Chinese literature in translation- Technique

[Laotang]

I'm translating a novel, and before I started I thought it would be quite easy, but now I have found there are so many questions that arise about technique, here are a few problems which are examples of broader issues that I have identified. It would be great to know what you guys think.

1)背后的日头把她的影子打在坡下，像个镰刀，镰刀旁边还有个黑影，那是她的罗汉

My translation: The sun behind her projected her sickle shaped shadow onto the slope below. There was a little black shadow next to the sickle; that was Luohan

The question I have about this is the name. Its not obvious to an English reader that Luohan is a dog (though in the next paragraph the dog starts barking). So would you a) say "that was her dog Luohan" or B) give the dog an English name, like buddy (because Luohan is the name of a budhist god)?

2). 地都不大。小的只有炕大

Each plot was quite small, the smallest being no bigger than a Kang

Most English people don't know what a "Kang" is (Brick bed with a fire underneath it that also double as a stove/seating area) Howard Goldblatt translates it as simply "Kang" in some of his works, but in the sense above, the comparison doesn't work. So would you

a) call it something like a "brick bed/stone bed/stove;"

B) say Kang on its own; or

c) Use Kang but footnote it

as an aside, I don't think footnotes should be used in fiction because it makes it something more like an academic work, what do you think?

So, it would be great to know what you think

Tom

[studentyoung]

1)背后的日头把她的影子打在坡下，像个镰刀，镰刀旁边还有个黑影，那是她的罗汉

My translation: The sun behind her projected her sickle shaped shadow onto the slope below. There was a little black shadow next to the sickle; that was Luohan

The question I have about this is the name. Its not obvious to an English reader that Luohan is a dog (though in the next paragraph the dog starts barking). So would you a) say "that was her dog Luohan" or B) give the dog an English name, like buddy (because Luohan is the name of a budhist god)?

I would like to say “that was her dog Luohan”. If you really want to give the dog an English name, how about“Arhat”, which means “Luohan”.

http://images.google.com/images?hl=en&q=Arhat&um=1&ie=UTF-8&sa=N&tab=wi (pictures of Arhat)

2). 地都不大。小的只有炕大

Each plot was quite small, the smallest being no bigger than a Kang

Most English people don't know what a "Kang" is (Brick bed with a fire underneath it that also double as a stove/seating area) Howard Goldblatt translates it as simply "Kang" in some of his works, but in the sense above, the comparison doesn't work. So would you

a) call it something like a "brick bed/stone bed/stove;"

B) say Kang on its own; or

c) Use Kang but footnote it

I prefer footnote it. It is clear to tell others how the northern Chinese live, for Kang is part of their life.

Cheers!

[muyongshi]

I agree with Studentyoung on the footnote issue.

However on the dog issue I do not think you should add the explanation if it is not evident from the text. Just looking at the original piece you put there, you would not necessarily know that it was a dog. So, I don't think you should add it to the English.