語(yǔ)言學(xué)與翻譯研究導(dǎo)引

前言

　　翻譯是從源語(yǔ)到目的語(yǔ)的語(yǔ)碼轉(zhuǎn)換過(guò)程，因而翻譯首先是一種語(yǔ)言現(xiàn)象。語(yǔ)言學(xué)作為一門研究語(yǔ)言的科學(xué)，在翻譯實(shí)踐以及在對(duì)翻譯實(shí)踐的描述、總結(jié)和探究中至關(guān)重要，甚至可以說(shuō)是不可或缺的，語(yǔ)言學(xué)對(duì)于翻譯研究的重要性是顯而易見(jiàn)?！　≡跉v史上，翻譯研究逐漸發(fā)展成為一個(gè)較為系統(tǒng)的學(xué)科，可以說(shuō)始于語(yǔ)言學(xué)，并在一定程度上依賴于語(yǔ)言學(xué)的研究成果。有關(guān)翻譯的研究曾經(jīng)一度是語(yǔ)言學(xué)研究中的一個(gè)組成部分，或被看成是語(yǔ)言學(xué)的一個(gè)分支。到了二十世紀(jì)中葉，語(yǔ)言學(xué)的發(fā)展及其對(duì)于翻譯理論研究的介入，使翻譯理論得以擺脫以往點(diǎn)評(píng)式、印象式的特點(diǎn)，變得越來(lái)越科學(xué)、系統(tǒng)。美國(guó)的奈達(dá)，英國(guó)的卡特福德、紐馬克，以及加拿大的維內(nèi)和達(dá)貝爾內(nèi)，都嘗試借助語(yǔ)言學(xué)的研究成果，對(duì)翻譯進(jìn)行學(xué)理上的思考和系統(tǒng)的研究，并取得了具有里程碑意義的研究成果?！　亩兰o(jì)八十年代后期開始，文化批評(píng)和文化研究在西方學(xué)術(shù)界崛起，并逐漸上升到主要地位，學(xué)者們開始從文化角度切入翻譯研究，語(yǔ)言學(xué)途徑的翻譯研究因?yàn)槠洹拔茖W(xué)主義”的嫌疑受到質(zhì)疑。借用張柏然教授的話說(shuō)，“翻譯的語(yǔ)言學(xué)范式給人們帶來(lái)了理性思維，破除了原來(lái)與文學(xué)研究范式的神秘性和主觀直覺(jué)的研究方式，從主觀性走向客觀性，使翻譯研究取得了很大進(jìn)展。但由于語(yǔ)言學(xué)范式使譯者過(guò)多依賴于語(yǔ)言的規(guī)律性，忽視主體的主觀能動(dòng)性，排除言語(yǔ)活動(dòng)的社會(huì)制約性和規(guī)定性，從而突出了原文文本的中心性，追求同一性和一致性，最終墮入語(yǔ)言邏各斯中心”。語(yǔ)言學(xué)理論在翻譯研究中一統(tǒng)天下的地位也受到挑戰(zhàn)，翻譯研究出現(xiàn)了“文化轉(zhuǎn)向”，語(yǔ)言學(xué)途徑的翻譯研究似乎出現(xiàn)式微的跡象。然而，從前幾年開始，文化途徑的翻譯研究似乎逐漸失去了興奮點(diǎn)和增長(zhǎng)點(diǎn)，人們于是乎又回過(guò)頭來(lái)重新反思翻譯問(wèn)題，有些學(xué)者開始探討“翻譯研究的語(yǔ)言學(xué)回歸”。在編者看來(lái)，翻譯研究中語(yǔ)言學(xué)回歸絕不可能是一種簡(jiǎn)單的回歸，歷史的洪流不會(huì)逆轉(zhuǎn)，翻譯研究也絕不能簡(jiǎn)單地回到語(yǔ)言學(xué)途徑。　　……

內(nèi)容概要

　　《大學(xué)翻譯學(xué)研究型系列教材：語(yǔ)言學(xué)與翻譯研究導(dǎo)引》共分九章，每章由“導(dǎo)論”、“選文”、“研究實(shí)踐”等三大部分組成，選文后還有“延伸閱讀”和“問(wèn)題與思考”?！皩?dǎo)論”部分簡(jiǎn)要介紹特定流派的語(yǔ)言學(xué)理論如何從獨(dú)特的研究視角出發(fā)審視翻譯問(wèn)題的，力爭(zhēng)概括出該理論流派的整體情況、研究脈絡(luò)和前沿思想?！斑x文”部分是相關(guān)流派的代表性論述。這些文章絕大多數(shù)選自學(xué)術(shù)期刊，少量文章選自學(xué)術(shù)專著或百科全書。每篇選文配有“導(dǎo)言”，位于選文的正文之前，介紹作者的學(xué)術(shù)背景、所選文章的來(lái)源及其主要內(nèi)容?！把芯繉?shí)踐”部分是根據(jù)選文所討論的研究課題和研究?jī)?nèi)容，選擇一些學(xué)者的研究案例，力圖幫助讀者從這些研究案例中得到啟發(fā)，找到研究的模式與方法，通過(guò)學(xué)習(xí)和模仿，創(chuàng)造性地開展具體的課題研究，培養(yǎng)讀者的學(xué)術(shù)研究能力。

書籍目錄

第一章 緒論：語(yǔ)言、語(yǔ)言學(xué)與翻譯研究導(dǎo)論選文選文一 On Linguistic Aspects of Translation選文二 Translation and Language：A Linguistic Approach to Translation Studies選文三 Linguistics and Translation選文四 翻譯的語(yǔ)言學(xué)情結(jié)選文五 翻譯學(xué)研究中的語(yǔ)言學(xué)模式與方法選文六 試析翻譯的語(yǔ)言學(xué)研究延伸閱讀問(wèn)題與思考研究實(shí)踐重新審視現(xiàn)代語(yǔ)言學(xué)理論在翻譯研究中的作用——比利時(shí)“語(yǔ)言與翻譯研究國(guó)際研討會(huì)”專家訪談錄第二章 語(yǔ)言對(duì)比與翻譯研究導(dǎo)論選文選文一 翻譯與對(duì)比語(yǔ)言學(xué)選文二 Comparative Stylistics of French and English：A Methodology for Translation選文三 Principles of Correspondence選文四 Shifts of Translation選文五 Type,Kind and Individuality of Text： Decision Making in Translation延伸閱讀問(wèn)題與思考研究實(shí)踐漢語(yǔ)雙主句英譯初探標(biāo)語(yǔ)翻譯的文本分析和翻譯策略——以上海世博會(huì)標(biāo)語(yǔ)的翻譯為例第三章 系統(tǒng)功能語(yǔ)言學(xué)（SFL）與翻譯研究導(dǎo)論選文選文一 M. A.K.Halliday and Translation選文二 J.C.Catford and SFL選文三 Peter Newmark and SFL選文四 Basil Hatim，Ian Mason and SFL選文五 Translation Quality Assessment： Linguistic Description versus Social Evaluation選文六 系統(tǒng)功能語(yǔ)言學(xué)路向翻澤研究述評(píng)延伸閱讀問(wèn)題與思考研究實(shí)踐漢英部分語(yǔ)篇銜接手段的差異第四章 文體學(xué)與翻譯研究導(dǎo)論選文選文一 The Place of Literary Stylistics in the Translation of Fiction選文二 Towards a Methodology for Investigating the Style of a Literary Translator延伸閱讀問(wèn)題與思考研究實(shí)踐基于語(yǔ)料庫(kù)的譯者風(fēng)格與翻譯策略研究——以《紅樓夢(mèng)》中報(bào)道動(dòng)詞及英譯為例第五章 語(yǔ)篇分析與翻譯研究導(dǎo)論選文選文一 Text Linguistics and Translation選文二 語(yǔ)篇語(yǔ)言學(xué)與翻譯研究延伸閱讀問(wèn)題與思考研究實(shí)踐小說(shuō)翻譯的語(yǔ)義連貫重構(gòu)第六章 語(yǔ)用學(xué)／社會(huì)語(yǔ)言學(xué)與翻譯研究導(dǎo)論選文選文一 Pragmatics and Translation選文二 Perlocutionary Equivalence： Marking, Exegesis and Recontextualisation……第七章 心理語(yǔ)言學(xué)／認(rèn)知語(yǔ)言學(xué)視域下的翻譯研究第八章 語(yǔ)料庫(kù)語(yǔ)言學(xué)與翻譯研究參考文獻(xiàn)

章節(jié)摘錄

　　The first half of the 20th century also saw links established between translation and anthropologically-based linguistics. Through the Empire， English speakers had been broughtinto contact with a world beyond Europe and with speakers of vastly different languages.Through his fieldwork centred on the life of the Trobriand islanders of New Guinea in thesouthwest Pacific， Bronislaw Malinowski （1884-1942）， holder of the first Chair ofAnthropology at the University of Lonclon， was empirically confronted with the limits oftranslation. With no English terms available for concepts crucial to his description of theculture and religion of the islanders， Malinowski was left no choice but to become "[iln thehistory of English linguistics [... ] the first scholar to deal with the systematic use oftranslation in the statement of meaning in ethnographic texts" （Firth， 1968：76）. Previouslyundocumented languages also attracted the attention of linguists in the United States， whereinterest focused on the Native American languages. Rapidly facing extinction， these becamethe object of study of such linguists as Franz Boas （1858-1942） and Edward Sapir （1884-1939）， both born in Europe and trained in neo-grammarian methodology. The observationsof Sapir， and in turn Benjamin Whorf （1897-1944）， found an expression in what hasbecome known as the Sapir/Whorf hypothesis which， with its emphasis on disparity in worldview between speakers of vastly different languages （Whorf， 1956）， makes translation anear impossibility in its more extreme， "stronger" interpretation. In its 66weaker" version，on the other hand， it does little more than confirm the experience of every practisingtranslator that languages differ not so much with respect to what it is possible to say in themas to the degree of difficulty with which it can be said.　　The European heritage of the neogrammarian insistence on rigour in methodology was atthe time reinforced in the USA by the influence of behaviourist， mechanistic psychology onlinguistics， which found its leading exponent in Leonard Bloomfield （1887-1949）. With itsstrong emphasis on methodology and concern with the structure of language to the exclusionof meaning， Bloomfield's Language （1933） dominated the study of linguistics during the1930s and 1940s， confining the scope of linguistic analysis of American "structuralists" toonly the structure and rules of the language investigated.　　Early views on the link between translation and linguistics are found in an often-quotedpaper by the Czech-born American structuralist Roman Jakobson. In "On I，inguistic Aspectsof Translation，" Jakobson （1959/2000） points to three different kinds of translation. Whileinterlingual translation entails the transfer of content as well as of form from one language toanother， intralingual translation entails the process of rewording in one and the samelanguage for purposes of clarification. The third kind is intersemiotic translation， which isthe method employed when a written text is transferred to another medium such as film ormusic. Acknowledging the need for the latter two types of translation， Roman Jakobsonpresciently anticipated recently-debated issues and developments in present-day translationstudies. In an article in The Independent of 15 November 2001， Susan Bassnett provoked alively debate with her proposal that， in order to maintain the interest of present-day schoolchildren， Shakespeare is in need of rewording （in other words， intralingual "translation"）into modern English. And， as the need for expertise in audio-visual translation rocketsbetween English and other lesser-used European languages for use in film and television，intersemiotic translation is becoming the subject of avid attention.　　……

圖書封面

圖書標(biāo)簽Tags

無(wú)

評(píng)論、評(píng)分、閱讀與下載

---

    語(yǔ)言學(xué)與翻譯研究導(dǎo)引 PDF格式下載

---