(完整版)尤金·奈达EugeneNida翻译理论
- 格式:doc
- 大小:23.28 KB
- 文档页数:8
尤金奈达功能对等理论
尤金·奈达(Eugene Nida)功能对等理论是20世纪最重要的翻译理论之一,也是国际翻译学会(International Association for Translation and Interpreting)推荐的翻译理论。
该理论指出,翻译并不是从一种文化传输到另一种文化,而是将一种文化的概念以一种文化的形式来表达。
这种概念的表达是以语言的形式,而且是以语言功能为基础的。
根据尤金·奈达(Eugene Nida)的功能对等理论,翻译的目的是帮助读者理解原文的概念,而不是简单地将原文的文字翻译成另一种语言。
在这种理论的框架下,翻译者必须考虑文化和语言功能,而不是仅仅考虑语法和词义。
为了实现这一目标,翻译者需要考虑语境,以及原文和目标语言之间的差异。
尤金·奈达(Eugene Nida)的功能对等理论认为,翻译是一种更新技术,它以一种“译者中心”的方式来解决文化传输问题。
翻译者要考虑原文所表达的概念,并将其翻译成一种具有相同功能的语言。
因此,翻译者必须以灵活的方式思考并表达文本的信息,以便使读者理解文本的意义。
尤金·奈达(Eugene Nida)功能对等理论提出了一种新颖、有效的翻译方法,改变了传统的翻译理论,并为翻译者提供了一种更加灵活的框架,以便他们能够以有效的方式传达原文的概念。
因此,尤
金·奈达(Eugene Nida)功能对等理论一直是翻译研究的一个重要组成部分,在翻译实践中也得到了广泛的应用。
翻译理论尤金·奈达的“动态对等”(Dynamic Equivalence)/“功能对等”(Functional Equivalence)尤金·A·奈达(Eugene A。
Nida)(1914—2011),美国著名的语言学家,翻译家,翻译理论家。
1943年获密歇根大学语言学博士学位,长期在美国圣经学会主持翻译部的工作,曾任美国语言学会主席,1980年退休后任顾问。
奈达是一位杰出的语言学家,他到过96个国家,在一百多所大学做过讲座,来中国有13次之多,直至2003年,奈达89岁高龄时,仍到非洲讲学。
(Toward a Science of Translating),尤金最有影响的著作是1964出版的《翻译的科学探索》其次要数《翻译理论与实践》(The Theory and Practice of Translation),系与查尔斯·泰伯合著(1969)。
奈达理论的核心概念是“功能对等”。
所谓“功能对等”,就是说翻译时不求文字表面的死板对应,而要在两种语言间达成功能上的对等。
为使源语和目的语的之间的转换有一个标准,减少差异,尤金·A·奈达从语言学的角度出发,根据翻译的本质,提出了著名的“动态对等”翻译理论,即“功能对等”。
在这一理论中,他指出,“翻译是用最恰当、自然和对等的语言从语义到文体再现源语的信息”(郭建中,2000 , P65).奈达有关翻译的定义指明,翻译不仅是词汇意义上的对等,还包括语义、风格和文体的对等,翻译传达的信息既有表层词汇信息,也有深层的文化信息。
“动态对等”中的对等包括四个方面:1. 词汇对等;2。
句法对等;3。
篇章对等;4.文体对等.在这四个方面中,奈达认为,“意义是最重要的,形式其次”(郭建中,2000 , P67)。
形式很可能掩藏源语的文化意义,并阻碍文化交流。
因此,在文学翻译中,根据奈达的理论,译者应以动态对等的四个方面,作为翻译的原则,准确地在目的语中再现源语的文化内涵.为了准确地再现源语文化和消除文化差异,译者可以遵循以下的三个步骤。
三、尤金·奈达和他的翻译理论1.奈达翻译理论概述尤金·奈达(Eugene A.Nida)理论的核心思想是“功能对等”(functional equivalence)。
简单讲,功能对等就是要让译文和原文在语言的功能上对等,而不是在语言的形式上对应。
他把功能分成九类①[在From One Language to Another中,奈达将语言的功能分成9类,即表现功能(expressive)、认识功能(cognitive)、人际功能(interpersonal)、信息功能(informative)、祈使功能(imperative)、行为功能(performative)、情感功能(emotive)、审美功能(aesthetic)和自我解释功能(metalingual)。
在奈达看来,翻译就是要在接受语中以最自然的方式重现原文中的信息,首先是重现意义,然后是风格。
最好的翻译读起来应该不像翻译。
要让原文和译文对等就必须使译文自然,而要达到这个目标就必须摆脱原文语言结构对译者的束缚。
翻译应避免“翻译腔”(translationese)。
奈达提出了翻译要达到的不是语言的对等,而是语言功能的对等,是读者心理反应的对等。
奈达从几个方面科学地描写了功能对等的具体内容。
这里将他的理论简单地概括成三个部分:①抛弃传统的词性概念;②采用核心句(kernel sentence)的概念以及句子转换的概念克服句法对译者的束缚;③用同构体的理论(isomorphism)来克服社会文化差异所造成的障碍。
现在分述如下。
五、奈达与纽马克翻译理论比较一、尤金·奈达的翻译理论综观奈达的翻译思想,可以分为三个不同的发展阶段,即早期带有明显的美国结构主义色彩的语言学阶段;中期的翻译科学说与翻译交际说阶段,以及后来的社会符号学阶段.1.2.3 动态对等说这是奈达翻译理论中最为人熟知的一种观点。
所谓动态翻译,就是在翻译交际理论指导下的翻译,即“从语义到语体,在接受语中用贴近原文的自然对等语再现源语信息”。
奈达功能对等翻译理论(Nida's Functional Equivalence Theory)是基于语言功能和交际目的的翻译理论,由美国翻译学家尤金·奈达(Eugene Nida)提出。
该理论认为,翻译的目的在于传达源语言(原文)的信息,使得译文的接受者能够理解并接受这些信息。
因此,译者应该根据翻译的目的和受众的需求,选择合适的翻译方法,实现翻译的功能对等。
奈达认为,翻译的功能对等可以分为两种类型:动态对等和形式对等。
动态对等(dynamic equivalence)强调翻译的功能目的,即将源语言的信息转化为译语(目标语言)的信息,以达到与原文相同的功能目的。
而形式对等(formal equivalence)则强调词汇和语法结构的相似性,使译文与原文的表面形式尽量相似。
奈达功能对等翻译理论强调了翻译的交际功能,即翻译的主要目的是传达信息,而不是简单地将原文单词和句子的翻译转换为另一种语言。
因此,译者需要考虑到受众的语言和文化背景,选择恰当的语言和表达方式,以实现源语言和目标语言之间的功能对等。
翻译理论尤金·奈达的“动态对等”(Dynamic Equivalence)/“功能对等”(Functional Equivalence)尤金·A·奈达(Eugene A.Nida)(1914-2011),美国著名的语言学家,翻译家,翻译理论家。
1943年获密歇根大学语言学博士学位,长期在美国圣经学会主持翻译部的工作,曾任美国语言学会主席,1980年退休后任顾问。
奈达是一位杰出的语言学家,他到过96个国家,在一百多所大学做过讲座,来中国有13次之多,直至2003年,奈达89岁高龄时,仍到非洲讲学。
尤金最有影响的著作是1964出版的《翻译的科学探索》(Toward a Science of Translating),其次要数《翻译理论与实践》(The Theory and Practice of Translation),系与查尔斯·泰伯合著(1969)。
奈达理论的核心概念是“功能对等”。
所谓“功能对等”,就是说翻译时不求文字表面的死板对应,而要在两种语言间达成功能上的对等。
为使源语和目的语的之间的转换有一个标准,减少差异,尤金·A·奈达从语言学的角度出发,根据翻译的本质,提出了著名的“动态对等”翻译理论,即“功能对等”。
在这一理论中,他指出,“翻译是用最恰当、自然和对等的语言从语义到文体再现源语的信息”(郭建中,2000 , P65)。
奈达有关翻译的定义指明,翻译不仅是词汇意义上的对等,还包括语义、风格和文体的对等,翻译传达的信息既有表层词汇信息,也有深层的文化信息。
“动态对等”中的对等包括四个方面:1. 词汇对等;2. 句法对等;3. 篇章对等;4.文体对等。
在这四个方面中,奈达认为,“意义是最重要的,形式其次”(郭建中,2000 , P67)。
形式很可能掩藏源语的文化意义,并阻碍文化交流。
因此,在文学翻译中,根据奈达的理论,译者应以动态对等的四个方面,作为翻译的原则,准确地在目的语中再现源语的文化内涵。
Eugene NidaDynamic Equivalence and Formal EquivalenceEugene A. Nida (1914-- ) is a distinguished American translation theorist as well as a linguist. His translation theory has exerted a great influence on translation studies in Western countries. His work on translatoin set off the study of modern translation as an academic field, and he is regareded as “the patriarch of translation study and a founder of the discipline” (Snell-Hornby 1988:1; Baker 1998:277)Nida’s theory of dynamic equivalence is his major contribution to translation studies. The concept is first mentioned in his article “Principles of Translation as Exemplified by Bible Translating”(1959) (《从圣经翻译看翻译原则》)as he attempts to define translating. In his influential work Toward a Science of Translating (1964) (《翻译原则科学探索》), he postulates dynamic equivalent translation as follows:In such a translation (dynamic equivalent translation) one is not so concerned with matching the receptor-language message with the source-language message, but with the dynamic relationship, that the relationship between receptor and message should be substantially the same as that existed between the original receptors and the message (1964:159) However, he does not give a clear definition of dynamic equivalence untill 1969. In his 1969 textbook The Thoery and Practice of Translation(《翻译理论与实践》), dynamic equivalence is defined “ in terms of the degree to which the receptors of the messages in the receptor language respond to it in substantially the same manner as the receptores in the source language”(1969:24) The expression “dynamic equivalence” is superseded by “functional equivalencev” in his work From One Language to Another (1986, with De Waard)(《从一种语言到另一种语言》). However, there is essentially not much difference between the two concepts. The substitution of “functional equivalence” is just to stress the concept of function and to avoid misunderstandings of the term “dynamic”, which is mistaken by some persons for something in the sense of impact ( Nida 1993:124). In Language, Culture and Translating(1993)(《语言与文化:翻译中的语境》, “functional equivalence” is further divided into categories on two levels: the minimal level and the maximal level. The minimal level of “functional equivalence” is defined as “The readers of a translated text should be able to comprehend it to the point that they can conceive of how the original readers of the text must have understood and appreciated it”. The maximal level is stated as “The readers of a translated text should be able to understand and aprreciate it in essentially the same manner as the original readers did” (Nida 1993:118; 1995:224). The two definitions of equivalence reveal that the minimal level is realistic, whereas the maximal level is ieal. For Nida,good translations always lie somewhere between the two levels (Nida 19954:224). It can be noted that “functional equivalence” is a flexible concept with different degrees of adequacy. Dynamic EquivalenceA term introduced by Nida(1964) in the context of Bible translation to describe one of two basic orientations found in the process of translation (see also Formal Equivalence). Dynamic equivalence is the quality which characterizes a translation in which “the message of the original text has been so transported into the receptor language that the response of the receptor is essentially like that of the original receptors”(Nida & Taber 1969/1982:200, emphasis removed). In other words, a dynamically equivalent translation is one which has been produced in accordance with the threefold process of Analysis, Transfer and Restructuring (Nida & Taber 1969/1982:200); formulating such a translation will entail such procedures as substituting TL items which are more culturally appropriate for obscure ST items, making lingguistically implicit ST information explicit, and building in a certain amount of REDUNDANCY(1964:131) to aid comprehension. In a translation of this kind one is therefor not so concerned with “matching the receptor-language message with the source-laguage”; the aim is more to “relate the receptor to modes of behavior relevant within the context of his own culture” (Nida 1964:159). Possibly the best known example of a dynamically equivalent solution to a translation problem is seen in the decision to translate the Biblical phrase “Lamb of God” into and Eskimo language as “Seal of God”: the fact that lambs are unkown in polar regions has here led to the substitution of a culturally meaningful item which shares at least some of the important features of the SL expression (see Snell-Hornby 1988/1955:15). Nida and Taber argue that a “high degree” of equivalence of response is needed for the translation to achieve its purpose, although they point out that this response can never be identical with that elicited by the original(1969/1982:24). However, they also issue a warning about the limits within which the processes associated with producing dynamic equivalence remain valid: fore example, a comparison with the broadly simialr category of Linguistic Translaton reveals that only elements which are linguistically implict in TT-rather than any additional contextual information which might be necessary to a new audience—may legitimately be made explicit in TT. The notion of dynamic equivalence is of course especially relevant to Bible translation, given the particular need of Biblical translations not only to inform readers but also to present a relevant message to them and hopefully elicit a response(1969/1982:24). However, it can clearly also be applied to other genres, and indeed in many areas ( such as literary translation) it has arguably come to hold sway over other approaches (Nida 1964:160). See also Fuctional Equivalence. Further reading: Gut 1991; Nida 1964,1995: Nida & Taber 1969/1982.奈达(Nida)(1964)在《圣经》翻译中所采用的术语,用来描述翻译过程的两个基本趋向之一(另见Formal Equivalence[形式对等])。
翻译理论尤金·奈达的“动态对等”(Dynamic Equivalence)/“功能对等”(Functional Equivalence)尤金·A·奈达(Eugene A.Nida)(1914-2011),美国著名的语言学家,翻译家,翻译理论家。
1943年获密歇根大学语言学博士学位,长期在美国圣经学会主持翻译部的工作,曾任美国语言学会主席,1980年退休后任顾问。
奈达是一位杰出的语言学家,他到过96个国家,在一百多所大学做过讲座,来中国有13次之多,直至2003年,奈达89岁高龄时,仍到非洲讲学。
尤金最有影响的著作是1964出版的《翻译的科学探索》(Toward a Science of Translating),其次要数《翻译理论与实践》(The Theory and Practice of Translation),系与查尔斯·泰伯合著(1969)。
奈达理论的核心概念是“功能对等”。
所谓“功能对等”,就是说翻译时不求文字表面的死板对应,而要在两种语言间达成功能上的对等。
为使源语和目的语的之间的转换有一个标准,减少差异,尤金·A·奈达从语言学的角度出发,根据翻译的本质,提出了著名的“动态对等”翻译理论,即“功能对等”。
在这一理论中,他指出,“翻译是用最恰当、自然和对等的语言从语义到文体再现源语的信息”(郭建中,2000 , P65)。
奈达有关翻译的定义指明,翻译不仅是词汇意义上的对等,还包括语义、风格和文体的对等,翻译传达的信息既有表层词汇信息,也有深层的文化信息。
“动态对等”中的对等包括四个方面:1. 词汇对等;2. 句法对等;3. 篇章对等;4.文体对等。
在这四个方面中,奈达认为,“意义是最重要的,形式其次”(郭建中,2000 , P67)。
形式很可能掩藏源语的文化意义,并阻碍文化交流。
因此,在文学翻译中,根据奈达的理论,译者应以动态对等的四个方面,作为翻译的原则,准确地在目的语中再现源语的文化内涵。
Eugene NidaDynamic Equivalence and Formal EquivalenceEugene A. Nida (1914-- ) is a distinguished American translation theorist as well as a linguist. His translation theory has exerted a great influence on translation studies in Western countries. His work on translatoin set off the study of modern translation as an academic field, and he is regareded as “the patriarch of translation study and a founder of the discipline” (Snell-Hornby 1988:1; Baker 1998:277)Nida’s theory of dynamic equivalence is his major contribution to translation studies. The concept is first mentioned in his article “Principles of Translation as Exemplified by Bible Translating”(1959) (《从圣经翻译看翻译原则》)as he attempts to define translating. In his influential work Toward a Science of Translating (1964) (《翻译原则科学探索》), he postulates dynamic equivalent translation as follows:In such a translation (dynamic equivalent translation) one is not so concerned with matching the receptor-language message with the source-language message, but with the dynamic relationship, that the relationship between receptor and message should be substantially the same as that existed between the original receptors and the message (1964:159) However, he does not give a clear definition of dynamic equivalence untill 1969. In his 1969 textbook The Thoery and Practice of Translation(《翻译理论与实践》), dynamic equivalence is defined “ in terms of the degree to which the receptors of the messages in the receptor language respond to it in substantially the same manner as the receptores in the source language”(1969:24) The expression “dynamic equivalence” is superseded by “functional equivalencev” in his work From One Language to Another (1986, with De Waard)(《从一种语言到另一种语言》). However, there is essentially not much difference between the two concepts. The substitution of “functional equivalence” is just to stress the concept of function and to avoid misunderstandings of the term “dynamic”, which is mistaken by some persons for something in the sense of impact ( Nida 1993:124). In Language, Culture and Translating(1993)(《语言与文化:翻译中的语境》, “functional equivalence” is further divided into categories on two levels: the minimal level and the maximal level. The minimal level of “functional equivalence” is defined as “The readers of a translated text should be able to comprehend it to the point that they can conceive of how the original readers of the text must have understood and appreciated it”. The maximal level is stated as “The readers of a translated text should be able to understand and aprreciate it in essentially the same manner as the original readers did” (Nida 1993:118; 1995:224). The two definitions of equivalence reveal that the minimal level is realistic, whereas the maximal level is ieal. For Nida,good translations always lie somewhere between the two levels (Nida 19954:224). It can be noted that “functional equivalence” is a flexible concept with different degrees of adequacy. Dynamic EquivalenceA term introduced by Nida(1964) in the context of Bible translation to describe one of two basic orientations found in the process of translation (see also Formal Equivalence). Dynamic equivalence is the quality which characterizes a translation in which “the message of the original text has been so transported into the receptor language that the response of the receptor is essentially like that of the original receptors”(Nida & Taber 1969/1982:200, emphasis removed). In other words, a dynamically equivalent translation is one which has been produced in accordance with the threefold process of Analysis, Transfer and Restructuring (Nida & Taber 1969/1982:200); formulating such a translation will entail such procedures as substituting TL items which are more culturally appropriate for obscure ST items, making lingguistically implicit ST information explicit, and building in a certain amount of REDUNDANCY(1964:131) to aid comprehension. In a translation of this kind one is therefor not so concerned with “matching the receptor-language message with the source-laguage”; the aim is more to “relate the receptor to modes of behavior relevant within the context of his own culture” (Nida 1964:159). Possibly the best known example of a dynamically equivalent solution to a translation problem is seen in the decision to translate the Biblical phrase “Lamb of God” into and Eskimo language as “Seal of God”: the fact that lambs are unkown in polar regions has here led to the substitution of a culturally meaningful item which shares at least some of the important features of the SL expression (see Snell-Hornby 1988/1955:15). Nida and Taber argue that a “high degree” of equivalence of response is needed for the translation to achieve its purpose, although they point out that this response can never be identical with that elicited by the original(1969/1982:24). However, they also issue a warning about the limits within which the processes associated with producing dynamic equivalence remain valid: fore example, a comparison with the broadly simialr category of Linguistic Translaton reveals that only elements which are linguistically implict in TT-rather than any additional contextual information which might be necessary to a new audience—may legitimately be made explicit in TT. The notion of dynamic equivalence is of course especially relevant to Bible translation, given the particular need of Biblical translations not only to inform readers but also to present a relevant message to them and hopefully elicit a response(1969/1982:24). However, it can clearly also be applied to other genres, and indeed in many areas ( such as literary translation) it has arguably come to hold sway over other approaches (Nida 1964:160). See also Fuctional Equivalence. Further reading: Gut 1991; Nida 1964,1995: Nida & Taber 1969/1982.奈达(Nida)(1964)在《圣经》翻译中所采用的术语,用来描述翻译过程的两个基本趋向之一(另见Formal Equivalence[形式对等])。