Education, Language and Sociology Research ISSN 2690-3644 (Print) ISSN 2690-3652 (Online) Vol. 6, No. 3, 2025 www.scholink.org/ojs/index.php/elsr 148 Original Paper A Comparative Study of Two English Translations of Chuan Xi Lu from the Perspective of Translator Behavior Evaluation Xinxia Liu1 1 School of Foreign Languages, Chongqing Jiaotong University, Chongqing, China Received: August 1, 2025 Accepted: August 20, 2025 Online Published: September 4, 2025 doi:10.22158/elsr.v6n3p148 URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.22158/elsr.v6n3p148 Abstract This study draws on the theory of translator behavior evaluation, taking the English translations of “Chuan Xi Lu” by American translator Henke and Chinese-American translator Chen Rongjie as the main research objects. By examining the identity attributes of the two translators, it explores the translator behaviors they exhibit in the translation of “Chuan Xi Lu” and reveals the historical and cultural motivations behind them. This study employs the methods of literature analysis, text close reading, and text comparative analysis to summarize and analyze the translation features of “Chuan Xi Lu”. It also combines the “truth-seeking-pragmatism” continuum evaluation model in the theory of translator behavior evaluation to analyze the translator’s behavior, mainly from the following two perspectives: within translation, as a language person, how can the translator make the translation seek truth from the original text? Beyond translation, as social beings, how can translators make their translations practical for society? Therefore, the research steps of this paper are divided into three steps: The first step is to analyze the identities of the two translators within the translation, and based on this, analyze the translators’ in-translation behaviors in seeking the truth of language meaning at the language level of the translation and their reasons; The second step is to analyze the identities of the two translators from outside the translation, and based on this, analyze the translator’s out-of-translation behaviors in choosing translation strategies and methods under the influence of social environmental factors such as social politics, historical context, and reader consciousness. The third step is to analyze and summarize whether the two translators tend to be more truth-seeking or more pragmatic in the “truth-seeking-pragmatic” continuum evaluation model, as well as the reasons for the differences in their behaviors. Keywords Chuan Xi Lu, translator’s behavioral evaluation, Chen Rongjie, Henke www.scholink.org/ojs/index.php/elsr Education, Language and Sociology Research Vol. 6, No. 3, 2025 149 Published by SCHOLINK INC. 1. Introduction The “Chuan Xi Lu” is an important work that records the main philosophical thoughts of Wang Yangming, a scholar of the Ming Dynasty in China. It is also a must-read introductory book for those studying Wang Yangming’s philosophy of the mind. The “Chuan Xi Lu” profoundly expounds Wang Yangming’s thoughts on the mind, such as the unity of knowledge and action and the realization of good conscience, making significant contributions to the development of Confucian philosophy. At the same time, it also provides ideological guidance for educational practice and contains wisdom for governance, playing a significant role in the inheritance of Chinese culture. At present, the first relatively complete translation of “Chuan Xi Lu” was done by the American scholar Henke, and the second translation was done by the Chinese-American scholar Chen Rongjie. After the publication of Chen Rongjie’s translation, many scholars conducted comparative analysis and evaluation between Chan’s translation and Henke’s translation. Like Nivison, David S published an evaluation of two translations of “The Book of Changes” in the American Oriental Society. He compared the table of contents titles of the two translators and found differences in content arrangement - Chen Rongjie divided “The Book of Changes” into several paragraphs and numbered each paragraph consecutively, while Henke also used the same segmentation method but did not number them. He also found that Henke’s text sometimes omitted the entire chapter, and sometimes even omitted multiple chapters at once. Nivison, David S directly pointed out: But in fact Henke reads the Chinese so badly that what in Chan is the beginning of an essay is in Henke not even the beginning of a sentence. (Nivison,1964, p. 438) From this, it can be seen that Nivison and David S highly praised Chen Rongjie’s translation, believing that his translation is more accurate than Henke’s and the annotations are more thoughtful. It’s not just him who thinks Chen Rongjie’s annotations are more meticulous. Schirokauer, Conrad M also stated in The Journal of Asian Studies: To avoid misunderstanding and to clarify differences in English and Chinese ways of thought, it seems advisable for a translator at times to explicate the meaning of a term and indicate the reasons for his rendition. As Professor Chan has pointed out, the “Instructions for Practical Living” contain almost every Chinese philosophical term, and an analysis of each is obviously beyond the scope of his book (Schirokauer, 1964, p. 151). It is indeed the case that although the Henke’s translation also has many annotations, the number of annotations is less than that of Chen Rongjie’s, and the length of the annotations is relatively short. As a philosophical text, the “Chuan Xi Lu” contains many obscure and difficult philosophical terms, and annotations are particularly important for readers. There are obvious differences between the two translations in terms of the selection of the base text, content arrangement, subtexts, annotations and translation strategies. By comparing the two translations, it is possible to explore how translators exert their subjectivity in the translation process, including their understanding of the original text, the choice of translation strategies, and the shaping of translation styles, etc. This helps to deepen people’s understanding of the role of translators and their comprehension that translation activities are not merely language conversion but also a process of cultural transmission and recreation. www.scholink.org/ojs/index.php/elsr Education, Language and Sociology Research Vol. 6, No. 3, 2025 150 Published by SCHOLINK INC. By January 2025, when searching for the keyword “Chuan Xi Lu” on China National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI), the literature that appears involves a wide range of theories, including the theory of functional equivalence, the perspective of translation ecology, the theory of multiple systems, and Bourdieu’s sociology, etc. However, there have been no related research from the perspective of translator evaluation has emerged yet. This might be because this theory has been around for a relatively short time and has not been widely studied and applied in the academic circle. From the perspective of translator behavior evaluation, when conducting evaluations, translator critics should comprehensively consider various factors both “within the translation” and “outside the translation”, ensuring the comprehensiveness of translation evaluation while also taking into account its objectivity and scientificity. 2. Overview of Translator Behavior Evaluation Theory The theory of translator behavior evaluation is an original translation evaluation theory system proposed by Professor Zhou Lingshun. It belongs to the study of translation sociology that combines the internal and external aspects of translation, as well as the translator’s conduct and the quality of the translation. The theory of translator behavior evaluation takes the translator as the entry point and the social perspective as the evaluation perspective. “It is a study of the role of the translator in the process of translation socialization, that is, translation activities, and the general behavioral law characteristics of its influence on the text” (Zhou Lingshun, 2014, p. 4). Translator behavior evaluation examines the rationality of a translator’s conduct both inside and outside translation and its relationship with the truthfulness and pragmatism of the translation. “Within translation” refers to the internal factors of translation and their research, mainly concerning “linguistic” issues. “Outside of translation” refers to the external factors of translation and their research, mainly concerning “social” issues. “Within translation” and “outside translation” are independent of each other yet interrelated. The combination of the two is the prerequisite guarantee for ensuring the comprehensiveness and objectivity of translation evaluation. The core framework of translator behavior evaluation theory is the “truth-seeking-pragmatic” continuum evaluation model. “Seeking truth” refers to the act where a translator, in order to achieve practical goals, fully or partially seeks the truth of the meaning carried by the original language. “Pragmatism” refers to the attitude and approach adopted by the translator to meet the need for practicality on the basis of seeking truth in all or part of the meaning carried by the original language (Zhou Lingshun, 2014, pp. 76-77). In the “truth-seeking-pragmatic” translator behavior continuum model, “truth-seeking” and “pragmatic” are interrelated yet independent of each other. “Seeking truth” is the foundation of “pragmatism”, an act of being loyal to the source language, and the guarantee of translation. And “pragmatism” is superior to “seeking truth”. It is the goal, attitude, method and effect. “Seeking truth” and “being pragmatic” are mutually conditional and can be transformed into each other under certain conditions. During the translation process, when the translator approaches the original text/author, its “linguistic nature” becomes prominent, and the translator’s lines tend to “seek truth”. Conversely, when the translator www.scholink.org/ojs/index.php/elsr Education, Language and Sociology Research Vol. 6, No. 3, 2025 151 Published by SCHOLINK INC. approaches the readers/society, their “sociality” becomes prominent, and the translator’s behavior tends to be “pragmatic”. For the practice of translators, “seeking truth - being pragmatic” is a dynamic self- disciplined process. Translators always strive to find the ideal balance between “seeking truth” and “being pragmatic”. When conducting a comparative analysis of the two English translations of “Chuan Xi Lu”, it is necessary to recognize that Henke and Chen Rongjie, the two translators, are volition-based individuals and inherently possess linguistic and social characteristics. Therefore, research should be carried out from both the “inside translation” and “outside translation” perspectives, in combination with the “truth- seeking - pragmatic” continuous evaluation model of translator behavior. 3. A Contrastive Analysis of the Two Translators’ Intra-translation Behavior The translator’s in-translation behavior refers to the language transformation behavior in which the translator reproduces the meaning of the original text within the translation, mainly manifested in the in- language correspondence between the translation and the original text, such as vocabulary, syntax and rhetoric, etc. 3.1 Vocabulary Translation When translating words, the translator should do so on the basis of fully understanding the meaning of the original text. Chen Rongjie adopted a highly “truth-seeking” translation strategy, translating after accurately understanding the meanings of the original words. In contrast, Henke’s translations have some mistakes due to insufficient understanding of the original text. For example: (1) 爱问：“何以有拟经之失？” (Wang Shouren, 2008, p. 28) I asked: “how is it that Wen Chung-tzu was faulty in his estimation of the classics?” (Henke, 1916, p. 62) I asked, “Why did Wang T’ung make the mistake of imitating the classics?” (Chan, 1963, p. 17) (2) 先生曰：“然则拟经独非效法孔子乎？” (Wang Shouren, 2008, p. 28) The teacher said: “Yes. But in interpreting the classics does one not follow Confucius?” (Henke, 1916, p. 63) The Teacher said, “Isn’t imitating the Classics also following Confucius?” (Chan, 1936, p. 18) From the context, it can be known that these two sentences were said by Mr. Xu Aihe when discussing the right and wrong of the “simulated scriptures”. The “拟经” in the two sentences precisely refer to the simulated scriptures, and “拟” means “simulated”. For the translation of the word “拟”, Henke translated it as “estimation” in Example 1 and “interpret” in example 2. Chen Rongjie translated it as “imitate” in both cases. From this, it can be seen that Chen Rongjie has a deeper understanding of the original text here and the translation is more reasonable. However, Henke made a mistranslation here due to his inadequate understanding of the original meaning. (3) 爱曰：“昨闻先生之教，亦影影见得功夫须是如此。” (Wang Shouren, 2008, p. 19) I said, “Yesterday when I heard your teaching I clearly realized that the task is as you describe it (Henke, 1910, p. 39). www.scholink.org/ojs/index.php/elsr Education, Language and Sociology Research Vol. 6, No. 3, 2025 152 Published by SCHOLINK INC. I said, “Yesterday when I heard your teaching, I vaguely realized that one’s effort must follow this procedure” (Chan, 1963, p. 14). In Example 3, “影影” is in the same situation. This sentence was said by Xu Ai: “Yesterday, upon hearing the master’s teachings, I had a vague feeling that doing martial arts should be like this.” “影影” here means “faint and indistinct”. Chen Rongjie translated it as “vaguely”, which is more reasonable. However, Henke translated it as “clearly”, which has the completely opposite meaning and fails to grasp the original intention of the text. 3.2 Syntactic Translation When translating sentences, both Henke and Chen Rongjie adopted a “truth-seeking” translation strategy, striving to be as faithful as possible to the original text in both content and form. For example: (4) 在文蔚须有取于惟浚之言而后尽，在惟浚又须有取于文蔚之言而后明。(Wang Shouren, 2008, p. 329) In what you have said, a little should be appropriated from Wei-chun, and then your exposition would be exhaustive; and in what Wei-chun has said, a little should be appropriated from yours, and then it would be clear. (Henke, 1916, p. 444) On your part, you need to take in his words before yours can be fully stated, and on his part he needs to take in your words before his can be made clear. (Chan, 1963, p. 179) In Example 4, Henke divided the original sentence into two parts and connected them with “and”, while Chen Rongjie made the translation sentence more concise. However, both translations retain the original meaning and antithesis form, and both achieve the goal of “seeking truth”. (5) 此是文公不可及处。(Wang Shouren, 2008, p. 121) This is the condition he was unable to attain in earlier years. (Henke, 1916, p. 114) This is where we cannot match Wen Kung. (Chan, 1963, p. 63) In the context, the meaning of Example 5 is “This is what sets Zhu Xi apart from others.” Henke translated it literally and there was a deviation in his understanding of the original text. Chen Rongjie’s translation more accurately conveys the meaning of the original text, achieving the goal of “seeking truth”. 3.3 Rhetorical Translation Wang Yangming extensively employed rhetorical devices such as antithesis and antithesis in his “Chuan Xi Lu”. The application of these rhetorical devices enhances the vividness of the language in the article and improves the literary appeal of the work. When translating these rhetorical devices, the two translators mostly adopted a truth-seeking translation strategy that retains the “heterogeneity” of the original text. For example: (6) 知是行的主意，行是知的功夫；知是行之始，行是知之成。(Wang Shouren, 2008, p. 15) Knowledge is the purpose to act, and that practice implies carrying out knowledge. Knowledge is the beginning of practice; doing is the completion of knowing. (Henke, 1916, p. 55) Knowledge is the direction for action and action the effort of knowledge, and that knowledge is the beginning of action and action the completion of knowledge. (Chan, 1963, p. 11) www.scholink.org/ojs/index.php/elsr Education, Language and Sociology Research Vol. 6, No. 3, 2025 153 Published by SCHOLINK INC. The original text employs the rhetorical device of antithesis, which reflects the thinking and personality traits of the Chinese nation and is a rhetorical form with Han ethnic characteristics. Antithesis is a rhetorical device that uses a pair of phrases or sentences with the same number of characters, the same structure, and corresponding meanings to express two corresponding, similar, or identical meanings. The duality in Chinese is not exactly the same as that in English. Therefore, translators should not translate word for word but rather through free translation, preserving both the meaning and the sentence structure of the original text. By comparing the translations of Henke and Chen Rongjie in Proportion 6, we can find that: the original text consists of four clauses. Henke’s second clause is different from the other three. The other three clauses all use noun structures like “the purpose, the beginning, the completion”, but the second clause uses a verb and does not fully retain the antithesis form of the original text. Chen Rongjie’s translation, in order to retain the antithesis form of the original text, even omits the verb “be” in the second sentence. This does not conform to English grammar, but it retains the beauty of the original sentence and achieves the goal of “seeking truth”. (7) 岂可专去事上理会？(Wang Shouren, 2008, p. 95) How can one confine himself to the investigation of things? (Henke, 1916, p. 165) How can one focus solely on the investigation of things? (Chan, 1963, p. 87) This original sentence employs the rhetorical device of rhetorical question. Both translators have successfully conveyed the meaning of the rhetorical question, achieving the goal of “seeking truth”. In terms of translation style, Henke’s translation is more colloquial, suitable for general readers to understand the tone of rhetorical questions, while Chen Rongjie’s translation is more formal, using “focus solely” which is more suitable for academic readers. 3.4 Title Translation The two translators translated the title of “Chuan Xi Lu” into different forms. Henke translated this title as “The Philosophy of Wang Yang-Ming”. and Chen Rongjie translated it as “Instructions for Practical Living and Other neo-Confucian Writing by Wang Yang-Ming”. These two translators did not translate the title word for word as “Chuan Xi Lu”. They both adopted the strategy of free translation. As one of the early translators to introduce the “Chuan Xi Lu” to the West, Henke’s translation might have been more influenced by the understanding of Chinese philosophy in the Western academic circle at that time. He chose a literal translation or a translation that is closer to the original meaning, possibly aiming to retain the “exotic flavor” of the original work as much as possible, while facilitating Western readers to initially come into contact with and understand this classic of Chinese philosophy through its literal meaning. However, due to language and cultural barriers, Henke’s translation may not have fully conveyed the profound philosophical implications of the “Chuan Xi Lu” in the title translation. In contrast, Chen Rongjie adopted a more flexible and interpretive strategy when translating the titles of “Chuan Xi Lu”. He deeply understood the connotation of the topic and, considering the acceptance of Western readers, chose a translation such as “Instructions for Practical Living”. This translation not only conveys the philosophical feature of the “Collected Instructions” that emphasizes practical application, but also www.scholink.org/ojs/index.php/elsr Education, Language and Sociology Research Vol. 6, No. 3, 2025 154 Published by SCHOLINK INC. reduces the difficulty of understanding and enhances its readability and appeal through a way of expression that is close to the life experiences of Western readers. It is well known that Wang Yangming’s main philosophical thoughts are all contained in this book. Chen Rongjie wrote in his translation notes: He believes that the title “Instructions for Practical Living and Other neo-Confucian Writing by Wang Yang-Ming” better conveys the meaning and spirit of the original text. This difference in translation reflects the varying depths of understanding of the “Chuan Xi Lu” by the two translators, as well as the different strategies they adopted when disseminating Chinese philosophy to Western readers. Henke pays more attention to faithfully conveying the original text, while Chen Rongjie focuses more on enhancing the readability and dissemination effect of the text through interpretive translation while maintaining the spirit of the original text. 4. A Contrastive Analysis of the Two Translators' Extra-translation Behavior Extratranslation behavior is the social behavior of translators, mainly involving some factors beyond translation activities that go beyond translation itself, such as the translator’s background, era, educational experience, target readers, etc. These factors will all influence the translator’s behavior. To achieve “pragmatism”, translators will also make appropriate rewrites to the original text. Henke was born in 1876 into a family of pastors in Iowa, USA, and grew up as a Christian and Methodist pastor. In 1900, he was sent to China to preach. During this period, he developed a strong interest in Chinese culture and philosophy. In 1911, Henke was invited by sinologists of the North China Branch of the Royal Asiatic Society of Shanghai to conduct in-depth research on Wang Yangming and was elected as a member of the society. After several years of preparatory work, Henke officially published in 1916 the English translation of his years of research on Wang Yangming - “Chuan Xi Lu”. Chen Rongjie was a Chinese-American scholar, a renowned historian of Chinese philosophy and an authority on Neo- Confucianism of the Song and Ming Dynasties. He received a solid traditional education in China and further his studies in the United States. He is proficient in both English and Chinese, familiar with Chinese and Western cultures, and obtained a Doctor of Philosophy degree, which laid a solid foundation for his later translation of “Chuan Xi Lu” (Liu Kongxi, 2019, p. 52). It is precisely because of the differences in background, era, educational experience, etc. between the two translators that there are some situations where they handle the English translation of “Chuan Xi Lu” differently, such as: 4.1 Translation of Numerals Many numerals are used in the “Collected Instructions”. Due to the different cultural backgrounds and thinking patterns between China and the West, the expressions of numerals sometimes vary. (8) 守衡再三謝 (Wang Shouren, 2008, p. 145) Shou Heng asked him for information two or three times. (Henke, 1916, p. 128) Shou Heng asked several times for an explanation (Chan, 1963, p. 76). (9) 惠再三请。(Wang Shouren, 2008, p. 154) Hui asked him a third time. (Henke, 1916, p. 134) www.scholink.org/ojs/index.php/elsr Education, Language and Sociology Research Vol. 6, No. 3, 2025 155 Published by SCHOLINK INC. Hui asked him again and again. (Chan, 1963, p. 82) The word “再三” in Chinese does not mean an exact number but rather refers to “many times”. In Examples 8 and 9, Henke translated them as “two or three times” and “a third time” respectively, while Chen Rongjie translated them as “several times” and “again and again” respectively. Henke’s translation translated it literally into exact numerals, which was caused by a lack of understanding of Chinese. Here, Chen Rongjie’s translation is more appropriate and closer to “pragmatic”, which might be related to the fact that Chen Rongjie was born in China and received Chinese education from a young age. 4.2 Translation of Phonetic Loanwords (10) 出入亦只是动静，动静无端，岂有乡邪？(Wang Shouren, 2008, p. 74) Outgoing and incoming also are really no more than action and rest. When action and rest are not right, how can there be a criterion. (Henke, 1916, p. 89) To go out or come in is no more than activity and tranquility. Neither activity nor tranquility has any beginning. Do they have any direction? (Chan, 1963, p. 40) (11) 孟子救告子之偏。(Wang Shouren, 2008, p. 93) In order to rescue Kao-tzu from his partiality. (Henke, 1916, p. 99) Mencius corrected Kao Tzu’s mistake of being one-sided. (Chan, 1963, p. 50) In Example 10, the “乡” in the original text is a phonetic loan. Phonetic loan is one of the character usage phenomena in ancient Chinese books, referring to the substitution of the original character with characters that have the same or similar pronunciations or forms. Here, “乡” actually refers to “向”, which means “direction”. It is unreasonable for Henke to translate it as “criterion”. This is also because as a foreigner, it is rather difficult to understand the obscure ancient Chinese text, and thus the usage of phonetic loanwords was ignored. The translation was based on the literal meaning. Here, Chen Rongjie translated it as “direction”, which is more accurate. In Example 11, the word “救” is in the same situation. Here, “救” actually represents “纠”, meaning “to correct”. It is unreasonable for Henke to translate it literally as “rescue”. Chen Rongjie’s translation as “correct” is more accurate. In these two respects, Chen Rongjie has done a better job in terms of” pragmatism “. 4.3 Translation of Cultural Metaphors (12) 心如明镜。(Wang Shouren, 2008, p. 156) The mind is like a bright mirror. (Henke, 1916, p. 138) The mind is like a clear mirror. (Chan, 1963, p. 81) Regarding the English translation of “明” in “明镜”, Henke uses “bright”, which is more accessible and suitable for ordinary readers, while Chen Rongjie uses “clear”, which is closer to the philosophical meaning of “Ming Jing” in Confucian thought, emphasizing the purity and clarity of the mind. (13) 心如止水。 (Wang Shouren, 2008, p. 156) The mind is like still water. (Henke, 1916, p. 138) The mind is like tranquil water. (Chan, 1963, p. 81) www.scholink.org/ojs/index.php/elsr Education, Language and Sociology Research Vol. 6, No. 3, 2025 156 Published by SCHOLINK INC. Regarding the translation of “止” in “止水”, Henke uses “still water”, which is more accessible and suitable for ordinary readers to understand the surface meaning of “the mind is as still as water”. Chen Rongjie’s use of “tranquil water” is closer to the philosophical meaning of “stopping water” in Confucianism, emphasizing the peace and clarity of the mind, which is suitable for academic readers. The different translation treatments of these two places are due to the fact that they lived in different eras, and their translation purposes and target readers were also different. However, both of them have achieved a “pragmatic” approach. Henke’s translation was published in 1916 and was aimed at the general Western readers in the early 20th century, especially beginners interested in Eastern philosophy. His translation aims to popularize Wang Yangming’s philosophy of the mind, so the language is easy to understand, with few annotations and avoiding complex philosophical discussions. Henke emphasized readability and simplified many core Confucian concepts so that Western readers could quickly understand the basic ideas of the text. Chen Rongjie’s translation was published in 1963 and was targeted at academic readers, especially scholars and students studying Chinese philosophy. His translation aims to deeply disseminate Confucianism, so the language is more formal, the annotations are detailed, and it provides a wealth of cultural, historical and philosophical background. His translation is more faithful to the original text, striving to convey the essence of Wang Yangming’s philosophy of mind. 4.4 Annotations Henke and Chen Rongjie had significant differences in the way and content of their annotations when translating the “Chuan Xi Lu”. Chen Rongjie’s annotations are detailed and highly academic, aiming to help readers deeply understand the philosophical and cultural background of the text. Henke, on the other hand, has fewer annotations and mainly provides basic explanations, emphasizing popularity and readability. For instance, there is a sentence in “Chuan Xi Lu”: 孟氏”尧舜之道，孝弟而已。Among them, “Yao and Shun” were two sage Kings in ancient China. Yao was renowned for his benevolence and virtue, while Shun was famous for his filial piety. They were revered by later generations as models of morality and exemplary governance. Henke translated it as “Yao and Shun” without providing annotations. Chen Rongjie translated it as “Yao and Shun” and explained the historical status of Yao and Shun and their symbolic significance in Confucianism in the annotation. The annotation wrote: “Yao and Shun were the sage Kings in ancient Chinese legends, and Confucianism regarded them as the embodiment of moral and political ideals.” Henke did not add any annotations, while Chen Rongjie helped academic readers understand the significance of Yao and Shun in Confucianism through annotations. The translator behavior of the two here is different, which might be due to the different target readers. Henke’s translation was aimed at the ordinary Western readers in the early 20th century, especially beginners interested in Eastern philosophy. These readers may lack a deep understanding of Chinese philosophy and culture. Therefore, Henke’s translations focus on popularity and readability, with few and simple annotations, mainly providing basic explanations and avoiding excessive academic discussions. For instance, he translated “良知” as “innate knowledge” without any annotation, arguing that ordinary readers do not need to delve deeply into its www.scholink.org/ojs/index.php/elsr Education, Language and Sociology Research Vol. 6, No. 3, 2025 157 Published by SCHOLINK INC. philosophical connotations. Chen Rongjie’s translation is aimed at academic readers, especially scholars and students who study Chinese philosophy. These readers need to have a deep understanding of the philosophical, historical and cultural background of the text. Therefore, Chen Rongjie’s annotations are detailed and highly academic. For instance, when translating “innate knowledge”, he not only provided multiple translations (such as “innate knowledge” and “innate knowing”), but also explained its core position in Wang Yangming’s philosophy of mind through annotations. The content of the annotations was: “Innate knowledge” is the core concept of Wang Yangming’s philosophy, referring to the moral cognitive ability that people are born with. “Be in harmony with the ‘Heavenly Principle’.” 5. Conclusion This article, with the aid of the theory of translator behavior evaluation, conducts a comparative study of the English translations of Henke’s and Chen Rongjie’s “Chuan Xi Lu”, and analyzes the in-translation and out-of-translation behaviors of the two translators. Meanwhile, with the aid of the “truth-seeking- pragmatic” translator continuum evaluation model, the research is conducted from a dynamic perspective. At the level of intra-translation behavior, the article compares the two translations from three aspects: vocabulary, syntax and rhetoric translation. The translations by the two translators basically achieved the goal of “seeking truth” and expressed the original content. At the level of extra-translation behavior, the article discusses the translation of numerals, phonetic loanwords and cultural metaphors, and analyzes the reasons for the different translation treatments of the two individuals. It is found that both have achieved a good balance between “seeking truth” and “being pragmatic” on the basis of “seeking truth”. Overall, both have reached a good balance between “seeking truth” and “being pragmatic”. Translators need to take into account both linguistic and social aspects. While conducting intra-language translation, they should also consider various factors outside of translation, so as to fully fulfill their duties and roles. From both the internal and external aspects of translation, it helps us to have a deeper understanding of translators and their translation behaviors, which is worthy of further research in the academic circle. References Chan, Wing-tsit. (1963). Instructions for Practical Living, and Other Neo-Confucian Writing by Wang Yang-Ming. New York: Columbia University Press. Henke, F. G. (1916). The Philosophy of Wang Yang-ming. London & Chicago: The Open Court Publishing Co. Nivison, David S. Book Review (Reviewed Works): Instructions for Practical Living and Other Neo- Confucian Writings by Wang Yang-ming and Wing-tsit Chan. The Philosophy of Wang Yang-ming by Frederick Goodrich Henke. (1964). Journal of the American Oriental Society, 84(4), 438. Schirokauer, Conrad M. Book Review: Instructions for Practical Living and Other Neo-Confucian Writings by Wang Yang-ming, by Wing-tsit Chan. (1964). The Journal of Asian Studies, 24(1), 151. www.scholink.org/ojs/index.php/elsr Education, Language and Sociology Research Vol. 6, No. 3, 2025 158 Published by SCHOLINK INC. Liu, K. X. (2019). Discrete Translator Chen Rongjie and the English Translation of ‘Instructions for Practical Use’. China Translation, 40.6, 52. Written by Wang Shouren and commented by Shi Bangyao. Collected Works of Mr. Wang Yangming. (2008). Beijing: Zhonghua Book Company. Zhou, L. S. (2014). Translator’s Behavior Evaluation: Theoretical Framework. Beijing: The Commercial Press. Zhou, L. S. (2014). Translator’s Behavioral Evaluation: Path Exploration. Beijing: The Commercial Press.