ne’er a one. (Hawkes, 1973, pp. 63-64)
Yang, 1978/1999, p. 29)
Note. Compiled by the author.
3.2 The Form and the syntax of the song
The Chinese original of the “Won-Done Song” was written in rhyme, which makes the song catchy and easy to memorize. The Chinese original of the song is in a rhyme scheme of aaba, and the end rhyme of the song is the sound “ao” (similar to the English pronunciation of “how” without the [h] sound). According to Laurence Kwok Pun Wong (2014), however, the rhyme in the original is rather imperfect, which creates a doggerel effect. In addition, he states that due to its vernacular origin the song of the original “reads like a doggerel with a touch of grim humour” (Wong, 2014, p. 470).
One of the greatest challenges when translating Chinese poetry is whether a translator is obliged to reproduce the prosody of the original. In Joly’s rendition, without the use of rhymes there seems to be no attempt at reproducing the prosody.
Unlike Joly, Hawkes translated the Chinese song with the use of rhyming, which are
“won,” “done” and “one.” His reproduction of the prosody of the “Won-Done Song”
is highly praised by Yenna Wu (2000), who stated that ““the marvelous ‘Won-Done
Song’ in Chapter One is but one example of the many beautifully rendered poems” (p.
234). In addition, in Hawkes’ English translation, with the repetition of “have done, have done,” the translation reads like a song, which closely matches to the effect of the original. As for the Yang’s translation, the translators occasionally translated the song with the use of rhyme, which are “aspires,” “briars,” “prize,” “eyes,” “wed,” and
“dead.” Compared with Hawkes’ translation, the Yangs’ version is less consistent at reproducing the prosody.
Apart from the difference in dealing with the prosody of the song, Hawkes’
translation is more consistent and concise in dealing with the title of the song and the concept of hao and liao. Regarding the title of the song, in the novel the Taoist who sang the song was described to explain the origin of the title of the song to Zhen:
The Chinese original:
你若果聽見了「好了」二字，還算你明白！可知世上萬般「好」便是「了」，
「了」便是「好」，若是不「了」便不「好」，若要「好」須是「了」。我這
歌兒便叫好了歌。（曹雪芹，2001，頁 10）
Joly’s translation:
“You may well have heard the two words ‘hao liao’,” answered the Taoist with a smile, “but can you be said to have fathomed their meaning? You should know that all things in this world are excellent, when they have attained finality;
when they have attained finality, they are excellent; but when they have not attained finality, they are not excellent; of they would be excellent, they should attain finality. My song is entitled Excellent-finality (hao liao).” (Joly, 2010, p.
18)
Hawkes’ translation:
“If you can make out ‘won’ and ‘done,’ replied the Taoist with a smile, “you may be said to have understood; for in all the affairs of this world what is won is done, and what is done is won; for whoever has not yet done has not yet won, and in order to have won, one must first have done. I shall call my song the
‘Won-Done Song’.” (Hawkes, 1973/1988, p. 64)
The Yangs’ translation:
“If you gathered that, you have some understanding,” the Taoist remarked.
“You should know that all good things in this world must end, and to make an end is good, for there is nothing good which does not end. My song is called All Good Things Must End.” (X. Yang & G. Yang, 1978/1999, p. 29)
The Chinese original of the explanation is very much like a tongue twister. In the text of the song Joly rendered the concept of hao and liao as “good” and “succeed,”
but in dealing with the title of the song he rendered it as “Excellent-finality (hao liao)”
(Joly, 2010, p. 18), which seems to have nothing to do with “good” and “succeed.”
Compared with Joly’s translation, Hawkes’ translation of the title of the song,
“Won-Done Song,” is more consistent to the song itself with the repetition of “won,”
“done” and “one” in stanza 1, stanza 2, stanza 3 and stanza 4. The Yangs’ translation is more similar to Joly’s translation without producing the effect of tongue twister.
Though the Yangs’ use of the repetition of the two words “good” and “end” appears in their translation of the title of the song “All Good Things Must End,” their
approach to the title of the song and the concept of hao and liao is less concise than Hawkes’ translation. With respect to the form of the translation of the “Hao liao ge,”
Hawkes’ is closer to the original text in the way he reproduced the song-like quality of the original through the use of rhyme.
In terms of the syntax of the song, among the three translations Hawkes’
translation of the song is freer. Originally served as a book for foreigners to learn the Chinese language, Joly’s translation of the novel is widely known as “an extremely literal translation” (Minford, 2010). For instance, Joly’s translation of the last line of the first stanza of the song is very literal with few changes to the syntax and part of speech of the original. Joly (2010) wrote:
Waste lie their graves, a heap of grass, extinct. (p. 18) Below is the Chinese original of the line:
荒塚一堆草歿了。（曹雪芹，2001，頁 10）
Unlike Joly, who translated zhong (塚), cao (草) and mo (歿) in order of the Chinese original, Hawkes (1973/1988) was not confined by syntax and part of speech of the original and wrote:
In grassy graves they lie now, every one. (p. 63)
The Yangs were also not confined by syntax and part of speech of the original song and wrote:
Their graves are a mass of briars. (p. 29)
The meaning of the Chinese original of the line is that all the jiangxiang of days gone by are dead in abandoned graves which are covered with piles and piles of grass.
Huang (荒) means desolate, waste or abandoned in Chinese. Cao (草) means grass in Chinese. Instead of directly translating the meaning of huang and cao in English as Joly did, Hawkes used “grassy graves” to imply the desolate state of the graves. As for
the Yangs’ rendition, the translators interpreted the graves as nothing but “a mass of briars.” The state of the graves described in the Yangs’ translation is similar to the meaning of the original, but the Yangs’ translation seems to be more like a prose than a poem. Compared with Joly’s “a heap of grass,” Hawkes’ use of the adjective “grassy”
can more vividly describe the image Cao tried to convey.
Another example to show the translators’ differences in terms of the word order of the song is their translations of the expression jinyin (金銀). The literal meaning of jinyin is riches or money. The expression can be divided into two words, which are jin (金) and yin (銀). Jin means gold while yin means silver in Chinese, the combination of the two words used as a symbol of money. Joly chose to adhere to the syntax and word order of the expression, literally rendering jinyin as “gold” and “silver.” The Yangs’
translation of jinyin is very similar to Joly’s, but they changed the word order to “silver and gold.” Both of Joly’s and the Yangs’ translations are faithful to preserve the
original meaning of gold and silver, which might help foreigners to learn the Chinese meanings of the two words. Unlike the aforementioned translators, however, Hawkes went beyond the literal meanings of the two words and translated the expression as
“riches.” His translation may be less faithful in terms of the word order of the expression, but it is relatively close to the conception of most Western readers.
Apart from not conforming to the part of speech of the Chinese original, Hawkes had his own way to translate and intensify the image of death in his translation. Though Hawkes’ “lie” is not as strong as Joly’s “extinct,” his repetition of “every one” in the last line of stanza 1 and stanza 2 not only results in an effect of the song-cycle but also further indicates to readers that regardless of the rich or the poor, somebody or nobody,
no one can escape from the doom of death. Below are the last line of stanza 2
respectively in Chinese original, Joly’s translation, Hawkes’ translation and the Yangs’
translation:
The Chinese original:
及到多時眼閉了。（曹雪芹，2001，頁 10）
Joly’s translation:
And when plenty has come, their eyelids close. (Joly, 2010, p. 18) Hawkes’ translation:
When they’ve had enough, it’s goodnight everyone! (Hawkes, 1973/1988, p.
63)
The Yangs’ translation:
Till death seals up their eyes. (X. Yang & G. Yang, 1978/1999, p. 29)
From the comparison above we can see that Hawkes’ translation is not as literal as Joly’s and the Yangs’. The literal meaning of yan bi liao (眼閉了) is “to close your eyes,” which is often used as an euphemism to imply that someone is dead. Hawkes’
“goodnight” reminds readers of Dylan Thomas’ “Do Not Go Gentle Into That Good Night,” where Thomas used night as a metaphor for death. Hawkes’ replacement of the concept of death with the euphemism “goodnight” shows that he is well aware of the language and cultural differences between two cultures. The way he approached yan bi liao preserves not only the effect of euphemism Cao tried to create but also the artistic value of the original phrase.
Joly’s translation adheres to the literal meaning of the sentence, while the Yangs
amplified the sentence with the word “death.” The Yangs’ translation is semantically correct, but it somehow reduces the effect of euphemism the author tried to have.
The three translations of the last line of stanza 4 also show the translators’
different strategies in terms of the syntax of the song. The last line of stanza 4, xiao shun zi sun shei jian liao (孝順子孫誰見了), serves as a rhetorical question indicating that few children and grandchildren are grateful to their parents. Xiao shun (孝順), which literally means filial or grateful in Chinese, is an adjective used to describe the expression zi sun (子孫). The literal meaning of zi sun is sons and grandsons. Shei (誰) means who in Chinese while jian (見) means see.
Both of Joly’s and the Yangs’ translations preserve the effect of rhetorical question by the use of “who” and question mark. In addition, Joly closely adhered to the word order of the sentence of the Chinese original in his translation. He literally rendered every Chinese word into English and strictly followed the structure of the original. Unlike Joly, the Yangs chose to reverse the original order of xiao shun zi sun and shei jian liao in their translation and rendered the sentences as “who ever saw a really filial son.” From the comparison above we can see that the Yangs’ translation is not as literal as Joly’s.
Hawkes’ translation of the line is more poetic and freer. Not confined by the style of the rhetorical question, Hawkes turned the sentence into an affirmative one and preserved the song style in his rendition. The way Hawkes approached the line may be less faithful to the original with regard to the syntax of the song, but his
translation is able to maintain the poetic style and artistic beauty Cao tried to create.