【正文】 Lu Xun and Qu Qiubai are worshiped as great revolutionaries and writers, and Zhu Guangqian as an aesthetician and philosopher. In general, their achievements in translation were overshadowed by their other achievements.Looking back at the long history of translation in China before the modern period, we can see that translation was taken as an instrument to help meet the social and political demands of the time. Almost no translators did translation for their own sake, nor could they earn their living by translating alone. So it was practiced in a rather free way and the translator even did not have to be a bilingual practitioner. A good mand of foreign languages was only a desirable virtue for a translator rather than a prerequisite for his/her profession.Throughout the history of China, we find that except in the period of Buddhist translation, there were hardly any fulltime translators. It can be summarized that the marginalization of the translator in Chinese history was the oute of the plex bination of social and cultural influences. In the WestIn the West, the translator has also been marginalized in society, literary and translation traditions. Firstly, the history of Bible translation greatly affected the translator’s status in western culture. Bible translation has flourished through the whole history of western translation. In the early history of western translation, particularly before the Renaissance, theories based on Bible translation were tinted with mystery, which insisted that translation cannot be carried out without divine inspirations. As a result, the translator’s initiative was totally denied and the translator himself was reduced to a recorder of divine edicts. Though more reasonable speculations on the translating of the Bible were presented later, it was still generally accepted before the Renaissance that the best way to convey the word of God was word for word translation. Therefore, it can be concluded that for a long time in the history of Bible translation the translator was regarded as the mouthpiece of God, which then became the historical roots of the low status of the translator in the western culture. Secondly, most of the later translators, particularly literary translators were great writers, ( Hugo and Baudelaire in France, Pope and Fitzgerald in England, Schiller and Goethe in Germany), and the quantity of their translations in general appeared dismal in contrast to those of their literary masterpieces. As for those ordinary translators, most of them were entrusted with translation tasks by their nonexpert patrons who made the decisions about what the target texts should be like. In such cases, the translator did not have the right to choose the source text。 A Passage to IndiaivContentsChapter One Translator’s Status in the History of Translation 3 The Marginal States of the Translator in the History of Translation 3 In China 3 In the West 6 The Consciousness of the Importance of the Translator 7 The Change of Translator’s role in translation 9 The conqueror. 9 The painter 10 The slave 10 The liberator 11 The master 11Chapter Two Translator’s Subjectivity and Its Theory Foundation 13 The Subjectivity of the Translator 13 Theory Foundation of Translator’s Subjectivity 14 Skopos theory 14 Deconstruction theory 17 Hermeneutics theory 19 Aesthetics 22 A Brief Summary on translator’s subjectivity 24Chapter Three Factors Influencing Translator’s Subjectivity 26 The Translator’s Ideology 26 The Translator’s Cultural Standpoint 27 The Translator’s Purpose 28 The Translator’s Aesthetic Taste, Creativity and Experience 29Chapter Four An Introduction to A Passage to India 30 An Introduction to the Author 30 An Introduction to the Novel 31Chapter Five A Comparative Study of the Two Chinese Versions From the Perspective of Translator’s Subjectivity 33 Meaning 33 Meaning 34 Collocative Meaning 36 Connotative Meaning 38 Affective Meaning 39 Grammatical Meaning 40 Style 43 Ideological Style 45 Style on Lexical Level 46 Style on Syntactic Level 48 Discourse 49 Style of Narration 50 Style of Dialogue 51 Culture 53Conclusion 56BIBLIOGRAPHY 58viIntroductionTranslation, as an act of great plexity, involves many factors. It demonstrates fully the plexity, diversity and indeterminacy of humanities. Among the many factors involved in translation, the most direct and crucial ones that influence the process and the end of translation may probably be the translator, the source text, the two languages and cultures concerned in translation and the target readers. In view of traditional translation theory, home and abroad, most of the discussions are mainly around such topics as the roles and characteristics of the translator, the relationship between the source and target text, the expectations of the target readers etc. All these discussions with certain degree of similarity and overlapping aspects touch the nature and criterion of translation and therefore concern the methodology of translation. In terms of research levels of translation, we have philological approach, the linguistic approach, the cultural approach and the philosophical approach with different schools and approaches holding different viewpoints on the nature of translation. Philological approach regards translation as a process of recreation. Linguistic approach generally defines translation as the replacement of one linguistic form of another or the transference of one linguistic form into another. Cultural approach of early stage holds that translation is a decisionmaking activity and later, people advocating this approach argue that translation is rewriting and manipulation. Also, there are expressions of the nature of translation in postcolonial theory and deconstruction theory. Here, this thesis does