高翻第5讲2010.10.12.ppt

单击此处编辑母版标题样式,单击此处编辑母版文本样式,第二级,第三级,第四级,第五级,*,Approaches to Translation,Lecture 5,Key,教师法,规定教师的权利有：,进行教学活动，开展教育教学改革和实验；,从事科学研究、学术交流，参加专业的学术团体，在学术活动中充分发表意见；,指导学生的学习和发展，评定学生的品行和学习成绩；,对学校教育教学、管理工作和教育行政部门的工作提出意见和建议，通过教职工代表大会或者其他形式，参与学校的民主管理；,参加进修或者或者其他方式的培训。,按时获取工资报酬，享受国家规定的福利待遇以及寒暑假期的带薪休假；,The Teachers Law of the Peoples Republic of China,specifies the rights of the teachers as follows:,1.Engage in educational teaching activities;carry out transformation of education and do teaching experiments.,2.Go in for scientific research and academic exchanges;,join in professional societies and fully express your opinions in academic activities.,3.Guide students study and development;evaluate students conduct and their school work;,4.Get paid on time;enjoy welfare treatment provided by the state and have summer and winter holidays with pay;,5.Put forward proposals or suggestions on school education,management and administration work;take part in school democratic management,through representative assembly of teaching and administrative staff or other forms;,6.Engage in advanced studies and other forms of training.,EugeneA.,Nida,尤金,奈达,是当代著名的语言学家和翻译理论家,长期来担任美国圣经协会翻译部的执行秘书,并曾任美国语言学会会长。奈达发表过许多关于翻译,翻译与语言学之关系的论著,比较著名的有：,翻译的科学探索,（,Toward a Science of Translating,，,1964,），,翻译理论与实践,（,The Theory and Practice of Translation,，,1969,与查尔斯,泰伯合著）。,(J.C.,Catford,),卡特福德,是英国著名语言学家和翻译理论家，他被誉为与美国的奈达、法国的穆南等齐名的翻译语言学创始人。曾任英国爱丁堡大学和美国密执安大学语言学教授。卡特福德被奈达誉为世界最有影响力的翻译语言学家，是伦敦语言学派中比较系统地提出翻译理论的专家。卡特福德认为，翻译是“用一种等值的语言（译语）的文本材料（,textual material,）去替换另一种语言（原语）的文本材料”。,J.C.,Catford,A world-renowned British linguist and translation theorist,and also an outstanding representative of the linguistic school of translation.His famous work,A Linguistic Theory of Translation,was first published by Oxford University Press in 1965,and republished in 1967.It was among the list of the series of language and linguistic studies of Oxford University.This book states the five aspects of translation:definition of translation,types of translation,translation equivalence,transference,and limits of translatability,which gives the positive impact to the development of translation theory and practice.,In this section,we shall cover four more or less distinct approaches to translation which have a direct bearing on major issues in translation studies:,linguistic,descriptive,functional and cultural approaches,.,To adopt an approach to a topic can mean one of at least three rather different things.It is possible to approach translation studies with a particular theory belong to another field of study in mind,and trying to widen that theory to encompass translational phenomena within its sphere of explanation.,This can benefit a theory because it is commonly accepted that the strength of a theory is partly measured in terms of the number of phenomena it can account for.Procedures of this type often(though not always)lead to the claim that translations and translational phenomena are special cases of whatever is the subject matter of the discipline(see for example,Gutt,1991).This sense of“approach”will not be used in this book.,Secondly,it is possible to try to develop a theory of translation by applying to it a theory drawn from another discipline.This can lead to translation studies being seen as a sub-branch of the informing discipline(see example,Catford,1965),particularly when the informing discipline is linguistics.It is particularly tempting for linguists to classify translation studies as branch of(applied)linguistics,because translations are linguistic phenomena,which look to linguists like those text-objects which are one of the standard foci of their attention.,Some of the approaches discussed in this chapter are approaches in this sense:writings on translation which approach the topic with theories drawn from other disciplines in mind.It is interesting and instructive to study this type of work because it shows the multifaceted nature of translational phenomena and highlights the extent to which a theory,in this case a theory of translation,can be shaped by the background assumptions of the theorist.,Thirdly,it is possible to apply knowledge gained in another discipline to translational phenomena while still considering translational phenomena to be subject specific,and while acknowledging that translation studies has a central theoretical,conceptual and notional core of its own.When this is done,insights from the other disciplines feed into translation studies in order that its own scope may be widened and phenomena inherent in it may become better understood.,This may go hand in hand with a specific interest in those aspects of translations and translational activity and phenomena which are closer in type to the foci of the informing theory;and it may be done in the hope that insights from translation theory might in turn be fed back into the informing theory.In this book,the main focus is on the language of translations,and linguistics and philosophy are viewed as sources of insights that can be used in its study;but we keep in mind the special nature of translating and translations,.,Linguistic Approaches,Catford,Among attempts at drawing on linguistic theory in setting up a theory of translation,Catfords,(1965)is one of the most thorough,systematic and well informed.The linguistic theory,Catford,draws on is that of,Halliday,(1961)an early version of systemic functional grammar.This theory was influenced by the work of J.R.Firth(see Firth 1957),and,Catfords,definition of meaning derives directly from Firth.,Meaning,says,Catford,(1965:35),is the total network of relations entered into by any linguistic form.,The relations that a linguistic form can inter into may be of two,kinds,(1)formal relationships,(with other forms as classified by linguistic theory)and,(2),contextual relationships,(between the linguistic form and aspects of the context defined by linguistic theory as relevant to it).,A linguistic form,therefore,has both formal and contextual meaning,though it is contextual meaning that is most usually understood by“meaning”(1965:5).,Nida,Nidas,functional measure of translation equivalence is reader response.As his(1964)subtitle,With Special Reference to Principles and Procedures Involved in Bible Translating implies,his main concern is with texts in the case of which the readers response may be of paramount importance.In Bible translation,the over-riding aim often is to create conditions favorable for the conversion of the reader to Christianity,and this requires the reader to be able to respond to the text in a very deep,emotional,personal way.,One of the few other text types that may elicit this type of response is the literary text,and,Nidas,point of departure is in fact adverse reactions to literary translations.The problem for the translator,according to,Nida,is that(1964:2):the translator is under constant pressure from the conflict between form and meaning.If he attempts to approximate the stylistic qualities of the original,he is likely to sacrifice much of the meaning,while strict adherence to the literal content usually results in considerable loss of the stylistic flavor.,Catford,(1965)bases his theory of translation firmly on an early version of,Hallidays,systemic grammar,韩礼德的系统语法,(,Halliday,1961),Nida,takes as his own starting point,Chomskys generative view of language,乔姆斯基的语言生成观,which he considers(1964:9):,particularly important for a translator,for in translating one language into another he must go beyond mere comparison of corresponding structures and attempt to describe the mechanisms by which the total message is decoded,transferred,and transformed into the structures of another language.,According to,Nida,(1964:120),the communicative act consists of,(1)the subject matter,(2)the participants,(3)the linguistic act,(4)the code used and(5)the message,that is the particular way in which the subject matter is encoded into specific symbols and arrangements,and the participants and the message are especially important,since the many different types of translation that exist can generally be accounted for by three basic factors in translating:,(1)the,nature of the message,(2)the,purpose or purposes of the author,and,by proxy,of,the translator,and(3)the,type of audience,.,Messages differ primarily in the degree to which content or form is the dominant consideration(1964:156),although content and form can never be completely divorced from one anther.,Whatever the translators aim-ranging from mere intelligibility to full equivalence with the source text-they have to consider the intended audience,for audiences differ both in decoding abilities and in potential interest.At this point,Nida,draws his famous distinction between,formal and dynamic equivalence,:Total equivalence,he asserts,is never possible in translation,so one must seek to find the closer possible equivalent.However,there are fundamentally two different types of equivalence:one which may be called,formal,and another which is primarily,dynamic,(1964:159).Of these,he has the following to say(,ibid.,):,Formal equivalence focuses attention on the message itself,in both form and content.In such a translation one is concerned with such correspondences as poetry to poetry,sentence to sentence,and concept to concept.,Viewed from this formal orientation one is concerned that the message in the receptor language should match as closely as possible the different elements in the source language.This means,for example,that the message in the receptor culture is constantly compared with the message in the source culture to determine standards of accuracy and correctness,In contrast,a translation that attempts to produce a dynamic rather than a formal equivalence is based upon the principle of equivalent effect(,Rieu,and Phillips 1954).In such a translation one is not so concerned with match the receptor-language message with the source-language message,but with the dynamic relationshipthat the relationship between receptor and message should be substantially the same as that which existed between the original receptors and the message.,A translation of dynamic equivalence aims at complete naturalness of expression,and tries to relate the receptor t o modes of behavior relevant within the context of his own culture;it does not insist that he understand the cultural patterns of the source-language context in order to comprehend the message.,However,if a translation is to meet the,four basic requirements,of,(1)making sense,(2)conveying the spirit and manner of the original,(3)having a natural,and easy form of expression,and,(4),producing a similar response,it is obvious that at certain points the conflict between content and form(or meaning and manner)will be acute,and that one or the other must give way(1964:164).,Nida,claims that Other things being equal,the efficiency of a translation can be judged in terms of the maximal reception for the minimal effort of decoding.Since linguistic forms and cultural backgrounds are diverse,a translation very easily becomes overloaded and thus inefficient in terms of decoding effort.,The general efficiency of the communication process is one of the three criteria which,Nida,considers basic to the evaluation of all translating.The other two are comprehension of intent and equivalence of response.,Reference:,Dagut,Menachem,.(1981).“Semantic Voids”as a problem in the translation process.,Poetics Today,2(4):61-71.,Firth,J.R.(1957).Papers in Linguistics 19341951.London:Oxford University Press.,Halliday,Michael Alexander Kirkwood(1961).Categories of the theory of grammar,Word,17(3):241-92.,Holmes,James S.1972(1988).The name and nature of translation studies.Paper presented in the translation section of the Third International Congress of Applied Linguistics,Copenhagen,21-26 August 1972,in,Translated Papers on Literary Translation and Translation Studies,Amsterdam:,Rodopi,pp.66-80.,Malmkjr,Kirsten.(2007).,Linguistics and the Language of Translation,.Edinburgh:Edinburgh University Press.,Toury,Gideon(1995),Descriptive Translation Studies and Beyond,Amsterdam and Philadelphia:John,Benjamins,Publishing Company.,McCarthy,Michael(1991),Morphology,in Kirsten,Malmkjr,(ed.),The Linguistics Encyclopedia,.London and New York:,Routledge,pp.314-23,Snell-,Hornby,Mary.1988(1995).,Translation Studies:An Integrated Approach,.Amsterdam and Philadelphia:John,Benjamins,Publishing Company.,Gutt,Ernst-August(1991),Translation and Relevance:Cognition and Context,Oxford:Basil Blackwell.,Catford,J.C.(1965),A Linguistic Theory of Translation:An Essay in Applies Linguistics,Oxford:Oxford University Press.,Zanettin,Federico,Silvia,Bernardini,and Dominic Stewart(eds.)(2003),Corpora in Translator Education,Manchester,UK and Northampton,MA:St Jerome Publishing.,Homework,Literal Translation,1.Losing ones independence for Americans is a shameful thing.,失去自由对于美国人民来说是一件可耻的事。,2.If you ask others to take you to the grocery store,you must fit your shopping to their schedule and preference for supermarkets.,如果你请求别人带你去杂货店，你就,必须迁就他们的时间安排及时对超市的选择。,Free Translation/Sense Translation,After dinner the two ladies,retired,to another room and left their husbands to,talk shop,.,饭后，两位女士退到另一个房间，让他们的丈夫谈正事。,2.Last spring,Mother Nature made April Fools,of all us who live in New England.,去年春天，,大自然捉弄了,我们所有居住在新英格兰的人。,