功能翻译理论Skopos theory
- 格式:doc
- 大小:56.50 KB
- 文档页数:7
翻译目的论简介即就是skopostheory Skopos是希腊语,意为“目的”。
翻译目的论(skopostheorie)是将Skopos概念运用于翻译的理论,其核心概念是:翻译过程的最主要因素是整体翻译行为的目的。
Skopos这一术语通常用来指译文的目的。
除了Skopos,弗米尔还使用了相关的“目标(aim)”、“目的(purpose)”、“意图(intention)”和“功能(function)”等词。
为了避免概念混淆,诺德提议对意图和功能作基本的区分:“意图”是从发送者的角度定义的,而“功能”指文本功能,它是由接受者的期望、需求、已知知识和环境条件共同决定的。
在弗米尔的目的论框架中,决定翻译目的的最重要因素之一是受众——译文所意指的接受者,他们有自己的文化背景知识、对译文的期待以及交际需求。
每一种翻译都指向一定的受众,因此翻译是在“目的语情景中为某种目的及目标受众而生产的语篇”。
弗米尔认为原文只是为目标受众提供部分或全部信息的源泉。
可见原文在目的论中的地位明显低于其在对等论中的地位。
编辑本段翻译目的论的产生与发展20世纪70年代,功能派翻译理论兴起于德国。
其发展经过了以下几个阶段。
第一阶段: 凯瑟琳娜·莱斯首次把功能范畴引入翻译批评,将语言功能,语篇类型和翻译策略相联系,发展了以源文与译文功能关系为基础的翻译批评模式,从而提出了功能派理论思想的雏形。
莱斯认为理想的翻译应该是综合性交际翻译,即在概念性内容,语言形式和交际功能方面都与原文对等,但在实践中应该优先考虑的是译本的功能特征。
第二阶段: 汉斯·弗米尔(Vermeer)提出了目的论,将翻译研究从原文中心论的束缚中摆脱出来。
该理论认为翻译是以原文为基础的有目的和有结果的行为,这一行为必须经过协商来完成;翻译必须遵循一系列法则,其中目的法则居于首位。
也就是说,译文取决于翻译的目的。
此外,翻译还须遵循“语内连贯法则”和“语际连贯法则”。
关于功能翻译理论20世纪70年代至80年代,德国的卡塔琳娜·莱思(K.Reiss)、汉斯·弗米尔(H.J.Vermeer)、贾斯特·霍斯一曼特瑞(J.H.Manttari)以及克里丝汀·诺德(C.Nord)等学者提出的“功能翻译理论”为翻译理论研究开辟了一个新视角。
此理论的核心是翻译目的/译文功能,因此本文将借用此理论来解释编译现象。
功能翻译理论的主要理论包括莱思提出的文本类型与翻译策略论、霍斯-曼特瑞的翻译行动论、弗米尔的目的论,以及诺德的翻译为本语篇分析理论。
以下概述后三种论说,即翻译行动论、目的论及以翻译为本的语篇分析理论。
翻译行动论(theory of translational action)是霍斯-曼特瑞于80年代提出来的(Munday 2001:77)。
该理论把翻译视为实现信息的跨文化、跨语言转换而设计的复杂行动。
这种行动所涉及的参与者有:行动的发起者(the initiator)、委托者(the commissioner)、原文产生者(the ST producer)、译文产生者(the TT producer)、译文使用者(the TT user)及译文接受者(the TT receiver)。
翻译理论好比环环相扣的链条,每一个环节参与者都有自己的目的,并关联到下一环节。
翻译行动论强调译文在译语文化中的交际功能。
因此,译文的形式并非照搬原文模式,而是取决于其是否在译语文化中合理地为其功能服务。
目的论(Skopos Theory)是弗米尔于20世纪70年代提出来的。
(Munday 2001:78—79)。
Skopos是希腊语,意指“目的”,其主要概念是,所有翻译遵循的首要规则就是“目的规则”,翻译目的决定翻译策略与具体的翻译方法。
弗米尔认为,翻译的结果是译文,但译者必须清楚地了解翻译的目的与译文功能,才能做好翻译工作,产生出理想的译作。
后来莱思与弗米尔在合著的《翻译的理论基础》(Groundwork for a General Theory of Translation 1984)一书中,指出了目的论的具体准则(Munday 2001:78—79):(1)译文(TT)决定于其目的(determined by its skopos);(2)译文为目标语文化社会提供信息,其关注点是把源语语言文化信息转换为目标语语言文化信息;(3)译文不提供模棱两可的信息;(4)译文必须能自圆其说(internally coherent);(5)译文不得与原文相悖(coherent with the ST);(6)上述所列五条准则的顺序表明其重要性的先后顺序,而所有准则都受目的论之支配。
浅析翻译目的论的作用和意义目的论(skopostheory)是翻译行动论的重要组成部分。
其首倡者德国功能派翻译学家HansJ.Vermeer指出﹐翻译是一种行动,而行动皆有目的,所以翻译要受到目的的制约。
该翻译理论的核心原则是“目的准则”,这一理论超越了传统的“等值”或“等效”的翻译观。
在目的论指导下,翻译方法就呈现出了多样性。
如果能在忠实原文的基础上达到翻译的目的,对原文既可以采用逐字翻译的方法,也可以采用改写的方法,或者采用介于两者之间的任何翻译策略。
从这种目的论延伸出来的译文评价体系则认为评价一篇译文的优劣,并非是看它对原文的等值程度( equivalence ),而是看它对于翻译目的的适宜性(adequacy),即是否有助于在译语情境中实现译文的预期功能。
目的论在具体翻译过程中体现出的一个实际意义,是就翻译方法的选择上提出新的看法。
原文通常原本是为源于文化中的一个情景而制作的,因此处在“原文”的地位,而译者的作用是进行跨文化的沟通。
因此,翻译的目的就是由任务决定的目标或意图,原文的内容或者表现形式必要时可由译者来修改。
翻译策略的选择应该围绕语言转化过程中两种语言符号本身的结构差异,同时还应考虑到两种语言形式表现出的社会文化差异。
【翻译目的论的作用意义】在传统译论中,首先考虑的都是原文和原文读者的心理反应,而在目的论理论中,原文和原文读者的心理反应都被退回到次要位置,取而代之则是翻译目的和忠实的问题。
其次,对等原则是语言学派翻译理论的基础,目的论使翻译标准多元化,而翻译标准多元化使翻译更接近于实际。
再次,目的论学派使西方从以语言学派为主的翻译理论研究中开辟了一条新的道路。
最后,功能派理论有助于人们开展翻译批评。
由于目的论突破了传统译论的模式,将翻译研究聚焦在翻译过程中译文目的的选择上,是一种对翻译的外部研究,因此这样无疑能够弥补传统翻译研究中的不足,从而为翻译学科的探索又增加了一个新的研究视角。
收稿日期:2008-09-15功能翻译理论是以目的论为核心,强调文本和翻译的功能的一种翻译理论。
它并不是20世纪的产物,但系统完善的功能翻译理论直到20世纪70年代才在德国形成。
早期的文学翻译和圣经翻译者主张字字对应的翻译,而翻译的结果往往让人迷惑不解。
20世纪50-60年代,语言学主导着翻译研究,人们把翻译仅仅看作是一种符号的转换过程。
20世纪70年代以来,德国功能翻译理论得到了蓬勃发展。
功能翻译理论学者开始认识到,翻译不仅仅是语言学的问题,甚至最关键的问题都不是语言学。
由于语言学并不能真正解决翻译中遇到的问题,他们开始探索能解决这些问题的其它途径。
最终,功能翻译理论学者找到了一种用文化来解释翻译现象的理论,这一理论从文化的角度来解释翻译中交际情景的特殊性以及语言情景因素与非语言情景因素的关系。
这一理论使我们对翻译有了更深入的理解。
功能翻译理论的开拓者是瑟林娜·雷斯(KatharinaReiss ),她是一位经验丰富的翻译家和翻译教师。
在她的《翻译批评的可能性与限制》一书中,她第一次把功能的范畴引入了翻译批评,开始对翻译的分析模式进行研究。
她的学生汉斯·威密尔(HansJ .Vermeer )则发展了这一理论,创立了功能翻译的核心理论-翻译目的论(Skopostheory )。
德国功能翻译理论的另一杰出代表人物是贾斯塔·赫兹·曼塔利(JustaHolzManttar ),曼塔利认为“翻译(translation )”是一个狭义的概念,它只涉及源语文本的使用。
而“翻译行为(translational action )”则是一个广义的概念,它涉及译者为翻译所做的一切,包括在翻译过程中对文化或技巧上的考虑。
克里斯蒂安·诺德(Christiane Nord )则是德国第二代功能翻译学派学者的杰出代表,是德国功能翻译理论的集大成者和主要倡导者之一,她是德国功能学派中首次用英文系统总结功能派各种思想,深入浅出地阐述了功能派复杂的学术理论和术语的学者。
功能翻译理论述评摘要:本文对功能翻译理论的来龙去脉及其发展进行了介绍,对功能翻译理论的代表人物及其核心思想进行阐述,目的在于说明,功能翻译理论以翻译目的为总则,把原文作者、译者、译文读者都纳入了研究的范畴,从而为文学翻译批评提供了一个多角度、动态的视野。
关键词:功能翻译理论;翻译目的论一、引言二十世纪五十年代至六十年代,主要是从语言学角度来研究翻译,特别是结构主义语言学,把语言看成了语码,翻译则成了语言操作。
七十年代,功能翻译理论开始兴起,领军人物有K.赖斯、H.J.费米尔、C.诺德、J.H.曼塔利等。
何为功能翻译理论,诺德的解释是:“功能主义,指的是功能或者是文本和翻译的功能的研究。
”它涵盖了多种理论方法,主要以德国功能翻译学派为主,还包括其他国家理论家的观点。
如英国学者纽马克的文本功能类型和美国学者奈达的功能对等论。
以功能方法来研究翻译的源头可以追溯到圣经翻译。
当时不少译者发现在不同的情况下需要采取不同的翻译。
但那时“适当的翻译”强调“字对字”翻译和对原文的忠实,即使译文与想要达到的意图不一致。
当时的圣经翻译者认为翻译应包含两个过程:一是对原文本的忠实再现,二是使译文适应于目标读者。
马丁•路德主张在翻译圣经时在部分文章采取“字对字”翻译,其他部分文章应使译文与读者的需要和期望一致。
同样,尤金•奈达区分了两种翻译中的对等:形式对等与动态对等。
奈达特别强调翻译目的、译者和接收者的作用以及翻译过程的文化含意。
但奈达的翻译仍是关注原文,与德国功能翻译学派的观点不完全一致。
二、功能翻译理论概述功能翻译理论的提出得益于交际理论、行为理论、话语语言学、语篇学说以及文学研究中趋向于接受理论的一系列研究活动所取得的成果。
它的出现反映了翻译的全面转向,即由原先占主导地位的语言学及侧重形式、强调等值的翻译理论转向更加注重功能和社会文化因素的翻译观。
功能派认为翻译是一种行为。
其理论的重点表现在如下三方面: (1)对翻译实质的阐释(2)对翻译过程参与者的角色分析(3)功能翻译原则的提出。
德国的功能派翻译理论仲伟合国外翻译理论?德国的功能派翻译理论仲伟合钟钰翻译早在公元前就已成为人们争论不休的话题。
从公元前罗马帝国的翻译学家们对“词对词”翻译与“意义对意义”翻译展开辩论至今,翻译理论领域可以说是“百花齐放,百家争鸣”,特别是近代,随着人类认知能力的发展,新的翻译理论不断涌现。
二十世纪七十年代,德国就出现一派翻译理论———功能派翻译理论。
功能派认为翻译(包括口、笔译)是一种行为。
其理论的重点表现在如下三方面:(1)对翻译实质的阐释(2)对翻译过程参与者的角色分析(3)功能翻译原则的提出。
本文拟从这三方面入手,介绍功能派翻译理论。
1.功能派的形成及重要理论谈到功能派,就不得不提及三位功能派翻译理论杰出的贡献者凯瑟林娜?雷斯(K atharina Reiss )、汉斯?威密尔(Hans.Vermeer )、贾斯塔?赫滋?曼塔利(Justa H olz Manttari )。
雷斯首先于1971年在她的著作《翻译批评的可能性与限制》(Po ssibilities and L imitation of Translation Criticism )一书中将文本功能列为翻译批评的一个标准,即从原文、译文两者功能之间的关系来评价译文。
当时,雷斯的理论建立在对等理论基础之上。
因此,这种关系实际上指的是原文与译文的功能对等。
雷斯的学生威密尔则突破了对等理论的限制,以文本目的(skopos )为翻译过程的第一准则,发展了功能派的主要理论:目的论(skopostheory )。
威密尔所提出的目的论(sko 2postheory )是功能派翻译理论中最重要的理论。
skopos 是希腊词,意思是“目的”。
根据目的论,所有翻译遵循的首要法则就是“目的法则”:翻译行为所要达到的目的决定整个翻译行为的过程,即结果决定方法。
这个目的有三种解释:译者的目的(如赚钱);译文的交际目的(如启迪读者);和使用某种特殊翻译手段所要达到的目的(如为了说明某种语言中语法结构的特殊之处而采用按其结构直译的方法)。
德国功能派翻译理论概述姓名:常首鸣班级:08级外应2班学号:2008142摘要:功能主义翻译理论于20世纪70年代出现在德国。
它既继承了传统译论的合理的成分,又突破了其束缚,具有很强的可操作性和实践意义,为整个翻译界提供了一条新的研究发展思路。
本文简要介绍功能学派的四位代表人物的主要理论,并对功能派翻译理论进行简要评述。
关键词:功能派翻译理论,目的论,翻译行为理论,功能,忠诚一、功能派翻译理论提出的背景翻译早在公元前就已成为人们争论不休的话题。
从罗马帝国的翻译家们对“词对词”翻译与“意义对意义”翻译展开辩论至今,翻译理论领域可以说是“百花齐放, 百家争鸣”。
功能派翻译理论虽然直到20 世纪70 年代在德国才首先产,可综观历史,翻译的功能观却在翻译实践中早为有所表现。
可是,无论中外,翻译的标准往往更多强调的是译文与原文本字面上严格忠实,因此在翻译的意图、目的和译本所起到的实际效果之间往往会产生一定的距离,这样翻译活动的执行者就常常处于一种两难的境地。
然而,从20 世纪50年代起,西方翻译理论基本上被圈定在语言范围之内,翻译理论家没有认识到翻译的本质不仅是纯语言方面的转换,而是建立在语言形式上不同文化间的交流。
随着翻译实践和理论研究的发展,语言学派也逐渐意识到其内在的弱点。
此时, 以新的视角重新审视翻译活动成为一种必然,功能派翻译理论就是这样一种尝试。
二、功能派主要理论功能主义理论将翻译定义从翻译即把原语文本一一对应地转换为目的语的观点中解放出来,扩展到翻译行为,把翻译研究纳入跨文化交际研究,指出翻译涉及跨文化的一切语言符号与非语言符号的转换。
功能派理论中对等原则的位置与语言学派大相径庭。
对等原则是语言学派翻译理论的基础,而功能派只将其视作特定情况下采用的原则。
功能主义理论是以目的论为主导的翻译标准多元化的理论体系,更符合翻译实践。
德国素有研究功能翻译理论的传统,凯瑟琳·赖斯( Katharina Reiss ) 、弗米尔( Hans. Vermeer ) 、曼特瑞( Justa Holz Manttari ) 、诺德( Christiane Nord )为其代表人物,他们为功能派的创立和发展做出了突出的贡献。
目的论的方法摘要:1.目的论的基本概念2.目的论的方法分类3.目的论在翻译中的应用4.目的论的局限性与挑战5.总结与展望正文:一、目的论的基本概念目的论(Skopos Theory)是德国翻译学者赫尔穆特·费尔米尔(Hans J.Vermeer)和凯瑟琳·雷斯(Katharina Reiss)在20世纪70年代提出的一种翻译理论。
它主张翻译活动应以实现译文读者的理解和接受为目标,强调翻译过程中译者的主观能动性和目标文化导向。
目的论认为,翻译不仅仅是传递原文信息,还应考虑到译文的目的、功能和接受者,从而使译文在不同文化背景下达到预期效果。
二、目的论的方法分类1.功能翻译方法:根据译文的功能和目的,采用合适的翻译策略。
例如,采用归化策略使译文符合目标语规范,或采用异化策略保留原文特色。
2.忠实翻译方法:在保证译文忠实于原文内容的同时,兼顾译文的可读性和接受性。
这种方法要求译者具备较高的语言素养和跨文化交际能力。
3.加译法:在原文基础上增加解释性词语或补充信息,以帮助目标语读者理解译文。
这种方法适用于原文中含有文化背景知识或专业术语的情况。
4.删译法:根据译文目的和读者需求,对原文进行删减或简化。
这种方法有助于提高译文的可读性和通顺性。
三、目的论在翻译中的应用1.文学翻译:在翻译文学作品时,目的论强调译者要充分考虑目标文化读者的审美习惯和接受程度。
例如,在翻译中国古代诗词时,译者应在保持原诗意境的基础上,采用恰当的翻译方法使之符合目标语诗歌的形式和风格。
2.商务翻译:在商务领域,目的论指导下的翻译注重译文的专业性、准确性和可操作性。
例如,产品说明、合同、广告等文本的翻译,都需要根据译文读者的需求和背景进行相应调整。
3.官方文件翻译:在政治、外交、法律等领域的官方文件翻译中,目的论强调译文的准确性和权威性。
同时,译者还需关注译文在不同文化间的可接受性,以避免因文化差异而产生的误解。
四、目的论的局限性与挑战1.主观性:目的论强调译者的主观能动性,但过度主观可能导致译文偏离原文,影响信息的传递。
功能翻译理论述评摘要:本文对功能翻译理论的来龙去脉及其发展进行了介绍,对功能翻译理论的代表人物及其核心思想进行阐述,目的在于说明,功能翻译理论以翻译目的为总则,把原文作者、译者、译文读者都纳入了研究的范畴,从而为文学翻译批评提供了一个多角度、动态的视野。
关键词:功能翻译理论;翻译目的论一、引言二十世纪五十年代至六十年代,主要是从语言学角度来研究翻译,特别是结构主义语言学,把语言看成了语码,翻译则成了语言操作。
七十年代,功能翻译理论开始兴起,领军人物有K.赖斯、H.J.费米尔、C.诺德、J.H.曼塔利等。
何为功能翻译理论,诺德的解释是:“功能主义,指的是功能或者是文本和翻译的功能的研究。
”它涵盖了多种理论方法,主要以德国功能翻译学派为主,还包括其他国家理论家的观点。
如英国学者纽马克的文本功能类型和美国学者奈达的功能对等论。
以功能方法来研究翻译的源头可以追溯到圣经翻译。
当时不少译者发现在不同的情况下需要采取不同的翻译。
但那时“适当的翻译”强调“字对字”翻译和对原文的忠实,即使译文与想要达到的意图不一致。
当时的圣经翻译者认为翻译应包含两个过程:一是对原文本的忠实再现,二是使译文适应于目标读者。
马丁•路德主张在翻译圣经时在部分文章采取“字对字”翻译,其他部分文章应使译文与读者的需要和期望一致。
同样,尤金•奈达区分了两种翻译中的对等:形式对等与动态对等。
奈达特别强调翻译目的、译者和接收者的作用以及翻译过程的文化含意。
但奈达的翻译仍是关注原文,与德国功能翻译学派的观点不完全一致。
二、功能翻译理论概述功能翻译理论的提出得益于交际理论、行为理论、话语语言学、语篇学说以及文学研究中趋向于接受理论的一系列研究活动所取得的成果。
它的出现反映了翻译的全面转向,即由原先占主导地位的语言学及侧重形式、强调等值的翻译理论转向更加注重功能和社会文化因素的翻译观。
功能派认为翻译是一种行为。
其理论的重点表现在如下三方面: (1)对翻译实质的阐释(2)对翻译过程参与者的角色分析(3)功能翻译原则的提出。
方梦之主编:《译学词典》,上海外语教育出版社,第29页功能翻译理论functionalist translation theory又称“功能目的论”(Skopos theory)。
1971年,德国的莱斯(K. Reiss)首先提出“把翻译行为所要达到的特殊目的”作为翻译评价的新模式。
1984年她在与费米尔(H. J. Vermeer)合写的General Foundation of Translation Theory一书中声称:译者在整个翻译过程中的参照系不应是“对等”翻译理论所注重的原文及其功能,而应是译文在译语文化环境中所预期达到的一种或若钟交际功能。
20世纪90年代初,德国学者克利斯蒂安·诺德(Christiane Nord)进一步拓展了译文功能理论。
她强调译文与原文的联系,但这种联系的质量与数量由译文的预期功能确定。
这就是说,根据译文语境,原文中的哪些内容或成分可以保留,哪些需调整或改写,该由译文的预期功能确定。
功能目的理论的两项基本原则是:1. 翻译各方面的交互作用受翻译目的所决定;2. 目的随接受对象的不同而变化。
按照这两项原则,译者可以为了达到目的而采用任何他自己认为适当的翻译策略。
换句话说,目的决定方式(The end justifies the means)。
作为受文化制约的语言符号,原文语篇和译文语篇受到各自交际环境的影响,译文功能与原文功能可相似或保持一致,也可能完全不同。
根据不同的语境因素和预期功能,选择最佳的处理方法,这是功能翻译理论比以对等为基础的翻译理论或极端功能主义的翻译理论更为优越之处。
翻译功能理论指导下的翻译方法表现出较大的灵活性,较高的科学性和易操作性。
Toury 把“功能目的论”看作是“译文文本中心论”的翻版。
Skopos theory (plural Skopos theories)1.(translation studies) The idea that translating and interpreting should primarilytake into account the function of both the source and target text.o1995, Paul Kussmaul, Training The Translator, John BenjaminsPublishing Co, p. 149:The functional approach has a great affinity with Skopos theory. The function of a translation is dependent on the knowledge, expectations, values andnorms of the target readers, who are again influenced by the situation they arein and by the culture. These factors determine whether the function of thesource text or passages in the source text can be preserved or have to bemodified or even changed.Introduction to the Skopos TheoryThe Skopos theory is an approach to translation which was put forward by Hans Vemeer and developed in Germany in the late 1970s and which oriented a more functionally and socioculturally concept of translation. Translation is considered not as a process of translation, but as a specific form of human action. In our mind, transla tion has a purpose, and the word “Skopos” was from Greek. It’s used as the technical term for the purpose of the translation.翻译目的论,"skopos"是希腊语“目的”的意思。
其核心概念是翻译过程的最主要因素是整体翻译行为的目的。
1.Introduction to the Skopos TheoryThe Skopos theory is an approach to translation which was put forward by Hans Vemeer and developed in Germany in the late 1970s and which oriented a more functionally and socioculturally concept of translation. Translation is considered not as a process of translation, but as a specific form of human action. In our mind, translation has a purpose, and the word “Skopos” was from Greek. It’s used as the technical term for the purpose of the translation. In the frame work of this theory, one of the most important factors determining the purpose of a translation is the address, who is the intended receiver or audience of the target text with their world language. Every translation is directed at an intended audience. The theory focuses above all on the purpose of the translation, which determines the translation methods and strategies that are to be employed in order to produce a functionally adequate result. Vermeer regards it as an “offer of information” that is partly or wholly turned into an “offer of information” for the target audience. From t his view, the status of the source is clearly much lower in Skopos theory than the equivalence theory.Ⅰ.Introduction of the Skopos TheorySkopos theory is the nucleus of German Functional School. The main idea of Skopos theory is that translators should hold the thought from the perspective of the target readers during the process of translation. Therefore, translators should bear in mind what the function of translation text is, what the target readers' demand is and even what communicative situation is. Consequently, the choice of translation strategies is decided by the purpose of the translation text,in order to achieve a better function text.There are three main rules which are skopos rule, coherence rule and fidelity rule.1.Skopos RuleSkopos is a Greek word for"aim"or"purpose". "The top-ranking rule for any translation is thus the'skopos rule',which means that a translation action is determined by its skopos;that is,'the end justifies the means'"by Reiss and Vermeer.Vermeer also stresses on many occasions that the skopos rule is a general rule,and translation strategies and methods are determined by the purpose and the intended function of the target text.2.Coherence RuleThe coherence rule states that the target text"must be interpretable as coherent with the target text receiver's situation".In other words,the target text must be translated in such a way that it is coherent for the target text receivers,given their circumstances and knowledge.In terms of coherence rule,the source text is no longer of most authority but only part of the translation beliefe.It is only an offer of information for the translator,who in turn picks out what he considers to be meaningful in the receiver's situation.2.Fidelity RuleTranslation is a preceding offer of information. It is expected to bear some relationship with the corresponding source text.Vermeer calls this relationship "intertextual coherence" or "fidelity". This is postulated as a further principle, referred to as the "fidelity rule" by Reiss and Vermeer in 1984.The fidelity rule merely states that there must be coherence between the translated version and the source text4.The Relationship among the RulesFidelity rule is considered subordinate to coherence rule,and both are subordinate to the skopos rule.If the skopos requires a change of function,the criterion will no longer be fidelity to the source text but adequacy or appropriateness with regard to the skopos.And if the skopos demands intra-textual incoherence,the standard of coherence rule is no longer vivid.Skopos theorySkopos theory is an approach to translation which was developed in Germany in the late 1970s (Vermeer 1978), and which reflects a general shift from predominantly LINGUISTIC and rather formal translation theories to a more functionally and socioculturally oriented concept of translation. (cf. ACTION (THEORY OF TRANSLATORIAL ACTION); COMMUNICATIVE/FUNCTIONAL APPROACHES). This shift drew inspiration from communication theory, action theory, text linguistics and text theory, as well as from movements in literary studies towards reception theories (see for example Iser 1978). Apart from Hans Vermeer, the founder of skopos theory, other scholars working in the paradigm include Margret Ammann (1989/1990), Hans Hönig and Paul Kussmaul (1982), Sigrid Kupsch-Losereit (1986), Christiane Nord (1988) and Heidrun Witte (1987a); see also articles in the journal TEXTconTEXT, published since 1986 by Groos in Heidelberg.Skopos theory takes seriously factors which have always been stressed in action theory, and which were brought into sharp relief with the growing need in the latter half of the twentieth century for the translation of non-literary text types. In the translation of scientific and academic papers, instructions for use, tourist guides, contracts, etc., the contextual factors surrounding the translation cannot be ignored. These factors include the culture of the intended readers of the target text and of the client who has commissioned it, and, in particular, the function which the text is to perform in that culture for those readers. Skopos theory is directly oriented towards this function.Translation is viewed not as a process of transcoding, but as a specific form of human action. Like any other human action, translation has a purpose, and the word skopos, derived from Greek, is used as the technical term for the purpose of a translation. Skopos must be defined before translation can begin; in highlighting skopos, the theory adopts a prospective attitude to translation, as opposed to the retrospective attitude adopted in theories which focus on prescriptions derived from the source text.In addition to its purpose, any action has an outcome. The outcome of translational action is a translatum (Vermeer 1979:174; translat in Reiss and Vermeer 1984/1991:2), a particular variety of target text.Vermeer’s skopos theoryVermeer (1978:100) postulates that as a general rule it must be the intended purpose of the target text that determines translation methods and strategies. From this postulate, he derives the skopos rule: Human action (and its subcategory: translation) is determined by its purpose (skopos), and therefore it is a function of its purpose. The rule is formalized using the formula: IA(Trl) = f(Sk). The main point of this functional approach is the following: it is not the source text as such, or its effects on the source-text recipient, or the function assigned to it by the author, that determines thetranslation process, as is postulated by EQUIV ALENCE-based translation theories, but the prospective function or skopos of the target text as determined by the initiator’s, i.e. client’s, needs. Consequently, the skopos is largely constrained by the target text user (reader/listener) and his/her situation and cultural background.Two further general rules are the coherence rule and the fidelity rule. The coherence rule stipulates that the target text must be sufficiently coherent to allow the intended users to comprehend it, given their assumed background knowledge and situational circumstances, The starting point for a translation is a text as part of a world continuum, written in the source language. It has to be translated into a target language in such a way that it becomes part of a world continuum which can be interpreted by the recipients as coherent with their situation (Vermeer 1978:100).The fidelity rule concerns intertextual coherence between translatum and source text, and stipulates merely that some relationship must remain between the two once the overriding principle of skopos and the rule of (intratextual) coherence have been satisfied.The general translation theory of Reiss and VermeerIn comb ining Vermeer’s general skopos theory of 1978 with the specific translation theory developed by Katharina Reiss, Reiss and Vermeer (1984/1991) arrive at a translation theory that is sufficiently general (allgemeine Translationstheorie), and sufficiently complex, to cover a multitude of individual cases. They abstract from phenomena that are specific to individual cultures and languages an account of general factors determining the translation process, to which special theories that concern individual problems or subfields can be linked consistently.A text is viewed as an offer of information (Informationsangebot) made by a producer to a recipient. Translation is then characterized as offering information to members of one culture in their language (the target language and culture) about information originally offered in another language within another culture (the source language and culture). A translation is a secondary offer of information, imitating a primary offer of information. Or, to be more precise, the translator offers information about certain aspects of the source-text-in-situation, according to the target text skopos specified by the initiator (Reiss and Vermeer 1984/1991:76). Neither the selection made from the information offered in the source text, nor the specification of the skopos happens at random; rather, they are determined by the needs, expectations, etc. of the target-text receivers. Translation is by definition interlingual and intercultural, it involves both linguistic and cultural transfer; in other words, it is a culture-transcending process (Vermeer 1992:40).Since skopos varies with text receivers, the skopos of the target text and of the source text may be different. In cases where the skopos is the same for the two texts, Reiss and Vermeer (1984/1991:45) speak of Funktionskonstanz (functional constancy), whereas cases in which the skopos differs between the two texts undergo Funktionsänderung (change of function). In cases of the latter type, the standard for the translation will not be intertextual coherence with the source text, but adequacy or appropriateness to the skopos, which also determines the selection and arrangement of content.Although a translatum is not ipso facto a faithful imitation of the source text, fidelity to the source text is one possible or legitimate skopos. Skopos theory should not, therefore, be understood as promoting (extremely) free translation in all, or even a majority of cases.Although the terms ‘skopos’, ‘purpose’ and ‘function’ are often used in terchangeably by Reiss and Vermeer (1984/1991), function is also used in a more specific sense which derivesmainly from Reiss. In this sense, it is linked to aspects of genre (Textsorte) and text type (Texttyp). The source text can be assigned to a text type and to a genre, and in making this assignment, the translator can decide on the hierarchy of postulates which has to be observed during target-text production (Reiss and Vermeer 1984/1991:196). Reiss and Vermeer’s text typology, based on Bühler (1934), includes the informative, the expressive and the operative text types, which derive from the descriptive, the expressive and the appellative functions of language, respectively. Such a typology is helpful mainly where functional constancy is required between source and target texts. However, both Vermeer (1989a) and Reiss (1988) have expressed reservations about the role of genre: the source text does not determine the genre of the target text, nor does the genre determine ipso facto the form of the target text, or, indeed, the skopos; rather, it is the skopos of the translation that determines the appropriate genre for the translatum, and the genre, being a consequence of the skopos, is secondary to it (Vermeer 1989a: 187).Status of source text and target textAccording to skopos theory, then, translation is the production of a functionally appropriate target text based on an existing source text, and the relationship between the two texts is specified according to the skopos of the translation. One practical consequence of this theory is a reconceptualization of the status of the source text. It is up to the translator as the expert to decide what role a source text is to play in the translation action. The decisive factor is the precisely specified skopos, and the source text is just one constituent of the commission given to the translator. The translator is required to act consciously in accordance with the skopos, and skopos must be decided separately in each specific case. It may be ADAPTATION to the target culture, but it may also be to acquaint the reader with the source culture. The translator should know what the point of a translation is—that it has some goal—but that any given goal is only one among many possible goals. The important point is that no source text has only one correct or preferable translation (Vermeer 1989a: 182), and that, consequently, every translation commission should explicitly or implicitly contain a statement of skopos. The skopos for the target text need not be identical with that attributed to the source text; but unless the skopos for the target text is specified, translation cannot, properly speaking, be carried out at all.Criticism of skopos theoryObjections to skopos theory mainly concern the definition of translation and the relationship between source text and target text.It has been argued that Reiss and Vermeer, in their attempt to establish a truly general and comprehensive translation theory, force totally disparate cases of text relations into a frame which they attempt to hold together by means of the notion of information offer (Schreitmüller 1994:105). But there should be a limit to what may legitimately be called translation as opposed to, for example, ADAPTATION. In translation proper (Koller 1990), the source text is the yardstick by which all translations must be measured, independently of the purpose for which they were produced.In this context it is also argued that, even though a translation may indeed fulfil its intended skopos perfectly well, it may nevertheless be assessed as inadequate on other counts, particularly as far as lexical, syntactic, or stylistic decisions on the microlevel are concerned (a point made by Chesterman 1994:153, who otherwise acknowledges the important contributions of skopos theory). Such objections come mainly from linguistically oriented approaches to translation that focus on bottom-up aspects of text production and reception. For example, Newmark (1991b: 106)criticizes the oversimplification that is inherent in functionalism, the emphasis on the message at the expense of richness of meaning and to the detriment of the authority of the source-language text.However, proponents of skopos theory argue for a wide definition of translation (e.g. Reiss 1990). As soon as one asks for the purpose of a translation, strategies that are often listed under adaptation, for example reformulation, paraphrase and textual explication, will come in naturally as part of translation. And critics of microlevel decisions usually lift the texts out of their respective environments for comparative purposes, ignoring their functional aspects.Reiss and Vermeer’s cultural approach has also been judged less applicable to literary translation, due to the special status of a literary work of art. Snell-Hornby (1990:84) argues that the situation and function of literary texts are more complex than those of non-literary texts, and that style is a highly important factor. Therefore, although skopos theory is by no means irrelevant to literary translation, a number of points need rethinking before the theory can be made fully applicable to this genre.It is also possible to argue that to assign a skopos to a literary text is to restrict its possibili ties of interpretation. In literary theory a distinction is often made between text as potential and text as realization, and skopos theory appears to see the text only as realization, and not as a potential which can be used in different situations with different addressees and having different functions. However, Vermeer (1989a: 181) argues that when a text is actually composed, this is done with an assumed function, or a restricted set of functions, in mind. Skopos theory does not deny that a text may be used in ways that had not been foreseen originally, only that a translatum is a text in its own right, with its own potential for use.Skopos theory has helped to bring the target text into focus. As a text, a translation is not primarily determined by a source text, but by its own skopos. This axiom provides a theoretical argument for describing translations in terms of original text production and against describing them in the more traditional terms of EQUIV ALENCE with another text in another language (see also Jakobsen 1993:156). Translation is a DECISION MAKING process. The criteria for the decisions are provided by the skopos, i.e. the concrete purpose and aims in a concrete translation commission.The shift of focus away from source text reproduction to the more independent challenges of target-text production has brought innovation to translation theory. As attention has turned towards the functional aspects of translation and towards the explanation of translation decisions, the expertise and ethical responsibility of the translator have come to the fore. Translators have come to be viewed as target-text authors and have been released from the limitations and restrictions imposed by a narrowly defined concept of loyalty to the source text alone.Further readingAmmann 1989/1990; Newmark 1991b; Reiss 1986, 1988, 1990; Reiss and Vermeer 1984/ 1991; Vermeer 1978, 1982, 1989a, 1992.CHRISTINA SCHÄFFNER中央电视台主持人:芮成钢名言世界上两件事情最难:一是把自己的思想装进别人的脑袋,二是把别人的钱装进自己的口袋。