语义学在翻译中的应用
|
摘要
这篇题为语义学在翻译中的运用的论文是从语义学与翻译的密切联系着手的，对这些联系的研究有助于理解并解决翻译中的一些问题。本文笔者遴选出了以下几个方面，即语义场理论、成分分析、意义的分类、中英语义对比及语义翻译来进行研究。这些研究涉及语义学、翻译学知识，其目的是尝试如何把语义学运用到翻译实践中并指导翻译实践。
语义场理论是现代语义学研究中的一项十分重要的成果。它主要包括三个要点：
1 语言中的词汇构成一个完整的词汇系统，在这个系统中词语的意义是相互关联的；
2 词汇应当作为一个完整的系统来研究，而非单独考察某一个词的语义变化；
3 某个词的准确意义只有在对词汇间相互关系的分析和比较中才能确定。
以英语和汉语为例，语义场理论与翻译的联系在于在某个共同概念下对一些词汇的比较，从而确定某个词语的确切含义。
成分分析法是一种描述单词和词组意义的方法，其理论基础是每一个词素的含义可以通过分析一系列的更为广泛、概括的语义特征而得出。
至于成分分析与翻译，本文主要讨论了成分分析法对译者的八种用途。
至于意义的分类，本文主要探讨了英国语言学家莱昂斯和利奇的两种分类法，前者把意义分为三类：描述意义、社会意义和表达意义；后者则将意义较为详细地分为七类：概念意义、内涵意义、社会意义、感情意义、联想意义、搭配意义和主题意义。比较而言，笔者认为，莱昂斯的意义分类法显得经济、概括性强，但略为模糊；而利奇的分类法更为系统、清晰，加之该分类法对翻译实践有更强的指导性和操作性，我
们在义中探讨了其中的每一种意义及其与翻译的联系。
在第－：章中，我们详尽地把英汉语义进行了对比，内穴涵；b竹议语
义重叠、语义平行、语义排斥及语义矛币。这样的比较对竹汉叶汗个关
重要，这上剿。wH‘廷汉两种语六在意义上确实有川仕丈扒、‘！‘汀、排
斥和矛币现象。倘若淬者致力于从另一种语；’ids中寻找述今人满怂的对等
物，那么他必须认真考虑语义学的所有这些万方血血。
水义的最后 章遣语义学和翻译的结介，义细分为八个邢分，第
部分讨论怠义在翻译中的地位，第二部分讨论怠义的改变和洲汗，第＿。
部分探讨语境一翻译，第四部分探讨歧义和翻译，最后 九5分则巾点讨
沦语义翻洋。
意义是翻译活动的核心，翻译就是翻译怠义，翻洋就足、J找怠义，
辩义乃翻译之本。
意义改变有四大趋势：意义扩大、意义缩小、意义降格和忐义仆格。
就泽犬W人，介翻坏。二义c发牛改变的W语时，了解其贪化的趋势就显
得相“！lffi要。
语境足用来描还怠义的，该意义可以从某个i。u、i。U组或Nf的沁后
文中得到确定。本文所说的语境包括旨内语境和六外语傀就汗行W占，
语境在jrp解原文、消除歧义方而功莫大焉。本义从语义学的川jX探讨了
语境的概念和分类，片对其在翻译中的作川作了 个概｝斤卜的沦述。
歧义在樊语中厂－泛存在，它上要分为饲7I12义和语江歧义。对歧义
句的翻译，笔肯认为消除歧义并准确理解原文尤为下垫。汗人小丫地抓卜
厂文，0光消除歧义，然后将其译为另一种语六。
恰义翻洋足。种掷译方法或途径，它足通过川详入叭的叶了物山现
源恰的语义的途径。八这一部分，我们着重讨论了该问地的 二个人山I：
语义理论和翻译理论、语义途径和语用途径翻译、以及冶义洲厅和交际
翻译。
总之，我们认为，·方而，意义是翻淖活动的核心，翻斤就足翻
译意义；另 方面，忿义是语占的一部分，而语义学足语．’i·f的 部分。
对我们而占，要想彻底掌握好英汉两种语六并作出令人淌怠的丛汉勺＿
译，详甘尤疑很有必安对语义学和翻译的大联有所了解，计只备川”’〕的
语义学知识。
This paper has probed into some aspects of semantic studies that are closely connected with translation and helpful in understanding and solving some problems in translation, namely semantic field theory, componential analysis, classifications of meaning, semantic contrast between English and Chinese, and notably semantic translatioa
Semantic field theory is one of the most important achievements in modem semantic studies. And the connection of semantic field theory and translation lies in the comparison of words under a certain common concept among different languages such as English and Chinese.
Componential analysis refers to the approach to the description of the meaning of words and phrases which rests upon the thesis that the sense of every lexeme can be analyzed in terms of a set of more general semantic features.
As for componential analysis in translation, we have dealt with the eight main uses for the translator. Moreover, a translator or translation theorist should always bear in mind that except in a narrow area or a series a field is not a structure or a 'mosaic' system (Trier's term), but a loose conglomeration of words of senses centered in one topic.
As for the classification of meaning, we have mainly discussed two types : John Lyons' and Geoffrey Leech's, the former including three sub-types : namely descriptive, social and expressive meaning, while the latter embracing seven, namely conceptual, connotative, social, -affective, reflected, collocative and thematic meaning. Comparing the two, we think that John Lyons' classification is economical, global, but a little vague, while Leech's is more systematic and clear-cut. And since Leech's classification is more instructive in guiding translators, we have dealt with each of their possible associations with translatioa
In the third chapter, we have had a thorough comparison between English and Chinese on semantic contrast, including semantic overlapping, parallelism, exclusion and conflict We thought that this comparison is of great importance to the mutual translation between English and Chinese. This is mainly because that Chinese and English truly overlap, parallel, exclude and conflict with each other significantly over the meanings. If the translator aims at finding the most satisfactory equivalence for one language in another, it is absolutely essential for him -to ponder over all these various aspects of the
semantics of language.
The last chapter is a combination of semantics and translation which subcategorises into five smaller parts, e.g. meaning as the core of translating, changes of meaning and translation, context and translation, ambiguity and translation, and semantic translation.
Meaning is the core of translating because translating is in search of meaning and understanding meaning is the foundation of translating.
The four well-marked tendencies of changes of meaning are extension, narrowing,
degeneration and regeneratioa All these changes can be easily seen from the
vocabulary.
Context is the term used to state meaning from what comes before and after a word, phrase, statement, etc. It is a topic much discussed and argued about in both semantics and pragmatics and it is meant here both linguistic context and context of situation.
To a translator, context is very important in understanding the original text Our paper in this section has explored the concept and categories of context from the perspective of semantics and made a brief discussion on the role of context in translatioa
Ambiguity in English is very common. It refers to a word or sentence permitting an un-specifiable range of possible interpretatioa It includes briefly two sorts: lexical ambiguity and grammatical ambiguity.
In translating ambiguous sentence, we think comprehension of the sentence is very important and the correct understanding cannot go without proper context Therefore, we'd better first resolve ambiguity according to the context, then translate it into another language.
Semantic translation is a translation approach whi
语义场理论是现代语义学研究中的一项十分重要的成果。它主要包括三个要点：
1 语言中的词汇构成一个完整的词汇系统，在这个系统中词语的意义是相互关联的；
2 词汇应当作为一个完整的系统来研究，而非单独考察某一个词的语义变化；
3 某个词的准确意义只有在对词汇间相互关系的分析和比较中才能确定。
以英语和汉语为例，语义场理论与翻译的联系在于在某个共同概念下对一些词汇的比较，从而确定某个词语的确切含义。
成分分析法是一种描述单词和词组意义的方法，其理论基础是每一个词素的含义可以通过分析一系列的更为广泛、概括的语义特征而得出。
至于成分分析与翻译，本文主要讨论了成分分析法对译者的八种用途。
至于意义的分类，本文主要探讨了英国语言学家莱昂斯和利奇的两种分类法，前者把意义分为三类：描述意义、社会意义和表达意义；后者则将意义较为详细地分为七类：概念意义、内涵意义、社会意义、感情意义、联想意义、搭配意义和主题意义。比较而言，笔者认为，莱昂斯的意义分类法显得经济、概括性强，但略为模糊；而利奇的分类法更为系统、清晰，加之该分类法对翻译实践有更强的指导性和操作性，我
们在义中探讨了其中的每一种意义及其与翻译的联系。
在第－：章中，我们详尽地把英汉语义进行了对比，内穴涵；b竹议语
义重叠、语义平行、语义排斥及语义矛币。这样的比较对竹汉叶汗个关
重要，这上剿。wH‘廷汉两种语六在意义上确实有川仕丈扒、‘！‘汀、排
斥和矛币现象。倘若淬者致力于从另一种语；’ids中寻找述今人满怂的对等
物，那么他必须认真考虑语义学的所有这些万方血血。
水义的最后 章遣语义学和翻译的结介，义细分为八个邢分，第
部分讨论怠义在翻译中的地位，第二部分讨论怠义的改变和洲汗，第＿。
部分探讨语境一翻译，第四部分探讨歧义和翻译，最后 九5分则巾点讨
沦语义翻洋。
意义是翻译活动的核心，翻译就是翻译怠义，翻洋就足、J找怠义，
辩义乃翻译之本。
意义改变有四大趋势：意义扩大、意义缩小、意义降格和忐义仆格。
就泽犬W人，介翻坏。二义c发牛改变的W语时，了解其贪化的趋势就显
得相“！lffi要。
语境足用来描还怠义的，该意义可以从某个i。u、i。U组或Nf的沁后
文中得到确定。本文所说的语境包括旨内语境和六外语傀就汗行W占，
语境在jrp解原文、消除歧义方而功莫大焉。本义从语义学的川jX探讨了
语境的概念和分类，片对其在翻译中的作川作了 个概｝斤卜的沦述。
歧义在樊语中厂－泛存在，它上要分为饲7I12义和语江歧义。对歧义
句的翻译，笔肯认为消除歧义并准确理解原文尤为下垫。汗人小丫地抓卜
厂文，0光消除歧义，然后将其译为另一种语六。
恰义翻洋足。种掷译方法或途径，它足通过川详入叭的叶了物山现
源恰的语义的途径。八这一部分，我们着重讨论了该问地的 二个人山I：
语义理论和翻译理论、语义途径和语用途径翻译、以及冶义洲厅和交际
翻译。
总之，我们认为，·方而，意义是翻淖活动的核心，翻斤就足翻
译意义；另 方面，忿义是语占的一部分，而语义学足语．’i·f的 部分。
对我们而占，要想彻底掌握好英汉两种语六并作出令人淌怠的丛汉勺＿
译，详甘尤疑很有必安对语义学和翻译的大联有所了解，计只备川”’〕的
语义学知识。
This paper has probed into some aspects of semantic studies that are closely connected with translation and helpful in understanding and solving some problems in translation, namely semantic field theory, componential analysis, classifications of meaning, semantic contrast between English and Chinese, and notably semantic translatioa
Semantic field theory is one of the most important achievements in modem semantic studies. And the connection of semantic field theory and translation lies in the comparison of words under a certain common concept among different languages such as English and Chinese.
Componential analysis refers to the approach to the description of the meaning of words and phrases which rests upon the thesis that the sense of every lexeme can be analyzed in terms of a set of more general semantic features.
As for componential analysis in translation, we have dealt with the eight main uses for the translator. Moreover, a translator or translation theorist should always bear in mind that except in a narrow area or a series a field is not a structure or a 'mosaic' system (Trier's term), but a loose conglomeration of words of senses centered in one topic.
As for the classification of meaning, we have mainly discussed two types : John Lyons' and Geoffrey Leech's, the former including three sub-types : namely descriptive, social and expressive meaning, while the latter embracing seven, namely conceptual, connotative, social, -affective, reflected, collocative and thematic meaning. Comparing the two, we think that John Lyons' classification is economical, global, but a little vague, while Leech's is more systematic and clear-cut. And since Leech's classification is more instructive in guiding translators, we have dealt with each of their possible associations with translatioa
In the third chapter, we have had a thorough comparison between English and Chinese on semantic contrast, including semantic overlapping, parallelism, exclusion and conflict We thought that this comparison is of great importance to the mutual translation between English and Chinese. This is mainly because that Chinese and English truly overlap, parallel, exclude and conflict with each other significantly over the meanings. If the translator aims at finding the most satisfactory equivalence for one language in another, it is absolutely essential for him -to ponder over all these various aspects of the
semantics of language.
The last chapter is a combination of semantics and translation which subcategorises into five smaller parts, e.g. meaning as the core of translating, changes of meaning and translation, context and translation, ambiguity and translation, and semantic translation.
Meaning is the core of translating because translating is in search of meaning and understanding meaning is the foundation of translating.
The four well-marked tendencies of changes of meaning are extension, narrowing,
degeneration and regeneratioa All these changes can be easily seen from the
vocabulary.
Context is the term used to state meaning from what comes before and after a word, phrase, statement, etc. It is a topic much discussed and argued about in both semantics and pragmatics and it is meant here both linguistic context and context of situation.
To a translator, context is very important in understanding the original text Our paper in this section has explored the concept and categories of context from the perspective of semantics and made a brief discussion on the role of context in translatioa
Ambiguity in English is very common. It refers to a word or sentence permitting an un-specifiable range of possible interpretatioa It includes briefly two sorts: lexical ambiguity and grammatical ambiguity.
In translating ambiguous sentence, we think comprehension of the sentence is very important and the correct understanding cannot go without proper context Therefore, we'd better first resolve ambiguity according to the context, then translate it into another language.
Semantic translation is a translation approach whi
引文
1 国华，英语歧义现象与汉译时处理方法初探，沈阳师范学院学报(哲社版)1998年第一期 26-29页
2 胡胜高，英语中的歧义现象及其语义分析，四川师范院学报(哲社版)1999年5月，84-87页
3 利奇，G．N．<<语义学>>，杨自俭、李瑞华等译，1999年版，上海外语教育出版社
4 李承兴，语言外语境与语义，北方论从，2000年第三期，120-122页
5 李龙泉，浯境的制约与译文的选择，四川外语学院学报，1998年第二期，97-101页
6 廖定中、蒋澄生，英语句法歧义简议，四川外语学院学报，1998年第二期，79-84页
7 廖七等，<<当代西方翻译理论探索>>，译林出版社 (南京)，2000年
8 彭长江、顾延龄，英语歧义句的理解与翻译，摘自《译海探秘》，湖南师大出版社，1999年 206-218页
9 谭载喜，翻译学与语义研究，深圳大学学报(人文版)1991年第三期；《翻译学》，湖北教育出版社，武汉，2000年
10 王东风，语义类型及其翻译，《中国翻译》1989年第五期，29-32页
11 王全智、赵卫红，意义关系再探讨，外语学刊，2001年第四期，64-72页
12 王占馥，特定语境中的语义变化，杭州师范学院学报，1999年第一期，55-59页
13 吴国良，语义和翻译探讨，《中国翻译》1998年第四期，19-21页
14 伍谦光，<<语义学导论>>，湖南教育出版社，1997年版
15 赵农，语义场内的词义联动现象，解放军外国语学院学报(洛阳)，1999年七月第四期，36-38页
16 张明林，语境分析与英汉翻译，宁波大学学报(人文版)，1997年第三期，35-41页
17 Baker, M, In Other Words: A Course Book on Translation. 2000,
Foreign Language Teaching and Research Press Routledge
18 Baugh,A.C.,& Cable,T.,1978, A History of the English Language. 3rd Edition,Englewood Cliffs:Prentice-Hall,Inc.
19 Bloomfield,L., 1984, Language. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.(originally published 1933)
20 Chomsky,N.,1957: Syntactic Structure. The Hague: Mouton
21 Ke Wenli, Semantics and Translation. 选自杨自俭、刘学云主编《翻译新论》(1983-1992)，湖北教育出版社 800-815页
22 Kreidler,C.W., Introducing English Semantics. 1997, Routledge London and New York
23 Leech, G., Semantics: the study of Meaning. 2nd Edition, 1981.Bungay Suffolk: Richard Clay
24 Liu Zhongde, Ten Lectures On Translation. 1991. 中国对外翻译
25 Lyons, J., Semantics. 1977, (Vol.One, Two), Cambridge:Cambridge University Press Linguistic Semantics: An Introduction.2000, Foreign Language Teaching and Research Press Cambridge University Press
26 Newmark, P., Approaches To Trunslation. 2001 Shanghai Foreign Language Education Press A Textbook of Translation. 2001 (ibid)
27 Nida, E. A.. Language, Culture, and Translating. 1993 Shanghai Foreign Language Education Press
28 Palmer, F.R.,Semantics. 2nd Edition 1976, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press
29 Saeed, J.I.,Semantics. 2000. Foreign Language Teaching and Research Press, Blackwell Publishers Ltd
30 de Saussure, F.,Course in General Linguistics. 1974, Fontana\Collins. (Originally published 1915)
31 Schogt,H.,Semantic Theory and Translation. From Anthology of Western Translation Theories
32 Springer-Verlag, Resolving Semantic Ambiguity.Editor:David S. Gorfein, NewYork Berlin London Paris Tokyo
33 Tan Zaixi, Towards a Textual Approach to Dranslation: The Role of Contrastive Semantics 选其所著《翻译学》，2000，湖北教育出版社，武汉，290-311页
34 Ullmann, S., 1962, Semantics. Oxford: Blackwell; NewYork: Barnes and Noble 1977, Semantics: An Introduction to the Science of Meaning, Oxford: Basil Blackwell
35 Zeng Xiancai, Semantics. Journal of Guangzhou Institute of Foreign Languages, Guangzhou
36 Zhang Yun-fei, An Introduction To Modern English Lexicology.1987, Beijing Teachers' University Press
2 胡胜高，英语中的歧义现象及其语义分析，四川师范院学报(哲社版)1999年5月，84-87页
3 利奇，G．N．<<语义学>>，杨自俭、李瑞华等译，1999年版，上海外语教育出版社
4 李承兴，语言外语境与语义，北方论从，2000年第三期，120-122页
5 李龙泉，浯境的制约与译文的选择，四川外语学院学报，1998年第二期，97-101页
6 廖定中、蒋澄生，英语句法歧义简议，四川外语学院学报，1998年第二期，79-84页
7 廖七等，<<当代西方翻译理论探索>>，译林出版社 (南京)，2000年
8 彭长江、顾延龄，英语歧义句的理解与翻译，摘自《译海探秘》，湖南师大出版社，1999年 206-218页
9 谭载喜，翻译学与语义研究，深圳大学学报(人文版)1991年第三期；《翻译学》，湖北教育出版社，武汉，2000年
10 王东风，语义类型及其翻译，《中国翻译》1989年第五期，29-32页
11 王全智、赵卫红，意义关系再探讨，外语学刊，2001年第四期，64-72页
12 王占馥，特定语境中的语义变化，杭州师范学院学报，1999年第一期，55-59页
13 吴国良，语义和翻译探讨，《中国翻译》1998年第四期，19-21页
14 伍谦光，<<语义学导论>>，湖南教育出版社，1997年版
15 赵农，语义场内的词义联动现象，解放军外国语学院学报(洛阳)，1999年七月第四期，36-38页
16 张明林，语境分析与英汉翻译，宁波大学学报(人文版)，1997年第三期，35-41页
17 Baker, M, In Other Words: A Course Book on Translation. 2000,
Foreign Language Teaching and Research Press Routledge
18 Baugh,A.C.,& Cable,T.,1978, A History of the English Language. 3rd Edition,Englewood Cliffs:Prentice-Hall,Inc.
19 Bloomfield,L., 1984, Language. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.(originally published 1933)
20 Chomsky,N.,1957: Syntactic Structure. The Hague: Mouton
21 Ke Wenli, Semantics and Translation. 选自杨自俭、刘学云主编《翻译新论》(1983-1992)，湖北教育出版社 800-815页
22 Kreidler,C.W., Introducing English Semantics. 1997, Routledge London and New York
23 Leech, G., Semantics: the study of Meaning. 2nd Edition, 1981.Bungay Suffolk: Richard Clay
24 Liu Zhongde, Ten Lectures On Translation. 1991. 中国对外翻译
25 Lyons, J., Semantics. 1977, (Vol.One, Two), Cambridge:Cambridge University Press Linguistic Semantics: An Introduction.2000, Foreign Language Teaching and Research Press Cambridge University Press
26 Newmark, P., Approaches To Trunslation. 2001 Shanghai Foreign Language Education Press A Textbook of Translation. 2001 (ibid)
27 Nida, E. A.. Language, Culture, and Translating. 1993 Shanghai Foreign Language Education Press
28 Palmer, F.R.,Semantics. 2nd Edition 1976, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press
29 Saeed, J.I.,Semantics. 2000. Foreign Language Teaching and Research Press, Blackwell Publishers Ltd
30 de Saussure, F.,Course in General Linguistics. 1974, Fontana\Collins. (Originally published 1915)
31 Schogt,H.,Semantic Theory and Translation. From Anthology of Western Translation Theories
32 Springer-Verlag, Resolving Semantic Ambiguity.Editor:David S. Gorfein, NewYork Berlin London Paris Tokyo
33 Tan Zaixi, Towards a Textual Approach to Dranslation: The Role of Contrastive Semantics 选其所著《翻译学》，2000，湖北教育出版社，武汉，290-311页
34 Ullmann, S., 1962, Semantics. Oxford: Blackwell; NewYork: Barnes and Noble 1977, Semantics: An Introduction to the Science of Meaning, Oxford: Basil Blackwell
35 Zeng Xiancai, Semantics. Journal of Guangzhou Institute of Foreign Languages, Guangzhou
36 Zhang Yun-fei, An Introduction To Modern English Lexicology.1987, Beijing Teachers' University Press