硕士学位论文-从阐释学视角看《名利场》两种译本的译者主体性.doc

学校代码：10254密 级：论文编号： 上海海事大学SHANGHAI MARITIME UNIVERSITY硕 士 学 位 论 文MASTER DISSERTATION论文题目： 从阐释学视角看 名利场两种译本的译者主体性 学科专业： 外国语言学及应用语言学 作者姓名： 张 鋆 指导教师： 韩忠华 教授 完成日期： 二一年五月 论文独创性声明本论文是我个人在导师指导下进行的研究工作及取得的研究成果。论文中除了特别加以标注和致谢的地方外，不包含其他人或其他机构已经发表或撰写过的研究成果。其他同志对本研究的启发和所做的贡献均己在论文中做了明确的声明并表示了谢意。 作者签名： 日期： 论文使用授权声明本人同意上海海事大学有关保留、使用学位论文的规定，即：学校有权送交论文复印件，允许论文被查阅和借阅；学校可以上网公布论文的全部内容或部分内容，可以采用影印、缩印或其他手段保存论文。保密的论文在解密后遵守此规定。作者签名： 导师签名： 日期： A Discussion on Translators Subjectivity from the Perspective of HermeneuticsBased on Two Chinese Versions of Vanity FairBy Zhang JunUnder the Supervision ofProfessor Han ZhonghuaA Thesis Submitted to the College of Foreign Languages ofShanghai Maritime Universityin Partial Fulfillment ofthe Requirements for the MA DegreeShanghai Maritime UniversityMay, 2010AcknowledgementsAt the moment when I complete the thesis, I can not help expressing my deep and great appreciation for those who helped me and gave me kind instructions on conceiving this thesis.First and foremost, I owe a great deal to Professor Han Zhonghua, my supervisor, for his patient tutorship, invaluable suggestions and guidance. It is quite fair for me to say that this thesis can never be achieved without his generous support and professional comments. I am extremely grateful not only for his inspiring encouragement but also for his objective criticism, which helped me a lot in improving this thesis. During the process of working on this thesis, I was once again deeply impressed by his earnest academic attitude, incisive viewpoints as well as his inexhaustible enthusiasm in academic study, which set a model for my future research.I also want to express special thankfulness to Professor Wang Dawei, Professor Zheng Lixin, Professor Weng Fengxiang and many other distinguished scholars in my university, for their instructional lectures, the influence of which will be felt all my life.Last but not least, it is necessary for me to express my sincere gratitude to my parents, some of my relatives, my classmates, and my friends. I thank them from bottom of my heart for their understanding and permanent support throughout my academic study. 摘 要名利场是十九世纪英国批判现实主义作家萨克雷(William Makepeace Thackeray 1811-1863)的成名之作，“也是他生平著作里最经得起时间考验的杰作”(杨绛, 1997)。在名利场的诸多中译本中，女翻译家杨必的译本一向深受读者青睐，也是难得看到的佳译。事隔多年后，湖南师范大学彭长江教授面临着更多、更大的困难重译了名利场，但其措辞及语言风格方面都与“杨译”大不相同。随着名利场中译本的不断增多，对不同译本的品评文章也源源不断。然而，评论者多集中于语言层面的分析，从文化空缺或“归化、异化”上入手，但从译者及其译者主体性角度出发的研究至今仍较少见。译者的主体性在翻译史上经历了一个由朦胧到凸显的过程。20世纪70年代以来，西方翻译理论出现了“文化转向”，运用后结构主义理论对文本的意义进行阐述。译者的主体性及其在翻译过程中所起的主体性作用逐渐受到西方翻译理论界的广泛关注，我国对译者主体性的研究也在日益加深。译者主体性在国内外已得到了应有的重视。阐释学 （Hermeneutics） 是 20 世纪 60 年代后盛行于西方的哲学和文化思潮。任何翻译都由理解开始，阐释学理论正是基于对意义的理解与阐释的一门学科。翻译阐释学派强调翻译和理解之间密不可分的关系，对理解的作用和方式进行不同的阐释。翻译活动也从传统的原作者“独白”和无限度的读者阐释，走向了原作者、文本译者、译文与译文读者之间的积极对话。在翻译的过程中，译者处于整个对话活动的中心位置, 扮演着读者和译文作者的双重角色。阐释学视角给翻译研究注入了新的活力，带来了新的研究视角。鉴于译者的主体地位在当今文化语境下已得到越来越多的关注，本文拟运用阐释学相关理论，重新审视和研究译者的主体性作用。本文拟以翻译阐释学理论为基础，以萨克雷的名作名利场的两个权威中文译本为语料，运用斯坦纳的“翻译的四步骤”，伽达默尔的“偏见”、“视域融合”等阐释学基本观点，通过实证分析，对萨克雷的名利场的两个中文译本进行对比研究，藉以考察译者主体性在文学翻译过程中的表现。 本文共分五章。第一章对萨克雷，其名著名利场及名利场的两个权威版的中译本做简要的介绍。第二章对“译者主体性”问题和“阐释学”理论及相关的研究现状进行较为详细的介绍和说明，阐明什么是“译者主体性”、“阐释学”经历了怎样的发展行程，以及它是如何与“译者主体性”相结合的。第三章和第四章是本文的重点。这两章以名利场的两个不同中文译本为案例，以从中所选取的大量文本实例为实证，运用阐释学的核心理论对“译者主体性”进行深入和充分的讨论。其中，第三章以乔治斯坦纳的“翻译四步骤”理论为依据，对名利场的两中译本的译者主体性的发挥进行对比分析与关照，即译者在经历 “信赖”、“侵入”、“吸收”和“补偿”这四个翻译步骤的过程中所体现出的译者主体性。第四章，根据伽达默尔的“视域融合”理论，从译本本身的不同特征，如译者的翻译策略、语言风格、艺术标准及文化传真度等，探讨名利场两中译本的译者主体性。第五章为结论，即：在阐释学理论的视域下，翻译过程应当理解为译者能动的阐释原文的过程，译者主体性的发挥具有其合法性和一定的局限性。传统译论中有关译者的理论很难指导译者在翻译实践中充分调动自己的主体性，而结合阐释学相关理论对译者主体性及其实际作用进行研究，则能够较好地解决这个问题。本文以阐释学理论与传统翻译理论相结合作为立论基础，旨在能从阐释学角度出发，为名利场的两个权威中文译本的译者主体性的解读，提供一个较新的视角。笔者希望本文能具有一定的理论意义，并能为文学翻译研究和翻译实践提供一点儿切实可行的参考。关键词：名利场; 译者主体性; 阐释学; 翻译四步骤; 视域融合 ABSTRACTWilliam Makepeace Thackeray, one of the greatest critical realist writers of England in the 19th century, reached his peak of popularity with the publication of his masterpiece Vanity Fair. It is “his most famous work in his literary career, which can certainly stand the test of time,” claimed Yang Jiang in 1997. Among the Chinese versions of Vanity Fair, the most widely acclaimed one is translated by Yang Bi, a well-known female scholar in China, and her version, regarded as the most authoritative one, has enjoyed great popularity among the Chinese readers ever since its publication. Confronted with more challenging difficulties though, Professor Peng Changjiang from Hunan Normal University re-translated the novel a few decades later, making innovations in terms of linguistic performances, rhetorical properties, and so on.As the number of the Chinese versions of Vanity Fair grows, articles commenting on different translations accordingly are coming forth endlessly. However, most of the comments and researches concerned are focused on the level of linguistic aspects, on “foreignization or domestication”，or on the basis of the cultural gap. It is still rare to see discussions and researches on comparison between the different versions from the perspective of translators functions or translators subjectivity. As we all know, the development of the theory of translators subjectivity underwent various stages from being obscure to its being on the foreground of today. Since 1970s, translation theories in the western world began to take a “Cultural Turn”. There has been a tendency of applying post-structuralism to the interpretation of texts. As a result, the theory of translators subjectivity and its leading role in the process of translating has aroused great concern among the translation theorists. Scholars in China have also paid increasing attention to this theory. At present translators subjectivity as a translation theory has achieved its deserving stature.Hermeneutics as a philosophical and cultural ideology was prevalent in the West in the late 1960s. Since any translation begins with the understanding, Hermeneutics is exactly such a branch of learning that is established on the basis of understanding and hermeneutical exegesis and interpretation of the textual and contextual meanings of the texts in question. Hermeneutics, as viewed from the aspect of the translation theory, emphasizes that there is an inseparable relationship between translation and comprehension. It illustrates the how and the why understanding and interpretation occurs from quite a different perspective. Thus the perception of the translating process begins to change from the writers own monologue and the targeted readers infinitive interpretation to an active dialogue between the original writer, the translator, the translation and the reader. In the light of the hermeneutical view, the translator becomes the interlocutor playing the double-role as both the reader of the source language text and the writer of the target language text. Hermeneutics, to some extent, has injected new vitality into the study of translation theories from a brand new perspective.In view of the situation in which more and more emphases are placed on translators subjectivity, this thesis aims at conducting a re-investigation into the theory of translators subjectivity from the perspective of Hermeneutics. By way of applying some core concepts of Hermeneutics, such as George Steiners “Fourfold Hermeneutic Translation Motion Theory”, and Gadamers Hermeneutic theories, including his theories of “Fusion of Horizons”, “Prejudice”, “Fore-Understanding”, and through the adoption of large quantities of factual instances taken from the two authoritative Chinese versions of William Makepeace Thackerays masterpiece Vanity Fair chosen for the intended comparative study, the author of this thesis aims to carry out a tentative analysis on translators subjectivity in the act of translating literary works.The whole thesis consists of four chapters. Chapter One is a brief introduction to Vanity Fair，its original writer William Makepeace Thackeray, as well as to the two translators and their translations. Chapter Two serves as the theoretical frame offering a detailed study of relevant theories of translators subjectivity and Hermeneutics. It involves the histories of the two theories and how Hermeneutics is applied to the study of translators subjectivity. Chapters Three and Four function as the core part of the thesis, aiming at carrying out ample and in-depth analyses on a great wealth of examples taken from the two Chinese translation versions being discussed from hermeneutical perspective. Chapter Three deals with the comparison between the two Chinese versions with a view to bringing forth translators subjectivity by applying George Steiners Fourfold Hermeneutic Translation Motion Theory, which explores into translators subjectivity embodied in the whole translation process that comprises the four necessary steps, namely “trust”, “aggression”, “incorporation” and “compensation”. Chapter Four brings forth the presentation of translators subjectivity as displayed in the two Chinese versions from different aspects on the basis of Gadamers “Fusion of Horizons” Theory, which concerns translators strategy and approaches, their linguistic performance, artistic style and the degree of fidelity in cultural transmission. A conclusion is drawn at the end of the thesis, that is, translation, from the perspective of Hermeneutics, should be viewed as an active understanding and interpretation of the actual meaning of the original writing. Translators subjectivity in the act of translation is legitimate although there are certain limitations.The traditional theory of translation can hardly activate the subjectivity of the translator into full play in their translating practice; nevertheless, when combined with the relevant theories of Hermeneutics, we may have ways to solve the problem. The aim of this thesis is to provide some new approaches to the understanding of the mechanism and the legitimate position of translators subjectivity as displayed in the two authoritative Chinese versions of the classical work of Vanity Fair on the basis of the theory of Hermeneutics. It is the proper writers hope that this thesis can be of certain theoretical value with its supply of the reliable and pragmatic reference to the study and practice of translating literary works.KEYWORDS: Vanity Fair, translators subjectivity, Hermeneutics, Fourfold Hermeneutic Translation Motion, Fusion of HorizonsVIICONTENTSPreface1Chapter Introduction41.1 An Introduction to Vanity Fair and its two Selected Chinese Versions41.1.1 A Summary of the NovelVanity Fair41.1.2 The two Complete Chinese Versions and Their Translators51.1.2.1 Yang Bis Translated Version of Vanity Fair51.1.2.2 Peng Changjiangs Translated Version of Vanity Fair71.2 Research Methodology81.3 Research Significance81.4 Layout of the Thesis9Chapter Hermeneutics and Translators Subjectivity102.1 Hermeneutics102.1.1 Origin and Development of Hermeneutics102.1.1.1 Origin of Hermeneutics102.1.1.2 Development of Hermeneutics112.1.2 Some Core Concepts of Modern Hermeneutics122.2 Subjectivity of Translator132.2.1 Definition of Translators Subjectivity132.2.2 Subjectivity of Translator from Invisibility to Visibility142.2.3 Distinction Between Translators Subjectivity and Translation Subjectivity.162.3 Enlightenment from Hermeneutics on Translators Subjectivity172.3.1 Validity of Translators Subjectivity from the perspective of Hermeneutics172.3.1.1 George Steiners Fourfold Hermeneutic Translation Motion Theory and its Theoretical Support to the Validity of Translators Subjectivity172.3.1.2 Gadamers Hermeneutic Theory, Including His Theories of “Fusion of Horizons”, “Prejudice”, “Fore-Understanding”, and Their Support to the Validity of Translators Subjectivity202.3.2 Avoidance of Excessive “Prejudice” Limitation of Translators Subjectivity22Chapter A Comparative Study of Translators Subjectivity Based on the Two Chinese Versions of Vanity Fairfrom the Perspective of “Fourfold Hermeneutic Translation Motion Theory”243.1 Translators Trust253.1.1 Translators Cultural Background253.1.2 Translators Translation Motive273.2 Translators Aggression293.2.1 Translators Aggression in Different Personality293.2.2 Translators Aggression as Different Gender313.2.3 Translators Understanding and Judgment of the Source Text343.3 Translators Incorporation353.3.1 Linguistic Absorption of the Style in the Original Work353.3.2 Aesthetic Acceptance of the Original Work373.3.3 Absorption of Cultural Consciousness of the Original Work393.4 Translators Compensation/Restitution403.4.1 Discrepancy Between Different Cultures and Losses in Translation403.4.2 Compensation by Choice of Words423.4.3 Compensation by Sentence Rearrangement433.4.4 Re-creation of Image of the Characters and Preservation of Figures of Speech46Chapter Presentation of Translators Subjectivity Based on the Two Chinese Versions of Vanity Fairfrom the Perspective of Gadamers Theory of “Fusion of Horizons”514.1 Translators Strategy and Approaches524.2 Fusion of Language Style584.3 Degree of Fidelity in Cultural Transmission63Conclusion69Bibliography72PrefaceIn the development of translation studies, translators subjectivity has undergone such a process of change from that of being invisible to that of being widely cognizant. It was not so conspicuous among the whole academic circle until the 1970s when the “Cultural Turn” came into being. From that time on, translators subjectivity has been given increasing attention on the part of both the translation theorists and translation practitioners.Vanity Fair, the renowned novel written by William Makepeace Thackeray, has made a name for itself since its publication. As one of the greatest critical realist writers of the 19th century in England, William Makepeace Thackeray drained his ironic power to describe all sorts of characters in the novel such as the sharp Bechy Sharp, the amiable Amelia, etc. The sarcastic tone, the incisive expression together with the humorous style distinguished this classic from its contemporary works, which has vividly depicted all forms of ugliness existed in the upper-class society in England in the 19th century. Meanwhile, the uniqueness of the classic as well as the great linguistic gap between two cultures becomes a huge barrier to the translation of the novel. Translators in China have made strenuous efforts to try and adopt different methods in order to vividly reproduce it in Chinese for the benefit of the Chinese readers, and their endeavors in the work have demonstrated an obvious manifestation on translators subjectivity. As the process of translation or interpretation begins with the understanding of the text in question, there is naturally a connection between Hermeneutics and translation theories, for it is exactly such kind of theory that calls for understanding and interpreting the meaning of the text. Hermeneutics, a method of textual analysis, has gone through three phases, namely, classic, general, and modern Hermeneutics (including ontological and philosophical hermeneutics). It bears a close relationship with translators subjectivity, especially some of its core concepts such as George Steiners Fourfold Hermeneutic Translation Motion Theory, Gadamers Hermeneutic Theory of “Fusion of Horizons”, “Prejudice” and “Fore-Understanding”. According to George Steiners Fourfold Hermeneutic Translation Motion Theory，a translation cannot be achieved only when it is composed after the translator undergoes four necessary phases, namely, trust, aggression, corporation and compensation. None of the four steps can operate independently to produce the desired effect without involving translators subjectivity for the reasons that, in the first place, a text would not be chosen for the act of translating if the translator does not have faith in the translatability of the text. And then, during the process when the translator penetrates into and tries to make sense of the text, he unavoidably injects his own subjective factors into his comprehension. Thirdly, the ultimate aim of aggression is corporation, which is more or less mixed with translators subjectivity. Thus, compensation is indispensible to make up for the discrepancy caused by the cultural gap and translators subjectivity. Gadamers Hermeneutic Theory of “Fusion of Horizons”, “Prejudice” and “Fore-Understanding” has unveiled the essence of translation that in order to do translation, the translator should first of all act as a reader, then as a writer. In line with Gadamers theory of “Fusion of Horizons”, there are two different horizons in the translators process of understanding and interpreting the original work as a reader: one is the texts horizon; the other is the interpreters horizon. When creating a literary work, the author carries his/her own primary horizon, while the interpreter has his/her own special horizon conceived in his/her specific era and cultural and cognitive environment. Thus the fusion of horizon takes place when the interpreter begins to understand the original work. As a result, a brand-new horizon appears which is higher than both of the previous two. Due to his/her “fore-understanding”, the translators comprehension of the source language text is a historical activity, which is limited by the translators historical condi