勒菲弗尔操纵理论对严复《天演论》翻译的操纵
|
摘要
比利时学者安德烈·勒菲弗尔(Andre Lefevere)是操纵学派的代表人物之一,他认为翻译分为四个层次:意识、诗学、论域和语言,同时他指出译者不仅要翻译词句,更重要的是翻译意识、诗学和论域。基于佐哈尔和福柯的翻译理论,他在《翻译、重写以及对文学名声的操纵》一书中,把翻译放到政治、意识形态、经济和文化背景中,深入探讨了翻译过程中影响翻译策略的各个层面的限制,引入了“改写”这一重要概念,认为翻译是对原文的改写,同时指出,在不同的历史条件下,改写主要受到两方面限制:意识形态和诗学形态。意识形态主要从政治、经济和社会地位方面来限制和引导改写者的创作,而诗学形态则是改写者进行创作时所处的文化体系的重要组成部分。勒菲弗尔的“改写观”重视译语文本的作用,扩大了人们对翻译现象的认识,开拓了翻译研究的新视野,对现代译学研究提供了一个新的视角。
严复是近代中国重要的启蒙思想家和翻译家,他翻译的《天演论》等西方著作,第一次比较系统的把西方资产阶级的政治、经济等思想介绍到中国来。毛泽东在《论人民民主专政》中说严复是“在中国共产党出世以前向西方寻找真理的一派人物”中的四大代表人物之一。翻译界素有“译才并世数严林”,严复作为近代史上重要的翻译家不仅有一百七十多万字的译作,还提出了“信、达、雅”的翻译准则,其对翻译影响之深远可想而知。《天演论》是严复译作中一部非常重要的作品,它以其独特的思想内容,典雅的表达方式,深远的社会意义迅速激起了人们救亡图存的爱国热情,并鼓舞了鲁迅、胡适等一大批无产阶级知识分子对救国救民真理的探求。
本文试从勒菲弗尔操纵理论的视角来研究严复的《天演论》翻译。《天演论》翻译中存在着大量的改写,根据勒菲弗尔的操纵理论,翻译是对原文的一种改写,而改写要受意识形态和诗学形态两方面的限制,因此改写者往往会对原作进行一定程度上的调整,使其符合改写者所处时期占统治地位的意识形态和诗学形态,笔者认为严复的《天演论》翻译是意识形态和诗学观综合操纵的结果。本文共分四章:
首先重点讲述勒菲弗尔操纵理论的核心概念——改写。分三点分别系统介绍操纵理论的相关理论基础,详细归纳勒菲弗尔操纵理论的改写观,并重点引出限制改写的因素——意识形态和诗学形态;
继而着重阐述严复的《天演论》翻译中存在的意识形态和诗学观方面的操纵。首先介绍赫胥黎的《进化论与伦理学》原本以及严复的《天演论》译本,然后分别从意识形态和诗学观两种操纵方法的角度详细地概括《天演论》翻译中存在的操纵;
然后详细分析严复的意识形态和诗学观的特点。首先介绍严复所处的时代背景及当时的社会主流意识形态和诗学观,进而挖掘出严复的意识形态是超前的,诗学观是符合时代的潮流的;
最后全面分析严复的《天演论》翻译是受严复本人意识形态和诗学观综合操纵的结果。笔者分别从严复的意识形态与诗学观对翻译选材和翻译策略的操纵着手,采用大量的翻译实例来详细分析论证。
综上所述,严复的《天演论》翻译是受其意识形态和诗学观综合操纵的结果。笔者通过对《天演论》翻译的研究加深对严复翻译的理解与认识,对其在特定时期所做的贡献给出合理的个人评价。
AndréLefevere is one of the representatives of manipulation school in translation. He believes that translation consists of four systems: ideology, poetics, register and language, and points out that translator should not only translate words and sentences, but also the ideology, poetics, and register. After adopting the contributions to translation studies made by Even-Zohar and Michel Foucault, he proposes the concept of rewriting in his book Translation, Rewriting and the Manipulation of Literary Fame, and tries to study translation in the context of politics, ideology, economy and culture, discussing further factors restricting the rewriting in translation. In Lefevere's words, translation is a rewriting of the original text. All rewritings, whatever their intentions, reflect a certain ideology and poetics and as such manipulate literature to function in a given society in a given way. Rewriting is manipulation, undertaken in the service of power, and in its positive aspect can help in the evolution of a literature and a society. Rewriting can introduce new concepts, new genres, new devices, and the history of translation is also the history of literary innovation, of the shaping power of one culture upon another (Lefevere, 2004a: viii). The concepts of rewriting in Lefevere's Manipulation Theory put emphasis on the function of the target text, expanding people's understanding towards translation phenomenon, broadening the translation field and offering a new perspective for the modern translation study.
Yan Fu is an important enlightenment thinker and translator in modern China. He first systematically introduces Western thoughts into China, such as, Huxley' Evolution and Ethics, Adam Smith's An Inquiry into Nature and Causes of the Wealth of Nations, etc. After his translation and introduction, the Western thoughts gradually spread in China. Mao Zedong once said: "Yan Fu is among the first group who are seeking truth from the West before the emergence of the Communist Party, and he is one of the four who are the most outstanding" (李泽厚126). Yan Fu, as an important translator in modern Chinese, not only owns the fame of talent in translation, translating over 1700000 words, but also proposes the translation criteria "Xin, Da, Ya", so his influence exerted on translation is profound without fail. TianYan Lun(《天演论》下同) is one of his most important works in translation, characterized by its distinctive content, elegant language expression and profound social function. Its emergence stimulates a lot of people's affectionate patriotism to save the country from extinction and struggle for survival, and encourages a number of advanced literati to seek the truth of saving the nation from aggression and exploration, such as Lu Xun and Hu Shi.
This thesis tries to study Yan Fu's translation of TianYan Lun from the perspective of Lefevere's Manipulation Theory. There exist a lot of rewritings in Yan Fu's translation of TianYan Lun. According to manipulation theory, translation is a rewriting of the original text, and the rewriting will be manipulated by ideology and poetics, so rewriters will rewrite the original text to conform to the dominant ideology and poetics of particular time in translation. Therefore the author of this thesis sounds that Yan Fu's translation of TianYan Lun is manipulated by his ideology and poetics. This thesis includes four chapters:
Chapter 1 serves as the theoretical basis for the present thesis, focusing on the core of Lefevere's Manipulation Theory—rewriting. Polysystem Theory and Power Discourse Theory will be briefly introduced as the theoretical basis relevant to manipulation in translation. The rewriting in Lefevere's Manipulation Theory, ideology and poetics manipulating rewriting in translation will be discussed respectively.
Chapter 2 concentrates mainly on the manipulation existing in Yan Fu's translation of TianYan Lun. First the original Evolution and Ethics and Other Essays(《进化论与伦理学》下同) written by Huxley and the Chinese version TianYan Lun translated by Yan Fu will be briefly elaborated. Then, the author will give a general survey of the manipulations in TianYan Lun from the ideological approach and poetical approaches.
Chapter 3 explores the personality of Yan Fu's ideology and poetics from the background of the dominant ideology and poetics in his times. His ideology is exceeding the age, his poetics is following his times, and both the two factors exert great manipulation on his translation.
Chapter 4 makes thorough analyses that Yan Fu's translation of TianYan Lun is manipulated by his ideology and poetics. The manipulation by his ideology and poetics in his choice of translation materials and translation strategies will be analyzed respectively with enough translation examples.
In conclusion, the author sounds that Yan Fu's translation of TianYan Lun is a manipulation determined by his ideology and poetics. Through the study of Yan Fu's translation of TianYan Lun from the perspective of Lefevere's Manipulation Theory, the author deepens the understanding and study on Yan Fu's translation, and makes a reasonable comment on Yan Fu's contribution to China's translation.
严复是近代中国重要的启蒙思想家和翻译家,他翻译的《天演论》等西方著作,第一次比较系统的把西方资产阶级的政治、经济等思想介绍到中国来。毛泽东在《论人民民主专政》中说严复是“在中国共产党出世以前向西方寻找真理的一派人物”中的四大代表人物之一。翻译界素有“译才并世数严林”,严复作为近代史上重要的翻译家不仅有一百七十多万字的译作,还提出了“信、达、雅”的翻译准则,其对翻译影响之深远可想而知。《天演论》是严复译作中一部非常重要的作品,它以其独特的思想内容,典雅的表达方式,深远的社会意义迅速激起了人们救亡图存的爱国热情,并鼓舞了鲁迅、胡适等一大批无产阶级知识分子对救国救民真理的探求。
本文试从勒菲弗尔操纵理论的视角来研究严复的《天演论》翻译。《天演论》翻译中存在着大量的改写,根据勒菲弗尔的操纵理论,翻译是对原文的一种改写,而改写要受意识形态和诗学形态两方面的限制,因此改写者往往会对原作进行一定程度上的调整,使其符合改写者所处时期占统治地位的意识形态和诗学形态,笔者认为严复的《天演论》翻译是意识形态和诗学观综合操纵的结果。本文共分四章:
首先重点讲述勒菲弗尔操纵理论的核心概念——改写。分三点分别系统介绍操纵理论的相关理论基础,详细归纳勒菲弗尔操纵理论的改写观,并重点引出限制改写的因素——意识形态和诗学形态;
继而着重阐述严复的《天演论》翻译中存在的意识形态和诗学观方面的操纵。首先介绍赫胥黎的《进化论与伦理学》原本以及严复的《天演论》译本,然后分别从意识形态和诗学观两种操纵方法的角度详细地概括《天演论》翻译中存在的操纵;
然后详细分析严复的意识形态和诗学观的特点。首先介绍严复所处的时代背景及当时的社会主流意识形态和诗学观,进而挖掘出严复的意识形态是超前的,诗学观是符合时代的潮流的;
最后全面分析严复的《天演论》翻译是受严复本人意识形态和诗学观综合操纵的结果。笔者分别从严复的意识形态与诗学观对翻译选材和翻译策略的操纵着手,采用大量的翻译实例来详细分析论证。
综上所述,严复的《天演论》翻译是受其意识形态和诗学观综合操纵的结果。笔者通过对《天演论》翻译的研究加深对严复翻译的理解与认识,对其在特定时期所做的贡献给出合理的个人评价。
AndréLefevere is one of the representatives of manipulation school in translation. He believes that translation consists of four systems: ideology, poetics, register and language, and points out that translator should not only translate words and sentences, but also the ideology, poetics, and register. After adopting the contributions to translation studies made by Even-Zohar and Michel Foucault, he proposes the concept of rewriting in his book Translation, Rewriting and the Manipulation of Literary Fame, and tries to study translation in the context of politics, ideology, economy and culture, discussing further factors restricting the rewriting in translation. In Lefevere's words, translation is a rewriting of the original text. All rewritings, whatever their intentions, reflect a certain ideology and poetics and as such manipulate literature to function in a given society in a given way. Rewriting is manipulation, undertaken in the service of power, and in its positive aspect can help in the evolution of a literature and a society. Rewriting can introduce new concepts, new genres, new devices, and the history of translation is also the history of literary innovation, of the shaping power of one culture upon another (Lefevere, 2004a: viii). The concepts of rewriting in Lefevere's Manipulation Theory put emphasis on the function of the target text, expanding people's understanding towards translation phenomenon, broadening the translation field and offering a new perspective for the modern translation study.
Yan Fu is an important enlightenment thinker and translator in modern China. He first systematically introduces Western thoughts into China, such as, Huxley' Evolution and Ethics, Adam Smith's An Inquiry into Nature and Causes of the Wealth of Nations, etc. After his translation and introduction, the Western thoughts gradually spread in China. Mao Zedong once said: "Yan Fu is among the first group who are seeking truth from the West before the emergence of the Communist Party, and he is one of the four who are the most outstanding" (李泽厚126). Yan Fu, as an important translator in modern Chinese, not only owns the fame of talent in translation, translating over 1700000 words, but also proposes the translation criteria "Xin, Da, Ya", so his influence exerted on translation is profound without fail. TianYan Lun(《天演论》下同) is one of his most important works in translation, characterized by its distinctive content, elegant language expression and profound social function. Its emergence stimulates a lot of people's affectionate patriotism to save the country from extinction and struggle for survival, and encourages a number of advanced literati to seek the truth of saving the nation from aggression and exploration, such as Lu Xun and Hu Shi.
This thesis tries to study Yan Fu's translation of TianYan Lun from the perspective of Lefevere's Manipulation Theory. There exist a lot of rewritings in Yan Fu's translation of TianYan Lun. According to manipulation theory, translation is a rewriting of the original text, and the rewriting will be manipulated by ideology and poetics, so rewriters will rewrite the original text to conform to the dominant ideology and poetics of particular time in translation. Therefore the author of this thesis sounds that Yan Fu's translation of TianYan Lun is manipulated by his ideology and poetics. This thesis includes four chapters:
Chapter 1 serves as the theoretical basis for the present thesis, focusing on the core of Lefevere's Manipulation Theory—rewriting. Polysystem Theory and Power Discourse Theory will be briefly introduced as the theoretical basis relevant to manipulation in translation. The rewriting in Lefevere's Manipulation Theory, ideology and poetics manipulating rewriting in translation will be discussed respectively.
Chapter 2 concentrates mainly on the manipulation existing in Yan Fu's translation of TianYan Lun. First the original Evolution and Ethics and Other Essays(《进化论与伦理学》下同) written by Huxley and the Chinese version TianYan Lun translated by Yan Fu will be briefly elaborated. Then, the author will give a general survey of the manipulations in TianYan Lun from the ideological approach and poetical approaches.
Chapter 3 explores the personality of Yan Fu's ideology and poetics from the background of the dominant ideology and poetics in his times. His ideology is exceeding the age, his poetics is following his times, and both the two factors exert great manipulation on his translation.
Chapter 4 makes thorough analyses that Yan Fu's translation of TianYan Lun is manipulated by his ideology and poetics. The manipulation by his ideology and poetics in his choice of translation materials and translation strategies will be analyzed respectively with enough translation examples.
In conclusion, the author sounds that Yan Fu's translation of TianYan Lun is a manipulation determined by his ideology and poetics. Through the study of Yan Fu's translation of TianYan Lun from the perspective of Lefevere's Manipulation Theory, the author deepens the understanding and study on Yan Fu's translation, and makes a reasonable comment on Yan Fu's contribution to China's translation.
引文
Aksoy, B. Translation as Rewriting: the Concept and its Implication On the emergence of a national literature. Translation Journal, 2001.
Baker, Mona. Routledge Encyclopedia of Translation Studies. Shanghai: Shanghai Foreign Language Education Press, 2004.
Bassnett, S. & Lerfevere, A, eds. Constructing Culture: Essays on Literary Translation. Shanghai: Shanghai Foreign Language Education Press, 2001.
Bassnett, S. Comparative Literature. Blackwell: Blackwell Publishes, 1993.
Cheung, Martha P.Y. "Power and Ideology in Translation Research in Twentieth Century China."2002-12-20.2008-2-10is/ events/ conference 2000/ ideology2.htm>.
Even-Zohar, Itamar. "Papers in Historical Poetics." Papers on Poetics and Semiotics. Eds. Hrushovski, Benjamin & Even-Zohar, Itamar. Tel Aviv: University Publishing Projects, 1978a.
Even-Zohar, Itamar. "The Position of Translated Literature within the Literary Polysystem." Literature and Translation: New Perspectives in Literary Studies with a Basic Bibliography of Books on Translation Studies.Eds.Holmes,Jose Lambert& Raymond Van Den Broeck.Leuven,Belgium:Acco,1978b.
Even-Zohar,Itamar."Polysystem Studies".Poetics Today,1990.
Foucault,Michel,eds.The Foucault Reader.Penguin:Harmondsworth,1986.
Foucault,Michel.Power/Knowledge.New York:Pantheon,1980.
Gentzler,Edwin.Contemporary Translation Theories.Shanghai:Shanghai Foreign Language EducatiOn Press,2004.
Greenblatt,Stephen.Renaissance Self-Fashioning:from More to Shakespeare.Chicago:University of Chicago Press,1980.
Hermans,Theo.The Manipulation of Literature:Studies in Literary Translation.London:Croom Helm,1985.
Hermans,Theo."Norm and the Determination of Translation:A Theoretical Framework." Alverez,R.& Africa,V,eds.Translation,Power,Subversion.Philadelphia:Multilingual Matters,1996.
Hermans,Theo.Translation in Systems:Descriptive and Systemic Approaches Explained.Manchester:St.Jerome,1999.
Huxley,Thomas H.Evolution and Ethics and Other Essays.New York:D.Appleton Inc,2002.
Jauss,Hans.Toward an Aesthetics of Reception.Shenyang:Liang Ning People Press,1987.
Lefevere,Andre.Translation,Rewriting and the Manipulation of Literary Fame. Shanghai: Shanghai Foreign Language Education Press,2004a.
Lerfevere, Andre, ed. Translation, History and Culture: A Sourcebook. Shanghai: Shanghai Foreign Language Education Press, 2004b.
Munday, Teremy. Introducing Translation Studies — Theories and Applications. London: Routledge, 2001.
Nida, Eugene A. Language, Culture and Translating. Shanghai: Shanghai Foreign Language Education Press, 2004.
Nord, Christiane. Translation as a Purposeful Activity: Functionalist Approaches Explained. Shanghai: Shanghai Foreign Language Education Press, 2001.
Bourdieu, Pierre and Passerson, J.C. Reproduction in Education, Society and Cultural Materialism. Manchester: Manchester University Press, 1977.
Roman, A & Carman, M. & Vidal, A. eds. Translation, Power and Subversion. Beijing: Foreign Language Teaching and Research Press, 2007.
Selden, Raman etc. eds. A Reader's Guide to Contemporary Literary Theory. Beijing: Foreign Language Teaching and Research Press,2004.
Shuttleworth, Mark & Cowie& Moira. Dictionary of Translation Studies. Manchester: St Jerome, 1997.
Snell-Hornby,Mary.Translation Studies:An Integrated Approach.Shanghai:Shanghai Foreign Language Education Press,2001.
Steiner,George.After Babel:Aspects on Language and Translation.London:Oxford University Press,1975.
Toury,Gideon.Descriptive Translation Studies and Beyond.Shanghai:Shanghai Foreign Language Education Press,2004.
Venuti,Lawrence.The Translator's Invisibility.Shanghai:Shanghai Foreign Language Education Press,2004.
Venuti,Lawrence.The Scandals of Translation.Towards an Ethics of Difference.London:Routledge,1998.
Vermeer,Hans J.Skopos and Commission in Translational Action.Andrew Chesterman,ed.Reading in Translation Theory.Finland:Oy Finn Lectura Ab.1989.
Williams Jenny & Chestrrman Andrew.The Map a Beginner 's Guide to Doing Research in Translation Studies.Shanghai:Shanghai Foreign Language Education Press,2004.
白守义,2002,《中国历史概论》。北京:北京外语出版社。
陈德鸿,张南峰,2000,《西方翻译理论精选》。香港:香港城市大学出版社。
陈玉刚编,1989,《中国翻译文学史稿》。北京:中国对外翻译出版公司。
董广才,张聪,2006,浅析勒弗维尔的重写理论,《文艺评论》,第6 期,208-209页。
方梦之主编,2004,《译学词典》。上海:上海外语教育出版社。
冯友兰,1985,《中国哲学简史》。北京:北京大学出版社。
郭延礼,1998,《中国近代翻译文学概论》。武汉:湖北教育出版社。
郝吉环,2004,权力话语理论与翻译理论和实践,《语言与翻译》,第2期,54-57页。
贺麟,1982,严复的翻译,《论严复与严译名著》,28-42页。
赫胥黎著,科学出版社集体译,1971,《进化论与伦理学》。北京:科学出版社。
黄振定,1998,《翻译学--艺术论与科学论的统一》。长沙:湖南教育出版社。
蒋骁华,2003,意识形态对翻译的影响:阐发与新思考,《中国翻译》,第5期,24-29页。
蒋小燕,2006,论严复《天演论》的文化观,《求索》第165期。
李文革,2004,《西方翻译理论流派研究》。北京:中国社会科学出版社。
李霞,2003,权力话语、意识形态与翻译,《西安外国语学院学报》,第2期,67-69页。
李泽厚,1982,论严复,《论严复与严译名著》,126-136页。
廖七一,2002,《当代西方翻译理论探索》。南京:译林出版社。
马祖毅,2001,《中国翻译简史》。北京:中国对外翻译出版公司。
蒙兴灿,2007,论英汉互译过程中的改写特质,《外语与外语教学》, 第3期,59-62页。
秦文华,2001,翻译--一种双重权力话语制约下的再创造活动,《外语学刊》,第3期。
商务印书馆编辑部,1982,《论严复与严译名著》。北京:商务印书馆。
施沃茨著 滕复译,1990,《严复与西方》。北京:职工教育出版社。
谭载喜,2004,《西方翻译简史》。北京:商务印书馆。
田野,2004,严复的选择,《四川外国语学院学报》第3期。
屠国元,王飞虹,2005,论译者的译材选择与翻译策略取向,《中国翻译》,第3期,
王东风,2003,一只看不见的手--论意识形态对翻译实践的操纵,《中国翻译》,第5期,16-23页。
王克非,1987,《严复集》译名札记,《外语教学与研究》,第3期,51-53页。
王克非,1992,论严复《天演论》的翻译,《中国翻译》,第3期,6-10页。
王克非,1997,《翻译文化史论》。上海:上海外语教育出版社。
王玲英,2005,严复翻译之信与意识形态操控,《中山大学学报论丛》,第4期,108-113页。
王拭,1975,《严复传》。北京:人民文学出版社。
王佐良,1982,严复的用心,《论严复与严译名著》,22-28页。
吴莎,2006,不忠实还是策略?-小议严复的翻译,《外语·翻译·文化》,丛刊第六辑,44-55页。
谢天振,1999,《译介学》。上海:上海外语教育出版社。
许钧,2003,《翻译论》。武汉:湖北教育出版社。
严复,1981,《天演论》。北京:商务印书馆。
严复,1986,《严复集》。北京:中华书局。
冯君豪,1998,《天演论》。郑州:中州古籍出版社。
杨柳,2001,论原作之隐形,《中国翻译》,第2期,47-51页。
杨正典,1997,《严复评传》。北京:中国社会科学出版社。
伊塔马·埃文-佐哈尔著,张南峰译,2002,多元系统论,《中国翻译》,第4期,19-25页。
张南峰,2001,从边缘走向中心(?)--从多元系统的角度看中国翻译研究的过去与未来,《外国语》,第4期,61-69页。
张南峰,2004,《中西译学批评》。北京:清华大学出版社。
张琳艳,李龙泉,2004,多元系统理论对制约作品译介因素的解释力,《四川教育学院学报》,第5期,54-56页。
赵一凡,1996,《欧美新学赏析》。北京:中央编译出版社。
仲伟合,2003,中国翻译概述:理论与实践,《中国翻译》,第4期。
Baker, Mona. Routledge Encyclopedia of Translation Studies. Shanghai: Shanghai Foreign Language Education Press, 2004.
Bassnett, S. & Lerfevere, A, eds. Constructing Culture: Essays on Literary Translation. Shanghai: Shanghai Foreign Language Education Press, 2001.
Bassnett, S. Comparative Literature. Blackwell: Blackwell Publishes, 1993.
Cheung, Martha P.Y. "Power and Ideology in Translation Research in Twentieth Century China."2002-12-20.2008-2-10
Even-Zohar, Itamar. "Papers in Historical Poetics." Papers on Poetics and Semiotics. Eds. Hrushovski, Benjamin & Even-Zohar, Itamar. Tel Aviv: University Publishing Projects, 1978a.
Even-Zohar, Itamar. "The Position of Translated Literature within the Literary Polysystem." Literature and Translation: New Perspectives in Literary Studies with a Basic Bibliography of Books on Translation Studies.Eds.Holmes,Jose Lambert& Raymond Van Den Broeck.Leuven,Belgium:Acco,1978b.
Even-Zohar,Itamar."Polysystem Studies".Poetics Today,1990.
Foucault,Michel,eds.The Foucault Reader.Penguin:Harmondsworth,1986.
Foucault,Michel.Power/Knowledge.New York:Pantheon,1980.
Gentzler,Edwin.Contemporary Translation Theories.Shanghai:Shanghai Foreign Language EducatiOn Press,2004.
Greenblatt,Stephen.Renaissance Self-Fashioning:from More to Shakespeare.Chicago:University of Chicago Press,1980.
Hermans,Theo.The Manipulation of Literature:Studies in Literary Translation.London:Croom Helm,1985.
Hermans,Theo."Norm and the Determination of Translation:A Theoretical Framework." Alverez,R.& Africa,V,eds.Translation,Power,Subversion.Philadelphia:Multilingual Matters,1996.
Hermans,Theo.Translation in Systems:Descriptive and Systemic Approaches Explained.Manchester:St.Jerome,1999.
Huxley,Thomas H.Evolution and Ethics and Other Essays.New York:D.Appleton Inc,2002.
Jauss,Hans.Toward an Aesthetics of Reception.Shenyang:Liang Ning People Press,1987.
Lefevere,Andre.Translation,Rewriting and the Manipulation of Literary Fame. Shanghai: Shanghai Foreign Language Education Press,2004a.
Lerfevere, Andre, ed. Translation, History and Culture: A Sourcebook. Shanghai: Shanghai Foreign Language Education Press, 2004b.
Munday, Teremy. Introducing Translation Studies — Theories and Applications. London: Routledge, 2001.
Nida, Eugene A. Language, Culture and Translating. Shanghai: Shanghai Foreign Language Education Press, 2004.
Nord, Christiane. Translation as a Purposeful Activity: Functionalist Approaches Explained. Shanghai: Shanghai Foreign Language Education Press, 2001.
Bourdieu, Pierre and Passerson, J.C. Reproduction in Education, Society and Cultural Materialism. Manchester: Manchester University Press, 1977.
Roman, A & Carman, M. & Vidal, A. eds. Translation, Power and Subversion. Beijing: Foreign Language Teaching and Research Press, 2007.
Selden, Raman etc. eds. A Reader's Guide to Contemporary Literary Theory. Beijing: Foreign Language Teaching and Research Press,2004.
Shuttleworth, Mark & Cowie& Moira. Dictionary of Translation Studies. Manchester: St Jerome, 1997.
Snell-Hornby,Mary.Translation Studies:An Integrated Approach.Shanghai:Shanghai Foreign Language Education Press,2001.
Steiner,George.After Babel:Aspects on Language and Translation.London:Oxford University Press,1975.
Toury,Gideon.Descriptive Translation Studies and Beyond.Shanghai:Shanghai Foreign Language Education Press,2004.
Venuti,Lawrence.The Translator's Invisibility.Shanghai:Shanghai Foreign Language Education Press,2004.
Venuti,Lawrence.The Scandals of Translation.Towards an Ethics of Difference.London:Routledge,1998.
Vermeer,Hans J.Skopos and Commission in Translational Action.Andrew Chesterman,ed.Reading in Translation Theory.Finland:Oy Finn Lectura Ab.1989.
Williams Jenny & Chestrrman Andrew.The Map a Beginner 's Guide to Doing Research in Translation Studies.Shanghai:Shanghai Foreign Language Education Press,2004.
白守义,2002,《中国历史概论》。北京:北京外语出版社。
陈德鸿,张南峰,2000,《西方翻译理论精选》。香港:香港城市大学出版社。
陈玉刚编,1989,《中国翻译文学史稿》。北京:中国对外翻译出版公司。
董广才,张聪,2006,浅析勒弗维尔的重写理论,《文艺评论》,第6 期,208-209页。
方梦之主编,2004,《译学词典》。上海:上海外语教育出版社。
冯友兰,1985,《中国哲学简史》。北京:北京大学出版社。
郭延礼,1998,《中国近代翻译文学概论》。武汉:湖北教育出版社。
郝吉环,2004,权力话语理论与翻译理论和实践,《语言与翻译》,第2期,54-57页。
贺麟,1982,严复的翻译,《论严复与严译名著》,28-42页。
赫胥黎著,科学出版社集体译,1971,《进化论与伦理学》。北京:科学出版社。
黄振定,1998,《翻译学--艺术论与科学论的统一》。长沙:湖南教育出版社。
蒋骁华,2003,意识形态对翻译的影响:阐发与新思考,《中国翻译》,第5期,24-29页。
蒋小燕,2006,论严复《天演论》的文化观,《求索》第165期。
李文革,2004,《西方翻译理论流派研究》。北京:中国社会科学出版社。
李霞,2003,权力话语、意识形态与翻译,《西安外国语学院学报》,第2期,67-69页。
李泽厚,1982,论严复,《论严复与严译名著》,126-136页。
廖七一,2002,《当代西方翻译理论探索》。南京:译林出版社。
马祖毅,2001,《中国翻译简史》。北京:中国对外翻译出版公司。
蒙兴灿,2007,论英汉互译过程中的改写特质,《外语与外语教学》, 第3期,59-62页。
秦文华,2001,翻译--一种双重权力话语制约下的再创造活动,《外语学刊》,第3期。
商务印书馆编辑部,1982,《论严复与严译名著》。北京:商务印书馆。
施沃茨著 滕复译,1990,《严复与西方》。北京:职工教育出版社。
谭载喜,2004,《西方翻译简史》。北京:商务印书馆。
田野,2004,严复的选择,《四川外国语学院学报》第3期。
屠国元,王飞虹,2005,论译者的译材选择与翻译策略取向,《中国翻译》,第3期,
王东风,2003,一只看不见的手--论意识形态对翻译实践的操纵,《中国翻译》,第5期,16-23页。
王克非,1987,《严复集》译名札记,《外语教学与研究》,第3期,51-53页。
王克非,1992,论严复《天演论》的翻译,《中国翻译》,第3期,6-10页。
王克非,1997,《翻译文化史论》。上海:上海外语教育出版社。
王玲英,2005,严复翻译之信与意识形态操控,《中山大学学报论丛》,第4期,108-113页。
王拭,1975,《严复传》。北京:人民文学出版社。
王佐良,1982,严复的用心,《论严复与严译名著》,22-28页。
吴莎,2006,不忠实还是策略?-小议严复的翻译,《外语·翻译·文化》,丛刊第六辑,44-55页。
谢天振,1999,《译介学》。上海:上海外语教育出版社。
许钧,2003,《翻译论》。武汉:湖北教育出版社。
严复,1981,《天演论》。北京:商务印书馆。
严复,1986,《严复集》。北京:中华书局。
冯君豪,1998,《天演论》。郑州:中州古籍出版社。
杨柳,2001,论原作之隐形,《中国翻译》,第2期,47-51页。
杨正典,1997,《严复评传》。北京:中国社会科学出版社。
伊塔马·埃文-佐哈尔著,张南峰译,2002,多元系统论,《中国翻译》,第4期,19-25页。
张南峰,2001,从边缘走向中心(?)--从多元系统的角度看中国翻译研究的过去与未来,《外国语》,第4期,61-69页。
张南峰,2004,《中西译学批评》。北京:清华大学出版社。
张琳艳,李龙泉,2004,多元系统理论对制约作品译介因素的解释力,《四川教育学院学报》,第5期,54-56页。
赵一凡,1996,《欧美新学赏析》。北京:中央编译出版社。
仲伟合,2003,中国翻译概述:理论与实践,《中国翻译》,第4期。