發(fā)布時(shí)間：2018-05-12 15:40

  本文選題：銜接 + 翻譯��； 參考：《寧波大學(xué)》2017年碩士論文

【摘要】：本文在系統(tǒng)功能語(yǔ)言學(xué)銜接理論框架下,通過(guò)對(duì)《邊城》兩個(gè)英譯本的銜接翻譯對(duì)比,分析概括了英譯漢銜接的方法與翻譯策略。研究分語(yǔ)法銜接和詞匯銜接兩部分展開(kāi):語(yǔ)法銜接具體包括指稱、替代、省略和連接四種類型,詞匯銜接包括復(fù)現(xiàn)和搭配兩類。對(duì)比《邊城》原文和兩英譯本發(fā)現(xiàn)英漢語(yǔ)中的銜接方式以共性為主,但也存在諸多差異。如:漢語(yǔ)的指稱銜接使用頻度遠(yuǎn)低于英語(yǔ),更傾向于使用名詞重復(fù)和零指稱形式,而英語(yǔ)傾向于使用替代銜接。具體而言,漢語(yǔ)近指詞“這”的使用高于原指詞“那”,而英語(yǔ)中that比this常見(jiàn),漢語(yǔ)中的名詞和動(dòng)詞重復(fù)在英語(yǔ)中對(duì)應(yīng)為one、same、do等替代形式及變體�！哆叧恰穬蓚�(gè)英譯本采用的銜接翻譯策略主要分為對(duì)等翻譯和非對(duì)等翻譯兩大類。在非對(duì)等翻譯策略中,兩個(gè)譯本都考慮的英漢銜接手段的差異,運(yùn)用了添加、省略、轉(zhuǎn)化、具體化等翻譯方法。兩譯本對(duì)比,金介甫譯文更貼近英文表達(dá)習(xí)慣,偏重歸化譯法,楊憲益譯本保留了較多漢語(yǔ)特色,傾向異化譯法。
[Abstract]:Under the framework of the cohesion theory of systemic functional linguistics, this paper analyzes and generalizes the methods and translation strategies of English-Chinese cohesion through the contrastive analysis of the two English versions of "Border Town". The study consists of grammatical cohesion and lexical cohesion: grammatical cohesion includes four types: reference, substitution, ellipsis and connection, and lexical cohesion includes repetition and collocation. Comparing the original text of Border Town with the two English versions, it is found that the cohesion patterns in English and Chinese are mainly common, but there are also many differences. For example, the frequency of referential cohesion in Chinese is much lower than that in English, and Chinese tends to use noun repetition and zero referential form, while English tends to use alternative cohesion. In particular, the Chinese proximal word "this" is more commonly used than the original word "that", and that is more common than this in English. The noun and verb repetition in Chinese is the alternative form and variant in English. The cohesive translation strategies used in the two English versions are divided into two categories: equivalent translation and non-equivalent translation. In the strategy of non-equivalent translation, the differences between English and Chinese cohesive devices considered in both versions are translated by adding, omitting, transforming and concretizing. Compared with the two versions, Jin Jiefu's translation is more close to the English expression habit, focusing on the domestication method, while the Yang Xianyi version retains more Chinese characteristics and tends to dissimilate the translation method.
【學(xué)位授予單位】：寧波大學(xué)
【學(xué)位級(jí)別】：碩士
【學(xué)位授予年份】：2017
【分類號(hào)】：H315.9;I046

【參考文獻(xiàn)】

相關(guān)期刊論文 前3條

1 隆濤;;沈從文小說(shuō)《邊城》中的民俗英譯方法論[J];語(yǔ)文建設(shè);2015年24期

2 余姿;;美學(xué)再現(xiàn)步驟在小說(shuō)《邊城》英譯中的研究[J];語(yǔ)文建設(shè);2015年18期

3 劉汝榮;;金介甫英譯《邊城》中文化移植的操縱理論考察[J];外語(yǔ)學(xué)刊;2014年06期

，

本文編號(hào)：1879175