西方翻译史概括

Translation and GenderHistorical BackgroundThe women's Movement and the Idea of GenderSimon de Beauvoir wrote in 1949"on ne nait pas femme, on le devient". E.M.Parshley translated this in 1953 as "one is not born, but rather becomes a woman". Beauvoir suggests that a girlbaby is turned into a woman by the society she grows up in and in response to the expectations that society has of women. The final product 'woman' is a result of education and conditioning, and differs according to the dominant influences she is subject to in the culture.Gender refers to the sociocultural construction of both sexes. Feminist thinkers of the late 1960s and early 1970s developed the term in the interests of examining and understanding women's socialized difference from men, and their comitant cultural and political powerlessness.Women and LanguageMany feminists think that language is not only a tool for communication but also a manipulative tool.Two different approaches to questions about women and language: The reformormist approach: view conventional language as a symptom of the society that spawned it. The radical approach: view conventional language as an important cause of women's oppression, the medium through which women were taught and came to know their subordinate place in the world. (Cameron 1985)The women's movement of the late 1960s and early 1970s focused on two aspects of women's difference:First, it tried to show how women's difference from men was in many ways due to the artificial behavioural stereotypes that come with gender conditioning. Second, the movement de-emphasized differences between women, stressing instead shared experiences, their commonality, their solidarity.Gender and the Practice of TranslationGender awareness in translation practice poses questions about the links between social stereotypes and linguistic forms, about the politics of language and cultural difference, about the ethics of translation, and about reviving inaccessible works for contemporary readers.It highlights the importance of the cultural context in which translation is done.Experimental Feminist Writing and Its TranslationThe radical feminist writing of the 1970s was experimental. It was radical as it sought to undermine, subvert, even destroy the conventional everyday language maintained by institutions such as schools and universities, publishing houses and the media, dictionaries, writing manuals, and the 'great works' of literature. Thus, they took on the radical position of attacking language itself, rather than just the messages carried by the language.Radical feminist writing in the late twentieth century has been experimental in that it explores new ground, seeking to develop new ideas and a new language for women. The theory is that the language women have at their disposal will influence their creativity, affecting their ability to think in revolutionary terms and their capacity to produce new work.Experiments have blossomed in every Western European and North American country, and in all languages due to the fact that writers are deconstructing different languages as well as different cultures, which require feminist attention in different places.Translating Experiments with LanguageWhen the grammar of a language such as French dictates that nouns, adj. and participles need to be gender-identified, feminist writers can subvert this gender requirement and the symbolic system that underlies it by applying the grammar system differently. This could mean feminizing words to give them new meanings. Similarly, when the syntax of a language or its conventions of style are too restrictive for women's new vision. the writer can change it.Assertive Feminist TranslationNo act of writing or translation is neutral and rewriting in the feminine is a conscious act that puts its cards on the table from the very beginning . Its project is to imbue translation praxis with feminist consciousness. Translation thus becomes a political activity that has the objective of making women visible and resident in language and society.Issues of sexism or women's silencing need not only be pointed out, they need to be solved with deliberate feminist intervention that redresses the imbalance and places women directly into the language.Descriptive Translation Studies and and Poly-system Theory Describing TranslationWhat confronted the translation researchers first is the relationship between a text and one or more translations of it. They try to analyze it from the perspective of description and empirical assessment.The main differences between systematic attempts at description concern approach and procedure. Some are source-text based, while others treat the source and target text on an equal basis.Toury’s AT TheoryIn 1980, Toury argued that the tertium comparatist should take into account the unequal status of a translation in relation to its source. The tertium comparatist, which Toury calls the A T or Adequate Translation, results from an analysis of the source text. A T is a hypothetical construct consisting of an “explicitation of [source text] textual relations and functions”(Descriptive Translation Studies and Beyond 1980:116)A T embodies the principle of a wholly retentive, source-text-oriented translation. This principle, which also constitutes a practical translation strategy, is termed ‘adequacy’. It refers to a mode of translation “which realizes in the target language the textual relationships of a source text with no breach oThe comparison between textual relations and functions presented in the source text and the target text:The identification of textual relations and functions in the source text and the formulation of the A TMapping target-text units on the A T and on the corresponding source-text unitsMeasuring shifts and deviations between target text, source text and A T so as to be able to characterize the overall relation between the translation and its sourceToury’s NormsNorms：external and socio-cultural constraintsThey are seen as “performance instructions”, both in a general sociological sense and, with reference to communication and translation, in the sense of controlling linguistic usage.Norms operate at the intermediate level between competence and performance. Competence stands for the set of options translators have at their disposal. Performance refers to the options actually selected Decisions and Norms:Jiri Levy’s ‘generative model’emphasized that at every level the translator had to choose one option from among a set of alternatives, in the knowledge that every decision will affect all subsequent decisions.The process covers everything from the selection of a text to be translated, via the overall orchestration at macro-level, down to individual sentence constructions, word choice, punctuation marks and even spelling.Preliminary norms（初步准则）, which concerns such things as the choices of the text to translate, or the decision to work directly from the original language or from an existing translation in another language, the decision to translate into the native or into a second or third languagethe initial norm（首要准则）, which governs the translator’s choice between two polar alternatives regarding the translation’s overall orientation, one which leans as far as possible to the source text, the other subscribing to usage in the receptor culture; the first pole Toury calls that of ‘adequacy’, the other that of ‘acceptability’③operational norms（操作准则），which guide decision-making during the actual business of translating;here Toury distinguishes between.Matricial norms（母体规范）, which help determine the macro-structure of the text and govern decisions concerning translating all or part of the source text, division into chapters, acts, stanzas, paragraphs and the like. Texutual-linguistic norms（文本规范）, which affect the text’s micro-level, the detail of sentence construction, word choice, the use of italics or capitals for emphasis, and so on.Andrew Chesterman’s NormsHis approach is descriptive.Chesterman’s discussion covers social, ethical and technical norms of translationThe social norm regulate interpersonal coordinationThe ethical norms : translators’wish to uphold the values of clarity, truth, trust and understandingThe technical norms: relating the four values(clarity, truth, trust, understanding)Process(or production) norm, which operate at a lower level than expectancy norms, regulate the translation process itself.T he accountability norm,which is ethical in nature, assumes that translators owe loyalty to the original writer, to the commissioner of the translation job, to themselves, and to their clients and prospective readers.The communicative norm is social in character and stipulates that translators should act in such a way as to optimize communication, as required by the situation, between all the parties involved.The relation norm urges the translator to ensure that “an appropriate relation of relevant similarity is established and maintained between the source text and the target text”Norm TheoryNorm refers to both a regularity in behavior and to the underlying mechanism which accounts for this regularity.The mechanism is a psychological and social entity. It mediates between the individual and the collective, between the individual’s intentions, choices and actions, and collectively held beliefs, values and preferences.Poly-system TheoryIt was developed in the 1970s by the Isreali scholar Itamar Even-Zohar brorrowing ideas from the Russian Formalists of the 1920s.Even-Zohar emphasizes that translated literature operates as a system: in the way the TL selects works for translation. in the way translation norms, behaviour and policies are influenced by other co-system According to Shuttleworth and Cowie:The poly-system is conceived as a heterogeneous, hierarchized conglomerate (or system) of systems which interact to bring about an ongoing, dynamic process of evolution within the poly-system as a whole.The hierarchy referred to the positioning and interaction at a given historical moment of the different strata of the poly-system.This 'dynamic process of evolution' is vital to the poly-system, indicating that the relations between innovatory and conservative systems are in a constant state of flux and competition.The position of translated literature is not fixed due to the flux.It may occupy a primary or a secondary position in the poly-system. If it is primary, 'it participates actively in shaping the centre of the poly-system'(Even-Zohar 1978/2000:193)Even-Zohar gives three major cases when translated literature occupies the primary position:when a 'young' literature is being established and looks initially to 'older' literatures for ready-made models when a literature is 'peripheral' or 'weak' and imports those literary types which it is lackingwhen there is a critical turning point in literary history at which established models are no longer considered sufficient, or when there is a vacuum in the literature of the country. (Jeremy Munday 2010:112) If translated literature assumes a secondary position, then it represents a peripheral system within thepolysyetem. It has no majoy influence over the central system and even becomes a conservative element, preserving conventional forms and conforming to the literary norms of the target system.Even-Zohar suggests that the position occupied by translated literature in the polysystem conditions the translation strategy.If it primary, translators do not feel constrained to follow target literature models and are more prepared to break conventions. They often produce a TT that is a close match in terms of adequacy, reproducing the textual relations of the ST.If it is secondary, tranlators tend to use existing target-culture models for the TT and produce more 'non-adequate' translations.The advantages of poly-system:Literature itself if studied alongside the social, historical and cultural forcesEven-Zohar moves away from the isolated study of individual texts toward the study of translation within the cultural and literary systems in which it functionsThe non-prescriptive definition of equivalence and adequacy allows for variation according to the historical and cultural situation of the text.The criticisms of poly-system theory:overgeneralization to 'universal laws' of translation based on relatively little evidencean over-reliance on a historically based 1920s' Formalist model which might be inappropriate for translated texts in the 1970s.the tendency to focus on the abstract model rather than the 'real-life' constraints placed on texts and translators the question as to how far the supposed scientific model is really objectivity.Even-Zohar suggests that the position occupied by translated literature in the polysystem conditions the translation strategy.If it primary, translators do not feel constrained to follow target literature models and are more prepared to break conventions. They often produce a TT that is a close match in terms of adequacy, reproducing the textual relations of the ST.If it is secondary, translators tend to use existing target-culture models for the TT and produce more 'non-adequate' translations.。