翻譯概論總結.docx

多項選擇：1. Roman Jakobsons tripartite classification: intralingual translation (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 (by the particular approach adopted or focus directed by their proponents): their approaches to translation may be grouped into the philological, 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 includes medium, area, rank, text type, time, and problem restrictedThe applied branch: translation aids, training and criticismNote: 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 studiesThe internal studies: the theoretical branch takes as its objects of study the nature, principles, and procedures of translation; the applied branch includes translation practice (text analysis and genre translation), T criticism, and the training of translators, development of the translation profession.Specifically, translation practice includes text analysis and genre translation, and the former covers such areas of research as: source text analysis, comparison of translations & their source texts, comparison of translations and non-translated texts (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 studies are the derived or borderline parts of TS, covering areas where the internal TS interact or marry with other disciplines, such as history, sociology, cultural anthropology, philosophy, linguistics, psychology, theory of communication, computer science and technology, etc. For example, history of translation; sociology and cultural studies of T; T ethics; terminology management; language and translation technologyOr historical/cultural translation; translation ethics; terminology and glossaries; translation and technologyThe internal studies and the external studies of translation are related and complementary to each other in that the research results in the former provide the latter with both a theoretical basis and a practical focus of concern while the research findings in external studies contribute to the depth and breadth of internal studies by providing new observations 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 the closest natural equivalent 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 of empirical phenomena, made in a way consistent with scientific method. Theories are collections of hypotheses that are logically linked together into a coherent explanation of some aspect of reality and which have individually or jointly received some empirical support.The properties of a good theory: strong explanatory power that can effectively explain the subject 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 success to be expected from the use of certain principles and procedures in the study of the subject matter.3. equivalence:A term used by many writers to describe the nature and the extent of the relationships which exist between SL and TL texts or smaller linguistic units. The nature of “equivalence” was successively discussed by prominent figures such as Jakobson, Eugene Nida, Peter Newmark, and Werner Koller. (1) Jakobsons linguistic meaning and equivalence. He followed the relation set out by Saussure between the signifier (the spoken and written signal) and the signified (the concept 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 ST and TT. He defined translation as “substituting messages in one language not for 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 kernels under some complicated surface structure. In terms of equivalence, he stated that there are formal equivalence which 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 equivalence is 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) Newmark put forward the notions of communicative translation and semantic translation.Communicative translation attempts to produce on its reader an effect as close as possible to that obtained on the readers of the original.Semantic translation attempts to render, as closely as the semantic and syntactic structures of the second language allow, the exact contextual meaning of the original.4. meaning:According to Nida, meaning is broke down into linguistic meaning, referential meaning 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 sign and something outside it2) there is a plurality of meaning: three kinds of relationship a sign may enter into referential(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 掛號信；vice-chancellor；indian meal;國際學院；基礎實驗樓b. Pragmatic meaning (PM) (sign-user)may be divided into four subsets: identificational meaning (regional, historial background of the speaker); expressive meaning (emotional content of an expression might have in terms of the personality or individual creativity of the user, e.g murder & homicide); associative meaning (connotative meaning隱含意義); social meaning (channel of contact, e.g phatic forms of discourse; forms of address vous/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 pragmatic meaning 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. Language as 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. fusion of horizon: the meeting of different perspectives or backgrounds. So far 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 a new light.總結自己學習情況：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 cover all the items outlined in the syllabus such as the skopos theory and the manipulation school, which I find them an enlightening reading as I read them in Jeremy Mundays “Introducing Translation Studies”. As far as I am concerned, the benefits by taking this course are twofold. First, owning to the systematic exemplifications and illustrations discussed in class, I have a better understanding of the major schools of translation chronologically and topologically. Equipped with the basic knowledge and systematic framework of translation studies, I can conduct my research or my future thesis paper from an in-depth perspective. The philological approach mainly concerning on the “word for word” or “sense for sense” debate, though 案例分析：1. deep structure analysisThe surface structure is the syntactic structure of the sentence which a person speaks, hears, reads or writes. It is the actually observed structure of a sentence.The deep structure is much more abstract and it is considered to incorporate all information relevant to the single or unambiguous interpretation of a particular sentence. Nida believes that the English language possesses seven such basic structures, which he terms “kernels” the minimal number of structures from which the rest can be 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 is an 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) determine the semantic and logical relationships between kernels (grouping the kernels into related sets)(4) find out the most efficient way of representing the given relationships between kernels in the target language. (state these relationships in a form which will be optimal, 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 weary travelers, now has become a land for winter and summer vacation, a land of magic and wonder.2. transliteration 以義出音 vs. translation: a terminological study of the rendition of a sutra text翻譯：長答題（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 being that of whether the translator should bring the original to the target reader (liberal translation) or the target language reader to the original (literal translation).Philological tradition in the western history can be illustrated chronologically: a) roman times word for word vs. sense for sense. Cicero & Horace & Quintilian: liberal translation; St. Augustine: literal translationb) the middle ages debate between translation and unacceptable interpretation. St. Jerome, father of the church, translated the Bible into Latin, and developed the Ciceronian distinction 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 developing language 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 to remain faithful without being subservient.d) Reformation doctrinal fidelity vs. possible heretical “mistranslation”. Martin Luther elevated and disseminated the usage of German by his translation of the Bible. Etienne Dolet, burn at the stake for his addition to his translation of one of Platos dialogues, advocated five principles in translation.e) the 17th & 18th centuries diversion of the activity of translation: translation as recovery or imitation of classical text; as language learning exercise; as commercial enterprise. John Dryden reduces all translation to three categories: the triadic model: metaphrase, paraphrase, and imitation. The Port- Royal grammar put forward that “accuracy” in translation could somehow be measured on a qualifiable basis. Alexander Tytler reacted against Drydens “paraphrase” (loose translation) and set up three basic and celebrated principles of translation: complete transcript of ideas, style and manner of the same character, and all the ease of the originalf) the 19th century romanticism and “creative translation”, which centered around the problem of whether translation could be considered as a creative or a mechanical enterprise.g) the 20th century the philological tradition enduredIn conclusion, the methodology of this school is introspective, impressionistic, relying heavily on the researchers and practitioners intuition. Its central concepts are too abstract to be unequivocally understood and too fuzzy to serve as a reliable basis on which detailed theoretical analysis can be conducted and universally accepted conclusion drawn 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解經學 and theory of understanding and interpretation of the significance of human actions, utterances, products, and institutions 闡釋學。 Hermeneutics is a Romantic approach to interpretation based not on absolute truth but on the individuals inner feeling and 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” (as opposed to “naturalizing”) method of translation, orienting himself or herself by the language 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 from his own intellectual perspective and cultural background in order to assimilate what is foreign in a “new light”.Viewing translation in hermeneutics, meaning must be expressed within the target language “in a new way” and therefore “every translation is at the same time an interpretation”. The status of translator was improved by “translators turn” since understanding is achieved through the very involvement of the translator in the convergence of two horizons.In summary, the perspective of hermeneutics is important in TS because it lends inspiring insights into the nature of T and has influenced some subsequent schools of thought on translation like the manipulative and post-structuralist ones and constructivism, but its concern about translation is basica