智多星欢迎您!13年深圳翻译公司

翻译有标准吗?关于翻译标准的讨论

日期:2019-06-27 | 来源:智多星 | 阅读:

Translation standards are complex and difficult to grasp in translation theory. The understanding of some standards in translation is that wise men see wisdom and benevolent people. The discussion of translation standards by translators seems to have never stopped. I think it is ultimately translated. To understand the problem, the debate surrounding these standards is actually to analyze and discuss the definition, nature and strategy of translation.

The reason why people understand a lot of basic terminology is because their perspective, educational background and cultural system are very different. As a learner of language and literature, we need to re-examine these translation standards. It can be closely integrated with our learning direction to facilitate a deeper understanding and comparison of original foreign literature and Chinese translations.



1. Literal translation or free translation

There are two different translations, literal translation and free translation. English is literal translation and free translation. For a long time, people have heated debates about these two translation methods.

Literal translation

Literal translation refers to the translation of the original text in the translation, as well as the rhetorical style and the form of the sentence in the translation. "A literal translation is one which follows the words of the original exactly without considering The general meaning or style of the text", regardless of the overall meaning or style of the text, the literal translation of the original text is not bad, but I think that literal translation is not entirely "literary translation" of China, by definition It is more corresponding to the "dead translation" proposed by China.

"Dead translation" is a purely word "faithful original", while literal translation is more gentle, as Mao Dun wrote in the article "literal translation and dead translation" in 1922:

"There have been some people who have recently criticized literal translation: they don't mean they don't understand, that is, they seem to be very difficult. We think that the literal translation seems to be more difficult, or there is, but it will never understand. The translation that cannot be understood is dead. The translated text is not literal translation."

But when we look at some literary translations, even if we are literal translations, we can get a general understanding of the translator's meaning, so the subtle difference between the "simple translation" and "dead translation" that is basically consistent is especially difficult for most readers to read, but from Generally speaking, those who oppose the literal translation are still against the translations that do not understand or seem to be strenuous.

2. Free translation

Free translation means that some content and form of the original text should not be directly expressed in Chinese, but after analysis, it is expressed in another form, that is to say, it is more focused on the translation of meaning, rather than on the surface.

"A free translation expresses the sense of the original words without being absolutely exact", "free translation" is actually for "dead translation".

"Transliteration" in China is for "free translation".

In Western translation, except for "literal translation", there is only "liberal translation" (free translation) but there are many classifications in China: dead translation, literal translation, free translation, Hu translation, and chaotic translation.

This seems to be more inclusive and targeted than foreign classifications. In the classroom, we are still basically doing a comparative study of literal translation and free translation.

3. Literal translation and free translation are inseparable

In translation practice, literal translation and free translation are inseparable. Many people blindly pursue literal translation. They want every word and every sentence to be translated according to the superficial meaning of the original text. The translation will be confusing.

When to use literal translation, when to use free translation, there is no fixed principle.

Generally speaking, if the syntactic rules of the original sentence and the target language are relatively close, the word order is also consistent, and the meaning of the original sentence is relatively clear, then some literal translations can be used. This makes it easier to get accurate, fluent translations.

Literal translation and free translation are relative concepts. In many cases, the definition is not particularly clear.

Zheng Hailing said that "translation is easy, that is, easy to change words to make the solution."

My understanding is that the permutation is generally used in translation. Absolute "literary translation" and "free translation" are not available. Translation methods without "alternative" can only be "dead translation."

Perhaps the most difficult problem we have to do when translating is how to control this "alternative". In what scope is not "literary translation" but "free translation".



2. Alienation and naturalization

Alienation and domestication are not simple literal translations and free translations. Alienation and domestication are strategies, and they are cultural.

The literal translation is a skill, a form, and a language level. Simply put, domestication and foreignization is an extension of the concepts of literal translation and free translation. They are closely related to politics, culture, philosophy, poetics, etc., and have two levels more than the two translation methods: literal translation and free translation:

The first is choosing foreign text. Because of the choice of text, the change of language form has different influences and feelings for readers;

Second, under the means of naturalization and alienation, the original text can be translated with the marginal text, or the orthodox text can be translated into the marginal discourse. The literal translation and the free translation can only follow the linguistic form of the original text. The translation of prose in classical Chinese is the practice of foreignization. The translation method is incomprehensible, that is, to some extent, domestication and alienation are more advanced than literal translation.

The foreignizing translation and domesticating translation in western translation theory are basically consistent with the concepts of source-oriented and target-oriented proposed by Chinese scholars.

Foreignization translation is for the translation of the language, and it is the alienation of the language and culture of the original language. Domestication is the adaptation of the language and culture of the original language to the translation of the language.

Alienation

The translation should be based on the source language and the original author.

Referring to alienation, its representative is American scholar Venuti, who proposed that "the purpose of its (anti-translation) is to develop a translation theory and practice to resist the tendency of the target language culture to take the guiding position, thereby highlighting the text in language and culture. "The difference between the two sides", he is more willing to deliberately make the papers uncomfortable, in order to achieve the purpose of allowing readers to accept foreign culture.

Alienation in the translation method to accommodate foreign language features, to absorb foreign culture.

The “Time is money” we often hang on the door, this conceptual alienation seems to be more convincing to the reader.

The "alienation faction" that advocates the preservation of the original language culture in the translation proposes the following reasons:

(1) It is necessary to make the target readers understand the foreign culture, and this is often the purpose of the reader's reading translation;

(2) The translator should believe that the reader's intelligence and imagination can understand the uniqueness of foreign culture;

(3) Transplanting into the source language culture in the target language culture will enrich the language expression of the target language culture and the target language;

(4) Translation should play the role of cultural exchange, and this is the main purpose of translation;

(5) If the translation cannot convey the phenomenon of the source language world, it cannot be regarded as faithful to the original work."

2. Naturalization

The translation should be based on the target language or the target reader. The domesticated translation has more local flavors, and it is more fluent and easy to understand for the readers of the translated language, and can avoid polysemy or ambiguity.

In many cases, the original text and the translation cannot be reconciled due to the existence of cultural differences. At this time, the translator often adopts a domestication translation strategy, which shows that domestication is also a contributor to language differences.

Nietzsche, one of the most influential philosophers in the modern West, is a supporter of naturalization. He thinks "Translation as conquest" in The gay science. He opposes translation. The blind obedience and advocacy advocate that the translator "must to let go of the hands and feet, not to stick to the original text."

(1) Translation is conquest

A. The translator is a creative traitor.

The translator's rebellion also lies in the fact that it is not easy to translate, and the translation of the translation must be counter-intuitive, and it must be countered. The translator is reminded to be cautious and not to be taken lightly. In addition, it means that the translator is called to break through the shackles of the original language and exert its subjectivity and creativity.

B. Translator's manipulator identity.

Le Fauville believes that translation is cultural rewriting, rewriting makes the life of the original text continue, so there is tremendous power, and rewriting is manipulation.

Translation is a form of rewriting text, a form of creating another textual image. In other words, translation creates the literary and cultural phenomena of the original text, the original author, and the original text. As the main body of translation activities, the translator naturally rises to the position of the manipulator.

C. Translator's conqueror identity.

Translation, as a social practice, is, in a sense, a product of political thought and ideology.

Translators always deal with the various cultural phenomena that appear in translation from the political standpoint and ideology of the country. The translator's cultural identity and cultural attitude have obvious political color.

The Romans were conquerors who wanted to plunder the spoils to exploit and plunder Greek cultural products. The translator's identity is the conqueror, and the subjective role is maximized. ”

I don't quite agree with Nietzsche's "translation is conquest". His thought is a naturalization under the premise of non-faithfulness. It can be said that it is an extreme manifestation of domestication translation. It emphasizes and exaggerates the translator's subjectivity. Creative.

Moreover, the large-scale free play will lose the meaning of the translation of the original works to some extent.

(2) Reasons for naturalization

The "naturalization group" that advocates the destination language culture as the destination provides the following reasons:

a. Imposing the language specification of the original language on the target language is generally unrealistic; similarly, it is dangerous to attempt to impose a system of source language culture on the target language culture.

Therefore, the translation must not only overcome the language barriers, but also overcome cultural barriers;

b. Because translation is communication, the translator's task is to avoid cultural conflicts as much as possible; and cultural conflicts lead to various forms of misunderstanding. Therefore, when translating a culture into another culture, the translator must carefully weigh the connotation of ideology in culture;

c. If the content and form of the translation are within the knowledge of the target reader's knowledge of the real world, the reader will be able to better understand the translation.

Therefore, we should transform the source language culture into the target language culture as much as possible. At the same time, the translator is also a communicator; in intercultural communication, he wants to eliminate the barriers and pass the meaning of the source language culture to the readers of the target language culture;

d. The translator should not place too high demands on the reader's intelligence and imagination, and insist on the readers of the target language culture to understand the world of the source language culture authors; the translator should be as close as possible to the source language culture. world;

e. From a communicative point of view, an effective way of communication in one culture is not necessarily equally effective in another culture. ”

3. Domestication and foreignization in China

China's translation has a long history. The dispute between alienation and domestication was the most intense in the 1930s. Lu Xun, Qu Qiubai and Chen Xiyu joined the debate.

At that time, the vernacular text had begun to develop, and the foreignization translation objectively enriched the Chinese expression and promoted the development of vernacular Chinese.

Mr. Lu Xun has always advocated the translation strategy of alienation. He believes that alienation can enrich the Chinese syntactic introduction culture and enhance Chinese.

However, alienation has some negative effects on Chinese translation. In the middle school textbooks, we can easily find that when “When” is encountered, both students and teachers are consistently translated into “when...”, and sometimes excessive alienation will cause our thinking to be stylized, so in terms of syntactic structure. If you still insist on alienation, there will be some drawbacks, as Mr. Siguo said: "I have only recently discovered that what I am doing is not translation studies, but resistance, resistance to English 'aggression', English' imperialism';

I believe that the Chinese have written thousands of articles and said tens of thousands of years of words. They don’t need to learn from others. They can also express their own feelings. When they encounter different opinions, I will not be convinced. The original expression method and words come, and that is the case. If others feel that the expression of English is novel, he has adopted the good eight-year war of resistance. The Chinese soldiers and civilians are sweating and sweating. Why come? If you surrender at the beginning What troubles are gone, if we surrender in English, we don’t have to study any translation..."

Of course, the idea of thinking is somewhat radical, but in terms of syntactic structure, should we be flexible when translating foreign works, rather than stylized as blunt?

In terms of literary translation, I personally still like alienation. Alienation is the only way to improve the level of Chinese literary translation. When using alienation, we can't have too much "translation cavity" to make readers puzzled. In line with the Chinese language specification, the translation should be smooth.

The debate on alienation and domestication will always exist and continue, but in any case, it is important for the readers of the translated language to have an in-depth understanding of the original author's writing intentions and the ideas to be expressed. Tolerant, alienated translations have also been accepted by most people. No matter which strategy we adopt in translation practice, since the return has played an irreplaceable role in our culture, it has coexisted and divided equally.



Third, functional equivalence and form correspondence

Functional equivalence and formal correspondence are a pair of terms gradually developed by American translation theorist Nida.

Functional equivalence theory was introduced to China from the 1980s. Nida proposed functional equivalence from the translation of the Bible, that is, readers' equivalent reaction theory.

Functional equivalence

As a world-renowned linguist, Nida proposed "Dynamic equivalence" and "Formal equivalence" in the 1964 article "Toward a Science of translation", 1969 In the book "Theory and Practice of Translation" written by Charles Taber, Nida changed the term "dynamic equivalence", called "functional equivalence".

Language, Culture and Translating of the Shanghai Foreign Language Education Press in 1993


—— 微信公众号 ——

热门标签