Teaching Translation From the Perspective of Skopos Theory
(陈曦 欧阳俊林)最后的定稿[1]
![(陈曦 欧阳俊林)最后的定稿[1]](https://img.taocdn.com/s3/m/004b38297375a417866f8f87.png)
文化差异与品牌翻译陈曦欧阳俊林（安徽师范大学外语学院，安徽芜湖 241000）摘要商品和品牌是用于识别某个公司特定的产品和使之区别于其它公司产品的词语或别的符号：是用于指明某特定制造厂商的产品，使之区别于竞争者产品公司的符号、图案或它们的组合。
一个优良的成功的品牌具有以下三个主要功能：①它把自己的产品和竞争者的产品区别开来; ②它作为一种可信赖的优质特征; ③它有助于介绍宣传和销售产品。
即有“成功的说服”和“说服尽可能多的人”的功效。
因此从某种意义上说，品牌名的翻译成败与否，直接关系着企业的生死存亡。
商品的品牌翻译，通常遵循以下五个原则：易看、易听、易写、易读及易理解，本文从目的论的角度对其进行分析。
翻译方法主要有音译、意译和重命名三种。
要译好一个品牌，除了要顾及音、形、义外，还必须考虑各国的风土人情和商品特征，了解产品的历史背景，在此重点讨论东西方文化差异在品牌翻译中有着不可忽略的影响以及在翻译中可以使用的一些技巧。
比如谐音和创新。
目的论中最重要的三个法则是：目的法则、连贯法则和忠实法则。
关键词：品牌；品牌翻译；文化差异；目的论On Cultural Differences and Brand TranslationChen Xi Ouyang Junlin( College of Foreign Languages, Anhui Normal University, Wuhu 241000, China )AbstractTrademark or brand is a kind of sign or phrase used to distinguish one specific product of a company from another. It serves as an agent to clarify the product for the manufacturer. Generally speaking, they are words, symbols, pictures, names or the blending of all this. A successful brand is supposed to bear three major functions: to distinguish it from the products of others, to own the credible quality of the product and to help introduce, publicize and sell the product. Namely, it should play the role of the go-between in “persuading and persuading more people to the best of its ability”. To some extent, it is a matter of life and death to the manufacturer.The author pointed out that the brand translation should comply with five principles: easy to see, hear, write, read and understand. This kind of translation is analyzed from the perspective of Skopos theory. The main approaches are literal translation, free translation and renaming. Aiming at an ideal brand translation, besides taking its sound, form and meaning into consideration, one ought to pay attention to its custom, feature and background. The author highlighted the effect of cultural differences in brand translation as well as some strategies and skills like sound similarity and original creation. The very three significant rules of Skopos theory are：skopos rule，intratexual rule and intertextual rule .Key Words : Brand; Brand Translation; Cultural Differences； Skopos theory1 引言1.1 目的论目的论是由德国翻译家弗米尔首倡，在其《普通翻译理论基础》一书提出了目的论。
Skopos theory翻译目的论
Skopos theory: a retrospective assessmentAndrew Chesterman[2010a In W. Kallmeyer et al. (eds), Perspektiven aufKommunikation. Festschrift für Liisa Tittula zum 60.Geburtstag. Berlin: SAXA Verlag, 209-225.]1. IntroductionIt is often said, especially by laymen, that translation does not really have a theory. Not true: it has lots! (Well, it depends what you want to call a theory; but still...) But at least it does not have a general theory, right? Translation Studies has produced at best only a mixture of fragmentary theories. – This claim is not quite true either: we have several candidates which present themselves as general theories of translation. One them is skopos theory.It is now about a quarter of a century since the publication of Reißand Vermeer’s classic work,Grundlegung einer allgemeinen Translationstheorie (1984), and even longer since the earliest publications on a functional approach to translation. Skopos theory, as aparticular type of general functional theory, seems fairly well established on the map of translation studies, and is duly mentioned in all the textbooks. But how well has it stood the test of time? My aim here is to offer a general retrospective assessment of the theory, also taking account of some more recent criticism.2. Axiomatic assumptionsAny theory rests on basic assumptions that are not tested within a given research paradigm, but are taken as given, self-evident, based on common sense and logic. We must start from somewhere, after all. But of course we can always query these assumptions if we wish, standing outside the paradigm. Some of them may be only implicit, hidden. But good theories aim to make all the relevant assumptions as explicit as possible, for instance as axioms from which the rest of the theoretical claims can be deduced. Skopos theory is unusual among other theories of translation, in that it has this form of a deductive, “syntactic” theory based on a small number of explicit axioms. In the 1984 version, these are called “rules” (Regeln). I give them here in summarized form (in the original German, from Reiß and Vermeer 1984: 119), followed by some brief initial explications and comments.1. Ein Translat ist skoposbedingt.2. Ein Translat ist ein Informationsangebot in einer Zielkultur und–sprache über ein Informationsangebot in einer Ausgangskulturund –sprache.3. Ein Translat bildet ein Informationsangebot nicht-umkehrbareindeutig ab.4. Ein Translat muß in sich kohärent sein.5. Ein Translate muß mit dem Ausgangstext kohärent sein.6. Die angeführten Regeln sind untereinander in der angegebenenReihenfolge hierarchisch geordnet (“verkettet”).Ad 1: Skopos theory thus assumes that a translation always has a skopos (a purpose), even though this may not always be clear (ibid.: 21). This skopos may often differ from that of the source text (surely a useful point). The skopos is the highest determining factor influencing the translator’s decisions. Elsewhere (ibid.: 96), the rule is phrased: “Die Dominante aller Translation is deren Zweck.” The theory assumes that the skopos is oriented towards to the intended target recipients: all translations have such a readership; even if you cannot always specify them, there are al ways “there” (ibid.: 85). – I will return below to problems of definition.Ad 2: The theory assumes that language is embedded in culture. Translation is seen as a subtype of more general cultural transfer (Reißand Vermeer 1984: 13). The “information offer” concept relates to the underlying theory of communication, whereby a sender “offers” information to a receiver. This information is assumed by the sender to be “interesting” to the receiver (ibid.: 76, 103), and, if the communicative act is successful, it will be interpreted by the receiver in a way that is compatible with the sender’s intention and does not give rise to a “protest” (ibid.: 67, 106).Ad 3: Translations are not normally reversible; and a given source text has many possible translations.Ad 4: Intratextual coherence is assumed to exist to the extent that the text makes sense to the receiver, that it is compatible with the receiver’s cognitive context, as in any form of communication. Note that rules 4 and 5 have a clear prescriptive form, unlike the others.Ad 5: This fidelity rule assumes that the translation represents the source text, in some way which is relevant to the skopos. The theory recognizes a range of equivalence types.Ad 6: This rule is of a different status from the others, and, as part of a general theory, problematic. We might at least want to query the order of rules 4 and 5 as being universally valid.Immediately after giving this summary, the authors claim that these rules are “probably” the only general rules of translation (ibid.: 120). All further development of the theory would then be filling in more detail, providing rules for the analysis of the target situation, establishing conditions for the selection of different translation strategies, and so on (ibid.: 85).A last initial comment: at the very beginning of the book, the authors define “theory”, quite reasonably, thus: “Unter ‘Theorie’ versteht man die Interpretat ion und Verknüpfung von ‘Beobachtungsdaten’” (ibid.: vii). This definition nevertheless seems to be rather at odds with the way they actually present their theory. The argument of the book does not start with empirical observations or inductive generalizations, but proceeds deductively. Examples are given to support claims, but many of them seem to be invented.In a later publication, Vermeer (1996: 12f) contextualizes skopos theory explicitly as a form of action theory. Here too he sets out a number of axioms (now called, in English, “theses”), as follows, ending at about the point where the previous list (above) began:1. All acting presupposes a “point of departure”, i.e. an actor’sposition in space and time, convictions, theories, etc., includingtheir respective history.2. All acting is goal-oriented.3. From a variety of possibilities [...] that action will be chosenwhich one believes one has the best reasons for choosing under the prevailing circumstances. The reason(s) may not be conscious forthe actor.4. Given the prevailing circumstances, an actor tries to reach theintended goal by what seem to him the/an optimal way, i.e., forwhich he believes he has the best overall reason(s).5. Translating is acting, i.e. a goal-oriented procedure carried out insuch a way as the translator deems optimal under the prevailingcircumstances.6. Thesis 5 is a general thesis valid for all types of translating[including interpreting].7. In translating, all potentially pertinent factors (including thesource text on all its levels) are taken into consideration as far asthe skopos of translating allows and/or demands. [Emphasisoriginal]8. The skopos of (translational) acting determines the strategy forreaching the intended goal.One might wonder about the apparent underlying assumption here that human behaviour is necessarily always rational –if these axioms aresupposed to be descriptive (on which more below). Another underlying assumption, to which we shall return, is the assumption of optimality: that the translator (always) acts in an optimal way.3. Conceptual contributionQuite apart from any other merits, a theory may contribute new concepts to a field. These may aid theoretical thinking in general, as well as description and explanation, and may be taken up and adapted by other theories. New theoretical concepts are interpretive hypotheses, to be tested pragmatically in use (see further e.g. Chesterman 2008). Two aspects of this potential conceptual contribution will be mentioned here, beginning with the central concepts themselves.3.1. Key terms and conceptual distinctionsSome of the earliest criticism of skopos theory had to do with some of its definitions, or the lack of them (see Koller 1990, on functional theories more generally; Kelletat 1986; Hebenstreit 2007). We can also ask whether the relation between the set of terms and the set of necessary concepts is an appropriate one. Are there too many terms, or too few?Skopos is said to be a synonym of Zweck (purpose)or Funktion(Reiss and Vermeer 1984: 96), but “function” itself is not explicitly defined in the same context. Perhaps it could be glossed as “intended effect”. But: effect on whom? Intended receivers, or any and all receivers? And intended by whom? Is it only the client’s intention that counts? What about the source author’s? The publisher’s? When does an effect begin, and end? What about heterogeneous effects? How do we actually measure effects? Furthermore, if skopos equals function, we may wonder why a new term is needed. Confusingly, the Germanterm Funktion is used in several senses, including the mathematical one. Two of these senses do indicate an interesting distinction: “external function” is said to denote the translator’s general o bjective of making a living, whereas “internal function” refers to the skopos of a given translation (or translation process) (ibid.: 4). This external function seems very close to the term telos proposed in Chesterman and Baker (2008), to describe a trans lator’s ideological motivation for working as a translator, either generally as a career or on some specific, perhaps chosen, assignment.Later, Vermeer (1996: 7-8) seeks to distinguish three related concepts as follows: the intention is what the client wants to do;the skopos is what the translation is for; and the function is the “text purpose as inferred, ascribed by recipient”. But there remain problemshere. Are these distinctions necessary? When might an intention clash with a skopos? Function, in particular, remains an unclear concept. Recipients are not a homogeneous set, and may well ascribe very different functions. Even a model reader may react differently on different occasions. And besides, actual reception should surely be distinguished from intended function. Both intentions and functions may be virtually impossible to access, particularly if the translations studied are distant in time or space. – The conceptual and terminological confusion here has not been resolved (see e.g. Nord 1997: 27f; Sunwoo 2007).Another problematic term is that of coherence, used both to refer to the similarity relation of equivalence between source and target, and to the intratextual interpretability of the translation itself. These seem very different concepts, and one wonders why the theory uses the same term. Since we already have “equivalence”, and this term is used in skopos theory too, why do we need a new term? We also already have “similarity”, if something looser than “equivalence” is wanted.A translation is defined in the second axiom as an offer of information about a source text (which is itself another such offer, about something else). This interpretation of the relation between source and target is much weaker than any notion of equivalence, weaker even than relevant similarity (although Reiss and Vermeer do refer occasionally tothe offer as being a “simulating” one, e.g. p. 80, 105). It does not appear to constrain the “offer” in any way, except insofar as the offer is assumed to be “interesting” to the receivers and is “coherent” with the source text. Here again we can ask: does this term really earn its place?Regarding the German term Translation itself, we can appreciate the way in which skopos theory (following a German tradition in Translation Studies) uses this to cover both written and oral translation: this is a neat solution we have not managed to imitate in English, and which has subsequently been widely accepted. There will, however, always be argument about the appropriate extension of the term. Kelletat (1986) and Koller (1990) think the skopos notion of translation is too broad because of the way it downgrades the importance of the source text and thus allows very free translations, adaptations etc., within the concept. Kelletat (1986: 15) even suggests the Reiss/Vermeer definition would include the whole of Latin literature! In my view, on the contrary, it is too narrow, if it is taken to exclude non-optimal translations.The theory’s use of the term “adequacy” (Adäquatheit) also merits a comment. The term was already familiar from other approaches, particularly Toury’s (e.g. 1980). But skopos theory defines it differently, not as a retrospective relation of closeness between target and source but as a prospective one between the translation, the source text and the skopos (Reiss and Vermeer 1984: 139). This skopos-sense of adequacy isso easily confused with the Toury-sense that scholars now either have to specify which sense is intended or give up using the term altogether. It is risky to give a new sense to an already established term.Skopos theory, like other functional approaches, has also contributed to a more differentiated conceptualization of the agents involved in the translation process. Instead of simply having a sender and a receiver, we have learned to distinguish between writer, client, translator, publisher, recipient, addressee and so on. In this sense, skopos theory has helped to shift the discipline towards a more sociological approach.3.2. Underlying metaphorical structureA good theory’s concepts do not exist in isolation, but in a network of relations. This network may be more or less consistent in terms of its metaphorical structure. Martín de León (2008) has recently drawn attention to some interesting problems in the underlying metaphorical conceptualization of skopos theory. She argues that the theory combines two different metaphors: TRANSFER and TARGET. This suggests a lack of conceptual consistency, insofar as the metaphors are incompatible.The TRANSFER metaphor describes the movement of an object from A to B, and assumes that the object (or some essence of it) does notchange en route. This means assuming some kind of equivalence, of course. As an underlying metaphor for translation (visible in the etymology of this word), it normally needs to reify some notion of meaning (referred to as the message in Holz-Mänttäri 1984). The client’s intention might also be regarded as an “object” that is to be preserved. However, the view of a translation as merely an “offer of information” about the source text appears to go against the TRANSFER metaphor.The theory’s notion of intertextual coherence also relates to this metaphor, albeit loosely. But how valid is this assumption that meaning is “there” in the text? Several contemporary models of cognition would argue that meaning always emerges via a process of interpretation, a process which depends on multiple variables and is not completely predictable (see e.g. Risku 2002). – In my view, both these positions are overstated. Surely some meanings are more obviously, objectively “there” in a text, while others are much less so and are open to interpretive variation. If no meanings were objectivizable at all, there would be no work for terminologists and no-one would dare to step into a plane.The TARGET metaphor on the other hand describes a process from a source along a path to a goal. It does not assume an unchanged, reified message. It implies that the translator can participate in constructing the meaning of the message and thus highlights notions ofintentionality and rationality. Skopos theory stresses the expertise and responsibility of the translator to select what needs to be translated and to translate it in the most appropriate manner. But this metaphor also prompts questions. Suppose a given process or action does not have a single goal but multiple ones, perhaps regarding heterogeneous receivers? And where actually is a goal located? Strictly speaking, the goal is not in the text but in the mind of the initiating agent, for whom the translation is merely a means to achieve a goal or goals. Further: where in the theory is there any space for an assessment of the goals themselves? Is it really enough to say that any end justifies the means? – We will take up the ethical dimension of this argument below.4. Ontological status of the theoryPerhaps the most debated problem of skopos theory has been its unclear ontological status. Does it aim to be a descriptive theory (of what is) or a prescriptive one (of what should be)? Does it describe a real world or an ideal, optimal one?This ambiguous status is already apparent in its axioms: axioms four and five are openly prescriptive, but the others are not. Reiss and Vermeeer say that there is no such thing as “the best” translation for agiven source text. “Es gibt nur das Streben nach Optimierung unter den jeweils gegebenen aktuellen Bedingungen” (1984: 113). – This is an interesting formulation. The “es gibt” looks like an existential, descriptive claim: it is a fact that translators strive, that they do their best. Well, how valid is this fact? We could reply that good translators do indeed do their best, most of the time, but surely there must also be many translators who merely do the minimum, at least sometimes. Professionals must often satisfice, after all. And there are many bad translators, of course (if a translator is anyone who does a translation, as a general theory should surely assume).It seems to me to be clear that skopos theory is essentially prescriptive, although it has some descriptive assumptions. It aims to describe how good translators, expert professionals, work; what good translations are like. It describes an ideal world (see also Chesterman 1998). Vermeer has acknowledged this (Chesterman 2001), saying that the theory seeks to describe optimal cases. Elsewhere, however, he also seems to suggest that functional theories in general are both descriptive and prescriptive:Skopos theory is meant to be a functional theoretical general theory covering process, product and, as the name says, function both ofproduction and reception. As a functional theory it does not strictlydistinguish between descriptive and (didactic) prescription.(Vermeer 1996: 26n)Although the term “functional” remains problematic, I find this claim curious. Consider for instance the analysis of the reception of translations in a given culture in a given period. This would be an analysis of how the translations “functioned” in the target culture (data might include all kinds of responses, critical reviews, library loans, size and number of editions published, allusions to the translations in other writings, use of the translations as source texts for further translations, or as literary influences; sales of commercial products advertised by the translations; changes in the social, political, religious or ideological conditions; and so on). The analysis would not need to be prescriptive in any way. Even if the analysis compared the reception with the inferred intentions of different clients, this would not imply a prescriptive approach.On the other hand, there is one obvious way in which prescriptive claims can be viewed descriptively, and that is by formulating them as predictive hypotheses, as argued in Chesterman (1999). Vermeer actually does precis ely this at one point (1996: 31): “if you translate in such and such a way then y will happen”. Such predictions can then be tested in the normal way, and the results can be generalized in the form of guidelines which, if followed, are reliablyassumed to lead to translations which do not give rise to negative feedback (“Protest” in skopos-theoretical terms). This, of course, is precisely what translator training courses teach. It is also what skopos theory aims to do. If you keep the skopos in mind, and translate accordingly, the result will be better than if you neglect the skopos.5. Empirical status of the theoryAs presented, skopos theory is not founded on a search for empirical regularities. This point has been made by many critics (e.g. Koller 1995: 215). We can nevertheless consider how its various assumptions and claims might be tested empirically. It is striking that very little such testing has actually been done. What kind of evidence would falsify or weaken its claims? I will f irst consider the theory’s descriptive adequacy, then comment on its explanatory adequacy and possible testable consequences.5.1. Descriptive adequacyAxioms two and three in the original list above are descriptive. Axiom two, on translation as an offer of information, is definitional. It is aninterpretive hypothesis, which can be glossed something like this: ‘in this theory, we claim that a translation is usefully interpreted as ...’. As such, the claim is not falsifiable, but is testable pragmatically, i.e. in use (see further Chesterman 2008). Has this interpretation been widely adopted and led to further hypotheses? Not notably, it seems. On the contrary, it has aroused some criticism, as it seems to allow the concept of translation to expand too far (e.g. Kelletat 1986).Axiom three states that translations are not reversible. This claim can certainly be tested empirically, via back-translation. In my view, the claim is too extreme. It would surely be more accurate to say that the smaller the unit of translation, the more reversible it is; that in cases of standardized translations – e.g. in multilingual glossaries of special fields or in the names of institutions, or in many idioms and proverbs, in numbers, etc. – reversibility may well be the norm. In other words, the claim needs to be restricted, made subject to other conditional factors such as size of translation unit, text type, skopos, and so on.There have been a few empirical studies recently which question some of the other basic assumptions of skopos theory. Koskinen (2008) examines the working conditions of EU translators. One of her findings is that in many cases, EU translations that are not intended for the general public are not directed at a target culture at all, but are oriented by the needs of the source institution (99-100). This goes against the skopostheory assumption that a translation should have optimal functionality for target culture addressees. However, this type of EU case is not evidence against the idea that a translation is primarily determined by its skopos. Here, the skopos is simply not a target-oriented one. Interestingly, Koskinen points out that the special requirements of this kind of translation are experienced as particularly problematic by translators who have been trained in a functional approach: their translation brief seems to conflict with the target-oriented way in which they have been trained to think.Furthermore, many professional translators do not work as autonomous individuals but as members of a team of experts, including terminologists, subject specialists, revisers, copyeditors and so on. Such conditions do not always support the skopos theory assumption that it is the translator who ultimately decides how to translat e, as the expert. (“Er entscheidet letzten Endes, ob, was, wie übersetzt/gedolmetscht wird.” Reiß and Vermeer 1984: 87.) One recent study illustrates this well: Nordman (2009) examines the complex process of Finnish-Swedish translation in the bilingual Finnish Parliament, and highlights interesting disagreements between the translator’s preferences and those of revisers or legal experts, and how these are resolved. The translators and revisers she studied seem to have different norm priorities. It is not always the translator’s views that prevail.Even in some literary translation the priority of the translator’s expertise has been questioned. In a questionnaire study dealing with poetry translation, Flynn (2004) queries the status of some of the factors which skopos theory assumes, including that of the dominance of the translator’s own expertise. Flynn found that the situational factors affecting the final form of the translation are more like sites of confrontation between the various agents involved, including publishers and proof-readers as well as translators. The translator does not necessarily always have the final say. Flynn’s results admittedly concern a particular type of translation only, in a particular (Irish) context; but again, we can point out that a general theory should be able to cope with all types.As another example of evidence against the assumption that it is the expert translator who makes the final decisions I cite an ongoing PhD project by Julia Lambertini Andreotti at Tarragona. She is a qualified court interpreter working with Spanish and English in California. The ethical code there requires that interpreters make no alteration to the register of the legal jargon as they translate. But since many of the clients are not well educated, they simply do not understand the legal terminology, and so do not understand what they are asked. As communication experts, the interpreters naturally wish to adapt theregister so that the clients can understand, but this is not allowed. The interpreters are simply not permitted to act as skopos theory assumes.One might argue that all such examples are cases where a translator is forced to act under duress, against the council of his own expertise, and thus in non-optimal conditions. They would thus fall outside the scope of skopos theory. Reiß and Vermeer explicitly exclude instances of “Translation unter Zwang” (1984: 101). – But there are multiple kinds and grades of duress, including unrealistic deadlines, legal constraints etc., which characterize much real-world translation and interpreting. Indeed, if there are in fact more non-optimal cases than optimal ones, skopos theory itself would deal only with special cases – surely not the intention of the skopos theorists. A general theory should be general enough to encompass all cases.From another point of view, note should be taken of studies on how translators perform under time pressure (e.g. Hansen 2002). These studies suggest that when professional experts work under unusual time pressure, they tend not to waste time pondering about the skopos or the target audience but simply stay on the surface of the text, translating fairly literally, without reformulations or other major shifts which might actually be appropriate for the readership. Here again we have professionals working in a non-optimal situation, without sufficient timefor normal working procedures. Under these conditions, the skopos assumptions seem not to represent what actually happens.Research such as these studies underlines the way in which skopos theory relates more to an ideal, optimal world than to the real and often suboptimal world of everyday translation. In this sense, some of the general descriptive claims and assumptions of the theory can easily be falsified, or forced into more conditioned formulations – if they are supposed indeed to apply to all translation, not just optimal translation done in optimal working conditions. And what about the undeniable existence of a great many really bad translations? These are nonetheless also translations, of a kind; but they are completely excluded from skopos theory. From the point of view of descriptive adequacy, then, the theory is inadequate. But if it is taken as a prescriptive theory, of course, this is not a valid criticism.5.2. Explanatory adequacyThe first axiom (in the German list above) is a causal one. From the point of view of the production of a translation, it states that the skopos is the most important conditioning factor. This has obvious prescriptive relevance. But retrospectively, as an answe r to the question “why is this。
英语专业文献综述
Yi b i n U n i v e r s i t y2015届本科毕业论文文献综述题目_翻译目的论指导下的英语介词汉译策略研究二级学院外国语学院专业英语学生姓名简汝梦学号110405034 年级2011级指导教师徐文英职称讲师年月日文献综述翻译目的论指导下的英语介词汉译策略研究Study on the Translation Strategies of English PrepositionsBased on Skopos Theory姓名：简汝梦学号：110405034 指导老师：徐文英摘要:英语介词使用频率高，搭配能力强，含义灵活，因此在翻译中属于比较难以处理的一种词类.目的论论者认为翻译是有明确的目的和意图,在译者的作用下，以原文文本为基础的跨文化的人类交际活动。
目的论以文本目的为翻译过程的第一准则，目的决定了译者需要采用何种翻译策略和方法。
目的论的提出为英语介词的汉译提供了可靠的指导.本文将目的论引入到介词翻译中，认为在目的论原则的指导下，英语介词的汉译可通过加词、减词、分译、转译等策略来达到较好的翻译效果以及更好地实现翻译目的。
关键词：英语介词；翻译；目的论导言：随着时代的发展，以及中国入世的大好形势的出现，汉语与英语在世界上似乎显得同等重要,所以将这两种语言互相转化是我们越来越重要的任务。
在英语中，英语介词数量不多，但其构成的介词短语在英语中的出现频率很高，功能多样且位置灵活，对构成句子具有重要作用，因此对于英语介词的翻译策略问题一直深受广大翻译学者的关注。
目的论以文本目的为翻译过程的第一准则，目的论者认为翻译是一种有目的的活动,目的决定了译者需要采用何种翻译策略和方法，即“目的决定论”.目的论的提出为英语介词汉译提供了有效的指导.因此，译者若能熟练掌握翻译目的和翻译方法，则能译出高质量的译文.鉴于此，本文先是阐述各大专家对于英语介词翻译以及翻译目的论的已有研究和探索，并结合笔者自己的观点加以评述;然后以此综述在翻译目的论指导下研究英语介词的汉译策略是个切实可行的手段；最后预测此观点的发展前景一定是光明受欢迎的。
功能目的论—翻译课学期论文
Skopos TheoryAbstract: In the 1970’ s Germany, a linguist by the name of Hans J. Vermeer broke the linguist-oriented trend by introducing the skopos theory, the first known functional approach to translation, which defends that every translation has a purpose, which would consequently determine the strategies the translator should adopt. This paper main introduces Vermeer’ s skopos theory, with its merits as well as demerits, and gives some personal insights on this theory.Keywords: Vermeer, skopos theory, functional theories of translationSkopos theory, a niche theory in the field of translation studies, employs the prime principle of a purposeful action that determines a translation strategy. The intentionality of a translational action stated in a translation brief, the directives, and the rules guide a translator to attain the expected target text translatum. Emerged around the late twentieth century, skopos theory is the core of the four approaches of German functionalist translation theory.1.Functional theories of translationFunctional theories from Germany in the 1970s-1980s mark a move away from linguistic typologies towards a consideration of culture. Katharina Reiss, a linguist and translation scholar, created a model of translation criticism based on the function relation between the source and the target text, though her views are still concerned with the previous equivalence ones. As she states in her book Possibility and Limits of Translation Criticism, an ideal translation should be “in which the aim in the TL(target language) is equivalence as regards the conceptual content, linguistic form and communicative function of SL(source language)” [3].Going further than Reiss, Hans J. Vermeer completely refuses the equivalence-based theories, stating that “Linguistic alone won’t help us. First, because translating is not a merely and not even primarily a linguistic process. Secondly, because linguistics has not yet formulated the right question to tackle our problem” [4].And he put forward with the skopos theory, which lays foundation for the functional theories of translation. Justa Holz-Manttari introduces the theory of translatorial action. Similar to the ideas of Vermeer,Holz-Manttari describes translation as a complex action that is meant to achieve a specific purpose. Moreover, her theory focuses on the analysis of the participants (initiator, translator, target audience), their role and the conditions in which their activities take place. Christina Nord comes up with the “loyalty principle” of skopos theory, which states that the translators must be loyal to the author by making sure that his translatum doesn’t falsifies or is against the author’s original intentions.2. Skopos theory2.1 Synopsis of skopos theoryDiffering from previous translation studies which focus on a loyal reproduction of the source text in a target language based on principles of equivalence, Vermeer uses the action theory to defend that translation is an action with certain purpose. In the book composed with Reiss, he argues that every action has a purpose since “an action aims to achieve a goal and thus to alter the current states of affairs’’ [4]. As translating is a form of translational action that involves intentional communication (or interaction, if it affects two or more agents) and transition, there must be a purpose associated with it [6]. Because of this, Vermeer states “A translational action is governed by its purpose [4].” And he introduces the Greek word Skopos into translation, which means “aim’’ or “purpose” to propose his skopos theory of translation.According to Vermeer, to translate means “to produce a text in a target setting for a target purpose and target addressees in target circumstances” [4].This is Vermeer’ s definition of translation, and is the manifestation of skopos theory. He proposes that there are three possible types of purposes. Firstly, a general purpose that a translator strives for, such as translating as a source of professional income. Secondly, a communicative purpose of a target text in a target circumstance, such as to instruct the audience. Thirdly, the purpose of a translation strategy or approach, such as to exhibit the structural traits of the source language [2]. In the case of the term “skopos” in skopos theory, it refers to the second type of purpose. For Vermeer, the main aspect that determines the purpose of a translation is the target audience. This includes their culture-specific knowledge, their knowledge of the world, their expectations and theircommunicative needs. Besides, from Vermeer’ s definition on translation, we can see that Vermeer completely excludes the source text as a key factor because, for him, the source text is merely a “source of information” that is then transformed into a “source of information” in the target language. Conversely, what skopos theory emphasizes in translation is a translatum—the target text (outcome) of a source text. And it is the skopos of translation that determines what strategies translators should take to obtain the intended goals. “Skopos theory shaped the way translators work by detaching from the source text and focusing on the target purpose and audience’’ [5]. Hence we can that Skopos theory gives great emphasis on the target language and target recipients. And since the purpose of the translation is judged by the translators, translators are endowed with great power.Under the spokos theory, there are six directives. They are as follows:(1) A translatum is determined by its skopos.(2) A translatum is an offer of information in a target culture and languageconcerning an offer of information in a source culture and source language.(3) A translatum does not initiate an offer of information in a clearly reversible way.(4) A translatum must be internally coherent.(5) A translatum must be coherent with the source text.(6)The five rules [sic] above stand in hierarchical order, with the skopos rulepredominating.The first directive highlights that in whatever condition the translation action is always determined by its skopos, its aim or purpose. The second directive points out the importance between the relationship of the source text and target text to their functions in their respective linguistic and cultural contexts [6].The third directive implies that the translatum do not necessarily have the same function of the source text, emphasizing the irreversibility. And the fourth directive emphasizes the internal textual coherence of source text and fifth the TT’ s intertextual coherence with the ST. There are three rules encompassing the six directives:(1)The skopos rule. The first rule to obey in the process of translation is the purposeof an overall translational action. Skopos rule is always put in the first place.(2)The coherence rule. This rule requires that any translatum should make senseaccording to the target culture of the target language so that the receivers can make sense of it. As quoted from Nord, this rule states:A translation should be acceptable in a sense that it is coherent with the receivers’ situation [2].(3)The fidelity rule. The third “overarching’’ rule necessitates intertextual coherencebetween the source and target texts as target texts are produced in accordance to the information offered by source texts.As quoted from Dan, this third rule states: The TT (target text) should bear some kind of relationship with the corresponding ST (source text) [2].As for the relationship between the three rules, the third rule, the fidelity rule, is subordinate to the second rule, the coherence rule, which in turn is subordinate to the skopos rule. In other words, when translating, the translator should first ensure that the TT fulfills its purpose, then make sure the TT is itself coherent and only see that the TT demonstrates coherence with the ST.2.2 Merits of skopos theoryTo begin with, the skopos theory has provided solid theoretical foundation for translating practical texts. For instance, legal translation is the translation of legal and interlingual information. And it is culture-dependent and there may be specific conventions or concepts that are culture-bound and only exist in the source culture but not the target culture. Through the standard set by the skopos theory, translators measure the preservation of elements in their transfer from source to target text. Via the skopos rule and the coherence rule, the requirement that the target text is coherent for the target text receivers will help to inform translators on adjusting the degree of preservation they want such that this coherence is ensured. To some certain extent, Skopos theory has a wide range of practicability as it can promote translators ‘s efficiency when dealing with practical texts [7].Furthermore, Skopos theory highlights the importance of translators in translation activities, which greatly actives participation of translators. It breaks through the restriction of equivalence translation theory, studies translation from theperspectives of intercultural communication, and broadens the vision of translation studies [8].2.3 Demerits of skopos theoryThe flip side of the coin that involves the freedom to choose from different translation strategies based on the element of purpose, is that the theory may be seen as a vague framework that does not provide precise step-by-step orchestration. Students and translators in training do not have guidelines to follow diligently, possibly posing additional pressure and responsibilities on the translator to seek an adequate translation strategy. This can diminish their understanding and translation experiences for practical situations that are vital in the beginning stages of learning.Skopos theory focuses on the functional study of the TT. Tang Yujie argues that sometime, in order to achieve certain purpose, the translator may take the strategy of rewriting, which makes the TT far betray the original text. By taking into account the needs and expectations of the target audience, the translator is detaching completely from the source text.[7] Skopos theory does not pay sufficient attention to the linguistic nature of the ST nor to the reproduction of mirco-level features in the TT. Even if the skopos is adequately fulfilled, it may be inadequate at the stylistic or semantic levels of individual segments.In addition, since it is up to the translator to decide the purpose of translation action, the translator may lose his sense of responsibility and professional ethics in the process of translation, thus becoming a vulgar utilitarian or pragmatist.Moreover, not all translation has a purpose. What purports to be a “general” theory is in fact only valid for non-literary texts. Literary texts are considered to have no specific purpose.Finally, “Jargon such as translatum does little to further translation theory where workable terms (target text) already exist” [1].3.ConclusionBefore functional approaches to translation, and more specifically the skopos theory, translation consisted of a loyal reproduction of the source text in a target language, based on principles of equivalence. The most revolutionary aspect aboutthese new approaches is that the source text was no longer the king of the translation, something translators had to worship. Now, the translators are allowed and encouraged to take into consideration, and privilege, other important aspects, namely the purpose of the translation, and its target audience, who the text is intended for, bearing in mind their circumstances.In my point of view, skopos theory poses as a huge improvement for translation studies, since it shifts the focus of the translation process, enabling the translator to overcome cultural barriers. This makes TT into more natural-sounding and cultural-appropriate texts, with no comprehension constraints, that people can actually connect with, and feel like they are reading something that are written specifically for them.References:[1] Munday, Jeremy. Introduction Translation Studies: Theories and Applications [M]. 4th edition.London: Routledge, 2016.[2] Nord, Christiane. Translating as a purposeful activity: Functionalist approaches explained (2nded.). London: Routledge,2018.[3] Reiss Katharina. Translation Criticis: The Potentials and Limitations.St. Jerome Publishing,1997.[4] Reiss, Katharina & Hans J. Vermeer. Towards a General Theory of Translational Action: Skopos Theory Explained [M]. translated by Christiane Nord. London: Routledge, 1984/2013.[5] Vermeer, Hans Josef . "Ein Rahmen für eine allgemeine Translationstheorie". Lebende Sprachen, 1978.[6] Xiaoyan Du. A Brief Introduction of Skopos Theory[J]. Theory and Practice in Language Studies,2012,2(10).[7]卞建华,崔永禄.功能主义目的论在中国的引进、应用与研究(1987—2005)[J].解放军外国语学院学报,2006(05):82-88.[8] 汤玉洁.浅析翻译目的论[J].和田师范专科学校学报,2008(01):159-161.。
翻译目的论视角下张培基英译文赏析以《我坐了木船》为例
翻译目的论视角下张培基英译文赏析以《我坐了木船》为例一、本文概述翻译作为跨文化交流的重要桥梁，其本质在于传达原文的意义和风格，使译文读者能够理解和欣赏原文的文化内涵。
在众多翻译理论中，翻译目的论以其独特的视角和实用性，为翻译实践提供了重要的指导。
本文旨在从翻译目的论的视角出发，对张培基的英译文进行赏析，以《我坐了木船》为例，探讨其翻译策略与技巧，并分析其如何有效地传达原文的意蕴和风格。
张培基先生是我国著名的翻译家，其译文以准确、流畅、优美著称。
他的翻译作品广泛涉及文学、历史、哲学等多个领域，为我国的翻译事业做出了重要贡献。
在《我坐了木船》这篇译文中，张培基先生凭借其深厚的语言功底和文化底蕴，成功地将原文的意境和情感传达给了译文读者。
通过对张培基英译文的赏析，本文旨在揭示翻译目的论在实际翻译中的应用，分析译者在翻译过程中如何根据翻译目的选择合适的翻译策略，并探讨这些策略如何影响译文的质量和效果。
本文也希望通过这一案例分析，为翻译爱好者和从业者提供一些有益的启示和借鉴，推动翻译研究的深入发展。
二、翻译目的论框架下的翻译原则与策略翻译目的论，作为一种功能主义的翻译理论，强调翻译的目的和翻译行为所要达到的功能。
在此理论框架下，翻译的原则和策略都围绕翻译的目的进行选择和调整。
在翻译目的论的指导下，翻译的首要原则是目的性原则，即翻译行为应满足译文的预期功能或目的。
这一原则要求译者在翻译过程中，不仅要忠实于原文的内容，更要考虑到译文的读者群体、文化背景和语境等因素，以确保译文能够有效地传达原文的意图和信息。
翻译目的论还强调连贯性原则和忠实性原则。
连贯性原则要求译文在内部逻辑和表达上要保持一致性和连贯性，使读者能够顺利理解译文。
忠实性原则则要求译文在尊重原文的基础上进行适当的调整，以确保译文与原文在意义和功能上的对等。
在翻译目的论的框架下，翻译策略的选择应服务于翻译的目的。
常见的翻译策略包括直译和意译。
直译策略更注重保留原文的字面意义和风格，而意译策略则更注重传达原文的深层含义和语境信息。
解读布莱克诗篇《老虎》的象征意义
试究中国古诗词英译中的常用技巧—以《发如雪》为例英语习语非稳定性结构特征研究A Comparison of the English Color TermsAn Analysis of Hamlet’s Delay of Revenge in HamletA Study on Developing Autonomous Learning Ability of Junior High School Students An Analysis of Trademark Translation——from the perspective of Skopos Theory商标名的英译汉目的论研究——以洗护用品为例体育专有名词的翻译研究论福斯塔夫的性格用批评性语言分析中美主要矛盾论圣经诗篇的修辞特点An Analysis of Jude’s Pursuit of Love in Jude the Obscure论建构主义理论指导下英语口语教学方法英语中介语无标志被动语态的错误分析An Analysis of Symbols in Y oung Goodman Brown《荆棘鸟》之宗教观从中西方文化差异看餐桌礼仪对《名利场》中女主人公的性格特征分析英汉习语中价值观的差异从《小王子》看成人世界的身份危机战后美国对伊拉克娱乐文化的影响中英文名词性后缀的比较及其对翻译的启示从人类文化语言学的角度分析英语语言中的性别歧视现象文化因素对品牌翻译的影响国际贸易中付款方式的比较分析及发展趋势《弗洛斯河上的磨坊》中玛吉的悲剧成因比较研究王维与华兹华斯的自然观中英饮食文化的比较如何培养初中生开口说英语的习惯《尤利西斯》与《春之声》中意识流手法的不同影响中学生英语口语流利性的障碍及解决策略The Analysis of Teacher Images in English Films And Their Impacts on Y oung Teachers 从词汇对等角度看《红楼梦》中“笑”一词的英译A Naturalistic Approach to Jude’s Tragedy in Jude the Obscure初中英语词汇教学《简爱》中的人文主义思想述评Comparing the Reasons for Hester Prynne’s and Tess D’Urbervilles’s Tragedies《达芬奇密码》中的女性主义《葬花吟》两英译本的比较研究The Horror Elements in Harry Potter and the Sorcerer's Stone从功能对等角度看英语动物习语的翻译《名利场》中女性命运对比目的论视角下的《边城》的英译研究浅析英汉基本颜色词之文化内涵－－以“白”与“黑”为例从对照艺术看《羊脂球》的人物形象塑造在孤独中寻找自我——析《没有指针的钟》J.T.马龙的救赎通过对比研究看电影《小红帽》对经典童话小红帽的颠覆托妮•莫里森《宠儿》中的主角赛丝的女性形象研究从《店员》解读作者双重身份的矛盾心理On Idioms from the Holy Bible英汉颜色词隐喻的认知比较与研究英汉翻译中的增词技巧从语言功能考察汉语公示语英译美国牛仔形象演变和西部电影发展的研究A Study of Fu Donghua’s Translation of Gone with the Wind from the Perspective of Rewriting 广告中的视觉隐喻及其解读归化和异化翻译策略的研究汉语文化负载词的理解与翻译谈英汉励志谚语互译英国历险小说《所罗门王的宝藏》浅谈自有品牌在中国零售企业的发展《嘉莉妹妹》中女主人公美国梦的幻灭论侦探小说中的侦探话语的谎言测定A Comparison of the English Color Terms浅析《了不起的盖茨比》中的象征文化语境维度下中餐菜名的英译研究诀别武器之缘由——再读《永别了，武器》丰田如何成为全球第一汽车生产商方言电视节目收视群体特点及社会影响分析《傲慢与偏见》中女性意识的体现V ocabulary Teaching Based on Pragmatic Approach电影片名翻译的研究中学英语教育中的情感教育Analysis of the Elements of Modernism of Wuthering Heights卡门-波西米亚之花浅析英汉问候语的文化异同从模因论角度下谈广告语的仿译《等待戈多》的荒诞色彩英汉动物词语隐喻意义的对比分析论学生角色在中学英语课堂中的转换以《最后一片叶子》为例论欧亨利的创作风格从商标翻译看中西文化差异英汉社交称呼语礼貌规范和语用失误研究On Michael Moore's Fahrenheit / From the Rhetoric Perspective浅析《格列佛游记》中的乌托邦主题从中英婚俗看两国文化差异中英色彩词的文化内涵异同分析情景教学法在小学英语教学中的运用浅析英语外加状语的语用功能从功能对等理论看商务合同的翻译美国C标准对中国英语教育的影响艾米莉•狄金森雏菊诗中的死亡观从语用模糊理论看国际商务合同的模糊用语的功能《园会》中男性人物性格作用分析中西方“云”文化的对比研究及其翻译中美地下电影之比较研究埃德加•爱伦•坡恐怖小说的哥特式特征分析英汉委婉语比较研究《分期付款》中英语长句的分译策略浅谈跨文化交流中的非语言沟通佛罗多与亚拉冈：悲剧虚构型模式中的低模仿英雄与喜剧虚构型模式中的高模仿英雄中英文幽默映射的语言与文化差异A Probe into Three Phases for Effective Business Negotiations“三美论”观照下的《再别康桥》英译本比较研究中外酒文化差异分析打破沉默——接骨师之女中“沉默”主题的解读从《永别了，武器》中看战争对人性的影响相似的母爱，不同的表达——对比研究《黑孩子》和《宠儿》中的母亲形象中国时政新词翻译探析英汉习语渊源对比及其常用分析方法图式理论在英语阅读教学中的应用研究汉英叠词对比研究及其翻译英语广告中双关语的运用及其翻译研究论英汉数字习语的差异及翻译用会话含义理论分析《傲慢与偏见》中的人物对白从文化角度看林语堂的《吾国与吾民》教师在初中教学中对学生的评价英语环境公示语翻译中的问题以及解决方法从爱伦·坡《黑猫》探讨人性的善良与邪恶论中西饮食文化的差异中国旅游指南的中译英研究英汉情感隐喻认知对比分析大学英语课程改革审视：基于通识教育的视角《永别了武器》中战争对人类所造成的毁灭Disillusionment of American Dream in death of a salesman高中生英语学习动机的研究与培养——以天河中学学生为例伊丽莎白．贝内特与简．爱的婚姻观之比较On the Image of Women's Language in English中西商务谈判中的跨文化因素研究分析形成性评价在英语教学中的应用失败的逃亡—从《麦田守望者》中主人公的逃亡看个人意识对社会的超越On Relationship Between Mothers-and-Daughters-in-Law in China and the West奥斯卡•王尔德童话中的理想与现实《红字》中的圣经典故与象征意义论流行网络词汇的汉英翻译游戏在小学英语词汇学习中的运用法国大革命对《西风颂》创作的影响归化翻译在电影字幕中的运用－－以《米尔克》为个案分析论国际商务中的跨文化有效沟通浅析伍尔夫意识流小说中的叙事时间论翻译的艺术性别差异在日常英语词汇和句法中的体现《红字》的人文主义色彩文化语境对隐喻理解的影响李尔王和格勒旺布王比较研究以赫索格为代表的索尔贝娄作品中知识分子的困境与出路中国现代散文风格精彩再现——评张培基教授《英译中国现代散文选》简析黑人英语的主要特征及其文化影响《善良的乡下人》的喜剧性分析功能对等理论在中文菜单翻译中的应用《飘》中斯佳丽的人物形象浅析英汉动物习语内涵意义的文化差异《哈克贝利.费恩历险记》三个中文译本的对比赏析商业意识对美国电影片名翻译的影响中西方礼貌用语对比分析论《麦田里的守望者》中的佛教禅宗因素论《简爱》中的女性意识A Study of Corporate Crisis Management through Sanlu Tainted Milk Powder Incident 解读《皆大欢喜》中的浪漫主义汉语句型习惯对英文写作的负迁移作用A Comparison of the English Color Terms英国议会制辩论－－探究与实践浅析英语专业学生在听力理解中的策略运用浅析《最蓝的眼睛》中的创伤和治愈对比研究《珊瑚岛》和《蝇王》主题的冲突性论《荆棘鸟》中人性和宗教信仰的矛盾冲突An Analysis of the Distorted Human Relations in The Grass Is Singing功能视角下商务英语合同英译汉的技巧探析从精神分析角度看《宠儿》中塞斯的内心世界——黑人民族精神重塑英汉称谓语对比分析《愤怒的葡萄》中的圣经原型On the Irony in Pride and Prejudice论世纪年代以来美国文化冲击对中国青少年的影响及教育策略改革的应对措施论新闻英语中隐喻的运用及其翻译技巧论《傲骨贤妻》字幕翻译中的归化和异化策略毛泽东诗词中典故翻译的对比研究浅谈奥巴马演讲中的语用策略An Analysis of the Pragmatic Functions of English Euphemism英美小说《傲慢与偏见》和《飘》中的女性主体意识比较分析浅析“冰山理论”调动读者参与的作用从《飘》中人物性格分析看适者生存的道理意象创造的对比研究——文化视觉下的中英文诗歌A Brief Study of the Impact of Affective Factors on English Teaching in Middle School 英汉“思考”类动词的语义成分与词汇化模式分析哈里的迷惘与自我救赎——《乞力马扎罗的雪》的哲学解读从《麦田里的守望者》看霍尔顿的摇滚情结英汉状语语序修辞对比与翻译由女性“奴性”潜意识解析玛利娅姆多舛命运Differences of Talent Requirements in Chinese and Western Employment Advertising 《莎乐美》中的意象分析翻译中的语境因素分析试析与地理环境有关的英语成语及其文化内涵《孔乙己》两种英译本对比研究李安电影中的文化融合现象当爱遇见不爱——浅析《马可百万》中的三对情爱关系英语系动词语义属性及句法行为研究做最好的自己—论斯佳丽形象对现代女性的教育意义。
Skopos Theory
Skopos Theory(2012-11-30 22:29:56)1.(translation studies) The idea that translating and interpreting shouldprimarily take into account the function of both the source and targettext.2.o1995, Paul Kussmaul, Training The Translator, JohnBenjamins Publishing Co, p. 149:2.The functional approach has a great affinity with Skopos theory.The function of a translation is dependent on the knowledge,expectations, values and norms of the target readers, who are again influenced by the situation they are in and by the culture. These factors determine whether the function of the source text orpassages in the source text can be preserved or have to be modified or even changed.Introduction to the Skopos TheoryThe Skopos theory is an approach to translation which was putforward by Hans Vemeer and developed in Germany in the late 1970s and which oriented a more functionally and socioculturally concept of translation. Translation is considered not as a process oftranslation, but as a specific form of human action. In our mind, translation has a purpose, and the word “Skopos” was from Greek.It’s used as the technical term for the purpose of thetranslation.翻译目的论，"skopos"是希腊语“目的”的意思。
(英语毕业论文)从心理角度分析斯蒂芬.茨威格《一个陌生女人的来信》
最新英语专业全英原创毕业论文，都是近期写作1 禅宗思想在艾米莉迪金森诗歌中的体现2 艾米莉.狄金森诗歌中的动物意象研究3 从“爱的习惯”看多丽丝.莱辛笔下的两性关系4 Sister Carrie’s Stepping Stone to Success5 艾米莉狄金森死亡诗歌的解读6 《身着狮皮》中的话语、移民与身份7 从《女勇士》中的女性形象看文化差异8 论《蝇王》中戈尔丁对人性之恶的解析9 荒诞与抵抗——《局外人》中莫尔索的荒诞表现之原因分析10 跨文化交际下的中英文禁忌语的对比研究11 Comparative Studies on Metaphors with Animal Images in Chinese and English12 A Study of Hawthorne’s Notion of Science as Shown in “Rappaccini's Daughter”13 《我，机器人》中苏珊.卡尔文的女性角色分析14 《远大前程》与《名利场》叙事技巧比较研究15 从关联理论看《茶馆》两个英译本中修辞格的处理16 从女性角度分析《喧哗与骚动》中的堕落与升华17 合作原则在小说《傲慢与偏见》对话分析中的应用18 英汉心理使役动词的对比研究19 试析与地理环境有关的英语成语及其文化内涵20 简爱的独立性格剖析21 中西跨文化交际中的礼貌问题之比较分析22 商标翻译分析23 《乱世佳人》女主人公斯嘉丽的性格分析24 词汇衔接手段在新闻英语中的应用25 从《推销员之死》看消费主义时代美国梦的破灭26 从广告层面比较研究中美文化差异27 外语学习中学习动机的影响28 从精神分析角度解析《一位女士的画像》中伊莎贝尔阿切尔的婚姻悲剧29 麦当劳法则及其在美国社会的影响30 A Journey through Harsh Reality: Reflections on Gulliver’s Travels31 商务谈判中的模糊语的使用32 NBA和CBA的文化差异分析33 广告语中预设触发语的语用分析34 从文本类型角度看旅游宣传资料的汉英翻译35 维多利亚时期英国女性文学作品的三个男性形象分析36 论汉语新词语的英译37 从文化的角度对比研究中英人名38 CET-和IELTS阅读培训课对比研究39 论奥斯丁女性主义观点在《爱玛》中的体现40 命运与社会的牺牲品—苔丝的悲剧根源探析41 On Chinese-English Advertisement Translation from the Perspective of the Skopos Theory42 约翰·福尔斯《法国中尉的女人》的元小说叙事研究43 网络英语中的新词探究44 英语新闻标题中的修辞及其翻译45 论电影翻译中的创造性叛逆——以《肖申克的救赎》为例46 浅谈当代大学生炫耀性消费文化47 女性主义视角下的《了不起的盖茨比》48 从等效理论视角看汉英外宣翻译49 独立学院英语专业大一学生阅读策略使用情况调查与分析50 从思维方式差异看英语复杂句汉译51 Problems and Solutions in Senior English Listening Teaching52 维多利亚时期的艺术对文学的影响——以白衣女人为例53 The Application of Task -Based Language Teaching in Middle School English Instruction54 The Conflict between Desire and Surroundings：an Analysis of Clyde in An American Tragedy55 American Individualism and Its Reflection in the Film Erin Brockovich56 顺应理论视角下公益广告英译中的语用失误分析57 《尤利西斯》与《春之声》中意识流手法的不同58 《老人与海》中词语修辞格的运用59 安娜与伊丽莎白个性完整性与分裂性的比较研究60 Body Language in Nonverbal Communication61 A Comparative Study of Tess in Tess of the D’Urbervilles and Jane in Jane Eyre62 网络语言风格的性别差异63 从《绝望主妇》各主角看美国家庭问题64 “庸人”自扰——《普鲁弗洛克情歌》主题探究65 Superstitions in Chinese and Western Festivals66 浅析简.奥斯汀《理智与情感》中的婚姻观67 论圣经诗篇的修辞特点68 极权主义下人性的扭曲——用福柯的空间理论解读乔治·奥威尔的《》69 英语单位名词研究——以《牛津高阶英汉双解词典（第六版）》为例70 歧义视角下的英语言语幽默研究71 从目的论看《红楼梦》中成语的翻译72 归化与异化翻译策略在英译汉语菜名中的应用73 英语广告的修辞及其翻译74 中西神话中的创世神话75 商标名的英译汉目的论研究——以洗护用品为例76 中国领导人讲话中中国特色词汇的汉英翻译77 《汤姆索亚历险记》和《哈克贝利费恩历险记》中人物形象的对比分析78 英语歧义现象及其在广告中的应用79 不同的音乐折射不同的文化80 灰姑娘文学形象在西方文化中的发展和演变研究81 英汉语言与文化差异对广告翻译的影响82 从合作原则谈影视翻译策略——以《功夫熊猫》为例83 Love and Death in The Awakening84 从《葡萄牙人的十四行诗集》探究布朗宁夫妇的爱情85 游戏在学前儿童英语教学中的角色及作用86 从精神分析学角度看哈姆莱特的性格变化87 A Comparison of Western and Eastern Privacy Concepts88 论商务英语信函写作的语篇衔接与连贯89 从目的论角度比较研究《彼得.潘》两个中文译本90 英语广告中的礼貌原则91 功能对等理论视角下李白诗歌中意象的英译92 中西方跨文化商务活动中礼貌的语义差别93 论《傲慢与偏见》中的爱情观和婚姻观94 从《成长的烦恼》和《家有儿女》的对比看中西方家庭价值观的差异95 On the Diversity and Unity of Contemporary American Feminism96 从目的论看《红楼梦》中灯谜翻译97 互联网时代的语言帝国主义98 美狄亚的女性主义分析99 生态视角下解读《荒野的呼唤》100 浅析《莳萝泡菜》中的意识流技巧运用101 《麦田里的守望者》的当代启示102 《远大前程》中乔的人道主义精神103 解析《诺桑觉寺》中凯瑟琳的自我成长104 从功能对等论看中餐菜单的英译105 杰克的悲剧与海明威的世界观106 爱伦坡侦探小说的特征与影响107 Cultural Factors in the Translation of English Idioms108 中西方酒文化对比分析109 功能目的论视角下的企业外宣资料的英译研究110 《高老头》主人公人物性格分析111 Advertising Translation from a German Functionalist Approach112 多丽丝莱辛的《金色笔记》中安娜的政治困惑分析113 道德与归属地的一致性－－《曼斯菲尔德庄园》空间维度分析114 论环境和社会制度对人的行为和品格的影响——以《雾都孤儿》中南希的形象分析为例115 《红字》-现实主义与浪漫主义的混合体116 从文化角度看英汉习语翻译117 解读《金色笔记》中的女性主义118 浅谈英语习语的特点及其汉译119 论中国古典诗词英译中三美原则的再现120 从顺应论的角度谈英文电影片名的汉译121 An Analysis of Tess’s Tragic Fate and the Realization of Hardy’s Fatalism122 反思《夜访吸血鬼》中的同性恋现象123 从弗吉尼亚伍尔夫到多丽丝莱辛：论女性主义的发展——对比两位作家笔下塑造的女性形象124 论接受理论对儿童文学作品的影响——以《快乐王子》中译本为例125 Rhetorical Art and Chinese-English Translation Suggestions of Business Transaction Correspondence126 A Comparison of English and Chinese Animal Words127 试论英汉日常礼貌表达的异同128 从女性主义角度浅析简.爱的婚姻观129 穷人的大团结，通往希望之乡的必经之路：《愤怒的葡萄》研究130 商务信函翻译技巧初探131 中西方文化背景对理解隐喻的影响132 汉英习语翻译中文化因素的处理133 中西文化差异对品牌翻译的影响134 从叶芝的诗歌看象征主义的发展135 英汉“悲伤”情感隐喻认知对比分析136 The Positive Impact of English Movies on Oral English137 论价值观对中美商务谈判的影响138 (日语系毕业论文)关于食品比喻表现的中日对照研究139 关于鲁宾逊的精神分析140 翻译的对等性研究及其应用141 一个陌生女人来信的人物性格分析142 浅析欧.亨利小说中恶棍骗子形象塑造－－以《双料骗子》，《提线木偶》为例143 从生态批评的视角看《远离尘嚣》的生态悖论144 网络英语词汇的构词特点145 (英语系经贸英语)浅析特许经营模式下受许人获得的优势－－以全聚德为例146 浅析电影字幕翻译中文化意象的重构——《冰河世纪》两个翻译版本的对比分析147 An Analysis of Women’s Status in Pride and Prejudice148 商务信函的写作原则与技巧149 中西方祭祀文化之异同150 中美脱口秀会话分析对比研究（开题报告+论）151 《紫色》女主人公性格分析152 堕落的世界－－－－-评菲茨杰拉德的《夜色温柔》153 对《老人与海》中主人公的性格分析154 On Transcendentalism in Thoreau’s Walden155 On the Application of Newmark’s Theory in Tourism English Translation156 中美家庭变迁的对比研究157 试论金融英语词汇的特点与翻译158 中西方饮料的跨文化差异159 海明威的生态意识在《老人与海》中的体现160 《善良的乡下人》中的女性形象分析161 论《爱玛》中简奥斯丁的社会理想162 跨文化交际视角下沉默行为的解析163 一个自我矛盾的精神世界—《达洛卫夫人》中的对照与一致164 英语商标的汉译原则及策略165 A Study of the Personality of Emily from A Rose for Emily166 英语名的取名艺术167 小学英语课堂任务设计的研究168 概念隐喻视角下的美剧《复仇》的语篇分析169 浅析英文新闻标题的翻译170 An Analysis of Communicative Language Teaching Method in Teaching Spoken English in China171 《傲慢与偏见》中英语反语的语用分析172 英汉动物习语中隐喻用法的对比分析173 英汉动物谚语中动物形象的意义及翻译174 英语广告中双关语的运用及翻译研究175 论《了不起的盖茨比》中二元主角的运用176 从会话含义分析鲍西娅人物形象177 命运与社会的牺牲品—苔丝的悲剧根源探析178 A Comparative Study of the Auspicious Culture in Wedding Custom between China and the West179 顺应论视野下茶文化负载词的英译策略180 从《一间自己的房间》看弗吉尼亚.伍尔夫的女性主义181 《格列佛游记》对理性的反思与批判182 论宋词词牌名的翻译183 儿童语言习得关键期假说的教育语言学重估184 Individual Factors in the Tragedy of The Lady with the Camellias185 矛盾修辞法的认知语用分析186 简爱——平凡而非凡的女人187 浅析公示语的翻译188 环境、性格、命运－－评《远大前程》主人公皮普189 A Survey of the Manifestations of “Babel” in the Movie Babel190 中西丧葬礼俗的对比研究191 外国品牌中译的创新翻译研究192 关于英语课堂中教师体态语的研究193 图式理论与英语听力教学194 广告英语的翻译195 The Linguistic Features of American Inaugural Address196 An Interpretation of Nightingale in The Nightingale and the Rose197 An Analysis of Oscar Wilde’s Subversion of Traditional Fairy Tales198 《百万美元宝贝》中麦琪性格男性化形成原因分析199 从女性意识的角度解读《荆棘鸟》中的女性形象200 《嘉莉妹妹》中女性自我意识探析。
skopostheory翻译功能目的论教程
• Having been trained as an interpreter by Katharina Reiss, Vermeer took up general linguistics, then translation studies and also desired to break with linguistic translation theory by proposing a new translation theory. • Skopostheorie is explained in detail in the book A Framework for a General Translation Theory co-authored by Vermeer and Reiss in 1984.
Chapter 1 Hans Vermeer and Skopos theory
Part 1 Hans vermeer
• Prof. Dr. h.c. Hans-Josef Vermeer (September 24, 1930 - Heidelberg, February 4, 2010), German linguist and translation scholar. • He was appointed Professor of General and Applied Linguistics at the University of Mainz in Germersheim (1971–1983). After that he held the chair of Translation Studies with special reference to Portuguese at Heidelberg University (1984–1992). He was also a visiting professor at Leopold Franzens University in Innsbruck (1999–2002), Bosphorus University in Istanbul (2002–2003) and Okan University in Istanbul (2004– 2008). He finally returned to the universities of Mainz and Heidelberg to teach in his final years. • He established the skopos theory.
功能翻译理论视角下大学英语翻译教学策略研究
课程教学Curriculum Teaching 功能翻译理论视角下大学英语翻译教学策略研究冀姗姗（西安思源学院陕西•西安710038）摘要产生于20世纪70年代的“功能翻译”理论改变了传统的以“源文本字、词、句”翻译为主的理念，使翻译语言不再生硬、僵化，契合了翻译文本功用性需求，是对传统英语翻译教学的有效补充。
功能翻译理论视角下大学英语翻译教学，通过培养学生英语翻译的连贯性，培养学生对英语翻译的目的性定位，培养学生翻译能力和技巧，进一步促进大学英语教学质量的提升，提升学生的翻译能力和水平。
关键词功能翻译理论大学英语翻译教学翻译策略中图分类号：G424文献标识码:A DOI:10.16400/ki.kjdkx.2020.10.059On Translation Teaching Strategies of College Englishfrom the Perspective of Functional Translation TheoryJI Shanshan(Xi'an Siyuan University,Xi'an,Shaanxi710038)Abstract The theory of"functional translation",which came into being in the1970s,has changed the traditional concept of "source text words,words and sentences",which makes the translation language no longer rigid and rigid,and meets the functional needs of the translated text.It is an effective supplement to the traditional English translation teaching.From the perspective of functional translation theory,college English translation teaching aims to improve the quality of college English teaching and improve students'translation ability and level by cultivating students'coherence in English translation,cultivating students'goal orientation and translation ability and skills.Keywords functional translation theory;college English translation teaching;translation strategy英语翻译主要分为口译和笔译两种形式，它具有跨语言、跨文化的活动特征，它是一门语言艺术，也是当代大学教育所需要掌握的技能之一；它是对学生英语水平的综合应用及测评，是语言输入至输出的动态过程，更是对语言再现或再创的一种艺术。
- 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)。
Ｓｉｎｏ－ＵＳ Ｅｎｇｌｉｓｈ Ｔｅａｃｈｉｎｇ，Ｄｅｃｅｍｂｅｒ ２０１６，Ｖｏ１．１３，Ｎｏ．１２，９２８．９３１
ｄｏｉ：１０．１７２６５／１５３９．８０７２／２０１６．１２．００３
Ｔｅａｃｈｉｎｇ Ｔｒａｎｓｌａｔｉｏｎ Ｆｒｏｍ ｔｈｅ Ｐｅｒｓｐｅｃｔｉｖｅ ｏｆ Ｓｋｏｐｏｓ Ｔｈｅｏｒｙ ＱＩ Ｊｉａｎ—ｔａｎ Ｎｉｎｇｂｏ Ｄａｈｏｎｇｙｉｎｇ Ｕｎｉｖｅｒｓｉｔｙ，Ｎｉｎｇｂｏ，Ｃｈｉｎａ
Ｔｒａｎｓｌａｔｉｏｎ ｆｏｒ ｌａｎｇｕａｇｅ ｔｅａｃｈｉｎｇ ｉｓ ｄｉｆｅｒｅｎｔ ｆｒｏｍ ｇｅｎｅｒａｌ ｔｒａｎｓｌａｔｉｏｎ ｗｈｉｃｈ ｉｓ ｃｈａｒａｃｔｅｒｉｚｅｄ ｗｉｔｈ Ｆａｉｔｈｆｕｌｎｅｓｓ，
Ｅｘｐｒｅｓｓｉｖｅｎｅｓｓ，ａｎｄ Ｅｌｅｇａｎｃｅ．Ｔｈｅ ｄｉｆｅｒｅｎｃｅｓ ｌｉｅ ｉｎ ｖｏｃａｂｕｌａｒｙ，ｓｔｒｕｃｔｕｒｅ，ａｎｄ ｄｉｓｃｏｕｒｓｅ．Ｔｈｅ ｅｘｔｒｅｍｅ ｅｍｐｈａｓｉｓ ｏｆ
ｔｒａｎｓｌａｔｉｏｎ ｓｋｉｌｌｓ ｗｉｌｌ ｍａｋｅ ｉｔ ｈａｒｄ ｔｏ ｌｅａｒｎ ｃｅｒｔａｉｎ ｌａｎｇｕａｇｅ ｅｌｅｍｅｎｔｓ ｆｏｒ ｔｈｅ Ｅｎｇｌｉｓｈ ｌｅａｒｎｅｒｓ．Ｔｈｅ ｐａｐｅｒ ｍａｋｅｓ ａｎ
ａｎａｌｙｓｉｓ ｏｎ ｔｈｅ ｔｈｒｅｅ ｌｅｖｅｌｓ ｏｆ ｔｒａｎｓｌａｔｉｏｎ ｆｏｒ ｌａｎｇｕａｇｅ ｔｅａｃｈｉｎｇ ｆｒｏｍ ｔｈｅ ｐｅｒｓｐｅｃｔｉｖｅ ｏｆ Ｓｋｏｐｏｓ Ｔｈｅｏｒｙ，ａｉｍｉｎｇ ａｔ
ｄｒａｗｉｎｇ ａｔｔｅｎｔｉｏｎ ｆｒｏｍ ｔｈｅ ｔｒａｎｓｌａｔｉｏｎ ｔｅａｃｈｅｒｓ ｔｏ ｃａｒｅ ｍｏｒｅ ａｂｏｕｔ ｓｔｕｄｅｎｔｓ’ｄｅｍａｎｄｓ ｏｆ ｌｅａｒｎｉｎｇ ｌａｎｇｕａｇｅ ｅｌｅｍｅｎｔｓ ｔｈｒｏｕｇｈ ｔｒａｎｓｌａｔｉｏｎ．
Ｋｅｙｗｏｒｄｓ．’ｔｒａｎｓｌａｔｉｏｎ ｆｏｒ ｔｅａｃｈｉｎｇ ｌａｎｇｕａｇｅ，ｌｉｔｅｒａｔｕｒｅ ｔｒａｎｓｌａｔｉｏｎ，ｄｉｆｆｅｒｅｎｃｅｓ
Ｉｎｔｒｏｄｕｃｔｉｏｎ Ｓｋｏｐｏｓ Ｔｈｅｏｒｙ ｐｏｉｎｔｓ ｏｕｔ ｔｈａｔ ａｌｌ ｔｈｅ ｔｒａｎｓｌａｔｉｏｎ ｍｕｓｔ ｆｏｌｌｏｗ ｔｈｅ ｔｏｐ ｒａｎｋｉｎｇ ｐｒｉｎｃｉｐｌｅ－－－ｐｕｒｐｏｓｅ—ｏｒｉｅｎｔｅｄ ｐｒｉｎｃｉｐｌｅ．Ｔｒａｎｓｌａｔｉｏｎ ｆｕｎｃｔｉｏｎｓ ｉｎ ｔａｒｇｅｔ ｌａｎｇｕａｇｅ ｃｏｎｔｅｘｔ ａｎｄ ｃｕｌｔｕｒｅ ａｃｃｏｒｄｉｎｇ ｔｏ ｔｈｅ ｗａｙ ｔｈａｔ ｔａｒｇｅｔ ｌａｎｇｕａｇｅ ｒｅｃｅｐｔｏｒｓ ａｒｅ ｅｘｐｅｃｔｉｎｇ．Ａ ｔｒａｎｓｌａｔｉｏｎ ａｃｔｉｏｎ ｉｓ ａｌｗａｙｓ ｄｅｔｅｒｍｉｎｅｄ ｂｙ ｉｔｓ ｐｕｒｐｏｓｅ，ｓｔａｔｉｎｇ ｔｈａｔ ａｎｙ ｔｒａｎｓｌａｔｉｏｎ ａｃｔｉｏｎ ｉｓ ｐｕｒｐｏｓｅｆｕ１．Ｉｎ Ｅｎｇｌｉｓｈ ｔｅａｃｈｉｎｇ，ｗｅ ｏｆｔｅｎ ｅｎｃｏｕｎｔｅｒ ｔｗｏ ｔｙｐｅｓ ｏｆ ｔｒａｎｓｌａｔｉｏｎ：Ｓｅｎｔｅｎｃｅ ａｎｄ ｔｅｘｔｕａｌ ｔｒａｎｓｌａｔｉｏｎ ａｒｅ ｕｓｅｄ ｔｏ ｐｒｏｍｏｔｅ ｓｔｕｄｅｎｔｓ’ｖｏｃａｂｕｌａｒｙ ｕｓｅ ａｎｄ ｓｙｎｔａｃｔｉｃ ｓｔｒｕｃｔｕｒｅ，ｗｈｉｃｈ ｉｓ ｃａｌｌｅｄ‘‘ｔｒａｎｓｌａｔｉｏｎ ｆｏｒ
ｔｅａｃｈｉｎｇ Ｅｎｇｌｉｓｈ ｌａｎｇｕａｇｅ”．Ｔｈｅ ｏｔｈｅｒ ｔｙｐｅ ｉｓ ｃａｌｌｅｄ‘‘ｌｉｔｅｒａｔｕｒｅ ｔｒａｎｓｌａｔｉｏｎ’’ｏｒ ｏｔｈｅｒ ｔｙｐｅｓ ｏｆ ｔｒａｎｓｌａｔｉｏｎ ｂａｓｅｄ ｏｎ ｔｈｅ ｐｒｉｎｃｉｐｌｅ ｏｆ“Ｆａｉｔｈｆｕｌｎｅｓｓ，Ｅｘｐｒｅｓｓｉｖｅｎｅｓｓ，ａｎｄ Ｅｌｅｇａｎｃｅ”．Ｓｉｎｃｅ ｔｗｏ ｔｙｐｅｓ ｏｆ ｔｒａｎｓｌａｔｉｏｎ ｈａｖｅ ｖａｒｉｏｕｓ ｐｕｒｐｏｓｅｓ，ｔｈｅｙ ｗａｙ ｏｆ ｄｏｉｎｇ ｔｈｅ ｊｏｂ ｓｈｏｕｌｄ ａｌｓｏ ｂｅ ｄｉｆｅｒｅｎｔ ｆｒｏｍ ｏｎｅ ａｎｏｔｈｅｒ，ｗｈｉｃｈ ｒｅｑｕｅｓｔｓ ｔｅａｃｈｅｒｓ ｏｆ Ｅｎｇｌｉｓｈ ｓｈｏｕｌｄ ｔｒｅａｔ ｗｉｔｈ ｔｈｅ ｔｗｏ ｔｙｐｅｓ ｏｆ ｔｒａｎｓｌａｔｉｏｎ ｉｎ ｄｉｆｅｒｅｎｔ ｗａｙｓ．Ｏｎｌｙ ｉｆ ｔｈｅ ｔｅａｃｈｅｒｓ ｄｏ ｔｈｉｓ ｗａｙ ｃａｎ ｄｉｆｆｅｒｅｎｔ ｐｕｒｐｏｓｅｓ ｏｆ ｔｒａｎｓｌａｔｉｏｎ ｂｅ ｒｅａｃｈｅｄ ｒｅｓｐｅｃｔｉｖｅｌｙ．
Ｔｈｅ Ｗａｙ ｔｏ Ｄｅａｌ Ｗｉｔｈ Ｗｏｒｄｓ Ｔｈｅｒｅ ａｒｅ ｔｈｒｅｅ ｂａｓｉｃ ｒｕｌｅｓ ｆｏｒ Ｓｋｏｐｏｓ Ｔｈｅｏｒｙ，ａｍｏｎｇ ｗｈｉｃｈ ｔｈｅ ｆｉｄｅｌｉｔｙ ｒｕｌｅ ｂｅｌｉｅｖｅｓ ｔｈａｔ ｔｈｅｒｅ ｅｘｉｓｔｓ ｉｎｔｅｒ－ｔｅｘｔｕａｌ ｃｏｈｅｒｅｎｃｅ ｂｅｔｗｅｅｎ ｓｏｕｒｃｅ ｔｅｘｔ ａｎｄ ｔａｒｇｅｔ ｔｅｘｔ．Ｔｈａｔ ｉｓ ｔｏ ｓａｙ，ｉｎ ａｌｌ ｔｈｅｏｒｉｅｓ ｏｆ ｔｒａｎｓｌａｔｉｏｎ，ｔａｒｇｅｔ ｔｅｘｔ ｓｈａｌｌ ｂｅ ｆａｉｔｈｆｕｌ ｔｏ ｔｈｅ ｓｏｕｒｃｅ ｔｅｘｔ，ｗｈｉｃｈ ｉｓ ａ ｒｕｌｅ ｔｏ ｂｅ ａｄｈｅｒｅｄ ｔｏ．Ｂｕｔ ｔｈｅ ｄｅｇｒｅｅ ａｎｄ ｗａｙ ｏｆ ｆｉｄｅｌｉｔｙ ｄｅｐｅｎｄ ｏｎ ｔｈｅ ｐｕｒｐｏｓｅ ｏｆ ｔｒａｎｓｌａｔｉｏｎ ａｎｄ ｕｎｄｅｒｓｔａｎｄｉｎｇ ｏｆ ｔｒａｎｓｌａｔｏｒｓ ｆｏｒ ｏｒｉｇｉｎａｌ ｔｅｘｔ（Ｎｏｒｄ，２００ １）．Ｓｉｎｃｅ ｈｅｌｐｉｎｇ ｓｔｕｄｅｎｔｓ ｔｏ ｕｎｄｅｒｓｔａｎｄ ａｎｄ ｍａｓｔｅｒ ｔｈｅ ｖｏｃａｂｕｌａｒｙ ｉｓ ｔｈｅ ｍａｉｎ ｐｕｒｐｏｓｅ ｏｆ ｔｅａｃｈｉｎｇ ｔｒａｎｓｌａｔｉｏｎ ｉｎ ｇｅｎｅｒａｌ Ｅｎｇｌｉｓｈ ｔｅａｃｈｉｎｇ，ｔｈｅ ｔｅａｃｈｅｒｓ ｏｆ Ｅｎｇｌｉｓｈ ｓｈｏｕｌｄ ｔｒｙ ｔｏ ａｃｈｉｅｖｅ ｅｑｕｉｖａｌｅｎｃｅ ｏｆ ｓｅｔ ｐｈｒａｓｅｓ ａｎｄ ｉｄｉｏｍｓ ｉｎ ｔｈｅ ｐｒｏｇｒｅｓｓ ｏｆ ｔｒａｎｓｌａｔｉｏｎ．Ｉｎ ｏｔｈｅｒ ｗｏｒｄｓ，ｔｈｅｙ ｓｈｏｕｌｄ ｔｅａｃｈ ｔｈｅ ｓｔｕｄｅｎｔｓ ｔｏ ｔｒａｎｓｌａｔｅ ｔｈｅ ｗｏｒｄｓ ｗｉｔｈ ｉｔｓ ｌｉｎｇｕｉｓｔｉｃ ｍｅａｎｉｎｇ．Ｔｈｅｒｅｆｏｒｅ，ｗｈｅｎ ｄｏｉｎｇ ｔｒａｎｓｌａｔｉｏｎ ｅｘｅｒｃｉｓｅｓ，ｔｈｅ ｔｒａｎｓｌａｔｏｒｓ ｓｈｏｕｌｄ ｈｉｇｈｌｉｇｈｔ ｔｈｅ ｓａｌｉｅｎｔ ｌｉｎｇｕｉｓｔｉｃ ｍｅａｎｉｎｇ ｏｆ ｗｏｒｄｓ ａｎｄ ｐｈｒａｓｅｓ ａｓ ｃｏｍｐｌｅｔｅｌｙ ａｓ ｐｏｓｓｉｂｌｅ，ｗｈｉｃｈ ｍｅａｎｓ ｔｈａｔ ｔｈｅｙ ｓｈｏｕｌｄ ｊｕｓｔ ａｃｈｉｅｖｅ ｔｈｅ ｅｑｕｉｖａｌｅｎｃｅ ｏｆ ｌｉｎｇｕｉｓｔｉｃ ｍｅａｎｉｎｇ，ｒｅａｃｈ“ｆａｉｔｈｆｕｌｎｅｓｓ ａｎｄ ｅｘｐｒｅｓｓｉｖｅｎｅｓｓ＇，，ａｎｄ ｎｏｔ ｓｔｒｅｓｓ‘‘ｅｌｅｇａｎｃｅ’’ｔｏｏ ｍｕｃｈ
ＱＩ Ｊｉａｎ－ｔａｏ，ａｓｓｏｃｉａｔｅ ｐｒｏｆｅｓｓｏｒ，ｍａｓｔｅｒ，Ｃｏｌｌｅｇｅ ｏｆ Ｈｕｍａｎｉｔｉｅｓ，Ｎｉｎｇｂｏ Ｄａｈｏｎｇｙｉｎｇ Ｕｎｉｖｅｒｓｉｔｙ． ＴＥＡＣＨｒＮＧ ＴＲＡＮＳＬＡＴＩｏＮ ＦＲＯＭ ＴＨＥ ＰＥＲＳＰＥＣＴＩＶＥ ０Ｆ ＳＫＯＰＯＳ ＴＨＥＯＲＹ ９２９ ａｎｄ ｔｒｙ ｔｏ ａｖｏｉｄ ｅｘｃｅｓｓｉｖｅｌｙ ａｍｐｌｉｆｙｉｎｇ，ｄｅｌｅｔｉｎｇ，ｒｅｖｅｒｓｉｎｇ，ｏｒ ｔｒａｎｓｆｅｒｒｉｎｇ ｔｈｅ ｍｅａｎｉｎｇ ｏｆ ｗｏｒｄｓ． Ｅｇ．Ｓｏｕｒｃｅ Ｔｅｘｔ：“…Ｉ’１１ ｃｏｕｎｔ ｔｈｒｅｅ ｈｕｎｄｒｅｄ．Ｔｈａｔ ｉｓ ｆｉｖｅ ｍｉｎｕｔｅｓ ａｎｄ ｎｏｔ ｏｎｅ ｏｆｙｏｕ ｉｓ ｔｏ ｍｏｖｅ ａ ｍｕｓｃｌｅ． Ｔｈｏｓｅ ｗｈｏ ｍｏｖｅ ｗｉｌｌ ｆｏｒｆｅｉｔ ５０ Ｒｕｐｅｅｓ．Ｒｅａｄｙ！”（ＺＨＡＩ，Ｃｏｌｌｅｇｅ Ｅｎｇｌｉｓｈ，２０１３）． Ｃｈｉｎｅｓｅ ｔｒａｎｓｌａｔｉｏｎ：“……我数三百一也就是五分钟一你们谁都不许动一动。动者将罚款５０卢比。准 备好！” Ａｃｃｏｒｄｉｎｇ ｔｏ ｔｈｅ ｌｉｔｅｒａｔｕｒｅ ｔｒａｎｓｌａｔｉｏｎ ｓｔａｎｄａｒｄ“Ｆａｉｔｈｆｕｌｎｅｓｓ，Ｅｘｐｒｅｓｓｉｖｅｎｅｓｓ，ａｎｄ Ｅｌｅｇａｎｃｅ”，ｔｈｅ ｒｅｆｅｒｅｎｃｅ ｔｒａｎｓｌａｔｉｏｎ ｋｅｅｐｓ ｔｈｅ ｓｐｉｒｉｔ ｌｏｙａｌｌｙ ａｎｄ ｉｔ ｒｅａｄｓ ｖｅｒｙ ｗｅｌ１．Ｉｔ ｉｓ ａ ｗｏｎｄｅｒｆｕｌ ｔｒａｎｓｌａｔｉｏｎ．Ｈｏｗｅｖｅｒ，ｔｈｅ ａｕｄｉｅｎｃｅ ｏｆ ｔｈｉｓ ｔｒａｎｓｌａｔｉｏｎ ａｒｅ ｓｔｕｄｅｎｔｓ，ａｎｄ ｔｈｅ ａｉｍ ｏｆ ｔｈｅ ｔｒａｎｓｌａｔｉｏｎ ｉｓ ｔｏ ｍａｋｅ ｓｔｕｄｅｎｔｓ ｍａｓｔｅｒ ｔｈｅ ｕｓａｇｅ ｏｆ ｕｎｃｏｍｍｏｎｌｙ ｕｓｅｄ ｗｏｒｄｓ．１ｉｋｅ‘‘ｆｏｒｆｅｉｔ”．Ｉｎ ｏｒｄｅｒ ｔｏ ｒｅａｃｈ ｔｈｅ ｒｅｑｕｉｒｅｍｅｎｔｓ ｏｆ“ｅｌｅｇａｎｃｅ’’ｉｎ ｌｉｔｅｒａｒｙ ｔｒａｎｓｌａｔｉｏｎ，ｔｈｅ ｔｒａｎｓｌａｔｏｒ ｔｒａｎｓｌａｔｅｓ ｔｈｅ ｗｏｒｄ ｉｎｔｏ‘＇ｐｅｎａｌｔｙ”，ｂｕｔ“ｐｅｎａｌｔｙ’’ｃａｎｎｏｔ ｅｘｐｒｅｓｓ ｔｈｅ ｌｉｎｇｕｉｓｔｉｃ ｍｅａｎｉｎｇ ｏｆ“ｆｏｒｆｅｉｔ＂，ｉｔ ａｌｓｏ ｍａｙ ｂｅ ｃｏｎｆｕｓｅｄ ｗｉｔｈ‘‘ｔ０ ｂｅ ｆｉｎｅｄ＂ｅａｓｉｌｙ，ｓｏ ｓｔｕｄｅｎｔｓ ｃａｎｎｏｔ ｍａｓｔｅｒ ｔｈｅ ｍｅａｎｉｎｇ ａｎｄ ｕｓａｇｅ ｏｆ“ｆｏｒｆｅｉｔ”ｆｒｏｍ ｔｈｉｓ ｔｒａｎｓｌａｔｉｏｎ．Ｂｅｃａｕｓｅ ａｃｃｏｒｄｉｎｇ ｔｏ Ｏｘｆｏｒｄ Ａｄｖａｎｃｅｄ Ｌｅａｒｎｅｒ Ｄｉｃｔｉｏｎａｒｙ．ｉｔｓ ｍｅａｎｉｎｇ ｉｓ： “ｔｏ ｈａｖｅ ｔｏ ｇｉｖｅ ｓｏｍｅｔｈｉｎｇ ｕｐ ｂｅｃａｕｓｅ ｓｏｍｅ ａｇｒｅｅｍｅｎｔ ｏｒ ｒｕｌｅ ｈａｓ ｂｅｅｎ ｂｒｏｋｅｎ，ｏｒ ａｓ ａ ｐｕｎｉｓｈｍｅｎｔ”．Ｉｆ ｉｔ ｃａｎ ｂｅ ｔｒａｎｓｌａｔｅｄ ｉｍｏ“谁动谁就交出５Ｏ卢比来”ｗｉｔｈ ｔｈｅ ｐｕｒｐｏｓｅ ｏｆ ｖｏｃａｂｕｌａｒｙ ｌｅａｒｎｉｎｇ，ｉｔ ｃａｎ ｅｘｐｒｅｓｓ ｔｈｅ ｌｉｎｇｕｉｓｔｉｃ ｍｅａｎｉｎｇ ｏｆ ａ ｗｏｒｄ ｍｏｒｅ ａｃｃｕｒａｔｅｌｙ，ａｎｄ ｈｅｌｐ ｓｔｕｄｅｎｔｓ ｍａｓｔｅｒ ｕｓａｇｅ ｏｆ ｔｈｅ ｗｏｒｄ ｂｙ ｔｒａｎｓｌａｔｉｏｎ ｃｏｍｐｒｅｈｅｎｓｉｏｎ．