文学翻译中概念范畴的动态识解
|
摘要
动态识解理论是继经典范畴理论、家族相似性和原型理论之后,关于人类认知过程中范畴构建的新观点。它是在已经给定的情境中,以原型理论为基础,并运用个体的认知经验、百科知识以及社会文化规约,对语境中的概念范畴进行界定。与之前的三种理论不同,动态识解理论强调人类是“即时”构建适用于认知语境的范畴边界,范畴框架和范畴等级的。这种观点打破了用以往理论的二元标准或模糊定义来解释范畴。动态识解理论在文学翻译中的应用研究不多,而且作为沟通两种不同文化视角下范畴观的方式,该理论对文学翻译的指导性就不容忽视。全世界最少存在五千多种不同形式的语言,但不同的语言间存在或相同或相近概念这个最大的前提,使翻译成为可能。对于文学翻译来说最重要的是在目的语文本中完成对原文本应有价值的体现。本文的目的就是要探讨文学翻译中,对概念范畴的动态识解能否对译者的翻译过程和读者的识解过程有指导性的帮助。
迄今为止,《阿Q正传》的正式英译本有五个。鉴于本文篇幅有限,而且其他四种译本时间比较久远,所以仅选取2009年由英国企鹅出版社出版的《阿Q正传及其他中国故事》。通过对单一译本的语境化识解,对概念范畴中最重要的三个特征进——范畴边界,范畴框架,范畴等级进行分析。在距离上一个英译本的20年之后,在中国向世界敞开大门30年之后,我们需要重新审视中国文学如何在英语文化框架之下体现其文化精髓。
本研究得出以下结论:读者对范畴的边界,框架和等级的建立及识解是即时的;不同文化框架之下,目的语文本读者对汉语文化负载词的理解主要依赖于语境的构建;动态识解理论对于文学翻译的指导性在于,用语境化的动态视角转化两种文化间的缺省概念和非对等概念,在不需寻求完全对等的情况下,准确的将原文本中的意境和情感传递给目的语读者。需要注意的是,对概念范畴的动态识解不仅仅是一种标准或者理论,它更是一种人类的认知机制。这种个体机制的无意识性和经验性可能导致对相同文本的理解出现偏差。而且,对小说译本的分析并不能代表所有文学或非文学形式,其结论也不能统一。本文为以后的研究提供了新的启示:以动态识解理论为基础,以语境化认知方法为手段,用篇章语境定义目的语文本中的词汇的概念范畴。
Dynamic construal theory is a new view on the construction of category in the process of human cognition after Classical Categorization Theory, family resemblance and prototype theory. Within the given scenarios, it bases on prototype theory, and applies individual cognitive experience, encyclopedic knowledge, even social and cultural conventions to define conceptual category in the context. It is different from first three theories, the dynamic construal theory emphasizes on the“on-line”constructing of boundary, frame and level which is appropriate for the cognitive context. This view breaks with the explanations of category which applies binary standards and fuzzy definitions of the past theories. The researches which apply dynamic construal theory to literature translation are not wide. As a communication method which is used to link up categorizations of two different cultural perspectives, its theoretical direction on literature translation can not be ignored. There are at least five thousand different forms of languages around the world. The biggest premise, in which the same or similar concepts exist between different languages, makes translation possible. To the literature translation, the most significant problem is how to transfer the embodiment of the due value from source text to target text. The aim of this research is to discuss in the literature translation, whether the dynamic construal theory possesses the instructive assistance to the process of translating and readers’construal process or not.
So far, it already has been five formal English versions of“Ah-Q Zheng Zhuan”published. In consideration of the limited space, and the other four versions are old, so the latest version The Real Story of Ah-Q and Other Tales of China, in which published by Penguin Press of Britain in 2009 is selected. Through the contextualized construal of this version, and then analyze the most important three attributes– boundary, frame and level. It has been 20 years since the last English version published; it has been 30 years since China began opening to the whole world, we need to reassess how Chinese literature reflects cultural essence under the frame of English culture.
After analyses, we have conclusions: readers’construal and construction of category boundary, frame, level is real-time; under different cultural frames, target text readers’comprehension on Chinese cultural-loaded words relies on the constructing of context principally. To literature translation, the instructive assistance of dynamic construal theory is that transferring the default and inequivalent concepts between different cultures with the dynamic view of contextualization. Under the situation of needless full equivalence, the artistic conception and emotion can be conveyed to target text readers precisely. It needs to pay attention to some points that dynamic construal of conceptual category is not only a theory or a standard, but also human cognitive mechanism. The unconsciousness and empiricism of individual mechanism may lead to diverse comprehensions. And the analysis on novel translation can not represent all the other literary forms, so the conclusion is impossible to unify. This paper provides a new perspective for the further translation study: which regards dynamic construal as theoretical base, contextualize cognition as method, and discourse context is applied to define conceptual category of words in target text.
迄今为止,《阿Q正传》的正式英译本有五个。鉴于本文篇幅有限,而且其他四种译本时间比较久远,所以仅选取2009年由英国企鹅出版社出版的《阿Q正传及其他中国故事》。通过对单一译本的语境化识解,对概念范畴中最重要的三个特征进——范畴边界,范畴框架,范畴等级进行分析。在距离上一个英译本的20年之后,在中国向世界敞开大门30年之后,我们需要重新审视中国文学如何在英语文化框架之下体现其文化精髓。
本研究得出以下结论:读者对范畴的边界,框架和等级的建立及识解是即时的;不同文化框架之下,目的语文本读者对汉语文化负载词的理解主要依赖于语境的构建;动态识解理论对于文学翻译的指导性在于,用语境化的动态视角转化两种文化间的缺省概念和非对等概念,在不需寻求完全对等的情况下,准确的将原文本中的意境和情感传递给目的语读者。需要注意的是,对概念范畴的动态识解不仅仅是一种标准或者理论,它更是一种人类的认知机制。这种个体机制的无意识性和经验性可能导致对相同文本的理解出现偏差。而且,对小说译本的分析并不能代表所有文学或非文学形式,其结论也不能统一。本文为以后的研究提供了新的启示:以动态识解理论为基础,以语境化认知方法为手段,用篇章语境定义目的语文本中的词汇的概念范畴。
Dynamic construal theory is a new view on the construction of category in the process of human cognition after Classical Categorization Theory, family resemblance and prototype theory. Within the given scenarios, it bases on prototype theory, and applies individual cognitive experience, encyclopedic knowledge, even social and cultural conventions to define conceptual category in the context. It is different from first three theories, the dynamic construal theory emphasizes on the“on-line”constructing of boundary, frame and level which is appropriate for the cognitive context. This view breaks with the explanations of category which applies binary standards and fuzzy definitions of the past theories. The researches which apply dynamic construal theory to literature translation are not wide. As a communication method which is used to link up categorizations of two different cultural perspectives, its theoretical direction on literature translation can not be ignored. There are at least five thousand different forms of languages around the world. The biggest premise, in which the same or similar concepts exist between different languages, makes translation possible. To the literature translation, the most significant problem is how to transfer the embodiment of the due value from source text to target text. The aim of this research is to discuss in the literature translation, whether the dynamic construal theory possesses the instructive assistance to the process of translating and readers’construal process or not.
So far, it already has been five formal English versions of“Ah-Q Zheng Zhuan”published. In consideration of the limited space, and the other four versions are old, so the latest version The Real Story of Ah-Q and Other Tales of China, in which published by Penguin Press of Britain in 2009 is selected. Through the contextualized construal of this version, and then analyze the most important three attributes– boundary, frame and level. It has been 20 years since the last English version published; it has been 30 years since China began opening to the whole world, we need to reassess how Chinese literature reflects cultural essence under the frame of English culture.
After analyses, we have conclusions: readers’construal and construction of category boundary, frame, level is real-time; under different cultural frames, target text readers’comprehension on Chinese cultural-loaded words relies on the constructing of context principally. To literature translation, the instructive assistance of dynamic construal theory is that transferring the default and inequivalent concepts between different cultures with the dynamic view of contextualization. Under the situation of needless full equivalence, the artistic conception and emotion can be conveyed to target text readers precisely. It needs to pay attention to some points that dynamic construal of conceptual category is not only a theory or a standard, but also human cognitive mechanism. The unconsciousness and empiricism of individual mechanism may lead to diverse comprehensions. And the analysis on novel translation can not represent all the other literary forms, so the conclusion is impossible to unify. This paper provides a new perspective for the further translation study: which regards dynamic construal as theoretical base, contextualize cognition as method, and discourse context is applied to define conceptual category of words in target text.
引文
[1] Berlin, Brent and Paul Kay. 1991[1969]. Basic Color Terms: Their Universality and Evolution [M]. Berkeley: University of California Press.
[2] Brown, G. and Yule, G. 1983.Discourse Analysis [M]. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press,.
[3] Brown, R. W. 1958.How Shall A Thing Be Called? Psychology Review. 65:14-21.
[4] Croft. W, Cruse. D. Alan. 1996. Cognitive Linguistics [M]. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
[5] Cruse. D. Alan. 2004.Meaning in Language: An Introduction to Semantics and Pragmatics[M].2nd ed.Oxford University Press.
[6] Fauconnier, G. 1995.Mental Spaces [M]. Cambridge Mass.: MIT Press.
[7] Gibbs, R.W Spilling the beans on understanding and memory for idioms in conversation, 1980(8)
[8] Givón, T. Prototype 1986. Between Plato and Wittgenstein. Inc. Craig, (ed.). Noun Classes and Categorization. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
[9] Jolicoeur, Pierre, S., Martin, A. Gluck and Stephen, M. Kosslyn. 1984.Pictures and Names: Making the Connection. Cognitive Psychology. 19:31-53.
[10] K?vecses, Zoltán. 2006. Language, Mind and Culture: A Practical Introduction. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
[11] Lakoff, G and M, Johnson. 1980. Metaphors We Live By [M]. Chicago: the University of Chicago Press.
[12] Lakoff, G. 1987. Women, Fire and Dangerous Things: what categories reveal about the mind [M]. Chicago: the University of Chicago Press.
[13] Lakoff, G. 2009.Ten Lectures on Cognitive Linguistics. Beijing: Foreign Language Teaching and Research Press, 12
[14] Langacker, R. 1986. Foundations of cognitive grammar, Vol.1 [M]. Stanford: Stanford University Press.
[15] Lovell, J. 2009. The Real Story of Ah-Q and Other Tales of China [M]. England: penguin Group.
[16] Minsky, M. 1975. A framework for representing knowledge [A]. In P.H. Winston (ed.). The psychology of computer vision [C]. New York: McGraw– Hill,.
[17] Rosch, E. Principle of categorization [A]. In Rosch, E. and B. B. Lloyd (eds) .Cognition and Categorization[C] .
[18] Rumelhart, D. 1975. Notes on a schema for stories [A]. In Bobrow, D. G. and Collins, A. M. (eds.). Representation and understandings: studies in cognitive science [C]. New York: Academic Press.
[19] Smith, L. Samuelson, L.2009. Perceiving and Remembering: Category, stability, variability and development.
[20] Schank, R. C. and Abelson, R. P. 1977. Scripts, Plans, Goals, and Understanding [M]. Hillsdale, N. J.: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
[21] Taylor, J. 2002.Cognitive Grammar [M]. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
[22] Taylor, J. 2003[1995/1989Linguistic Categorization: Prototype in Linguistic Theory [M]. Beijing: Foreign Language Teaching and Research Press.
[23] Taylor, J. 2007. Ten Lectures on Applied Cognitive Linguistics. Beijing: Foreign Language Teaching and Research Press.4
[24] Ungerer, F. and Schmid, H. J. 2008.An Introduction to Cognitive Linguistics [M]. 2nd ed. Beijing: Foreign Language Teaching and Research Press.
[25] Wittgenstein, L. 1953. Philosophical Investigations [M]. Trans. By Elizabeth Anscombe. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
[26]程琪龙.2007.概念框架和认知[M].上海:上海外语教育出版社.103.
[27]孔庆东.2009.正说鲁迅[M].重庆:重庆出版集团重庆出版社.
[28]蓝纯.2005.认知语言学与隐喻研究[M].北京:外语教学与研究出版社.
[29]李福印.2008.认知语言学概论[M].北京:北京大学出版社.
[30]陈丹青.2006.笑谈大先生——2005年6月5日在北京鲁迅博物馆讲演.见:李静.2005年中国随笔年选[C].广州:花城出版社, 1-20
[31]李小飞.2006.范畴边界的动态构建研究[J].山东外语教学.5:43-46.
[32]刘正光.2008.语言非范畴化[M].上海:上海外语教育出版社.
[33]鲁迅. 1999.呐喊[M].桂林:漓江出版社.
[34]束定芳.2009.认知语义学[M].上海:上海外语教育出版社.
[35]苏新春.2006.文化语言学教程[M].北京:外语教学与研究出版社. 91.
[36]王乾坤.1999.鲁迅的生命哲学(增订版)[M].北京:人民文学出版社.242.
[37]王希杰.2004.汉语修辞学[M].北京:商务印书馆. 403 - 406.
[38]王寅.2009.认知语言学[M].上海:上海外语教育出版社.
[39]颜林海.2008.翻译认知心理学[M].北京:科学出版社. 106.
[40]张洪芹.2007.动态词义识解论:(博士学位论文).河南:河南大学英语系.
[41]赵艳芳.2007.认知语言学概论[M].上海:上海外语教育出版社.
[2] Brown, G. and Yule, G. 1983.Discourse Analysis [M]. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press,.
[3] Brown, R. W. 1958.How Shall A Thing Be Called? Psychology Review. 65:14-21.
[4] Croft. W, Cruse. D. Alan. 1996. Cognitive Linguistics [M]. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
[5] Cruse. D. Alan. 2004.Meaning in Language: An Introduction to Semantics and Pragmatics[M].2nd ed.Oxford University Press.
[6] Fauconnier, G. 1995.Mental Spaces [M]. Cambridge Mass.: MIT Press.
[7] Gibbs, R.W Spilling the beans on understanding and memory for idioms in conversation, 1980(8)
[8] Givón, T. Prototype 1986. Between Plato and Wittgenstein. Inc. Craig, (ed.). Noun Classes and Categorization. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
[9] Jolicoeur, Pierre, S., Martin, A. Gluck and Stephen, M. Kosslyn. 1984.Pictures and Names: Making the Connection. Cognitive Psychology. 19:31-53.
[10] K?vecses, Zoltán. 2006. Language, Mind and Culture: A Practical Introduction. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
[11] Lakoff, G and M, Johnson. 1980. Metaphors We Live By [M]. Chicago: the University of Chicago Press.
[12] Lakoff, G. 1987. Women, Fire and Dangerous Things: what categories reveal about the mind [M]. Chicago: the University of Chicago Press.
[13] Lakoff, G. 2009.Ten Lectures on Cognitive Linguistics. Beijing: Foreign Language Teaching and Research Press, 12
[14] Langacker, R. 1986. Foundations of cognitive grammar, Vol.1 [M]. Stanford: Stanford University Press.
[15] Lovell, J. 2009. The Real Story of Ah-Q and Other Tales of China [M]. England: penguin Group.
[16] Minsky, M. 1975. A framework for representing knowledge [A]. In P.H. Winston (ed.). The psychology of computer vision [C]. New York: McGraw– Hill,.
[17] Rosch, E. Principle of categorization [A]. In Rosch, E. and B. B. Lloyd (eds) .Cognition and Categorization[C] .
[18] Rumelhart, D. 1975. Notes on a schema for stories [A]. In Bobrow, D. G. and Collins, A. M. (eds.). Representation and understandings: studies in cognitive science [C]. New York: Academic Press.
[19] Smith, L. Samuelson, L.2009. Perceiving and Remembering: Category, stability, variability and development.
[20] Schank, R. C. and Abelson, R. P. 1977. Scripts, Plans, Goals, and Understanding [M]. Hillsdale, N. J.: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
[21] Taylor, J. 2002.Cognitive Grammar [M]. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
[22] Taylor, J. 2003[1995/1989Linguistic Categorization: Prototype in Linguistic Theory [M]. Beijing: Foreign Language Teaching and Research Press.
[23] Taylor, J. 2007. Ten Lectures on Applied Cognitive Linguistics. Beijing: Foreign Language Teaching and Research Press.4
[24] Ungerer, F. and Schmid, H. J. 2008.An Introduction to Cognitive Linguistics [M]. 2nd ed. Beijing: Foreign Language Teaching and Research Press.
[25] Wittgenstein, L. 1953. Philosophical Investigations [M]. Trans. By Elizabeth Anscombe. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
[26]程琪龙.2007.概念框架和认知[M].上海:上海外语教育出版社.103.
[27]孔庆东.2009.正说鲁迅[M].重庆:重庆出版集团重庆出版社.
[28]蓝纯.2005.认知语言学与隐喻研究[M].北京:外语教学与研究出版社.
[29]李福印.2008.认知语言学概论[M].北京:北京大学出版社.
[30]陈丹青.2006.笑谈大先生——2005年6月5日在北京鲁迅博物馆讲演.见:李静.2005年中国随笔年选[C].广州:花城出版社, 1-20
[31]李小飞.2006.范畴边界的动态构建研究[J].山东外语教学.5:43-46.
[32]刘正光.2008.语言非范畴化[M].上海:上海外语教育出版社.
[33]鲁迅. 1999.呐喊[M].桂林:漓江出版社.
[34]束定芳.2009.认知语义学[M].上海:上海外语教育出版社.
[35]苏新春.2006.文化语言学教程[M].北京:外语教学与研究出版社. 91.
[36]王乾坤.1999.鲁迅的生命哲学(增订版)[M].北京:人民文学出版社.242.
[37]王希杰.2004.汉语修辞学[M].北京:商务印书馆. 403 - 406.
[38]王寅.2009.认知语言学[M].上海:上海外语教育出版社.
[39]颜林海.2008.翻译认知心理学[M].北京:科学出版社. 106.
[40]张洪芹.2007.动态词义识解论:(博士学位论文).河南:河南大学英语系.
[41]赵艳芳.2007.认知语言学概论[M].上海:上海外语教育出版社.