英語畢業(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>　　翻譯對等</b></p><p>　　盡管全世界漸漸成為一個地球村，翻譯仍然是語言和文化之間交流互動，相互影響的主要方式之一。而名稱的翻譯，尤其是政府機構(gòu)名稱的翻譯，更是其中重要的一環(huán)。</p><p>　　翻譯，并不是一個單一的個體，它只有在文化，社會職能，政治和權(quán)力關系的情境下進行才能開枝散葉，這一點已普遍為人們所接受。而今，

33、翻譯研究領域充斥著大量五花八門的翻譯標準，毫無例外，有些是由名人名家提出的，具有相當?shù)臋?quán)威性和影響力。然而在翻譯實踐中，應如何選擇所謂的“翻譯標準”為我們的翻譯把關？又應采取何種翻譯標準來評價一份翻譯的好壞？</p><p>　　在語言學理論蓬勃發(fā)展的大背景下，翻譯學界的理論學家們堅守著“對等原則”的黃金定律。翻譯對等論是西方翻譯理論的核心學說。這個理論的出現(xiàn)給翻譯理論的發(fā)展和進步注入了極大的動力。我們不難發(fā)現(xiàn)，

34、在中國，正是翻譯對等論在扮演著英譯政府機構(gòu)名稱時的指導準則。名稱翻譯的定義是用目的語的對等名或其他詞語來替換源語的名稱。相似地，中國政府機構(gòu)名稱的英譯則是用英文中的對等名來替換政府機構(gòu)的中文名稱。</p><p>　　打個比方，人們常常將翻譯形容為一個移動的軌道。它沿著一條小徑或穿過一個容器將某些信息由A處傳達至B處。西方的翻譯從業(yè)者和理論學家們普遍認同這一比喻。他們認為在信息移動或傳遞的過程中，這個軌道似的東西

35、并不會改變信息本身的身份特征。許多中國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。中西方的兩種觀點都認為源語文本和目的語文本必須完全相同。這恰恰說明了“翻譯對等論”的詞源。從本質(zhì)上講，這個詞描述了源語文本和目的語文本之間的關系。</p><p>　　對等是指兩者相等的狀態(tài)，事實或性質(zhì)。這個詞廣泛應用于諸如化學，數(shù)學之類的科學領域。因此，它逐漸帶上了濃厚的科學意味，絕對而準確。受其影

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

37、等論，品評三位頗具影響力的西方翻譯學者，尤金·奈達，安德魯·切斯特曼和彼得·紐馬克關于翻譯對等論的研究成果。希望他們的理論能夠為中國政府機構(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</b></p><p>　　尤金·奈達對翻譯的定義是：“翻譯是指接受語復制源語的信息

38、的最近似的自然等值，首先在意義方面，其次在文體方面.”這是一種語言（源語）的文本材料被另一種語言（目的語）對等的文本材料替換的過程。譯者必須努力求得等值而不是同一，從某種意義上講，這是強調(diào)復制信息而不是保留話語的形式。目的語信息應與源語的不同成分盡可能吻合，以復制原文的形式和內(nèi)容。翻譯等值是在比較源語和目的語時發(fā)現(xiàn)的一種經(jīng)驗性的現(xiàn)象，如同翻譯單位一樣，是有用的，指導操作的概念。</p><p>　　奈達認為對等有

39、兩類，即形式對等和動態(tài)對等。形式對等關注信息本身，不僅關注其形式，也關注其內(nèi)容。動態(tài)對等則建立在“對等效果原則”的基礎之上。</p><p>　　形式對等指的是在目的語中找到代表源語文本中詞或詞組的最近似的對等詞。奈達和泰伯明確表示，語言對中并不是總存在形式對等詞。因此，如果翻譯的目的在于達到形式對等而非動態(tài)對等時，則盡可能使用形式對等詞。然而，由于目的語讀者要理解譯作并不簡單，源語在目的語中的形式對等詞有時會帶

40、有強烈的隱含意義。根據(jù)奈達和泰伯的理論，形式對等會扭曲譯入語的語法和文體形式，因此扭曲了原文要傳達的信息，導致目的語讀者誤解或難以理解。</p><p>　　動態(tài)對等是建立在被奈達稱作“對等效果原則”的基礎上的。這種原則認為目標文本的接受者和信息之間的關系應當同源語文本的接受者和信息之間的關系大體相同。譯者必須根據(jù)目的語讀者的語言需求和文化期望修改信息，使譯文表達完全自然。奈達對譯作的關鍵要求就是自然。他將動態(tài)對

41、等的目標定義為尋求源語信息最近似的自然對等語。這種以目標文本的接受者為導向的方法認為為了使譯文清新自然，對語法，詞匯和文化所指進行適度調(diào)整相當重要。目的語不應受到源語干擾，且源語環(huán)境與目的語環(huán)境的差異性應被降低到最小。</p><p>　　奈達更傾向于應用動態(tài)對等論，他認為這種翻譯法更為有效。因此，翻譯過程的產(chǎn)品，即目的語文本，必須在譯入語讀者中產(chǎn)生相同的影響。翻譯中的動態(tài)對等不僅僅局限于正確無誤地交流信息，這一

42、點只有奈達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，對等是翻譯理論的五個超模因之一，與其他四大超模因同等重要，即源語目的語關系，不可譯性，異議與直譯以及“所有寫作都是翻譯”的論述。切斯特曼從語用學的角度分析后得出：真正的對等，即絕對對等

43、，只有“源語文本中的X在任何情況下都被譯為特定目的語文本中的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”）和一些專業(yè)性詞匯，如氧氣，分子等。如此看來，真正能夠檢驗對等的唯一方法就是“反譯”，即翻譯目的語中的對等詞，看其是否與原文本吻合。當然，除了少數(shù)詞語和簡單孤立的句法結(jié)構(gòu)，絕對對等是不太可能實現(xiàn)的。</p><p><b>

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

45、量等同于原作對原文讀者產(chǎn)生的效果。紐馬克對交際翻譯的描述與奈達的動態(tài)對等理論類似，因為它也試圖使譯作在譯文讀者身上產(chǎn)生相似的效果，而語義翻譯與奈達的形式對等有相似之處。</p><p>　　同時，紐馬克指出，只有結(jié)合應用語義和交際翻譯才能實現(xiàn)保持原文精髓的目標。語義翻譯要求譯者保留原文的審美價值，盡力維持作者的語言特征和獨特風格。根據(jù)語義翻譯論，譯者應該保留原文的語義和句法結(jié)構(gòu)。信息的刪除和縮略都會導致對作者創(chuàng)作