Chapter 2 Theories and Methodologies Applied in the Report
2.1 The Theory of Intertextuality
Originated from a western literary theory, the term “intertextuality” was put forward bythe French scientist and literary critic Julia Kristeva in 1960s. “Intertextuality” includesseveral related concepts, including textual, textuality, intertext and intertextual[5]. Kristevaindicated that any text is constructed of mosaic of quotations, and all texts were the result oftheir transformation and absorption of other texts[6]. According to this theory, only after thecross-reference to its pretexts, can the meaning of a text be rationally generated andcomprehended. Meanwhile, the absorption and transformation between texts are not limitedby time and space. From the perspective of time, texts can inherit from each other. From theperspective of space, texts can transcend cultural barriers. Therefore, intertextuality embodiesthe unity of history and synchrony[7].
2.1.1 Classification of Intertextuality
Genette defined the definition of narrow intertextuality. From his point of view, relationbetween a given text and other texts means intertextuality[8]. The broad Intertextuality wasprovided by Kristeva and Roland Barthes, who held the belief that intertextuality attachedimportance not only to the interplay of form among texts, but also to the influence of culturalelements that exist everywhere.
Some scholars analyze intertextuality from the perspective of texts, as a result theyproposed the definition of diachronical intertextuality and synchronical intertextuality. In theview of diachronical intertextuality, knowledge structure and cultural elements are taken intoconsideration. While in the view of synchronical intertextuality, intertextuality is regarded asthe relation between any relevant elements in the same text. Barthes held the view thatintertextuality was both the development of diachronism and synchronism.
2.2 The Concept of Cultural Back-Translation
With the rise of the American civil rights movement in the 1960s, Chinese Americanliterature made its debut on the history stage and finally won a place in the Americanliterature. Represented by Li Jinyang, Tang Hengheng and Tan EnMei, Chinese-Americanwriters combined traditional Chinese culture with western mainstream culture and presented itto foreign readers in their English works that based on Chinese subjects. These literary worksingeniously show the exotic customs and culture of China, which not only caters to the needsof westerners, but also successfully establishes the image of China. Chinese-American writers,role as cultural transmitters, try their best to introduce Chinese culture to the west, thereforehow to restore their works and achieve cultural return in translation is a valuable topic forresearch. Translating these English-written works into Chinese always involve culturalback-translation, so in this trend of increasingly frequent cultural exchanges, people shouldpay more attention to the study of “cultural back translation”.
In 2013, Liang Zhifang first proposed the concept of cultural back-translation in thestudy of Chinese American literature, and compared it with back-translation. Liang Zhifangbelieves that cultural back-translation aims at translating works which depicting Culture B inLanguage A, into Language B and bringing them back to Culture B[16]. This concept has beenmentioned in other scholars' studies as well, Chen Zhijie and Pan Hualing study the conceptof back translation from a cultural perspective, Wu Yangbo defines it as “cultural restoration”in the study of the translation of Moment in Peking, Wang Hongyin and Jiang Huimin
