"The Analects" as the most important monument of Confucian culture contains principles that regulate the behavioral norms of the Chinese people. The concept of "xiao" (), which is one of the key ideological dominants of "The Analects" and a specific value category of the Chinese nation, due to the uniqueness of its semantic content, has a pronounced untranslatability and represents a typical example of a lacuna. The subject of this study is the analysis of ways to overcome the lacuna employed by Russian sinologists from various historical periods when translating the concept of "xiao" in "The Analects". The main goal of the work is to identify the translation methods and characteristic features inherent to sinologists of different eras based on the analysis of translations, and to offer recommendations and formulate conclusions relevant for conveying lacunae in the process of Sino-Russian cultural exchange in the modern context. The article primarily employs a comparative method for researching Russian translations of "The Analects" made in different historical periods, complemented by quantitative and qualitative analysis methods. The logic behind the formation of various translation options for the concept of "xiao" is examined, as well as the translation methods and features characteristic of different translators in conveying this concept. Based on this, the conclusion is drawn that in translating "xiao," Russian sinologists of various periods predominantly utilized substitution techniques and semantic translations, supplemented by literal translations. The translations show both common features—epoch-related influence, continuity, and a gradual increase in variability—and distinct individual stylistic features. In the context of the intensification of modern Sino-Russian cultural dialogue, it is advisable to flexibly apply differentiated methods for conveying lacunae in translating various types of texts. For instance, in translating artistic prose, the unification of the translated equivalent is permissible to facilitate reader comprehension; in everyday intercultural communication, a variety of translation options helps to more fully reveal cultural semantics; in the translation of fundamental works, it is justified to use transliteration and descriptive translation with notes simultaneously. Such an approach fosters clearer mutual understanding between cultures and consequently deepens cultural exchange and the dissemination of cultural values between the two countries.
Yang et al. (Wed,) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: