图里_翻译规范论 (2)
合集下载
相关主题
- 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)。
The then theoretical context which was dominated by translation models that posits a definition of equivalence as functional-dynamic. It is, for Toury, source-oriented and invariably directive and normative because they recognized only correct instances and types.
Translation equivalence is not a hypothetical ideal but an empirical matter. The translated text exists as a cultural artifact for the replacement of a source text by an acceptable version in the receiving culture.
吉迪恩·图里是低地国家翻பைடு நூலகம்译理论界代表性的人物,他 在对希伯莱英语翻译文学进 行大量描述性研究的基础上, 发展了埃文·佐哈尔(Itamar Even-Zohar)的多元系统理 论和霍姆斯(James Holmes) 的描述翻译理论,形成了一 套完整的描述翻译学理论和 方法,在翻译界产生了重大 影响。
Too much idealized
Toury’s own theoretical framework
“Original” texts contain clusters of properties, meanings, possibilities. All translation privilege certain properties/meanings at the expense of others, and the concept of a “correct” translation ceases to be a real possibility(Toury, 1980: 18)
Is based on difference and assumes structural differences between languages.
Posits hypothetical poles of total acceptability in the target culture at the one extreme and total adequacy to the source text at the other. Translation is located in the middle.
Criticism of the current theory context
Skepticism of abstract theories involving ideal authors, translators, and readers.
Aesthetic theories of literary transfer and even pair-bound “objective” descriptions of linguistic possibilities do not account for various factors which clearly influence the translation product.
Target-text theory
As opposed to source-text theory; It focuses not on some notion of equivalence as postulated requirements,
but on the actual relationship constructed between the source text and its “factual replacement”. He introduces a new set of factors that may be more powerful that other factors. The eventual goal of Toury’s theory was to establish a hierarchy of interrelated factors that determine the translation product. In short, Toury demanded that translation theory include cultural-historical
Toury’s own theoretical framework
Opposes theories that are based upon a single unified and abstract identity or a proper interpretation of “equal” performance.
Despite the lack of conformity with hypothetical models of translation equivalence, mistranslations are rare; complete equivalence is even rarer. Near-adequacy is often accidental.
Two Periods of his work
1972-1976, base on polysystem theory framework, reported in Translation Norms and Literary Translation into Hebrew, a comprehensive sociological study of the cultural conditions affecting the translation of foreign language novels into Hebrew during the period 193045;
1975-1980, still based on polysystem framework, but he came up a hypothesis which distinguished him from his predecessors, collected in papers In Search of a Theory of Translation, an attempt to develop a more comprehensive theory of translation base on findings of his own field work;
Findings: linguistics and aesthetics played a very small role in the translation process; most texts were selected for ideological reasons; accidents also.
Field work of Gideon Toury
Goal: to discover the actual decisions made during the translation process, and eventually a system of rules governing the translation ;
“facts”, a set of laws that he calls “translation norms”.
3 kinds of norms
Three kinds of translation norms:
1.Preliminary:预备规范 factors such as those which govern the choice of the work and the overall translation strategy within a polysystem.（ determine the choice of the text to be translated）
Translations themselves have no “fixed” identity; because they are always subject to different socio-literary contextual factors, they thus must be viewed as having multiple identities, dependent upon the forces that govern the decision process at a particular time.
Reasons for lack of concern for “faithfulness”: the translators’ main goal of achieving acceptable translations in the target culture; cultural condition of the receiving system predominates.
Chapter 7 Gideon Toury
toward a target-text theory of translation
Descriptive Tanslation Studies
Toury : a brief summary of his life
Gideon Toury is Professor of Poetics, Comparative Literature and Translation Studies at Tel Aviv University, where he holds the M. Bernstein Chair of Translation Theory. He is the founder and General Editor of Target: International Journal of Translation Studies and for years General Editor of the important Benjamins Translation Library. He has published three books, a number of edited volumes and numerous articles, in both English and Hebrew, in the fields of translation theory and comparative literature. His articles have also appeared in translation in many other languages, and he is himself an active translator too (with about 30 books and many articles to his credit). He is a member of the editorial or advisory boards of a number of international journals. In 2000, he was awarded an honorary doctorate by Middlesex University, London.
Translation equivalence is not a hypothetical ideal but an empirical matter. The translated text exists as a cultural artifact for the replacement of a source text by an acceptable version in the receiving culture.
吉迪恩·图里是低地国家翻பைடு நூலகம்译理论界代表性的人物,他 在对希伯莱英语翻译文学进 行大量描述性研究的基础上, 发展了埃文·佐哈尔(Itamar Even-Zohar)的多元系统理 论和霍姆斯(James Holmes) 的描述翻译理论,形成了一 套完整的描述翻译学理论和 方法,在翻译界产生了重大 影响。
Too much idealized
Toury’s own theoretical framework
“Original” texts contain clusters of properties, meanings, possibilities. All translation privilege certain properties/meanings at the expense of others, and the concept of a “correct” translation ceases to be a real possibility(Toury, 1980: 18)
Is based on difference and assumes structural differences between languages.
Posits hypothetical poles of total acceptability in the target culture at the one extreme and total adequacy to the source text at the other. Translation is located in the middle.
Criticism of the current theory context
Skepticism of abstract theories involving ideal authors, translators, and readers.
Aesthetic theories of literary transfer and even pair-bound “objective” descriptions of linguistic possibilities do not account for various factors which clearly influence the translation product.
Target-text theory
As opposed to source-text theory; It focuses not on some notion of equivalence as postulated requirements,
but on the actual relationship constructed between the source text and its “factual replacement”. He introduces a new set of factors that may be more powerful that other factors. The eventual goal of Toury’s theory was to establish a hierarchy of interrelated factors that determine the translation product. In short, Toury demanded that translation theory include cultural-historical
Toury’s own theoretical framework
Opposes theories that are based upon a single unified and abstract identity or a proper interpretation of “equal” performance.
Despite the lack of conformity with hypothetical models of translation equivalence, mistranslations are rare; complete equivalence is even rarer. Near-adequacy is often accidental.
Two Periods of his work
1972-1976, base on polysystem theory framework, reported in Translation Norms and Literary Translation into Hebrew, a comprehensive sociological study of the cultural conditions affecting the translation of foreign language novels into Hebrew during the period 193045;
1975-1980, still based on polysystem framework, but he came up a hypothesis which distinguished him from his predecessors, collected in papers In Search of a Theory of Translation, an attempt to develop a more comprehensive theory of translation base on findings of his own field work;
Findings: linguistics and aesthetics played a very small role in the translation process; most texts were selected for ideological reasons; accidents also.
Field work of Gideon Toury
Goal: to discover the actual decisions made during the translation process, and eventually a system of rules governing the translation ;
“facts”, a set of laws that he calls “translation norms”.
3 kinds of norms
Three kinds of translation norms:
1.Preliminary:预备规范 factors such as those which govern the choice of the work and the overall translation strategy within a polysystem.（ determine the choice of the text to be translated）
Translations themselves have no “fixed” identity; because they are always subject to different socio-literary contextual factors, they thus must be viewed as having multiple identities, dependent upon the forces that govern the decision process at a particular time.
Reasons for lack of concern for “faithfulness”: the translators’ main goal of achieving acceptable translations in the target culture; cultural condition of the receiving system predominates.
Chapter 7 Gideon Toury
toward a target-text theory of translation
Descriptive Tanslation Studies
Toury : a brief summary of his life
Gideon Toury is Professor of Poetics, Comparative Literature and Translation Studies at Tel Aviv University, where he holds the M. Bernstein Chair of Translation Theory. He is the founder and General Editor of Target: International Journal of Translation Studies and for years General Editor of the important Benjamins Translation Library. He has published three books, a number of edited volumes and numerous articles, in both English and Hebrew, in the fields of translation theory and comparative literature. His articles have also appeared in translation in many other languages, and he is himself an active translator too (with about 30 books and many articles to his credit). He is a member of the editorial or advisory boards of a number of international journals. In 2000, he was awarded an honorary doctorate by Middlesex University, London.