skopos theory——目的论
浅析翻译目的论的作用和意义
浅析翻译目的论的作用和意义目的论(skopostheory)是翻译行动论的重要组成部分。
其首倡者德国功能派翻译学家HansJ.Vermeer指出﹐翻译是一种行动,而行动皆有目的，所以翻译要受到目的的制约。
该翻译理论的核心原则是“目的准则”，这一理论超越了传统的“等值”或“等效”的翻译观。
在目的论指导下，翻译方法就呈现出了多样性。
如果能在忠实原文的基础上达到翻译的目的，对原文既可以采用逐字翻译的方法，也可以采用改写的方法，或者采用介于两者之间的任何翻译策略。
从这种目的论延伸出来的译文评价体系则认为评价一篇译文的优劣，并非是看它对原文的等值程度( equivalence )，而是看它对于翻译目的的适宜性(adequacy)，即是否有助于在译语情境中实现译文的预期功能。
目的论在具体翻译过程中体现出的一个实际意义，是就翻译方法的选择上提出新的看法。
原文通常原本是为源于文化中的一个情景而制作的，因此处在“原文”的地位，而译者的作用是进行跨文化的沟通。
因此，翻译的目的就是由任务决定的目标或意图，原文的内容或者表现形式必要时可由译者来修改。
翻译策略的选择应该围绕语言转化过程中两种语言符号本身的结构差异，同时还应考虑到两种语言形式表现出的社会文化差异。
【翻译目的论的作用意义】在传统译论中,首先考虑的都是原文和原文读者的心理反应,而在目的论理论中,原文和原文读者的心理反应都被退回到次要位置,取而代之则是翻译目的和忠实的问题。
其次,对等原则是语言学派翻译理论的基础，目的论使翻译标准多元化,而翻译标准多元化使翻译更接近于实际。
再次,目的论学派使西方从以语言学派为主的翻译理论研究中开辟了一条新的道路。
最后,功能派理论有助于人们开展翻译批评。
由于目的论突破了传统译论的模式,将翻译研究聚焦在翻译过程中译文目的的选择上,是一种对翻译的外部研究,因此这样无疑能够弥补传统翻译研究中的不足，从而为翻译学科的探索又增加了一个新的研究视角。
功能翻译理论目的论
方梦之主编：《译学词典》，上海外语教育出版社，第29页功能翻译理论functionalist translation theory又称“功能目的论”（Skopos theory）。
1971年，德国的莱斯（K. Reiss）首先提出“把翻译行为所要达到的特殊目的”作为翻译评价的新模式。
1984年她在与费米尔（H. J. Vermeer）合写的General Foundation of Translation Theory一书中声称：译者在整个翻译过程中的参照系不应是“对等”翻译理论所注重的原文及其功能，而应是译文在译语文化环境中所预期达到的一种或若钟交际功能。
20世纪90年代初，德国学者克利斯蒂安·诺德（Christiane Nord）进一步拓展了译文功能理论。
她强调译文与原文的联系，但这种联系的质量与数量由译文的预期功能确定。
这就是说，根据译文语境，原文中的哪些内容或成分可以保留，哪些需调整或改写，该由译文的预期功能确定。
功能目的理论的两项基本原则是：1. 翻译各方面的交互作用受翻译目的所决定；2. 目的随接受对象的不同而变化。
按照这两项原则，译者可以为了达到目的而采用任何他自己认为适当的翻译策略。
换句话说，目的决定方式（The end justifies the means）。
作为受文化制约的语言符号，原文语篇和译文语篇受到各自交际环境的影响，译文功能与原文功能可相似或保持一致，也可能完全不同。
根据不同的语境因素和预期功能，选择最佳的处理方法，这是功能翻译理论比以对等为基础的翻译理论或极端功能主义的翻译理论更为优越之处。
翻译功能理论指导下的翻译方法表现出较大的灵活性，较高的科学性和易操作性。
Toury 把“功能目的论”看作是“译文文本中心论”的翻版。
Skopos theory (plural Skopos theories)1.(translation studies) The idea that translating and interpretingshould primarily take into account the function of both the sourceand target text.o1995, Paul Kussmaul, Training The Translator, JohnBenjamins Publishing Co, p. 149:The functional approach has a great affinity with Skopos theory.The function of a translation is dependent on the knowledge,expectations, values and norms of the target readers, who are again influenced by the situation they are in and by the culture. Thesefactors determine whether the function of the source text orpassages in the source text can be preserved or have to be modified or even changed.Introduction to the Skopos TheoryThe Skopos theory is an approach to translation which was put forward by Hans Vemeer and developed in Germany in the late 1970s and whichoriented a more functionally and socioculturally concept of translation. Translation is considered not as a process of translation, but as a specific form of human action. In our mind, translation has a purpose, and the word “Skopos” was from Greek. It’s used as the technical term for the purpose of the translation.翻译目的论，"skopos"是希腊语“目的”的意思。
目的论在大学英语翻译教学中的应用
目的论在大学英语翻译教学中的应用摘要英语翻译是大学英语教育中重要的一环，而目的论在英语翻译中的应用则是近年来受到广泛关注的研究课题。
本文旨在探讨目的论在大学英语翻译教学中的应用，从理论与实践两个方面分析其意义和方法。
一、目的论基本概念目的论（Skopos Theory）是由德国维也纳学派翻译学家Vermeer于20世纪80年代提出的，其核心理念是翻译活动是以目的为导向的。
即翻译活动的目的决定了翻译过程中要采取的翻译策略和翻译成果的实际效果。
目的论使翻译活动变得主动而非被动，更加迅速地适应了全球化的文化和社会环境。
二、目的论在大学英语翻译教学中的意义1. 帮助学生理解文化差异在英语翻译教学中，文化差异是一个重要的话题。
通过目的论的理念，我们可以更好地帮助学生深入理解不同文化间的表达和语言差异，从而更好地翻译出文本的意义。
2. 培养学生的翻译策略意识目的论在翻译教学中的应用，可以帮助学生从策略层面上理解和运用翻译技巧。
在实践中，学生需要理解原文的句法和表达意图，然后根据翻译目的选择合适的翻译策略，这有助于提高翻译水平。
3. 促进跨文化交流和理解随着全球化的到来，跨文化交流和理解变得越来越重要。
通过目的论在英语翻译教学中的应用，学生可以更好地理解和应对来自不同文化和语言背景下的翻译需求，进而促进跨文化交流和理解。
三、目的论在大学英语翻译教学中的实践1. 教师角色的重要性在目的论的应用下，教师不再是传授知识的单一角色，而是要担起引导学生理解翻译目的、进行翻译策略分析和评估的角色，要注重激发学生的翻译策略意识和跨文化理解能力。
2. 实例操练的必要性在实践中，通过教师设置一定的实例来操练，可以帮助学生更好地领悟目的论的理念，比如设定不同翻译目的和任务，鼓励学生运用目的论理念构思翻译策略，并在教师的引导下进行分析和评估。
3. 辅助工具的使用目的论在翻译教学中的应用辅助工具的使用是不可或缺的，利用相关的软件和网络技术可以更好地辅助翻译理论的学习和身处不同文化和语言上下文中的实践。
浅析汉斯弗米尔的目的论文
浅析汉斯弗米尔的目的论文汉斯·弗米尔是德国功能学派的主要代表人物之一、他所提出的目的论，不仅是功能学派的核心理论，而且对西方翻译理论做出重要的贡献。
目的论认为翻译是一项有目的的活动，并且以实现译文的预期功能和效果为首要原则。
本文结合翻译实例，对目的原则、连贯原则及忠实原则进行介绍，并且对目的论做出评价。
下面为大家带来浅析汉斯·弗米尔的目的论文，快来看看吧。
【关键词】汉斯·弗米尔;原则;评价;目的论一、目的论简述1971年，德国著名翻译理论家凯瑟琳娜·赖斯(Katharina Reiss)的著作《翻译批评的可能性与限制》的发表，标志着德国功能学派的建立。
赖斯将“功能”这一概念引入翻译批评研究，并首先提出要把“翻译行为希望达到的特殊目的”作为翻译批评的新模式。
汉斯·弗米尔(HansJ.Vermeer)师从凯瑟琳娜·赖斯，长期从事语言和翻译研究，曾发表过多部翻译学作品，如《关于翻译理论》(1983)，与赖斯合著的《普通翻译理论基础》(1984)和《翻译目的理论：争论与反论》(1996)。
弗米尔在他与赖斯合作撰写的《普通翻译理论基础》(1984)一书中正式提出功能目的论(the Skopos Theory)，认为译者在整个翻译过程中的参照系不应是对等翻译理论所注重的原文及其功能，而应是译文在译语文化环境中所预期达到的一种或几种交际功能。
翻译并非仅仅是一个从原语到目标语的语码转换的过程，而是人类行为的一个特定模式，它有一定的目的。
译者的任务就是在不同的语言和文化群体之间搭起桥梁。
弗米尔在目的.论中提出的三大原则对具体翻译实践具有重大的指导意义。
二、目的论三大原则(1)目的原则(Skopos Rule)在弗米尔的三大原则中，目的原则是其首要原则。
翻译的目的在于，使译文在目标文化中发挥作用，并且能够以目标读者所期望的形式呈现，以满足他们的阅读需求。
因此，翻译技巧与策略的选择是由翻译行为所要达到的目的决定的。
翻译目的论
翻译目的论卞正东(江南大学外语系, 214063)摘要:翻译目的论是一种较新的西方翻译理论模式。
从西方翻译目的论入手,从作者的目的和译者的目的两个角度论述了目的论对英汉互译的指导作用。
从一些具体的佳译实例和一些翻译失误的分析中得出结论:译者要想取得良好的交际效果,就必须考虑翻译目的因素。
关键词:目的论;翻译研究;交际翻译一、引言翻译目的论是一种较新的翻译理论模式,它的建立可以追溯到二十世纪六七十年代,当时翻译研究中的语言学取向受到挑战,反动者摈弃独霸译坛的结构主义刻板模式,以开先河者的姿态为译界注入了一股对经院派迂腐之气具有祛除力的清流。
[1 ]翻译目的论( Skopos Theory) 是由德国译论家HansVermeer 发展起来的翻译理论模式,该理论基本上属于一种对翻译的外部研究,它将研究聚焦在翻译过程中各种目的的选择上,因此无疑能够弥补传统翻译研究的不足,从而为翻译的多学科探索又增加一个崭新的研究视角。
言语交际是一种有目的、有意图的活动,它传递说话人的意图。
在意图、意义、语言三者的关系上,意图赋予语言以意义,意义是意图和语言相结合的产物,语言则是联结意图和意义的中介或纽带,也是这两者的外化、物化手段。
因此,要确定话语意义,就必须充分考虑说话人的意图、交际场合以及听话人的背景知识、信念、态度等语境因素。
就翻译而言,它们是一种“三元关系”间(即原作者———译者———译文读者) 的明示推理过程。
[2 ] 在这一过程中,译者既要通过原文语境关联推理认知原作意图和意义,与原作者达成认知上的共识而构成交际的一方，又要通过译文将自己认知的原作意图及其相关信息与译文读者交流而形成交际的另一方,从而完成这种“三元关系”间的跨文化语言交流。
但是,由于文化环境、思维方式、表达习惯上的差异,原作意图极其语篇形式与译文读者的认知能力可能存在着一定的差距,原语与译语的语篇功能在很多情况下往往也难以一致。
对于这种情况,继费米尔(H. J . Vermeer) 之后,以莱斯(K. Reiss) 、诺德(C. Nord) 等为主的“目的论”学者提出了明确的主。
Skopos_Theory._Schaeffner目的论
Skopos theoryBy CHRISTINA SCHÄFFNERSkopos theory is an approach to translation which was developed in Germany in the late 1970s (Vermeer 1978), and which reflects a general shift from predominantly LINGUISTIC and rather formal translation theories to a more functionally and socioculturally oriented concept of translation. (cf. ACTION (THEORY OF TRANSLATORIAL ACTION); COMMUNICATIVEIFUNCTIONAL APPROACHES). This shift drew inspiration from communication theory, action theory, text linguistics and text theory, as well as from movements in literary studies towards reception theories (see for example Iser 1978). Apart from Hans Vermeer, the founder of skopos theory, other scholars working in the paradigm include Margret Ammann (198911990), Hans Hönig and Paul Kussmaul (1982), Sigrid Kupsch-Losereit (1986), Christiane Nord (1988) and Heidrun Witte (1987a); see also articles in the journal TEXTconTEXT, published since 1986 by Groos in Heidelberg. Skopos theory takes seriously factors which have always been stressed in action theory, and which were brought into sharp relief with the growing need in the latter half of the twentieth century for the translation of non-literary text types. In the translation of scientific and academic papers, instructions for use, tourist guides, contracts, etc., the contextual factors surrounding the translation cannot be ignored. These factors include the culture of the intended readers of the target text and of the client who has commissioned it, and, in particular, the function which the text is to perform in that culture for those readers. Skopos theory is directly oriented towards this function.Translation is viewed not as a process of trans coding, but as a specific form of human action. Like any other human action, translation has a purpose, and the word skopos, derived from Greek, is used as the technical term for the purpose of a translation. Skopos must be defined before translation can begin; in highlighting skopos, the theory adopts a prospective attitude to translation, as opposed to the retrospective attitude adopted in theories which focus on prescriptions derived from the source text. In addition to its purpose, any action has an outcome. The outcome of translational action is a translatum (Vermeer1979:174; translat in Reiss and Vermeer 198411991:2), a particular variety of target text.Vermeer's skopos theoryVermeer (1978:100) postulates that as a general rule it must be the intended purpose of the target text that determines translation methods and strategies. From this postulate, he derives the skopos rule: Human action (and its subcategory: translation) is determined by its purpose (skopos), and therefore it is a function of its purpose. The rule is formalized using the formula: IA(Trl) = f(Sk).The main point of this functional approach is the following: it is not the source text as such, or its effects on the source-text recipient, or the function assigned to it by the author, that determines the translation process, as is postulated by EQUIVALENCE-based translation theories, but the prospective function or skopos of the target text as determined by the initiator's, i.e. client's, needs. Consequently, the skopos is largely constrained by the target text user (reader/listener) and his/her situation and cultural background. Two further general rules are the coherence rule and the fidelity rule. The coherence rule stipulates that the target text must be sufficiently coherent to allow the intended users to comprehend it, given their assumed background knowledge and situational circumstances. The starting point for a translation is a text as part of a world continuum, written in the source language. It has to be translated into a target language in such a way that it becomes part of a world continuum which can be interpreted by the recipients as coherent with their situation (Vermeer 1978:100).The fidelity rule concerns intertextual coherence between translatum and source text, and stipulates merely that some relationship must remain between the two once the overriding principle of skopos and the rule of (intratextual) coherence have been satisfied.The general translation theory of Reiss and VermeerIn combining Vermeer's general skopos theory of 1978 with the specific translation theory developed by Katharina Reiss, Reiss and Vermeer (1984/1991) arrive at a translation theory that is sufficiently general(allgemeine Translationstheorie), and sufficiently complex, to cover a multitude of individual cases. They abstract from phenomena that are specific to individual cultures and languages an account of general factors determining the translation process, to which special theories that concern individual problems or subfields can be linked consistently.A text is viewed as an offer of information (Informationsangebot) made by a producer to a recipient. Translation is then characterized as offering information to members of one culture in their language (the target language and culture) about information originally offered in another language within another culture (the source language and culture). A translation is a secondary offer of information, imitating a primary offer of information. Or, to be more precise, the translator offers information about certain aspects of the source-text-in-situation, according to the target text skopos specified by the initiator (Reiss and Vermeer 1984/1991:76). Neither the selection made from the information offered in the source text, nor the specification of the skopos happens at random; rather, they are determined by the needs, expectations, etc. of the target-text receivers. Translation is by definition interlingual and intercultural, it involves both linguistic and cultural transfer; in other words, it is a culture-transcending process (Vermeer 1992:40).Since skopos varies with text receivers, the skopos of the target text and of the source text may be different. In cases where the skopos is the same for the two texts, Reiss and Vermeer (1984/1991:45) speak of Funktionskonstanz (functional constancy), whereas cases in which the skopos differs between the two texts undergo Funktionsanderung (change of function). In cases of the latter type, the standard for the translation will not be intertextual coherence with the source text, but adequacy or appropriateness to the skopos, which also determines the selection and arrangement of content.Although a translatum is not ipso facto a faithful imitation of the source text, fidelity to the source text is one possible or legitimate skopos. Skopos theory should not, therefore, be understood as promoting (extremely) free translation in all, or even a majority of cases.Although the terms 'skopos', 'purpose' and 'function' are often used interchangeably by Reiss and Vermeer (1984/1991), function is also used in a more specific sense which derives mainly from Reiss. In this sense, it is linked to aspects of genre (Textsorte) and text type (Texttyp). The source text can be assigned to a text type and to a genre, and in making this assignment, thetranslator can decide on the hierarchy of postulates which has to be observed during target-text production (Reiss and Vermeer 1984/1991:196).Reiss and Vermeer's text typology, based on Bühler (1934), includes the informative, the expressive and the operative text types, which derive from the descriptive, the expressive and the appellative functions of language, respectively. Such a typology is helpful mainly where functional constancy is required between source and target texts. However, both Vermeer (1989a) and Reiss (1988) have expressed reservations about the role of genre: the source text does not determine the genre of the target text, nor does the genre determine ipso facto the form of the target text, or, indeed, the skopos; rather, it is the skopos of the translation that determines the appropriate genre for the translatum, and the geme, being a consequence of the skopos, is secondary to it (Vermeer 1989a:187).Status of source text and target textAccording to skopos theory, then, translation is the production of a functionally appropriate target text based on an existing source text, and the relationship between the two texts is specified according to the skopos of the translation. One practical consequence of this theory is a reconceptualization of the status of the source text. It is up to the translator as the expert to decide what role a source text is to play in the translation action. The decisive factor is the precisely specified skopos, and the source text is just one constituent of the commission given to the translator. The translator is required to act consciously in accordance with the skopos, and skopos must be decided separately in each specific case. It may be ADAPTATION to the target culture, but it may also be to acquaint the reader with the source culture. The translator should know what the point of a translation is-that it has some goal-but that any given goal is only one among many possible goals. The important point is that no source text has only one correct or preferable translation (Vermeer 1989a:182), and that, consequently, every translation commission should explicitly or implicitly contain a statement of skopos. The skopos for the target text need not be identical with that attributed to the source text; but unless the skopos for the target text is specified, translation cannot, properly speaking, be carried out at all.Criticism of skopos theoryObjections to skopos theory mainly concern the definition of translation and the relationship between source text and target text.It has been argued that Reiss and Vermeer, in their attempt to establish a truly general and comprehensive translation theory, force totally disparate cases of text relations into a frame which they attempt to hold together by means of the notion of information offer (Schreitmüller 1994:105). But there should be a limit to what may legitimately be called translation as opposed to, for example, ADAPTATION. In translation proper (Koller 1990), the source text is the yardstick by which all translations must be measured, independently of the purpose for which they were produced.In this context it is also argued that, even though a translation may indeed fulfil its intended skopos perfectly well, it may nevertheless be assessed as inadequate on other counts, particularly as far as lexical, syntactic, or stylistic decisions on the microlevel are concerned (a point made by Chesterman 1994:153, who otherwise acknowledges the important contributions of skopos theory). Such objections come mainly from linguistically oriented approaches to translation that focus on bottom-up aspects of text production and reception. For example, Newmark (1991b:106) criticizes the oversimplification that is inherent in functionalism, the emphasis on the message at the expense of richness of meaning and to the detriment of the authority of the source-language text. However, proponents of skopos theory argue for a wide definition of translation (e.g. Reiss 1990). As soon as one asks for the purpose of a translation, strategies that are often listed under adaptation, for example reformulation, paraphrase and textual explication, will come in naturally as part of translation. And critics of micro level decisions usually lift the texts out of their respective environments for comparative purposes, ignoring their functional aspects.Reiss and Vermeer's cultural approach has also been judged less applicable to literary translation, due to the special status of a literary work of art. Snell-Hornby (1990:84) argues that the situation and function of literary texts are more complex than those of non-literary texts, and that style is a highly important factor. Therefore, although skopos theory is by no means irrelevant to literary translation, a number of points need rethinking before the theory can be made fully applicable to this genre.It is also possible to argue that to assign a skopos to a literary text is to restrict its possibilities of interpretation. In literary theory a distinction is often made between text as potential and text as realization, and skopos theory appears to seethe text only as realization, and not as a potential which can be used in different situations with different addressees and having different functions. However, Vermeer (1989a:181) argues that when a text is actually composed, this is done with an assumed function, or a restricted set of functions, in mind. Skopos theory does not deny that a text may be used in ways that had not been foreseen originally, only that a translatum is a text in its own right, with its own potential for use.Skopos theory has helped to bring the target text into focus. As a text, a translation is not primarily determined by a source text, but by its own skopos. This axiom provides a theoretical argument for describing translations in terms of original text production and against describing them in the more traditional terms of EQUIVALENCE with another text in another language (see also Jakobsen 1993:156). Translation is a DECISION MAKING process. The criteria for the decisions are provided by the skopos, i.e. the concrete purpose and aims in a concrete translation commission. The shift of focus away from source text reproduction to the more independent challenges of target-text production has brought innovation to translation theory. As attention has turned towards the functional aspects of translation and towards the explanation of translation decisions, the expertise and ethical responsibility of the translator have come to the fore. Translators have come to be viewed as target-text authors and have been released from the limitations and restrictions imposed by a narrowly defined concept of loyalty to the source text alone.Further readingAmmann 1989/1990; Newmark 1991b; Reiss 1986, 1988, 1990; Reiss and Vermeer 1984/1991; Vermeer 1978, 1982, 1989a, 1992.Baker M. (ed.) (1998/2001). Routledge Encyclopedia of Translation Studies. London: Routledge.。
浅谈翻译目的论
浅谈翻译目的论一、本文概述翻译目的论是一种重要的翻译理论，它强调翻译活动应基于翻译的目的和目标受众的需求进行。
本文将对翻译目的论进行深入探讨，首先概述其基本概念和核心思想，接着分析其在翻译实践中的应用及其影响，并探讨其优缺点。
本文还将结合具体案例，分析翻译目的论在文学、商务、法律等领域翻译实践中的实际运用，以期对翻译工作者和翻译学习者提供有益的启示和指导。
翻译目的论认为，翻译是一种有目的的交际行为，翻译的目的决定翻译的策略和方法。
翻译过程不仅仅是语言之间的转换，更是文化、语境和交际意图的传递。
因此，翻译者需要根据翻译的目的和目标受众的需求，选择适当的翻译方法和策略，确保译文能够准确传达原文的意义和意图。
本文将从多个角度全面阐述翻译目的论的理论基础和实践应用，旨在为翻译工作者和翻译学习者提供一个全面、深入的了解翻译目的论的平台。
本文也将对翻译目的论的发展趋势进行展望，以期对翻译领域的未来发展提供一定的参考和借鉴。
二、翻译目的论概述翻译目的论（Skopos Theory）是一种重要的翻译理论，起源于20世纪70年代的德国，由汉斯·弗米尔（Hans Vermeer）提出，并由其后的学者如诺德（Nord）等人进一步发展和完善。
这一理论的核心观点是：翻译的目的决定了翻译的策略和方法。
换句话说，翻译并非简单地从一种语言到另一种语言的文字转换，而是一种有目的、有意图的跨文化交流活动。
翻译目的论强调，翻译的首要原则是翻译行为所要达到的目的，这包括译文的交际目的、使用目的以及翻译过程中译者的目的。
因此，翻译的目的决定了翻译策略的选择，也影响了翻译过程中的具体操作。
例如，如果翻译的目的是为了传递原文的信息，那么译者可能会采用直译的策略；如果翻译的目的是为了让目标读者更好地理解原文的文化背景，那么译者可能会采用意译或解释性翻译的策略。
翻译目的论还提出了“功能对等”的概念，即译文在目标语言文化环境中应该具有与原文在原语言文化环境中相同或相似的功能。
功能主义翻译目的论在中国的传播与发展
功能主义翻译目的论在中国的传播与发展一、概述功能主义翻译目的论作为翻译理论中的重要流派之一，自20世纪80年代被引入中国以来，对中国的翻译研究和实践产生了深远的影响。
本文旨在探讨功能主义翻译目的论在中国的传播与发展，分析其在翻译教学、翻译实践以及翻译批评等领域的应用，并对其未来发展趋势进行展望。
功能主义翻译目的论由德国功能派翻译理论家汉斯弗米尔（Hans Vermeer）提出，强调翻译是一种有目的的跨文化交际行为，应以译文预期的功能和目的为导向。
该理论认为，翻译的目的决定了翻译的过程和结果，译者应根据具体语境和交际目的选择合适的翻译策略和方法。
在中国，功能主义翻译目的论的传播与发展经历了几个阶段。
20世纪80年代至90年代，中国翻译界开始关注西方翻译理论，功能主义翻译目的论作为其中之一被引入中国。
这一时期，学者们主要通过翻译和介绍国外相关文献来传播该理论，并结合中国翻译实践进行初步应用和研究。
21世纪以来，随着中国翻译研究的深入发展，功能主义翻译目的论逐渐得到广泛应用和系统研究。
学者们从不同角度对该理论进行了阐释、应用和拓展，丰富了中国翻译理论的内涵。
本文将通过对相关文献的梳理和分析，探讨功能主义翻译目的论在中国的传播与发展历程，总结其在翻译教学、翻译实践以及翻译批评等领域的应用经验和研究成果，并对其未来发展趋势进行展望，以期为推动中国翻译研究和实践的发展提供有益参考。
1. 介绍功能主义翻译目的论的基本概念功能主义翻译目的论是一种重要的翻译理论，起源于20世纪70年代的德国，由汉斯弗米尔（Hans J. Vermeer）和凯瑟琳娜莱斯（Katharina Reiss）等学者提出并发展。
该理论强调翻译的目的和翻译过程中各种因素之间的互动关系，认为翻译是一种有目的的交际行为，翻译策略和方法的选择应该根据翻译的目的和读者需求来确定。
在功能主义翻译目的论的框架下，翻译不再被看作是简单的语言转换，而是一种跨文化、跨语言的交流活动，其最终目的是实现特定的交际功能。
目的论的方法
目的论的方法摘要：1.目的论的基本概念2.目的论的方法分类3.目的论在翻译中的应用4.目的论的局限性与挑战5.总结与展望正文：一、目的论的基本概念目的论（Skopos Theory）是德国翻译学者赫尔穆特·费尔米尔（Hans J.Vermeer）和凯瑟琳·雷斯（Katharina Reiss）在20世纪70年代提出的一种翻译理论。
它主张翻译活动应以实现译文读者的理解和接受为目标，强调翻译过程中译者的主观能动性和目标文化导向。
目的论认为，翻译不仅仅是传递原文信息，还应考虑到译文的目的、功能和接受者，从而使译文在不同文化背景下达到预期效果。
二、目的论的方法分类1.功能翻译方法：根据译文的功能和目的，采用合适的翻译策略。
例如，采用归化策略使译文符合目标语规范，或采用异化策略保留原文特色。
2.忠实翻译方法：在保证译文忠实于原文内容的同时，兼顾译文的可读性和接受性。
这种方法要求译者具备较高的语言素养和跨文化交际能力。
3.加译法：在原文基础上增加解释性词语或补充信息，以帮助目标语读者理解译文。
这种方法适用于原文中含有文化背景知识或专业术语的情况。
4.删译法：根据译文目的和读者需求，对原文进行删减或简化。
这种方法有助于提高译文的可读性和通顺性。
三、目的论在翻译中的应用1.文学翻译：在翻译文学作品时，目的论强调译者要充分考虑目标文化读者的审美习惯和接受程度。
例如，在翻译中国古代诗词时，译者应在保持原诗意境的基础上，采用恰当的翻译方法使之符合目标语诗歌的形式和风格。
2.商务翻译：在商务领域，目的论指导下的翻译注重译文的专业性、准确性和可操作性。
例如，产品说明、合同、广告等文本的翻译，都需要根据译文读者的需求和背景进行相应调整。
3.官方文件翻译：在政治、外交、法律等领域的官方文件翻译中，目的论强调译文的准确性和权威性。
同时，译者还需关注译文在不同文化间的可接受性，以避免因文化差异而产生的误解。
四、目的论的局限性与挑战1.主观性：目的论强调译者的主观能动性，但过度主观可能导致译文偏离原文，影响信息的传递。
Skopos_Theory._Schaeffner目的论
Skopos theoryBy CHRISTINA SCHÄFFNERSkopos theory is an approach to translation which was developed in Germany in the late 1970s (Vermeer 1978), and which reflects a general shift from predominantly LINGUISTIC and rather formal translation theories to a more functionally and socioculturally oriented concept of translation. (cf. ACTION (THEORY OF TRANSLATORIAL ACTION); COMMUNICATIVEIFUNCTIONAL APPROACHES). This shift drew inspiration from communication theory, action theory, text linguistics and text theory, as well as from movements in literary studies towards reception theories (see for example Iser 1978). Apart from Hans Vermeer, the founder of skopos theory, other scholars working in the paradigm include Margret Ammann (198911990), Hans Hönig and Paul Kussmaul (1982), Sigrid Kupsch-Losereit (1986), Christiane Nord (1988) and Heidrun Witte (1987a); see also articles in the journal TEXTconTEXT, published since 1986 by Groos in Heidelberg. Skopos theory takes seriously factors which have always been stressed in action theory, and which were brought into sharp relief with the growing need in the latter half of the twentieth century for the translation of non-literary text types. In the translation of scientific and academic papers, instructions for use, tourist guides, contracts, etc., the contextual factors surrounding the translation cannot be ignored. These factors include the culture of the intended readers of the target text and of the client who has commissioned it, and, in particular, the function which the text is to perform in that culture for those readers. Skopos theory is directly oriented towards this function.Translation is viewed not as a process of trans coding, but as a specific form of human action. Like any other human action, translation has a purpose, and the word skopos, derived from Greek, is used as the technical term for the purpose of a translation. Skopos must be defined before translation can begin; in highlighting skopos, the theory adopts a prospective attitude to translation, as opposed to the retrospective attitude adopted in theories which focus on prescriptions derived from the source text. In addition to its purpose, any action has an outcome. The outcome of translational action is a translatum (Vermeer1979:174; translat in Reiss and Vermeer 198411991:2), a particular variety of target text.Vermeer's skopos theoryVermeer (1978:100) postulates that as a general rule it must be the intended purpose of the target text that determines translation methods and strategies. From this postulate, he derives the skopos rule: Human action (and its subcategory: translation) is determined by its purpose (skopos), and therefore it is a function of its purpose. The rule is formalized using the formula: IA(Trl) = f(Sk).The main point of this functional approach is the following: it is not the source text as such, or its effects on the source-text recipient, or the function assigned to it by the author, that determines the translation process, as is postulated by EQUIVALENCE-based translation theories, but the prospective function or skopos of the target text as determined by the initiator's, i.e. client's, needs. Consequently, the skopos is largely constrained by the target text user (reader/listener) and his/her situation and cultural background. Two further general rules are the coherence rule and the fidelity rule. The coherence rule stipulates that the target text must be sufficiently coherent to allow the intended users to comprehend it, given their assumed background knowledge and situational circumstances. The starting point for a translation is a text as part of a world continuum, written in the source language. It has to be translated into a target language in such a way that it becomes part of a world continuum which can be interpreted by the recipients as coherent with their situation (Vermeer 1978:100).The fidelity rule concerns intertextual coherence between translatum and source text, and stipulates merely that some relationship must remain between the two once the overriding principle of skopos and the rule of (intratextual) coherence have been satisfied.The general translation theory of Reiss and VermeerIn combining Vermeer's general skopos theory of 1978 with the specific translation theory developed by Katharina Reiss, Reiss and Vermeer (1984/1991) arrive at a translation theory that is sufficiently general(allgemeine Translationstheorie), and sufficiently complex, to cover a multitude of individual cases. They abstract from phenomena that are specific to individual cultures and languages an account of general factors determining the translation process, to which special theories that concern individual problems or subfields can be linked consistently.A text is viewed as an offer of information (Informationsangebot) made by a producer to a recipient. Translation is then characterized as offering information to members of one culture in their language (the target language and culture) about information originally offered in another language within another culture (the source language and culture). A translation is a secondary offer of information, imitating a primary offer of information. Or, to be more precise, the translator offers information about certain aspects of the source-text-in-situation, according to the target text skopos specified by the initiator (Reiss and Vermeer 1984/1991:76). Neither the selection made from the information offered in the source text, nor the specification of the skopos happens at random; rather, they are determined by the needs, expectations, etc. of the target-text receivers. Translation is by definition interlingual and intercultural, it involves both linguistic and cultural transfer; in other words, it is a culture-transcending process (Vermeer 1992:40).Since skopos varies with text receivers, the skopos of the target text and of the source text may be different. In cases where the skopos is the same for the two texts, Reiss and Vermeer (1984/1991:45) speak of Funktionskonstanz (functional constancy), whereas cases in which the skopos differs between the two texts undergo Funktionsanderung (change of function). In cases of the latter type, the standard for the translation will not be intertextual coherence with the source text, but adequacy or appropriateness to the skopos, which also determines the selection and arrangement of content.Although a translatum is not ipso facto a faithful imitation of the source text, fidelity to the source text is one possible or legitimate skopos. Skopos theory should not, therefore, be understood as promoting (extremely) free translation in all, or even a majority of cases.Although the terms 'skopos', 'purpose' and 'function' are often used interchangeably by Reiss and Vermeer (1984/1991), function is also used in a more specific sense which derives mainly from Reiss. In this sense, it is linked to aspects of genre (Textsorte) and text type (Texttyp). The source text can be assigned to a text type and to a genre, and in making this assignment, thetranslator can decide on the hierarchy of postulates which has to be observed during target-text production (Reiss and Vermeer 1984/1991:196).Reiss and Vermeer's text typology, based on Bühler (1934), includes the informative, the expressive and the operative text types, which derive from the descriptive, the expressive and the appellative functions of language, respectively. Such a typology is helpful mainly where functional constancy is required between source and target texts. However, both Vermeer (1989a) and Reiss (1988) have expressed reservations about the role of genre: the source text does not determine the genre of the target text, nor does the genre determine ipso facto the form of the target text, or, indeed, the skopos; rather, it is the skopos of the translation that determines the appropriate genre for the translatum, and the geme, being a consequence of the skopos, is secondary to it (Vermeer 1989a:187).Status of source text and target textAccording to skopos theory, then, translation is the production of a functionally appropriate target text based on an existing source text, and the relationship between the two texts is specified according to the skopos of the translation. One practical consequence of this theory is a reconceptualization of the status of the source text. It is up to the translator as the expert to decide what role a source text is to play in the translation action. The decisive factor is the precisely specified skopos, and the source text is just one constituent of the commission given to the translator. The translator is required to act consciously in accordance with the skopos, and skopos must be decided separately in each specific case. It may be ADAPTATION to the target culture, but it may also be to acquaint the reader with the source culture. The translator should know what the point of a translation is-that it has some goal-but that any given goal is only one among many possible goals. The important point is that no source text has only one correct or preferable translation (Vermeer 1989a:182), and that, consequently, every translation commission should explicitly or implicitly contain a statement of skopos. The skopos for the target text need not be identical with that attributed to the source text; but unless the skopos for the target text is specified, translation cannot, properly speaking, be carried out at all.Criticism of skopos theoryObjections to skopos theory mainly concern the definition of translation and the relationship between source text and target text.It has been argued that Reiss and Vermeer, in their attempt to establish a truly general and comprehensive translation theory, force totally disparate cases of text relations into a frame which they attempt to hold together by means of the notion of information offer (Schreitmüller 1994:105). But there should be a limit to what may legitimately be called translation as opposed to, for example, ADAPTATION. In translation proper (Koller 1990), the source text is the yardstick by which all translations must be measured, independently of the purpose for which they were produced.In this context it is also argued that, even though a translation may indeed fulfil its intended skopos perfectly well, it may nevertheless be assessed as inadequate on other counts, particularly as far as lexical, syntactic, or stylistic decisions on the microlevel are concerned (a point made by Chesterman 1994:153, who otherwise acknowledges the important contributions of skopos theory). Such objections come mainly from linguistically oriented approaches to translation that focus on bottom-up aspects of text production and reception. For example, Newmark (1991b:106) criticizes the oversimplification that is inherent in functionalism, the emphasis on the message at the expense of richness of meaning and to the detriment of the authority of the source-language text. However, proponents of skopos theory argue for a wide definition of translation (e.g. Reiss 1990). As soon as one asks for the purpose of a translation, strategies that are often listed under adaptation, for example reformulation, paraphrase and textual explication, will come in naturally as part of translation. And critics of micro level decisions usually lift the texts out of their respective environments for comparative purposes, ignoring their functional aspects.Reiss and Vermeer's cultural approach has also been judged less applicable to literary translation, due to the special status of a literary work of art. Snell-Hornby (1990:84) argues that the situation and function of literary texts are more complex than those of non-literary texts, and that style is a highly important factor. Therefore, although skopos theory is by no means irrelevant to literary translation, a number of points need rethinking before the theory can be made fully applicable to this genre.It is also possible to argue that to assign a skopos to a literary text is to restrict its possibilities of interpretation. In literary theory a distinction is often made between text as potential and text as realization, and skopos theory appears to seethe text only as realization, and not as a potential which can be used in different situations with different addressees and having different functions. However, Vermeer (1989a:181) argues that when a text is actually composed, this is done with an assumed function, or a restricted set of functions, in mind. Skopos theory does not deny that a text may be used in ways that had not been foreseen originally, only that a translatum is a text in its own right, with its own potential for use.Skopos theory has helped to bring the target text into focus. As a text, a translation is not primarily determined by a source text, but by its own skopos. This axiom provides a theoretical argument for describing translations in terms of original text production and against describing them in the more traditional terms of EQUIVALENCE with another text in another language (see also Jakobsen 1993:156). Translation is a DECISION MAKING process. The criteria for the decisions are provided by the skopos, i.e. the concrete purpose and aims in a concrete translation commission. The shift of focus away from source text reproduction to the more independent challenges of target-text production has brought innovation to translation theory. As attention has turned towards the functional aspects of translation and towards the explanation of translation decisions, the expertise and ethical responsibility of the translator have come to the fore. Translators have come to be viewed as target-text authors and have been released from the limitations and restrictions imposed by a narrowly defined concept of loyalty to the source text alone.Further readingAmmann 1989/1990; Newmark 1991b; Reiss 1986, 1988, 1990; Reiss and Vermeer 1984/1991; Vermeer 1978, 1982, 1989a, 1992.Baker M. (ed.) (1998/2001). Routledge Encyclopedia of Translation Studies. London: Routledge.。
翻译理论名词解释
翻译理论名词解释翻译理论是指对翻译过程和翻译实践进行系统分析和研究的学科领域。
翻译理论的研究涉及翻译的原则、方法、技能以及对翻译现象和过程的准确描述和解释。
以下是对几个常见翻译理论名词的解释：1. 翻译目的论（Skopos Theory）翻译目的论强调翻译的目的决定了翻译的策略和方法。
翻译的目的可以是与原文意义等效，也可以是达到接受目标语读者的特定需求和期望。
翻译目的论关注译文的功能和使用情境，并根据具体目的确定翻译策略，强调翻译的灵活性和自由度。
2. 等同译法（Equivalent Effect）等同译法认为翻译要在保持与源语言文本等效的前提下传达译文的意义。
翻译的目标是尽可能准确地表达源语言的观点、感情和风格，使译文读者能够与源语言的读者有类似的阅读体验。
3. 文化转移（Cultural Transfer）文化转移理论认为，翻译不仅仅是语言的转换，还涉及到文化的转移。
翻译过程中，源语言中的文化元素需要转移到目标语言的文化背景中，以保持文化信息的准确传达。
翻译者需要有深入了解不同文化之间的差异，并采取相应的转化策略。
4. 直译与意译（Literal Translation vs. Free Translation）直译强调以原文字面意义为依据进行翻译，注重原文的语法结构和词义的传达。
意译则更加注重把握原文的意思和情感，弹性地运用目标语的表达方式。
在实际翻译中，直译和意译往往是结合使用的，翻译者需要根据具体文本和翻译目标选择合适的翻译策略。
5. 动态对等（Dynamic Equivalence）动态对等理论认为，翻译应该追求与源语文本相同的效果和反应，而不仅仅是对原文进行语义层面的等效翻译。
翻译的目标是在目标语的文化和语境中呈现出与源语文本相似的意义和效果。
翻译理论的不断发展和完善，为翻译实践提供了理论指导和操作方法。
翻译理论的研究对于提高翻译质量、促进跨文化交流以及研究语言和文化之间的关系具有重要意义。
目的论在翻译中的名词解释
目的论在翻译中的名词解释随着全球化的不断推进，翻译在不同领域和行业中扮演着重要的角色。
而翻译的目的与目标是翻译过程中必不可少的因素。
在翻译学中，存在着一个重要的理论分支，即目的论。
目的论（Skopos theory）是由德国翻译学家Hans J. Vermeer于1970年提出的，它强调翻译的目的决定了翻译策略和效果。
本文将对目的论在翻译中的名词解释进行阐述。
目的论的核心观点是翻译的目的决定了翻译的策略和方式。
在目的论中，重点是关注翻译的目的。
翻译的目的可以使译文的功能性，也可以是满足特定需求的功能。
这种理论观点强调翻译作为一种文化交流工具，必须根据特定的目的和需求来选择合适的翻译策略，并能够在不同的文化环境和语言之间传递信息。
在目的论中，翻译的目标和目标群体也是一个重要的因素。
翻译的目标可能是理解和解释原文，也可能是传达特定的感情或意图。
目标群体则决定了翻译的风格和口吻。
例如，在翻译文学作品时，目标群体可能是广大读者，那么译者需要用通俗易懂的语言来传达原文的情感和美感；而在专业领域的翻译中，目标群体可能是专业人士，需要精确和准确的术语和表达。
目的论也关注翻译的实践过程和策略。
在目的论中，翻译过程应该是有意识和目标导向的。
译者需要仔细分析和理解原文，同时考虑翻译的目的和目标群体，选择适当的翻译策略。
这种策略可能是直译、意译、变通等。
在一些特殊情况下，译者还可以进行创造性的翻译，以满足翻译的目的和需求。
此外，目的论也强调翻译的效果和评估。
翻译的效果应该能够满足翻译的目的和目标群体的需求。
因此，评估翻译的质量和准确性是一个重要的过程。
译者需要不断反思和改进自己的翻译策略，以达到最佳的翻译效果。
目的论在翻译学中具有重要的意义。
它提供了一种全新的翻译方法和理论框架，使翻译能够更好地适应不同领域和行业的需求。
通过关注翻译的目的和目标群体，翻译可以更准确地传递信息和表达意图，达到预期的效果。
同时，目的论也提醒译者注意自身的翻译实践和策略，不断改进和提高翻译质量。
16 Chapter Four Skopos Theory (目的论)
II. Discussi1997:109-22) and Schaffner (1997:237-8) discuss some of the criticisms that have been made of skopos theory by other scholars: 1. what purports to be a „general‟ theory is in fact only valid for non-literary texts. Literary texts are considered either to have no specific purpose and/or to be far more complex stylistically. 2. Reiss‟s text type approach and Vermeer‟s skopos theory are in fact considering different functional phenomena and cannot be lumped together.
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, which Vermeer calls the translatum. Therefore, in skopos theory, knowing why an ST is to be translated and what the function of the TT will be are crucial for the translator.
基于目的论视角下的英文化妆品说明书翻译
基于目的论视角下的英文化妆品说明书翻译一、本文概述在全球化的大背景下，化妆品行业日益国际化，英语作为全球通用语言，在化妆品说明书翻译中扮演着重要角色。
本文旨在探讨目的论视角下的英文化妆品说明书翻译，分析翻译过程中的主要挑战和策略，以及目的论如何指导翻译实践。
本文首先将对目的论的基本概念进行阐述，然后结合英文化妆品说明书的特点，探讨翻译过程中的语言转换、文化传递和读者接受度等问题。
通过具体案例分析，本文将揭示目的论在英文化妆品说明书翻译中的实际应用，旨在为翻译实践提供有益的参考和指导。
二、目的论翻译理论概述目的论（Skopos Theory）是20世纪70年代由德国翻译理论家汉斯·弗米尔（Hans Vermeer）提出的翻译理论，后经其学生诺德（Nord）进一步完善。
该理论颠覆了传统等值翻译理论的主导地位，强调了翻译行为的目的性和结果导向性。
根据目的论，翻译是一种有目的的交际行为，其首要原则是“目的原则”（Skopos Rule），即翻译应能在译入语情境和文化中，按译入语接受者期待的方式发生作用。
目的论还提出了“连贯性原则”（Coherence Rule）和“忠实性原则”（Fidelity Rule），作为对目的原则的补充和制约。
在目的论视角下，英文化妆品说明书的翻译不仅仅是语言层面的转换，更是一种跨文化的交际活动。
翻译过程中，译者需要根据目标读者的需求和期待，选择适当的翻译策略和方法，以实现信息传递、文化交流和商业推广等多重目的。
因此，译者在进行英文化妆品说明书翻译时，应充分考虑目标市场的文化背景、消费习惯、审美偏好等因素，以确保译文能够准确、有效地传达原文的信息和功能。
目的论也强调译者的主体性和创造性。
译者作为翻译活动的主体，应充分发挥其主观能动性，根据翻译目的和语境需求，灵活运用各种翻译技巧和方法，以实现最佳的翻译效果。
在英文化妆品说明书翻译中，译者可以通过调整句式结构、增减信息、转换表达方式等手段，使译文更符合目标读者的阅读习惯和审美需求。
16 Chapter Four Skopos Theory (目的论)
Rules 4 and 5 touch on general skopos „rules‟ concerning how the success of the action and information transfer is to be judged: the coherence rule, linked to internal textual coherence, and the fidelity rule, linked to intertextual coherence with the ST. The coherence rule states that the TT „must be interpretable as coherent with the TT receiver‟s situation‟ (Reiss and Vermeer 1984:113). In other words, the TT must be translated in such a way that it is coherent for the TT receivers, given their circumstances and knowledge.
generalskopos?rules?concerninghowinformationtransfercoherencerulelinkedinternaltextualcoherencefidelityrulelinkedintertextualcoherencecoherencerulestatestt?mustttreceiver?ssituation?reissvermeer1984
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, which Vermeer calls the translatum. Therefore, in skopos theory, knowing why an ST is to be translated and what the function of the TT will be are crucial for the translator.
翻译目的论的概念
“翻译目的论(skopos theory)是将Skopos概念运用于翻译的理论，其核心概念是：翻译过程的最主要因素是整体翻译行为的目的。
”
目的论即翻译目的论，包括三个原则：目的法则、连贯性原则、忠实原则
一、目的法则
翻译“目的论”认为目的性原则是翻译的首要原则。
在翻译过程中起主要作用的是译文在译语文化中所要达到的交际目的。
目的性原则要求翻译的过程应该以译文在译语文化中达到它预期的功能为标准，翻译只是以原语文本为基础的一种翻译行为。
译者在整个翻译过程中不再以对等理论所强调的原文及其功能为标准，而是注重译文在译语文化环境所要实现的一种或几种交际功能。
目的性原则是决定翻译过程的根本原则。
二、连贯性原则
译文必须语内连贯，换言之，译文必须对于具有目的语交际环境和知识背景的接受者是可理解的。
也就是说“译文必须能让接受者理解，并在目的语交际环境和文化中有意义”。
三、忠实原则
在目的论中，忠实性法则仅仅是指原文和译文中应该存在某种对应关系，并不要求原文和译文在内容上一字不差。
忠实的程度与形式取决于译者对原文的理解及翻译的目的。
诺德认为，“在能够达到译文预期功能的情况下，译者应尽可能保持译文与原文在语言特色上的一致。
”。
翻译目的论简介
翻译目的论简介即就是skopostheory Skopos是希腊语，意为“目的”。
翻译目的论(skopostheorie)是将Skopos概念运用于翻译的理论，其核心概念是：翻译过程的最主要因素是整体翻译行为的目的。
Skopos这一术语通常用来指译文的目的。
除了Skopos，弗米尔还使用了相关的“目标(aim)”、“目的(purpose)”、“意图(intention)”和“功能(function)”等词。
为了避免概念混淆，诺德提议对意图和功能作基本的区分：“意图”是从发送者的角度定义的，而“功能”指文本功能，它是由接受者的期望、需求、已知知识和环境条件共同决定的。
在弗米尔的目的论框架中，决定翻译目的的最重要因素之一是受众——译文所意指的接受者，他们有自己的文化背景知识、对译文的期待以及交际需求。
每一种翻译都指向一定的受众，因此翻译是在“目的语情景中为某种目的及目标受众而生产的语篇”。
弗米尔认为原文只是为目标受众提供部分或全部信息的源泉。
可见原文在目的论中的地位明显低于其在对等论中的地位。
编辑本段翻译目的论的产生与发展20世纪70年代,功能派翻译理论兴起于德国。
其发展经过了以下几个阶段。
第一阶段: 凯瑟琳娜·莱斯首次把功能范畴引入翻译批评,将语言功能,语篇类型和翻译策略相联系,发展了以源文与译文功能关系为基础的翻译批评模式,从而提出了功能派理论思想的雏形。
莱斯认为理想的翻译应该是综合性交际翻译,即在概念性内容,语言形式和交际功能方面都与原文对等,但在实践中应该优先考虑的是译本的功能特征。
第二阶段: 汉斯·弗米尔(Vermeer)提出了目的论,将翻译研究从原文中心论的束缚中摆脱出来。
该理论认为翻译是以原文为基础的有目的和有结果的行为,这一行为必须经过协商来完成;翻译必须遵循一系列法则,其中目的法则居于首位。
也就是说,译文取决于翻译的目的。
此外,翻译还须遵循“语内连贯法则”和“语际连贯法则”。
- 1、下载文档前请自行甄别文档内容的完整性，平台不提供额外的编辑、内容补充、找答案等附加服务。
- 2、"仅部分预览"的文档,不可在线预览部分如存在完整性等问题,可反馈申请退款(可完整预览的文档不适用该条件!)。
- 3、如文档侵犯您的权益，请联系客服反馈,我们会尽快为您处理(人工客服工作时间：9:00-18:30)。
A Review of the Application and Study of FunctionalistSkopos Theory in ChinaSkopos theory is the core of the German Functionalist translation theory. It has been more than ten years since functionalist skopos theory was first introduced into China. Great achievements have been made in its introduction, application and study. Though greatly approved, it also faces doubts and criticisms from the Chinese translation circle. Those in favor of the theory translate and introduce the theory to people and apply it to various translation practices while the critics points out its demerits from different angles. The reasons why skopos theory is so greatly approved are as follows: it is target text-oriented, and is not confined to “faithfulness”; it has a strong capability of explaining the irregular translation phenomena. And its criticisms result from the weaknesses of the theory itself.Since the skopos theory was first introduced into China, the articles and studies about it spring up like mushrooms after rain. These studies concern the definition of translation, translation criteria, translation criticism, translation teaching, translation strategy, literary and non -literary translation, etc. In recent years, many articles combine the skopos theory with other theory; even compare the skopos theory with the Chinese traditional translation theory, such as Zhou Mengzhen’s Skopos Theory and Faithfulness, Expressiveness and Elegance—Comparison of the Two Translation Theory from East and West. Through the comparison of the similarities and differences of the two theories and analysis of their own characteristics, the author proposed that skopos theory is a theoretical system which is purpose-oriented and with a diversified translation criteria. While Yan Fu’s theory is more abstract, vague and subjective. The two theories have similarity in pursuing fidelity, coherence and adaptation of readers, but differ in translation criteria and importance of translator. The application of skopos theory on translation teaching is also a cause for concern. Typical examples are The Construction of Translation Textbooks from the Perspective of Skopos Theory and Functionalist Skopos Theory and Translation Teaching in China. Authors make researches and analysis for the domestic translation teaching and thenput forward precious suggestion and opinions.Retrieving the keyword “skopos theory” in CNKI, limiting the time from 2005 to 2013, we find 1156 results. Researches on skopos theory rise obviously in the past eight years. The published papers present an increasing trend year by year. This means that skopos theory attracts more and more scholars’ attention in China. Particularly in 2012, the published papers is as high as 248. Skopos theory receives a lot of publicity and is widely used in all kinds of field. Constantly produced relevant papers are best instances to illustrate this point. Analyzing these skopos theory papers as a whole, we can find huge difference in the types of research. The number of papers about translation strategy is as high as 82%, in which the non-literary researches are 80% and the literary researches are 2%. By contrast, papers relevant translation criticisms are 15%, while the translation theory and translation teaching related papers are 5%. These figures suggest that there has been an intensified interest in translation strategy in the domestic skopos theory research and the non-literary field is predominant. It shows that Chinese scholars focus on how the skopos theory used as translation strategy in non-literary text, while the application of skopos theory in translation theory, criticisms and teaching are less. All these papers fall into three categories: judgment, application and research. The first category mainly discusses the introduction, dissemination and judgment of skopos theory. The application papers analyze some typical texts under the perspective of skopos theory. The last category analyzes the skopos theory in deep and makes a combination with other translation theory. The first two categories are superior in number, which are 38% and 42%. However, the research papers make up only a small proportion. It indicates that the domestic research about skopos theory develop unbalanced.Research about skopos theory injects fresh energy to our translation research, but we cannot afford to ignore the problem in it. Firstly, the research has not been systemized and the content and angle are a bit pale. The research of skopos theory in translation criticisms, theory and teaching are comparatively of lack. Moreover, the research range is narrow. We only narrowed our sight on the quotation of several important principles and concepts of skopos theory, but ignored the discussion andexpand the importance of skopos theory in original text and literary translation. The last but not the least, the imbalance of research types is worthy of our attention. Papers about judgment and application outnumber the research papers. And many papers just focus the superficial phenomenon rather than discern the essence. Only the comprehensive and systematic research and the substantial evidence analysis can make a better understanding of skopos theory.。