A SEMANTIC APPROACH IN TRANSLATING

SINO-VIETNAMESE POEM
Abstract
Vietnam culture has been strongly influenced by China’s a thousand year
of ruling and even after independence. Areas as to the influence of China’s
culture range from belief system, conventional practices, language to the way
our ancestor used to think. Many of those aspects still survive and flourish until
now such as the practice of giving lucky money at the beginning of a New Year,
calligraphy… and especially Sino-Vietnamese (SV) poem.
Basically, Sino-Vietnamese is the reconstruction of the sound categories
of Middle Chinese, meaning that it tries to render the Middle Chinese within the
phonology of Vietnamese to derive consistent pronunciations for the entire
Chinese lexicon (Wikipedia A, n.d). For example, Singapore president “Lee
Kuan Yew” will be transcribed into Sino-Vietnamese as “Lý Quang Diệu”
based on how his Chinese name sounds when reading out loud. Theoretically,
all Chinese words can be transcribed into Sino-Vietnamese despite a few
exception. Overtime some Sino-Vietnamese words have been integrated into
Vietnamese vocabulary and been part of the native language that are
understandable and widely used by almost everyone. Such words are “hắc”,
“bạch”, “mã” which means “black”, “white”, and “horse” respectively.
However, large part of the Sino-Vietnamese vocabulary is still somewhat vague
to Vietnamese native speaker since they are essentially the transcription of
Chinese sound into Vietnamese pronunciation.
Thus, the need for a dictionary and translation when reading Sino-
Vietnamese is real, especially when reading poetry for it contains more than just
mere words but also the cultural values, aesthetic elements and author’s inner
emotion. This paper will then attempt to analyze the translation of Sino-
Vietnamese poem in the light of Newmark’s semantic translation theory. It is
constructed into 3 main parts: chapter 1 is the introduction, briefly introducing
Newmark’s theory of semantic translation, comparison with communicative
translation and word-for-word translation and its characteristics; chapter 2 is the
main body, analyzing the translation of the poem “Cố Hành Cung” (Original
name: 故行宮) by Chinese poet Wang Jian (Vương Kiến); and chapter 3 is the
conclusion.
Keyword: Sino-Vietnamese, semantic translation, Newmark, poem, SL, TL, ST,
TT.
 I. INTRODUCTION
Although Newmark’s semantic and communicative translation theories were
not widely received as Nida’s formal and dynamic equivalence, it did contribute
a lot in the understanding of translation theory in general. His book – A
Textbook of Translation – is currently used when teaching translation theory in
addition with other materials by Jeremy Munday, Catford. According to
Newmark, semantic translation attempts to render, as closely as the semantic
and syntactic structures of the second language allow, the exact contextual
meaning of the original; whereas communicative translation attempts to produce
on its readers an effect as close as possible to that obtained on the readers of the
original (Newmark 1981: 39). In other words, the semantic translation replicates
the original text’s form within the target language, reproduces the original
context and retains the characters of SL culture (Wang Miaomiao, 2014). On the
other hand, the communicative translation tries to adapt the SL culture to the TT
culture, transferring the SL culture as much as possible to the TT culture in
order to make it more acceptable to the TT readership.
Let consider the following example:
“Nhà có chó dữ”
The communicative translation of this phrase will be “Beware of the dog”.
Instead of translating the phrase, we borrow a popular phrase in English to
transfer the connotation meaning of the origin and make it natural in the TL so
that TL reader will be able to easily understand the phrase immediately.
If we really translate it, the TT will be like this:
“There is a fierce dog in the house.”
This way of translation is called word-for-word translation. The phrase is
translated rigidly in accordance with the origin without paying respect to the
context or the connotation that the speaker wants to imply. In short, it only
transfers the denotation of the phrase.
For semantic translation, translator must understand as much as possible
what the speaker really wants to imply or transfer. In this case, the original
phrase is not only meant to stating fact: we have a fierce dog in the house, but to
imply that when walking nearby the house, you should be cautious because of
the fierce dog if you don’t want to get bitten. The original phrase is a warning
and it wants passer-by to infer from the fact of a fierce dog in the house that
they should be careful. It other words, it warns passer-by of the possibility of
being bitten by the dog without explicitly stating it. Thus, when translating this
phrase, the translator must, firstly, take into consideration the speaker’s
intention in order to transfer that intention only without any obvious statement
unlike the communicative translation does. The semantic translation of the
phrase is then:
“Fierce dog in house” or “Fierce dog in house!”
Notice how the translation conforms to the origin not only in terms of word’s
number but also purpose. By omitting “there is a” and article “the” in the word-
for-word version, the translation becomes a statement, not a simple sentence
and hence, has much more emphasis effect on readers, specifically warning
passer-by of the possibility of being bitten. Translator can also add an
exclamation mark at the end of the phrase to enhance the effect on readers.
From the example, the semantic translation strongly adheres to the ST and is
very loyal to the author’s thought process. In order to translate any text, the
translator has to analyze the author’s thought process: what is it that he trying to
convey; what kind of cultural values are implicitly displayed; how does he feel
when constructing the text. Then, the translator must utilize the TL as much as
he could to transfer those original thoughts as they are in the SL, which is an
extremely arduous task as he embarks to unravel all the myths behind language.
And suddenly, he comes across a gap – an equivalent gap in terms of both
meaning and effect that the SL has on the readership that the TL cannot afford
to do in such way. This also leads to over-translation as the translator
misunderstands the author’s purpose or over-analyzes the text.
II. ANALYSIS OF THE POEM
1. The case of Sino-Vietnamese.
First of all, many may argue that the translation of SV poem to Vietnamese
is not a translation since both forms are written in Latin alphabet and
pronounced according to Vietnamese phonology. As a result, the “translation” is
not actually a translation; rather, it is an interpretation of mere difficult words.
It’s reasonable to think in that way since some SV words have been widely
used for so long to the extent that they become an integral part to the
Vietnamese vocabulary. People are constantly exposed to Sino-Vietnamese
words through daily conversation, newspaper, TV… that they take these words
for granted and forget about their origin. That’s why when they come across the
translation of SV poem they think that the SV version is just Vietnamese as well.
Therefore, the translation of SV poem is just a mere interpretation of difficult
and strange words. Besides, SV word is the transcription of Middle Chinese
sound. It is transcribed based on how the Chinese word sounds and then written
down within Vietnamese phonology. Consequently, the meaning of SV word is
the meaning of the Chinese word itself; and the word order when transcribing is
also retained as well.
2. Why Sino-Vietnamese Poem?
The boundary among semantic, communicative, and word-for-word
translation is not clearly defined. For semantic translation is applied, it requires
three conditions: (1) a text that is rich in culture and personal thought and
emotion; (2) translator’s choice of whether translating it as it is or adapting it to
the TL culture; (3) the translatability of the ST. Text such as literature is perfect
for applying this method since they are well-crafted body of words with some
very specific features of personal language usage soaked in author’s deepest
contemplation and contemporary culture values.
Although SV is frequently used in daily conversation, it is mostly found in
poem. Varied in styles and content, SV poem is a collection of essences
accumulated and passed down from older generations to younger one,
representing a segment of history, society, and culture of both China and
Vietnam. It is so because during China’s one thousand years ruling of Vietnam,
many things were introduced into Vietnam including language, belief, politics,
cultural values, and governance system, which were still used by Vietnamese
governance after independence for another one thousand years. Moreover, since
SV is the transcription of Chinese sound, SV poem somehow pertains the
characteristics of the origin in terms of tone, rhythm, rime. SV poem is a class
of its own that requires serious consideration before translating otherwise all of
its particular features, which is what makes them so beautiful, will be lost
during translation.
3. “Cố Hành Cung” by Wang Jian
Let’s have a look at the poem “Cố Hành Cung” by Wang Jian poet. On the left
is the original version and on the right the Sino-Vietnamese version.
Chinese version Sino-Vietnamese version
故行宮 Cố hành cung
Liêu lạc cố hành cung,
寥落故行宮， Cung hoa tịch mịch hồng.
宮花寂寞紅。 Bạch đầu cung nữ tại,
Nhàn toạ thuyết Huyền Tông.
白頭宮女在，
閑坐說玄宗。
 The SV version is the transcription of the Chinese version so that the word order
and pronunciation of the SV version is almost the same as the Chinese one. A
translation of the poem in each method will be given below for comparison and
analysis purpose. The semantic translation will be analyzed in terms of poem
length, metrical pattern, rhyme, and word usage. Firstly, let focus on the length
of the poem.

The original version is a five-character quatrain, meaning that it has four

lines and five characters each. It is a curtailed form or Jueju – a shortened
version of the eight-line version, resulting in a verse form which can be more
challenging in terms of conveying a complete poem or developing a complete
poetic concept (Wikipedia B). Now let consider the translations:
Word-for-word Semantic translation Communicative translation
translation
Hành cung cũ đứng chơ Tàn tạ hành cung cũ, Quạnh hiu thương cảnh hành cung,
vơ nơi hoang vắng, Quạnh hiu mấy đoá hồng. Trước cung hoa thắm mấy bông rầu rầu.
Cung nhân đầu bạc trắng, Trong cung, bà chúa bạc đầu,
Hoa trong cung vẫn nở
Ngồi kể chuyện Huyền Tông. Ngồi rồi, kể chuyện khi hầu Huyền Tông.
trong lặng lẽ.

Người cung nữ ở đó đã Translated by Lê Nguyễn Translated by Ngô Tất Tố

già, tóc đã bạc, Lưu

Bà ngồi an nhàn, kể các

chuyện xưa của vua
Huyền Tông.
The semantic translation clearly conforms to the SV version with five
characters each line and four lines in total while the other two versions are
variations. In the word-for-word version, the translation is very loose without
any specific form of poetic style since it only transfers exactly the meaning of
the word. For the communicative method, the SV version is translated and
adapted to a typical Vietnamese form – a six-eight meter poem consisting of
alternating lines of six and eight characters.

It’s important to note that in poetry, poem length is crucial in

complementing the meaning as it dictates how the poet chooses words due to
limited word number, how syllables combine to create a distinct feeling that is
partially inherent in the form itself. This special feature is hard to replicate in
the TL unless the translation follows the exact form used in the SL which, in
this case, the semantic translation does. If reading out loud the SV and semantic
translation version, the feeling invoked is almost the same. It is almost the same
because the equivalent effect is extremely hard to achieved, not to say
impossible especially when it comes to translating poem belonged to this genre
since they first arose around the 7th century and became popular during the Tang
dynasty. In addition to that, almost no one can relive exactly the experience that
other went through: modern day translator rarely experiences what ancient poet
experienced even if the translator inherits all the cultural values of the era when
the poet lived.

With identical length comes the metrical pattern and rhyme of the poem.
According to the rule, the rhyme will fall at the last word of the second and
fourth line as the poem follows a 2/3 metric foot together with interval caesuras
or stops within the lines. Basically, 2/3 metric foot means that the poem will be
read in group of 2 words following a short break and then group of 3 words. So
in the SV version, the two words that rhyme are “hồng” and “Tông”; and the
poem will be read as follow.

“Liêu lạc / cố hành cung,

Cung hoa / tịch mịch hồng.

Bạch đầu / cung nữ tại,

Nhàn tọa / thuyết Huyền Tông.”

Only in the semantic translation are these features retained almost the
same with a slight variation in metric foot of the last line. The semantic version
also has identical rhyme as the SV version. In fact, the translator uses exactly
the same word to create the rhyme.

Lastly, word usage in the semantic translation is close to the SV version.

One thing to bear in mind when analyzing this aspect is that there is no need to
analyze every single word since some of them are already used widely. In the
first line of the SV version, the word “liêu” means “tịch mịch, vắng vẻ”; “lạc”
means “suy bại, suy đồi”; and “cố” means “cũ”. In the semantic version, the
translator uses “tàn tạ” to replace “liêu lạc”. It is good choice because the
denotation of “tàn tạ” is “suy bại, suy tàn” while its connotation is “vắng vẻ”.
Thus, the word captures both meanings in the SV version. As for the other lines,
the translator carefully chooses words that have closest meanings to the SV
words: “quạnh hiu” for “tịch mịch”, “trắng” for “bạch”, “ngồi” for “tọa”, and
“kể chuyện” for “thuyết”.
 In general, the semantic translation retains almost every aspects of the
SV version from poem length, prosody, to the somewhat particular word usage
of the SV as clearly evident of the translation in which some SV words are kept
as they are. On the other hand, in the communicative translation, word are used
in a way that is familiar to Vietnamese people as clearly evident of the words
“mấy bông” and “rầu rầu” which can be found in Vietnamese proverbs quite
often. Beside from that, the metrical foot and rhythm is far different from the
SV since it follow Vietnamese form of six-eight meter.
III. CONCLUSION
In conclusion, the semantic translation of SV poem seems to be the most
suitable method because it retains almost all the features of the origin. But not
all SV poems can be translated in this method especially poem that has under
four lines such as haiku or tanka. They usually have only three lines with
seventeen syllables as every single word is carefully chosen and highly
symbolic. Nevertheless, the essence of poetry and literature sometimes lies in
the feeling and meaning that the author wants to share which nothing can
obstruct even the language itself. The translation method then, no matter which
one, is a magical tool in itself for it has done a wonderful job in conveying those
feelings of a faraway and ancient people to us.
REFERENCE
1. Wikipedia A. (n.d). Sino-Vietnamese Vocabulary.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sino-Vietnamese_vocabulary
2. Wikipedia B. (n.d). Classical Chinese poetry forms.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Classical_Chinese_poetry_forms#Tone
3. Peter Newmark. (1981). Approaches to translation, pp.39.
4. Wang Miaomiao. (2014). A Study on Semantic and Communicative
Translation of Magical Things in Harry Potter, pp.26.