翻譯專業(yè)中英文對(duì)照外文翻譯文獻(xiàn)

翻譯專業(yè)中英文對(duì)照外文翻譯文獻(xiàn)翻譯專業(yè)中英文對(duì)照外文翻譯文獻(xiàn)(文檔含英文原文和中文翻譯)TranslationEquivalenceDespitethefactthattheworldisbecomingaglobalvillage,translationremainsamajorwayforlanguagesandculturestointeractandinfluenceeachother.Andnametranslation,especiallygovernmentnametranslation,occupiesaquitesignificantplaceininternationalexchange.Translationisthecommunicationofthemeaningofasource-languagetextbymeansofanequivalenttarget-languagetext.Whileinterpreting—thefacilitatingoforalorsign-languagecommunicationbetweenusersofdifferentlanguages—antedateswriting,translationbeganonlyaftertheappearanceofwrittenliterature.ThereexistpartialtranslationsoftheSumerianEpicofGilgamesh(ca.2000BCE)intoSouthwestAsianlanguagesofthesecondmillenniumBCE.Translatorsalwaysriskinappropriatespill-overofsource-languageidiomandusageintothetarget-languagetranslation.Ontheotherhand,spill-overshaveimportedusefulsource-languagecalquesandloanwordsthathaveenrichedthetargetlanguages.Indeed,translatorshavehelpedsubstantiallytoshapethelanguagesintowhichtheyhavetranslated.DuetothedemandsofbusinessdocumentationconsequenttotheIndustrialRevolutionthatbeganinthemid-18thcentury,sometranslationspecialtieshavebecomeformalized,withdedicatedschoolsandprofessionalassociations.Becauseofthelaboriousnessoftranslation,sincethe1940sengineershavesoughttoautomatetranslation(machinetranslation)ortomechanicallyaidthehumantranslator(computer-assistedtranslation).TheriseoftheInternethasfosteredaworld-widemarketfortranslationservicesandhasfacilitatedlanguagelocalizationItisgenerallyacceptedthattranslation,notasaseparateentity,bloomsintoflowerundersuchcircumstanceslikeculture,societalfunctions,politicsandpowerrelations.Nowadays,thefieldoftranslationstudiesisimmersedwithabundantlydiversifiedtranslationstandards,withnoexceptionthatsomeofthemarepresentedbyrenownedfiguresandareratherauthoritative.Inthetranslationpractice,however,howshouldweselecttheso-calledtranslationstandardstoserveasourguidelinesinthetranslationprocessandhowshouldweadoptthetranslationstandardstoevaluateatranslationproduct?Inthemacro-contextofflourishoflinguistictheories,theoristsinthetranslationcircle,keeptothegoldenlawoftheprincipleofequivalence.ThetheoryofTranslationEquivalenceisthecentralissueinwesterntranslationtheories.Andthepresentationofthistheorygivesgreatimpetustothedevelopmentandimprovementoftranslationtheory.It’snotdifficultforustodiscoverthatitisthetheoryofTranslationEquivalencethatservesasguidelinesingovernmentnametranslationinChina.Nametranslation,asdefined,isthereplacementofthenameinthesourcelanguagebyanequivalentnameorotherwordsinthetargetlanguage.TranslatingChinesegovernmentnamesintoEnglish,similarly,isreplacingtheChinesegovernmentnamewithanequivalentinEnglish.Metaphoricallyspeaking,translationisoftendescribedasamovingtrajectorygoingfromAtoBalongapathoracontainertocarrysomethingacrossfromAtoB.ThisviewiscommonlyheldbybothtranslationpractitionersandtheoristsintheWest.Inthisview,theydonotexpectthatthistrajectoryorsomethingwillchangeitsidentityasitmovesorasitiscarried.InChina,totranslateisalsounderstoodbymanypeoplenormallyas“totranslatethewholetextsentencebysentenceandparagraphbyparagraph,withoutanyomission,addition,orotherchanges.Inbothviews,thesourcetextandthetargettextmustbe“thesame”.Thishelpsexplaintheetymologicalsourcefortheterm“translationequivalence”.ItisinessenceawordwhichdescribestherelationshipbetweentheSTandtheTT.Equivalencemeansthestateorfactorpropertyofbeingequivalent.Itiswidelyusedinseveralscientificfieldssuchaschemistryandmathematics.Therefore,itcomestohaveastrongscientificmeaningthatisratherabsoluteandconcise.Influencedbythis,translationequivalencealsocomestohaveanabsolutedenotationthoughitwasfirstappliedintranslationstudyasageneralword.Fromalinguisticpointofview,itcanbedividedintothreesub-types,i.e.,formalequivalence,semanticequivalence,andpragmaticequivalence.Inactualtranslation,itfrequentlyhappensthattheycannotbeobtainedatthesametime,thusformingakindofrelativetranslationequivalenceintermsofquality.Intermsofquantity,sometimestheSTandTTarenotequivalenttoo.Absolutetranslationequivalencebothinqualityandquantity,eventhoughobtainable,islimitedtoafewcases.Thefollowingisabriefdiscussionoftranslationequivalencestudyconductedbythreeinfluentialwesternscholars,EugeneNida,AndrewChestermanandPeterNewmark.It’sexpectedthattheirstudiescaninstructGNTstudyinChinaandprovidetranslatorswithinsightfulmethods.Nida’sdefinitionoftranslationis:“Translationconsistsinreproducinginthereceptorlanguagetheclosestnaturalequivalentofthesourcelanguagemessage,firstintermsofmeaningandsecondlyintermsofstyle.”Itisareplacementoftextualmaterialinonelanguage〔SL〕byequivalenttextualmaterialinanotherlanguage（TL）.Thetranslatormuststriveforequivalenceratherthanidentity.Inasense,thisisjustanotherwayofemphasizingthereproducingofthemessageratherthantheconservationoftheformoftheutterance.Themessageinthereceptorlanguageshouldmatchascloselyaspossiblethedifferentelementsinthesourcelanguagetoreproduceasliterallyandmeaningfullyaspossibletheformandcontentoftheoriginal.TranslationequivalenceisanempiricalphenomenondiscoveredbycomparingSLandTLtextsandit’sausefuloperationalconceptliketheterm“unitoftranslation”.Nidaarguesthattherearetwodifferenttypesofequivalence,namelyformalequivalenceanddynamicequivalence.Formalcorrespondencefocusesattentiononthemessageitself,inbothformandcontent,whereasdynamicequivalenceisbasedupon“theprincipleofequivalenteffect”.FormalcorrespondenceconsistsofaTLitemwhichrepresentstheclosestequivalentofaSTwordorphrase.NidaandTabermakeitclearthattherearenotalwaysformalequivalentsbetweenlanguagepairs.Therefore,formalequivalentsshouldbeusedwhereverpossibleifthetranslationaimsatachievingformalratherthandynamicequivalence.TheuseofformalequivalentsmightattimeshaveseriousimplicationsintheTTsincethetranslationwillnotbeeasilyunderstoodbythetargetreadership.AccordingtoNidaandTaber,formalcorrespondencedistortsthegrammaticalandstylisticpatternsofthereceptorlanguage,andhencedistortsthemessage,soastocausethereceptortomisunderstandortolaborundulyhard.DynamicequivalenceisbasedonwhatNidacalls“theprincipleofequivalenteffect”wheretherelationshipbetweenreceptorandmessageshouldbesubstantiallythesameasthatwhichexistedbetweentheoriginalreceptorsandthemessage.Themessagehastobemodifiedtothereceptor’slinguisticneedsandculturalexpectationandaimsatcompletenaturalnessofexpression.NaturalnessisakeyrequirementforNida.HedefinesthegoalofdynamicequivalenceasseekingtheclosestnaturalequivalenttotheSLmessage.Thisreceptor-orientedapproachconsidersadaptationsofgrammar,oflexiconandofculturalreferencestobeessentialinordertoachievenaturalness;theTLshouldnotshowinterferencefromtheSL,andthe‘foreignness‘oftheSTsettingisminimized.Nidaisinfavoroftheapplicationofdynamicequivalence,asamoreeffectivetranslationprocedure.Thus,theproductofthetranslationprocess,thatisthetextintheTL,musthavethesameimpactonthedifferentreadersitwasaddressing.OnlyinNidaandTaber'seditionisitclearlystatedthatdynamicequivalenceintranslationisfarmorethanmerecorrectcommunicationofinformation.AsAndrewChestermanpointsoutinhisrecentbookMemesofTranslation,equivalenceisoneofthefiveelementoftranslationtheory,standingshouldertoshoulderwithsource-target,untranslatability,free-vs-literal,All-writing-is-translatinginimportance.Pragmaticallyspeaking,observedChesterman,“theonlytrueexamplesofequivalence(i.e.,absoluteequivalence)arethoseinwhichanSTitemXisinvariablytranslatedintoagivenTLasY,andviceversa.Typicalexampleswouldbewordsdenotingnumbers(withtheexceptionofcontextsinwhichtheyhaveculture-boundconnotations,suchas“magic”or“unlucky”),certaintechnicalterms(oxygen,molecule)andthelike.Fromthispointofview,theonlytruetestofequivalencewouldbeinvariableback-translation.This,ofcourse,isunlikelytooccurexceptinthecaseofasmallsetoflexicalitems,orperhapssimpleisolatedsyntacticstructure”.PeterNewmark.DepartingfromNida’sreceptor-orientedline,Newmarkarguesthatthesuccessofequivalenteffectis“illusory“andthattheconflictofloyaltiesandthegapbetweenemphasisonsourceandtargetlanguagewillalwaysremainastheoverridingproblemintranslationtheoryandpractice.Hesuggestsnarrowingthegapbyreplacingtheoldtermswiththoseofsemanticandcommunicativetranslation.Theformerattemptstorender,ascloselyasthesemanticandsyntacticstructuresofthesecondlanguageallow,theexactcontextualmeaningoftheoriginal,whilethelatter“attemptstoproduceonitsreadersaneffectascloseaspossibletothatobtainedonthereadersoftheoriginal.”Newmark’sdescriptionofcommunicativetranslationresemblesNida’sdynamicequivalenceintheeffectitistryingtocreateontheTTreader,whilesemantictranslationhassimilaritiestoNida’sformalequivalence.Meanwhile,Newmarkpointsoutthatonlybycombiningbothsemanticandcommunicativetranslationcanweachievethegoalofkeepingthe‘spirit’oftheoriginal.Semantictranslationrequiresthetranslatorretaintheaestheticvalueoftheoriginal,tryinghisbesttokeepthelinguisticfeatureandcharacteristicstyleoftheauthor.Accordingtosemantictranslation,thetranslatorshouldalwaysretainthesemanticandsyntacticstructuresoftheoriginal.Deletionandabridgementleadtodistortionoftheauthor’sintentionandhiswritingstyle.翻譯對(duì)等盡管全世界正在漸漸成為一個(gè)地球村，但翻譯仍然是語言和和文化之間的交流互動(dòng)和相互影響的主要方式之一。而名稱的翻譯，特別是政府機(jī)構(gòu)名稱的翻譯，更特別是其中重要的一環(huán)。翻譯，是指在準(zhǔn)確通順的基礎(chǔ)上，把一種語言信息轉(zhuǎn)變成另一種語言信息的活動(dòng)。這個(gè)過程從邏輯上可以分為兩個(gè)階段：首先，必須從源語言中得到含義，然后把信息重新編碼成目標(biāo)語言。所有的這兩步都要求對(duì)語言語意學(xué)的知識(shí)以及對(duì)語言使用者文化的了解。除了要保留原有的意思外，一個(gè)好的翻譯，對(duì)于目標(biāo)語言的使用者來說，應(yīng)該要能像是以母語使用者說或?qū)懙媚前懔鲿?，并且要符合譯入的語言的習(xí)慣（除非是在特殊情況下，演說者并不打算像一個(gè)本語言使用者那樣說話，例如在戲劇中）。翻譯分為口譯和筆譯?？谧g又稱為“傳譯”，顧名思義，是指譯員以口語的方式，將需要譯入的語言轉(zhuǎn)換為譯出語。由于語言必定早于文字出現(xiàn)，因此口譯的出現(xiàn)也必定早于筆譯。所有與語言相關(guān)的事物（例如文學(xué)和演講）基本上都可以進(jìn)行翻譯，包括小說、電影、詩歌、演講等等。但是不同的領(lǐng)域，翻譯的困難度也不同。例如，詩歌幾乎是不可能準(zhǔn)確翻譯的，因?yàn)樵姼璧男问?、音韻等，都是組成其含義的一分子。很多非文學(xué)類文本的翻譯工作，包括軟件手冊(cè)和其他商業(yè)及專業(yè)文本，注重的是意義的傳達(dá)，以能通順傳意為主要要求。在全球化的潮流下，不但有越來越多的國際組織，同時(shí)企業(yè)的經(jīng)營也越來越以全球觀點(diǎn)出發(fā)，這也帶動(dòng)了國際化與本地化產(chǎn)業(yè)的興起。如果說非文學(xué)作品的翻譯是一項(xiàng)可以學(xué)習(xí)的技能的話，那么翻譯文學(xué)作品甚至詩歌，往往可以說是一門藝術(shù)，需要一些天賦。文學(xué)翻譯出于美學(xué)的考慮，在翻譯時(shí)不能僅注重字對(duì)字、詞對(duì)詞的翻譯，更不能忽略了文化間的不同點(diǎn)，否則經(jīng)常會(huì)導(dǎo)致譯文在語意、美感、風(fēng)格上的流失?？傊?，一個(gè)優(yōu)秀的翻譯人員必須在準(zhǔn)確性和可讀性之間找到很好的平衡。翻譯，并不是一個(gè)個(gè)單一的個(gè)體，它只有在文化和社會(huì)職能，政治和權(quán)力關(guān)系的情境下進(jìn)行時(shí)才能開枝散葉，這一點(diǎn)已經(jīng)普遍為人們所接受。而當(dāng)今社會(huì)，翻譯研究領(lǐng)域充斥著大量五花八門的各種各樣的翻譯標(biāo)準(zhǔn)，毫無例外，有些是由名人名家或著名學(xué)者提出的，具有相當(dāng)不小的權(quán)威性和影響力。但是在翻譯的實(shí)踐中，應(yīng)如何去選擇所謂的“翻譯標(biāo)準(zhǔn)”為我們的翻譯成果把關(guān)？又應(yīng)當(dāng)采取何種翻譯標(biāo)準(zhǔn)來評(píng)價(jià)一份翻譯的文本好壞呢？在語言學(xué)理論正在蓬勃發(fā)展的大背景下，翻譯學(xué)界的理論學(xué)家們堅(jiān)持遵守著“對(duì)等原則”的黃金定律。翻譯對(duì)等論是西方翻譯理論非常重要的核心學(xué)說。這個(gè)理論的出現(xiàn)給翻譯理論的進(jìn)步和發(fā)展注入了相當(dāng)大的動(dòng)力。我們很容易注意到，在中國，正是翻譯對(duì)等論在作為英語翻譯方法政府機(jī)構(gòu)名稱的指導(dǎo)準(zhǔn)則。名稱翻譯的準(zhǔn)確定義是用目的語的對(duì)等名稱或其他詞語來替換需要翻譯的源語言的名稱。與之相似的是，中國政府機(jī)構(gòu)名稱的英譯卻是用英文中的對(duì)等名稱來替換中國政府機(jī)構(gòu)的中文名稱。打一個(gè)比方吧，人們常常將翻譯的過程形容為一個(gè)移動(dòng)的軌道。它沿著一條小路或穿過一個(gè)容器一樣的東西將某些信息由A處傳達(dá)至B處。在西方國家的翻譯從業(yè)者和理論學(xué)家們普遍贊同這一個(gè)比喻。他們認(rèn)為在信息移動(dòng)或者傳遞的過程中，這個(gè)軌道一樣的東西并不會(huì)改變信息本身的身份特征。而且許多中國人通常也將翻譯這種行為理解為“逐句逐段地翻譯整篇文章，不可以去省略，添加，或有任何的改動(dòng)。中西方的兩種觀點(diǎn)中都認(rèn)為源語文本和目的語的文本必須完全相同。這正好說明了“翻譯對(duì)等理論”的詞源。從詞語本質(zhì)上來說，這個(gè)詞語非常形象的描述了源語文本和目的語言文本之間的微妙的關(guān)系，讓我們翻譯的人可以清楚的了解兩者的共同之處。對(duì)等是指兩者相等的一種狀態(tài)，事實(shí)或者性質(zhì)。這個(gè)詞語廣泛應(yīng)用于好比化學(xué)，數(shù)學(xué)之類的科學(xué)領(lǐng)域。因此，它漸漸的帶上了濃厚的科學(xué)意味，十分絕對(duì)而且準(zhǔn)確。受其影響，翻譯對(duì)等這一原則也逐漸擁有了絕對(duì)的指示意義，但是一開始它是作為類別詞被應(yīng)用于翻譯研究中的。從語言學(xué)的角度可以將翻譯對(duì)等原則分為三類，那就是，形式對(duì)等，語意對(duì)等和語用對(duì)等。我們?cè)趯?shí)際的翻譯實(shí)踐中經(jīng)常發(fā)生這種情況，這三種對(duì)等并不能同時(shí)實(shí)現(xiàn)，所以從翻譯質(zhì)量方面看對(duì)等也只是相對(duì)的。但是從翻譯數(shù)量方面看，源語文本和目的語的語文本有時(shí)也不是相等的。其中翻譯質(zhì)量和數(shù)量的絕對(duì)對(duì)等雖然可以實(shí)現(xiàn)，但也僅僅局限于少數(shù)例子。下面我們將簡單地討論一下翻譯對(duì)等理論，并且品評(píng)三位比較具影響力的西方翻譯學(xué)者，尤金·奈達(dá)，安德魯·切斯特曼和彼得·紐馬克關(guān)于翻譯對(duì)等論的研究成果。希望他們的理論能夠?yàn)橹袊畽C(jī)構(gòu)名稱的翻譯和研究指引方向，并為廣大譯者啟蒙思想和給予借鑒。尤金·奈達(dá)對(duì)翻譯的定義是：“翻譯是接受語和復(fù)制源語的信息的最近似的自然等值，首先在意思方面，其次在文體方面.”這是一種語言（源語）的文本材料被另一種語言（目的語）對(duì)等的文本材料替換的過程。譯者必須努力求得等值而不是完全一樣，從某種意義上講，這是強(qiáng)調(diào)復(fù)制的信息而不是保留話語的形式。目的語的信息應(yīng)與其源語的不同成分盡可能吻合，以復(fù)制原文的形式和內(nèi)容。翻譯等值是在比較其源語和目的語時(shí)發(fā)現(xiàn)的一種經(jīng)驗(yàn)性的現(xiàn)象，就像翻譯單位一樣，是有用的并且是指導(dǎo)操作的概念。奈達(dá)認(rèn)為對(duì)等有兩種分類，即形式對(duì)等和動(dòng)態(tài)對(duì)等。形式對(duì)等更關(guān)注信息本身，不僅關(guān)注其形式，也關(guān)注它的內(nèi)容。動(dòng)態(tài)對(duì)等建立在“對(duì)等效果原則”的基礎(chǔ)之上。形式上的翻譯對(duì)等指的是去在目的語中找到代表源語文本中詞或詞組的最近似的對(duì)等詞。著名的翻譯學(xué)家奈達(dá)和泰伯曾明確的表示，語言對(duì)中并不是總存在形式對(duì)等詞。因此，如果