These misinterpretations have caused much attention in literary criticism. Many critics had analyzed his misreading in certain works. Because of the influence of cultural background, the domestic and foreign scholars focus on the different angles. Domestic scholars focus mainly on the poetry and poetic theories of Pound, his translation theory and practice as well as the relationship between Pound and Chinese culture. From the perspective of the poetics and poetry 源Z自+吹冰=文-论(文+网[www.chuibin.com of Pound, scholars give more attention to the origin of poetic theory, his role in Imagist and Modernist literature movement and his poetic aesthetics. Representative of this kind is Yuan Ruojuan’s Imagist Poetry and Chinese classic poetry which uses a comparative way to study Pound’s poetic theory (Yuan 1984). From the perspective of translation, domestic researchers mainly discuss the translation theory of Pound and his creation and misreading in translation as well as its cross-cultural meaning. And there are also many scholars concentrate on the relationship between Pound and the Chinese culture. What they concern most is the nutrition provided by the Chinese literary classics and the influence of Chinese culture on Pound’s principles of Imagist poetry. While the foreign scholars pay more attention to the relationship between Pound and Modernism as well as Mysticism, Pound’s economic thought and the use of Orientalism theory to explain the relationship between Pound and China in recent years. Western scholars mainly focus on the relationship between Pound and Modernism as well as Mysticism, Pound’s economic thought and the use of Orientalism theory to explain the relationship between Pound and China. American scholars Cary Wolfe discusses in his The Limits of American Literary Ideology in Pound and Emerson the relationship between Pound’s works and the tradition of American culture in order to explain the political and economical thoughts of Pound (Wolfe 1994). They regarded these misinterpretations as the result of cultural difference or his practice of his views in translation. This thesis, however, tries to categorize Pound’s misunderstandings of the Chinese literary classics into three types and ascribes the misreading to the impact of western philosophy of language and American tradition of literature. Having been enlightened by so many researches and studying results, this thesis will discuss the old issue from a new point of view and hope it will give some statements to the long-time discussion. In conclusion, Pound’s misreading, or mistranslation, is just following the tradition of American literature.