英译中翻译论文：行为（翻译行为理论）Action (theory of 'translatorial action')

“翻译行为理论”（贾斯塔•赫兹•曼塔利），它代表一个以功能为导向的翻译理论与实践，这种理论是由曼塔利在1984年首先提出来的。在这种理论中我们主要是将翻译设想成一个跨文化交流的过程，其最终产品是一个能够适当地运用在具体情况和背景下的文本。在这个概念中，既没有源和目标文本的比较，语言学也不起主要作用，而翻译是适用在专家和客户之间的合作互动的大背景下。The theory of 'translatorial action' (trans- latorisches Handeln), which represents a function-oriented approach to the theory and practice of translation, was developed by Justa Holz-Manttari (1984). Translation is here conceived primarily as a process of intercultural communication, whose end prod¬uct is a text which is capable of functioning appropriately in specific situations and con¬texts of use. In this conception, neither source- and target-text comparison, nor linguistics, has any significant role to play, and translation is situated within the wider context of cooperat¬ive interaction between professionals (experts) and clients.
霍尔兹•曼塔利的目的是提供一个理论基础和概念框架，职业译者可以从中得出获得指导；为了发展她的方法，她借鉴了通信理论和行为理论。通信理论使她特别指出跨文化障碍沟通过程是翻译行为理论的组成部分，，而行动理论为她在划定翻译行为的具体特点时提供了依据。Holz-Manttari's aim is to provide a theoreti¬cal basis and conceptual framework from which guidelines for professional translators may be drawn; and in developing her appro¬ach, she draws on communication theory and on action theory. Communication theory enables her to highlight the components involved in a process of communication across cultural barriers, while action theory provides the basis for a delineation of the specific characteristics of translatorial action.
对翻译行为的主要目的是跨越文化障碍时能够合作性的、功能性的沟通。这涉及到一个很好的协议而不是传统意义上认为的翻译文本，为了把她的理论与更传统的翻译方法相区别，在德国，霍尔兹-曼塔适用了一个非常独特并具有高度抽象的术语，有时甚至回避“翻译”，为了避免在内涵与传统预期上对她的理论产生误导。她认为，因为动词“翻译”需要一个语法对象，因此，一提到“翻译”，人们往往直接关注到需要翻译的文本，这就是对这个翻译文本产生损害，她发现这个导向特别无用（霍尔兹•曼塔利1986：355）。
The primary purpose of translatorial action is to enable cooperative, functionally adequate communication to take place across cultural barriers. This involves a good deal more than what is traditionally conceived as the transla¬tion of texts, and in order to set her theory apart from more traditional approaches, Holz- Manttari develops, in German, a distinctive and highly abstract terminology, at times eschewing even the term 'translation' (Obersetzung), in order to avoid the connotations and expectations traditionally attached to that term. She argues that because the verb "translate' (ubersetzen) requires a grammatical object, it tends to direct attention back towards the text that is to be translated, to the detriment of the text that is to be produced, an orientation which she finds particularly unhelpful (Holz-Manttari 1986: 355). In her model, source-text analysis is reduced to an 'analysis of construction and function' (1984: 139ff.), in which the actual part played by the source text is extremely limited. The source text is viewed as a mere tool for the realization of communicative func¬tions; it is totally subordinate to its purpose, is afforded no intrinsic value, and may undergo radical modification in the interest of the target reader. The translator is unilaterally committed to the target situation because it is primarily the message and the commission, rather than the text itself, that have to be rendered for the client. It is mainly because the source text may be thus 'dethroned' (Newmark 1991b: 106) that Holz-Manttari's theory has met with objections or reservations, even by theorists who them¬selves apply a functional approach to translation (see for example Nord 1991a: 28). Newmark also finds fault with the 'modernistic abstract jargon of contemporary Public Rela¬tions' and the 'businesslike manner of writing' which, he believes, obscure "the real issues in translation' (1991b: 106). However, in Holz- Manttari's model, translation and other forms of (foreign language) text production are conceived as part of, rather than constitutive of, translatorial action. One purpose of the translatorial text operations is to establish whether the content and form components of the source text are functionally suitable for the target text. In making this decision, the transla¬tor cannot be guided by the source text alone, but must research, in addition, the target cul¬ture's conception of the subject matter, of text classes and of genres. The textual profile of the target text is determined by its function, and whether this is or is not similar to the textual profile of the source text can only be estab¬lished through systematic translatorial analysis. The translator, as an expert communicator, is at the crucial centre of a long chain of communi¬cation from the original initiator to the ultimate receiver of a message, and is thus situated within the wider social context. The model takes account of the relationship between trans¬lator and client as well as the relationship between translator and original writer, and between translator and reader. The ethical responsibility of the translator is seen to derive from his or her status as an expert in the field of transcultural message transfer, because only translators with the requisite expertise can succeed in producing a functionally adequate text (professional profiles are discussed in Holz-Manttari 1986: 363ff.). This has clear consequences for the training of translators.
Holz-Manttari's main aim is to specify the factors that guide translatorial action, conceived as professional text production. An action is determined by its function and pur¬pose, and its outcome, too, must be judged by these criteria. The purpose of the translatorial action process is to produce a message trans¬mitter (Botschafistrager) that can be utilized in superordinate configurations of actions (Handlungsgefiige) whose function is to guide and coordinate communicative, cooperative action (Holz-Manttari 1984: 17).
In the process of translatorial action, texts act as message-transmitter compounds (Botschafistrager im Verbund) of content (Tektonik), structured according to function and represented by formal elements (Textur). A source text is a text to which a translation initiator, a client, has assigned, primarily or secondarily, the function of serving as source material for translatorial action. A target text, to be used either by the translation initiator or by some other user, is the outcome of a trans¬lation expert's translatorial action.
The notion of function is central in two respects. On the one hand, it forces the transla¬tor to embed the product of translatorial action in a complex situation of human needs. On the other hand, it forces the translator to embed translatorial action in the social order, i.e. in a society organized by a division of labour. The main roles in a translation process are played by one or more persons or institutions. The roles include the initiator, the commissioner, the text producer, the translator, the target-text "applicator" and the receptor, and each role is highly complex.
The translator is the expert whose task it is to produce message transmitters for use in transcultural message transfer. To do this, the translator must, at a particular place and at a particular time, produce a particular product for a particular purpose. The translator's actions must be informed by suitable data, and must be carried out according to specifically negotiated conditions. Finally, the process must be completed by a deadline. Translatorial action therefore involves not only the transla¬tor as translation expert, but also the client/ commissioner with whom the translator must negotiate cooperatively.
So, translation is embedded in the purpose¬ful configuration of actions which is trans¬latorial action, and this, in turn, is embedded in a hierarchy of complex actions and sub¬ordinate to the global aim of transcultural communication. Therefore, a definition of translation cannot be based purely on a con¬figuration of elements such as UNIT OF TRANSLATION, source text, or genre. Rather, a theoretically sound definition of translatorial action must take account of all the elements involved in human communicative action across cultures; in particular, it must take into consideration the client's culture, the process of text production in its widest sense, and the concept of expert action.
Because cultures may have different con¬ventions, transcultural text production may require substitution of elements of the source text by elements judged more appropriate to the function the target text is to serve. This function is determined by the purpose of the communicative action in which the text is to play a part as a message transmitter. 
Text production is the purpose of transla¬torial action, and the texts produced will be used by clients as message transmitters in combination with others for transcultural message transfer. The purpose of the message transfer is the coordination of action-oriented, communicative cooperation. The purpose of the coordination is the direction of cooperation towards an overall aim. When communication is to take place transculturally, this aim can only be met if measures are taken to overcome cultural barriers. In other words, culture- specific circumstances predetermine to a great extent the text to be produced, and the measures taken to overcome cultural barriers constitute a significant part of expert action.
In establishing a product specification (Produktspezifikation), that is, a description of the properties and features required of the target text, text-external factors pertaining to the commissioning of the target text influence to a great extent the framework within which all the textual operations involved in transla¬torial action are to take place. These factors include the aim of the action, the mode in which it is to be realized, the fee to be paid and the deadline for delivery, all of which are negotiated with the client who has commis-sioned the action. The roles of all actors involved, the overall aim of the action, the purposes of individual actions within the configuration of actions in which the text to be produced will be used, the circumstances in which these actions will take place, and the functions of message transmitters are all sub¬jected to careful analysis and evaluation.
As experts in translational action, transla¬tors are responsible for carrying out a commission in such a way that a functionally appropriate text is produced. They are respon¬sible for deciding whether, when and how a translation can be realized. Whether a commis¬sion can be realized depends on the circums¬tances of the target culture, and the translator must negotiate with the client in order to establish what kind of optimal translation can be guaranteed, given a specific set of circums¬tances. The translatorial text operations are based on analytical, synthetic, evaluative and creative actions that take account of the ulti¬mate purpose of the text to be-produced and of aspects of different cultures in order that the distances between them may be overcome.
Holz-Manttari's concept of translatorial action is considered relevant for all types of translation and the theory is held to provide guidelines for every decision to be taken by the translator. .Translatorial action is initiated externally, and its conditions are, at least partly, determined by purposes and aims that are peculiar to each individual case of transla-tion.
See a/so:
COMMUNICATIVE/FUNCnONAL APPROACHES; SKOPOS THEORY.
Further reading
Holz-Manttari 1984, 1986, 1988, 1992; New- mark 1991b; Nord 1988, 1991a, 1997.
CHRISTINA SCHAFFNER
 
Adaptation may be understood as a set of translative operations which result in a text that is not accepted as a translation but is nevertheless recognized as representing a source text of about the same length. As such, the term may embrace numerous vague notions such as imitation, rewriting, and so on. Strictly speaking, the concept of adaptation requires recognition of translation as non-adaptation, as a somehow more constrained mode of transfer. For this reason, the history of adaptation is parasitic on historical concepts of translation.
The initial divide between adaptation and translation might be dated from CICERO and Horace (see LATIN TRADmON), both of whom referred to the interpres (translator) as work¬ing word-for-word and distinguished this method from what they saw as freer but ent¬irely legitimate results of transfer operations. The different interpretations given to the Horatian verse, Nec verbum verba curabis reddere fidus interpres ('and you, will not render word-for-word pike a] faithful transla¬tor') - irrespective of whether they were for or against the word-for-word precept - effec¬tively reproduced the logic by which adaptations could be recognized.
The golden age of adaptation was in the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries, the epoch of the belles infideles, which started in France and then spread to the rest of the world (see FRENCH TRADITION). The very free trans¬lations carried out during this period were justified in terms of the need for foreign texts to be adapted to the tastes and habits of the target culture, regardless of the damage done to the original. The nineteenth century wit-nessed a reaction to this 'infidelity' (see GERMAN TRADITION), but adaptations con¬tinued to predominate in the theatre. In the twentieth century, the proliferation of techni¬cal, scientific and commercial documents has given rise to a preference for transparency in translation, with an emphasis on efficient communication; this could be seen as licensing a form of adaptation which involves rewriting a text for a new readership.
Generally speaking, historians and scholars of translation take a negative view of adapta¬tion, dismissing the phenomenon as distortion, falsification or censorship, but it is rare to find clear definitions of the terminology used in discussing this controversial concept.
Main definitions
It is possible to classify definitions of adaptation under specific themes (translation technique, genre, metalanguage, faithfulness), though inevitably these definitions tend to overlap.
As a translation technique, adaptation can be defined in a technical and objective way. The best-known definition is that of Vinay and Darbelnet (1958), who list adaptation as their seventh translation procedure: adaptation is a procedure which can be used whenever the context referred to in the original text does not exist in the culture of the target text, thereby necessitating some form of re-creation. This widely accepted definition views adaptation as a procedure employed to achieve an equiva¬lence of situations wherever cultural mis¬matches are encountered.
Adaptation is sometimes regarded as a form of translation which is characteristic of particular genres, most notably drama. Indeed, it is in relation to DRAMA TRANSLATION that adaptation has been most frequently studied. Brisset (1986: 10) views adaptation as a "retenitorialization' of the original work and an 'annexation' in the name of the audience of the new version. San- toyo (1989: 104) similarly defines adaptation as a form of 'naturalizing' the play for a new milieu, the aim being to achieve the same effect that the work originally had, but with an audi¬ence from a different cultural background.
Adaptation is also associated with the genres of advertising and SUBTITLING. The emphasis here is on preserving the character and function of the original text, in preference to preserving the form or even the semantic meaning, especially where acoustic and/or visual factors have to be taken into account. Other genres, such as children's literature, require the re-creation of the message accord¬ing to the sociolinguistic needs of a different readership (Puurtinen 1995). The main fea¬tures of this type of adaptation are the use of summarizing techniques, paraphrase and omission.
Adaptation is, perhaps, most easily justified when the original text is of a metalinguistic nature, that is, when the subject matter of the text is language itself. This is especially so with didactic works on language generally, or on specific languages. Newmark (1981) points out that in these cases the adaptation has to be based on the translator's judgement about his/ her readers' knowledge. Coseriu (1977) argues that this kind of adaptation gives precedence to the function over the form, with a view to producing the same effect as the original text. However, while such writers start from the principle that nothing is untranslatable, others like Berman (1985) claim that the adaptation of metalanguage is an unnecessary form of exoticism.
Definitions of adaptation reflect widely varying views about the concept vis-a-vis the issue of remaining 'faithful' to the original text. Some argue that adaptation is necessary precisely in order to keep the message intact (at least on the global level), while others see it as a betrayal of the original author. For the former, the refusal to adapt confines the reader to an artificial world of 'foreignness"; for the latter, adaptation is tantamount to the destruc¬tion and violation of the original text. Even those who recognize the need for adaptation in certain circumstances are obliged to admit that, if remaining faithful to the text is a sine qua non of translation, then there is a point at which adaptation ceases to be translation at all.
Modes, conditions and restrictions 
By comparing adaptations with the texts on which they are based, it is possible to elaborate a provisional list of the ways (or modes) in which adaptations are carried out, the motiva¬tions (or conditions) for the decision to adapt, and the limitations (or restrictions) on the work of the adapter.
In terms of mode of adaptation, the pro¬cedures used by the adapter can be classified as follows:
« transcription of the original: word-for- word reproduction of part of the text in the original language, usually accompanied by a literal translation « omission: the elimination or reduction of
part of the text •» expansion: making explicit information that is implicit in the original, either in the main body or in footnotes or a glossary o exoticism: the substitution of stretches of . slang, dialect, nonsense words, etc. in the original text by rough equivalents in the target language (sometimes marked by italics or underlining) •» updating: the replacement of outdated or obscure information by modern equivalents « situational equivalence: the insertion of a more familiar context than the one used in the original
o creation: a more global replacement of the original text with a text that preserves only the essential message/ideas/functions of the original.
The most common factors (i.e. conditions) which cause translators to resort to adaptation are:
o cross-code breakdown: where there are simply no lexical equivalents in the target language (especially common in the case of translating metalanguage) « situational inadequacy: where the context referred to in the original text does not exist in the target culture <> genre switching: a change from one dis¬course type to another (e.g. from adult to children's literature) often entails a global re-creation of the original text •» disruption of the communication process: the emergence of a new epoch or approach or the need to address a different type of readership often requires modifications in style, content or presentation.
These conditions (which in practice may exist simultaneously) can lead to two major types of adaptation: local adaptation, caused by prob¬lems arising from the original text itself and limited to certain parts of it (as in the first two conditions), and global adaptation, which is determined by factors outside the original text and which involves a more wide-ranging revision.
As a local procedure, adaptation may be applied to isolated parts of the text in order to deal with specific differences between the language or culture of the source text and that of the target text. In this case, the use of adap¬tation as a technique will have a limited effect on the text as a whole, provided the overall coherence of the source text is preserved. This type of adaptation is temporary and localized; it does not represent an all-embracing ap¬proach to the translation task. Local, or as Farghal (1993: 257) calls it, 'intrinsic' adapta¬tion is essentially a translation procedure which is guided by principles of effectiveness and efficiency and seeks to achieve a balance between what is to be transformed and high¬lighted and what is to be left unchanged.
As a global procedure, adaptation may be applied to the text as a whole. The decision to carry out a global adaptation may be taken by the translator him/herself or may be imposed by external forces (for example, a publisher's editorial policy). In either case, global adapta- • tion constitutes a general strategy which aims to reconstruct the purpose, function or impact of the original text. The intervention of the translator is systematic and s/he may sacrifice formal elements and even semantic meaning in order to reproduce the function of the original.
. As in the case of translation, adaptation is' carried out under certain restrictions, the most obvious of which are:
« the knowledge and expectations of the target reader: the adapter has to evaluate the extent to which the content of the orig¬inal text constitutes new or shared information for the potential audience o the target language: the adapter must find an appropriate match in the target lan¬guage for the discourse style of the original text and look for coherence of adapting modes 
♦ the meaning and purpose (s) of the original
and target texts
Theoretical boundaries between adaptation and translation
Some scholars prefer not to use the term 'adaptation' at all, believing that the concept of translation can be stretched to cover all types of transformation as long as the main function of the activity is preserved. Others view the two concepts as representing essentially different practices. Michel Gameau, Quebec poet and translator, coined the term tradaptation to express the close relationship between the two activities (Delisle 1986). The very few scholars who have attempted a serious analysis of the phenomenon of adaptation and its relation to translation insist on the tenuous nature of the borderline which separates the two concepts.
The controversy surrounding the supposed opposition between adaptation and translation is often fuelled by ideological' issues. This becomes evident when one considers the heated debates that have raged over the trans¬lation of the Bible ever since the first versions began to appear. It is this apparent lack of objectivity about the adaptation process that has prompted Gambier (1992: 424) to warn against what he calls the 'fetishization' of the original text After alii it is often argued that a successful translation is one that looks or sounds like an original piece of work, which would seem to imply that the translator is expected to intervene actively (i.e. adapt) to ensure that this ideal is achieved.
The study of adaptation encourages the theorist to look beyond purely linguistic issues and helps shed light on the role of the transla¬tor as mediator, as a creative participant in a process of verbal communication. Relevance, rather than accuracy, becomes the key word, and this entails a careful analysis of three major concepts in translation theory: meaning, purpose (or function, or skopos: see SKOPOS THEORY) and intention. We could say that translation - or what is traditionally under¬stood by the term translation - stays basically at the level of meaning, adaptation seeks to transmit the purpose of the original text, and exegesis attempts to spell out the intentions of the author. This kind of analysis will inevitably lead translation studies to consider the inferen¬tial communication pattern (Sperber and Wilson 1986), rather than the traditional code model, as the most appropriate frame of refer¬ence for the discipline (see COMMUNICATIVE/ FUNCTIONAL APPROACHES).
Adaptation has always been defined in relation to something else - a specific style, linguistic conventions or a communication model. The emergence of translation studies as an independent discipline now enables us to study adaptation in its own terms, as both a local and a global procedure. It is imperative that we acknowledge adaptation as a type of creative process which seeks to restore the balance of communication that is often dis¬rupted by traditional forms of translation. Only by treating it as a legitimate strategy can we begin to understand the motivation for using it and to appreciate the relationship between it and other forms of conventional translation.
Further reading
Bastin 1996; Brisset 1990; Delisle 1986; Donaire et al. 1991; Farghal 1993; Foz 1988; Gailliard 1988; Gambier 1992; Merino 1992; Nord 1991a; Santoyo 1989.
GEORGES L. BASTIN Translated from Spanish by Mark Gregson