功能语境视角下的《中庸》英译本比较研究
发布时间：2018-08-04 20:16
【摘要】：本研究以系统功能语言学语境理论为视角,对《中庸》的陈荣捷译本和休中成译本进行比较分析,以探究两个译本意义体现形式的特色,并从语境视角对产生译本差异的原因进行阐释,以期为以《中庸》为代表的典籍翻译理论与实践带来新的启示。语境理论是系统功能语言学的重要组成部分,具有很强解释力和可操作性,因而被广泛应用于语篇分析和翻译研究,但从目前的研究来看,无论是功能语境理论自身还是其与翻译研究的结合,都存在一些值得进一步深入思考的问题。从功能语境理论自身来看,关于情景语境的语域与语言功能耦合关系的讨论居多,而对文化语境的探讨明显不足。而翻译中的语境研究主要围绕原文与译文在语境各层次之间的对应关系展开,尤其是原文与译文情景语境语域组成要素及其体现形式的对应与转换关系,但对产生译本差异的语境要素作用机制关注较少。为了更好地对《中庸》两个英译本进行对比分析,本研究对功能语境理论进行了再思考与拓展并对翻译研究中的语境转化机制进行了初步地探讨。基于功能语境理论框架,本研究对《中庸》原文及其两个英译本进行了比较分析,研究发现两个译本均较为忠实地传达了原文意义,但在具体体现形式上仍存在一定差异:首先,从概念意义体现形式来看,陈译小句过程类型与原文更为接近,休译关系过程比例高于原文和陈译,而心理过程少于陈译,且被动结构大于陈译。从逻辑语义关系来看,休译的嵌入小句比例明显高于陈译,逻辑意义层次及所涉及参数较多,说明休译解释性内容较多,句式较为复杂。其次,从人际意义体现形式来看,在语气上,陈译较忠实于原文语气结构,而休译祈使句多于陈译,感叹句少于陈译,说明休译与读者互动较多,但减少了原作者个人情感表达与评价性内容。从情态词来看,休译情态表意愿的义务情态词高于陈译,而意愿情态词低于陈译和原文,表明译者受到译入语思维方式及宗教文化的影响,认为在实践中庸之道的过程中,人们应履行适当的义务和承担相应的责任。从评价性资源来看,休译消极意义词汇比例高于陈译,说明译者在一定程度上受到译入语宗教因素的影响。最后,从语篇意义体现形式来看,宏观层面上,陈译注释较少,原文语篇题材完全采用朱熹注释本,而休译增加了对原文段落的划分、设定各部分标题并增加大量文内注释及开篇引言。语篇微观层面上,休译特殊主位较多,语法词汇等衔接手段也高于陈译和原文,说明休译为便于读者更好地理解原文,对原文语篇结构进行了适当调整。在语言分析的基础上,我们从情景语境和文化语境角度对产生两个译本意义体现形式差异的原因进行了阐释:陈译忠实于原文的情景语境配置,"人"与"天地"之间的关系是彼此相互关联又互动统一的整体,人通过社会活动、自身内省过程以及家庭生活、政治活动等方方面面来践行"天道"与"人道"的统一。整体来看,陈译较为忠实地再现了原文情景,语言凝练,句式简洁。休译构建的译文语篇中,为使译文读者更好地理解原文,对原文情景进行了适度调整,强化了客观情景的描写,并增加了参与者与读者的互动,译文语篇阐释性内容较多,句式较为复杂。两个译本的差异取决于两位译者的文化身份及认知倾向,陈荣捷是美籍华裔,对中国传统典籍文化尤其是中国儒家思想有较深刻的理解,深谙原文产生的时代背景及其所植根的中国传统儒学"天人合一"思想,因而较为忠实地再现了原文的思想内容与哲学内涵。而休中诚为海外汉学家,受到西方"主客对立"哲学观和理性思维的影响,在译文中增加了客体参与者要素,相应减少了主体参与者要素,并减少了主体参与者的评价与判断,但增加了与译文读者的互动,从而使叙述更加客观;同时译者从译文读者阅读的期待出发,对译文内容进行了适当调整与修改,并增添了大量的背景信息和评述性内容。本研究的意义主要体现在以下几个方面:首先,本研究对《中庸》及其两个英译本经验意义、人际意义以及语篇意义的体现形式进行了全面、系统地比较与分析,并从情景语境、文化语境以及译者主观能动作用等角度对产生两个译本差异的原因进行了阐释,从而避免了以往研究中主观判断、点评式的分析方法所带来的片面性,进一步丰富和发展了《中庸》及其英译研究。其次,本研究将微观的语言分析与宏观的文化语境阐释相结合,并将译者主体因素纳入考察范围,构建出一个翻译功能语境模式,能够较全面地考察翻译中的语境要素及作用机制。最后,本研究进一步丰富和细化了功能语境中文化语境的相关内容,从而更好地指导语篇分析与翻译实践。
[Abstract]:This study, from the perspective of the systemic functional linguistic context, makes a comparative analysis of the Chen Rongjie and Hugh Chinese versions of the doctrine of the mean, in order to explore the characteristics of the two translations, and to explain the reasons for the translation of the translation from the context of context, with a view to bringing the theory and practice of the translation of the classics as the representative. Context theory, an important part of systemic functional linguistics, has a strong explanatory and maneuverability, and is widely used in discourse analysis and translation studies. However, from the current research, there are some further reflections on both the theory of functional context and the combination of translation studies. From the point of view of the theory of functional context, there are many discussions on the coupling relationship between the register and the language function of the situational context, while the discussion of the cultural context is obviously inadequate. In order to make a comparative analysis of the two English versions of the doctrine of the mean, this study rethinks and expands the theory of functional context and preliminarily discusses the mechanism of context transformation in the study of translation. Based on the framework of functional context, this study makes a comparative analysis of the original text and its two English versions. It is found that the two versions all convey the meaning of the original faithfully, but there are still some differences in the concrete forms. First, from the form of conceptual meaning, the type of the sentence is closer to the original. From the logical semantic relation, the proportion of the embedded clauses in the translation is obviously higher than that of the old translation, and the logical meaning level and the parameters involved are more, indicating that the interpretive content is more complex and the sentence pattern is more complex. Secondly, from the interpersonal meaning. In the present form, in terms of the mood, Chen's translation is more faithful to the original tone structure, while the rest of the imperative sentence is more than the old translation, the exclamatory sentence is less than the old translation, which shows that there is more interaction between the rest and the reader, but it reduces the personal emotional expression and the evaluative content of the original author. The word is lower than the old translation and the original text, indicating that the translator is influenced by the way of thinking and religious culture. In the course of the practice of the mean, people should fulfill the appropriate obligations and bear the corresponding responsibility. From the evaluation of the resources, the proportion of the negative translation words is higher than that of the old translation, which shows that the translator is subject to the translation to some extent. The influence of religious factors. Finally, from the form of discourse meaning, on the macro level, the translation notes are less, the subject matter of the original text is fully adopted by the Zhu Xi annotation, while the rest translation increases the division of the text paragraphs, sets up the headlines and adds a large number of notes and introductions. The means of grammatical and lexical cohesion are also higher than that of the original and the original. It shows that it is convenient for readers to better understand the original text and adjust the textual structure of the original text properly. On the basis of the linguistic analysis, we explain the reasons for the difference in the form of the two translation meanings from the situational context and the cultural context. The relationship between "human" and "heaven and earth" is the unity of each other. People practice the unity of "heaven" and "Humanitarianism" through social activities, self introspection process, family life and political activities. In the text of the translation construction, in order to make the readers understand the original text better, the text can be properly adjusted, the description of the objective situation is strengthened, the interaction between the participants and the reader is increased, the interpretative content of the translation text is more and the sentence pattern is more complex. The differences between the two translations depend on the cultural body of the two translators. Chen Rongjie, a Chinese American, has a profound understanding of Chinese traditional classics culture, especially Chinese Confucianism, and has a deep understanding of the background of the origin of the original and the thought of "unity of nature and man" of Chinese traditional Confucianism, which is rooted in the original Chinese Confucianism, and thus faithfully reproduces the ideological content and philosophical connotation of the original text. The sinologist, influenced by the philosophical and rational thinking of "the antagonism of subject and guest" in the west, adds the elements of the object participant in the translation, reduces the main participants' elements and reduces the evaluation and judgment of the main participants, but increases the interaction with the translation readers, thus making the narrative more objective; meanwhile translators read from the translation readers. The significance of this study is mainly reflected in the following aspects: first, this study has carried out a comprehensive and systematic comparison of the empirical meaning, interpersonal meaning and textual meaning of "Zhong Yong >" and its two English versions. Compared with the analysis, and from the context of the situation, the cultural context and the translator's subjective initiative, the reasons of the two translation differences are explained, thus avoiding the one-sided nature of the subjective judgment and the analysis method of the review in the previous study, and further enriching and developing the study of "moderation" and its English translation. Secondly, this study will The microcosmic language analysis combined with the macro cultural context interpretation, and integrates the translator's main factors into the scope of the study, constructs a translation functional context model, and can comprehensively investigate the contextual elements and the mechanism of action in the translation. Finally, this study further enriches and fines the related contents of the cultural context in the functional context. And better guide the analysis of discourse and the practice of translation.
【学位授予单位】：北京科技大学
【学位级别】：博士
【学位授予年份】：2017
【分类号】：H315.9
本文编号：2165020
[Abstract]:This study, from the perspective of the systemic functional linguistic context, makes a comparative analysis of the Chen Rongjie and Hugh Chinese versions of the doctrine of the mean, in order to explore the characteristics of the two translations, and to explain the reasons for the translation of the translation from the context of context, with a view to bringing the theory and practice of the translation of the classics as the representative. Context theory, an important part of systemic functional linguistics, has a strong explanatory and maneuverability, and is widely used in discourse analysis and translation studies. However, from the current research, there are some further reflections on both the theory of functional context and the combination of translation studies. From the point of view of the theory of functional context, there are many discussions on the coupling relationship between the register and the language function of the situational context, while the discussion of the cultural context is obviously inadequate. In order to make a comparative analysis of the two English versions of the doctrine of the mean, this study rethinks and expands the theory of functional context and preliminarily discusses the mechanism of context transformation in the study of translation. Based on the framework of functional context, this study makes a comparative analysis of the original text and its two English versions. It is found that the two versions all convey the meaning of the original faithfully, but there are still some differences in the concrete forms. First, from the form of conceptual meaning, the type of the sentence is closer to the original. From the logical semantic relation, the proportion of the embedded clauses in the translation is obviously higher than that of the old translation, and the logical meaning level and the parameters involved are more, indicating that the interpretive content is more complex and the sentence pattern is more complex. Secondly, from the interpersonal meaning. In the present form, in terms of the mood, Chen's translation is more faithful to the original tone structure, while the rest of the imperative sentence is more than the old translation, the exclamatory sentence is less than the old translation, which shows that there is more interaction between the rest and the reader, but it reduces the personal emotional expression and the evaluative content of the original author. The word is lower than the old translation and the original text, indicating that the translator is influenced by the way of thinking and religious culture. In the course of the practice of the mean, people should fulfill the appropriate obligations and bear the corresponding responsibility. From the evaluation of the resources, the proportion of the negative translation words is higher than that of the old translation, which shows that the translator is subject to the translation to some extent. The influence of religious factors. Finally, from the form of discourse meaning, on the macro level, the translation notes are less, the subject matter of the original text is fully adopted by the Zhu Xi annotation, while the rest translation increases the division of the text paragraphs, sets up the headlines and adds a large number of notes and introductions. The means of grammatical and lexical cohesion are also higher than that of the original and the original. It shows that it is convenient for readers to better understand the original text and adjust the textual structure of the original text properly. On the basis of the linguistic analysis, we explain the reasons for the difference in the form of the two translation meanings from the situational context and the cultural context. The relationship between "human" and "heaven and earth" is the unity of each other. People practice the unity of "heaven" and "Humanitarianism" through social activities, self introspection process, family life and political activities. In the text of the translation construction, in order to make the readers understand the original text better, the text can be properly adjusted, the description of the objective situation is strengthened, the interaction between the participants and the reader is increased, the interpretative content of the translation text is more and the sentence pattern is more complex. The differences between the two translations depend on the cultural body of the two translators. Chen Rongjie, a Chinese American, has a profound understanding of Chinese traditional classics culture, especially Chinese Confucianism, and has a deep understanding of the background of the origin of the original and the thought of "unity of nature and man" of Chinese traditional Confucianism, which is rooted in the original Chinese Confucianism, and thus faithfully reproduces the ideological content and philosophical connotation of the original text. The sinologist, influenced by the philosophical and rational thinking of "the antagonism of subject and guest" in the west, adds the elements of the object participant in the translation, reduces the main participants' elements and reduces the evaluation and judgment of the main participants, but increases the interaction with the translation readers, thus making the narrative more objective; meanwhile translators read from the translation readers. The significance of this study is mainly reflected in the following aspects: first, this study has carried out a comprehensive and systematic comparison of the empirical meaning, interpersonal meaning and textual meaning of "Zhong Yong >" and its two English versions. Compared with the analysis, and from the context of the situation, the cultural context and the translator's subjective initiative, the reasons of the two translation differences are explained, thus avoiding the one-sided nature of the subjective judgment and the analysis method of the review in the previous study, and further enriching and developing the study of "moderation" and its English translation. Secondly, this study will The microcosmic language analysis combined with the macro cultural context interpretation, and integrates the translator's main factors into the scope of the study, constructs a translation functional context model, and can comprehensively investigate the contextual elements and the mechanism of action in the translation. Finally, this study further enriches and fines the related contents of the cultural context in the functional context. And better guide the analysis of discourse and the practice of translation.
【学位授予单位】：北京科技大学
【学位级别】：博士
【学位授予年份】：2017
【分类号】：H315.9
【参考文献】
相关期刊论文 前10条
1 赵常玲;何伟;;功能语境视角下的《中庸》英译比较研究[J];西安外国语大学学报;2016年04期
2 何伟;赵常玲;;翻译中的认知功能语境模式[J];外国语文;2016年05期
3 刘华文;叶君武;;刍议汉学域界内的哲学典籍译释学研究[J];中国翻译;2016年02期
4 侯健;;相遇在濠梁之上:再论安乐哲与郝大维的《中庸》英译[J];外国语(上海外国语大学学报);2016年01期
5 何伟;赵常玲;;从功能语境看译者的选择——兼评萧红小说《手》的两个英译本[J];外语教学;2016年01期
6 黄巧亮;;文化态势与翻译策略选择[J];外语学刊;2016年01期
7 曾蕾;胡红辉;;《论语》及其英译本中投射语言结构的功能语篇对等研究[J];外语与外语教学;2015年06期
8 周新凯;许钧;;中国文化价值观与中华文化典籍外译[J];外语与外语教学;2015年05期
9 黄国文;;“译意”和“译味”的系统功能语言学解释[J];外语教学与研究;2015年05期
10 杨少涵;;《中庸》“政犹蒲卢”郑、朱注之歧异与会通[J];中山大学学报(社会科学版);2015年05期
相关博士学位论文 前3条
1 郭磊;新教传教士柯大卫英译《四书》之研究[D];北京外国语大学;2014年
2 侯健;推而行之：《中庸》英译研究[D];河南大学;2013年
3 徐玉臣;“语境——纯理功能耦合假说”的多维关系研究[D];复旦大学;2005年
，本文编号：2165020
本文链接：https://www.wllwen.com/waiyulunwen/yingyulunwen/2165020.html
