操纵学派“忠实观”与传统“忠实观”的对比研究

发布时间：2018-04-23 22:11

本文选题：翻译 + 忠实　；参考：《湖南工业大学》2014年硕士论文

【摘要】：翻译是人类一项古老的活动，翻译研究经历了历史的变化，，翻译理论呈现出纷繁多彩的局面。传统的翻译研究注重语言层面的研究。操纵学派的翻译研究是翻译研究步入广阔文化转向空间的最具影响力的研究之一，其翻译理论以它独特的文化视角为翻译研究的推进开阔了思路，它重视文化与翻译之间相互的影响。 “忠实”从翻译伊始就被当成为翻译过程中最为基本的一条标准。在翻译研究中，关于“忠实”的探讨几乎从未止步。在传统的翻译研究中，有中国的“信、达、雅”、“神似”之说，也有西方的“文本对等”、“翻译三原则”等等。从二十世纪后期开始，翻译研究逐渐进入了“文化转向”的时代，操纵学派对“忠实”这一概念提出了新的理解，认为把“忠实”当成是翻译中唯一可能的方法是行不通的。笔者在对传统忠实观和操纵学派忠实观进行了比较全面系统的归纳整理之后将二者进行了对比研究，旨在辨析传统忠实观和操纵学派忠实观的特点和本质，理清二者之间的联系和区别。操纵学派“忠实观”与传统“忠实观”产生于不同的背景之下。操纵学派“忠实观”产生于后现代主义哲学盛行的背景之下。同时，其产生时翻译研究较传统时期有了较大的发展。而传统“忠实观”的形成则受到了本质主义的影响。操纵学派“忠实观”之所以不同于传统“忠实观”在很大程度上是因为他们所产生的理论基础存在差别。以形式主义、权力话语理论以及解构主义理论为基础的操纵学派观点对“忠实”的理解更为全面和开阔。而以语文学、语言学理论为基础的传统观点对“忠实”的看法则较多地关注语言层面的问题。对操纵学派“忠实观”与传统“忠实观”在产生背景和理论基础的对比研究为两者实质的研究奠定了基础。在实质的对比中可以发现操纵学派对待“忠实”的看法与传统的观点有所不同。操纵学派不否认“忠实”的存在，但是却是从不同的角度看待“忠实”。传统观点从规定的、微观的、前瞻的角度看待“忠实”，而操纵学派则从描写的、宏观的、后顾的角度更新了对“忠实”的看法。通过对操纵学派“忠实观”与传统“忠实观”几个方面的对比，可以发现，操纵学派“忠实观”并非以颠覆和抛弃传统“忠实观”为目的，而是从不同的角度看待翻译问题。随着翻译学科的发展，从多角度、广角度看待翻译问题必不可少。
[Abstract]:Translation is one of the ancient activities of human beings , and the translation studies have experienced a variety of historical changes . The translation studies focus on language - level research . The translation studies of the manipulation school are one of the most influential factors in the study of translation studies into a wide cultural shift space . The translation theory is an open mind for the promotion of translation studies in its unique cultural perspective , which pays attention to the interaction between culture and translation .

From the beginning of the 20th century , the translation studies have gradually entered the era of " cultural turn " , and the manipulation school has made a new understanding of the concept of " faithfulness " , and it is believed that " faithfulness " is the only possible method in translation .

The " faithful view " of the manipulating school is under the background of the different background . The " faithful view " of the manipulating school is generated in the background of post - modernism philosophy . At the same time , it has a great development compared with the traditional period , and the formation of traditional " faithful view " is influenced by essentialism .

The " faithful view " of the manipulation school is different from that of the traditional " fidelity " because of the differences in the theoretical foundation that they produce . The traditional view based on the theory of formalist , power discourse and Deconstruction is more comprehensive and open . The traditional view based on Chinese literature and linguistic theory is more concerned with the problem of language level .

The contrast between the " fidelity " and the traditional " fidelity " of the manipulation school lays a foundation for the study of the essence of the two . In essence , it can be found that the attitude of the manipulation school to " faithfulness " is different from that of the traditional view . The manipulation school does not deny the existence of " faithfulness " , but the traditional view looks at " faithfulness " from the perspective of the specified , microscopic and forward - looking perspective , while the manipulation school updates the view of " faithfulness " from the perspective of the description , macro and post - Gu .

Through the comparison between the " faithful view " of the manipulation school and the traditional " faithful view " , it can be found that the " faithful view " of the manipulation school is not to overturn and abandon the traditional concept of fidelity , but to view the translation problems from different angles . With the development of the subject of translation , it is necessary to treat translation problems from a multi - angle and wide angle .

【学位授予单位】：湖南工业大学
【学位级别】：硕士
【学位授予年份】：2014
【分类号】：H059

【参考文献】