翻译概论总结

多项选择：1. romanjakobson stripartiteclassification:intralingualtranslation(rewording), interlingual translation (translation proper), and intersemiotic translation (transmutation)2. text types: technical, institutional, literary translation3. outline of major theories of translation:(1) chronologically (by the time of their birth or occurrence): the philological, hermeneutic, linguistic,communicative,sociosemiotic,skopos,manipulative,norm,post-structuralist, postcolonial(2) topologically(bytheparticularapproachadoptedorfocusdirectedbytheir proponents):theirapproachestotranslationmaybegroupedintothephilological, linguistic, functionalist, semiotic, cultural, philosophical.重要概念：1. translation studies:(1). the paper“the name and nature of translation studies”written by james holmes in 1988, marks the birth of the discipline of ts.the descriptive branch:product, process, function-orientedthe theoretical branch:general & partial which includesmedium, area, rank, text type, time, and problem restrictedthe applied branch:translation aids, training and criticism精品资料note: though being lucid and inspiring in his theory, it shall be noted that description and theorizing are usually inseparable from each other in research.(2). the internal studies and external studiestheinternalstudies:thetheoreticalbranchtakesasitsobjectsofstudythenature, principles, and proceduresof translation; theapplied branchincludestranslation practice (textanalysisandgenretranslation),tcriticism,andthetrainingoftranslators, development of the translation profession.specifically,translationpracticeincludestextanalysisandgenretranslation,andthe former covers such areas of research as: source text analysis, comparison of translations& theirsourcetexts,comparisonoftranslationsandnon-translatedtexts(comparable texts), translation with commentary; while the genre translation covers texts like drama,poetry, prose fiction, religious text, tourism texts, and multimedia texts.the external translation studiesare the derived or borderline parts of ts, covering areas where the internal ts interact or marry with other disciplines, such as history, sociology,culturalanthropology,philosophy,linguistics,psychology,theoryofcommunication,computer science and technology, etc. for example, history of translation; sociology andculturalstudiesoft;tethics;terminologymanagement;languageandtranslation technologyor historical/cultural translation; translation ethics; terminology and glossaries; translation and technologythe internal studies and the external studies of translation are related and complementaryto eachotherin thatthe researchresultsin theformerprovidethelatterwithbotha theoretical basis and a practical focus of concern while the research findings in externalstudiescontributetothedepthandbreadthofinternalstudiesbyprovidingnewobservations and new perspectives.2. definition of translation:according to wilss (1995), translation is an action directed toward both the source text and the reader of the target language. its procedure is determined by its function and it pursues a goal of enabling understanding between individuals of different linguistic and cultural communities.nida and taber (1969) regard translation as a communication-based task and define it as: translation consists in reproducing in the receptor language theclosest naturalequivalent of the source language message, first in terms of meaning, and secondly in terms of style.(closest in meaning and style; acceptability; loss of information)- translation as a kind of communication between different language group- translation should communicate information or meaning3. theory:a theory, in the simplest sense, is just a view or understanding of something that concerns us. in modern science, it is generally understood or refers to a proposed explanation ofempiricalphenomena,madein a wayconsistentwithscientificmethod.theoriesare collections of hypotheses that are logically linked together into a coherent explanation ofsomeaspectof realityand whichhaveindividuallyor jointlyreceivedsomeempirical support.the properties of a good theory: strong explanatory power that can effectively explain thesubject matter it pertains to; strong predicative power which means it should proved a) reasonably adequate predictions about the properties not yet discovered of the specific object under investigation and b) a measure of predictability about the degree of successto beexpectedfromtheuseofcertainprinciplesandproceduresin thestudyof the subject matter.3. equivalence:a term used by many writers todescribe the nature and the extent of the relationshipswhichexistbetweenslandtltextsorsmallerlinguisticunits.thenatureof“equivalence ” wassuccessivelydiscussedbyprominentfiguressuchasjakobson, eugene nida, peter newmark, and werner koller.(1) jakobson s linguistic meaning andequivalence.he followedthe relationset outby saussurebetweenthesignifier(thespokenandwrittensignal)andthesignified(theconcept signified). he stated that the signifier and signified form the linguistic sign, but the sign is arbitrary or unmotivated, thus there is ordinarily no full equivalence between standtt.hedefinedtranslationas“substitutingmessagesinonelanguagenotfor separate code-units (signifier) but to entire messages (signified) in some other language”.(2) catford regarded the central task of translation as“defining the nature and conditions of translation equivalence”and there exists a distinction between textual equivalence and formal correspondence.(3) nida, inspired by noam chomskys generative-transformational grammar, put forward a three-stage system of translation and used back-transformation to analyze the kernelsunder some complicated surface structure. in terms of equivalence, he stated that there areformal equivalencewhich focuses attention on the message itself in both form and content, the message in the receptor language should match as closely as possible the different elements in the source language.dynamic equivalenceis based on the principle of equivalent effect, where the relationship between receptor and message should be substantially the same as that which existed between the original receptor and the message.there are four basic requirements of a translation.(4) newmarkputforwardthenotionsofcommunicativetranslationandsemantic translation.communicativetranslationattemptstoproduceonitsreaderaneffectascloseaspossible to that obtained on the readers of the original.semantictranslationattemptstorender,ascloselyasthesemanticandsyntactic structures of the second language allow, the exact contextual meaning of the original.4. meaning:accordingto nida,meaningis brokedownintolinguisticmeaning,referentialmeaning and emotive meaning.in terms of traditional studies of meaning, the meanings of meaning are as follows: reference and sense: reference is the relationship between words and the things, actions, events, and qualities they stand for; sense is the place a which a word or phrase holds in the system of relationships with other words or phrases in the vocabulary of a language.from the perspective of sociosemiotics, there are 4 basic facts about meaning:1) meaning is a kind of relationship.meaning is not really an entity (because words do not have meanings, people have meanings for words), but the relationship between a signand something outside it2) there is a pluralityof meaning:threekindsof relationshipa signmayenterintoreferential(semantic), pragmatic, syntactic (intralingual);a. referential meaning (rm) (sign-real world entity)is chiefly connected with the topic of a communication. its core elements are the external situation, the facts of the real world.also known as informative, conceptual, cognitive meaning.but rm does not equal literal meaning (lm).e.g挂号信； vice-chancellor； indian meal;国际学院；基础实验楼b. pragmatic meaning (pm) (sign-user)may be divided into four subsets:identificationalmeaning(regional, historial background of the speaker);expressive meaning(emotional content of an expression might have in terms of the personality or individual creativity ofthe user, e.g murder & homicide);associative meaning(connotative meaning隐含意义 ); socialmeaning(channelof contact,e.gphaticformsofdiscourse;formsofaddressvous/tu; flatter; register); imperative meaning (conative meaning, operative or instrumental meaning)c. intralingual meaning (im) (sign-sign) is related to the code: phonetic meaning; phonological meaning; graphemic meaning; morphological/lexemic meaning, syntactic meaning, discoursal/textual meaning3) style is meaning. style in its linguistic sense is reduced to a group of pragmaticmeaning and intralingual meanings.4) different meaning may carry different weight in different contexts.5. code: a system of signs or signals involved in the transmission of messages. languageas a code is a system of multiplicity, i.e. it is composed of diverse elements or has different aspects.6. sign: a thing that signifies or stands for another thing or things.7. signification: using signs to mean. a third item is included in the process of signification, that is, an abstract concept of the thing for which the sign stands.8. message:according to nida and taber, it consists of two aspects: meaning and style9. fusionofhorizon:themeetingofdifferentperspectivesor backgrounds.sofar as translation is concerned, this concept implies that a translator has to emerge from his own intellectual perspective and cultural background in order to assimilate what is foreign in anew light.总结自己学习情况：taking the course“introduction of translation studies”is conducive to the improvement of both my theoretical and practical inquiry on translation. it is a pity that we cannot coverall the itemsoutlinedin thesyllabussuchas theskopostheoryandthe manipulation school,whichi find theman enlighteningreadingasi readthemin jeremymunday s“introducing translation studies”.as far as i am concerned, the benefits by taking this course are twofold. first, owning tothesystematicexemplificationsandillustrationsdiscussedinclass,i haveabetter understandingofthemajorschoolsoftranslationchronologicallyandtopologically.equipped with the basic knowledge and systematic framework of translation studies, i canconductmyresearchormyfuturethesispaperfromanin-depthperspective.the philologicalapproachmainlyconcerningonthe“wordforword ”or “senseforsense ” debate, though案例分析：1. deep structure analysisthe surface structureis the syntactic structure of the sentence which a person speaks, hears, reads or writes. it is the actually observed structure of a sentence.thedeepstructureismuchmoreabstractanditisconsideredtoincorporateall information relevant to the single or unambiguous interpretation of a particular sentence.nida believes that the english language possesses seven such basic structures, which heterms“kernels ”theminimalnumberofstructuresfromwhichtherestcanbe most efficiently and relevantly derived.nida advocated the back-transformation of complex surface structures onto an underlying level, in which the fundamental elements are objects, events, abstracts, and relationals.four steps for analyzing and transferring complicated sl sentences(1) determine whether each word isan object, and event, an abstract, or a relational(2) identify the kernels,(making explicit the implicit constituent elements of the kernels: who are the recipient and agent?)(3) determinethesemanticandlogicalrelationshipsbetweenkernels(groupingthekernels into related sets)(4) find out the most efficient way ofrepresenting the given relationships between kernelsin thetargetlanguage.(statetheserelationshipsin a formwhichwillbeoptimal,i.e. closest to the form in the target language, for transfer into the target language)例子： the unique and mixed ethnic heritage of the population; the american defence of bastogne sealed their (nazi troops) fate; this land, which once barred the way of wearytravelers, now has become a land for winter and summer vacation, a land of magic and wonder.2. transliteration以义出音vs. translation: a terminological study of the rendition of a sutra text翻译：长答题（ essay questions；optional ） :1. the philological school, which lays emphasis on the source text, including its production, transmission, and history of interpretation, a typical question raised with this school beingthatofwhetherthetranslatorshouldbringtheoriginaltothetargetreader(liberaltranslation) or the target language reader to the original (literal translation). philological tradition in the western history can be illustrated chronologically:a) roman timesword for word vs. sense for sense. cicero & horace & quintilian: liberaltranslation; st. augustine: literal translationb) themiddleagesdebatebetweentranslationandunacceptableinterpretation.st.jerome, father of the church, translated the bible into latin, and developed the ciceroniandistinction between the undesirable “word for word ”translation and the desirable “sense for sense ”translation. translator such as king alfred in england perceived the task of translating the bible as linked to the task of elevating the status of the newly developinglanguage known as english, i.e. the old english.c) the renaissance“copying ”an original, but also creating a new text with an individual voice. focus on how to strike a balance in between and how toremain faithful withoutbeing subservient.d) reformationdoctrinalfidelityvs. possibleheretical“mistranslation”. martinluther elevated and disseminated the usage of german by his translation of the bible. etiennedolet,burnat thestakeforhis additionto his translationof oneof plato s dialogues, advocated five principles in translation.e) the 17 th & 18 th centuriesdiversion of the activity of translation: translation as recoveryor imitationof classicaltext;as languagelearningexercise;ascommercialenterprise. john dryden reduces all translation to three categories: the triadic model: metaphrase,paraphrase,andimitation.theport-royalgrammarputforwardthat“accuracy ”in translation could somehow be measured on a qualifiable basis. alexander tytler reactedagainst drydens “paraphrase”(loose translation) and set up three basic and celebrated principlesof translation:completetranscriptofideas,styleandmannerofthesame character, and all the ease of the originalf) the19th centuryromanticism and“creativetranslation ”, whichcentered around the problemofwhethertranslationcouldbeconsideredasacreativeoramechanicalenterprise.g) the 20 th centurythe philological tradition enduredin conclusion,themethodologyofthisschoolisintrospective,impressionistic,relying heavilyontheresearchers andpractitionersintuition.itscentralconceptsaretooabstractto be unequivocallyunderstoodandtoo fuzzyto serveas a reliablebasison which detailed theoretical analysis can be conducted and universally accepted conclusiondrawn simply because different people may have different views of these concepts.2. the hermeneutic school, which concerns the interpretative process of the st.the term“hermeneutics”is used in two senses: the part of christian theology解经学and theoryofunderstandingandinterpretationofthesignificanceofhumanactions,utterances, products, and institutions阐释学。hermeneutics is a romantic approach to interpretationbasednotonabsolutetruthbutontheindividual sinnerfeelingand understanding.friedrich schleiermacher, founder of modern protestant theology and of modern hermeneutics. to “give the reader the same impression that he as a german would receive the work in the original language ”, the translator must adopt an “alienating ”(asopposed to “naturalizing ”) method of translation, orienting himself or herself by thelanguage and content of the st.while schleiermacher was instrumental in extending hermeneutics beyond the theological domain, heidegger was the first related the problem of understanding in general to that of linguistic translation. the interrelationship between hermeneutics and translation may be viewed from two angles: the status of translation in hermeneutics and the inspirations ts derived from hermeneutics. translation is given by heidegger a function of challenging thinking that both the original and the translated language are unique in their capacity for harbor philosophical premises or presuppositions.gadamer develops his philosophical hermeneutics in terms of the concept of“fusion of horizons ”, which implies that, in the view of translation, a translator has to emerge fromhis ownintellectualperspectiveandculturalbackgroundin orderto assimilatewhatisforeign in a“new light ”.viewingtranslationinhermeneuti