【正文】 whole western translation circles. Meanwhile, he brought Hermeneutics into a new era, when it evolved into a philosophical translation theory. Some Core Concepts of Modern HermeneuticsAccording to Schleiermacher, as every text contained a unique meaning or the author’s deliberate meaning, the task of the interpreter was to unveil these underlying meaning. He hold that every thought in a text must be connected to its context in the personal life of its author so only by going back to the origin of his idea could the author be understood. He suggested that in order to grasp the exact meaning of a text, the interpreter should try his/her best to be acquainted with a writer even better than the text.Inheriting and developing Schleiermacher’s ideas, Dilthy believed that understanding was possible because of the homogeneity of human nature, the found of objective understanding. So in the process of interpreting, the interpreter should endeavor to experience and understand the original reality that the author represented in the text, hence to reproduce it. He objected the subjective intervention of the interpreter and advocated the objective reconstruction of the primary meaning of a text.Heidegger proposed the celebrated “preunderstanding” that understanding itself was the existing mode of being and the original understanding was a, which constituted the “angle of view” for being’s existence (Heidegger, 1999: 191). Heidegger also brought forward the standard of language and understanding, and emphasized the relation of revealing and protecting functions between language and existence. One of his contributions to Hermeneutics was in his analysis of language beginning with its meaning from an ontological perspective.HansGeorge Gadamer (19002002), based on Heidegger’s theory, proposed a lot of farreaching Hermeneutic concepts, such as “ForeUnderstanding”, reasonable and unreasonable “prejudice”, the most important one “fusion of Horizons” and so on. He listed three properties of interpretation: universality, creativity and historicity. In his representative Truth and Method, he stated that an individual with a prehensive mind always started his understanding with a certain prejudice。 even a historian could not prehend the history by making himself an individual living in the past time。 his present and historical factors would constantly join in the understanding. (Gadamer, 1975: 263). For him, understanding was the interaction between the subject and the object in the exchange of the present and the past, instead of a passive duplication of the text, it was a “productive” effort, which gradually revealed the truth of the text in the cooperation between the subject’s “l(fā)egitimate prejudices” and the object. He confirmed the dynamic role of the interpreter and thought that “as far as understanding was concerned, the meaning of the text was inexhaustible”. In short, for Gadamer, “not occasionally only, but always, the meaning of a text goes beyond its author” (Gadamer, 1975: 263).George Steiner (1975) put forward his famous and historic translation Hermeneutic theory, the Fourfold Hermeneutic Translation Motion Theory, which divided translation process into four steps: trust, aggression, incorporation and pensation. Subjectivity of Translator Definition of Translator’s SubjectivityThere are countless, intangible factors posing translator’s subjectivity, such as his/her cultural background, personality, thinking mode, gender and so on. During the process of translation, the author, the source text, the target readers, different language systems, cultural elements, the writing situation together with many other aspects will all confine translator’s subjectivity. Thus we may define translator’s subjectivity like this: it means translator’s subjective and dynamic activity in translation for the sake of the cultural need of target language, by which the translator will be restricted under the marginal subjectivities, external environment and self horizon. Moreover, it is characterized by autonomy, dynamics, skopos and creativity. (Tu Guoyuan, 2003:9)Generally speaking, translator’s subjectivity is translator’s subjective initiative that he/she manifests in translation to meet the need of the target language and its culture. The performance of translator’s subjectivity is influenced and restricted by the translator’s ability of bilingual application, receiving circumstance and the time background. It consists of many characteristics, such as consciousness, autonomy, purposefulness and creativity, in which we can see the translator’s aesthetic consciousness and aesthetic value orientation. Subjectivity of Translator from Invisibility to VisibilityIn traditional domestic translation theories, the author oriented and the source text oriented view were too popular to share a little attention to the role of the translator. As a result, the translator and the reader became invisible receivers. In the translation process, the writer’s ideas and intentions were put much emphasis on, which can be demonstrated by the numerous praise or criticism of the rule of fidelity to the original work. In China, Zhi Qian (支謙) of the Han Dynasty proposed “ply with its original meaning without embellishment”。 Shi Daoan(釋道安) of the Eastern Jin Dynasty believed “deliver in accordance with the original text”；Yan Fu of the Qing Dynasty put forward the famous translation criterion of “fidelity, expressiveness and elegance” as “信、達(dá)、雅”，which is widely circulated in modern society.Making a general survey of the development of translator’s subjectivity in China, we can conclude that the study in his regard could be generalized into two phases, initial phase and developing phase. The former phase, from 1996 to 2001, is represented by appealing for the status and function of translator through translation process. Early in 1996, Yuan Li (袁莉) was enlightened by the topic of French translation semin