Gradually, the translator’s subjectivity has attracted more attention and the translator plays a role as an interlocution and is treated equally with the other two participants, namely the source text writer and the target text reader。 Thus translators can take full advantage of his priority under relevant circumstances without being either servile or domineering。

 When referring to the 1970s, the Cultural Turn emerges in Translation Studies (TS)。 André Lefevere said that “Translation is, of course, a rewriting of an original text。” As the handler of the source language (SL) text, the translator is the subject of translational activities for sure。 Actually, there are many articles on the subject of translation written by Chinese TS scholars but they haven’t reached an agreement with respect to this problem yet。 Yang deems that writer, translator and reader are the subjects of literary translation; Xu Jun pided the subject of translation into two parts: the broad sense and the narrow sense。 Chen Daliang deems that the translation’s subject is translators and explicates why the translator is the only subject of translation further (Chen 2)。 The author holds that translation’s subject is the translator。 Other issues will be more convenient to discuss after we solve this problem。  文献综述

As a process, translation unavoidably covers two steps: comprehending source text (ST) and expressing the contents consist in the original text with the target language。 In this kind of course, a translator’s creative cognition tips the balance, and his or her subjectivity is not just confined by the ST。 This can be showed in the following respects: 

1。 His attitudes with regard to the original text。 

2。 His inpidual experience, criterion of judgement, values。

3。 His target culture and target readership consciousness。 

4。 His purpose, self-determination, pioneering spirit and so on。来:自[优E尔L论W文W网www.youerw.com +QQ752018766-

The translator’s subjectivity is in relation to the subjective agency or translator’s awareness to a great extent。 To the source text, the translator’s interpretation has an immediate aim of translating the ST into TT (target text), however, a common reader’s interpretation has not。 That’s the most significant difference。 What’s more, there are also pergences between all kinds of subject’s creative activities and the translator’s translating activities: he has to accomplish his translation on the basis of accurate and proper interpretation of the ST。 That implies he is not in the position to abridge or adapt the ST at his pleasure and must put the scrutiny of the ST first。 There are intimate connections between the duality of the translating activity and duality of the translator’s subjectivity and the former determines the latter: for one thing, as one inpidual, the translator can select whatever translating styles and methods just as his wishes; for another, he must take various factors into account in the process of doing his translation, such as ideology, poetics and so on。