4. Results and discussion

1)An overview of the frequency and collocates of donkey(s)

266 hits of donkey and donkeys were found in the English texts of Red Sorghum and The Republic of Wine(see Table 1). The table also presented the word tokens in two Chinese versions. There were 63 hits of donkey(s)in Red Sorghum and 203 in The Republic of Wine while in Chinese versions the numbers were 267 and 325. Both the English texts appeared fewer hits than the original Chinese texts.

Considering some abridgment in Goldbott's translation made little influence on the total numbers, for manual check had ensured those abridgment had no connection with donkey(s), the current study could deduce that Goldblatt made some necessary omissions when translating repeated words or meaningless images, or he might substitute the Chinese character“驴”with other lexicons.

Besides, the 30 top collocates out of the total 303 were listed here (see Table 2), with a standard of frequency-ranking, a five left to five right window span and at least 2 frequencies. Table 3 lists the categories of the collocates, most of which are prepositions, conjunctions, articles and pronouns. Some are surely considered content words exampled by avenue, donkey, pleas ure, etc. while others are either functional words or content words. For instance, like shares multiple categories, being preposition or verb.

It is explicit that 7 function words are in the top 10 collocates. “The” and “a”are articles.“And”is a conjunction. “On”, “in” and “to”are prepositions. The colligation of donkey(s) can be shown as Article + N, Particle + N, and Conjunction + N. The finding implicates that donkey(s)embodies more textual meaning in the English texts, used as a sign to organize or arrange each part of the content and described objectively to some degree.

2)Specific contextual meanings

Since an overview of the collocates in the English material is unavailable to figure out the specific images of “donkey”clearly, the study focuses on the adjectival collocates in Table 3. Collocates such as little, black, pussy, delicious and slaughtered somehow signify the image of “donkey”.

Table 4 investigates all the adjectival collocates of donkey(s)in Red Sorghum and The Re public of Wine. 36 out of 303 collocates of donkey(s)are with the specific meaningful images. Those collocates are classified by different contextual meaning:“description of the appearance”(e.g. little, black); “showing active state”(e.g. running, feisty); “quietness”(e.g. weary, stared and silently); “swearing or disparaging”(e.g. pussy, rotten and damned); “being seen as food”(e.g. delicious, steamed and braised)and “showing the life mode”(e.g. tethered, spattered and huddled). Some descriptions are complimentary such as beautiful and feisty; others are criticizing, like ugly, damned and bastard. The conclusion comes from Table 4 that“donkey”is a gregarious animal, sometimes active or quite. Also, “donkey” was in a low position, being seen as food or something disgusting.

Table 5 concludes the images of “donkey”in the English material.58 concordances of donkey(s)with specific contextual meanings probably help the further probing of the images of “donkey”. For the “negative”images of “donkey”in the English texts,14 concordances shows“miserable”(counting 24.14%),3 concordances show“degrading”(counting 5.17%),5 concordances show“disgusting”(counting 8.62%),3 concordances show“restless”(counting 5.17%),3 concordances show“exhausted”(counting 5.17%), and 4 concordances show“cowardly”(counting 6.90%). For the “positive”images,13 concordances show“meek”(counting 22.41%),8 concordances show“smart”(counting 13.79%),2 concordances show“innocent”(counting 3.45%),1 concordance showes“noble”(counting 1.72%), and 2 concordances show“mysterious”(counting 3.45%). The data is shown in Figure 1.

Goldblatt tends to show the “negative”side (counting 55.18%)of “donkey”rather than the “positive”side(counting 44.82%). For the “negative”side, he mostly depicts a miserable image of “donkey”, while he mostly shows a meek“donkey”in the “positive”side. Accordingly, the research concludes that the image of “donkey”in Goldblatt's translation of Red Sorghum and The Republic of Wine is mainly miserable, meek and smart.

3)The translation strategies for “donkey”

In the bilingual comparative material composed of Red Sorghum(1994)and The Republic of Wine(2012)and the Chinese versions,39 corresponding Chinese and English sentences are helpful to analyse Goldblatt's translation of “donkey”. He exposes the image of “donkey”with omission, induction, literal translation, foreignization and domestication (see Table 6).

Comparing both Chinese and English contents, the current study finds that“donkey”contains more contextual meaning in Mo Yan's novels but more lexical and textual meaning in Goldblatt's translations.

Firstly, “donkey”is not associated with bad or violent person in the English texts. The original Chinese vulgar words are with“donkey”but the English material without, for Goldblatt's translations comply with the western expressions. For example:

1 老子就是这地盘上的王，吃了十年拤饼，还在乎王大爪子那个驴日的！

I'm king here. I ate fistcakes for ten years, and I don't give a damn about that fucking Big Claw Wang! ’

In addition, “donkey”is not so cowardly as it is in the original Chinese texts. Though Sentence 2 perfectly keeps the full original meaning for western readers, it fails to show a very coward donkey, from which the original readers could image and immediately guess how afraid GreatGranddad is. Goldblatt's translation directly shows us a frightful Great-Granddad. He may think the donkey is not as coward as Great-Granddad.

2 外曾祖父背靠小毛驴，对着狗连连做出友好动作。小毛驴在他背后瑟瑟地抖。

Poor Great-Granddad quaked in fright.

Secondly, sometimes Goldblatt translated the original Chinese metaphors objectively and literally. Mo Yan's novels characterized with interesting metaphors, sharp irony, local dialects and a sense of primitive life. When translating figurative sentences, Goldblatt always keeps specific images. He tries to foreignize the original meaning to make the western readers know more about the Chinese images of “donkey”. In Sentence 3, “donkey”is described as a lifeless, exhausted, wild, annoying, mocking and thoughtless animal.

3 驴菜滚滚，涌上桌来，吃得我们肚皮如鼓，饱嗝不断，大家的脸上，都蒙了一层驴油，透过驴油，显出了疲倦之色，仿佛刚从磨道里牵出来的驴子。

A medley of donkey dishes flows onto our table, filling stomachs that are now stretched taut as drums, and drawing rumbling belches out of the diners. Our faces are covered with a film of donkey grease, through which weariness shows, like donkeys worn out from turning a millstone.

Furthermore, the Chinese Sentence 4 obviously shows the intelligence, cuteness and docility of “donkey”. Goldblatt omits the descriptions in his translation.

4 走了一里又一里，白日斜射，青天如涧，曾外祖父被毛驴甩在后面，毛驴认识路径，驮着奶奶，徜徉前行。

The distance between them lengthened, one li at a time, with the sun's rays slanting down, the sky high and clear; the donkey quickly outpaced Great-Granddad.

Nevertheless, he would like to preserve“donkey”when exposing the strong emotions of a character, aiming to impress western readers. In Sentence 5, he translates the Chinese“老混蛋”into“old bastard offspring of a stinking donkey”. The translation, on one hand indicates how angry the character feels, and on another hand western readers are aware of the disgusting image of “donkey”.

5 马队队长说，老混蛋！

“You old bastard offspring of a stinking donkey! ”the cavalry-detachment commander shouted back.

Thirdly, When“donkey”simply indicates a kind of cattle in the Chinese material, Goldblatt is more likely to translate it into“animal”or “mule”. Such translations embody a broadening lexical meaning of “donkey”. Seeing Example 6:

6 外曾祖父抱着一捆干草，一把把地抽着喂驴。

Great-Granddad was feeding straw to the animal.

4)Discussion:criticism of the translation of “donkey”

The traditional view for “donkey”may be humble, degragating, stubborn and dull. However, an investigation of Goldblatt's translation proves that it is not so negative. “Donkey”also embodies good images like“meek”, “smart”, “diligent”, “innocent” and “energetic”.

The criticism of Goldblatt's translations may focus on his deliberate foreignizaiton and domestication, which attributes to different recognition of “donkey”between American and Chinese cultures. Some argued that Goldlatt paid much attention to the original Chinese meaning when translating some metaphors, which in return might mislead western readers. He reserves“donkey”in swearing or to interpret strong negative emotions, while sometimes the Chinese text is not with“donkey”. Nevertheless, factors such as the subjectivity of a translator might take into consideration when reviewing Goldblatt's translation. And we have to admit his great contribution for Chinese literature“walking out”.

Once Goldbatt said in the Writing Life, “I translate, so I am here. When I realized that I serve the readers of two sides with faithfulness, I was in good mood in translating. And I am glad to translate all kinds of Chinese books into readable, accessible and best-sell English versions.”With the passion for Chinese literature, it is believed that his translation takes readers of both cultures into consideration.