【作者】 斯琴巴图；

【导师】 王静安；

【作者基本信息】 内蒙古大学 ， 外国语言学及应用语言学， 2010， 硕士

【摘要】 德国功能主义翻译理论学派中的目的论(Skopos Theory)认为翻译是一种基于源语文本的有目的的行为活动,决定翻译过程的最高准则是整个翻译行为的目的。这一理论使一直被用来衡量译文质量标准的“对等”被另一个评估标准“充分”所取代,从而为翻译研究开启了一个全新的视角。本文以目的论为理论框架,评析《蒙古秘史》这一蒙古族古典文学名著的两个英译本(F.W柯立甫的译本和道尔基与额仁图的译本)中文化特定词的翻译。本文主要从五个方面即：生态文化,物质文化,社会文化,宗教文化及语言文化对《蒙古秘史》中文化特定词进行深入分析,说明翻译的目的是如何影响译者翻译策略的选择,所选择的策略又如何影响了译文效果。每个翻译作品都会受到特定历史、社会和文化因素的影响。由于翻译目的不同,在翻译同一作品的时候不同的译者会采用不同的翻译策略。所以在评析译本时必须对译者所处的历史背景以及读者对象等诸多因素充分加以考虑。通过对《蒙古秘史》两个英译本的比较分析,作者发现两位译者在文化特定词的处理上采取了完全不同的翻译策略。主要表现在,柯立甫的《蒙古秘史》译本面向欲了解十三世纪蒙古历史文化的专家学者,目的是向译本读者再现原汁原味的历史文化背景及其独特的语言表达方式,故采用异化翻译法。该译本以源语文本为中心,保留其语言特点和写作风格,注重语际连贯,并附有大量的注释、脚注和评论。而道尔基与额仁图的译本则针对普通英语读者,欲使其轻松地赏读这本蒙古民族古典文学名著,故以译语文本为中心,注重译语的连贯流畅,侧重于归化翻译,可读性强。研究进而发现,两个译本与各自的预期目的是一致的。就其13世纪蒙古民族古典名著的语言和写作风格而言,柯立甫的译文更忠实于原著,学术性见长；而从普通英语读者的角度看,道尔基与额仁图的译文通俗流畅,更易理解和接受。正如学者周钰良所说,“风格迥异,然各得其所”。因此作者得出的结论是：译文是否成功,翻译策略的选择是否恰当,关键是看他是否达到了自己的翻译目的。更多还原

【Abstract】 Skopos theory, which developed from German functionalism, holds that translation is a form of transnational action based on a source text and the primary principle determining any transaction process is the purpose (skopos) of the overall transactional action. This theory has replaced "equivalence", an aged yardstick to judge the quality of translation with "adequacy". As a break with the traditional idea of equivalence and an important complement to translation theories, skopos theory thus opens up a new perspective for the translation practice and studies.The author of the thesis tries to make an analysis and contrast of the culture-specific terms in two major English versions of The Secret History of the Mongols from the perspective of skopos theory, pointing out that it is because of different translation purposes (skopos) that different translation strategies and methods are used in the two translations. According to skopos theory, the production of a certain translation is confined to specific social, historical and cultural conditions. With different translation purposes, the translation of the same source language text will surely focus on different points. Therefore, an evaluation of the two different translations must take into account the intended purposes of the translations and their respective social, historical, and cultural background.Through a comparative study of two major English versions of The Secret History of the Mongols (translated by Francis Woodman Cleaves and N.Dorjgotov and. Z.Erendo respectively), the research reveals that two translators adopt two different strategies, namely, Cleaves adopts foreignization strategy, semantic translation method and adheres to the source language text strictly and provides with extensive notes, footnotes and brackets. On the contrary, N.Dorjgotov and Z.Erendo mainly adopt domestication strategy and communicative translation method by means of assimilation, deletion and globalization in translating the culture-specific terms in the Secret History of the Mongols.Then the research further reveals that different characteristics represented in the two versions and the different expected functions of the TT are consistent with the skopos they set to reach. However, it is hard to say which version is better since both translations have their own merits and advantages. As regard to the capital monument of thirteenth-century Mongolian literature, Cleaves does well in keeping the cultural heritage; while concerning the target readers, N.Dorjgotov and. Z.Erendo’s version is more acceptable to general readership.Theis thesis reaches a conclusion that the two versions account for the different strategies the translators take into their translation, and each translation is adequate when its purpose (skopos) is achieved.更多还原