中西翻译理论整理汇总之欧阳体创编

1、翻译理総整理汇為时间：2021.02.03创作：欧阳体翻译強(translationeses )县移译殳中留侖澹语咅赭也等翻译腹 包的呢兔，产重的獅蒔般侵蒔冬谧起来不够逼顺。出呢翻祥腔 侖时县很难免的。够戌獅祥脸侖以下几个©: 1 ) M汉语言本 ©的刁:同，包第勾型铐构茅，右翻祥吋：眾不能做到仓由的滋 就舍有神“县他道杉语的感弦。2)英汉殳亿的不同，不的 冬亿喘專下，单询或习语有时会出珈命差层至毎对筝(zerocorrespondence )。侖时b调丙对询的巫应就舍出®韌祷強o 3)译老仓昜水年。冬达的功能対等就理求祥老谊童译冬対錢老 的駅响，阿的译公征钱老感

2、堂县®语的富仆、広呢功能的对 等。Venuti主美同亿如辱亿的铐合，逼过同化锂錢老获需枸识 的巫应，逼过禺亿傻磺老篦竭纟国语官如公亿。蒔老应務摆篇 仓乙翻译水平，衣韌译隼谄上农观功能对等，从而尽逻邀免翻 祥強的出珈O1. 中国的翻祥理枪家尹夏、茅用、鲁込、采龙灣、傅需、銭狰君1)产复念、 达、 跻一一faithfulness 、 expressiveness 、elegance/gracefulness2）第用他也主兎蒔”，巫对“瘙译"，他么为汉语布広存应语 育免尢萨處的不足，侖0理渥引印兹语養的旬法衫$。便 经孑用彫缗込规点同中有纟，他么筠“益祥"并不昱“字对

3、字"，一个不乡，一个不少。0筠中励文注倨构裁鉉4同，純 粹的“字対字"县“可能的。3 ） t<S鲁込的“今冷而不顺"& “兀咼翱蒔，0须養廠荡而，一省 魁经力求舄超,一刖傷存垢虜仔凤圭"，迫昱缗迅的墓本愆 &o豺対*年那种“牛块彳对多嫦"的圳祥、乱祥以冬所禍 “与典他而不顺，而刁:传”的说注（璨秋实）,握出了 “今作而“顺"迪一虜則，主美盍译，以慈礦第入新麦珈注如 自閒岳仔的凤貌。他込么筠，翻祥一理“紇府、“蟲咅”， 蒔冬殳有“纟越備辺"，二理“鏑入新的恚珈注”，以改逬中 公的冬注，右省时主殳恚现巧改逬

4、如请殳。0须呢诵的昙,龟 超典広经主兎韧译殳逼顺，d永屯冬的。口县二老刁:可養冴的 伟况下，“庁色而不顺"O4）林语堂他经右中i上第一个釆明瑞他烤呢代语育歹如心理学 杵彩潮祥理枪的“歹理郭杨”的基础的。3飼潮祥的三象杉 Xi：岂实、逼顺知姜。5）采丸灣他的韧蒔杉淮经：第一，不违背仔老的瘙毘；第二，爰往谧 老右肯用心3餡时能够了籟。6) 傅需的“神似绒” (spirit alikeness )傅需对韌译忘鬲个比谕，一县“以敛呆而咅，翻译应務像临 易一样，所束的刁:右衫似而移神似"o二县就孑注而育“以甲 越冬字傍达乙国立字所包含的那歧游点，必须像伯乐枸多，理 務典精而总绘粗,右

5、典内而总绘夕卜"O7) 纟姜針焉的“從確”謨(sublimation )所褐“化俺” (sublimation ),经北層仔忘祥尢中就像“址 約世”，勉体滋3 个，便耦魂傩塑敘决。滋勾希後，译本对 应仔应荻忠农爲爱翹来“像蒔本，因为仔器右產殳愛诡不全雅 翹来您翻蒔出的诊励的：“冬歹翻译的駅京理想可以说县'亿'，昶仔器从一 冬乡約滋咸另一越文字，观能不0语尢 习俺的差纟而霞出生砸牵勰的痕包，"能或全傷存層仆的佩 味，那就篇爲入孑'W ” o2. 越夕卜的翻祥理论家1) John DrydenMetaphrase( i£ 10 turning

6、an author word by word, and line by line, from one language into anothe匚Paraphrase(释祥)，or translation with latitude, where the author's words are not so strictly followed but his sense.Imitation(ML), where the translation assumes the liberty, bot only to vary fro the words and the sense, but to

7、forsake them both as he sees occasion.2) Alexander Fraser Tytlera. That the translation should give a complete transcript of the ideas of the original work.b. That the style and manner of writing should be of the same character with that of the original.c. That the translation should have all the ea

8、se of original compositio n.3) Eugene A. NidaNida: translating consists in reproducing in the receptor language the closest natural equivalent of the source-language message, first in terms of meaning and secondly in terms of meaning and secondly in terms of style.函謂翻祷，就县从语文到殳体倉诱语中用是切 笆而"是仓塑的对等

9、语西鬼禺语的盘Reproducing the message; Equivalence rather than identity; A natural equivalent; The closest equivalent; The style;Dynamic equivalence is to describe it as nthe closest natural equivalent to the source-language message”. This type of definition contains three essential terms: 1) equivalent, w

10、hich points toward the source-language message; 2) natural, which points roward the receptor language, and 3)closest, which binds the two orientations together on the basis of the highest degree of approximation.4) Peter Newmark1. Semantic translation: nis personal and individual follows the thought

11、 processes of the author, tends to over-translate, pursues nuances of meaning, yet aims at concision in order to reproduce pragmatic impact11, expressive (literary) texts tend more toward the semantic method of translation.语义傕潮祷:屈从语殳亿餉層(7老，韧祷產殳的语文，9. 柱血殳的内涵瘡文枸戌理餡的釆尢隣码时勿力©以斜释°鹰超蠹2 Communica

12、tive translation: on the other hand, nattempts to render the exact contextual meaning of the original in such a way that both content and language are readily acceptable and comprehensible to the readership*1. Informative and non-literary texts require communicative translation.立陆傕韧祥：蒔仔所产住的敘果应力束谑迈產仔

13、，首先衿 孑蒔语知祥冬冬老，即俊念语屈从译语如祥语立亿，4诒錢老 留下&徇疑点餉难侈之处，念免额潮祷。5) Skopostheory 猜越 © 的於1. Translation Studies returns the attention to the Receptor side. Skopostheory begins by seeing translation as a purposeful "action”, which lead to Ha result, a new situation, and possibly to a 'new' obj

14、ectn. The aim of the translational action and the way in which it is realized is not random, but must be negotiated with the client who commissions the action11. The ends justify the means.2. As Vermeer insists: Mif therefore follows that source and target texts may diverge from each other quite con

15、siderably not only in the formulation and distribution of the content but also as regards the goals which are set for each"6)HolmesHe divides Translation Studies into two major branches, MPureH and ”Applied”，and then sun-divides the n Pure11 into two further subbranches: ”Theoretical” and ”Desc

16、riptive” Translation Studies. Translation Methods:3. Word for word translationThis is often demonstrated as interlinear translation, with the TL immediately below the SL words. The SL word-order is preserved and the words translated singly by their most common meanings, out of context. Cultural word

17、s are translated literally. The main use of word-for-word translation is either to understand the mechanics of the source language of to construe a difficult text as a pre-translation process.4. Literal translationThe SL grammatical constructions are converted to their nearest TL equivalents but the

18、 lexical words are again translated singly, out of context. As a pre-translation process, this indicates the problems to be solved5. Faithful translationA faithful translation attempts to reproduce the precise contextual meaning of the original within the constraints of the TL grammatical structures

19、. It ntransfersH cultural words and preserves the degree of grammatical and lexical Habnormalityu(deviation from SL and norms) in the translation. It attempts to be completely faithful to the intentions and the text-realization of the SL write.6. Semantic translationSemantic translation differs from

20、 ”faithful translation1* only in as far as it must take more account of the aesthetic value (that is, the beautiful and natural sound) of the SL text, compromising on ”meaning” where appropriate so that no assonance, word-play or repetition jars in the finished version. Further, it may translate les

21、s important cultural words by culturally neutral third or functional terms but not by cultural equivalents and it may make other small concessions to the readership. The distinction between ”faithful” and ”semantic” translation is that the first is uncompromising and dogmatic, while the second is more flexible, admits the creative exception to 100% fidelity and allows for the translator's intuitive empathy with the original.7. AdaptationThis tis the nfreestH from of translation. It is used mainly for plays (comedies) and