汉语量词英译研究.doc

Abstract

The translation research on Chinese quantifiers is widely noticed in the long tradition of systematic translation research. However, careful description of translation practice presents that translation is filled with changes and shifts. The serious translation research on Chinese quantifiers by categorization translation methods are produced is an important factor that should not be ignored. The dissertation connects the classification with the translating skills to explore how to deal with the translation on the Chinese quantifiers and the solutions that help translators’ translation work. The categorizing method and case study are selected. Based on the systematic conclusion, the analysis mainly focuses on translating methods which are primarily relied on the equivalence between Chinese quantifiers and English ones and then they could be translated according to the collocation practice, coped with the translation on the basis of the context or circumstances, conducted profound understanding on the original and then making best choices, applied to literal translation or free translation depending on the needs of the original and selected whether to translate or not based on the passionate or dispassionate pursuit of the quantifiers. Through the analysis, it is hoped that the findings of this dissertation will give some insights for the comprehension of the novel translating methods on the Chinese quantifiers.

Key words: English translation; Chinese quantifiers; translation methods; systematic categorization

摘要

长期以来，在传统的系统翻译研究中，汉语量词的英译研究是备受关注的。然而，通过严谨的翻译实践描述可以发现，翻译过程充满各种变化和转移。为了应对这一状况，应该通过已有的分类归纳法对汉语量词进行细致的翻译研究，而这种分类归纳法无疑是这研究必不可少的重要因素。论文把分类与翻译技巧结合在一起来探讨如何处理汉语量词的英译和寻找一些能帮助翻译者在量词翻译这一板块遇到的问题的解决办法。论文选取归纳法和例证法进行研究。基于系统的总结，论文主要根据中英量词的对等关系进行分析，从而找出五种翻译方法或应对技巧：根据搭配习惯翻译、依据情景处理、理解原语深层含义择译、运用直译和意译法、按量词强弱程度择译或弃议。通过分析，希望本论文的研究成果能为汉语量词的英译理解和创新提供启发和帮助。
关键词：英语翻译；汉语量词；翻译方法；系统分类

Contents

Abstract i
摘要 ii
1．Introduction 1
1.1 Research background 1
1.2 Research questions and research methods 1
1.3 Organization of the dissertation 2
2．Literature Review 3
2.1 Introduction 3
2.2 Early studies on quantifiers 3
2.3 Quantifiers research in new perspectives 4
2.3.1 Cu Zexiang: focus theory.......................................................................................4
2.3.2 He Jie: rhetoric aesthhetic consciousness on quantifiers’ stipulations of an agreement swerve .................................................... .......................................................................................4
2.3.3 Researchers’ quantifiers study in distinguishing directions …………………………….. ...6
2.4 Summary 7
3．An Exhaustive Translation Study of Chinese Quantifiers 8
3.1 Introduction 8
3.2 Equivalence between Chinese classifiers and English quantifiers 8
3.2.1 Analysis of nominal classifiers with English quantifiers ........................8
3.2.2 Analysis of momentum classifiers with English quantifiers ... ....................................................11
3.3 Five translation methods or general settlements over the translation difficulties 11
3.4 Summary 14
4．Conclusion 15
4.1 Summary of the major findings 15
4.2 Limitations and suggestions 15
References 16
Acknowledgements 17

1．Introduction
1.1 Research background
Since translation practice began, translation researches have been focusing on how to achieve translation equivalence. To judge a translated text is better or not is always to watch whether it follows the original text correctly and faithfully. Different translation theories endeavour figuring out the most available way to reach translation equivalence, for instance, Nida’s (2004) theory of dynamic equivalence and Catford’s (1965) equivalence theory. According to Catford (1965: 21), “a central task of translation theory is that of defining the nature and conditions of translation equivalence”. With equivalence as the center goal, translators are supposed to follow the original text as closely as possible, and there is little systematic place for quantifiers in translation.
However, there is no absolute equivalence, but only partial equivalence in certain language aspects, for example, equivalence of function, meaning and style. There is a famous Italian saying “traduttore troditore” which means “to translate is to betray”. Equivalence is always relative while nonequivalence is inevitable in translation.
According to traditional translation studies, translation nonequivalence is due to objective language and cultural differences, which reflects the traditional understanding of translation as a transparent linguistic process. However, since the culture turn in translation studies, it is controversial that translation is not a pure transparent process of language code switching, but a process involving the translator’s subjectivity and other cultural elements. As a result, the second half of the twentieth century has witnessed the appearance of various new translation studies such as the polysystem theory, the manipulation school and deconstruction translation theories. These new theories give up the concept of translation equivalence, and explore the relations between translation and various factors such as the role of the translator, ideology, politics and power. Translation shifts and rewritings have been the main parts of translation studies; nevertheless the translation of Chinese quantifiers is still an great obstacle in translating work.
1.2 Research questions and research methods
Continuing the long tradition of equivalence and translator’s invisibility in translation studies, this dissertation concentrates on the rare side of translation by studying the equivalence with Chinese classifiers and English table quantifiers, and solving the problems exploding during translating. This dissertation will mainly look into the following three questions:
(1) What preparation should be made before translating the large quantities of Chinese quantifiers?
(2) What can be done while faced to the problem of seeking equal or proper words, especially in the part of quantifiers, for translating?
(3) What limitations and suggestions could be put forward under the research?
The research is descriptive rather than prescriptive. Quantifiers’ accurate translation is taken as inevitable phenomena in translation practice. The research presents various translation methods, and studies the general skills of Chinese measure words translation in translation shifts based on the metric method. The classification of quantifiers is selected as the primary research way and exemplification is used to assist in the study. The classification of quantifiers and the ways of quantifiers’ translation are taken as the significant parts and elaborated or analyzed carefully.
1.3 Organization of the dissertation
The dissertation is composed of four chapters. Chapter One functions as an introduction, and states the research setting, methodology and structure of the whole dissertation. Chapter Two introduces the early studies of quantifiers and some new perspectives in such kind of research. Chapter Three is the main part of the whole dissertation, which will analyze and integrate the materials and then figure out the proper ways to cope with the problems which will be encountered. Chapter Four concludes the dissertation, presenting the major findings, limitations of the dissertation, and the prospects for future work in this field.

2．Literature Review
2.1 Introduction
This chapter starts with the theoretical framework of this dissertation, mainly extensively outlining the early studies on quantifiers, and then has a review of the late perspectives about the measure words. The final part of this chapter deals with the significance of the systematic exploring of translating Chinese classifiers.
2.2 Early studies on quantifiers
Quantifiers are viewed as the unique part of speech in the Sino-Tibetan language system. It is exceptionally complex and tough work to name the measure words affirmatively and study continuously attributing to the early internal language studies being constrained within the frame of western grammar research. At first, as to such kind of study, the internal parts mostly follow the western theoretical research results like the grammar research without its absolute system. After all, because there are few or even no such concepts in western language systems, the early studies of quantifiers show nothing as Xiao Cui (2011: 6) said. Although many scholars have paid close attention to the thing—classifiers come from the nouns and they are affinitive to nouns, which results from the limited knowledge of quantifiers, people cannot define it as an individual one. Mashiwentong (马建忠: 1983) regards the classifiers as “numerational alternative name”, and it has been the first time people be aware of the “numerational alternative name” which is different from another words, but at that time “quantifier” had not been confirmed yet. With the Newly National Language Grammar emerging, Li Jinxi (1924: 81) refers, “Classifiers express the amounts, follow the numbers and can be digit.” Then come out the “unit nouns” by Wang Li in Chinese Contemporary Grammar (1959) and Lv Shuxiang (2006). Nevertheless scholars have got down to distinguishing the momentum classifiers from nominal classifiers; they still can’t make a breakthrough. Even though “particle” is defined to classifiers in Peking Monosyllablic Vocabulary (1983) and “standard of measurement” is noted by Chen Wangdao (1978), these researches expressly describe features of quantifiers and yet don’t give them a definite concept. Till Ding Shengshu (1979: 5) explains formally, “Quantifiers usually are applied behind the demonstrative nouns or numerals, and ahead of nouns” in Modern Chinese Grammar Speech. “Quantifier” shows its official debut.
Though the quantifier research is a hard job, domestic studies have been in progress and the foreign scholars neither miss such great chances of “the gold rush”. Quantifier research was then at its lowest ebb. Most of the scholars engaged in this matter to great extent employed a cognitive perspective to investigate the nominal classifier system for nominal classifiers that offer a unique insight into the mechanism of categorization of the world by human beings. Their thesis, for example, Semantics and Cognition by Jackendoff (1983), Woman, Fire, and Dangerous Things by Lakoff G. (1987), Basic Objects in Natural Categories, Cognitive Psychology by Rosch, E. (1976: 382-439), Cognition by Reed (1982), firstly reviews plentiful articles on this issue scattered over different fields, and then distinguishes two kinds of classifiers: measure words for quantifying and categorization words for categorizing nouns on the basis of their inherent properties or our interaction with them. The latter, which is the point of their studies, is further. Their works were divided into several subclasses on a cognitive basis to reveal the basic means adopted by human beings in the procedure of turning the massive world into easy-to-perceive concepts. Based on this division system, a cognitive comparison between non-native classifiers and local measure words is made in order to figure out what is common or different in the way all human beings think.
2.3 Quantifiers research in new perspectives
As translation studies move toward the “culture turn” which shifts the focus of studies “from a more formalist approach to translation to one that laid greater emphasis on extra-textual factors” (Bassnett, 2007: 13), diverse elements that have an effect on translation of Chinese quantifiers attract more and more attention. In the following sections, the dissertation presents what new angles are put forward and how they are connected with the knowledge in other fields.
2.3.1 Chu Zexiang: focus theory
Traditionally, many scholars discuss the quantifiers in a static way. As is known we get to understand it in the research way of the classification, match, overlap and rhetoric of the measure words. Then people adopt dynamic methods to explore it. Grammarians gradually apply advanced theories and methods to create new opinions. They place a stress on studying this matter with common theory of language, quantifiers of mandarin, dialect and ancient Chinese research. Focus theory is applied to quantifiers research by Chu Zexiang (2001) falling into people’s sights. In his study, it isn't chained to the use of numeral “one” with stressing the amount, mainly use “one”, this numeral, and shows its feature meanwhile, and then explains the word order of “noun+quantifier” by listing examples, contrasting and intensifying the concerning points. The study wants to point out that the speaker desires to make his words with numeral classifier phrases more attractive. Chu Zexiang moves further to another aspect - the word order of “noun+quantifier” also performs comparability and meets the need of phonetic rhythm In conclusion, it’s true that Chu Zexiang digs at the study of quantifiers in one leap.
2.3.2 He Jie: rhetoric aesthetic consciousness on quantifiers’ stipulations of an agreement swerve
He Jie (2000) proposes the aspect of body in quantifier research, which is to draw attention to the Chinese classifiers with a focus on the semantic aspect. It includes five parts: a summary of former studies on Chinese classifiers, the sub-categorization of the classifiers, the relationship between the grammatical form and meaning in relation to the distribution of the classifiers, the semantic usage of the classifiers, the formation process and changes of meanings of the classifiers. He creates many new ideas for his theory and definitely makes great contribution. His book, Research on Contemporary Chinese Quantifiers, has always been bringing new insights into Chinese classifiers, and benefiting everyone from college students to researchers both at home and abroad.
Stipulations of an agreement swerve refers that the word which should have modified A finally has transferred to modify B. This perspective is exhibited by He Jie actually being rather distinctively. According to Chen Wangdao (1980: 118), “Beauty is a kind of emotion, and philosophy is behaving like sorts of understanding.” Rhetoric aesthetic consciousness on quantifiers’ stipulations of an agreement swerve is one kind of people’s feeling and taste about effects of quantifiers’ swerving resulting in bursting with some kind of affection and imagination. It impresses people in special ways: vivid verve, novel embodiment, profound humour and violent passions. They are called of “Four Beauties” because people could have an cheerful entertainment after handling them. Here goes to the details as follow.
Firstly, within the