AnAnalysisonCross—culturalFactorsAffectingtheChinese—EnglishTranslationofBusinessContracts

【Abstract】The Chinese language subject to subjective thinking pattern， inductive discourse patterns and low degree of uncertainty avoidance. The people who use English adopt objective thinking pattern， deductive discourse patterns and high degree of uncertainty avoidance. The differences between them are outstanding in language expression. And thus will lead to the mistranslation of business contracts， which will block the translation in business contracts.

【Key words】cross-cultural factors； business contracts； translation

【作者簡(jiǎn)介】董秋萍（1989，12- ），女，研究生，廣州南洋理工職業(yè)學(xué)院，研究方向：商務(wù)合同翻譯。

1. Subjective Thinking vs Objective Thinking

Westerners attach importance to natural objects and take the object-oriented thinking patterns， and tend to explore the outside world. Chinese people are affected by tradition and pay more attention to peoples ethical life.（Lu Meng， 2014） Chinese people focus on themselves and describe the objective facts from their own viewpoints， so the Chinese thinking patterns tend to point at the human-being. One of the obvious signs of this difference is reflected in language expression. When the natural objects or things is being described， especially when it comes to the behavior of the main body， the human or biological words is taken as the subjects in the Chinese language， which is called personal subject. However， English language often takes objects or things as the subjects， which is called impersonal subject. The author will illustrate the differences between Chinese and English language in terms of thinking patterns in business contracts.

1） Source text：此合同在締約方執(zhí)行之前不具有法律約束力；此合同應(yīng)對(duì)締約 方各自繼承人、子公司、附屬公司、職員、官員、董事、代理、子承包商和法人代表具有法律約束力；

Target text：This Contract shall not be effective until executed by the Parties. This Contract shall be binding upon the successors， subsidiaries， affiliates， employees， officers， directors， agents， subcontractors and legal representatives of the Parties.

In this example， “此合同不具有法律約束力” is being translated into “This contract shall not be effective”. The people who use the Chinese language often adopt subjective thinking pattern. So “此合同不具有” shows that “具有” is an active voice. In the English version， “This contract shall not be effective” takes “This contract” as the subject， and takes the “shall not be effective” as the predicate verb. The people who speak English often adopt objective thinking pattern， so the non-biological nouns are being taken as the subject and passive voice is adopted in the English language. From this sentence， it can be concluded that the Chinese and English language have different thinking patterns.

2） Source text：甲方有權(quán)根據(jù)法律規(guī)定制定各類規(guī)章制度， 向派遣人員公示，并通過簽收、集中培訓(xùn)等方式使派遣人員知悉相關(guān)內(nèi)容。

Target text：Party A is entitled to made various regulations and systems according to the laws， and notice them to the dispatched personnel， and make the dispatched personnel be informed of relevant contents by means of signing， concentrated training and so on.

In this example， the active voice “有權(quán)” is adopted in the Chinese version， showing the subjective thinking， but the English version use the passive voice “is entitled to”. It reflects that the English language pays more attention to the logical and natural facts that people are given the right to do things. This is a typical objective thinking.

2. Inductive Discourse Pattern vs Deductive Discourse Pattern

Inductive discourse pattern tends to put forward the secondary arguments first and then the main argument following， while deductive discourse pattern usually offers the main argument first， and then provide a secondary argument or other supporting the arguments， which introduce the topic first to show clear relevance by making a series of supportive evidence followed. Scollon argues that there are some differences between Chinese and English discourse because the two languages tend to adopt the “inductive” and “deductive” discourse patterns， respectively. （Lu Meng， 2014） Scollons point of view is to focus on the logical layers of the text structure， and more directly analyze the two main discourse differences of the Chinese and English language. The author will elaborate the mistranslation caused by the two different discourse patterns as follows：

1） Source text：除派遣人員有本合同第十二條、第十三條第1.2項(xiàng)規(guī)定的情形外，甲方不得在試用期與派遣人員解除聘用合同。

Target text：Party A cannot terminate the employment relationship with the dispatched personnel in the probation period， in addition to the circumstances in Article 12 and item 1. 2 of Article 13 of this contract.

In this example， the Chinese version put the subordinate clause “除…外”， a secondary information at the beginning， and then the main sentences follow behind. But the English version puts the most important information forward and then analyzes the secondary information. This manifests that in the discourse mode， the Chinese language is inclined to inductive discourse pattern， and the English language is inclined to the deductive discourse pattern.

2） Source text：就此合同而言， 如果其他人有足夠的能力處理某實(shí)體事務(wù)和/或控制董事會(huì)或類似法人團(tuán)隊(duì)的構(gòu)成，該實(shí)體被視為由該其他人控制。

Target text：For the purposes herein， an entity is deemed to be controlled by another person， if that other person is able to direct its affairs and/or to control the composition of its management board or similar corporate body.

In this example， the source text explains the adverbial clause of condition “如果…” first and then put the most important sentence “該實(shí)體被視為由該其他人控制” behind to draw a conclusion. Nevertheless， the English version draws a conclusive sentence， “an entity is deemed to be controlled by another person” firstly， and then explains the secondary information. Oriental people used to put the reason first， and then summed up the point of view. Westerners are accustomed to making straightforward views， uttering the most important part of the content to get the initiative， and then gradually discussed the secondary information.

3.Low Degree of Uncertainty Avoidance vs High Degree of Uncertainty Avoidance

The theory of uncertainty avoidance is proposed by Geert Hofstede， director of the Dutch Institute for International Cultural Co-operation， in quantitative study of cultural factors. （Wu Xianlu， 2009） Uncertainty refers to the extent to which people tolerate vague or endure ambiguity and uncertainty. High degree of uncertainty avoidance means that there is a strong need for written rules， planning， regulations， rituals and ceremonies， restrictions which are made to avoid the uncertain factors. However， low degree of uncertainty avoidance culture has a high tolerance and adaptability for uncertain situations， and it is usually more willing to change and be willing to take risks.

The business contract in the Chinese language is inclined to high degree of uncertainty avoidance， the Chinese language subject to the theory of “Ruling by Humanity” that all texts can be explained by people， so that the business contract in the Chinese language has a low degree of uncertainty avoidance. But the people in British and American countries are more inclined to believe the logic and external constraints， that is， “Rule of Law”. So the business contract in the English language tends to set up many rules and restrictions to make sure that the contract text must be clear and accurate without any uncertainty factors.

1） Source text：如甲方需要乙方提供廣告攝影、版權(quán)圖片購買、物料制作等，甲乙雙方另行協(xié)商費(fèi)用并訂立相關(guān)補(bǔ)充協(xié)議。

Target text：Provided that Party A requires the advertising photography， purchase of copyright pictures， material manufacture and others offered by Party B， both Parties shall negotiate and conclude and sign the corresponding supplemental agreements otherwise.

In this example， in the Chinese language， a word “訂立” was used to express the establishment of a contract， while the two words “conclude and sign” is used in English， which reflected the character of a high degree of uncertainty avoidance in the Anglo-American countries. The business contract in English language usually uses synonyms to narrow the gap of uncertainty and to avoid the confusion caused by vague expression， so that the contract can be implemented effectively and smoothly.

2） Source text：每月開始交貨的五天前，賣方應(yīng)該告知買方交貨時(shí)間表，并在兩天內(nèi)要求就交貨時(shí)間表甲乙雙方達(dá)成協(xié)議。

Target text：Five days prior to the commencement of the monthly delivery， the Seller shall notify the Buyer of the delivery schedule， and an agreement on the schedule shall be made and entered into by and between Party A and Party B within two days.

In this example， the Chinese version only uses one word “達(dá)成”to express the meaning of concluding agreement， but in the English version， the synonym “be made and entered into” and “ by and between” are used to express the doctrine that English words in contract language must be very accurate and rigorous， which also manifests that the English language in business contract is inclined to the low degree of uncertainty avoidance.

References：

[1]Savomar et al.Communication between Cultures（7th Ed.）[M].Boston：Stamford，Cencage Learning 2012.

[2]呂朦.高低語境文化角度分析漢英語篇結(jié)構(gòu)差異[J].內(nèi)蒙古電大學(xué)刊，2014，（03）：103-104.

[3]伍先祿，彭愛和.從不確定性規(guī)避理論看中西跨文化交際的心態(tài)調(diào)整[J].湘潭師范學(xué)院學(xué)報(bào)（社會(huì)科學(xué)版），2009，（05）：99-102.