Abstract This article traces the history of Chinese translations of Spanish Renaissance literary works, offering a systematic review of the translation and dissemination of major authors and their works over the past century. Focusing on canonical authors from the “Golden Age” – the core period of the Spanish Renaissance – such as Juan Ruiz and Cervantes, the study examines their Chinese renditions, including the works of translators, translation sources, and the influence of seminal texts such as Libro de buen amor (The Book of Good Love), Don Quixote , and Lazarillo de Tormes (The Life of Lazarillo de Tormes). Special attention is given to the characteristics of key translations produced during different historical periods, including an analysis of the unique value of Yang Jiang’s translation of Don Quixote , and an exploration of the translation history of diverse literary genres, such as picaresque and pastoral novels, and drama. In addition, the paper investigates the dissemination of Baroque literature in China, highlighting the vital role of anthologized translations in promoting Spanish Golden Age poetry. By mapping the transmission and reception of these works, the study sheds light on the broader cultural impact of Spanish Renaissance literature in China and provides a rich body of documentary evidence for future research on Sino-Spanish literary exchange.

Abstract This article explores the intercultural significance and creativity of translation in the global dissemination of Chinese culture. It argues that translation is not merely a linguistic transformation, but a process of cultural transformation. Beginning with the German translation of one of Feng Zhi’s sonnets, it illustrates how translation can draw upon philosophical resources within a specific linguistic-cultural context. The article then introduces the theoretical foundations of transculturality ( Transkulturalität ) and transculturation , examining how translation fosters literary innovation across cultures. Furthermore, the article argues that translation serves as a mediator between heterogeneous cultures, creating a “third space” that is neither original nor target culture. Concepts such as ju zhi yi tu 橘枳易土 are used to explain mechanisms of grafting and transformation in translation. Finally, the article draws upon examples from the Chinese translation of Buddhist texts, family history research, and the cross-cultural adaptation of modern philosophy to propose that translation is a vital means of responding to modernity and shaping future cultural forms – a decentralized pathway for knowledge reproduction and reimagination.

Abstract The translation of long 龍 , a culturally loaded term in Chinese tradition, into Indo-European linguistic and cultural contexts has long posed a challenge for translators and scholars. In the sixteenth century, the Spanish Sinologist Juan González de Mendoza employed the term serpiente dorada (golden serpent) to signify the symbol of Chinese imperial power. While contemporary Chinese scholars have acknowledged early sinologists’ use of “serpent” in place of “dragon” for the rendition of long , they tend to interpret this choice as a pragmatic compromise: selecting the lesser of two evils, based on the assumption that “serpent” was the less culturally charged of two terms. This view, however, overlooks the fact that both terms bore strong negative associations in medieval and early modern Europe. This article argues that the key distinction lies not in the degree of negativity, but in the specific anti-Christian meaning of ‘dragon’ in the sixteenth-century European cultural memory. Depicting the Chinese emperor with the symbol of the dragon would have evoked an image of a pagan, anti-Christian tyrant, consequently undermining the evangelizing intent of Mendoza’s book, The History of the Great and Mighty Kingdom of China and the Situation Thereof . Instead, the choice of “serpent” served as a symbolic displacement aligned with the author’s ideological and textual goals. At the same time, his didactic agenda was subtly embedded within a utopian vision of China, giving rise to what may be seen as a new cultural paradigm. When interpreted through the concrete political and economic dynamics of Sino-European interaction, this paradigm can be seen as a historical reflection of the early modern development of Sino-Western relations.

Abstract This article outlines the English translation and research status of Wang Wei’s poetry within the two contexts of the development of modern American poetry and sinology studies. On the one hand, as American poets liberated themselves from the confines of British and European cultural traditions and propelled changes in poetic concepts and forms, they regarded Wang Wei’s landscape and reclusion poetry as a paradigm of Chinese poetry, utilizing the diverse nature of classical Chinese poetry as a resource. On the other hand, sinologists aiming for a deep understanding of Chinese literature have attempted to “correct” American readers’ one-sided perception of Wang Wei’s poetry by revealing the complexity and richness of Wang Wei as a person and his poetry in their research. Gaining insight into the state of research on the translation of Wang Wei’s poetry in the United States and the historical evolution of Wang Wei’s image aids us in contemplating the selections, misreadings, and creative transformations involved in the cross-regional dissemination of literature, along with the intricate interactions between the literary creation, literary movements, and cultural currents of the areas where literature is spread, interpreted, and received.

Abstract The classical Chinese work of supernatural fiction Liaozhai zhiyi is the ancient Chinese novel that has been translated into the most foreign languages. During nearly two centuries of transmission to the West, “strange” (yi 異 ) has become the focal point for sinologists’ translation and study of Liaozhai zhiyi . Shaped by different historical contexts and scholarly concerns, the interpretations of yi by sinologists have evolved alongside broader developments in Western sinology, creating multiple levels of discourse. From the misinterpretations of the early Sino-Western contact period, to using Liaozhai zhiyi to observe the “strangeness” of customs out of a desire to understand Chinese social life, and finally to the deep exploration of fundamental characteristics of Chinese culture, European and American sinology has regarded this idea of “strangeness” as a bidirectional link for understanding the other and examining the self. Ultimately, sinologists elevated the yi of Liaozhai zhiyi from a culturally specific literary experience to a universal discourse resource, while enriching the understanding of Liaozhai zhiyi in cross-cultural contexts.

Abstract The persistent prioritization of public virtue over private virtue in modern China demands critical re-examination. From a hermeneutical perspective, the balance between public and private virtues necessitates a recalibration. This recalibration must be grounded in evolving socio-political conditions. The ancient-modern transformation constitutes the fundamental prerequisite for analyzing the status of public and private virtues. Within the classical paradigm, the primacy of private virtue was axiomatic; within the modern framework, the precedence of public virtue is incontrovertible. The modern condition precludes direct extrapolation from private to public virtue. The traditional Confucian methodology of conceptualizing virtue’s “public nature” through individual moral cultivation necessitates transition to a modern framework of differentiated public and private virtues, though the social ethical efficacy of private virtue and the political ethical functionality of public virtue must be discretely validated. This phenomenon transcends simple Chinese-Western comparative analysis, demanding comprehension through the lens of historical transformation. The bifurcation of public and private virtues represents a universal human condition rather than a regionally specific experience.

Abstract In China’s ancient patriarchal clan system, individuals were bound by their ethical roles and could not discuss the faults of rulers and parents. In the Analects of Confucius, it says, “The father conceals the wrongdoing of the son, and the son conceals the wrongdoing of the father.” Examples of concealing in the Chunqiu Gongyang zhuan 春秋公羊傳 reveal that there are two connotations of concealing: first, the concealing that means “not speaking” (buyan 不言), and second, the “pain” (tong 痛) of “being unable to bear something” (buren 不忍). Thus, concealing became a distinctive mode of speech, emphasizing how the sincerity of one’s ethical feelings constrains and regulates verbal expression. When filial sons and loyal courtiers were burdened with the ethical and political failings of their rulers and parents, they could only handle their distress, their moral stance, and ethical commitment by hiding their feelings. These situations are also reflected in the content and lyricism of the Shijing 詩經 and related works of song and poetry.

Abstract One lens that has long been used to examine the Chinese concepts of the public and the private is morality and its public and private boundaries. From ancient times to the modern era, public morality and the political morality of the state have been closely connected. Intellectuals of recent times have, with growing influence, linked the establishment of public morality with the identity and revitalization of the state. According to the philosophies of “establishing the public and abolishing the private” and “subsuming the private to the public,” which became dominant ideologies after the creation of the modern Chinese state in the last century, the private morality of ordinary citizens is viewed as subject to control by an authority. Due to the delegitimization of private property and the perceived threat of private interests at that time, private morality did not establish its own foundation or clear boundaries. Public morality has consistently and forcefully integrated with private morality, resulting in the frequent merging of the public and the private, making it difficult to distinguish between the two. Moreover, traditional concepts of the sacred have not kept pace with modern changes, and the relationship between public and private morality has thus become more complex, leading to numerous challenges in governing Chinese society today.