《还乡》三译本语用对比分析
|
摘要
托马斯·哈代是英国最杰出的乡土小说家。其小说《还乡》笔触细腻生动,具有深刻的思想内容,以及戏剧化的情节结构,是作者深刻思想内容与创作艺术的结晶。著名翻译家张谷若于1958年和1991年11月出版《还乡》的中文译作,学者王守仁也于1998年5月出版该书译作。本文从语用学视角,分析比较《还乡》的上述三个译本。
语用学是一门新兴学科,研究的是说话者如何使用语言实现成功交际的问题。语用学对文学文本的翻译具有重要的理论借鉴和实践应用价值。本文尝试把语用学应用于哈代小说翻译的研究,探索文学、语言学及翻译的跨学科研究方法。小说《还乡》的翻译中,每章标题和乡间土语翻译中的最大问题是文体选择,主要人物的对话翻译则需着重考虑言语行为的再现,而心理描写和文化负荷语段的翻译涉及心理、文化语境因素。所以,本文主体部分分别选取语用学中的语域理论、言语行为理论和语境理论从上述三方面对《还乡》三译本进行对比分析。全文由引言、正文和结论组成:
引言部分简介小说《还乡》及其三个中文译本,概述语用学的主要研究对象,指出运用语用学理论对比分析三译本的可行性。
第一章首先概述哈代的作品、地位及国内外哈代研究和哈代翻译现状。然后简述语用学的定义、两大流派及发展现状,并把语用学与文学翻译结合起来,论述从语用学角度对比分析《还乡》三个中文译本的可行性。
第二章以韩礼德的语域理论为依据,从翻译中如何根据语场、语旨和语式的异同再现原文语域特征的角度,对比分析《还乡》三个中文译本中的每章标题翻译和独特人物克锐这一形象的语言描写翻译,从中见出张谷若第二个译本的标题翻译最为出色,而其两个译本中对克锐这个人物的语言描写翻译也较王守仁更胜一筹。
第三章主要以塞尔关于施为性言语行为的分类和间接言语行为理论为基础,从具体言语行为再现的角度,对比分析《还乡》三个中文译本中对话描写的翻译,从中见出,张谷若两译本的对话翻译远胜过王守仁的译本。
第四章从维索尔伦的顺应论入手,从语境因素如何影响译者选择目的语语言和目的语读者如何理解的角度,对比分析《还乡》三个中文译本中的心理描写翻译和文化负荷语段翻译,从中见出,两译者在这两方面翻译各有得失,张谷若的翻译略胜一筹。
结论部分总结上述分析对比,指出《还乡》三个译本各有得与失。总体来讲,张谷若两译本更多的选取符合中国社会、文化、语言等习惯的汉语,而王守仁的译本更多的保留原文的形式,从语用角度来看,张谷若两译本尤其是第二个译本更为出色。
Thomas Hardy is an outstanding British regional novelist, and The Return of the Native is one of his major novels, which has profound ideological contents and dramatic plot. The famous translator Zhang Guruo published two Chinese versions of it in 1958 and 1991, and the scholar Wang Shouren published his Chinese version in 1998. In the perspective of pragmatics, this thesis analyses and compares these three Chinese versions of The Return of the Native.
Pragmatics is a new discipline that studies how speakers of a language use it to effect successful communication. It is of great theoretical reference and practical value to the translation of literary texts. This thesis attempts to apply pragmatics to the translation of Hardy’s The Return of the Native as a probe of interdisciplinary research method in literature, translation and linguistics. In the translation of The Return of the Native, dealing with the subtitles and countryside dialects involves choices of style; coping with the dialogues between the main characters could be seen as reproducing the speech acts;while rendering the psychological descriptions and cultural loaded discourse in Chinese, context ingredients such as cultural differences and mentalities are covered. Therefore, this thesis employs register theory,speech act theory and context theory of pragmatics to analyse and compare the three Chinese versions of The Return of the Native. It consists of four chapters in addition to an introduction and a conclusion.
The introduction offers a brief of Hardy’s novel The Return of the Native and its three Chinese versions as well as the main research objects of pragmatics, and points out the feasibility of applying pragmatic theories to the contrastive analyses of the three translated versions.
Chapter 1 introduces Hardy’s status in English literature, and reviews the status quo of studies on Hardy at home and abroad. It introduces and analyses The Return of the Native, its two translators Zhang Guruo and Wang Shouren, and their three Chinese versions. This chapter also introduces the definition, the two major traditions, the current situation and developing tendency of pragmatics, and combines pragmatics and literary translation to interpret the feasibility of applying pragmatic theories to the contrastive analyses of the three Chinese versions of The Return of the Native.
Chapter 2 introduces Halliday’s register theory and applies it to the analysis of the translation of The Return of the Native. Register theory holds that language varies with its function, and a register is the type of language which is selected as appropriate to the type of situation. Three social variables determine the register: field of discourse, tenor of discourse, and mode of discourse. As regards the translation of the subtitles and utterances of the unique character Christian in the three Chinese versions of The Return of the Native in the perspective of reproducing the register features, Zhang’s second version does the best in subtitle translation, and his two versions do better than Wang’s version when translating Christian’s utterances.
Chapter 3 compares and analyses the translation of the dialogues in the three Chinese versions of The Return of the Native mainly in the perspective of Searle’s classification of illocutionary acts and his indirect speech act theory. It is concluded that Zhang’s two versions do much better in dialogue translation than Wang’s version.
Chapter 4 compares and analyses the translation of psychological descriptions and cultural loaded discourse of the three Chinese versions of The Return of the Native in the perspective of context theory initiated by Verschueren, according to whom, pragmatics is a perspective on language, and language has three key properties, i.e. variability, negotiability and adaptability, and contextual correlates of adaptability are one angle of investigation. In terms of communicative and linguistic contexts, both translators have merits and shortcomings and Zhang’s two versions do a little better than Wang’s version.
The conclusion summarizes the previous chapters and points out that both translators of The Return of the Native have merits and shortcomings. Generally speaking, Zhang prefers making a good effort to find language in accord with Chinese habits of society, culture, language, etc. while Wang is more inclined to preserve the form of the original. Zhang does better in the pragmatic perspective on the whole.
语用学是一门新兴学科,研究的是说话者如何使用语言实现成功交际的问题。语用学对文学文本的翻译具有重要的理论借鉴和实践应用价值。本文尝试把语用学应用于哈代小说翻译的研究,探索文学、语言学及翻译的跨学科研究方法。小说《还乡》的翻译中,每章标题和乡间土语翻译中的最大问题是文体选择,主要人物的对话翻译则需着重考虑言语行为的再现,而心理描写和文化负荷语段的翻译涉及心理、文化语境因素。所以,本文主体部分分别选取语用学中的语域理论、言语行为理论和语境理论从上述三方面对《还乡》三译本进行对比分析。全文由引言、正文和结论组成:
引言部分简介小说《还乡》及其三个中文译本,概述语用学的主要研究对象,指出运用语用学理论对比分析三译本的可行性。
第一章首先概述哈代的作品、地位及国内外哈代研究和哈代翻译现状。然后简述语用学的定义、两大流派及发展现状,并把语用学与文学翻译结合起来,论述从语用学角度对比分析《还乡》三个中文译本的可行性。
第二章以韩礼德的语域理论为依据,从翻译中如何根据语场、语旨和语式的异同再现原文语域特征的角度,对比分析《还乡》三个中文译本中的每章标题翻译和独特人物克锐这一形象的语言描写翻译,从中见出张谷若第二个译本的标题翻译最为出色,而其两个译本中对克锐这个人物的语言描写翻译也较王守仁更胜一筹。
第三章主要以塞尔关于施为性言语行为的分类和间接言语行为理论为基础,从具体言语行为再现的角度,对比分析《还乡》三个中文译本中对话描写的翻译,从中见出,张谷若两译本的对话翻译远胜过王守仁的译本。
第四章从维索尔伦的顺应论入手,从语境因素如何影响译者选择目的语语言和目的语读者如何理解的角度,对比分析《还乡》三个中文译本中的心理描写翻译和文化负荷语段翻译,从中见出,两译者在这两方面翻译各有得失,张谷若的翻译略胜一筹。
结论部分总结上述分析对比,指出《还乡》三个译本各有得与失。总体来讲,张谷若两译本更多的选取符合中国社会、文化、语言等习惯的汉语,而王守仁的译本更多的保留原文的形式,从语用角度来看,张谷若两译本尤其是第二个译本更为出色。
Thomas Hardy is an outstanding British regional novelist, and The Return of the Native is one of his major novels, which has profound ideological contents and dramatic plot. The famous translator Zhang Guruo published two Chinese versions of it in 1958 and 1991, and the scholar Wang Shouren published his Chinese version in 1998. In the perspective of pragmatics, this thesis analyses and compares these three Chinese versions of The Return of the Native.
Pragmatics is a new discipline that studies how speakers of a language use it to effect successful communication. It is of great theoretical reference and practical value to the translation of literary texts. This thesis attempts to apply pragmatics to the translation of Hardy’s The Return of the Native as a probe of interdisciplinary research method in literature, translation and linguistics. In the translation of The Return of the Native, dealing with the subtitles and countryside dialects involves choices of style; coping with the dialogues between the main characters could be seen as reproducing the speech acts;while rendering the psychological descriptions and cultural loaded discourse in Chinese, context ingredients such as cultural differences and mentalities are covered. Therefore, this thesis employs register theory,speech act theory and context theory of pragmatics to analyse and compare the three Chinese versions of The Return of the Native. It consists of four chapters in addition to an introduction and a conclusion.
The introduction offers a brief of Hardy’s novel The Return of the Native and its three Chinese versions as well as the main research objects of pragmatics, and points out the feasibility of applying pragmatic theories to the contrastive analyses of the three translated versions.
Chapter 1 introduces Hardy’s status in English literature, and reviews the status quo of studies on Hardy at home and abroad. It introduces and analyses The Return of the Native, its two translators Zhang Guruo and Wang Shouren, and their three Chinese versions. This chapter also introduces the definition, the two major traditions, the current situation and developing tendency of pragmatics, and combines pragmatics and literary translation to interpret the feasibility of applying pragmatic theories to the contrastive analyses of the three Chinese versions of The Return of the Native.
Chapter 2 introduces Halliday’s register theory and applies it to the analysis of the translation of The Return of the Native. Register theory holds that language varies with its function, and a register is the type of language which is selected as appropriate to the type of situation. Three social variables determine the register: field of discourse, tenor of discourse, and mode of discourse. As regards the translation of the subtitles and utterances of the unique character Christian in the three Chinese versions of The Return of the Native in the perspective of reproducing the register features, Zhang’s second version does the best in subtitle translation, and his two versions do better than Wang’s version when translating Christian’s utterances.
Chapter 3 compares and analyses the translation of the dialogues in the three Chinese versions of The Return of the Native mainly in the perspective of Searle’s classification of illocutionary acts and his indirect speech act theory. It is concluded that Zhang’s two versions do much better in dialogue translation than Wang’s version.
Chapter 4 compares and analyses the translation of psychological descriptions and cultural loaded discourse of the three Chinese versions of The Return of the Native in the perspective of context theory initiated by Verschueren, according to whom, pragmatics is a perspective on language, and language has three key properties, i.e. variability, negotiability and adaptability, and contextual correlates of adaptability are one angle of investigation. In terms of communicative and linguistic contexts, both translators have merits and shortcomings and Zhang’s two versions do a little better than Wang’s version.
The conclusion summarizes the previous chapters and points out that both translators of The Return of the Native have merits and shortcomings. Generally speaking, Zhang prefers making a good effort to find language in accord with Chinese habits of society, culture, language, etc. while Wang is more inclined to preserve the form of the original. Zhang does better in the pragmatic perspective on the whole.
引文
冯庆华.文体翻译论[M].上海:上海外语教育出版社,2002.
何琴《.德伯家的苔丝》及其三种汉译本的比较[J].湖北教育学院学报,2005,11(22,6):39-40,18.
何自然,陈新仁.当代语用学[M]. 北京:外语教学与研究出版社,2002
何兆熊.新编语用学概要[M].上海:上海外语教育出版社,2000.
《还乡》(托马斯·哈代),苏州图书馆。2001 年 8 月 27 日。2006 年 5 月11 日。
《还乡》,亦凡公益图书馆。2000 年 7 月 19 日。2006 年 5 月 23 日。
李海燕.《还乡》悲剧的批判现实主义意义[J].语文学刊,2005,6:90-92.
李世强.哈代的小说创作及其宗教观[J].云南师范大学学报,2006,9(38,5):121-124.
林万平.《苔丝》及其汉译本的比较研究[J].贵州师范大学学报,2002.2:108-110.
马弦.论《还乡》中大自然描写的象征性[J].四川外语学院学报,2003,11(19,6):64-67.
束定芳.现代语义学[M].上海:上海外语教育出版社,2000.
思果.译道探微[M] .北京:中国对外翻译出版公司,2002.
涂靖.文学语用学纲要[M].长沙:湖南人民出版社,2005.
王小萍.析张谷若译《苔丝》的特色[J].广东教育学院学报,2000.2:65-70.
谢天振.译介学[M].上海:上海外语教育出版社,1999.2.
熊音.《还乡》原译文语言特色比较[J].(508-518)刘重德. 英汉语比较研究[C] 中国英汉语比较研究会编 1994
徐珺.功能语法用于《儒林外史》汉英语篇的研究:情景语境观[J].现代外语,2003.4(26.2):128-134,160.
---.《儒林外史》英汉语对比研究:语言与文化[J].Foreign Language Education, 24.2:48-51.
---.《儒林外史》英汉语语篇对比研究[J].外语与外语教学,2002.12:1-5.
严辰松,高航. 语用学[C].上海:上海外语教育出版社,2005.
颜学军.简论托马斯·哈代的文学思想[J].解放军外国语学院学报,2006,9(29,5):89-92.
喻云根.英美名著翻译比较[M].武汉:湖北教育出版社,1995.
张谷若.还乡[Z].北京:人民文学出版社,1958.
张中载. 托马斯·哈代――思想和创作[M].北京:外语教学与研究出版社,1987.2.
Dai Weidon, He Zhaoxiong. A New Concise Course on Linguistic for Students of English [M]. Shanghai: Shanghai Foreign Language Education Press, 2002.
Dale Kramer. The Cambridge Companion to Thomas Hardy [C]. Shanghai: Shanghai Foreign Language Education Press, 2000.
F. de Saussure. Course in General Linguistics [M]. Beijing: Foreign Language Teaching and Research Press,,2001.10.
Geoffrey N. Leech. Style in Fiction: A Linguistic Introduction to English Fictional Prose [M]. Beijing: Foreign Language Teaching and Research Press, 2001.10.
Jef Verschueren. Understanding Pragmatics [M]. Beijing: Foreign Language Teaching and Research Press, 2000.8.
Leo Hickey. The Pragmatics of Translation [C]. Shanghai: Shanghai Foreign Language Education Press, 2001.
Liu Bingshan. A Short History of English Literature[M].Zhengzhou: Henan People’s Publishing House, 1993.4
Stephen C. Levinson. Pragmatics [M]. Beijing: Foreign Language Teaching and Research Press, 2001.11
Thomas Hardy. The Return of the Native [Z].Toronto & New York: Bantam Books, 1981.
何琴《.德伯家的苔丝》及其三种汉译本的比较[J].湖北教育学院学报,2005,11(22,6):39-40,18.
何自然,陈新仁.当代语用学[M]. 北京:外语教学与研究出版社,2002
何兆熊.新编语用学概要[M].上海:上海外语教育出版社,2000.
《还乡》(托马斯·哈代),苏州图书馆。2001 年 8 月 27 日。2006 年 5 月11 日
《还乡》,亦凡公益图书馆。2000 年 7 月 19 日。2006 年 5 月 23 日
李海燕.《还乡》悲剧的批判现实主义意义[J].语文学刊,2005,6:90-92.
李世强.哈代的小说创作及其宗教观[J].云南师范大学学报,2006,9(38,5):121-124.
林万平.《苔丝》及其汉译本的比较研究[J].贵州师范大学学报,2002.2:108-110.
马弦.论《还乡》中大自然描写的象征性[J].四川外语学院学报,2003,11(19,6):64-67.
束定芳.现代语义学[M].上海:上海外语教育出版社,2000.
思果.译道探微[M] .北京:中国对外翻译出版公司,2002.
涂靖.文学语用学纲要[M].长沙:湖南人民出版社,2005.
王小萍.析张谷若译《苔丝》的特色[J].广东教育学院学报,2000.2:65-70.
谢天振.译介学[M].上海:上海外语教育出版社,1999.2.
熊音.《还乡》原译文语言特色比较[J].(508-518)刘重德. 英汉语比较研究[C] 中国英汉语比较研究会编 1994
徐珺.功能语法用于《儒林外史》汉英语篇的研究:情景语境观[J].现代外语,2003.4(26.2):128-134,160.
---.《儒林外史》英汉语对比研究:语言与文化[J].Foreign Language Education, 24.2:48-51.
---.《儒林外史》英汉语语篇对比研究[J].外语与外语教学,2002.12:1-5.
严辰松,高航. 语用学[C].上海:上海外语教育出版社,2005.
颜学军.简论托马斯·哈代的文学思想[J].解放军外国语学院学报,2006,9(29,5):89-92.
喻云根.英美名著翻译比较[M].武汉:湖北教育出版社,1995.
张谷若.还乡[Z].北京:人民文学出版社,1958.
张中载. 托马斯·哈代――思想和创作[M].北京:外语教学与研究出版社,1987.2.
Dai Weidon, He Zhaoxiong. A New Concise Course on Linguistic for Students of English [M]. Shanghai: Shanghai Foreign Language Education Press, 2002.
Dale Kramer. The Cambridge Companion to Thomas Hardy [C]. Shanghai: Shanghai Foreign Language Education Press, 2000.
F. de Saussure. Course in General Linguistics [M]. Beijing: Foreign Language Teaching and Research Press,,2001.10.
Geoffrey N. Leech. Style in Fiction: A Linguistic Introduction to English Fictional Prose [M]. Beijing: Foreign Language Teaching and Research Press, 2001.10.
Jef Verschueren. Understanding Pragmatics [M]. Beijing: Foreign Language Teaching and Research Press, 2000.8.
Leo Hickey. The Pragmatics of Translation [C]. Shanghai: Shanghai Foreign Language Education Press, 2001.
Liu Bingshan. A Short History of English Literature[M].Zhengzhou: Henan People’s Publishing House, 1993.4
Stephen C. Levinson. Pragmatics [M]. Beijing: Foreign Language Teaching and Research Press, 2001.11
Thomas Hardy. The Return of the Native [Z].Toronto & New York: Bantam Books, 1981.