《骆驼祥子》英译本归化和异化翻译策略的对比研究
|
摘要
文学是语言文字艺术，文学翻译就是语言文字艺术的再现，即用另一种语言文字的文学艺术形式再现该语言文字所承载和表现的文学艺术形式。老舍的《骆驼祥子》是中国现代文学史上的优秀作品，自问世以来，已被译成多种文字并存在诸多译本。其中最引人注目的是中国著名翻译家施晓菁的译本Camel Xiangzi和美国翻译家Jean M. James的Rickshaw。这两位译者的母语不同，他们秉承的翻译策略也存在诸多差异。
目前关于中国文学作品英译研究的学术论文数量很多，对于归化和异化这两种翻译策略孰是孰非的争论也一直持续不断。本研究的目的并非一定要在归化和异化这两种翻译策略中辨出优劣，而是以翻译策略的争论为出发点，探讨归化和异化策略在传递原文思想的过程中对再现原著的语言文化所发挥的作用和产生的效果，从而弄清什么样的翻译策略既可以使原著拥有更多的异国读者，又可以使原语文化得到更广泛的传播。
本文选取的研究对象为母语分别是汉语和英语的两位译者对同一中国文学作品《骆驼祥子》的译出和译入版本，从词句、语篇和文化等角度来分析两个译本的语言特征、采取的翻译策略及产生的表达效果，探究影响译者翻译策略选择的真正因素。研究表明，母语和原著语言一致的译者倾向使用异化策略以求更为真实地传递原语文化，但有时也会由于自身对原著文化太熟悉而忽略一些细节从而造成漏译，在遇到文化色彩浓厚的俗语而不易表达时也会退而采取归化策略；而母语和译语一致的译者出于对读者接受能力的考虑而倾向采用归化策略以求增加译著的可读性，充分发挥其作为译者的再创造性，忽略甚至故意舍弃了一些独具原语民族特色的表达方式，但有时也会采取异化策略大胆担当起文化使者的角色，把原文语言表达的妙处再现并移植到译本中来。由此可见，文学翻译中译者的语言背景和文化取向对最终的译本会产生重大的影响。
本研究由五个章节构成。第一章是引论，指出了本论文的研究问题和研究目的，并介绍了研究方法、语料收集和整篇论文的框架结构。第二章阐述了《骆驼祥子》这部小说目前的翻译状况。首先作者回顾了中国文学翻译的历史和归化异化策略在文学翻译中的应用。为了更深入地说明这一点，作者列举了几部中国文学作品的成功译作。随后作者又对老舍、小说《骆驼祥子》及其写作特色和众多译本中的代表作进行了简短的介绍。第三章是理论框架，介绍了归化和异化两种翻译策略的提出、定义和发展，并介绍了国内外对此存在的争论。然后作者又引入了其他影响翻译策略选择的理论——译者的主体性和创造性，这些理论的运用和策略的选择都和译者的母语存在直接的联系。第四章是论文的主体部分，依据前几章节中的例子和理论，对《骆驼祥子》的两个英译本进行了对比分析。作者分别从词句层面、语篇层面和文化层面对两个译本的译文进行分析，探索了影响译者翻译策略选择的因素。最后一部分是总结。作者归纳了本论文的主要发现并对今后的研究提出了一些建议。
本研究得出的结论是归化和异化不是泾渭分明的两个对立面，由于语言文化本身的各种特性和译者的背景条件，文学翻译中绝对的归化和绝对的异化都是不可取的。从共时和历时的角度来看，归化策略和异化策略都是相互联系的，在翻译实践中这两种策略会出现相互覆盖的现象。因为译出和译入的两位译者在实际操作中采用的归化和异化手法所占的比重不同，译本会在翻译策略上表现出不同程度的倾向性。翻译策略多样性的存在本身就意味着任何一种翻译策略都不能十全十美，翻译策略的选择是动态的、变化的，归化和异化两种策略均具有其存在的价值，对中国传统文化向世界传播都能发挥一定的积极作用。
Literature is an art of language and literature translation is the reproduction of the art oflanguage, i.e., using the artistic form of another language to represent that of this language. LaoShe’s Luotuo Xiangzi is an outstanding work in China’s modern literature history. It has beentranslated into many languages since it was published and there have been many translatedversions. Among them the most striking versions are Camel Xiangzi translated by the famousChinese translator Shi Xiaojing and Rickshaw by the American translator Jean M. James.Because the two translators’ native languages are different, the translation strategies they adoptare also very different.
Nowadays there are many research papers and comments on Chinese literature translationand the debate about domesticating and foreignizing translation strategies has continuedconstantly. The purpose of this thesis is not to distinguish which translation strategy has moreadvantages, but to explore the roles and effects brought about by domesticating and foreignizingstrategies during the course of representing the indigenous language and culture of the originaltext. It will make clear what kind of translation strategy tends to make the original have moreforeign readers and make the original culture spread more extensively.
This study selects the two different English versions of a Chinese novel Luotuo Xiangzi asthe study object. They are respectively translated by a Chinese translator and an Englishtranslator. From the angles of words and sentences, discourse, and culture the study attempts toanalyze the two versions’ language features, translation strategies and expressive effects as wellas to explore the real factors determining the choice of translation strategies. The study showsthat the translator whose native language is the source language (SL) consistently tends to useforeignizing strategy so as to transfer the SL culture. But sometimes the translator is so familiarwith the original culture that he neglects some details and makes some omissions. For someidioms with strong cultural features which are difficult to express, the translator will also take thedomesticating strategy. While the translator whose mother tongue is the target language tends toadopt domesticating strategies to increase the readability and acceptability of the translation. Asa translator he will bring his creativity into full play, ignore and even intentionally abandon someunique national characteristics of the SL expressions. But sometimes he will also assume the roleof a culture emissary bravely and adopt the foreignizing strategy to represent and transplant theaesthetics of the SL expression into the translated text. Thus, in literary translation thetranslators’ linguistic background and cultural orientation will exert a significant impact on thefinal versions.
This thesis is composed of five chapters. Chapter One serves as the introduction, includingthe research question and purpose, research methodology and data collection as well as theorganization of the whole thesis. In Chapter Two, the author deals with the current state of thetranslation of Luotuo Xiangzi. Chapter Three is the theoretical framework about domesticationand foreignization. Chapter Four, as the main body of this thesis, conducts a contrastive study oftwo English versions of Luotuo Xiangzi. In the last part, the author concludes the main findingsof this thesis, and offers some proposals for further researches.
The conclusion of this study is that domestication and foreignization are not two oppositesides conflicting with each other. In literary translation due to the various characteristics oflanguages and cultures, plus the translators’ background, the choice of either absolutedomestication or absolute foreignization is not advisable. From the synchronic and diachronicperspectives, the two strategies are relative to each other. In translating practices, these twostrategies appear to overlap with each other. In the actual translating operation the two translators,whose native languages are respectively the source language and target language, adopt thedomesticating and foreignizing methods with different proportion, therefore the translatingstrategies used in the two versions tend to be different. The diversity of translating strategiesshows that any kind of translation strategy is not perfect and the selection of translation strategiesis dynamic and keeps changing. The two strategies both have their values and can both playpositive roles in spreading traditional Chinese culture to the world.
目前关于中国文学作品英译研究的学术论文数量很多，对于归化和异化这两种翻译策略孰是孰非的争论也一直持续不断。本研究的目的并非一定要在归化和异化这两种翻译策略中辨出优劣，而是以翻译策略的争论为出发点，探讨归化和异化策略在传递原文思想的过程中对再现原著的语言文化所发挥的作用和产生的效果，从而弄清什么样的翻译策略既可以使原著拥有更多的异国读者，又可以使原语文化得到更广泛的传播。
本文选取的研究对象为母语分别是汉语和英语的两位译者对同一中国文学作品《骆驼祥子》的译出和译入版本，从词句、语篇和文化等角度来分析两个译本的语言特征、采取的翻译策略及产生的表达效果，探究影响译者翻译策略选择的真正因素。研究表明，母语和原著语言一致的译者倾向使用异化策略以求更为真实地传递原语文化，但有时也会由于自身对原著文化太熟悉而忽略一些细节从而造成漏译，在遇到文化色彩浓厚的俗语而不易表达时也会退而采取归化策略；而母语和译语一致的译者出于对读者接受能力的考虑而倾向采用归化策略以求增加译著的可读性，充分发挥其作为译者的再创造性，忽略甚至故意舍弃了一些独具原语民族特色的表达方式，但有时也会采取异化策略大胆担当起文化使者的角色，把原文语言表达的妙处再现并移植到译本中来。由此可见，文学翻译中译者的语言背景和文化取向对最终的译本会产生重大的影响。
本研究由五个章节构成。第一章是引论，指出了本论文的研究问题和研究目的，并介绍了研究方法、语料收集和整篇论文的框架结构。第二章阐述了《骆驼祥子》这部小说目前的翻译状况。首先作者回顾了中国文学翻译的历史和归化异化策略在文学翻译中的应用。为了更深入地说明这一点，作者列举了几部中国文学作品的成功译作。随后作者又对老舍、小说《骆驼祥子》及其写作特色和众多译本中的代表作进行了简短的介绍。第三章是理论框架，介绍了归化和异化两种翻译策略的提出、定义和发展，并介绍了国内外对此存在的争论。然后作者又引入了其他影响翻译策略选择的理论——译者的主体性和创造性，这些理论的运用和策略的选择都和译者的母语存在直接的联系。第四章是论文的主体部分，依据前几章节中的例子和理论，对《骆驼祥子》的两个英译本进行了对比分析。作者分别从词句层面、语篇层面和文化层面对两个译本的译文进行分析，探索了影响译者翻译策略选择的因素。最后一部分是总结。作者归纳了本论文的主要发现并对今后的研究提出了一些建议。
本研究得出的结论是归化和异化不是泾渭分明的两个对立面，由于语言文化本身的各种特性和译者的背景条件，文学翻译中绝对的归化和绝对的异化都是不可取的。从共时和历时的角度来看，归化策略和异化策略都是相互联系的，在翻译实践中这两种策略会出现相互覆盖的现象。因为译出和译入的两位译者在实际操作中采用的归化和异化手法所占的比重不同，译本会在翻译策略上表现出不同程度的倾向性。翻译策略多样性的存在本身就意味着任何一种翻译策略都不能十全十美，翻译策略的选择是动态的、变化的，归化和异化两种策略均具有其存在的价值，对中国传统文化向世界传播都能发挥一定的积极作用。
Literature is an art of language and literature translation is the reproduction of the art oflanguage, i.e., using the artistic form of another language to represent that of this language. LaoShe’s Luotuo Xiangzi is an outstanding work in China’s modern literature history. It has beentranslated into many languages since it was published and there have been many translatedversions. Among them the most striking versions are Camel Xiangzi translated by the famousChinese translator Shi Xiaojing and Rickshaw by the American translator Jean M. James.Because the two translators’ native languages are different, the translation strategies they adoptare also very different.
Nowadays there are many research papers and comments on Chinese literature translationand the debate about domesticating and foreignizing translation strategies has continuedconstantly. The purpose of this thesis is not to distinguish which translation strategy has moreadvantages, but to explore the roles and effects brought about by domesticating and foreignizingstrategies during the course of representing the indigenous language and culture of the originaltext. It will make clear what kind of translation strategy tends to make the original have moreforeign readers and make the original culture spread more extensively.
This study selects the two different English versions of a Chinese novel Luotuo Xiangzi asthe study object. They are respectively translated by a Chinese translator and an Englishtranslator. From the angles of words and sentences, discourse, and culture the study attempts toanalyze the two versions’ language features, translation strategies and expressive effects as wellas to explore the real factors determining the choice of translation strategies. The study showsthat the translator whose native language is the source language (SL) consistently tends to useforeignizing strategy so as to transfer the SL culture. But sometimes the translator is so familiarwith the original culture that he neglects some details and makes some omissions. For someidioms with strong cultural features which are difficult to express, the translator will also take thedomesticating strategy. While the translator whose mother tongue is the target language tends toadopt domesticating strategies to increase the readability and acceptability of the translation. Asa translator he will bring his creativity into full play, ignore and even intentionally abandon someunique national characteristics of the SL expressions. But sometimes he will also assume the roleof a culture emissary bravely and adopt the foreignizing strategy to represent and transplant theaesthetics of the SL expression into the translated text. Thus, in literary translation thetranslators’ linguistic background and cultural orientation will exert a significant impact on thefinal versions.
This thesis is composed of five chapters. Chapter One serves as the introduction, includingthe research question and purpose, research methodology and data collection as well as theorganization of the whole thesis. In Chapter Two, the author deals with the current state of thetranslation of Luotuo Xiangzi. Chapter Three is the theoretical framework about domesticationand foreignization. Chapter Four, as the main body of this thesis, conducts a contrastive study oftwo English versions of Luotuo Xiangzi. In the last part, the author concludes the main findingsof this thesis, and offers some proposals for further researches.
The conclusion of this study is that domestication and foreignization are not two oppositesides conflicting with each other. In literary translation due to the various characteristics oflanguages and cultures, plus the translators’ background, the choice of either absolutedomestication or absolute foreignization is not advisable. From the synchronic and diachronicperspectives, the two strategies are relative to each other. In translating practices, these twostrategies appear to overlap with each other. In the actual translating operation the two translators,whose native languages are respectively the source language and target language, adopt thedomesticating and foreignizing methods with different proportion, therefore the translatingstrategies used in the two versions tend to be different. The diversity of translating strategiesshows that any kind of translation strategy is not perfect and the selection of translation strategiesis dynamic and keeps changing. The two strategies both have their values and can both playpositive roles in spreading traditional Chinese culture to the world.
引文
Buck, Pearl. S. All Men Are Brothers. New York: The John Day Company,1933.
Baker, Mona. Encyclopedia of Translation Studies. London and New York: Routledge,1998.
Catford, J.C. A Linguistic Theory of Translation. London: Oxford University press,1965.
Hartmann, Stork, F.C. Dictionary of Language and Linguistics. Amsterdam: Applied Science,1972,
Lefevere, Andre. Translation Rewriting and Manipulation of Literacy Fame. London and NewYork: Routledge,1992.
Jackson, J. H. Water Margin. Shanghai: The Commercial Press, Ltd,1937
Jakobson, Roman. On linguistic Aspects of Translation, in R. A. Brower (ed). On Translation.Cambridge: Harvard University Press,1959.
Jeremy Munday. Introducing Translation Studies: Theories and Applications. London and NewYork: Routledge,2001.
Lao She. Camel Xiangzi. Trans. Shi Xiaojing. Beijing: Foreign languages Press,2001.
Lao She. Rickshaw. Trans Jean M. Honolulu: University of Hawaii Press,1979.
Newmark, Peter. A Textbook of Translation. New Jersey: Prentice Hall,1988.
Nida, Eugene.&Charles, R. Taber. The Theory and Practice of Translation. Leiden: E. J. Brill,1969.
Nida, Eugene. The Theory and Practice of Translation: With Special reference to BibleTranslating U.S.A.: Brill Academic Publishers,1982.
Nida, Eugene. Language and Culture-Contexts in Translation. Shanghai: Shanghai ForeignLanguage Education Press,2001.
Nida, Eugene. From One language to Another. New York Thomas Nelson Publishers’ House,1986.
Venuti, Lawrence. The Translator’s Invisibility: A History of Translation. London: Routledge,1995.
Venuti, Lawrence. The Scandals of Translation: Towards an Ethics of Difference. London P NewYork: Routledge,1998.
班荣学,赵荣.文学翻译的“忠实”与“创造”.西北大学学报，2006,(36):159.
陈秀.论译者介入.中国翻译,2002,(10):19-22.
邓婕.译者主体性与翻译策略.广东外语外贸大学学报，2006,(3):47.
邓炎昌,刘润清.语言与文化.北京：外语教学与研究出版社,1997.
韩敏.从中国历史上的四次翻译高潮看中国翻译传统.新西部,2009,(2):121.
孔慧怡.翻译·文学·文化.北京：北京大学出版社,1999.
李润新.老舍研究论文集.北京：人民文学出版社,2000.
刘正刚,陈首慧.文化转换过程中译者的策略选择.郑州航空工业管理学院学报,2006,(4):104.
陆艳.规范与翻译:林纾翻译的描述研究.上海：华东师范大学，2005.
梅忠波.译者的角色与翻译风格.成都教育学院学报,2006,(12):154.
潘文国.翻译与对比研究.上海：上海外语教育出版社，2005.
沙傅里.《水浒传》的英译.翻译通讯,1984,(2):29.
宋阜森.浅论《骆驼祥子》的艺术特色.现代语文,2010,(9):75.
孙会军.从《浮生六记》等作品的英译看翻译规范的运作方式.解放军外国语学院学报,2004,（2）:67-71
田德语.论译者的身份.中国翻译,2000,(6):20.
魏瑾,魏书艳.论文学翻译中译者的主体性.衡阳师范学院学报，2004,(25):141.
魏莉.《水浒传》三个英译本的比较研究.内蒙古农业大学学报，2009,(3):119.
杨玉秀.老舍作品中的北京话词语例释.北京:北京大学出版社,1984.
王岳川.新世纪中国身份与文化输出.广东社会科学,2004,(3):5-13.
谢世坚.从翻译规范看清末民初小说翻译.山东师范大学外国语学院学报,2002,（1）:9-13.
谢天振.译介学.上海:上海外语教育出版社,1999.
徐钧.文学翻译的理论与实践—翻译对话录.南京：译林出版社,2001:7.
徐曼玲.试论译者主体性对文本的诠释.长沙铁道学院学报,2006,(7):206.
姚瑶.从苏珊巴斯奈特德文化翻译观看林语堂《浮生六记》英译本中意识文化信息的传译.苏州：苏州大学,2004.
查明建,田雨.论译者主体性—从译者文化地位的边缘谈起.中国翻译，2003,(1):22.
张慧兴,张映先.论《红楼梦》两个英译本的翻译策略.武汉科技大学学报，2006,(2):65.
张今.文学翻译原理.开封：河南大学出版社，1998.
张南峰.中西译学批评.北京：清华大学出版社，2004.
赵冬梅.译者主体性关照下的翻译单位研究.四川师范大学学报，2007,(34):111.
Baker, Mona. Encyclopedia of Translation Studies. London and New York: Routledge,1998.
Catford, J.C. A Linguistic Theory of Translation. London: Oxford University press,1965.
Hartmann, Stork, F.C. Dictionary of Language and Linguistics. Amsterdam: Applied Science,1972,
Lefevere, Andre. Translation Rewriting and Manipulation of Literacy Fame. London and NewYork: Routledge,1992.
Jackson, J. H. Water Margin. Shanghai: The Commercial Press, Ltd,1937
Jakobson, Roman. On linguistic Aspects of Translation, in R. A. Brower (ed). On Translation.Cambridge: Harvard University Press,1959.
Jeremy Munday. Introducing Translation Studies: Theories and Applications. London and NewYork: Routledge,2001.
Lao She. Camel Xiangzi. Trans. Shi Xiaojing. Beijing: Foreign languages Press,2001.
Lao She. Rickshaw. Trans Jean M. Honolulu: University of Hawaii Press,1979.
Newmark, Peter. A Textbook of Translation. New Jersey: Prentice Hall,1988.
Nida, Eugene.&Charles, R. Taber. The Theory and Practice of Translation. Leiden: E. J. Brill,1969.
Nida, Eugene. The Theory and Practice of Translation: With Special reference to BibleTranslating U.S.A.: Brill Academic Publishers,1982.
Nida, Eugene. Language and Culture-Contexts in Translation. Shanghai: Shanghai ForeignLanguage Education Press,2001.
Nida, Eugene. From One language to Another. New York Thomas Nelson Publishers’ House,1986.
Venuti, Lawrence. The Translator’s Invisibility: A History of Translation. London: Routledge,1995.
Venuti, Lawrence. The Scandals of Translation: Towards an Ethics of Difference. London P NewYork: Routledge,1998.
班荣学,赵荣.文学翻译的“忠实”与“创造”.西北大学学报，2006,(36):159.
陈秀.论译者介入.中国翻译,2002,(10):19-22.
邓婕.译者主体性与翻译策略.广东外语外贸大学学报，2006,(3):47.
邓炎昌,刘润清.语言与文化.北京：外语教学与研究出版社,1997.
韩敏.从中国历史上的四次翻译高潮看中国翻译传统.新西部,2009,(2):121.
孔慧怡.翻译·文学·文化.北京：北京大学出版社,1999.
李润新.老舍研究论文集.北京：人民文学出版社,2000.
刘正刚,陈首慧.文化转换过程中译者的策略选择.郑州航空工业管理学院学报,2006,(4):104.
陆艳.规范与翻译:林纾翻译的描述研究.上海：华东师范大学，2005.
梅忠波.译者的角色与翻译风格.成都教育学院学报,2006,(12):154.
潘文国.翻译与对比研究.上海：上海外语教育出版社，2005.
沙傅里.《水浒传》的英译.翻译通讯,1984,(2):29.
宋阜森.浅论《骆驼祥子》的艺术特色.现代语文,2010,(9):75.
孙会军.从《浮生六记》等作品的英译看翻译规范的运作方式.解放军外国语学院学报,2004,（2）:67-71
田德语.论译者的身份.中国翻译,2000,(6):20.
魏瑾,魏书艳.论文学翻译中译者的主体性.衡阳师范学院学报，2004,(25):141.
魏莉.《水浒传》三个英译本的比较研究.内蒙古农业大学学报，2009,(3):119.
杨玉秀.老舍作品中的北京话词语例释.北京:北京大学出版社,1984.
王岳川.新世纪中国身份与文化输出.广东社会科学,2004,(3):5-13.
谢世坚.从翻译规范看清末民初小说翻译.山东师范大学外国语学院学报,2002,（1）:9-13.
谢天振.译介学.上海:上海外语教育出版社,1999.
徐钧.文学翻译的理论与实践—翻译对话录.南京：译林出版社,2001:7.
徐曼玲.试论译者主体性对文本的诠释.长沙铁道学院学报,2006,(7):206.
姚瑶.从苏珊巴斯奈特德文化翻译观看林语堂《浮生六记》英译本中意识文化信息的传译.苏州：苏州大学,2004.
查明建,田雨.论译者主体性—从译者文化地位的边缘谈起.中国翻译，2003,(1):22.
张慧兴,张映先.论《红楼梦》两个英译本的翻译策略.武汉科技大学学报，2006,(2):65.
张今.文学翻译原理.开封：河南大学出版社，1998.
张南峰.中西译学批评.北京：清华大学出版社，2004.
赵冬梅.译者主体性关照下的翻译单位研究.四川师范大学学报，2007,(34):111.