漢英立法文本中詞匯銜接對比及其翻譯
發(fā)布時間:2018-05-12 17:21
本文選題:詞匯銜接 + 立法文本�。� 參考:《西南政法大學(xué)》2012年碩士論文
【摘要】:韓禮德與哈桑的銜接理論自產(chǎn)生以來,一直備受語言學(xué)家和翻譯家的青睞。該理論認(rèn)為銜接是語篇生成的必要條件之一,形式上將銜接分為語法銜接和詞匯銜接。其中,詞匯銜接與英漢立法語言翻譯的關(guān)系尤為密切,詞匯銜接在實現(xiàn)英漢立法語篇整體連貫中起著無法替代的作用。立法文本是最為嚴(yán)謹(jǐn)?shù)姆蓵嫖捏w,要求語言規(guī)范,用詞準(zhǔn)確,在銜接關(guān)聯(lián)上尤為如此。漢英立法文本中詞匯銜接手段的運用不同于其它文本,具有本身獨特地特征,因此探討漢英立法文本中詞匯銜接的異同,不僅可以指導(dǎo)漢英法律翻譯實踐,同時也推動了法律翻譯理論的發(fā)展。 本文以立法文本為研究語料,對漢英立法文本中詞匯銜接手段進行系統(tǒng)對比研究,探討漢英法律語言中詞匯銜接模式的異同,得出如下結(jié)論:漢英立法文本都大量使用詞匯銜接手段,主要是詞語重復(fù)、上下義詞語和近義詞,但漢語立法文本偏向詞匯重復(fù),而英語立法文本則更多的采用同義詞、替代等手段。其中,以詞語曲折形式實現(xiàn)的重復(fù),是英語立法文本特有的現(xiàn)象。有鑒于此,針對詞匯銜接在立法文本中的特征,總結(jié)出主要有對譯、增譯、改譯和減譯等詞匯銜接的基本翻譯方法,,并實事求是指出存在的問題以及相應(yīng)的解決措施。 作者雖是對漢英立法語篇中詞匯銜接對比與翻譯研究的一次嘗試,結(jié)論流于膚淺,但具有拋磚引玉的價值,相信這次的嘗試性研究,有助于法律翻譯者更加深入地了解漢英立法文本中詞匯銜接的異同,翻譯過程中有意識地注重合理取舍。相信本人的努力會為今后的研究者起到投石問路的作用。
[Abstract]:Since the birth of Halliday and Hasan's cohesion theory, it has been favored by linguists and translators. The theory holds that cohesion is one of the necessary conditions for the formation of a text, which is formally divided into grammatical cohesion and lexical cohesion. Especially, lexical cohesion is closely related to the translation of English and Chinese legislative languages. Lexical cohesion plays an irreplaceable role in the overall coherence of English and Chinese legislative texts. Legislative texts are the most rigorous written style of law, which requires language norms and accurate words, especially in connection with cohesion. The use of lexical cohesive devices in Chinese-English legislative texts is different from other texts and has its own unique characteristics. Therefore, exploring the similarities and differences of lexical cohesion in Chinese-English legislative texts can not only guide the practice of Chinese-English legal translation. It also promotes the development of legal translation theory. Based on the legislative texts, this paper makes a systematic comparative study of lexical cohesion devices in Chinese and English legislative texts, and probes into the similarities and differences of lexical cohesion patterns in Chinese and English legal languages. The conclusions are as follows: both Chinese and English legislative texts use lexical cohesion devices, mainly word repetition, upper and lower semantic words and synonyms, but Chinese legislative texts tend to be lexical repetition, while English legislative texts use more synonyms. Substitute, etc. Among them, repetition in the form of twists and turns is a unique phenomenon in English legislative texts. In view of the characteristics of lexical cohesion in legislative texts, this paper summarizes the basic translation methods of lexical cohesion, such as translation, addition, modification and subtraction, and points out the existing problems and corresponding solutions. Although the author is an attempt to study the contrastive and translation of lexical cohesion in Chinese-English legislative texts, the conclusion is superficial, but it is of great value to us. It is helpful for legal translators to better understand the similarities and differences of lexical cohesion in Chinese and English legislative texts. I believe my efforts will play a role in the future of the researchers.
【學(xué)位授予單位】:西南政法大學(xué)
【學(xué)位級別】:碩士
【學(xué)位授予年份】:2012
【分類號】:H315.9;H152;H315
【參考文獻(xiàn)】
相關(guān)期刊論文 前3條
1 朱永生;銜接理論的發(fā)展與完善[J];外國語(上海外國語大學(xué)學(xué)報);1995年03期
2 苗興偉;論銜接與連貫的關(guān)系[J];外國語(上海外國語大學(xué)學(xué)報);1998年04期
3 仲人,吳娟;法律文字要恪守譯名同一律[J];中國翻譯;1994年05期
本文編號:1879470
本文鏈接:http://sikaile.net/wenyilunwen/hanyulw/1879470.html
最近更新
教材專著