从阐释学看文学翻译的再创造
|
摘要
文学翻译历来以其独特的艺术性和复杂性而备受关注,它不仅是语言和字面意义上的转换,而且要求忠实再现原文学文本的艺术现实,使译文读者得到与原文读者相同的美感享受,这就决定了文学翻译是一项复杂的创造性活动。再创造是文学翻译的核心,关系到文学翻译的成败,没有再创造就没有文学译本的再现和生成。
阐释学作为一门对于意义的理解与解释的哲学理论,所关心的问题与翻译研究联系十分紧密。本文拟从伽达默尔现代阐释学中有关理解的几个核心概念——“偏见”、“视域融合”等入手,浅析文学翻译的本质是艺术的再创造这一特征对翻译研究的意义。傅东华先生是第一位将美国畅销小说“Gone with the Wind”(《飘》)翻译介绍给中国读者的翻译家。长期以来,翻译界对他这部译作的评价褒贬不一,毁誉参半。本文以阐释学翻译理论为基础,对傅东华先生的译作《飘》进行了较为全面的分析,力求得出较为客观的评价。
除引言和结语外,全文由四章组成。第一章介绍了阐释学翻译理论的发展概况,奠定了本文的理论基础;第二章论述了文学翻译的定义及翻译过程,并进一步对再创造的概念、文学翻译过程中再创造的必要性和可能性进行了论述;第三章为本文的重点,运用德国哲学家伽达默尔的哲学阐释学,重点论述了其“偏见”、“视域融合”等观点,并以此为基础论述了再创造在翻译过程中的必要性、可能性和表达过程中对再创造“度”的把握;第四章以傅东华先生的译本《飘》为例,从“视域融合”的角度浅析傅东华先生通过增加、省略、转换等翻译方法对作品进行再创造,并从译者当时的社会文化及历史背景出发分析了文学翻译过程中再创造的“偏见观”因素。从而论证了再创造并不意味着译者随意自由的发挥和对原作的完全叛逆,而是在忠实再现原文的思想内容和精神,在遵循译语语言和文化的基本规范的基础上美的创造;结语部分对全文作了回顾和总结。
Literary translation is always paid much more attention to the utmost because of its literariness and complexity, literary translation is not only the transformation of languages and literal meanings, but it is required to represent the authenticity of literary works so as to contribute to the same aesthetic feeling of the target readers with that of the source text readers. Literary translation is a sophisticated re-creative activity. Re-creation is the key issue of literary translation, since if there is no re-creation, the representation of the target text is impossible.
Hermeneutics is the philosophical theory of understanding and interpreting, which are inevitable in every act of translation. From Gadamer's modern hermeneutic concepts——prejudice and fusion of horizons, this thesis analyzes that re-creation develops thoroughly in literary translation, since some believe that the essence of literary translation is the re-creation of art. Mr. Fu Donghua is the first translator who introduced Gone with the Wind, a best seller popular in America to Chinese readers. For a long time, his translation of this novel has been the center of controversy. Guided by hermeneutic approach, especially the re-creation in literary translation, a comparatively comprehensive analysis of Mr. Fu Donghua's translation Gone with the Wind has been done, which comes to a more objective and scientific evaluation.
This thesis consists of four chapters besides the Introduction and Conclusion. In Chapter 1, the thesis outlines the development of hermeneutic approach and lays down the theoretical foundation of this thesis; Chapter 2 investigates a general view of the necessity and possibility of re-creation in literary translation, as well as the definition and process of literary translation; Chapter 3 is the focus of the thesis. It analyzes the presentation of re-creation in the comprehension and representation process and fusion of horizons in translating process by employing the Germen philosopher Hans-Georg Gadamer's Hermeneutics; in Chapter 4, with a case study of Mr. Fu Donghua's translated edition Gone with the Wind, the thesis explores Mr. Fu Donghua's perfect fusion of horizons in translation strategies——addition, deletion and alteration, as well as the "prejudice" factors of re-creation in society, culture, and history. It draws a conclusion that re-creation does not refer to "treason" against the source text, but it should be fulfilled in accordance with the principle of being faithful to the content and spirit of the source text and conforming to the general norms of target language and culture; the conclusion provides a review and summary of the whole thesis.
阐释学作为一门对于意义的理解与解释的哲学理论,所关心的问题与翻译研究联系十分紧密。本文拟从伽达默尔现代阐释学中有关理解的几个核心概念——“偏见”、“视域融合”等入手,浅析文学翻译的本质是艺术的再创造这一特征对翻译研究的意义。傅东华先生是第一位将美国畅销小说“Gone with the Wind”(《飘》)翻译介绍给中国读者的翻译家。长期以来,翻译界对他这部译作的评价褒贬不一,毁誉参半。本文以阐释学翻译理论为基础,对傅东华先生的译作《飘》进行了较为全面的分析,力求得出较为客观的评价。
除引言和结语外,全文由四章组成。第一章介绍了阐释学翻译理论的发展概况,奠定了本文的理论基础;第二章论述了文学翻译的定义及翻译过程,并进一步对再创造的概念、文学翻译过程中再创造的必要性和可能性进行了论述;第三章为本文的重点,运用德国哲学家伽达默尔的哲学阐释学,重点论述了其“偏见”、“视域融合”等观点,并以此为基础论述了再创造在翻译过程中的必要性、可能性和表达过程中对再创造“度”的把握;第四章以傅东华先生的译本《飘》为例,从“视域融合”的角度浅析傅东华先生通过增加、省略、转换等翻译方法对作品进行再创造,并从译者当时的社会文化及历史背景出发分析了文学翻译过程中再创造的“偏见观”因素。从而论证了再创造并不意味着译者随意自由的发挥和对原作的完全叛逆,而是在忠实再现原文的思想内容和精神,在遵循译语语言和文化的基本规范的基础上美的创造;结语部分对全文作了回顾和总结。
Literary translation is always paid much more attention to the utmost because of its literariness and complexity, literary translation is not only the transformation of languages and literal meanings, but it is required to represent the authenticity of literary works so as to contribute to the same aesthetic feeling of the target readers with that of the source text readers. Literary translation is a sophisticated re-creative activity. Re-creation is the key issue of literary translation, since if there is no re-creation, the representation of the target text is impossible.
Hermeneutics is the philosophical theory of understanding and interpreting, which are inevitable in every act of translation. From Gadamer's modern hermeneutic concepts——prejudice and fusion of horizons, this thesis analyzes that re-creation develops thoroughly in literary translation, since some believe that the essence of literary translation is the re-creation of art. Mr. Fu Donghua is the first translator who introduced Gone with the Wind, a best seller popular in America to Chinese readers. For a long time, his translation of this novel has been the center of controversy. Guided by hermeneutic approach, especially the re-creation in literary translation, a comparatively comprehensive analysis of Mr. Fu Donghua's translation Gone with the Wind has been done, which comes to a more objective and scientific evaluation.
This thesis consists of four chapters besides the Introduction and Conclusion. In Chapter 1, the thesis outlines the development of hermeneutic approach and lays down the theoretical foundation of this thesis; Chapter 2 investigates a general view of the necessity and possibility of re-creation in literary translation, as well as the definition and process of literary translation; Chapter 3 is the focus of the thesis. It analyzes the presentation of re-creation in the comprehension and representation process and fusion of horizons in translating process by employing the Germen philosopher Hans-Georg Gadamer's Hermeneutics; in Chapter 4, with a case study of Mr. Fu Donghua's translated edition Gone with the Wind, the thesis explores Mr. Fu Donghua's perfect fusion of horizons in translation strategies——addition, deletion and alteration, as well as the "prejudice" factors of re-creation in society, culture, and history. It draws a conclusion that re-creation does not refer to "treason" against the source text, but it should be fulfilled in accordance with the principle of being faithful to the content and spirit of the source text and conforming to the general norms of target language and culture; the conclusion provides a review and summary of the whole thesis.
引文
1.These four articles were all published in Foreign Languages,and respectively in vol.of 1991(5);1998(2);2000(3);2000(5).
2.Bruns,Gerald L.Hermeneutics:Ancient and Modern.New Haven:Yale University Press.1992:247.
3.According to Heidagger."Da" means "like this" and "sein" means "existence"."Dasein" refers to the state of "appearing and unfolding"of "existence".
4.Hans-Georg Gadamer.Truth and Method.tr.revised by Weinsheimer.Joel and Marshall.G.Donald.New York:Continuum.2000:270.
5.郑海凌,《文学翻译学》。郑州:文心出版社。2000:39页。
6.Universaux cultures and universaux de langusge in English:1).commonality of human languages;2).commonality of human cultures and 3).adequate ability of sense perception and comprehension.(Liao,2001a:193-194)(Nida,1984:14)
7.A press founded in Shanghai in 1913,in the early it was devoted to the edition and publishing of text books.
Bassnett,Susan & Andre Lefeveere.2002.Constructing Cultures——Essays on Literary Translation.Shanghai:Shanghai Foreign Language Education Press.
Delisle,Jean.1989.Translation:An Interpretative Approach.Ottawa:University of Ottawa Press.
Gadamer,Hans-George translated by Garpett Barden and John Gumming.1975.Truth and Method.Bei Jing:China Social Sciences Publishing House.
Gentzler,Edwin.2004.Contemporary Translation Theories(Revised Second Edition).Shanghai:Shanghai Foreign language Education Press.
Hatim,Basil and Mason,Ian.1998.The Translator as Communicator.London;New York:Routledge.Landers Clifford E.2001.Literary Translation—A Practical Guide.Toronto.Sydney:Multilingual Matters LTD.
Hatim Basil.and Mason Ian.1990,Discourse and the Translator.New York:Longman Group Ltd.
Jauss,Hans Robert.1994.Literary History as a Challenge to Literary Theory.In Philip Rice&Patricia Waugh(ed.)Modern LiteraryTheory: A Reader.New York:Edward Amold.
Lefevere,Andre.1992.Translation History Culture.London & New York:Routledge.
Mitchell,Margaret.1996.Gone with the Wind.Bei Jing:Yi ling Press.
Newmark,Peter.1988.A Textbook of Translation.UK:Prentice Hall International Ltd.
Newmark,P.1981.Approach to Translation.Oxford:Pergamon Press.
Nida,Eugene A.1969.Science of Translation.Shanghai:Shanghai Foreign Language Education Press.
Nida,Eugene A.2001.Language and Culture Contexts in Translating.Shanghai:Shanghai Foreign Language Education Press.
Nida,Eugene A.2004.Towards a Science of Translating.Shanghai:Shanghai Foreign language Education Press.
Searle,John R.1969.Speech Act——An Essay in the Philosophy of Language.Berkeley:University of Califomia.
Shuttleworth,Mark,and Moira Cowie.1997.Dictionary of Translation Studies.Manchester:St.Jerome.
Snell-Homby,Mary.1995.Translation Studies:An Integrated Approach.Amsterdam and Philadelphia.
Steiner,G.2001.After Babel:Aspects of Language and Translation.Shanghai:Shanghai Foreign Language Education Press.
Tytler,A.F.1978.Essay on the Principles of Translation.Amsterdam: Hohn Benjamins.
VennewitzL,1993.The Art of Literary Translation.New York:University Press of America.
Wang Dongfeng & Shen Dan.1999.Translating.Meta.78-100.Website:http://www.erudit.org/revue/metal/1999/v44/n1
蔡新乐,郁东占,1997,《文学翻译的释义学原理》。开封:河南大学出版社。
蔡新乐,郁东占,1998,为什么要将释义学引入文学翻译理论,《外国语》第2期,6-11页。
陈福康,1992,《中国译学理论史稿》。上海:上海外语教育出版社。
陈建中,1997,翻译即阐释,《外语与外语教学》第6期,42-46页。
陈良廷等(译),1990,《乱世佳人》。上海:上海译文出版社。
方梦之主编,2004,《译学词典》。上海:上海外语教育出版社。
冯庆华,王显,1998,从文化交流的宏观角度研究翻译——(飘)的译本研究,《外国语》第3期,52-56页。
傅东华(译),1940,《飘》(上、中、下)。杭州:浙江文艺出版社。
黄龙胜,2005,阐释学与文学翻译中译者的主体性,《东华大学学报》第2期,19-23页。
伽达默尔,1998,《哲学解释学》(夏镇平译)。上海:上海译文出版社。
金惠康,2003,《跨文化交际翻译》。北京:中国对外翻译出版公司。
廖晶,朱献珑,2005,论译者身份——从翻译理念的演变谈起,《中国翻译》第3期,14-19页。
廖七一等,2001,《当代西方翻译理论探索》。南京:译林出版社。
廖七一,2004《当代英国翻译理论》。武汉:湖北教育出版社。
刘重德,2003,《西方译论研究》。北京:中国对外翻译出版公司。
刘重德,1991,《文学翻译十讲》。北京:中国对外翻译出版公司。
刘军平,梁志芳,2003,《权力话语与翻译:中国近当代翻译策略的主题演变》,载《外语与翻译》第2期,36-41页。
刘宓庆,1999,《文化翻译论纲》。武汉:湖北教育出版社。
刘宓庆,1999,《当代翻译理论》。北京:中国对外翻译出版公司。
刘英凯,1987,归化——翻译的歧路,《现代外语》第1期,58-64页。
吕俊,2002,理解中的偏见与翻译的再创造,《外语与外语教学》第6期,35—38页。
吕周聚,2001,《中国现代主义诗学》。人民文学出版社。
鲁迅,1984,《“题未定”草》,载《翻译研究文集》。外语教学与研究出版社。
罗新璋,1995,释“译作”,《中国翻译》第2期,7-10页。
茅盾,1984,为发展文学翻译事业和提高翻译质量而奋斗,罗新璋,《翻译论集》。北京:商务印书馆,501-517页。
孙致礼,2002,中国的文学翻译:从归化趋向异化,《中国翻译》第1期,40-44页。
孙致礼,2003,再谈文学翻译的策略问题,《中国翻译》第1期,48-51页。
唐培,2003,从阐释学视角探讨译者的主体性——兼谈《魔戒》译者 主体性的发挥,《解放军外国语学院学报》第6期,68-72页。
屠国元,朱献珑,2003,译者主体性:阐释学的阐释,《中国翻译》第6期,8-14页。
王东风,1999,《文化缺省与翻译补偿》,郭建中,《文化与翻译》。北京:中国对外翻译出版公司,229页。
文军,高晓鹰,2003,归化异化,各具一格——从功能翻译理论角度评价《飘》的两种译本,《中国翻译》第5期,40-43页。
萧立明,2001,《新译学论稿》。北京:中国对外翻译出版公司。
谢天振,1999,《译介学》。上海:上海外语教育出版社。
谢天振,2000,作者本意与文本本意——解释学理论与翻译研究,《外国语》第3期,53-60页。
许钧,1998,《翻译思考录》。武汉:湖北教育出版社。
许钧,2001,《文学翻译的理论与实践——翻译对话录》。南京:译林出版社。
许钧,2003,“创造性叛逆”和翻译主体性的确立,《中国翻译》第1期,6-11页。
许渊冲,1984,《翻译的艺术》。北京:中国对外翻译出版公司。
许渊冲,1999,再创造与翻译风格,《解放军外国语学院学报》第3期,72-76页。
杨武能,1987,阐释、接受与再创造的循环,《中国翻译》第6期,3-6页。
余光中,2002,《余光中谈翻译》。北京:中国对外翻译出版公司。
张德让,2001,伽达默尔哲学解释学与翻译研究,《中国翻译》第4期,23-25页。
朱栋霖,丁帆,朱晓进(主编),2000,《中国现代文学史》1917-1997(上册)。北京:高等教育出版社。
朱健平,2002,现代阐释学和接受美学在我国翻译研究中的运行轨迹,《上海科技翻译》第1期,6-12页。
朱献珑,2003,论文学翻译中的创造性叛逆——从阐释学角度分析,《山东外语教学》第3期,104-107页。
2.Bruns,Gerald L.Hermeneutics:Ancient and Modern.New Haven:Yale University Press.1992:247.
3.According to Heidagger."Da" means "like this" and "sein" means "existence"."Dasein" refers to the state of "appearing and unfolding"of "existence".
4.Hans-Georg Gadamer.Truth and Method.tr.revised by Weinsheimer.Joel and Marshall.G.Donald.New York:Continuum.2000:270.
5.郑海凌,《文学翻译学》。郑州:文心出版社。2000:39页。
6.Universaux cultures and universaux de langusge in English:1).commonality of human languages;2).commonality of human cultures and 3).adequate ability of sense perception and comprehension.(Liao,2001a:193-194)(Nida,1984:14)
7.A press founded in Shanghai in 1913,in the early it was devoted to the edition and publishing of text books.
Bassnett,Susan & Andre Lefeveere.2002.Constructing Cultures——Essays on Literary Translation.Shanghai:Shanghai Foreign Language Education Press.
Delisle,Jean.1989.Translation:An Interpretative Approach.Ottawa:University of Ottawa Press.
Gadamer,Hans-George translated by Garpett Barden and John Gumming.1975.Truth and Method.Bei Jing:China Social Sciences Publishing House.
Gentzler,Edwin.2004.Contemporary Translation Theories(Revised Second Edition).Shanghai:Shanghai Foreign language Education Press.
Hatim,Basil and Mason,Ian.1998.The Translator as Communicator.London;New York:Routledge.Landers Clifford E.2001.Literary Translation—A Practical Guide.Toronto.Sydney:Multilingual Matters LTD.
Hatim Basil.and Mason Ian.1990,Discourse and the Translator.New York:Longman Group Ltd.
Jauss,Hans Robert.1994.Literary History as a Challenge to Literary Theory.In Philip Rice&Patricia Waugh(ed.)Modern LiteraryTheory: A Reader.New York:Edward Amold.
Lefevere,Andre.1992.Translation History Culture.London & New York:Routledge.
Mitchell,Margaret.1996.Gone with the Wind.Bei Jing:Yi ling Press.
Newmark,Peter.1988.A Textbook of Translation.UK:Prentice Hall International Ltd.
Newmark,P.1981.Approach to Translation.Oxford:Pergamon Press.
Nida,Eugene A.1969.Science of Translation.Shanghai:Shanghai Foreign Language Education Press.
Nida,Eugene A.2001.Language and Culture Contexts in Translating.Shanghai:Shanghai Foreign Language Education Press.
Nida,Eugene A.2004.Towards a Science of Translating.Shanghai:Shanghai Foreign language Education Press.
Searle,John R.1969.Speech Act——An Essay in the Philosophy of Language.Berkeley:University of Califomia.
Shuttleworth,Mark,and Moira Cowie.1997.Dictionary of Translation Studies.Manchester:St.Jerome.
Snell-Homby,Mary.1995.Translation Studies:An Integrated Approach.Amsterdam and Philadelphia.
Steiner,G.2001.After Babel:Aspects of Language and Translation.Shanghai:Shanghai Foreign Language Education Press.
Tytler,A.F.1978.Essay on the Principles of Translation.Amsterdam: Hohn Benjamins.
VennewitzL,1993.The Art of Literary Translation.New York:University Press of America.
Wang Dongfeng & Shen Dan.1999.Translating.Meta.78-100.Website:http://www.erudit.org/revue/metal/1999/v44/n1
蔡新乐,郁东占,1997,《文学翻译的释义学原理》。开封:河南大学出版社。
蔡新乐,郁东占,1998,为什么要将释义学引入文学翻译理论,《外国语》第2期,6-11页。
陈福康,1992,《中国译学理论史稿》。上海:上海外语教育出版社。
陈建中,1997,翻译即阐释,《外语与外语教学》第6期,42-46页。
陈良廷等(译),1990,《乱世佳人》。上海:上海译文出版社。
方梦之主编,2004,《译学词典》。上海:上海外语教育出版社。
冯庆华,王显,1998,从文化交流的宏观角度研究翻译——(飘)的译本研究,《外国语》第3期,52-56页。
傅东华(译),1940,《飘》(上、中、下)。杭州:浙江文艺出版社。
黄龙胜,2005,阐释学与文学翻译中译者的主体性,《东华大学学报》第2期,19-23页。
伽达默尔,1998,《哲学解释学》(夏镇平译)。上海:上海译文出版社。
金惠康,2003,《跨文化交际翻译》。北京:中国对外翻译出版公司。
廖晶,朱献珑,2005,论译者身份——从翻译理念的演变谈起,《中国翻译》第3期,14-19页。
廖七一等,2001,《当代西方翻译理论探索》。南京:译林出版社。
廖七一,2004《当代英国翻译理论》。武汉:湖北教育出版社。
刘重德,2003,《西方译论研究》。北京:中国对外翻译出版公司。
刘重德,1991,《文学翻译十讲》。北京:中国对外翻译出版公司。
刘军平,梁志芳,2003,《权力话语与翻译:中国近当代翻译策略的主题演变》,载《外语与翻译》第2期,36-41页。
刘宓庆,1999,《文化翻译论纲》。武汉:湖北教育出版社。
刘宓庆,1999,《当代翻译理论》。北京:中国对外翻译出版公司。
刘英凯,1987,归化——翻译的歧路,《现代外语》第1期,58-64页。
吕俊,2002,理解中的偏见与翻译的再创造,《外语与外语教学》第6期,35—38页。
吕周聚,2001,《中国现代主义诗学》。人民文学出版社。
鲁迅,1984,《“题未定”草》,载《翻译研究文集》。外语教学与研究出版社。
罗新璋,1995,释“译作”,《中国翻译》第2期,7-10页。
茅盾,1984,为发展文学翻译事业和提高翻译质量而奋斗,罗新璋,《翻译论集》。北京:商务印书馆,501-517页。
孙致礼,2002,中国的文学翻译:从归化趋向异化,《中国翻译》第1期,40-44页。
孙致礼,2003,再谈文学翻译的策略问题,《中国翻译》第1期,48-51页。
唐培,2003,从阐释学视角探讨译者的主体性——兼谈《魔戒》译者 主体性的发挥,《解放军外国语学院学报》第6期,68-72页。
屠国元,朱献珑,2003,译者主体性:阐释学的阐释,《中国翻译》第6期,8-14页。
王东风,1999,《文化缺省与翻译补偿》,郭建中,《文化与翻译》。北京:中国对外翻译出版公司,229页。
文军,高晓鹰,2003,归化异化,各具一格——从功能翻译理论角度评价《飘》的两种译本,《中国翻译》第5期,40-43页。
萧立明,2001,《新译学论稿》。北京:中国对外翻译出版公司。
谢天振,1999,《译介学》。上海:上海外语教育出版社。
谢天振,2000,作者本意与文本本意——解释学理论与翻译研究,《外国语》第3期,53-60页。
许钧,1998,《翻译思考录》。武汉:湖北教育出版社。
许钧,2001,《文学翻译的理论与实践——翻译对话录》。南京:译林出版社。
许钧,2003,“创造性叛逆”和翻译主体性的确立,《中国翻译》第1期,6-11页。
许渊冲,1984,《翻译的艺术》。北京:中国对外翻译出版公司。
许渊冲,1999,再创造与翻译风格,《解放军外国语学院学报》第3期,72-76页。
杨武能,1987,阐释、接受与再创造的循环,《中国翻译》第6期,3-6页。
余光中,2002,《余光中谈翻译》。北京:中国对外翻译出版公司。
张德让,2001,伽达默尔哲学解释学与翻译研究,《中国翻译》第4期,23-25页。
朱栋霖,丁帆,朱晓进(主编),2000,《中国现代文学史》1917-1997(上册)。北京:高等教育出版社。
朱健平,2002,现代阐释学和接受美学在我国翻译研究中的运行轨迹,《上海科技翻译》第1期,6-12页。
朱献珑,2003,论文学翻译中的创造性叛逆——从阐释学角度分析,《山东外语教学》第3期,104-107页。