文本顯征及其在翻譯中的差移

內(nèi)容概要

翻譯涉及文本的理解與生成?，F(xiàn)象學(xué)美學(xué)、話語研究、認(rèn)知語言學(xué)可謂殊途同歸，都注意到語言之于意識(shí)如同鏡頭之于景物。于是本文提出，任何一部文學(xué)作品都具備·種潛質(zhì)，在被閱讀的過程中對(duì)意識(shí)進(jìn)行推拉與層，即“文本顯征”。把握了它，就能了解作品映射到閱瀆心理中的意識(shí)識(shí)構(gòu)型，就可以進(jìn)一步探究其心理指向。作者將經(jīng)將經(jīng)典美文《荷塘月色》及其三個(gè)英譯本作為語料，突破了譯本比較的傳統(tǒng)方法，視各文本為獨(dú)立的言語生命，先縱觀缸個(gè)文本的內(nèi)在，再橫看單語語考察的結(jié)果，最終開啟了對(duì)翻譯研究中效果和差移這兩個(gè)重要問題的思考。

書籍目錄

List of FiguresList Of TablesAbbreviations1 introduction and Overview2 Salience in Aesthetics and Linguistics：Structure and  Hierarchy of Consciousness as Molded by Language  2.1  Within Aesthetics：The Phenomenological Approach to Text  2.2 Within Linguistics：The Cognitive and Functional Approaches to Language    2.2.1 Langacker’s Cognitive Linguistics    2.2.2 Discourse Stuldies  2.3 Summary3 Mapping Textual Salience  3.1 The Notion of Textual Salience  3.2 General Parameters in Mapping Textual Salience    3.2.1  Key Terms     3.2.1.1 THING VS.RELATION     3.2.1.2 Levels and Planes ofReading    3.2.2 General Paralneters     3.2.2.1  Selection.Perspective.Abstraction in a Conceptual Reading oya Linguistic Sign     3.2.2.2 Discourse Performance of a Linguistic Sign wfth Its Contextual Readingt     3.2.2.3 Culture—Specific or Discipline—Specific Association from Intertextual Readings of a Linguistic Sign  3.3 Summary4 Descriptive Stage One：Textual Salience Projected by the Origina  4.1 Introducing the Corpus3  4.2 Scope of Characterization3  4.3 Characterizing Textual Salience Projected by《荷塘月色》    4.3.1 Textual Salience Observed via THING.Signs3     4.3.1.1 Degree of Objectification of SELF：A Hierarchy of Salience Indexed in Deictic THING—Signs3     4.3.1.2 Formation of a Salience Hierarchr via Non—Deictic THING.Signs    4.3.2 Textual Salience Observed via RELAtiON.Signs     4.3.2.1 Temporality in Construal of Situations：Tw0 Indexes     4.3.2.2 Characterizing the Aspectual Phenomena in《荷塘月色》     4.3.2.3 Findings and Discussions     4.3.2.4 Summary  4.4 Summary：Mapping Textual Salience in the Original5 Descriptive Stage Two：Textual Salience Projected by the  Translations and Comparison with the Original  5.1 Texmal Salience Projected by the Translations    5.1.1 Textual Salience Projected by TT     5.1.1.1 TextualSalience Observedvia THING.Signs     5.1.1.2 Textual Salience 0bserved via RELATION.Signs    5.1.2 Textual Salience Projected by TT     5.1.2.1 TextualSaHence Observedvia THING—SiRns     5.1.2.2 Textual Salience 0bserved via RELATION.Signs    5.1.3 TeXtual Salience Projected by TT     5.1.3.1 TextualSalience Observedvia THING—Signs     5.1.3.2 Textual Salience Observed via RELATION-Signs  5.2 Comparison Between the Translations and the Original with Respect to Textual Salience  5.3 Summary of the Descriptive and Comparative WorkRamifications ofthe Case Study：ATranslation-Related Query into Effect and Shift  6.1 Reflections on Effect：Potentiality VS.Actuality    6.1.1 AnAnalysis ofthe Notion ofEffect

章節(jié)摘錄

　　The desire to understand why one text can impress the same reader so differently from another （more so especially of one with higher literariness as is commonly termed） turns into a quest for where such differences arise. Yet it should be emphasized that such a motivation has largely come from intuitive impressions over different translations of the same original and further from dissatisfaction with stopping at the intuitive level. Hence the following questions arise： Are there any properties of the text itself that largely shape the discourse processing experience and lead to variations， and what are they？ Exploration into the texts should be able to help us explain the variations. I believe that the potential forces at play within a text are endowed by the linguistic presentation， but that these potentials will not be actualized without the mechanisms via which the given language engages， and operates on， consciousness. The intense efforts of linguistics to uncover the mysteries of language throughout the twentieth century and the rise of the science of the mind in the late twentieth century encourage a conception of discourse processing experiences from the point of view of the mutual influence between language and the mind. Or to put it more specifically， discourse structurings manifested through linguistic presentation within a text can impose on consciousness while epistemic experiences of an individual mind contribute to the interpreting of the text. The fact that the neurobiological mechanisms involved are anything but well understood is less fundamental and relevant to the generative/interpretive variability than the existence of the minds capacity to impose alternate structures on a conceived phenomenon be it a real world event or a textual entity——as well as the structure of consciousness that is subject to alternate impositions by linguistic presentation.　　Salience， in a non-technical sense， refers to the state or quality of something standing out from the rest， hence implying a two-sidedness （a cognized object and a cognizing subject） and a hierarchy; while in the science of the mind it can be considered as pertinent to the study of attention， if we accept William James century-old definition of that term， i.e. "the taking possession by the mind...of one out of what seem several simultaneously possible objects or trains of thought" （cited "in Duncan ; my italics）. For James， attention is， loosely speaking， an adjustment of consciousness. Since the reality and importance of attention as a mental phenomenon is now beyond dispute， its evident properties such as relative level of intensity are well worth noting in an attempt to explore discourseexperience.

圖書封面

圖書標(biāo)簽Tags

無

評(píng)論、評(píng)分、閱讀與下載

---

    文本顯征及其在翻譯中的差移 PDF格式下載

---