The translator27s invisibility Venuti 译者的隐形
- 格式:doc
- 大小:24.00 KB
- 文档页数:6
收稿日期:2020-7-5中国动漫有着辉煌的起点。
1941年,亚洲第一部动画长片《铁扇公主》由南京的万氏兄弟拍摄完成。
我国第一部动画的出世距离全球首部动画电影《白雪公主》仅间隔四年。
然而,在全球动画开始向数字技术转型的过程中,中国动漫与世界一流水平的差距渐渐拉开,人们一度对国漫发展失去了信心。
《哪吒之魔童降世》的问世让国人看到了国产动漫再次崛起的希望。
随着国漫影响力逐渐扩大,字幕翻译便显得尤为重要。
字幕翻译不仅是传递信息的工具,更是传达电影神韵,实现文化交流的关键。
如何让外国观众实现无障碍观影,真正了解其中的中国传统文化,这是翻译工作者需要思考的问题。
1 翻译的目的论20世纪70年代,功能派翻译理论兴起于德国,其发展经过了四个阶段:凯瑟林娜·莱斯(Katharina Reiss )的功能主义翻译批评理论;汉斯·费米尔 (Hans Vermeer )的目的论;贾斯塔·赫兹-曼塔利 (Justa Holz-Manttari )的翻译行为理论;克里斯蒂安·诺德(Christiane Nord )的功能加忠诚理论。
其中,费米尔提出的目的论被视为功能派翻译理论中最重要的理论。
费米尔的目的论包含目的性法则、连贯性法则和忠实性法则,其中,目的性法则是最高原则。
在进行翻译活动时,译者首先要遵循的原则就是目的性法则,即在翻译时融合译入语的情境和文化,让译文按译语接收者期待的方式发生作用。
简单来说,就是在进行翻译实践之前译者要首先考虑到文化差异等因素,并且在翻译过程中尽可能消除这些隔阂,将原作者想要表达的中心思想正确地输出给译语接收者。
这也就要求译者时刻遵循翻译的目的性法则,以翻译目的为基础进行翻译实践。
2 电影字幕的翻译功能派翻译理论强调翻译目的,即整个翻译过程,包括翻译方法和翻译策略的选择,都是由翻译行为所要达到的目的决定的。
在进行翻译之前译者必须明确翻译的目的是什么,要达到什么样的效果,从而采取相应的翻译策略。
The translator’s invisibilityA history of translationLawrence VenutiChapter one InvisibilityI“Invisibility” is the term I will use to describe the translator’s situation and activity in contemporary Anglo-American culture. A translated text, whether prose or poetry, fiction or nonfiction, is judged acceptable by most publishers, reviewers, and readers when it reads fluently, when the absence of any linguistic or stylistics peculiarities makes it seem transparent, giving the appearance that it reflects the foreign writer’s personality or intention or te essential meaning of the foreign text-the appearance, in other words, that the translation is not the translation, but the “original”.The illusion of transparency is an effect of fluent discourse, of the translator’s effort to insure easy readability by adhering to current usage, maintaining continuous syntax, fixing a precise meaning. What is so remarkable here is that this illusory effect conceals the numerous conditions under which the translation is made, starting with the translator’s crucial intervention in the foreign text. The more fluent the translation, the more invisible the translator, and presumably, the more visible the writer or meaning of the foreign text.P4.A fluent translation is written in English that is current (“modern”) instead of archaic, that is widely used instead of specialized (“jargonization”), and that is standard instead of colloquial (“slangy”). Foreign words (pidgin) are avoided, as are Britishism in American translations and Americanisms in British translations. Fluency also depends on syntax that is not so “faithful”to the foreign text as to be “not quirt idiomatic”, that unfolds continuously ans easily (not “doughy”) to insure semantic “precision”with some rhythmic definition, a sense of closure (not a “dullthud’). A fluent translation is immediately recognizable and intelligible, familiarized, domesticated, not disconcertingly, foreign, capable of giving the reader unobstructed access to great thoughts, to what is present in the original. Under the regime of fluent translating, the translator works to make his or her work invisible, producing illusory effect of transparency that simultaneously masks its status as an illusion: the translated text seems natural, i.e., not translated.The translator’s invisibility is also partly determined by the individualistic conception of authorship that continues to prevail in Anglo-American culture. According to this conception, the author freely expresses his thought and feelings in writing, which is thus viewed as an original and transparent self-representation, unmediated by trans individual determinants (linguistic, cultural, social) that might complicate authorial originalityIIP17Translation is a process by which the chain of signifiers that constitutes the source-language text is replaced by a chain of signifiers in the target language which the translator provides on the strength of an interpretation.P19.The German theologian and philosopher Friedrich Schleiermacher. In an 1813 lecture on the different methods of translation, Schleiermacher argued that “there are only two. Either the translator leaves the author in peace, as much as possible, and moves the reader towards him; or he leaves the reader in peace, as much as possible, and moves the author towards him” (Lefevere 1977: 74). Admitting that translation can never be completely adequate to the foreign text, Schleiermacher allowed the translator to choose between a domesticating method, an ethnocentric reduction of the foreign text target-language cultural values, bring the author back home, and a foreignizing method, an ethnodeviant pressure on those values to register the linguistic and cultural difference of the foreign text, sending the reader abroad.I want to suggest that insofar as foreignizing translation seeks to restrain the ethnocentric violence of translation, it is highly desirable today, a strategic culture intervention in the current state of the world affairs, pitched against the hegemonic English-language nations and the unequal cultural exchanges in which they engage their global others. Foreinizing translation in English can be a form of resistance against ethnocentrism and racism, cultural narcissism and imperialism, in the interests of democratic geopolitical relations.Consider Nida’s concept of “dynamic”or “functional equivalence”in translation, formulated first in 1964, but restated and developed in numerous books and articles over the past thirty years. “A translation of dynamic equivalence aims at complete naturalness od expression,” states Nida, “and tries to relate the receptor to modes of behavior relevant within the context of his own culture” (Nida 1964: 159). The phrase “naturalness of expression” signals the importance of a fluent strategy to this theory of translation, and in Nida’s work it is obvious that fluency involves domestication. For Nida, accuracy in translation depends on generating an equivalent effect in the target-language culture: “the receptor of a translation should comprehend the translated text to such an extent that they can understand how the original receptors must have understood the original text”(ibid. 36). The dynamically equivalent translation is “interlingual communication”which overcomes the linguistic and cultural differences that impede it (ibid. 11).。
浅析韦努蒂的翻译思想浅析韦努蒂的翻译思想摘要:通过对西方翻译理论和译本的研究,韦努蒂批判在西方翻译界占主导地位的归化翻译,指出英美文化中通顺流畅的归化策略导致译者“隐形”,并主张异化的翻译策略以阻挡英美文化的霸权。
该篇论文主要分析韦努蒂的核心思想,批判地分析异化翻译的积极意义和局限性,从而更好地指导翻译实践。
关键词:译者的隐形归化异化局限性美裔意大利学者劳伦斯.韦努蒂是解构主义的代表人物之一,他秉承该流派的思想,追求文化的多样性,主张“存异”而非“求同”,反对传统以译入语为倾向的归化翻译策略,提倡译者“显形”和异化的翻译策略以抵御英美文化的霸权主义。
一、译者的“隐形”韦努蒂在其专著 Translator's Invisibility: A History of Translation 中提出“隐形”这个术语,用来描述译者在当代英美翻译界的状况。
在传统翻译中,对于外国文学的翻译一直以归化为主导,认为好的译文应该通顺流畅,读起来不像译文而且译者在翻译过程应力求“透明”让人没感觉到其存在。
这也就是韦努蒂所指的“不可见性”即译者应处于“隐形”的状态。
这主要原因在于:首先,译者本身倾向于译成“流畅”的英语。
译者以译入语文化为归宿,努力地使译文语言地道,符合译入语的语言习惯,从而提高可读性。
其次,译入语读者阅读翻译文本的方式。
不论是散文、诗歌、小说还是其他类型的题材,多数人所接受的译文是读起来流畅,没有任何语言或风格的独特之处,看上去译文已经反映了作者的实质意义,译文似乎不是译文而是原作。
这种流畅透明的翻译似乎符合忠实的准则,传达了原文的精神实质,但忽略了原文与译文,作者和译者的相互关系。
传统的翻译观认为译文是原著的派生,只有作者才能对文本拥有绝对的解释权,译者处于次要地位,译文从属于原文。
译者的任务是使译文通顺流畅,不得对译文干预,译者应尽可能地保持译文透明,减少翻译的痕迹,恪守忠实原文的准则。
因此,译者就会本着以译入语的语言特征和价值观念来同化外来语言。
第 34 卷 第 1 期2021 年 1 月江西电力职业技术学院学报Journal of Jiangxi Vocational and Technical College of ElectricityVol.34 No.1Jan.2021李煜《虞美人》两英译本中的格式塔意象再造刘烨秋(西南石油大学外国语学院,四川成都 610500)摘 要:基于格式塔意象再造理论,对李煜《虞美人》的格式塔意象进行阐释;同时,比较分析两英译本在格式塔意象再造上的得失,结果表明,诗歌翻译的关键在于格式塔意象的再造。
为了成功地实现诗歌翻译,在理解原文时,译者需树立整体意识,宏观把握全文,以实现心理层面的格式塔意象构建;在创造译文时,译者需树立能动意识,对所选译语字斟句酌,以实现文字层面的格式塔意象再造。
关键词:格式塔意象再造;李煜《虞美人》;诗歌英译中图分类号:H315.9 文献标识码:B 文章编号:1673-0097(2021)01-0109-020 引言“南唐后主”李煜的《虞美人》因刻画“愁”的形象而经久不衰,因而在秉承弘扬优秀中华文化、大力促进文化交流的大环境下,本词的英译也颇受国内外译者关注。
国内包括许渊冲[1](2007)、徐忠杰(1986)等,而国外属 Fränkel(1976)的译文较有代表性。
词属于诗歌的范畴,语言凝练且意蕴深远。
基于此,为了实现成功的诗歌翻译,在译诗中再现原诗意象,并传达其丰富内涵就显得尤为重要。
然而,纵观国内外该词已有的英译版本,能成功再现原诗意象的并不多,译者在创造译文时往往容易忽略对诗歌原文的宏观把握,难以实现原诗整体意象上的再造。
针对此现状,姜秋霞[2]于2000年提出了可运用文学翻译的格式塔意象模式——格式塔意象再造理论,为进一步研究文学翻译(包括诗歌翻译)提供了新的研究视角。
从该理论出发,选取李煜《虞美人》两不同英译本进行分析,并针对诗歌翻译如何实现成功的格式塔意象再造提出建议,以期为译者提供参考,使之能较为准确地再现原诗真正的内涵。
一.劳伦斯·韦努蒂的基本信息及其主张:劳伦斯·韦努蒂 Lawrence Venuti(1953年—)学者,大学英语教授,专职翻译家,美籍意大利人,生于费城南部(此区域居住者多为意大利裔),七十年代早期在天普大学攻读英语文学,1980年获哥伦比亚大学博士学位。
主要著作:主编论文集《对翻译的重新思考:语篇、主体性与意识形态》(RethinkingTranslation: Discourse, Subjectivity,Ideology),(1992)、《译者的隐身一部翻译史》(Translator's Invisibility: A History ofTranslation)(1995)《不光彩的翻译》(The Scandals of Translation: Towards anEthics of Difference)(1998).韦努蒂把解构主义的翻译思想付诸实施,提出了反对译文通顺的翻译策略。
其目的是:在思想意识上反对殖民主义的翻译观和英美民族中心主义和帝国主义文化价值观;在翻译原则和方法上,提创“存异”而不是“求同”。
通过对英美翻译历史的研究,他得出英美文化中译者和译作实际上处于“隐形”状态。
造成译者隐形的原因是由于归化翻译是英美翻译界的主流翻译方法所致。
鉴于归化翻译是英美翻译作品是主流翻译方法,而译者在这些翻译作品中都是“隐形人”。
Venuti主张“异化”翻译,号召译者采取抵抗翻译策略,以显示自己在翻译中的存在。
Venuti的异化翻译法归因于19世纪德国哲学家Schleiermacher的翻译论说:the translator leaves the author in peace, as much as possible, and moves the reader towards him. “译者尽量不惊动原作者,让读者向他靠近。
”VENUTI异化翻译理论中存在的问题:由于Venuti过分关注政治对翻译方法的影响,其所提倡的异化翻译理论忽视了文学翻译的主要目的,没有考虑到接受者的需求。
傲慢与偏见》两个中译本中反讽语的翻译《傲慢与偏见》在中国有着很高的知名度,七十年来已经有三十三个译本,之中又以王科一和孙致礼的译本最为出众。
因此就以这二人的译本为例,探讨他们在处理反讽语句其中所采用的归化与异化策略对翻译反讽语句的作用,为今后翻译具有反讽色彩的文学作品提供一定的帮助。
一、引言为何几个世纪以来,简?奥斯汀的小说那么受人追捧,很大的原因就是她风趣又幽默的语言常常令人忍俊不禁,即使是再琐碎的小事和再不过平凡的人,她也能描绘地栩栩如生。
她的小说中充满了讽刺,其中又以反讽这一修辞手法最为突出。
众所周知,《傲慢与偏见》既是她的成名之作,也是反讽艺术的典范。
小说描写了乡绅班纳特五个待字闺中的千金,主角是二女儿伊丽莎白。
她在舞会上认识了达西,但是见他为人傲慢,一直对他心生排斥。
几经波折后,伊丽莎白消除了对这西的偏见,达西也放下傲慢,这对有情人终成眷属。
在这部小说中,奥斯丁一反当时社会上流行的矫揉造作的写作方法,而是用幽默的语言、锋利的笔触以及其独特的反讽手法为我们塑造出一个又一个经典的人物形象,18世纪末到19 世纪初的英国人的日常生活和人生百态引人入胜。
在作者的巧妙运用之下反讽贯穿整个小说,使得小说有着经久不衰的魅力。
所以,能否精准地翻译其中带有反讽意味的语句,对于读者在阅读这本小说时是否能正确地体会作者的意思来说非常重要。
在中国,简?奥斯汀小说的翻译始于七十多年前。
1935 年,杨斌第一个翻译了《傲慢与偏见》,并且大多数人都认为这个译本非常通顺且忠实。
在这之后,有越来越多的学者开始翻译这个本小说。
迄今为止,已经有33个版本了,其中又以王科一(2010)和孙致礼(2012)的版本最为出名最受认可。
接下来就以这两人的译本为例,从归化与异化视角来探讨在翻译带有反讽意味的语句时所应采用的翻译策略。
二、反讽;归化与异化在进一步讨论前,有必要对相关概念先做简要介绍。
(一)反讽究竟何为“反讽”呢?在中国古代汉语中,“风”是“讽” 的假借,有“用委婉的语言暗示、劝告、指责”的意思。
校园英语 / 翻译研究从异化译法看南希·米特福德《游客》的翻译三亚学院外国语学院/谢滔滔【摘要】《游客》这篇游记充分体现了南希简洁讽刺的语言特点。
笔者在翻译的过程中使用了异化译法,尽可能原滋原味地保留文章风格。
【关键词】南希·米特福德 异化 语言特点作者及语言特点:南希出生在一个古老的英国贵族家庭,是一战二战之间时期著名的英国女作家。
她提出过“上”和“非上”语言的概念。
她认为一个人日常言语能体现出他的身份地位。
贵族则不需要彰显自己的身份和地位,他们坚持使用简洁传统的语言。
南希写作时也秉承了这一传统。
《游客》一文充分体现了她的语言特点,简洁讽刺却不失幽默。
异化法的使用:异化是指译者在翻译时迁就外来文化的语言特点,尽量保留源语作者的语言特色。
其目的在于保存和反映异域民族特征和语言风格特色,为读者保留异国情调。
在翻译本文时,笔者尽可能地保留原文语言特点。
原文以对比手法来表现南希对游客和居民的讽刺,以凸显大自然淳朴民风的美。
对比和讽刺是本文的主要语言特点:自然景色之间的对比,自然景色与人的活动之间的对比,人与人之间的对比。
南希以此讽刺人类活动给大自然带来的负面影响,以及旅游商业化对淳朴的民风造成的消极影响。
为了突出对比效果,在翻译be lonely as a cloud笔者增译了“宁静”一词,而翻译最后一句Torcello is itself again时译成了“托切罗又如往常一样宁静安详。
”在翻译描写自然景色的语段时,笔者选用的都是意义积极,动作舒缓的词,比如,坐落,流淌,悠悠滑行等等。
与之对应的,翻译描写游客们的部分时,选用了意义消极,动作突兀的词,比如,回避,异常,涌,揪下,漫无目的等等。
为了保留南希对游客和岛民的讽刺,笔者把brother 译成了“小弟”而不是“小弟弟”,babies译成了“小孩子”而不是“宝宝”,因为“小弟弟”和“宝宝”的意象都是纯洁可人的。
hoping for a tip 笔者也译成了“捞点小钱”这种带有消极意义的词句。
The translator’s invisibilityA history of translationLawrence VenutiChapter one InvisibilityI“Invisibility” is the term I will use to describe the translator’s situation and activity in contemporary Anglo-American culture. A translated text, whether prose or poetry, fiction or nonfiction, is judged acceptable by most publishers, reviewers, and readers when it reads fluently, when the absence of any linguistic or stylistics peculiarities makes it seem transparent, giving the appearance that it reflects the foreign writer’s personality or intention or te essential meaning of the foreign text-the appearance, in other words, that the translation is not the translation, but the “original”.The illusion of transparency is an effect of fluent discourse, of the translator’s effort to insure easy readability by adhering to current usage, maintaining continuous syntax, fixing a precise meaning. What is so remarkable here is that this illusory effect conceals the numerous conditions under which the translation is made, starting with the translator’s crucial intervention in the foreign text. The more fluent the translation, the more invisible the translator, and presumably, the more visible the writer or meaning of the foreign text.P4.A fluent translation is written in English that is current (“modern”) instead of archaic, that is widely used instead of specialized (“jargonization”), and that is standard insteadof colloquial (“slangy”). Foreign words (pidgin) are avoided, as are Britishism in American translations and Americanisms in British translations. Fluency also depends on syntax that is not so “faithful”to the foreign text as to be “not quirt idiomatic”, that unfolds continuously ans easily (not “doughy”) to insure semantic “precision” with some rhythmic definition, a sense of closure (not a “dullthud’). A fluent translation is immediately recognizable and intelligible, familiarized, domesticated, not disconcertingly, foreign, capable of giving the reader unobstructed access to great thoughts, to what is present in the original. Under the regime of fluent translating, the translator works to make his or her work invisible, producing illusory effect of transparency that simultaneously masks its status as an illusion: the translated text seems natural, i.e., not translated.The translator’s invisibility is also partly determined by the individualistic conception of authorship that continues to prevail in Anglo-American culture. According to this conception, the author freely expresses his thought and feelings in writing, which is thus viewed as an original and transparent self-representation, unmediated by trans individual determinants (linguistic, cultural, social) that might complicate authorial originalityIIP17Translation is a process by which the chain of signifiers that constitutes the source-language text is replaced by a chain of signifiers in the target language which the translator provides on the strength of an interpretation.P19.The German theologian and philosopher Friedrich Schleiermacher. In an 1813 lecture on the different methods of translation, Schleiermacher argued that “there are only two. Either the translator leaves the author in peace, as much as possible, and moves the reader towards him; or he leaves the reader in peace, as much as possible, and moves the author towards him”(Lefevere 1977: 74). Admitting that translation can never be completely adequate to the foreign text, Schleiermacher allowed the translator to choose between a domesticating method, an ethnocentric reduction of the foreign text target-language cultural values, bring the author back home, and a foreignizing method, an ethnodeviant pressure on those values to register the linguistic and cultural difference of the foreign text, sending the reader abroad.I want to suggest that insofar as foreignizing translation seeks to restrain the ethnocentric violence of translation, it is highly desirable today, a strategic culture intervention in the current state of the world affairs, pitched against the hegemonic English-language nations and the unequal cultural exchanges in which they engage their global others. Foreinizing translation in English can be a form of resistance against ethnocentrism and racism, cultural narcissism and imperialism, in the interests of democratic geopolitical relations.Consider Nida’s concept of “dynamic” or “functional equivalence” in translation, formulated first in 1964, but restated and developed in numerous books and articles over the past thirty years. “A translation of dynamic equivalence aims at completenaturalness od expression,” states Nida, “and tries to relate the receptor to modes of behavior relevant within the context of his own culture”(Nida 1964: 159). The phrase “naturalness of expression” signals the importance of a fluent strategy to this theory of translation, and in Nida’s work it is obvious that fluency involves domestication.For Nida, accuracy in translation depends on generating an equivalent effect in the target-language culture: “the receptor of a translation should comprehend the translated text to such an extent that they can understand how the original receptors must have understood the original text”(ibid. 36). The dynamically equivalent translation is “interlingual communication” which overcomes the linguistic and cultural differences that impede it (ibid. 11).如有侵权请联系告知删除,感谢你们的配合!。