Chapter 2
Peter Newmark
Semantic and Communicative Translation Guided Reading
Peter Newmark (1916) is an accomplished translation scholar as well as an experienced translator. He has translated a number of books and articles and published extaensively on translation. His publications on translation include Approaches to Translation (1981), About Translation(1983), Paragraphs on Translation段落翻译(1985), A Textbook of Translation翻译教程(1988), and More Paragraphs on Translation(1993).
In his work Approaches to Translation, Newmark proposes two types of translation: semantic translation语义翻译and communicative translation交际翻译. Semantic translation focuses primarily upon the semantic content of the source text whereas communicative translation focuses essentially upon the comprehension and response of receptors. This distinction results from his disapproval of Nida's assumption假定，假设，设想；假装；承担，担任that all translating is communicating, and the overriding最主要的，最优先的principle of any translation is to achieve "equivalent effect". For Newmark, the success of equivalent effect is "illusory", and that "the conflict
of loyalties, the gap between emphasis on source and target languages will always remain as the overriding problem in translation theory and practice"(1981:38). To narrow the gap, Newmark 系统地阐述，确切地表达；规划，构想出formulates his concepts of "communicative translation" and "semantic translation", which in a sense从某种意义上说are similar to Nida's "dynamic equivalent translation" and "formal equivalent translation". Newmarks admits "communicative translation" is a common method and could be used in many types of translation. Nevertheless, he justifies证明……正当/有理，为……辩护the legitimacy合法性，正当；合理性，妥当；嫡出，正统of "semantic translation" in the following three aspects. Firstly, all translations depend on the three 一分为二，二分法；本质对立dichotomies, namely, the foreign and native cultures, the two languages, the writer and the translator. Hence, it is unlikely to have a universal theory that could include all these factors. Secondly, previous discussions on methods of translation, either Nida's "dynamic equivalence" or Nabokow's "literal translation", does not reflect the actual reality of translation method, for each of them either recommends one or 贬低，轻视disparages the other. Thirdly, the social factors, especially the readers of the second language, only play a partial部分的；偏爱/袒/心的role
发挥部分作用in translation. Some texts, such as an expressive one, require a "semantic translation"(1981:62). It can be seen that可以看出by proposing the coexistence of "communicative translation" and "semantic translation", Newmark suggests a correlation相互关系，关联；相关性between translation method and text type.
It should be pointed out that应该指出的是Newmark's semantic translation differs from literal translation直译because the former "respects context", interprets and even explains while the latter sticks very closely to source text at word and syntax level(1981:62). Literal translation, however, is held to be the best approach in both semantic and communicative translation, "provided that如果equivalent effect is secured, the literal word-for-word translation is not only the best, it is the only valid method of translation"(1981:39). Here Newmark seems to only take account of考虑到，顾及，体谅literary translation rather than non-literary translation, which is often rendered more freely in order to communicate the meaning. But he also states that when there is a conflict between semantic and communicative translation, the latter would win out胜出. For instance, it is better to render communicatively the public sign 公共标志bissiger Hund and chien mechant into beward the
dog! in order to communicate efficiently the message, but not semantically as dog that bites! and bad dog!(1981:39). Nevertheless, it is difficult for a translator to follow Newmark's translation methods in practice, which should be adopted flexibly according to the specific context and text type.
A Textbook of Translation is an expansion and a revision of Approaches to Translation in many aspects在很多方面. In this book, Newmark, follwing the German linguist Karl Buhler's functional theory of language, proposes three main types of texts (i.e. expressive有表现力的，富有表情的, informative提供大量资料或信息的，授予知识的and vocative呼格的) as well as methods of translating them (Chapters 4 and 5). Although he lists many translation methods from word-for-word translation to adaptation, he insists that "only semantic and communicative translation fulfill the two main aims of translation, which are first, accuracy, and second, economy". While semantic translation is used for expressive texts, communicative translation is for informative and vocative texts although he admits that few texts are purely expressive, informative or vocative. By stressing the wide applicability of these two translation methods, Newmark seems to overlook the function of other translation methods frequently adopted in translation
practice.
Newmark's semantic and communicative translation ahve been quoted frequently among translation scholars. His concern about the coexistence of semantic and communicative translation shows that in his view effect-oriented translation以效果为导向的翻译such as Nida's dynamic equivalence should not be overstressed in translation practice, but is just one type of translation. Newmark's types of translation, however, are less influential than Nida's dynamic equivalence in the field of translation studies because they "raise some of the same points concerning the translation process and the importance of the TT reader译文读者" (Munday 2000:46). Further, his views and comments are still very traditional and prescriptive规定的，指定的，规范的, bearing some traces of traditional translation theories. The strength of his writing lies in that his discussion on translation covers a wide range of topics, and he always provides useful advice and guidance for translator 接受训练的人，实习生，培训生trainees with a large number of interesting and useful examples, which are more convincing than abstract theoretical arguments抽象的理论论证. The following excerpt is selected from Chapter 3 of Newmark's Approaches to Translation. In this chapter he 假定，要求postulates his two
main methods of translation (i.e. Semantic and communicative translation), and tries to apply them into different types of text. Communicative and Semantic Translation
1.A translation must give the words of the original.
2.A translation must give the ideas of the original.
3.A translation should read like an original work.
4.A translation should read like a translation.
5.A translation should reflect the style of the original.
6.A translation should possess the style of the translation.
7.A translation should read as a contemporary of the original.
8.A translation should read as a contemporary of the translation.
9.A translation may add to or omit from the original.
10.A translation may never add to or omit from the original.
11.A translation of verse should be in prose.
12.A translation of verse should be in verse.
(The Air of Translation, T.H. Savory, Cape, 1968, p.54)
In the pre-linguistics period of writing on translation, which may be said to date from Cicero through St. Jerome, Luther, Dryden, Tytler, Herder, Goethe, Schleiermacher, Buber, Ortega y Gasset, not to say Savory, opinion swung between literal and free, faithful and beautiful, exact and natural translation, depending on whether the bias was to be in favour of赞成the author or
the reader, the source or the target language of the text. Up to the nineteenth century, literal translation represented a philological语言学的，文献的，文学的academic exercise语言学学术活动from which the cultural reformers文化改革者were trying to rescue literature. In the nineteenth century, a more scientific approach was brought to bear on对……有影响，和……有关translation, suggesting that certain types of texts must be accurately translated, while others should and could not be translated at all! Since the rise of modern linguistics (philology语言学was becoming linguistics语言学here in the late fifties), and anticipated by预计到Tytler in 1790, Larbaud, Belloc, Knox and Rieu, the general emphasis, supported by communication-theorists as well as by non-literary translators, has been placed on the reader---on informing the reader effectively and appropriately, notably显著地，明显地；尤其，特别in Nida, Firth, Koller and the Leipzig School. In contrast 相反, the brilliant essays of Benjamin, Valery and Nabokov (anticipated by Croce and Ortega y Gasset) advocating literal translation have appeared as isolated孤立的，被隔离的, paradoxical phenomena自相矛盾的现象, relevant only to 与……有关translating works of high literary culture. Koller (1972) has stated that the equivalent-effect principle of
translation is tending to rule out把……排除在外，排除……的可能性；不把……考虑在内all others, particularly the predominance of any formal elements such as word or structure. The apparent triumph of the "consumer" is, I think, illusory. The conflict of loyalties, the gap between emphsis on source and target language will always remain as the overriding problem in translation theory and practice. However, the gap could perhaps be narrowed if the previous terms were replaced as follows:
SOURCE LANGUAGE BIAS TARGET LANGUAGE BIAS
LITERAL FREE
FAITHFUL IDIOMATIC
SEMANTIC / COMMUNICATIVE Communicative translation attempts to produce on its readers an effect as close as possible to that obtained on the readers of the original. Semantic translation attempts to render, as closely as the semantic and syntactic造句法的，句子结构的structures of the second language allow, the exact contextual上下文的，前后关系上的meaning of the original.
In theory, there are wide differences between the two methods. Communicative translation addresses itself solely to the second reader, who does not anticipate difficulties or obscurities, and
would expect a generous transfer of foreign elements into his own culture as well as his language where necessary. But even here the translator still has to respect and work on the form of the source language text as the only material basis for his work. Semantic translation remains within the original culture and assists the reader only in its 言外之意，涵意connotations if they constitute组/构/形成；设立，建立，任命the essential human (non-ethnic种族的，民族的，部落的) message of the text. One basic difference between the two methods is that where there is a conflict, the communicative must emphasize the "force" rather than the content of the message. Thus for Bissige Hund or Chien mechant, the communicative translation Beware of the dog! Is mandatory命令的；义务的，强制的; the semantic translations ("dog that bite", "savage dog") would be more informative but less effective. Generally, a communicative translation is likely to be smoother, simpler, clearer, more direct, more conventional依照惯例的，符合习俗的，因循守旧的；常规的, conforming to a particular register语域（在特定社交场合或专业领域中人们使用的词汇﹑语法等的范围）of language, tending to （与名）在……下面/之下；级别低于，隶属于（与形、动）不足under-translate, i.e.即，换而言之，也就是To use more generic类的，属的；一般的，通用的,
hold-all terms in difficult passages. A semantic translation tends to be more complex, more awkward不灵活的，笨拙的, more detailed, more concentrated, and pursues the thought-processes 思考过程rather than the intention of the transmitter传送/递者；传输者；传播者；发射机，发射台. It tends to over-translate, to be more specific than the original, to include more meanings in its search for one nuance意义上的细微差别of meaning. However, in communicative as in semantic translation, provided that equivalent-effect in secured, the literal word-for-word translation is not only the best, it is the only valid method of translation. There is no excuse for unnecessary "同义词synonyms", let alone v.&n.释义，意译，改述paraphrases, in any type of translation.
Conversely相反地, both semantic and communicative translation comply with遵照，服从the usually accepted syntactic造句法的，句子结构的equivalents (Vinay and Darbelnet's "transpositions") for the two languages in question
正在谈论的. Thus, by both methods, a sentence such as "II traversa la Manche en nageant" would normally be translated as "He swam across the Channel". In semantic, but not communicative translation, any deviation背离，偏离；偏差；离题from SL 文体规范stylistic norms规范，标准would be
reflected in an equally wide deviation from the TL norms, but where such norms clash, the deviations are not easy to formulate 构想出，规划；系统地阐述，确切地表达, and the translator has to show a certain tension between the writer's manner and the
强迫，强制；冲动，欲望compulsions of the target language. Thus when the writer uses long complex sentences in a language where the sentence in a "literary" (carefully worked) style is usually complex and longer than in the TL, the translator may reduce the sentences somewhat, compromising between the norms of the two languages and the writer. If in doubt, however, he should trust the writer, not the "language", which is a sum of abstractions抽象的总和. A semantic translation is concrete. Thus when faced with:
此处略去一段法语。
The translator has to cling to words, 排列，配置；组合，搭配collocations, structures, emphases（emphasis的复数）强调，重点:
"The utilitarian功利的，实用的point of view is as alien and inappropriate as it possibly could be precisely to such an intense eruption爆发of supreme rank-classifying, rank-discriminating value-judgements: here in fact feeling has reached the antithesis 对立，相反；对句，对偶of the low degree of fervour（fervor）
热情，热诚，热烈presumed in every type of calculating深谋远虑的，精明的；算计的，攻于心计的；计算的cleverness, every assessment of utility." (My version.)
Thus a translation is always closer to the original than any intralingual舌的，语言的rendering or paraphrase misnamed "translation" by George Steiner(1975), and therefore it is an indispensable不可缺少的，必需的tool for a semantician （semanticist）语义学学者，精通语义学的人and now a philosopher. Communicative and semantic translation may well coincide同时发生；相符，一致---in particular尤其，特别, where the text conveys a general rather than a culturally (世俗的，现世的，尘世的；短暂的，暂时的temporally and 空间的，与空间有关的spatially) bound形成……的界线，限制message有文化限制的信息and where the matter is as important as the manner---notably then in the translation of the most important religious, philosophical, artistic and scientific texts, assuming second readers as informed and interested as the first. Further, there are often sections in one text that must be translated communicatively (e.g.non-lieu---"nonsuit驳回"), and others semantically (e.g. A quotation from a speech). There is no one communicative nor one semantic method of translating a
text---these are in fact widely v.重叠，把……叠在一起；与……
部分一致n.重叠的部分overlapping 一队/伙/组/群/帮bands of methods. A translation can be more, or less, semantic---more, or less, communicative---even a particular section or sentence can be treated more communicatively or less semantically. Thus in some passages, Q.Hoare and G. Nowell Smith (1971) state that: "We feel it preferable更可取的，更好的，更合意的to choose fidelity忠诚，忠实；精确over good English, despite its awkwardness, in view of鉴于，考虑到the importance of some concepts in Gramsci's work." Each method has a common basis in analytical or cognitive translation which is built up both proposition观点，见解，主张；提议，建议；定理，命题by proposition and word by word, denoting表示，是……的标志，意味着；指的是，意思是the empirical factual事实的，真实的，确凿的knowledge of the text, but finally respecting the convention习俗，惯例；公约，协议；会议，大会of the target language provide that the thought-content of the text has been reproduced. The translation emerges in such a way that the exact meaning or function of the words only become apparent as they are used. The translator may have to make interim暂时的，临时的；间歇的，过渡期间的decisions without being able at the time to visualize the relation of the words with the end product. Communicative and semantic translation bifurcate分成两支，分
叉at a later stage of analytical or cognitive translation which is a 在前，先于，预先pre-translation procedure which may be performed on the source-language text to convert it into the source or the target language---the reluctant versions will be closer to each other than the original text and the final translation.
In principle, cognitive translation 使互换位置transposes the SL text grammatically to plain "animate活的，有生命的；有活力的，有生气的subject+verb+non-animate object" 条款；从句，分句clauses, or, in the extended version, to sequences of: "an agent (subject) does (active verb) something (direct object
直接宾语) to or for someone (indirect object) with something (instrumental) somewhere (locative表示位置的) "sometime (temporal) to make something (resultant作为结果的，因而发生的)"---additionally, an agent/object may be in a variety of relationships with another agent/object (possessive占有欲强的，不愿与人分享的；表示所属关系的词, equative同义词, dependency属国，属地；依赖性, source, partitive表示部分的（e.g. some,any), genitive属格，所有格, characteristic, etc.)---(relationships often covered or concealed by the English preposition介词"of"), which must be spelt out in a clause. Thus the grammatical meaning of the SL text becomes explicit.
Further, cognitive translation splits up断绝关系，离婚；裂开，分裂the word-class a.同其他事物演变的；非独创的n.衍生词，派生词derivatives, i.e. 副词adverbs
(=preposition+adjective+noun), adjectival形容词的nouns (e.g. "whiteness"), qualifying限制的，限定的prefix-verb-nouns (e.g. "contribution"), noun-verbs (e.g. "to ration"),
noun-adjective-verb-nouns (e.g. "rationalization"), etc., into their 组成部分，成分，零部件components and 详细解说explicates the relations of all multiple同许多部分组成的，复合的，多样的，多重的noun compounds (e.g. "data acquisition 数据采集control system": system to control the acquiring of data). Further, it replaces figurative比喻的，借喻的and colloquial口语的，会话的language, idioms and 成语的，词语的phrasal verbs短语动词with 表示的，指示的denotative terms; clears up清理；澄清；放晴；解决lexical and grammatical ambiguities模棱两可，含糊不清; 加入（额外的事），窜改；插入（话、文字）interpolates relevant encyclopedic 广博的，知识渊博的；百科全书的information for ecological 生态的，生态学的, cultural and institutional制度的；学会的，协会的terms; replaces 代词pronouns with nouns and identifies referential参考的，参照的；指示的synonyms参照代名词; reduces cultural terms to their functional definitions;
and analyses the semantic语义的features of any words that are likely to be split into two or three words when translated. Thus as far as is possible (the process is artificial) the text is removed from its natural cultural and linguistic axis轴，坐标轴，中心线，基准线to an artificial neutral universal plane飞机；平面of language.
Nida in his admirable analysis令人钦佩的分析of grammatical meaning (1917a, pp.47-49) approaches cognitive translation somewhat differently, preferring to split surface structures into separate 含蓄的，潜在的；基本的，根本的；在下面的underlying (previously concealed) sentences. Thus he analyses: "their former director thought their journey was a deception" into: (a) he directed them formerly, (b) he though X (the entire following expression), (c) they journeyed, (d) they deceived Y (without specifying who Y is), adding an analysis of the relationship between (c) and (d)---e.g. means-result: by journeying they deceived", means-purpose (they journeyed in order to deceive), n.添加剂a.附加的additive events (they journeyed and they deceived).
For cognitive translation, I think: "The man who used to be their director (to direct them) thought they had travelled to deceive (by travelling they had deceived, they had traveled and
deceived)" is adequate. Another (more likely?) alternative missed by Nida must be added: "The man who used to be their director thought they had merely pretended to travel, in order to deceive others." (Most verbal nouns名词化的动名词may be active or passive消极的，被动的；冷淡的，不主动的in meaning.)
It is not usually necessary to make a full cognitive translation, a procedure similar to Brislin's (1976) "decentring消解中心化". Where the cultures of two languages have been in contact for centuries, the translator normally resorts to cognitive translation only for obscure, ambiguous or complex passages. A cognitive translation may serve as a tertium comparationis between texts with distant cultures and radically different language structures. Where cognitive translation results in a poorly written and/or repetitive text, communicative translation requires a bold attempt to clarify and reorganize it. A text such as the following would require considerable rewriting before it is translated: "If industrialists are so keen for Britain to join why does not the Government make it possible for those who want to get into Europe without the sacrifice to British sovereignty...which must be the inevitable result of our joining if we are to rely on M. Debre's words recently that the Common Market is unworkable
without the Treaty of Rome.
Proposed rewrite:
"As industrialists are so keen, why does not the Government make it possible for Britain to get into Europe without sacrificing her sovereignty? According to M. Debre's recent statement, this would first require amendments to the treaty of Rome, which is the legal instrument法律文书governing the Common Market共同市场."
I am assuming that whilst a semantic translation is always inferior to it original, since it involves loss of meaning, a communicative translation may be better, since it may gain in force有效，生效，实施中；大批，大量and clarity清楚，明晰what it loses in semantic content. In communicative translation the translator is trying in his own language to write a little better than the original, unless he is reproducing the
well-established formulae配方；公式；套话，固定的说法，惯用语句of notices or correspondence. I assume that in communicative translation one has the right to correct or improve the logic; to replace clumsy with elegant, or at least functional, syntactic structures; to remove obscurities; to eliminate消除，清除，根除；淘汰repetition重复，反复and tautology重复，赘述; to exclude把某人排除在外，把某物排
斥在外；防止进入/参加；不包括the less likely interpretations of an ambiguity; to modify and clarify jargon术语，行话(i.e. Reduce loose 属的，类的；一般的，总称的generic terms通用条款/词组/术语/说法to rather more concrete components), and to normalize使标准/正常/常态化怪诞，古怪，怪异bizarreries of idiolect个人言语特点，个人习语, i.e. wayward 任性的，倔强的，刚愎的；反复无常的uses of language. Further, one has the right to correct mistakes of fact and 滑倒，失足；小错误，小疏忽slips, normally stating what one has done in a footnote注脚，注释. (All such corrections and improvements are usually inadmissible不允许的，不许可的；不可接受的；不能承认的in semantic translation.)
In theory a communicative translation is ipso facto a subjective procedure, since it is intended primarily to achieve a certain effect on its readers' minds, which effect could only be verified 证实，核对，证明by a survey of their mental and/or physical reactions. In fact, it is initially as constrained by the form, the structures and words of the original as a semantic translation (the pre-translation process) until the version is gradually skewed偏的，歪斜的；歪曲的，曲解的to the reader's point of view.（逐渐朝着读者的观点倾斜）Then the translator starts to ask himself whether his version is "happy", i.e. a successful
"act", rather than whether it is true, i.e. an exact statement (cf. Austin, 1962). He begins to extend the unit of translation, having secured the referential basis参照依据, i.e. the truth of the information; he views words and phrases in expanding waves in their linguistic context语言语境, restructuring and rearranging clauses, reinforcing emphases. Nevertheless, each lexical and grammatical unit has to remain 看作，视为accounted for---that is his Antaean link with the text.
In one sense（=in a sense从某种意义上说）, communicative translation, by adapting and making the thought and cultural content of the original more accessible to the reader, gives semantic translation another dimension任何一种量度；面积，体积，程度，范围. The Leipzig School, notably Neubert and Kade, have referred to（谈到，提到；查阅；涉及，关于，有关；提交给……处理this as the "pragmatic实际的，务实的；实用主义的" element, but I think this is a little misleading易引起误解的，易使人产生错觉的. To begin with, peirce and notably显著地，明显地；著名地；尤其，特别Morris defined "pragmatics语用学，语言实用学" as the branch of semiotics
符号学that deals with the relation between signs or linguistic expressions and their users (传播/输者；传送/达者）(transmitters and receptors). Communicative translation, however, is
Chapter 2 Peter Newmark Semantic and Communicative Translation Guided Reading Peter Newmark (1916) is an accomplished translation scholar as well as an experienced translator. He has translated a number of books and articles and published extaensively on translation. His publications on translation include Approaches to Translation (1981), About Translation(1983), Paragraphs on Translation段落翻译(1985), A Textbook of Translation翻译教程(1988), and More Paragraphs on Translation(1993). In his work Approaches to Translation, Newmark proposes two types of translation: semantic translation语义翻译and communicative translation交际翻译. Semantic translation focuses primarily upon the semantic content of the source text whereas communicative translation focuses essentially upon the comprehension and response of receptors. This distinction results from his disapproval of Nida's assumption假定，假设，设想；假装；承担，担任that all translating is communicating, and the overriding最主要的，最优先的principle of any translation is to achieve "equivalent effect". For Newmark, the success of equivalent effect is "illusory", and that "the conflict
严复,中国介绍近代思想的第一人，翻译“第一国手” 信、达、雅——中国传统翻译思想的纲领:信“Faithfulness”——忠实原文,达“Expressiveness”——语言通顺畅达,雅“Elegance”——文字古雅.信为本，雅为表，达是两者的纽带 林纾翻译理论： 1、“存旨”论：“神会、步境、怡神”; 2、“文心”论：要讲究“文之枢纽”文章的“纲领”文章的“开场、伏脉、接笋、结穴”; 3、“支点”论：在翻译某个作家的作品的时候，总是努力在中国古代文学中寻找与之对应的作家; 4、“足音”论：虽不审西文，然日闻其口译，却能区别其文章之流派，如辨家人只足音。 近代西学翻译思想 （1）明末清初的科技翻译高潮 代表人物：徐光启，李之藻 翻译特点：翻译方式为外国人主译，华士润色；或中外合译；少见国人主译之书籍 （2）清末民初的西学翻译高潮 A. 洋务时期的翻译贡献：科学技术术语的统一 B.维新时期的翻译贡献：①译名的统一;②东学西渐 代表人物：马建忠梁启超严复林纾 马建忠：杰出的语言学家，著名的翻译家和翻译评论家，早期资产阶级维新思想家，著有《马氏文通》 贡献：“善译”说 梁启超：近代资产阶级维新思想家，著名史学家，被中国学术界奉为“鸿儒” 他的翻译思想：A “翻译强国”思想译书三义：择当译之本，定公译之例，养能译之才; B “翻译文体革命思想”：提倡“通俗语体”; C翻译小说理论的影响 D 翻译文学与佛典的关系,科学地提出了佛经翻译的三个时期 瞿秋白：佛经的翻译是中国第一次用自己最简单的言语去翻译印度日耳曼族之中最复杂的一种言语——梵文。 事实上开创了白话的运用。 胡适：开创一种文学新体；解放了最缺乏想象力的中国古文学；中国浪漫主义文学受其影响；佛经往往带着小说或戏曲的形成。 The features of traditional Chinese translation theories (1)The Confucianism(儒学) is obvious (2) It puts emphasis on practice skills (3)It closely relates with classical Chinese esthetics “五四”新文学时期的翻译思想: ⑴关于“直译与意译”; ⑵关于“信与顺”; ⑶关于“形似与神似”. 鲁迅的“易解，丰姿”双标准论，即“凡是翻译，必须兼顾两个方面，一则求其易解，一则保存原作的丰姿”，和“翻译与创作并重”的思想。瞿秋白的“绝对正确，绝对白话”和“信顺统一”的思想，郭沫若的“创作论”的翻译思想。成仿吾的“批评的建设”和“建设的批评”的文艺翻译批评思想即诗歌翻译思想。 中国传统译论的特点: （1）、以中和为美 ,讲求和谐; （2）、尚化实为虚 ,讲求含蓄; （3）、重感性体悟 ,讲求综合 鲁迅主要理论贡献: 1. “易解、丰姿”双标准论, “移情、益智”双功能说; 2.“宁信而不顺”的翻译思想; 3.“重译”和“复译”的思想; 4.翻译批评：“剜烂苹果”的思想; 5.“翻译应与创作并重”的思想. 《狂人日记》——文学史上的第一篇真正意义的白话小说。 瞿秋白翻译思想: 1 、关于大众化原则“绝对正确，绝对白话”的思想; 2、关于翻译与中国现代语言建设的思想郭沫若翻译理论和思想:整个翻译思想的灵魂--创作论. 1、翻译家不是鹦鹉名士; 2、好的翻译等于创作; 3、风韵译; 4、共鸣说; 5、生活体验论; 6、译文同样应该是一件艺术品 成仿吾翻译理论和思想: 1. 文艺批评：翻译批评思想; 2. 诗歌翻译理论与思想; 3. 马克思主义著作翻译：“准确性、鲜明性、生动性 “顺”派
英语翻译学论文-彼得.纽马克的翻译理论初探 一、引言 彼得·纽马克(Peter Newmark),1916年出生,英国著名的翻译理论家和翻译教育家。纽马克认为翻译既是一门科学,也是一门艺术[1]。说它是科学,因为翻译是严谨的、一丝不苟的,具有很严格的标准,比如一些科技术语、成语、度量单位或部分社交用语已经有了特定的翻译模式;翻译又是艺术,因为在很多场合要求译者进行选择判断,不能墨守陈规,否则只能反映表层意思,触及不到深层的含义。 纽马克在分析和总结各家各派翻译理论的基础上,将文体论、话语分析、符号学、格语法的理论、功能语法和跨文化交际理论应用于翻译理论和研究,对于翻译理论、翻译教学、翻译语言学以及翻译技巧都进行了精辟的论述。1981年,在《翻译问题探索》(Approaches to Translation,1981)中,纽马克提出了"语义翻译"(Semantic Translation)和"交际翻译"(Communicative Translation)[1]两个重要的翻译策略,成为西方翻译研究史上的里程碑。尽管已经年已耄耋,纽马克仍然笔耕不辍,不断发表学术成果。20世纪90年代他又提出"关联翻译法",进一步完善了他的翻译理论。下面本文将就纽马克的主要译论观点进行初步探析,以求对纽马克的翻译理论做更深层次的理解,并将相关翻译标准应用到英汉、汉英翻译中去。 二、文本功能及其分类 纽马克认为,翻译活动即是对文本的翻译,研究翻译不能离开文本。在修正布勒(Buhler)、雅各布森(Jakobson)功能模式的语言理论基础上,根据不同的内容和文体,纽马克提出了一套自己的文本功能及其分类。他将文本分为表达功能(expressive function)、信息功能(informative function)和号召功能(vocativefunction)。 (一)表达功能(expressive function) 表达功能的核心是讲话人、作者。语言表达功能的核心在于讲话人或作者运用这些话语表情达意,不去考虑读者的反应。纽马克认为,从翻译的目的看,典型的表达型文本有:1、严肃的文学作品,包括抒情诗、短篇小说、长篇小说、戏剧等;2、权威性言论,主要有政治人物的政治演说及文件等,法律法规文献,公认的权威人物撰写的科学、哲学和学术著作。这些文本的权威性来自其作者的地位或可靠性以及他们的语言能力。虽然这样的文本大多不具有言外之意,但往往带有其作者个人特征的"印记";3、自传、散文及个人信函。当这些文本是作者个人情感的一种宣泄,当读者背景模糊时,便属于表达型文本。 在翻译表达型文本时,要遵循"作者第一"的原则。以原作者为核心,既要忠实原作者表达的思想内容,又要忠实原作者的语言风格。在这类文本的翻译中,译者不仅不容许对原文进行修饰和修正,而且必须尽可能以词、短语和分句作为基本翻译单位。 (二)信息功能(informative function) 语言信息功能的核心是外在的语境、话题的事实或语言之外的因素等。典型的信息型文本涉及百科知识,其形式往往非常标准化,如教材、技术报告、报纸或杂志文章、学术论文、备忘录或会议记录等。信息型文本由于强调"真实性",通常用不带个人特色的现代语言写成。因此,在翻译信息型文本时,应遵循"真实性第一"的原则。译者在语言应用上,可以不以原作为标准,而以读者的语言层次为标准,力求通顺易懂,必要时还可以对原文进行修正。与表达型文本相比,译者有更大的自由度,比如当原文表达含糊、混乱或不确切时,译者有责任进行修改,以对目的语读者负责。鉴于此,翻译信息型文本为主的对外交流材料时,可以不受原文结构的束缚,打乱原文的叙述顺序,采用自由的方式,以原文信息加以充实。这种场合,由于许多信息资料通过翻译得以进一步整理,有时译者翻译的文本反而好于原文[3]。 (三)号召功能(vocative function)
西方翻译理论简介 中西译论因其不同的哲学思想、价值观念和语言文化习惯形成了彼此相异的译论体系。西方翻译理论有着严格的方法论、精确的理论描述、细腻和定性定量的分析。战后西方翻译研究更是欣欣向荣，翻译流派异彩纷呈，翻译大家层出不穷，翻译思想、翻译方法、研究角度日新月异。译介和引进当代西方翻译理论的成果，加强中西译论的交流与对话，无疑对创立具有中国特色的翻译研究大有裨益。 正如奈达所说，翻译理论应“兼容并包，利用多种手段来解决翻译中的种种难题”。积极地了解当代西方翻译理论的沿革、现状与发展趋势，打破翻译研究的地域、学科、流派的限制，形成跨学科综合、多元互补的研究格局，汲取一切译论研究成果，这无论对初涉译事的后生或对有相当经验的译者应该说都不无裨益。 西方翻译理论也包括古典译论、现代译论、当代译论，尤其是当代西方翻译理论更是流派林立，如美国翻译培训派：策德内斯：创立培训班的前提、里查兹：翻译的理论基础、庞德：细节翻译理论、威尔：翻译的矛盾；翻译科学派：乔姆斯基：语言的“内在”结构、奈达：翻译中的生成语法、威尔斯：翻译的科学、德国翻译理论的发展趋势；早期翻译研究派：俄国形式主义的影响、利维.米科和波波维奇、霍姆斯、勒非弗尔、布罗克与巴斯奈特；多元体系派：传统语言学和文学界限的瓦解、通加诺夫：文学的演变、佐哈尔：系统内部文学的联系、图里：目标系统；解构主义派：福科：解构原文、海德格尔：重新认识命名、德里达：系统的解构主义理论、解构主义理论的影响、解构与创译。当代西方翻译理论大家包括奈达（三个发展阶段、对等概念、逆转换理论）、卡特福德（翻译的语言学、翻译的界定与分类、翻译等值的条件与可译性）、威尔斯（翻译是一门科学、翻译是交际过程、翻译方法的定义与分类、文本类型与翻译原则）、纽马克（语义结构、翻译原则、文本类型与翻译方法）、斯坦纳（翻译是理解的过程、语言的可译性、翻译的步骤）、巴尔胡达罗夫（翻译的定义及实质、翻译理论的定位、语义与翻译、翻译的层次）、费道罗夫、ｖ.科米萨罗夫的翻译理论、穆南（语言与意义、“世界映象”理论与可译性、意义交流与翻译、可译性与限度）、塞莱丝柯维奇和法国释意理论（释意的基本问题、翻译程序与评价标准、释意理论与翻译教学）。另外当代西方翻译理论也典型地体现在后殖民主义与女性主义及其它以“解构为方法论”，以及以对“权力话语”的关注为重点的各种翻译理论，代表性的译论家有西门、巴巴拉.哥达德、凯特.米勒特、艾德里安.里奇、玛丽.艾尔曼、桑德拉.吉尔伯特、苏桑.格巴与埃莱娜.西苏、罗宾逊、巴斯奈特、特里弗蒂、韦努蒂、尼南贾纳、斯皮瓦克、霍米.巴巴、根茨乐、玛丽亚.提莫志克、本雅明、德里达、保尔.德曼、欧阳桢、Luise Von Flotow, Denison Norman, Graham Joseph F, Van Gorp Hendrik, Asad Talal, Brisset Annie, De Lotbinière-Harwood Susanne, Cheyfitz Eric, Chamberlain Lori, Spivack Gayatri Chakravorty, Niranjana Tejaswini, Mehrez Samia, Jacquemond Richard, Rafael Vicente L., Williams Patrick, Laura Chrisman, Vieira Else Ribeiro Pires, Sengupta Mahasweta, Lambert José, Franco Aixelā J avi er, Von Flotow Luise, Kathleen Davis. 李文革在《西方翻译理论流派研究》中将西方的翻译理论划分为三个阶段:语言学阶段、结构主义阶段和解构主义阶段，比较简洁地概括了西方译论的整体发展历程。与此同时，他又从类型上对翻译的文艺学派语言学派、翻译研究学派、翻译阐释学派、翻译的解构主义学派，美国翻译培训班学派、法国释意理论派等八个派别进行了逐一论证，分析和研究。具体来说，西方翻译的文艺学派包括：20世纪以前西方翻译的文艺学派，如俄国翻译的文艺学派、前苏联翻译的文艺学派，以及20世纪西方翻译的文艺学派。 翻译的语言学派包括布拉格学派与雅可布逊、伦敦学派与卡特福德和纽马克、美国结构学派与奎因、交际理论与奈达和威尔斯、德国功能派与诺德、前苏联的语言学派与费道罗可和巴尔胡达罗夫。翻译研究学派则包括早期翻译研究学派与霍姆斯、多元系统学派与埃文——佐哈尔、描写学派与图里、文化学派与勒弗维尔和巴斯奈特、综合学派与斯奈尔——霍恩比、女权主义、“食人主义”和后殖民主义翻译研究。翻译的阐释学派包括两种翻译途径与施莱尔马赫、阐释学翻译模式与斯坦纳、阐释学理解观与海德格尔和伽达默尔。翻译的解构主义流派包括“异延”解构主义翻译思想与德里夫、“纯语言”的解构主义翻译思想与本亚明、解构主义翻译策略与韦努蒂。美国翻译培训班学派包括翻译培训班的理论基础与理查兹、细节翻译理论与庞德、翻译的矛盾观与威尔。法国释意理论派则包括释意理论的基本问题、翻译程序与翻译评价标准、释意理论与翻译教学 西方翻译理论的渊源表现在三大模式探究，两千多年的西方翻译理论研究史是霍拉斯等人开创的。霍拉斯(Horace)拒绝绝对的忠实和对等。西塞罗(Cicero)认为译者“不应以僵化的理念为原则来指导翻译中的模仿”。杰罗姆(Jerome)代替了意义“独尊的”单元翻译观，进入了西方古典译论的鼎盛时期。施莱尔马赫(Schleiermacher)所创立的诠释派对意义求本溯源，反对对<圣经>的神权论教条主义解释。 研究西方翻译理论就应该研究它的梗概、变迁和发展，并从历史的角度对西方翻译史研究的意义和价值陈述了自己意见，既吸收当代国内外的有关研究成果，力求突出重点，对西方翻译领域各历史时期尤其是对20世纪以来领域的代表人物、代表译作、思想流派以及重要历史事件等加以叙述与评论，对翻译实践和翻译理论相互间的促进、演变和发展过程，作了深入浅出的剖析和讨论，对于翻译思想和理论发展的性质及方向，又阐述了自己的基本认识和见解
2008 年6 月 第10 卷/ 第6 期/ 河北师范大学学报/ 教育科学版/ JOURNAL OF HEBEI NORMAL UNIVERSITY/ Educational Science Edition/ J un. 2008 Vol. 10 No. 6 收稿日期:2008 - 02 - 16 作者简介:陈凯(1978 - ) , 女, 河北保定人, 助教, 研究方向为翻译理论与实践; 张建辉(1980 - ) , 男, 河北保定人,助教, 研究方向为翻译理论与实践。 彼得·纽马克翻译理论浅析 陈凯, 张建辉 (保定学院, 河北保定071000) 摘要:彼得·纽马克撰写了多部翻译理论著作,将翻译文本类型进行分类,提出了语义翻译、交际翻译 的概念,同时他对自己的理论进行了进一步扩充———提出了关联翻译法,为国内外译界提供了很好的指导, 为繁荣译论做出了重大贡献。 关键词:彼得·纽马克;翻译理论 中图分类号: H 059 文献标识码:A 文章编号:1009 - 413X(2008) 06 - 0142 - 03 彼得·纽马克,英国当代翻译家、翻译理论家, 其翻译理论简明扼要,短小精悍,与奈达的卷帙浩繁 相得益彰。和奈达一样,纽马克运用现代语言学来 分析和解决具体的翻译问题。他认为译论“源于比 较语言学,在语言学的范畴内,主要涉及语义学;所 有语义学的问题都与翻译理论有关”,同时,他承认 语言的平等性和可译性,认为翻译既是科学,也是艺 术和技巧,针对不同种类的文本,译者要采用不同的 翻译方法,力图使译作对译文读者产生的效果应尽 量等同于原作对原文读者产生的效果[1 ] 。下面本文 将就其主要的译论观点进行简析,以求对纽马克的 翻译理论有个更深层次的了解。 一、文本类型分类 在纽马克看来,翻译就是文本的翻译,研究翻译 不能离开文本。因此,纽马克根据Buhler 的语言功 能理论将所有的文本划分为三大范畴:表达型文本、 信息型文本和号召型文本。 (一) 表达型文本 在表达型文本中,如文学作品、私人信件、自传 和散文等,其核心思想是表情达意,作者独特的语言 形式和内容应同等重要。因此,这样的文本强调原 作者的权威,不会去考虑读者的反应。典型的表达 型文本包括:1. 严肃的文学作品,包括抒情诗、长篇 小说、短篇小说、戏剧等;2. 权威性言论,包括国家政
中国翻译史及重要翻译家 08英本1 杨慧颖 NO.35 中国翻译史上有许多为人们所熟知的大家，现就其翻译观点和主要作品做一简介： 严复 是中国近代翻译史上学贯中西、划时代意义的翻译家，也是我国首创完整翻译标准的先驱者。严复吸收了中国古代佛经翻译思想的精髓，并结合自己的翻译实践经验，在《天演论》译例言里鲜明地提出了“信、达、雅”的翻译原则和标准。“信”（faithfulness）是指忠实准确地传达原文的内容；“达”（expressiveness）指译文通顺流畅；“雅”（elegance）可解为译文有文才，文字典雅。这条[1]著名的“三字经”对后世的翻译理论和实践的影响很大，20世纪的中国译者几乎没有不受这三个字影响的。 主要翻译作品： 《救亡决论》，《直报》，1895年 《天演论》，赫胥黎，1896年～1898年 《原富》（即《国富论》），亚当·斯密，1901年 《群学肄言》，斯宾塞，1903年 《群己权界论》，约翰·穆勒，1903年 《穆勒名学》，约翰·穆勒，1903年 《社会通诠》，甄克斯，1903年 《法意》（即《论法的精神》），孟德斯鸠，1904年～1909年 《名学浅说》，耶方斯，1909年 鲁迅 鲁迅翻译观的变化,从早期跟随晚清风尚以意译为主,到后期追求直译、反对归化。鲁迅的翻译思想主要是围绕"信"和"顺"问题展开的。他"宁信而不顺"的硬译观在我国文坛上曾经引发过极大的争议。 鲁迅先生说过:凡是翻译,必须兼顾两面,一则当然力求其易解,一则是保存着原作的丰姿。从实质上来讲,就是要使原文的内容、风格、笔锋、韵味在译文中得以再现。翻译涉及原语(source language)与译语(target language) 两种语言及其文化背景等各方面的知识,有时非常复杂。所以,译者要想收到理想的翻译效果,常常需要字斟句酌,反复推敲,仅仅懂得一些基本技巧知识是不够的,必须广泛涉猎不同文化间的 差异,必须在两种语言上下工夫,乃至独具匠心。
Chapter 2纽马克的翻译理论 一、纽马克翻译理论的类型 纽马克把翻译分为四类 1、交际翻译 翻译交际中，目标文本所产生的效果应力求接近源文本； 2、语义翻译 语义翻译中目标文本应在目标语的语义和句法结构允许的情况下尽可能准确地再现原文的语境含义； 3、直译 在直译中原文本的基本意义被译过来目标文本虽合乎目标语的句法结构，但意思是孤立的，没有考虑源语用词的语境因素； 4、死译 在死译中，源文本所有词语的基本意思得到了翻译，但目标文本既不考虑源语用词的语境因素，句法也不合乎目标语要求就连词序也是按照源语文本排列的。 二、纽马克根据语言的三大功能 表达功能（expressive function） 传信功能（informative function） 召唤功能（vocative function） 分析了各种不同类型的作品。他认为各类作品的功能的侧重点不同, 应采取不同的翻译方法。有一些作品, 重点放在原文的语义内容上, 应采取“语义翻译”（semantic translation)的方法, 译文要尽可能接近
于原文的语言形式, 以保持其语义内容, 有一些作品, 重点放在读者的理解和反应上, 应采取“交流翻译”的方法, 译文更倾向于译入语的语言形式, 使读者更容易接受和理解。纽马克对“交流翻译”的定义是： “交流翻译试图用这样一种方式正 确地传达原作的文中意义, 使其内容与语言都可以很容易地为读者所接受和理解。”（communicative translation attempts to render the original in such a way that both content and language are readily acceptable and comprehensible to the readership) 这种翻译可以摆脱原文语言形式的束缚, 更好地发挥译文语言的优势, 使译文流畅、自然、简洁、明了, 更容易为读者所接受和理解, 这样的译文必然会受到广大读者的欢迎, 用严复的话说, 就可以“言之有文,行之弥远”, 合乎“雅”的要求了。 纽马克谈理论, 最重视与实践的结合。他说“任何理论如果不是产生于翻译实践中的间题, 那就毫无意义, 毫无生命力。”所以, 我们有必要通过翻译实践中的实例来 证实这三家理论的一致性。试举例如下: eg.1 If she did, she need not coin her smiles so lavishly; flash her glances so unremittingly; manufacturing airs so elaborate graces so multitudinous. 译1,如果她真做了, 她就不需要这样浪费地铸造她的微笑, 这样不懈
Chapter 2纽马克的翻译理论 Chapter 2纽马克的翻译理论一、纽马克翻译理论的类型 纽马克把翻译分为四类 1、交际翻译 翻译交际中，目标文本所产生的效果应力求接近源文本; 2、语义翻译 语义翻译中目标文本应在目标语的语义和句法结构允许的情况下尽可能准确地再现原文的语境含义; 3、直译 在直译中原文本的基本意义被译过来目标文本虽合乎目标语的句法结构，但意思是孤立的，没有考虑源语用词的语境因素; 4、死译 在死译中，源文本所有词语的基本意思得到了翻译，但目标文本既不考虑源语用词的语境因素，句法也不合乎目标语要求就连词序也是按照源语文本排列的。 二、纽马克根据语言的三大功能 表达功能(expressive function) 传信功能(informative function) 召唤功能(vocative function) 分析了各种不同类型的作品。他认为各类作品的功能的侧重点不同, 应采取不同的翻译方法。有一些作品, 重点放在原文的语义内容上, 应采取“ 语义翻译”(semantic translation)的方法, 译文要尽可能接近 于原文的语言形式, 以保持其语义内容, 有一些作品, 重点放在读者 的理解和反应上, 应采取“交流翻译”的方法, 译文更倾向于译入语 的语言形式, 使读者更容易接受和理解。纽马克对“ 交流翻译”的 定义是:
“交流翻译试图用这样一种方式正 确地传达原作的文中意义, 使其内容与语言都可以很容易地为读者 所接受和理解。”(communicative translation attempts to render the original in such a way that both content and language are readily acceptable and comprehensible to the readership) 这种翻译可以摆脱原文语言形式的束缚, 更好地发挥译文语言的优 势, 使译文流畅、自然、简洁、明了, 更容易为读者所接受和理解, 这样的译文必然会受到广大读者的欢迎, 用严复的话说, 就可以“ 言 之有文,行之弥远” , 合乎“ 雅”的要求了。 纽马克谈理论, 最重视与实践的结合。他说“ 任何理论如果不是产 生于翻译实践中的间题, 那就毫无意义, 毫无生命力。” 所以, 我们 有必要通过翻译实践中的实例来 证实这三家理论的一致性。试举例如下: eg.1 If she did, she need not coin her smiles so lavishly; flash her glances so unremittingly; manufacturing airs so elaborate graces so multitudinous. 译1,如果她真做了, 她就不需要这样浪费地铸造她的微笑, 这样不懈 地闪耀她的眼光, 制造这样精致的气派, 这样众多的文雅。 译2,如果她当真爱他的话, 她就用不着这样过分地装出笑容, 不断地送她的媚眼,费尽心计装腔作势, 摆出许多文雅的姿态。 译3,如果她当真爱他的话, 她就根本用不着这样满面堆笑, 滥送秋波, 煞费苦心地故作姿态, 装出许多斯文模样。 从以上例子, 我们可以看出
中国翻译理论浅说 —近代中国八大翻译家 1.严复的“信达雅” 2.鲁迅的直译 3.林语堂的美学 4.郭沫若的创作论 5.朱光潜的艺术论 6.傅雷的神似 7.钱钟书的化境 8.许渊冲的竞赛论 1 严复 信达雅（faithfulness, expressiveness, elegance） 2 鲁迅 宁信而不顺（Rather be faithful than smooth.） ?Lu has translated & introduced 200 works by 100 authors from 14 countries, half of which are in Russian. ?The first period:（1903---1919） ?While he was in Japan.in 1903年凡尔纳的著名科幻小说《月界旅行》和雨果的《随见录》中的《哀尘》以及编译的《斯巴达之魂》。 ?In 1907,《红星佚史》cooperated with Zhouzuoren. ?In 1909,《域外小说集》 ?“以直译为主，以意译为辅”与“以信为主，以顺为辅”的思想 ?鲁迅先生主张翻译“以直译为主，以意译为辅”与“以信为主，以顺为辅”。反对顺而不信。鲁迅所主张的“宁信而不顺”中的“不顺”，就是在翻译时，“不但在输入新的内容，也在输入新的表现法”，而“其中一部分，将从不顺而成为顺，有一部分，则因为到底不顺而被淘汰，被踢开。” ?鲁迅在20世纪30年代就提出了异化的翻译理论, ?其实，韦努蒂早在1986年在其发表于Criticism28(Spring)的一篇名为
“TheTranslator’Invisibil时”的论文中已经明确提出了“异化翻译” 的概念(参见Robinson，1997：97)．但这个概念真正产生国际影响是在其名作The Translator’s Invisibility--A History of Translation 于1995年出版之后。另外，补充一点，我国传统译论中虽然没有明确、具体的“异化翻译”概念或提法，但其中并不缺乏“异化翻译”思想。追溯起来，唐玄奘的“五不翻”之说已经有明显的“异化翻译”思想雏形。 玄奘可以说是世界上第一个对“异化翻译”进行归纳和理论总结的入。宋初高僧赞宁的“六例”说(详见王宏印，2003：78—91；陈福康，2000：38--42)，则“大大地推进了玄奘的‘五不翻’理论”(王宏印，2003：80)，可以说，赞宁发展了玄奘的古典“异化翻译”思想。鲁迅的“宁信而不顺” 之说(详见王秉钦：2004：1 10—127)在现代意义上与“异化翻译”理论有诸多类似。概括起来，我国传统译论中的异化翻译思想有如下内涵：1)作为翻译方法，其内容包括a)音译，b)直译，c)保存句法形式；2)作为文化策略，其内容包括a)保证佛典的准确、庄严和神秘，b)丰富汉语语汇，引进新的表达法；c)医治国人“脑筋糊涂”的毛病(即“改造国民性”)；3)作为文化理念，它含有一的文化“精英主义”意识(参看本文注释2)。 ?其实鲁迅的“异化翻译”思想中也含有一定的文化“精英主义”意识，如，他在“关于翻译的通信”(1931)中将中国的译文读者分为三类．并主张对不同的读者要有不同的译文：“甲，有很受了教育的；乙，有略能识字的； 丙，有识字无几的。而其中的丙，则在‘读者’范围之外…… ?至于供给甲类的读者的译本，无论什么，我是主张‘宁信 ?而不顺’的……我还以为即使为乙类读者而译的书，也应 ?该时常加些新的字眼，新的语法在里面，但自然不宜太多，以偶尔遇见，而想一想，或问一问就能懂得为度。必须这样，群众的言语才能丰富起来”。 鲁迅的主张是正确的。但其中还是难免有些文化“精英主义”意识，即异化翻译的读者主要是少数文化精英。这与韦努蒂异化翻译理论中的文化“精英主义”意识有些类似。但韦努蒂比较极端．而鲁迅则灵活、现实得多，因为他完全注意到了“乙类”读者的重要性。
纽马克的翻译理论 Chapter 2 Peter Newmark Semantic and Communicative Translation Guided Reading Peter Newmark (1916) is an accomplished translation scholar as well as an experienced translator. He has translated a number of books and articles and published extaensively on translation. His publications on translation include Approaches to Translation (1981), About Translation(1983), Paragraphs on Translation段 落翻译(1985), A Textbook of Translation翻译教程(1988), and More Paragraphs on Translation(1993). In his work Approaches to Translation, Newmark proposes two types of translation: semantic translation语义翻译 and communicative translation交际翻译. Semantic translation focuses primarily upon the semantic content of the source text whereas communicative translation focuses essentially upon the comprehension and response of receptors. This distinction results from his disapproval of Nida's assumption假定，假设， 设想;假装;承担，担任 that all translating is communicating, and the overriding最主要的，最优先的 principle of any translation is to achieve "equivalent effect". For Newmark, the success of equivalent effect is "illusory", and that "the conflict
中国翻译(理论)史概论 1.翻译的二字由来： 据文字记载，早在周代就有了翻译活动，从事翻译的人员被成为“象胥”/ “象寄”。 从汉代起，“译”逐渐成为了总称。 从东汉起，“翻”字也开始使用。 在南北朝时期，佛经译著中已开始使用“翻译”二字。 2.中国翻译史上重要的四个次时期： 1）. 西汉至隋唐时期的佛经翻译 2）. 明末清初的自然科学翻译 3）. 近代的社会科学和文学翻译（鸦片战争至新中国成立） 4）. 新中国成立后 关于佛经翻译“ 西汉哀帝刘欣时期的《浮屠经》当为我国最早的佛经译本。隋文帝统一中国后，大举兴佛，开启了佛教发展的新高峰，佛经翻译也走入高峰期。唐朝以后，佛教活动逐渐走向平淡，以潜在方式成为中国文化深层结构的一部分，佛经翻译日趋衰落。 北宋译经尚有余响，南宋已将近销声匿迹了。 佛经翻译名家及名论：支谦(三国): 在《法句经序》提出了“文”与“质”两种对立的翻译观，即翻译的文质之争。支谦在理论上提倡“文质并举”，而在实践操作中却遵循“因寻本质，不加文饰”。为早期的直译说。 道安(东晋): 提出“五失本，三不易”之说，主张直译要求“案本而传”，是直译理论的代表。 鸠摩罗什(东晋): 主张“意译”。追求译作有“天然西域之语趣” 玄奘: (唐朝)：“即需求真，又需喻俗”。相当于今天的“忠实，通顺” 明末清初的自然科学翻译： 西方的传教士，翻译了一些天文、数学、机械等自然科学著作，使中国人首次接触到西方科学技术知识，开阔了视野，增长了见识。这一时期翻译活动的代表作首推中外合作翻译的欧几里德的《几何原本》。前六卷最具代表性，影响最大。据不完全统计，耶稣会传教士在华200年间，共翻译西书437种，其中宗教书籍251种，自然科学书籍131种，人文科学55种。： 代表人物：利玛窦（？－1610）意大利传教士，学习过汉语，对中国文化有一定的认识和了解。他外表儒雅，会说中国话，熟知“四书”、“五经”，1583年来中国后，很快为明清之际中西文化交流打开了新的局面。利玛窦与我国近代科学的先驱徐光启合作翻译了《几何原本》前六卷。利玛窦还与另一些近代科学的先驱人物如李之藻、杨廷筠、叶向高等人合作，翻译了一些有关天文、历算和其他自然科学的书籍徐光启（1662——1633）中国近代科学的先驱人物，杰出的爱国科学家和科学文化的领导者，是最早将翻译的范围从宗教扩大到自然科学的翻译家。他认为，科技翻译就是吸取别国多年积累的科技成果，尽快地为我所用，以此壮大自身。
纽马克的翻译理论主要是什么 彼得?纽马克是英国著名的翻译理论家和翻译教育家。纽马克在分析和总结各家各派的翻译思想的基础上，将文体论、话语分析、符号学、格语法的理论、功能语法和跨文化交际理论应用于翻译理论和研究，对于翻译理论、翻译教学、翻译语言学以及翻译技巧都进行了精辟的论述。纽马克翻译理论的核心是语义翻译和交际翻译，这也是其翻译理论中最主要、最有特色的组成部分。他的代表作包括《翻译问题探索》(Approaches to Translation, 1981) 、《翻译教程》(A Text book of Translation, 1988)、《翻译论》(About Translation, 1991)和《翻译短评》(Paragraphs on Translation, 1993)。在《翻译问题探索》一书中，纽马克提出，针对不同的文本类型应当采用不同的翻译方法——语义翻译(semantic tr anslation) 或交际翻译(communicative translation)。根据不同的内容和文体，他将文本分为抒发功能(expressive function)、信息功能(informative function)、呼唤功能(vocative function)、审美功能(aesthetic function)、应酬功能(phatic f unction)和元语言功能(metalingual function)。20世纪90年代他又提出“关联翻译法”，这标志着他的翻译理论渐趋系统。下面本文将就纽马克的主要译论观点进行初步解读,以求对纽马克的翻译理论做更深层次的理解,并将相关翻译标准应用到英汉、汉英翻译中去。一．语言功能与文本类型纽马克认为,翻译活动即是对文本的翻译,研究翻译不能离开文本。在修正布勒(Buhler)、雅各布森(Jakob son)功能模式的语言理论基础上,根据不同的内容和文体,纽马克提出了一套自己的文本功能及其分类。他将文本分为以下六种：(一)表达功能(expressive func tion) 表达功能的核心是讲话人、作者。语言表达功能的核心在于讲话人或作者运用这些话语表情达意,不去考虑读者的反应。纽马克认为,从翻译的目的看,典型的表达型文本有:1、严肃的文学作品,包括抒情诗、短篇小说、长篇小说、戏剧等;2、权威性言论,主要有政治人物的政治演说及文件等,法律法规文献,公认的权威人物撰写的科学、哲学和学术著作。这些文本的权威性来自其作者的地位或可靠性以及他们的语言能力。虽然这样的文本大多不具有言外之意,但往往带有其作者个人特征的"印记";3、自传、散文及个人信函。当这些文本是作者个人情感的一种宣泄,当读者背景模糊时,便属于表达型文本。在翻译表达型文本时,要遵循"作者第一"的原则。以原作者为核心,既要忠实原作者表达的思想内容,又要忠实原作者的语言风格。在这类文本的翻译中,译者不仅不容许对原文进行修饰和
一、佛经翻译时期 安世高——小乘佛经的首译者 安世高（东汉）：西域安息人，太子，博学多识，笃信佛教，弃王位而向佛，游化西域，后旅居中国，通晓汉语，注重修行，译经20多年，多是直译。“义理明晰，辩而不华”，《明度五十校计经》，开后世禅学之源。 支谦——《法句经序》 支谦（三国）：月支人，博览经籍，莫不谙究。世间伎艺，多所综习。遍学异书，通六国语。孙权时（二二二―二五二）拜为博士，辅导太子孙亮。谦以经多梵文，集众本译为汉文行于世。约三十年间，译经八十八部、一百一十八卷。其翻译以大乘“般若性空”为重点。反对译文尚质，主张“曲得圣义，辞旨文雅”，首创“会译”，译文加注也始于他，《法句经序》是中国首篇重要译论。 鸠摩罗什——最著名的佛经翻译大师 鸠摩罗什（六朝），印度人，我国著名佛教学者、佛经翻译家。出家后，通晓大乘经论，后到了中国长安，前后所译的经论，有380多卷。鸠摩罗什倾向于意译，“其文约而诣（畅达），其旨婉而彰”，提出了表现原作文体风格问题，促进了六朝佛学繁荣和隋唐佛教诸宗形成。 释道安——五失本，三不易 释道安（晋代）：著名佛教学者，讲授《般若经》。他不懂梵文，通过同本异译比较研究翻译。他貌丑心慧，“穷览经典，钩深致远”后，对佛经进行注释，凡二十二卷。利于佛教的广泛传播，为后世佛经注释作出范例。还总结出翻译的“五失本，三不易”学说，具有翻译本体论意义。 (一)胡语里边，倒装句很多，翻译时必须要改过来，使之顺从汉语语法，适应中文的结构； (二)胡语的经典文字质朴，而中国人喜好文字华美，翻译时为了适合中国人好文的习惯，在文字上不得不加以润饰，以便流通； (三)胡经原原本本，十分详细，尤其是颂文部分，同一意义往往要反复三、四次，翻译时，对这些重复的句子要加以删略；
Peter Newmark?(1916–2011) was an?English?professor?of?translation?at the?University of Surrey.[1] [edit]Biography He was one of the main figures in the founding of?Translation Studies?in the English-speaking world from the 1980s. Life Nida was born in?Oklahoma City,?Oklahoma?on November 11, 1914. He became a Christian at a young age, when he responded to the altar call at his church “to accept Christ as my Saviour.”[2] He graduated summa cum laude from the?University of California?in 1936. After graduating he attended Camp Wycliffe, where Bible translation theory was taught. He ministered for a short time among the Tarahumara Indians in Chihuahua, Mexico, until health problems due to an inadequate diet and the high altitude forced him to leave. Sometime in this period, Nida became a founding charter member of?Wycliffe Bible Translators, a sister organization of the?Summer Institute of Linguistics. In 1937, Nida undertook studies at the?University of Southern California, where he obtained a Master’s Degree in New Testament Greek in 1939. In that same year, Eugene Nida became interim pastor of Calvary Church of?Santa Ana, California, after the founding pastor resigned in 1939.[3]?In spite of his conservative background, in later years Nida became increasingly ecumenical and New Evangelical in his approach.[4] In 1943, Nida received his Ph.D. in Linguistics from the?University of Michigan, he was ordained as a Baptist minister, and he married Althea Lucille Sprague. The couple remained married until Althea Sprague Nida's death in 1993. In 1997, Nida married Dr. María Elena Fernandez-Miranda, a lawyer and diplomatic attache. Nida retired in the early 1980s, although he kept on giving lectures in universities all around the world, and lived in Madrid, Spain and?Brussels,?Belgium. He died in Madrid on August 25, 2011 aged 96.[5] [edit]Career In 1943, Nida began his career as a?linguist?with the?American Bible Society?(ABS). He was quickly promoted to Associate Secretary for Versions, then worked as Executive Secretary for Translations until his retirement. Nida was instrumental in engineering the joint effort between the?Vatican?and the?United Bible Societies?(UBS) to produce cross-denominational Bibles in translations across the globe. This work began in 1968 and was carried on in accordance with Nida's translation principle of Functional Equivalence. [edit]Theories Nida has been a pioneer in the fields of?translation theory?and?linguistics. His Ph.D. dissertation,?A Synopsis of English Syntax, was the first full-scale analysis of a major language according to the "immediate-constituent" theory. His most notable contribution to translation theory is Dynamic Equivalence, also known as Functional Equivalence. For more information, see "Dynamic and formal equivalence." Nida also developed the "componential-analysis" technique, which split words into their components to help determine equivalence in translation (e.g.