语境视角下的隐喻翻译
|
摘要
隐喻在日常生活中无处不在,它不仅是一种修辞手段,还是人类认识世界的一种思维方式。自20世纪七十年代起,学者从认知心理学、哲学、语用学、符号学等角度对隐喻进行多层次的系统研究,而隐喻翻译的研究却未引起足够的重视。通过相关文献阅读,笔者发现国外对隐喻翻译的研究主要集中在隐喻的可译性和翻译技巧,而国内学者主要从语义、意象、文化、认知四个方面对隐喻翻译进行研究。然而隐喻的识别与理解必须在特定的语境中才能实现,任何翻译都离不开语境。本文试图从语境的视角对隐喻翻译进行研究。作者首先阐述了语境与隐喻的关系。
语境即语言的使用环境,包括言内语境和言外语境。言外语境又细分为情景语境和文化语境。而新“语义三角”与语境关系密切。新“语义三角”包括三个要素:所指、能指和语言符号。所指世界与能指世界属于言外语境,而语言符号世界属于言内语境。因此,从某种意义上说,新“语义三角”便是语境。而隐喻是在人类认识世界并与其相互作用以及创造语言过程中产生的;其本质是从一个概念域(源语域)向另一概念域(目标域)映射的结果;其功能主要表现在认知功能和语言学功能;它对人类认识世界和创造新的词汇和概念产生了重要的作用,并间接地促进了人类思维的发展。
因人类生活在同一地球上,人们往往对同一事物有相似的体验,于是产生了相似的隐喻表达;而因不同的语系和文化,人类则常会用不同的源语去映射同一目标域。同一隐喻在不同的语境下会表现出不同的意义。在隐喻翻译前正确理解源语隐喻意义至关重要。隐喻翻译涉及三个概念:本体、喻体和喻意。根据隐喻在两种语言中的语境异同提出了五种翻译方法:移植法、补偿法、替代法、转化法和省略法。当源语隐喻在目的语读者中能引起相同或相似联想时,采用移植法;当出现文化空缺而又需保留原喻体时,可先直译再进行加注或解释补偿其损失的意义;当目的语中可找到对等喻体来表达同一意义时,则可采用替代法;当目的语读者能理解源语喻体和喻意,但直译会使表达晦涩时,可把隐喻转换成明喻;当以上四种都行不通时,省略隐喻,直接翻译意义。
笔者最后对全文做了总结,并提出隐喻翻译需要进一步研究的问题。
Metaphor is pervasive in our daily life, and it is not only a figure of speech, but also a mode of thinking for human beings to know the world. Scholars have made a multi-level and systematic study of metaphor from cognitive psychological, philosophical, pragmatic and semiotic aspects since 1970s, but the translation of metaphor does not gain the equal attention. After reading the relative literatures, the author finds that the western scholars mainly study the translatability of metaphor and translation techniques and Chinese scholars study metaphor translation from four aspects: semantic, imagery, cultural and cognitive aspects. Anyhow, the identification and understanding of metaphors can be only realized in specific context, and any translation cannot be separated from context, so this paper studies the translation of metaphor from the perspective of context. The author firstly analyzes the relationship between context and metaphor.
Context is the environment in which language is used, which embraces linguistic context and non-linguistic context. Non-linguistic context is subdivided into situational context and cultural context. And new semantic triangle has a close relationship with context. New semantic triangle covers three elements: referent, reference (thought) and linguistic sign. Referent world and reference (thought) world belong to non-linguistic context, and linguistic sign world belongs to linguistic context. In this sense, new semantic triangle is context. Metaphor is produced when people know the world and create the language; its essence is to understand one conceptual domain in terms of another conceptual domain; its functions are mainly reflected in cognitive and linguistic aspects; and it plays an important role in the process of understanding the world and creating new vocabulary and new sense, and also promotes the development of human thought indirectly.
As people live on the same planet, people always have similar experiences for one thing and similar metaphorical expressions are produced. At the same time, due to different language families and cultures, people in different places will use different source domains to map the same target domain. The same metaphor may represent different meanings in different contexts. Getting a correct understanding of the original metaphor before translating is very critical. And there are three terms concerned with metaphor translation: object, image and sense. According to the contextual similarities and differences in two languages, five translation methods are put forward: transplant, compensation, replacement, conversion and omission. When the original image can evoke the same or similar association for the target language readers, transplant can be adopted. When cultural vacancy occurs and the original image must be retained, notes and explanation can be added to compensate the sense. When a standard image in the target language can be found, replacement is feasible. When there is no difficulty for the target language readers to understand the original image, but the literal translation can make the text unnatural, the metaphor can be converted into simile. If the above methods are not feasible, the translator can adopt omission, that is, omit the metaphor and just translate the sense.
Lastly, the paper draws the conclusion based on the above research, and comes up with the subjects for further studies concerning the translation of metaphor.
语境即语言的使用环境,包括言内语境和言外语境。言外语境又细分为情景语境和文化语境。而新“语义三角”与语境关系密切。新“语义三角”包括三个要素:所指、能指和语言符号。所指世界与能指世界属于言外语境,而语言符号世界属于言内语境。因此,从某种意义上说,新“语义三角”便是语境。而隐喻是在人类认识世界并与其相互作用以及创造语言过程中产生的;其本质是从一个概念域(源语域)向另一概念域(目标域)映射的结果;其功能主要表现在认知功能和语言学功能;它对人类认识世界和创造新的词汇和概念产生了重要的作用,并间接地促进了人类思维的发展。
因人类生活在同一地球上,人们往往对同一事物有相似的体验,于是产生了相似的隐喻表达;而因不同的语系和文化,人类则常会用不同的源语去映射同一目标域。同一隐喻在不同的语境下会表现出不同的意义。在隐喻翻译前正确理解源语隐喻意义至关重要。隐喻翻译涉及三个概念:本体、喻体和喻意。根据隐喻在两种语言中的语境异同提出了五种翻译方法:移植法、补偿法、替代法、转化法和省略法。当源语隐喻在目的语读者中能引起相同或相似联想时,采用移植法;当出现文化空缺而又需保留原喻体时,可先直译再进行加注或解释补偿其损失的意义;当目的语中可找到对等喻体来表达同一意义时,则可采用替代法;当目的语读者能理解源语喻体和喻意,但直译会使表达晦涩时,可把隐喻转换成明喻;当以上四种都行不通时,省略隐喻,直接翻译意义。
笔者最后对全文做了总结,并提出隐喻翻译需要进一步研究的问题。
Metaphor is pervasive in our daily life, and it is not only a figure of speech, but also a mode of thinking for human beings to know the world. Scholars have made a multi-level and systematic study of metaphor from cognitive psychological, philosophical, pragmatic and semiotic aspects since 1970s, but the translation of metaphor does not gain the equal attention. After reading the relative literatures, the author finds that the western scholars mainly study the translatability of metaphor and translation techniques and Chinese scholars study metaphor translation from four aspects: semantic, imagery, cultural and cognitive aspects. Anyhow, the identification and understanding of metaphors can be only realized in specific context, and any translation cannot be separated from context, so this paper studies the translation of metaphor from the perspective of context. The author firstly analyzes the relationship between context and metaphor.
Context is the environment in which language is used, which embraces linguistic context and non-linguistic context. Non-linguistic context is subdivided into situational context and cultural context. And new semantic triangle has a close relationship with context. New semantic triangle covers three elements: referent, reference (thought) and linguistic sign. Referent world and reference (thought) world belong to non-linguistic context, and linguistic sign world belongs to linguistic context. In this sense, new semantic triangle is context. Metaphor is produced when people know the world and create the language; its essence is to understand one conceptual domain in terms of another conceptual domain; its functions are mainly reflected in cognitive and linguistic aspects; and it plays an important role in the process of understanding the world and creating new vocabulary and new sense, and also promotes the development of human thought indirectly.
As people live on the same planet, people always have similar experiences for one thing and similar metaphorical expressions are produced. At the same time, due to different language families and cultures, people in different places will use different source domains to map the same target domain. The same metaphor may represent different meanings in different contexts. Getting a correct understanding of the original metaphor before translating is very critical. And there are three terms concerned with metaphor translation: object, image and sense. According to the contextual similarities and differences in two languages, five translation methods are put forward: transplant, compensation, replacement, conversion and omission. When the original image can evoke the same or similar association for the target language readers, transplant can be adopted. When cultural vacancy occurs and the original image must be retained, notes and explanation can be added to compensate the sense. When a standard image in the target language can be found, replacement is feasible. When there is no difficulty for the target language readers to understand the original image, but the literal translation can make the text unnatural, the metaphor can be converted into simile. If the above methods are not feasible, the translator can adopt omission, that is, omit the metaphor and just translate the sense.
Lastly, the paper draws the conclusion based on the above research, and comes up with the subjects for further studies concerning the translation of metaphor.
引文
[1] Aristotle. Rhetoric and Poetics[M]. New York: The Modern Library, 1954.
[2] Asher, R. E. The Encyclopedia of Language and Linguistics[Z]. Oxford: Pergamon Press Ltd, 1994.
[3] Broeck, Raymond. The Limits of Translatability as Exemplified by Metaphor Translation[J]. Poetics Today, 1981 (4): 73-87.
[4] Dagut, Menachim. Can Metaphor Be Translated?[J]. Babel, 1976 (1): 21-33.
[5] Firth, John R. Papers in Linguistics[C], 1934-1951. London: Oxford University Press, 1957.
[6] Firth, J. R. The technique of semantics[A]. (reprinted in Firth, 1957. Papers in Linguistics, 1934-1951[C], London: Oxford University Press) 1935.
[7] Hawkes, Terence. Metaphor[M]. London: Methuen, 1972.
[8] Halliday, M.A.K.&Hasan, R. Cohesion in English[M]. Beijing: Foreign Language Teaching and Research Press, 2001.
[9] Halliday, M.A.K. The Linguistic Sciences and Language Teaching[M]. London: Longman, 1964.
[10] Hatim, B. & Mason, I. Discourse and the Translator[M]. Shanghai: Shanghai Foreign Language Education Press, 2001.
[11] Hester, M. M. The Meaning of Poetic Metaphor[M]. The Hague, Mouton, 1967.
[12] Hymes, D. Foundations of Sociolinguistics: An Ethnographic Approach[M]. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press, 1974.
[13] Lakoff, G. &Johnson, M. Metaphors We Live by[M]. London: University of Chicago Press, 1980.
[14] Lakoff, G. The Contemporary Theory of Metaphor[M]. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1993.
[15] Lynne, Cameron & Graham, Low. Research and Applying Metaphor[M]. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2001.
[16] Lyons, J. Semantics[M]. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1977.
[17] Malinowski, B. The Problem of Meaning in Primitive Language[M]. New York: Harcourt Brace&World, 1923.
[18] Mounin, Georges. Die Ubersetzung. Geschichte, Theorie, Anwendung[M]. Munchen: Nymphenburg, 1967.
[19] Newmark, P. Approaches to Translation[M]. Shanghai: Shanghai Foreign Language Education Press, 2001.
[20] Newmark, P. Approaches to Translation[M]. Oxford: Pergamon Press Ltd, 1982.
[21] Newmark, P. A Textbook of Translation[M]. Shanghai: Shanghai Foreign Language Education Press, 2001.
[22] Nida, Eugene A. Language and Culture Contexts in Translating[M]. Shanghai: Shanghai Foreign Language Education Press, 2001.
[23] Nida, Eugene A. &.Taber, Charles R. The Theory and Practice of Translation[M]. Leiden: E.J Brill, 1969.
[24] Nida, Eugene A. Language, Culture, and Translation[M]. Shanghai: Shanghai Foreign Language Education Press, 2001.
[25] Nida, Eugene A. Toward a Science of Translating[M]. Leiden: E.J Brill, 1964.
[26] Ogden, C. K. and I. A. Richards. The Meaning of Meaning[M]. London: Routledge, 1923.
[27] Richards, I.A. The Philosophy of Rhetoric[M]. London: Oxford University Press, 1936.
[28] Ricoeur, P. The Rule of Metaphor[M], trans.By R.Czerny. London: Routledge & Kegan Paul, 1986.
[29] Saeed, J.L. Semantics[M]. London: Blackwell Publishers Ltd, 1997.
[30] Snell-Hornby, M. Translation Studies An Integrated Approach[M]. Shanghai: Shanghai Foreign Language Education Press, 2001.
[31] Van Dijk, T.A. Text and Context: Explorations in the Semantics and Pragmatics of Discourse[M]. New York: Longman, 1977.
[32]陈安定.英汉比较与翻译[M].北京:中国对外翻译公司, 1991.
[33]程同春.英语隐喻的思考与翻译[J].中国科技翻译, 2005 (5): 36-40.
[34]陈望道.修辞学发凡[M].上海:上海人民出版社, 1976.
[35]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.
[36]曹雪芹,高鹗著;杨宪益,戴乃迭译.大中华文库:红楼梦[M].长沙:湖南人民出版社, 1999.
[37]曹雪芹.红楼梦[M].北京:人民文学出版社, 1994.
[38]邓颖琪.隐喻的认知基础及其翻译研究[D].广州大学硕士论文, 2005.
[39]何科育.从文化的角度论隐喻的翻译[D].四川师范大学硕士论文, 2006.
[40]何善芳.英汉语言对比研究[M].上海:上海外语教育出版社, 2002.
[41]何自然.语用学与英语学习[M].上海:上海教育出版社, 1997.
[42]胡壮麟.语篇的衔接与连贯[M],上海:上海外语教育出版社, 1994.
[43]胡壮麟.认知隐喻学[M].北京:北京大学出版社, 2004.
[44]柯平.英汉与汉英翻译教程[M].北京:北京大学出版社, 1993.
[45]蓝纯.认知语言学与隐喻研究[M].北京:外语教学与研究出版社, 2005.
[46]李磊.隐喻及其翻译[D].宁夏大学硕士论文, 2005.
[47]李锡胤.关于“语义三角”之我见[ J].俄语语言文学研究, 2003(3).
[48]林书武.《隐喻:其认知力与语言结构》评介[J].外语教学与研究, 1994 (4): 62-63.
[49]林书武.国外隐喻研究综述[J].外语教学与研究, 1997(1): 11-19.
[50]林书武.隐喻研究的基本现状,焦点及趋势[J].外国语, 2002 (1): 38-45.
[51]刘法公.隐喻汉英翻译原则研究[M].北京:国防工业出版社, 2008.
[52]吕瑞昌.汉英翻译教程[M].西安:陕西人民出版社, 1983.
[53]卢中.论隐喻的文化内涵及其翻译[D].江西师范大学硕士论文, 2004.
[54]毛荣贵.英译汉技巧新篇[M].北京:外文出版社, 2001.
[55]彭利元.经典“语义三角”辩证[J].外语学刊, 2009 (4): 51-54.
[56]彭利元.翻译语境化论稿[M].长沙:湖南人民出版社, 2008.
[57]曲波.林海雪原[M].北京:人民文学出版社, 1990.
[58]邱懋如.可译性及零翻译[J].中国翻译, 2001(1): 24-27.
[59]时德英.翻译中的语境考量[J].海外英语, 2010(9): 157-160.
[60]束定芳.隐喻学研究[M].上海:上海外语教育出版社, 2000.
[61]唐才平,康有金.隐喻的本质及其翻译策略[J].河北理工大学学报, 2007(11):136-138.
[62]特伦斯·霍克斯著,高丙中译.论隐喻[M].北京:昆仑出版社, 1992.
[63]谭震华.英语隐喻词语的翻译[J].上海科技翻译, 2002 (4): 26-27.
[64]王德春.修辞学发凡与中国修辞学[M].上海:复旦大学出版社, 1983.
[65]王浩宇.隐喻的认知和翻译[D].天津大学硕士论文, 2006.
[66]王宏印.英汉翻译综合教程[M].辽宁:辽宁师范大学出版社, 2002.
[67]王建平.语言交际中的艺术——语境的逻辑功能[M].北京:求实出版社, 1989.
[68]吴敬梓著;杨宪益,戴乃迭译.大中华文库:儒林外史[M].长沙:湖南人民出版社, 1999.
[69]王璐.论隐喻及隐喻翻译[D].黑龙江大学硕士论文, 2006.
[70]王武兴.英汉语言对比与翻译[M].北京:北京大学出版社, 2003.
[71]肖坤学.论隐喻的认知性质与隐喻翻译的认知取向[J].外语学刊,2005 (5): 101-105.
[72]萧立明.新译学论稿[M].北京:中国对外翻译出版社, 2003.
[73]谢之君.翻译中的隐喻性认知[J].上海科技翻译, 2001(3): 1-6.
[74]熊炎中.小议英语隐喻翻译[J].中南民族大学学报, 2006 (6): 218-219.
[75]徐芳.英汉基本颜色词的隐喻认知对比[J].安徽工业大学学报, 2009 (3): 80-82.
[76]徐莉娜.隐喻的审美取向与跨文化交际[J].修辞学习, 1998 (3): 6-7.
[77]徐莉娜.隐喻语的翻译[J].中国翻译, 1999 (4): 21-24.
[78]许明武.计算机英语中的隐喻及其翻译技巧[J].中国翻译, 2003 (3): 69-72.
[79]许渊冲译.汉魏六朝诗一百五十首[M].北京:北京大学出版社, 1996.
[80]叶子南.英汉翻译对话录[M].北京:北京大学出版社, 2003.
[81]余立三.英汉修辞比较与翻译[M].北京:商务印书馆, 1985.
[82]于艳红.隐喻的认知与翻译[J].语言与翻译, 2005 (1): 53-56.
[83]袁礼,彭卓丽.隐喻的认知与翻译[J].湖北经济学院学报, 2007(4):154-155.
[84]张光明.认知隐喻翻译研究[M].北京:国防工业出版社, 2010.
[85]张培基.英汉翻译教程[M].上海:上海外语教育出版社, 1980.
[86]张蓊荟.翻译的认知隐喻观[J].外语与外语教学, 2006 (6): 53-55.
[87]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.
[88]赵伟军.英语比喻的翻译[J].湘潭大学社会科学学报, 2000 (6): 132-134.
[89]赵艳芳.隐喻的认知基础[J].解放军外语学院学报, 1994 (2): 30-34.
[90]赵艳芳.认知语言学概论[M].上海:上海外语教育出版社, 2001.
[91]郅友昌,孟霞.俄罗斯学者视野中的语义三角模式[J].解放军外国语学院学报, 2006(3): 16-21.
[92]周方珠.翻译多元论[M].北京:中国对外翻译出版公司, 2004.
[93]周轶.英语隐喻及其汉译[D].上海师范大学硕士论文, 2004.
[94]朱波.论翻译中隐喻化思维的重要性[J].外语研究, 2001 (4): 63-66.
[95]朱永生.语境动态研究[M].北京:北京大学出版社, 2005.
[2] Asher, R. E. The Encyclopedia of Language and Linguistics[Z]. Oxford: Pergamon Press Ltd, 1994.
[3] Broeck, Raymond. The Limits of Translatability as Exemplified by Metaphor Translation[J]. Poetics Today, 1981 (4): 73-87.
[4] Dagut, Menachim. Can Metaphor Be Translated?[J]. Babel, 1976 (1): 21-33.
[5] Firth, John R. Papers in Linguistics[C], 1934-1951. London: Oxford University Press, 1957.
[6] Firth, J. R. The technique of semantics[A]. (reprinted in Firth, 1957. Papers in Linguistics, 1934-1951[C], London: Oxford University Press) 1935.
[7] Hawkes, Terence. Metaphor[M]. London: Methuen, 1972.
[8] Halliday, M.A.K.&Hasan, R. Cohesion in English[M]. Beijing: Foreign Language Teaching and Research Press, 2001.
[9] Halliday, M.A.K. The Linguistic Sciences and Language Teaching[M]. London: Longman, 1964.
[10] Hatim, B. & Mason, I. Discourse and the Translator[M]. Shanghai: Shanghai Foreign Language Education Press, 2001.
[11] Hester, M. M. The Meaning of Poetic Metaphor[M]. The Hague, Mouton, 1967.
[12] Hymes, D. Foundations of Sociolinguistics: An Ethnographic Approach[M]. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press, 1974.
[13] Lakoff, G. &Johnson, M. Metaphors We Live by[M]. London: University of Chicago Press, 1980.
[14] Lakoff, G. The Contemporary Theory of Metaphor[M]. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1993.
[15] Lynne, Cameron & Graham, Low. Research and Applying Metaphor[M]. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2001.
[16] Lyons, J. Semantics[M]. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1977.
[17] Malinowski, B. The Problem of Meaning in Primitive Language[M]. New York: Harcourt Brace&World, 1923.
[18] Mounin, Georges. Die Ubersetzung. Geschichte, Theorie, Anwendung[M]. Munchen: Nymphenburg, 1967.
[19] Newmark, P. Approaches to Translation[M]. Shanghai: Shanghai Foreign Language Education Press, 2001.
[20] Newmark, P. Approaches to Translation[M]. Oxford: Pergamon Press Ltd, 1982.
[21] Newmark, P. A Textbook of Translation[M]. Shanghai: Shanghai Foreign Language Education Press, 2001.
[22] Nida, Eugene A. Language and Culture Contexts in Translating[M]. Shanghai: Shanghai Foreign Language Education Press, 2001.
[23] Nida, Eugene A. &.Taber, Charles R. The Theory and Practice of Translation[M]. Leiden: E.J Brill, 1969.
[24] Nida, Eugene A. Language, Culture, and Translation[M]. Shanghai: Shanghai Foreign Language Education Press, 2001.
[25] Nida, Eugene A. Toward a Science of Translating[M]. Leiden: E.J Brill, 1964.
[26] Ogden, C. K. and I. A. Richards. The Meaning of Meaning[M]. London: Routledge, 1923.
[27] Richards, I.A. The Philosophy of Rhetoric[M]. London: Oxford University Press, 1936.
[28] Ricoeur, P. The Rule of Metaphor[M], trans.By R.Czerny. London: Routledge & Kegan Paul, 1986.
[29] Saeed, J.L. Semantics[M]. London: Blackwell Publishers Ltd, 1997.
[30] Snell-Hornby, M. Translation Studies An Integrated Approach[M]. Shanghai: Shanghai Foreign Language Education Press, 2001.
[31] Van Dijk, T.A. Text and Context: Explorations in the Semantics and Pragmatics of Discourse[M]. New York: Longman, 1977.
[32]陈安定.英汉比较与翻译[M].北京:中国对外翻译公司, 1991.
[33]程同春.英语隐喻的思考与翻译[J].中国科技翻译, 2005 (5): 36-40.
[34]陈望道.修辞学发凡[M].上海:上海人民出版社, 1976.
[35]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.
[36]曹雪芹,高鹗著;杨宪益,戴乃迭译.大中华文库:红楼梦[M].长沙:湖南人民出版社, 1999.
[37]曹雪芹.红楼梦[M].北京:人民文学出版社, 1994.
[38]邓颖琪.隐喻的认知基础及其翻译研究[D].广州大学硕士论文, 2005.
[39]何科育.从文化的角度论隐喻的翻译[D].四川师范大学硕士论文, 2006.
[40]何善芳.英汉语言对比研究[M].上海:上海外语教育出版社, 2002.
[41]何自然.语用学与英语学习[M].上海:上海教育出版社, 1997.
[42]胡壮麟.语篇的衔接与连贯[M],上海:上海外语教育出版社, 1994.
[43]胡壮麟.认知隐喻学[M].北京:北京大学出版社, 2004.
[44]柯平.英汉与汉英翻译教程[M].北京:北京大学出版社, 1993.
[45]蓝纯.认知语言学与隐喻研究[M].北京:外语教学与研究出版社, 2005.
[46]李磊.隐喻及其翻译[D].宁夏大学硕士论文, 2005.
[47]李锡胤.关于“语义三角”之我见[ J].俄语语言文学研究, 2003(3).
[48]林书武.《隐喻:其认知力与语言结构》评介[J].外语教学与研究, 1994 (4): 62-63.
[49]林书武.国外隐喻研究综述[J].外语教学与研究, 1997(1): 11-19.
[50]林书武.隐喻研究的基本现状,焦点及趋势[J].外国语, 2002 (1): 38-45.
[51]刘法公.隐喻汉英翻译原则研究[M].北京:国防工业出版社, 2008.
[52]吕瑞昌.汉英翻译教程[M].西安:陕西人民出版社, 1983.
[53]卢中.论隐喻的文化内涵及其翻译[D].江西师范大学硕士论文, 2004.
[54]毛荣贵.英译汉技巧新篇[M].北京:外文出版社, 2001.
[55]彭利元.经典“语义三角”辩证[J].外语学刊, 2009 (4): 51-54.
[56]彭利元.翻译语境化论稿[M].长沙:湖南人民出版社, 2008.
[57]曲波.林海雪原[M].北京:人民文学出版社, 1990.
[58]邱懋如.可译性及零翻译[J].中国翻译, 2001(1): 24-27.
[59]时德英.翻译中的语境考量[J].海外英语, 2010(9): 157-160.
[60]束定芳.隐喻学研究[M].上海:上海外语教育出版社, 2000.
[61]唐才平,康有金.隐喻的本质及其翻译策略[J].河北理工大学学报, 2007(11):136-138.
[62]特伦斯·霍克斯著,高丙中译.论隐喻[M].北京:昆仑出版社, 1992.
[63]谭震华.英语隐喻词语的翻译[J].上海科技翻译, 2002 (4): 26-27.
[64]王德春.修辞学发凡与中国修辞学[M].上海:复旦大学出版社, 1983.
[65]王浩宇.隐喻的认知和翻译[D].天津大学硕士论文, 2006.
[66]王宏印.英汉翻译综合教程[M].辽宁:辽宁师范大学出版社, 2002.
[67]王建平.语言交际中的艺术——语境的逻辑功能[M].北京:求实出版社, 1989.
[68]吴敬梓著;杨宪益,戴乃迭译.大中华文库:儒林外史[M].长沙:湖南人民出版社, 1999.
[69]王璐.论隐喻及隐喻翻译[D].黑龙江大学硕士论文, 2006.
[70]王武兴.英汉语言对比与翻译[M].北京:北京大学出版社, 2003.
[71]肖坤学.论隐喻的认知性质与隐喻翻译的认知取向[J].外语学刊,2005 (5): 101-105.
[72]萧立明.新译学论稿[M].北京:中国对外翻译出版社, 2003.
[73]谢之君.翻译中的隐喻性认知[J].上海科技翻译, 2001(3): 1-6.
[74]熊炎中.小议英语隐喻翻译[J].中南民族大学学报, 2006 (6): 218-219.
[75]徐芳.英汉基本颜色词的隐喻认知对比[J].安徽工业大学学报, 2009 (3): 80-82.
[76]徐莉娜.隐喻的审美取向与跨文化交际[J].修辞学习, 1998 (3): 6-7.
[77]徐莉娜.隐喻语的翻译[J].中国翻译, 1999 (4): 21-24.
[78]许明武.计算机英语中的隐喻及其翻译技巧[J].中国翻译, 2003 (3): 69-72.
[79]许渊冲译.汉魏六朝诗一百五十首[M].北京:北京大学出版社, 1996.
[80]叶子南.英汉翻译对话录[M].北京:北京大学出版社, 2003.
[81]余立三.英汉修辞比较与翻译[M].北京:商务印书馆, 1985.
[82]于艳红.隐喻的认知与翻译[J].语言与翻译, 2005 (1): 53-56.
[83]袁礼,彭卓丽.隐喻的认知与翻译[J].湖北经济学院学报, 2007(4):154-155.
[84]张光明.认知隐喻翻译研究[M].北京:国防工业出版社, 2010.
[85]张培基.英汉翻译教程[M].上海:上海外语教育出版社, 1980.
[86]张蓊荟.翻译的认知隐喻观[J].外语与外语教学, 2006 (6): 53-55.
[87]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.
[88]赵伟军.英语比喻的翻译[J].湘潭大学社会科学学报, 2000 (6): 132-134.
[89]赵艳芳.隐喻的认知基础[J].解放军外语学院学报, 1994 (2): 30-34.
[90]赵艳芳.认知语言学概论[M].上海:上海外语教育出版社, 2001.
[91]郅友昌,孟霞.俄罗斯学者视野中的语义三角模式[J].解放军外国语学院学报, 2006(3): 16-21.
[92]周方珠.翻译多元论[M].北京:中国对外翻译出版公司, 2004.
[93]周轶.英语隐喻及其汉译[D].上海师范大学硕士论文, 2004.
[94]朱波.论翻译中隐喻化思维的重要性[J].外语研究, 2001 (4): 63-66.
[95]朱永生.语境动态研究[M].北京:北京大学出版社, 2005.