chapter 3 Albrecht Neubert Translation as Text.doc

Chapter 3Albrecht NeubertTranslation as TextGuided ReadingAlbrecht Neubert has been a leading figure in translation studies for over 30 years. He was the Chair of English translation at the University of Leipzig, and co-founder of the influential Leipzig school of Translation Theory, which is characterized by a linguistically-oriented, scientific approach to translation. During the course of his career, he has held the CERN Chair of Translation at Leuven University and guest款待，招待 教授的职位professorships at SUNY Binghamton and Kent State University. He has shown immense creativity and energy in his extensive writings and the areas of his interest cover many facets of translation and interpreting.Neubert is certainly one of the prominent German translation theorists who has contributed substantially to translation studies and deserves primordial最初的，原始的 reverence尊敬 and reputation as an internationally notable scholar of translation. He is insightful具有洞察力的, anticipating预期的, and far-sighted有远见的 to help establish the widespread movement to introduce formal and empirical rigor严厉；艰苦；严峻；严密 into translation studies. He helped found the Institute for Applied Linguistics at Kent State University, now a center for American translation studies, to promote interdisciplinary各学科间的，跨学科的 research exploring the cognitive processes of translation and interpreting.The German Leipzig School made significant contributions to Translation Studies, and shed light on阐明，解释，使某事物清楚 the German functionalism as well. Its theoretical framework理论框架 originated from the influence of communication theory and linguistics concerning communicative correspondence, the intention of 委员；长官；专员，特派员commissioners, and the text-linguistic approach. Text linguistics文本语言学 is a branch of linguistics that deals with texts as communication systems. It takes into account the form of a text, but also its setting, the way in which it is situated in an interactional互动的, communicative context. Both the author of a text as well as its 收信人，收件人addressees are taken into consideration in their respective分别的，各自的 roles in the specific communicative context. In general, it is an application of linguistic analysis at the broader level of text, rather than just a sentence or word.Neubert and Sherve co-authored Translation as Text (1992) in which many ideas regarding text-linguistic, sociolinguistic社会语言学, and psycholinguistic心理语言学 models are discussed. Neubert commented that the previous linguistic approach treats translation as a specific type of language use without considering external外部的，外面的 or extralinguistic语言（学）以外的 factors such as critical norms or the constraints of practice实践的制约. It concentrates on systemic系统的，组织的；全身的 relationships between the source and target languages. The model studies the linguistic resources语言资源 of the source and target languages and the 机械装置；结构，机制；办法，途径；手法，技巧mechanisms available in the target language for overcoming the structural differences between source and target that appear in translation (Neuber 1992:19).The linguistic model presumes a bottom-up自下而上的，从细节到总体的，从个别到全貌的 process which begins with words and their discrete分离的，不相关联的 meanings, but there are constraints operating at a level beyond the sentence. To produce a pragmatically adequate translation充足的解释, transformations and modifications are made to a linguistically adequate target text. Thus, Neubert proposed the textual linguistic model by 详细阐述developing the top-down从整体到细节 text production for translation. The essential translation unit is the entire text, from which one calculates backwards to arrive at the global proposition全球性的命题（观点，见解，主张；提议，建议；定理，命题, which is then divided into smaller, single, transportable可运输的，可传送的，可移动的 semantic units, while meaning is also carried globally in the text.The text-linguistic model of translation emphasizes the various uses of language by speakers and writers in particular communicative situation (Neubert 1986b, 1973a), and textually and pragmatically adequate translation. It is a top-down recreation of the text through the purposeful有目的的；果断的，有决心的 selection of target language resources. The model is called text-linguistic because it reflects the expansion of translation studies into discourse analysis话语分析 and pragmatics语用学，语言实用学. The text-linguistic model differs from the linguistic model in its broader, text-based conception of meaning and its more realistic formulation规划，构想；公式化 of the notion观念，概念；意图，想法 of translation equivalence, at textual and communicative level.In the text-linguistic model, translation does not involve the transfer of meanings, but rather而是, the communicative values of the source text that are transferred. The term refers to the 交际语境communicative contextualization语境化，把握语境 of words and meanings in discourse. Communicative values are meaning 混合物，合成物composites seen entirely at a textual level and in communicative context (Neubert 1992:24). The text-linguistic model of translation is a distinct approach with the textual systems of two communicating communities as the frame of reference.Neubert assumes a textual perspective on从文本的角度假设 translation, as the text is the primary object of research, and is regarded as having the potential to act as a unifying concept一个统一的概念 in the discipline of Translation Studies. He 假定posits:他从文本的角度对翻译作为假设，由于文本是主要的研究对象，并且被认为在翻译研究中，具有作为一个统一概念的潜质。This perspective respects more narrowly focused perspectives on translation by providing a framework for understanding how various translation processes and results may be 使和解，使重归于好；使一致/和谐reconciled in the concept of translation as text. The text, and the features which give it textuality文本性, are proposed as an integrating concept集成概念 for the interdiscipline跨学科 of translation (Neubert 1992:viii).The development of translation studies has manifested interdisciplinary nature that results in new research directions and patterns. However, linguistics and textlinguistics are among many disciplines that continue to contribute to our understanding of translation. The textual perspective reminds us that translational activity is still text-centered and the observable看得见的，觉察得到的；应遵守的，可奉行的 facts of translation are manifested in the texts (ibid.). Thus it is text-based, emphasizing the communicative values of the source text that are transferred and the communicative contextualization语境化 of words and meanings. The translator knows what texts should be like to the expectation of the text users and engages in a textual process of transfer and text production (ibid. :24).Neubert points out: with the advent of textlinguistics, a more complex view is being introduced-the textlinguistic perspective, which has brought to translation studies a re-interpretation of grammatical and lexical distinctions重新解释语法和词汇的区别 as well as an exploration of correspondences beyond the sentence level. Disregarding the role of the text was like failing to see the wood for the trees. Translating the words and structures correctly does not guarantee an adequate translation (Neubert 1995: 1016-1017).Translation, Text, Translation StudiesBy Albrecht NeubertTranslation and ParadoxTranslation has been an important part of cultural interaction for many centuries. Even with this long history, translation is a paradox. It is natural because we have always done it. Sometimes it seems quite unnatural, especially when we read bad translations. Translation is necessary, but doing it correctly sometimes seems impossible. There have always been social and economic conditions which create a demand for translation. Because of that demand, translators do their work and do it effectively, despite the differences of culture and language that separate the peoples of the world. Translation has evolved quite naturally over the course of human history人类历史的进程. It has evolved as a unique answer to a basic human need for intercultural communication跨文化交际. The term language mediation语言调解调停，仲裁, the collective name for translation and interpreting, underscores this crucial role. Still, translation is basically an unnatural act. The whole premise of translation seems problematic. How can we possibly use a foreign language to convey messages originally expressed in another language? The potential for distortion and loss of meaning is immense. A source text is embedded in a complex linguistic, textual, and cultural context. Its meaning, communicative intent, and interpretive作为说明的，解释的 effect draw upon its natural relationships in that environment. Its a 令人怯步的，使人气馁的daunting task艰巨的任务 to pull a text from its natural surroundings and recreate it in an alien linguistic and cultural setting. The text belongs to a dynamic cultural and linguistic ecology. The translator 根除；迫使离开uproots it in a valiant attempt to transplant移栽，移种；移植；使迁移 its fragile meaning. Translation certainly seems unnatural. Many translations sound unnatural as well. This is vivid testimony生动的见证 to the inherent difficulties of the process.As unnatural as translation may seem, it is a necessary transgression违反/犯；犯罪，罪过；越界，海侵. Our complex global civilization demands it. The need for translation is exploding爆炸；爆发，突发；发怒；激增，讯速扩大 with the growth of international communication. It seems proper, recognizing the need for greater human communication, to try to see translation as the most natural endeavors. Looking at translation as a natural act emphasizes the similarities of disparate languages and cultures. The alternate交替的，轮流的；间隔的；供选择的 view emphasizes their differences. Some of those who focus on cultural difference are convinced that确信 there are fewer human universals人类共性 than we might care to admit人类的共性可能比我们愿意承认的还要少. They suggest that translation is impossible. These critics claim that translators actually do violence to texts when they rip扯，撕，划 them their natural settings. Venuti expresses an opinion like this when he says that translation is akin近似的，同类的 to terrorism (Venulti 1991). He claims that the power of translation is its ability to (re)constitute and cheapen减价；降低；贬低 foreign texts, to trivialize使平凡，使变为琐碎 and exclude foreign cultures轻视和排斥外来文化, and thus因此，从而 potentially to figure in把计算在内 racial discrimination种族歧视 and ethnic violence种族暴力, international political confrontations国际政治对抗, terrorism, and war. Venuti proposes resistive有抵抗力的，抵抗的 translation as a solution. This kind of translation highlights the foreignness of the source text by embedding stylistic or other discontinuities不连续性；间断 in the target text.From this highly critical perspective, translation seems at odds with与不和/争吵/不一致 natural monolingual只用一种语言的 discourse. It is burdened with a perennial终年的；长久的，持久的 bias. Venutis condemning definition of translation follows inexorably无情地，冷酷地: translation is the forcible强制/迫的；强有力的，有说服力的 replacement of the linguistic and cultural difference of foreign text with a text that will be intelligible to the target language reader (Venuti 1991). This view quite appropriately stresses the potential destructiveness of translation. Translation always involves loss. Every experienced translator knows and accepts this. Like all of nature, translation is entropic熵态属性; it is a linguistic example of the second law of thermodynamics热力学. There is always semantic loss from the source text at this convergence聚合，会合；汇流 of cultural systems. Translation destroys the original linguistic form of the source text as well. As a result, the target community absorbs the foreign text and 抹去，擦掉，冲掉；忘却；彻底破坏/毁灭obliterates it difference. Venutis criticism is source-centered; he looks at what is lost. If there is loss, there may be gain. This is also a paradox of translation.The target audience may be 使丰富/富裕/富足enriched instead of 使贫困/贫瘠/恶化impoverished. Even if the translation cannot transfer everything in the source text, it still brings benefit to the target culture. If there were nothing of value, readers in the target culture would not demand translations. Even if we concede承认；让出，允许；让步，承认失败 that preserving everything in the source text is impossible, the translation pessimist must still agree that something is transferred in the translation. Not all foreign values and meanings must disappear during the transfer. To say that everything of value in the foreign text is bound to its linguistic form is too extreme. It implies that the linguistic and textual systems of the target language are hostile to the values of the foreign text. It implies that information content cannot be separated from linguistic and textual form.Translation has always been a unique source of knowledge and wisdom for mankind. Translation arises from a deep-seated need来自深层次的需要 to understand and come to terms with达成协议，甘心忍受 otherness. We want to know what other people know and feel what other people feel. Of course, there is always the possibility that our view of other cultures will be distorted by translation. Translation may be turned to the service of political and ideological意识形态的；观念学的；空论的 agendas. The capacity of translation for violence, however, is no greater than its capacity to heal, to enrich, and to educate. What is the alternative? If we do not translate, then one of the most significant resources we have for conquering the isolation imposed by linguistic and cultural difference is 浪费，挥霍squandered.Translation is unnatural, but we do it because we must. Without translation the opportunity for information transfer is lost. The moral and aesthetic values of other cultures would be kept from us. The scientific discoveries and technical applications of other societies would be unknown. Of course, Venuti does not ask the translator to stop translating. He asks the translator to be aware of the potential for ethnocentric民族中心主义的，种族优越感的 violence that translation carries. While translations capacity for harm is undeniable, so is its ability to open the target culture to new ideas. Evolution and change in culture result from outside stimuli（stimulus的复数）. The diffusion传播，散布；扩散 of innovation through texts is a 始终如一的，不断的；不变的，恒定的，稳定的；坚定的，忠实的constant pattern恒定模式 in culture. Translation has played a significant role in cultural change. It is true that translation can be used to suppress压制，镇压；查禁；抵制, but translation can also liberate解放，释放；使获得自由. It can help to create new 范例，典范；词形变化表paradigms and new ways of living.Translation has also enriched our languages. The lexical, syntactic, and stylistic inventories详细目录；清单 of languages have been as much enhanced by translation as they have been sullied弄脏，玷污 by it. No modern language would be what it is today if not for translation. Think of the effect of the vast amount of translation from the classical languages into English. The 全部节目，全部作品repertoires, the structural distinctions, and the lexical systems of our modern languages have developed in significant reaction to linguistic contact through translation. Has this contact 减价；降低，贬低cheapened or trivialized the foreign other? Perhaps it has, but this is certainly not true in all cases. Cultural contact through translation has brought at least as many benefits as it has liabilities责任，义务；不利条件. This is yet another paradox of translation.There are many texts which do not suffer appreciably可察觉的，明显的；有一点，有几分，略微 in translation. Good examples are the pragmatic text which constitutes the bulk of主要部分，大部分 the non-literary translators work. What violence is done to the assembly n.集合，集会；装配，安装 manual组装手册 for a childs bicycle when it is translated from Japanese into English? Should we ignore target-language textual expectations when we translate medical texts about the AIDS vaccine疫苗 into other languages? Should a translator ignore the linguistic resources of the target language when he or she tries to make the text more fluent and accessible? Venuti 控告，起诉，告发indicts fluency in the target text because it lets the translation pass as an original text in the target language. He also indicts the use of translation resources, such as parallel texts平行文本, which make fluency possible. He assumes that linguistic and textual structure cannot be separated from the cultural values with which he is primarily concerned. Vunuti sets his agenda when he states that the point is rather to develop a theory and practice of translation that resists dominant target-language cultural values目标语言的主要文化价值 so as to signify表示，意味，预示 the linguistic and cultural difference of the text (Venuti 1991). In this statement he proposes a translation strategy opposed to fluency. The strategy uses non-fluent renderings of the target text to heighten提高，加强；使更显著 the differences between source and target. Isnt this strategy based on the assumption that the target language is incapable of forms of expression which transfer and preserve the cultural values and unique ideas of the foreign culture? This bondage奴役；束缚 of language and cultural content denies the creative capacity of language. Resistive strategies try to preserve cultural differences. Isnt it possible for fluency and cultural difference to coexist? If translators understand cultural difference, why cant the resources of the target language be 获得；赞助，支持；征募；入伍enlisted in its service? Maybe cultural values are lost because the translator does not understand them. Resistant translation is a denial of the power of language and the infinite novelty of expression that 授权，准许；使能够empowers every linguistic and textual system. Frankly, for most translators, this whole argument is a non-issue. Pragmatic texts make up the bulk of their work. Perhaps of greater concern for serious 实习者practitioners and eager users of translation is the great amount of translation which is neither destructive nor constructive, but simply awful.Translation(s) and TextWe are aware that Venutis call for resistive translation refers primarily to certain literary and cultural texts. We apologize for using his argument as a foil箔；陪衬，衬托 for our own. Venuti is correct in his analysis of the potential for harm in translation, and he focuses, as we do, on the effects of the