英語(yǔ)畢業(yè)論文外文翻譯

1、<p><b>　　外文資料原文</b></p><p>　　Translation Equivalence</p><p>　　Despite the fact that the world is becoming a global village, translation remains a major way for languages and cul

2、tures to interact and influence each other. And name translation, especially government name translation, occupies a quite significant place in international exchange.</p><p>　　It is generally accepted that

3、translation, not as a separate entity, blooms into flower under such circumstances like culture, societal functions, politics and power relations. Nowadays, the filed of translation studies is immersed with abundantly di

4、versified translation standards, with no exception that some of them are presented by renowned figures and are rather authoritative. In the translation practice, however, how should we select the so-called translation st

5、andards to serve as our guidel</p><p>　　In the macro - context of flourish of linguistic theories, theorists in the translation circle, keep to the golden law of the principle of equivalence. The theory of T

6、ranslation Equivalence is the central issue in western translation theories. And the presentation of this theory gives great impetus to the development and improvement of translation theory. It’s not difficult for us to

7、discover that it is the theory of Translation Equivalence that serves as guidelines in government name translatio</p><p>　　Metaphorically speaking, translation is often described as a moving trajectory going

8、 from A to B along a path or a container to carry something across from A to B. This view is commonly held by both translation practitioners and theorists in the West. In this view, they do not expect that this trajector

9、y or something will change its identity as it moves or as it is carried. In China, to translate is also understood by many people normally as“ to translate the whole text sentence by sentence and </p><p>　　E

10、quivalence means the state or fact or property of being equivalent. It is widely used in several scientific fields such as chemistry and mathematics. Therefore, it comes to have a strong scientific meaning that is rather

11、 absolute and concise. Influenced by this, translation equivalence also comes to have an absolute denotation though it was first applied in translation study as a general word. From a linguistic point of view, it can be

12、divided into three sub-types, i.e., formal equivalence, sem</p><p>　　The following is a brief discussion of translation equivalence study conducted by three influential western scholars, Eugene Nida, Andrew

13、Chesterman and Peter Newmark.It’s expected that their studies can instruct GNT study in China and provide translators with insightful methods.</p><p>　　Eugene Nida</p><p>　　Eugene A. Nida’s defi

14、nition of translation is : “Translation consists in reproducing in the receptor language the closest natural equivalent of the source language message , first in terms of meaning and secondly in terms of style.” It’s a r

15、eplacement of textual material in one language〔SL〕by equivalent textual material in another language〔TL〕. The translator must strive for equivalence rather than identity. In a sense, this is just another way of emphasizi

16、ng the reproducing of the message rathe</p><p>　　Nida argues that there are two different types of equivalence, namely formal equivalence and dynamic equivalence. Formal correspondence focuses attention on t

17、he message itself, in both form and content, whereas dynamic equivalence is based upon “the principle of equivalent effect”.</p><p>　　Formal correspondence consists of a TL item which represents the closest

18、equivalent of a ST word or phrase. Nida and Taber make it clear that there are not always formal equivalents between language pairs. Therefore, formal equivalents should be used wherever possible if the translation aims

19、at achieving formal rather than dynamic equivalence. The use of formal equivalents might at times have serious implications in the TT since the translation will not be easily understood by the target readers</p>&

20、lt;p>　　Dynamic equivalence is based on what Nida calls “the principle of equivalent effect” where the relationship between receptor and message should be substantially the same as that which existed between the origin

21、al receptors and the message. The message has to be modified to the receptor’s linguistic needs and cultural expectation and aims at complete naturalness of expression. Naturalness is a key requirement for Nida. He defin

22、es the goal of dynamic equivalence as seeking the closest natural equi</p><p>　　Nida is in favour of the application of dynamic equivalence, as a more effective translation procedure. Thus, the product of th

23、e translation process, that is the text in the TL, must have the same impact on the different readers it was addressing. Only in Nida and Taber's edition is it clearly stated that dynamic equivalence in translation i

24、s far more than mere correct communication of information.</p><p>　　Andrew Chesterman </p><p>　　As Andrew Chesterman points out in his recent book Memes of Translation, equivalence is one of the

25、 five supermemes of translation theory, standing shoulder to shoulder with source-target, untranslatability, free-vs-literal, All-writing-is-translating in importance. Pragmatically speaking, observed Chesterman, “the on

26、ly true examples of equivalence (i.e., absolute equivalence) are those in which an ST item X is invariably translated into a given TL as Y, and vice versa. Typical examples would be </p><p>　　Peter Newmark&l

27、t;/p><p>　　Departing from Nida’s receptor-oriented line, Newmark argues that the success of equivalent effect is“illusory”and that the conflict of loyalties and the gap between emphasis on source and target lan

28、guage will always remain as the overriding problem in translation theory and practice. He suggests narrowing the gap by replacing the old terms with those of semantic and communicative translation. The former attempts to

29、 render,as closely as the semantic and syntactic structures of the second languag</p><p>　　Meanwhile, Newmark points out that only by combining both semantic and communicative translation, can we achieve the

30、 goal of keeping the ‘spirit’ of the original. Semantic translation requires the translator retain the aesthetic value of the original, trying his best to keep the linguistic feature and characteristic style of the autho

31、r. According to semantic translation, the translator should always retain the semantic and syntactic structures of the original. Deletion and abridgement lead to di</p><p><b>　　外文資料譯文</b></p&g

32、t;<p><b>　　翻譯對(duì)等</b></p><p>　　盡管全世界漸漸成為一個(gè)地球村，翻譯仍然是語(yǔ)言和文化之間交流互動(dòng)，相互影響的主要方式之一。而名稱的翻譯，尤其是政府機(jī)構(gòu)名稱的翻譯，更是其中重要的一環(huán)。</p><p>　　翻譯，并不是一個(gè)單一的個(gè)體，它只有在文化，社會(huì)職能，政治和權(quán)力關(guān)系的情境下進(jìn)行才能開(kāi)枝散葉，這一點(diǎn)已普遍為人們所接受。而今，

33、翻譯研究領(lǐng)域充斥著大量五花八門的翻譯標(biāo)準(zhǔn)，毫無(wú)例外，有些是由名人名家提出的，具有相當(dāng)?shù)臋?quán)威性和影響力。然而在翻譯實(shí)踐中，應(yīng)如何選擇所謂的“翻譯標(biāo)準(zhǔn)”為我們的翻譯把關(guān)？又應(yīng)采取何種翻譯標(biāo)準(zhǔn)來(lái)評(píng)價(jià)一份翻譯的好壞？</p><p>　　在語(yǔ)言學(xué)理論蓬勃發(fā)展的大背景下，翻譯學(xué)界的理論學(xué)家們堅(jiān)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的核心學(xué)說(shuō)。這個(gè)理論的出現(xiàn)給翻譯理論的發(fā)展和進(jìn)步注入了極大的動(dòng)力。我們不難發(fā)現(xiàn)，

34、在中國(guó)，正是翻譯對(duì)等論在扮演著英譯政府機(jī)構(gòu)名稱時(shí)的指導(dǎo)準(zhǔn)則。名稱翻譯的定義是用目的語(yǔ)的對(duì)等名或其他詞語(yǔ)來(lái)替換源語(yǔ)的名稱。相似地，中國(guó)政府機(jī)構(gòu)名稱的英譯則是用英文中的對(duì)等名來(lái)替換政府機(jī)構(gòu)的中文名稱。</p><p>　　打個(gè)比方，人們常常將翻譯形容為一個(gè)移動(dòng)的軌道。它沿著一條小徑或穿過(guò)一個(gè)容器將某些信息由A處傳達(dá)至B處。西方的翻譯從業(yè)者和理論學(xué)家們普遍認(rèn)同這一比喻。他們認(rèn)為在信息移動(dòng)或傳遞的過(guò)程中，這個(gè)軌道似的東西

35、并不會(huì)改變信息本身的身份特征。許多中國(guó)人通常也將翻譯理解為“逐句逐段地翻譯整篇文章，不得省略，添加，或有任何改動(dòng)。中西方的兩種觀點(diǎn)都認(rèn)為源語(yǔ)文本和目的語(yǔ)文本必須完全相同。這恰恰說(shuō)明了“翻譯對(duì)等論”的詞源。從本質(zhì)上講，這個(gè)詞描述了源語(yǔ)文本和目的語(yǔ)文本之間的關(guān)系。</p><p>　　對(duì)等是指兩者相等的狀態(tài)，事實(shí)或性質(zhì)。這個(gè)詞廣泛應(yīng)用于諸如化學(xué)，數(shù)學(xué)之類的科學(xué)領(lǐng)域。因此，它逐漸帶上了濃厚的科學(xué)意味，絕對(duì)而準(zhǔn)確。受其影

36、響，翻譯對(duì)等原則也逐漸擁有了絕對(duì)的指示意義，而一開(kāi)始它是作為類別詞被應(yīng)用于翻譯研究的。從語(yǔ)言學(xué)的角度可以將其分為三類，即，形式對(duì)等，語(yǔ)義對(duì)等和語(yǔ)用對(duì)等。在實(shí)際的翻譯實(shí)踐中經(jīng)常發(fā)生這種情況，三類對(duì)等并不能同時(shí)實(shí)現(xiàn)，因此從翻譯質(zhì)量方面看對(duì)等只是相對(duì)的。從翻譯數(shù)量方面看，源語(yǔ)文本和目的語(yǔ)文本有時(shí)也不是相等的。翻譯質(zhì)量和數(shù)量的絕對(duì)對(duì)等雖然可以實(shí)現(xiàn)，也僅僅局限于少數(shù)個(gè)例。</p><p>　　下面我們將簡(jiǎn)單地探討一下翻譯對(duì)

37、等論，品評(píng)三位頗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?guó)政府機(jī)構(gòu)名稱翻譯的研究指引方向，為廣大譯者啟迪思想，給予借鑒。</p><p><b>　　尤金·奈達(dá)</b></p><p>　　尤金·奈達(dá)對(duì)翻譯的定義是：“翻譯是指接受語(yǔ)復(fù)制源語(yǔ)的信息

38、的最近似的自然等值，首先在意義方面，其次在文體方面.”這是一種語(yǔ)言（源語(yǔ)）的文本材料被另一種語(yǔ)言（目的語(yǔ)）對(duì)等的文本材料替換的過(guò)程。譯者必須努力求得等值而不是同一，從某種意義上講，這是強(qiáng)調(diào)復(fù)制信息而不是保留話語(yǔ)的形式。目的語(yǔ)信息應(yīng)與源語(yǔ)的不同成分盡可能吻合，以復(fù)制原文的形式和內(nèi)容。翻譯等值是在比較源語(yǔ)和目的語(yǔ)時(shí)發(fā)現(xiàn)的一種經(jīng)驗(yàn)性的現(xiàn)象，如同翻譯單位一樣，是有用的，指導(dǎo)操作的概念。</p><p>　　奈達(dá)認(rèn)為對(duì)等有

39、兩類，即形式對(duì)等和動(dòng)態(tài)對(duì)等。形式對(duì)等關(guān)注信息本身，不僅關(guān)注其形式，也關(guān)注其內(nèi)容。動(dòng)態(tài)對(duì)等則建立在“對(duì)等效果原則”的基礎(chǔ)之上。</p><p>　　形式對(duì)等指的是在目的語(yǔ)中找到代表源語(yǔ)文本中詞或詞組的最近似的對(duì)等詞。奈達(dá)和泰伯明確表示，語(yǔ)言對(duì)中并不是總存在形式對(duì)等詞。因此，如果翻譯的目的在于達(dá)到形式對(duì)等而非動(dòng)態(tài)對(duì)等時(shí)，則盡可能使用形式對(duì)等詞。然而，由于目的語(yǔ)讀者要理解譯作并不簡(jiǎn)單，源語(yǔ)在目的語(yǔ)中的形式對(duì)等詞有時(shí)會(huì)帶

40、有強(qiáng)烈的隱含意義。根據(jù)奈達(dá)和泰伯的理論，形式對(duì)等會(huì)扭曲譯入語(yǔ)的語(yǔ)法和文體形式，因此扭曲了原文要傳達(dá)的信息，導(dǎo)致目的語(yǔ)讀者誤解或難以理解。</p><p>　　動(dòng)態(tài)對(duì)等是建立在被奈達(dá)稱作“對(duì)等效果原則”的基礎(chǔ)上的。這種原則認(rèn)為目標(biāo)文本的接受者和信息之間的關(guān)系應(yīng)當(dāng)同源語(yǔ)文本的接受者和信息之間的關(guān)系大體相同。譯者必須根據(jù)目的語(yǔ)讀者的語(yǔ)言需求和文化期望修改信息，使譯文表達(dá)完全自然。奈達(dá)對(duì)譯作的關(guān)鍵要求就是自然。他將動(dòng)態(tài)對(duì)

41、等的目標(biāo)定義為尋求源語(yǔ)信息最近似的自然對(duì)等語(yǔ)。這種以目標(biāo)文本的接受者為導(dǎo)向的方法認(rèn)為為了使譯文清新自然，對(duì)語(yǔ)法，詞匯和文化所指進(jìn)行適度調(diào)整相當(dāng)重要。目的語(yǔ)不應(yīng)受到源語(yǔ)干擾，且源語(yǔ)環(huán)境與目的語(yǔ)環(huán)境的差異性應(yīng)被降低到最小。</p><p>　　奈達(dá)更傾向于應(yīng)用動(dòng)態(tài)對(duì)等論，他認(rèn)為這種翻譯法更為有效。因此，翻譯過(guò)程的產(chǎn)品，即目的語(yǔ)文本，必須在譯入語(yǔ)讀者中產(chǎn)生相同的影響。翻譯中的動(dòng)態(tài)對(duì)等不僅僅局限于正確無(wú)誤地交流信息，這一

42、點(diǎn)只有奈達(dá)和泰伯的書才有明確闡述。</p><p><b>　　安德魯·切斯特曼</b></p><p>　　安德魯·切斯特曼在他最新出版的圖書《翻譯模因論》中指出，對(duì)等是翻譯理論的五個(gè)超模因之一，與其他四大超模因同等重要，即源語(yǔ)目的語(yǔ)關(guān)系，不可譯性，異議與直譯以及“所有寫作都是翻譯”的論述。切斯特曼從語(yǔ)用學(xué)的角度分析后得出：真正的對(duì)等，即絕對(duì)對(duì)等

43、，只有“源語(yǔ)文本中的X在任何情況下都被譯為特定目的語(yǔ)文本中的Y，反之亦然”這種情形。典型的例子有數(shù)詞（這種情況也有例外，在某些情境下，它們有特定的文化內(nèi)涵，例如表示“魔力”或“霉運(yùn)”）和一些專業(yè)性詞匯，如氧氣，分子等。如此看來(lái)，真正能夠檢驗(yàn)對(duì)等的唯一方法就是“反譯”，即翻譯目的語(yǔ)中的對(duì)等詞，看其是否與原文本吻合。當(dāng)然，除了少數(shù)詞語(yǔ)和簡(jiǎn)單孤立的句法結(jié)構(gòu)，絕對(duì)對(duì)等是不太可能實(shí)現(xiàn)的。</p><p><b>

44、　　彼得·紐馬克</b></p><p>　　與奈達(dá)的以接受者為導(dǎo)向的翻譯方法不同，紐馬克認(rèn)為取得對(duì)等效果的希望是虛無(wú)的,忠實(shí)于不同對(duì)象而產(chǎn)生的沖突，強(qiáng)調(diào)源語(yǔ)或目的語(yǔ)之間的分歧一直是翻譯理論與實(shí)踐中的首要難題。他建議使用語(yǔ)義翻譯和交際翻譯的方法替換過(guò)去的做法以縮小分歧。語(yǔ)義翻譯試圖在譯入語(yǔ)語(yǔ)義和句法結(jié)構(gòu)允許的范圍內(nèi)，盡可能準(zhǔn)確地傳達(dá)原文的上下文意義。而交際翻譯試圖使譯作對(duì)譯文讀者產(chǎn)生的效果盡

45、量等同于原作對(duì)原文讀者產(chǎn)生的效果。紐馬克對(duì)交際翻譯的描述與奈達(dá)的動(dòng)態(tài)對(duì)等理論類似，因?yàn)樗苍噲D使譯作在譯文讀者身上產(chǎn)生相似的效果，而語(yǔ)義翻譯與奈達(dá)的形式對(duì)等有相似之處。</p><p>　　同時(shí)，紐馬克指出，只有結(jié)合應(yīng)用語(yǔ)義和交際翻譯才能實(shí)現(xiàn)保持原文精髓的目標(biāo)。語(yǔ)義翻譯要求譯者保留原文的審美價(jià)值，盡力維持作者的語(yǔ)言特征和獨(dú)特風(fēng)格。根據(jù)語(yǔ)義翻譯論，譯者應(yīng)該保留原文的語(yǔ)義和句法結(jié)構(gòu)。信息的刪除和縮略都會(huì)導(dǎo)致對(duì)作者創(chuàng)作