流畅与突显—典籍英译的策略研究
|
摘要
从根本上说,中国典籍英译是我国文化外交的一部分,因此我们有必要主动从事典籍英译策略的研究。毋容置疑,得体的策略将促成翻译的成功。
言及典籍英译策略,人们纷云采用文化翻译中的异化还是归化。这非常自然,因为典籍英译是文化翻译的特殊领域。然而典籍英译的特殊性与异化或归化各自的不足也引起人们诸多的思考,因此,许多学者转向更宽阔的视界重新考虑这一课题。
本文旨在尝试在文化外交精神的观照下,运用理论比较和应用描述的方法努力寻求如何最有效地进行典籍英译。
文化外交是独立主权国家利用文化手段来达到特定目的外交活动。它是一种国际活动,其目标在于是借助人文关怀与感情投入进行和平式的温情说服,以期与国外民众和政府官员建立起一种持久的、有深远影响力的国际友谊,从而获得他们的同情、理解和支持。这就要求我们尊重与正视民族差异、语言差异与文化差异,多注意说服的方式和技巧。为了能吸引国外公众并让他们容易理解我们之所想而采取和平式的柔性公示文化真相的策略是明智的。我们的文化外交应不卑不亢。所有这些即是文化外交精神。
在文化外交精神的观照下,作者提出了三个平等理念,即民族(种族)平等,语言平等,文化平等。然后回顾了施莱尔马赫的两种翻译方法,发现其真正用意不在能指而在所指,强调吃透原文语言,把握原文意旨与真实映象。
接着,作者分析了文努蒂的异化翻译理论,指出了其中有价值的观点,如(1)翻译是展示文化差异的场所,应让读者看到异域文化;(2)翻译有助于塑造文化身份;(3)译者与作者应平起平坐,等等。不过,我们也不能忽视该理论的缺陷:预设不平等,抵抗句子流畅。
为了弥补异化翻译理论的不足,本文作者提出并描述了“流畅与突显”策略,并论证了其理论上的合理性与实践上的可行性。
作为翻译策略,“流畅与突显”要求译文在句法上必须符合目的语语文习惯(实践证明译文中出现的,对目的语读者而言的新奇词语不会降低译文句子的流畅度,而且,按英语句法习惯写(说)出流畅的句子不是不可能的。),同时突出中国文化特色,原作意图、风格以及原作中生活映象的真实。但是,不同文体的作品要求突显的方面也不一样。具体来说,翻译思想著作要突出其原意、翻译诗歌要突出其形式和意境、翻译小说(和戏剧)突出其生活映象等方面的真实。文化特色与写作风格则是不同文体作品对突显的共同要求。换句话说,译者应阐明思想著作中的深层涵义,保持诗歌的形式相似(包括音乐美,诗行数目与音响结构特点)和意境一致。另外,译者清醒地把握并转达原作中的文化承载词和修辞手法。不过说到底,译文的质量(流畅与突显)取决于译者的双语水平。这些在第四章有详细例示。
落实到典籍英译,流畅意味着尊重英语读者及其语言、文化,突显则要维护中国民族自尊与文化自尊。流畅建议译者按英语的句法习惯去说、去写,充分考虑、高度尊重了英语读者及其文化,而突显则有助于译者展示原作特点,高扬文化特色,充分照顾原语作者及其文化。
翻译的真正任务是让原作作者与目的语读者相会于中点。“我”和“你”而不是“我”和“他者”的关系应是原作作者、译者、目的语读者之间的主导关系,这种关系同样适用于原语文化与目的语文化。
“流畅与突显”之构想可能会减少异化与归化带来的麻烦。因为“流畅与突显”之构想是建立在民族平等,语言平等与文化平等基础之上的,而且吸收了异化与归化的各自的优点。平等意识是成功文化外交的催化剂。
本文共分五章。第一章介绍了典籍的定义,典籍翻译实践及相关策略,然后提出了“流畅与突显”策略。第二章强调了中国人主动英译典籍的意义。第三章在理论和实践上详细讨论了“流畅与突显”之构想。第四章用更多的范例阐述这一策略在不同语境中的运用,以说明不同文体的作品对突显的不同要求。第五章总结了归化/异化的实质,彰显了流畅与突显策略的不卑不亢。
Fundamentally, translating Chinese classics is a part of cultural diplomacy; therefore, it is necessary for us to take the initiatives to study strategies of translating Chinese classics. There is no doubt that appropriate strategies will bring translation to success.
Speaking of strategies of translating Chinese classics, people have different voices on whether foreignization or domestication should be adopted in cultural translation. It is quite natural that people argue about the strategies because translating Chinese classics is a special part of cultural translation. However, particularities of translating Chinese classics and respective demerits of foreignization or domestication have set people thinking a lot. Consequently, many scholars have turned to a wider sphere of vision to reconsider this issue.
In this thesis, the author, in the light of cultural diplomacy, intends to make a tentative attempt to find the most effective method to translate Chinese classics into English by theoretical comparison and practical description.
Cultural diplomacy is the diplomatic activity that the independent and sovereign states perform to achieve certain goals by means of culture. Cultural diplomacy is a kind of international activity, the aim of which is to achieve international friendship by peaceful and affable persuasion through humanistic care and emotional investment, and to exert enduring and far-reaching influence on foreign public and governmental officials so as to gain sympathy, understanding and support from foreign countries. This asks us to respect and face national, linguistic and cultural differences, and pay close attention to the skills and manners of persuasion, in order to attract the foreign public and let them easily understand what we are thinking. It is wise to publicize the cultural truth peacefully and softly. Our cultural diplomacy should be neither haughty nor humble. All of these make up the spirit of cultural diplomacy.
Enlightened by the spirit of cultural diplomacy, the author first puts forth three equalities, namely, national equality, linguistic equality and cultural equality, and then, traces the two translation methods by Friedrich Schleiermacher, finding out that the real stress of Friedrich Schleiermacher is the signified rather than the signifier, emphasizing the importance of getting the essence of a source language, and visualizing images in source-language texts.
Next, the author analyzes Venuti’s foreignization theory on translation and points out Venuti’s valuable ideas. (a) A translation should be the site where a different culture comes into being, and where a reader can get a glimpse of a cultural other; (b) Translation helps to form the identity of a culture; (c) Both the author and the translator should enjoy equal status. Yet, we can not overlook the flaws of his theory: presupposition of inequality and resistance to syntactical fluency.
To seam the holes of foreignization theory on translation, the author of this thesis puts forward and describes the strategy of fluency and prominence, as well as verifies its theoretical rationality and practical feasibility.
Fluency and Prominence as a translation strategy requires that translated versions are syntactically fluent (practice witnesses that some terms which are new and exotic to English readers will not reduce syntactical fluency of the target-language text. And it is not impossible to produce fluent sentences in line with English grammar), and at the same time, the individuality of Chinese culture, the intention, the style and the life reality in the source-language text are prominent. Works of different styles ask for different aspects of prominence. Different aspects of prominence in translation are respectively prominence of the intention in ideological works, prominence of the poetic form and imagery in poetry, prominence of the reality of life in novels (and dramas), and prominence of distinctive cultural images and writing manners of them all. In other words, translators have to elucidate the deep meaning of ideological works; they should convey the similarity in form (the beauty of music, the number of lines and the feature of sound structures) and imagery correspondence. In addition, translators should have a clear picture of culture-bounded words and rhetorical devices in the source-language texts. But in essence, the quality (fluency and prominence) of translation depends on translator’s bilingual level. All of these are elaborately exemplified in Chapter Four.
In translating Chinese classics, fluency means respecting target-language readers and other cultures; while prominence is to safeguard national self-respect of Chinese people and culture. Fluency advises translators to write or to speak in agreement with the syntactic rules of the target language, showing good consideration and high respects for the target-language readers and their cultures; prominence helps them highlight the special cultural images in the source-language text, thinking highly of the source-language authors and their cultures. The essential task of translation is to have source-language authors and the target-language readers meet at a middle point. The relation between“I”and“thou”, not“I”and“others”, should be the dominant relation between the source-language author, translator, and the target-language reader, and that between the source-language culture and the target-language culture.
Possibly, the formulation of fluency and prominence would lessen the troubles given by domestication/foreignization, as the formulation of Fluency and Prominence is on the principle that all nations, their languages and their cultures are on an equal footing. The sense of equality will lead cultural diplomacy to success.
This thesis consists of five parts. In Chapter One, the author, first of all, makes a list of different views on different the definition of Chinese classics, and briefly introduces the practice of translating Chinese classics and relative strategies, and then puts forward“fluency and prominence”. In Chapter Two, the author stresses the significance for Chinese people to take the initiatives in translating Chinese classics. Chapter Three elaborates on“fluency and prominence”in theory and in practice, and Chapter Four gives more samples to illustrate the contextual application of“fluency and prominence”, aiming to display that different styles require different prominence on the basis of fluency in syntax. Chapter Five summarizes the essence of the domestication/foreignization and displays the merits of the strategy of fluency and prominence. The strategy is neither haughty nor humble.
言及典籍英译策略,人们纷云采用文化翻译中的异化还是归化。这非常自然,因为典籍英译是文化翻译的特殊领域。然而典籍英译的特殊性与异化或归化各自的不足也引起人们诸多的思考,因此,许多学者转向更宽阔的视界重新考虑这一课题。
本文旨在尝试在文化外交精神的观照下,运用理论比较和应用描述的方法努力寻求如何最有效地进行典籍英译。
文化外交是独立主权国家利用文化手段来达到特定目的外交活动。它是一种国际活动,其目标在于是借助人文关怀与感情投入进行和平式的温情说服,以期与国外民众和政府官员建立起一种持久的、有深远影响力的国际友谊,从而获得他们的同情、理解和支持。这就要求我们尊重与正视民族差异、语言差异与文化差异,多注意说服的方式和技巧。为了能吸引国外公众并让他们容易理解我们之所想而采取和平式的柔性公示文化真相的策略是明智的。我们的文化外交应不卑不亢。所有这些即是文化外交精神。
在文化外交精神的观照下,作者提出了三个平等理念,即民族(种族)平等,语言平等,文化平等。然后回顾了施莱尔马赫的两种翻译方法,发现其真正用意不在能指而在所指,强调吃透原文语言,把握原文意旨与真实映象。
接着,作者分析了文努蒂的异化翻译理论,指出了其中有价值的观点,如(1)翻译是展示文化差异的场所,应让读者看到异域文化;(2)翻译有助于塑造文化身份;(3)译者与作者应平起平坐,等等。不过,我们也不能忽视该理论的缺陷:预设不平等,抵抗句子流畅。
为了弥补异化翻译理论的不足,本文作者提出并描述了“流畅与突显”策略,并论证了其理论上的合理性与实践上的可行性。
作为翻译策略,“流畅与突显”要求译文在句法上必须符合目的语语文习惯(实践证明译文中出现的,对目的语读者而言的新奇词语不会降低译文句子的流畅度,而且,按英语句法习惯写(说)出流畅的句子不是不可能的。),同时突出中国文化特色,原作意图、风格以及原作中生活映象的真实。但是,不同文体的作品要求突显的方面也不一样。具体来说,翻译思想著作要突出其原意、翻译诗歌要突出其形式和意境、翻译小说(和戏剧)突出其生活映象等方面的真实。文化特色与写作风格则是不同文体作品对突显的共同要求。换句话说,译者应阐明思想著作中的深层涵义,保持诗歌的形式相似(包括音乐美,诗行数目与音响结构特点)和意境一致。另外,译者清醒地把握并转达原作中的文化承载词和修辞手法。不过说到底,译文的质量(流畅与突显)取决于译者的双语水平。这些在第四章有详细例示。
落实到典籍英译,流畅意味着尊重英语读者及其语言、文化,突显则要维护中国民族自尊与文化自尊。流畅建议译者按英语的句法习惯去说、去写,充分考虑、高度尊重了英语读者及其文化,而突显则有助于译者展示原作特点,高扬文化特色,充分照顾原语作者及其文化。
翻译的真正任务是让原作作者与目的语读者相会于中点。“我”和“你”而不是“我”和“他者”的关系应是原作作者、译者、目的语读者之间的主导关系,这种关系同样适用于原语文化与目的语文化。
“流畅与突显”之构想可能会减少异化与归化带来的麻烦。因为“流畅与突显”之构想是建立在民族平等,语言平等与文化平等基础之上的,而且吸收了异化与归化的各自的优点。平等意识是成功文化外交的催化剂。
本文共分五章。第一章介绍了典籍的定义,典籍翻译实践及相关策略,然后提出了“流畅与突显”策略。第二章强调了中国人主动英译典籍的意义。第三章在理论和实践上详细讨论了“流畅与突显”之构想。第四章用更多的范例阐述这一策略在不同语境中的运用,以说明不同文体的作品对突显的不同要求。第五章总结了归化/异化的实质,彰显了流畅与突显策略的不卑不亢。
Fundamentally, translating Chinese classics is a part of cultural diplomacy; therefore, it is necessary for us to take the initiatives to study strategies of translating Chinese classics. There is no doubt that appropriate strategies will bring translation to success.
Speaking of strategies of translating Chinese classics, people have different voices on whether foreignization or domestication should be adopted in cultural translation. It is quite natural that people argue about the strategies because translating Chinese classics is a special part of cultural translation. However, particularities of translating Chinese classics and respective demerits of foreignization or domestication have set people thinking a lot. Consequently, many scholars have turned to a wider sphere of vision to reconsider this issue.
In this thesis, the author, in the light of cultural diplomacy, intends to make a tentative attempt to find the most effective method to translate Chinese classics into English by theoretical comparison and practical description.
Cultural diplomacy is the diplomatic activity that the independent and sovereign states perform to achieve certain goals by means of culture. Cultural diplomacy is a kind of international activity, the aim of which is to achieve international friendship by peaceful and affable persuasion through humanistic care and emotional investment, and to exert enduring and far-reaching influence on foreign public and governmental officials so as to gain sympathy, understanding and support from foreign countries. This asks us to respect and face national, linguistic and cultural differences, and pay close attention to the skills and manners of persuasion, in order to attract the foreign public and let them easily understand what we are thinking. It is wise to publicize the cultural truth peacefully and softly. Our cultural diplomacy should be neither haughty nor humble. All of these make up the spirit of cultural diplomacy.
Enlightened by the spirit of cultural diplomacy, the author first puts forth three equalities, namely, national equality, linguistic equality and cultural equality, and then, traces the two translation methods by Friedrich Schleiermacher, finding out that the real stress of Friedrich Schleiermacher is the signified rather than the signifier, emphasizing the importance of getting the essence of a source language, and visualizing images in source-language texts.
Next, the author analyzes Venuti’s foreignization theory on translation and points out Venuti’s valuable ideas. (a) A translation should be the site where a different culture comes into being, and where a reader can get a glimpse of a cultural other; (b) Translation helps to form the identity of a culture; (c) Both the author and the translator should enjoy equal status. Yet, we can not overlook the flaws of his theory: presupposition of inequality and resistance to syntactical fluency.
To seam the holes of foreignization theory on translation, the author of this thesis puts forward and describes the strategy of fluency and prominence, as well as verifies its theoretical rationality and practical feasibility.
Fluency and Prominence as a translation strategy requires that translated versions are syntactically fluent (practice witnesses that some terms which are new and exotic to English readers will not reduce syntactical fluency of the target-language text. And it is not impossible to produce fluent sentences in line with English grammar), and at the same time, the individuality of Chinese culture, the intention, the style and the life reality in the source-language text are prominent. Works of different styles ask for different aspects of prominence. Different aspects of prominence in translation are respectively prominence of the intention in ideological works, prominence of the poetic form and imagery in poetry, prominence of the reality of life in novels (and dramas), and prominence of distinctive cultural images and writing manners of them all. In other words, translators have to elucidate the deep meaning of ideological works; they should convey the similarity in form (the beauty of music, the number of lines and the feature of sound structures) and imagery correspondence. In addition, translators should have a clear picture of culture-bounded words and rhetorical devices in the source-language texts. But in essence, the quality (fluency and prominence) of translation depends on translator’s bilingual level. All of these are elaborately exemplified in Chapter Four.
In translating Chinese classics, fluency means respecting target-language readers and other cultures; while prominence is to safeguard national self-respect of Chinese people and culture. Fluency advises translators to write or to speak in agreement with the syntactic rules of the target language, showing good consideration and high respects for the target-language readers and their cultures; prominence helps them highlight the special cultural images in the source-language text, thinking highly of the source-language authors and their cultures. The essential task of translation is to have source-language authors and the target-language readers meet at a middle point. The relation between“I”and“thou”, not“I”and“others”, should be the dominant relation between the source-language author, translator, and the target-language reader, and that between the source-language culture and the target-language culture.
Possibly, the formulation of fluency and prominence would lessen the troubles given by domestication/foreignization, as the formulation of Fluency and Prominence is on the principle that all nations, their languages and their cultures are on an equal footing. The sense of equality will lead cultural diplomacy to success.
This thesis consists of five parts. In Chapter One, the author, first of all, makes a list of different views on different the definition of Chinese classics, and briefly introduces the practice of translating Chinese classics and relative strategies, and then puts forward“fluency and prominence”. In Chapter Two, the author stresses the significance for Chinese people to take the initiatives in translating Chinese classics. Chapter Three elaborates on“fluency and prominence”in theory and in practice, and Chapter Four gives more samples to illustrate the contextual application of“fluency and prominence”, aiming to display that different styles require different prominence on the basis of fluency in syntax. Chapter Five summarizes the essence of the domestication/foreignization and displays the merits of the strategy of fluency and prominence. The strategy is neither haughty nor humble.
引文
Bake, Mona. Routledge Encyclopedia of Translation Studies. Shanghai: Shanghai Foreign Language Education Press, 2005.
Bassnet, Susan & Lefevere, Andre. Constructing Cultures. Shanghai: Shanghai Foreign Language Education Press, 2001.
Featherstone, Simon. Postcolonial Cultures. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press, 1998.
Gentzler, Edwin. Contemporary Translation Theories. Shanghai: Shanghai Foreign Language Education Press, 2004.
Guo, Shangxing & Sheng, Xingqing. A History of Chinese Culture. Kaifeng: China: Henan University Press, 2002.
Hawkes, David. The Story of the Stone. U.K: Penguin Books, 1973.
He, Xianbin. Translation as Manipulated by Power Relations. Xiamen: Xiamen University Press, 2005.
Kathleen, Davis. Deconstruction and Translation. Shanghai: Shanghai Foreign Language Education Press, 2005.
Legge, James. The Four Books. Changsha: Hunan Publishing House, 1995.
Luo, Xuanmin. “Alienation or Foreignization: Translation in China and the West”[J] (2005). Pan, Wenguo. Translation and Contrastive Studies-Proceedings of 2002 International Symposium. Shanghai: Shanghai Foreign Language Education Press, 2005: 172-178
Nida, Eugene A. Language and Culture. Shanghai: Shanghai Foreign Language Education Press, 2002.
Niranjana, Tejaswini. Siting Translation. Oxford: University of California, Oxford 1992.
Philip Babcock Gove Ph.D and The Merriam-Webster Editorial Staff. Webster’s Third New International Dictionary of The English Language Unabridged,
Massachusetts: G. & C. Merriam Company, Publisher Springfield, 1996.
Robinson, Douglas. Western Translation Theory. Beijing: Foreign Language Teaching and Research Press, 2006.
Schaffne, Christina & Kelly-Holmes, Helen. Cultural Functions of Translation. Clevedon, Philadelphia, Adelaide: Multilingual Matters LTD, 1995.
Shuttleworth, Mark & Cowi E., Moira. Dictionary Of Translation Studies. Shanghai: Shanghai Foreign Language Education Press, 2004.
Simpson, J. A. & Weiner, E. S. C. The Oxford English Dictionary. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1989.
Sun, Jiazheng. Culture Is Like Water. Beijing: Foreign Languages Press, 2006.
Venuti , Lawrence. The Scandals of Translation: Towards an Ethics of Difference. London: Routledge, 1998.
Venuti , Lawrence. The Translator’s Invisibility : A History of translation. Shanghai: Shanghai Foreign Language Education Press, 2004.
Waley, Arthur. Tao Te Ching. Beijing: Foreign Language Teaching and Research Press, 2004.
Wang, Baotong. Round the Realms of Gold. Kaifeng: Henan University Press, 2003.
Wang, Baotong. Out the Realms of Gold—How Poetry Lasts. Kaifeng: Henan University Press, 2000.
Xie, Yaowen. Classical Chinese Poetry and Poetics: A Comparative Study in Terminology by Way of Chinese Wisdom. Guangzhou: Jinan University Press, 2006.
Yang, Xianyi & Yang, Gladys. A Dream of Red Mansions. Beijing: Foreign Languages Press, 1995.
包惠南,包昂. 《中国文化与汉英翻译 》 [M]. 北京: 外文出版社,2004.
曹雪芹,高鄂. 《红楼梦》 [M]. 上海: 上海古籍出版社,2003.
程永生. 从四大古典小说名著选段翻译看如何英译涉及中国历史文化语篇”[J]. 《安徽理工大学学报》, 2004, (3): 49.
丛滋杭.《中国古典诗歌英译理论研究 》 [M]. 北京: 国防工业出版社,2007.
戴东新. 论典籍英译的传播学特征[J].《沈阳师范大学学报》,2006,(5):26-27.
范 岳. 典籍英译应形成一个系统 [J]. 《辽宁大学学报》,2006,(2):58.
冯庆华. 《红译艺坛——<红楼梦>翻译艺术研究》 [M]. 上海: 上海外语教育出版社,2006.
傅光明. 《论战中的鲁迅》 [M]. 北京:京华出版社,2006.
高旭东. 《跨文化的文学对话》 [M]. 北京: 中华书局,2006.
葛校琴. 当前归化/异化策略讨论的后殖民视阈[J]. 《中国翻译》,2002, (5):35.
顾丹柯. 《老子说》 [M]. 上海:上海世界图书出版公司,2006.
辜正坤. 《老子道德经》[M]. 北京:北京大学出版社,2005.
辜鸿铭. 《辜鸿铭文集(上下)》 [M]. 海口:海南出版社,1996.
郭尚兴,王超明. 《汉英中国哲学辞典》 [M]. 开封: 河南大学出版社,2002.
郭尚兴. 汉英文化类辞典编篡要端举论[J]. 《上海翻译》,2006,(3):51.
郭尚兴. 论中国传统文化在跨文化翻译中的几个问题 [J]. 《河南大学学报》,2001,(3):93.
贺淯滨. 《中国古典诗歌选译》 [M]. 北京:中央编译出版社,2004.
胡开宝. 论异化与《新世纪汉英大词典》中文化限定词的翻译 [J]. 《外语教学》,2006, (1):55-56.
惠 宇,《新世纪汉英大词典 》 [M]. 北京:外语教学与研究出版社,2004.
霍跃红. 典籍英译:意义、主体和策略 [J]. 《外语与外语教学》,2005,(9):54-55.
姜 飞. 《跨文化传播的后殖民语境》[M]. 北京: 中国人民大学出版社,2005.
姜怡,姜欣. 从《茶经》章节的翻译谈典籍英译的意形整合 [J]. 《大连理工大学学报》,2006,(3):85.
姜智芹. 《文学想象与文化利用》[M]. 北京: 中国社会科学出版社,2005.
金沛霖. 《孟子语录》[M]. 北京: 中国文联出版社,2006.
李 平. 《西方人眼中的东方文学艺术》[M]. 上海: 上海教育出版社,2004.
李文革. 《西方翻译理论流派研究》[M]. 北京: 中国社会科学出版社, 2004.
李 智. 《文化外交》[M]. 北京: 北京大学出版社,2005.
李致忠,周少川,张木早. 《中国典籍史》 [M]. 上海: 上海人民出版社,2004.
林戊荪. 《孙子兵法 孙膑兵法》[M]. 北京:外文出版社, 长沙:湖南人民出版社,1999.
刘宓庆. 《文化翻译论纲》 [M]. 武汉: 湖北教育出版社,2005.
刘性峰. 典籍英译的意义 [J]. 《皖西学院学报》,2005, (2):105.
卢炳群. 《英汉辞格比较与唐诗英译散论》 [M]. 青岛:青岛出版社,2003.
卢红梅. 《华夏文化与汉英翻译》 [M]. 武汉: 武汉大学出版社,2006.
罗 钢. 关于殖民话语和后殖民理论的若干问题[J](1997). 《跨文化传播的后殖民语境》, 姜飞, 北京: 中国人民大学出版社,2005: 34.
马祖毅,任荣珍. 汉籍外译史[M]. 武汉: 湖北教育出版社, 1997.
马德五.《孔子说》[M]. 上海: 上海世界图书出版公司,2004.
马会娟. 对 Lawrence Venuti 异化翻译理论的再思考 [J]. 《天津外国语学院学报》,2006, (1):29-31.
倪奕旋. 论文化压迫下的异化与超异化变形 [J]. 《黑龙江社会科学》,2006, (3):128.
潘文国. 译入与译出[J] . 《中国翻译》,2004,(2):40-43.
潘富恩,温少霞. 《论语今译》 [M]. 济南:齐鲁书社,2004.
赛妮亚,《犹太文化精神》[M]. 兰州: 甘肃人民美术出版社,2006.
孙 晶. 《文化霸权理论研究》 [M]. 北京: 社会科学文献出版社,2004.
孙昌昆. 《礼记名言》[M]. 济南:齐鲁书社, 2006.
孙会军. 《普遍与差异》[M]. 上海: 上海译文出版社,2005.
孙会军. 归化与异化——两个动态的概念 [J]. 《外语研究》,2003,(4):61.
谭载喜. 《西方翻译简史》 [M]. 北京:商务印书馆,2004.
王宝童. 《王维诗百首》[M]. 上海:上海世界图书出版公司,2005.
王 宏. 墨子英译对比研究 [J]. 《解放军外国语学院学报》,2006,(6):58.
王 宏,束慧娟. 理论与实践紧密结合,广度与深度齐头并进——第二届全国典籍英译研讨会述评 [J]. 《中国翻译》, 2004,(1):37.
王义静. 追求创新与多元——第三届全国典籍英译研讨会述评 [J]. 《中国翻译》,2005,(5):67.
王宏印. 试论文学翻译批评的背景变量 [J]. 《中国翻译》,2004,(2):36.
王 宁. 《文化翻译与经典阐释》[M]. 北京:中华书局,2006.
王卫新. 异化还是移植——关于中国文化翻译走向的思考 [J]. 《中国地质大学学报》,2003,(5):88.
汪榕培,李正栓. 《典籍英译研究》 [M]. 石家庄:河北大学出版社,2005.
王 勇. 20 年来的《论语》英译研究 [J]. 《求索》,2006,(5):178.
王佐良. 《翻译与试笔》 [M]. 北京:外语教学与研究出版社,1997.
文月娥. 异化翻译与文化传播 [J]. 《玉溪师范学院学报》,2006,(2):71.
许 明,花建. 《文化发展论》 [M]. 北京:北京大学出版社,2004.
许渊冲. 《李白诗选》 [M]. 石家庄: 河北人民出版社,2005.
许渊冲. 中国学派的古典诗词翻译理论 [J]. 《外语与外语教学》,2005,(11):41.
许渊冲. 中国是不是翻译强国?[J]. 《上海翻译》,2005,(2):62.
许渊冲. 《最爱唐宋词》 [M]. 北京:中国对外翻译出版公司,2006.
许渊冲. 《论语》 [M]. 北京:高等教育出版社,2006.
杨成虎. 典籍的翻译与研究——《楚辞》几种译本得失谈 [J]. 《宁波大学学报》, 2004,(4):61.
杨宪益,戴乃迭. 《史记选》 [M]. 北京:新世界出版社,2002.
杨自俭. 对比语篇学与汉语典籍英译 [J]. 《外语与外语教学》,2005,(7):62.
余英时. 《文化评论与中国情怀》 [M]. 桂林:广西师范大学出版社,2006.
袁士槟. 《孙子兵法》 [M]. 北京:外语教学与研究出版社,2005.
张岱年. 《文化与价值》 [M]. 北京:新华出版社,2004.
张洁华,黄蕾,徐来. 古籍英译的起始性原则 [J]. 《华东师范大学学报》,1999,(3):74.
张经浩,陈可培. 《名家 名论 名译》 [M]. 上海:复旦大学出版社,2005.
卓振英. 汉诗英译中的‘借形传神’及变通 [J]. 《福建外语》,2002,(1):54.
Bassnet, Susan & Lefevere, Andre. Constructing Cultures. Shanghai: Shanghai Foreign Language Education Press, 2001.
Featherstone, Simon. Postcolonial Cultures. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press, 1998.
Gentzler, Edwin. Contemporary Translation Theories. Shanghai: Shanghai Foreign Language Education Press, 2004.
Guo, Shangxing & Sheng, Xingqing. A History of Chinese Culture. Kaifeng: China: Henan University Press, 2002.
Hawkes, David. The Story of the Stone. U.K: Penguin Books, 1973.
He, Xianbin. Translation as Manipulated by Power Relations. Xiamen: Xiamen University Press, 2005.
Kathleen, Davis. Deconstruction and Translation. Shanghai: Shanghai Foreign Language Education Press, 2005.
Legge, James. The Four Books. Changsha: Hunan Publishing House, 1995.
Luo, Xuanmin. “Alienation or Foreignization: Translation in China and the West”[J] (2005). Pan, Wenguo. Translation and Contrastive Studies-Proceedings of 2002 International Symposium. Shanghai: Shanghai Foreign Language Education Press, 2005: 172-178
Nida, Eugene A. Language and Culture. Shanghai: Shanghai Foreign Language Education Press, 2002.
Niranjana, Tejaswini. Siting Translation. Oxford: University of California, Oxford 1992.
Philip Babcock Gove Ph.D and The Merriam-Webster Editorial Staff. Webster’s Third New International Dictionary of The English Language Unabridged,
Massachusetts: G. & C. Merriam Company, Publisher Springfield, 1996.
Robinson, Douglas. Western Translation Theory. Beijing: Foreign Language Teaching and Research Press, 2006.
Schaffne, Christina & Kelly-Holmes, Helen. Cultural Functions of Translation. Clevedon, Philadelphia, Adelaide: Multilingual Matters LTD, 1995.
Shuttleworth, Mark & Cowi E., Moira. Dictionary Of Translation Studies. Shanghai: Shanghai Foreign Language Education Press, 2004.
Simpson, J. A. & Weiner, E. S. C. The Oxford English Dictionary. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1989.
Sun, Jiazheng. Culture Is Like Water. Beijing: Foreign Languages Press, 2006.
Venuti , Lawrence. The Scandals of Translation: Towards an Ethics of Difference. London: Routledge, 1998.
Venuti , Lawrence. The Translator’s Invisibility : A History of translation. Shanghai: Shanghai Foreign Language Education Press, 2004.
Waley, Arthur. Tao Te Ching. Beijing: Foreign Language Teaching and Research Press, 2004.
Wang, Baotong. Round the Realms of Gold. Kaifeng: Henan University Press, 2003.
Wang, Baotong. Out the Realms of Gold—How Poetry Lasts. Kaifeng: Henan University Press, 2000.
Xie, Yaowen. Classical Chinese Poetry and Poetics: A Comparative Study in Terminology by Way of Chinese Wisdom. Guangzhou: Jinan University Press, 2006.
Yang, Xianyi & Yang, Gladys. A Dream of Red Mansions. Beijing: Foreign Languages Press, 1995.
包惠南,包昂. 《中国文化与汉英翻译 》 [M]. 北京: 外文出版社,2004.
曹雪芹,高鄂. 《红楼梦》 [M]. 上海: 上海古籍出版社,2003.
程永生. 从四大古典小说名著选段翻译看如何英译涉及中国历史文化语篇”[J]. 《安徽理工大学学报》, 2004, (3): 49.
丛滋杭.《中国古典诗歌英译理论研究 》 [M]. 北京: 国防工业出版社,2007.
戴东新. 论典籍英译的传播学特征[J].《沈阳师范大学学报》,2006,(5):26-27.
范 岳. 典籍英译应形成一个系统 [J]. 《辽宁大学学报》,2006,(2):58.
冯庆华. 《红译艺坛——<红楼梦>翻译艺术研究》 [M]. 上海: 上海外语教育出版社,2006.
傅光明. 《论战中的鲁迅》 [M]. 北京:京华出版社,2006.
高旭东. 《跨文化的文学对话》 [M]. 北京: 中华书局,2006.
葛校琴. 当前归化/异化策略讨论的后殖民视阈[J]. 《中国翻译》,2002, (5):35.
顾丹柯. 《老子说》 [M]. 上海:上海世界图书出版公司,2006.
辜正坤. 《老子道德经》[M]. 北京:北京大学出版社,2005.
辜鸿铭. 《辜鸿铭文集(上下)》 [M]. 海口:海南出版社,1996.
郭尚兴,王超明. 《汉英中国哲学辞典》 [M]. 开封: 河南大学出版社,2002.
郭尚兴. 汉英文化类辞典编篡要端举论[J]. 《上海翻译》,2006,(3):51.
郭尚兴. 论中国传统文化在跨文化翻译中的几个问题 [J]. 《河南大学学报》,2001,(3):93.
贺淯滨. 《中国古典诗歌选译》 [M]. 北京:中央编译出版社,2004.
胡开宝. 论异化与《新世纪汉英大词典》中文化限定词的翻译 [J]. 《外语教学》,2006, (1):55-56.
惠 宇,《新世纪汉英大词典 》 [M]. 北京:外语教学与研究出版社,2004.
霍跃红. 典籍英译:意义、主体和策略 [J]. 《外语与外语教学》,2005,(9):54-55.
姜 飞. 《跨文化传播的后殖民语境》[M]. 北京: 中国人民大学出版社,2005.
姜怡,姜欣. 从《茶经》章节的翻译谈典籍英译的意形整合 [J]. 《大连理工大学学报》,2006,(3):85.
姜智芹. 《文学想象与文化利用》[M]. 北京: 中国社会科学出版社,2005.
金沛霖. 《孟子语录》[M]. 北京: 中国文联出版社,2006.
李 平. 《西方人眼中的东方文学艺术》[M]. 上海: 上海教育出版社,2004.
李文革. 《西方翻译理论流派研究》[M]. 北京: 中国社会科学出版社, 2004.
李 智. 《文化外交》[M]. 北京: 北京大学出版社,2005.
李致忠,周少川,张木早. 《中国典籍史》 [M]. 上海: 上海人民出版社,2004.
林戊荪. 《孙子兵法 孙膑兵法》[M]. 北京:外文出版社, 长沙:湖南人民出版社,1999.
刘宓庆. 《文化翻译论纲》 [M]. 武汉: 湖北教育出版社,2005.
刘性峰. 典籍英译的意义 [J]. 《皖西学院学报》,2005, (2):105.
卢炳群. 《英汉辞格比较与唐诗英译散论》 [M]. 青岛:青岛出版社,2003.
卢红梅. 《华夏文化与汉英翻译》 [M]. 武汉: 武汉大学出版社,2006.
罗 钢. 关于殖民话语和后殖民理论的若干问题[J](1997). 《跨文化传播的后殖民语境》, 姜飞, 北京: 中国人民大学出版社,2005: 34.
马祖毅,任荣珍. 汉籍外译史[M]. 武汉: 湖北教育出版社, 1997.
马德五.《孔子说》[M]. 上海: 上海世界图书出版公司,2004.
马会娟. 对 Lawrence Venuti 异化翻译理论的再思考 [J]. 《天津外国语学院学报》,2006, (1):29-31.
倪奕旋. 论文化压迫下的异化与超异化变形 [J]. 《黑龙江社会科学》,2006, (3):128.
潘文国. 译入与译出[J] . 《中国翻译》,2004,(2):40-43.
潘富恩,温少霞. 《论语今译》 [M]. 济南:齐鲁书社,2004.
赛妮亚,《犹太文化精神》[M]. 兰州: 甘肃人民美术出版社,2006.
孙 晶. 《文化霸权理论研究》 [M]. 北京: 社会科学文献出版社,2004.
孙昌昆. 《礼记名言》[M]. 济南:齐鲁书社, 2006.
孙会军. 《普遍与差异》[M]. 上海: 上海译文出版社,2005.
孙会军. 归化与异化——两个动态的概念 [J]. 《外语研究》,2003,(4):61.
谭载喜. 《西方翻译简史》 [M]. 北京:商务印书馆,2004.
王宝童. 《王维诗百首》[M]. 上海:上海世界图书出版公司,2005.
王 宏. 墨子英译对比研究 [J]. 《解放军外国语学院学报》,2006,(6):58.
王 宏,束慧娟. 理论与实践紧密结合,广度与深度齐头并进——第二届全国典籍英译研讨会述评 [J]. 《中国翻译》, 2004,(1):37.
王义静. 追求创新与多元——第三届全国典籍英译研讨会述评 [J]. 《中国翻译》,2005,(5):67.
王宏印. 试论文学翻译批评的背景变量 [J]. 《中国翻译》,2004,(2):36.
王 宁. 《文化翻译与经典阐释》[M]. 北京:中华书局,2006.
王卫新. 异化还是移植——关于中国文化翻译走向的思考 [J]. 《中国地质大学学报》,2003,(5):88.
汪榕培,李正栓. 《典籍英译研究》 [M]. 石家庄:河北大学出版社,2005.
王 勇. 20 年来的《论语》英译研究 [J]. 《求索》,2006,(5):178.
王佐良. 《翻译与试笔》 [M]. 北京:外语教学与研究出版社,1997.
文月娥. 异化翻译与文化传播 [J]. 《玉溪师范学院学报》,2006,(2):71.
许 明,花建. 《文化发展论》 [M]. 北京:北京大学出版社,2004.
许渊冲. 《李白诗选》 [M]. 石家庄: 河北人民出版社,2005.
许渊冲. 中国学派的古典诗词翻译理论 [J]. 《外语与外语教学》,2005,(11):41.
许渊冲. 中国是不是翻译强国?[J]. 《上海翻译》,2005,(2):62.
许渊冲. 《最爱唐宋词》 [M]. 北京:中国对外翻译出版公司,2006.
许渊冲. 《论语》 [M]. 北京:高等教育出版社,2006.
杨成虎. 典籍的翻译与研究——《楚辞》几种译本得失谈 [J]. 《宁波大学学报》, 2004,(4):61.
杨宪益,戴乃迭. 《史记选》 [M]. 北京:新世界出版社,2002.
杨自俭. 对比语篇学与汉语典籍英译 [J]. 《外语与外语教学》,2005,(7):62.
余英时. 《文化评论与中国情怀》 [M]. 桂林:广西师范大学出版社,2006.
袁士槟. 《孙子兵法》 [M]. 北京:外语教学与研究出版社,2005.
张岱年. 《文化与价值》 [M]. 北京:新华出版社,2004.
张洁华,黄蕾,徐来. 古籍英译的起始性原则 [J]. 《华东师范大学学报》,1999,(3):74.
张经浩,陈可培. 《名家 名论 名译》 [M]. 上海:复旦大学出版社,2005.
卓振英. 汉诗英译中的‘借形传神’及变通 [J]. 《福建外语》,2002,(1):54.