翻译理论知识3

西方翻译理论的主要流派及成就1.美国翻译理论Eugene. A. Nida：Functional EquivalenceOklahoma, pious Christian, Los Angel University, South California University (Master in Holly Bible New Testament in Greece ) Michigan University (Doctor of Linguistics guided by Charles Fries & Leonard Bloomfield in1943) 美国圣经公会供职从事组织和指导圣经翻译工作。

著作40多部，论文250余篇最早、最多，影响最大。

谭载喜《奈达论翻译》《中国翻译》和外国语。

1984年，中国对外翻译出版公司与金隄合著On Translation: With Special Reference to Chinese and English 《论翻译》Language, Culture, and Translating (1993)《语言、文化与翻译》Shanghai Foreign Languae Education Press世界性的深远影响，为翻译注入了新思想和活力，引进了新的概念和方法。

“奈达的著作，开创了翻译理论的新时代。

”（Christian Balliu）奈达的翻译思想分成三阶段：1）描写语言学句法、词法和语义翻译问题的描写研究2）交际理论运用语言学理论最重要，成熟、发展、系统3）社会符号学运用社会语言学和社会符号学翻译从科学到艺术的转化翻译是艺术(art)，翻译家是天生的；翻译研究是科学(science)，是比较语言学的重要分支。

翻译基本上是一种技艺（technology），需要多种学科才能产生令人满意的译作，包括语言学、文化人类学、心理学和交际理论（1996）。

奈达的基本翻译思想：1）翻译是交际活动2）翻译主要是译意3）为了译意，必须改变语言表达形式。

翻译过程四阶段：分析(analysis)、转换(transfer)、重组(restructure)和检验(test)。

Eugene. A. Nida’s translating thought and theory have made worldwide influence. Not only has he published a great number of books and essays on translation, but also he is active in taking part in international academic exchanges and always gives lectures all over the world even in his eighties. He has brought new thought and vigor to the career of translation by introducing new concepts and methods.Is it a translator’s task to focus primarily on the source culture or the target culture? Although the answer is not clear-cut, the dominant criterion is the communicative function of the target text.Translating means communicating, and this process depends on what is received by persons hearing or reading a translation. Judging the validity of a translation cannot stop with a comparison of corresponding lexical meanings, grammatical classes, and rhetorical devices. What is important is the extent to which receptors correctly understand and appreciate the translated text. Accordingly, it is essential that “functional equivalence be stated primarily in terms of a comparison of the way in which the original receptors understood and appreciated the text and the way in which receptors of the translated text understand and appreciate the translated text.” Language And Culture –Contexts in Translating(Nida, 2001) 《语言与文化一翻译中的语境》Nida, one of the greatest scholars in the translating field, describes his famous theory of Functional Equivalence in his several books and articles. In Toward a Science of Translating (Nida, 1964), 《翻译科学初探》he used the concept of “dynamic equivalence” to refer to the “closest natural equivalent”. In The Theory and Practice of Translation(Nida &Taber, 1969), 《翻译理论与实践》he improved this concept and defined it like this: Translation is to reappear information of the source language in the target language by selecting the closest natural equivalent of the original text according to first meaning, then style.In the definition, “close” refers to “close information to the source language”; “natural” to “natural form of expression in the target language”; “equivalent” to “the way in which they are combined”. Therefore, in a sense, Nida here focused on semantic equivalence （语义对等）instead of formal correspondence.But the term “dynamic equivalence” is always misunderstood by some translators, accordingly many individuals have been led to think that if a translation has considerable impact then it must be a correct example of “dynamic equivalence”. And even every kind of free translations can style itself “dynamic equivalent”. Because of this misunderstanding and in order to emphasize the concept of function, it seems much more satisfactory to use the expression “functional equivalence” in describing the degrees of adequacy of a translation. So in From One Language to Another: Functional Equivalence in Bible Translation (Nida & Warrd, 1986), 《从一种语言到另一种语言：论圣经翻译中的功能对等》Nida changed the term of “dynamic equivalence” into that of “functional equivalence”. The terms “function” and “functional” seem to provide a much sounder basis for talking about translation as a form of communication, since the focus is on what a translation does or performs. In this book,Nida also developed his definition of “information”, declaring that information involves the form of language as well as the content of thought. He believes that form can also convey meaning. If the form is altered, the meaning may be simultaneously changed. Subsequently, he requires that translators must try their best to achieve both “semantic equivalence” and “formal correspondence”.The adequacy of a translation depends on a great many different factors: the reliability of the text itself, the discourse type, the intended reader, the manner in which the translated text is to be used, and the purpose for which the translation has been made. So many factors make it complicate to evaluate a translation. In The Sociolinguistics of Interlingual Communication(Nida, 1996), 《跨语交际的社会语言学》Nida pointed out that acknowledging the various degree of “equivalence” is more realistic. In general, it is best to speak of “functional equivalence” in terms of a range of adequacy, since no translation is ever completely equivalent. A number of different translations can, in fact, represent varying degrees of equivalence. This means that “functional equivalence” cannot be understood in its mathematical meaning of identity but in terms of proximity, i.e., on the basis of degrees of closeness t o functional identity. His view of “functional equivalence” implies different degrees of adequacy from “minimal to maximal equivalence” on the basis of both cognitive and communicative factors. As a matter of fact, translation can only achieve “functional equivalence”, i.e., “communicative equivalence”.Lawrence Venuti：Translating Strategy of DeconstructionVenuti（韦努蒂）, an Italian American, Translator’s Invisibility: A History of Translation,1995 《译者的隐身》，韦努蒂结合政治、历史和文化考察翻译，批判了翻译史中占主导地位的以目的语文化为归宿的倾向，提出了解构主义的反对译文通顺的翻译策略。