基于演绎逻辑的翻译明晰化假说证伪
发布时间：2018-09-12 15:57
【摘要】：本论文是基于演绎逻辑的,对由Blum-Kulka提出并得到一些语料库的实证研究支持的翻译中明晰化假说的证伪。该假说主张“明晰化是翻译过程本身固有的,普遍的策略”。论文试图证明无论基于语料库的研究或是基于译例的研究,提供什么统计数据,明晰化假说在逻辑上是不成立的。研究分两个步骤进行：首先分析了上述研究的共同特点,即用语料库研究得出的数据来证明明晰化假说；然后运用演绎逻辑对这些研究进行分析,逐一指出其推理有悖逻辑的地方,从而证明其结论是不成立的。 尝试以演绎逻辑为手段来证伪翻译中的明晰化假说,是研究“翻译普遍性”的一种新的途径,它具有以下几点意义。 首先,本文就翻译中的明晰化和明晰化假说进行集中和比较深入的研究,对明晰化假说进行比较全面和深刻的考察。通过批判地回顾翻译研究的基于语料库研究的支持明晰化假说的学术思潮,本文认为,这种研究只可能得出翻译中明晰化出现的某种或然性,而不可能(如明晰化假说所认为的那样)为明晰化普遍存在于一切翻译中提供证据。 其次,对翻译中明晰化假说的反思,可以启发对其他基于语料库的有关“翻译过程本身固有的普遍策略”或“翻译普遍性”的进一步思考。本文认为,除了隐含在翻译的定义之中的普遍特征(如“翻译涉及两种语言”、“翻译涉及思维”等)之外,证明翻译过程中存在其他不受相关语言文化系统影响的普遍的、固有的翻译策略,如简略化(simplification)、规范化(normalization)、整齐化(leveling out)和集中化(convergence)等等的企图,同样是注定要失败的。 第三,本文将逻辑演绎作为方法论基础,在明晰化假说的研究中引进了一种新的研究思路,凸显在翻译研究中以逻辑来考察理论假说(尤其是新出现的假说)的可行性和实际意义。 本文研究的主要问题如下： (1)翻译中明晰化现象的本质是什么? (2)翻译中明晰化假说的核心是什么? (3)基于语料库的对明晰化假说理论的研究能否证明其理论的真伪?为什么? (4)如果对于第(3)个问题的第一部分的回答是否定的,如何证明翻译中明晰化假说理论不成立? 本研究属于纯理论研究,其目标是用演绎逻辑从理论上驳斥明晰化假说,而不是为支持或反对这一假说提供更多的经验证据。 本文分为五章。 第一章是绪论,概述研究的缘起,目的,问题,方法以及全文的基本结构。 第二章主要探讨翻译中的明晰化。首先界定与明晰化相关的几个概念,例如,语言中的“明晰”概念,对其表现的程度和层面进行具体的描述。然后指出基于语料库的已有翻译研究中“明晰化”定义存在的问题,在此基础上提出了“明晰化”的工作定义,接着讨论“明晰化”的几种类型,随后归纳出翻译中“明晰化”的本质：一是明晰化首先是一种翻译技巧,二是翻译中明晰化是指让目的语文本中某一片断在明晰程度上超越原语文本中对应的片断。 第三章介绍翻译中的明晰化假说及支持这一假说的基于语料库的研究。以Blum-Kulka最先在任选例句的基础上提出的明晰化假说为起点,详细分析基于语料库的研究用以证明明晰化假说的常见的方式,即首先以语料库提供的统计数据,说明翻译中明晰化出现频率较高所显示的一种倾向,然后试图证明这种明晰化倾向是翻译过程本身固有的普遍策略。 第四章从演绎逻辑的角度对基于语料库的明晰化假说进行证伪。这一章首先剖析Blum-Kulka明晰化假说的真正内涵,指出该假说实际上包含两个次命题：一是明晰化是翻译过程本身所固有的策略,二是明晰化是翻译过程本身中普遍地存在的策略。Blum-Kulka证明这两个次命题所用的理由,以演绎逻辑来检验,显出了其逻辑上的谬误,所以这一假说从一开始就不成立。然后本章逐一分析基于不同种类语料库的证明明晰化假说的研究所凭借的理由,同样用演绎逻辑进行检验,发现那些推理也是不符合逻辑的。 第五章为本文的结论。这部分针对研究问题总结本研究的主要发现,指出存在的不足,并对今后的研究提出一些建议。 本文的主要结论如下： (1)关键概念的厘定对任何理论探讨都是至关重要的。支持“明晰化假说”的研究没有对其所用的关键概念如“翻译”、“普遍”、“固有”、“策略”的内涵及外延进行考察,导致这些关键概念缺乏准确、全面的理解,使其研究从一开始就有了可能影响研究结论正确性的方法论上的缺陷, (2)由于没有厘清关键概念,这种研究不能进行严密的逻辑推理,不得不诉诸一些不相关的理由来支持明晰化假说,这些不相关的理由因此经不起演绎逻辑的检验。 (3)基于语料库的关于“翻译普遍性”的研究产生的数据显示的是或高或低的倾向或曰或然性,因此除了暗含在翻译的定义之中的普遍的、固有的本质特性之外,此类研究不可能提供证据来证明包括明晰化在内的任何策略是翻译过程本身中固有的或普遍的策略。此类基于语料库的研究转向比较语言学更为有益,目的是为译者和翻译软件设计师提供帮助,告诉他们处理特定的两种语言间、特定方向的翻译中的特定问题,恰当的方式很可能是什么。
[Abstract]:This dissertation is based on deductive logic and is intended to prove the hypothesis of clarification in translation, which is proposed by Blum-Kulka and supported by some corpus-based empirical studies. The research is divided into two steps: first, it analyzes the common characteristics of the above-mentioned studies, that is, the data obtained from corpus studies to prove the clarification hypothesis; then it uses deductive logic to analyze these studies, pointing out one by one the illogical aspects of their inferences, and so on. It is proved that the conclusion is untenable.
The attempt to falsify the clarification hypothesis in translation by means of deductive logic is a new approach to the study of "translation universality". It has the following significance.
Firstly, this paper makes a concentrated and in-depth study of the hypothesis of clarification and clarification in translation, and makes a comprehensive and profound study of the hypothesis. It is impossible, as the clarification hypothesis suggests, to provide evidence for the ubiquity of clarification in all translations.
Secondly, reflections on the hypothesis of clarification in translation can inspire further reflection on other corpus-based theories such as "universal strategies inherent in the process of translation" or "universality of translation". Besides, it is also doomed to fail to prove that there are other common and inherent translation strategies, such as simplification, normalization, leveling out and convergence, which are not influenced by the relevant linguistic and cultural systems.
Thirdly, logical deduction as the methodological basis is introduced into the study of the clarification hypothesis, which highlights the feasibility and practical significance of applying logic to the study of theoretical hypothesis (especially the emerging hypothesis) in translation studies.
The main problems of this study are as follows:
(1) what is the essence of clarity in translation?
(2) what is the core of the clarity hypothesis in translation?
(3) can a corpus based study of the theory of clarity hypothesis prove its authenticity? Why?
(4) If the answer to the first part of question (3) is negative, how can the theory of clarification hypothesis in translation be proved to be untenable?
The purpose of this study is to refute the clarification hypothesis theoretically with deductive logic, rather than to provide more empirical evidence to support or oppose the hypothesis.
This article is divided into five chapters.
The first chapter is the introduction, which summarizes the origin, purpose, problems, methods and the basic structure of the full text.
Chapter Two is devoted to the study of clarification in translation. Firstly, several concepts related to clarification are defined, such as the concept of "clarity" in language, and the degree and level of its expression are described in detail. The definition of "clarification" is discussed, and then several types of "clarification" are discussed. The essence of "clarification" in translation is summed up as follows: first, clarification is a translation skill, and second, clarification in translation is to let a certain segment of the target text surpass the corresponding segment in the source language to a certain degree of clarity.
Chapter Three introduces the hypothesis of clarification in translation and the corpus-based research that supports it. Starting with the hypothesis of clarification proposed by Blum-Kulka on the basis of the first optional sentence, this paper analyzes in detail the common ways in which corpus-based research proves the hypothesis, i.e. the statistical data provided by the corpus. This paper attempts to prove that the tendency of clarification in translation is a common strategy inherent in the translation process.
In Chapter Four, the corpus-based clarification hypothesis is falsified from the perspective of deductive logic. Firstly, this chapter analyzes the true connotation of Blum-Kulka's clarification hypothesis and points out that the hypothesis actually contains two sub-propositions: one is that clarification is an inherent strategy in the translation process itself, and the other is that clarification is a universal existence in the translation process itself. Blum-Kulka proves the reasons for these two sub-propositions, and tests them with deductive logic, revealing their logical fallacies, so this hypothesis does not hold from the outset. Then this chapter analyzes one by one the reasons on which the research institutes based on different types of corpus demonstrate the clarification hypothesis, and tests them with deductive logic as well. Finding those reasoning is also illogical.
The fifth chapter is the conclusion of this paper. This part summarizes the main findings of this study, points out the shortcomings, and puts forward some suggestions for future research.
The main conclusions of this paper are as follows:
(1) The definition of key concepts is essential to any theoretical discussion. The study supporting the "clarification hypothesis" does not examine the connotation and extension of the key concepts such as "translation", "universality", "intrinsic", "strategy". This leads to the lack of accurate and comprehensive understanding of these key concepts, which makes the study from the very beginning. There are methodological flaws that may affect the correctness of the research conclusions.
(2) Without clarifying the key concepts, this study can not carry out rigorous logical reasoning, and has to resort to some unrelated reasons to support the clarification hypothesis, which can not withstand the test of deductive logic.
(3) Data from corpus-based studies of "translation universality" indicate a tendency or probability of high or low, so it is impossible for such studies to provide evidence that any strategy, including clarification, is a translation process, except for the universal and intrinsic nature of the implied definition of translation. Such corpus-based research has turned to comparative linguistics as a more useful tool for translators and translation software designers to help them deal with specific problems in particular directions between two languages.
【学位授予单位】：湖南师范大学
【学位级别】：博士
【学位授予年份】：2013
【分类号】：H059
本文编号：2239515
[Abstract]:This dissertation is based on deductive logic and is intended to prove the hypothesis of clarification in translation, which is proposed by Blum-Kulka and supported by some corpus-based empirical studies. The research is divided into two steps: first, it analyzes the common characteristics of the above-mentioned studies, that is, the data obtained from corpus studies to prove the clarification hypothesis; then it uses deductive logic to analyze these studies, pointing out one by one the illogical aspects of their inferences, and so on. It is proved that the conclusion is untenable.
The attempt to falsify the clarification hypothesis in translation by means of deductive logic is a new approach to the study of "translation universality". It has the following significance.
Firstly, this paper makes a concentrated and in-depth study of the hypothesis of clarification and clarification in translation, and makes a comprehensive and profound study of the hypothesis. It is impossible, as the clarification hypothesis suggests, to provide evidence for the ubiquity of clarification in all translations.
Secondly, reflections on the hypothesis of clarification in translation can inspire further reflection on other corpus-based theories such as "universal strategies inherent in the process of translation" or "universality of translation". Besides, it is also doomed to fail to prove that there are other common and inherent translation strategies, such as simplification, normalization, leveling out and convergence, which are not influenced by the relevant linguistic and cultural systems.
Thirdly, logical deduction as the methodological basis is introduced into the study of the clarification hypothesis, which highlights the feasibility and practical significance of applying logic to the study of theoretical hypothesis (especially the emerging hypothesis) in translation studies.
The main problems of this study are as follows:
(1) what is the essence of clarity in translation?
(2) what is the core of the clarity hypothesis in translation?
(3) can a corpus based study of the theory of clarity hypothesis prove its authenticity? Why?
(4) If the answer to the first part of question (3) is negative, how can the theory of clarification hypothesis in translation be proved to be untenable?
The purpose of this study is to refute the clarification hypothesis theoretically with deductive logic, rather than to provide more empirical evidence to support or oppose the hypothesis.
This article is divided into five chapters.
The first chapter is the introduction, which summarizes the origin, purpose, problems, methods and the basic structure of the full text.
Chapter Two is devoted to the study of clarification in translation. Firstly, several concepts related to clarification are defined, such as the concept of "clarity" in language, and the degree and level of its expression are described in detail. The definition of "clarification" is discussed, and then several types of "clarification" are discussed. The essence of "clarification" in translation is summed up as follows: first, clarification is a translation skill, and second, clarification in translation is to let a certain segment of the target text surpass the corresponding segment in the source language to a certain degree of clarity.
Chapter Three introduces the hypothesis of clarification in translation and the corpus-based research that supports it. Starting with the hypothesis of clarification proposed by Blum-Kulka on the basis of the first optional sentence, this paper analyzes in detail the common ways in which corpus-based research proves the hypothesis, i.e. the statistical data provided by the corpus. This paper attempts to prove that the tendency of clarification in translation is a common strategy inherent in the translation process.
In Chapter Four, the corpus-based clarification hypothesis is falsified from the perspective of deductive logic. Firstly, this chapter analyzes the true connotation of Blum-Kulka's clarification hypothesis and points out that the hypothesis actually contains two sub-propositions: one is that clarification is an inherent strategy in the translation process itself, and the other is that clarification is a universal existence in the translation process itself. Blum-Kulka proves the reasons for these two sub-propositions, and tests them with deductive logic, revealing their logical fallacies, so this hypothesis does not hold from the outset. Then this chapter analyzes one by one the reasons on which the research institutes based on different types of corpus demonstrate the clarification hypothesis, and tests them with deductive logic as well. Finding those reasoning is also illogical.
The fifth chapter is the conclusion of this paper. This part summarizes the main findings of this study, points out the shortcomings, and puts forward some suggestions for future research.
The main conclusions of this paper are as follows:
(1) The definition of key concepts is essential to any theoretical discussion. The study supporting the "clarification hypothesis" does not examine the connotation and extension of the key concepts such as "translation", "universality", "intrinsic", "strategy". This leads to the lack of accurate and comprehensive understanding of these key concepts, which makes the study from the very beginning. There are methodological flaws that may affect the correctness of the research conclusions.
(2) Without clarifying the key concepts, this study can not carry out rigorous logical reasoning, and has to resort to some unrelated reasons to support the clarification hypothesis, which can not withstand the test of deductive logic.
(3) Data from corpus-based studies of "translation universality" indicate a tendency or probability of high or low, so it is impossible for such studies to provide evidence that any strategy, including clarification, is a translation process, except for the universal and intrinsic nature of the implied definition of translation. Such corpus-based research has turned to comparative linguistics as a more useful tool for translators and translation software designers to help them deal with specific problems in particular directions between two languages.
【学位授予单位】：湖南师范大学
【学位级别】：博士
【学位授予年份】：2013
【分类号】：H059
【参考文献】
相关期刊论文 前10条
1 陈小慰;翻译中的语用明晰化处理[J];福建外语;1997年04期
2 胡开宝;毛鹏飞;;国外语料库翻译学研究述评[J];当代语言学;2012年04期
3 贺显斌;英汉翻译过程中的明晰化现象[J];解放军外国语学院学报;2003年04期
4 周红民;;论翻译中的“显化”现象[J];外语研究;2007年06期
5 肖忠华;戴光荣;;寻求“第三语码”——基于汉语译文语料库的翻译共性研究[J];外语教学与研究;2010年01期
6 黄立波;王克非;;语料库翻译学:课题与进展[J];外语教学与研究;2011年06期
7 刘敬国;陶友兰;;语料库翻译研究的历史与进展——兼评《语料库翻译研究:理论、发现和应用》[J];外国语(上海外国语大学学报);2006年02期
8 陈振东;夏天;;理解过程的明晰化在翻译教学中的意义与操作[J];中国翻译;2007年02期
9 陈琳;;论陌生化翻译[J];中国翻译;2010年01期
10 戴光荣;肖忠华;;基于自建英汉翻译语料库的翻译明晰化研究[J];中国翻译;2010年01期
，本文编号：2239515
本文链接：https://www.wllwen.com/wenyilunwen/yuyanxuelw/2239515.html
