5. Parody, Translation, and Chinese Diglossia
5.4 Text Excerpt: Analysis and Discussion
5.4.1 Text Excerpt (Original)
has already been mentioned, the two issues play an important role in the present paper’s discussion of register, linguistic variation, and narrative style as it pertains to the narrator of Ah Q Zhengzhuan. Moreover, in the interview, Lovell, briefly
describes her method for portraying in English Lu Xun’s juxtaposition in the original of literary and vernacular language. Lovell explains, “Where Lu Xun used classical Chinese to make a contrast with the vernacular elsewhere, my translation style for these excerpts became less comfortable, more stilted” (2010; Interview). Lovell goes on to make it clear that she is also very aware of the parodic narrative style of the original. Lovell tells the interviewer, “Lu Xun’s doing something similar in the facetious opening to “The Real Story of Ah‐Q”, poking fun at the flatulence of
Confucian literary convention” (ibid.). Analysis presented in the subsequent section will discuss in more detail Lovell’s attempt to recreate through juxtaposition of literary and vernacular language Lu Xun’s parodic narrative style in Ah Q Zhengzhuan.
5.4 Text Excerpt: Analysis & Discussion
5.4.1 Text Excerpt (Original)
The following excerpt is taken from the second chapter of the novella. In the
passage, the narrator begins telling of the exploits of the main character Ah Q. After a brief discussion of Ah Q’s utterly unremarkable existence, the narrator starts right in with quite a scathing description of the character’s exaggerated sense of pride:
阿Ｑ又很自尊，所有未莊的居民，全不在他眼睛裡，甚而至於對於兩位
“文童”也有以為不值一笑的神情。夫文童者，將來恐怕要變秀才者也；
趙太爺錢太爺大受居民的尊敬，除有錢之外，就因為都是文童的爹爹，
而阿Ｑ在精神上獨不表格外的崇奉，他想：我的兒子會闊得多啦！
(Lu Xun 2002:3)
Ah Q also [is] very proud. The Weizhuang villagers are not worth his notice. Toward the two “young scholars”, in particular, he feels them not
even worth a smile. It is said, one who is a young scholar, it seems, will become a talented literati. Mr Chao and Mr Qian enjoy the villagers’
respect, not only because they have money but also, because they are the dads of the two young scholars. However, Ah Q is alone in not being in the spirit of showing any particular worship toward them. He thinks, “My children gonna be much more richer!”
(my translation)
This particular passage corresponds to an example cited in Huang’s (1990) article
“The Inescapable Predicament”. It will serve to direct the present paper’s initial analysis of Lu Xun’s original text. Based upon discussion of the passage, a detailed analysis of the four English translations — Wang (1941); the Yangs (1956); Lyell (1990); and Lovell (2009) — will be carried out in order to further investigate issues pertaining to the (un‐) translatability of linguistic variation as it pertains to Lu Xun’s use of parody and the unique characteristics of the Chinese diglossic language contact situation.
According to Huang, an important feature of the particular section of text is, “the narrator introduces the discourses of ‘others’ without any apparent
acknowledgement (such as typographical indication)” (1990:437). In other words, although the main voice of the passage is that of the narrator, there is also, in the text, a second voice, namely that of the people of Weizhuang. Huang suggests that in the underlined sentence above, and in Lu Xun’s choice of the informal ‘爹爹’ (‘dad’), the narrator is actually narrating “from the perspective of the villagers” (ibid.).
Huang also notes that this change of voice is important because it points to the narrator’s shifting of satirical subject — from Ah Q to the villagers.
Finally, Huang explains that the success of the satire lies in the awkward hybrid construction of the villagers’ voice: literary language (‘夫文童者’; ‘young scholar’
and ‘秀才者也’; ‘talented literati’) mixed with a dash (‘將來恐怕要變’; ‘it seems will be’) of vernacular (ibid.). In terms of Ferguson’s diglossia this means H variety used inappropriately and combined, again, inappropriately with L variety. According to Huang, “this ‘hybrid construction’ captures perfectly the typical villager's
combination of snobbery and envy: they are trying awkwardly to imitate or repeat what the rich and ‘educated’ say” (ibid.).
I also would like to add that not only does Lu Xun juxtapose literary language with vernacular within the villagers’ voice, but he also juxtaposes H and L across the entire passage, itself. As Mair explains, literary wenyan and vernacular baihua demonstrate a stark disparity across grammatical structures (1994:709). In
particular, Mair points to the difference in the grammatical function of the Chinese word shi (是). As Mair explains, under the literary wenyan system of grammar, shi has a demonstrative use, while under the baihua system it is used as a copulative verb (1994:710). According Mair, “This distinctive characteristic of VS [baihua] (A shih B {“A is B”}) which is so apparent even up to present day, is utterly different from LS [wenyan], which lacks a copulative verb altogether” (ibid.). “Instead,” Mair continues, “LS [wenyan] employs the nominative sentence structure A B yeh (也) (“A {is} B”)” (ibid.).16 Based upon Mair’s explanation, a clear juxtaposition of H and L can be seen in Lu Xun’s employment of both nominative and copulative verb function in the passage. The underlined phrase: 將來恐怕要變秀才者也 (one who is a young scholar, it seems, will become a talented literati), employs the wenyan nominative yeh (也), while the subsequent phrase: 就因為都是文童的爹爹 (because they are the dads of the two young scholars), clearly employs the baihua copulative verb
function of shi (是).
Finally, in addition to the points outlined in Huang’s article, I would also like to suggest that the final sentence of this passage, ‘我的兒子會闊得多啦’; ‘my children gonna be much more richer’ (in bold above), offers insight into Lu Xun’s treatment of the voice of the character Ah Q, and, therefore, will prove useful in our analysis of
16Due to the fact that he employs a previously popular romanization system — Wade Giles Pinyin — that differs from the Hanyu Pinyin system favored presently, Mair uses the romanized shih and yeh to represent the Chinese words 是 and 也, respectively, instead of the Hanyu Pinyin shi and ye.
the two English translations. The voice of Ah Q will be discussed further in relation to analysis carried out upon the four English translations that follows.
In summary, analysis of the four English translations will focus upon representation of the following four aspects: firstly, the change in voice at the phrase ‘夫文童者，將 來恐怕要變秀才者也’; ‘It is said, one who is a young scholar, it seems, will be one who becomes a talented literati’; secondly, the hybridity of the villagers’ voice as it is presented in this particular phrase and in the use of the informal ‘爹爹’; ‘dads’;
thirdly, variation between narrator and character voice as it exists in the final sentence of the passage; and finally, contrast in nature between the narrative discourse and the actual subject matter being narrated so as to present a parody of traditional, Chinese historiographical conventions.
5.4.2 Text Excerpt (Wang 1941)
Wang’s 1941 translation will be the first to be discussed. As analysis will
demonstrate, the translation lacks any variation of register whatever and obscures somewhat the change in voice at the sentence in question:17
阿Ｑ又很自尊，所有未莊的居民，全不在他眼睛裡，甚而至於對於兩位
“文童”也有以為不值一笑的神情。夫文童者，將來恐怕要變秀才者也；
趙太爺錢太爺大受居民的尊敬，除有錢之外，就因為都是文童的爹爹，
而阿Ｑ在精神上獨不表格外的崇奉，他想：我的兒子會闊得多啦！
(Lu Xun 2002:3)
Ah Q was very proud and held all the inhabitants of Wei in contempt, even to the extent of sneering at the two students. Now a student might one day pass his examination and become a licentiate. The reason Their Honors Chao and Chien were so esteemed by the villagers was that, besides their wealth, they were fathers of students. But in spirit Ah Q had no special regard for them. “My son would be much better than they,”
he would assure himself.
(Wang 1941: 82)
17I have included the original text before each translated text in order to facilitate comparison.