【作者】 迟庆立；

【导师】 冯庆华；

【作者基本信息】 上海外国语大学 ， 英语语言文学， 2007， 博士

【摘要】 翻译在文化日益受到关注的今天,翻译活动作为文化交际活动的一种,也深受影响。上世纪90年代初翻译研究领域出现的文化转向,以及90年代末的文化研究的翻译转向,将文化与翻译越来越紧密地联系到了一起。文化翻译一词的使用,也随之成为译界的常用术语。翻译活动必然涉及策略的选择。而针对这个问题,翻译界历来看法不一。论文即从文化翻译策略上的争论出发,对文化翻译策略选择多样性与不同译本之间的关系做一研究。现有的文化翻译定义繁多,且所持的视角存在较大分歧。为了使研究角度更为清晰,论文对现存的文化翻译定义进行了回顾。在分析和比较的基础上,论文认为,广义的文化翻译指将一种文化向别种文化译介的整个过程,以达到相互了解、平等对话为目的;狭义的文化翻译,指“原文中特有文化内容/因素的翻译”。本文所研究的文化翻译策略针对的即是狭义的文化翻译。由于原文中特有的文化内容或因素,可能在译文的各个语法层面体现,为便于研究,论文选择在词汇层面进行研究,即将文化负载词的翻译作为本论文的研究对象。之所以选择文化负载词作为研究对象,最重要的原因,是因为词是文化差异表现最为直接和明显的语言层面。文化负载词的恰当处理,对于促进文化概念的认同有着非同寻常的意义,反之,要对一种文化的特色进行清除或置换,也往往首先在词汇的层面进行。在对研究范围进行了限定之后,本文对作为文化翻译策略的归化和异化的定义也进行了归纳,认为归化和异化不是泾渭分明的两个对立面。绝对的归化和绝对的异化,由于文化本身的各种特性,即使从理论上讲也是不可能存在的。由于归化和异化无论从共时还是历时角度而言都是相对的,且无论采用归化或是异化策略,其所用翻译方法都会出现相互的覆盖,因此,论文认为归化和异化只是两种大的方向。随着在实际操作中各翻译方法所占比重的不同,译本会表现出在翻译策略上程度不同的倾向。为了便于分析,论文将文化翻译过程中使用的具体方法分为阐释、替换、直译与字译、音译、省译与注释六种,并就各种方法进行了具体说明。论文随后对中西翻译史上涉及文化翻译策略的论述和实践进行了梳理和总结,探求历时过程中文化翻译策略整体的倾向变化,同时比较共时状态下就翻译策略的争论,对文化翻译策略的多样性进行研究。在中国翻译史部分,论文分别对佛经翻译时期、西学东渐时期和综合翻译时期多位名家的论述和实践进行了总结。对西方翻译史部分的梳理,则从两个角度进行,首先对不同国家各个时期的译者在策略上的选择进行探究,其次由于论文的研究主要针对的英汉翻译,故而专门对西方汉学家在汉籍英译领域的实践进行了总结。从这些译者及翻译理论家的论述中,可以清晰地看出文化翻译策略发展的总体趋势,那就是从归化向异化的发展,从趋同向独立的发展,同时从不同译家的观点和实际选择,更可见文化翻译策略选择的多样性。在从历史角度探讨了文化翻译策略多样性的现实存在性后,论文在第三章中,从翻译活动的外部环境和翻译活动的内部环境两个方面,分析了文化翻译策略多样性存在的理论基础。翻译活动的外部环境,包括文化的特性和文化间的关系。文化特性指所有文化的共有属性,文化间的关系,指的是一种文化在同另一种文化交往时所处的相对地位,是一种文化对他我关系的一种定位。文化间关系的不断变动,意味着不同时期的译者可以根据当时社会文化环境的不同,选择自己认为适合的翻译策略。翻译活动的内部环境,涉及文本、译者,以及译本的服务对象——读者。翻译活动的具体操作从原语文本来,最终还要归结到译语文本中去,而文本的意义多重性等多种因素,在文化框架下促使不同的译者做出不同的选择。受王东风(2002)提出的文化认同机制假设启发,论文认为读者作为排异系统的重要组成部分,在语言的实际使用中,检验着译者做出的翻译选择。没有哪种翻译是没有目标读者的。而读者的多层次性和阅读目的多重性,客观上要求译本在文化翻译策略上的多样性。至于译者,他们是语码转换站中外来文化因子最初的处理者,而译者所具有的主体性以及译者自身的客观条件,使策略的多样性存在成为了必然。论文认为,文化翻译策略的多样性,不仅有其存在的必然性,更重要的是其存在的必要性。文化翻译策略多样性最直接的影响,就是带来了源于同一文本的多个译本的互补性。所谓互补性,就文本自身而言,指各个译本之间在内容、形式上相互补充、互为观照的关系;就文本在文化语境下的角色而言,则指各译本通过对同一种文化因素的反复强调、不断修正和补充,共同推动来自源语文化的文化因子进入译语文化。对于共时性的译本,这种互补性表现为同一时期的相互补充、校正和对照,对于历时性的译本,这种互补性不仅表现在后出现者对先出现者在各方面补充和修正,同时也表现在先出现者为后来者在文化接受上所做的先期铺垫上。为了进一步说明文化翻译策略多样性与多译本之间的互补关系,论文在第四、第五章采用了统计分析方法,分别通过实例对共时性多译本和历时性多译本之间的互补关系展开了比较研究。论文在第四章以《红楼梦》的两个英文全译本为例,对共时性译本的翻译策略使用进行了对比分析,研究因文化翻译策略选择不同而产生的译文互补性。论文采用奈达对翻译活动中涉及的文化因素分类方法,由于语言文化层面极为复杂,限于篇幅,本文未将其列入分析范围,因此论文实际考察的文化层面为生态、物质、宗教和社会四个文化层面。论文首先随机抽取的170个文化负载词样本,按照其概念意义归入不同的文化层面后,对这些文化负载词所使用的具体翻译方法进行了统计。经过分析比较,发现霍克斯的译本使用最多的前三种翻译方法分别是替换、阐释和直译与字译,而杨宪益、戴乃迭译本使用最多的是直译与字译、替换及阐释。同时两个译本在各个文化层面上的策略选择相关度又各有不同,在生态和物质文化层面,两者的差距最大,而在宗教和社会文化层面,特别是社会文化层面却相当接近。不过即使是在策略选择比较接近的社会文化层面,也存在着不同。杨宪益夫妇偏向于使用文末注释,对象多为人,而霍克斯却喜欢使用文内阐释的方式,对象多为事物。通过两个译本的比较,论文认为,霍克斯的译本更倾向于读者对原文内容的理解,而杨宪益夫妇则更倾向于保持原文的原有形式。正是由于策略倾向的不同,使两者构成了良好的互补。论文随后在第五章以《聊斋志异》的几个节译本为例,对历时性多译本的翻译策略使用及译本互补关系进行了研究。这一部分的研究分为两部分进行。在第一部分中,论文选择了不同时期出版的三个译本,进行文化翻译策略的多样性研究。这三个译本分别出自翟理斯(H. A. Giles)(1926)、卢允中、杨立义、杨之宏、陈体芳(1982)以及丹尼斯·马尔及维克多·马尔(Denis C. & Victor H. Mair)(2001)。由于《聊斋志异》的现存译本多为节译本,交迭的部分比较有限,且《聊斋志异》作为短篇故事集,故事数量虽多但篇幅较小,加之多人物描写,而少环境描写,生态与物质文化材料的收集相对较为困难,因此对《聊斋志异》的研究只涉及了宗教和社会两个文化方面。在对文化负载词样本进行分析后,论文发现三个译本按照出版的时间顺序,出现了注释使用量由多而少,同时直译使用频率由少而多的现象,清晰地呈现出从形式到内容的互补。第二部分则针对《聊斋志异》中各故事的篇名翻译进行了翻译策略研究,由于以译本为单位,因此选择了五个译本进行比较研究,从整体上探讨不同译者在处理篇名时的策略倾向,以及由此产生的译文互补。最后,论文在第六章对全篇进行了总结,同时提出,翻译策略多样性存在的事实本身就意味着任何一种翻译策略都不能十全十美,因为左右翻译策略选择的因素时刻处于动态变化之中,任何一种策略上的倾向都必然造成译本需要其他译本进行补充的地方。因此,在翻译策略的选择上,应鼓励译者发挥主观能动性。在翻译活动,尤其是复译活动中,应鼓励翻译策略选择的多样性。需要说明的是,尽管本文试图通过客观的定量分析进行实证性研究,但由于译者在实际操作中往往做法灵活,在对具体文化负载词使用的翻译方法定性上难免存在一定的主观性。此外,由于主客观条件的限制,本文所收集到的资料从数量和规模上都存在着很大的局限性。且本文的选材范围主要限于文学作品,而本文的统计材料也全部取自《红楼梦》和《聊斋志异》两部文学作品,因此论文提出的论点也应主要适用于文学作品的翻译。相关研究可以在多个层面继续进行。论文对翻译策略选择与多译本互补问题的研究主要是从文化负载词这一层面进行。事实上,文化因素的翻译还可以涉及短语、句子以及篇章层面,这些都可以成为将来系统研究的对象。更多还原

【Abstract】 As a part of cultural exchange, translation activities attract more attention than before in today’s globalization. The“cultural turn”in translation studies started from the early 1990s, and the“translation turn”in the field of cultural studies appeared in the late 1990s have bound Culture and Translation even tighter than before. Yet, a consequent stronger consciousness of the differences between different cultures nowadays makes it even harder for a translator to decide whether his version should get near or keep away from the target culture, and to what extent. Which cultural translation strategy to choose is a question every translator has to face, yet no consensus has ever been reached. That is why the dissertation chooses to study cultural translation strategies. The study aims to illustrate the relationship between the different choices on cultural translation strategy and the complementation between different versions of the same text.The dissertation starts with a review of the existing definitions of cultural translation which is quite large in number and different in perspective. Based on an analysis, the dissertation puts forward its own definition of cultural translation in a narrow sense and in a broad sense as well. The former refers to the translation of the specific cultural elements existing in the original text, while the latter refers to the whole period of introducing one culture to another through translation in the aim of achieving mutual understanding and equal dialogue.The study is done basically on the lexical level. The chief reason for choosing words, or culture-loaded words to be specific, as the object of the research is that the lexical level is the very linguistic level where the cultural differences are shown most directly and distinctly. By a tactical handle of the culture-loaded words, the translator can either positively promote the acceptance of the cultural elements in the target culture, or hinder the process by erasing the specific cultural features of the source text.The dissertation then goes on with an explanation of the translation strategies commonly known as assimilation and alienation. The dissertation holds that there is no clear cut between these two, for the features of culture as a general alone has made it theoretically impossible for translation versions to be either entirely assimilated or alienized. In this sense, assimilation and alienation are, synchronically and diachronically, both terms of relativity. In other words, assimilation and alienation refer to the overall tendencies, with the degrees being determined by the specific combination of translation methods. Various methods are classified into six types in this dissertation.They are interpretation, substitution, literal and word-for-word translation, transliteration, omission and annotation.The dissertation continues with a simple historical retrospect over the relevant comments and actual choices concerning cultural translation strategies made by some distinguished translators both in China and in the west. Though some of the comments may seem fragmental, they still reveal the general trend in the development of cultural translation strategies, and those debates on translation issues and different choices made by different translators well illustrate the diversity of tranlation strategies.The actual existence of diversity of cultural translation strategies has its theoretical foundation. In the third chapter the dissertation proceeds to show what shapes this diversity through an analysis of the external environment and internal elements of a translation activity. The external environment refers to the characteristics of culture as general, and the specific relationship between the two cultures involved, or the status one culture holds in comparison to the other.The internal elements involve the original text, the readers and the translators. The distinct features of a specific text, together with the common feature of embodying multiple meanings shared by all texts, require the translators to make a choice on what to keep and what to give up. The readers, with a great variety in their personal conditions and purposes of reading, along with their role as the dominant component of the rejection system in the target culture when encountering foreign concepts, demands various types of translation versions. As for the translators, their individuality as well as the subjectivity they acquire as translators, makes it simply impossible for these prime processors of the foreign concepts in the code transfer station to act uniformly when making a choice.As a matter of fact, the existence of diversity of cultural translation strategies is not only inevitable but also necessary, for it leads directly to the complementation among different translation versions of the same original text. As far as the texts themselves are concerned, complementation means acting as the complement to each other in both content and style by bringing on what is missing or weakened in other ones. When it comes to the role texts play in the cultural context, complementation refers to the co-efforts of different versions in promoting the acceptance of the foreign concepts embedded by reinforcing those concepts with continuous modification and clarification. For diachronic versions, complementation means even more. It manifests itself not only in the later versions’modification of the earlier ones, but also in the function of the earlier versions of getting the readers better prepared for the later ones. Here the point is exemplified by two complete English versions of Hong Lou Meng and five selected translations of Liao Zhai Zhi Yi.The two complete English versions of Hong Lou Meng are taken as the example of synchronic versions. Altogether one hundred and seventy cultural–loaded words are chosen randomly for the analysis. A statistical investigation of the specific translation methods or method combinations shows that the three methods favored most by David Hawkes are substitution, interpretation, and literal and word-for-word translation, and the sequence changes to literal and word for word translation, substitution, and interpretation when it comes to Yangs’version. Furthermore, the translation strategies of the two versions also show quite a difference when a specific aspect of culture is concerned. The two versions are quite remote from each other when ecology and material culture are involved, yet quite close when it comes to religious and social cultures, especially the latter. However, even in the scope of the social culture where the two versions show much similarity, differences can still be discerned. Yangs’version prefer to use more notes to provide information about historical figures mentioned in the text, while Hawkes’version tends to provide information about unanimated things. A contrast reveals that Yangs’version stays closer to the expression of the original, while Hawkes’version makes more efforts in reaching out to the readers. The two make a perfect match by stressing on different aspects of the original text.In the fifth chapter, several abridged translations of Liao Zhai Zhi Yi are selected for study as an example of diachronic versions for the same original text. A statistical analysis on the three versions published in 1826, 1982 and 2001 respectively shows an interesting linear track with the number of notes decreasing dramatically while the use of literal and word for word translation prevailing gradually. The second part of the chapter focuses on the different cultural translation strategies adopted by different translators in the handling of the titles of the stories. Five versions are taken as the objects of the research. The overall features demonstrated in the titles of each version are then carefully analyzed.The dissertation comes to the conclusion in chapter six that the very existence of the diversity of cultural translation strategies indicates that no single translation strategy could ever be perfect. Since the factors that affect the final choices of translation strategies are naturally dynamic, translation strategies chosen by any two different translators can never be identical in the context of literary translation, and that leads to the consequence that every version produced must have some places left to be complemented. Therefore, for the sake of a more comprehensive reflection of a particular original text, the translators’initiative should be encouraged instead of being suppressed in translation activity, especially when it comes to re-translation.Despite the efforts made by the author in adopting a quantitive approach of analysis in conducting an empirical study, subjectivity can hardly be totally avoided in the specific classification of translation methods applied to a particular culture-loaded word due to the flexibility of translators’practice. In addition, because the limitation of individual efforts, the collected materials for analysis are far from enough in respect of quantities and scope.It should be noted that as this dissertation concentrates on literary works only, with its statistical materials all taken from two Chinese literary classics of Hong Lou Meng and Liao Zhai Zhi Yi, the conclusion of this research is mainly applicable to literary works. Besides the lexical level which the dissertation works on, the diversity of cultural translation strategies and complementation of different versions at other textual levels are all worthy of a further exploration.更多还原