack of
specification, disjunction/polysemy of
words and expressions
3.0 Comparison
• 3.7 Different terms for similar notions
• 3.8 DTT seldom mentions vagueness
language but actually incorporates the
idea pervasively in its theory
4.0 Vagueness and DTT
• 4.1 Semantic indeterminacy and iterability
• Boundaries of meaning are vague and not
clean-cut (Derrida, 1981).
• 4.2 Translation process is unstable: open
(Davis, 2001) to differing and delaying
• 4.3 Vagueness and intertextuality and
translatability, e.g. color, age, time words,
(Derrida, 1976/Wu, 1987, 1996)
4.0 Vagueness and DTT
• 4.4 Indeterminacy of source texts
• 4.4.1 Derrida’s neologism différance
(1972c/1982), a combination of differ and
delay, to show spatio-temporal movement
of language and translations
• 4.4.2 All language generates meaning
through a systemic movement of play of
differences.
4.0 Vagueness and DTT
• 4.4.3 There can be no pure, totally unified origin
of meaning of source texts.
• 4.5 Life of source/original texts depends on
readers and translators. Translation and reading
give life (afterlife) to source texts are dead
without translation.
• 4.6 Meaning of source texts depends on
translators and readers and thus changes with
time according to different translators and
readers of different times/ages.
5.0 Translation standard of
Deconstruction theory
• 5.1 pluralistic as translations are pluralistic.
• 5.2 unstable and undetermined. There is no pure,
eternal standard for translation evaluation
• 5.3 changeable and variable to keep up with the
time
• 5.4 vague because natural language is innately
vague, which decides the indeterminacy and
iterability of source texts and translations.
6.0 Conclusion
• Deconstruction translation theory is
profoundly influenced by vagueness of
natural language, reflects many notions of
vague language studies and is
theoretically founded upon vagueness of
language, without knowing it though.
• Correspondence: [email protected]
• Mailing address: School of International
Studies, Xi’an Jiaotong University, Xi’an
710049, China
• Thanks.