摘要
本论文对蒯因提出的翻译不确定性论题进行了理论梳理,并将这一语言哲学论题与英汉/汉英翻译的理论与实践相结合,提出了一种以翻译意义为依据的,既具有客观性,又能容纳不确定性的新的翻译观念。
首先通过文献归纳与概念分析,对蒯因的翻译不确定性论题进行了批判性审查。持行为主义意义观的蒯因设想了一个彻底翻译的思想实验,在这个思想实验中,观察句是基础,刺激-反应是判断的标准。他通过分析发现:以同一个语言事实为观察基础的几个翻译手册之间可能会互不相容,因为彻底翻译思想实验的三个步骤——兔子跑过时语言学家对语词的猜测、土人同意或不同意、语义上升后的分析假设——全部隐藏着意义的不确定性,特别是第三步分析假设阶段,并由此得出翻译不确定性的结论。这一论题对以意义事实为基础的传统翻译观提出了挑战。在对这一论题的进一步阐释过程中,蒯因体现了自己的整体论观念、实用主义思想及新经验主义立场。
论文进一步分析了蒯因提出翻译不确定性论题的三点理由:指称的不可测知性、证据对理论的非充分决定性,以及本体论的相对性。指称的不可测知性类似于一种弱意义上的翻译不确定性,它预设的是语词的物化,即我们对客观世界的感知和认识会随着时间的推移而失真的特性。这种指称的不可测知性表现在语言学习的四个阶段、指称本身的异常多变性(模糊性、歧义性及不透明性),以及语言的特异性三个方面。证据对理论的非充分决定性类似于一种较强意义上的翻译不确定性,它预设的主题是其由感觉证据赋予的经验内容,是指我们关于世界的科学理论超越了我们对世界的观察。而本体论的相对性是指相对于特定的背景知识,相对于分析假设和相对于对存在量词的不同理解方式。但是,按照蒯因行为主义的意义观,几个相互竞争的翻译手册中,没有证据能够证明哪一个是正确的,而没有正确的翻译意味着没有意义的存在,由此导致了意义怀疑论,翻译的可能性也受到挑战。因此,蒯因的理论需要进一步修改和完善。于是,我们引入戴维森的真值条件意义论,并通过彻底诠释、诠释不确定性及三角测量模式来阐述从诠释到翻译的可能性。
在上述讨论的基础上,论文进而探讨了翻译不确定性论题与翻译理论及实践的关系。首先,对所谓不可译性的几个方面进行了分析与讨论,并尝试提出可能的解决办法。然后,通过对翻译不确定与可译性及不可译性之间关系的讨论,再次论证翻译的可能性。接着,论文例举翻译实践中存在的几个方面的差异与不匹配,并提出了可行的解决方法。基于翻译是可能的,但有不确定性的特点,本文对Dorit Bar-On提出的翻译意义概念进行了修正、改善,将它视为介于源语文本与译语文本之间的一套特征。这些特征是通过概念整合而形成的,具有语境依赖性、时间性、协商性、生成性及动态平衡性。翻译意义被引入翻译评价体系,作为判断翻译好坏的标准。
最后,本文结合翻译不确定性论题,通过典型案例分析法,对英汉互译中的一些理论问题和实践问题做了批判性的考察,提出了一些启发性的见解。通过比较研究的方法,对比同一源文本的不同翻译版本之间的联系和区别,主张以保存翻译意义的多少作为评价标准来区分好坏与优劣。也就是说,翻译意义保留得越多,翻译就越好,反之则越差。翻译意义对翻译文本的评价指标分为准确、最佳、相当、更好四个基本类型。此外,本文还将翻译意义作为协调一种既能容纳不确定性,又具有基于文本类别不同的客观性的新的翻译观念的手段,并以语境原则及翻译意义作为协调信达雅的分析框架,重构了一组可用于评价英汉互译对错与优劣的合理性标准。
Upon the analysis of Quine’s indeterminacy of translation, this dissertationcombines the thesis with the theory and practice of English Chinese translation in bothways, and puts forward a new idea of translation containing both the characteristics ofobjectivity and indeterminacy on translation meaning (tr-meaning).
To begin with, Quine’s thesis is critically investigated through documentaryinduction and conceptual analysis. Holding the meaning concept of behaviorism,Quine assumes a thought experiment named radical translation in which observationsentence is regarded as the basis and stimulus-response as the criterion of judgment.Quine argues that translation handbooks based on the same language facts areincompatible with each other. This is because of the meaning indeterminacy hidden inthe three steps of radical translation: linguists’ guess in the process of rabbit running,aborigines’ assent or dissent and analytical hypothesis after semantic ascent,especially the last step. And thus the conclusion of indeterminacy of translation isreached, which poses challenges to the meaning-fact oriented traditional translationconcept. In the argumentation process of the thesis, Quine demonstrates his concept ofholism, pragmatism and new empiricism.
Quine’s three arguments are then analyzed: the inscrutability of reference, theunder-determination of theory by evidence and ontological relativity. Theinscrutability of reference, in a weak sense like indeterminacy of translation,presupposes the topic of reification which means that our sense of the reality subjectsto gradual distortion over time. The following three aspects embody the inscrutabilityof reference: four stages of language study, vagaries of reference (i. e. vagueness,ambiguity and opacity) and regimentation. The under-determination of theory byevidence, in a robust sense like indeterminacy of translation, presupposes the topic ofempirical content endowed by perceptional evidence, which implies that our physicaltheory about the world transcends our observation. Ontological relativity is assumedon specific background knowledge, analytical hypothesis and the differentunderstanding ways for the existential quantifier. However, according to Quine’smeaning concept of behaviorism, no evidence verifies the correct one in several competitive translation handbooks, which suggests that there is no meaning at all.This conclusion leads to skepticism, and challenges translatability between languages.It is obvious that Quine’s thesis needs to be modified. Then Davidson’s truthconditional theory of meaning is introduced to demonstrate the argumentation processfrom interpretability to translatability through the analysis of radical interpretation,indeterminacy of interpretation and the triangulation mode.
Based on the above discussion, the relation between the thesis of indeterminacyof translation and the theory and practice of translation is analyzed. Possible methodsare proposed to solve the problem of so called “untranslatability”. Through thediscussion of the relation between the indeterminacy of translation and translatabilityand untranslatability, the translatability is further discussed. Practicable methods areproposed to account for the differences and mismatches in translation practice. Inview of the idea that translation is possible and indeterminate, tr-meaning proposed byDorit Bar-On is modified, which is a set of features integrated by concepts betweensource text and translation text, including context reliability, timing, negotiation,generation and dynamic balance. Tr-meaning is introduced in translation assessmentsystem to judge the quality of translation.
Finally, in the light of Quine’s thesis, some heuristic opinions are proposed forthe theory and practice of English-Chinese and Chinese-English translation throughan in-depth examination of typical translations. Among the different versions of thetranslation based on the same source text, the candidate version which preserves moretr-meaning will be better, and vice versa. There are in total four levels for tr-meaningassessment, i. e. exact translation, best translation, equally good translation and bettertranslation. Besides, tr-meaning is also used to coordinate the new idea of translationcontaining both the characteristics of objectivity and indeterminacy. Context andtr-meaning are regarded as coordinators in the analysis frame of “truthfulness,expressiveness, and elegance” of translation criteria.
引文
Bar-On, D. Indeterminacy of Translation: Theory and Practice [D]. University ofCalifornia,1987.
———. Indeterminacy of Translation: Theory and Practice [J]. InternationalPhenomenological Society,1993,53(4):187-810.
Carnap, R. Meaning and Synomymy in Natural Languages [J]. Philosophical Studies,1955,6(3):33-47.
———. Meaning and Necessity [M].2nded. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press,1956.
Catford, J. C. A Linguistic Theory of Translation [M]. Oxford: Oxford University Press,1965.
Chao, Y. R. Dimensions of Fidelity in Translation with Special Reference to Chinese[J]. Harvard Journal of Asiatic Studies.1969,(29):109-130.
Chomsky, N. Quine’s Empirical Assumptions [A]. D. Davidson&J. Hintikka (eds.).Words and Objections [C]. Dordrecht: Reidel,1969.
———. Rules and Representations [M]. New York: Columbia University Press,1980.
Davidson, D. Reply to Burge [J]. The Journal of Philosophy,1988,85(11):664-665.
———. The Structure and Content of Truth [J]. The Journal of Philosophy,1990,87(6):279-328.
———. Meaning, Truth, and Evidence [A]. R. Barrett&R. Gibson (eds.). Perspectiveon Quine [C]. Oxford: Blackwell,1991:68-79.
———. Truth Rehabilitated [A]. Truth, Language, and History [C]. Oxford: OxfordUniversity Press,1997.
———. In Defence of Convention-T [A]. Inquiries into Truth and Interpretation [C].2nded. Oxford: Clarendon Press,2001a5:65-75.
———. Radical Interpretation [A]. Inquiries into Truth and Interpretation [C].2nded.Oxford: Clarendon Press,2001a9:125-139.
———. Belief and the Basis of Meaning [A]. Inquiries into Truth and Interpretation[C].2nded. Oxford: Clarendon Press,2001a10:141-154.
———. On the Very Idea of a Conceptual Scheme [A]. Inquiries into Truth andInterpretation [C].2nded. Oxford: Clarendon Press,2001a13:183-198.
———. Rational Animal [A]. Subjective, Intersubjective, Objective [C]. Oxford:Clarendon Press,2001b7:95-105.
———. The Second Person [A]. Subjective, Intersubjective, Objective [C]. Oxford:Clarendon Press,2001b8:107-121.
———. Coherence Theory of Truth and Knowledge [A]. Subjective, Intersubjective,Objective [C]. Oxford: Clarendon Press,2001b10:137-157.
———. Epistemology Externalized [A]. Subjective, Intersubjective, Objective [C].Oxford: Clarendon Press,2001b13:193-204.
———. Essays on Actions and Events [C].2nded. Oxford: Clarendon Press,2001c.
Davis, K. Deconstruction and Translation [M]. Shanghai: Shanghai Foreign LanguageEducation Press,2004.
Derrida, J. Positions [M]. Trans. Alan Bass, Chicago: University of Chicago Press,1981.
Evans, G. The Varieties of Reference [M]. Oxford: Oxford University Press,1982.
———. Identity and Predication [A]. Collected Papers [C]. Oxford: OxfordUniversity Press,1985:25-48.
Friedman, M. Physicalism and the Indeterminacy of translation [J]. No s,1975,9(4):353-374.
Gentzler, E. Contemporary Translation Studies [M]. London&New York: Routledge.1993.
Gibson, Jr. R. F. The Philosophy of W. V. Quine: an Expository Essay [M]. Tampa, FL:University Presses of Florida,1982.
Goldblatt, H. Why I Hate Arthur Waley? Translating Chinese in a Post-Victorian Era[J]. Translation Quarterly.1999,(13-14):33-47.
Grayling, A. C. An Introduction to Philosophic Logic [M].3rded. Oxford: BlackwellPublishers.1997.
Grice, H. P.&P. F. Strawson. In Defense of a Dogma [J]. Philosophical Review,1956,65(2):141-158.
Gumperz, J. J.&S. C. Levinson. Introduction: Linguistic Relativity Re-examined [A].J. J. Gumperz,&S. C. Levinson (eds.). Rethinking Linguistic Relativity [C].Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press,1996:1-18.
Hervey, S. J. Speech Acts and Illocutionary Function in Translation Methodology [A].L. Hickey (eds.). The Pragmatics of Translation [C]. Shanghai: Shanghai ForeignLanguages Education Press,2001.
Hickey, L. Perlocutionary Equivalence: Marking, Exegesis and Recontextualisation[A]. L. Hickey (eds.). The Pragmatics of Translation [C]. Shanghai: ShanghaiForeign Languages Education Press,2001.
Hobbes, T. Leviathan [M]. Kindle,2012.
Hookway, C. Quine: Language, Experience and Reality [M]. London: Polity Press,1988.
Jakobson, R. On Linguistic Aspect of Translation [A]. Brower (eds.). On Translation[C]. Cambridge, Mass: Harvard University Press,1959.
Jin, D.&E. A. Nida. On Translation: with Special Reference to Chinese and English[M]. Beijing:China Translation&Publishing Corporation,1984.
Kelly, L. The True Interpreter [M]. Oxford: Basil Blackwell,1979.
Kirk, R. Translation Determined [M]. Oxford: Oxford University Press,1986.
Kuhn, T. S. The Structure of Scientific Revolution [M].2nded. Enlarged. Chicago: TheUniversity of Chicago Press,1970.
Landers, C. E. Literary Translation: A Practical Guide [M]. Shanghai: ShanghaiForeign Language Education Press,2008.
Leech, G. Semantics: The Study of Meaning [M].2nded. Harmondsworth: Penguin,1981.
Locke, J. An Essay Concerning Human Understanding [M]. Oxford: OxfordUniversity Press,1979.
Lycan, W. G. Philosophy of Langauge [M].2nded. New York&London: Routledge,2008.
Medina, J. Language: Key Concepts in Philosophy [M]. London&New York:Continuum,2005.
Miller, A.&W. Crispin (eds.). Rule-Following and Meaning [C]. Chesham: AcumenPublishing Limited,2002.
Miller, A. Meaning Scepticism [A]. M. Devitt and R. Hanley (eds.). The BlackwellGuide to the Philosophy of Language [C]. Oxford: Blackwell,2006.
———. Philosophy of Language [M].2nded. Montreal&Kingston: McGill-Queen’sUniversity Press,2007.
Mounin, G. Les problémes théoriques de la traduction [M]. Paris: Gallimard,1963.
Newmark, P. Approaches to Translation [M]. Oxford: Pergamen Press,1981.
Nida, E. A.&C. R. Taber. The Theory and Practice of Translation [M]. Leiden: E. J.Brill,1982.
Palmer, R. E. Hermeneutics: Interpretation Theory in Schleiermacher, Dilthey,Heidegger, and Gadamer [M]. Evanston, IL: Northwestern University Press,1969.
Pitcher, G. Introduction [A]. G. Pitcher (eds.). Truth [C]. Englewood Cliffs:Prentice-Hall.1964.
Quine, W. V. O. Main Trends in Recent Philosophy: Two Dogmas of Empiricism [J].The Philosophical Review,1951,(60):20-43.
———. From a Logical Point of View [M]. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press,1953.
———. Word and Object [M]. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press,1960.
———. The Ways of Paradox and Other Essays [M]. New York: Random House,1966.
———. Ontological Relativity and Other Essays [M]. New York: ColumbiaUniversity Press,1969.
———. Philosophy of Logic [M]. Englewood: Prentice Hall,1970.
———. Facts of the Matter [A]. W. S. Robert&R. M. Kenneth (eds.). AmericanPhilosophy: From Edwards to Quine [C]. Norman, Oklahoma: The University ofOklahoma Press,1977.
———. Theories and Things [M]. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press,1981.
———. Truth by Convention [A]. P. Benacerraf&H. Putman (eds.). The Philosophyof Mathematics [C]. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press,1983.
———. Indeterminacy of Translation Again [J]. The Journal of Philosophy,1987,84(1):5-10.
———. Pursuit of Truth [M]. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press,1992.
———. Three Indeterminacies [A]. R. B. Barret and R. F. Gibson (eds.). Perspectiveson Quine [C]. Cambridge, MA: Blackwell,1993:1-16.
———. In Praise of Observation Sentences [J]. Journal of Philosophy,1993,(15):107-116.
Robinson, D. Western Translation Theory: from Herodotus to Nietzsche [M]. Beijing:Foreign Language Teaching and Research Press,2006.
Samovar, L. A., R. E. Porter&L. A. Stefani. Communication Between Cultures [M].3rded. Beijing: Foreign Language Teaching and Research Press,2000.
Soames, S. Indeterminacy of Translation and the Inscrutability of Reference [J].Cannadian Journal of Philosophy,1999,(29):321-370.
———. Philosophical Analysis in the Twentieth Century, Volume2: The Age ofMeaning [M]. Princeton&Oxford: Princeton University Press,2003.
Steiner, G. After Babel: Aspect of Language and Translation [M]. Shanghai:ShanghaiForeign Language Education Press,2001.
Tytler, A. F. Essay on the Principles of Translation [M]. Beijing: Foreign LanguageTeaching and Research Press,2007.
Wilss, W. The Science of Translation: Problems and Methods [M]. Amsterdam: JohnBenjamins Publishing Company,1982.
包惠南.文化语境与语言翻译[M].北京:中国对外翻译出版公司,2001.
巴尔胡达罗夫(前苏联).察毅等编译.语言与翻译[C].北京:中国对外翻译出版公司,1985.
保罗·利科(法).汪堂家译.活的隐喻[M].上海:上海译文出版社,2004.
陈波.蒯因的语言哲学[J].北京社会科学,1996,(4):31-34.
———.奎因哲学研究:从逻辑和语言的观点看[M].北京:生活·读书·新知三联书店,1998.
陈常燊.理解的准则:戴维森合理性理论研究[M].北京:中国社会科学出版社,2012.
陈福康.中国译学理论史稿(修订版)[M].上海:上海外语教育出版社,2000.
陈嘉映.语言哲学[M].北京:北京大学出版社,2003.
谌莉文、梅德明.意义阐释与口译思维运作的主体间性:语言游戏视角[J].外语与外语教学,2010,(6):71-74.
崔永禄(主编).文学翻译佳作对比赏析[M].天津:南开大学出版社,2001.
达尼卡·赛莱斯科维奇、玛丽娅娜·勒德雷尔(法).孙慧双译.口笔译概论[M].北京:北京语言学院出版社,1992.
杜世洪.从个案出发看“不可译现象”的可译潜势[J].外语研究,2007,(1):48-52.
杜争鸣.论意译、直译、不译的社会语言学与跨文化交际涵义[A].郭建中(编).文化与翻译[C].北京:中国对外翻译出版公司,2000.
樊永前(编著).翻译技能与技巧[M].北京:气象出版社,2009.
方兴.翻译问题新探——基于戴维森意义理论的反思[M].北京:中国社会科学出版社,2010.
费道罗夫(前苏联).群力译.费道罗夫关于可译性/不可译性问题的说明及确切翻译的原则[A].中国对外翻译出版公司(编).外国翻译理论评介文集[C].北京:中国对外翻译出版公司,1983.
冯庆华.实用翻译教程[M].上海:上海外语教育出版社,2002.
冯文坤.翻译与翻译之存在[M].成都:四川人民出版社,2009.
格雷林(英).牟博译.哲学逻辑引论[M].北京:中国社会科学出版社,1990.
郭建中.当代美国翻译理论[M].武汉:湖北教育出版,2000.
———.翻译:理论、实践与教学[M].杭州:浙江大学出版社,2010.
郭沫若.给“俄文教学”编辑部的回信[A].中国译协《翻译通讯》编辑部(编).翻译研究论文集(1949-1983)[C].北京:外语教学与研究出版社,1984:20.
何刚.情境、意向、表达行为——表达方式探微[J].外国语,2002,(2):23-29.
何刚、张春燕.试论文化语用原则[J].修辞学习,2006,(5):34-39.
何三宁.翻译多元论实证分析研究[M].北京:科学出版社,2008.
何自然.语用学与语言学习[M].上海:上海外语教育出版社,1997.
霍布斯(英).黎思复、黎廷弼译.利维坦[M].北京:商务印书馆,1985.
洪谦(主编).逻辑经验主义(上卷)[M].北京:商务印书馆,1982.
胡红辉、曾蕾.《论语》及其英译本中投射语言的人际功能分析[J].北京科技大学学报(社会科学版),2012,28,(3):44-49.
黄邦杰.译艺谭[M].北京、香港:中国对外翻译出版公司、三联书店香港分店合作出版,1991.
黄任.对“信、达、雅”的再认识[A].耿龙明(主编).翻译论丛[C].上海:上海外语教育出版社,1998:82-90.
黄振定.简论翻译的客观性与主观性[J].外语与外语教学,2000,(1):50-53.
黄忠廉.翻译本质论[M].武汉:华中师范大学出版社,2000a.
———.翻译变体研究[M].北京:中国对外翻译出版公司,2000b.
贾保罗.中文圣经之修订—前途如何[A].贾保罗(主编).圣经汉译论文集[C].香港:基督教辅侨出版社,1965:150-160.
季羡林.季羡林谈翻译[M].北京:当代中国出版社,2007.
金学勤.《论语》英译之跨文化阐释:以理雅各、辜鸿铭为例[M].成都:四川大学出版社,2009.
奎因(美).邓生庆译.逻辑哲学[M].北京:生活·读书·新知三联书店,1991.
———.王路译.真之追求[M].北京:生活·读书·新知三联书店,1999.
李德超.翻译理论的哲学探索:奎因论翻译的不确定性[J].上海科技翻译,2004,(4):50-53.
李建军.文化翻译论[M].上海:复旦大学出版社,2010.
李明清.商务翻译标准多元论[M].长沙:湖南人民出版社,2009.
李文革.西方翻译理念流派研究[M].北京:中国社会科学出版社,2004.
李越然.论口译的社会功能——口译理论基础初探[J].中国翻译,1999,(3):7-11.
廖七一.当代英国翻译理论[M].武汉:湖北教育出版社,2004.
梁启超.论译书[A].中国译协《翻译通讯》编辑部(编).翻译研究论文集(1894-1948)[C].北京:外语教学与研究出版社,1984:8-20.
刘法公.隐喻汉英翻译原则研究[M].北京:国防工业出版社,2009.
刘军平.通过翻译而思:翻译研究的哲学途径[J].外语与外语教学,2010,(2):64-67.
刘宓庆、吴明华.现代翻译理论[M].济南:山东文艺出版社,1990.
陆谷孙(主编).英汉大词典(第2版)[Z].上海:上海译文出版社,2007.
陆国强.思维模式与翻译[M].上海:上海外语教育出版社,2012.
罗伯特·所罗门(美).张卜天译.大问题:简明哲学导论(第3版)[M].桂林:广西师范大学出版社,2011.
罗国清.零翻译研究[M].上海:上海交通大学出版社,2011.
罗素(英).马元德译.西方哲学史(下卷)[M].北京:商务印书馆,1982.
吕俊.奎因的“翻译不确定性”到底是什么意思?——对一个译学中哲学误读的纠正[J].上海翻译,2012,(2):2-6.
尼古拉斯·布宁、余纪元(编著).西方哲学英汉对照辞典[Z].北京:人民出版社,2001.
马会娟.商务英语翻译教程[M].北京:中国商务出版社,2004.
———.汉译英翻译能力研究[M].北京:北京师范大学出版社,2013.
马建忠.拟设翻译书院议[A].中国译协《翻译通讯》编辑部(编).翻译研究论文集[C].北京:外语教学与研究出版社,1984:1-5.
梅德明.通用口译教程[M].北京:北京大学出版社,2007.
———.悟道与译道[J].中国翻译,2012,(5):78.
梅剑华.对奎因翻译不确定性再思[J].哲学动态,2011,(12):99-105.
潘文国.对外汉语教学的跨文视角[M].上海:华东师范大学出版社,2004.
彭爱民.蒯因不确定性论题解读[J].西南交通大学学报,2011,12(2):52-56.
彭卓吾.翻译学——一门新兴科学的创立[M].北京:北京图书馆出版社,2000.
钱歌川.翻译的基本知识[M].北京:世界图书出版公司,2011.
钱冠连.汉语文化语用学[M].北京:清华大学出版社,1997.
钱钟书.林纾的翻译[A].中国译协《翻译通讯》编辑部(编).翻译研究论文集(1949-1983)[C].北京:外语教学与研究出版社,1984:267-295.
邱懋如.翻译对等及最近原则[A].耿龙明(主编).翻译论丛[C].上海:上海外语教育出版社,1998.
曲卫国.语用学的多层面研究[M].上海:复旦大学出版社,2012.
却正强.论翻译中的可译性与不可译性之争[J].学术问题研究(综合版),2010,(2):60-64.
冉永平.语用学:现象与分析[M].北京:北京大学出版社,2006.
单继刚.翻译的哲学方面[M].北京:中国社会科学出版社,2007.
施太格缪勒(德).王炳文等译.当代哲学主流(上卷)[M].北京:商务印书馆,1986.
孙冠臣.奎因彻底翻译的不确定性论题[J].世界哲学,2006,(1):65-77.
孙自挥.本体论相对性的语言性解读[J].西南民族大学学报(人文社会科学版),2011a,(1):67-70.
———.对奎因的意义不确定性论题的研究[J].电子科技大学学报,2011b,13(3):82-85.
谭载喜.西方翻译简史(增订版)[M].北京:商务印书馆,2004.
———.关于西方翻译理论发展史的几点思考[J].外国语,2005,(1):53-59.
唐红芳.跨文化语用失误研究[M].成都:西南交通大学出版社,2007.
唐纳德·戴维森(美).王路译.真与谓述[M].上海:上海译文出版社,2007a.
———.牟博、江怡译.对真理与解释的探究[M].北京:中国人民大学出版社,2007b.
汤富华.从意义不确定论谈译本差异的永恒性[J].外语与外语教学,2006,(4).
涂纪亮.西方语言哲学研究的现状与前景[J].外语教学与研究,2003,35(5):323-330.
———.从解释学角度考察翻译标准中的“信”[J].外语学刊,2008,(1):1-5.
王宾.翻译与诠释[M].上海:上海外语教育出版社,2006.
王秉钦、王颉.20世纪中国翻译思想史(第二版)[M].天津:南开大学出版社,2009.
王丹阳.翻译的不确定性:原因·表现·启示[J].外语与外语教学.2003,(3):49-62.
王德春.多角度研究语言[M].北京:清华大学出版社,2002.
王东风.解构“忠实”——翻译神话的终结[J].中国翻译,2004,25(6):3-9.
汪福祥.汉译英中的习语翻译[M].北京:外文出版社,2007.
王静.戴维森纲领与知识论重建[M].北京:科学出版社,2013.
王静、张志林.语义外在论对语言理解的必要性[J].哲学研究,2010,(5):67-74.
王宁.翻译研究的文化转向:解构主义的推进[J].清华大学学报(哲学社会科学版),2009,24(6):127-139.
王银权.实用汉英电视新闻翻译[M].武汉:武汉大学出版社,2009.
汪堂家.可译性、不可译性与思维方式的转换[A].李伟国(编).辞海新知(第7辑)[C].上海:上海辞书出版社,2001:15-30.
———.哲学的追问:哲学概念清淤录之一[M].上海:复旦大学出版社,2012.
王寅.认知语言学的“体验性概念化”对翻译主客观性的解释力[J].外语教学与研究,2008,40(3):211-217.
威廉·冯·洪堡特(德).论语言的民族特性[A].姚小平(编译).洪堡特语言哲学文集[C].北京:商务印书馆,2011.
威廉·莱肯(美).陈波、冯艳译.当代语言哲学导论[M].北京:中国人民大学出版社,2011.
威廉·詹姆斯(美).陈羽纶、孙瑞禾译.实用主义[M].北京:商务印书馆,1979.
沃尔特·本雅明(德).乔向东译.翻译者的任务[J].中国比较文学,1999,(1):71-83.
武光军.奎因的翻译哲学研究[J].外语教学理论与实践,2012,(1):79-84.
武锐.翻译理论探索[M].南京:东南大学出版社,2010.
夏廷德.翻译补偿研究[M].武汉:湖北教育出版社,2006:31.
肖家燕.红楼梦概念隐喻的英译研究[M].北京:中国社会科学出版社,2009.
徐北文(主编).李清照全集评注[M].济南:济南出版社,1990.
许国璋.许国璋论语言[M].北京:外语教学与研究出版社,1991.
许钧.文字·文学·文化:《红与黑》汉译研究[M].南京:南京大学出版社,1996.
许渊冲.译笔生花[M].郑州:文心出版社,2005.
雅克·德里达(法).汪堂家译.论文字学[M].上海:上海译文出版社:1999.
———.张宁译.书写与差异[M].北京:生活·读书·新知三联书店,2001.
严复.《天演论·译例言》[A].中国译协《翻译通讯》编辑部(编).翻译研究论文集[C].北京:外语教学与研究出版社,1984:6-7.
杨丰宁.英汉语言比较与翻译[M].天津:天津大学出版社,2006.
杨平.中西文化交流视域下的《论语》英译研究[M].北京:光明日报出版社,2011.
杨晓荣.翻译批评导论[M].北京:中国对外翻译出版公司,2005.
叶闯.理解的条件——戴维森的解释理论[M].北京:商务印书馆,2006.
———.翻译不确定性对意义的否定[J].世界哲学,2009,(1):90-103.
岳好平.英汉情感隐喻的认知研究[M].长沙:湖南人民出版社,2010.
张今.文学翻译原理[M].开封:河南大学出版社,1987.
赵明.语际翻译与文化交融[M].江苏徐州:中国矿业大学出版社,2003.
赵明、王慧娟、吕淑文.关于零翻译的若干问题探讨[J].中国矿业大学学报(社会科学版),2005,(2):125-130.
张蓊荟.认知视阈下英文小说汉译中隐喻翻译的模式及评估[M].北京:中国文联出版社,2009.
祝吉芳(主编).英汉翻译:方法与试笔[M].北京:北京大学出版社,2007.
朱自方.翻译何以可能——蒯因的翻译不确定性论题批判[J].学术月刊,2008,40,(4):40-46.
庄夫.翻译标准论[A].耿龙明(主编).翻译论丛[C].上海:上海外语教育出版社,1998:91-104.