Such projects as nature and function of translatological dictionary, object and structure of compilation and study of translatological dictionaries, are all in the domain of ontology. “The study of methodology, in the construction of a discipline, is one of the most important issues, second only to that of ontology. The relationship between ontology and methodology can be described as that between ‘essence’ and ‘application’, or ‘orientation’ and ‘route’, with ontology determining orientation and methodology, route.” (Pan Wenguo & Tan Huimin: 256) The study of methodology is not something that may or may not be necessary to the construction of a discipline but something indispensable indeed. It is attempted in this paper to do some research in methodology of translatological dictionary compiling, taking into consideration such problems as the concept and features of methodology, principles of translatological dictionary compiling methodology, and finally presenting a brief view concerning translatological dictionary compiling methodology, in which reiterated first is the philosophical basis, and then the main contradiction in translatological dictionary compiling is exposed before the brief view is given.

Methodology, according to A Concise Dictionary of Social Sciences, refers to “general method employed to know and transform the world, and also to the theory of the method. It was Hegel who for the first time pointed out the special nature of philosophical methodology and distinguished between philosophical methodology and that of specific sciences. Methodology is determined by world outlook, both being agreeable to each other. A certain world outlook will lead to a certain methodology. Dialectical materialism and historical materialism are not only the solely scientific world outlook but also the solely scientific methodology, demanding people to start from reality and deal with problems objectively, historically and comprehensively, to concretely analyse concrete problems, and, on the basis of subjective and objective conditions, to formulate practical plans with a view to transforming the objective world.” (Editorial Board for A Concise Dictionary of Social Sciences:167)

This definition tells us that methodology refers both to general method and to theory of the method. The general method research belongs in the domain of pure theoretical studies while the concrete method research in the domain of applied studies. The philosophical methodology can be universally applied, but that of concrete sciences, for instance, translation methodology, is not and it can be applied only to a concrete sphere. The methodology of concrete sciences should also be philosophically deep, agree with philosophical methodology, and can be universally applied in the concrete domain.

According to some scholars’ research on disciplinary construction methodology has three characteristics: “First, methodology is abstract and general, i.e. philosophical in nature. It functions, in philosophy, in relation to ontology and covers a system of directive principles intended to attain the goal set by ontology. Difference in ontological understanding will certainly result in different methodologies….Second, when methodology is designed ‘to apply to a specific discipline’, it is aimed at solving concrete problems….Thirdly, methodology is macroscopic since it covers ‘directive principles’.” (Pan Wenguo & Tan Huimin:259―260) This knowledge concerning philosophical and disciplinary methodology thus forms a basis on which an investigation may be carried out into translatological dictionary compiling methodology (mentioned below as TDCM, and translatological dictionary as TD).

 

It should be recognized that TDCM is a major project and many scholars’ many years’ meticulous study is to be done before any substantial findings are obtained. What I do below is only an initial reflection which is aimed to catch a whale by throwing out a minnow.

    It is already known that methodology and method are two essentially different concepts although they are closely related. Philosophical, direct and macroscopic, methodology covers principles employed to guide the discipline as a whole while methods are instrumental, microscopic, partial, in that they are concrete ways of study directed at individual problems, or rather, concrete modes or methods used in dealing with specific questions. It should be further known that the probe into and the application of methodology are to be restricted by certain conditions, which we call methodological principles. Referring to the findings produced by Pan Wenguo and Tan Huimin(283–294)in their research on contrastive linguistics, this author will give a brief introduction to these principles and make some revision according to the actual conditions of TD compiling.

These refer to factors that function behind the scenes. There are three major factors which govern methodology.

⑴The determinative role played by ontology Ontological construction is the most important thing to any discipline since there would be no methodology without ontology. Now we are going to investigate into TDCM, but we cannot go a step without doing some research in advance in such ontological respects as the nature and function of translatological dictionaries, and the object, structure, disciplinary location, type classification of TD compilation and study. If there were not any “essence”, to what we “apply” methodology? Similarly, if there were not an “orientation” to go in, why should there be any need for “route”? Ontology determines orientation, so methodology is said to be restricted by ontology.

⑵The determinative role played by purpose theory It can be said that the purpose theory is the factor that plays the greatest influence upon methodology. As “application” and “route”, methodology is a means that serves the disciplinary purpose. Take contrastive linguistics for example, if the purpose is to give the difference and similarity of two languages concerned so as to be conducive to foreign languages teaching, structuralist ways will naturally be adopted for description; whereas the intention of testifying to the “universal grammar” that lies behind the surface difference and similarity will, very probably, turn one to transformational-generative linguistics approach for interpretation. Since they are different in their understanding of the TD compiling purpose it is only natural for scholars to turn to different ways, and as a result, different theories will present themselves in methodological exposition.

⑶The determinative role played by outlook on TD In addition to ontology and purpose theory, what is a more important factor that determines methodology lies in essential viewpoints. The cognition of disciplinary ontology and purpose theory, take contrastive linguistics for example, is in fact determined by outlook on language. Different outlooks on language result in different linguistic theories, and lead to different locations in disciplinary nature, thus restricting the selection in disciplinary research methodology. For example, it is simply because of the utter difference in outlook on language that the structuralists emphasize the difference between languages while the transformational school strives to prove that all languages are in essence “cast from one mould.” Believing in the weak even strong Sapir-Whorf hypothesis, the main philosophical view of structuralists is relativism and adopts induction; while the transformationalists’ are philosophically based on the ideology of René Descartes, i.e. absolutism, therefore they adopt deduction since they think that, on the highly abstract level, all languages are just the same. What basic view one has toward TD, for example, one may regard it as “authority”, “model”, or partly as relative “authority”, relative “model” and partly as “translatological research reference”, “selective edition of translatological knowledge” will, accordingly, formulate one’s outlook on TD. The former is related with absolutism while the latter with relativism. Difference in outlook on TD will certainly lead to different ontologies and purpose theories and compiling approaches.

⑴Theories adopted in research The first choice is that of basic views and theories. Take linguistics for example, “Linguistic outlook and theory represent two levels. Standing on the highest level, linguistic outlook essentially can be divided into no more than three kinds. One may stress the natural properties of language and regard it as the research object of natural sciences; or stressing the social properties of language and regard it as the research object of social sciences; or stressing the humane properties of language and regard it as the research object of humanities. Linguistic theories lie on the second level. The three kinds of linguistic outlook, described with a general structure in view, are not necessarily carried out by all in a thorough way. With the three linguistic outlooks being further divided, arranged and organized again in different ways, miscellaneous linguistic theories will be formed. When the systematicness in natural linguistic properties is emphasized, for example, a structuralist theory may come out; When humans’ biological nature in natural linguistic properties stands out, biolinguistics will appear; When the character of human exchange becomes a focus, communicative linguistics may be produced; When various aspects of humane property are stressed, there can certainly be cultural linguistics and ethnolinguistics, etc. Attention may also go at once to two or three linguistic properties but different linguistic schools may be formulated because of difference in stress or in ordinal placement.” (Pan Wenguo&Tan Huimin: 287)

As TD research has just started up it is not possible for there to be miscellaneous schools of thought. There are not many outlooks on TD with obvious marks to be studied. Few TD scholars have done their work so deeply as to touch the philosophical level perhaps because people are not very clear yet that reflections on TD outlook are related with the lifeline of the research area. If reflections on TD are not given proper attention research will not be carried out in depth, thus slowing down the development of the discipline. If one does not have a clear outlook on TD, research on TD ontology and methodology will certainly be conspicuously affected for lack of consciousness and profundity.

⑵Levels of research Once the TD outlook is made clear, it can be said that the problem of orientation has been properly solved and what follows will only concern the specific “route”. Choice involved in selection will, of course, still give rise to problems concerning ontology. First of all, the researcher may choose among research levels, i.e. make clear his major research orientation on the three levels of TD theory, applied theory and compiling practice——which is your major research orientation? Theoretical, applied or compiling studies? The three kinds of research are different in that they adopt different research approaches. The theoretical research, for example, may be done chiefly in the macroscopic perspective, while the applied and compiling studies will generally turn to the microscopic one. People being different in background, interest, and basis, choice should be made by each scholar on the basis of the disciplinary need.

⑶Object and layers of research We can list six major objects of TD research——translatological knowledge, dictionary knowledge, compiler, compiling process, translatological dictionary, and reader. They can also be called six important elements involved in the whole process of dictionary compilation. The six items may be regarded as the first layer of objects of study in which the compiler stands at the core and together with other five form a system. The compiler being the most active element, his subjectivity plays a role in TD compiling much greater than that played by the subjectivity of a translator in the process of translation. The quality of a dictionary, the effect it produces in the market, the influence it causes, all these chiefly depend upon the compiler. The researcher may, of course, choose one or several elements as his research object. They may be further divided, so his choice can be made on the second and third layers. For example, with “compiling process”, the items for exploration at the second layer may be given as preparation before editing; determination of compiling aim, macroscopic framework, stylistic rules and layout; entry collection; shaping of entry microscopic structure; interpretation writing; proof-reading and manuscript finalizing, etc. One may choose from them and go into in-depth research. Varying with the research objects and layers, methods used in research will undergo corresponding changes. One may also choose from perspectives. Suppose the object remains unchanged, there may be many perspectives to be chosen, such as philosophy, culturology, translatology, lexicography, sociology, psychology, science of communication, synthetic way, etc. With change in perspective, great differences will be discovered in the method, findings and expression of research.

⑷Plural Complement in Research Approaches The researcher has an even greater room of selection because approach is plural and open-ended. Methodology being restricted, every researcher has to make a selection concerning his disciplinary methodology. As for ordinary approaches, however, one may make a choice out of one’s own consideration. For example, among all kinds of approaches, such as analytic and synthetic, macroscopic and microscopic, qualitative and quantitative; sampling, comparative method, elaboration, intertextuality, diachrony, modelling, etc., one has the freedom to determine whether to take or reject on the basis of one’s need. Since various approaches are mutually complementary, the image of the whole “elephant” can be reflected only when observations from all perspectives come together.

⑸Pattern of Research This may be defined as a collection of methods, in which the researcher may give a full play to his creative power. The pattern of research is in fact the crystallization of experience of the predecessors, contemporary scholars and the researcher himself, significant to the in-depth disciplinary development and to the training and enlightenment of successors. The TD research is thin in this respect because it has come into the world for only a few years, hence those who are determined to plunge into research in this field will certainly get a golden chance to demonstrate their ability.

2.1.3 Identical Principles If background principles demonstrate objective compulsiveness, selective principles are pregnant with subjective autonomy, then identical principles may be called restrictive ones on subjectivity. Practically, they emit a restrictive force on selective principles, i.e. absolute freedom does not exist in the process of selection and the researcher is to operate under restriction to certain extent.

⑴Theoretical Harmony and Unity The theoretical consistence should be considered first. By this is meant the principle of consistence should be kept when one employs a ready theory. The theoretical consistence in linguistics studies, for example, consists in the requirement that one should not use now structuralist linguistics, now generative linguistics, now functional linguistics, now discourse-analysis theory, etc. It is perhaps not very obvious examining from only one article, but theoretical inconsistence will easily be disclosed when several articles are put together. What is concerned here is philosophical depth. Changeable attitude exposes that the researcher does not operate on the layer of philosophy, not obeying any philosophical principles.

However, keeping to consistence in the guiding theory can go shoulder to shoulder harmoniously with the principle of “plurality of theories and methods”. As it is a newly opened sphere, TD compilation and study will necessarily go through a process of groping and testing in adopting theories and methods. We should be open-minded in TD research and extensively take in nutritious elements from such disciplines as translatology, lexicography, linguistics and other closely related disciplines. Inheritance is to go before development, and creation must be based on criticism. “Plurality of theories and methods” points not only to the prospect of the whole discipline but is worth the while of every scholar to be engaged in actively trying out various ways. It can be said that extensively taking in various theories and methods in the research on different levels and layers with different objects and targets is practically something needed and necessary for development. It must be remembered, however, that this research characterized by plurality ought to be harmonious fusion of various theories, doctrines and methods instead of piecing together in a haphazard way just like “curing the head when the head aches and curing the foot when the foot aches.” Going through the researcher’s mind and notional reorganization and struggling for a new disciplinary target, the quintessence of all kinds forms a new system in the new field of TD compilation and study, with a harmonious internal fusion. This is a “harmonious theoretical unity” full of creative spirit, which does not reflect consistence in one theory but instead a spirit of incorporating in the research miscellaneous elements.

⑵Correspondence in Modelling  In Routledge Encyclopedia of Translation Studies compiled by Mona Baker there is an entry called “Models of translation”, which elaborates on modelling in translation studies under such subentries as “Models of translation”, “Theoretical models”, “Analogue models”, “Translating as modeling” and “Models and norms”. Translation may be regarded as model of the original. A conscientious study of the theory of modeling shows that the TD is in turn model of translatology, in which there is much to be researched.

There are two interpretations for the entry “Model” in Cihai (Word Ocean) of which the first goes as “Model is opposite to ‘prototype’ in natural dialectics. It is substitute for the object of study. Prototype refers to the object in objective existence whereas model is substitute with characteristics similar to those of the prototype. It is the simplification, abstraction and analogue of system or process. According to the mode in which the prototype is represented, it may be divided into material and notional models. See ‘Modelling method’. Modelling is employed in different spheres. In economics, for example, a model is a quantitative kind of abstraction and generalization in that it can describe the main features and rules of change of an object or of a social economic phenomenon. According to nature it can be divided as: substantial model, made imitating the real object, agreeing with corresponding requirements in geometrical shape and dimensions; graphic model, with which the laws of change that happens to objects are reflected by means of abstract concepts, such as a demand curve; mathematical model, which gives an simulation employing signs or mathematical formulas; economical model.” (Cihai Editorial Board: 1185) We herein get to know that modelling is a scientific method used to expose the form, character or essence of the prototype (i.e. the imitated object) through studying the model. When applied to TD research, it consists in regarding TD as a model in imitation of its prototype translatology. Of the two major kinds of modelling, material and notional, TD belongs in the notional type, there being a imitating-imitated relationship between TD and translatology, which may be called correspondence——also a kind of identity.

TD is in fact an idealized reflection and depiction of translatology in the compiler’s mind, capable of simulating one or several aspects or even the whole of translation, the chief means of which is entry. A model, in theory, may expand or reduce the object. So far as TD is concerned, the chief function lies in condensation. It seems that every entry results from condensation of much content. With each TD reflecting one or several parts of translatology, the whole system of TDs is to reflect the whole of the discipline of translation.

⑶Progressiveness of Layers We have said above that the sphere of TD studies may be divided into the three layers of TD theory, applied theory and compiling practice, each again capable of being subdivided. It is thus known that the numerous research projects are in fact not on the same layer but with layeredness and progressiveness. There is a “directive” relationship   progressing from theory to practice——the philosophical TD theory directs general theory, which directs applied theory, which in turn directs compiling practice.

There is, again, another progressive relationship among different disciplinary properties. Here it is necessary to refer to the situation of linguistic research. “Language is possessive of social and humane as well as natural properties. Although we may start from any angle to define language, it is only the humane property angle that is the most inclusive.” “The humane property of language ‘administrates’ the social property, and the humane, social properties ‘administrate’ the natural one; therefore, in the system of linguistics (including contrastive linguistics) the studies starting from natural property is to ‘obey’ those from social property, and then more willingly ‘obey’ those from humane property. Take speech sound study for example, phonetics is research from natural property, phonemics from social, and phonology from humane; therefore, phonology may ‘administrate’ phonemics, and the latter ‘administrate’ phonetics; conversely, the phonetic findings are to ‘obey’ phonemics, and the findings of the latter, phonology.” (Pan Wenguo&Tan Huimin: 293―294)

Is the discipline TD compilation and study endowed with natural property? The answer is to come yet, but it is definitely possessive of social and humane properties. Between studies from the two perspectives there is, too, a “administration―obedience” relationship. Such an analysis tells us that although a researcher enjoys freedom in selecting among projects, the freedom is restricted by the research system instead of an isolated, absolute freedom without relation with any system. When he makes a choice among projects, a TD research is therefore to be clear of the position of his research in TD compilation and study and then further in the translatological system so as to deal with it in a macroscopic perspective, thus being able to contribute to the disciplinary construction no matter in what perspective and on what subject he does his study.

 

Next comes a brief introduction to this author’s view concerning TDCM.

Dialectical materialism and historical materialism are the only scientific world outlook and philosophical methodology and also the philosophical basis of TDCM.

The two aspects of any object are both opposed to and unified with each other. Contradiction is just this intrinsic character and its reflection in people’s mind. Every object, phenomenon, process and various internal elements inside them invariably contain two aspects that are mutually different and opposed to each other on the one hand and mutually agreed and related on the other. Contradictions result in the existence of all objects and push them forward. The contradiction between cognition and practice promotes people’s cognition to develop from the lower to the higher level.

The movement of contradiction is thus expounded in the book Philosophical Principles: “The movement and development of objects all result from the identity and struggle between the two contradictory aspects, from the common function played by identity and struggle.” “The mutual dependence between the two contradictory aspects is the precondition for the existence and development of objects. The existence of one aspect is preconditioned by that of the other and this forms their mutual dependence which is in turn the precondition for the existence of any definite object and specific contradiction. Every development is that of a specific object which is the unity of two contradictory aspects. Since the identity characterized by mutual dependence of two opposing sides is that in development, one aspect’s development, too, will have to have the development of the other side for condition. Development is something that happens inside the unity of a contradiction, therefore one aspect cannot develop isolatedly without the other.” “The two contradictory aspects mutually repel, negate, fight each other, thus pushing an object to develop. The struggle between the opposites will lead to change in force of the two aspects, to alteration in strength comparison between them. When the change develops to a certain stage, a radical change will happen to the object since the original restriction has been surmounted, breaking the old unity and establishing a new one. All contradictory opposites at once rely on and repel each other, there being identity and struggle at the same time. A continuous change happens in this identity-struggle to the strength comparison between the two sides, resulting in their reciprocal transformation. The struggle between opposites is the determinative force that brings about the transformation.” (Xiao Ming: 122―123)

The whole process of TD compiling is full of contradictions. It is just the identity-struggle relationship that pushes TD compiling forward. Only by fully understanding this can we successfully deal with various relations and make contributions to the disciplinary construction.

2.2.2 Translatological Dictionary Compiling Methodology TD compiling is a complicated system formulated by many contradictions. In order to probe into TDCM we are first to get clear, in this system of contradictions, what is the basic contradiction before we are in a position to put forward a methodology with macroscopic directive significance in relation with this basic contradiction and other contradictions concerned.

2.2.2.1 Basic Contradiction in TD compiling The task of DT compiling lies in serving the research and construction of translatology. The actual situation of translatology is that the discipline has been established for a very short time, with some respects not being very mature; that in the theoretical world many schools vie with one another and theorists see questions in quite different ways, with new terms cropping up in large numbers; that in the world of practice and service people and companies do their work in all sorts of ways without any definite regulations; and that in the world of education the basis is newly laid and various enthusiastic institutions are like the Eight Immortals crossing the ocean, each displaying his or her own magic power, there people enjoying excessive freedom but without a comprehensive plan. The contradiction between the actual situation of translatology and the obligation of TD constitutes the basic contradiction of TD compiling. The actual situation of translatology is featured as above and the main characteristic may be generalized as many schools vying and a hundred of theorists contending with one another. TD shoulders various obligations, with the most important one being clarifying the translatological situation and normalizing translation studies. The actual situation of translatology will continue over a long period of time and the TD obligations, too, are not to be shirked; therefore, characterized by academic contending and discourse normalization, each trying to break a new way and plan the future, the two opposites are at once identical and disagreeable. Each aspect of the basic contradiction depends upon the other for the precondition of existence, co-existing in the unity of TD compiling. The two opposites are at once struggle and link up with each other, thus pushing the discipline forward.

2.2.2.2 A Brief Introduction to TDCM Descriptiveness vs. normativeness, comprehensiveness vs. singularity, theoreticalness vs. practicalness, practicality vs. academicalness, and openness vs. closedness, all these concrete contradictions in compilatory principles represent the embodiment of the basic TD contradiction in TD compiling, with the most representative one being descriptiveness and normativeness which is put in the first place of the five pairs. The reason for saying so lies in the fact that this contradictory pair of compilatory principles concentratedly demonstrate the compiler’s effort to solve the basic TD contradiction, one that pays attention to both aspects.

Just as Mao Zedong says: “In the development of a complicated object there are many contradictions, of which there must be one that is the principal contradiction whose being and development determines or influences the being and development of other contradictions.”(Mao Zedong: 295) Descriptiveness versus normativeness is just such a determinative contradiction, which plays a leading role in the process of TD compiling while others are in a secondary and obedient place. When the main contradiction is adequately found and correctly dealt with all problems will be readily solved. “Thousands of scholars and practitioners do not know this method, so they are not able to find ways of solving contradictions, as if they fell into a sea of smoke without finding the centre.”(Ibid.:297; My translation)

With a view to clarifying the translatological situation and normalizing translation studies, a TD compiler, shouldering the arduous task and faced with the situation of many schools vying and a hundred of theorists contending with one another, has to deliberate whether to take objective reality into consideration and try to reflect the reality of translation studies in a descriptive spirit, and clarify the disciplinary situation and normalize translation studies to a properly smaller extent, or to give full play to one’s subjective initiative in changing the present situation and do his best to accomplish his TD obligation by strictly employing the normative standards. This is in fact a problem of choosing among general methods, which is both macroscopic and directed at specific problems and concerns the overall situation. Here is the dividing line——those who choose the former may be called descriptive school and the latter, normative school.

On the knowledge of contradiction Mao Zedong continues: “…When dealing with various contradictions, be it principal or secondary, can we treat the two contradictory aspects in an equal stand? Again, no. In whatever contradiction the development of both sides is not balanced. Sometimes they seem to be in equilibrium, but this is only something temporary and relative, more often than not what prevails being imbalance. Of the two conflicting aspects, one must be principal and the other secondary. The principal aspect is just the aforesaid one that plays a leading role in the contradiction. The character of an object is chiefly determined by the principal aspect of contradiction which is in the dominant position.” (Ibid.) The descriptive school, therefore, when probing into the contradiction, in fact decides on the conclusion that descriptiveness must be put in the dominant position and normativeness, secondary. The normative school holds an opinion that is just the opposite. When there is not any conflict, i.e. the TD obligation may be smoothly carried out, there will be no difference and argument at all; once there occurs something, however, for example, with regard to the entry “translation”, people’s views cannot be unified since they look at it in quite different perspectives, then argument will happen as if stormy waves suddenly came. The former thinks now that a commonly accepted definition cannot be found and the near future will not see the problem to be solved, then we may as well respect the fact by introducing in the entry interpretation several typical ones to “describe” the actual state of research, treating “translation” as a topic; whereas the latter deems the TD obligation must be firmly carried out and it is just because there is not a common cognition that TD is required to give an authoritative definition in order that people’s understanding may be unified, here “translation” being processed as a specialized term.

Belonging in the descriptive school, this author, in the foreseeable future, also in his rest of life, will adhere to the descriptive spirit unswervingly, but he is not dogged-minded. The descriptive principle is designed to apply to the whole as the principal one, but in some cases the decision may be otherwise. Take the study of translation strategy for example, in the Lu Xun period (1920s―1930s) it was “yanghua”(洋化, foreignization) that was put in opposition to “guihua”(归化, domestication)，with the academic discussion characterized by strong political colouring seething with enthusiasm; however, when the year 1995 saw the raising of the pair of translation strategies foreignizing and domesticating by the American Lawrence Venuti on the basis of Schleiermacher’s theory, there occurs the problem of terminological translation. “Domesticating” is doubtlessly to be put as “归化”(guihua), but how to translate “foreignizing”? A vast majority of people agree to putting it into the neutral term “异化”(yihua) instead of the obviously pejorative “洋化”(yanghua). It is not necessary in such a case to stick stubbornly to the descriptive spirit and give two corresponding words “异化” and “洋化”. The normative principle should be followed here so that only “异化” be given as the corresponding word, but mention is to be made in the interpretation of “洋化” and the contending on translation strategies in the period of Lu Xun since historical fact has to be respected. Otherwise, the young masters and doctors may think this issue has not been taken into consideration of Chinese scholars. Again, take the example of the entry “translation”, if someday ten years later in the future, together with the heightening of cognitive and expressive ability, there occurs a definition upon which the majority of people agreed, then this author will cordially approve of giving in the new TD only the definition that has become the principal aspect of the contradiction. This is a dialectical way of looking at things, utterly different from a metaphysical one that is ossified, coagulative, and stagnant. 

The TDCM, in a nutshell, is based on dialectical materialism and historical philosophy, viewing problems cropping up in the process of compiling in a dialectic, historic perspective, and advocating that the law of the unity of opposites should be followed and when problems occur the main contradiction and the principal aspect should be found out first. While abiding by principles we should also pay attention to pliability and give consideration to all aspects, i.e. play well on the keyboard that is formed by many pairs of contradictory principles.

 

With many layers of character, TDCM is philosophical, on the one hand, intended to provide directive principles for the targets stipulated by TD ontology, thus endowed, too, with macroscopicness; on the other, it is instrumental, necessitated to aim the arrow at the target by taking the specific features of the TD domain into consideration, so one often has to incorporate some concrete methods when dwelling upon methodology. Before exploring into TDCM, we emphatically expounded the methodological principles, i.e. background, selective and identical principles, with each being done in three or five aspects. And then we made a research on TDCM after having concisely presented the philosophical basis, pointing out that the contradiction between the actual situation of translatology and the obligation of TD constitutes the basic contradiction of TD compiling.

The kernel subject of TDCM study, TD compiling principles include many pairs of contradictions, which fully shows the complicatedness of TD compiling. To this author’s mind, TD compiling principles include at least five pairs of contradictions: descriptiveness vs. normativeness, comprehensiveness vs. singularity, theoreticalness vs. practicalness, practicality vs. academicalness, and openness vs. closedness, which clearly form an assemblage of contradictions. Faced with so many contradictory principles, we may be at a loss which way to follow if no proper way is found. It is just here that great significance is to be discovered in Mao Zedong’s philosophical exposition of main contradiction and principal aspect of contradiction. It is exposed in this essay that of the five pairs of contradictions descriptiveness vs. normativeness is the main one in which descriptiveness is the principal aspect of contradiction and plays a leading role.

A new subject, TDCM is a virgin land on which there are few ploughing and weeding. Theoretical crystallization in this field, although extremely difficult, can be realized through observation and deliberation.

A temporary corresponding neural connection will be formed on the cerebral cortex after the cognitive subject is stimulated by an object, for instance a TD entry, and perception occurs. If one often reads entries of the same kind in different dictionaries, similar neural connection will appear repeatedly and stay on the cerebral cortex. The neural connection will not disappear immediately when the stimulant, i.e. the entry, stopped producing any effect on the brain, but will instead leave a trace which is called representation which forms the basis for us to know an object. A concept, i.e. knowledge of an object’s essence and internal connections, will be formulated through processing and generalization——abstract thinking. Rational cognition may be carried out, when concepts accumulate, through judging and inferring. Concepts form judgment, and judgments form inference, resulting in logical conclusion which is theory. This author expects that there will be many scholars plunging themselves into the discussion of TD theories, including exploration into the methodology of TDCM so that the domain of TD compiling and study will be continually opened up and finally shaped.

 

 

 

Introduction to the author： Sun Yingchun, male，b.1949, Dean of School of Translation and Interpretation, Shandong University at Weihai, People’s Republic of China; Professor and Doctoral Supervisor of Shandong University; Member of Chinese Translators Association; Head of Translatological Committee, Shandong Association of Foreign Linguistics; Research fields: translation theory; translatological dictionary compilation and research