Dr Joanna Melville-Richards:

I have seen 9 translations【編注：version 2 - 10】 of the poem by Zhang Jiuling, which vary from a literal prose translation (e.g. Version 6), metamorphosing through various proportions of text and free verse forms and structures (Version 5), to a lyrical version (Version 2), the latter that catches the emotional context in a strict poetic form, imitating that of the original. 

Some of the translations are unsatisfactory and are sometimes even rather strange to English first language speakers like myself. Such an as 'cut out the candlelight' (Version 7) is alien to English speakers; certainly, we would not say 'blow out the candle stick' (Version 10) on the grounds that the candle holder or ‘stick’ cannot be blown out. However, the s, such as 'The candle doused' (Version 2), ‘blow my lamp out’ (although quite archaic, version 3), ‘Candle blown out’ (Versions 4 and 9), ‘blow out my candle’ (Version 5), ‘extinguish the candle’ (Version 6), and ‘candle is snuffed out’ (although the definite article ‘the’ is needed, Version 8), are acceptable. I get the feeling that some of these translations have been achieved with a dictionary in one hand without absolute comprehension of the language therein.

Version 2 by Peter Jingcheng Xu more strictly maintains the original end-rhyme patterns than any of the other renditions: His rhyming scheme AAAAAAAA is far closer to the original ABCBDBEB. His version is compact and terse, harnessing pithy and lucid words to describe a universal longing which resonates throughout the centuries. A poem is a device and medium to express complex feelings with succinct and vivid words. English Sonnets, Welsh Englyn and Japanese Haiku all aim to encompass a universal truth in a few words. This poem is no exception and Peter follows and respects this tradition and transports it literarily and poetically into the target-language context.  

Dr Joanna Melville-Richards:

This version, that by Herbert Giles shows its age: it is anachronistic and the language used is archaic and overly formal in a manner that we would never use nowadays.  'Vest'? To us, this is an undergarment, functional, but not attractive. This image rather detracts from any concept of beauty which I think this poem is meant to convey. 

Dr Joanna Melville-Richards:

Version 4 has repetition of words ‘far, far’ and ‘long, long’: this technique is not employed in the landscape of the source text. As such, because they are not particularly mellifluous words: the phrases 'far, far' and 'long, long', do not impact dramatically on the picture which the poet is attempting to describe.  'Long' is repeated again in the following line as a verb, which could, in the right hands, be a clever poetic conceit, but in this case, is almost certainly not the poet's intention since the parallel conceit does not exist in the original text. In this case, it is better to replace it with another word like ‘crave’ or ‘yearn’. 

Dr Joanna Melville-Richards:

Version 5 is a very free verse. Toward the end of the poem, the original author describes the beautiful concept of holding the moonlight in the poet's hand, but is unable to share his handful of moonbeams, which is completely omitted in this version. The alternative offering does not create this vivid image of a handful of bright light and the powerlessness of the poet to give it to his beloved. 

Dr Joanna Melville-Richards:

Version 6 is possibly the most literal translation but it loses the lyricism of the original in so doing. The imagery is there but the rendition is prose, which does not have a rhythmic stress pattern. 

Dr Joanna Melville-Richards:

Version 7 is verbose: too many words to convey the terse, emotive mood of the original poem. 'Nice' is a rather mediocre adjective to describe the intimacy of the moment: it has the meaning of 'agreeable, pleasant, and satisfactory’ in modern English (see Oxford dictionary). Probably when this translation was made – I'm guessing that in the late nineteenth century or the early twentieth century, the meaning was more appropriate to the original poet’s situation. The lines are in rhyming couplets, but very uneven in length and stress. Of interesting note is that the number of the lines in this version is too many, with two more lines than that of the source text.   

Dr Joanna Melville-Richards:

In Version 8, the poem has been maintained in eight lines, conforming to the original with alternate rhyming lines. The lines scan well and the poet's emotions are vividly conveyed especially with the phrase 'yearning-languishing-throughout'. The concepts are sustained until, sadly, the last line which does not have quite the same impact as the original poem. Here, no lover is mentioned in the poet's longing for a sweet dream, which is perhaps the only way he can communicate his feelings to his beloved. 

Dr Joanna Melville-Richards:

Version 9 is quite loyal to the original in images, but not in rhyming scheme. There is a curious lack of adjectives and descriptive words throughout the target-language text, except 'endless lonesome' which has a dramatic and emotive impact. Otherwise, there is little to catch attention, no poetic phrases and no vivid vocabulary, with which to conjure up a striking concept. The structure is basically rhyming couplets - AABBCCDD. 

Dr Joanna Melville-Richards:

In Version 10, the translator employs the second person pronoun ‘you’, which is not found in the original. The original is more introspective: the poet is expressing his own feelings in isolation.  In this version, the phrase 'Please put on your night gown' is an extraordinary translation and quite different in meaning from the original one. As I have commented in my analysis of the use of language earlier, this rendition uses the awkward phrase 'blow out the candle stick' which does not make sense to first language English speakers. Hoever, there is some attempt to recreate the rhyming scheme of the Chinese poem, but it is only partial, - AAAABBBB.