纽马克的翻译理论共26页
简析纽马克的语义翻译和交际翻译理论
简析纽马克的语义翻译和交际翻译理论纽马克的语义翻译和交际翻译理论是由纽马克（Newmark）提出的翻译理论，它是20世纪80年代翻译理论发展的重要成果。
纽马克把翻译分为语义翻译和交际翻译，以满足翻译的两个不同要求：根据语义翻译原则，翻译者应尽可能准确地传达原文的意义；根据交际翻译原则，翻译者应尽可能调整译文，使其与译文读者的文化背景和知识水平相匹配。
语义翻译原则强调保持原文的语义，以实现准确的传达。
纽马克提出，翻译应尽可能准确地传达原文的意义，翻译应尽可能保持原文的语义，而不是简单地把原文字句翻译成等值的译文字句。
因此，翻译应是一种意义的传递，而不是字面上的翻译。
在翻译过程中，翻译者要保持原文的重点和重点，以及原文中的意义，而不能只是简单地把原文字句翻译成等值的译文字句，这样会破坏原文的意义。
交际翻译原则强调调整译文，使之与译文读者的文化背景和知识水平相匹配。
纽马克认为，翻译应尽可能调整译文，使其符合读者的文化背景和知识水平，这样才能有效地传达原文的信息。
这种调整可以通过改变原文中的文体、句式、表达方式等来实现。
纽马克的语义翻译和交际翻译理论，对翻译理论发展具有重要意义。
它提出了翻译的两个不同要求：语义翻译和交际翻译，即根据语义翻译原则，翻译者应尽可能准确地传达原文的意义；根据交际翻译原则，翻译者应尽可能调整译文，使其与译文读者的文化背景和知识水平相匹配。
它的出现，被认为是翻译理论发展的一个重要里程碑，它为翻译理论的发展提供了一个新的视角，引发了翻译理论发展的新思想和新活动。
综上所述，纽马克的语义翻译和交际翻译理论对翻译理论发展具有重要意义，它提出了翻译的两个不同要求：语义翻译和交际翻译，以满足翻译的两个不同要求：根据语义翻译原则，翻译者应尽可能准确地传达原文的意义；根据交际翻译原则，翻译者应尽可能调整译文，使其与译文读者的文化背景和知识水平相匹配。
它的出现，被认为是翻译理论发展的一个重要里程碑，它为翻译理论的发展提供了一个新的视角，引发了翻译理论发展的新思想和新活动，为翻译理论发展提供了新的借鉴和参考。
纽马克的翻译理论
• 到底孰个是真正的解人实在无法评断。我们又安 到底孰个是真正的解人实在无法评断。 得起严老先生于地下而询之这恐怕要成为千古疑 案了。正是,妙谛纷纷说到今 妙谛纷纷说到今, 案了。正是 妙谛纷纷说到今 几人探藏得真经就 拿一个“ 字来说吧。 拿一个“ 信”字来说吧。以“ 信”作为翻译的标 对不对呢当然对的。谁也不能否认的, 准, 对不对呢当然对的。谁也不能否认的 因为这 是翻译的本质所决定的不‘ 就不成其为翻译。 是翻译的本质所决定的不‘ 信”就不成其为翻译。 但是“ 是一个抽象的、空洞的概念。 但是“ 信”是一个抽象的、空洞的概念。到底怎 样才算“ 各个翻译家都有不同的看法, 样才算“ 信” 各个翻译家都有不同的看法 因此 就出现了各种不同的翻译方式。 就出现了各种不同的翻译方式。有人认为必须逐 句移译方为信有人认为必须尽可能保持原文的语 言形式, 以至句法结构有人认为可以不顾原文的语 言形式 言形式, 言形式 只要传达原作的意思就行有人认为必须 形神兼似”方为信多有人认为“遗貌取神” “ 形神兼似”方为信多有人认为“遗貌取神”斯 为信。各人的看法不同, 众说纷纭, 为信。各人的看法不同 众说纷纭 莫衷一是在这 一方面, 奈达博士似乎比严老先生就要高明一些, 一方面 奈达博士似乎比严老先生就要高明一些 或者说, 明确一些了。 或者说 明确一些了。
• 严复的“信、达、雅”说, 实际上并没有构成完整 严复的“ 的翻译理论。他老先生当日写《例言》那篇文章, 的翻译理论。他老先生当日写《例言》那篇文章 也并不有志为翻译理论家, 他只是根据他翻译《 也并不有志为翻译理论家 他只是根据他翻译《天 演论》的经验, 谈谈自己的心得体会而已。 演论》的经验 谈谈自己的心得体会而已。所以他 采取的评议方法是随感式、印象式的, 采取的评议方法是随感式、印象式的 是微观的分 析方法, 并没有从宏观的角度, 进行全面的分析研 析方法 并没有从宏观的角度 从而找出客观的规律来。事实上, 究, 从而找出客观的规律来。事实上 象翻译这样 一门牵涉到两个不同民族的语言、文化、思想、 一门牵涉到两个不同民族的语言、文化、思想、 艺术交流的、极其广泛而繁复的学问,要简单地用 艺术交流的、极其广泛而繁复的学问 要简单地用 三个字来概括其理论, 恐怕是有困难的。 三个字来概括其理论 恐怕是有困难的。而况他老 人家又是一位古文大家,行文力求古雅 简练、 行文力求古雅、 人家又是一位古文大家 行文力求古雅、简练、含 言有尽而意无穷” 所以他解释“ 蓄, 要“ 言有尽而意无穷” 。所以他解释“ 信、 达、雅” 三词的涵义, 只有寥寥数语, 而含义深邃, 三词的涵义 只有寥寥数语 而含义深邃 难于窥测, 读者要悉心揣摩, 难于窥测 读者要悉心揣摩 以探测其意旨所在而 各人由于经验和领悟的不同, 各人由于经验和领悟的不同 往往就作出不同的解 释来。所以, 近百年来, 不知有多少人引用“ 释来。所以 近百年来 不知有多少人引用“ 信、 赞颂“ 解释“ 达、雅” , 赞颂“ 信、达、雅” ,解释“ 信、达、 解释 雅” 。
彼得纽马克的所有翻译理论
语义对等性的实现方法
为了实现语义对等性，译者需要深入理解原文的语境、词汇和语法结构，同时还需要考虑目标语言的表达习惯和文化背景。
语义对等性
语义翻译与交际翻译的区别
语义翻译更注重原文的形式和内容，力求保持原文的语义和句法结构，而交际翻译则更注重译文的交际效果，强调译文的流畅性和可读性。
语义翻译与交际翻译的联系
交际翻译的对等性
彼得纽马克认为，交际翻译和语义翻译并不是相互独立的，而是相互补充的。
在翻译过程中，需要根据文本的类型和功能选择适当的翻译方法。对于信息型文本，如新闻报道、科技文献等，应该采用语义翻译方法，以准确地传达原文的信息；对于表达型文本，如诗歌、散文等，应该采用交际翻译方法，以使译文更符合目标语言的表达习惯和文化背景。
04
文化翻译理论
VS
彼得纽马克认为，文化翻译是一种将源语言中的文化信息传达给目标语言读者的过程，其原则包括保持源语言的文化特色、尊重目标读者的文化背景和审美习惯。
详细描述
彼得纽马克认为，文化翻译的主要目的是在目标语言中再现源语言的文化特色和内涵，以促进不同文化之间的交流和理解。为了实现这一目的，文化翻译应遵循以下原则：保持源语言的文化特色，尊重目标读者的文化背景和审美习惯，以及在必要时对原文进行适当的调整或注释。
在实际翻译中，两种方法常常需要结合使用，以确保译文既忠实于原文的内容和风格，又能够有效地传达原文的信息和功能。
01
02
03
交际翻译与语义翻译的关系
优点
交际翻译强调译文的交际效果，能够使译文更符合目标语言的表达习惯和文化背景，使读者更容易理解和接受。同时，交际翻译的对等性要求也提高了译文的准确性和可读性。
直译的定义与原则
直译的原则
纽马克的翻译理论
03
有利于目标语读者理解和感受原文的文化背景和内涵
语义翻译的优缺点
语义翻译的优缺点
01
缺点
02
可能过于强调原文的语义和句法结构，导致 目标语表达不够流畅自然
03
可能过于依赖直译，导致译文失去原文的语 言魅力和文化特色
04
可能过于追求准确性和忠实性，忽略译文的 读者感受和文化差异
要点三
文本类型分析
根据纽马克的翻译理论，译者需要对 原文的文本类型进行分析，根据不同 的文本类型采取不同的翻译策略。例 如，在信息型文本中，译者应注重信 息的准确性和清晰度；在号召型文本 中，译者应注重语言的感染力和说服 力。
在机器翻译中的应用
01
语义理解
纽马克的翻译理论强调语义理解在翻译中的重要性。在机 器翻译中，语义理解是关键，机器需要通过对语言的分析 和理解来生成准确的译文。
THANKS FOR WATCHING
感谢您的观看
在实际翻译过程中，语义翻译和交际翻译并不是互斥的， 而是可以相互补充的。在某些情况下，可以将两种方法结 合使用，以达到更好的翻译效果。
无论是语义翻译还是交际翻译，都需要译者具备扎实的语 言基础、文化背景知识和专业素养，以确保翻译的质量和 准确性。
定义与特点
01
02
定义：语义翻译是指根 据原文的语义、句法结 构和表达方式，使用目 标语的对应词汇和结构 进行翻译，尽可能准确 地传达原文的意义和信 息。
可能牺牲原文的艺术性
在文学作品的翻译中，交际翻译可能过于注重信息的传递而牺牲原文的艺术性和审美价值。
文化因素难以完全传递
由于文化差异的存在，交际翻译在传递原文文化因素时可能会遇到困难，难以完全准确地传递文化信 息。
《纽马克翻译教程》课件
交际翻译
交际翻译
交际翻译的局限性
是指将译文的交际目的作为翻译的首 要目标，强调译文的流畅性和可读性 ，使读者能够轻松理解原文的含义。
可能会过于强调译文的流畅性和可读 性，导致原文的意义、语言风格和修 辞手法被忽略或改变。
交际翻译的优点
能够使译文更加符合目标语言的表达 习惯和阅读习惯，提高译文的流畅性 和可读性，使读者更容易理解和接受 。
未来研究展望
• 展望：未来可以对纽马克的理论进行进一步的完善和发展，例 如加强语境和文化因素在翻译过程中的作用，探索更加有效的 翻译方法和技巧等。同时，还可以结合其他翻译理论和方法， 形成更加全面和系统的翻译理论体系。
05
案例分析与实践
案例选择与背景介绍
案例选择
选择具有代表性的文本作为翻译 案例，如文学、新闻、广告等领 域的文本。
04
纽马克理论的评价与反 思
理论的优势与不足
优势
纽马克的理论强调了翻译过程中的语义分析，有助于提高翻译的准确性。同时 ，该理论还注重目标语言的可读性和流畅性，有助于提高翻译的质量。
不足
纽马克的理论过于复杂，难以掌握。此外，该理论对原文和目标语言的语境和 文化因素考虑不够充分，可能导致翻译的偏差。
《纽马克翻译教程》 PPT课件
contents
目录
• 纽马克简介 • 纽马克的翻译理论 • 纽马克理论在翻译实践中的应用 • 纽马克理论的评价与反思 • 案例分析与实践
01
纽马克简介
纽马克生平
01
02
03
04
出生于1931年，英国著 名翻译理论家
毕业于英国剑桥大学， 获得语言学博士学位
长期在伦敦大学任教， 从事翻译教学和研究工 作
纽马克的翻译理论
Chapter 2Peter NewmarkSemantic and Communicative Translation Guided ReadingPeter Newmark (1916) is an accomplished translation scholar as well as an experienced translator. He has translated a number of books and articles and published extaensively on translation. His publications on translation include Approaches to Translation (1981), About Translation(1983), Paragraphs on Translation段落翻译(1985), A Textbook of Translation翻译教程(1988), and More Paragraphs on Translation(1993).In his work Approaches to Translation, Newmark proposes two types of translation: semantic translation语义翻译and communicative translation交际翻译. Semantic translation focuses primarily upon the semantic content of the source text whereas communicative translation focuses essentially upon the comprehension and response of receptors. This distinction results from his disapproval of Nida's assumption假定，假设，设想；假装；承担，担任that all translating is communicating, and the overriding最主要的，最优先的principle of any translation is to achieve "equivalent effect". For Newmark, the success of equivalent effect is "illusory", and that"the conflict of loyalties, the gap between emphasis on source and target languages will always remain as the overriding problem in translation theory and practice"(1981:38). To narrow the gap, Newmark 系统地阐述，确切地表达；规划，构想出formulates his concepts of "communicative translation" and "semantic translation", which in a sense从某种意义上说are similar to Nida's "dynamic equivalent translation" and "formal equivalent translation". Newmarks admits "communicative translation" is a common method and could be used in many types of translation. Nevertheless, he justifies证明……正当/有理，为……辩护the legitimacy合法性，正当；合理性，妥当；嫡出，正统of "semantic translation" in the following three aspects. Firstly, all translations depend on the three 一分为二，二分法；本质对立dichotomies, namely, the foreign and native cultures, the two languages, the writer and the translator. Hence, it is unlikely to have a universal theory that could include all these factors. Secondly, previous discussions on methods of translation, either Nida's "dynamic equivalence" or Nabokow's "literal translation", does not reflect the actual reality of translation method, for each of them either recommends one or 贬低，轻视disparages the other. Thirdly, the social factors, especially the readers of the second language, only play a partial部分的；偏爱/袒/心的 role发挥部分作用 in translation. Some texts, such as an expressive one, require a "semantic translation"(1981:62). It can be seen that可以看出by proposing the coexistence of "communicative translation" and "semantic translation", Newmark suggests a correlation相互关系，关联；相关性 between translation method and text type.It should be pointed out that应该指出的是Newmark's semantic translation differs from literal translation直译 because the former "respects context", interprets and even explains while the latter sticks very closely to source text at word and syntax level(1981:62). Literal translation, however, is held to be the best approach in both semantic and communicative translation, "provided that如果equivalent effect is secured, the literal word-for-word translation is not only the best, it is the only valid method of translation"(1981:39). Here Newmark seems to only take account of考虑到，顾及，体谅 literary translation rather than non-literary translation, which is often rendered more freely in order to communicate the meaning. But he also states that when there is a conflict between semantic and communicative translation, the latter would win out胜出. For instance, it is better to render communicatively the public sign 公共标志 bissiger Hund and chien mechant into beward the dog!in order to communicate efficiently the message, but not semantically as dog that bites! and bad dog!(1981:39). Nevertheless, it is difficult for a translator to follow Newmark's translation methods in practice, which should be adopted flexibly according to the specific context and text type.A Textbook of Translation is an expansion and a revision of Approaches to Translation in many aspects在很多方面. In this book, Newmark, follwing the German linguist Karl Buhler's functional theory of language, proposes three main types of texts (i.e. expressive有表现力的，富有表情的, informative提供大量资料或信息的，授予知识的and vocative呼格的) as well as methods of translating them (Chapters 4 and 5). Although he lists many translation methods from word-for-word translation to adaptation, he insists that "only semantic and communicative translation fulfill the two main aims of translation, which are first, accuracy, and second, economy". While semantic translation is used for expressive texts, communicative translation is for informative and vocative texts although he admits that few texts are purely expressive, informative or vocative. By stressing the wide applicability of these two translation methods, Newmark seems to overlook the function of other translation methods frequently adopted in translationpractice.Newmark's semantic and communicative translation ahve been quoted frequently among translation scholars. His concern about the coexistence of semantic and communicative translation shows that in his view effect-oriented translation以效果为导向的翻译such as Nida's dynamic equivalence should not be overstressed in translation practice, but is just one type of translation. Newmark's types of translation, however, are less influential than Nida's dynamic equivalence in the field of translation studies because they "raise some of the same points concerning the translation process and the importance of the TT reader译文读者" (Munday 2000:46). Further, his views and comments are still very traditional and prescriptive规定的，指定的，规范的, bearing some traces of traditional translation theories. The strength of his writing lies in that his discussion on translation covers a wide range of topics, and he always provides useful advice and guidance for translator 接受训练的人，实习生，培训生trainees with a large number of interesting and useful examples, which are more convincing than abstract theoretical arguments抽象的理论论证. The following excerpt is selected from Chapter 3 of Newmark's Approaches to Translation. In this chapter he 假定，要求postulates his two main methods of translation (i.e. Semantic and communicative translation), and tries to apply them into different types of text.Communicative and Semantic Translation1.A translation must give the words of the original.2.A translation must give the ideas of the original.3.A translation should read like an original work.4.A translation should read like a translation.5.A translation should reflect the style of the original.6.A translation should possess the style of the translation.7.A translation should read as a contemporary of the original.8.A translation should read as a contemporary of the translation.9.A translation may add to or omit from the original.10.A translation may never add to or omit from the original.11.A translation of verse should be in prose.12.A translation of verse should be in verse.(The Air of Translation, T.H. Savory, Cape, 1968, p.54)In the pre-linguistics period of writing on translation, which may be said to date from Cicero through St. Jerome, Luther, Dryden, Tytler, Herder, Goethe, Schleiermacher, Buber, Ortega y Gasset, not to say Savory, opinion swung between literal and free, faithful and beautiful, exact and natural translation, dependingon whether the bias was to be in favour of赞成 the author or the reader, the source or the target language of the text. Up to the nineteenth century, literal translation represented a philological 语言学的，文献的，文学的 academic exercise语言学学术活动 from which the cultural reformers文化改革者 were trying to rescue literature. In the nineteenth century, a more scientific approach was brought to bear on对……有影响，和……有关translation, suggesting that certain types of texts must be accurately translated, while others should and could not be translated at all! Since the rise of modern linguistics (philology 语言学 was becoming linguistics语言学 here in the late fifties), and anticipated by预计到Tytler in 1790, Larbaud, Belloc, Knox and Rieu, the general emphasis, supported by communication-theorists as well as by non-literary translators, has been placed on the reader---on informing the reader effectively and appropriately, notably显著地，明显地；尤其，特别in Nida, Firth, Koller and the Leipzig School. In contrast相反, the brilliant essays of Benjamin, Valery and Nabokov (anticipated by Croce and Ortega y Gasset) advocating literal translation have appeared as isolated孤立的，被隔离的, paradoxical phenomena自相矛盾的现象, relevant only to 与……有关translating works of high literary culture. Koller(1972) has stated that the equivalent-effect principle of translation is tending to rule out把……排除在外，排除……的可能性；不把……考虑在内all others, particularly the predominance of any formal elements such as word or structure. The apparent triumph of the "consumer" is, I think, illusory. The conflict of loyalties, the gap between emphsis on source and target language will always remain as the overriding problem in translation theory and practice. However, the gap could perhaps be narrowed if the previous terms were replaced as follows:SOURCE LANGUAGE BIAS TARGET LANGUAGE BIAS LITERAL FREEFAITHFUL IDIOMATICSEMANTIC / COMMUNICATIVECommunicative translation attempts to produce on its readers 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造句法的，句子结构的 structures of the second language allow, the exact contextual上下文的，前后关系上的 meaning of the original.In theory, there are wide differences between the two methods. Communicative translation addresses itself solely to the second reader, who does not anticipate difficulties or obscurities, andwould expect a generous transfer of foreign elements into his own culture as well as his language where necessary. But even here the translator still has to respect and work on the form of the source language text as the only material basis for his work. Semantic translation remains within the original culture and assists the reader only in its 言外之意，涵意connotations if they constitute组/构/形成；设立，建立，任命 the essential human (non-ethnic种族的，民族的，部落的) message of the text. One basic difference between the two methods is that where there is a conflict, the communicative must emphasize the "force" rather than the content of the message. Thus for Bissige Hund or Chien mechant, the communicative translation Beware of the dog! Is mandatory命令的；义务的，强制的; the semantic translations ("dog that bite", "savage dog") would be more informative but less effective. Generally, a communicative translation is likely to be smoother, simpler, clearer, more direct, more conventional依照惯例的，符合习俗的，因循守旧的；常规的, conforming to a particular register语域（在特定社交场合或专业领域中人们使用的词汇﹑语法等的范围） of language, tending to （与名）在……下面/之下；级别低于，隶属于（与形、动）不足under-translate, i.e.即，换而言之，也就是 To use more generic类的，属的；一般的，通用的,hold-all terms in difficult passages. A semantic translation tends to be more complex, more awkward不灵活的，笨拙的, more detailed, more concentrated, and pursues the thought-processes 思考过程 rather than the intention of the transmitter传送/递者；传输者；传播者；发射机，发射台. It tends to over-translate, to be more specific than the original, to include more meanings in its search for one nuance意义上的细微差别 of meaning.However, in communicative as in semantic translation, provided that equivalent-effect in secured, the literal word-for-word translation is not only the best, it is the only valid method of translation. There is no excuse for unnecessary "同义词synonyms", let alone v.&n.释义，意译，改述paraphrases, in any type of translation.Conversely相反地, both semantic and communicative translation comply with遵照，服从 the usually accepted syntactic造句法的，句子结构的 equivalents (Vinay and Darbelnet's "transpositions") for the two languages in question 正在谈论的. Thus, by both methods, a sentence such as "II traversa la Manche en nageant" would normally be translated as "He swam across the Channel". In semantic, but not communicative translation, any deviation背离，偏离；偏差；离题 from SL 文体规范stylistic norms规范，标准 would be reflected in an equally wide deviation from the TL norms, but where such norms clash, the deviations are not easy to formulate 构想出，规划；系统地阐述，确切地表达, and the translator has to show a certain tension between the writer's manner and the 强迫，强制；冲动，欲望compulsions of the target language. Thus when the writer uses long complex sentences in a language where the sentence in a "literary" (carefully worked) style is usually complex and longer than in the TL, the translator may reduce the sentences somewhat, compromising between the norms of the two languages and the writer. If in doubt, however, he should trust the writer, not the "language", which is a sum of abstractions抽象的总和. A semantic translation is concrete. Thus when faced with:此处略去一段法语。
纽马克
二、语言意义
纽马克从语言意义入手把翻译定义为“把 一种语言中某一语言单位或片断，即文本或 文本的一部分的意义用另一种语言表达出来 的行为”。他比较关注如何用意义理论来解 决翻译中的实际问题。
（1）语言学意义（linguistic meaning），包括 同义词、阐释意义，翻译最能体现该意义；
（2）所指意义（referential meaning）；
（3）语用意义（pragmatic meaning）；
（4）音美意义（phonaesthetic meaning），包 括原文中的节奏、声音等产生的意义，如象声词、 半韵、头韵、文字游戏、节奏等直接或间接表达的 意义。
虽然文本的意思都能翻译出来，但由于多种因
素的影响，意思的走失就更多，主要表现在四个方 面：
（1）原文内容涉及到本国特有的自然环境、社 会制度、文化习俗，译文意思就必然走失。译者可 采用音译、意译、译借或在译语中采用一个意义类 似的名称，或借译与音译相结合，以及采用释义的 方法，把意思在括号或注释里说明。但无论如何， 译文都很难和原文意义完全吻合。
在纽马克看来，每一种意义变体都是可译的，换 句话说，“一切都是可译的”，这同奈达的观点非 常一致。但译者在翻译中无须反映所有的意义层面。
纽马克进而认为，这些还不是文本的全部 意义。既然翻译是信息转换和信息传递的过 程，文本的意义还必须受到其他多种因素的 影响和制约。纽马克用下图表现影响语义的 诸多因素：
纽马克把意义归纳为三种类型：
（1）认知意义（cognitive meaning）；
纽马克-文本类型及翻译理论
交际翻译优点
注重读者的理解和反应，使译文更加流畅自然， 易于理解。
ABCD
语义翻译缺点
可能过于直译，导致译文不够流畅自然，有时甚 至出现生硬晦涩的现象。
交际翻译缺点
可能过于依赖译者的主观判断，导致译文信息传 递不准确或偏离原文意图。
语义翻译与交际翻译的适用范围
语义翻译适用范围
适用于文学、诗歌、法律、科技等文本 类型，强调对原文的忠实和准确性。
交际翻译
交际翻译是指译者在翻译过程中注重目标语读者的理解和反应，强调译文的流畅性和易懂 性。这种翻译方法适用于新闻、广告、说明书等以传达信息为主的文本类型。
文化信息的传递
纽马克认为，翻译不仅仅是语言之间的转换，更是文化信息的传递。译者在翻译过程中应 充分考虑原作中的文化背景和内涵，尽可能地将其传递给目标语读者。
纽马克-文本类型及翻译 理论
• 引言 • 文本类型 • 翻译理论 • 纽马克翻译理论的应用 • 结论
01
引言
主题简介
本文将介绍纽马克的文本类型及翻译 理论，探讨其理论背景、主要观点以 及在翻译实践中的应用。
纽马克的文本类型及翻译理论对于翻 译实践具有重要的指导意义，能够帮 助译者更好地理解和处理不同类型的 文本，提高翻译质量。
对翻译实践的启示
01
纽马克的文本类型及翻译理论提醒译者在翻译过程中要充分考虑原文的功能、 文本类型和交际目的，以确保译文的有效性和准确性。
02
针对不同类型的文本，译者应采用不同的翻译方法和策略，例如在翻译信息型 文本时，要注重语义的准确传达；在翻译表达型文本时，要注重原文的艺术性 和审美价值；在翻译号召型文本时，要注重译文的号召力和感染力。
02
文本类型
《纽马克翻译教程》课件
本课件旨在介绍《纽马克翻译教程》的内容和学习方法，分享翻译技巧，并 通过实例演示帮助学习者提升翻译水平。
介绍
背景
了解纽马克翻译教程的起源和发展，介绍该教程的作者和目标受众。
课程结构
概述教程的模块组成和内容安排，强调每个模块的重要性和学习收益。
教程内容
基础知识
学习语言学基础和翻译理论， 掌握翻译的核心概念和方法。
实践技巧
探索实用的翻译技巧和工具， 提高翻译效率和准确性。
领域专长
培养在特定领域的专业翻译技 能，理解和应用行业术语和惯 用语。
学习方法
1
自学
通过阅读课程材料和参考书籍，自主探索翻译技巧和最佳实践。
2
实践
通过参与实际翻译项目和模拟演练，提升翻译技能和应用能力。
3
互动
参加在线讨论和交流，与其他学习者分享经验和学习心得。
跨文化交流
探讨在翻译中面临的跨文化挑战 和如何进行有效的跨文化交流。
课程评价
学员口碑
分享学员对《纽马克翻译教程》的评价和体验， 展示学习成果和提升效果。
专业认证
介绍相关翻译认证考试和证书，提升学习者的职 业竞争力。
问题和讨论
留出时间回答学员的问题和与学员交流，提供互动的学习环境。
翻译技巧
1 语境理解
通过深入理解原文语境，准确传达作者意图和信息。
2 词汇选择
掌握各类词汇和短语的正确运用，提高翻译的准确性和专业性。
3 语体转换
根据目标受众和文体要求，在不失原意的前提下进行语体转换。
实例演示
翻译过程
通过实际案例演示翻译的步骤和 技巧，展示成功翻译的方法。
翻译工具
纽马克——文本类型及翻译理论课件
03
未来研究可以借鉴其他学科的理论和方法，拓展翻译研究的视野和思路。
拓展跨学科的研究视野
THANKS
感谢您的观看。
02
在结合两者时，可以根据具体情况采用直译、意译、归化、异化等方法，以保留原文的语言特点和传达内在意义的同时，提高译文的流畅性和可读性。
语义翻译与交际翻译结合的优缺点
03
将两者结合可以使译文更加准确、流畅、易于理解，同时保留原文的语言特色和风格。然而，这种方法需要较高的语言水平和丰富的翻译经验，同时也需要不断实践和总结经验。
译者需要根据具体情况选择合适的翻译策略，以达到最佳的翻译效果。在选择语义翻译和交际翻译时，需要考虑文本的类型、语境、读者群体等因素。
03
CHAPTER
翻译理论
语义翻译理论概述
语义翻译理论强调在翻译过程中尽可能保留原文的语义和句法结构，力求传达原文的内在意义。
语义翻译的特点
语义翻译重视原文的词汇、语法和修辞特点，力求在译文中保持这些特点，以使译文读者能够更好地理解原文的深层含义。
跨文化交流
纽马克的理论对于跨文化交流也具有重要意义，有助于促进不同语言和文化之间的理解和沟通。
01
未来研究可以进一步探索不同文本类型在翻译过程中的特点和规律，以及如何更好地处理这些特点。
深入研究不同文本类型的翻译规律
02
未来研究可以关注翻译过程中文本类型的动态变化，以及如何应对这些变化。
关注翻译过程中的动态变化
交际翻译的优缺点
交际翻译能够使译文更加流畅、易于理解，提高译文的交际效果。然而，过度强调交际效果可能导致译文失去原文的语言特色和风格。
语义翻译与交际翻译结合的必要性
01
在实际翻译过程中，单纯采用语义翻译或交际翻译都可能存在局限性，因此需要将两者结合起来，以实现更好的翻译效果。
彼得纽马克的所有翻译理论 ppt课件
第四组成员：郭晗敬 1104020319
(三班 )
黄 佳 1104020318
余 红 1104020336
5/19/2020
英国彼得∙纽马克谈翻译理论与技巧
一、简介 二、翻译和其他学科的关系 三、翻译和意义上的走失 四、翻译理论文献 五、同语言功能有关的翻译理论 六、翻译方法和技巧 七、总结
Hale Waihona Puke 英国彼得∙纽马克谈翻译理论与技巧
A Red, Red Rose by Robert Burns
O my luve is like a red, red rose, That’s newly sprung in June; O my Luve is like the melodie, That's sweetly play'd in tune.
英国彼得∙纽马克谈翻译理论与技巧
四、翻译理论文献 如:语言学家兼《圣经》翻译者奈达，就讨论了各
种翻译问题。他改编了转换语法，提出八个典型 核心句式作为原文和译文两种语言结构之间的转 换阶段，在语义学领域内还运用了成分分析法等。 康米萨罗夫（Komissarov)看到翻译理论正在 向三个方向发展：1、外延方向（情报译法） 2、 语义方向（确切等值译法）3、转换方向（相关结 构换位译法）。他的等值翻译理论又分为五个层 次：1、词汇单位 2、词的搭配 3、信息内容 4、 情景场合 5、交际目的 。 寇勒区分了情报和交际， 而莱斯则分类说明了不同的原文种类等等。
语义学常被描述为一种理论性的科目，所 以符号学便成为翻译理论的重要因素.
一个冰棒对于读者而言，意思可能只是一个小棍 棒上的冰冻甜食，但对制造商来说却意味着有利 可图的收入来源；对一个家庭主妇来说则意味着 是一种一年到头都避免不了的麻烦，对小孩则意 味着附在小冰棒上的并可持久品味的冷饮。
纽马克的翻译理论
纽马克的翻译理论Chapter 2Peter NewmarkSemantic and Communicative Translation Guided Reading Peter Newmark (1916) is an accomplished translation scholar as well as an experienced translator. He has translated a number of books and articles and published extaensively on translation. His publications on translation include Approaches to Translation (1981), About Translation(1983), Paragraphs on Translation段落翻译(1985), A Textbook of Translation翻译教程(1988), and More Paragraphs on Translation(1993).In his work Approaches to Translation, Newmark proposes two types of translation: semantic translation语义翻译and communicative translation交际翻译. Semantic translation focuses primarily upon the semantic content of the source text whereas communicative translation focuses essentially upon the comprehension and response of receptors. This distinction results from his disapproval of Nida's assumption假定，假设，设想；假装；承担，担任that all translating is communicating, and the overriding最主要的，最优先的principle of any translation is to achieve "equivalent effect". For Newmark, the success of equivalent effect is "illusory", and that "the conflictof loyalties, the gap between emphasis on source and target languages will always remain as the overriding problem in translation theory and practice"(1981:38). To narrow the gap, Newmark 系统地阐述，确切地表达；规划，构想出formulates his concepts of "communicative translation" and "semantic translation", which in a sense从某种意义上说are similar to Nida's "dynamic equivalent translation" and "formal equivalenttranslation". Newmarks admits "communicative translation" is a common method and could be used in many types of translation. Nevertheless, he justifies证明……正当/有理，为……辩护the legitimacy合法性，正当；合理性，妥当；嫡出，正统of "semantic translation" in the following three aspects. Firstly, all translations depend on the three 一分为二，二分法；本质对立dichotomies, namely, the foreign and native cultures, the two languages, the writer and the translator. Hence, it is unlikely to have a universal theory that could include all these factors. Secondly, previous discussions on methods of translation, either Nida's "dynamic equivalence" or Nabokow's "literal translation", does not reflect the actual reality of translation method, for each of them either recommends one or 贬低，轻视disparages the other. Thirdly, the social factors, especially the readers of the second language, only play a partial部分的；偏爱/袒/心的role发挥部分作用in translation. Some texts, such as an expressive one, require a "semantic translation"(1981:62). It can be seen that 可以看出by proposing the coexistence of "communicative translation" and "semantic translation", Newmark suggests a correlation相互关系，关联；相关性between translation method and text type.It should be pointed out that应该指出的是Newmark's semantic translation differs from literal translation直译because the former "respects context", interprets and even explains while the latter sticks very closely to source text at word and syntax level(1981:62). Literal translation, however, is held to be the best approach in both semantic and communicative translation, "provided that如果equivalent effect is secured, the literal word-for-word translation is not only the best, it is the only valid method of translation"(1981:39). Here Newmark seems to onlytake account of考虑到，顾及，体谅literary translation rather than non-literary translation, which is often rendered more freely in order to communicate the meaning. But he also states that when there is a conflict between semantic and communicative translation, the latter would win out胜出. For instance, it is better to render communicatively the public sign 公共标志bissiger Hund and chien mechant into beward thedog! in order to communicate efficiently the message, but not semantically as dog that bites! and bad dog!(1981:39). Nevertheless, it is difficult for a translator to follow Newmark's translation methods in practice, which should be adopted flexibly according to the specific context and text type.A Textbook of Translation is an expansion and a revision of Approaches to Translation in many aspects在很多方面. In this book, Newmark, follwing the German linguist Karl Buhler's functional theory of language, proposes three main types of texts (i.e. expressive有表现力的，富有表情的, informative提供大量资料或信息的，授予知识的and vocative呼格的) as well as methods of translating them (Chapters 4 and 5). Although he lists many translation methods from word-for-word translation to adaptation, he insists that "only semantic and communicative translation fulfill the two main aims of translation, which are first, accuracy, and second, economy". While semantic translation is used for expressive texts, communicative translation is for informative and vocative texts although he admits that few texts are purely expressive, informative or vocative. By stressing the wide applicability of these two translation methods, Newmark seems to overlook the function of other translation methods frequently adopted in translationpractice.Newmark's semantic and communicative translation ahve been quoted frequently among translation scholars. His concern about the coexistence of semantic and communicative translation shows that in his view effect-oriented translation以效果为导向的翻译such as Nida's dynamic equivalence should not be overstressed in translation practice, but is just one type of translation. Newmark's types of translation, however, are less influential than Nida's dynamic equivalence in the field of translation studies because they "raise some of the same points concerning the translation process and the importance of the TT reader译文读者" (Munday 2000:46). Further, his views and comments are still very traditional and prescriptive规定的，指定的，规范的, bearing some traces of traditional translation theories. The strength of his writing lies in that his discussion on translation covers a wide range of topics, and he always provides useful advice and guidance for translator 接受训练的人，实习生，培训生trainees with a large number of interesting and useful examples, which are more convincing than abstract theoretical arguments抽象的理论论证. The following excerpt is selected from Chapter 3 of Newmark's Approaches to Translation. In this chapter he 假定，要求postulates his twomain methods of translation (i.e. Semantic and communicative translation), and tries to apply them into different types of text. Communicative and Semantic Translation1.A translation must give the words of the original.2.A translation must give the ideas of the original.3.A translation should read like an original work.4.A translation should read like a translation.5.A translation should reflect the style of the original.6.A translation should possess the style of the translation.7.A translation should read as a contemporary of the original.8.A translation should read as a contemporary of the translation.9.A translation may add to or omit from the original.10.A translation may never add to or omit from the original.11.A translation of verse should be in prose.12.A translation of verse should be in verse.(The Air of Translation, T.H. Savory, Cape, 1968, p.54)In the pre-linguistics period of writing on translation, which may be said to date from Cicero through St. Jerome, Luther, Dryden, Tytler, Herder, Goethe, Schleiermacher, Buber, Ortega y Gasset, not to say Savory, opinion swung between literal and free, faithful and beautiful, exact and natural translation, depending on whether the bias was to be in favour of赞成the author or the reader, the source or the target language of the text. Up to the nineteenth century, literal translation represented a philological语言学的，文献的，文学的academic exercise语言学学术活动from which the cultural reformers文化改革者were trying to rescue literature. In the nineteenth century, a more scientific approach was brought to bear on对……有影响，和……有关translation, suggesting that certain types of texts must be accurately translated, while others should and could not be translated at all! Since the rise of modern linguistics (philology语言学was becoming linguistics语言学here in the late fifties), and anticipated by预计到Tytler in 1790, Larbaud, Belloc, Knox and Rieu, the general emphasis, supported by communication-theorists as well as by non-literary translators, has been placed on the reader---on informing the reader effectively and appropriately, notably显著地，明显地；尤其，特别in Nida, Firth, Koller and the Leipzig School. In contrast 相反, the brilliant essaysof Benjamin, Valery and Nabokov (anticipated by Croce and Ortega y Gasset) advocating literal translation have appeared as isolated孤立的，被隔离的, paradoxical phenomena自相矛盾的现象, relevant only to 与……有关translating works of high literary culture. Koller (1972) has stated that the equivalent-effect principle of。
纽马克翻译理论
纽马克翻译理论纽马克翻译理论是由美国翻译学家劳维·纽马克于1966年提出的，是对翻译过程中不同语言之间的差异进行思考和研究的理论体系。
该理论主张翻译是一个复杂的思维活动，不仅是为了传递信息，还包括对原文语境、文化背景和意义的理解与转换。
纽马克翻译理论的核心观点是“等效”，即在翻译过程中要寻求源语和译语之间的最佳对等关系。
这种对等关系不仅仅是词语的对应，还包括语法结构、句子成分、篇章结构和文化背景等方面的对等。
纽马克认为，在译语中只有找到和源语尽可能相近的等效元素，才能更好地传达原文的意义和信息。
纽马克翻译理论还注重对源语与译语的交互作用进行分析。
他认为翻译不是简单的单向转换过程，而是源语和译语之间的双向互动。
翻译过程中，译者需要根据源语的信息和结构来生成译文，同时还需要在译语中反映出自己的思维和文化背景。
这种双向互动使得翻译过程更丰富、灵活，使译文更贴近译者的认知和表达方式。
另外，纽马克翻译理论还强调了语境的重要性。
他认为在翻译过程中，必须考虑到源语和译语之间的语境差异，并在译文中重新建立适当的语境。
语境包括文化背景、社会环境、语用规范等各种因素，影响着信息的传递和接收。
因此，翻译者需要具备广泛的知识背景，能够理解并恰当地转换这些语境因素，从而保证译文的准确性和通达性。
纽马克翻译理论的意义在于提供了一种系统的翻译思路和方法，为翻译实践提供了理论指导。
该理论强调了翻译过程中的主观能动性和交互性，强调了译者对语境的敏感度和理解力，使得翻译不再是简单的语义转换，而是一种更加复杂的思维和沟通活动。
此外，纽马克翻译理论的强调了译文的灵活性和可变性，使得翻译不再受限于严格的对等要求，而是可以根据不同翻译目的和接受者的需求进行调整和变化。
总而言之，纽马克翻译理论是对翻译过程中语言差异与等效关系的思考和研究，强调了翻译是一种复杂的思维活动，需要考虑到语境和文化背景等因素。
该理论为翻译实践提供了理论支持和指导，使译者能够更加准确地传达源语的意义和信息。
纽马克翻译理论简介
Peter Newmark?(1916–2011) was an?English?professor?of?translation?at the?University of Surrey.[1][edit]BiographyHe was one of the main figures in the founding of?Translation Studies?in the English-speaking world from the 1980s.LifeNida was born in?Oklahoma City,?Oklahoma?on November 11, 1914. He became a Christian at a young age, when he responded to the altar call at his church “to accept Christ as my Saviour.”[2]He graduated summa cum laude from the?University of California?in 1936. After graduating he attended Camp Wycliffe, where Bible translation theory was taught. He ministered for a short time among the Tarahumara Indians in Chihuahua, Mexico, until health problems due to an inadequate diet and the high altitude forced him to leave. Sometime in this period, Nida became a founding charter member of?Wycliffe Bible Translators, a sister organization of the?Summer Institute of Linguistics.In 1937, Nida undertook studies at the?University of Southern California, where he obtained a Master’s Degree in New Testament Greek in 1939. In that same year, Eugene Nida became interim pastor of Calvary Church of?Santa Ana, California, after the founding pastor resigned in 1939.[3]?In spite of his conservative background, in later years Nida became increasingly ecumenical and New Evangelical in his approach.[4]In 1943, Nida received his Ph.D. in Linguistics from the?University of Michigan, he was ordained as a Baptist minister, and he married Althea Lucille Sprague. The couple remained married until Althea Sprague Nida's death in 1993. In 1997, Nida married Dr. María Elena Fernandez-Miranda, a lawyer and diplomatic attache.Nida retired in the early 1980s, although he kept on giving lectures in universities all around the world, and lived in Madrid, Spain and?Brussels,?Belgium. He died in Madrid on August 25, 2011 aged 96.[5][edit]CareerIn 1943, Nida began his career as a?linguist?with the?American Bible Society?(ABS). He was quickly promoted to Associate Secretary for Versions, then worked as Executive Secretary for Translations until his retirement.Nida was instrumental in engineering the joint effort between the?Vatican?and the?United Bible Societies?(UBS) to produce cross-denominational Bibles in translations across the globe. This work began in 1968 and was carried on in accordance with Nida's translation principle of Functional Equivalence.[edit]TheoriesNida has been a pioneer in the fields of?translation theory?and?linguistics.His Ph.D. dissertation,?A Synopsis of English Syntax, was the first full-scale analysis of a major language according to the "immediate-constituent" theory. His most notable contribution to translation theory is Dynamic Equivalence, also known as Functional Equivalence. For more information, see "Dynamic and formal equivalence." Nida also developed the "componential-analysis" technique, which split words into their components to help determine equivalence in translation (e.g."bachelor" = male + unmarried). This is, perhaps, not the best example of the technique, though it is the most well-known.Nida's dynamic-equivalence theory is often held in opposition to the views of?philologists?who maintain that an understanding of the?source text?(ST) can be achieved by assessing the inter-animation of words on the page, and that meaning is self-contained within the text (i.e. much more focused on achieving semantic equivalence).This theory, along with other theories of correspondence in translating, are elaborated in his essay?Principles of Correspondence,[6]?where Nida begins by asserting that given that “no two languages are identical, either in the meanings given to corresponding symbols or in the ways in which symbols are arranged in phrases and sentences, it stands to reason that there can be no absolute correspondence between languages. Hence, there can be no fully exact translations.”?[7]?While the impact of a translation may be close to the original, there can be no identity in detail.Nida then sets forth the differences in translation, as he would account for it, within three basic factors: (1) The nature of the message: in some messages the content is of primary consideration, and in others the form must be given a higher priority.(2) The purpose of the author and of the translator: to give information on both form and content; to aim at full intelligibility of the reader so he/she may understand the full implications of the message; for imperative purposes that aim at not just understanding the translation but also at ensuring no misunderstanding of the translation. (3) The type of audience: prospective audiences differ both in?decoding?ability and in potential interest.Nida brings in the reminder that while there are no such things as “identical?equivalents” in translating, what one must in translating seek to do is find the “closest natural equivalent”. Here he identifies two basic orientations in translating based on two different types of equivalence: Formal Equivalence (F-E) and Dynamic Equivalence (D-E).F-E focuses attention on the message itself, in both form and content. Such translations then would be concerned with such?correspondences?as?poetry?to poetry,?sentence?to sentence, and?concept?to concept. Such a formal orientation that typifies this type of structural equivalence is called a “gloss translation” in which the translator aims at reproducing as literally and meaningfully as possible the form and content of the original.The principles governing an F-E translation would then be: reproduction of grammatical units; consistency in word usage; and meanings in terms of the source?context.D-E on the other hand aims at complete “naturalness” of expression. A D-E translation is directed primarily towards equivalence of response rather than equivalence of form. The relationship between the target language?receptor?and message should be substantially the same as that which existed between the original (source language) receptors and the message.The principles governing a D-E translation then would be:?conformance?of atranslation to the receptor?language?and?culture?as a whole; and the translation must be in accordance with the context of the message which involves the?stylisticselection and arrangement of message constituents.Nida and Venuti have proved that?translation studies?is a much more complex discipline than may first appear, with the translator having to look beyond the text itself to deconstruct on an intra-textual level and decode on a referential level —assessing culture-specific items,?idiom?and figurative language to achieve an understanding of the?source text?and embark upon creating a translation which not only transfers what words mean in a given context, but also recreates the impact of the original text within the limits of the translator's own language system (linked to this topic:?George Steiner, the Hermeneutic Motion, pragmatics, field, tenor, mode and the?locutionary,?illocutionary?and?perlocutionary). For example, a statement that Jesus "met" someone must be carefully translated into a language which distinguishes between "met for the first time", "met habitually" and simple "met". Nida was once criticised for a controversial change in the?Revised Standard Version?Bible translation regarding the removal of the word "virgin" from Isaiah 7:14.[8]?However, as Peter Thuesen's book?In Discordance with the Scriptures?points out, Nida was not actually a committee member for that project.[9]彼得?纽马克是英国著名的翻译理论家和翻译教育家。
纽马克的翻译理论
适合语义翻译或交际翻译的文本
绝大多数信息性、祈使性、人际性，部分审美 性及元语言性文本和文本片段，适合用交际翻 译，如非文学作品、新闻报道、科技文章、公 函、教科书、报告、政治宣传品，约定俗成的 交际用语的翻译。
如果原文是表达性文本或是重要的审美性文 本或是重要的审美性文本，其表达形式与内容、 一样重要，那么是文学作品，还是哲学、宗教、 政治、科技作品都需要采用语义翻译，如自传、 私人信函、抒发个人情感的文学作品应用语义 翻译。
• 交际翻译： 指译作对译文读者产生的效果尽量等同 于原作对原文读者产生的效果。
语义翻译和交际翻译的提出
SL emphasis emphasis
Word-for-word translation字对字翻译 Adaptation 归化
TL
Literal translation 直译 translation意译
Wet Paint !
A “湿油漆！” B “油漆未干，请勿触 摸！”
语义翻译与交际翻译的共同点
• 两种翻译方法都是建立在认知翻译（cognitive translation）基础之上的，是对认知翻译的修 正和完善，都必须反映原文的思想内容，都必须 服从译如语的语法结构和某些固定的文体特征。 • 没有绝对的语义翻译，也没有绝对的交际翻译。 • 如果原文信息带有普遍性，不带文化特性，信息 内容的重要性与表达信息的方式和手段同等重要， 而译文读者的知识水平和兴趣又与原文读者相当， 就可以同时采用语义翻译和交际翻译，应该说这 是最“理想”的翻译，因为可以同时照顾到原文 作者和译文读者。
• 纽马克强调交际翻译应以读者为中心,注重读者的 可能反应,重视读者的接受能力。由于读者认识的 局限,当异化的译本中出现的语言差异和文化障碍 读者无法跨越,甚至误解时,应以归化为策略导向。 所以,从这个意义上讲,交际翻译的实质是归化。