典型英汉句型的对比和转化研究Contrast and Transformation Between Typical English and Chinese Sentence Patterns.doc

典型英汉句型的对比和转化研究contrast and transformation between typical english and chinese sentence patternsabstract：the british people have a tendency towards analytical，lineal and abstract thinking mode, separating subjects from objects, while the chinese are prone to synthetic，spiral and concrete thinking mode, unifying the subject and the object. the difference in thinking mode has contributed to different typical sentence patterns：in english，the typical sentence pattern is s=np+vp；in chinese，it is s=topic+ comment. the two formulas pose contrasts to each other in such aspects as thematic，preference for sentence style，syntactic unit and the nature of subject. knowledge about those contrasts can provide insight into and offer guidance on the transfor- mation of sentence patterns between the two languages. during transformation from chinese into english, hypotaxis can be preferred to, while parataxis is usually favored during transformation from english into chinese. key words：typical sentence patterns, contrast, transformationintroductioneugene a. nida (1983:12) once remarked, “translation consists in the receptor language the closet natural equivalence of the source language.” fully aware of the notion as translators are, they have always found elusive the approach to achievement of such “closest natural” equivalence. the difficulty has defied much attempt at complete solution because of innate differences between cultures and languages, among which the difference between sentence patterns is most frequently confronted. the reason resides in the fact that while trans1ating, the translator takes sentence as the translation unit consciously, sentence patterns between languages can directly influence, or even determine the quality of a piece of trans1ationin this book syntactic structures published in 1957，chomsky proposed that a sentence has two levels of structures：the deep structure and the surface structure(胡壮麟，2001：235)the former refers to the underlying relationship between the constituents of a sentence such as that between the subject and the verb；the latter refers to the phonological representation of the former and is usually considered to be close to what people can discern and receivefrom this point of view，translation is the process of seeking for the equivalent surface structure in another language. hence adequate knowledge about the differences between sentence patterns in the target language and those in the source language becomes even more importantof course，some cardinal principles are also to be applied to make such transformation successful 1. different typical sentence patterns and their separate underlying thinking modes 1.1 different typical sentence patternstraditional english grammar defined sentence as a linguistic unit, complete with a subject and a predicatein the 1960s，american grammarian noam chomsky(胡壮麟, 2001:115) proposed the following formula for english sentences: s=np+vp. despite the difference in expression, the two definitions are identical in connotation: subject and verb are essential to typical english sentence patternchinese grammar，developed under the influence of english grammar，also attempted to define sentences in much the same wayfor instance，chinese scholar wang li and gao mingkai once remarked that chinese sentences a1so follow the same patternsubject +verb-as english sentences do.(蔡基刚，2001：172)however, the recent studies have revealed that such a definition does not apply to almost 50 percent chinese sentencesshen xiaolong analyzed the sentence patterns adopted in lu wenhuis novel the well and concluded that 49.6 percent of its sentences, or 1054 in total，fell out of the category of“subject +verb”a typical example is the sentence” 那场大火，幸好消防队员及时赶到”，which can not be analyzed in the“subject +verb”formulainstead, it would be more appropriate to analyze the sentence as“s=topic + comment”，with“那场大火”as the topic and“幸好消防队员及时赶到”as the comment. in one word，the english typical sentence pattern is s=np+vp，while that of chinese is s= topic + commentthe difference has its origin in different thinking modes 1.2 contrast in thinking mode 1.2.1 analytical thinking mode vssynthetic thinking modeunder the impact of such masters as francis bacon, the british have developed an analytical thinking mode. in other words, they tend to take objects apart and consider them in terms of their componential parts. accordingly, emphasis is placed upon individual parts and their interrelations. the fact that western medicine treats the human system as an assembly of different organs shall testify to the trait. on the other hand, ancient chinese believed in the unity of man and nature, and the belief has deeply influenced the chinese mode of thinking: objects, whether concrete or abstract, are deemed as integrated wholes. naturally, emphasis is laid on the whole instead of its individual components. take the traditional chinese medicine as an example: it regards the human system as an integrated whole and medicine is not only prescribed for the treatment of the ailing parts. as in thinking mode, so in language. the difference in thinking mode has generated the different tendency in language: the english language tends to be hypotactic, with its emphasis on formal connection; the chinese language tends to be paratactic, with much stress on logical and chronic coherence. 1. 2. 2 lineal thinking mode vs. spiral thinking modesuppose that an english student and a chinese student are to borrow a dictionary from the same teacher. the english student would state his intention immediately after some brief greetings. the chinese student, however, is most likely to present a great deal of pleasantry before he comes to the point, in compliance with the virtue attached to politeness and euphemism since ancient times. the difference in their approaches bespeaks the difference in their thinking modes: the english tend to follow a lineal one, with its stress on “first things first”, while the chinese is more likely to follow a spiral one, with its stress on circumlocution，that is to say，“pleasantry first”. accordingly, the english language emphasize the correspondence between form and function；while chinese restriction on such correspondence is relatively loose. instead，emphasis is 1aid upon semantic coherence and consistency. 1. 2. 3 separation of subject and object vs. their unification the british cherish the separation of subject from object. such a thinking mode is directed at outward objects，exploring their influence. in other words, outside objects take the primary position，while the self becomes involved only because of the influence exerted upon it by those external objectson the other hand，the ancient chinese philosophy emphasized the importance of human being, the emphasis is demonstrated in the famous sayings of confucius, one of the greatest scholars in ancient china，who once remarked (蔡基刚，2001：195)，“according to the intention of the heaven, human being is most important.” mencius，another scholar in ancient china also said(蔡基刚，2001：195)，“all the things are to serve man.” these remarks are a demonstration of the importance placed upon human being in the chinese thinking modeactually，people from china regard man as the only one capable of conscious acts. in accordance with the difference in thinking mode, the english language attaches great value to being concrete，objective and impersonal，while the chinese language regards it as a virtue to be general and personal. 1. 2. 4 abstract thinking mode vs. concrete thinking modeaccording to the english, the world is made up of abstract units, following certain corresponding rules. in other words, they tend to be abstract in thinking mode. on the other hand, the chinese tend to describe abstract concepts with concrete terms, that is, they are prone to concrete thinking mode. the contrast has unavoidably left its mark upon languages: english emphasizes the correspondence between form and function; chinese is prone to stress on semantic consistency. as a result, the english language has more and much stricter rules governing formal coherence and compactness; the chinese language, in contrast, calls for more reader participation in decoding. thinking mode provides the underlying mechanism for the generation and development of language; in turn, it finds its expression in the latter. one language is not only integral to, but also the major carrier for a certain thinking mode. to the last analysis, the difference in thinking mode has bred the difference between hypotaxis and parataxis. in his outline of classical chinese grammar, edwin g. pulleyblank once wrote:where english and many other languages use hypostatic construction, with relationship of subordination explicitly marked by connectives and verbal morphology, chinese very often uses parataxis, leaving the semantic relationships to be inferred from the test. in other words, english has a tendency towards hypotaxis or formal coherence and smoothness, joining words, phrases, word groups and clauses with connectives, references and other linking devices. on the other hand, chinese has a propinquity towards parataxis or semantic consistency; its words, word groups and clauses are relatively loosely connected in form. such contrast naturally results in different sentence patterns: the np + vp of the english language and the topic + comment of the chinese language. 2. contrast between typical sentence patterns 2. 1 contrast in thematic structure a thematic structure consists of two componential parts: the theme and the rhyme. (thompson, 2000:132) the former is defined as the starting point of the message or the ground from which the clause is taking off. the latter refers to the remainder of the structure. broadly speaking, thematic structure or topic structure has two differing components: marked and unmarked, if the subject and the theme are one, the structure is unmarked; if not, it is marked. so, in she works in the afternoon., the thematic structure is unmarked, while in in the afternoon she works., it is marked. in the narrow sense, thematic structure only includes marked ones. 2. 1. 1 english :subject-prominent according to a new english course book by zhang zhenbang, there are five typical sentence patterns in english (章振邦, 1999:23 ):a. subject + verb. here the verb is intransitive, no object is to follow it, for example, no subject can be added to the verb rusts” in the sentence iron rusts. b. subject + verb + complement. in this case, the verb is called a linking verb, including like, seem, be and so on. c. subject + verb + object + complement. the verb is called complex transitive verb, since it takes an object and a complement. an example: we elected him president. d. subject + verb + indirect object + direct object. the verb in this case is labeled as ditransitive. just as the prefix di- indicates the number of two, the verb takes two objects, for instance, i give my brother some toys. e. subject + verb + object. the verb used here is transitive and takes one object only, for instance, i want a cup. the five basic patterns provide the basis for all the other sentences, which are expanded, condensed or otherwise evolved in form. so it is obvious that grammatical subject is indispensable to any typical sentences in english, that is to say, english is subject-prominent. the subject can be easily located in any type of sentences, however intricate their structure may be. for example, in the sentence in the corner diagonally opposite the door, mrs. higgins, now over 60 and long past taking the trouble to dress out of faction, sits writing at an elegantly simple writing table, with a bell bottom within reach of her hand.” the subject is obviously mrs. higgins. the prominence of the subject also explains the phenomenon of constant reference to the subject within some sentences. in another bomb gave the town of nagasaki the same fatal blow, it killed an estimated 54, 000 people. the pronoun is intended to refer to the subject of the sentence another bomb”. moreover, any english thematic structure can be converted into the svo order after some alterations. for instance, “to john he gave nothing, but to ann he gave ten shillings.” can be converted into the normal order he gave nothing to john, but he gave ten shillings to ann.” it is the same case with up into the sky shot the rocket, which can be converted into the rocket shot up into the sky.2. 1. 2 chinese: topic-prominent on the other hand, chinese has the characteristic of topic-prominence; the topic + comment structure applies to almost 50 percent of its sentences. on many occasions, the thematic subject, the topic, takes place of the grammatical subject, which, as a result, is often omitted without jeopardizing the original semantic interpretation. for example, 把成功的三个条件拿来分析一下, 天资是由”天”决定的, 我们无能为力, 机遇是不期而来的, 我们也无能为力。(季羡林, 2000:1 )” the subject of the main clause is 我们, and it is omitted. yet the omission does not interfere with the correct interpretation of the whole sentence; the topic把成功的三个条件拿来分析一下 has made clear about what the sentence is going to deal with. so it would be more appropriate to describe chinese as topic-prominent. the very characteristic has led to the arbitrariness of subject existence. since the existence of the grammatical subject can be arbitrary, some chinese sentences are not so readily convertible into the svo order, especially in such cases that the thematic subject-the theme-is marked. following are two instances(李瑞华, 1996:305): 他们那帮死脑筋, 我们每人都开导了一番。看戏, 我最喜欢看京剧。 in the first sentence the topic is 他们那帮死脑筋 and the grammatical subject is 我. obviously, in no way can the sentence be rearranged in the normal sequence of svo, neither can the second sentence be. all in all, the contrast in thematic structure is conspicuous: in an english structure, there is always a thematic subject, as well as a grammatical subject, to be located and the structure is always readily convertible into the normal word order; in chinese structure, however, more often than not, there is no grammatical subject to be found, so the thematic subject, the topic, is made more prominent. 2. 2 contrast in preference for sentence style and hierarchy between clauses the contrast fails into two aspects: preference for sentence style and hierarchy between clauses. following are two texts cited to illustrate the point:also secure, by 1689, was the principle of a representative government, as tested against the two criteria for valid constitutions proposed in the previous chapter. as to the first criterion, there was a genuine balance of power in english society, expressing itself in the whig and tory parties. as narrowly confined to the privileged classes as they were, they nonetheless represented different factions and tendencies. elections meant real choice among separate, coordinating parties and personalities. (gee, j. p, 2000:2) 把成功的三个条件拿来分析一下, 天资是由“天”决定的, 我们无能为力, 机遇是不期而来的, 我们也无能为力。只有勤奋一项是完全由我们自己决定的, 我们必须在这一项上狠下工夫。在这里, 古人的教导也多得很。还是先举韩文公。他说”业精于勤, 荒于嬉; 形成于思, 毁于随” 这两句话是大家再熟悉不过的了。 (季羡林2000:1) 2. 2. 1 contrast in preference for sentence style there are four sentences in the english text cited, three of which are complex sentences, relying on words and grammatical devices for coherence. as to the first criterion” is a reference to two criteria, while they in the third sentence corresponds to the whig and tory parties stated in the previous sentence. in the last sentence, elections is connected to representative government. actually the final sentence may be deemed as the natural result of the preceding sentences. thanks to the various connectives, english is a language dominated by long sentences, which are found in novels, technical writings, speeches and other styles of texts. on the other hand, the chinese text poses a clear contrast to its counterpart. between its sentences there are no visible connective devices to hold them together, nor are there any between their clauses. instead, the clauses are arranged in such a manner as seemingly independent of each other. in the first sentence, for instance, there are no subordinating clauses, nor referential devices, nor word or grammatical devices to bind them into a formally integrated whole. nonetheless, they are semantically coherent, that is to say, they are closely bound together with meaning. in fact, they are all directed at the item成功的三个条件, a term which they are intended to illustrate. it is the same case with the other sentences in the paragraph. they all deal with one thing 勤奋. if seen on the whole, all the sentences are an illustration of 成功的三个条件. semantic connection makes possible the loose structure and prevalence of short sentences in chinese. all in all, the english language has a preference for long sentences, with their constituents closely interrelated on the surface, while chinese prefers short sentences with their components loosely bound in appearance yet semantically coherent. 2. 2. 2 contrast in hierarchy between clausesin english sentences, clauses are subordinated to achieve balance and supply any message that the main clause may have failed to include. theoretically, this characteristic makes it possible for sentences to expand infinitely. in the sample text, as tested against the two criteria for valid constitutions proposed in the previous chapter makes up for what the main clause does not clarify. as to the first criterion and expressing itself in the whig and tory parties in the second sentence and as narrowly confined to the privileged classes as they were in the third sentence serve much the same purpose. as satellites to clarify and highlight the main