292

What Are the Main Differential Features-the Advantages and

Disadvantages-of Semantic and Communicative Translation? In
What Circumstances Would One or the Other Be Appropriate?
I-ying Tsai

Cheng Shiu University

Abstract
Translators continue to search for the working standard to produce a standard
translation script. Translators generally need to consider two factors at the same time,
(a) to make the translated text and its style comply with the writers ideas, and (b) to
translate the source texts into the readers understandable culture and language. Peter
Newmark provided two theories, semantic translation and communicative
translation, in his academic textbooks, An Approach to Translation (Newmark, 1988a)
and A Textbook of Translation (Newmark, 1988b). These descriptions later constituted
the most important parts of Newmarks translation theories and formed the main
theoretical framework of this essay within which the topic will be discussed in detail.
Based upon Newmarks theories, this essay is going to discuss the main differential
features of semantic translation and communicative translation, with reference to
materials mainly dealing with translations from Chinese to English or from English to
Chinese. Particular attention is paid to the advantages and disadvantages of
Newmarks two translation methods, and their appropriate application in the Chinese-
English or English-Chinese translation processes is discussed. In conclusion, the main
difference between semantic translation and communicative translation is that the
former respects source text above all and the latter considers primarily the readers.
Semantic translation theory, in general, is suitable for expressive texts, while
communicative translation theory for informative and vocative texts. However, in
translation processes, these two theories cannot be applied separately.

293
1. Introduction
Translators continue to search for the working standard, which aims to produce a
standard translation script. Using ethical consideration as an example, is there really a
standard principle to judge ethics in this world? This is an open question with no
definite answers. Likewise, translation faces the same situation as there is no one
absolute standard which can accommodate all the varying problems in different
translation circumstances. Therefore, Zhao (2003:115) claimed that the translation
process is like the way of human life, which requires following and cross referencing
several principles in order to make ways of living (my translation).

Put into practical terms, translators generally need to consider two factors at the
same time, (a) to make the translated text and its style comply with the writers ideas,
and (b) to translate the source texts into the readers understandable culture and
language. To help translators understand these two factors better, Peter Newmark, a
British theorist in the translation domain, provided two theories, semantic translation
and communicative translation, in his academic textbooks, An Approach to
Translation (Newmark, 1988a) and A Textbook of Translation (Newmark, 1988b).
These descriptions later constituted the most important parts of Newmarks translation
theories and formed the main theoretical framework of this essay within which the
topic will be discussed in detail.

Based upon Newmarks theories, this essay is going to discuss the main
differential features of semantic translation and communicative translation, with
reference to materials mainly dealing with translations from Chinese to English or
from English to Chinese. Examples include the translation of literature (expressive
texts), advertisement (vocative texts), and technical manuals (informative texts).
Particular attention is paid to the advantages and disadvantages of Newmarks two
translation methods. Based on this analysis, how these two methods can be
appropriately applied in the Chinese-English or English-Chinese translation processes
has been discussed.

This essay is divided into five sections. Following the Introduction, the
general background of Newmarks translation methods will be described in section
two. Section three and section four can be seen as a parallel structure. Section three
focuses on the semantic translation, its advantage, disadvantage and appropriate
translation circumstance. Section four focuses on the communicative translation, its
advantage, disadvantage and appropriate translation circumstance. Then in section
five, a side-by-side comparison will be made to discuss the importance of integrating
these two methods in the translation process and a general conclusion will be drawn
accordingly.

2. Background Information

294
As mentioned above, semantic translation and communicative translation will be
introduced in this section and their main characteristics will be described. And
according to their own characteristics, the question as to what kind of text-category
would be appropriate for one or the other will be discussed as well.

In the 1960s, Eugene Nida made a pioneer effort in translation history to debate
the approaches of literal and free translation, where he categorized varying translation
modes into two main approaches according to the actual conditions, formal
equivalence and dynamic equivalence. As stated by Nida (1964: 159), formal
equivalence focuses attention on the message itself, in both form and contentOne is
concerned that the message in the receptor language should match as closely as
possible the different elements in the source language. He went on to say, dynamic
equivalence is based on the principle of equivalent effect, where the relationship
between receptor and message should be substantially the same as that which existed
between the original receptors and the message (ibid). His systematic theories set a
path for translators moving on from word-to-word translation. Furthermore, his
theories had a significant influence on Peter Newmark. As claimed by Munday
(2001:44), Communicative translation resembles Nidas dynamic equivalence in the
effect it is trying to create on TT (target text) reader, while semantic translation has
similarities to Nidas formal equivalence.

According to Newmark (1988b: 58), the characteristic of the semantic translation
attempts to reproduce the precise contextual meaning of the original within the
constraints of the target language grammatical structure. Whereas for the
communicative translation, it attempts to render the exact contextual meaning of the
original in such a way that both content and language are readily acceptable and
comprehensible to the readership (ibid: 47). Obviously, semantic translation was
created to retain the cultural element, the writers register and unique expression in
the source language. Thus, by applying semantic translation, the structure of sentences
and the order of segments in the target language can be transferred close to the source
language. On the other hand, communicative translation is designed to translate the
source texts in a reader-oriented approach, which aims to ensure readers understand
the main message in the source language.

Chen (2005) made a comment on the above two methods that Newmarks theory
should be a choice of selecting the most suitable way of translation in a given
situation. For example, the communicative translation should be the way to proceed
for the translation of popular fiction. However, if semantic translation is the choice to
proceed, then, during the translation process, the smaller fragments of words should
be compromised to make the whole look complete (my translation). Thus, one must
first examine the types and characteristics of the source texts before carrying out the
translation. Moreover, Newmark argued that semantic translation and communicative
translation should be applied in the translation processes from an integrated
perspective rather than alternative as neither of them could successfully accommodate

295
all the circumstances. To a great extent, therefore, it is only by way of switching
between these two types of translation methods that one will be able to create a good
piece of translation.

Moreover, Newmark mentioned the importance of text analysis in his academic
textbooks, An Approach to Translation (Newmark, 1988a) and A Textbook of
Translation (Newmark, 1988b), where the text-categories analysis and their related
translation methods have been highlighted. According to Newmark, the texts can be
divided into three categories: (a) expressive text, (b) informative text, and (c) vocative
text. The function of expressive text is to express the mind process of a speaker, a
writer, or an originator of the utterance. This type of text includes: serious imaginative
literature; authoritative statements; and autobiography, essays, and personal
correspondence. Next, the informative text aims to deliver specific knowledge to
readers, such as facts, reports, ideas, or theories. And the range of literal varieties
covers academic papers, textbooks, popular science or art books, and popular
journalism. Last, for the vocative text, its purpose is to call the readership to act, think,
or feel, in fact, to react in the way intended by the text. Instructions, publicity,
propaganda, persuasive writing, and possibly popular fiction all belong to this
category.

In general, semantic translation is writer-oriented and communicative translation
is reader-oriented. Therefore, Newmark (1988a, 1988b) claimed that semantic
translation is more suitable for expressive texts, while communicative translation is
for informative and vocative texts. To better understand the implementation of
these two translation methods, the advantage, disadvantage and appropriate
circumstance of semantic translation and communicative translation will be described
based on related examples in turns.

3. Semantic Translation
Semantic translation attempts to reproduce the precise contextual meaning of the
original within the constraints of the target language grammatical structure
(Newmark, 1988b: 58).

3.1 Advantage
Newmark (1988b: 47) believed that a semantic translation attempts to preserve
its authors idiolect, his peculiar form of expression, in preference to the spirit of
the source or the target language. To support this viewpoint, Liu (200457)
furthered this argument in detail, stating that semantic translation is a kind of art . It
fully demonstrates the expression of a language, in an objective and precise way,
whereby during its translation process of the source language, the additional
explanation of terms is only required when the target language is becoming difficult to
understand by the readers. In other words, semantic translation tries to maintain the
original work of the author (my translation). Obviously, the purpose of semantic

296
translation is to ensure that the authors spiritual features, such as register, phonetics,
contextual meaning and so on, have been fully delivered to readers through the target
scripts. By applying the semantic translation method, each word in the source texts
needs to be translated faithfully. At the same time the grammatical structure of the
source language needs to be adjusted towards the target language. Through this way
of translation, readers could grasp the essence of the authors thoughts. To better
understand the advantage of semantic translation, its application in the translation
process of Tang poems has been taken as an example in the following.

Song and Lin (2006: 42) made a comment on the English translation work of the
poems in the Tang dynasty to the effect that, when translating such work, one must
consider the style and cultural factors of the classic poems, while being able to deliver
a clear message to the reader. Through semantic translation, the target language
needs to be able to deliver every detailed meaning of the source language faithfully.
To better understand this comment, the poem Untitled by Shang Yin Li has been
taken as an example here, the translation of which needs to correspond precisely with
the poets ideas.

Lis Untitled is a piece of love poetry that is written to show the sufferings of
missing a person through the symbol of silkworms and candles. Below is the
translation of it:

Original: (si)
Literal translation: Spring silkworms die while they spin out the silk;
Candles burn and turn to ashes as they have no tear to
shed.
(my translation)
Translated by Anon.: Spring silkworm till its death spins silk from lovesick heart.
Candles only when burned up have no tears to shed.
(cited in Song & Lin, 2006)

For poems, the language exquisiteness lies in its phonetics. In the poem
translation processes, therefore, translators should pay particular attention to this issue.
In the poem translation above, (si) has been semantically translated as silk. This
is because the term (si) literally means silk in Chinese while it also has the same
phonetic sound of (si) missing. If translators use communicative translation, the
exquisiteness in source language cannot be faithfully delivered to readers though the
poets intention and thought could be translated straightforwardly. As Newmark
(1988b 46) has mentioned, semantic translation is more flexible, admits the creative
exception to 100% fidelity and allows for the translators intuitive empathy with the

297
original. Thus for poem translation, the semantic translation (the Anon.s translation
version) is more appropriate than communicative translation as it not only delivers the
original meaning but also demonstrates the aesthetic value of the source language, in
both phonetics and formality.

3.2 Disadvantage
Newmark (1988b:42) stated that a semantic translation is always inferior to its
original, since it involves loss of meaning. Hence the translated version based on
semantic translation is usually worse in quality when compared with the original
version. This phenomenon, the loss of meaning, often appears in the translation
processes of highly regarded literature or those writings that consist of great literary
value. In these kinds of works, therefore, translators are seldom able to completely
demonstrate the essence of the original work.

Furthermore, Newmark (1988a, 1988b) also mentioned that the semantic
translation would often cause over-translation. He claimed that semantic translation
is personal and individual, follows the thought process of the author and tends to
over-translate (1988b: 47). In terms of practice, over-translation means that readers
receive more information in the target language than the author has given in the
source language. This is usually caused by the improper expression of the culture.
Hsu (2001: 79) made an extension on the cause of over-translation, commenting that
over-translation would occur if translators are trying to transform the hidden culture
meaning into the target language.

For example, Hawkes semantic translation (cited in Hsu, 2001) of the following
sentence from The Red Chamber is open to argument:

Original:
Literal translation: Things are worked out by man, but their achievement
is met by fate.
Translated by Hawkes: Man proposes. God disposes.
Suggested version: Man proposes Fate disposes.(my translation)

As a Christian, Hawkes translated this sentence as Man proposes. God disposes.
To some extent, (tian) can be translated as God literally. However, since this
term God has a western religious meaning, this semantic translation extends what
the author wanted to express and renders the original sentence with a religious
meaning. This results in the phenomenon of over-translation. Therefore, to reflect the
original meaning of the sentence, the original text should be translated as Man
proposes Fate disposes.

3.3 Appropriate circumstance, with examples

298
Newmark (1988a) claimed that the semantic translation is suitable for
expressive texts translation, where the specific language of the speaker or writer is
as important as the content. This is mainly because semantic translation intends to
present every detail of the contextual meaning of the source text by means of
maintaining the texts characteristics and expressions. Therefore, poems, novels,
speeches, and any authoritative texts should normally be translated semantically from
a writer-oriented perspective as the unit of translation is likely to be small, since
words rather than sentences contain the finest nuances of meaning (Newmark, 1988b:
50).

In the early 20th century, Chinese theorists mostly preferred the writer-oriented
theories. Since most of the works picked for translation at that period in China were
literature or important speeches which always had specific messages or particular
expressions, the translation theories created in that period tend to be faithful to the
source text. Yan Fus fidelity (xin), fluency (da), and elegance (ya) (cited by Chan,
2004) and Lin Yu Tangs (ibid) theory of faithfulness, fluency, and beauty are
very similar to Newmarks semantic translation method. Lin (ibid) explained that
faithful translation does not mean the source texts need to be translated literally or
word by word; instead it tends to treat each sentence as a unit and interpret it
accordingly. To be fluent, Lin claimed that as far as the translated scripts are sound
grammatically and correct in terms of the target language, this would be a good
translation. Moreover, Lin (ibid) indicated that beauty is an approach that the
translator must follow the authors style of writing. (Please note that Lins beauty is
different from Yans elegance as Yan prefers to use those stunning words).

The following paragraph is extracted from Bridgehead Revisited as an example to
demonstrate that, if the source language has a specific message or particular
expression, it needs to be translated semantically. Since the story was set in the period
before the Second World War, many sentences used specific expressions to portray the
contemporary lifestyle of the upper classes in the 1920s. The writing style is both
discrete and elegant, containing plenty of long sentences. To better express the
authors ideas, this kind of literature translation should usually adopt the semantic
translation method.

An excerpt from Brideshead Revisited:
J ulia left Sebastian and me at Brideshead and went to stay with an aunt, Lady
Rosscommon, in her villa at Cap Ferrat. <1>All the way she pondered her
problem. She had given a name to her widower-diplomat<2>; she called him
Eustace
Translated by Lai (2006) in Chinese:

<1>
<2>


299
Based on this excerpt, some important points have been noted regarding the
implementation of a semantic translation approach.

Analysis: <1>

Back translation:
J ulia left Sebastian and me at Brideshead, and she herself went to live with an
aunt, Lady Rosscommon, in her villa, which is at Cap Ferrat.
Interpretation:
In the source text, the author used many long sentences, which can be seen as
one of his important writing styles. This has been well demonstrated in the
sample above, where insertion of many joining clauses forms a complex
expression. To allow the authors writing style to be delivered to the readers
successfully, it is necessary to translate every segment from the source
language to the target language, thus the ideal translation approach for such a
job would be semantic translation. Compared to the original text J ulia left
Sebastian and me at Brideshead and went to stay with an aunt, Lady
Rosscommon, in her villa at Cap Ferrat, it can be observed that the structure
of the semantically translated version is very close to the original one.

Analysis: <2>
Back translation: Wife-lost diplomat
Interpretation: widower-diplomat is the authors own term, by joining two unrelated
words together to form a new term. To demonstrate the authors literal creation
of words, and to show this unique bonding in the target language, it is
necessary for it to be translated precisely, thus the version based on a semantic
translation approach can be found to reflect the writers style, an unusual
combination.

4. Communicative Translation
Communicative translation attempts to render the exact contextual meaning of
the original in such a way that both content and language are readily acceptable and
comprehensible to the readership (Newmark, 1988b: 47).

4.1 Advantage
As claimed by Newmark (1988b: 47), inadequately and/or inaccurately written
passages can be corrected in communicative translation. Therefore, communicative
translation would make the target scripts more readable, like written in a mother
tongue, and more appreciated by the reader. In such a way, the information the author
intended to deliver would be easier to get across.

Using the most successful advertisement in China, the translation of Coca-Cola,
as an example, Coca-Cola is translated as (Keko-kele), which can be back

300
translated in English as keko for delicious and kele for joyous.
Putting keko and kele two words together would give a meaning of joyous in the
mouth in Chinese. Therefore, the communicative translation of Coca-Cola in Chinese
not only kept the phonetic sound of the word, but also added in marketing elements.
Since the message in the translated version is easy to understand and can be delivered
to the new audiences in an acceptable way, it attracts many buyers to it in a short
period of time.

Here is another example to show where the communicative translation is more
appropriate:

Source language: wet paint
Semantic translation in Chinese:
Back translation: watery paint
Communicative translation in Chinese:
Back translation: the painting is not dry yet.

From the example above, it can be found that the semantic translation can not
achieve the purpose of advising audiences to avoid touching the wet paint. In order to
deliver the warning message and emphasize the function of the sign, the
communicative translation is more suitable in this kind of circumstance.


4.2 Disadvantage
Newmark (1988b:47-48) pointed out that communicative translation is social,
concentrates on the message and the main force of the text, and tends to be under-
translated. Gan (2005: 139) further elaborated this statement that under-translation
has over estimated the meaning of the information provided in the translated text, thus
failing to provide the essential information and resulting in readers misunderstanding
the message that the author intended to give in the original text (my translation). This
kind of under-translation caused by communicative translation will frequently make it
difficult for readers to get the implied meanings of the source texts. If translators fail
to point out such issues, it would lead to an additional distortion of meaning in the
translation process. Here, for example, is a paragraph from Laozi, which was
translated into English by Arthur Waley (1999: 121):

Source Language:
Semantic Translation: With Tao (power) you have by contract, without
Tao you take by force. (my translation)
Communicative Translation: For he who has power of Tao is the Grand

301
Almoner; he who has not the power is the
Grand Perquisitor. (translated by Waley)

In this case, the translator uses Grand Almoner and Grand Perquisitor to
reflect the classic level of the script, but this communicative translation version may
pose problems for an English language reader, not only because the terms almoner
and perquisitor themselves are rare, but also because they dont faithfully reflect the
implication of the Chinese source texts. According to the Oxford English Dictionary,
the definition of almoner is an official distributor of alms (Almoner, 1989) and
perquisitor is the original acquirer of an estate to which his descendants have
succeeded (Perquisitor, 1989). In the Chinese source text, the term has the
implication of having something by contract and the term has the implication of
taking something by force. In the communicative translation version by Waley,
Almoner might show a little bit of implied meaning of has something by contract,
yet Perquisitor can hardly be related to taking something by force. (Newmark,
1988a: 44) Therefore, the translation does not present the implication of the actual
meaning in the source text.Unless the readers have knowledge of the Chinese culture
and are very fond of Laozi, they would not be able to get the idea from the translation.
As the terms used in the communicative translation are very western and even esoteric,
it might confuse and alienate readers even more. It seems that a more semantic
translation in this case would be better by using the concepts of contract and force.

4.3 Appropriate circumstance, with examples
As stated by Chan (2002:15), for those parts that are done with literal translation
that would cause readers confusion and misunderstanding, translators should use
their own comprehension with consideration for the target audiences, and make an
interpretation that these audiences would understand (my translation). Since
communicative translation intends to explain the message of the source text to the
readers, it is suitable for informative texts and vocative texts (Newmark 1988a,
1988b). The informative texts contain those texts related to knowledge, such as non-
literary writing, journalism, informative articles and books, textbooks, reports,
scientific and technological writing. On the other hand, the vocative texts contain
those texts with pragmatic function, such as propaganda, advertisement, and public
notices. Example 1 consists of two instructional sentences that are extracted from a
manual of universal adaptor (SS, 2005). It aims to demonstrate the implementation of
communicative translation in informative texts.

Example 1 Manual of Universal Adaptor:
1. Select the applicable plug-insert for the country in which you are traveling.
Please refer to the global traveler guide.
2. Slide and push the plug-insert completely into the master unit
Chinese translation:

302
1.
Back translation: Please select the applicable plug-insert for the country
2.
Back translation: Push and move the plug interface completely into a universal
adapter.
Analysis:
Since information in the technical texts needs to be delivered to the audience
from an easily understandable and acceptable way, communicative translation
is more appropriate compared to semantic translation. The above instruction
could not be semantically translated into Chinese since the Chinese expression
way is different from English. Thus, communicative translation helps
restructure the original sentences in the source texts to allow them to conform
to the register of Chinese, which aims to help Chinese readers to comprehend
the instruction. As stated by Newmark (1988a:43), communicative translation
is concerned manly with the receptors, usually in the context of language and
cultural variety. Therefore, communicative translation is more appropriate for
informative texts than semantic translation.

Example 2 is an advertisement extracted from Time Magazine (October 2006,
No.128, which was published in a bilingual version in Taiwan). It aims to demonstrate
the implementation of communicative translation in vocative texts.

Example 2: Packing Order <1>
A beautiful piece of vintage luggage might seem like an ideal travel
companion. Stylish, graceful and conjuring up a more refined era of globe-
trotting, a 1920s leather case is guaranteed to turn heads at the airport.
Unfortunately, though, these glamorous artefacts werent designed for the
trials of modern travel. But it is possible to indulge in nostalgia without your
clothes ending up scattered across the carousel. In October, the British
company Uppercase will launch a new line of band-stitched leather cases
inspired by the elegant designs of the 1920s, but with the sturdiness of modern
luggage. The range is available in a variety of colors, from traditional beige or
black to ultramodern neon pink. This is some emotional baggage <2>youll
want to keep
Chinese translation:
<1>

1920

Uppercase
1920

303

<2>

Analysis: <1>
Back translation: Perfect packing
Interpretation:
Compared with the original title, packing order, the Chinese title, perfect
packing () has been totally changed based on the communicative
translation method. To attract the readers, the original structure of the source
texts has been broken down and the adjective perfect has been added to
correct (amend) the original written passages. If this title is translated
semantically, it becomes pack in order , which will cause Chinese
readers confusion and misunderstanding of this advertisement. Therefore,
communicative translation is more appropriate for vocative texts than
semantic translation.

Analysis: <2>
Back translation: Mental burden
Interpretation:
This is a metaphor, which not only means material baggage but also presents a
meaning of desired burden in peoples mind. The translator uses bricks to
emphasize its double-entendre. If using the semantic translation method, this
term can be translated as emotional bag, which sounds clumsy in
Chinese and loses the implied attraction to the readers. To achieve a certain
effect on its readers minds (Newmark, 1988a: 42), communicative translation
is more appropriate here rather than semantic translation.

5. Discussion & Conclusion
In translation processes, there are normally two attitudes that the translators can
adopt: one is to make the translated text and style comply with the writers, and the
other one is to translate the texts according to the target language. Built upon these
two attitudes, Newmarks semantic translation and communicative translation provide
systemic theoretical frameworks for literal translation and free translation. The main
difference between semantic translation and communicative translation is that the
former respects source text above all and the latter considers primarily the readers.

It is clear that semantic translation theory, in general, is suitable for expressive
texts, while communicative translation theory for informative and vocative texts.
However, these two theories sometimes coincide in some cases. For expressive texts,
sometimes detailed explanations based on communicative translation are required to
deal with obscurities. On the other hand, for informative and vocative texts, precise
description based on semantic translation is also often needed to deliver the essential

304
information. In translation processes, therefore, these two theories cannot be applied
separately. Based on specific requirements in various cases (source/target texts),
semantic translation and communicative translation need to be analysed holistically
and be applied from an integrated perspective to achieve a better outcome.

Nowadays, translators are usually asked to be faithful to the source texts in the
literature translation domain. However, Newmarks theory is based on the translation
of French, German, and English. Since the grammatical structure, writing habit, and
the way of thinking in Chinese are different to the European language systems, it
sometimes requires multi-level manipulation when making translation between
Chinese and English. Therefore, further research work is expected to be carried out to
discuss the appropriateness of implementing Newmarks two translation methods in
the translation processes between Chinese and English.
Words count: 4911

305
References
References in English:
Almoner. (1989). The Oxford English dictionary. (p. 353). Oxford: Oxford University
Press.
Chan, L. T. H. (2004). Twentieth-century Chinese translation theory: Modes, issues
and debates. Amsterdam/Philiadelphia: J ohn Benjamins.
Munday, J . (2001). Introducing translation studies. London: Routledge.
Newmark, P. (1988a). A textbook of translation. New York: Prentice Hall,
International (UK) Ltd.
Newmark, P. (1988b). Approaches to translation. Oxford and New York: Pergamon.
Nida, E. (1964). Toward a science of translating. Leiden: E. J . Brill.
Perquisitor. (1989). The Oxford English dictionary. (p. 590). Oxford: Oxford
University Press.
Waley, A. (1999). Laozi, library of Chinese classics. (A. Waley, Trans.) Hunan: Hunan
Peoples Publishing House.

References in Chinese:
Chan, D. A. (2002). (The principles of translation). Taipei: Taiwan
Commercial Press.
Chen, Y. P., (2005).
(A comparative study of Yan Fu and Newmarks
translation theories from the perspective of modes of thinking). Journal of
Shijiazhuang Teachers College, 7(5), 89-92.
Gan, H. Y. (2005). (On under
translation & over translation and the shunning strategy). Journal of Huaihua
University, 24(4), 139-141.
Hsu, J . (2001). (Culture loaded word-
obstacles and the solutions of information exchanges during the translation
progress). Journal of PLA University of Foreign Language, 24(2), 77-81.
Lui, G. L. (2004). (On
translation of Chinese ancient poetry through Newmark's semantic
translation and communicative translation Journal of Shijiazhuang
Teachers College, 6(4), 55-59.
Song, M. & Lin, M. (2006). (On the adaptability of
cultural context in English translation of Tang poems). Yinshan Academic
Journal, 19(1), 41-45.

306
SS AA 101-9 Manual of universal adaptor. (2005).
Zhou, Z. X. (2003). (Translation in practice). Taipei: Taiwan Commercial
Press.