內(nèi)容譯中中譯

ITranslationysanimportantroleininterlingualcommunicationandis increasinglyessentialinrecentyearsduetothedeepeningcontactsbetweencountries.Themainfunctionoftranslationistotranslatethecontentofinformation,inotherwords,totranslatethemeaningofthesourcelanguage.Textistheultimateunitoftranslation.Asavisiblenetofatext,cohesionofferstremendoushelptotheunderstandingofthesourcetext,thuscontributingtotheproductionofacorrecttranslation.However,sinceeachlanguagehasdevelopeditsparticulardevicesthatarebynomeansthesameasthoseofotherlanguages,havingakeenawarenessofthecontrastiveresultsincohesivedevicesbetweenthesourceandthetargetlanguagesandtheirinfluenceontranslationcanhelptranslatorsproduceeffectivetranslationandattainaproperreflectionofthesourcetext.Beforethe1960s,linguistshadpursuedtheirlinguisticresearchatthelevelofsentence.Recently,withtheboomoftextlinguistics,morescholarshaveassumedatextualontranslation,andplentyofresearcheshavebeendoneoncohesion.Inthetextual,whatistransferredistheinformationandcommunicativevaluescontainedinthesourcetext.Toacquireacommunicativetranslation,thetranslatorneedstounderstandthoroughlyvariouslanguagefeaturesofboththesourceandtargetlanguages.Thisinvolvesnotonlyunderstandingthemeaningsofwordsandsyntacticrelations,butalsobeingsensitivetoallthecohesivedevicesbindingthetexttogether.Therearemanylinguistshavingdonesystematicresearchoncohesion,butthebestknownwasgivenbyA.K.HallidayandR.Hasan(1976)intheirCohesioninEnglish.Theirstudycanberegardedasacornerstoneoftheresearchofdiscourseysis.Theysystematizetheconceptofcohesionbyclassifyingitintofivecategories:reference,substitution,ellipsis,conjunction,whicharealsocalledgrticalcohesion,andlexicalcohesion.Theformerisrealizedthroughgrrandthelatterisrealizedthroughvocabulary.GrticalcohesionisthecrucialelementforcreatingtextureandcontributesmuchtotextBasedonthecohesiontheoryputforwardbyHallidayandHasan,thisthesisattemptstomakeacontrastivestudyonEnglishandcohesivedevicesthroughtheofalargenumberofexamples,andputsforwardsometranslationstrategiesconcerningeachcohesivedevice,whichmaybehelpfultotheapplicationoftranslation.II tureThestudyoftextlinguisticsdevelopedfromthe1960s.Sincethen,scholarsathomeandabroadhavedonevariousresearchesontextysis.Thisexpandedthescopeoftextlinguisticstotherelationsofsentenceswithinatext.Therefore,cohesiontheorybegantospringup.HallidayandHasan(1976)identifyfivemaincohesivedevicesinEnglishintheirbookCohesioninEnglish.Theyarereference,substitution,ellipsis,conjunctionandlexicalcohesion.HallidayandHasanrefertocohesionasrelationsofmeaningthatexistwithinthetext,anddefineitasatext.InherbookTranslationStudies:AnIntegratedApproach,MarySnell-Hornby(2001)statesthatthetranslator’stextysisshouldbeginbyidentifyingthetextintermsofcultureandsituation.Thenextstepistheysisofthestructureofthetext,proceedingdownfromthemacro-culturetotheleveloflexicalcohesionandincludingtherelationshipbetweenthetitleandthemainbodyofthetext.PeterNewmark(2001)showsinhisbookATextbookofTranslationthatthewholetextshouldberegardedastheunitoftranslation.Hegivesadviceonhowtotranslatesound-effectsandconnectivesuchascohesionandenumerators,linguisticsynonymsandMonaBaker(2004),inherbookInOtherwords:aCoursebookonTranslationstatesthattheultimateaimofatranslator,inmostcases,istoachieveameasureofequivalenceattextuallevel,ratherthanatwordorphraselevel.BeaugrandeandDresslor(1981)bringforththenotionof“textuality”,whichreferstothecomplexsetoffeaturesthattextsmusthavetobeconsideredastextsincommunication.Theyputforwardsevenstandardsoftextuality:intentionality,acceptability,situationality,informativity,coherence,cohesion,andintertextuality.Cohesionasoneofthelinguisticfeaturesoftexts,togetherwithcoherenceintexts,isthecoreofthestudiesoftextlinguistics.Theyalsoelaboratethesignificanceandfunctionofcohesivedevices.In,HuZhuanglin(1994)systematicallycomparesdifferentcohesivedevicesemployedinEnglishandinhisbookDiscourseCohesionandCoherence.HeenlargesHalliday’sframeworkandstudiestextualcohesionandcoherencefromdifferentlevels:transitivity,reference,structuralcohesion,conjunction,lexis,themeandrheme,phoneticsystemandsoon,whichgivesdueattentiontothelanguage.OtherscholarssuchasLiYunxing,ZhuYongshenghavealsomadecontrastiveresearchoncohesivedevices.IIIContrastbetweenEnglishandTextualCohesiveHallidayandHasan(1976)identifyfivemaincohesivedevicesinEnglish:reference,substitution,ellipsis,conjunctionandlexicalcohesion.AndinthefollowingpartwewillmakeacontrastivestudyonEnglishandcohesivedevicesthroughtheysisofeachcohesivedevice.ContrastinTheterm“reference”istraditionallyusedinsemanticsfortherelationshipthatholdsbetweenawordandwhatitpointstointherealworld.InHallidayandHasan’smodelofcohesion,referenceisusedinasimilarbutmorerestrictedway.Accordingtothem(1976),referenceisadevicethatdenotestherelationshipofidentity,whichholdsbetweentwolinguisticfunctions.Intermsoftheclassificationofreference,andEnglishbearnoevidentdifference.alsohasthethreetypesofreference: al,demonstrativeandcomparativereference,andcanbeanaphoricandcataphorictoo.However,theydifferalotintheusageandtheusingfrequencyofreference.alalreferenceisreferencebymeansoffunctioninthespeechsituation.Thecategoryof alreferenceincludes alpronouns,possessivedeterminersandpossessivepronouns.andEnglish alreferencesdifferinbothformandexpression.InEnglish,thegender,numberandcaseareindicatedthroughmorphologicalchanges.Butindifferenceonlyoccuringenderofthethird- pronounsandthenumberthepronouns.Moreover,inEnglish,pluralformsofthefirst pronounsaredifferentsyntactically,whilein“我們”and“咱們”aresemanticallydifferent.Apartfromtheabovementioned,hasnorelativepronoun,butEnglishdoes,whichisalsoimportantintranslation.Forexample,Theledge,whereIcedmycandle,hadafewmildewedbookspiledupinonecorner;anditwascoveredwithwritingscratchedonthepaint.—EmilyBronte,Wuthering—英譯《呼嘯山莊Inthisexample,relativepronoun“where”isusedinEnglish.However,hasnorelativepronouns.Insummary, alreferenceisfrequentlyusedinEnglish,whilehasthetendencytoomitmostofthe alreferences,whichiscalled"zeroanaphoric".DemonstrativeAccordingtoHallidayandHasan,demonstrativereferenceisreferencebymeansoflocation,onascaleofproximity.Itisessentiallyaformofverbalpointing.Demonstrativereferenceincludesselectivedeterminers(“this”,“that”,“these”and“those”),non-selectivedeterminer(“the”)andfourdemonstrativeadverbs(“here”,“there”,“now”and“then”).Generally“this”,“these”and“here”implytheproximitytothespeaker,while“that”,“those”and“there”indicatethedistancefromthespeaker.InEnglishtexts,suchdemonstrativesasthesingularforms“this”and“that”areoftenusedtoreferanaphoricallytosomethingthathasbeensaidbefore.Indialogues,thespeakeroftenuses“this”torefertosomethinghehassaidand“that”torefertosomethingthathasbeensaidbyhisinterlocutor.Forexample,“Heaskedformore?”Mr.Limbkins,thefattestboardmember,askedinhorror.“Bumble,isthisreallytrue?”—CharlesDickens,OliverInthisexample,“this”referstowhathasbeensaidbythespeakerMr.ComparedwithEnglish,demonstrativereferencehasamoresystem.tendstousemore“這”than“那”.Thisispartlybecausethatintheuseofdemonstrativereferenceisaffectedbypsychology.Intheproximityisthedistanceinone’sheartratherthantherealdistance.However,inEnglishtherealdistancedeterminestheproximity.“Thatboywillbehanged!”saidthemanwhoearlierhadcalledOlivera—CharlesDickens,Oliver“這孩子將來是要上絞刑架的”起初說是個(gè)傻子的那位先生嚷嚷著Aswecanseeintheexample,“that”inEnglishistranslatedinto“這”inIntermsofthedeterminer“the”,doesnothaveadefinitearticle.“the”isoftentranslatedtofromtheirEnglishequivalents.Comparative

Comparativereferencecanbedividedintotwocategories:generalcomparisonandparticularcomparison.Generalcomparisoniscomparisonintermsoflikenessandunlikenessofthingsthroughadjectivesandadverbsofcomparisonthroughtheformofidentity,similarityordifference,suchas“same”,“equal”,“identical”,“similar”,“different,”etc.Particularcomparisonmeanscomparisonbetweenthingsasregardsproperty,tyorquality,suchas“bigger”,“faster”,“better”,“moreimportant”,etc.Thecohesivedevicesascomparativereferencecanalsobeclassifiedinasimilarway.HuZhuanglin(1994)classifiescomparativereferenceintogeneralcomparisonandspecialcomparison.Generalcomparisonincludesetc.Intermsofspecialcomparison ,“““used.Besides,somecomparativestructuresarealsousedin,suchas“像……一樣”,,“像……之類”.Forexample,Q從來沒見過的，一見之下，又使他—《阿Q正傳Allthevillagersstaredathiminconsternation.AhQhadneverseensuchlooksbefore;theyrefreshedhimasmuchasadrinkoficedwaterinsummer.Sohewalkedonevenmorehappily…—譯,TheTrueStoryofAhTosummarize,thereisnotmuchdifferenceinthefunctionsofcomparativereferenceitemsbetweenandEnglish.ButtheessentialdifferencebetweenEnglishandcomparativereferenceliesinthatEnglishcanrelyoninflectionstorealizecomparisoninadditiontolexicalandsyntacticmeans,butdependsexclusivelyonlexicalandstructuralmeanstoachievecomparison.Contrastin“Substitutioncanbethoughtastherecementofoneitembyanother.”(Halliday&Hasan,1976:88).Thesubstituteisasortofcounterthatisusedinceoftherepetitionofaparticularitem.Themainpointofsubstitutionistoavoidrepetitionofwordsorideasandtoyaroleofcohesivefunctioninthetext.TherearethreetypesofsubstitutioninEnglish:nominalsubstitution(“one”,“ones”,and“same”),verbalsubstitution(“do”)andclausalsubstitution(“so”and“not”).Thenominalsubstitutes“的”and“者”aresimilartotheEnglishsubstitutesone”andones”.Forexample,b)—MayIhavealookatthat—Yes.Whichone?Theredoneortheblack—《新編漢英翻譯hasastheequivalentsfortheEnglishverbalsubstitution“do”.Butdoesn’tuseverbalsubstitutionasfrequentlyasEnglish.For—誰想和我們一起踢，—《新編漢英翻譯，InEnglish,“so”isacommonclausalsubstitute.Thecounterpartis“這樣For他近來很容易鬧脾氣了；其實(shí)他的生活，倒也并不比之前更艱難，人見他也客氣，也不說要現(xiàn)錢。而阿Q總覺得自己太失意：既然革了命，不應(yīng)該只—,《阿Q正傳—Istheregoingtobean—Itsays“這樣”intheaboveexamplesubstitutesfortheclause“其實(shí)他的生活，倒也并不比之前更艱難人見他也客氣也不說要現(xiàn)錢”.“So”substitutesforthewholeclausethere’sgoingtobeanearthquake”.Ifsuchwordsarenotused,thetextwillseemtobelong-winded.HallidayandHasan(1976)regard“not”asthenegativeequivalentoftheclausalsubstitute“so”.Forexample,—Haseveryonegone—IhopeInthisexample,thesecondspeakeruses“not”tosubstitutethepreviousclause“Haseveryonegonehome?”ContrastinEllipsisiscloselyrelatedtosubstitutionandcanbeinterpretedasthatformofsubstitutioninwhichtheitemisrecedbynothing,oritcanbedefinedassubstitutionbyzero.Itmeansleavingsomethingunsaid,whichisneverthelessunderstood.Therearethreetypesofellipsis:nominal,verbalandclausal.Nominalellipsismeansellipsiswithinthenominalgroup.ForAllElizabeth’sangeragainsthimhadbeenlongdoneaway;buthadshestillfeltany,itcouldhardlyhavestooditsgroundagainsttheunaffectedcordialitywithwhichheexpressedhimselfonseeingheragain.—JaneAustin,PrideandIntheabovesentence,thenoun“anger”inthesecondclause“buthadshestillfeltany”isomitted,whichiscallednominalellipsis.Verbalellipsismeansellipsiswithintheverbalgroup.For—Haveyoubeen—Yes,ITheverb“have”intheabovesentenceisaninstanceofverbalellipsis.Itstandsfor“havebeenying”.Clausalellipsisreferstotheomissionofthewholeclauseorpartoftheclause.For—Howmuchdoesit—ThreeIntheabovesentence,“Threecents’’recesthewholeclause“itcoststhreeBecauseofthelimitedspaceofthisthesis,wewillnotdiscussthethreekindsofellipsisoneafteranotherindetail,buttrytofindoutdifferencesbetweenthetwolanguages.Andtheobviousdifferenceslieinthefollowingthreerespects:First,ContentverbellipsisoccursmuchmoreofteninEnglishthanin;Second,EllipsisinismostlyconcernedwithsubjectinsteadofThird,WhileEnglishresortstotense,moodorpolaritysignalstomakecontentverbellipsispossible,reliesonrepetitionorotherlexicalmeanstorealizecohesion.ForReadingmakethafullman;Conferenceareadyman;andwritinganexact—F.Bacon,Of—譯《論學(xué)習(xí)Inthisexample“maketh”isleftoutinthesecondandthirdsentencesinEnglishversion.Butwhenputinto,theomittedverbisadded.ContrastinConjunctioninvolvestheuseofformermarkerstorelatesentences,clausesandparagraphstoeachother.HuZhuanglin(1994)statesthatthecohesivewordsinthetexthavetheirowndefinitemeaning,andbythesecohesivewordsthereadercanunderstandthesemanticrelationbetweensentencesandevenpredictthesemanticmeaningoffollowingsentencethroughtheprecedingsentencebylogic.Inotherwords,asacohesivedevice,conjunctionysaroleinrelatingtoeachotherlinguisticelementsthatoccurinsuccessionbutarenotrelatedbyotherstructuralmeans.ItcanbedividedintofiveAdditive:and,or,also,inaddition,besides,moreover,similarly,likewise,bycontrast,forinstance;Adversative:but,yet,however,instead,nevertheless,atanyrate,asamatter

Causal:so,consequently,itfollows,for,because,forthisTemporal:then,next,afterthat,onanotheroccasion,inconclusion,finally,atContinuative:now,ofcourse,well,anyway,surely,afterDuetothefactthatEnglishisahypotacticlanguagewhileisa language,conjunctionthus esthemoststrikingdifferencebetweenthetwolanguages.ConjunctivewordshaveahighfrequencyinEnglishtext,whileEnglishusesconnectivestoachievecohesionintext,oftenresortstowordorder,repetition,parallelstructure,compactstructureandfour-characterphrasetobuildupthesemanticrelations.Forexample,—《背影Weenteredtherailwaystationaftercrossingthe—張培基譯TheSightofFather’sInEnglishtranslation,weusetheconjunctive“after”toconnectthetwoclauseswhoserelationshipcanbeeasilyunderstoodinstructure.ContrastinlexicalLexicalcohesionis“thecohesiveeffectachievedbytheselectionofvocabulary”.(Halliday&Hasan,1976:274).AccordingtoHallidayandHasan,lexicalcohesionisdividedintotwocategories:reitionandcollocation.Rei tionis“aformoflexicalcohesionwhichinvolvestherepetitionofaitematoneendofthescale;theuseofageneralwordtoreferbacktoalexicalitem,attheotherendofthescale;andanumberofthingsinbetweentheuseofasynonym,nearsynonym,orasuperordinate”(HallidayandHasan,1976:278).AswouldcomeintoMr.Picwick’sface;thesextendedintoalaugh,thelaughintoaroar,andtheroarbecameageneral.—CharlesDickens,Pickwick皮先生的臉上會(huì)浮現(xiàn)出一絲微笑，微笑逐漸變成大笑，大笑變成狂笑,—譯《匹外傳Intheaboveexample,theuseofsuchsynonymsas“s,laughandroar”makesthetextcohesive.ThemostsignificantdifferencebetweenandEnglishinreitionisthatappreciatesmorerepetitiontoachievecohesiveeffect,whilerepetitiontendstobeavoidedinEnglishunlessitisusedtoexpressemphasisorclarity.However,weshouldnotjumptotheconclusionthatlacksavocabularycomparablewiththelargeEnglishone,whichoffersavarietyofvocabularies,inwhichmostaresynonyms.preferenceforrepetitionispartlycausedbythenatureofparataxisandis,additionally,determinedbythetextnormsacceptedinthelanguagecommunity.alsohasagreatnumberofsynonymsusedfortextualcohesion.Forexample,Everychangeofseason,everychangeofweather,everyhourofthedayproducesonechangeinthemagicalhuesandshapeofthesemountains.Inthisexample,uses“更迭“轉(zhuǎn)變“變化”asthesynonymsoftheEnglishword“change”.Collocationisachievedthroughtheassociationoflexicalitemsthatregularlyco-occur.Lexicalcohesionisnotarelationbetweenpairsofwords.Onthecontrary,ittypicallyoperatesthroughlexicalchainsthatrunthroughatextandarelinkedtoeachotherinvariousways.Forexample,Morethan2,000patientsaredyingannuallywhilewaitingfortransnts…Theshortageoforgansissoacute.Intheaboveexample,“transnts”and“organs”havetheobvioussemanticcollocationinEnglish,andtheytogethermakeacohesivetext.Generally,thereisnotmuchdifferenceinthelexicalcohesionbetweentheEnglishandlanguagesexceptthatEnglishhasafewinflectionalformsforeachlexicalitem(verbsornouns，adjectivesoradverbs)toexpressthesamemeaning,butalexicalitemhasnoinflectionssotherepetitionofthesamewordorphraseisoftenemployedtoexpressthesamelexicalrelationship.Forexample,Mydictionarydefineshappinessas“l(fā)ucky”or“fortunate”,butIthinkabetterdefinitionofhappinessis“thecapacityforenjoyment”.Themorewecanenjoywhatwehave,thehappierweare.—LynnPeters,OurPursuitof我的辭典給“”下的定義是“幸運(yùn)“好運(yùn)，但是，我認(rèn)為對(duì)更好的解釋是“能夠樂在其中。我們?cè)侥軜吩谄渲校覀兙驮??！g《我們追求的Intheabovesentence,thethreelexicalitemscontributealottothecohesionandcoherenceofthetext,andtheybothhavegrticalormorphologicalchanges:“definite-definition”,“happy-happiness-happier”,“enjoyment-enjoy”.Thislexicalchaingivesmuchemphasistoitstheme“OurPursuitofHappiness”.Sincehasnosuchgrticalormorphologicalvariations,therepetitionofthesamewordismostlyIVTranslationStrategiesofTextualCohesiveTherearetwogeneralstrategiesintranslatingcohesion:overttranslationandcoverttranslation.ThispartattemptstoexploresometranslationstrategieswithregardtothedifferencesofcohesivedevicesinandEnglishsoastogivethetranslatorssomeguidanceinthetranslationprocess.OvertOverttranslationmeans ltranslationinthisthesis.ByoverttranslationtranslatorretainsthecohesivedevicesofthesourcetextanditoftendealswiththesimilarityofcohesivedevicesbetweenEnglishand.Thatmeanstoreproducecohesioninthetargetlanguagetranslationidenticaltothatinsourcelanguagetext.Oppositewordsisausefulwayoflexicalcohesion.Onetextiscohesivewithapairofwordswhichhaveoppositemeaningoccurringintwosentences.Ifthereareequivalentavailable,thetranslatorcanreachacohesivetranslationbyoverttranslation.Forexample,Itwasthebestoftimes,itwastheworstoftimes;itwastheageofwisdom,itwastheageoffoolishness;itwastheepochofbelief,itwastheepochofincredulity;itwastheseasonoflight,itwastheseasonofdarkness;itwasthespringofhope,itwasthewinterofdespair;wehavenothingbeforeus,wehaveeverythingbeforeus;wewereallgoingdirecttoheaven;wewereallgoingdirecttheotherway.—CharlesDickens，ATaleofTwo這是最好的時(shí)代，這是的時(shí)代，這是智慧的時(shí)代，這是愚蠢的時(shí)代；這是信仰的時(shí)期這是懷疑的時(shí)期這是光明的季節(jié)這是的季節(jié)這是希望之春，這是失望之冬；人們面前有著各樣事物，人們面前一無所有；人們正在直登；人 —、張揚(yáng)譯《Theabovetextreitesthestructureof“itwas…”and“wehave…”,andthepairofthewordsofoppositemeaning:best/worst,wisdom/foolishnessandnothing/anythingtoreachafuleffectandcohesivetext.Sincehastheequivalentwords,thetranslationofthistextisdonebyoverttranslation.CovertIntermsofthedifferencesbetweenEnglishandcohesivedevices,coverttranslationisemployedbasedontheclassificationofcohesivedevices.Omissionandaddingaretechniquesoftenemployedindealingwithcohesivedevices,suchasintranslatingreference,substitutionandconjunction.ReferenceandsubstitutionusedinEnglisharesometimesconvertedtolexicalcohesionintherenditions,thepurposeofwhichiseithertoconformtothelanguagenormsortoreproducetheoriginalstylisticeffect.InthefollowingtextwewilldiscussthetranslationofeachcohesiveinTranslationofItisevidentthattherealtranslationproblembetweenEnglishandreferenceliesintheirdifferencesinusageandusingfrequency. alreferencesarenotsofrequentlyusedinasinEnglish.Bearingthisdifferenceinmind,in-Englishtranslationthetranslatorwilladdorsupplythemissingsubject,whileinEnglish-translation,weshouldomitthereference.InEnglish-translation, alreferencesarenotalwaysomitted,andtheyaresometimesconvertedtolexicalcohesion.Forexample,Hehatedfailure;hehadconquereditallhislife,risenaboveit,anddespiseditin他討厭失敗，他一生中曾戰(zhàn)勝失敗，失敗，并且藐視別人Inordertostresscertainemotionsorsomemeaningsandformbeautifulrhythms, alreferenceisrepeatedintranslation.Inthisexample,“失敗”isrepeatedintranslationofthe alreference“it”.ThemostprominentdifferencebetweenEnglishanddemonstrativereferenceisthatinthereisnoexactequivalenttoEnglishdefinitearticle“the”.Tohandleit,usinand“那”insteadtosignaldefiniteness.Generallyspeaking,Englishanddonothavesignificantdifferencescomparativereference,whichbringsconveniencetoTranslationofThoughbothlanguageshavesimilarformsofsubstitution,andEnglishhavegreatdifferencesinitsusage.First,substitutioninislessthanthatinEnglish,becausetendstorepeatwordstoreachcohesion.ThereforeinngEnglish-translation,thetranslatorcanrepeatthewordsbeingsubstituted.ForHehashisownpositiveopiniononallmatters;notanunwiseone,usually,forhisownends;andwillasknoadviceofyours.HereweknowthatrepetitionisthephenomenonthatEnglishtriestoavoidbutstronglyfavoredby.Inthisexample,thesubstitute“one”isusedintheoriginalversionreferringbackto“opinion”intheprevioussentence.Butwhentheyareputinto,repetitionisamustmethod,forversionreadsnaturallybyrepeating“見Second,Englishnominalsubstituteshavesingularandpluralformsandverbalsubstituteshavemorphologicalchangesintense.doesnothavesuchforms.Therefore,inEnglish-translation,thetranslatorrecesEnglishsubstitutewithlexicaldevicesin,orjustomitsthem.Forexample,Heroeshaveaprofoundimpactonourpastandshouldcontinuetodob)們對(duì)我們的過去曾有過深遠(yuǎn)的影響,對(duì)將來也應(yīng)繼續(xù)如此,whennecessary,showsthesituationofmorethanone orobjectandthetime,however,bymeansoflexicalitems.Intheabovesentence,thepart“doso”substitutesfor“aprofoundimpact”inEnglishtext,whileintranslation,itisrecedby“如此”.Englishsubstitutioncanalsobeconvertedtoothercohesivedevices,suchasandlexicalTranslationofAsEnglishoftenusesverbalellipsis,inEnglish-translationthetranslatorshouldrepeatoraddtheverbomitted.Otherwise,theymayseemambiguoustothereaders.Forexample,Perhapsnootherthinghassuchpowertoliftthepooroutofpoverty,thewretchedoutofhismisery,tomaketheburden-bearerforgethisburden,thesickhissuffering,thesorrowhisgrief,thedowntroddenhisdegradation,asbooks.—OrisonS.Marden,世上或許沒有別的東西像書籍那樣有這種力量: Aswehavediscussedabove,ellipsisinismostlyconcernedwithsubjectwhileEnglishellipsisoftenoccursinpredicate,weshalladdorrepeattheellipticaliteminEnglish-translation.Intheaboveexample,theverbalellipsis“forget”isrepeatedintheversion.Similarly,becauseellipsisinismostlyconcernedwithsubjectinsteadofpredicate,in-Englishtranslation,theomittedsubjectshallbeadded.Forexample,（他）（（—《父親Fatherwentthroughuntoldhardshipsformeallhislife.Hebroughtmeup,sentmetoschool,hadahousebuiltformeandboughtmeafewmuofland.HewenttoHankoutoengageintradetheyearwhenhewasalreadysixty.Andhetriedtomakeoutthathewasstillinhisfiftieslestpeopleshouldconsiderhimtoooldtobeofmuchuse.—張培基譯,BecauseofthenatureofEnglishbeinghypotacticandbeingpartic,thesubjectscan’tbeomittedinEnglishbecausetheyyanimportantroleinthecohesionandcoherenceofEnglishtext.SowhenputintoEnglish,whatisomittedinshouldbeadded.Intheabovesentences,thesubject“他”inthebracketisomittedintext,butitisdwhenputintoEnglish.Therefore,addingisastrategyusedwhentranslatingellipsis.TranslationofSincewehavediscussedabovethatconjunctivewordshaveahigherfrequencyinEnglishtextwhilelowerin,accordinglytherearetwomethodsoftranslatingconjunction:addingin-EnglishtranslationandomissioninEnglish-Beingaparticlanguage,tendstocohereatextwithmeaningandinternallogic,whileEnglishpreferstouseavarietyofconjunctionstoachievetextualcohesion.Forexample,a)的名勝古跡，的妙處，我應(yīng)該說是了解的—《前的I’msupposedtobeveryfamiliarwithitsscenicspotsandhistorical—張培基譯PredawnNeitherofthelinescontainstheconjunctions,buttheyarecohesivein.However,whenputintoEnglishtranslation,“and”shouldbeaddedtoreachcohesiveeffectandmakethetextsmoother.Istoodandwarmedmynumbedfingersovertheblaze,thenIlookedround;therewasnocandle,buttheuncertainlightfromthehearthshowedbyintervals,paperedwall…—CharlotteBronte,Jane—英譯《簡(jiǎn)愛Englishisheavywithconjunctions.Whenputintosomeofthemshouldbeomittedconcerningthecharacteristicsofbeingpartic.Inthisexample,theconjunctive“then”inthesourcetextrepresentsatemporalrelationship.However,becausethetimesequenceisalreadyembeddedintheinternallogic,itisnotnecessarytotranslatethetimeindicator“then”.Whenputinto,itisomitted.TranslationoflexicalLexicalcohesioninthetextisoftenconvertedtoothercohesivedevices,suchasreferenceandsubstitutionintheEnglishrenditions,thepurposeofwhichiseithertoconformtotheEnglishlanguagenormsortoreproducetheoriginalstylisticeffect.For父欠下來的，一個(gè)不知道為了什么事。他們問阿Q,阿Q爽利的答到“因?yàn)槲?—《阿Q正傳Thetwoothermenalsoseemedtobevillagers.Theygraduallyfellintoconversationwithhim,andoneofthemtoldhimthatthesuccessfulprovincialcandidatewantedtodunhimfortherentowedbyhisgrandfather;theotherdidnotknowwhyhewasthere.WhentheyquestionedAhQ,heansweredquitefrankly,“BecauseIwantedto—譯,TheTrueStoryofAhSinceandEnglishbelongtodifferentlanguagefamilies,thecohesivedeviceinmaybeimproperinEnglish.Onthisaccount,in-Englishtranslation,thetranslatorshouldadjustth