从译者主体性角度分析李清照词的英译

发布时间：2018-07-05 10:01

本文选题：李清照 + 词　；参考：《上海外国语大学》2010年硕士论文

【摘要】： 宋词在中国古典文学史上有着极为重要的文学价值和历史地位,千百年来,宋词以其独特的文学艺术魅力吸引着国内外广大文学爱好者。而宋代词史上最伟大的女词人李清照,在整个中国文学发展史上的文学地位和研究价值是不言而喻的。虽然诗词难译,仍有许多中西方学者致力于李清照词在英语文化中的传播,大大促进了西方社会对中国古典文学的了解。几十年来,60首李清照词,已出现了400多种英文译本。这为多译本对比提供了绝佳的素材。如今的多译本对比许多都局限于字词层面上的分析,旨在找到一种“权威”译本,实现“忠实”和“对等”。译者主体性的提出,为多译本研究打开了一扇窗。 20世纪60年代,翻译研究出现了文化转向,人们开始对“源文本中心论”提出质疑,开始更多地关注译者以及译者在翻译中所扮演的角色。译者主体性的概念应势而生,逐步受到国内外学者的关注而成为翻译界热烈讨论的话题之一。关于译者主体性的问题,如“谁是翻译中的主体”,“译者主体性的概念如何界定”等,众说纷纭,莫衷一是,迄今没有定论。对这些问题进行一番回顾和讨论,有助于理解译者主体性如何在翻译过程中发挥作用。伽达默尔的哲学阐释学,被视为译者主体性的理论基础。本文拟从哲学阐释学的视角,重新审视译者主体性概念,通过阐述“理解的历史性”,“成见”,“视域融合”三个核心概念,强调不同的译者,因其所处社会文化背景、个人知识结构、兴趣、审美情趣等方面的差异,对同一文本有不同的解读,并会按照自己的解读来再现原作的信息,因而产生面貌各异的多种译本。在个案分析中,本文选取了大量李清照词英译的译例,尝试探究在李清照词英译的各个阶段,译者的主体性是如何得以发挥的。通过分析,本文的论点得到证明:译者主体性的发挥,是李清照词多译本合理存在的重要因素;在进行多译本对比时,应充分考虑翻译中最活跃的因素——译者,进一步分析差异产生的深层次原因,以期更好地促进诗词翻译实践。
[Abstract]:Song ci has an extremely important literary value and historical position in the history of Chinese classical literature. For thousands of years, Song ci has attracted many literature lovers at home and abroad with its unique literary and artistic charm. Li Qingzhao, the greatest female poet in the history of ci in Song Dynasty, is self-evident in the literary status and research value of the whole history of Chinese literature. Although poetry is difficult to translate, many Chinese and western scholars have devoted themselves to the spread of Li Qingzhao in English culture, which has greatly promoted the understanding of Chinese classical literature in western society. In the past decades, there have been more than 400 English translations of 60 Li Qingzhao words. This provides excellent material for comparison of multiple translations. Many of today's multi-translations are confined to word-level analysis in order to find a "authoritative" translation to achieve "faithfulness" and "equivalence". The subjectivity of the translator has opened a window for the study of multiple versions. In the 1960s, the cultural turn of translation studies began to question the "source-text-centered theory". More attention has been paid to the translator and his role in translation. The concept of translator's subjectivity has gradually become one of the hot topics in the translation field because it has attracted the attention of scholars at home and abroad. There are different opinions on the translator's subjectivity, such as "who is the subject in translation" and "how to define the translator's subjectivity". A review and discussion of these problems will help to understand how the translator's subjectivity plays a role in the translation process. Gadamer's philosophical hermeneutics is regarded as the theoretical basis of translator's subjectivity. From the perspective of philosophical hermeneutics, this paper attempts to re-examine the translator's concept of subjectivity. By expounding the three core concepts of "historical understanding", "prejudice" and "horizon fusion", this paper emphasizes the different translators because of their social and cultural background. The differences in individual knowledge structure, interest, aesthetic taste and so on, have different interpretations of the same text, and will reproduce the original information according to their own interpretation, thus producing various versions with different features. In the case study, this paper selects a large number of examples of English translation of Li Qingzhao words, and tries to explore how the translator's subjectivity can be brought into full play in all stages of the translation of Li Qingzhao words into English. Through the analysis, it is proved that the translator's subjectivity is an important factor in the reasonable existence of multi-translation of Li Qingzhao words, and that the translator, the most active factor in translation, should be taken into account in the comparison of multiple versions. Further analysis of the causes of the differences, in order to better promote the practice of poetry translation.
【学位授予单位】：上海外国语大学
【学位级别】：硕士
【学位授予年份】：2010
【分类号】：H315.9;I046

【引证文献】