翻譯理論論文

1、The consistency between the functionalism and the literal translation 姓名：常首鳴學(xué)號(hào)：2008142班級(jí)：08級(jí)外應(yīng)2班Abstract: Although the skopos theory has set a new ground for translation theories, it has been regarded as a perspective with no relevance to such concepts as “l(fā)iteral translation” and“l(fā)oyalty”. The func

2、tionalism, pursuing the “l(fā)oyalty” principle on a macro-level, belongs to the translation system of “l(fā)oyalty”. The Functionalism and the literal translation, sharing a deeper relationship, is consistent in nature. Key words: the functionalism, the literal translation, loyalty , information   1.

3、the theory of the functionalism (1) .the functionalism In the 1970s, Reiss, Vermeer and Christiane Nord proposed the theory of the functionalism in which the focus, with the purpose of translation as its theoretical core, changes from the relation between the original writing and the translation to

4、the expected effect of the translation. The functionalism offered a new study perspective.Reiss, the founder of the school, regarded the text function as the object of the translation study, arguing that the assessment of translation should be conducted through the analysis of relation between the f

5、unction of the original text and the translation. The relation is the functional equivalence between the original writing and the translation.As Reiss student, Vermeer followed the theory of functionalism, proposing the skopos theorythe core theory of functionalism. She pointed out that translators

6、should consider the expected effect(s) of the target context rather than the closeness between the original and the translation. And later, Christiane Nord developed this theory, putting forward the concept of “Function plus Loyalty”, in which she holds that “translation should create a target text

7、with specific functions, and the relation between the two writings should be also made clear according to the expected function or the requirement asked by the target context.” It is obvious that although the translated text, according to Nord, needs processing “l(fā)oyally”, it could be changed at some

8、 specific requirement; for the translator needs to handle the interpersonal relationship between him and the author, the reader of the original writing, even the publisher so as to highlight certain purpose of the translation. (2). the uniqueness of the functionalism Now we can distinguish the diffe

9、rences between the functionalism and the traditional translation theory: the focus is changed from the internal problemsthe skills at translating word, phrase, sentence or paragraph, to the external onesreproduction of the expected effect of the source text or realization of the specific requirement

10、 of the translation effect by the initiator. In translation, the expected purpose determines the translating process, that is to say, the specific effect determines the means of translating. According to the functionalism, the original text, as one of the sources of information that the translator u

11、ses to realize the expected function, should be subject to the expected function, not having the only decisive meaning; but the authority of the original text can not be over-impaired. The functionalism is scientific that the function of the original is consistent with the expected function on the m

12、acro-level, in other words, no matter how the expected function changes, it will not depart from the initial function of the source text, and hereby there will be a sufficient guarantee of the accuracy, and this standpoint serves as the theoretical background for Nords “Function plus Loyalty”. But t

13、his criterion also stands at the center of controversy: how could the “l(fā)oyalty” be guaranteed? And how could the translation be considered accurate if the original text is adjusted according to the function rather than being translated loyally? 2.the controversial “l(fā)iteral translation” Why is the so

14、urce text translated loyally, and which form is adopted to realize the “l(fā)oyal translation”? The analysis of this question will facilitate the further understanding of the distinction between the functional translation strategy and the re-creation, and of the dialectical relationship between the theo

15、ry of functionalism and the literal translation.(1). the early development of the literal translation Loyalty means the correct understanding and expression of the original meaning. That is a generally acknowledged concept of the literal translation. But there is much controversy about how to do it

16、for hundreds of years.The early theory of literal translation can be traced back to the ancient Greek when, under the influence of religious belief, translation must be conducted literally, placing the original text on a pedestal, and the translator has to right to alter the original, any translatio

17、n catering for the reader being regarded as unbearable. This view, although at the early stage of translation theory, has exerted great influence upon later study. Till now there are still many supporters, among whom the most influential figures are Lu Xun and Vladimir Nabokov. Lu Xun holds “to be f

18、aithful rather than smooth”, claiming that he would rather have his reader “suffer” his translation than alter the original text; Nabokov advocates the absolutely accurate copy of the original, stating that he would rather use annotation to keep the formal correspondence between the original and the

19、 translation. (2). the influence of modern linguisticsActually, the early translation theory is the so-called interlinear translation. Peter Newmark has pointed out the boundary between the literal translation and the interlinear translation: he thinks that in the translated text the grammatical for

20、m of the original should be renounced, while the meaning of the original remains; on the contrary, the interlinear translation copies both the form and the content of the original, but the grammatical structure is destroyed at the same time. The development of modern linguistics supplies new theoret

21、ical support for the literal translationtranslation should focus on the content behind the forms rather than the simple correspondence of word and sentence. The modern linguistics hold that among the various linguistic forms there is a universal meaning which shares a kind of information that could

22、be understood by all the people speaking different languages, and all these forms containing the information could be transformed into different languages; and the action in the opposite way is translation. The position has won many supporters, among whom Chomsky and Halliday are the backbone. This

23、view is a progress in the literal translation theory, for it pays more attention to the “functional equivalence” instead of the traditional formal equivalence, it is, however, a pity that the perspective excludes the factors outside the semantic structure.But the theory of literal translation is the

24、 most thorough one that sticks to the original text, and whats more, its comparative accuracy stands out from other theories. Although the standard of loyalty is changed from the narrow sense to the broad sense, namely, from the pseudo-literal translation to the real one, the accurate understanding

25、of the original meaning is never changed.3. the literal-translation nature of the functionalism From the discussion above, it can be said that the literal translation aims to comprehensively convey the accurate information so as to help readers obtain the most “original information” with the least i

26、nterference. In literal translation, “l(fā)iteral” refers to the degree that the translation sticks to the original information, while the theory is flexible when adopting the specific translation strategythis attempt is the source of inspiration of functionalism. It is certain that there exists a commo

27、n ground between the functionalism and the literal translation theory. (1). function, decoding, and authentic information Function refers to the effect that the author of the original text expects in the specific background of register which is essential for the reader to understand the original tex

28、t and the author to realize the value of the original writing. The background of register, compared to the original text, is of the equal importance for two aspects: the expected effect of the original text that is realized in the background of register of the target language through the translated

29、version; the certain function that is realized in the culture of the target language through the translated text. From the perfective of information theory, what is indispensable for decoding the complete information is the manner of conveying information in the encoding process and the background k

30、nowledge facilitating understanding the information, or rather, they are part of the information. Without these parts there would be no potential context to re-decode the information even though the original meaning could be accurately translated. In this case, the translation makes no sense. (2). “

31、function”the flexible literal translation The translation practice, under the guidance of the functionalism, is not the creative activity for it, based upon the original information, strictly follows the principle of accuracy. It can be regarded as “l(fā)oyal” in a broader senseloyal to the intention(s)

32、 of the original writer instead of the original text. In other words, the strategy of the functionalism can be deemed one of the variants of literal translation. 4. conclusion Having highlighted the novelty of the functionalism, functionalists over-emphasize the purposes of translation, weakening the original decisive role over the target text. The functionalism is misunderstood as a deviation from the principle of loyalty, while a carefully