|
Abstract Abstract: There have been disputes in scholastic circles over the interpretation of the original meaning of the concept “loss of source text” in “Five Losses of Source Text and Three Difficulties in Translation” put forward by Master Daoan. Some insist that “loss of source text” means “changing the form of source text” (change of form), and some claim that it means “violating the content/spirit of the original” (change of meaning), while others take vague and ambiguous viewpoints. Making a thorough analysis of these views, this paper finds that the first viewpoint is fair and reasonable, the second biased and the third hard to evaluate for its ambiguity. Therefore, it is advisable to take into consideration the background against which
the concept was put forward if we wish to find out the true meaning of “loss of source text”. As a matter of fact, the concept focuses basically on the change of form rather than the change of meaning of source text, but after all, it is Daoan’s concern about loss of meaning caused by loss of form that gives birth to the concept.
Key words: “five losses of source text and three difficulties in translation”; loss of source text; connotation
|
|
|
|
|
|
