【作者】 张莹；

【导师】 谢天振；

【作者基本信息】 上海外国语大学 ， 翻译学， 2008， 博士

【摘要】 中国译学研究自1979年以来经历了从零散到成体系,从无学科到学科独立,从只有传统译论到多元范式并存的发展历程。近三十年来是中国译学日益走向繁荣的时期,也是中国译学观念激烈冲突与演进的时期。本文试图以涉及翻译学学科理解、学科建设和学科发展方向的译学观念为线索,梳理从1979-2007年的中国译学发展阶段,特别考察涉及翻译学学科建设的译学观念演进和冲突,从而总结出中国译学健康发展需要提倡的学术研究态度和需要避免的认识误区。本文第一章借鉴伊文·佐哈尔的“多元系统理论”,将中国翻译研究看作一个译学多元系统,其中各种研究范式所代表的译学观念不断处于冲突、变异和融合之中,为争夺译学多元系统的中心位置而时刻斗争,并在斗争中彼此借鉴与融合。本章将1979-2007年间的中国译学发展进程,划分为三个不同的发展阶段:1979年之前的中国译学研究以传统译论为主,缺乏必要的学科意识,笔者称之为“一元无体系的传统译论期”;1979-1986年间中国译学研究开始恢复,语言学翻译研究范式开始登陆中国译学多元系统,两种译学观念发生初步冲突,笔者称之为“二元初显的中国译学恢复期”;1986-1995年间中国译学多元系统开始出现较大规模的学科理论建设,理论框架的构建中出现传统译论和语言学翻译观两种范式平分秋色的局面,笔者称之为“二元范式并存的中国译学构想期”;1995-2007年间中国译学多元系统开始出现突破文本和语言局限的文化研究范式,最终导致中国译学研究的文化转向,中国译学在繁荣中日益走向独立,并向国际译学多元系统的中心位置靠拢,笔者称之为“多元范式并存的中国译学文化转向期”。第一章在宏观描述中国译学在每个发展阶段的学术图景基础上,重点关注不同研究范式的翻译观在当时译学多元系统中的位置、彼此冲突的轨迹,以及对中国译学多元系统发展所起到的作用。本文第二章以“演进”为关键词,从研究对象、学科定位和学科范式等三个侧面梳理中国译学学科观念的演进历程。具体的切入点体现在三个问题上:“翻译学该研究什么”、“翻译学是怎样一门学科”、“翻译学是如何理解翻译转换过程的”。这三个问题分别体现着中国译学观念对翻译学研究对象的认识、对翻译学研究方法体系的采用,以及对翻译现象本质的理解。中国译学观念经历了从“只有传统译论”,到“引进语言学翻译研究范式”,再到“文化研究范式引起文化转向,多元研究范式并存”这样的发展历程,对如上三个问题的回答体现出中国译学研究视野的逐渐拓宽、学科定位的逐渐清晰和准确、对研究对象本质认识的逐渐深刻。本文第三章以“冲突”为关键词,从1979-2007年间涉及翻译学学科建设的三次规模较大、程度较激烈的学术论争入手,展示译学新观念进入中国译学多元系统过程中遭到的阻力和质疑,从而有利于梳理和澄清中国译学观念中存在的一些问题。第一次冲突起因于强调“中国特色”译学观引起的质疑与论争;第二次冲突起因于否定翻译学学科价值引起的质疑与论争;第三次冲突起因于对文化转向翻译观和解构主义翻译观的排斥和澄清。在对中国当代涉及翻译学学科发展的译学观念进行了较为详尽的梳理之后,本文在结论部分总结了有益于中国译学发展的学术态度、学术精神和有害于中国译学发展的学术话语弊病,并指出中国译学观念在当前仍然存在两个认识误区:将翻译研究的本体混同于翻译活动的本体;将翻译研究的不同范式混同于自然科学范式。中国译学观念现代化需要达成如下两个共识:中国译学必须走出语言和文本的局限,才能真正走向独立;中国译学必须多元范式共存,才能真正走向繁荣。更多还原

【Abstract】 From 1979 to 2007, the Translation Studies in China has gone through a crucial development of what an emerging discipline has undergone. This nearly-three-decade period is not only an era in which the discipline of the Translation Studies in China comes into being and enjoys a growing prosperity, but also a time when different paradigms and viewpoints collide and converge, each struggling for its legal academic position. This dissertation tries to investigate the academic outcomes of the Translation Studies in China from 1979-2007, to describe its different phases of development, to present the process of idea evolutions and idea conflicts, and finally, to conclude the beneficial academic attitudes and to warn the harmful misconceptions.Chapter One borrows the framework of "Poly-system theory" to survey the Translation Studies in China from 1979 to 2007. According to the different paradigms patterns, the 27-year period of development is divided into three phases. Before 1979, the Chinese traditional translation theories were overwhelming when there was no awareness of being a discipline. From 1979 to 1986, the linguistic paradigm appeared when two concepts began to collide. From 1986 to 1995, scholars in the translation studies were eager to construct a separate discipline of Translation Studies when the linguistic paradigm began to share the central position with Chinese traditional translation theories. From 1995 to 2007, cultural studies paradigm began its centripetal motion in China’s Translation Studies circle when an era of multi-paradigms began in China.Chapter Two tries to trace the idea evolutions in China’s Translation Studies circle from 1979 to 2007. By asking three questions which involve the recognitions of the discipline object, the discipline terminological systems, and the discipline object’s definitions, this chapter demonstrates the deepening understanding of the Translation Studies Discipline in China.Chapter Three tries to present the three idea conflicts in China’s Translation Studies circle. The first conflict was the arguments about if or not should China’s Translation Studies deliberately maintain its Chinese feature by rejecting foreign translation theories. The second conflict was the argument about if translation theories are worthless or not. The third conflict was the argument about if the cultural studies paradigms and the deconstruction paradigms have diverted from the Translation Studies per se. By displaying each point of view as well as its supporting evidences, this chapter discloses the dominating ideas in China’s Translation Studies circle.This dissertation focuses on the ideas of Translation Studies discipline. The conclusion part lists some academic diseases and misconceptions existed in China’s Translation Studies circle. By focusing on academic attitudes and discipline recognitions, this dissertation hopes to build up some common-sense ground on which we can push China’s Translation Studies in a more efficient way.更多还原