More Logical Thinking for Contemporary Chinese Translation Studies
Minglun Cao
DOI: https://doi.org/10.3969/j.issn.1006-0766.2016.03.007
2016-01-01
Abstract:In some theoretical books and academic articles written by contemporary Chinese translation studies scholars, there are quite a number of logical fallacies, including vague concept, hypotheses contrary to fact, false analogy, overgeneralization, and other illogical, false, erroneous, unreasonable, and defective thinking. Some scholars argue “the meaning of a text is uncertain"; some confound literary work with poem;some believe that self-translation is equal to self-mutilation; and some declare“translation is rewriting". These illogical and influential arguments or statements are liable to mislead young scholars and college students in Translation Studies. This essay analyses and clarifies the four typical fallacies, and points out that: 1 ) “that the meaning of a text is uncertain"is a self-fulfilling falsification; 2 ) “literary work=poem"confounds a genus with a species; 3 ) “self-translation=self-mutilation"is a false analogy; 4 ) and “translation=rewriting" is a pseudo-proposition on account of overgeneralization. Thus it can be seen that contemporary Chinese translation studies need more logical thinking, and that Chinese young scholars and college students should not take all the views from books for granted, but should practice clear, objective and rational thinking ( logical thinking) , weigh and consider those views, and distinguish the true from the false.