...............................
Chapter Two Theoretical Framework
2.1 Ideology
First proposed by the French philosopher Destutt de Tracy as “idelogie” in 1796, the word “ideology” combined “idea” and “logos” together and was yielded as a weapon to criticize religion at that time, and now it has evolved and developed through years. Once mentioned, it seems that ideology has always been linked with politics and power, while actually it is beyond that sphere. Since 1960s, the western translation studies have taken interest in the relation between translation and power (Tymoczko & Gentzler, 2002, p.xii-xiii), thus stimulating the later important works that pushed the field forwards into a new phase, especially those of the Manipulation School. Among those masterpieces, the ones of André Lefevere and Susan Bassnett have led everyone into a wider trajectory: the ideological forces on translation, rather than to linger on the minute level of linguistics.
A number of domestic scholars have also endeavored to expound what exactly is ideology. Wang Dongfeng (2003) refers to Tracy and Merriam-Webster’s Collegiate Dictionary’s definition of ideology and doubts Lefevere’s classification of ideology and poetics, so he later puts forward “an invisible hand” to cover the two. However, it should be put clear that the three concepts Lefevere brought up are inseparable in essence which makes it hard to discuss just one factor at a time. Li Jin (2006) makes a further refinement by taking translators’ individual ideology and the dominating ideology of the society they belong to into account. Kong Zhixiang (2009) elaborats the concrete impacts that ideology exerted on, for instance, the choices of what to translate and how to translate, etc. Yet it should be noticed that the influence of ideology upon literature is not definitive consi
