This study conducts an detailed examination of James S. Gale’s translation methodology applied to 104 titles from Yi Kyoo-bo (1168~1241)’s Dongguk Yi Sangguk Jip (Collection of Works by Yi Kyoo-bo, the Minister of the Eastern Country, 東國李相國集). Despite the non-realization of Gale’s publication aspirations, this marks early and pivotal efforts to acquaint English-speaking readers with Yi Kyoo-bo’s prose and poetry, thus promoting the global recognition of Korean literary heritage. A comparative analysis of the original Chinese titles against their English renditions allows this paper to categorize the translations into five distinct methodologies: omission, condensation, literal translation, creative translation, and expansion. The findings reveal Gale’s inclination towards crafting succinct titles, frequently at the expense of excluding details that might elucidate the original texts’ contexts. This approach remains consistent across his translations of works by another eminent Korean author, Choi Chi-won. Contrarily, Kevin O’Rourke, a contemporary translator of Yi Kyoo-bo’s compositions, adopts a notably divergent strategy, favoring titles that adhere more closely to literal translation. Gale’s translation philosophy not only sought to transmit the essential messages encapsulated within the original texts but also endeavored to situate them within the ambit of Western literary conventions. This aspect underscores Gale’s instrumental role in the transcultural dissemination of Korean literature.

This paper investigates the dissemination of Jesuit publications regarding China and the impact of Johan Nieuhoff’s illustrations on the emergence of English Chinoiserie during the seventeenth century. Despite England’s lagging behind the Roman Catholic powers in Chinese research, the works of Mendoza and Jesuit scholars such as Trigault, Semedo, and Martini were widely disseminated in Europe and heavily relied upon by English writers. These works played a complex role in challenging and reinforcing prevailing stereotypes about European civilization. Moreover, Nieuhoff’s illustrations, produced by a Dutch merchant, had a significant impact on English Chinoiserie and were widely employed in practical arts. The extensive readership and influence of Nieuhoff’s illustrations serve as a testament to their significance, which can be seen in the variety of ways in which they were used to reflect the popularity of English Chinoiseries. By examining the cultural trends that followed and the translated publications available in seventeenth century England, it becomes apparent that the works of the Jesuit missionaries and Nieuhoff’s illustrations played key roles in shaping English perceptions of China. Furthermore, their influence on European attitudes towards China during this period provides valuable insight into the development of cross-cultural exchange between Europe and China.

English translators have many difficulties in choosing appropriate expressions to render ‘junzi 君子’ closely related to the East Asian Confucian cultural traditions into their language. James Legge’s renderings of junzi in Mencius, which vary depending on the context, are different from the contemporary tendencies to consistently translate junzi into the word ‘gentleman’ or the transliterated word ‘junzi.’ The paper argues that Legge’s various translations of junzi help us identify different nuances of meaning and reconsider some of our present conventional uses. It examines on the etymology of junzi and its historical and social development in the Warring States Period to examine Legge’s translation aspects. It also argues that Legge’s translation to specify junzi to a ruler, a prince and a sovereign sage in some controversial passages has a great influence on the English readers’ interpretation of the text. Legge’s specific translation directs readers to suppose that the Chinese word ‘junzi 君子’ is better understood as a benevolent ruler because he has the power to play a crucial role in achieving the true Kingly government and not simply a moral scholar.