内容译中中译6份

IowemygreatestthankstomysupervisorMrs.FengSufangforherinsightfulguidance,scholasticdisciplineandconstructivecriticismwithoutwhichIwouldneverhavebeenabletosummonupenoughcouragetowriteandcompletethisthesis,whatIthink,oneofthemostchallengingtopics.DuringmyfouryearsatJinZhongUniversity,sheguidedmethroughframingmyacademicorientation,andofferedunflaggingencouragementandsoundadviceeverystepofmyway.WheneverIencounteredanydifficulty,shewasalwaystheretohelpmeout.Iwanttoexpressmydeepestrespectandappreciationtoherforherenormouscontributionsintime,energy,andeclecticexpertisethroughtheentireprocess.Finally,myspecialthanksaregiventomyfamilyandfriendsfortheirgeneroushelpandconstantsupport.OnTranslator’sSubjectivityinFeminist:Feminismtranslationhas eanewtranslationtheorysincethe“culturalturn”intranslationstudiesinthe1980s.Somescholarsthinkthattherearemanyfeminismideasanddreamsinfeminismtranslationandtherearenotsomanyinnovationsintranslationtheory.Buttheappearanceoffeminismtranslationtheorydoesprovideaspecialoftranslationstudies—afeminism.Thispapergivesthedefinitionandtheauthorexploresthesubjectivityofthetranslatorinbothfeministtranslationtheoryandpractice.Byyzingthefeministtranslators’translationpractice,theauthorshowshowfeministtranslatorsdisytheirsubjectivityintheprocessoftranslation,howtheymanipulateofandinterveneintotheoriginaltext,andhowtheyconstructtheirfemaleidentitythroughtranslation.:Feminismtranslation;translator’ssubjectivity;feminismTableof in in………………..............Tableof I ture Definitionoftranslator’s Changesoftranslator’s Translator’sidentityintraditional Translator’sidentityintranslationstudiesinthetrendofCultural IVysisofTranslator’sSubjectivityRegardingFeminist Translator’ssubjectivityinfeminist Redefinitionoffidelityandemphasisoncreative Emphasisonequalitybetweenauthorand Visibilityoffeminist Translator’ssubjectivityinfeministtranslation Feministtranslator’schoiceofsource FeministTranslator’schoiceoftranslation V IIntraditionaltranslationstudies,theoriginaltextortheauthorwasconsideredtobemoreimportant.Inordertoachieve“faithfulness”or“equivalence”,translatorstriedtobe sinthetranslatedtext.Translators’subjectivityandcreativitywereignored.Theydidnotreceivedueattentionandrespectforquitealongperiodinhistory.Translatorsbegantoturntheirattentiontoculturalproblemsunderthe“cultureturn”inthe1980s.Fromthenon,translationhasnotbeentreatedasapurelinguistictransferfromthesourcelanguagetothetargetlanguage.Variousfactorsthataffecttranslationhavebeentakenintoaccount,suchaspublishing,lirynorm,feminism,post-colonialtheory,racialdifference,etc.Asoneofthesefactors,feminismhasaninfluenceontranslationstudiesforthefollowingreasons:theyareattributedtoculturalstudies;bothfeministsandtranslatorsbelievethatlanguageisameanstodisytheirculturalidentity.“Women’sliberationmustfirstbealiberationof/fromlanguage”(Simon,1996:8).Languagecantakeintoeffectinthecreationofmeaning.Inotherwords,thetranslatornotonlylinksupthesourcelanguageandthetargetlanguage,butalsouseslanguageasawayofculturalintervention.“Translationstudieshavebeenimpelledbymanyoftheconcernscentraltofeminism:thedistrustoftraditionalhierarchiesandgenderedroles,deepsuspicionofrulesdefiningfidelity,andthequestioningofuniversalstandardsofmeaningandvalue.Bothfeminismandtranslationareconcernedbythewaysecondarinesscomestobedefinedandcanonized;botharetoolsforacriticalunderstandingofdifferenceasitisrepresentedinlanguage”(ibid).Itisquitenaturalthatfeministsandtranslatorscombinewitheachotherduetotheircommoninterestsandsimilarities.Thecombinationoffeminismwithtranslationstudiesleadstothebirthoftranslationtheory.Unlikeotherresearcheswhichemphasizetheobjectiveexistenceofthetranslator’ssubjectiveinitiative,feministtranslationtheorytrieshardtogetridofthoseoldistideasinbothtranslationstudiesandsocialconcepts,anditcanbeseenasthestartingpointofthestruggleforwomen’sdignityandequalitybetweenmenandFeministtranslationtheorypaysspecialattentiontothegenderissue.AsthefamousfeministtranslationtheoristSherrySimon(1996)says,“Investigationbetweengendertranslationleadstounexpectedviewsofotherwisefamiliarterrain”.Anotherwell-knownfeministtranslationcriticLuiseVonFlotowalsothinksgenderisimportantintranslationstudies.“Giventhepoliticalweightthatbothfeministthinkersandthe‘politicalcorrectness’reactionhaveassignedtolanguage,itisclearthatgendermust eanissueintranslation”(Flotow,1997:1).Feministtranslatorstryhardtomakewomen’svoiceheardandtheirfemaleidentityvisibleinthetranslatedtext.Feministtranslatorstaketranslationasanimportantwaytochangetheirsubordinatestatusinsocietyandwinequalitybetweenmenandwomen.Thispaperintendstoexplorethetranslator’ssubjectivityfromagender.Itaimstoinvestigatethetranslator’ssubjectivityinbothfeministtranslationtheoryandpractice.Theauthorgivesadetailedexnationofthefeministemphasisonthetranslator’ssubjectivity.Byyzingthefeministtranslators’translationpractice,theauthorshowshowfeministtranslatorsdisytheirsubjectivityintheprocessoftranslation,howtheymanipulateofandinterveneintotheoriginaltext,andhowtheyconstructtheirfemaleidentitythroughtranslation. tureThetranslator,thesubjectoftranslation,isthebridgeofthesourcetextandthetargettextandysanimportantroleintranslationpractice.However,thetranslator’ssubjectivityhasbeenneglectedforalongperiodintraditionaltranslationstudies.InAlvarezandCarmen’sbookTranslation,Power,Subversion(1996),theythinktranslatorisjustatranslator.WiththeCulturalTurnintranslationstudiessincethe1980s,thisissuehasgraduallyreceiveddueattentioninwesterntranslationworld.WaterBenjamin(2000)saidtheimportanceoftranslatorinhiswork“TheTaskoftheTranslator”.Thetranslatorthenshiftedfromthepositionofinvisibilitytothatofvisibility.TheCulturalTurnintranslationstudieshasprovidedmanygoodnewideasandnewapproaches,amongwhichthefeministtranslationtheory,withitspeculiarpoliticalflavor,esanoutstandingdisciplineinthenewlydevelopedtranslationtheoriesasithasenlargedtheresearchscopeandparticularlybroadenedthestudiesofthetranslator’ssubjectivitybybringingintheconceptof“genderedtranslator”.ItsrepresentativesarefamousCanadianscholarsandtranslationtheoreticiansLouiseVonFlotowandSherrySimon,whosemasterpiecesareTranslationandGender:Translatinginthe‘EraofFeminism’(1997)andGenderinTranslation:CulturalIdentityandthePoliticsGodardandSusannedeLotbiniere-Harwoodhavealsocontributedmuchtothetheory.Thetheoryisuniqueinmakingcontributionstofemalesubjectivityintheproductionofmeaningandwomen’scontrolofthetextbyimntingfeministideasintranslation.Similarly,theresearchonthetranslator’ssubjectivityhasbeenrisinginrecentyearsinsincethe1990s,mostlyfromthesofSkopostheory,HermeneuticsandReceptionAesthetics.XieTianzhen(2003),XuJun(2003)andZhaMingjian(2003)arefamousfortheirresearchonthetranslator’ssubjectivity.However,fewpeoplehavetoucheduponfeministtranslationitself,letalonethetranslator’ssubjectivityfromsucha.Inearly1980s,ZhuHong，anexpertintheBritishandAmericanlitureaswellasatranslator,broughtthewesternfeministideasinto,whichhaslaterinfluencedtheforeignliryresearchandcriticismandfemininelirycreation,buthasnotgreatlyaffected’stranslationtheoryandpractice.Thetranslationcircleindidnotpaymuchattentiontotheinfluenceoffeminismontranslationuntil2000,whichcanberevealedbythepitifullysmallnumberofthepapersonfeministtranslationtheorysearchedfromtheperiodicalwebsitessince2001,withonlyonein2001andsevenin2002.In2003,MuLeipublishedherinterviewwithProfessorZhuHongentitled“TranslationandFeminineLiture”inwhichZhuHongadmittedherbeingdeeplyaffectedbythefeministtranslationtheory.JiangXiaohua(2003)andXieTianzhen(2003)alsodiscussedthetheoryintheirownpapers.Theyearsof2004and2005witnessedprosperousresearchfruitsofthetheory,towhichXuLai(2004),FengWenkun(2005),etc.havecontributedalot.Thesepapersusuallyintroducetoreaderstheviewpointsofthetheoryandyzeitseffects.Nevertheless,researchontranslationandgenderinisanewsubjectthatneedstobefurtherprobedinto.OnTranslator’sBeforeanexplorationofthetranslator’ssubjectivityfromtheofthefeminismtranslation,itisnecessarytoclarifythedefinitionoftranslator’subjectivityandchangesoftranslator’sidentityintraditionalstudiesortheCulturalTurn.Definitionoftranslator’sAsWangYuliang(1995)putsSubjectivityistheessentialcharacteristicofthesubjectwhichpresentsitselfintheobjectiveactivityoftheobject.Tobespecific,subjectivityistheexteriortransformationofthesubject’sessentialpowerinitsobjectiveactivity,whichchanges,influencesandcontrolstheobjectinitiativelyandmakestheobjectserveforthesubject.Accordingtothedefinition,thesubjecthaspowerovertheobject,butWanglateralsoexinsthatthesubjectisalsosubjecttotheconstraintsoftheobjectcomingfromtheobjectiveenvironmentsandconditions.Actually,scholarsevenargueovertherealsubjectoftranslation.YangWuneng(2003)considersthatthewriter,thetranslatorandthereadertogetherconstitutethesubjectoftranslation,however,XuJun(2003)thinksthatinabroadsense,thesubjectoftranslationincludestheauthor,thetranslatorandthereaderbutonlythetranslatorinanarrowsense.TheauthorofthisthesispreferstotaketheterminitsnarrowTheconceptofsubjectivityislaterappliedtotranslationstudies.BasedonWang’sexnation,ZhaMingjianandTianYu(2003)definethetermasfollows:Translator’ssubjectivityreferstothesubjectiveinitiativedisyedbythetranslator—translatingsubject,torealizehis/hertranslationpurposeonthepremiseofrespectingthetranslationobject.Itsessentialfeaturesarehis/herobviousculturalawareness, alityandstyle,culturalandaestheticcreation.Asshownhere,thetranslationobjectforthetranslatoristhesourcetextinwhichhe/shehastoconformtoinordertofulfillhis/hertranslationpurpose.Thetranslatormaygivehis/hersubjectivitytofullyinthewholetranslationprocessundertherestrictionssetonhim/herbythesourcetext.Eithertherestrictionsoftheobjectortheinitiativeofthemaybeover-exaggeratedorover-evaluatedintheactualtranslationInfact,noconsensushasbeenreachedyetwithregardtothedefinitionofthetranslator’ssubjectivity.Somescholarsinthewestborrowtheideaofwriters’subjectivityintheirexnationsoftranslators’subjectivity.TheAmericantranslationtheoristDouglasRobinsondirectlyregardsthetranslatorasawriter,affirmingthetranslator’sactiveandcreativeroleintranslation.Whateachsaysabovemakessense.However,ZhaandTian’sdefinitionispreferredinthisthesisbecauseittakesintofullconsiderationthetranslator’ssubjectivity.YetwealsoagreewithRobinsoninthattosomeextent,thetranslatorresemblesanauthenticwriter.Changesoftranslator’sTranslationtheoryandpracticehaveexperiencedthousandsofyears’development,inwhichdifferentstageshavewitnesseddifferentrecognitionofthetranslator’sidentity.Thispartisintendedtointroducetranslator’spositionandidentityintraditionaltranslationstudiesandinthetrendoftheCultureTurntoprovideaprofoundunderstandingofthisissue.Translator’sidentityintraditionalTranslator’sidentityandstatushavebeenremainingignoredforquitealongtimeinconventionaltranslationstudies.Frameworkedinthestructurallinguisticsandbinaryoppositephilosophyinthelate1950sandthe1960s,traditionaltranslationtheoryholdsthattranslationisamechanicaltransformationfromonelanguagetoanother.Itentitlestheoriginaltextandtheoriginalauthortosupremeauthority.Theconventionalviewoftranslationsupposesanactiveoriginalandapassivetranslation,creationfollowedbyapassiveactoftransmission(Simon,1996:11).Theapproachestotranslationaremostsource-text-oriented.Accordingly,thenotionofequivalenceisconsideredthefundamentalcriterionfortranslation.Consequently,translatorsathomeandabroadareallboundbysuchidealandEugeneNida’s“equivalence”whichrequiresthattranslatorsshouldalwaysbeatcommandofthesourcetextandthetargettextshouldbeinthesameeffectasthatofthesourcetexttoreaders.Asaresult,translatorsshouldtrytoreducetheirsubjectiveinvolvementintranslationand“reproduceinthereceptorlanguagetheclosestequivalentofthesource-languagemessage,firstintermsofmeaningandsecondintermsofstyle”(Nida,1982:55).“Theidealtargettextshouldbelikeapieceofglass,whichissotransparentthatreaderscannotfeelitsexistence”(Venuti,1995:111).Inthissense,translationisassumedtotakeceinavacuum.Translatorsthenaresupposedtoremainsilentandtrytobevoicelessintheirworks.Thatiswhymanypejorativewordslike“copy”,“derivation”,“parody”andsoonareusedtodegradetranslators’work.Inthewest,thetranslatoriseitherregardedasa‘slave’ora‘dutifulwife’,whichsetsofftheviewonauthoritativeanddominatingroleoftheauthorinthetwo-polarrelationshipoftheauthorandthetranslator.Somescholarsthinkthatthetranslatorisunderstoodtobeaservant,aninvisiblehandmechanicallyturningthewordofonelanguageintoanother.Theterm“dancersontheshackle”vividlyportraystherepressedtranslatorwhoisdeprivedofhis/hersubjectivityandcreativity.In,thetranslatorisevencomparedtoa‘parasite’ora‘parrot’.Othertermslike‘skilledworker’,‘craftsman’,‘translatingmachine’,‘tongueman’oreven‘culturaltool’arefrequentlyemployedtonamethetranslator.Theysisaboveshowsthatthetraditionaltranslationtheoryfeaturesthetranslator’sinvisibilityandthetranslator’ssubjectivity,ofcourse,isfrownedupon.Thetraditionalnotionofutmostfidelityrestrainstranslator’sdomofcreativityanddeniestranslator’ssubjectivity.Thetranslatorhastoswaybetweenthetwopolesoffidelityandtreasonortrytoseekbalancebetweenrepressionandcreation,oragencyandsubmission,eitherignoringhim/herselftobefaithfulorbeingcursedandlabeledasabetrayer.Butthetranslatorisnotdoomedtobelowinstatus.Then,whenandhowwillthehumbleandobscuredestinyofthetranslatorchange?Translator’sidentityintranslationstudiesinthetrendofCulturalItisinthe1970sthattranslationbegantobestudiedinadynamic,functionalandcommunicativeandsincethenthetranslatorhasrisentothesurfaceintranslationstudieswiththeCulturalTurn.The1980sandthe1990ssawmanynewschoolsandtheoriesmushroom,rangingfromthepolysystemschoolrepresentedbyItamarEvan-ZoharandGideonTouryandthemanipulationschoolbyAndreLefevere,SusanBassnettandTheoHermanstodeconstructionrepresentedbyJacquesDerrida,MichelFoucaultandRolandBarthes.Allthesenewapproachestotranslationshareacommonfeature:theyareallattemptstorethinkoftheroleofthetranslator,renouncinghis/herimageasafaithfulservantinthetraditionalSherrySimonunderlinesthenewtrendasSomeofthemostexcitingdevelopmentsintranslationstudiessincethe1980shavebeenpartofwhathasbeencalled“culturalturn”.Theturntocultureimpliesaddinganimportantdimensiontotranslationstudies.Insteadofaskingthetraditionalquestionwhichhaspreoccupiedtranslationtheorists—“howshouldwetranslate,whatisacorrecttranslation?”—theemphasisiscedonadescriptiveapproach:“whatdotranslationsdo,howdotheycirculateintheworldandelicitresponse?”Thisshiftemphasizestherealityoftranslations swhichexistmateriallyandmoveabout,addtoourstoreknowledge,andcontributetoongoingchangesinesthetics(Simon,1996:7).Intheabove,translationisviewedfromadifferentaspect.Sincethelate1980s,translationstudieshaveturnedtobeculture-orientedandtranslationisunderstoodasaculturalratherthanamerelinguistictransfer.Theactoftranslationisnolongerregardedas‘transcoding’fromonecontextintoanother,butan‘actofculturalcommunication’.Thepolysystemschoolchangesthetraditionalnotionthattranslationissecondarytoitssourcetext.Itindicatesthattranslationstudiesshouldbeputinalargerliry,socialandculturalframeandthattranslationisdecidedbyallthesystemsinthetargetlanguageculture.Sincethenpeoplehaverealizedthattranslationisonlyaspecialtransmissionamongallthesystems,andtheargumentsover“equivalence”betweenthesourceandtargettextsarenolongerthefocus.Therepresentativesofthemanipulationschoolputforwardveryimportantviewpoints.ThecontributionsmadebyAndreLefevereandSusanBassnettaresignificant.Theirco-editedbookentitledTranslation,History,andCulture(1990)isatonesymbolizingthattranslationstudieshavetakentheCulturalTurn.Lefevereholdsthattranslationisadecision-makingprocessforthetranslatorinwhich“ideology,patronageandpoetics”exertarestrictiveeffectontheactivityofthesubject.Heviewstranslationas“rewriting”,admittingtheroleofthetranslatorasasubjectiveagent.Bassnettconsiderstranslationasmanipulatingprocess,duringwhichthetranslatorexertshis/herpower.Differentfromthetraditionalscholars,theycasttheireyesontheexteriorfactorsinfluencingtranslation.Withthescholars’efforts,theimageoftranslatorshasincreasingly eempoweredandlessself-effacing.Thefactthatthetranslatormakesavitallinkbetweendifferentcultureshasbeengraduallyacknowledged.Deconstructionquestionstraditionalassumptionsaboutmeaningcertaintyandemphasizestheuncertaintyoftextmeaning.Itdeniesthetraditionaldichotomybetweenthesourcetextandthetargettextandadvocatesthesymbioticrelationshipbetweenthesourceandtargettexts,andthetranslatorandthewriter.Sodeconstructionistsmovethetranslatortowardsthetranslator’svisibility.Allthenewtheorieshavemaderemarkablecontributionstotheculturalturnintranslationstudies.Infactthereisalottobeexploredineachtheorybutduetothelimitedspaceandthepurposeofthisthesis,theauthorherejustgivesabriefintroductiontotheminordertofeaturetheirowneffortsinthestudyofthetranslator’ssubjectivity.Inaword,theCulturalTurnisabreakthroughintranslationstudieswhichhelpsestablishthetranslator’ssubjectivity.Peoplehavebeguntonoticetheinfluenceoftranslationsonthetargetculture.Thetarget-text-orientedapproachputstheculturalidentityandroleofthetranslatortotheforeground.Thetranslator’ssubjectivityhasbeencedontheagendainthetranslationstudiessincethen. ysisofTranslator’sSubjectivityRegardingFeministTranslationFeministtranslationtheoryputsemphasisonthetranslator’ssubjectivitybecauseofdeconstructivenature,andthetranslator’ssubjectivityisbroughtintofullyinfeministtranslationpracticeonaccountoffeministtranslators’politicalpurposeoftranslation.Translator’ssubjectivityinfeministFeministtranslationtheorypaysspecialattentiontothetranslator’ssubjectivity.Owingtothedeepinfluenceofthethoughtoffeministmovement,feministtranslatorsmakeresearchesfromafeminist.Thepurposeoftheirtranslationistowinequalitybetweenmenandwomenandsharethesimilarrightsandprivilegeswithmen.Therefore,feministtranslatorsdotheirutmosttooverturnthepatriarchaloppressionimposedonwomenandconstructtheirfeminineidentityinthetargettextbyemployingafemininelanguageintranslation.Languageisviewedbyfeministsasameansofcreatingmeaningandthusmeaningcreatedinafemininelanguageistorevealthefemaleidentity.Translationisregardedasarewritinginafeminineway.Intheprocessofrewritingtheoriginal,thetranslator’ssubjectivityisbroughtintofully.Feministtranslators’fullexertionoftheirsubjectivityresultsfromtheiruniqueidentity.Infeministtranslationpractice,feministtranslatorsdisytheirsubjectivityandcreativitytoagreatextent.Theyadoptradicaltranslationstrategiestorecethepatriarchalideologyintheoriginalwithafemaleone.Theyhandleandinterveneintotheoriginal,tryingtocontrolthepowerofthediscourseandfeminizethelanguageintoonevoicingforthemwithanaimtoliberatewomenfromthestateofbeingoppressed.Feministtranslationtheoryprovidesanewunderstandingofsomeissuesintranslationstudies.Itviewstranslationasproductionwhichiscontrarytothetraditionalnotionoftranslationasreproductionandimitation;itreinterpretsthenotionof“fidelity”andjustifiestranslator’streasontotheauthorortheoriginal;anditaffirmsequalitybetweentheauthorandthetranslatorandfeministtranslator’svisibilityintranslation.RedefinitionoffidelityandemphasisoncreativeIntraditionaltranslationtheories,“fidelity”isthemostimportantstandardthatallthetranslatorsshouldconformto.Theauthorandtheoriginaltextareauthoritative,whilethetranslatorandthetranslatedtextaresubordinate.Muchemphasishasbeenattachedtotheauthorandloyaltytotheauthorhasbeenregardedasvital.Thelinguisticfunctionisalsoemphasizedand“equivalence”and“fidelity”havebeenconsideredastheassessmentstandardaswellasthetranslatingnormofallkindsoftranslation.However,theconnotationoftheword“fidelity”willchangewiththepurposeoftranslationinalargeculturalcontext.Fromagender,fidelitysometimesdeterminestherelationshipbetweentheoriginaltext(man)andthetranslatedtext(woman),therelationshipbetweentheauthor(man)andthetranslator(woman)inparticular.translatorstryveryhardtorecetheauthorsoastoensurethecreativityofthetranslatedtextandadjustthenotionof“fidelity”accordingtotheirownideology.JustasSimonstatedinherbookGenderinTranslation(1996),“Feministtranslationtheoryaimstoidentifyandcritiquethetangleofconceptswhichrelegatebothwomenandtranslationtothebottomofthesocialandliryladder.Todoso,itmustinvestigatetheprocessesthroughwhichtranslationhascometobe‘feminized’andattempttotroublethestructuresofauthoritywhichhavemaintainedthisassociation”.Apartfrom“troublingthestructuresofauthoritywhichhavemaintainedthisassociation”,feministtranslatorstrytorewritethe“tangleofconcepts”.Byngthis,theyendowthoseconceptswithfeministconnotationsandcontentswithanaimtobetterservethepoliticalagendaofaffirmationoftheirfemaleidentity.Consequently,feministtranslatorsreinterpret“fidelity”.“Forfeministtranslation,fidelityistobedirectedtowardneithertheauthornorthereader,buttowardthewritingproject—aprojectinwhichbothwriterandtranslatorparticipate”(Simon,1996:2).Infeministtranslators’eyes,“fidelity”intraditionaltranslationstudiesimpliestheideologicalconstructionofthemalediscoursewhichhelpstomaintainthedominantstatusofmen.Suchinterpretationof“fidelity”indicatesthat“fidelity”isnotaneternaltruth,anditchangeswithtime.“Fidelitydirectedtowardthefeministwritingproject”indicatesthatboththeandthetranslatormustbefaithfultotheirpoliticalagenda.Inotherwords,boththeauthorandthetranslatorshouldbeloyaltothepursuitofequalitybetweenmenandwomen.Itbringsitselfthepoliticalpurposeandmissionto plish.Here,awritingprojectwhichiscloselyrelatedtothe“genderedpolitics”hasrecedtheoriginaltextand ethehigheststandard.Asaresult,boldchangesmadebyfeministtranslatorsareviewednotasabetrayalbutajustifiableactionsoastobeloyaltotheaffirmationoftheiridentity.Feministtranslatorsaregivenmoreroomtoexerttheirsubjectivity.Whentheyinterveneintotheoriginaltextandrewriteitinafeminineway,theynotonlyfeminizetheoriginallanguagebutalsoaddtheirfemaleideologytothetranslatedtext.Therefore,infeministtranslation,thetranslator’ssubjectivityisjustifiedandemphasized.Thereinterpretationoffidelityleadsustoreconsiderthetreasoninfeministtranslation.Sincethetranslatorisnotloyaltotheauthororthereader,buttothefeministwritingtreasonisnecessaryandjustifiableinfeministtranslation.“Overthepastdecadeanumberofwomentranslatorshaveassumedtherighttoquerytheirsourcetextfromafeminist,tointerveneandmakechangeswhenthetextsdepartfromthis”(Flotow,1997:24).Infeministtranslators’eyes,theabsolutefidelitytotheoriginaltextwithpatriarchalideasmayleadtodiscriminationagainstwomenanddeliberatechangesinthetranslatedtextmayhelpthemtorevealthefemaleideology.Itdeservesourattentionthatfeministtranslatorspossessdoubleidentity.Ontheonehand,sheisafeminist,afirmsupporterofthefeministmovement,whowilltryuntiringeffortstooverturnthepatriarchaloppressionandwinwomenequalrights.Ontheotherhand,sheisatranslatorwhoisthemessagecarrier,thatistosay,sheusesanotherlanguagetopresentthetarget-languagereaderwiththemessageintheoriginaltext.Itisthisdoubleidentitythatendowsthemwithdoubleinferiority.Translatorsandwomenoccupysimilarstatusinthesociety:bothofthemareconsideredtobeinferiorandsubordinate.Therefore,intranslation,theytryhardtodeconstructthemeaningintheoriginaltextandrewritetheoriginalinafeminineway.Whentranslating,theynotonlychangethemasculinevoiceintoafeminineone,butalsosubstitutethecontentsthatarecontradictorytowomen’sideology.Whenafeministtranslatorisconfrontedwithideologicallyunfriendlytexts,especiallythosethatareagainstwomen’srightsordoharmtowomen’ssocialstatus,“shefeelscompelledtomakechangestothetextinaccordancewithherownestheticfeministsensibilities”(Simon,1996:30).Feministtranslatorsfeelittheirresponsibilitytomakethefeministideasstandoutintheirtranslation.Feministtranslators’activeandconscioustreasonendowthemwithmuchroomtoexerttheirsubjectivity.Theyactivelymanipulateofandinterveneintothesourcetextandtryhardtocontrolthepowerofthediscourseandtofeminizethelanguageintoonevoicingforthembyemployingboldandinterventionisttranslation