本文選題：《邊城》 + 文化翻譯觀　； 參考：《江蘇科技大學(xué)》2017年碩士論文

【摘要】：沈從文的代表作《邊城》,在中國文學(xué)史上享有盛譽。它以20世紀30年代湘西邊城小鎮(zhèn)茶峒為背景,以極其優(yōu)美的筆觸,描繪了湘西地區(qū)特有的風(fēng)土人情。作為中國鄉(xiāng)土文學(xué)的代表,《邊城》中富含中國特色文化信息尤其是湘西特色文化信息。自《邊城》出版80余載,共有四個英譯本,前兩個譯本已少有人提及,目前戴乃迭譯本與金介甫譯本相對較為權(quán)威。國內(nèi)外學(xué)者對《邊城》原文的研究較為充分,但是對于其譯本的研究相對較少,從文化角度的研究也不夠充分。鑒于以上原因,本文選取《邊城》戴乃迭(1981)與金介甫(2009)譯本為研究對象,采用巴斯奈特的文化翻譯觀為理論基礎(chǔ)進行研究。文化翻譯觀強調(diào)翻譯要以文化為基礎(chǔ),而不僅僅是以文本為基礎(chǔ);翻譯是一種交互活動,而不僅僅是對原文的解碼與重新組碼。巴斯奈特文化翻譯觀的提出是翻譯以及翻譯研究史上一個重要的節(jié)點。本文依托文化翻譯觀,從奈達關(guān)于文化的五種分類出發(fā),即生態(tài)文化、物質(zhì)文化、社會文化、宗教文化、語言文化,比較分析《邊城》兩英譯本,主要從兩個方面展開:(1)戴乃迭與金介甫在譯介原文中的文化信息時所采取的策略有何不同?原因為何?(2)從文化翻譯觀角度來看,哪個譯本更多地受到了文化操控的影響,哪個譯本能夠更好地傳達原作的文化信息?通過對譯本生態(tài)文化、物質(zhì)文化、社會文化、宗教文化以及語言文化的比較分析,本文得出結(jié)論:兩位譯者在譯介過程中均采用了歸化與異化的策略,戴乃迭更傾向于采用歸化而金介甫更傾向于采用異化或歸化、異化相結(jié)合的策略,翻譯策略選擇上的差異主要是因為他們文化身份的差異以及翻譯的時間差;從文化翻譯觀角度來看,金介甫更多地受到了文化操控的影響,尤其體現(xiàn)在譯介生態(tài)文化、物質(zhì)文化、社會文化信息和宗教文化中;在譯介上述四種文化時,金譯本能更好地在目的語中達到文化功能對等,而在譯介語言文化時,戴譯本則在目的語中構(gòu)建出與原作相似的文化形象。
[Abstract]:Shen Congwen's masterpiece, Border City, enjoys a high reputation in the history of Chinese literature. Against the background of tea cave, a border town in western Hunan in the 1930s, it depicts the local customs and customs in Xiangxi region with the most beautiful brushwork. As the representative of Chinese local literature, Frontier City is rich in cultural information with Chinese characteristics, especially in Xiangxi. More than 80 years since the publication of the Frontier City, there have been four English versions, the first two versions have been seldom mentioned. At present, Dai Nadi version and Jin Jiefu version are relatively authoritative. Scholars at home and abroad have done more research on the original text of the Frontier City, but the study of its translation is relatively few, and the study from the cultural point of view is also insufficient. In view of the above reasons, this paper selects the translation of Dai Nai Dei (1981) and Jin Jiefu 2009) as the object of study, and studies it on the theoretical basis of Bassnett's cultural translation view. The view of cultural translation emphasizes that translation should be based on culture, not only on text. Translation is an interactive activity, not just decoding and recoding the original text. The concept of Bassnett's cultural translation is an important point in the history of translation and translation studies. Based on the view of cultural translation, this paper begins with Nida's five classifications of culture, namely ecological culture, material culture, social culture, religious culture, language culture, and makes a comparative analysis of the two English versions of Border City. What is the difference between Dai Naidi and Jin Jiefu in translating and introducing the cultural information in the original text? From the perspective of cultural translation, which version is more influenced by cultural manipulation and which version can better convey the cultural information of the original work? Based on the comparative analysis of the ecological culture, material culture, social culture, religious culture and language culture of the translation, this paper concludes that both translators have adopted the strategies of domestication and alienation in the process of translation and introduction. Dai Nai Dei is more inclined to adopt domestication, while Jin Jiefu is more inclined to adopt the strategy of dissimilation or domestication. The difference in translation strategy choice is mainly due to the difference of their cultural identity and the time difference in translation. From the perspective of cultural translation, Jin Jiefu is more influenced by cultural manipulation, especially in the translation of ecological culture, material culture, social cultural information and religious culture. The Jin version can better achieve cultural functional equivalence in the target language, while in the translation of language and culture, Dai version constructs a cultural image similar to that of the original text in the target language.
【學(xué)位授予單位】：江蘇科技大學(xué)
【學(xué)位級別】：碩士
【學(xué)位授予年份】：2017
【分類號】：H315.9;I046

【參考文獻】

相關(guān)期刊論文 前10條

1 謝江南;劉洪濤;;沈從文《邊城》四個英譯本中的文化與政治[J];中國現(xiàn)代文學(xué)研究叢刊;2015年09期

2 隆濤;;對比《邊城》兩英譯本文化負載詞翻譯[J];短篇小說(原創(chuàng)版);2015年26期

3 蘇暢;;文化翻譯觀下的錫伯族史詩《西遷之歌》英譯探討[J];外語學(xué)刊;2014年04期

4 樓捷;吳榮蘭;;從文化翻譯觀視角論中國傳統(tǒng)菜名英譯的文化功能等值[J];浙江樹人大學(xué)學(xué)報(人文社會科學(xué)版);2014年03期

5 付智茜;楊小剛;;對翻譯家楊憲益、戴乃迭夫婦翻譯思想的描述性研究[J];湖南財經(jīng)高等專科學(xué)校學(xué)報;2010年06期

6 曾文雄;;“文化轉(zhuǎn)向”核心問題與出路[J];外語學(xué)刊;2006年02期

7 王寧;;翻譯的文化建構(gòu)和文化研究的翻譯學(xué)轉(zhuǎn)向[J];中國翻譯;2005年06期

8 胡德香,熊秋香;文化翻譯批評初探[J];語言與翻譯;2004年04期

9 查明建,田雨;論譯者主體性——從譯者文化地位的邊緣化談起[J];中國翻譯;2003年01期

10 蔡平;翻譯方法應(yīng)以歸化為主[J];中國翻譯;2002年05期

相關(guān)博士學(xué)位論文 前2條

1 張志清;異化翻譯思想探究[D];湖南師范大學(xué);2013年

2 羅承麗;操縱與構(gòu)建：蘇珊·巴斯奈特“文化翻譯”思想研究[D];北京語言大學(xué);2009年

相關(guān)碩士學(xué)位論文 前1條

1 李佐;多元系統(tǒng)理論下對《邊城》兩個英譯本的比較研究[D];浙江大學(xué);2010年

，

本文編號：1914189