Inter-textualization of David Hawkes’ Translation Notes and The Translated Text of The Story of the Stone

Intertextuality as a literary discourse strategy is used to create an interrelationship between texts and generate related understanding in separate works. The classic Chinese novel Hongloumeng, widely acclaimed as the epitome of Chinese literature, is well known for its complex plot, linguistic complexities and philosophical allusions. British born sinologist David Hawkes, in an ultimate fusion of exquisite Chinese scholarship and profound understanding of both Chinese and Western literary canons, created an astounding new text that reincarnates Cao’s Hongloumeng in The Story of the Stone . While the success of Hawkes’ translation has largely been attributed to his profound knowledge and linguistic ability, the role played by his translation notebook has almost been glossed over, with most research activities on the English translation of the eighteenth century classic confined to the traditional source text-target text binary approach. This paper applies methodologies from literary studies to examine the int erplay between Hawkes’ translation notes and the translated text. The study argues that besides Hawkes’ linguist skills and wide scholarship, his translation notes played a fundamental role in his exceptional English rendition of Cao Xueq in’s magnum opus. This is a case study that seeks to further highlight the importance of extratextual material in the systematic investigation and understanding of translational activity.


Introduction
Any reader of David Hawkes' English rendition of the Classic Chinese novel Hongloumeng, traditionally known as The Story of the Stone or Dream of the Red Chamber, will be mesmerized at the vivid description of the imaginary and fictional world in Cao Xueqin's magnum opus.Fan Shengyu (2022) argues that "even for Chinese readers, Hongloumeng cannot be described as a reader friendly book".One of the key reasons is the myriad of literary and philosophical allusions in the novel that necessitate extensive and profound scholarship in Chinese literature and philosophy in order to comprehend and appreciate.
Although the novel was set in the mythical past with all major events taking place in a confined domestic environment, David Hawkes (1923Hawkes ( -2009)), in an ultimate fusion of exquisite Chinese scholarship and profound understanding of both Chinese and Western literary canons, created an astounding new text that reincarnates Cao's Hongloumeng in The Story of the Stone (Stone).Combining his addictive passion for Hongloumeng with a wide range of linguistic, literary, inter-cultural and translation skills, Hawkes succeeded in creating a translation that is today considered a novel in its own right.
While there have been over a dozen English translations of Hongloumeng (including excerpts and some unpunished), the Hawkes-Minford 1 translation stands out from the lot as it brings out the true flavor of the original.The success of David Hawkes' translation 1 Hawkes translated the first 80 chapters while Minford translated the last 40 chapters has largely been attributed to his profound knowledge, sensitivity, and linguistic ability in both Chinese and English, which enabled him to see beyond the ordinary.However, the primordial role played by his translation notebooks has almost been glossed over.
There have been very few analytical examinations of the intricate process that led to the creation of Hawkes' final text.
Although translated texts provide invaluable data about the behavior of translators, as well as society's expectations from the translation at any given time, extra-textual or first-hand materials have the capacity to complement textual findings (Munday,2014); however, such materials (like translation manuscripts and the translator's notebook) have for long been overlooked in descriptive translation studies especially where the source and target texts are the main primary sources.Munday (2014) argues that extratextual sources "are an indispensable resource for the investigation of the conditions, working practices and identity of translators and for the study of their interaction with other participants in the translation process".She further argues that, "although source texts and target texts constitute the most basic raw materials for descriptive translation studies, the presence of pre-textual materials can lead to more objective deductions and analyses of both the translation process and the final product".Unfortunately, first hand materials for the critical analysis of the translation process are bafflingly few as very few translators keep traces of their own work.Minford (2000) intimates that; "in the past, the self-effacing attitude on the part of the translator was in general considered right and proper in the wider literary community".Unlike most literary translators of his time, David Hawkes left records of his own achievements, he noted his daily workings as he progressed in the translation.Fan (2022) states that "no translator of Chinese fiction had ever managed to do anything like this before, least of all with Hongloumeng which presents some of the most complicated editorial and textual challenges in the whole of Chinese literature.
Hawkes' notebooks document in chronological order the reference sources he consulted, the things that baffled him, when he completes a translation, who sees his translations and so forth.After his demise, the summarized notes (four informal working journals) were acquired by the Translation Center of Lingan University, Hongkong, which, after realizing its value, decided to publish a facsimile edition.A close examination of the notebook reveals a wealth of information on his editorial choices, his profound love for the novel and above all, his total commitment to the daunting task.The present article adopts an interdisciplinary approach to examine the inter-relationship between the notes and the translated text through a close reading of the two with the objective of situating the notes' influence on the translated text.

Intertextuality and Translation Studies
The concept of intertextuality has existed ever since the first of human history; the discourses about texts began; however, its debut as a critical theory and an approach to textual analysis only came to realization following formulations by theorists such as Ferdinand de Saussure and Roland Barthes before Bulgarian-French literary critic Julia Kristeva coined in the term 'intertextuality' in 1966.Inter-textuality has been used differently in different domains to analyze different problems with varying results.As a literary theory, intertextuality provides numberless ways of interpreting texts, including literary works, as it views all texts, not as a closed network but as an open product containing the traces of other texts (Zengin, 2019).
Following Zengin (2019), the concept is defined in this article in its simplest sense as; "a way of interpreting texts which focuses on the idea of texts borrowing words and concepts from each other".Simply put, intertextuality is the shaping of a text's meaning by another text.The significance of this concept for translated text is best understood if viewed from the backdrop of the growth of narratology informed by literary theories, signaled by an ever-growing interest on the role of extra-textual materials in translational activity.Gérard Genette, another major figure in the French academic establishment since the 1960s, in her Theory of Paratextuality, which falls within a larger theoretical framework built around the concept of "trans-textuality", introduced the idea of 'paratextuality' which he defined as; Relationship that binds the text properly speaking . . . to what can be called its paratext: a title, a subtitle, intertitles; prefaces, postfaces, notices, forewords, etc.; marginal, infra-paginal, terminal notes; epigraphs; illustrations; blurbs, book covers, dust jackets, and many other kinds of secondary signals, whether allographic [from a third party] or autographic [from the author].Genette 1997b Genette's theory argues that the text is the literary work which an author has created and made public; it is the core of his publication project.Everything added or produced for the sake of its publication can be called a paratext, be it 'peritext' (inside the book, including titles, sub-titles, footnotes, preface) or 'epitext' (outside the book, including flyers, letters, interviews, translation manuscripts, translators' notes) (Genette,1982).These liminal devices are interconnected to the literary text or the final product.Based on Genette's categorization of paratex, David Hawkes translation notes can well fall under the category of 'epitext' (extratextual materials) and constitutes one of the several liminal devices that contribute to influencing the nature of the final text and, consequently, its reception.
The significance of the concept of inter-textuality in translation studies can be seen in a number of research activities carried out by representatives of different schools and trends.One of the earliest applications of the concept of inter-textuality to translation research after the introduction of the term by Julia Kristeva in 1966 was by Anton Popovič ("Aspects of metatexts" 1967), who elaborated a detailed typology of intertextual links both at the micro-stylistic and macro-stylistic levels of the text.He employs the term 'metacommunication' to describe all types of text interpretation by translators, literary critics, scholars and readers.Since the 1990s, intertextuality has become one of the main parameters of discourse analysis.Basil Hatim and Ian Mason ("Discourse and the Translator", 1990) defined intertextuality as a semiotic category: a sign system that expands the boundary of the textual meaning through connotations.He asserts that the pragmatic status of an intertextual reference takes priority over its semiotic and informative status.In other words, to be adequate to the intention behind the allusion, a translator can sacrifice this allusion by shifting or even neutralizing it [20, p. 134].
Albrecht Neubert and Gregory Schreve (1992) approach intertextuality from the perspective of prototypical semantics.They describe intertextuality as 'a set of the reader's textual expectations that should be heeded by a translator'.They assert that every translation has double intertextuality: the original has intertextual links with texts of the source language, and translation establishes intertextual links with the texts of the target language, arguing that the translator should give preference to textual connections of the target language to meet the target reader's expectations.In general, the translator is the mediator of intertextuality of the source text and the target text, thus referring to translation as 'mediated intertextuality'.P. Torop (1995 12, p. 23-24), in "Total translation", elaborated a translation studies paradigm of intertextuality, which covers textual translation (translation of the whole text into the whole text); metatextual translation (translation of the whole text into the culture: commentaries, reviews, ads; intertextual translation (the author translates into his text somebody else's word or the whole complex of them); extratextual translation (splits the text into codes rendered by other than verbal means (screen production).Umberto Eco ("To Say Almost the Same Thing: Experiences in Translation", 2003) views intertextuality in the poststructuralist light.He introduced the term 'intertextual irony', which he says is always implicit as its references to other texts are not obvious; it is just "winking at the possible intellectual reader".He argues for the possibility of dual reading: "The text can be read and enjoyed naively feeling no intertextual references, or the reader can fully comprehend those references and even hunt for them".He further states that the ideal translation of an intertextual reference is the one where a translator reproduces no less but also no more of what the original hints at.(4, p. 255-269) Looking at the road covered by intertextuality in the field of translation studies, we realize that translation studies scholars adopt for different approaches.These include; philosophical interpretation of the ontology of translation as an intertextual phenomenon, genre discrimination of metatexts according to types of their correlation with the proto-text, the traditional idea of intertextuality as the presence of explicit allusions and quotations in the structure of the source text (most widespread trend); poly-systemic approaches aiming at singling out translation intertextuality, i.e. literary and para-literary references to the target culture in the text of translation, post-structural studies whose object is the implicit intertext (intertextual irony) and its translation potential.Within the field of translation studies, especially descriptive translation studies, first hand material like translation manuscripts and archives have the potential to provide unrivalled insights into both the translation process and the product.However, they have long been glossed over in the analysis of the translations and translated literature.One of such material that provide a wealth of information on both the process and the product is David Hawkes' translation notebooks.Unfortunately, most of the research done on David Hawkes' translation has mostly adopted for the traditional source text-target text binary approach.However, there have been some remarkable works which make use of his notes.
Bao Dewang and Liang Jiawei (2018), based on David Hawkes' translation notes of the English Translation of Hongloumeng, tried to reveal the unknown efforts and hardships Hawkes went through to produce The Story of the Stone by looking at the notes from four angles: research on the author, text, translation process and translation method.They pointed out that Hawkes' translation notes constitute a new basis for critical research on Hongloumeng.This is one of the reasons that prompted the present study, which seeks to investigate the role played by the notes in Hawkes' highly acclaimed rendition of the Chinese classic.Christina Chau's (2019) "Translators in the Making" meticulously traces the origins of all the reference books Hawkes consulted.This makes it an extremely useful tool for further research.Her focus was on the published The Story of the Stone: A Translator's Notebooks and, supplemented by various first-hand materials (correspondence between Hawkes and Minford, drafts).She states the notes "provide clues as to what reference books he was consulting, give the names of those people he turned to for help, the precise dates on which he finished a particular chapter, etc.".The value of her research, therefore, is bibliographic rather than literary.The present study undertakes a closer reading of the key elements of the notebooks to establish their relationship and influence on the final text.
Leonora Min Zhou (2020), in her Target journal article 'The Translator as Cartographer Cognitive Maps and World-making in Translation' borrowed the concept of cognitive maps from psychology and David Hawkes's English translation of the novel and various materials from his notebooks to demonstrate the translator's (mental) cartographic effort to conjure up 'maps in mind' in response to the textual spatial cues distributed throughout the novel.She argues that Hawkes's cognitive maps (found in the notebooks) offer explanations for some translational performances that have been too readily under looked as insignificant.
One of the most outstanding monographs that makes use of Hawkes' Notes is Fan Shengyu's (2022) The Translator's Mirror for the Romantic: Cao Xueqin's Dream and David Hawkes' Stone.Fan uses Hawkes' notebooks and other precious primary sources to decipher Hawkes' master translation of Hongloumeng.He uses the notes and other primary sources to show various motivations for Hawkes' revisions, arguing that Hawkes' notebooks, his typescripts, the manuscript of his first draft and his letters reveal the practical, concrete nature of his work.Through examples of his thinking process, Fan reveals his microscopic attention to detail, the enormous sensitivity of his imagination, and his great creativity as a translator as he sought to engage readers in the exploration of more wonders and dimensions of Hawkes' translation.
The process of translation begins with reading, as all translations involve reading more than the text to be translated.A good translator needs to read into and around the central text.Intertextuality puts forward even higher requirements for translators.The translator is the mediator of the source text and target text, a process which happens through reading and commenting (elucidating) the original and rewriting the original in another language.The ensuing discussion presents examples from Hawkes' notebooks to demonstrate how he managed to play the three roles of researcher-cum-commentator-cum-author.

The interplay between Hawkes' Notes and the translated text of Stone
The theory of intertextuality emphasizes the interdependence of text, arguing that no text can exist without others.This interconnectedness is perceived specifically through the following three aspects: the completion of the text, the interpretation of the text and the rewriting of the text.The act of translation entails the interpretation of meaning.However, translation is much more complicated than the simple transfer of meaning as it also involves the transfer of both form and socio-cultural values.During the translation process, the translator plays three roles at the same time: the reader of the pre-text (source text), the commentator (elucidator) and the author of the generated text (target text).Translation can thus be described as a dialogue between the original and the translated text, with the translator as the mediator.
In the case of Hawkes' translation, this dialogue between the original (Hongloumeng) and the final (The Story of the Stone) is realized through the mediation of his translation notebooks.From the original, Hawkes makes notes, which he uses to produce the final.Fan Shengyu (2021) describes these notes "as a treasure trove of information about his ability as a researcher and reader and his thoroughness in pursuing a link or piece of information".This study seeks to examine the influence of the notes, which were, in most cases, the outcome of his reading and extensive research on his final text.

The Translator as a Researcher
Hongloumeng can well be referred to as an encyclopedia of Chinese culture and civilization and stands out in Chinese literature for both its literary and linguistic complexities.John Minford, who translated the last forty chapters of the novel, observed that: "over the years, almost every part of the Chinese-speaking literary, philosophical, religious, and political universe (not to mention linguistic, economic, culinary, sartorial, medical, botanical, horticultural, architectural, historical, and art-historical) has become somehow or other engaged with the novel and its interpretation" (Minford, 2003).Translating a novel of such a magnitude could not be a mere issue of verbal fidelity or accuracy; moreover, the translation of a literary work is never a language issue only, just as Umberto states: "We decide how to translate, not on the basis of the dictionary, but on the basis of the whole history of two literatures … Translating is not connected with linguistic competence but with inter-textual, psychological, and narrative competence."Umberto Eco (1985) Fan (2020) further reiterates that; "all translations involve reading more than the text to be translated.A good translator needs to read into and around the central text".This includes previous translators' works, literary works from the same period, critical works by the commentators and the academic and scholarly works of more recent times.This was exactly what Hawkes did when he decided to translate Hongloumeng, as evident in the over 700 entries in his translation notebooks.
Hawkes started reading Hongloumeng several years before finally deciding to give up professorship and quit his position as chair of Chinese in Oxford in 1971 to concentrate fully on its translation.When Hawkes embarked on the translation of the novel, he read widely and extensively in order to get a deeper understanding of various philosophical and cultural allusions as well as the poetic devices that abound in the masterpiece.The outcome of his research was recorded in many cases in the notebooks and contributed in no small part to shaping his translation decisions.A close reading of the notebooks provides the missing link between his manuscript and the published book as we can see more clearly how he decided what to add, delete, change or restore and observe with amazement how scrupulous and fastidious Hawkes was as well as his unrivalled patience and energy in pursuing a link.His mastery of the Chinese language, coupled with his multilingual skills,2 permitted him to consult several sources in different languages.Several examples are found in the notebooks; however, this study only focuses on a select few for illustration.
筆錠如意 Bi ding ru-yi is a sound rebus which appears in chapters 18, 42 and 53.In chapter 18, Yuan-chun gives it as a present to her family during one of her family visits.In chapter 42, Grandmother Jia offers it as a gift to Grannie Liu, and in chapter 53, it is cited as one of the items among a trayful of New Year medallions.In order to decode this expression 筆錠如意, Hawkes draws a picture of the ru-yi sceptre and notes down the two expressions 筆錠如意 and 必定如意as can be seen in his 2 July 1971 entry: In a tribute to the doyen of British Sinology, Arthur Waley, published in the Times Literary Supplement on March 3 rd , 1961, Hawkes paid tribute to Waley's work as "the distillation of profound scholarship and patient research".Fan (2020) suggests that Hawkes was actually pointing to the two key features that any serious translation of literature must have (profound scholarship and research).A close look at Hawkes' notebooks reveals that he was actually referring to his own approach to translations.Patient research and the study of language constituted the bedrock of his work on Hongloumeng.
Hawkes was not only a translator; he was an erudite researcher whose background as a sinologist3 had a profound influence on his translation.Although he did not produce a list of works he consulted, the notebooks reveal that he consulted a wide range of materials from authoritative works such as Peiwen Yunfu 佩文韻府, Classics on Chinese philosophy such as Zhuang-zi 莊子, bibliographies, anthologies, dictionaries such as Guoyu cidian 國語辭典 and specialized works including works by Hongloumeng scholars as well as earlier translations like the Japanese translation Kōrōmu, by Itō Sōhei 伊藤漱平.The diverse nature of the sources consulted attest to the diverse nature of the topics treated in the novel, as well as its complexity.
Hawkes, the researcher, did not only consult literary sources; he also consulted experts in various fields from his wide circle of friends.In his Monday 15 th November 1971 entry, he records a phone-call from Mary Tregear explaining 燙蠟釘硃動起手來: The concept of intertextuality places reading at the center of understanding the meaning of a text.The translator, as a researcher, carefully reads the original and, making use of his intertextual knowledge, associates the meaning of the original to other related texts in order to fully comprehend the most profound meaning of the original.This involves exploring other texts which are somewhat related to the original, and the meaning derived from the original depends to a great extent on the fusion of the information from related texts.Therefore, translators, as researchers, have to combine their own social and cultural backgrounds to carefully interpret the original text.

The Translator as a Commentator
The translator's second role is to elucidate the content of the original.Commenting on the text entails being absolutely familiar with relevant literary themes and the historical and social background implied in the text.Hawkes was not just a translator; he was also a textual critic.His mastery of literary canons of both the West and China helped him to understand the literary devices that were embedded in Cao's novel.He basically reconstructed a new text from the original.During the reading, Hawkes made several notes and textual comments on the content of the original.As for how textual notes should be recorded, Paul Eggert (2013) made this very incisive comment: "The recording is not just documentary but interpretative; the authorial is distinguished from the nonauthorial, thus helping to explain the editor's preferences in the reading text and allowing the reader to construct the sequence of alterations within the one state".
Hawkes was, at the same, a translator and a textual scholar.He made alterations and modifications whenever necessary.Chau (2020) argues that not only did Hawkes achieve mastery of the textual history of the novel, he was, at the same time, ready to emend the text, making alterations, amplifications and omissions whenever necessary.In all this, he was attempting to fulfill his main purpose as a translator, aiming to make the work fully comprehensible to the English language reader.On pages 64-65, Hawkes expresses skepticism over the accuracy of the text.

Figure 3 Hawkes Notebook 64-65 (from Hawkes 2020) with transcription of handwritten notes
After reading the text, Hawkes is very convinced that the expression 不上一月 is not correct and gives his reasons as seen above.
Hawkes is very meticulous as he pays attention to the slightest errors and inconsistencies in the text.On Page 161 of his notebook, he notices, for example, that the 4 characters (Old Mrs. Lai 賴嬤嬤, Lai Da's wife 賴大家的, the wives of Zhou Rui 周瑞家的 and Zhang Cai 張材家的) are engaged in a conversation, and comments: "None of them have been got off the stage up to this point.".Therefore, he supplied 三人去了 to "The four women then left.",remarking, "Our Forgetful Author".(Hawkes notebook p161) In chapter 45, Xi-chun asks Xi-feng for the architect's drawing in preparation for her painting of the Garden.In the Chinese text, Xi-feng replies that the drawing isn't at Grandmother Jia's, 那 個圖樣沒有在老太太那裡.Hawkes remembers that in Chapter 42, Bao-chai suggests that they should ask Lady Wang for the drawing, 你和太太要出來.Hawkes alters Xi-feng's reply to read 那個圖 樣沒有在太太那裡, replacing 老太太 with 太太 and renders accordingly, "The architect's drawing isn't at Lady Wang's." The textual history of Hongloumeng, as earlier indicated, is extraordinarily complex.When Hawkes started working on The Story of the Stone, he set about mastering the intricate details of the many early manuscript transcriptions and printed editions of the novel.As he translated, he consulted all of these different versions, listing the differences even to variations in phrases and single words.In his notebook, Hawkes documented his editorial choices among the variant texts of the novel and his meticulous emendations.He virtually created his own version of the Chinese text in order to produce the best possible English translation.In several cases, the translated text was a result of his comparison of the various texts of Hongloumeng.He chose the source text based on its clarity and consistency.
For his translation, Hawkes followed the basic text established by Gao E., occasionally deviating from it for a number of reasons.Chau (2019) states that "the problems of Hongloumeng are never purely textual, involving as they do other matters, such as the identity of the author, the Red Inkstone commentaries, the relationship between the novel and the autobiographical reality it reflects, and the reliability of Gao E.'s declarations as editor".These are probably among the reasons why Hawkes admitted the arbitrariness of his own editorial emendations, saying: "A translator has divided loyalties.He has a duty to his author, a duty to his reader and a duty to the text.The three are by no means identical and are often hard to reconcile" (Hawkes 1977: 20).
Despite the fact that Hawkes uses the Renmin edition as his starting point, as the work proceeds, he deviates from it, making changes where necessary.The Notebooks show how he made his choices and the reasons for changing, omitting or altering particular words and phrases in the text.Hawkes also identified inconsistencies in the original texts, with his ultimate goal being to produce a readable and consistent work.For example, chapter 19 describes how the Jia family celebrated the New Year.They had play performances at home.The deafening sounds of musical instruments and the shouts of battle cries could easily be heard in the streets outside.Hawkes comments on the variation of the variant texts in his notebooks, stating that he prefers the Gengchen version because its 'more fun to translate'.

Figure 4 Hawkes Notebook (from Hawkes 2020) with transcription of handwritten notes
Based on his comments, he provides the following translation: 滿街之人個個都讚好熱鬧戲別人家斷不能有的」 (Gengchen version, 19, 402) "Where the passers-by smiled appreciatively and told each other that only a family like the Jias could afford theatricals that produced so satisfying a volume of noise."(Stone, 19, 376)

The translator as an author
The translator's third role is rewriting the original.As an author, the translation has the responsibility of reproducing the meaning of the original in another language.This reproduction is not a mere transfer of the linguistic elements embedded in the original but also the cultural and philosophical Literary translation is generally perceived not only as a way of rewriting the original text but also as a means of re-presenting the source culture in a way that suits the ideological, aesthetics, sensitivity and expectations of the target culture.
Kung (2021) states that; "literary translation functions as a form of rewriting that contributes to the generation of cultural initiatives for assimilating the translated literature into the poetics of the target culture".This takes into consideration the contextual aspects of translation practice, considered as an act of rewriting with a particular emphasis on how translation can be impacted and constrained by wider contextual issues.This section investigates how the rewriting of the meaning of the original texts of Hongloumeng occurs by examining how the final text was reshaped either in its entirety or partially by the translator's notes.
The cultural turn in translation studies essentially entails an examination of how the final presentation of the target text is the outcome or representation of a mediated process relating to the original text led by the translation players (Hatim 2001).This discussion is indicative of the irreplaceable role of the extra textual materials, particularly of their interaction or interdependence with the concerned socio-cultural environments (final text).According Genette's concept of paratextuality, we distinguish between two types of paratextual elements; peritexts (within the book) an epitext (outside the books).Epitexts like Hawkes' notes function as a mediating device between the original and the final translation.Accordingly, paratext can be theorized as the consequence of a 'complex negotiation of the text's meaning within the economic, social, political and cultural contexts and conventions current at its moment of production' (Bell 2002: 632; Kung 2013).This aspect is particularly relevant with regard to the mediated nature of translation, which is 'naturally much more urgent than in the case of an original literature because the work is often far from its recipient' (Kovala 1996: 120), which belongs to a different socio-cultural sphere.Lefevere (1992b) introduced the concept of anthologization, which is a form of rewriting like translation, which is one of the key methods through which translation players collect, edit, and repackage the original text as translations.One of the key elements involved in this repackaging is revising.(Revision is a vital part of the whole arduous process).A close examination of Hawkes' notes shows that the process of revising and shaping his own creation is a continuous process of hard work, attention to detail, meticulous record-keeping and a deep commitment to transforming the original work as beautifully as possible.Fan (2020) argues that; the inability to present a finished product with adequate artistry at the first attempt is common to writers and translators alike".Hawkes' constant revision shows that he only knew what was the best translation once he saw it on the page.

Resonance of the notes with the translated text
During the process of re-presenting the original, the translator performs conscious or unconscious rewriting of the pre-text that reflects a direct or indirect intertextual relationship with the results of the reading.The translator shuttles back and forth in the interwoven network of texts to get his/her own understanding and the product of understanding, that is, the meaning, and then turns the product of understanding into the final product of translation.Italian aesthetician and literary critic Benedetto Croce thinks that literary translation is the recreation of art, the translation is the regeneration of the original text, and the translator is the giver of the regeneration of life (Tan, 2000).British translator Andre Lefevere believes that whether translators can reproduce the original text depends on their skills as artists (Lefevere, 1995).Therefore, to what extent a translation can be revived depends entirely on the translator's creativity, in which intertextuality plays an important role.Of course, the degree of the translator's creativity also needs to be considered; the key is to be faithful to the original text and reflect the translator's style.Just as Mr. Qian quoted Confucius to say that one should follow one's heart and do what one wants without exceeding the the rules here are about degree.
In Chapter 62, Bao-yu and the girls are playing a drinking game, in which they agree that the losers have to give a famous quotation in prose, a familiar quotation in verse, a dominoes three-some, a song-title, and the day's forecast from an almanac, all five to make sense when they are put together.
After the game, Xiang-yun was found half-drunk, lying on the grass, reciting the following quotations as if she was in the drinking game: 1. 泉香而酒洌 2. 玉盌盛來琥珀光 3. 直飲到梅梢月上 4. 醉扶歸 5. 卻為宜會親友 Hawkes notices the variant text for the above texts.The manuscripts (Qianlong, Gengchen) provide the complete version of the above five lines, whereas Renmin has the 2 nd and 3 rd quotations missing.Hawkes writes beside each quotation his findings.With all 5 quotations resolved, Hawkes writes down his draft at the bottom, putting down in brackets the rules of the drinking game as shown in the original Chinese version, which is what we find in his final draft.
1. 泉香而酒洌 the spring water being sweet, the wine is good (古文) 2. 玉盌盛來琥珀光 Pour me its liquid amber in a jade cup (舊詩) 3. 直飲到梅梢月上 We'll drink till we see 'The moon above the plum-tree bough' (骨牌名) 4. 醉扶歸 Then, as we're Rolling Home (曲牌名) 5. 卻為宜會親友 "It will be a good time to meet a friend" the crossed-out original reads: It would be an advantage to meet a close friend", which is modified as "It will be a sound time to meet a friend") (憲書上的話).From Hawkes (2000) In Chapter 23, when Bao-yu meets Dai-yu, she is sorrowfully burying the flowers in the Garden, sweeping up the fallen petals and putting them into the bag.He offers to help.Bao-yu teases her by using the quotation from the story, 會真記, which was made into the play known as Western Chamber 西廂記, which she is reading at the moment: "我就是個, 多愁多病的身, 你就是那 倾國倾 城的貌。" Hawkes copies down two more lines to give context and then writes the draft of the translation of the quotation, which is the same as what we find in the Stone, as shown in the following.
On page 39 of the notebooks, Hawkes remarks on his decision to translate 鑞鎗頭.Hawkes chooses to translate the expression 鑞 鎗頭 simply as leaden counterfeit rather than pewter counterfeit because pewter would not suggest softness in the minds of the English readers.
Having resolved the translation, Hawkes writes down several lines of the original Chinese text in Western Chamber 97 to give context to the expression 鑞鎗頭.Hawkes writes the following draft translation of the line in the play: "You are a sham spear with soft leaden head."This draft is modified for the published translation as follows: "原來也是個「銀樣鑞鎗頭!"Well, I know you now for what you are: "Of silver spear the leaden counterfeit"!As shown in the notebook on page 321, Hawkes writes that these lines originate from the play, The Return of the Soul, Scene 10 Jingmeng, or Youyuan, in which the aria pattern, "Zaoluopao" "皂羅袍", is used.Hawkes brackets the character "是" in the line, "原 來 (是) 姹紫嫣紅開遍", as this is included in the novel but not in the original play, 牡丹亭 Hawkes draws a line to connect the quotation "都付與斷井頽垣" with the quotation "良辰美景奈何天", perhaps indicating that the former is immediately followed by the latter in the play, 牡丹亭.Hawkes also drafts a translation of these lines, which is retained almost fully in the published version.
The only alterations are the omission of the apostrophe in "Midst ", which shows the word is an abbreviation of "Amidst", and the addition of dashes at the end of the quotations.
In Chapter 58, following the news that The Dowager Consort of the late Emperor has passed away, a special decree is issued banning people of high standing from putting on musical performances for one year.Hawkes notices that one of them, 藥官 Pivoine, has died earlier, and 3 of the remaining 11 players, viz.Charmante, Trésor, and Topaze have not been placed.The notebook shows how Hawkes works out how many of the original 12 players in the troupe in Pear Tree Court remain in the household.Consequently, Hawkes edits the text by having the "將去者四五人" (literally, 4 or 5 leaving) in the original Chinese text replaced "The three who were leaving" in the English translation.

The Mismatch Between Notes and Translation
There are several instances where there is a difference between what is in the notes and the final decision or the final translated text.For example: In the Ancestral Temple, there is a long couplet on two vertical boards at the sides of the arch as follows: "肝腦塗地, 兆姓賴保肓之 恩; 功名貫天, 百代仰蒸嘗之盛" 。 On page 358, after writing down the couplet, Hawkes gives the source for the expression 肝腦塗 地 in Han Shu 41.Hawkes writes a draft of the translation of the two lines of the couplet on page 299 of this notebook.This translation in the notebook is slightly different from the published translated text.The couplet is formatted in the published translation as if it is displayed on the boards, Hawkes providing no punctuation at the end of the lines, despite the use of punctuation in the modern Chinese text.This applies to the other inscriptions, 星輝輔弼 and 慎終追遠.
Inside the gate of the Temple, over the entrance to the vestibule, a board with the expression 星輝輔弼 inscribed in the late Emperor's calligraphy.The inscriptions down the two sides were also written by the same Emperor.Hawkes renders them as follows: 星輝輔弼 HIS MINISTERS ARE AS SHINING STARS 勛業有光昭日月，their achievements outshone the celestial luminaries 功名無 間及兒孫。Their fame is reflected in the generations that come after them.Hawkes gives the translation of 星輝輔弼 all in capital letters so as to match the format of the board.The draft translation of the couplet is the same as the published version, except that in the second line, the latter has "in the generations" instead of the former's "upon the generations." Hawkes, who has a particular interest in Chinese drama, remarks on page 120 that, "'代玉's comment on 西廂記 「脫布衫」is not that appropriate.The expression in question applies to the male protagonist, whereas Dai-yu is referring to her own circumstances.
Hawkes' familiarity with the play enables him to make the point.Despite the remarks, Hawkes simply translates the text as it is.As with previous quotations, Hawkes gives on page 330 the origin of the line, the tune of the song, and the role of the singer as follows.However, the reference to Book the Second, Act 3 should actually be Act 2 (第二本, 第二折): Also, Hawkes provides on both pages 266 and 330 a draft translation, which is what we find in the published version, with the exception of the last word of the second line, which, in the 176 published version, reads "grass" instead of "moss".This was almost certainly to provide a rhyme with 'pass'「幽僻處，可有人行?"A place remote, where footsteps seldom pass, 點蒼苔，白露冷冷」 And dew still glistens on the untrodden grass."

Importance of Studying Hawkes' Translation Notes
David Hawkes notes can be considered as the "black box" of the translation process.It records many of the translators' hesitations and repetitions in the translation process and how he carefully translated every word.It thus plays an irreplaceable role in our understanding of Hawkes' translation.A careful study and in-depth analysis are worthwhile to further understand Hawkes' translation.
Studying Hawkes' notes helps us to go beyond textual analyses in the historical research of the English translation of Hongloumeng.
The notes also give us a crucial testimony about the translation process and conditions under which it took place and provide a potentially rich source both for the translation historian, translation researcher and the professional translator.

Conclusion
David Hawkes translation notebooks provide ample information into the English translation of the Classical Chinese novel Hongloumeng.By reading through the notes, we can discover the translator's working practices, which can be of great help to today's practicing literary translators.The notes not only constitute a rich source of raw material for research on the history of the translation of Hongloumeng but also open up new areas in the field of translation research at a time when translation archives are gradually gaining ground.

Figure 1 .
Figure 1.Chinese symbolism: Bi ding ru-yi 筆錠如意 (from Hawkes 2000, 24), with transcription of handwritten notes.In the notebooks, Hawkes records a wide range of sources he consulted to understand the meaning of 筆錠如意.According to Chau (2019), "the expression 筆錠如意 works like a pun and as a rebus through the use of homophones or near homophones, different characters which are pronounced in the same or a similar way.筆 is close to the sound of 必."By replacing 筆 with 必, 筆 錠如意 becomes 必定如意.Thus, 筆錠 如意 is associated with 必定如意, as a symbol of success and good fortune.

Figure 2
Figure 2 Hawkes consults an expert (from Hawkes 2000) with transcription of handwritten notes.