Hans Vermeer “功能理论”与“目的论”

关于功能翻译理论
20世纪70年代至80年代，德国的卡塔琳娜·莱思(K．Reiss)、汉斯·弗米尔(H．J．Vermeer)、贾斯特·霍斯一曼特瑞(J．H．Manttari)以及克里丝汀·诺德(C．Nord)等学者提出的“功能翻译理论”为翻译理论研究开辟了一个新视角。

此理论的核心是翻译目的／译文功能，因此本文将借用此理论来解释编译现象。

功能翻译理论的主要理论包括莱思提出的文本类型与翻译策略论、霍斯-曼特瑞的翻译行动论、弗米尔的目的论，以及诺德的翻译为本语篇分析理论。

以下概述后三种论说，即翻译行动论、目的论及以翻译为本的语篇分析理论。

翻译行动论(theory of translational action)是霍斯-曼特瑞于80年代提出来的(Munday 2001：77)。

该理论把翻译视为实现信息的跨文化、跨语言转换而设计的复杂行动。

这种行动所涉及的参与者有：行动的发起者(the initiator)、委托者(the commissioner)、原文产生者(the ST producer)、译文产生者(the TT producer)、译文使用者(the TT user)及译文接受者(the TT receiver)。

翻译理论好比环环相扣的链条，每一个环节参与者都有自己的目的，并关联到下一环节。

翻译行动论强调译文在译语文化中的交际功能。

因此，译文的形式并非照搬原文模式，而是取决于其是否在译语文化中合理地为其功能服务。

目的论(Skopos Theory)是弗米尔于20世纪70年代提出来的。

(Munday 2001：78—79)。

Skopos是希腊语，意指“目的”，其主要概念是，所有翻译遵循的首要规则就是“目的规则”，翻译目的决定翻译策略与具体的翻译方法。

弗米尔认为，翻译的结果是译文，但译者必须清楚地了解翻译的目的与译文功能，才能做好翻译工作，产生出理想的译作。

后来莱思与弗米尔在合著的《翻译的理论基础》(Groundwork for a General Theory of Translation 1984)一书中，指出了目的论的具体准则(Munday 2001：78—79)：(1)译文(TT)决定于其目的(determined by its skopos)；(2)译文为目标语文化社会提供信息，其关注点是把源语语言文化信息转换为目标语语言文化信息；
(3)译文不提供模棱两可的信息；(4)译文必须能自圆其说(internally coherent)；(5)译文不得与原文相悖(coherent with the ST)；(6)上述所列五条准则的顺序表明其重要性的先后顺序，而所有准则都受目的论之支配。

至于第(5)点，我们的理解是：译文必须在思想内容与内在逻辑上与原文相一致，而不是指语言形式或遣词造句上的一致。

诺德的《翻译的语篇分析》(Text Analysis in Translation 1988／1991)向读者展示了一个更为具体的功能语篇分析模式——跨越字词的层面，从语篇的角度来解释翻译。

她首先区分比较了两种类型的翻译：纪实性翻译(documentary translation)和工具性翻译(instrumental translation)。

纪实性翻译充当了原作者和译文接受者之间进行原语文化交流的工具，原语文化特色在译文中保持不变，如逐字翻译就属纪实性翻译；后者则是在目标语文化的交流中充当一种独立的信息传递工具，译文根据自身的目的对原文作调整。

1. Key Concepts of Skopostheorie
Skopos is the Greek word for “aim” or “purpose” and was introduced into translation theory in the 1970s by Hans Vermeer as a technical term for the purpose of a translation and of the action of translating. The major work on Skopos theory (Skopostheorie) is Groundwork for a General Theory of Translation, a book Vermeer co-authored with Katharina Reiss (Reiss and Vermeer 1984). Skopos theory focuses above all on the purpose of the translation, which determines the translation methods and strategies that are to be employed in order to produce a functionally
adequate result. This result is the TT (target text), which Vermeer calls the translatum. Therefore, in Skopos theory, knowing why an ST (source text) is to be translated and what the function of the TT will be of crucial for the translator.
There exist three possible kinds of purpose in the field of translation: the general purpose aimed at by the translator in the translation process (perhaps ‘to earn a living”), the communicative purpose aimed at by the TT in the target situation (perhaps “to instruct the reader”) and the purpose aimed at by a particular translation strategy or procedure (for example, “to translate literally in order to show the structural particularities of the SL”) (qtd. in Nord, 2001: 28). Nevertheless, the term Skopos usually refers to the purpose of the TT. And it is the receiver, or rather the addressee, who is the main factor determining the TT Skopos. Therefore, the prime principle determining any translation process is the purpose (Skopos) of the overall translational action.
2. Three Rules of Skopostheorie
According to Skopostheorie, there are three basic rules to govern the translator’s activities in the process of translation.
Skopos rule: refers to the top-ranking rule for any translation which indicates that a translation action is determined by its Skopos. Vermeer explains the Skopos rule as follows: Each text is produced for a given purpose and should serve this purpose. The Skopos rule thus reads as follows: translate/interpret/speak/write in a way that enables your text/translation to function in the situation in which it is used and with the people who want to use it and precisely in the way they want it to function (qtd. in Nord, 2001: 29)
However, the Skopos rule does not offer any general principle or strategy that can be employed to guide any specific translation process. Instead, they can only be determined according to the specific Skopos ready to be achieved by a translation. Since a translational action is determined by its Skopos, the Skopos rule is the top-ranking rule for some kind of translation.
Coherence rule: A translator is supposed to produced a text is at least likely to be meaningful to target-culture receivers. For this end, only when the TT conforms to the standard of intratextually coherent, can it make sense in the communicative situation and culture in which it is received and the receiver will have no difficulty in understanding it. A communicative interaction can only be regarded as successful if the receivers interpret is as being sufficiently coherent with their situation. Accordingly, as another important rule of Skopostheorie, the “coherence rule”, specifies that a translation should be acceptable in a sense that it is coherent with the receiver’s situation (qtd. in Nord, 2001: 32). Here, being “coherent with” is synonymous with being “part of”the receiver’s situation. Since a translation is an offer of information about a preceding offer of information, it is expected to bear certain relationship with the corresponding ST.
Fidelity rule: Vermeer calls the relationship between a translation and the corresponding ST “intertextual coherence” or “fidelity” which is postulated as a further principle and referred to as the “fidelity rule” (ibid.). The important point is that intertextual coherence should exist between the ST and the TT, while the form it takes depends both on the translator’s interpretation of the ST and on the translation Skopos. The maximally faithful imitation of the ST is just one of the possible kinds of intertexual coherence.
In all, the three basic rules of the Skopostheorie are designed to govern the translator’s activities in the whole translation process. In most cases, however, a translation cannot satisfy the three rules at the same time due to the reason that the Skopos of the translation is frequently likely to deviate from the intention of the corresponding SL text. In general, the hierarchical order of
abidance of the three rules should be the Skopos rule first, the coherence rule second and then the fidelity rule, or to put it in another way, the demand for fidelity is considered subordinate to intratextual coherence (or the coherence rule), and both are subordinate to the Skopos rule. When a translation which is faithful to the ST cannot be effectively understood by the TT receiver, the translator should give up the fidelity rule and conform to the coherence rule, i.e. to make his translation meaningful in the target communicative situation and culture. If the Skopos requires a change of function, the required standard will no longer be intertextual coherence with the ST but adequacy or appropriateness with regard to the Skopos (qtd. in Nord, 2001: 32-33). And if the Skopos demands intratexual incoherence, the standard of intratextual coherence is no longer valid.
3. Translation Brief of Skopostheorie
Generally, the Skopos is specified by the translation brief, in which the initiator would give as many details as possible about the purpose, explaining the addressees, time, place, occasions and medium of the intended communication and the function the text is intended to have. (“Brief”is the English equivalent of the German word Ubersetzungsauftrag. It used to be translated as “commission”by Vermeer, ‘assignment”by Pochhacker and Kussmaul, etc. Here Nord adopts Janet Fraser’s term “brief”.) Exactly speaking, the translation brief includes the following information:
● The intended text function;
● The target text addressees;
● The time and place of text reception;
● The medium over which the text will be transmitted;
● The motive for the production or reception of the text.
This model specifies what kind of translation is needed so as to enables the translator to decide what information to include in the target text. Guided by the translation brief, the translator selects certain items from the SL offer of information (originally meant for source-culture addressees) and processes them in order to form a new offer of information in TL, from which the TL addressees can in turn select what they consider to be meaningful in their own situation.
4. Advantages of Skopostheorie over the Traditional Translation Theories
4.1 Traditional Equivalence-based Approaches
For centuries, the literal/free translation has been a heating topic for the translation theoreticians until the 1960s when they began to analyze the translation systematically. At that time, linguistic approaches were hot issues and the debate on meaning and equivalence was no doubt the focus therein. Over the following twenty years, many further attempts were made to define the nature of equivalence and one of the most important figures in translation studies is the American Eugene Nida. When he was translating and organizing the translation of Bible, he developed the theory of equivalence, which was then elaborated in two major works in the 1960s: Toward A Science of Translating(1964a) and the co-authored The Theory and Practice of Translation (Nida and Taber 1969). In the first book, Nida attempted to move translation, Bible translation in particular, into a more scientific era by incorporating recent studies in linguistics. He declared two basic orientation types of equivalence, namely formal equivalence and dynamic equivalence. Formal equivalence is approximate to ST structure. Since this type of translation is often used in an academic environment, the students are allowed to gain close access to the language and customs of the source culture (Munday, 2001). Dynamic equivalence is based on the principle of equivalent effect, where the “relationship between receptor and message should be
substantially the same as which existed between the original receptors and the message” (Nida, 1964: 159).
Nida also placed special emphasis on the purpose of the translation, on the roles of both the translator and the receivers, and on the cultural implications of the translators in the translation process:
When the question of the superiority of one translation over another is raised, the answer should be looked for in the answer to another question, best for whom? The relative adequacy of different translations of the same text can only be determined in terms of the intention, which each translation successfully fulfills the purpose for which it was intended. In other words, the relative validity of each translation is seen in the degree to which the receptors are able to respond to its message (in terms of both form and content) in comparison with (1) what the original author evidently intended would be the response of the original audience and (2) how that audience did, in fact, respond. The responses can, of course, never be identical, for interlingual communication always implies some difference in cultural setting, with accompanying diversities in value systems, conceptual presuppositions, and historical antecedents. (Nida, 1976: 64)
He produced an analytical procedure systematically for translators working with all kinds of text and his linguistic approach to translation has been influential on many subsequent and prominent translation scholars.
However, as time went by, Nida’s concept of formal and dynamic equivalence has come to be heavily criticized. Scholars felt that equivalence was still over concerned with the word level, and some translation scholars working in training institutions were also aware that the equivalence approach lacked consistency, because in translating Bible or literature works, the theorists of equivalence tended to accept this as the optimum translation procedure, but for pragmatic texts, such as C-E translation of publicity materials, they preferred the non-literal strategy and in some cases, equivalence might even not be called for at all. This different or even contradictory standard made the equivalence approach rather confusing, and some scholars got more and more doubtful and unsatisfied with. Under such circumstances, they started to seek for a more practical theory.
4.2 Advantages of Skopostheorie
From the above analysis, we can see that the disadvantages of the traditional equivalence-based approaches are that they just consider the static relationship between the ST and the TT without paying too much attention to some other dynamic relationships and factors. Equivalence-based theories focus on the ST according to which the features of the ST must be preserved in the TT, and the TT must be equivalent to the ST. They exclude many translational phenomena such as rewriting and reconstructing from the field of translation study and thus can hardly describe some common phenomena in translation study. Therefore, some scholars began to question the equivalence-based translation theories. New theories were called for. This is where Skopostheorie emerged in 1970s which intended to break up with linguistic translation theory and bridge the gap between theory and practice.
An important advantage of Skopostheorie is that it allows the possibility of the same text being translated in different ways according to the purpose of the TT and the commission which is given to the translator. In Vermeer’s words:
What the Skopos states is that one must translate, consciously and consistently, in accordance with some principle respecting the target text. The theory does not state what the principle is: this must be decided separately in each specific case. (Vermeer 1989/2000: 228)
So, using Vermeer’s own example, an ambiguity in a will written in French would need to be
translated literally, with a footnote or comment, for a foreign lawyer dealing with the case. On the other hand, if the will appeared in a novel, the translator might prefer to find a slightly different ambiguity that works in the TL without the need of a formal footnote, so as not to interrupt the reading process.
In a word, Skopostheorie enjoys advantages over the traditional translation theories attaching too much importance to “equivalence”or “faithfulness”. Because, traditionally, it is considered that the translator’s task is to offer the same amount and kind of information as the ST producer. This equivalence-based criterion was regarded as the standard to evaluate a translation. While Reiss and Vermeer maintain what the translator does is to offer another kind of information in another form, which has “directly challenge the traditional concept of equivalence as a constitutive feature of translation” (Nord, 2001:35)
附1：目的论与编译
编译
编译(adaptation)是译者自由度最大的一种翻译方法，接近于根据原文进行改写或改编。

在文学翻译和其他一些有特殊目的的翻译活动中，这种翻译方法比较常见。

例如：
(1) 白日依山尽，黄河入海流。

欲穷千里目，更上一层楼。

(王之涣)
Westward the sun, ending the day’s journey in a slow descent behind the mountains.
Eastward the Yellow River, emptying into the sea.
To look beyond, unto the farthest horizon, upward!
Up another storey!
(翁显良译)
(2) 到过真正法国拉丁区的人，都知道这是一个文人艺术家的集散地，无论你是什么人，也要来感受澳门这间以此命名的餐厅。

水晶灯下，柔和的光线散落在餐厅每一个角落，舒适宽敞的高背座椅，一丝不苟的摆设，都令人有回到家那份温暖的感觉，兴致所至，走到钢琴前轻奏一曲，浪漫气氛不言而喻。

与亲友畅谈时，品尝粉红色的“三文鱼红酒醋摩士”，令胃口大开。

热盘“煎鸡肉片沙律配野草莓汁”及“煎牛肉片配茄肉白酒汁”，魅力没法挡。

再细意品尝鲜甜多汁的“芒果雪芭”，在不知不觉之间，你会发现自己已经爱上这个地方。

France’s world famous Latin Quarter has inspir ed countless artists, musicians and writers during its long, distinguished history. And bathed in the delicate light of crystal chandeliers, the intimate ambience and soothing piano music of Macau’s very own La Comedie will almost certainly inspire you to create a masterpiece or two of your own. But before you go to work, be sure to savour a range of incomparably fine menu whose many highights include “Mousse of Salmon with Balsamique Vinegar” and “Pan-fired Sliced Chicken with Salad and Raspberry Seasoning”. And be sure to leave a little space at the end of your meal for La Comedie’s absolutely irresistible “Mango Sorbet”.
(摘自澳门旅游宣传册)
以上的两个译例中，第一篇原文是五言古诗，译者在翻译时加以改变，采用了散
文体的形式阐释原文的内容。

第二篇是旅游宣传广告，原文中的内容在翻译时也同样出现了许多改编之处，包括删减、添加、重写等等。

以上我们简要介绍了几种常见的翻译方法。

从宏观的角度而言，我们按照侧重于原文抑或是侧重于译文的程度来区别不同的翻译方法。

事实上，这些不同的方法在翻译理论研究和翻译实践中一直受到不同研究者的关注。

例如，早在19世纪初期，德国神学家兼翻译家施莱艾尔马赫(Freidrich Schleiermacher 1768-1834)在其《论翻译的不同方法》一书中就曾提出过两种不同的翻译策略选择：一是将译文读者领向原文作者，即顺从原文；另一是将原文作者，引向译文读者，即顺从译文(Munday 2001：28)。

可以说，这一观点是较早从原文和译文两个方面同时关注翻译方法的理论。

后来的学者，如珀斯盖特(J．P．Postgate：1992)提出的前瞻式(prospective translation)和后顾式(retrospective translation)翻译方法，以及温努提(Lawrence Venuti：1995)提出的异化(foreignizing translation)和归化(domestication)的方法，都从不同的侧面强调了翻译方法与原文和译文各自的关系。

有一点需要指出的是：这些方法之间并不是完全独立，互不相关的。

从本章的图3—1中我们也可以注意到，这几种翻译方法之间的关系更像是一个连续体(continuum)的关系：从几乎与原文一对一的逐字翻译到脱开原文形式而自由发挥的编译，译文同原文语言表达形式的对应程度逐渐减少；与此同时，译文符合译语表达习惯和可接受性的程度又逐渐增加。

事实上，在翻译实践中，译者通常不会仅仅局限于采用某一种翻译方法，而是根据不同的需要，灵活选用不同的翻译方法和策略。

这也是我们下一节将要讨论的问题。

影响翻译方法的因素
翻译是一种特殊形式的语言活动，涉及原文产生、原文理解、译文表达、译文接受等诸多环节。

这些不同的步骤和因素都在不同程度上影响到译者所选择的具体翻译方法。

我们在这里简要提及三个方面的因素。

1．语篇类型
语篇(text)是人们在交往中传达各种信息的一个语义单位(黄国文1988：7—8)。

由于受不同交际场合和不同交际目标的影响，语篇呈现出许多不同的变体，这也就是我们所说的语篇类型(text types)。

例如，根据语篇的范围，我们可以将语篇分为：宗教语篇、文学语篇、新闻语篇、科技语篇、广告语篇、法律语篇等类型。

这些不同类型的语篇各自都具有比较鲜明的语言表达形式和特点。

在翻译活动中，这些不同的语言表达方式会直接关系到翻译方法的选择和使用。

例如：(李运兴2001：75，100)
(1) Spring are not always the saine. In some years, April bursts upon our Virginia hills in one prodigious leap and all the stage is filled at once, whole chorusos of tulips, ambesque of forsythia, cadenzas of flowering plum. The trees grow leaves overnight.
春天并非总是一模一样。

四月，有时不知怎地一跃，就来到了弗吉尼亚的山坡上——转眼到处生机勃勃。

郁金香组成了大合唱，连翘构成了阿拉伯式图案，洋李唱出了婉转的歌声。

一夜之间，林木着装，绿叶瑟瑟。

(2) Multiple reflections, mistakes, and diffraction effects at the edges of the sample are generally considered the main sources of errors. To enhance the measurement accuracy, special attention must be paid to the choice of the radiating elements, the design of the sample holders, and the sample thickness and location
between the two radiating elements.
多次反射、失配，及样品边缘的衍射效应是误差的主要根源。

为提高测量的精度，应特别注意辐射元件的选择，样品支架的设计以及辐射元件间的样品的厚度和取向。

例(1)的原文摘自一篇散文作品。

译者在正确传达原文意义的前提下，充分发挥译文语言的特点，注重采用符合译语表达习惯、容易为译语读者所接受方式来翻译这一文学语篇。

如，将原文中的词组“whole chonlses of tulips，arabesque of forsythia，cadenzas of flowering plum”扩充为三个并列小句：“郁金香组成了大合唱，连翘构成了阿拉伯式图案，洋李唱出了婉转的歌声”，这种意译的翻译处理方法，使译文再现了原文中鲜明的生动形象特征。

另外，使用“生机勃勃”、“一夜之间，林木着装，绿叶瑟瑟”等汉语中常见的成语和四字表达法，也增加了译文的可读性。

这种以译语为主的翻译方法，在文学语篇及其它一些类型语篇的翻译中十分普遍。

例(2)选自科技语篇。

原文中的句子结构严谨，措辞客观中立，同时还有许多专业术语和表达法。

译者在翻译这一语篇时，采用了忠实于原文的方法来处理其中的语言表达。

如，句型结构紧扣原文，没有任何调整或改动，术语的措辞也完全对应于原文中的表达方式。

这种注重原文的翻译方法，是科技语篇、法律语篇等类型的语篇翻译时比较常见的方法。

2．翻译目的
除语篇类型的因素外，翻译方法的选择同译者的翻译目的也有很大的关系。

例如：(冯庆华2002：472)
(3)“姥姥既如此说，况且当年你又见过这姑太太一次，何不你老人家明日就走一趟，先试试风头再说。

”刘姥姥道：“嗳哟哟！可是说的，‘侯门深似海’，我是个什么东西，他家人又不认得我，我去了也是白去的”。

(《红楼梦》第六回) A．“Since this is your idea, mother, and you’ve called on the lady before, why not go there tomorrow and see how the wind blows?” “Aiya! ‘The threshold of a noble house is deeper than the sea.’ And who am I? The servants there don’ t know me, it's no use my going.” (杨宪益、戴乃迭译)
B．“Well, if it’s as you say, Grannie, and being as you’ve already seen this lady, why not go there yourself and spy out the land for us?” “Bless us and save us!” said Grannie Liu. “You know what they say: ‘A prince’s door is like the deep sea.’ What sort of crea ture do you take me for? The servants there don’t know me; it would be a journey wasted.” (David Hawkes 译)
以上两种译文中，第一种注重原文的语言表达方式在译文中的再现，第二种则倾向于使用译语中的表达方式传递原文的含义。

例如，“试试风头”这一原语中的习语，在杨译本中按照原文的表达方式再现为“see how the wind blows”；而在Hawkes译本中则选用了“spy out the land”，这样一个译语中的习语表达方式。

又如，感叹语“嗳哟哟”，在第一种译本里采用了音译的方法，直接将原文的表达方式移入译语中；而第二种译本则使用了译语里的习惯表达方式：“B1ess us and save us”。

这两种不同的翻译处理手法，同译者各自不同的翻译目的有着很密切的联系。

杨译本旨在将原语文化及其语言表达方式介绍到译语文化中，向译
语文化输入具有异国情调的新元素，因此，重视原文的内容和表达成为翻译过程中首先要考虑的因素，同时也决定和影响了具体翻译方法的选择。

Hawkes译本旨在向译语读者推介一部经典文学作品，译文的可读性、可接受性以及可能畅销的程度，是译者关注的重点，因此，使用译语读者熟悉的表达方式来传达原文的内容，成为译者在选择具体翻译方法时需要考虑的主要的因素。

这两种不同的翻译目的也由此产生了两种风格不同的译本。

3．读者对象
在翻译活动中，译文的读者对象是另一个影响翻译方法的因素。

虽然译者并不能完全清楚地了解和知晓译文的具体读者对象，但是，在翻译时译者心目中始终存在一个目标读者群，这类目标读者会在一定程度上影响译者所选择的翻译处理方法。

例如：
(4) One night there flew over the city a little Swallow. His friends had gone away to Egypt six weeks before, but he had stayed behind, for he was in love with the most beautiful Reed. He had met her early in the spring, as he was flying down the river after a big yellow moth, and had been so attracted by her slender waist that he had stopped to talk to her．(Oscar Wilde, The Happy Prince)
某一个夜晚一只小燕子飞过城市的上空。

他的朋友们六个星期以前就到埃及去了，但是他还留在后面，因为他恋着那根最美丽的芦苇。

他还是在早春遇见她的，那时他正沿着河顺流飞去，追一只黄色飞蛾，她的细腰很吸引他的注意，他便站住同他谈起话来。

(巴金译)
(5) and the historical sense involves a perception, not only of the pastness of the past, but of its presence; the historical sense compels a man to write not merely with his own generation in his bones, but with a feeling that the whole of the literature of Europe from Homer and within it the whole of the literature of his own country has a simultaneous existence and composes a simultaneous order. This historical sense, which is a sense of the timeless as well as of the temporal and of the timeless and the temporal together, is what makes a writer traditional. And it is at the same time what makes a writer most acutely conscious of his place in time, of his own contemperaneity. (T. S Eliot, Selected Essays)
历史感牵涉到一种认识，不仅认识到过去的过去性，还认识到过去的现在性。

历史感使一个人写作时不仅骨子里有他自己的一代，还有从荷马以来的整个欧洲文学，其中包括他自己国家的整个文学，它们同时存在，组成一个同时的秩序。

这种历史感既能感到超越时间的，也能感到暂时存在的，而且能把两者放在一起来感觉——这样的历史感使得一个作家成为传统的作家，而同时又使他敏锐地意识到他自己在时间中的地位，意识到他的当代性。

(王佐良译)
例(4)是童话寓言故事，读者对象是儿童或青少年读者。

我们从译例中可以看到，译者在翻译时注重使用更贴近译语文化中童话故事的表达方式，以简单平实的语言表达，将原文的内容自然流畅地传达出来。

如，原文里本来有一个复合长句：He had met her early in the spring, as he was flying down the river after a big yellow moth, and had been so attracted by her slender waist that he had stopped to talk to her．在翻译时，译者采用了分拆句子的意译方法，将原来的长句改为五个小复句。

这样一来，译文既忠实地传达了原文的意义，同时又保证了相当通顺自然的
可读性效果。

例(5)是文学评论，属于学术语篇，读者对象为学者、文学研究者或文学创作者。

译者在翻译时力求完全彻底地传达原文作者所欲表达的思想和观点，将原语文化中的新理论、新学说介绍到译语文化中。

因此，我们可以从译例中注意到，译者在翻译时，无论是术语的措辞，如“历史感”、“过去性”、“现代性”、“当代性”，还是句型的配搭以及语态的使用，均十分贴近原文的表达方式。

这种注重原文表达的翻译方法，可以为读者提供一个了解原文作者思想的途径，为读者接受、吸纳、评价或批判有关的学术观点铺垫必要的前提。

附2：
泰山北斗一代通儒
——缅怀德国功能派翻译理论创始人汉斯·费梅尔教授
王建斌北京外国语大学
2010年2月4日，国际翻译学界的泰斗、德国功能派翻译理论创始人、德国海德堡大学翻译学院教授汉斯·费梅尔(Hans J．Vermeer，1930-2010)先生不幸病逝。

当其家人发布的讣告传来时，我真有些不敢相信自己的眼睛，心中倍感震惊和悲痛。

1991年至l996年间，我在海德堡大学攻读翻译学博士学位，师从费梅尔教授。

先生学识渊博，治学严谨，对我们这些学生亲如慈父。

是他把我领入了翻译学的殿堂。

回国之后，我一直希望能够有机会请他到国内讲学，对中国文化怀有至爱之情的先生也表示了极大的兴趣，但出于种种原因，最终未能如愿，这令我万分懊悔、自责。

如今与先生相隔万里，坐在书桌旁，望着书柜中我回国前先生送给我的他的著作，及书桌上先生的家人发来的讣告，看着几天前(2010年2月20日)先生的遗骸在海德堡山间公墓下葬的照片，我心中思绪万千。

先生作为一位学富五车的学者和慈父的形象像无声电影，默默地在我脑海中回放。

五年中聆听先生教诲、与先生共处的时光重新回到了眼前。

一、融通东西、学贯古今
在我的眼中，先生首先是一位融通东西、学贯古今、潜心学术的博学的智者。

先生的家人发布的讣告十分朴素简短，除了家人的姓名及下葬的时间、地点，对先生的评述只有一句话，但它恰如其分地概括了先生半个多世纪治学的经历。

这是非洲马里学者阿马杜·巴(Amadou Hampate Ba，1991—1991)的一句名言：“一位长者驾鹤西去，一座知识的大厦焚毁倾覆”(德文：Wenn ein Greis stirbt，brennt eine Bibliothek．英文：When an old man dies，a library burns．)。

先生本身就是一座知识的大厦，他在世时是一位活着的图书馆。

先生学术功底之深厚、涉猎领域之广泛、精通语言之多(22种)令翻译理论界众人无法望其项背。

先生著作如山，文辞如海。

在300多项著作、论文中，最早的一项涉及的是葡萄牙语，这也是先生学术研究涉猎的第一领域。

早在1953年，先生就获得了德国海德堡大学葡语笔译硕士学位，一年后又获得该语种口译硕士学位。

先生翻译了众多葡语文学作品，葡语是先生最为得心应手的工作语言。

先生涉猎的第二大研究领域是日耳曼语言文学。

早在上个世纪60年代中期，先生就发表了众多研究中世纪德语专业文献的文章，对1966年出版的德语词典学中的里程碑《瓦里希》(Wahrig)大辞典、德罗斯多夫斯基(Drosdowski)主编的杜登大辞典、魏因里希(Harald Weinrich)和恩格尔(Ulrich Engel)分别编撰的德语语法有过学术价值很高的评述。

先生涉猎的第三大领域是语言学和印度学。

他1962年在海德堡大学提交的博士论文探讨的就是印欧语言中色谱的语言表述及其可译性。

1968年他的教授资格论文(Habilitationsschrift)探讨的是中亚、南亚语言结构及其从中导引出的语言联盟问题。