The Translator
翻译与文化
TRANSLATION STRATEGIES
Word-for-word translation The ST word order is preserved and the words translated singly by their most common meanings out of context. Cultural words are translated literally. 逐词翻译是按原文词 序，再现原词的最常用意 义，对有文化内涵的词语 进行直译的翻译。 Adaptation This is the freest form of translation. The ST culture is converted to the TT culture and the text rewritten. 改编是最自由的翻译 形式。源语文化被转换为 译入语文化，源语文本被 改写。
翻译过程不再被看作仅是两种语言之 间的活动，而是看作涉及“跨文化转换” 的两种文化之间的活动。
— 斯奈尔· 霍恩比
对于真正成功的翻 译而言，熟悉两种文化 甚至比掌握两种语言更 重要，因为词语只有在 其所起作用的文化背景 中才具有意义。 — 尤金· 奈达
For truly successful translating, biculturalism is even more important than bilingualism, since words only have meanings in terms of the cultures on which they function. — Eugene Nida
Hatim and Mason (1990)
译者是两个不同语言 群体的单语交际者之间的 双语中介人。
翻译理论概论(英文)
spontaneous sociolinguistic observations (”Russians like diminutive suffixes better than Hungarians.”)
spontaneous text-linguistic observations (”The sentences of Indo-European languages start with a longer introductory part than the corresponding Hungarian sentences and have to be shortened in the Hungarian translation” or ”English, German, and Russian texts are more impersonal than Hungarian texts.”)
Translation Studies
1. Introduction to the theory of translation
Krisztina Károly, Spring, 2006 Sources: Klaudy, 2003; Baker, 1998
The nature of the translator’s
The medium of the translator’s activity = two languages
communicating in two Ls at the same time can never be as instinctive and unconscious as communicating only in one in translation, even the most instinctive translator develops ideas about the relationship between the two Ls, their similarities and differences, their relationship with reality, the similarities and differences in the way the two Ls segment reality linguistically, etc.
The translator27s invisibility Venuti 译者的隐形
The translator’s invisibilityA history of translationLawrence VenutiChapter one InvisibilityI“Invisibility” is the term I will use to describe the translator’s situation and activity in contemporary Anglo-American culture. A translated text, whether prose or poetry, fiction or nonfiction, is judged acceptable by most publishers, reviewers, and readers when it reads fluently, when the absence of any linguistic or stylistics peculiarities makes it seem transparent, giving the appearance that it reflects the foreign writer’s personality or intention or te essential meaning of the foreign text-the appearance, in other words, that the translation is not the translation, but the “original”.The illusion of transparency is an effect of fluent discourse, of the translator’s effort to insure easy readability by adhering to current usage, maintaining continuous syntax, fixing a precise meaning. What is so remarkable here is that this illusory effect conceals the numerous conditions under which the translation is made, starting with the translator’s crucial intervention in the foreign text. The more fluent the translation, the more invisible the translator, and presumably, the more visible the writer or meaning of the foreign text.P4.A fluent translation is written in English that is current (“modern”) instead of archaic, that is widely used instead of specialized (“jargonization”), and that is standard insteadof colloquial (“slangy”). Foreign words (pidgin) are avoided, as are Britishism in American translations and Americanisms in British translations. Fluency also depends on syntax that is not so “faithful”to the foreign text as to be “not quirt idiomatic”, that unfolds continuously ans easily (not “doughy”) to insure semantic “precision” with some rhythmic definition, a sense of closure (not a “dullthud’). A fluent translation is immediately recognizable and intelligible, familiarized, domesticated, not disconcertingly, foreign, capable of giving the reader unobstructed access to great thoughts, to what is present in the original. Under the regime of fluent translating, the translator works to make his or her work invisible, producing illusory effect of transparency that simultaneously masks its status as an illusion: the translated text seems natural, i.e., not translated.The translator’s invisibility is also partly determined by the individualistic conception of authorship that continues to prevail in Anglo-American culture. According to this conception, the author freely expresses his thought and feelings in writing, which is thus viewed as an original and transparent self-representation, unmediated by trans individual determinants (linguistic, cultural, social) that might complicate authorial originalityIIP17Translation is a process by which the chain of signifiers that constitutes the source-language text is replaced by a chain of signifiers in the target language which the translator provides on the strength of an interpretation.P19.The German theologian and philosopher Friedrich Schleiermacher. In an 1813 lecture on the different methods of translation, Schleiermacher argued that “there are only two. Either the translator leaves the author in peace, as much as possible, and moves the reader towards him; or he leaves the reader in peace, as much as possible, and moves the author towards him”(Lefevere 1977: 74). Admitting that translation can never be completely adequate to the foreign text, Schleiermacher allowed the translator to choose between a domesticating method, an ethnocentric reduction of the foreign text target-language cultural values, bring the author back home, and a foreignizing method, an ethnodeviant pressure on those values to register the linguistic and cultural difference of the foreign text, sending the reader abroad.I want to suggest that insofar as foreignizing translation seeks to restrain the ethnocentric violence of translation, it is highly desirable today, a strategic culture intervention in the current state of the world affairs, pitched against the hegemonic English-language nations and the unequal cultural exchanges in which they engage their global others. Foreinizing translation in English can be a form of resistance against ethnocentrism and racism, cultural narcissism and imperialism, in the interests of democratic geopolitical relations.Consider Nida’s concept of “dynamic” or “functional equivalence” in translation, formulated first in 1964, but restated and developed in numerous books and articles over the past thirty years. “A translation of dynamic equivalence aims at completenaturalness od expression,” states Nida, “and tries to relate the receptor to modes of behavior relevant within the context of his own culture”(Nida 1964: 159). The phrase “naturalness of expression” signals the importance of a fluent strategy to this theory of translation, and in Nida’s work it is obvious that fluency involves domestication.For Nida, accuracy in translation depends on generating an equivalent effect in the target-language culture: “the receptor of a translation should comprehend the translated text to such an extent that they can understand how the original receptors must have understood the original text”(ibid. 36). The dynamically equivalent translation is “interlingual communication” which overcomes the linguistic and cultural differences that impede it (ibid. 11).如有侵权请联系告知删除，感谢你们的配合！。
文化翻译(讲义)-左飚
文化翻译：理论与实践（讲义）左飚一、翻译是跨文化交际活动，译者是文化中介人。
Translation is intercultural communication and the translator is a cultural mediator.1、翻译是中介人The Translator as a Mediator- The translator is a bilingual mediating agent between monolingual communication participants in two different language communities.George Steiner (1975) 译者是两个不同语言群体的单语交际者之间的双语中介人。
-The translator is first and foremost a mediator between two parties for whom mutual communication might otherwise be problematic. Hatim and Mason (1990) 译者首先是两方的中介人，没有他，两方的交际会有困难。
2、翻译是文化中介人The Translator as a Cultural Mediator- The translator is a cross-cultural specialist.（跨文化专家）Mary Snell-Hornby (1992) -The translation operator is a cultural operator. Heuson and Martim (1991) （文化运作者）-The translator is a cultural mediator. David Katan (2004) （文化中介人）-In order to play the role of mediator, the translator has to be flexible in switching his cultural orientation. …Hence, a cultural mediator will havedeveloped a high degree of intercultural sensitivity.Taft (1981) 译者如果想发挥（文化）中介人的作用，就必须灵活地转换自己的文化取向。
The translator's invisibility Venuti 译者的隐形
The translator’s invisibilityA history of translationLawrence VenutiChapter one InvisibilityI“Invisibility” is the term I will use to describe the translator’s situation and activity in contemporary Anglo-American culture. A translated text, whether prose or poetry, fiction or nonfiction, is judged acceptable by most publishers, reviewers, and readers when it reads fluently, when the absence of any linguistic or stylistics peculiarities makes it seem transparent, giving the appearance that it reflects the foreign writer’s personality or intention or te essential meaning of the foreign text-the appearance, in other words, that the translation is not the translation, but the “original”.The illusion of transparency is an effect of fluent discourse, of the translator’s effort to insure easy readability by adhering to current usage, maintaining continuous syntax, fixing a precise meaning. What is so remarkable here is that this illusory effect conceals the numerous conditions under which the translation is made, starting with the translator’s crucial intervention in the foreign text. The more fluent the translation, the more invisible the translator, and presumably, the more visible the writer or meaning of the foreign text.P4.A fluent translation is written in English that is current (“modern”) instead of archaic, that is widely used instead of specialized (“jargonization”), and that is standard instead of colloquial (“slangy”). Foreign words (pidgin) are avoided, as are Britishism in American translations and Americanisms in British translations. Fluency also depends on syntax that is not so “faithful”to the foreign text as to be “not quirt idiomatic”, that unfolds continuously ans easily (not “doughy”) to insure semantic “precision”with some rhythmic definition, a sense of closure (not a “dullthud’). A fluent translation is immediately recognizable and intelligible, familiarized, domesticated, not disconcertingly, foreign, capable of giving the reader unobstructed access to great thoughts, to what is present in the original. Under the regime of fluent translating, the translator works to make his or her work invisible, producing illusory effect of transparency that simultaneously masks its status as an illusion: the translated text seems natural, i.e., not translated.The translator’s invisibility is also partly determined by the individualistic conception of authorship that continues to prevail in Anglo-American culture. According to this conception, the author freely expresses his thought and feelings in writing, which is thus viewed as an original and transparent self-representation, unmediated by trans individual determinants (linguistic, cultural, social) that might complicate authorial originalityIIP17Translation is a process by which the chain of signifiers that constitutes the source-language text is replaced by a chain of signifiers in the target language which the translator provides on the strength of an interpretation.P19.The German theologian and philosopher Friedrich Schleiermacher. In an 1813 lecture on the different methods of translation, Schleiermacher argued that “there are only two. Either the translator leaves the author in peace, as much as possible, and moves the reader towards him; or he leaves the reader in peace, as much as possible, and moves the author towards him” (Lefevere 1977: 74). Admitting that translation can never be completely adequate to the foreign text, Schleiermacher allowed the translator to choose between a domesticating method, an ethnocentric reduction of the foreign text target-language cultural values, bring the author back home, and a foreignizing method, an ethnodeviant pressure on those values to register the linguistic and cultural difference of the foreign text, sending the reader abroad.I want to suggest that insofar as foreignizing translation seeks to restrain the ethnocentric violence of translation, it is highly desirable today, a strategic culture intervention in the current state of the world affairs, pitched against the hegemonic English-language nations and the unequal cultural exchanges in which they engage their global others. Foreinizing translation in English can be a form of resistance against ethnocentrism and racism, cultural narcissism and imperialism, in the interests of democratic geopolitical relations.Consider Nida’s concept of “dynamic”or “functional equivalence”in translation, formulated first in 1964, but restated and developed in numerous books and articles over the past thirty years. “A translation of dynamic equivalence aims at complete naturalness od expression,” states Nida, “and tries to relate the receptor to modes of behavior relevant within the context of his own culture” (Nida 1964: 159). The phrase “naturalness of expression” signals the importance of a fluent strategy to this theory of translation, and in Nida’s work it is obvious that fluency involves domestication. For Nida, accuracy in translation depends on generating an equivalent effect in the target-language culture: “the receptor of a translation should comprehend the translated text to such an extent that they can understand how the original receptors must have understood the original text”(ibid. 36). The dynamically equivalent translation is “interlingual communication”which overcomes the linguistic and cultural differences that impede it (ibid. 11).。
英国译学界的名人
英国译学界的名人张美芳（中山大学，广州510275；澳门大学，澳门）前言：本文作者于2002年下半年到英国访问，期间访问了英国多个设有翻译教学与研究的大学及其翻译学科的领头人，其中包括：曼城理工学院的蒙娜·贝克(Mona Baker, Umist)；萨里大学的彼得·纽马克(Peter Newm ark, Surrey University)；赫瑞沃大学的伊恩·梅森(Ian Mason, Heriot Watt University)；米道士大学的科思婷·曼可尔(Kirsten Malmkjaer, Middlesex University)；艾斯顿大学的克里思汀娜·沙伏讷(Christina Schäffner, Aston University)；伦敦大学学院的逖奥·荷曼斯(Theo Hermans, University College London)；帝国学院的马克·撒特威(Mark Shuttleworth, Imperial College); 萨里大学的杰瑞米·曼迪(Jerem y Munday, Surrey University)。
遗憾的是，虽然笔者在英国期间曾跟闻名世界译坛的英国华威大学副校长苏珊·巴斯纳(Susan Bassnet, Warwick University )在网上联系过，并准备前往访问她，后来却因她临时有出国任务，我们见面的计划未能实现。
上述学者是活跃在英国译学界的精英分子，也是国际译学界的知名人士。
他们的一部分著作已在中国出版，例如Newmark的《翻译教程》(A Textbook of Translation)与《翻译研究途径》(Approaches to Translation)，Baker的《换言之——翻译研究课程》(In Other Words: a coursebook on translation)，Hatim 和Mason 合着的《语篇与译者》(Discourse and the Translator),Bassnett 和Lefevere 合着的《文化建构——文学翻译论集》(Constructing Cultures – Essays on Literary Translation)等；而他们的新作更是逐渐成为世界各地翻译研究生的必读或常用书籍，例如Mark Shuttleworth 的《翻译研究词典》(Dictionary of Translation Studies)，Jeremy Munday的《翻译研究入门》(Introducing Translation Studies)，Theo Hermans的《翻译研究体系——解释描写途径与系统导向途径》(Translation in System s—Descriptive and System-oriented Approaches Explained)等。
翻译理论——精选推荐
翻译理论07本《翻译理论与实践》考试理论部分复习提纲⼀、翻译定义：1. 张培基——翻译是⽤⼀种语⾔把另⼀种语⾔所表达的思维内容准确⽽完整地重新表达出来的语⾔活动。
10. “Translation is the expression in one language of what has been expressed in another language, preserving semantic and stylistic equivalences.” --- Dubois12. “Translation is a craft consisting in the attempt to replace a written message and/or statement in one language by the same message and/or statement in another language.” --- Peter Newmark13. Translation or translating is a communicative activity or dynamic process in which the translator makes great effort to thoroughly comprehend a written message or text in the source language and works very hard to achieve an adequate or an almost identical reproduction in the target language version of the written source language message or text.⼆、翻译标准1. 翻译的标准概括为⾔简意赅的四个字：“忠实（faithfulness）、通顺（smoothness）”。
Walter Benjamin - The Task of the Translator
Walter Benjamin, "The Task of the Translator"(introduction to a Baudelaire translation, 1923; this text translated by Harry Zohn, 1968)[This is taken from the anthology, The Translation Studies Reader, ed. Lawrence Venuti (London: Routledge, 2000).]1.In the appreciation of a work of art or an art form, consideration of the receiver never provesfruitful. Not only is any reference to a certain public or its representatives misleading, buteven the concept of an "ideal" receiver is detrimental in the theoretical consideration of art, since all it posits is the existence and nature of man as such. Art, in the same way, positsman's physical and spiritual existence, but in none of its works is it concerned with hisresponse. No poem is intended for the reader, no picture for the beholder, no symphony for the listener.2.Is a translation meant for readers who do not understand the original? This would seem toexplain adequately the divergence of their standing in the realm of art. Moreover, it seems to be the only conceivable reason for saying "the same thing" repeatedly. For what does aliterary work "say"? What does it communicate? It "tells very little to those who understand it. Its essential quality is not statement or the imparting of information -- hence, something inessential. This is the hallmark of bad translations. But do we not generally regard as theessential substance of a literary work what it contains in addition to information -- as even a poor translator will admit -- the unfathomable, the mysterious, the "poetic," something that a translator can reproduce only if he is also a poet? This, actually, is the cause of anothercharacteristic of inferior translation, which consequently we may define as the inaccuratetransmission of an inessential content. This will be true whenever a translation undertakes to serve the reader. However, if it were intended for the reader, the same would have to apply to the original. If the original does not exist for the reader's sake, how could the translation be understood on the basis of this premise?3.Translation is a mode. To comprehend it as mode one must go back to the original, for thatcontains the law governing the translation: its translatability. The question of whether awork is translatable has a dual meaning. Either: Will an adequate translator ever be foundamong the totality of its readers? Or, more pertinently: Does its nature lend itself totranslation and, therefore, in view of the significance of the mode, call for it? [. . .]4.Translatability is an essential quality of certain works, which is not to say that it is essentialthat they be translated; it means rather that a specific significance inherent in the originalmanifest itself in its translatability. It is plausible that no translation, however good it maybe, can have any significance as regards the original. Yet, by virtue of its translatability the original is closely connected with the translation; in fact, this connection is all the closersince it is no longer of importance to the original. We may call this connected a natural one, or, more specifically, a vital connection. Just as he manifestations of life are intimatelyconnected with the phenomenon of life without being of importance to it, a translation issues from the original -- not so much for its life as from its afterlife. For a translation comes later than the original, and since the important works of world literature never find their chosentranslators at the time of their origin, their translation marks their stag of continues life. The idea of life and afterlife in works of art should be regarded with an entirely unmetaphorical objectivity. [. . .] The concept of life is given its due only if everything that has a history of its own, and is not merely the setting for history, is credited with life. In the final analysis,the range of life must be determined by history rather than by nature, least of all by suchtenuous factors as sensation and soul. The philosopher's task consists in comprehending allof natural life through the more encompassing life of history. And indeed, is not thecontinued life of works of art far easier to recognize than the continual life of animalspecies? The history of the great works of art tells us about their antecedents, theirrealization in the age of the artist, their potentially eternal afterlife in succeedinggenerations. Where this last manifests itself, it is called fame. Translations that are more than transmissions of subject matter come into being when in the course of its survival a work has reached the age of its fame. Contrary, therefore, to the claims of bad translators, such translations do not so much serve the work as owe their existence to it. [. . .]5.With this attempt at an explication [that languages "are not strangers to one another, but are,a priori and apart from all historical relationships, interrelated in what they want to express"]our study appears to rejoin, after futile detours, the traditional theory of translation. If the kinship of languages is to be demonstrated by translations, how else can this be done but by conveying the form and meaning of the original as accurately as possible? To be sue, that theory would be hard put to define the nature of this accuracy and therefore could shed no light on what is important in a translation. Actually, however, the kinship of languages is brought out by a translation far more profoundly and clearly than in the superficial andindefinable similarity of two works of literature. To grasp the genuine relationship between an original and a translation requires an investigation analogous to the argumentation by which a critique of cognition would have to prove the impossibility of an image theory.There it is a matter of showing that in cognition there could be no objectivity, not even a claim to it, if it dealt with images of reality; here it can be demonstrated that no translation would be possible if in its ultimate essence it strove for likeness to the original. For in its afterlife -- which could not be called that if it were not a transformation and a renewal of something living -- the original undergoes a change. Even words with fixed meaning can undergo a maturing process. The obvious tendency of a writer's literary style may in time wither away, only to give rise to immanent tendencies in the literary creation. What sounded fresh once may sound hackneyed later; what was once current may someday sound quaint.To seek the essence of such changes, as well as he equally constant changes in meaning, in the subjectivity of posterity rather than in the very life of language and its works, would mean -- even allowing for the crudest psychologism -- to confuse the root cause of a thing with its essence. More pertinently, it would mean denying, by an importance of thought, one of the most powerful and fruitful historical processes. And eve3n if one tried to turn anauthor's last stroke of the pen into the coup de grâce of is work, this still would not save that dead theory of translation. For just as the tenor and the significance of the great works of literature undergo a complete transformation over the centuries, the mother tongue of the translator is transformed as well. While a poet's words endure in his own language, even the greatest translation is destined to become part of the growth of its own language andeventually to be absorbed by its renewal. Translation is so far removed from being the sterile equation of two dead languages that of all literary forms it is the one charged with thespecial mission of watching over the maturing process of the original language and the birth pangs of its own.6.[Benjamin talks about language 'kinship,' which to him is not a matter of likeness oridentities of origin but in "intentionality." Nonetheless, words from two different languages are not 'interchangeable.'] this, to be sure, is to admit that all translation is only a somewhat provisional way of coming to terms with the foreignness of languages. An instant and final rather than a temporary and provisional solution of this foreignness remains out of the reach of mankind; at any rate, it eludes any direct attempt. Indirectly, however, the growth of religions ripens the hidden seed into a higher development of language. Althoughtranslation, unlike art, cannot claim permanence for its products, its goal is undeniably a final, conclusive, decisive stage of all linguistic creation. In translation the original rises intoa higher and purer linguistic air, as it were. In cannot live there permanently, to be sure. [. ..] The transfer can never be total, but what reaches this region is that element in a translation which goes beyond transmittal of subject matter. This nucleus is best deigned as the element that does not lend itself to translation. Even when all the surface content has been extracted and transmitted, the primary concern of the genuine translator remains elusive. Unlike the words of the original, it is not translatable, because the relationship between content and language is quite different in the original and the translation. While content and language form a certain unity in the original, like a fruit and its skin, the language of the translation envelops its content like a royal robe with ample folds. For it signifies a more exaltedlanguage than its own and thus remains unsuited to its content, overpowering and alien. This disjunction prevents translation and at the same time makes it superfluous. For anytranslation of a work originating in a specific stage of linguistic history represents, in regard to a specific aspect of its content, translation into all other languages. Thus translation,ironically, transplants the original into a more definitive linguistic realm since it can no longer be displaced by a secondary rendering. The original can only be raised there anew and at other points of time. [. . .]7.The task of the translator consists in finding that intended effect upon the language intowhich he is translating which produces in it the echo of the original. This is a feature of translation which basically differentiates it from the poet's work, because the effort of the latter is never directed at the language as such, at its totality, but solely and immediately at specific linguistic contextual aspects. [. . .] The traditional concepts in any discussion of translations are fidelity and license -- the freedom of faithful reproduction and, in its service, fidelity to the word. These ideas seem to be no longer serviceable to a theory that looks for other things in a translation than reproduction of a meaning. [Benjamin discusses the'untranslatability' of connotation, etc.] Finally, it is self-evident how greatly fidelity inreproducing the form impedes the rendering of the sense. Thus no case for literalness can be based on a desire to retain the meaning. Meaning is served far better -- and literature and language far worse -- by the unrestrained license of bad translators. Of necessity, therefore, the demand for literalness, whose justification is obvious, whose legitimate ground is quite obscure, must be understood in a more meaningful context. Fragments of a vessel which are to be glued together must match one another in the smallest details, although they need not be like one another. In the same way a translation, instead of resembling the meaning of the original, must lovingly and in detail incorporate the original's mode of signification, thus making both the original and the translation recognizable as fragments of a greater language, just as fragments are part of a vessel [Benjamin here invokes the Kabbalistic doctrine of tsim-tsum, the breaking of the vessels and the gathering up of the 'sparks of light,' which will usher in Messianic time, one of Benjamin's life-long concerns]. In the realm of translation, too, the words 'in the beginning was the word' [Benjamin writes the Greek here] apply. On the other hand, as regards the meaning, the language of a translation can -- in fact, must -- let itself go, so that it gives voice to the intentio of the original not as reproduction but as harmony, as a supplement to the language in which it expresses itself, as its own kind of intentio. Therefore it is not the highest praise of a translation, particularly in the age of its origin, to say that it reads as if it had originally been written in that language. Rather, the significance of fidelity as ensured by literalness is that the work reflects the great longing for linguistic complementation. A real translation is transparent; it does not cover the original, doe snot black its light, but allows the pure language, as though reinforced by its ownmedium to shine upon the original all the more fully. This may be achieved, above all, by a literal rendering of the syntax which proves words rather than sentences to be the primary element of the translator. For if the sentence is the wall before the language of the original, literalness is the arcade.8.Fidelity and freedom in translation have traditionally been regarded as conflictingtendencies. This deeper interpretation of the one apparently does not serve to reconcile thetwo; in fact, it seems to deny the other all justification. For what is meant by freedom but that the rendering of the sense is no longer to be regarded as all-important? Only if the sense of a linguistic creation may be equated with the information it conveys does some ultimate, decisive element remain beyond all communication -- quite close and yet infinitely remote, concealed or distinguishable, fragmented or powerful. In all language and linguisticcreations there remains in addition to what can be conveyed something that cannot becommunicated,; depending on the context in which it appears, it is something thatsymbolizes or something symbolized. It is the former only in the finite products of language, the latter in the evolving of the languages themselves. And that which seeks to represent, to produce itself in the evolving of languages, is hat very nucleus of pure language. Though concealed and fragmentary, it is an active force in life as the symbolized thing itself,whereas it inhabits linguistic creations only in symbolized form. While that ultimateessence, pure language, in the various tongues is tied only to linguistic elements and their changes, in linguistic creations it is weighted with a heavy, alien meaning. To relieve it of this, to turn the symbolizing into the symbolized, to regain pure language fully formed in the linguistic flux, is the tremendous and only capacity of translation. In this pure language -- which no longer means or expresses anything but is, as expressionless and creative Word, that which is meant in all languages -- all information, all sense, and all intention finally encounter a stratum in which they are destined to be extinguished. This very stratumfurnishes a new and higher justification for free translation; this justification does not derive from the sense of what is to be conveyed, for the emancipation from this sense is the task of fidelity. Rather, for the sake of pure language, a free translation bases the test on its own language.. It is the task of the translator to release in his own language that pure language which is under the spell of another, to liberate the language imprisoned in a work in his re-creation of that work. For the sake of pure language he breaks through decayed barriers of his own language. [Here Benjamin talks about various German translators.]9.the extent to which a translation manages to be in keeping with the nature of this mode isdetermined objectively by the translatability of the original. The lower the quality anddistinction of its language, the larger the extent to which is information, the less fertile a field is it for translation, until the utter preponderance of content, far from being the lever fora translation of distinctive mode, renders it impossible. The higher the level of a work, themore does it remain translatable even if its meaning is touched upon only fleetingly. This, of course, applies to originals only. Translations, on the other hand, prove to be untranslatable not because of any inherent difficulty, but because of the looseness with which meaning attaches to them. Confirmation of this as well as of every other important aspect is supplied by Hölderlin's translations, particularly those of the two tragedies by Sophocles. In them the harmony of the languages is so profound that sense is touched by language only the way an aeolian harp is touch by the wind. Hölderlin's translations are prototypes of their kind; they are to even the most perfect renderings of their texts as a prototype is to a model. This can be demonstrated by comparing Hölderlin's and Rudolf Borchardt's translations of Pindar's Third Pythian Ode. For this very reason Hölderlin's translations in particular are subject to the enormous danger inherent in all translations: the gates of a language thus expanded and modified may slam shut and enclose the translator with silence. Hölderlin's translations from Sophocles were his last work; in them meaning plunges from abyss to abyss until itthreatens to become lost in the bottomless depths of language. There is, however, a stop. It is vouchsafed to Holy Write alone, in which meaning has ceased to be the watershed for the flow of language and the flow of revelation. Where a text is identical with truth or dogma, where it is supposed to be "the true language" in all its literalness and without the mediation of meaning, this text is unconditionally translatable. In such case translations are called for only because of the plurality of languages. Just as, in the original, language and revelation are one without any tension, so the translation must be one with the original in the form ofthe interlinear version, in which literalness and freedom are united. For to some degree all great texts contain their potential translation between the lines; this is true to the highest degree of sacred writings. The interlinear version of the Scriptures is the prototype or ideal of all translation.Petrarch: Sonnet 140The following literal prose translation of Petrarch's "Sonnet 140," the poem translated by both Wyatt and Surrey, is taken from p. 9 of The English Sonnet by Patrick Cruttwell (Longmans, Green & Co., 1996).Love, who lives and reigns in my thought and keeps his principal seat in my heart, comes like an armed warrior into my forehead, there places himself and there sets up his banner. She who teaches me to love and to suffer and who wishes that reason, modesty and reverence should restrain my great desire and burning hope, thrusts aside and disdains our ardour. Wherefore Love in terror flies to my heart, abandoning all his enterprise, and laments and trembles; there he hides himself and no more appears without. What can I do, when my lord is afraid, except stay with him until the last hour? For he makes a fine end who dies loving well.Francesco Petrarca in Translation.Amor, che nel penser mio vive e regnaE 'l suo seggio maggior nel mio cor tene,Talor armato ne la fronte vène,Ivi si loca, et ivi pon sua insegna.Quella ch'amare e sofferir ne 'nsegnaE vòl che 'l gran desio, I'accesa spene,Ragion, vergogna e reverenza affrene,Di nostro ardir fra se stessa si sdegna.Onde Amor paventoso fugge al core,Lasciando ogni sua impresa, e piange, e trema;Ivi s'asconde, e non appar piú fòre.Che poss'io far, temendo il mio signorSe non star seco infin a l’ora estrema?Ché bel fin fa chi ben amando more.Francesco Petrarca.Love that doth reign and live within my thoughtAnd built his seat within my captive breast,Clad in arms wherein with me he fought,Oft in my face he doth his banner rest.But she that taught me love and suffer pain,My doubtful hope and eke my hot desireWith shamefaced look to shadow and refrain,Her smiling grace converteth straight to ire.And coward Love, then, to the heart apaceTaketh his flight, where he doth lurk and 'plain,His purpose lost, and dare not show his face.For my lord's guilt thus faultless bide I pain,Yet from my lord shall not my foot remove,--Sweet is the death that taketh end by love.Henry Howard Earl of Surrey. (1517-47)Sir Thomas Wyatt (1503-1542)The Long Love that in my Thought doth HarbourThe longë love that in my thought doth harbourAnd in mine hert doth keep his residence,Into my face presseth with bold pretenceAnd therein campeth, spreading his banner.She that me learneth to love and sufferAnd will that my trust and lustës negligenceBe rayned by reason, shame, and reverence,With his hardiness taketh displeasure.Wherewithall unto the hert's forest he fleeth,Leaving his enterprise with pain and cry,And there him hideth and not appeareth.What may I do when my master fearethBut in the field with him to live and die?For good is the life ending faithfully.Petrarch, 189 Trans., Anna Maria ArmiPassa la nave mia colma d'oblio My ship is sailing, full of mindless woe,Per aspro mare, a mezza notte il verno, Through the rough sea, in winter midnight drear, Enfra Scilla e Caribdi; et al governo Between Scylla and Charybdis; there to steer Siede 'l signore, anzi 'l nimico mio; Stands my master, or rather stands my foe.A ciascun remo un penser ponto e rio At each oar sits a rapid wicked thoughtChe la tempesta e 'l fin par ch'abbi a scherno; Which seems to scoff at storms and at their end; La vela rompe un vento umido, eterno, The sail, by wet eternal winds distraught,Di sospir, si spernaze, e desio; With hopes, desires and sighs is made to rend. Pioggia di lagrimar, nebbia di sdegni A rain of tears, a fog of scornful lines, Bagna e rallenta le giá stanche sarte, Washes and tugs at the too sluggish cords Che son d'error con ignoranzia attorto Which by error with ignorance are wound.Celansi i duo mei dolci usati segni; Vanished are my two old beloved signs, Morta fra l'onde è la ragion e l'arte, Dead in the waves are all reason and words, Tal ch'i' 'ncomincio a desperar del porto. And I despair ever to reach the ground.Sir Thomas Wyatt.My galley, chargèd with forgetfulness, Thorough sharp seas in winter nights doth pass 'Tween rock and rock; and eke mine en'my, alas, That is my lord, steereth with cruelness;And every owre a thought in readiness,As though that death were light in such a case. An endless wind doth tear the sail apaceOf forced sighs and trusty fearfulness.A rain of tears, a cloud of dark disdain,Hath done the weared cords great hinderance; Wreathèd with error and eke with ignorance. The stars be hid that led me to this pain; Drownèd is Reason that should me comfort, And I remain despairing of the port.VEGLIA by Giuseppi UngarettiThree English translations of the Italian poem Veglia which was written while Ungaretti was a soldier in the First World War.a. WakeHill Four, the 23rd of December 1915A whole nightthrown neara massacredcompanionwith his mouthsneeringfacing the whole moonwith the congestionof his handspenetratingmy silenceI have writtenletters full of loveI have never beenattached to lifeso muchtranslated by Fiamma Ferrarob. DeathwatchAll night longthrown againsta buddyslainwith his gnashingteethbared to the full moonwith his bloatedhandspenetratingmy silenceI was writingletters full of loveNever have I huggedlifeso hardCima Quattro, December 1915translated by Sonia Raiziss and Alfredo de Palchic. VigilCima Quattro, 23 December, 1915One entire nightthrown besidea comrademassacredwith the mouth of himgnashedfacing the full moonwith the congestionof the hands of himpenetratedinto my silenceI wroteletters filled with loveNever have I beensoattached to lifeHere is the original poem:Un’in tera nottatabuttato vicinoa un compagnomassacratocon la sua boccadigrignatavolta al pleniluniocon la congestionedelle sue manipenetratanel mio silenzioho scrittolettere piene d’amoreNon sono mai statotantoattacato alla vitaVERSO VIENNA . TOWARDS VIENNA.Il convento barocco The baroque conventdi schiuma e di biscotto all biscuit and foamadombrava uno scorcio d’acque lente shaded a glimpse of slow waterse tavole imbandite, qua e la sparse and tables already set, scattered here and theredi foglie e zenzero. with leaves and ginger.Emerse un nuotatore, sgrondò sotto A swimmer emerged, drippinguna nube di moscerini under a cloud of gnats,chiese del nostro viaggio, inquired about our journey, spokeparlò a lungo del su o d’oltre confine. at length about his own, beyond the frontier.Additò il ponte in faccia che si passa He pointed to the bridge before us,(informò) con un soldo di passaggio. you cross over (he said) with a penny tollSalutò con la mano, sprofondò, With a wave of his hand, he sank down,fu la corrente stessa…. became the river itself……….Ed al suo posto, And in his place battistrada balzò da una rimessa to announce our coming, out of a shedun bassotto festoso che latrava, bounced a dachshund, gaily barking -fraterna unica voce dentro l’afa. sole brotherly presence in the sticky heat.(Eugenio Montale) (William Arrowsmith)NEAR VIENNA TOWARD VIENNA.The baroque convent The baroque conventfoam and biscuit made of foam and biscuit,shaded a brief moment of slow water shaded an inlet of smooth waterand set tables, scattered here and there and well provided tables scatteredwith leaves and ginger. here and there with leaves and ginger.A swimmer emerged, dripping A swimmer surfaced, drippingunder a cloud of gnats, inquired under a cloud of gnats,about our journey, going on who inquired about our journeyabout his own across the border. and told of his voyages beyond the pale.He pointed to the bridge in front of us Indicating the bridge before us whichthat costs (he said) a penny to cross over you cross (he said) with ten cent’s toll,He waved, dove in again, became he waved goodbye and then submerged,the river…….. –he was the stream itself……And in his place Understudya happy dachshund, our pacesetter, in his place, a dachshund bouncedbounded barking out of a garage, with a howl from a nearby shed,The one fraternal voice inside the heat. sole fraternal voice in the sultry heat.(Jonathan Galassi) (Edith Farnsworth)。
诗歌翻译家查良铮研究
Sichuan International Studies UniversityA Study of Zha Liangzheng as a Poetry TranslatorbyLiang YeA thesissubmitted to the Graduate Schoolin partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree ofMaster of ArtsinEnglish Language and Literatureunderthe supervision ofAssociate Professor Gao WeiChongqing, P. R. ChinaJune 2018查良铮既是著名诗人，又是伟大的翻译家。
首先他是位著名的“九叶派诗人”，笔名为穆旦，他的代表作是《探险队》、《穆旦诗集》、《旗》，他结合西欧现代主义与中国诗歌传统，具有独特的穆旦诗歌特色。
之后，由于穆旦诗人身份以及社会环境的变化，他成为一名多产的诗人翻译家。
主要翻译的作品有俄国普希金的《普希金抒情诗选》，英国雪莱的《雪莱抒情诗选》，以及英国拜伦的《唐璜》、《拜伦抒情诗选》等。
他的译著颇多，影响深远。
然而，由于各种原因，作为翻译家的查良铮所受到的关注少于作为诗人的穆旦。
而且诗人穆旦为什么会成为翻译家，这也值得探讨和深究。
因此，对诗歌翻译家查良铮进行系统性的分析和探究很有必要。
本文的主要研究方法是跨学科研究法，结合翻译学和社会心理学理论；其次是传统的文献研究方法，通过阅读和查阅相关书籍获得材料；论文数据从知网和国外网站上获得;本篇论文也采用图表统计法，使之前的研究情况一目了然。
本文的创新点是理论新，从社会认同理论的主身份认同来解释查良铮主身份变化的原因。
本文首先简单介绍背景、目的、意义、研究方法、数据收集以及本文的框架。
其次介绍之前关于诗人穆旦和翻译家查良铮的研究。
翻译工作者宪章中英对照
The Translator's Charter翻译工作者宪章(Approved by the Congress at Dubrovnik in 1963, and amended in Oslo on July 9, 1994) The International Federation of Translators国际翻译工作者联合会Noting that translation has established itself as a permanent, universal and necessary activity in the world of today; that by making intellectual and material exchanges possible among nations it enriches their life and contributes to a better understanding amongst men; that in spite of the various circumstances under which it is practiced translation must now be recognized as a distinct and autonomous profession; and desiring to lay down, as a formal document, certain general principles inseparably connected with the profession of translating, particularly for the purpose of国际翻译工作者联合会认为，翻译工作在当代世界被看作是一种经常、普遍和必不可少的活动形式；翻译工作能够使各国人民进行精神与物质上的交流，丰富各国人民的生活，促进人们之间的了解；尽管从事翻译工作的环境各有不同，但当前必须把翻译工作看作是一种固定、独立的职业。
- 1、下载文档前请自行甄别文档内容的完整性，平台不提供额外的编辑、内容补充、找答案等附加服务。
- 2、"仅部分预览"的文档,不可在线预览部分如存在完整性等问题,可反馈申请退款(可完整预览的文档不适用该条件!)。
- 3、如文档侵犯您的权益，请联系客服反馈,我们会尽快为您处理(人工客服工作时间：9:00-18:30)。
The Translator’s Initiative in Translating作者：佟倩来源：《读与写·教育教学版》2014年第07期Abstract：Traditional translation studies hold the translator’s initiative is the biggest cause of unfaithfulness. On this basis，they request the translator to be “transparent body” and try to avoid subjectivity participation during translating. This paper points out the translator’s initiative does exist in the process of translating. The analysis is carried out in both abstract theory and concrete practice aspects， uses philo sophic viewpoint and“SL→SL’→TL’→TL” theory， and listed main factors of subjective participation. This paper aims to not only point out the neglect of the traditional studies，but also hope that from now on， translators can face their initiative squarely and take good advantage of it，so as to put the world’s translation enterprise forward.Key words：translation； initiative；“SL→SL’→TL’→TL” theory； faithfulness中图分类号：H319 文献标识码： A 文章编号：1672-1578（2014）7-0003-03Translation is a complicated activity. The translator， as the subject， has a great effect on it. Any translation activity cannot separate itself from the translator’s decision-making power. Tian Depei， the professor of Anhui University， holds，“First， the translator should conduct a careful study of the original as a reader. Second， the translator should represent the original as a writer. Third，the translator should express the original as a researcher.”① This multiple identity of the translator decides that his initiative plays its role during the whole process of translating.However， in the long history of translation studies， people hold a common understanding that translation is just duplicating the original in another language and the translated version is the replica of the original. On this basis， in the long period， people have paid excessive attention to “faithfulness”， the most important translation criterion， and even idealized it. They hanker after exact faithfulness and request the translator to be “transparent body”. Although people have tried to avoid the translator’s subjective effect，it still cannot be wiped out because the translator’s initiative exists from the very start to the end of translating objectively.To talk about a translator’s initia tive， we may first start it from philosophic point of view. As everyone knows， subject and object is a pair of concepts in philosophy. They depend on each other and also condition each other. If there is no subject， object cannot exist， and vice versa. So no matter subject or object， they have both initiative and passivity. Translation is the same. Translator， as the subject， also has his initiative and passivity. Most of our studies before are concentrated on his passivity. But the translator’s initiative determines his traces left in the translated version. That’s why we still get different good versions from different qualified translators， when wespare no effort to advocate the translated version should be faithful to the original. That is to say，initiative exists objectively.Zhang Renxian’s “SL→SL’→TL’→TL” theory has well put it. In this theory， when a translator is researching the original，the latter will arouse the former’s response： praising or depreciating，which helps the translator form his ideal original represented by SL’. According to SL’， the translator gets the translated version TL’. Then，he adds his subjective factors to process TL’ and gets TL which common readers read. It is the translator’s initiative who determines the proces s ofSL→SL’ and TL’→TL. ②A clear understanding of translation process can help us discuss the translator’s initiative in practice. Generally speaking， it is explained in three phases： comprehension， expression and collation. Among them， no doubt， comprehension and expression are more important than collation that belongs to latter work. And the translator’s initiative gives a full play in the former two phases.I Comprehension PhaseOnce referring to comprehension， we may recall an old saying，“One thousand readers， one thousand Hamlets.” That is to say， different people usually have different feelings about the same text. Hans-Georg Gadmer believes that reading comprehension is subject， because no matter what kind of comprehension it is， they all belong to historical phenomena and could not cast off the restriction of history.③ When a translator starts to translate some materials，he first plays a reader’s role. He must try to understand the content and be clear about the author’s in tention.Therefore，different translators’ understandings of the same original will not be same.At first， a translator can make use of his initiative to decide which kind of book he wants to translate and is able to translate. In order to attack the old society’s darkness and to claim readers to struggle with it， Ba Jin， the great writer and translator， used his pen as a gun. Among all the great works of the Russian poet Pushkin， he only chose one poem A Letter to Siberia about revolution. The other factor of the translator’s self-analysis is how broad his knowledge covers. Xiao Qian， a famous Chinese writer， sets up a good example for us. When he was first invited to translate James Joyce’s Ulysses，he refused. He said I called it “The Book of God”， because it was too difficult to understand. Till the end of 1980s， with his advanced English， he started to translate this book. After several years’ hardworking， a good translated version of Ulysses was born.Second， generally speaking， in order to have a better comprehension of the original， a qualified translator often makes use of his initiative to find out the information about the author and the original as much as possible from books，magazines or people’s comments， such as：background of the author and the original，the author’s experience and his writing style， etc. On one hand， the information is helpful to comprehension under most circumstances. But on the otherhand， it may also mislead the translator. Therefore，it’s time to take advanta ge of the initiative to set apart the information.Third， starting to comprehend the original， it is the first time that he has connected with it. The comprehension， what the translator is ready to express， is neither the exact thing the author put on the paper， nor the simple idea from the translator， but the result of communication between the author and translator. The original is their bridge. But， as translators have their own living experiences， the result of communication is also different. On this basis， the translated versions expressed from these comprehensions are ironed with different marks. That is one of the reasons why facing the same material， different translators have different translated versions， and even the same translator will get different versions， if he translates the same material in different periods. For example， the following is the three translated versions for one of our Chinese poems.The original：登鹳雀楼（王之涣）白日依山尽，黄河入海流。