A Statistical Survey of Translated Fiction 1840-1920


TARUMOTO TERUO
Osaka University of Economics


Thanks largely to A Ying (see below) it is generally believed that in the late Qing period more translated works of fiction were published than original works. Is this correct?
First let us consider periodicals, as the normal practice then was for new works of fiction to appear in periodicals before being published in book form. Data derived from the catalogues Xinhai geming shiqi qikan jieshao (Introduction to Periodicals of the Period of the 1911 Revolution, Beijing, 1982-87) and Zhongguo jindai qikan pianmu huilu (Index to Early Modern Chinese Periodicals, Shanghai, l980-84) indicate that 621 periodicals were launched between 1857 and 1920. The number of periodicals in circulation hit three peaks: one in 1898, at the time of the reforms that followed China's defeat in the Sino-Japanese war of 1895; one in 1907-8, following the Russo-Japanese war of l905; and in l913, following the 191l revolution in China.
Publishing of periodicals in the late Qing-early Republic period was not confined to the Chinese mainland. Periodicals in Chinese were also published in Japan, America, Singapore, France and other countries. But the three main centres were Shanghai, Japan and Beijing: together they made up roughly 66% of the output. Shanghai was far and away the leading centre throughout the period. In the l900s Japan was well ahead of Beijing in second place, although in the 1910s the position was reversed. Liang Qichao's two journals Qingyi bao and Xinmin congbao, as well as the first magazine devoted entirely to fiction, Xin xiaoshuo, were all published in Japan.
A Ying (1900-1977) was the leading authority on late Qing literature in the middle of this century. He was the author of
(A History of Late Qing Fiction, 1937) and the compiler of Wan Qing xiaoshuo mu (Catalogue of Late Qing Fiction, completed 1940). In his History he estimated the number of fiction titles published as gat least 1500". In his later catalogue he listed 1,107 titles. The earlier figure was sheer guesswork.
A Ying's catalogue remained the chief bibliographical source for late Qing fiction until recently. Everyone relied on it. It certainly deserves credit
as a pioneering work, but it has its faults. For instance, it includes works
published after l912, which by no means qualify as "late Qing". If we subtract these and others whose publication date is uncertain from his catalogue, there remain 420 original works and 587 translated works, making a total of 1,007. Translation accounts for approximately 58%.
From the sources he used to write his History, A Ying was already firmly of the opinion that translations made up six-tenths of all publications. He wrote in his History (A Ying 1937, 274):

If anyone asked if original works or traslated works were in a majority in late Qing fiction, probably those with a modicum of understanding of the period would all answer, eTranslations were more numerous than original works'. Statistics of all kinds show that the quantity of translations was not less than two-thirds of the whole, though relatively few were of good quality. What is more, Chinese original works were heavily influenced by this flood of imports.

This dictum was regarded as authoritative. In his introduction to Zhongguo jindai wenxue daxi: Fanyi wenxue ji (Treasury of Early Modeern Chinese Literature: Translated Literature, l990) Shi Zhecun referred to A Ying's estimate, and speculated that there might have been twice as many translated as original works of fiction. Actually no one had checked A Ying's figures. The fact is, they are not reliable.
Let us look for example at the fiction published in periodicals. How many original and translated works of fiction were published in the four leading magazines of the late Qing period, Xin xiaoshuo (New Fiction), Xiuxiang xiaoshuo (Illustrated Fiction), Xinxin xiaoshuo (Latest Fiction) and Xiaoshuo lin (Forest of Fiction)? Now they are all available in reprint, so the numbers are easily calculated. The four magazines published 62 original works and 71 translated works, making a total of 133. Of these A Ying's catalogue
includes 24 and 22 respectively, totalling 46, or only 35%. A Ying did not
state his criteria for inclusion, but his catalogue entries embrace both magazine publications and separate books. His omission of so many magazine publications casts serious doubt on his statistics.
@@ In 1988 the present writerCunder the imprint of Qingmo Xiaoshuo Yanjiuhui, published (A Bibliography of Late Qing-Early Repubulic Fiction). It was based on 74 existing bibliographical Sources. Subsequent revision has expanded that number to 132, including most importantly Ershi shiji Zhongguo wenxue dadian, 1897-1929 (Encyclopedia of 20th Century Chinese Literature 1897-1929, ed. Chen Mingshu, Shanghai Jiaoyu Chubanshe, 1994). We have paid particular attention to fiction published in periodicals. At the present time, we have collected 13,799 titles (original fiction 9,437, translated fiction 4,362 titles). Broken down into periods. For 1840-1911 we have 1,288 original, 1,016 translated. For 1912-1920 we have 5,059 original, 1,488 translated. In total, over the whole period 1840-1920, original titles number 6,347 and translated title 2,504. Compared with A Ying's catalogue, for the period up to 1911 we list 3.07 times the number of original works it does, and 1.73 times the number of translated works.
From our bibliographical research it is clear that original works far outnumbered translated works. Up to 1911 translated works made up; only 44%; A Ying's figure of 58% is incorrect. The most that can be said for A Ying's point of view is that the number of translated titles slightly exceeded original titles for the six years 1902-1907 (see graph below).

œThe Translation of European and American Fiction

The source of translations published between 1840 and 1920 is often unclear: many omitted to state the original title and/or author. Of our 2,504 titles for translations, 1,748 (approx. 70%) do state the nationality of the author. British and American fiction makes up the great bulk of these: l,071. France follows with 33l works, then Russia (133), Japan (103), and Germany (34). These five make up about 96% of the total. The trend for British-American fiction to predominate was continuous throughout the period; interestingly, though, translations of Japanese works were more numerous than those of Russian works before the 1911 revolution, but the position was reversed after the revolution.
It is an indisputable fact that stories of detection and adventure made up the largest category of British-American fiction. Authors of these genres, in descending order, are Arthur Conan Doyle (96 titles); Nick Carter (40); Henry Rider Haggard (34), William Tufnel1 1e Queux (25), Guy Newell Boothby (16), Allen Upward (15), Arthur Morrison (13), and Charles Garvice (l2). Outstanding authors in other categories include Washington Irving (19 titles), Charles Dickens (18), Shakespeare (10, being the narratives in Lamb's Tales from Shakespeare).
Among French authors Maupassant tops the list with 34 titles, followed by Alexandre Dumas pere (29), Jules Verne (19), Victor Hugo (18), Maurice Leblanc (15), Fortune du Boisgobey (14) and Alphonse Daudet (l4).
The great majority of Russian works were by Tolstoi (67 titles), followed a long way behind by Chekhov (l7). Other Russian authors like Andreev, Turgenev, Gorki and Pushkin were barely represented.
Japanese political novels of the Meiji period were popular with Chinese translators in the period following the reform movement, 1898 to 1903. Authors translated included Shiba Shirou, Yano Humio, Miyake Hikoya and Suehiro Tetcho. However, the most translated Japanese author (14 works) was Oshikawa Shunrou (l876-1914), who wrote adventure novels. Detective fiction was represented by Kuroiwa Ruikou, with two of his own works and 22 that he translated.
It should be emphasized that the above figures are for separate titles: they do not distinguish between long and short works of fiction. If we were to consider bulk-the number of Chinese characters printed-no doubt the picture would look different. Jules Verne, for instance, wrote full-length novels, while Maupassant wrote mainly short stories. But the calculation of bulk would be a mammoth task which we are unable to undertakeD

œRetranslation

Retranslation was quite common in Japan. French literature, for example, was more often than not translated into Japanese via an English intermediary. This was because Dutch had given way to English as the foreign language most widely learned in Japan. Retranslation from Japanese in turn became common among Chinese translators, particularly in the 1900s. The reasons were set out by Liang Qichao in 1897: he argued that Japanese was easier to understand than European languages because of the high incidence of Chinese characters and the less complex grammar, and was phonetically more manageable*1. Liang escaped to Japan after the failure of the 1898 reforms, where he founded a succession of periodicals. The larger number of Chinese students studying in Japan also published their own magazines. Potential material in the form of existing Japanese translations was plentiful, the manpower was available, and the outlets were there. That is how the phenomenon of retranslation came about.
The retranslation of European and American literature from the Japanese that we have been able to identify number 77. That is only 4.4% of the 1,748 which declare their country of origin. However, it should be emphasized that there were in addition an unquantifiable number of undeclared retranslations whose provenance cannot be traced but can be supposed to have been done via Japanese, such as those by Chinese translators who knew no foreign language other than Japanese. Unfortunately we cannot rely on supposition.
Of the 77 identified retranslations, 42 derive from Anglo-American originals. Among these, 12 of the 15 works of Allen Upward are accounted for as parts of a series entitled Secrets of the Courts of Europe, all translated into Japanese by Tokutomi Roka. These were classified as gdiplomatic fiction", and as such had the function of not only entertaining readers but also informing them on how European countries conducted their national affairs. Adventure and detective novels make up the majority overall, but strangely enough Conan Doyle's name appears only as the author of gHow the Brigadier Slew the Fox" from Adventures of Brigadier Gerard: none of the Serlock Holmes storied were retranslated from the Japanese.
The same pattern can be observed in retranslations of French works. Of the 25 retranslated into Chinese from the Japanese, seven were novels by Jules Verne, and all were done in the first few very active years 1902-l904. Detective fiction was also very well represented, with two works by Emile Gaboriau (l832-73), who invented the brilliant investigator Lecoq, and nine works by Fortune du Boisgobey (182l-91), who also took up Lecoq. The works of Gaboriau and du Boisgobey were all translated into Japanese by one person, Kuroiwa Ruikou, though they were retranslated into Chinese by different hands. Only two works were by authors who still survive in the literary pantheon: a fragment from Victor Hugo, and one Maupassant story.
In contrast, all the five works from Russia were by epantheon'authors: one each by Pushkin, Chekhov, Lermentov, Gorki and Tolstoi. The same applies to the one German (Sudermann) and the one Polish work (Sienkiewicz).
Another striking fact is that we have not been able to trace any new retranslation of Western fiction from the Japanese after 1911. That does not mean that they ceased altogether, but it does indicate a major shift from reliance on Japanese as an intermediary to direct translation from European languages. And that in turn reflects the progress in teaching and leaning European languages in China itself, and the redirection of Chinese students educated abroad from Japan to America and Europe.
Translated by D. E. Pollard

Note
1. Liang Qichao: gBianfa tongyi sanzhiqi: yishuh (The reforms explained, 3:7: translation), Shiwu bao, No.33 (20.7.1897).