Ｉｍｐａｃｔ ｏｆ Ｄｅｃｏｎｓｔｒｕｃｔｉｏｎ ｏｎ Ｔｒａｎｓｌａｔｉｏｎ Ｔｈｅｏｒｙ

Abstract：Deconstruction theory is a translation theory which is worthy our great attention. This paper expounds the effects of deconstruction theory on translation theory and practice， points out the limitations of the theory， and puts forward the necessity to construct a new translation standard after deconstruction. The ideas and methods it illustrated bring us many new inspirations， which have important reference value and significance to reconstruct Chinese translation theory.

Key words：Derrida; deconstruction; translation theory

【中圖分類號】H059 【文獻標識碼】A 【文章編號】1002-2139（2009）-07-0052-02

I Introduction

Deconstruction， which is also called \"post-structuralism，” is the rebellion of deconstructionist represented by JacqueDerrida to structuralism， it systematically eliminates the thoughts about structuralism on structure and significance， so it is also called the deconstructionism. Derrida is， as it were， the most representative thinker of deconstructionism. In the《De La Grammatologie》， which is recognized as the classic work of deconstructionism， he points out that the goal of logography is to subvert the western rationalism interpretation tradition byname of \"Logocentrisim\" . [1]JacqueDerrida’s most basic deconstruction strategy is to deconstruct the traditional philosophy dualism opposition， and change the hierarchical order in a particular time. In his opinion， deconstruction criticism first is to reverse the order of primary and secondary of each pair of concept of dualism opposition， then other aspects. He also believes that symbol identity doesn't exist， and there is a gap hard to repair between signifier and signified， meaning expands and develops in the difference， and its philosophy is dialectical， dynamic and developmental.

II The Effect of Deconstructionism on Translation Theory

Deconstructionism believes that there are differences between signifier and signified for some reasons， the meaning of source text is uncertain， it is only fixed in the context temporarily， the translator should fully exert subjectivity to find original meaning， dig out the factors that can make the source text survive， use the exchange of language to make it develop and become maturity， so as to form a kind of symbiotic relationship between translation and original. This kind of viewpoint is far different from that of structuralism， structuralism believes that the meaning of original is determined， the translator should strive to find the balance between original and translation， its main task is to represent the original meaning. However， deconstructionism regards the relationship between original and translation from a new angle-translation is the way in which the original text survives. Text itself does not have certain meaning and has changed the original meaning even not translated， and endowed with new meaning. Therefore， the translator is the theme of literary creation， the birth of a new text. So， the position and function of translator and translation is greatly improved. [2] The original， which has equal status with the translation， survives by depending on it. Deconstructionism also believes that the difference between language and various language expressions are realized deeply through translation.

Derrida thoroughly breaks the theory of metaphysics and Logocentrisim by dismantling presence and subverves the order. Structuralism believes that signifier and signified combinine tightly， while Deridda believes these two have unrepaired difference， meaning expands in difference， text also develops in it. Therefore， Derrida puts forward the concept of différance， which refers to the difference， distinction and postponement. It believes that signifier and signified do not closely combine， and the appearance of symbols do not mean that what it referrers present now. Symbols are not same; their meanings depend on other symbols， so meaning is uncertain. Différance permeate s into every reality. Each concept manifests itself through silently subversion of the structure of every concept and reality， The concept of différance used to read means that meaning is different in space and delayed in practice， and will not be confirmed， it is a process of constant change and develop， and text do not have ultimate meaning， text is an open and incomplete system. The essence of translation is actually continuously revised or to delay the process of replacement. Only through translation can reveal the difference between languages. Translation is not only searching for meaning in différance， but also provides place and chance for those absent， lost， depressed to discuss. [3]Due to the multeity and uncertainty of the original text， any interpretation or translation cannot end its possible meanings in the process of translation. The relationship between original and translation is a kind of symbiotic， equal and complementation instead of that of imitating and imitated in traditional translation theory.

Derrida thinks that any text involves some kind of structure， namely the relationship between a single text and other languages， any language is related with other languages， and not isolated， but connected and switched. Therefore， Derrida advocates that translation is a kind of transformation with adjustment， from a language to another language， a text to another text. He claims to cancel the traditional translation equivalence criteria， emphasizes the conversion methods between languages， and thought that the goal of translation is to reveal the multiple meaning of original text and transform in the expanded language. German translation theorist Benjamin advocates the concept of pure language in his classic deconstruction work《The Task of Translator》to explain the differences between languages， while Derrida uses différance. [3] Because of différance， Derrida shows the point that translation is transformation and advocates to cancel the traditional equivalence criteria in the process of translation， and based on the method of conversion between languages. Derrida's view of expanded language completely changed the relationship that the original decide translation， and established the relationship of equal symbiotic， the uncertainty and polyphyly of the original meaning， advocated conversion instead of translation， changed the traditional translation standards and translation concept. He thinks that the differences between languages and specific way of language expression will be more profoundly and accurately understood through translation. Translation is not only in two languages， but also is in the expanded languages.

Because of their own experiences and be in different times， translators often have different understanding and experience， so in the process of constantly rewritten， conversion and combination， the translation more or less leaves traces of the translator’s experience. Actually， translation is also a creative process， the translator's creation activity adds color to the original， and gradually become mature， it is the embodiment of deconstructionism viewpoint that the original survives by depending on the translation. [4] But， when readers read， subject mind of the translator already has a psychological schema of deconstruction; it is the organic combination of the world outlook， the outlook on life， the general cultural perspective， the artistic culture and literature， form aesthetic reading and psychological schema for each reader in the form of experience. The author thinks， because of the long-term influence of Logocentrism， on one hand， reader love and desire to read charming translated works for being influenced by the innovation expectation， on the other hand， because of the difference between translated text and the original works， what is need is not only the dialogue between translator and original text， but also the dialogues between the translated text and its reader and the dialogue between translator and the reader of translated works.

III Limitation

Deconstructionism changes the traditional translation concepts and translation standards， and the relationship between original and the translation text， but it also has some shortcomings. First， deconstructionism， although it broke the rules， consistency， certainty， reflections and doubt of traditional translation studies， failed to bring new truth and ration， only focused on theoretical exploration， is destructive rather than is constructive. [5] Translation activity is after all a kind of cross- culture social activity， and an intercourse activity of two kinds of different power discourses under different cultural contexts， not only needs theoretical guidance， but also reasonable concrete translation mode， method or technology. Secondly， deconstructionism denied the author’s creative and authority on the original text， which is a kind of extreme views. Deconstructionism overthrowed \"Logocentrisim\"， improved the status of translator， and fully brought freedom to them， but the excessiveness and indulgence of subjective consciousness also provided basis for random translation. At the same time， it also may make the schema deconstruction of original text tampered and changed， and made translation have no principle to follow. Last， the arguments of deconstructionism of the original text about uncertainties， openness and pluralism， may ultimately go towards relativism and nihilism， thus make the translation activities in a circulation of meaning interpretation without beginning and end， and all the texts can not escape the fate of deconstruction， subversion and suspected. This may cause the objective conjuncture in the process of translation， and bring chaos for translators.

IV Conclusion

It can thus be seen that the deconstructionists who took Derrida as the representative did not like the traditional theory which attempt to provide a good translation model， but more inclined to explore the interrelated relationships between languages in translation. Deconstruction theory， not only made dialogue come true but also established the importance of the status of the translator theoretically， so that liberated the translator from the shackles of the traditional concept of equivalent， avoided the horns of a dilemma， the translation is no longer subsidiary of original， and translator is no longer manacled and interfered by original so that can not do creativity work， thereby the translator's subjective initiative activeness is fully brought into play， the reader's vision of innovation expectancy was satisfied in the full extent. Therefore， deconstruction theory may make translation practice more creativity and flexibility.

The introduction of the concept of deconstruction of translation produced a huge change of relationship between the author and the translator， the original and the translation: the original， after being elected， is no longer associated with the author; the original life is to be continued by the translation， and this task will be completed by translator. The introduction of the concept of deconstruction of translation also transfers the study focus of translation， from the description of original to the function-oriented translation. [6] The evaluation standard of translation is no longer a traditional pure function. The nature and principles of translation became a rewrite and processing of the original， which is a cross-cultural conversion， not the language conversion.

However， under the influence of two types of power discourse， translation activity is a kind of cross-cultural conversation and social activity. Under the impact of deconstructionism， the traditional rationality has been dissolved， which not only brought vitality to the translation， but also caused confusion， the reconstruction of a new rationality is inevitable. Special attention has been paid to language problems， and translation is the activity which carried out cross-cultural communication through language that must be consistent with the rationality and general acceptability of social interaction. In short， translation studies and activities must and certainly will be reconstruct a new rationality.

References:

[1] Derrida，Jacque.1987.Glas.(tr)J.P.Leavy.1991. Lincoln:Universityof Nebraska Press

[2] Benjamin，Andrew.1989.Translation and the Nature of Philosophy:A New Theory of Words. LondonNew York:Routledge

[3] Davis， Kathleen.2006.Deconstruction And Translation:ShangHai Foreign language Education Press

[4] Gentzler， Edwin.Contemporary Translation Theories.2004

ShangHai Foreign language Education Press

[5] 何加紅．跨越文本的障礙[J]．西南民族學院學報，1999，4.

[6] 李紅滿. 解構(gòu)主義翻譯理論的發(fā)軔[J]．山東外語教學，2001，