从伽达默尔的前见理论看文学翻译中的误读

发布时间：2018-03-21 09:23

本文选题：阐释学　切入点：伽达默尔　出处：《中南大学》2008年硕士论文　论文类型：学位论文

【摘要】： 误读一直以来都是文化领域的一个富有争议的话题。在传统逻各斯中心主义观念的影响下,翻译被认为是对原作忠实的模仿,译者则被看作原文作者的“传声筒”,其主体性受到极大忽视。误读现象也被视为对原作的“错误”解读而被彻底否定。所有这些导致翻译活动缺乏创造性,翻译研究也长期依附于语言学研究之上,停滞不前。直到20世纪70年代,西方翻译研究出现了“文化转向”,翻译中的文化问题才逐渐被重视起来。以当代阐释学为代表的新兴理论介入翻译研究,给翻译研究带来了一股清新气息。本文从当代阐释学中伽达默尔的前见理论入手,以导致译者前见的三方面因素为主线,重点分析文学翻译中的误读现象。文章首先简要地介绍了阐释学的发展历史及重点概念,随后对伽达默尔的前见理论做了重点介绍。前见理论由海德格尔的理解的前结构概念发展而来,它主张前见是理解和解释所不可缺少的前提,任何理解和解释都不可能避免解释者前见的参与。文章接着讨论了误读的定义和分类。通过对文学作品和文学翻译特点的分析,指出由于文学作品具有开放性等特点,其翻译中有很多空白需要译者来填补。由此指出,相对于非文学翻译,文学翻译中的误读现象更具有研究意义。文章接着用前见理论对文学翻译中的误读现象进行了探讨,指出由于任何理解和阐释过程都必然存在前见,而文学翻译中必然包含译者对原作的理解和阐释,因此文学翻译中译者的前见是不可避免的。译者的前见必然导致他在文学翻译过程中对文学原作的误读。文章分别从导致译者前见的三方面因素(即文学翻译的社会环境、文学原作的特点和译者个性)分析了文学翻译中的误读现象,进而得出结论:误读在文学翻译中是普遍存在的。文章最后对文学翻译中误读的影响进行了探讨,并指出,一方面误读是文学翻译创造性的必要前提,传统翻译观将误读彻底否定并排斥的观点是片面的和消极的;另一方面,对理解与阐释的限度问题也值得进行更加深入的研究。
[Abstract]:Misreading has always been a controversial topic in the field of culture. The influence of the traditional concept of logocentrism, translation is regarded as the faithful imitation of the original work, the translator is regarded as the original author of the "mouthpiece", the subject has been seriously ignored. Misreading phenomenon also is regarded as the original "the error interpretation was completely negative. All these lead to the translation activities lack of creativity, translation studies have long been attached to linguistic research on stagnant. Until 1970s, the western translation studies have taken the" cultural turn "in translation, cultural turn has gradually taken seriously. Emerging theories in contemporary translation studies in hermeneutics as the representative of the that brought a fresh air to the translation studies. This paper from the front to see Gadamer Contemporary Hermeneutics theory, leading to the three factors of the translator as before The main line is to analyze the misreading phenomenon in literary translation.
This paper first briefly introduces the development history and focus on the concept of hermeneutics, then introduces the theories of Gadamer and Heidegger. By understanding the concept of development before the structure see the former theory, it advocates see is the indispensable precondition of understanding and interpretation, understanding and interpretation of any cannot avoid the interpreter before participation. The paper discusses the definition and classification of misreading. Through the analysis of literary works and literary translation features, pointed out that because of the literary works has the characteristics of openness, there are many gaps in the translation the translator needs to fill. It is pointed out that, compared to the non literary translation, Misreading in Literary Translation is more the significance of the research. Then this paper used to see the former theory discusses the misreading in literary translation, pointed out that due to any understanding and interpretation must exist before, and literary turn In the translation must include the translator's understanding and interpretation of the original, so the translator in literary translation is inevitable. The translator's prejudice will inevitably lead to him in the process of literary translation of the original text. This article from the misreading of the three aspects which cause the translator before see (that is, literary translation of the social environment, the original literature the characteristics and the translator's personality) of Misreading in literary translation, then draws the conclusion: misreading is a common phenomenon in literary translation. Finally the influence of Misreading in literary translation are discussed, and pointed out that a false reading is a necessary prerequisite for creativity in Literary Translation, traditional translation theories will completely deny misreading and the rejection of the view is one-sided and negative; on the other hand, the limitation of understanding and interpretation is also worth further study.

【学位授予单位】：中南大学
【学位级别】：硕士
【学位授予年份】：2008
【分类号】：I046;H059

【引证文献】