“翻译学导论”期末考试题型及课程复习提纲

“翻译学导论”期末考试题型及课程复习提纲考试题型：I. Match the following translation theorists with their representative works. [10 points, 1 point each]II. Interpret the following terms. [20 points, 5 points each]III. Interpret the following concepts. [40 points, 20 points each]IV. Analyze and comment on the following translated version(s) by applying any translation theory you are familiar with. [30 points]复习提纲一、作者和代表作的搭配1. Roman Jakobson On Linguistic Aspects of Translation (1959)2. E.A. Nida Toward a Science of Translating (1964)3. E.A. Nida & Taber The Theory and Practice of Translation (1969)4. James Holmes The Name and Nature of Translation Studies (1972)5. George Steiner After Babel (1975)6. Susan Bassnett Translation Studies (1980)7. Peter Newmark Approaches to Translation (1981)8. Wolfram Wilss The Science of Translation (1982)9. Theo Hermans The Manipulation of Literature (1985)10. Peter Newmark A Textbook of Translation (1988)11. Mary Snell-Hornby Translation Studies: An Integrated Approach (1988）12. Christiane Nord Text Analysis in Translation (1989)13. Susan Bassnett & AndréLefevere Translation, History and Culture (1990)14. Andre Lefevere Translation, Rewriting, and the Manipulation of Literary Fame (1992)15. Edwin Gentzler Contemporary Translation Theories (1993)16. Gideon Toury Descriptive Translation Studies (1995)17. Lawrence Venuti The Translator’s Invisibility (1995/2008)18. Christiane Nord Translating as a Purposeful Activity (1997)19. Luise Von Flotow Translation and Gender (1997)20. Maria Tymoczko Translation in a Postcolonial Context (1999)二、解释以下术语1. word-for-word/literal translation and sense-for-sense/free translation2. metaphrase, paraphrase, imitation3. Formal equivalence and dynamic/functional equivlence4. Semantic Translation and Communicative Translation5. documentary translation and instrumental translation6. translational action7. skopo theory8. polysystem theory9. norms10. equivalence11. foreignization and domestication12. translation/translating13. Prescriptive Translation Studies and Descriptive Translation Studies三、理解以下观点1. Translating consists in reproducing in the receptor language the closest natural equivalent of thesource-language message, first in terms of meaning and secondly in terms of style. (Nida & Taber, The Theory and Practice of Translation, 1969: 12)2. 翻译（translating）即解释，具体地说，翻译的过程就是，在跨文化的历史语境中，具有历史性的译者使自己的视域与源语文本视域互相发生融合而形成新视域，并用浸润着目的语文化的语言符号将新视域重新固定下来形成新文本的过程。

（朱健平，2003; 2007）(Translating is interpreting. More specifically, translating is the process in which the translator with his history fuses his horizon with that of the source text in an across-cultural historical context and forms a new horizon, and then he constructs a new text, namely, the target text, by using the newly acquired horizon in the target language soaked with the target culture. )3. And I did not translate them as an interpreter, but as an orator, keeping the same ideas and forms,or as one might say, the ‘figures’ of thought, but in language which conforms to our usage.And in so doing, I did not hold it necessary to render word for word, but I preserved the general style and force of the language. (Cicero, 46 BC/1960:364)4. Translation is just like the TL taking over the sense of the ST. Translation is like the originaltext being marched into the TL like a prisoner by its conqueror. (Jerome, qtd. in Robinson, 1997: 26)5. You must ask the mother at home, the children in the street, the ordinary man in the market andlook at their mouths, how they speak, and translate that way; then they’ll understand and see that you’r e speaking to them in German. (Martin Luther1530)6. Dryden reduces all translation to three categories:1) metaphrase: ‘word by word and line by line’ translation, which corresponds to literaltranslation.2) paraphrase: ‘translation with latitude, where the author is kept in view by the translator,so as never to be lost, but his words are not so strictly followed as his sense’. This involves changing whole phrases and more or less corresponds to faithful or sense-for-sense translation.3) imitation:‘Forsaking’ both words and sense. This corresponds to Cowley’s very freetranslation and is more or less adaptation. (Dryden, 1680/1992: 17)7. Dryden dismissed the ‘servile, literal’ translation with a simile: ‘’Tis much like dancing onropes with fettered legs –a foolish task.’ (Dryden, 1680/1992: 18)8. Dryden changed to a point between paraphrase and literal translation in 1697.I thought fit to steer betwixt the two extremes of paraphrase and literal translation: to keepas near my author as I could, without losing all his graces, the most eminent of which are in the beauty of his words. I may presume to say … I have endeavored to make Virgil speak such English as he would himself have spoken, if he had been born in England, and in this present age. (Dryden, 1697/1992: 26)9. A ‘good translation’ should be that in which the merit of the original work is so completelytransfused into another language, as to be as distinctly apprehended, and as strongly felt by a native of country to which that language belongs, as it is by those who speak the language of the original work. (A.F. Tytler, 1797: 14)10. Tytler’s three general ‘laws’ or ‘rules’:1) The translation should give a complete transcript of the ideas of the original work.2) The style and manner of writing should be of the same character with that of the original.3) The translation should have all the ease of original composition.(A.F. Tytler, 1797: 15)11. The two paths open for the ‘true’ translator:Either the translator leaves the writer alone as much as possible and moves the reader toward the writer, or he leaves the reader alone as much as possible and moves the writer toward the reader. (Schleiermacher, 1813/1992: 41-2)12. The surface structure of the ST is analyzed into the basic elements of the deep structure; theseelements are ‘transferred’ in the translation process and then restructured semantically and stylistically into the surface structure of the TT. (Nida & Taber: 1969)13. Formal equivalence focuses attention on the message itself, in both form and content … themessage in the receptor language should match as closely as possible the different elements in the source language. (Nida, 1964:159)Dynamic equivalence is based on ‘the principle of equivalent effect’, which means that ‘the relationship between receptor and message should be substantially the same as that which existed between the original receptors and the message’. (Nida, 1964: 159)14. The success of the translation depends above all on achieving equivalent response. It is oneof the ‘four basic requirements of a translation’, which are:1) making sense;2) conveying the spirit and manner of the original;3) having a natural and easy form of expression;4) producing a similar response. (Nida, 1964: 164)15. Ress’s Theory on the relationship between translation methods and text type:According to Katharina Reiss (1977), different methods should be adopted when translating different types of text:(1) The TT of an informative text should transmit the full referential or conceptual content of the ST. The translation should be in ‘plain prose’, without redundancy and with the use of explicitation when required.(2) The TT of an expressive text should transmit the aesthetic and artistic form of the ST. The translation should use the ‘identifying’ method, with the translator adopting the standpoint of the ST author.(3) The TT of an operative text should produce the desired response in the TT receiver. The translation should employ the ‘adaptive’ method, creating an equivalent effectamong TT readers.16. Holz-Mänttäri’s translational action modelInterlingual translation is described as ‘translational action from a source text’ and as a communicative process involving a series of roles and players (Holz-Mänttäri, 1984: 109-11):1) the initiator: the company or individual who needs the translation.2) the commissioner: the individual who contacts the translator.3) the ST producer: the individual within the company who writes the ST, not necessarily always involved in the TT production.4) the TT producer: the translator(s) and the translation agency or department.5) the TT user: the person who uses the TT, for example as teaching material or sales literature.6) the TT receiver: the final r ecipient of the TT, for example the students in a TT user’s class or clients reading the translated sales literature.These players each have their own specific primary and secondary goals.17. The basic underlying ‘rules’ of skopos theory (Reiss and Vermeer 1984: 119).1) A translatum (or TT) is determined by its skopos.2) A TT is an offer of information (Informationsangebot ) in a target culture and TL concerning an offer of information in a source culture and SL.3) A TT does not initiate an offer of information in a clearly reversible way.4) A TT must be internally coherent.5) A TT must be coherent with the ST.6) The five rules above stand in hierarchical order, with the skopos rule predominating.18. Even-Zohar’s Polysystem Theory:If the highest position is occupied by an innovative literary type, then the lower strata are likely to be occupied by increasingly conservative types. If the conservative forms are at the top, innovation and renewal are likely to come from the lower strata. Otherwise a period of stagnation occurs. (Even-Zohar, 1978: 120)If translated literature assumes a secondary position, then it represents a peripheral system within the polysystem. It has no major influence over the central system and even becomes a conservative element, preserving conventional forms and conforming to the literary norms of the target system. This secondary position is the ‘normal’ one for translated literatures. (Even-Zohar, 1978: 203)19. Even-Zohar gives three major cases when translated literature occupies the primary position:1) when a ‘young’ literature is being established and looks initially to ‘older’ literatures for ready-made models;2) when a literature is ‘peripheral’ or ‘weak’ and imports those literary types which it is lacking. This can happen when a smaller nation is dominated by the culture of a larger one.3) when 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. Where no type holds sway, it is easier for foreign models to assume primacy.。