Another one is Yao Naiqiang’s version: 结果，我养成了三缄其口，不妄作判断的习惯，这个习惯使许多性格乖戾的人乐意向我敞开心扉，但同时也使我成为不少老谋深算的无聊之徒的攻击对象。5

The phrase “in consequence”, Wu Ningkun translated it as “久而久之”, just like the word “gradually”。 As we all know, the meaning of “in consequence” is more close to Yao’s version, “结果”，as a result。 But when we consider this sentence carefully, it is obvious that Wu’s version are better than Yao’s version。 Here, this sentence give us a direct result of advice that Nick’s father gave him, “Whenever you feel like criticizing any one, just remember that all the people in this world haven’t had the advantages that you’ve had。” This “in consequence ”has an undertaking relation with the advice mentioned above, at the same time, it also has a implication of time。 Next sentence, Yao translated “Reserve all judgments” as “三缄其口,保留判断”, which added a phrase means remaining silent。 We can see that Yao’s translation are a typical free translation here, he create another word to give “reserve all judgment ” a detailed proving expression, on the one hand he makes  the sentences more fulfilled, on the other hand, the use of idiom can make Chinese readers be familiar with their own culture。

And in the next sentence “curious natures”, Yao and Wu use “性格乖戾的人”“有怪癖的人”，their translating structure are similar, “这个习惯使得。。。。。。对我敞开心扉/说心里话” 。 So we can see that Yao’s translation can better cater the aesthetic of the mainstream。 But what does “乖戾”mean in English？We can find a homoionym in English, “grumpiness”, a fussy and eccentric disposition。 As far as I am concerned, as for fluency and beauty of  language, Yao’s translation is much better than Wu’s。 But everything has two sides, when Yao cater the aesthetic of mainstream, he will miss more things about the original version。 What’s more, famous writers always have some forward thinking, if this is hard to understand, let me change a way to express it。 Famous writers are unique, and hard to understand。 Just like this sentences, “curious natures” may be someone they have something different from normal people, we cannot draw a conclusion that he or she is of grumpiness。 So in my point of view, maybe Wu’s version is not so fluent in language, but concerning about the fidelity of the original version, I think Wu’s version is worthy of being read again and again。 I firmly hold the view that each time you read it ,you will find something you ignored last time。

So here we can see Wu stress more on literal translation。 What’s more, he also concern liberal translation。 He is good at combining liberal translation with literal translation appropriately。 And Yao Naiqiang’s version seems to pay more attention to liberal translation, which stress more on the fluency of language。 

1。2 Domestication and foreignization5 文献综述

These pair of terms first appears in Lawrence Venuti’s works The Translator’s Invisibility :A History of Translation。 In his works, he turns the discussion of literal translation and liberal translation to the deep thinking of domestication and foreignization。 According to Lawrence Venuti, discussion of domestication and foreignization are the extending of discussion of literal translation and liberal translation。 Literal translation and liberal translation just focus on linguistic, but domestication and foreignization focus more on language, culture, cogitation, art and some other fields。 And Lawrence’s theory is based on the speech given by Friedrich Schleiermacher in 1813, which title is  On the Different Methods of Translating6。 Schleiermacher hold the view that there are two methods to help readers understand the original version correctly and completely。 The first one is “Either the translator leaves the author in peace, as much as possible, and moves the readers towards him。” , which concluded as foreignization strategies by Lawrence。 And the other one is “Or he leaves the readers in peace, as much as possible, and moves the author towards him。”, it is also be defined as domestication by Lawrence。