英语论文
原创论文
留学生作业
英语论文格式
免费论文
essay
英国硕士论文
英国毕业论文
英语论文
留学生论文
澳大利亚论文
新西兰论文
澳洲Report
澳洲留学生论文
美国留学论文
Dissertation
美国硕博论文
essay case
Eassy
Term paper
英语毕业论文
英文论文
课程作业
德语论文
德语专业论文
德语本科论文
德国留学论文
Assignment
日语论文
韩语论文
法语论文
俄语论文

翻译的原则

时间:2022-10-21 来源:未知 编辑:梦想论文 阅读:
Translation is to express the meaning expressed in one language with another language. To be specific, it is to "change words to make mutual understanding". ① However, how to express the meaning expressed in one language with another language? Can we "understand" each other after "exchanging words"? What is the degree of "phase solution"? These questions undoubtedly boil down to: What is the standard of translation? How to translate?
 
Yan Fu was the first enlightening thinker in modern China who systematically introduced Western learning. While introducing Western learning, he proposed the standard of translation - "faithfulness, expressiveness and elegance", which had a great impact on modern Chinese translation practice and theoretical research. "I believe that as long as there is translation in China, there will always be people reading the Three Character Classic!" ②
 
Although Yan Fu's argument has some reasons, it is not difficult to find that "faithfulness, expressiveness and elegance" are neither abstract standards with high generalization nor specific standards with practical guidance, "From a purely theoretical perspective, the juxtaposition of faithfulness, expressiveness and elegance as translation criteria is logically flawed, because it seems to mean that if the original text is not up to standard, it can also be purposely 'up to standard'; if the original text is not elegant, it can also be purposely 'elegant'. Then, wouldn't it be self contradictory to the word 'faithfulness'?" ③
 
The Analects of Confucius Yong Ya said that "the quality of literature is superior to that of literature, which is wild, and the quality of literature is superior to that of history", which means that it is rude to have more simple content than literary talent, and it is also frivolous to have more literary talent than simple content. Confucius advocated "gentleness" and opposed flashy rhetoric, so he said that "words are enough to express meaning" - words can be enough to express meaning. The preface of Er Ya says: "Er, it is near; Ya, it is right. Words can be near, but it is right." The Analects of Confucius · Shuer says that "Zi Suo's elegant words, Poems, Books, and Zhuli are all elegant words". The "elegant words" refer to the "Zhuxia's words" - standard language, which is different from local dialects, and is equivalent to "Mandarin". However, Yan Fu's "elegance" does not refer to "popular characters" - the language of the masses, but "the syntax of characters before the Han Dynasty". In order to cover up the contradiction of "da", Yan Fu revolved between "chang da" (such as "considering the truth but not the truth, even if it is not translated, then da shang yan") and "expression" (such as "the title is called to achieve the purpose, but not the cloud of translation"). He took advantage of it and exerted it. He sought "trust" by "expressing words" - "to achieve it, that is, to believe it"; and "elegance" by "words without text, that is, not far away from the line" - "elegance" by "beyond faith and communication". It is easy to see that Yan Fu's logic is that to "believe", one must "reach", and to "reach", one must "elegant". In other words, "elegant" is the condition of "reach", "reach" is the condition of "trust", and "to reach" has finally become the excuse of "seeking elegance": "to use pre Han word syntax is to reach easy; to use popular words is to seek difficult."
 
Compared with Lin Shu, who "merged with the world's translators", Yan Fu translated only eight or nine kinds of books. Among the eight or nine kinds of books translated by Yan Fu, there are only four "slightly close to literal translation, less to ridicule", namely, "Quxue Xueyan", "Yuanfu", "Quji Quanjie" and "Social Annotation", ⑤ Since then, "the middle meaning of the cycle is the same as the original book, while the analogy used is easier to use your own meaning. It is just a book that uses the foot to describe people. Whether it is true to the original or not, it doesn't matter". ⑥ Although Yan Fu proposed "faithfulness, expressiveness and elegance", he did not fully implement it.
 
Yan Fu put forward the concept of "faithfulness, expressiveness and elegance" when translating and introducing Western learning. Therefore, whether "faithfulness, expressiveness and elegance" is complete as the standard of translation must be examined in the light of the specific historical background at that time. It is not allowed to simply talk about the facts, so as to ignore Yan Fu's "original intention of hard translation".
 
Yan Fu said that those who steal words are the wings of ideals. ⑦ Therefore, from the perspective of "Da", the books translated by the Westernization Movement and missionaries "do not conform to the order of teachers" and "do not conform to the outline of political science", which is contrary to the purpose of "learning from the West as a whole and learning from the West as a function", so "they are not the lifeblood". In contrast, the lifeblood of the "new western learning" is the "reform", that is, to use the theory of evolution and natural human rights to oppose the theory of destiny and the theory of divine grant of monarchy, and to use natural science and mechanical materialism to demonstrate atheism, so as to "open up people's minds and strengthen the foundation". It was "the matter of self strengthening and seed conservation" that Yan Fucai "repeated three compliments". Fundamentally, Yan Fu's "original intention of hard translation" is to "take advantage of others", and his so-called "reaching the goal" is to "reach" the bourgeois democratic theory's "theory of equality of civil rights", "the theory of liberalism and utilitarianism, and natural science and its methodology in the rising period of capitalism".
 
From the perspective of "elegance", Yan Fu's use of "refined words" to "achieve his purpose" is "a must", because the vernacular at that time was far from mature. He had read poetry books in the pre-qin period, and was influenced by ancient Chinese. He shook his head when reading ancient books. He even noticed the tone and breadth of the ancient books. He did not often contact "secular words", and the use of "secular words" was not as easy as the use of ancient Chinese, but he had to translate, We have no choice but to choose the latter from "popular writing" and "ancient writing". Not only in translation, but also in daily writing, we may feel that "using the character syntax before Chinese is easy". More importantly, as a retro reformist, Yan Fu's translation is aimed at the scholar bureaucrats who speak "elegant words". In order to enable them to read the books they have translated, the best way is to attract them with "elegant words" first, and use "elegant words" to break the shackles, so that the stubborn and conservative scholar bureaucrats are willing to accept western theories, As Yan Fu said in his book "Yuan Fu" translated from the public discussion with Liang Ren, "I am translating for those who read more ancient Chinese books", and "if the disciples are popular words, so as to learn from the countryside, this is the so-called late, not revolutionary, in the literary world." One word breaks the mystery! Yan Fu's "elegance" sincerity can be said to be well intentioned: starting from the form of expression, the scholar bureaucrats believed that "the foot is up and down with the Zhou and Qin philosophers" and finally "fell". Of course, Yan Fu, after all, was a reformist with a retro ideology, and later became a conservative. He did not understand that "benefiting the common people" was a historical necessity, and that "benefiting the common people" was a historical promoter.

Simply from the perspective of translation standards, "if you 'believe' completely and truly, and convey the most subtle aspects of the original's thoughts and feelings, meaning, and even the style and verve of its words, then not only 'shun' is no problem, but also the so-called 'ya' (if the original is' ya ') is no problem.' xin ',' da '(shun),' ya 'three words, are really a' letter '." ⑧ In this sense, Yan Fu's "faithfulness, expressiveness and elegance" is logically "congenitally deficient".
 
As early as the 20th year of the reign of Guangxu (1894), Ma Jianzhong (1845-1900) made an in-depth discussion on translation in his Proposed Translation Academy and proposed the criteria of "good translation":
 
It is difficult for a man to translate, but what will he do? In his daily study, he must first compare the words of the translator and all the translators with each other, so as to examine the source of the breeding of each other's words. For the reasons of similarities and differences, all the equivalent meanings should be investigated. He should be careful about the level of sound, analyze the complexity of the words and sentences, and make full use of the abnormality of the style and the reason of the profound and profound meaning. If so, the book will be handed over, the operation will be repeated, the intention will be known, and the expression will be copied, as if its tone. Then, the mind will understand the divine interpretation, the pen will be shaken, and the translated text will be just like the translated text, and there has been no difference between it and the original text. If it is, it will be a good translation.
 
In this passage, Ma Jianzhong not only pointed out the condition of "good translation" - the ability to freely control "the language of the two countries", but also pointed out the process of "good translation" - "a book to hand, repeated operation, to know exactly where its intention is, and to copy its spirit, as if its tone". If the original text can reach the level of "spiritual understanding", it will naturally be able to "shake the pen and write" when translated, and "translated text" will naturally become "good translation" - "no matter what happens in it, then readers can get the same benefits as watching the original text."
 
Ma Jianzhong's "good translation", in a word, is "faithfulness" - believing everything from the content intention to the style effect, which is more abstract than Zhu Yanfu's "faithfulness, expressiveness and elegance", so that "literal translation", "free translation" and "faithfulness, expressiveness and elegance" are unified in "no matter what happens to them... no different from the original text". If it is said that "literal translation" is for "faithfulness" and "free translation" is for "expressiveness", then since the translator has "known exactly where its intention is, and copied its expression as if its tone", and reached the level of "spiritual understanding", "faithfulness" will not be a problem naturally; Since the translators have "examined the source of each other's literature, the reasons for the similarities and differences, all the equivalent meanings, and tried to find out the wrongs", and "examined the level of their voices, analyzed the complexity of their words and sentences, and made full use of the abnormality of their styles, and the reason for their profound and profound meanings", "da" will not naturally become a problem. At the same time, on the premise that the translator can "copy his look as if his tone", the original text "elegant" and "translated text" will certainly not be "vulgar", on the contrary, the original text "vulgar" and "translated text" will certainly not be "elegant".
 
Ma Jianzhong's "good translation" is undoubtedly the highest realm of translation. No matter Nida's "equivalence", Fu Lei's "divine likeness", or Qian Zhongshu's "transformation", they are not out of the circle of "good translation". However, if "good translation" - or "equivalence", "likeness", "transformation" - is used as a standard to measure the translation in actual translation activities, it can be asserted that no translation can "reach the standard", because "thorough and complete transformation" is an unattainable ideal "⑨. Although high standards are for strict requirements, since "the law is above all else" is only "getting it" in the end, it is better to propose practical and specific requirements as the basic principles of translation than to adopt the "unrealized ideal": 1) Abide by the content intention of the original text; 2) Follow the language habits of the target language; 3) The style and register appropriate to the original text.
 
Some people lay particular stress on "elaborate re creation" and regard translation as art; Some people lay particular stress on "certain objective laws" and regard translation as a science. However, whether regarded as art or science, the fundamental task of translation is to "fax". The translator cannot act as a "liar matchmaker", ⑩ otherwise, he will complain about his spouse countless times. Translation is nothing more than filling old wine with new bottles. Although the bottles - language and text types - have changed, the wine - content, style and effect - cannot change.
 
It is a consensus that translation must be "faithful". But what is "faithful"? What is "faithful" should be the content intention and style effect of the original text, not the language expression form of the original text. If we pay more attention to the language expression form of the original text, the translation will undoubtedly be "colorful" and not "qualified" due to "estrangement". If the language expression of the translated text can not even "connect", how can readers "integrate"? How can the result be "the same as the original"? Language expression habits vary greatly with different language types.
 
Wu Yan pointed out the essence of the "translational style" in his "Speaking from the so-called" translational style "in the light of the situation that Chinese speakers translate foreign languages into Chinese: some translators" walk on one leg "," fail to treat two languages dialectically ", the translation" is foreign Chinese ", and fail to" faithfully translate and express the original ". Ye Shengtao said that he "doesn't know a foreign language, and often reads something translated". In the article "Talk about Translation", he frankly said that "because I don't know a foreign language, I want to read the translated version", revealing such a simple truth: "Other people don't know a foreign language, so they should ask you to translate; if everyone knows, you don't have to bother." It was with the "layman" vision of "not knowing a foreign language" that Ye Shengtao saw and pointed out the essence of the problem. The core idea of Ye Shengtao is to oppose "death turnover". In a word, "death turn" is "foreign language written in Chinese characters". "The language habits of all languages are quite stable". According to Ye Shengtao, "translators are people who are proficient in two languages, that is, people who can use two languages to think and express". On the contrary, "people who can use two languages to think and express" are "people who are proficient in two languages", and "people who are proficient in two languages" can become "translators". Ye Shengtao means that "dead translator" cannot be a "translator", and the fundamental reason why he cannot be a "translator" is that he is not proficient in two languages, cannot use two languages to think and express, and is not proficient in two languages, cannot use two languages to think and express, and the final result is only "dead translator" - "foreign language written in Chinese characters".
 
Wu Yan examines "foreign Chinese" from the perspective of "expert", criticizes "translation style" from the perspective of "dialectical treatment of two languages and characters", and points out that "according to the characteristics of Chinese language and characters, the original works should be translated and expressed faithfully and thoroughly". Ye Shengtao looked at "foreign words written in Chinese characters" from the perspective of "layman", criticized "death overturn" based on the basic conditions of "spiritual two languages", and pointed out that "the language habits of all languages are quite stable, and we should accept foreign influence on the condition that we are compatible with Chinese language habits". Wu Yan and Ye Shengtao have different perspectives on the issue, but their views are completely the same: "according to the characteristics of Chinese language" and "compatible with Chinese language habits". Wu Yan and Ye Shengtao, aiming at the situation that Chinese speaking translators translate foreign languages into Chinese, advocated that the translation should be "based on the characteristics of Chinese language" and "compatible with Chinese language habits". As far as "translators" and "all translators" are concerned, Wu Yan and Ye Shengtao's proposition is nothing more than following the language habits of the target language!
 
Each language has its own style, and there are obvious differences between different styles. Although most words in each language are applicable to various styles, many words are only used in certain specific styles, some words are only used in written language, some words are only used in certain specific styles, some words are only used in written language, and some words are only used in spoken language. At the same time, the choice of words and sentences will be different due to different communication identities, communication occasions, communication contents and communication psychology. As far as translation is concerned, it is of great benefit to understand and master the differences between spoken and written language, formal language style and informal language style in the two languages of "the translator" and "so translator", and then to use words and sentences that are not only "agreeable" but also "appropriate". Generally speaking, the original text is written, while the translated text cannot be spoken; The original text is colloquial, and the translation cannot be written; The original text is very formal, but the translation cannot be informal; The original text is not formal, and the translation cannot be very formal. Although the basic grammar and vocabulary in a language are understood and used by most people who speak the language and belong to the "common core", different industries have different "jargon" and different majors have different "terminology". The translation should be a unified whole. The translation should not mix spoken and written languages, nor should "dialect" and "refined language" be mixed. In a word, when translating, the translator must pay attention to the "register" of words and sentences in the original and the translated text, so that the translated text is not only "agreeable" in semantics, but also "appropriate" in pragmatics.
 
According to Zhang Zhongying's article "On Style in Translation", an American finally translated the "God damn it" that Confucius swore to say when he translated The Analects of Confucius Yongya! Although the translation of "God damn it" is "agreeable" in semantics, it is not "appropriate" in pragmatics - even if "in a panic, swear in the mouth", Confucius, who is "gentle", will never be able to say an American "national curse". It can be seen that, in addition to adhering to the content and intention of the original text and following the language habits of the target language, the translation must also conform to the style and register of the original text.

分享到:
------分隔线----------------------------
发表评论
请自觉遵守互联网相关的政策法规,严禁发布色情、暴力、反动的言论。
最新评论
最近热门免费论文
随机推荐免费论文