2。2 What is expressiveness?

     His “Da, expressiveness ” demands that the version must be clear and flowing without any grammatical mistakes or confused logic and sense。 In order to facilitate comprehension, word order should be changed, but the interpretation need to be clear and coherent。

2。3 What is elegance?

     “Ya, Elegance” demands that version in the language should be accepted by the target reader as they are educated。 Elegance is different from faithfulness and expressiveness because the latter ones are rigid requirements for translation while elegance is a soft requirement。 There is no right and wrong in terms of elegance。They just have some distinctions regarding to feeling or degree。 What kind of version meets Yan Fu’s demand of elegance? We can use a sentence from Sir Winston Churchill to definite, “Broadly speaking, the short words are the best, and the old words of all。” 论文网

      Since Yan Fu’s translation theory plays a special and important role in Chinese translation history, some people still dissent over it because of its elegance。 There are two reasons for that。 Firstly, it does have limits and shortcomings in the eyes of today。 Secondly, some translators break the interconnection between the three facets。 In fact, we can consider one translator meets the demand of “elegance” if he keeps in line with the original text in terms of genre and wording。 

3。Compare the Versions from the Point of Faithfulness

     Faithfulness, as the first one of three standards, is decided by translation’s special properties。 Translation is another creation, but different from creation, because it must be based on original texts and can not be fabricated by translators personally。 When we translate works in practice, faithfulness must emphasized on account of its most important role。 In most circumstances, faithfulness and expressiveness supplement each other。 But in a few cases, translator need to solve it with different processing methods and place emphasis on expressiveness because different literal works have different requirements。 Translation standards should be used flexibly, adapting to original text’s condition。 The following is the comparison between Xu Yuanchong’s and Waley’s version from the point of faithfulness。 Both nouns and verbs would be taken into consideration。 

3。1 Translation of nouns

      “雎鸠”is a turtledove that represents love and lover, just as mandarin duck in Chinese culture。 It sings softly and always be kind to their spouses and birdlings。 They always appear in pair on people’s mind, and this become necessary in a love song。 So Xu translating it into“turtledoves” is very appropriate and wise because it not only refers to culvers but also indicates young men and girl who fell in love。 That is the meaning and artistic conception the love song wants to express to people。 Like Wu Yu evaluated: “ I think this translation can fully express the birds’ loyalty to love and people’s love view at that time。” (Wu 38) Moreover, dove is a kind of bird standing for duteous love that the western cherish all the time so that it caters to the Western culture, too。 However, Waley translating the bird into “ospreys” is not that good because preyers are not suitable to show up in a love poetry for its fierce image。 Xu Yuanchong once said: “ the English man considers ‘雎鸠’ as ospreys。 But ospreys eat fish so it is not good for a love song。” (Xu 71)  It may destroy the glorious conception that the work itself wants to be。 As to turtledove’s chirp, Xu Yuanchong ingeniously translated into “cooing” that can thyme with “wooing”。 

      “荇菜”，according to biological studies, is a floating herbaceous plant whose rhizomes are edible。 It is one kind of delicacy in ancient times and linked closely with common people’s daily life。 Xu translated the plant into “cresses”, a familiar plant that can also be eaten while Waley translated into “water mallow” that can not form a clear image for readers。 Folk songs always come from and reflect people’s daily life。 Things mentioned in them need to be closed to life so that interpretation would fit the original text and current customs better。 In this connection, Waley, an English sinologist, has too many difficulties in fully understanding Chinese local culture。 Hence, as far as “荇菜” is concerned, Xu’s version is better than Waley’s。文献综述