从文化角度论英汉典故翻译中语用隐含的传达
|
摘要
该论文旨在从文化角度研究英汉典故翻译中语用隐含的传达。根植于特有文化的典故在跨文化翻译中存在一些不可逾越的鸿沟。典故的内涵并非显而易见，只有处于同一文化中的读者才能理解典故的隐含意义。因此，向目的语读者传达原语典故的隐含意义就构成了典故翻译中最重要的步骤。语用学中的术语“隐含意图”这一概念与典故的根本特征如含蓄，婉约等具有密切的联系。语用隐含的传达集中表现在如何将原语的隐含意义或意图展现在目的语中，以符合目的语的社会文化语境。原语典故暗含意义的传达就是语用隐含的传译。语境，尤其是文化语境，对语用隐含的传译发挥着决定性的作用。由于典故的隐含意义与其文化内涵休戚相关，典故翻译实际上是文化内涵的传达。语用隐含意义的翻译是语用翻译的核心问题。它对跨文化翻译中的典故文化内涵的传达具有很大的启示作用。
本文介绍了语用翻译中重要的两大概念，即隐含意图的保留和明说，或‘隐含’与‘明示’。钱冠连教授认为原文的语用隐含应该得到保留。从文学的角度出发，他认为隐含或含蓄，抑或伊塞尔谈到的‘空白’，是构成文本的文学性的重要因素。一旦原文的含蓄在译文中得到明示或取消，就丧失了文本的文学性。何自然教授持相反观点。他认为原文的隐含在译文中应得到显现，以帮助译语读者克服文化障碍。这两种观点各有利弊。保留隐含则保留了异域风情，却对译语读者的接受能力提高了要求。明示则充分考虑了译语读者的理解能力，但原语文化特色会得到淡化甚至扭曲。本文作者认为，这两种取向的和谐统一为典故的文化内涵或语用隐含意义的传达提供了有效的途径。
该论文从文化角度对传达典故的语用隐含的各种可行性策略进行了探讨。本文对莎士比亚戏剧多种中译本，《红楼梦》英译本及其它文学作品中译者对英汉典故的处理作了详细的分析。分析表明，典故的语用隐含意义的处理受到诸多因素的制约，如语境，功能，文本类型等等。作者认为，语用隐含意义应该涵盖文化意义。既然典故被视为人类文明的结晶和文化沉积，那
么语用翻译运用到典故翻译中应该重视文化的保留。文章进一步阐述了在全
球化时代典故翻译中语用隐含意义的传达应该遵循‘文化传真’的根本原则。
它有益于长期的文化交流。
本文的结论是典故翻译在很大程度上是一种文化传播。典故的语用隐含
意义应该既包括典故的喻义又涵盖典故的文化特色。典故翻译的最佳途径就
是力图在语用隐含的保留与明示之间取得平衡，充分展现典故的喻义及文化
特色。在文化翻译中一直占主导地位的归化翻译应该让位于异化翻译，因为
它有助于文化的传播。异化的典故翻译策略不仅有助于将外国文化真实地展
现给中国读者，而且有利于向海外传播我国灿烂的文化。翻译应该成为两种
语言文化之间的平等交流与对话，这对于文化翻译尤为如此。
This thesis intends to study translation of pragmatic implicature in the C-E/E-C translation of allusions in a cultural perspective. Allusions, as embedded in specific cultures, have given rise to insurmountable problems in cross-cultural translation. The connotation of allusion is not always identifiable; it is rather implied and approachable only to those readers who are grounded in the same culture. Therefore, how to convey the implied meaning of a source-cultural allusion to the target language readers comprises the most important step in translating allusions. The term 'implicature', as denned in pragmatics, has close affinities with the essential features of allusion, such as implicity, covertness and subtlety, etc. Translation of pragmatic implicature focuses on how the implied or intended meaning of the source text can be conveyed in the target text with an aim to achieve appropriateness in the social and cultural context of the target language. It can be argued that conveyance of the implied meaning of source-cultural allusions approximates translation of pragmatic implicature, which is immensely determined by the contexts of which cultural context constitutes the most critical part. As the implied meaning or implicature of an allusion largely pertains to its cultural connotation, translation of allusions is, on a whole, the transmission of cultural connotations. Translation of pragmatic implicature, being the focus of pragmatic translation, has shed considerable light on the conveyance of cultural connotations of allusions in cross-cultural translation.
The present thesis introduces two important concepts in pragmatic translation, namely, implicature and explicature, respectively upheld by scholars of pragmatics Qian Guanlian and He Ziran. Prof. Qian argues from a literary point of view that the implicature of the source text should remain implicit in the target text so as not to spoil the literariness of the text as he insists that implicity, or 'gaps', in Iser's words, comprises the most important feature of literariness of a specific text. On the contrary, Prof. He holds that the implicature of the source text should be made
explicit in the target text, which can help the target language readers to overcome cultural bumps. In the case of implicature, the foreign flavor may be retained yet the target language readers' acceptability is challenged. In the case of explicature, the comprehensibility of the target language readers is taken into full consideration yet the cultural flavor may be decolored or even distorted. The author of this thesis holds that both of these two arguments have their merits and demerits in the application of cultural translation. The author suggests that a well manipulation of these two provide a pathway for the conveyance of cultural connotation or pragmatic implicature of allusions.
Starting in a cultural perspective, the author explores the various potential strategies for conveying pragmatic implicatures or cultural connotations of culture-specific allusions. Through a detailed analysis of authentic examples in C-E /E-C translation of allusions taken from Shakespearean plays, Chinese classics like Hong Lou Meng and a variety of other literary works, the thesis reveals that the treatment of pragmatic implicatures of allusions in cross-cultural translation is determined by a variety of factors, such as context, functions and text types, etc. The author further argues that pragmatic implicature should embrace the concept of culture and pragmatic translation requires the preservation of culture specifically in the application of allusion translations, since allusions have long been viewed as cultural deposits and crystallization of human civilization. The author believes that 'facsimile of culture' should be the guiding principle for the conveyance of pragmatic implicatures in translation of allusions in the age of globalization, which is beneficial for cultural exchange in the long run.
The author of the present thesis draws the following conclusion that translation
本文介绍了语用翻译中重要的两大概念，即隐含意图的保留和明说，或‘隐含’与‘明示’。钱冠连教授认为原文的语用隐含应该得到保留。从文学的角度出发，他认为隐含或含蓄，抑或伊塞尔谈到的‘空白’，是构成文本的文学性的重要因素。一旦原文的含蓄在译文中得到明示或取消，就丧失了文本的文学性。何自然教授持相反观点。他认为原文的隐含在译文中应得到显现，以帮助译语读者克服文化障碍。这两种观点各有利弊。保留隐含则保留了异域风情，却对译语读者的接受能力提高了要求。明示则充分考虑了译语读者的理解能力，但原语文化特色会得到淡化甚至扭曲。本文作者认为，这两种取向的和谐统一为典故的文化内涵或语用隐含意义的传达提供了有效的途径。
该论文从文化角度对传达典故的语用隐含的各种可行性策略进行了探讨。本文对莎士比亚戏剧多种中译本，《红楼梦》英译本及其它文学作品中译者对英汉典故的处理作了详细的分析。分析表明，典故的语用隐含意义的处理受到诸多因素的制约，如语境，功能，文本类型等等。作者认为，语用隐含意义应该涵盖文化意义。既然典故被视为人类文明的结晶和文化沉积，那
么语用翻译运用到典故翻译中应该重视文化的保留。文章进一步阐述了在全
球化时代典故翻译中语用隐含意义的传达应该遵循‘文化传真’的根本原则。
它有益于长期的文化交流。
本文的结论是典故翻译在很大程度上是一种文化传播。典故的语用隐含
意义应该既包括典故的喻义又涵盖典故的文化特色。典故翻译的最佳途径就
是力图在语用隐含的保留与明示之间取得平衡，充分展现典故的喻义及文化
特色。在文化翻译中一直占主导地位的归化翻译应该让位于异化翻译，因为
它有助于文化的传播。异化的典故翻译策略不仅有助于将外国文化真实地展
现给中国读者，而且有利于向海外传播我国灿烂的文化。翻译应该成为两种
语言文化之间的平等交流与对话，这对于文化翻译尤为如此。
This thesis intends to study translation of pragmatic implicature in the C-E/E-C translation of allusions in a cultural perspective. Allusions, as embedded in specific cultures, have given rise to insurmountable problems in cross-cultural translation. The connotation of allusion is not always identifiable; it is rather implied and approachable only to those readers who are grounded in the same culture. Therefore, how to convey the implied meaning of a source-cultural allusion to the target language readers comprises the most important step in translating allusions. The term 'implicature', as denned in pragmatics, has close affinities with the essential features of allusion, such as implicity, covertness and subtlety, etc. Translation of pragmatic implicature focuses on how the implied or intended meaning of the source text can be conveyed in the target text with an aim to achieve appropriateness in the social and cultural context of the target language. It can be argued that conveyance of the implied meaning of source-cultural allusions approximates translation of pragmatic implicature, which is immensely determined by the contexts of which cultural context constitutes the most critical part. As the implied meaning or implicature of an allusion largely pertains to its cultural connotation, translation of allusions is, on a whole, the transmission of cultural connotations. Translation of pragmatic implicature, being the focus of pragmatic translation, has shed considerable light on the conveyance of cultural connotations of allusions in cross-cultural translation.
The present thesis introduces two important concepts in pragmatic translation, namely, implicature and explicature, respectively upheld by scholars of pragmatics Qian Guanlian and He Ziran. Prof. Qian argues from a literary point of view that the implicature of the source text should remain implicit in the target text so as not to spoil the literariness of the text as he insists that implicity, or 'gaps', in Iser's words, comprises the most important feature of literariness of a specific text. On the contrary, Prof. He holds that the implicature of the source text should be made
explicit in the target text, which can help the target language readers to overcome cultural bumps. In the case of implicature, the foreign flavor may be retained yet the target language readers' acceptability is challenged. In the case of explicature, the comprehensibility of the target language readers is taken into full consideration yet the cultural flavor may be decolored or even distorted. The author of this thesis holds that both of these two arguments have their merits and demerits in the application of cultural translation. The author suggests that a well manipulation of these two provide a pathway for the conveyance of cultural connotation or pragmatic implicature of allusions.
Starting in a cultural perspective, the author explores the various potential strategies for conveying pragmatic implicatures or cultural connotations of culture-specific allusions. Through a detailed analysis of authentic examples in C-E /E-C translation of allusions taken from Shakespearean plays, Chinese classics like Hong Lou Meng and a variety of other literary works, the thesis reveals that the treatment of pragmatic implicatures of allusions in cross-cultural translation is determined by a variety of factors, such as context, functions and text types, etc. The author further argues that pragmatic implicature should embrace the concept of culture and pragmatic translation requires the preservation of culture specifically in the application of allusion translations, since allusions have long been viewed as cultural deposits and crystallization of human civilization. The author believes that 'facsimile of culture' should be the guiding principle for the conveyance of pragmatic implicatures in translation of allusions in the age of globalization, which is beneficial for cultural exchange in the long run.
The author of the present thesis draws the following conclusion that translation
引文
1.quoted from The Full Knowing Reader: Allusion and the Power of the Reader in the Western Literary Tradition.(Pucci, Joseph:1998), from Preminger, A. Ed. The Princeton Encyclopedia of Poetry and Poetics (1965), Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
2.quoted from Culture Bumps: An Empirical Approach to the Translation of Allusions. (Leppihalme: 1997: 68) Clevedon: Multilingual Matters.
3.ibid. p.46.
4.ibid. p.39.
5.ibid. p47
6．see 黄侃编撰，2000，《文心雕龙札记》。上海：上海古籍出版社。
7.see p.10. The Full Knowing Reader: Allusion and the Power of the Reader in the Western Literary Tradition. (Pucci, Joseph: 1998) New Haven; London: Yale University Press.
8.see Culture Bumps: An Empirical Approach to the Translation of Allusions. (Leppihalme: 1997: 20) Clevedon: Multilingual Matters.
9．seep. 187. 何自然，1997，《语用学与英语学习》。上海：上海外语教育出版社。
10.see p.4. Rainer Schulte and John Biguenet. 1992. Ed. Theories of Translation: An Anthology of Essays from Dryden to Derrida. Chicago; London: The University of Chicago Press.
11.ibid. p.44.
12．seep. 792. 何自然，1992，Pragmatics and CE/EC Translation. 杨自俭、刘学云主编，1999，《翻译新论》。武汉：湖北教育出版社。
13．ses 朱耀先，1997，汉英成语典故翻译方法刍议，《河南大学学报》(社科版)第9期，97—99。
14．seep. 293. 钱冠连，1997，《汉语文化语用学》。北京：清华大学出版社。
15．secp. 1715. 袁行霈主编，1988，《历代名篇赏析集成》(下)。北京：中国文联出版公司。
16．see 许渊冲，1990，《唐诗宋词一百五十首》。北京：北京大学出版社。
17．Seep. 196．李定坤，1994，《汉英辞格对比与翻译》。武汉：华中师范大学出版社。
18.ibid. p. 201.
19.ibid.p.207.
20.ibid.p.179.
21.ibid.p.208.
22．see 易艳萍，2000，典故人名及其翻译。蒋坚松、黄振定主编，《语言与翻译研究》。北京：中国社会科学出版社。313—323页。
Austin, J. L. 1962． How to Do Things with Words. Oxford: Clarendon Press.
Bassnett, S & Lefevere, A. 2001． Constructing Cultures. Shanghai: Shanghai Foreign Language Press.
Bassnett, S. 1991． Translation Studies. London: Routledge.
Cao, Xueqin (translated by Yang Hsienyi and Gladys Yang). 1978． A Dream of Red Mansions. Beijing: Foreign Language Press.
Cao, Xueqin (translated by David Hawkes). 1973． The Story of the Stone. Penguin Books.
Cross, A. (1985, 1984) Sweet Death, Kind Death. New York: Ballantine.
Edwin, G. 1990． Contemporary Translation Studies. Cambridge University Press.
Godwin, G. 1985, 1984． Mr. Bedford and the Muses. London: Pan Books.
Gordon, I. A. 1966． The Movement of English Prose. London: Longman.
Grice H. P. 1975． "Logic and Conversation" in Davis, S. 1991． Pragmatics: A Reader. Oxford: OUP.
Hatim, B. and Mason, I. 1990． Discourse and the Translator. Harlow: Longman.
Hervey, S.G.J. "Speech Acts and Illocutionary Function in Translation Methodology". In Leo Hickey. ed. 2001． The Pragmatics of Translation. Shanghai Foreign Language Education Press.
Iser, W.1974． "The Reading Process: A Phenomenological Approach". In R.C.Davis. ed. 1986． Contemporary Literary Criticism. New York & London: Longman.
Jakobson, R, 1960． "Closing Statement: Linguistics and Poetics", in Sebeok Ed. Kramsh, C 1944． Context & Culture in language Teaching. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Lambert, J. & van Gorp, H. 1985． "On Describing Translations". In T. Hermans. Ed. The Manipulation of Literature: Studies in Literary Translation. London: Croon Helm.
Larson, M.L. 1984． Meaning-Based Translation: A Guide to Cross-Language Equivalence. London: Croon Helm.
Leppihalme, R.1997． Culture Bumps: An Empirical Approach to the Translation of Allusions. Clevedon: Multilingual Matters.
Levinson, S. C. 1983． Pragmatics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
London, J. 1992． Martin Eden. Beijing: Foreign Language Teaching and Research Press.
Malmkjar, K. 2001 "Cooperation and Literary Translation". In Leo Hickey. Ed. The Pragmatics of Translation. Shanghai: Shanghai Foreign Language Education Press.
Nash, W. 1985． The Language of Humor. London: Longman.
Newmark, P. 1982． Approaches to Translation. 2001． Shanghai: Shanghai Foreign Language Education Press.
Nida, E.A. 1993． Language, Culture and Tanslating. Shanghai: Shanghai Foreign Language Press.
Pattanaik, P. 1997． The Art of Translation. New Delhi: Harman Publishing House.
Pucci, J. 1998． The Full Knowing Reader: Allusion and the Power of the Reader in the Western Literary Tradition. New Haven; London: Yale University Press.
Pym, B. (1979,1961) No Return of Love. London: Jonathan Cape.
Schleiermacher, F. 1813． "On the Different Methods of Translating" in Rainer Schulte and John Biguenet. Ed. 1992． Theories of Translation: An Anthology of Essays from Dryden to Derrida. Chicago and London: The University of Chicago Press.
Searle, J.R. 1969． Speech Acts. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Shakespeare, W. 1975． The Complete Works of William Shakespeare. New York: Gramery Books.
The Holy Bible. 1991． King James Version. New York: Ivy Books.
Turk, H. 1991． The Question of Translatability: Benjamin, Quine, and Derrida. In H. Kittel and A.P. Frank Ed. Interculturality and the Historical Study
of Literary Translations. Berlin: Erich Schmidt.
Venuti, L. 1998. The Scandals of Translation: Towards an Ethics of Difference. London; New York: Routledge.
Venuti, L. 2000. "Translation, Community, Utopia". In Lawrence Venuti Ed. 2000. The Translation Studies Reader. London and New York: Routledge.
包惠南，2001，《文化语境与语言翻译》。北京：中国对外翻译出版公司。
曹雪芹，高鹗，1987，《红楼梦》。长沙：岳麓书社。
陈珍广、祁庆生 主编，1988，《西方名言引喻典故辞典》。广州：花城出版社。
郭建中 主编，2000，《文化与翻译》。北京：中国对外翻译出版公司。
何自然，1997，《语用学与英语学习》。上海：上海外语教育出版社。
何自然，1992，Pragmgics and CE/EC Transltion, 杨自俭刘学云编，《翻译新论》。1999，武汉：湖北教育出版社。
黄侃撰，2000，《文心雕龙札记》。上海：上海古籍出版社。
杰克·伦敦著，孙法理译，1998，《马丁．伊甸》。南京：译林出版社。
李定坤，1994，《汉英辞格对比与翻译》。武汉：华中师范大学出版社。
廖七一等 主编，2001，《当代英国翻译理论》。武汉：湖北教育出版社。
马佳 编著，2000，《圣经典故》。上海：学林出版社。
钱冠连，1997，《汉语文化语用学》。北京：清华大学出版社。
孙致礼，1998，文化与翻译，杨自俭主编，《英汉语比较与翻译3》。2000，上海：上海外语教育出版社。
朱生豪译，1984，《莎士比亚全集》。北京：人民文学出版社。
许渊冲，1992，《中诗英韵探胜》。北京：北京大学出版社。
周心慧、邹晓棣 主编，1989，《中外典故大词典》。北京：中国科学出版社。
范东生，2000，文化的不同层次与翻译标准，《外国语》第3期，67—72。
郭建中，1998，翻译中的文化因素：异化与归化，《外国语》 第2期，12—18。
郭建中，2000，韦奴蒂及其解构主义的翻译策略，《中国翻译》第1期，49—52。
顾正阳，1998，论典故、双关、借代的翻译，《上海科技翻译》第1期，13—16。
黄昀，2001，《红楼梦》正册判词英译本对比赏析，《安徽广播电视大学学报》第1期，45—49。
潘明霞，1999，《威尼斯商人》两译本中典故翻译的对比，《四川外国语学院学报》第3期，91—93。
钱冠连，1997，翻译的语用观，《现代外语》第1期，32—37。
陈琳，2001，文化翻译中语用用意的翻译研究，《四川外语学院学报》第11期，82—85。
谢建平，2001，文化翻译与‘文化传真’，《中国翻译》第9期，19—2
张奎武，1994，圣经典故在莎剧中的艺术效果，《外国文学评论》第1期，111—16。
赵建忠，2000，《红楼梦》在国外传播的跨文化翻译问题，《天津外国语学院学报》第3期，27—30。
褚雅芸，2000，也谈典故翻译中的欠额补偿——兼与乐金声先生商榷，《中国翻译》第4期，64—67。
2.quoted from Culture Bumps: An Empirical Approach to the Translation of Allusions. (Leppihalme: 1997: 68) Clevedon: Multilingual Matters.
3.ibid. p.46.
4.ibid. p.39.
5.ibid. p47
6．see 黄侃编撰，2000，《文心雕龙札记》。上海：上海古籍出版社。
7.see p.10. The Full Knowing Reader: Allusion and the Power of the Reader in the Western Literary Tradition. (Pucci, Joseph: 1998) New Haven; London: Yale University Press.
8.see Culture Bumps: An Empirical Approach to the Translation of Allusions. (Leppihalme: 1997: 20) Clevedon: Multilingual Matters.
9．seep. 187. 何自然，1997，《语用学与英语学习》。上海：上海外语教育出版社。
10.see p.4. Rainer Schulte and John Biguenet. 1992. Ed. Theories of Translation: An Anthology of Essays from Dryden to Derrida. Chicago; London: The University of Chicago Press.
11.ibid. p.44.
12．seep. 792. 何自然，1992，Pragmatics and CE/EC Translation. 杨自俭、刘学云主编，1999，《翻译新论》。武汉：湖北教育出版社。
13．ses 朱耀先，1997，汉英成语典故翻译方法刍议，《河南大学学报》(社科版)第9期，97—99。
14．seep. 293. 钱冠连，1997，《汉语文化语用学》。北京：清华大学出版社。
15．secp. 1715. 袁行霈主编，1988，《历代名篇赏析集成》(下)。北京：中国文联出版公司。
16．see 许渊冲，1990，《唐诗宋词一百五十首》。北京：北京大学出版社。
17．Seep. 196．李定坤，1994，《汉英辞格对比与翻译》。武汉：华中师范大学出版社。
18.ibid. p. 201.
19.ibid.p.207.
20.ibid.p.179.
21.ibid.p.208.
22．see 易艳萍，2000，典故人名及其翻译。蒋坚松、黄振定主编，《语言与翻译研究》。北京：中国社会科学出版社。313—323页。
Austin, J. L. 1962． How to Do Things with Words. Oxford: Clarendon Press.
Bassnett, S & Lefevere, A. 2001． Constructing Cultures. Shanghai: Shanghai Foreign Language Press.
Bassnett, S. 1991． Translation Studies. London: Routledge.
Cao, Xueqin (translated by Yang Hsienyi and Gladys Yang). 1978． A Dream of Red Mansions. Beijing: Foreign Language Press.
Cao, Xueqin (translated by David Hawkes). 1973． The Story of the Stone. Penguin Books.
Cross, A. (1985, 1984) Sweet Death, Kind Death. New York: Ballantine.
Edwin, G. 1990． Contemporary Translation Studies. Cambridge University Press.
Godwin, G. 1985, 1984． Mr. Bedford and the Muses. London: Pan Books.
Gordon, I. A. 1966． The Movement of English Prose. London: Longman.
Grice H. P. 1975． "Logic and Conversation" in Davis, S. 1991． Pragmatics: A Reader. Oxford: OUP.
Hatim, B. and Mason, I. 1990． Discourse and the Translator. Harlow: Longman.
Hervey, S.G.J. "Speech Acts and Illocutionary Function in Translation Methodology". In Leo Hickey. ed. 2001． The Pragmatics of Translation. Shanghai Foreign Language Education Press.
Iser, W.1974． "The Reading Process: A Phenomenological Approach". In R.C.Davis. ed. 1986． Contemporary Literary Criticism. New York & London: Longman.
Jakobson, R, 1960． "Closing Statement: Linguistics and Poetics", in Sebeok Ed. Kramsh, C 1944． Context & Culture in language Teaching. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Lambert, J. & van Gorp, H. 1985． "On Describing Translations". In T. Hermans. Ed. The Manipulation of Literature: Studies in Literary Translation. London: Croon Helm.
Larson, M.L. 1984． Meaning-Based Translation: A Guide to Cross-Language Equivalence. London: Croon Helm.
Leppihalme, R.1997． Culture Bumps: An Empirical Approach to the Translation of Allusions. Clevedon: Multilingual Matters.
Levinson, S. C. 1983． Pragmatics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
London, J. 1992． Martin Eden. Beijing: Foreign Language Teaching and Research Press.
Malmkjar, K. 2001 "Cooperation and Literary Translation". In Leo Hickey. Ed. The Pragmatics of Translation. Shanghai: Shanghai Foreign Language Education Press.
Nash, W. 1985． The Language of Humor. London: Longman.
Newmark, P. 1982． Approaches to Translation. 2001． Shanghai: Shanghai Foreign Language Education Press.
Nida, E.A. 1993． Language, Culture and Tanslating. Shanghai: Shanghai Foreign Language Press.
Pattanaik, P. 1997． The Art of Translation. New Delhi: Harman Publishing House.
Pucci, J. 1998． The Full Knowing Reader: Allusion and the Power of the Reader in the Western Literary Tradition. New Haven; London: Yale University Press.
Pym, B. (1979,1961) No Return of Love. London: Jonathan Cape.
Schleiermacher, F. 1813． "On the Different Methods of Translating" in Rainer Schulte and John Biguenet. Ed. 1992． Theories of Translation: An Anthology of Essays from Dryden to Derrida. Chicago and London: The University of Chicago Press.
Searle, J.R. 1969． Speech Acts. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Shakespeare, W. 1975． The Complete Works of William Shakespeare. New York: Gramery Books.
The Holy Bible. 1991． King James Version. New York: Ivy Books.
Turk, H. 1991． The Question of Translatability: Benjamin, Quine, and Derrida. In H. Kittel and A.P. Frank Ed. Interculturality and the Historical Study
of Literary Translations. Berlin: Erich Schmidt.
Venuti, L. 1998. The Scandals of Translation: Towards an Ethics of Difference. London; New York: Routledge.
Venuti, L. 2000. "Translation, Community, Utopia". In Lawrence Venuti Ed. 2000. The Translation Studies Reader. London and New York: Routledge.
包惠南，2001，《文化语境与语言翻译》。北京：中国对外翻译出版公司。
曹雪芹，高鹗，1987，《红楼梦》。长沙：岳麓书社。
陈珍广、祁庆生 主编，1988，《西方名言引喻典故辞典》。广州：花城出版社。
郭建中 主编，2000，《文化与翻译》。北京：中国对外翻译出版公司。
何自然，1997，《语用学与英语学习》。上海：上海外语教育出版社。
何自然，1992，Pragmgics and CE/EC Transltion, 杨自俭刘学云编，《翻译新论》。1999，武汉：湖北教育出版社。
黄侃撰，2000，《文心雕龙札记》。上海：上海古籍出版社。
杰克·伦敦著，孙法理译，1998，《马丁．伊甸》。南京：译林出版社。
李定坤，1994，《汉英辞格对比与翻译》。武汉：华中师范大学出版社。
廖七一等 主编，2001，《当代英国翻译理论》。武汉：湖北教育出版社。
马佳 编著，2000，《圣经典故》。上海：学林出版社。
钱冠连，1997，《汉语文化语用学》。北京：清华大学出版社。
孙致礼，1998，文化与翻译，杨自俭主编，《英汉语比较与翻译3》。2000，上海：上海外语教育出版社。
朱生豪译，1984，《莎士比亚全集》。北京：人民文学出版社。
许渊冲，1992，《中诗英韵探胜》。北京：北京大学出版社。
周心慧、邹晓棣 主编，1989，《中外典故大词典》。北京：中国科学出版社。
范东生，2000，文化的不同层次与翻译标准，《外国语》第3期，67—72。
郭建中，1998，翻译中的文化因素：异化与归化，《外国语》 第2期，12—18。
郭建中，2000，韦奴蒂及其解构主义的翻译策略，《中国翻译》第1期，49—52。
顾正阳，1998，论典故、双关、借代的翻译，《上海科技翻译》第1期，13—16。
黄昀，2001，《红楼梦》正册判词英译本对比赏析，《安徽广播电视大学学报》第1期，45—49。
潘明霞，1999，《威尼斯商人》两译本中典故翻译的对比，《四川外国语学院学报》第3期，91—93。
钱冠连，1997，翻译的语用观，《现代外语》第1期，32—37。
陈琳，2001，文化翻译中语用用意的翻译研究，《四川外语学院学报》第11期，82—85。
谢建平，2001，文化翻译与‘文化传真’，《中国翻译》第9期，19—2
张奎武，1994，圣经典故在莎剧中的艺术效果，《外国文学评论》第1期，111—16。
赵建忠，2000，《红楼梦》在国外传播的跨文化翻译问题，《天津外国语学院学报》第3期，27—30。
褚雅芸，2000，也谈典故翻译中的欠额补偿——兼与乐金声先生商榷，《中国翻译》第4期，64—67。