论文部分内容阅读
（Zhejiang University of Finance & Economics 310018， China）
【Abstract】： Based on existing translation of station names provided by Hangzhou Metro Group as well as examples of Metro translation in other five cities， including Beijing， Tianjin， Shenzhen， Guangzhou and Hong Kong， this paper analyzes common errors exist in translation of station names and puts forward seven general rules for metro sign translation. These rules are listed with an aim to provide some criteria for the present choice of translation and make every translation reasonable in theory. Besides， as similar errors also exist in other cities’ metro stations as well as public transport systems，this paper may well function as a reference for future translation in this field.
【Keywords】： public sign translation， Hangzhou metro， translation mistakes， translation rules
1 Introduction
As an international tourist attraction， Hangzhou has witnessed an immense increase in the number of foreign tourists in the past decade. To keep up with this trend， more and more bilingual， and even trilingual public signs have been put up in public places in every corner of Hangzhou， so as to bring convenience to foreign visitors in the first place. First launched in 2012， The Hangzhou Metro has made Hangzhou the 17th city in China to enjoy a rapid transit system. Yet， problems and inconveniences brought by Hangzhou Metro’s station translation have spark off a heated debate among general public. Under this circumstance， this paper aims to analyze errors involved in the existing translation of Hangzhou Metro’s station names and to suggest several general rules for metro sign translation. As similar errors also exist in other cities’ metro stations， this paper may as well provide some references for future translation.
2 Features and Limitations of Previous Researches
Since the beginning of the new century， the domestic academic circle has given much attention to the study of public signs and so far， much advancement has been made. As articles could be put into two categories， namely case study and survey study， most scholars， in terms of this subject， conduct their study in the form of case study and strive to propose possible solutions to solve related problems. Li Kexing[1]studies the signs in Shenzhen and pointed out several severe problems that exists. He stresses that such problems may not only bring harm to the city’s reputation but also ruin the image of China and the Chinese nation. Wan Zhengfang， Shan Yi， Chen Ting， Xie Zehang and Shen Yuehong[2]make an investigation on the translation of place names such as those of shops and government units in some famous streets in Shanghai and identify typical problems in translation and suggest several solutions. Wang Yinquan and Chen Xinren[3]visit some of the most renowned scenic spot as well as subway stations in Nanjing and conduct their research on this case example. When London succeeded in bidding for Olympics， Dai Zongxian and Lv Hefa[4]take a close look at the function features as well as the most prominent stylistic characteristics of public signs there and point out that back translation is the best approach to adopt in C-E translation of signs in public places. According to Luo Xuanmin and Li Tuwang [5]， the inadequate translation of public signs in Beijing remains a huge problem. They collect and classify representative cases of mistaken translation in public signs and offer a detailed account of characteristics， function and stylistic conventions for this special genre of translation. Besides， the C-E Signs Research Center of Beijing International Studies University [6]carried out a research project. The research project is conducted to find out how foreign residents and visitors feel about C-E translation of signs in China， to compare the Chinese approach to sign translation with those adopted by other countries， to identify functional and grammatical deficiencies in English versions of signs in China and to otherwise reflect on general issues in this area of concern. Collaboration between Chinese translators and native English speakers in China is recommended as the most effective and the most intercultural sensitive model in the translation of signs. While the study of public signs in China is making headways， Liu Jinlong and Ye Hongwei[7]proposed three harsh problems in the study of applied translation --- the lack of systematic theory， the lack of systematic methodology and the overlapped research content based on some monotonous research methods. These are also problems that exist in the study of sign translation. Qualitative and quantitative researches in the past decade suggest the fundamental significance of introducing translation systems from countries as well as regions with established regulations.
Furthermore， in terms of Hangzhou Metro， as there are now only three Metro lines in Hangzhou and all of which are set up within five years， the samples are not enough to conduct similar research and such research are hardly conducted by now. Hence， this paper selects the existing translation of station names provided by Hangzhou Metro Group as the object of study and hopes to enrich the study on place name translation in this field.
3 An Introduction to Terms Concerned
3.1 Transliteration and Liberal Translation
Transliteration（音譯）， also known as Romanization， alphabetization or Pinyin in this paper， is a mapping from one system of writing into another， typically grapheme to grapheme. Transliteration attempts to be lossless， so that an informed reader should be able to reconstruct the original spelling of unknown transliterated words. To achieve this objective transliteration may define complex conventions for dealing with letters in a source script which do not correspond with letters in a goal script. In 1967， the United Nations Conference on the Standardization of Geographical Names[8]confirmed that national standardization is the proper basis for international standardization and urged every country in the world to adopt Romanization from other writing systems for application in the UN Roman-alphabet languages （English， French， and Spanish）. According to its resolution， place names should be translated according to the “one and only” rule， namely single Romanization. For instance， “白云大道” in Guangzhou should be transliterated into “Baiyun Dadao” rather than “Baiyun Avenue”. The latter translation is considered inappropriate because it adopts more than one kinds of method， which is against the rule of single Romanization. Likewise， the translation “White Cloud Avenue” is as well not acceptable.
Liberal translation（意譯）， also known as adaptation or free translation in this paper is a procedure whereby the translator replaces a term with cultural connotations， where those connotations are restricted to readers of the original language text， with a term with corresponding cultural connotations that would be familiar to readers of the translated text. Liberal translation， in terms of public signs translation， is antithetical to the method of transliteration. It gives up the sound in exchange for meaning and spirit of the original sign language. Still taking “白云大道” for example， the term should be translated into “White Cloud Avenue” using liberal translation. In this sense， albeit losing the sound， the term clearly conveys the corresponding cultural connotation that is easily intelligible to local residents. 3.2 Specific Names and Common Names
Specific names（专名） refer to nouns that distinguish one entity from another. Specific names are often meaningless in themselves. In other words， if one replaces a specific name “A” with “B”， the name still makes sense all the same.
Common names（通名） are antithetical to specific names in terms of public sign translation as well as place names translation. Common names refer to nouns that distinguish one class of entity from another， which convey certain kinds of meanings. If one replaces a common name “A” with “B”， the meaning that “B” conveys is rather different. Names of functional facilities， as is recognized by the general public， is the most ordinary kind of common names. More examples and explanations will be given further account in the fourth section of this thesis.
4 An Analysis of Hangzhou Metro’s Station Translation
4.1 Problems Appeared in Hangzhou Metro’s Station Translation
After analyzing all 59 existing translations of Hangzhou Metro’s station names， three major problems are discovered.
First， over-alphabetization. In December 1978， the State Council made a decision that the alphabetization of Chinese names of places and persons according to phonetics should be applied to all languages using Roman alphabet， including English， French， German， Spanish and Esperanto， beginning from January 1979. The policy stipulates the entire nation to translate Chinese place names through alphabetization. Among 59 stations being used at present， over 49% of Hangzhou Metro stations are translated through sole alphabetization.
Second， inconsistency in strategic adoption. For instance， the term “站” is translated differently as in “城戰” and “东站”. Both “zhan”s， in the Chinese language， signify the meaning of “railway station”. In the station translation provided by Hangzhou Metro Group， the first “zhan” is translated through alphabetization as in “Chengzhan”. To an outland viewer， the meaning of the term might be ambiguous， whereas its pronunciation in the Chinese language is clearly stated. Meanwhile， the second “zhan” is translated by its meaning as in “East Railway Station” --- while the sound is missed， it conveys the meaning explicitly. Two different strategies adopted in the above-mentioned example lack a distinct rule and may cause unnecessary confusion to outlanders.
Third， lack of cultural connotation of the target language. The lack of cultural connotation of the target language suggests translator’s failure in conveying the meaning of a place name. In other words， translation of this kind make light of the cultural connotation lying behind the place name， which is practicable but clearly not the best option. For instance， the Chinese place name “湘湖”is translated into “Xianghu”. The cultural connotation of a “lake” is not presented in the translation. For outlanders who know nothing about the Chinese language， they are very much likely to miss the information on “what is Xianghu like as a scenic spot”. Here is another example. The place name “烈士陵園” in Guangzhou is translated into “Martyrs’ Park”. As the park was first established in memory of the historical event --- Guangzhou Uprising in 1927， the writer assumes that “Martyrs’ Memorial Park” illustrate its cultural connotation in a better way. 4.2 Suggested Solutions
The above-mentioned three problems are， in fact， closely related. To be specific， the trend of over-alphabetization necessarily leads to the lack of cultural connotation of the target language. And different attitudes towards the problem of over-alphabetization when translate the name of railway stations result in inconsistency in strategies adoption. Thus， to solve the above-mentioned problems， some general rules are suggested with the hope to be helpful in standardization of place names translation.
4.2.1 Suggested Rules
The first rule， transliteration for specific names（专名音译原则）. Here are two examples of how stations of The Mass Transit Railway of Hong Kong， the model of Hangzhou Metro， are translated under the guidance of this principle. “粉岭”， as a specific term， is translated into “FANLING”， by means of Jyutping （Cantonese Pinyin）. Another specific term “大潭” is in the same manner translated into “TAITAM”.
The second rule， liberal translation for common names（通名意译原则）. For instance， names of functional facilities， as is suggested above， is the most ordinary kind of common names. According to road traffic regulations provided by the Beijing government[9]， functional facilities refer to infrastructure facilities as well as service facilities which provide services so as to meet the needs of the general public in public activities. Based on the second rule， names of functional facilities should be translated into matched English using liberal translation， therefore making the social function of the place known by the public. What’s more， when it comes to a place name with both specific and common terms involved， translator needs to be careful in identifying what kind of the terms are they and actively follow the two above-mentioned principles. In the example of “屯門码头”，the first two Chinese characters “屯” and “门” comprise a specific name in the Chinese language. Therefore， in accordance with the principle， the place name is translated into “TUEN MUN”. Meanwhile， the third and the fourth Chinese characters “码” and “头” comprise a common name and is hence translated into “FERRY PIER” as the principle suggests. As a result， the term “屯門码头” is properly translated into “TUEN MUN FERRYPIER”.
The third rule， functional significance emphasis（突显功能原则）. Additional common name is allowed if a translator wants to stress the functional significance of a place name. For instance， as a specific name， the place name “湘湖” in Hangzhou is translated into “Xianghu” following the above-mentioned first rule. Nevertheless， if the translator wants to stress the functional significance of the place， i.e.， in this case， the role of “湘湖” as a lake as well as a tourist attraction， the term “lake” is allowed to be added into the translation. The fourth rule， implications emphasis（突顯內涵原则）. This rule is， in some way similar to the third rule， but is in fact viewed from a different perspective. The third rule is written from the perspective of the translator --- whether the translator wants to stress the functional significance of a place or not. But on the other hand， the fourth rule is proposed from the perspective of the place name itself --- whether the place name implies anything hidden from the surface. To better illustrate this rule， take a look at the example of “尖东” in Hong Kong. According to the first principle， one may take it for granted as a specific term and translate it into “EASTTSIM”. You can’t blame a translation of this kind. Nonetheless， to be specific， the Chinese character “尖” here stands for the site “尖沙咀”. So it would be more appropriate to translate the place name into “EASTTSIMSHATSUI”. Here is another example of “洪湖里” in Tianjin. The Chinese character “里” here symbolizes a residential community， or， in other words， an “estate”. The usage of the word “estate” makes the English translation more understandable to outlanders and benefits communication.
The fifth rule， translation of terms with more than two sets of Chinese terms（顺序原则）. When a term in the Chinese language involves two or more than two common terms， translate the entire term in sequence. For instance， “皇岗公园六街” in Shenzhen is translated into “Huanggang Park 6th Street. As this example suggests， without using any redundant preposition， long place names should be translated by sense-groups and in sequence， .
The sixth rule， translation of nouns of locality（方位词翻译原则）. In general， when a noun of locality indicates the direction， it should be translated into English， as “下沙西” into “West Xiasha”. Nevertheless， when a noun of locality has become part of the term and no longer symbolizes direction， it should be translated by means of transliteration. For instance， in the case of “深南大道” in Shenzhen， the decision maker ultimately adopted the translation “Shennan Boulevard”. The term “东门” is translated into “Dongmen”.
The seventh rule， complying with the original forms of expression（名从主人原则）. This rule is effective under two conditions. First， Places with existing translation， such as organizations， universities and markets etc. On this occasion， the translator should follow the rules of “complying with the original forms of expression” in translation and adopt these translations. Second， Famous streets and cultural relics with existing translation， the translator should follow the rule of “complying with the conventional forms of expression” and adopt these translations. 4.2.2 Suggested Translations
Using these seven general principles， this section will give an account of some cases in the translation of Hangzhou Metro Station and figure out whether the present translations are reasonable or not according to these rules. The following is a graph of six groups of existing station names translation provided by Hangzhou Metro Group：
In the case of “打鐵關” and “闸弄口”， the Chinese characters “关” and “口” do not convey the common meaning of “pass” or “port”. Hence these two terms should be categorized as specific names. According to the first rule， specific names and terms should adopt the method of transliteration. So these two terms are appropriately translated into “Datieguan” and “Zhalongkou”.
In the case of “客运中心”， the Chinese place name stands for public transportation passenger station which provides ready access and sever as a common name. According to the second rule， the place name is translated into “Coach Center”，which allows the traffic function of the place known by the public.
In the case of Group 3， the term “站” is translated differently as in “城战” and “东站” in the present translation. Both “zhan”s， in the Chinese language， signify the meaning of “railway station”. While being explicitly conveyed in the translation “East Railway Station”， this meaning is missed in “Chengzhan”. Hangzhou railway station was first nicknamed “城站” by local residents in the year 1910. The station was nicknamed because it was relocated from suburb to downtown. However， albeit being highly recognized by locals， the translation “Chengzhan” seems to cause confusions and troubles to outside visitors. For a outland visitor at first sight， they can hardly relate the place name “Chengzhan” with a railway station. According to the third rule， additional common name is allowed if a translator wants to stress the functional significance of a place. As a transportation center， railway station is of huge significance on an everyday level. And it is fairly imperative to convey the functional significance of “城站” and translate the term into “Hangzhou Railway Station”.
In the case of “湘湖”， the place name is translated into “Xianghu” in the present translation. According to the first rule， translation of this kind is fairly reasonable for “Xianghu” is a specific name. Nonetheless， Xianghu is renowned for its beautiful scenery and is honored as the “sister lake” of West Lake. So if the translator wants to stress the functional significance of the place， i.e.， in this case， the role of “湘湖” as a lake as well as a tourist attraction， the term “lake” is allowed to be added into the translation， additional common name is allowed. Two cases in Group 4 aptly illustrate the sixth rule. In general， when a noun of locality indicates the direction， it should be translated into English， as “下沙西”into “West Xiasha”. Nevertheless， when a noun of locality has become part of the term and no longer symbolizes direction， it should be translated be means of transliteration. For instance， in the case of “西興” on Line 1 of Hangzhou Metro， the place name is translated into “Xixing”for the Chinese character “西” does not indicate direction.
In the case of “中医药大学站”， four different kinds of translation were put forward one after another. Earlier this year， before Metro Line 2 was to be put into use， the Hangzhou Metro Group put up a draft of station translation for publicity and extended their welcome for feedback as well as revise advice from the public. Some local residents propose to translate the station name “中醫药大学站” into “Chinese Medicine University”， “TCM University” or “Traditional Chinese Medical University”. Nevertheless， the decision maker eventually sticks to the original version “Chinese Medical University” as the translation has long been used by the university itself and should be respected. The process of final adoption follows the seventh rule， i.e.， complying with the original forms of expression.
5 Conclusion
Throughout the history of translation， opinions have always been varied towards which is the best way to translate public signs. Some insists on using the method of transliteration as the State Council and the United Nation’s documents stipulated. While others propose the method of liberal translation， for they consider this trend as a must in the process of globalization and internationalization.
From the perspective of the nation and law， the first opinion sounds more plausible for it is backed by related legal documents and has been carried out for years. However， to outlanders who know completely nothing about the Chinese language， the sole adoption of transliteration may cause troubles in understanding and sometimes ruin an opportunity to share the cultural connotations behind the place names. For instance， the translation “Xihu” for West Lake may means nothing to a foreign tourist if he or she come to Hangzhou for the first time. On the other hand， the sole adoption of free translation may as well bring troubles to foreign visitors， for such translation might not be well-understood by every local resident， especially the elders. In this sense， when a foreign tourist wants to ask about the way， this kind of translation may multiply the difficulties and pose barriers for both sides to understand each other， which without doubt causing an adverse impact against what the public sign should be like. In this thesis， seven general rules concerning the translation of place names are listed. These rules are listed to provide some criteria to the present choice of translation as well as function as a reference for future translation and allow room for possible perfection.
With more and more metro lines as well as public transportation routes established in Hangzhou， certain regulations are badly needed to standardize translations and make them reasonable. Whenever a new place name comes around， it is of great significance for translators to refer to general rules concerned as well as other recognized translation and then put forward the most appropriate translation. As for translations that already exist in the public transit system， it is related institutions’ bound duty to recheck according to certain standards and avoid unnecessary confusions and troubles.
Furthermore， if possible， as to some of the few translations that frequently causing confusion as well as inconvenience， translators can list more than one optional translation for foreigners. For instance， “杭州體育場” can be marked with two kinds of translation， i.e.， “Hangzhou Stadium” as a major translation the general rule suggests and “Hangzhou Ti Yu Chang” as a handy translation for foreign tourists to ask about the way.
To sum up， the ultimate purpose of translation is to realize communication， and in this sense， whatever kind of translation is chosen， it should perform this function to the fullest. And as the core thought of this thesis， the seven suggested rules listed aim to achieve this purpose and bring convenience and comfort to those who come across the translation and enable them to receive help from it.
References：
[1]李克兴. 试析深圳的英语弊病及翻译谬误[J].上海科技翻译，2000（1）：35-44.
[2]万正方，单谊，陈婷，谢泽畅，沈月红.必须重视城市街道商店和单位名称的翻译——对上海部分著名路段、商店和单位牌名等翻译错误的调查[J].中国翻译，2004（2）：72-77.
[3]王银泉，陈新仁.城市标识用语英译失误及其实例剖析[J].中国翻译，2004（2）：81-82.
[4]戴宗显，吕和发.公示语汉英翻译研究——以2012年奥运会主办城市伦敦为例[J].中国翻译，2005（6）：38-42.
[5]罗选民，黎土旺.关于公示语翻译的几点思考[J].中国翻译，2006（4）：66-69.
[6]北京第二外国语学院公示语翻译研究中心.全国公示语翻译现状的调查与分析[J].中国翻译，2007（5）：62-67.
[7]刘金龙，叶红卫.公示语翻译：回顾、现状与展望——“第二届全国公示语翻译研讨会”综述[J].上海工程技术大学教育研究，2007（4）：63-65.
[8]Helen Kerfoot. Role of the United Nations in the standardization of geographical names， 1970，
http：//unstats.un.org/UNSD/geoinfo/UNGEGN/docs/_data_ICAcourses/_HtmlModules/_Documents/D12/Documents/%20D12-03_Kerfoot （accessed： 05/04/2015）.
[9]北京市人民政府外事办公室，北京市标准化协会，中国对外翻译出版公司.北京市公共场所双语标识英文译法通则.北京市人民政府外事办公室，2006：1.
【Abstract】： Based on existing translation of station names provided by Hangzhou Metro Group as well as examples of Metro translation in other five cities， including Beijing， Tianjin， Shenzhen， Guangzhou and Hong Kong， this paper analyzes common errors exist in translation of station names and puts forward seven general rules for metro sign translation. These rules are listed with an aim to provide some criteria for the present choice of translation and make every translation reasonable in theory. Besides， as similar errors also exist in other cities’ metro stations as well as public transport systems，this paper may well function as a reference for future translation in this field.
【Keywords】： public sign translation， Hangzhou metro， translation mistakes， translation rules
1 Introduction
As an international tourist attraction， Hangzhou has witnessed an immense increase in the number of foreign tourists in the past decade. To keep up with this trend， more and more bilingual， and even trilingual public signs have been put up in public places in every corner of Hangzhou， so as to bring convenience to foreign visitors in the first place. First launched in 2012， The Hangzhou Metro has made Hangzhou the 17th city in China to enjoy a rapid transit system. Yet， problems and inconveniences brought by Hangzhou Metro’s station translation have spark off a heated debate among general public. Under this circumstance， this paper aims to analyze errors involved in the existing translation of Hangzhou Metro’s station names and to suggest several general rules for metro sign translation. As similar errors also exist in other cities’ metro stations， this paper may as well provide some references for future translation.
2 Features and Limitations of Previous Researches
Since the beginning of the new century， the domestic academic circle has given much attention to the study of public signs and so far， much advancement has been made. As articles could be put into two categories， namely case study and survey study， most scholars， in terms of this subject， conduct their study in the form of case study and strive to propose possible solutions to solve related problems. Li Kexing[1]studies the signs in Shenzhen and pointed out several severe problems that exists. He stresses that such problems may not only bring harm to the city’s reputation but also ruin the image of China and the Chinese nation. Wan Zhengfang， Shan Yi， Chen Ting， Xie Zehang and Shen Yuehong[2]make an investigation on the translation of place names such as those of shops and government units in some famous streets in Shanghai and identify typical problems in translation and suggest several solutions. Wang Yinquan and Chen Xinren[3]visit some of the most renowned scenic spot as well as subway stations in Nanjing and conduct their research on this case example. When London succeeded in bidding for Olympics， Dai Zongxian and Lv Hefa[4]take a close look at the function features as well as the most prominent stylistic characteristics of public signs there and point out that back translation is the best approach to adopt in C-E translation of signs in public places. According to Luo Xuanmin and Li Tuwang [5]， the inadequate translation of public signs in Beijing remains a huge problem. They collect and classify representative cases of mistaken translation in public signs and offer a detailed account of characteristics， function and stylistic conventions for this special genre of translation. Besides， the C-E Signs Research Center of Beijing International Studies University [6]carried out a research project. The research project is conducted to find out how foreign residents and visitors feel about C-E translation of signs in China， to compare the Chinese approach to sign translation with those adopted by other countries， to identify functional and grammatical deficiencies in English versions of signs in China and to otherwise reflect on general issues in this area of concern. Collaboration between Chinese translators and native English speakers in China is recommended as the most effective and the most intercultural sensitive model in the translation of signs. While the study of public signs in China is making headways， Liu Jinlong and Ye Hongwei[7]proposed three harsh problems in the study of applied translation --- the lack of systematic theory， the lack of systematic methodology and the overlapped research content based on some monotonous research methods. These are also problems that exist in the study of sign translation. Qualitative and quantitative researches in the past decade suggest the fundamental significance of introducing translation systems from countries as well as regions with established regulations.
Furthermore， in terms of Hangzhou Metro， as there are now only three Metro lines in Hangzhou and all of which are set up within five years， the samples are not enough to conduct similar research and such research are hardly conducted by now. Hence， this paper selects the existing translation of station names provided by Hangzhou Metro Group as the object of study and hopes to enrich the study on place name translation in this field.
3 An Introduction to Terms Concerned
3.1 Transliteration and Liberal Translation
Transliteration（音譯）， also known as Romanization， alphabetization or Pinyin in this paper， is a mapping from one system of writing into another， typically grapheme to grapheme. Transliteration attempts to be lossless， so that an informed reader should be able to reconstruct the original spelling of unknown transliterated words. To achieve this objective transliteration may define complex conventions for dealing with letters in a source script which do not correspond with letters in a goal script. In 1967， the United Nations Conference on the Standardization of Geographical Names[8]confirmed that national standardization is the proper basis for international standardization and urged every country in the world to adopt Romanization from other writing systems for application in the UN Roman-alphabet languages （English， French， and Spanish）. According to its resolution， place names should be translated according to the “one and only” rule， namely single Romanization. For instance， “白云大道” in Guangzhou should be transliterated into “Baiyun Dadao” rather than “Baiyun Avenue”. The latter translation is considered inappropriate because it adopts more than one kinds of method， which is against the rule of single Romanization. Likewise， the translation “White Cloud Avenue” is as well not acceptable.
Liberal translation（意譯）， also known as adaptation or free translation in this paper is a procedure whereby the translator replaces a term with cultural connotations， where those connotations are restricted to readers of the original language text， with a term with corresponding cultural connotations that would be familiar to readers of the translated text. Liberal translation， in terms of public signs translation， is antithetical to the method of transliteration. It gives up the sound in exchange for meaning and spirit of the original sign language. Still taking “白云大道” for example， the term should be translated into “White Cloud Avenue” using liberal translation. In this sense， albeit losing the sound， the term clearly conveys the corresponding cultural connotation that is easily intelligible to local residents. 3.2 Specific Names and Common Names
Specific names（专名） refer to nouns that distinguish one entity from another. Specific names are often meaningless in themselves. In other words， if one replaces a specific name “A” with “B”， the name still makes sense all the same.
Common names（通名） are antithetical to specific names in terms of public sign translation as well as place names translation. Common names refer to nouns that distinguish one class of entity from another， which convey certain kinds of meanings. If one replaces a common name “A” with “B”， the meaning that “B” conveys is rather different. Names of functional facilities， as is recognized by the general public， is the most ordinary kind of common names. More examples and explanations will be given further account in the fourth section of this thesis.
4 An Analysis of Hangzhou Metro’s Station Translation
4.1 Problems Appeared in Hangzhou Metro’s Station Translation
After analyzing all 59 existing translations of Hangzhou Metro’s station names， three major problems are discovered.
First， over-alphabetization. In December 1978， the State Council made a decision that the alphabetization of Chinese names of places and persons according to phonetics should be applied to all languages using Roman alphabet， including English， French， German， Spanish and Esperanto， beginning from January 1979. The policy stipulates the entire nation to translate Chinese place names through alphabetization. Among 59 stations being used at present， over 49% of Hangzhou Metro stations are translated through sole alphabetization.
Second， inconsistency in strategic adoption. For instance， the term “站” is translated differently as in “城戰” and “东站”. Both “zhan”s， in the Chinese language， signify the meaning of “railway station”. In the station translation provided by Hangzhou Metro Group， the first “zhan” is translated through alphabetization as in “Chengzhan”. To an outland viewer， the meaning of the term might be ambiguous， whereas its pronunciation in the Chinese language is clearly stated. Meanwhile， the second “zhan” is translated by its meaning as in “East Railway Station” --- while the sound is missed， it conveys the meaning explicitly. Two different strategies adopted in the above-mentioned example lack a distinct rule and may cause unnecessary confusion to outlanders.
Third， lack of cultural connotation of the target language. The lack of cultural connotation of the target language suggests translator’s failure in conveying the meaning of a place name. In other words， translation of this kind make light of the cultural connotation lying behind the place name， which is practicable but clearly not the best option. For instance， the Chinese place name “湘湖”is translated into “Xianghu”. The cultural connotation of a “lake” is not presented in the translation. For outlanders who know nothing about the Chinese language， they are very much likely to miss the information on “what is Xianghu like as a scenic spot”. Here is another example. The place name “烈士陵園” in Guangzhou is translated into “Martyrs’ Park”. As the park was first established in memory of the historical event --- Guangzhou Uprising in 1927， the writer assumes that “Martyrs’ Memorial Park” illustrate its cultural connotation in a better way. 4.2 Suggested Solutions
The above-mentioned three problems are， in fact， closely related. To be specific， the trend of over-alphabetization necessarily leads to the lack of cultural connotation of the target language. And different attitudes towards the problem of over-alphabetization when translate the name of railway stations result in inconsistency in strategies adoption. Thus， to solve the above-mentioned problems， some general rules are suggested with the hope to be helpful in standardization of place names translation.
4.2.1 Suggested Rules
The first rule， transliteration for specific names（专名音译原则）. Here are two examples of how stations of The Mass Transit Railway of Hong Kong， the model of Hangzhou Metro， are translated under the guidance of this principle. “粉岭”， as a specific term， is translated into “FANLING”， by means of Jyutping （Cantonese Pinyin）. Another specific term “大潭” is in the same manner translated into “TAITAM”.
The second rule， liberal translation for common names（通名意译原则）. For instance， names of functional facilities， as is suggested above， is the most ordinary kind of common names. According to road traffic regulations provided by the Beijing government[9]， functional facilities refer to infrastructure facilities as well as service facilities which provide services so as to meet the needs of the general public in public activities. Based on the second rule， names of functional facilities should be translated into matched English using liberal translation， therefore making the social function of the place known by the public. What’s more， when it comes to a place name with both specific and common terms involved， translator needs to be careful in identifying what kind of the terms are they and actively follow the two above-mentioned principles. In the example of “屯門码头”，the first two Chinese characters “屯” and “门” comprise a specific name in the Chinese language. Therefore， in accordance with the principle， the place name is translated into “TUEN MUN”. Meanwhile， the third and the fourth Chinese characters “码” and “头” comprise a common name and is hence translated into “FERRY PIER” as the principle suggests. As a result， the term “屯門码头” is properly translated into “TUEN MUN FERRYPIER”.
The third rule， functional significance emphasis（突显功能原则）. Additional common name is allowed if a translator wants to stress the functional significance of a place name. For instance， as a specific name， the place name “湘湖” in Hangzhou is translated into “Xianghu” following the above-mentioned first rule. Nevertheless， if the translator wants to stress the functional significance of the place， i.e.， in this case， the role of “湘湖” as a lake as well as a tourist attraction， the term “lake” is allowed to be added into the translation. The fourth rule， implications emphasis（突顯內涵原则）. This rule is， in some way similar to the third rule， but is in fact viewed from a different perspective. The third rule is written from the perspective of the translator --- whether the translator wants to stress the functional significance of a place or not. But on the other hand， the fourth rule is proposed from the perspective of the place name itself --- whether the place name implies anything hidden from the surface. To better illustrate this rule， take a look at the example of “尖东” in Hong Kong. According to the first principle， one may take it for granted as a specific term and translate it into “EASTTSIM”. You can’t blame a translation of this kind. Nonetheless， to be specific， the Chinese character “尖” here stands for the site “尖沙咀”. So it would be more appropriate to translate the place name into “EASTTSIMSHATSUI”. Here is another example of “洪湖里” in Tianjin. The Chinese character “里” here symbolizes a residential community， or， in other words， an “estate”. The usage of the word “estate” makes the English translation more understandable to outlanders and benefits communication.
The fifth rule， translation of terms with more than two sets of Chinese terms（顺序原则）. When a term in the Chinese language involves two or more than two common terms， translate the entire term in sequence. For instance， “皇岗公园六街” in Shenzhen is translated into “Huanggang Park 6th Street. As this example suggests， without using any redundant preposition， long place names should be translated by sense-groups and in sequence， .
The sixth rule， translation of nouns of locality（方位词翻译原则）. In general， when a noun of locality indicates the direction， it should be translated into English， as “下沙西” into “West Xiasha”. Nevertheless， when a noun of locality has become part of the term and no longer symbolizes direction， it should be translated by means of transliteration. For instance， in the case of “深南大道” in Shenzhen， the decision maker ultimately adopted the translation “Shennan Boulevard”. The term “东门” is translated into “Dongmen”.
The seventh rule， complying with the original forms of expression（名从主人原则）. This rule is effective under two conditions. First， Places with existing translation， such as organizations， universities and markets etc. On this occasion， the translator should follow the rules of “complying with the original forms of expression” in translation and adopt these translations. Second， Famous streets and cultural relics with existing translation， the translator should follow the rule of “complying with the conventional forms of expression” and adopt these translations. 4.2.2 Suggested Translations
Using these seven general principles， this section will give an account of some cases in the translation of Hangzhou Metro Station and figure out whether the present translations are reasonable or not according to these rules. The following is a graph of six groups of existing station names translation provided by Hangzhou Metro Group：
In the case of “打鐵關” and “闸弄口”， the Chinese characters “关” and “口” do not convey the common meaning of “pass” or “port”. Hence these two terms should be categorized as specific names. According to the first rule， specific names and terms should adopt the method of transliteration. So these two terms are appropriately translated into “Datieguan” and “Zhalongkou”.
In the case of “客运中心”， the Chinese place name stands for public transportation passenger station which provides ready access and sever as a common name. According to the second rule， the place name is translated into “Coach Center”，which allows the traffic function of the place known by the public.
In the case of Group 3， the term “站” is translated differently as in “城战” and “东站” in the present translation. Both “zhan”s， in the Chinese language， signify the meaning of “railway station”. While being explicitly conveyed in the translation “East Railway Station”， this meaning is missed in “Chengzhan”. Hangzhou railway station was first nicknamed “城站” by local residents in the year 1910. The station was nicknamed because it was relocated from suburb to downtown. However， albeit being highly recognized by locals， the translation “Chengzhan” seems to cause confusions and troubles to outside visitors. For a outland visitor at first sight， they can hardly relate the place name “Chengzhan” with a railway station. According to the third rule， additional common name is allowed if a translator wants to stress the functional significance of a place. As a transportation center， railway station is of huge significance on an everyday level. And it is fairly imperative to convey the functional significance of “城站” and translate the term into “Hangzhou Railway Station”.
In the case of “湘湖”， the place name is translated into “Xianghu” in the present translation. According to the first rule， translation of this kind is fairly reasonable for “Xianghu” is a specific name. Nonetheless， Xianghu is renowned for its beautiful scenery and is honored as the “sister lake” of West Lake. So if the translator wants to stress the functional significance of the place， i.e.， in this case， the role of “湘湖” as a lake as well as a tourist attraction， the term “lake” is allowed to be added into the translation， additional common name is allowed. Two cases in Group 4 aptly illustrate the sixth rule. In general， when a noun of locality indicates the direction， it should be translated into English， as “下沙西”into “West Xiasha”. Nevertheless， when a noun of locality has become part of the term and no longer symbolizes direction， it should be translated be means of transliteration. For instance， in the case of “西興” on Line 1 of Hangzhou Metro， the place name is translated into “Xixing”for the Chinese character “西” does not indicate direction.
In the case of “中医药大学站”， four different kinds of translation were put forward one after another. Earlier this year， before Metro Line 2 was to be put into use， the Hangzhou Metro Group put up a draft of station translation for publicity and extended their welcome for feedback as well as revise advice from the public. Some local residents propose to translate the station name “中醫药大学站” into “Chinese Medicine University”， “TCM University” or “Traditional Chinese Medical University”. Nevertheless， the decision maker eventually sticks to the original version “Chinese Medical University” as the translation has long been used by the university itself and should be respected. The process of final adoption follows the seventh rule， i.e.， complying with the original forms of expression.
5 Conclusion
Throughout the history of translation， opinions have always been varied towards which is the best way to translate public signs. Some insists on using the method of transliteration as the State Council and the United Nation’s documents stipulated. While others propose the method of liberal translation， for they consider this trend as a must in the process of globalization and internationalization.
From the perspective of the nation and law， the first opinion sounds more plausible for it is backed by related legal documents and has been carried out for years. However， to outlanders who know completely nothing about the Chinese language， the sole adoption of transliteration may cause troubles in understanding and sometimes ruin an opportunity to share the cultural connotations behind the place names. For instance， the translation “Xihu” for West Lake may means nothing to a foreign tourist if he or she come to Hangzhou for the first time. On the other hand， the sole adoption of free translation may as well bring troubles to foreign visitors， for such translation might not be well-understood by every local resident， especially the elders. In this sense， when a foreign tourist wants to ask about the way， this kind of translation may multiply the difficulties and pose barriers for both sides to understand each other， which without doubt causing an adverse impact against what the public sign should be like. In this thesis， seven general rules concerning the translation of place names are listed. These rules are listed to provide some criteria to the present choice of translation as well as function as a reference for future translation and allow room for possible perfection.
With more and more metro lines as well as public transportation routes established in Hangzhou， certain regulations are badly needed to standardize translations and make them reasonable. Whenever a new place name comes around， it is of great significance for translators to refer to general rules concerned as well as other recognized translation and then put forward the most appropriate translation. As for translations that already exist in the public transit system， it is related institutions’ bound duty to recheck according to certain standards and avoid unnecessary confusions and troubles.
Furthermore， if possible， as to some of the few translations that frequently causing confusion as well as inconvenience， translators can list more than one optional translation for foreigners. For instance， “杭州體育場” can be marked with two kinds of translation， i.e.， “Hangzhou Stadium” as a major translation the general rule suggests and “Hangzhou Ti Yu Chang” as a handy translation for foreign tourists to ask about the way.
To sum up， the ultimate purpose of translation is to realize communication， and in this sense， whatever kind of translation is chosen， it should perform this function to the fullest. And as the core thought of this thesis， the seven suggested rules listed aim to achieve this purpose and bring convenience and comfort to those who come across the translation and enable them to receive help from it.
References：
[1]李克兴. 试析深圳的英语弊病及翻译谬误[J].上海科技翻译，2000（1）：35-44.
[2]万正方，单谊，陈婷，谢泽畅，沈月红.必须重视城市街道商店和单位名称的翻译——对上海部分著名路段、商店和单位牌名等翻译错误的调查[J].中国翻译，2004（2）：72-77.
[3]王银泉，陈新仁.城市标识用语英译失误及其实例剖析[J].中国翻译，2004（2）：81-82.
[4]戴宗显，吕和发.公示语汉英翻译研究——以2012年奥运会主办城市伦敦为例[J].中国翻译，2005（6）：38-42.
[5]罗选民，黎土旺.关于公示语翻译的几点思考[J].中国翻译，2006（4）：66-69.
[6]北京第二外国语学院公示语翻译研究中心.全国公示语翻译现状的调查与分析[J].中国翻译，2007（5）：62-67.
[7]刘金龙，叶红卫.公示语翻译：回顾、现状与展望——“第二届全国公示语翻译研讨会”综述[J].上海工程技术大学教育研究，2007（4）：63-65.
[8]Helen Kerfoot. Role of the United Nations in the standardization of geographical names， 1970，
http：//unstats.un.org/UNSD/geoinfo/UNGEGN/docs/_data_ICAcourses/_HtmlModules/_Documents/D12/Documents/%20D12-03_Kerfoot （accessed： 05/04/2015）.
[9]北京市人民政府外事办公室，北京市标准化协会，中国对外翻译出版公司.北京市公共场所双语标识英文译法通则.北京市人民政府外事办公室，2006：1.