Introduction

After the “cultural turn”, the traditional perspective of Translation Studies (TS) has shifted its emphasis from the language approach to the contextual, ideological, and cultural aspects that influence translation. Therefore, translation is defined as “manipulation” (Hermans, 1985), “rewriting” (Lefevere, 1992), “conduct guided by norms” (Toury, 1995), “an ideologically rooted endeavour” (Schäffner, 2003), etc.

Numerous studies have been conducted in response to the growing interest in the relationship between ideology and translation (Hatim and Mason, 1990, 1997; Puurtinen, 2003; Gumul, 2011; Schäffner, 2004; Kemppanen, 2004; Gagnon, 2006; Munday, 2007; Valdeón, 2007; Kim, 2017; Gu, 2019; Gu and Tipton, 2020; Pan et al., 2020). Hatim and Mason (1997) illustrate a clear distinction between ‘the ideology of translating’ and ‘the translation of ideology’, as demonstrated in their study (Hatim and Mason, 1997, p. 119). The former refers to the ideological nature of translation activities (behaviors and texts) and emphasizes the concept of extratextual functions. The latter refers to translators’ treatment of ideology in the original text, emphasizing the linguistic micro-level within the text.

Munday (2007) concurs with the notion that translators’ linguistic preferences and ideologies are related. Through the lexico-grammatical decisions of the translators, he examines the ideology and the way it is textually expressed in the translation of Latin American leaders (Munday, 2007, p. 196). Set in the scope of critical discourse analysis (CDA), Gumul (2011) investigates the translation transfer of syntactic markers (transitivity, nominalization, lexical choices) with ideological significance in the 22 Polish translations from English newspapers and magazines in a Polish reprint magazine Forum. It is found that a substantial proportion of the ideologically loaded translational shifts tend to reflect the anti-war attitude of the Polish public opinion rather than the government’s pro-war stance, thus casting an altered perspective of view to the intended audience.

Recently, the combination of systemic functional linguistics (SFL), corpus linguistics (CL) and CDA has attracted a number of scholars to conduct studies on the relationship between ideology and translation (Afzaal et al., 2022). Farhan (2017) explores ideological manipulation in the five English translations of presidential speeches after the Arab Spring using the synergy method of CL and CDA. It is found that collocation, semantic prosody, discourse prosody, transitivity, modality and lexical cohesion serve as vehicles of ideological meaning and that two out of the five translations project a manipulated ideology that does not conform to the ideology underlying the original political discourse.

Similarly, Pan et al. (2020) conducted a corpus-based CDA study of the ideology involved in the translation practice of a Chinese government-affiliated institution. They compared the institutional and individual translations of Chinese political texts from the linguistic description, such as transitivity, mood, and modality. Three types of translation shifts are identified in the institutional translations, while a rather literal translation is found in the translations by the individual translator. They attribute their findings to “the institution’s ideological purpose of presenting China to the world” (Pan et al., 2020, p. 51).

Against this backdrop, this study aims to contribute to this direction by exploring the correlation between textual ideology and the English translations of political document discourse within the synergy method of CL and SFL in the Chinese context. In this respect, the system of modality within SFL has a significant role to play because modality has long been proved to be “a matter of ideological interest”, “a vehicle of ideological meaning” (Gumul, 2011, p. 762), etc. Thus, modality shifts can provide a motivating area of examination in shedding light on the translators’ ideological mediation of the STs. Modality is defined as “the speaker’s judgement, or request of the judgement of the listener, on the status of what is being said” (Halliday and Matthiessen, 2014, p. 172).

The interpersonal function of language constitutes an indispensable part of communication. The system of Modality within SFL corresponds with interpersonal functions of language, such as the speaker’s stance (Biber et al., 2000), attitude (Thompson, 2008), judgement (Halliday and Matthiessen, 2014), etc. Therefore, it is rewarding to examine how modality, which embodies the interpersonal function, is mediated and reconstructed by the translators in Chinese political document discourse. This study takes the modality system within SFL as the theoretical framework. It investigates the (in)consistencies in the official translators’ choices for translating modality and how these in(consistencies) relate to the socio-political and socio-cultural context of Chinese political discourse. To this end, the following questions are addressed:

(1) What are the linguistic choices of modality in the STs and TTs?

(2) What are the translation shifts of modality?

(3) Do the translation shifts of modality engender changes in the ST’s ideological contents?

Literature review

Studies of Chinese political discourse translation

Among Chinese academia, previous studies focus mainly on the summary of translation experience from the official translators of varying levels of experience to expound on translation principles, strategies, difficulties, etc. (Cheng, 2004; Wang, 2008, 2011, 2016; Chen, 2014, 2018; Yang 2018). In addition, official translators tend to publish academic papers to comment on their expectations/practice in translation departments. For instance, taking the translation of Xi Jinping’s report at the 19th NCCPC as an example, Yang (2018) claims that official translators uphold the principle of being faithful to the original text while thinking-over linguistic differences and the target audience into account. As the official translators participate in translating Chinese political discourse, their studies provide a valuable guideline for scholars and students.

What scholars have researched include the following aspects: evaluating the English translation strategies and methods, and putting forward their suggestions on some political terms, sentences, and passages (Wu, 2010; Afzaal et al., 2022; Afzaal, 2023; Kaibao and Afzaal, 2024; Li et al., 2024; Yang and Li, 2015), exploring the extratextual factors influencing the translation of political texts in China (Hu, 2014), the dissemination and reception of the translated political terms (Wu and Zhao, 2013), the studies of China’s international image building and the translated political discourse in China (Hu and Tian, 2018; Xie and Wang, 2018). For instance, Hu (2014) argues that the rewriting of many texts in Chinese political discourse translation is not based on the consideration of intratextual factors, but the result of manipulation of many extratextual factors. Hu (2014) concludes that the English translation of the expression “台独 (taidu)” into “Taiwan secession” is attributed to Chinese translators’ political quality of being sensitive in the lexical choice in the translational practice. If “台独 (taidu)” is rendered into “Taiwan independence”, it will inevitably result in the fact that the legitimacy of “Taiwan independence” is recognized in the English translation.

Nevertheless, the correlation between textual ideology and the English translations of political discourse within the synergy method of CL and SFL is inadequately addressed in the Chinese context. A telling example is Hu and Tian’s (2018) corpus-based study. They discuss the textual effect of the English translations of the Government Work Report (2000–2016), that is, the image of the Chinese government recreated by the translation. It is found that the high-frequency use of modal verbs with high values in English translations enlarges the psychological distance between the Chinese government and the readers of the Government Work Report.

Modality in translation

There is a recent rise of interest in investigating modal verbs and modality among Chinese translation academia. Researchers focus on the following aspects: the functional study of modality in the Chinese government legal discourse and its English translation (Li, 2015), the role of modality in recreating the image of Chan master Huineng in four English translations of The Platform Sutra (Yu and Wu, 2016), the function of modality in achieving the diplomatic translators’ role of “policy endorsers” in “interpersonal connotations” embedded in the Chinese diplomatic discourse (Fu, 2016, p. 104), a sociosemiotic analysis of modality in Chinese government press conference interpreting (Fu, 2018), the official interpreters’ role in “mediating the communication between the ST speakers and TT listeners” (Li, 2018, p. 137), etc.

Studies above suggest that translation scholars have been aware of the function of modality in realizing interpersonal communication in translation studies. For instance, Fu (2016) compares modal patterns in interpreted and translated diplomatic discourse from the dimensions of modality type, orientation, and value with the aim of examining the interpersonal component in translational activities. The data for his study includes the Chinese Premier’s press conferences and his reports on the work of the government from 2008 to 2012. Fu’s (2016) findings show that there exist similarities in modal distribution and that there is frequent use of modulation in the translated diplomatic discourse. He suggests that the modality system plays an important role in articulating the translators’ attitudes and stances.

However, modality shifts have not received enough attention in translation studies. Despite the different focus on the written and spoken discourse, Fu’s (2018) and Li’s (2018) studies are illuminating to this study. In the former, Fu (2018) conducts a sociosemiotic study of modality shifts in the Chinese government press conference interpreting (2008–2013). It is found that some common trends are shared in the distribution of modality in the STs and TTs. He proposes a taxonomy of translation shifts of modality in the interpreter-mediated discourse. His study suggests the official interpreters’ identity is demonstrated in politically mediated communication. In the latter, Li (2018) explores the reconstruction of modality in Chinese–English Government Press Conference interpreting (1989–2014). To this end, she takes Descriptive Translation Studies and the modality system within SFL as the theoretical framework. She examines the general features of modality shifts and the interpersonal effects of the major types of modality shifts. It is found that the interpreters’ preference for “weakening”, “subjectivization” and “de-obligation” in the reconstruction of modality (Li, 2018, p. 134). The interpersonal effects of these modality shifts are categorized into the following: The shifts of “weakening” and “subjectivization” highlight “the Chinese government’s subjectivity and make the Chinese officials or journalists sound more friendly and polite”; the shifts of de-obligation” foreground “the Chinese officials’ speeches more sincere and responsive to the audience”. She attributes her findings to the institutional norm of “fidelity first and acceptability second” and the typological features of GPC interpreting in China (Li, 2018, p. 135).

Methods

Theoretical framework of the study

The system of modality: modality type

The system of modality expresses the intermediate degrees between the positive and negative poles (Halliday and Matthiessen, 2014). As Fig. 1 shows, the system of modality has four dimensions: modality type, orientation, modality value, and polarity. Given that the positive forms of polarity dominate in the data, the dimension of polarity is not included in this section.

Fig. 1
figure 1

Halliday and Matthiessen’s system of modality (2014).

Full size image

Figure 1 shows two types of modality: modalization (modality in propositions) and modulation (modality in proposals). The clause takes on the form of propositions when language is used to exchange information, while the clause takes on the form of proposals when language is used to exchange goods-&-services (Halliday and Matthiessen, 2014). In a proposition, “the meaning of the positive and negative pole is asserting and denying” (Halliday and Matthiessen, 2014, p. 177). There are two kinds of intermediate possibilities between the positive and the negative propositions: one expresses the degrees of probability: “possibly/probably/certainly”, and another one expresses degrees of usuality: “sometimes/usually/always” (Halliday and Matthiessen, 2014, p. 177). Modality signifies a speaker’s attitudes toward the degree of assertion and denial, which is strongly connected with the construal of “the region of uncertainty that lies between yes and no” (Halliday and Matthiessen, 2014, p. 176).

While in a proposal, “the meaning of the positive and negative poles is prescribing and proscribing: positive ‘do it, negative ‘don’t do it” (Halliday and Matthiessen, 2014, p. 177). There are two kinds of intermediate possibility between the positive and negative poles (prescribing and proscribing): one expresses varying degrees of obligation: “allowed to/supposed to/required to”, and another one expresses degrees of inclination: “willing to/anxious to/determined to” (Halliday and Matthiessen, 2014, p. 177).

The system of Modality: orientation

The second dimension in the modality system is orientation, which determines “how each type of modality will be realized” (Halliday and Matthiessen, 2014, p. 692). Orientation is distinguished between subjective and objective modality, and between the explicit and implicit variants. According to Halliday and Matthiessen (2014), there are four distinct means of expressing modality: implicit subjective, explicit subjective, implicit objective, and explicit objective. For instance, implicit subjective is realized by “modal operator as Finite” in modalization (probability): Mary’ll know; explicit subjective is realized by “projecting mental clause as mood Adjunct” in modalization (probability): I think Mary knows; In my opinion Mary knows”; implicit objective is realized by “modal adverb as mood Adjunct” in modalization (probability): Mary probably knows; Mary is likely to; and explicit objective is realized by “relational clause with modal Complement/Attribute” in modalization (probability): It is likely that Mary knows (Halliday and Matthiessen, 2014, p. 693).

The system of Modality: modality value

The third dimension of the modality system is modality value which, in Halliday and Matthiessen’s (2014, p. 694) words, is “attached to the modal judgment: high, median or low”. Table 1 shows the three values of modality. The modality value system is valuable for examining the speaker’s commitment. Modality is “the degree to which the speaker commits herself to the validity of what she is saying” (Thompson, 2008, p. 69).

Table 1 Three values of modality.
Full size table

They also distinguish three values of the modal items (Halliday and Matthiessen, 2014). It is illustrated in Table 2.

Table 2 Values of the modal items.
Full size table

Data of the study

The six reports include Jiang Zemin’s reports in 1992 and 1997, Hu Jintao’s reports in 2002 and 2007, and Xi Jinping’s report in 2017. The reasons for choosing Jiang Zemin’s report in 1992 as the beginning report in this data are as follows. The former Chinese leader Deng Xiaoping made his famous South China tour from January 8 to February 21, 1992, inspecting the southern cities of Wuchang, Shenzhen, Zhuhai and Shanghai. During this tour, Deng Xiaoping made important speeches, which played an important role in directing and speeding up China’s reform and opening-up and the socialist modernization process. The bilingual versions of the six reports are mainly collected from the website of Theory China. The size of the corpus amounts to 182,653 tokens, with the Chinese subcorpus and English subcorpus 109,279 and 73,374 tokens, respectively.

To investigate and identify any trends in the linguistic choices of modality in the English translations of the six reports, the modal items are extracted from a diachronic point. Then, the comparative study of the 18th and 19th parallel corpora will be used as a case study on the grounds that the different uses of the modal verbs should and will constitute one of those “critical points” (Munday, 2012) in the decision-making processes of the official translators of Chinese political discourse.

The corpus tool Antconc 3.5.8 is used to identify and count modal items in both the Chinese and English corpora. The entry point to make a systemic comparison between the STs and TTs is to identify the recurrent linguistic patterns in the TTs, and then compare these patterns with their counterparts in the STs on a one-to-one basis. Thus, the top modal items identified in the TTs will be compared with their counterparts in the STs for possible translation shifts with the help of CUC ParaConc V0.3.

Analysis procedures

Four steps of processing are done on the data. First, the alignment of the Chinese corpus and the official English corpus is conducted with the help of ABBYY Aligner 2.0, a free alignment software. When the Alignment errors occur, they need to be performed manually. Then, modal items are identified with the help of Antconc 3.5.8, a freeware concordance program for Windows. The top modal items in the TTs are then used as search terms in the parallel corpus to establish “coupled pairs” between the STs and the TTs. Finally, the translation shifts are identified with the help of CUC ParaConc V0.3, a parallel concordance software for retrieving aligned parallel texts developed by the Communication University of China. CUC ParaConc V0.3 is more compatible with the Chinese language, and it can be used to retrieve a Chinese keyword and its official English translation. The retrieved pairs will be investigated manually.

There are also three values (high, median, and low) of modality in Chinese. Based on the modality system (Halliday, 1994, pp. 146–150), Li (2007, p. 139) classifies the Chinese modality system in detail and holds that in the system of Chinese modality, “modalization is likely to be realized by modal adverbs while modulation is realized by modal auxiliaries”. Li’s (2007: 140) classification of modal auxiliaries and modal adverbs in Chinese is listed in Table 3.

Table 3 Modal auxiliaries and modal adverbs in Chinese (Li, 2007).
Full size table

A new revised categorization of modality types and values for Chinese political document discourse.

The Chinese political discourse is imbued with its specific political rhetorical and discoursal features. Chinese politics is featured by the top-down pattern of political communication in China. Kluver (1996, p. 121) emphasizes that top-down rhetoric plays “a central role in re-crafting China’s dominant political ideology”. Coupled with the discursive effects of Chinese political discourse translation, a newly revised categorization (Table 4) of modality types and values is recommended for this study. This current categorization is achieved based on Li’s (2007) categorization of modal auxiliaries and modal adverbs in Chinese and Halliday and Matthiessen’s (2014) categorization of modality types and modality values.

Table 4 A new revised categorization of modality types and values for Chinese political document discourse.
Full size table

For a systemic and practical analysis of English modality items for this study, Biber et al.’s (1999) nine core modal verbs (can, could, may, might, must, shall, should, will, would) are focused for this study. Additionally, “need to” and “want to” are included, because they are equivalent to yuanyi 愿意 and xuyao 需要, which are listed in Li’s (2007, p. 140) classification of Chinese modal auxiliaries and modal adverbs. “Need to” and “want to”, which are related in meaning to the modal auxiliaries, are called semi-modals by Biber et al. (2000, p. 73). Similarly, yuanyi 愿意 and xuyao 需要 can be regarded as Chinese semi-modals, because they cannot be categorized into modal verbs or modal adverbs.

Notably, the modal adverb always is also included, because it is equivalent to yizhi一直, which is listed in Li’s (2007, p. 140) classification of Chinese modal auxiliaries and modal adverbs. Of mention that all Chinese and English items related to modality are called modal items (including modal verbs, modal adverbs, and semi-modals) in this study.

According to Li (2007, p. 40), neng (gou) 能(够) is categorized under the modality type of modulation. Similarly, Halliday and McDonald (2004, p. 340) agree that the modal expression of ability, neng (gou), “be able to” forms part of “the system of modulation”. Based on their study, neng (gou) 能(够) is categorized under the modality type of modulation, signifying the semantic meaning of ability. However, neng (gou) 能(够) is not assigned degrees of value in Li’s (2007) study. Given the political nature of political discourse, neng (gou) 能(够) is classified as of low modality in this study.

Of mention is that the contextual reading of the STs and the TTs is also important for this new revised categorization because a close contextual reading makes the research more reliable and objective. For instance, all the concordances of a searched modality item should be closely examined to determine whether this modality item should be included or not. Such lines as “…… never interfere in the internal affairs of other countries or impose our own will on them” (the 17th report) and “The very purpose of developing socialist democracy is to give full expression to the will of the people, protect their rights and interests, ……” (the 19th report) are not included, because the word will in italics (the author’s emphasis) in these sentences are not modality items. Besides, such a line as “There will be a higher rate of employment” (the 16th report) is also excluded, because the modal verb (will) indicates probability. A close reading of the STs and the TTs discloses that the modalized use of will is rather sporadic. Specifically, 14 instances of modalized and 1003 instances of modulated will are identified in the translated discourse.

As to the STs, such lines from the 19th report as “地方 各级 党委 常委 会”, 残奥 会, “人民 日益 增长 的 物质 文化 需要”, and “适应 人民 需要 的” (Figs. 2 and 3) are not included in the data, as 会 and 需要 are not modal items in these lines.

Fig. 2
figure 2

The screenshot of the extraction of 会.

Full size image
Fig. 3
figure 3

The screenshot of the extraction of 需要.

Full size image

Results and discussions

The linguistic choices of modality in the STs and TTs

The comparative study of Tables 5 and 6 shows that the TTs are substantially more modalised (157% increase) overall than the STs. Specifically, there is a 111% increase in modalization in the TTs. As for the modulation, there is a 17% decrease in high-valued modulation, a prominent 1279% increase in medium-valued modulation, a 45% increase in low-valued modulation, and a 43% increase in low-valued ability. Thus, it can be argued that the TTs are more modalized than the STs.

Table 5 The distribution of the linguistic choices of modality in the STs.
Full size table
Table 6 The distribution of the linguistic choices of modality in the TTs.
Full size table

As to the linguistic choices of modality in the STs, Table 5 shows there are many more instances of modulation (98%) than that of modalization (2%). It suggests that the General Secretaries are concerned about the propositional contents of their reports to the NCCPC. As the reports communicate the plans of the CPC and its governance policies, it is the General Secretaries’ expectation to adopt more modulation to show their ability, commitment, volition, obligation, and inclination. In order to give their commands to all Party members and officials on the one hand, and to boost the Chinese people’s confidence and trust in the CPC on the other hand, the General Secretaries favor more obligation and inclination in the Reports.

Additionally, modality values differ in modulation. High frequencies of high-valued modality (about 80%) in the STs help the General Secretaries create an authoritative image, which signals their leadership over all party members and officials. The evidence of such an argument can be found in Xiong’s (2018) study, which suggests that the report to the NCCPC is imbued with an imperative tone, embodying the command of the CPC as the leadership over all party members and officials.

Notably, a diachronic examination of the modal items shows that the modal verb要far outnumbers the rest among the modal items. The modal verb 要 is followed by 必须, another high-valued item. It adds a layer of authoritative and uncompromising tone for the General Secretaries. On the contrary, the low-valued modal verb 可以 and modal adverb 可能, indicating the modalization (usuality), are scarcely used in the STs (only 51 out of 1258 modal items, making up only 2%). And the modalization (probability) is almost ruled out in STs.

As to the linguistic choices of modality in the TTs, Table 6 shows there are many more instances of modulation (97%) than that of modalization (3%). It suggests that the official translators favor the use of modulation. Thus, both the STs and TTs are more modulated than modalized.

However, a significant difference lies in modality values in the STs and TTs. Contrary to the STs, the medium-valued modal items in modulation are preferred in the TTs (Table 6), followed by the high- and low-valued ones from a diachronic perspective. This finding corroborates the ideas of previous studies (Wang and Chen, 2007; Fu, 2016), which argue that the modality values in political discourse should be sequenced as the following: medium > high > low. The medium- and low-valued modality in the TTs recreates a less authoritative image of the General Secretary (or the CPC he represents).

Notably, Table 6 shows that the medium-valued modal verb should (1132) has the highest frequency, followed by the medium-valued modal verb will (1003) and the high-valued modal verb must (727). However, a diachronic analysis of the modal items shows that there exist different distribution features of the top three items (should, will, and must). Mainly, the modal verb should be used the most frequently in the 18th English report, while the modal verb will occur the most frequently in the 19th English report. On the other hand, the 18th English report uses the modal verb that should express the obligation of the CPC to carry out its actions. In contrast, the 19th English report adopts will to express the inclination of the CPC to perform its actions. The conditions with should are the carrying out of an obligation, and will is one type of dynamic modality, expressing willingness. Similarly, Biber (2006, p. 99) states that the use of should stress “necessity/obligation” and will underscore “prediction/volition”. This divergence provides evidence for the official translators’ intentional manipulation to cast an altered ideological content diachronically to the target audience.

As Fig. 2 shows, there are a total of 418 occurrences of should. Of mention is that contextual reading is essential in the searching process of translation pairs. The searching process is repeated back and forth several times for the reliability of the research results. Then, all the 93 instances of should in the parallel corpus of the 19th English report are extracted and compared with its corresponding items in the STs. The results are presented in Table 7. Next, all the will instances in the parallel corpora of the 18th and 19th reports are extracted and compared with their corresponding items, as shown in Table 7.

Table 7 Instances of should in the 18th and 19th English reports and its counterparts.
Full size table

Instances of will in the 18th and 19th English reports and its counterparts.

Notably, how the modal verbs should and will are realized share some common trends. The methods are as follows: (1) the modal items should and will are triggered by the equivalent items in Chinese, (2) the addition of the modal items should and will, (3) high-valued modal items in Chinese are translated into low-valued modal items should and will. Besides, there is a special case concerning how the modal item will be realized. Table 7 shows that the low-valued modal items in Chinese are often translated into high-valued modal item will. Therefore, I can identify three main types of translation shifts between should and will and their corresponding items.

First, the addition of should and will in the TTs.

The official translators tend to add should and will in the TTs. Example 1 shows that the official translators add should when the General Secretary outlines the CPC’s priorities over the next five years. The repeated addition of should in Example 1 contributes to making the English translation parallel, thus, strengthening a constant forceful tone. The official translators’ addition of should untriggered by the Chinese modality item might explain why the TTs are much more modalized than the STs.

Example 1

教育是民族振兴和社会进步的基石。… 全面实施素质教育, 深化教育领域综合改革, …积极发展继续教育, 完善终身教育体系, 建设学习型社会。大力促进教育公平。

‘Education is the cornerstone of national renewal and social progress. … Comprehensively implement quality-oriented education, deepen comprehensive reform in the field of education, … Actively develop continuing education, improve the system of lifelong education, and build a learning society. Vigorously promote fairness in education.’

OT: Education is the cornerstone of national renewal and social progress. … We should provide well-rounded education for all students, deepen overall education reform, …… We should actively develop continuing education, improve the system of lifelong education, and build a learning society. We should vigorously promote fairness in education. (the 18th report)

Example 1 centers on the CPC’s priorities for education over the next five years. After mentioning “education is the cornerstone of national renewal and social progress”, General Secretary Hu Jintao uses the polar statement “全面实施素质教育, 深化教育领域综合改革…” to underscore the Party officials’ obligation to give priorities to education. The polar statements could be translated literally into “Comprehensively implement quality-oriented education, deepen comprehensive reform in the field of education…”, but with the addition of the medium-valued should, the objective statement is shifted into a subjective assessment. In Yu and Wu’s (2016, p. 6) words, the modulated clauses expand the “potential for further negotiation” from an interpersonal point of view. Instead of the polar statements, the modulation of obligation should “give more discretion to the hearer who will find it easier to choose to either comply or refuse” (Yu and Wu, 2016, p. 6).

Example 2

中国奉行防御性的国防政策。中国发展不对任何国家构成威胁。中国无论发展到什么程度, 永远不称霸, 永远不搞扩张。中国积极发展全球伙伴关系, 扩大同各国的利益交汇点, 推进大国协调和合作, 构建总体稳定、均衡发展的大国关系框架。

‘China pursues a national defense policy that is defensive in nature. China’s development poses no threat to any country. No matter how developed it may become, China will never seek hegemony or engage in expansion. China has actively developed global partnerships and expanded the convergence of interests with other countries. China has promoted coordination and cooperation with other major countries and work to build a framework for major country relations featuring overall stability and balanced development.’

OT: China pursues a national defense policy that is, in nature, defensive. China’s development does not pose a threat to any other country. No matter what stage of development it reaches, China will never seek hegemony or engage in expansion. China has actively developed global partnerships and expanded the convergence of interests with other countries. China will promote coordination and cooperation with other major countries and work to build a framework for major country relations featuring overall stability and balanced development. (the 19th report)

The ST of Example 2 is Xi Jinping’s statement about the importance of China’s pursuit of a national defense policy that is, in nature, defensive. After emphasizing “China will never seek hegemony or engage in expansion”, Xi Jinping uses several polar proposals, that is, DO or DO NOT in a categorical way. These polar statements can be translated literally. As the example shows, the polar proposal “中国积极发展全球伙伴关系” can be translated into “China has actively developed global partnerships” in a categorical way. However, the official translators add a medium-valued inclination item will, which allows the speaker take up an intermediate degree between the positive and negative poles. The modulated TT seems more satisfactory and more polite to an international audience.

Second, downgrading the modality value of Chinese modality items to the lower-valued should and will in the TTs

Tables 6 and 7 shows that yao 要, a high-valued inclination item, tends to be translated into the lower-valued items should and will. This type of shift takes up a percentage of 14% and 5% respectively.

Example 3

我们要始终坚持一个中国原则。… 对台湾任何政党, 只要不主张“台独”、认同一个中国, 我们都愿意同他们交往、对话、合作。… 我们要努力促进两岸同胞团结奋斗。… 我们要切实保护台湾同胞权益, 团结台湾同胞维护好、建设好中华民族共同家园。

‘We must always adhere to the One-China principle…. We are ready to engage in exchanges, dialogue and cooperation with any political party in Taiwan as long as it does not advocate Taiwan independence and recognizes the One-China principle…. We must work hard to promote unity and hard work of compatriots on both sides of the Taiwan Straits…. We must earnestly protect the rights and interests of Taiwan compatriots and unite with them to safeguard and build the common home of the Chinese nation.’

OT: We must continue to adhere to the one-China principle. … We are ready to conduct exchanges, dialogue and cooperation with any political party in Taiwan as long as it does not seek Taiwan independence and recognizes the one-China principle. We should sustain cross-Straits exchanges and cooperation. … We should encourage the compatriots on both sides of the Taiwan Straits to unite and pursue a common endeavor. … We should fully protect the rights and interests of our Taiwan compatriots and work with them to safeguard and build the common home of the Chinese nation. (the 18th report)

The ST of Example 3 is Hu Jintao’s demanding to enrich “the practice of “One Country, Two Systems”. After underscoring the importance of the one-China principle, Hu Jintao uses a list of “我们要” (we + obligation modal) to press the Taiwan authority to enrich the practice of “One Country, Two Systems” with more prudence on the one hand, and protect the rights and interests of the Taiwan people on the other hand. As such, the CPC’s carrot-and-stick approach towards Taiwan is articulated with the repeated use of “我们要”.

With “我们要” translated into “we + should (the lower-value obligation item)”, the speech function of command is not changed, but more obligation is placed on the Chinese collective we in the TTs. With the addition of our, the first-person plural possessive, the use of “our Taiwan compatriots” suggests an extra layer of the CPC’s obligation and positive engagement to protect the rights and interests of the Taiwanese people. Just as Billig (1995) argues, politicians often evoke nationalistic views through personal pronouns in a specified context.

Third, upgrading the modality value of Chinese modality items to a higher-valued will in the TTs

Example 4

全体中华儿女携手努力, 就一定能在同心实现中华民族伟大复兴进程中完成祖国统一大业。

“If all the sons and daughters of the Chinese nation work hand in hand, we can surely accomplish the great cause of national reunification in the course of working together to realize the great rejuvenation of the Chinese nation.”

OT: Working hand in hand, we, the sons and daughters of the Chinese nation, will surely accomplish the great cause of China’s reunification in the course of our common endeavor to achieve the great renewal of the Chinese nation. (the 18th report)

The ST in Example 4 illustrates the abilities of the sons and daughters of the Chinese nation through the modal items—定and能. The medium-valued modal item—定 is translated into the word surely. With a higher-valued inclination item will adopted to replace 能, the speaker sounds more self-assured in underscoring the inclination and volition of the sons and daughters of the Chinese nation.

Conclusion

This study takes the modality system within SFL as the theoretical framework and investigates the correlation between textual ideology and the English translations of political discourse and how the translation shifts of modality relate to the socio-political and socio-cultural context of Chinese political discourse. It is found that the STs are replete with modal items with firm tones such as 要 (yao), —定 (yiding), 必须 (bixu), etc. On the one hand, these words contribute to the CPC’s resolution in making strategic promises and realizing political mobilization. This points towards the embodiment of what the CPC is determined to do for the next five years. On the other hand, these words serve as the most powerful weapon of the General Secretary’s political mobilization, which promises to arouse the audience’s enthusiasm for participation and motivate them to support the cause of the ruling party. Thus, these modal items are conducive to arousing the enthusiasm of the public and consolidating their trust and support in the CPC’s various policies.

As to the linguistic choices of modality in the STs and TTs, there are many more instances of modulation than that of modalization. It might be argued that the official translators comply with the tenet norm of translating Chinese political discourse (faithfulness and loyalty to the original discourse). Given this, their linguistic choices of more modulation indicate their compliance with the General Secretary’s (or the CPC he represents) stance.

The study found the collocation pattern “we + should/will + verb” that helps to construct a more proactive image of the CPC being efficient, positive, and responsive. With the lower-valued modality items in the STs upgraded in the TTs, the official translators work to glorify the positive aspects of the in-group members.

The second type of shift might be attributed to the variable of tenor. As argued above, the official translators tend to downgrade Chinese modality items to the lower-valued should and will in the TTs. For instance, when 要 (yao) is rendered into modal items with a lower-valued modal item, the interpersonal meaning expressed by the official translators deviates from the ideological contents in the STs. Notably, when there is a downgrade in modality value in English, the meaning deviates from the ideological contents in the original text. The shift of modality makes the speaker’s stand less firm or less absolute.

One the one hand, the authority of the General Secretary’s reports to the delegates at the NCCPC is unassailable through the top-down pattern of political communication. It suggests that the social distance between the speaker (the General Secretary) and the addressees (the delegates) is wide and that the relationship between the speaker and the addressees is characterized by the authoritative tone of order and instruction. Translating this tone into English might involve the official translators’ mediation to make the TTs globally acceptable. With the high-valued modal items in the STs downgraded in the TTs, a different interpersonal relationship is reshaped in the TTs. The unequal relationship between the General Secretary and the addressees established through the top-down political rhetoric in Chinese political discourse is recreated with a more balanced one. In the TTs. That is, a kind of negotiation relation between the speaker and the audience is constructed through the lower-valued modal items.

On the other hand, the official translators of Chinese political discourse and the international audience live in different cultural backgrounds. The social distance between them is huge. The previous studies showed the acceptance of the international audience in the field of Chinese political discourse translation (Zhang, 2013; Huang et al. 2014). It suggests that the official translators have long been aware of the social distance between the international audience and themselves. I can find evidence of such an argument from Huang’s (2004) statement that official translators should fully consider the language expression habits and thinking patterns of target readers and adopt appropriate translation strategies to achieve the expected purpose and communicative function of the TTs.