8/13/2019 p 020100615614679843562

1/5

M.A. Thesis Literary Translation

Chapter 1

An Introduction to the Concept of Intertextuality

1.1 Origins of Intertextuality

With the rapid development of science and technology (especially the

invention and application of the computer), western society stepped into the

postindustrial stage at the end of 1!"#s. The entire western cultures

developed from the classical stage into the modern stage, and then the so$

called %post$modern& stage. 'n the aove acground, the western literarytheory egan to gradually transit from *tructuralism to +ost$*tructuralism.

1"#s saw the transition e-tensively entering the whole areas of the

humanities. As a trend of theoretical thought or a way of thining, +ost$

*tructuralism has so far profoundly influenced and changed the appearance of

the western academy and thought.

'nterte-tuality is the theory of the te-t originating from the western

*tructuralism and +ost$*tructuralism ideological trend. 't holds that symols

in any wors are all related with other symols not appearing in the present

wors, any te-t interweaves with other te-ts, every te-t is the refraction of

other te-ts. 't is the asorption and transformation of other te-ts. They consult

each other and involve each other, forming an opening networ with limitless

potentiality, which forms oth an enormous radiating system of the te-t in the

past, at present and in the future and an evolving process of literary symols.

Literary wors are constructed y codes, forms and systems deposited y

previous wors. The codes, forms and systems of culture as well as of other

art forms function as guidance to the meaning of a literary wor. Te-ts,

whether they are literary or non$literary, are viewed y modern theorists as

lacing in any ind of independent meaning. They are practically what

1

8/13/2019 p 020100615614679843562

2/5

M.A. Thesis Literary Translation

theorists called interte-tual. The act of reading, theorists claim, leads the

readers to e-plore an enormous networ of te-tual relations. To interpret a

te-t, to uest its meaning is to trace those relationships. *o reading ecomes a

process of traveling etween te-ts. Meaning turns out to e something that

e-ists etween a te-t and all the other te-ts to which it refers and relates. Te-t

thus falls into interte-t.

*ince it came into eing, many western literature critics have een

concentrating on it and e-plaining it from different angles, which has enlarged

its connotation greatly. 't has touched many areas of modern western literaturetheory such as *tructuralism, *emiotics, +ost$ *tructuralism and Western

Mar-ism.

When it is involved in two inds of different languages and cultures, this

ind of interte-tual relation is seldom understood y people in other culture

systems due to lac of mutual understanding etween cultural circles and

ecomes ostacles in cross$language communication. The interte-tual

reference is /ust lie the director who not only hides deeply ehind the curtain

of culture ut also manipulates the language signs acting on the stage. 0nly

recogniing the actors and neglecting the director will lead to mistranslation.

2irstly, we will trace ac the history of interte-tuality and give a

relatively rief introduction to the theory. 3enerally speaing, the theory of

interte-tuality can e said to originate from the disciplines of 2erdinand de

*aussure, Mihail 4ahtin and T.*. 5liot. *o we will e-plore its origins

respectively.

1.1.1 Ferdinand de Saussure: Structural-Linguistic Source

Modern literary and cultural theory is universally viewed to stem from

modern linguistics. 'nterte-tuality is without e-ception. As the father of

6

8/13/2019 p 020100615614679843562

3/5

M.A. Thesis Literary Translation

modern linguistics, *aussure emphasies the systematicfeaturesof language.

'n his Course in General Linguistics, *aussure divides the sign into two parts

and puts forward a definition in which a sign is regarded as a two$sided coin

comining asignified(concept) and asignifier (sound$image). The notion of

the linguistic sign emphasies that its meaning is non$referential7 a sign is not

a word#s reference to some o/ect in the world ut the comination,

conveniently sanctioned, etween a signifier and a signified. *igns are

aritrary. They possess meaning not ecause of a referential function ut

ecause of their function within a linguistic system, as it e-istsat any momentof time. 2or *aussure, any piece of language (parole) is produced y

processes of

8

8/13/2019 p 020100615614679843562

4/5

M.A. Thesis Literary Translation

Notes

1. *opos7 %*opos& is a 3ree word for %purpose&. 'n terms of 9ermeer or

his *opostheorie, the word %*opos& is a technical term for the aim or

purpose of a translation.(:hristiane ;ord, 6""176) 2or convenience, this

thesis also follows this pattern.

6. avis, ?athleen. @Signature in Translation#. 'n >ir >elaastita

(ed.)Traductio: Essays on Punning and Translation. ?7 *t. Berome

+ulishing, 1

3entler, 5dwin. Contemporary Translation Theories (Reised Second

Edition!. *hanghai7 *hanghai 2oreign Language 5ducation press,

6""=(6""1)

Cermans, Theo. Translation "et#een Poetics and $deology. Translation andLiterature, 1= (8)7 18D$1=E

. . 6"""

. %the last straw FF& ,

6""6, (6)

E