《圍城》翻譯之淺見課題論文開題結(jié)題中期研究報告（經(jīng)驗交流）

1、圍城翻譯之淺見課題論文開題結(jié)題中期研究報告（經(jīng)驗交流） 【摘 要】盡管中文本的圍城在中國取得了重大的成功。但是由Jeanne Kelly和Nathan K. Mao合著的譯本卻并未使其成為世界經(jīng)典。作者采用文本和風(fēng)格兩部分來分析研究圍城原作和譯本的一些得與失。本文的全部歸旨是希望通過這一系列討論為圍城今后的翻譯提供參考。 【關(guān)鍵詞】圍城 風(fēng)格 翻譯標(biāo)準(zhǔn) 1H159 1A 110069682（2009）02007602 Introduction Qian Zhongshu ranks among the foremost and prominent twentieth-century Chine

2、se novelist, and his novel Fortress Besieged （Wei-cheng） was an immediate success after its first publication in 1947, and has long been hailed as one of the greatest twentieth-century Chinese novels. Lately, a piece of news written by Julia Lovell from Guardian （2005） has brought it back to the lim

3、elight of literary world, though not the way a classic should have expected. Fortress Besieged is a fairly uncontroversial choice. Ribald, sarcastic, set against the drop-curtain of wartime China, its pages populated by young westernized Chinese harried by their traditional families, Fortress Besieg

4、ed has everything for a great novel. It ought to stand a better chance of reaching into the hearts of Anglophone readers than many other works of modern Chinese fiction. The truth is not so. Such a hurrah of modern Chinese literature stirs few ripples in the pond of Anglophone readers. As the report

5、 states, the translation which is, for the most part, competent hardly reproduces the dazzling, spiked wit for which the original is renowned; and dialogue, in particular, is wooden and unidiomatic（Julia Lovell 2005）. Through a brief analysis on the original text and the translation, a discerning an

6、d selective translator may get some inspiration, assimilating the good parts while casting aside the bad ones. The Principles of Translation Let us first look at the history of Western translation studies. Up to the eighteenth century, Alexander Fraser Tyler（1790，P167）describes in Essay on Principle

7、s of Translation a good translation to be, that, in which the merit of the original work is so completely transfused into anther language, as to be a distinctly apprehended, and as strongly felt, by a native of the country to which that language belongs, as it is by those who speak the language of t

8、he original work. The epitome of modern translation theories is represented by the theory of “dynamic equivalence” and “functional equivalence”, pointing out that the receptors of the message in the receptor language （Nida 1969）. Then, in retrospect to the history of Chinese translation, the well-kn

9、own three-character principles put forward by Yan Fu, faithfulness, expressiveness and elegance （“信、達(dá)、雅”）, has long been enshrined as the very motto of every Chinese translator. Fu Lei attaches much importance to “what is aimed for is not affinity in shape but likeness in spirit.” In conclusion, as

10、the genius and character of language is confessedly very different, it has hence become a common opinion, that it is the very duty for a translator to attend to sense and spirit of his original, to make himself perfectly master of his authors idea, and to communicate them in those expressions which

11、he judges to be best suited to convey. A Textual and Stylistic Comparison between the Original and Translation 1The Analysis of Wording One basic way of looking at translation is lexical, so it is the chief concern for translators to get the words right first. As is illustrated in A Textbook of Tran

12、slation, Peter Newmark（1988, p.73）makes this quite clear, “All the same, we do translate words, because there is nothing else to translate; there are only the words on the page; there is nothing else there.” As a general point about translation is that, in principle, since corresponding SL and TL wo

13、rds do not usually have precisely the same semantic range （though many do in cognate languages）, you are over-or under-translating most of the time. As is further explained by Peter Newmark（1988, pp.34-35） that we must remember that the great number of words in one language include and overlap in va

14、rying degrees of meanings the words they appear most obviously to translate into another language, and therefore more often than not they are translated by several different more specific words. This illustrates one of the main problems in translation, the enforced shift from generic to specific uni

15、ts or vice versa. According to the said theory, deficiencies of this kind can be easily found in the book. Example 他那時窘得似乎甲板上人都在注意他，心里怪鮑小姐太做得出，恨不能說她幾句。方鴻漸從此死心不敢妄想，開始讀叔本華，常聰明地對同學(xué)們說：“世間哪有戀愛？壓根兒是生殖沖動?！保ǖ谝徽?，P78） At that moment he was so embarrassed that it seemed to him that everybody on deck was watchi

16、ng him. Inwardly he blamed Miss Pao for being too overt in her behavior and wished he could have said something to her about it.From then on, he buried his feelings and dared not indulge in vain hopes. He began reading Schopenhauer and would often say wisely to his classmates, “Where is romantic lov

17、e in the world? Its entirely the reproductive urge.” （Chapter 1，P810） The word“說”（literally：say）shows up twice in the same paragraph, and both times the translators use the same word“say”. Although it is grammatically and lexically adopted, non-Chinese readers can hardly tell the different emotional

18、 effects of these two “說”within the contexts, which can be easily discerned in the words of original works. In the first sentence, the word“說”（say）is actually correlatively equivalent to the word“怪”（blame）, so it means expressing ones unhappy feelings; In the second sentence, it means preaching or h

19、aranguing ones idea to the public. So the following version satisfactorily reproduces both the literal meaning and the extended meaning： At the moment he was so embarrassed that it seemed to him that everybody on deck was watching him. Inwardly he blamed Miss Pao for being too overt in her behavior

20、and wished he could have complained to her about itHe began reading Schopenhauer and would often preach presumptuously to his classmates, “Where is romantic love in the world? Its entirely the reproductive urge.” 2The Analysis of Style The significance of style is clearly noted in The Theory and Pra

21、ctice of Translation（Eugene A. Nida & C.R. Taber 1969）：though style is secondary to content, it is nevertheless important. In trying to reproduce the style of the original one must beware of producing something which is not functionally equivalent, which means that reproducing style, even on a forma

22、l level, may not result in an equivalence, and it is functional equivalence which is required, whether on the level of content or on the level of style. （1）Classic Chinese The authors knowledge of Chinese classics and Pidgin English unquestionably helps him to better caricature Mr. Fang Tung-weng, t

23、he protagonists father, and Mr. Jimmy Chang, a Shanghai comprador. In the case of the former, his every thought is an allusion, a proverb, or a quote from the classics, as evidenced in the following letter advising his son to pay more attention to school work: 吾不惜重資，命汝千里負(fù)笈，汝埋頭攻讀之不暇，而有余閑照鏡耶？汝非婦人女子，何須

24、置鏡？惟梨園子弟，身為丈夫而對鏡顧影，為世所賤。吾不圖汝甫離膝下，已濡染惡習(xí)，可嘆可恨！且父母在，不言老，汝不善體高堂念遠(yuǎn)之情，以死相嚇，喪心不孝，于斯而極?。ǖ谝徽拢琍8） Through the style of writing in this letter, it is self evident that Fang Tung-weng is the man himself: allusive, self-righteous, prejudiced, traditional, and pedantic. The success of the portrait of Fang Tung-we

25、ng is due, to a large extent, to the authors understanding of the empty posturings of the traditional country squire whose ideas are those of the imperial past though he lives in the modern twentieth century. However, the way of expression in classic Chinese is not fully conveyed in the translation,

26、 in which the original flavor is largely lost. （2）Pidgin English Qian Zhongshus portrait of the Changs is precise, especially Jimmy Chang. His speech has a special characteristic, he likes to sprinkle his Chinese with meaningless English expressions. It isnt that he has new ideas, which are difficul

27、t to express in Chinese and requires the use of English. The English words inlaid in his speech can not even be compared with the gold teeth inlaid in ones mouth. A better comparison would be with the bits of meat stuck between the teeth-totally useless. And he imitates the American accent down to t

28、he slightest inflection. He uses American slang words and expression, such as headache for wife, States short for United States, dough for money. By this it brings this little scene so splendidly to life is the way the author captures the pidgin English around him, so that Jimmy Chang becomes not a

29、dim personification, not a stock figure of allegory, but a genuine flesh-and-blood comprador living in the great metropolisShanghai: 張先生大笑道：“我不懂什么年代花紋，事情忙，也沒工夫翻書研究。可是我有hunch；看見一件東西，忽然what dyou call靈機(jī)一動，買來準(zhǔn)O.K.。他們古董客都佩服我，我常對他們說：不用拿假貨來fool我。O yeah，我姓張的不是sucker，休想騙我！ ”關(guān)上櫥門，又說：“咦，headache”便按電鈴叫用人。（第二章，P

30、45） Mr. Chang laughed heartily and said, “I dont know anything about period designs. Im too busy to have time to sit down and study it. But I have a hunch when I see something, and a suddenwhat dyou call?inspiration comes to me. Then I buy it and it turns out to be quite OK. Those antiques dealers a

31、ll respect me. I always say to them, Dont try to fool me! ”He closed the cupboard and said, “Oh, headache” then pressed an electric bell to summon the servant. （Chapter 2，P44） In such a short paragraph, Jimmy Chang intercepts five English words, and even American slangs, into the conversation. In the original version, Chinese and English are mingled together, and