翻譯史考試試題

1、1.Explainthedefinitionoftranslationandtheconceptof“formalcorrespondence”intheview of Catford.Translation may be defined as follows: the replacement of textual material in onelanguage(SL)byequivalenttextualmaterialinanotherlanguage(TL).Theuseoftheterm“textualmaterial”underlinesthefactthatinnormalcond

2、itionsitisnottheentiretyofaSLtextwhichistranslated,thatis,replacedbyTLequivalents. But at one or more levels of language there may be simple replacement, by non-equivalent TL material.Moreover, at one or more levels there may be no replacement at all, but simple transference of SLmaterialintotheTLte

3、xt.Theterm“equivalent”isclearlyakeyterm.ThecentralproblemoftranslationpracticeisthatoffindingTLtranslationequivalents.Acentraltaskoftranslationtheoryisthatofdefiningthenatureandconditionsoftranslationequivalent.sA formal correspondent is any TL category (unit, class, structure, etc.) which may be sa

4、idto occupy, as nearly as possible, the “same” place in the economy of the TL as the given SL categoryoccupiesintheSL.Formalcorrespondencecanbeonlyapproximate,andcanonlybeestablishedultimatelyonthebasisoftextualequivalenceatsomepoint.Whats yourunderstandingof“thenatureoftranslation”inthelightofNida?

5、According to Nida, the nature of translating is: Translating consists in reproducing in thereceptor language the closest natural equivalent of the source-language message, first in termsofmeaningandsecondlyintermsofstyle.Explanation of the Nature of the Translation (pp12-14)Translatingmust aim prima

6、rily at “reproducing the message”. Todo anythingelse isessentiallyfalsetoonestaskasatranslator.(aim)The translator must strive for equivalence rather than identity. In a sense this is just anotherwayofemphasizingthereproductionofthemessageratherthantheconservationoftheformoftheutterance.(equivalence

7、)The best translation does not sound like a translation. It should studiously avoid“translationese”formalfidelity,withresultingunfaithfulnesstothecontentandtheimpactofthemessage.(natural)Aconscientioustranslatorwillwanttheclosestnaturalequivalentbecauseoftheculturaldifferences.Meaning must be given

8、priority, for it is the content of the message which is of primeimportance for translating, and to do anything else is essentially false to ones task as a translator.Style is saidsecondary tocontent, but it isstill important. One should not translatepoetryasthoughitwereprose,norexpositorymaterialast

9、houghitwerestraightnarrative.Explain“semantictranslation”and“communicativetranslation”proposed byNewmark.Semantic translation attempts to render, as closely as the semantic and syntacticstructuresofthesecondlanguageallow,theexactcontextualmeaningoftheoriginal.Communicativetranslationattemptstoproduc

10、eonitsreadersaneffectascloseaspossibletothatobtainedonthereadersoftheoriginal.Generally, a semantic translation tends to be more complex, more awkward, moredetailed, more concentrated, and pursues the thought-processes rather than the intention of thetransmitter. It tends to overtranslate, to be mor

11、e specific than the original, to include moremeanings in its search for one nuance of meaning. A communicative translation is likely to be smoother, simpler, clearer, more direct, more conventional, conforming to a particular registerof language, tending to undertranslate, i.e. to use more generic,

12、hold-all terms in difficultpassages.A semantic translation is out of time and local space, where a communicative translationis ephemeral and rooted in its context. A semantic translation attempts to preserve its authorsidiolect,hispeculiarformofexpression.Itrelatesto“expressive” functionoflanguage,w

13、herecommunicativetranslationrespondstothevocativefunctionoflanguage.One basic difference between the two methods is that where there is a conflict, thecommunicative must emphasize the “force” rather than the content ofe message, e.g.:Bewareofthedog!留神狗！ Keepoffthegrass！1勿踏草坪！ 2不要在草坪上行走。Wetpaint！1“留神

14、油漆！”或“油漆未干！”2油漆剛剛噴上。However,incommunicativeasinsemantictranslation,providedthatequivalent-effectissecured, the literal word-for-word translation is not only the best, it is only valid method of translation.4.“Formalequivalence”,“dynamicequivalence”,and“functionalequivalence”arethekeyconcepts in Nida

15、s theories of translation. How do you understand them?Formalequivalence:aformal-equivalencetranslation isbasicallysource-oriented;thatis,itisdesignedtorevealasmuchaspossibleoftheformandcontentoftheoriginalmessage.In doing so, an F-E translation attempts to reproduce several formal elements, includin

16、g: 1.grammaticalunits,2.consistencyinwordusage,and3.meaningsintermsofthesourcecontext.The reproduction of grammatical units may consist in: a translating nouns by nouns, verbs by verbs, etc.; b keeping all phrases and sentences intact(i.e. not splitting up and readjusting the units); and c preservin

17、g all formal indicators, e.g. marks of punctuation, paragraph breaks, and poetic indentation. In attempting to reproducing consistency in wordusage,anF-Etranslationusuallyaimsatso-calledconcordanceofterminology;thatis,italwaysrenders a particular term in the source-language document by the correspon

18、ding term in the receptor document. In order to reproduce meanings in terms of the source context, an F-E translation normally attempts not to make adjustments in idioms, but rather to reproduce such expressions more or less literally, so that the reader may be able to perceive something of the wayi

19、nwhichtheoriginaldocumentemployedlocalculturalelementstoconveymeanings.equivalence: in contrast, a translation which attempts to produce a dynamicratherthanaformalequivalenceisbasedontheprincipleofequivalenteffect.Insuchatranslationthefocusofattentionis directed toward the receptor response. O neway

20、 of defining a D-E translation is to describe it as “the closest natural equivalent to thesource-language message.” This type of definition contains three essential terms: 1) equivalent, whichpointstowardthesource-languagemessage,2)natural,whichpointstowardthereceptorlanguage, and 3) closest, which

21、binds the two orientations together on the basis of the highest degreeofapproximation.However, since a D-E translation is directly primarily toward equivalence of responseratherthanequivalenceofform,itisimportanttodefinemorefullytheimplicationsoftheword“natural”asappliedtosuchtranslation.Basically,t

22、heword“natural”isapplicabletothreeareasof the communication process; for a natural rendering must fit 1) the receptor language and culture as a whole, 2) the context of the particular message, and 3) the receptor-language ermsoffunctional equivalence. The translation process has been defined on the

23、basis that the receptors ofatranslationshouldcomprehendthetranslatedtexttosuchanextentthattheycanunderstandhow the original receptors must have understood the original text. The expression “dynamic equivalence” has, however, led to some confusion, since the term “dynamic” has beenunderstood merely i

24、n terms of something which has impact and appeal. Accordingly, to avoid misunderstanding the expression “functional equivalence” is employed, particularly sinc e the twin bases for effective translation seem to be best represented in a sociosemiotic and sociolinguisticorientation,inwhichthefocusisuponfunction.Thetranslatormustseektoemplo