【作者】 陆颖；

【导师】 张春柏；

【作者基本信息】 华东师范大学 ， 英语语言文学， 2014， 博士

【摘要】 本论文从文化研究视角出发,以傅东华初译(1935)与重译(1959)《珍妮姑娘》为个案,探讨社会文化语境转变、译者主体成长和两者关系改变对重译《珍妮姑娘》的动机、目标、过程的影响,从而历史地评价译本,.归纳译者翻译风格和思想的发展历程,探究重译的本质特征和个案批评研究的模式。本研究首先以译本为起点,将两种译文置于三维立体的文本空间中,在细读比对基础上,探寻两个译本翻译策略和译文风格转变及傅东华翻译风格的独特性和时代性。而后以译家为主线,译史为背景,通过译者著述、译作序跋、出版广告、政策文件等大量一手史料再现傅东华初译和重译《珍妮姑娘》的历史现场,参照傅东华在整个翻译生涯中的成长和转变,从译者主体和社会文化语境两方面,点线面结合地勾勒语境差异与傅东华惯习转变对重译的影响,以及语境与译者的相互关系对翻译过程的影响,从而全面、客观地评述两个历史语境中的译本、译家、译事、译史,多层次地审视译者和两个译本的历史地位,并归纳重译的独特性和个案研究的模式。本研究得出的结论主要有三点：第一,重译本和初译本呈现出截然不同的风格,这不仅是版本演进和文本更新,更是语境转变、译者发展及两者关系变化的结果。重译本《珍妮姑娘》在内容、意义、形式和语言上均有体现出强烈的人民性,接近工农大众需求,是新中国构建国家意识形态的需要。重译的出版受国家赞助,与国家政策主张保持高度一致,服务国家意识形态和国家民族文学构建,参与汉语规范统一和文艺大众化。译者傅东华由左翼时期雄踞文坛中心,转为解放后在文坛边缘徘徊,翻译中更多表现出对国家意志的接受和顺应,也凝结着24年中对翻译理想的不懈追求和对现实的积极调和。这些变化最终铸就了重译本的“人民性”,使译本具有存在的合理性和文化历史性。第二,《珍妮姑娘》的两度翻译折射出傅东华翻译生涯发展的大致轨迹。他对翻译始终寄予极大期望,系读者于心,以高度使命感严肃对待,视忠实为翻译的终极追求,但他又直面现实,顺势而为,经历了从最初的形神兼弃,到20-30年代的舍神留形和40年代的求神胜形,最后到解放后的神形兼求的过程。第三,这一重译个案也体现了重译为异重译、因译而异、异中有重的本质特征,揭示出重译活动的复杂性和文化历史性,有力地驳斥了“重译复译假设”和重译“贵在超越”论。因而,研究和评价重译活动需将新旧译本更迭、语境异同及译者历时发展列入考察视野,在动态的历史中,以“译本-译事-译家-译史”的框架,情境化地加以评价。更多还原

【Abstract】 This dissertation, with Fu Donghua’s translations of Jennie Gerhardt published in1935and1959respectively as a case study, discusses how the changes in socio-cultural context, the translator and their mutual relationship influence the motivation, aim and process of translation, in an attempt to criticize the translation and retranslation historically, to trace the development of Fu Donghua’s translation style and thoughts, and to probe the core nature of retranslation and a model for criticism and case study.Taking the translated texts as the starting point, the writer compares and contrasts them both synchronically and diachronically through close reading with a purpose to find out the changes in translation strategy and style between the two versions and the translator’s unique style and changes over time. Then the study follows the trace of the translator’s development in the socio-cultural context to reveal how changes in the context, the translator and their relationship can influence the whole process of translating. This is carried out on the basis of abundant first-hand evidence, including Fu’s literary and academic works, prefaces to and postscripts of his translations, advertisements, policies and documents and so on, to help reconstruct the historical scene of Fu’s translating activities and the trace of his translational development. The writer can thus examine the translated text, the translator, the translating process and the two historical periods in a comprehensive and objective way, and then to criticize Fu Donghua and his two Chinese translations of Jennie Gerhard’s historically, and to find out the unique nature of retranslation and a tentative research model.The main findings of this dissertation boil down to the following three points:Firstly, the retranslated Jennie Gerhardt, close to the background of mass readers in new China, is bestowed with the character of people, not only in content and meaning, but also in form and language. The rebirth of Jennie Gerhardt and its survival and prosperity after1959is not just a matter of adaptation or textual renewal, but a means to construct national ideology. Patronized by the government, it was in accordance with its policies and prepositions to help construct national ideology and literature, to standardize the Chinese language in the new age and to popularize literature and art. As Fu Donghua’s literary position was marginalized, he was more inclined to accept and adapt to national will. His unswerving pursuit of translation ideal was translated into reality through principled compromise. Therefore, the changes in the socio-cultural context, the translator and their mutual relationship together forged the character of the people in retranslation, which endowed it with existential rationality and cultural-historical significance.Secondly, the translations of Jennie Gerhardt reveal Fu Donghua’s shifts in his whole translation career, yet that also shows his unchanged great expectation and seriousness for translation, a strong sense of mission, a great concern with readers and an ultimate pursuit of faithfulness in correspondence with varied reality. He was unfaithful both in form and spirit in the early stage, and he sought for formal resemblance at the expense of readability in the1920s and1930s, while deviated from the source text to accomplish spiritual resemblance in the1940s, and finally tried to attain both after1949.Thirdly, this case study reveals the core nature of retranslation, that is, retranslation sets out for difference, and creates it through unavoidable overlapping, and gives rise to its complexity and cultural-historical significance. That in turn refutes the ideal of retranslating for surpassing older versions and the popular "retranslation hypothesis" that later translations tend to be closer to the source text. Hence in retranslation criticism, a fair and contextualized evaluation should be made in the dynamic history with a thorough examination of textual changes, contextual differences and the translator’s development under the framework of "the translated text-translation process-the translator-translation history".更多还原