【作者】 包涵；

【导师】 韩忠华；

【作者基本信息】 上海海运学院 ， 外国语言学及应用语言学， 2001， 硕士

【摘要】 根据奈达博士著名的翻译理论—功能对等理论，本文对鲁迅的小说集《呐喊》的两种英文译本进行了对比研究。 鲁迅是我国新文学的奠基人，他所创作的小说集《呐喊》是中国第一部白话文作品，里面共收录了短篇小说十四部，在中国现代文学史上占有极为重要的地位。可以说，《呐喊》是中国文学史上的一座里程碑。几乎没有人不承认鲁迅的文体是独树一帜的，无论是内容还是形式都带有强烈的个人特色。鲁迅的小说在白话文中占有突出的地位，实际上它促成了白话文的形成，对后来的作家有着深刻的影响。 论文中所引用的例子选自鲁迅的小说集《呐喊》及其两种英文译本：杨宪益及戴乃迭夫妇的Call To Arms和威廉莱尔的Diary Of aMadman and Other Stories。 与传统的翻译理论不同，奈达的功能对等理论从另一角度为翻译提供了一个衡量的标准。传统的翻译理论把翻译的重点放在语言的表现形式上，而奈达则认为翻译的重点应当是读者对译文的反应。要达到理想的翻译，就是要找到与原文最自然且最切近的对等语。也就是说译文的读者对译文的反应要等值与原文读者对原文的反应。 论文正是运用了奈达的这个功能对等理论来评析《呐喊》的两个英文译本。通过对译本中大量的例子分析，本文作者试图找出两种译本的译者在不同的层面上所达到与原文“最自然且最切近的译文”的方法。 论文共分为四个章节。在第一章中，本文着重阐述了奈达的功能对等理论。首先介绍了奈达对翻译所下的定义；其次列举了翻译中最基本的三个过程；之后详细地分析了功能对等理论中的四个主要原则。 第二章简要介绍了鲁迅的生平，以及小说集《呐喊》的主要内容 Functional Equlvalence InTranslatlon一0n the TwTwo English wrslons of川口H口门 与语言特色。 第三章是本文的主体部分，从意义、风格与文化二个方面详尽地 对两个译本做了对比分析。其中第一部分是从意义的角度来阐还语义 在翻译过程中的重要性。翻译的首要之点就是表达原文的意思。语义 的传译应该在翻译中享有优先地位。本文主要论述了两种不同类型的 意义：一种是指示意义，另一种是联想意义。针对不同种类的意义， 应有不同的翻译要领及方法。 第二部分是从风格的角度来探讨怎样找到与原文最为对等的译 文。翻译原文风格时所要遵循的是一个“动态的对等”，而不是形式上 的对等。鲁迅的风格是独树一帜的，因而要在译文中反应出原作的风 格也是相当困难的。但风格的载体又是具体的，译者不必一味追求在 形式上与原作完全对等，而只要正确地译出原语信息所蕴含的意义， 原作的风格自然会融入译文之中，使译文读者达到与原文读者相同的 感受。鲁迅的语言准确精练，修辞运用地恰到好处。本文正是从这两 个方面来分析鲁迅的风格在两种译文中的体现。 第三部分主要分析两种译文在文化传递方而的得失。奈达的功能 对等理论既要求译文能够尽可能的再现原义所蕴含的文化信层、，又要 求译文能够被其读者理解并且接受，同时产牛与原文问样的效果。 最后一章列举了在两个译本中各自出现的一些过译、误译及译不 足的现象。当然，这只是本文作者的个人见解，仅供大家讨论。更多还原

【Abstract】 It is the primary purpose of this paper to evaluate two English versions of the remarkable collection of stories Na Han by Lu Xun in the light of the translation theory of functional equivalence. Na Han, which includes fourteen short stories, is a milestone and of epoch-making significance in the history of Chinese literature. From its content to its form, it has fresh characteristics and a strong originality. It has produced a huge impact on the society, and contributed to the development of the Chinese revolution. The illustrative examples in this paper following two English versions of Na Han: Yang Xianyi & Gladys Yang: Call to Arms, are selected from the Foreign Languages Press, 1981. William Lyell: Diary of a Madman and Other Stories, Honolulu: University of Hawaii Press, 1990. Nida’s theory of functional equivalence provides a completely new criterion for the evaluation of translated works, which shifts from the focus of message to that of the response of the receptor. The closest natural equivalent translation is the translation that can evoke from its readers the same response as the source text does from its readers. In this paper, the theory of functional equivalence serves as a principle by which to assess the two English versions of Na Han. This paper is composed of four chapters. In Chapter One, the writer of this paper elucidates Nida’s translation theory of functional equivalence. She briefly introduces Nida’s definition of translation, and three fundamental procedures of translation. She detailedly analyzes the Functional Equivalence in Translationn the Two English Versions of Na Han theory of functional equivalence in terms of four diverse focuses. Chapter Two introduces Lu Xun, the master of language, and his great works Na Han. In Chapter Three, a comparative research of the two English versions is based on those three perspectives: meaning, style and cultural connotation. Section One deals with the meaning of the original to see if the significant elements have been transferred from the source language to the receptor language. In translating, meaning should take precedence over other factors. From the angle of meaning, the writer mainly discusses the translating of the denotative meaning and the associative meaning. When translating on the level of denotative meaning, it is not necessary to consider much of the connotation of the original text. It only requires a full comprehension of the denotative meaning and a correct choice of the closest equivalence. While translating an expression containing associative meanings, the translators must analyze the exact implied meanings in the original text before expressing them properly in the receptor language. Section Two, from the two aspects of language and rhetoric, shows how the translators reproduce the unique style of the great literary master. Through the comparison, the writer proves that while reproducing the style of the original text, the translator should not follow the usually misleading rule of formal correspondence. He should try his best to reproduce the same effect upon the readers of his translation as that upon the readers of the original by following the author’s style in a dyn更多还原