当代国外翻译理论.doc

当代国外翻译理论导读 作者:谢天振 编者:谢天振 市场价：40.00 卓越价：35.20为您节省：4.80元(88折) VIP 价：34.20 SVIP价：33.50 全场购物免配送费！ 现在有货。 ) 目录前言第一章 语言学派翻译理论1.罗曼雅科布逊 论翻译的语言学问题2.彼得纽马克 交际翻译与语义翻译()3.约翰卡特福德 论翻译转换4.尤金奈达 论对等原则5.巴兹尔哈蒂姆 互文介入：利用翻译中缺省语篇的理论体系6.玛丽斯奈尔霍恩比 翻译：一种跨文化活动第二章 阐释学派翻译理论7.乔治斯坦纳 阐释的步骤8.安托瓦纳贝尔曼 翻译及对异的考验第三章 功能学派翻译理论9.凯瑟琳娜莱斯 翻译的抉择：类型、体裁及文本的个性10.汉斯弗米尔 翻译行为中的目的与委任11.克里斯汀娜诺德 目的、忠诚及翻译中的惯例第四章 文化学派翻译理论12.詹姆斯霍尔姆斯 翻译学的名与实13.伊塔玛埃文佐哈 翻译文学在文学多元系统中的地位14.吉迪恩图里 描述性翻译研究的理论基础15.安德烈勒菲弗尔 大胆妈妈的黄瓜：文学理论中的文本、系统和折射16.苏珊巴斯奈特 文化研究的翻译转向17.西奥赫曼斯 翻译研究及其新范式第五章 解构学派翻译理论18.瓦尔特本雅明 译者的任务19.雅克德里达 巴别塔之旅20.保罗德曼 评本雅明的译者的任务21.劳伦斯韦努蒂 文化身份的塑造第六章 女性主义翻译理论22.雪莉西蒙 翻译理论中的性别化立场23.劳丽钱伯伦 性别与翻译的隐喻24.巴巴拉格达德 女性主义话语翻译的理论化25.冯弗罗托 女性主义翻译理论批评第七章 后殖民翻译理论26.道格拉斯罗宾逊 后殖民研究与翻译研究27.特佳斯维妮尼南贾纳翻译的定位28.盖亚特里斯皮瓦克 翻译的政治29.埃尔斯维埃拉 解放卡利班们论食人说与哈罗德德坎波斯的超越越界性创造诗学第八章 苏东学派翻译理论30.安德烈费奥多罗夫 翻译理论的任务31.吉维加切奇拉泽 文学翻译中的创造性原则32.吉里列维 翻译是一个作选择的过程33.安娜丽洛娃 翻译研究的范畴 Translation Theory(2007-09-29 14:13:41) 标签： 学习公社translationenglishtheory Translation TheoryBy Juan Daniel Prez VallejoTranslation teacher,University of Cd. Del Carmen, Campeche, Mexico The study of proper principle of translation is termed as translation theory. This theory, based on a solid foundation on understanding of how languages work, translation theory recognizes that different languages encode meaning in differing forms, yet guides translators to find appropriate ways of preserving meaning, while using the most appropriate forms of each language. Translation theory includes principles for translating figurative language, dealing with lexical mismatches, rhetorical questions, inclusion of cohesion markers, and many other topics crucial to good translation. Basically there are two competing theories of translation. In one, the predominant purpose is to express as exactly as possible the full force and meaning of every word and turn of phrase in the original, and in the other the predominant purpose is to produce a result that does not read like a translation at all, but rather moves in its new dress with the same ease as in its native rendering. In the hands of a good translator neither of these two approaches can ever be entirely ignored.Conventionally, it is suggested that in order to perform their job successfully, translators should meet three important requirements; they should be familiar with:the source languagethe target languagethe subject matterBased on this premise, the translator discovers the meaning behind the forms in the source language and does his best to produce the same meaning in the target language - using the forms and structures of the target language. Consequently, what is supposed to change is the form and the code and what should remain unchanged is the meaning and the message. (Larson, 1984)One of the earliest attempts to establish a set of major rules or principles to be referred to in literary translation was made by French translator and humanist tienne Dolet, who in 1540 formulated the following fundamental principles of translation (La Manire de Bien Traduire dune Langue en Aultre), usually regarded as providing rules of thumb for the practicing translator:The translator should understand perfectly the content and intention of the author whom he is translating. The principal way to reach it is reading all the sentences or the text completely so that you can give the idea that you want to say in the target language because the most important characteristic of this technique is translating the message as clearly and natural as possible. If the translation is for different countries besides Mexico, the translator should use the cultural words of that country. For example if he/she has to translate ”She is unloyal with her husband” in this country it can be translated as “Ella le pone los cuernos” but in Peru it can be translated as “Ella le pone los cachos”. In this case it is really important the cultural words because if the translator does not use them correctly the translation will be misunderstood.The translator should have a perfect knowledge of the language from which he is translating and an equally excellent knowledge of the language into which he is translating. At this point the translator must have a wide knowledge in both languages for getting the equivalence in the target language, because the deficiency of the knowledge of both languages will result in a translation without logic and sense. For example if you translate the following sentence “Are you interested in sports?” as “Ests interesado en deportes?” the translation is wrong since the idea of this question in English is “Practicas algn deporte?” The translator should avoid the tendency to translate word by word, because doing so is to destroy the meaning of the original and to ruin the beauty of the expression_r. This point is very important and one of which if it is translated literally it can transmit another meaning or understanding in the translation.For example in the sentence.- “In this war we have to do or die”, if we translate literally “En esta guerra tenemos que hacer o morir” the message is unclear. The idea is, (.) “En esta guerra tenemos que vencer o morir.”The translator should employ the forms of speech in common usage. The translator should bear in mind the people to whom the translation will be addressed and use words that can be easily understood. Example. “They use a sling to lift the pipes” if the translation is to be read by specialists we would translate it “Utilizan una eslinga para levantar la tubera”. If the text is to be read by people who are not specialists we would rather translate it “Utilizan una cadena de suspension para levantar los tubos”.Flip to Text Version La Trobe University Harry AvelingA Short History of Western Translation Theory1. Traditional Translation TheoriesThere is a continuity of intellectual expression from Ancient Greece, Rome, the Middle Ages, through to the Renaissance, the Reformation, and the rise of the early European nation states. The central language of scholars and other readers was Latin, while the core of this tradition was classical literature and Judeo-Christianity. There was a profusion of economic and political contacts throughout Europe and the Middle East, and this must have involved an abundance of linguistic transactions. Nevertheless, Lefeveres words provide an accurate background to understanding the social position of the subjects of traditional translation theory: In such a culture, translations were not primarily read for information or the mediation of the foreign text. They were produced and read as exercises, first pedagogical exercises, and later on, as exercises in cultural appropriation - in the conscious and controlled usurpation of authority. (Lefevere 1990: 16).2. German RomanticismAt the beginning of the nineteenth century, a second, more philosophical and less empirical, formation began to open within discourses on translation theory (Munday 2001: 27). This formation was connected, in one direction, with the rise of philology as a university discipline, and in another with the literary movement of Romanticism. Philology provided a range of new and exotic texts and allowed the experts to produce translations aimed primarily at other experts, not the general culture of which these scholars were a part (Lefevere 1990: 22). Romanticism exalted the translator as a creative genius in his own right, in touch with the genius of his original and enriching the literature and language into which he is translating (Bassnett-McGuire 1980: 65). The stress on both the original author and the translator as being artists was not part of traditional discourse formations.3. The Early and Middle Twentieth Century Discussion in English of translation theory during the first half of the twentieth century continued to be dominated by the themes of Victorian discourse on translation, literalness, archaizing, pedantry and the production of a text of second-rate literary merit for an elite minority (Bassnett-McGuire 1980: 73). In his list of major contributors to the area of translation theory, Steiner recognises only the names of Dryden, Quine and Pound among English-speakers. Quine and Pound both belong to the twentieth century and challenged the dominant discourse. Willard V. Quine (b. 1908), a major American philosopher, wrote on the indeterminacy of translation within the field of linguistic philosophy (Quine 1960). Ezra Pound (1885-1972) was a poet and critic. Ronnie Apter has argued that Pound made three major innovations to thinking about the nature and intent of literary translationhe discarded the Victorian pseudo-archaic translation diction; he regarded each translation as a necessarily limited criticism of the original poem; and he regarded good translations as new poems in their own right (Apter 1987: 3).More radical, and more decisive, developments in translation theory took place in Europe. These begin with the Russian Formalist movement, which focused on the what makes literary texts different from other texts, what makes them new, creative, innovative (Gentzler 1993: 79). One of their answers was that literary texts rely on a process of defamiliarisation, using language in new and strikingly different ways from ordinary speech. This led the Formalist to focus on surface structural features and to analyse them to learn what determines literary status (Gentzler 1993: 79). In so doing, they began the search for descriptive rules, which would help scholars understand the process of translation, and not normative rules, in order to study and assess the work of other translators (Bell 1991: 12). Their work was extended and refined by the Prague school of linguistics, founded by Roman Jakobson, who had earlier worked in Moscow. In his essay On the Linguistic Aspects of Translation (1959), Jakobson expanded traditional discourse of equivalence into the theme of equivalence in difference. In so doing, he argued that words should be seen within their (arbitrary) semiotic context, and that the grammatical pattern of a language (as opposed to its lexical stock) determines those aspects of each experience that must be expressed in the given language (Venuti 2000: 114).4. Translation StudiesThree factors worked to limit this sharp focus on descriptive linguistics as the major form of discourse on translation. The first was the questioning of Chomskys linguistic theories by linguists themselves. The second was the development of a number of new and dynamic fields within linguistics, such as discourse analysis, text linguistics, sociolinguistics, computational linguistics, prototype semantics, and other assorted wonders (Pym 1992: 184). These wonders took in prior fields such as British social anthropology and American cultural anthropology, as well as contemporary and parallel developments in philosophy, information and communication theories, computational linguistics, machine translation, artificial intelligence, and the ideas of socio-semiotics as developed within French structuralist and post-structuralist thought (Nida 2001: 110). The sense increased that: Language is not the problem. Ideology and politics are (Lefevere 1990: 26). This has led to a separation between linguistic and cultural approaches to translation in the last quarter of the twentieth century. For some translation scholars, indeed, it has seemed that strictly linguistic theories have been superseded, as translation has come to be considered in its cultural, historical and sociological context (Woodsworth 1998: 100).Basic Knowledge of Translation TheoryI. Translation1. Definition1) The definition in the old daysl “译即易，谓换易言语使相解也。”贾公彦(618-907)唐朝l “夫翻译者，谓翻梵天之语转成汉地之言。音虽似别，义则大同。”法云(960-1279)宋代It means that translation is a rendering from nbone language (Source Language) into another (Target Language), remaining the meaning.l The British scholar Dr. Samuel Johnson once said: “To translate is to change into another language, remaining the sense.”2) The current definitionl The American translation theorist Eugene A. Nida wrote in 1964: Translation consists in reproducing in the receptor language the closest natural equivalence of the source language, first in terms of meaning and secondly in terms of style.（所谓翻译，是在译语中用切近而又最自然的对等语再现原语的信息，首先是意义，其次是文体。）1) 再现原文的信息(message)而不是保留原文的形式结构(formal structure)2) 对等(equivalence)不是同一(identity)3) 对等是最贴近、自然的对等4) 意义是优先考虑的因素5) 文体很重要l The British translation theorist Tytlers definition in 1970 about translation: “A good translation is one which the merit of the original work is so completely transfused into another language as to be as distinctly apprehended and as strongly felt by a native of the country to which that language belongs as it is by those who speak the language of the original work.”l Prof. Huang Long TranslatologyTranslation may be defined as follows:The replacement of textual material in one language (SL) by equivalent textual material in another language (TL)（翻译可以作以下界定：用一种语言（目的语）的文本材料对等地再现另一种语言（源出语）的文本材料。）1) 部分地替代2) 对等概念In summary1) Translation is the information transferring between two languages and the cultural communication between two language families.2) Translation is a rendering from one language into another. Translation is a science, an art, a bilingual art, a craft, a skill, an operation and communication.3) Translation is a representation or recreation in one language of what is written or said in another language.4) Translation is a kind of science because it was a whole set of rules governing it and certain objective laws to go by in the process of translating.2. Varieties of translation1) Interpretation and written translation2) In terms of SL and TL, Interlingual translation语际(不同语言之间)，Intralingual translation语内(同一语言rewording)，Intersemiotic translation符际(eg.把语言符号用图画、手势、数字或音乐来表达)3) In terms of style, political essay政论，practical writing应用文，science and technology科技，literary translationII. Translation Criteria or Principlel Tytlers: Essay on the Principles of Translation, 17911) A translation should give a complete transcript of the ideas of the original work.译文应完全复写出原作的思想。2) The style and manner of writing should be of the same character as that of the original.译文的风格和笔调应与原文的性质相同。3) A translation should have all the ease of the original composition.译文应和原作同样流畅。l Yanfus: Faithfulness, Expressiveness and Elegance (信、达、雅)1. “Faithfulness” means the full and complete conveying of the original content of thought.2. “Expressiveness” demands that the version should be clear and flowing without any grammatical mistakes or confused logic and sense.3. “Elegance” refers to the use of classical Chinese before the Han Dynasty.In summary, the first two words as translation criteria are acceptable. The original meaning of “Elegance” is unacceptable for today, but we can give it new sense -elegant style in translation. l Others:Lu Xuns (鲁迅)translation principle:Rather be faithful (in thought) than smooth (in language) in opposition to Liang Shi-qius translation principle in 1930s. (宁信不顺)Fu Leis付雷translation criteria:TL should be similar to SL both in Form and in Spirit. (形似、神似)Liu Chongdes刘重德translation criteria: faithfulness, expressiveness and closeness. (信、达、切) faithfulness: to be faithful to the content of the original; expressiveness: to be as expressive and smooth as the original; closeness: to be as close to the original style as possible.Liang Shiqiu s and Zhao Jingshens (梁实秋，赵景深) translation principle in 1930s:“Its better to have a smooth version than a faithful one.”宁错务顺Eugene A. Nidas translation principle: Dynamic equivalence or Functional equivalence or Equivalent-effect theory.The main idea is that the translator is to produce as nearly possible the same effect on his readers as was produced on the readers of the original.Peter Newmarks translation principle:From the angle of contextual analysis, he puts forward two translation approaches: Semantic translation and Communicative translation.Semantic translation: The translator attempts, within the bare syntactic and semantic constraints of the TL, to produce the precise contextual meaning of the author. Semantic translation focuses primarily upon the semantic content of the source text.Communicative translation: The translator attempts to produce the same effect on the TL readers as was produced by the original on the SL readers. Communicative translation focuses essentially upon the comprehension and response of receptors.l In summary, translation criteria: faithfulness and smoothness忠实与通顺.Faithfulnessrefers to that content and style of TL should be faithful to the SL.Smoothnessrequires that version should be clear and distinct, flowing and easy to read without signs of the mechanical word-for-word translation, of obscure language, of grammatical mistakes, confused structure and logic.III. Prerequisites of a translatorAs Zhou En-lai said: To be a good translator we should strengthen our “basic training” in the three essential aspects:1) The enhancement of our political consciousness2) The betterment of our command of the relevant languages3) The broadening of the range and scope of our general knowledge.IV. Translation strategies: foreignization and domesticationForeignization:If the translators preference is placed on preserving the language and cultural diffe