VIEWS ON EQUIVALENCE
MOTTO Do we really know how we translate or what we translate?...Are we to accept “naked ideas” as the means of crossing from one language to another?...Translators know they cross over but do not know by what sort of bridge. They often re-cross by a different bridge to check up again. Sometimes they fall over the parapet into limbo.
https://www.doczj.com/doc/eb14777556.html,/ 岩棉板岩棉管硅酸盐保温涂料硅酸铝https://www.doczj.com/doc/eb14777556.html, https://www.doczj.com/doc/eb14777556.html,
VIEWS ON EQUIVALENCE
translation studies: the contemporary theory of “partial communication”: communication does not transfer the total message the translating process does not transfer the totality of what is in the original
“the ideal of total equivalence is a chimera. Languages are different from each other; they are different in form having distinct codes and rules regulating the construction of grammatical stretches of language and these forms have different meanings.[...]There is no absolute synonymy between words in the same language, so why should anyone be surprised to discover a lack of synonymy between languages?” (Bell, 1991:6)
VIEWS ON EQUIVALENCE
?J.C. Catford (1965):
equivalence= textual interchangeability in a given situation-criticized by K. Reiss and Vermeer (1984): a translation is not interchangeable with its source text in a given situation; source texts and translations operate in different language communities.
“The information they convey may be felt and judged to be equivalent, and the situations they communicate in may be felt to be interculturally comparable (or equivalent), but they are not the same.” (A.L. Jakobsen)
VIEWS ON EQUIVALENCE (CONTINUED)
?S. Bassnett-McGuire (1991):
the interpretation of translation should be based on the comparison of the text’s “function” as original and as a translation.
?Disadvantage:
her use of the term function is so broad that almost any deviation, addition, deletion could be labelled a “functional equivalent.”
it allows the replacement of much of the text, with all its particular resonance and associations, with something new and completely different, but which theoretically affects the reader the same way. (E. Gentzler, 1993:101)
VIEWS ON EQUIVALENCE (CONTINUED)
?Holmes (1974:78):
equivalence= preservation of the sound, the sense, the rhythm, the textual “material” and recreation of those specific sensation-sound, sense and association-despite inherent limitations in the TL (opposed to S. Bassnett-McGuire’s theory)
VIEWS ON EQUIVALENCE (CONTINUED)
?Van den Broeck (1978) :
redefines and recuperates “equivalence” for his own concept of “true understanding” of how one should regard literary translation. (Broeck, 1978:29)
In agreement with Lefevere (1975), Broeck (1978) considers that the original author’s intention and the function of the original text can be determined and translated so that the TT will be equivalent to the ST and function accordingly. A translation can only be complete if and when both the communicative value and the time-place-tradition elements if the ST have been replaced by their nearest possible equivalents in the TT (Lefevere, 1975:102; Broeck, 1978:39).
VIEWS ON EQUIVALENCE (CONTINUED)
?Neubert (1986):
the text has a kind of a “mosaic” quality, an elasticity that allows it to be translated into a variety of “relative” TTs.
introduces the term “translational relativity” in the reconstruction process, allowing for a “creative” process of transfer from the ST to the TT. This relativity derives from an inherent multiplicity of structural possibilities in the original (Neubert, 1986:97).
VIEWS ON EQUIVALENCE (CONTINUED)
?Toury (1980):
considers translation from the point of view of the target culture (TC)
sets forth a TT theory for translation, focussing not on a notion of equivalence as postulated requirements, but on the “actual relationships” between the ST and its “factual replacement” (Toury, 1980:39).
The following aspects of Toury’s theory have contributed to the development of translation theory:
1.The abandonment of one-to-one notions of correspondence and the possibility of literary/ linguistic equivalence
2.The involvement of the literary tendencies within the TC in the production of any translated text
3.The destabilization of the notion of an original message with a fixed identity
4.The integration of both ST and TT in the semiotic web of intersecting cultural systems.
VIEWS ON EQUIVALENCE (CONTINUED)
Translation studies: there are as many variants of a translation as there are translators.
Yet, among those many versions, there will be what Popovic (1976) calls the “invariant core” of the original. The invariant= what exists in common between all existing translations of a single work.
Instead of prescribing a technique which can eliminate losses and smooths over changes, Popovic accepts that losses, gains and changes are a necessary part of the translation process because of the inherent differences of intellectual and aesthetic values in the two cultures.
VIEWS ON EQUIVALENCE (CONTINUED)
?E. Nida’s (1969) two types of equivalence:
formal equivalence (focuses attention on the message itself, in both form and content);
dynamic equivalence (based on the principle of equivalent effect, i.e. that the relationship between receiver and message should aim at being the same as that between the original receivers and the SL language).
?The equivalent effect is based on the “four basic requirements of a translation”:
1.making sense;
2.conveying the spirit and manner of the original;
3.having a natural and easy form of expression;
4.producing a similar response.
VIEWS ON EQUIVALENCE (CONTINUED)
?Peter Newmark’s two types of translation:
communicative translation-attempts to produce on its readers an effect as close as possible to that obtained on the readers of the original ~ Nida’s dynamic equivalence;
semantic translation-attempts to render, as closely as the semantic and syntactic structures of the second language allow, the exact contextual meaning of the original ~ Nida’s formal equivalence.
VIEWS ON EQUIVALENCE (CONTINUED)
Werner Koller (1979) introduces the concept of correspondence, linked with the concept of equivalence:
Field Contrastive Linguistics Science of Translation
Research area Correspondence phenomena and
conditions, describing corresponding
structures and sentences in the TL
and SL systems Equivalence phenomena, describing hierarchy of utterances and texts in SL and TL according to the equivalence criterion
Knowledge Langue Parole Competence Foreign language competence Translation competence
VIEWS ON EQUIVALENCE (CONTINUED)
?Werner Koller’s (1979) five types of equivalence:
Denotative equivalence-related to the extralinguistic content of a text (“content invariance”);
Connotative equivalence-related to the lexical choices, especially between near-synonyms (“stylistic equivalence”); Text-normative equivalence-related to text types;
Pragmatic/ communicative equivalence-oriented towards the receiver of the text or message;
Formal equivalence-related to the form and aesthetics of the text, includes word plays and the individual stylistic features of the ST (“expressive equivalence”).
VIEWS ON EQUIVALENCE (CONTINUED)
?Cay Dollerup’s (2006: 64) main concepts:
Translations as approximations-there is no perfect translation or ideal translator; we can only discuss tangible approximations of these elusive ideals;
Adequacy-a translation is adequate when it conveys the meaning of the source text to the target language in a given situation; the users, clients, recipients can determine the fulfillment of this criterion.
VIEWS ON EQUIVALENCE (CONTINUED)
Most theories to date can be characterized as theories of (what is allegedly) the only legitimate or genuine kind of translation (D. Delabastita, 1991:143).
The genuine concept of translation can be defined
-in positive terms, i.e. “to render the SL message with the closest TL equivalent...is, we believe, the only possible way leading to fidelity” (Shen, 1989:234).
-in negative terms, i.e. “literalism has indeed little claim to theoretical validity as an approach to “total translation” (Shen, 1989:224).
VIEWS ON EQUIVALENCE (CONTINUED)
?Recent theories:
translation= an act of communication across cultural boundaries, the main criteria being determined by the recipient of the translation and its specific function (Snell-Hornby, 1988:47)
The traditional relationships between the ST and TT are replaced by networks of relationships and concepts of intertextuality (Toury, 1986; Lambert, 1989; E. Gentzler 1993) cultural studies model.
The translator’s task is to strive for the highest possible degree of “matching” or “equivalence” between the SL and the TL text, i.e. the TL text must try to achieve a similar effect on the foreign reader as the SL text does on the native reader (Wekker and Wekker, 1991:221, apud Gentzler, 1993). The TL text must be equivalent to the SL text on both a linguistic and a socio-cultural level.
EQUIVALENCE AND ADEQUACY IN TRANSLATION
K. Reiss and H. Vermeer (1984:133): in a number of translations, e.g.
translations for teaching purposes and philological translations, the function of the TLT is different from that of the SLT. In this case, the principle governing the translation process is adequacy.
Adequacy= the appropriate selection of linguistic signs in the TL in view of the dimensions selected in the ST. (Reiss)
An adequate TT= one in which the TT matches a relevant dimension of the ST, because the translator does not aim at producing a full textual equivalent of the ST but focuses on a certain dimension of the ST.
Adequacy is a more general concept than equivalence. Equivalence involves matching not just one dimension, but all dimensions of the ST.
E. Nida (1976:64) considered that the relative adequacy of different
translations of the same text “can only be determined in terms of the extent to which each translation successfully fulfils the purpose for
which it was intended” (Nida, 1976:64).
CONCLUSIONS
?Translation must take into consideration:
the linguistic context;
the semantic context;
the pragmatic context.
?Translation also involves cultural translation, as cultures shape concepts and texts differently.
REFERENCES:
Croitoru, Elena. 1996. Interpretation and Translation. Galati: Editura Porto-Franco.
Dollerup, Cay. 2006. Basics of Translation Studies. Iasi: Institutul European.
Munday, Jeremy. 2001. Introducing Translation Studies. Theories and applications. London: Routledge Group.
Ansoft 协同设计方法 －复杂波导系统设计 2008-06-12 ANSOFT CORPORATION
目录 前言 (2) 一、 Ansoft复杂无源器件仿真解决方案 (2) 二、波导滤波器的设计 (4) (一) Iris 波导滤波器设计 (4) 1) 在HFSS中进行的基本单元建模和仿真 (4) 2) 建立HFSS与Ansoft Designer间的动态链接 (10) 3) 在Ansoft Designer中求解 (14) 4) 在Ansoft Designer中完成滤波器的优化设计 (15) 5) 将Ansoft Designer中优化后的IRIS滤波器export到HFSS进行验证 (17) (二) Combline滤波器设计 (19) 1) 在HFSS中进行基本单元的建模仿真 (19) 在求解设置部分可参考前述IRIS波导滤波器的设置，所不同的是求解频率为0.4GHz (34) 2) 在HFSS中进行基本单元的参数化扫描 (41) 3) 建立HFSS与Ansoft Designer间的动态链接 (42) 4) 在Ansoft Designer中完成滤波器的优化设计 (46) 5) Ansoft Designer 与 HFSS的仿真结果对比与讨论 (48)
前言 HFSS精确可靠的三维电磁场仿真彻底改变了传统设计流程， 调试硬件原型的传统设计手段被对三维电磁场仿真模型的设计和优化所取代，大大地缩短了设计周期。尽管如此，Ansoft仍不懈地致力于优化使用者的仿真设计流程，提高优化效率，从而进一步缩短设计周期。 现今对于滤波器或其他复杂波导器件的理论研究和设计技术已经非常成熟，但设计工作依旧面临很多问题。电路仿真具有很高的速度，可快速的仿真出滤波器各个部件的集总电参数，但是在电磁场求解工具中设计真实的3D微波元件却需要花费数周的时间。本文主要阐述了电路仿真器如何与3D场仿真器协同完成设计工作，从而使设计周期从原先的数周缩短为数日。这种解决方案的核心是“场路结合、协同仿真”，优点是有效的结合了三维电磁场仿真的精度和电路仿真的速度，使微波无源器件的设计流程进入了新的时代。 下面我们将以几个具体的例子来说明这套通过“场路结合、协同仿真”来设计复杂无源器件的解决方案。 一、 Ansoft复杂无源器件仿真解决方案 当电磁场仿真被设计者广泛接受后，我们进一步需要把这种技术应用到各种需要精确仿真求解的更大规模的设计问题中。这里就产生了一对速度与精度之间的矛盾，因为我们知道电路仿真速度是很快的，传统的仿真方法一般都是基于等效电路的。我们希望有一种切实可行的解决方案：能提供快速、具有电磁精度、且求解问题的规模不受限制。因为作为工程设计软件，仅仅解决求解精度问题是不够的，更重要的是能够提供一种高效率的、可操作性强的设计流程。“场路结合、协同仿真”的思路就是基于这种实际工程中的需求而产生的。 Ansoft提供的这套复杂无源器件仿真的解决方案如下图所示：
Ansoft高级培训班教材 ISM天线射频特性的Ansoft HFSS分析 李磊谢拥军编著 西安电子科技大学Ansoft培训中心
目录 第一章序言 第二章 创建项目 第三章 构造模型 第四章 优化
第一章序言 本讲义主要是引导学员学习使用Ansoft HFSS的优化功能进行微波工程设计。随着越来越多的民用科研产品集中在ISM频段，这一频段的微波元器件设计也就越来越受到射频工程师的关注。对于民用产品来说，微带天线适应了其集约化、小型化的需求，从而成为产品设计中的关键。 Ansoft HFSS提供的优化设计功能，特别适合于微波产品的优化设计。在这一优化功能中，结构参数、媒质本构常数等可以作为待优化的参数，元件的S参数、本征值和场分布等都可以作为优化的目标函数。学员通过可以本讲义的练习，熟悉这一功能。 这本手册的后边部分描述将引导你如何使用软件去建立、仿真和优化一个ISM天线的axial ratio（轴比）。本例假设使用者已经学习过并理解指南中的“The Getting Started”的内容。 备注：如果你对该内容不熟悉，请翻看指南中“Using the 3D Solid Modeler”部分。 该天线是一个右手圆极化天线（RHCP），工作在2.4GHz的ISM频率 (Bluetooth, 802.11b, etc. )
第二章创建项目 本章中你的目标是： √保存一个新项目。 √把一个新的HFSS设计加到已建的项目 √为项目选择一种求解方式 √设置设计使用的长度单位 时间：完成这章的内容总共大约要5分钟。 一.打开HFSS并保存一个新项目 1.双击桌面上的HFSS9图标，这样就可以启动HFSS。启动后的程序工作环境如图： 图2－1 HFSS工作界面 1．打开File选项(alt+F),单击Save as。2．找到合适的目录，键入项目名hfopt_ismantenna。 图2－2 保存HFSS项目
四.设置边界条件和激励源26 五.设置求解条件31 第二章创建项目 本章中你的目标是： √保存一个新项目。 √把一个新的HFSS设计加到已建的项目 √为项目选择一种求解方式 √设置设计使用的长度单位 时间：完成这章的内容总共大约要5分钟。 一.打开HFSS并保存一个新项目 1.双击桌面上的HFSS9图标，这样就可以启动HFSS。启动后的程序工作环境如图： 图2－1 HFSS工作界面 1．打开File选项(alt+F),单击Save as。2．找到合适的目录，键入项目名hfopt_ismantenna。
图2－2 保存HFSS项目 二.加入一个新的HFSS设计 1．在Project菜单，点击insert HFSS Design选项。( 或直接点击图标。)一个新的工程被加入到hfopt_ismantenna项目中，默认名为HFSSModel n。 图2－3 加入新的HFSS设计 2．为设计重命名。在项目树中选中HFSSModel1,单击鼠标右键，再点击Rename项，将设计重命名为hfopt_ismantenna。
图2－4 更改设计名 三.选择一种求解方式 1．在HFSS菜单上，点击Solution Type选项. 2．选择源激励方式，在Solution Type 对话框中选中Driven Mode项。 图2－5 选择求解类型图2－6 选择源激励方式 四.设置设计使用的长度单位 1.在3D Modeler菜单上，点击Units选项. 2.选择长度单位，在Set Model Units 对话框中选中mm项。
图2－5 选择长度单位图2－6 选择mm作为长度单位 第三章构造模型 本章中你的目标是： √建立物理模型。 √设置变量。 √设置模型材料参数 √设置边界条件和激励源 √设置求解条件 时间：完成这章的内容总共大约要35分钟。 一.建立物理模型 1．画长方体。 在Draw菜单中，点击Box选项（或直接点击图标）；