This thesis is made up of five chapters。 In the first chapter, a brief introduction of Hong Lou Meng and its translations is given。 Then, the significance of this thesis is also stated。 The second chapter serves as a literature review on the two often-used translation strategies: foreignization and domestication in the translations of Hong Lou Meng。 Firstly, the definition of domestication and foreignization is briefly introduced。 Secondly, arguments between them both at home and abroad are reviewed。 Lastly, the comparison between literal translation and free translation is also briefly introduced。 Later, in the third chapter, a comparative study of names in the two translations is conducted and several examples are selected to show the similarities and differences of the translation of names in Hong Lou Meng。 And in the fourth chapter, a comparative study of proverbs in the two translations is conducted。 Then, some examples are also provided to show how to translate proverbs better。 The strategies of domestication and foreignization are compared and analyzed in these examples。 Finally, in the fifth chapter, a conclusion of this thesis is drawn。

2。 Literature Review

Domestication and foreignization are referred to as two commonly-used translation strategies。 This thesis will explain and compare these two terms according to Venuti。

2。1 The definition of domestication and foreignization

According to Venuti, domestication, an ethnocentric reduction of the foreign text to target-language cultural values, brings the author back home; while foreignization, an ethnodeviant pressure on those values to register the linguistic and cultural difference of the foreign text, sends the reader abroad。 Generally speaking, the former refers to the translation strategy in which a transparent fluent style is adopted in order to minimize the strangeness of the foreign text for target readers, while the later designates the type of translation in which a target text “deliberately” breaks target conventions by retaining something of the foreignness of the original。 (Shuttleworth & Cowie, 2001) 

2。2 Arguments between domestication and foreignization

(1) Arguments in China论文网

The arguments between domestication and foreignization in China can be traced back to the 20th century。 At that time, Lu Xun and his follow intellectuals argued strongly over “faithfulness over fluency”。 Domestication was considered as the dominant translation method between 1870s and 1970s, and it was advocated by many translators, such as Yan Fu, Lin Shu, Fu Lei and Qian Zhongshu。 Yan Fu’s Triple Translation Principles “faithfulness, expressiveness and elegance”, Fu Lei’s “spiritual likeness” and Qian Zhongshu’s “sublimation” have the same purpose of making the TL readers feel that the version they are reading does not read like a “translated version”, but rather, it is like a “created work”。 Modern western translation theories were introduced to China in 1980s。 Then, Chinese translators got much enlightened from them and started rethinking domestication and foreignization。 Then , equal attention began to be paid to domestication and foreignization in Chinese translation practice, but advocates of foreignization like Lu Xun criticized severely domestication。 He held that the translated text must try to retain the strangeness and it was the “strangeness” that would render “exotic flavor” to translation。 (Chen Fukang, 1992) Influenced by Lu Xun, lots of translators began to employ foreignization in their translation。 Consequently, they successfully introduced into Chinese some western language structures, which enriched the expression of Chinese。 Foreignization began to play a leading role in the field of translation in China in the last 20 years of the 20th century。

In recent years, the arguments over domestication and foreignization break up again。