浅析语境与翻译 43页.doc

2012届本科生毕业论文 学 号：成 绩：浅析语境与翻译院 部： 外国语学院专 业： 英语（商务方向） 姓 名： 指导教师： 二一二年四月 毕业论文诚信声明本人郑重声明：所呈交的毕业论文浅析语境与翻译是本人在指导老师的指导下，独立研究、写作的成果。论文中所引用是他人的无论以何种方式发布的文字、研究成果，均在论文中以明确方式标明。本声明的法律结果由本人独自承担。 毕业论文作者签名： 年 月 日摘 要语言是一种社会现象，是在某种社会的某种环境中使用的。同时语言也是人类所独有的信息传递工具。人们在利用语言进行信息传递的时候，总要有其特定的语言环境。在搞翻译工作时，如果不管语境，就会遇到种种棘手的难题。大量的研究成果表明，语境在翻译的理论研究和应用研究中都占有极其重要的地位。在翻译领域，语境已经成为国内外译者和翻译理论家们研究的热点，但他们大多数人还只是就某一具体问题或某一方面问题加以分析，或是从影响语境的某些因素加以研究。本文从语境的三个方面（语内语境、情景语境、文化语境）对语境对于翻译的影响进行了研究。本论文共分六章。第一章是引言部分，阐明了本课题研究的重要意义、目的及文章结构。第二章是语境研究的理论基础。作者回顾了语境理论的发展。第三章主要探讨语境的本质，定义及分类。具体阐述语境对翻译的影响。第四章分为两部分，主要阐述语内语境与翻译的关系，重点分析了语内语境中的词语语境与语句语境。词语语境对翻译的影响一节中介绍了歧义一词多义与同形异义，同义词，反义词的连用现象。语句语境对翻译的影响一节中介绍了替代、省略、连接以及重复。最后简单论述了句子语境的确定与解释功能。第五章主要阐述情景语境与翻译的关系,介绍了语域的概念，并且将语域分为语场，语式及语旨。本章首先通过举例说明不同语场对于翻译的影响。接着同样通过举例说明不同语式对于翻泽的影响，语式部分还讨论了修辞的翻译,语旨被分成四个部分，通过举例说明了它对于翻译的影响。第六章主要阐述文化语境与翻译的关系。本章首先论述了语言与文化以及翻译与文化的关系，又详细讨论了不同文化中不同的思维方式，不同的历史背景，不同的地理环境，以及不同的宗教信仰与翻译的关系。结论部分概括了本论文所论述的语境，翻译以及二者的关系，总结了本文的观点，即翻译作品质量的好坏很大程度上受到语境的影响，脱离了语境，翻译工作就无法展开。 关键词 语言 翻译 语内语境 情景语境 文化语境abstract language is a social phenomenon. it is only used in a certain environment of certain society. and it is a tool used only by our human. there is always a special language environment when people use it to communicate. while if translators translate articles without take the language environment-context into consideration, many problems will certainly arise. a large number of studies show that context indeed plays a very significant role in translation studies and practice. however in the field of translation, context has already become a hot point in translators and translation theorists in china. but most of them only studied a single aspect, or certain elements that influence context. now this essay studies the importance of context from three aspects: linguistic context, situational context, cultural context. this essay consists of six chapters. the first chapter is the introductory part, which reflects the significance of the study coupled with its aims in writing as well as the whole structure of this essay. the second chapter is about the theoretic background of the study on context. in the first part, the author reviews the development of the theory of context. the third chapter reflects the nature of context. it concerns the definition. and classification of context. at the same time, it discusses how context influences translation. the fourth chapter deals with linguistic context and translation which include two parts. here the meaning of linguistic context contains word context and sentence context. and the first part is going to discuss how the linguistic context influences translation, ambiguity, antonyms and synonyms. while the second part forces on the relationship between sentence context and translation through substitute, ellipsis and so on. the fifth chapter mainly concerns on situational context and translation. this chapter introduced the concept of register which is consists of field, mode, and tenor. and at the beginning of the chapter gives different examples to explain the relations between these three factors and translation. meanwhile, the translation of rhetoric is included in the part of mode. the sixth chapter talks about the cultural context and translation .at first; it introduces the relation between language and culture as well as the relation between translation and culture. then it provides various examples to reflect the relations between different thought patterns, historical background, geographic culture, religious culture and translation. in the conclusion summarizes the problems of context, translation and their relation. thus the context largely affects the work of translation and it is impossible for translators to do their job without take context into consideration.key words language： translation; linguistic context; situational context; cultural contextcontents chapter one introductionchapter two theoretic background of the study on context 2.1 previous theoretic exploration in context 2.1.1 malinowskis contribution to the study of context 2.1.2 firths theoretic studies of context2.1.3 hallidays theoretic studies of context 2.1.4 other theoretic investigations into contextchapter three on context3.1 contextual elements involved in translation3.1.1 linguistic context3.1.2 non-linguistic context 3.1.2.1 situational context3.1.2.2 social-cultural context 3.2 how context influences translationchapter four linguistic context and translation 4.1 word context 4.1.1 the change of words meaning in communication 4.1.2 ambiguity 4.1.2.1 polysemy 4.1.2.2 homonymy 4.1.3 antonyms and synonyms 4.1.3.1 antonyms in pairs 4.1.3.2 synonyms in pairs 4.2 sentence context 4.2.1 the change of sentences meaning in communication 4.2.2 sentence contexts essential factors 4.2.2.1 substitution 4.2.2.2 ellipsis 4.2.2.3 conjunction 4.2.2.4 repetition 4.2.3 the confirmation and explanation of the sentence contextchapter five situational context and translation 5.1 the concept of register 5.2 field 5.2.1 translation in different fields 5.3 mode 5.3.1 translations in different modes 5.3.2 rhetoric 5.4 tenor 5.4.1 four divisions of the tenor 5.4.2 translation in different tenorschapter six cultural context and translation 6.1 cultural context and translation 6.1.1 cultural context and comprehension 6.1.2 cultural context and representation 6.2 the difference of thinking patterns and translation 6.3 the difference of historical background and translation 6.4 the difference of geographic culture and translation 6.5 the difference of religious culture and translation conclusionbibliographyacknowledgechapter one introduction as a kind of information system, language is unique to human society. the communication with language-the transmitting and receiving of information, appears only in particular circumstance and are affected by them. so context plays a very important role for a translator to understand the texts and it also helps the reader to interpret the meaning. the famous translation theorist, peter newmark, has said in his famous book approaches to translation ( 1982:113) that “ context is the overriding factor in all translation, and has primacy over any rule, theory, or primary meaning.” the relation between context and translation is just like the relation between water and fish. in the field of modern linguistics, context plays a more important role. while in the field of translation, context has become the highlight of translators as well as their theorists in our country. however, most of them have only studied a certain problem or aspect that influence context. as we know, translation is a sophisticated language social activity. it not concerns on the word-to-word translation. “translation is a communicative progress which takes place with in a social context.”(hatim & mason 2001:3) in order to translate one language to another while at the same time keeps the content of the source language, translators are inevitably working under the bound of both the source language and target language. so translators have to be sensitive in any source text for they are positioned between two independent social structures. the translator plays as an observer of the text-world environment of source language. and the role of the translator as reader is then constructing the meaning of source text. as a text producer, the translator operates in a different social and cultural environment, trying to use his interpretation to reflex the meaning of the source text. translator should convey the content, intention and style of the source text, at the same time they should meet the needs of the readers living in the specific historical period. text is the target of translation, that is to say, what a translator works with is different types of text. so what is text? text is a series of signals that transmit from a sender to a receiver a special code or set of codes through some medium. a text may be one word, one sentence, one passage or even one novel. the word “context” comes from the latin word contextus. and how is context to be defined? although numbers of scholars have their own definitions of context, they just express the same meaning in different ways, thus, “context involves the relevant elements of the surrounding linguistic or nonlinguistic structures in relation to an uttered expression under consideration. the expression is normally a unit corresponding to a sentence, but can also be a word or a global discourse unit.” (asher 1994:731). the contextual factors that the meaning of a text lingers on involve both the social and cultural background as well as the surrounding words. while we have to learn context from multi-dimension, then we can understand the meaning and function of a text. this dissertation proceeds in six chapter. chapter one is the introductory part. chapter two concerns the theoretic background of the study on context. chapter three is about the classification of context. chapter four studies the linguistic context and translation. chapter five studies the situational context and translation. chapter six studies the cultural context and translation. then it ended with a conclusion. chapter twotheoretic background of the study on context 2.1 previous theoretic exploration in context in the last decades, saussures distinguish between langue and parole exerted universal influence on linguistic studies. according to saussures suggestion, the label “linguistics” assumes the existence of utterly homogeneous speech communities that each uses a uniform linguistic code, mainly for referential functions. on the ground of assumption, the purpose of theoretical linguistics is the elaboration of context-free linguistic rules explaining that part of linguistic behavior. while, when linguists only described the construction of a language and codified its vocabulary, they did not tell people the true meaning of language. therefore, many scholars involved malinowski, firth, halliday had contributed to the spread of pragmatic study in linguistics. they take language essentially as asocial activity and are not satisfied with the view that a formal system could be isolated from its culture. as a result, the following years have witnessed a shift of emphasis from peer theoretical analysis of linguistic form and structure to the study of the theories for applied aims.2.1.1 malinowskis contribution to the study of contextmalinowski, was the anthropologist of england and he acted as one of the founders of functionalism. also, he was one of the first investigators to study the context. in his essay the problem of meaning in primitive languages (1923), he made large contribution to the development of contextual studies of linguistic. when he was dealing with his anthropological fieldwork makes a chance for him to arouse his interest in context. working with the people who live under a remote culture, malinowski made hard endeavors to translate the local dialects for english-speaking readers. he used various ways, such as free and literal translations, but he failed in these trying. so malinowski later translated while made a comment, taking the contextual factors into consideration. after noting how words become comprehensive, he broadened his conception of context by the notion “context of culture”. malinowski later developed his idea of meaning. in his view, meaning is not contained in words alone. and his work constituted the point of departure for a method to the analysis of language that extends from firth to halliday.2.1.2 firths theoretic studies of context largely affected by malinowski, firth, acclaimed as the father of the functional theory of language, moved even further to explore the meaning by setting up his own theory of semantics upon the concept of context. and he claimed that meaning is not only related with its environment, but also “deeply embedded in the living process of persons maintain themselves in society.”(liu runqing 1988:67) firth absorbed malinowakis notion of context of situation, but his understanding of context of situation is different from that of malinowaki. for malinowaki, context of situation refers to the immediate environment where utterances are embedded. while as to firth, context can not be regarded as something concrete, instead, it is the representation of the surroundings. we can get this information from his words as follows: my view was, and still is, thatcontext of situation is best used as a suitable schematic construct to apply to language events, and that it is a group of related categories at a different level from grammatical categories but rather of the same abstract nature. a context of situation for linguistic work brings into relation the following categories: (1) the relevant features of participants: persons, personalities.a. the verbal action of the participants.b. the non-verbal action of the participants.(2) the relevant objects.(3) the effect of the verbal action. (firth, 1957:182) while firth as a linguist, he pay a careful attention to linguistic context that distinguished himself from malinowski. in 1935, firth pointed out that the context includes the following five branches: phonological, morphological, lexical, clausal context and context of situation. the first four components belong to the linguistic proper (牛强、陈林华,1999:32) and the last one is consist of both situational and verbal context. firth also notices the difference between extra linguistic and linguistic context. his classified the linguistic context together with his context of situation was contained in his semantic theory. firth defined meaning as “function in context” (sampson,1980:226).meaning should be viewed as a combination of contextual relations and phonetics, grammar, lexicology and semantics each contributes to the totality of meaning in their respective context. when analyzing the meaning of an utterance, we first abstract it from its context of situation and then separate the complex of meaning into its component functions called modes.2.1.3 hallidays theoretic studies of context at the base of the malinowskis and firths studies of context, halliday employed firths idea of context to build the systemic-functional theory in which the categories and their relations are explained clearly. descending directly from firthsview of context theory, halliday, took a functional approach to view language as an instrument of social interaction. halliday points out that “all languages are languages in use, in a context of situation, and all of it relates to the situation”(1978:33), which shows the importance of context in any interpretation of a text. therefore, a text is an example of social meaning in a particular context of situation. since we do not use language alone while always use it in conjunction. thus context of situation is a necessary ingredient, without it any linguistic theory will be inadequate. hallidays concept of context of situation deserves our attention. he was ispired by basil bernsteins notion of “critical socializing context”. halliday proposed that context of situation should be represented in still more abstract terms than what firth had suggested. context of situation does not mean a special situation with tangible dimensions. it should be seen as a periodicity “situation type”. later halliday identified three situation types: field, tenor and mode. field refers to the continual social activity where the linguistic plays as a constitutive part. while tenor refers to the relation among the relevant participants: who are these participants in this social activity under research. and mode refers to the role that language acts in the total situation. typical examples of mode are “ both the channel taken by the language-spoken or written, extempore or prepared-and its genre or rhetorical mode, as narrative, didactive, persuasive, phatic communication andso on” (halliday & hason, 1976:22) in a word, the concept of context is a combination of a field of meaningful social interaction, a tenor and a mode of symbolic organization. they function as the determinants of a text. with a detailed specification of the context of situation according to these three parts, we are able to predict the corresponding semantic properties of a text.2.1.4 other theoretic investigations into context after the start study of context by malinowski, and subsequently explored by firth and halliday, more and more linguists follow their theories and extended it. joshua. a. fishman is the founder of american social linguistic, put forward the notion “semantic domain”. he holds that semantic domain is the social situation limited by the general acts. fishman believes that the speech act should adapt to the semantic domain, thus, language used by people should be always suitable to its environment. dell hathaway hymes, the anthropologist and social linguist of america, did not agree with his peers. so he find out eight components of speech situation: text, setting, participants, ends, key,