本文選題：改寫 + 操縱��； 參考：《蘇州大學(xué)》2016年碩士論文

【摘要】：20世紀(jì)70年代,“文化轉(zhuǎn)向”首先在西方文學(xué)研究界興起,逐漸上升到主導(dǎo)地位,并由文學(xué)理論家進(jìn)一步發(fā)展深化進(jìn)而影響到其它文學(xué)相關(guān)領(lǐng)域。翻譯文學(xué)作為文學(xué)研究的重要部分,受到的最引人注目的影響,莫過于“文化翻譯”學(xué)派的興起。該派學(xué)者主要探討譯文產(chǎn)生的文化背景,以及譯文對譯入語文化中的文學(xué)和文化規(guī)范所產(chǎn)生的影響。作為其中的重要代表人物,安德烈·勒菲弗爾在其多部專著中詳細(xì)闡述了文化派的翻譯思想,提出了“翻譯即改寫”的觀點(diǎn),認(rèn)為翻譯研究不能僅僅追求語言層面上的“對等”,而應(yīng)更多地關(guān)注其文化和社會(huì)等宏觀層面上的形成原因,突出譯者的作用。他提出,翻譯有時(shí)不能真實(shí)地反映原作的面貌,這是正常的,因?yàn)榉g并不是在真空中進(jìn)行的,而是把文學(xué)作品從一個(gè)文化系統(tǒng)帶入到另一個(gè)文化系統(tǒng)中,因此譯者始終受到多重社會(huì)因素的操縱:當(dāng)時(shí)的主流詩學(xué)、意識(shí)形態(tài)和贊助人等等。他據(jù)此提出了關(guān)于翻譯的影響要素理論,即翻譯的操縱觀。勒菲弗爾的翻譯“改寫”和“操縱”的觀點(diǎn)對于翻譯研究具有里程碑式的意義。本文共分為五個(gè)部分。第一部分簡要介紹勒菲弗爾的理論,以及論文的結(jié)構(gòu)框架。第二部分是文獻(xiàn)綜述,總結(jié)了國內(nèi)外學(xué)者對于勒菲弗爾理論的研究情況、《紅樓夢》的譯介和翻譯研究情況。第三部分分析了該理論對翻譯學(xué)貢獻(xiàn),如翻譯研究從規(guī)約性研究向描述性研究的轉(zhuǎn)變,承認(rèn)了不同譯文的存在價(jià)值,打破了傳統(tǒng)翻譯的原文中心說等。同時(shí),也總結(jié)了這一理論的局限性,如重要概念的定義過于寬泛、模糊,影響了對翻譯的解釋力,以及對翻譯活動(dòng)缺乏實(shí)際的指導(dǎo)意義。此外,國內(nèi)大部分學(xué)者在研究勒菲弗爾的操縱和改寫時(shí),對其研究的反思和批判過于極端化,這主要是對理論理解的片面性造成的,在理論的應(yīng)用方面,也有機(jī)械化的傾向。本文對之前學(xué)者的質(zhì)疑進(jìn)行了反思,一一做出了解釋,并對勒菲弗爾理論在文本研究中的應(yīng)用提出了新的方法。第四部分,本文利用勒菲弗爾的“操縱”和“改寫”的觀點(diǎn),運(yùn)用前一章提出的新的文本研究方法,對《紅樓夢》三個(gè)英文全譯本進(jìn)行了深入討論。楊憲益、戴乃迭夫婦的《紅樓夢》英文全譯本力求最大限度地還原原作中的文化意象,對于《紅樓夢》的中國傳統(tǒng)社會(huì)文化做到了極大的忠實(shí);與此相對,霍克斯的英文全譯本中采取的翻譯策略則有所不同,認(rèn)為譯文要做到讓毫無中國文學(xué)背景知識(shí)的西方讀者明白易懂,因此對原文做了較多的主觀改動(dòng),使其更加迎合讀者的審美趣味。值得一提的是,本文還選取了較少為學(xué)者討論的最早的《紅樓夢》英文全譯本——邦斯?fàn)柹窀缸g本——進(jìn)行文本對比,以期能夠更加全面地展示理論對不同譯作的解釋力。邦斯?fàn)柹窀缸g本態(tài)度極為認(rèn)真,為了彌補(bǔ)其之前《紅樓夢》譯本不完整的遺憾,力求做到譯文與原文的完全對應(yīng)。第五部分是對全文的總結(jié)。根據(jù)以上討論,作者指出了本研究的不足之處,對今后的研究方面提出了建議。本文在理論和實(shí)踐方面的意義在于:首先,深入分析了較少有學(xué)者研究的邦斯?fàn)柕摹都t樓夢》譯本;第二,在研究方法上,與之前學(xué)者僅從詩學(xué)、意識(shí)形態(tài)和贊助人三個(gè)方面評價(jià)翻譯不同,本文從更多方面如語域和譯者主體性等都做出了解釋,期望能夠?yàn)榻窈笤摾碚摰膽?yīng)用,以及《紅樓夢》翻譯研究有所啟示。
[Abstract]:In 1970s, "cultural turn" began to rise to the dominant position in the western literary research field. It was further developed and deepened by the literary theorists and further influenced other literature related fields. Translation literature, as an important part of literary research, was most notably influenced by the "cultural translation" school. The scholars mainly discuss the cultural background of the translation and the influence of the translation on the literary and cultural norms in the culture of the target language. As an important representative of the translation, Andre Lefebvre elaborated the thought of the translation of the cultural school in his many monographs, and put forward the view of "translation or rewriting". Translation studies should not only pursue the "equivalence" on the language level, but should pay more attention to the reasons for the formation of the cultural and social aspects, and highlight the role of the translator. He suggests that translation can not reflect the original face of the original, which is normal, because translation is not carried out in a vacuum, but a literary work from A cultural system is brought into another cultural system, so the translator has always been manipulated by multiple social factors: the mainstream poetics, ideology and patronage at that time. He put forward the theory of influence factors on translation, that is, the view of manipulation. The study of translation studies has a milestone. This article is divided into five parts. The first part is a brief introduction of Lefebvre's theory and the structural framework of the thesis. The second part is a literature review, summarizes the research on Lefebvre theory by scholars both at home and abroad, the translation and translation studies of the Red Mansions dream, and the third part of the analysis. The contribution of theory to translation studies, such as the transformation of translation studies from a formal study to a descriptive study, acknowledges the value of the existence of different translations and breaks the original theory of the traditional translation. At the same time, it also summarizes the limitations of the theory, such as the definition of the important concept too broad and vague, which affects the interpretation of translation and the reversal of the translation. The translation activities lack practical guiding significance. In addition, most scholars in China are too extreme to rethink and criticize Lefebvre's research in the study of manipulation and rewriting. This is mainly caused by the one-sided theory of theoretical understanding and the tendency of mechanization in the application of theory. This paper rethinks the questions of previous scholars. An explanation is made one by one, and a new method is put forward for the application of Lefebvre's theory in text research. In the fourth part, this paper, using the view of Lefebvre's "manipulation" and "Rewriting", uses the new method of text research proposed in the previous chapter to discuss the "dream of Red Mansions >" three English full versions in depth. Yang Xianyi, Dai Naidie The English full translation of the couple's "dream of Red Mansions" seeks to maximize the cultural image in the original, and has made a great loyalty to the Chinese traditional culture of the dream of Red Mansions. In contrast, the translation strategies adopted in the English version of Hawkes are different, and the translation is to make it possible for the west to make no Chinese background knowledge in the West. It is worth mentioning that the original version of "Red Mansions", the English version of Bonsall, which is less discussed by scholars, is compared to a more comprehensive demonstration of the theory to the difference. The interpretate force of the translated version is very serious. In order to make up for the incomplete translation of the dream of the Red Mansion, he strives to complete the complete correspondence between the translation and the original text. The fifth part is a summary of the full text. According to the above discussion, the author points out the shortcomings of this study and puts forward some suggestions for the future research. The significance of theory and practice lies in the following: first, it analyzes Bonsall's translation of the dream of Red Mansions, which is less studied by scholars; second, in the study method, the former scholars only evaluate the translation from the three aspects of poetics, ideology and patrons. This article explains more aspects such as the register and the translator's subjectivity. Hope can provide some inspiration for the future application of the theory and the translation of dream of Red Mansions.
【學(xué)位授予單位】：蘇州大學(xué)
【學(xué)位級別】：碩士
【學(xué)位授予年份】：2016
【分類號(hào)】：H315.9;I046

【相似文獻(xiàn)】

相關(guān)期刊論文 前10條

1 張鴻凡;曾薇薇;;安德烈·勒菲弗爾翻譯思想述評[J];海外英語;2011年10期

2 陳敬艷;;勒菲弗爾及其操縱論[J];現(xiàn)代婦女(下旬);2013年06期

3 李玲霞;;淺談勒菲弗爾的翻譯改寫理論及他對The Lysistriata不同版本改寫的詮釋[J];科技信息;2014年07期

4 張文君;;解讀安德烈·勒菲弗爾的翻譯改寫理論[J];瓊州學(xué)院學(xué)報(bào);2010年03期

5 吳濤;;勒菲弗爾“重寫”理論視域下的華茲生《史記》英譯[J];昆明理工大學(xué)學(xué)報(bào)(社會(huì)科學(xué)版);2010年05期

6 張敏;;從勒菲弗爾“三要素”看新文化運(yùn)動(dòng)時(shí)期的翻譯活動(dòng)[J];現(xiàn)代婦女(下旬);2013年06期

7 趙亮;;從安德烈·勒菲弗爾的理論看清末民初偵探小說的翻譯[J];內(nèi)蒙古農(nóng)業(yè)大學(xué)學(xué)報(bào)(社會(huì)科學(xué)版);2009年05期

8 鄧江雪;;勒菲弗爾譯學(xué)思想探究[J];黑河學(xué)刊;2012年05期

9 祝嫣;;淺析勒菲弗爾的“翻譯操縱論”[J];劍南文學(xué)(經(jīng)典教苑);2013年02期

10 魏婷婷;;安德烈·勒菲弗爾譯學(xué)思想述評[J];鄭州鐵路職業(yè)技術(shù)學(xué)院學(xué)報(bào);2014年01期

相關(guān)會(huì)議論文 前1條

1 詹璐;;勒菲弗爾的“改寫”說行不通了嗎?——《愛情故事》“文革”譯本“禁忌”翻譯探究[A];中國英漢語比較研究會(huì)第八次全國學(xué)術(shù)研討會(huì)論文摘要匯編[C];2008年

相關(guān)重要報(bào)紙文章 前1條

1 王向娜;環(huán)法賽基爾岑繼續(xù)領(lǐng)跑[N];中國體育報(bào);2008年

相關(guān)碩士學(xué)位論文 前10條

1 孟兆霞;勒菲弗爾改寫論視角下葛浩文英譯本《豐乳肥臀》中文化因素的改寫研究[D];西北師范大學(xué);2015年

2 付娟;[D];西安外國語大學(xué);2015年

3 毛筠鑫;論翻譯中的改寫[D];南京航空航天大學(xué);2015年

4 趙薇;《紅樓夢》翻譯中的改寫和操縱[D];蘇州大學(xué);2016年

5 胡杰;根據(jù)安德烈·勒菲弗爾的重寫理論對晚清文學(xué)翻譯（1895—1918）的闡釋[D];西南石油學(xué)院;2004年

6 許泓婷;從勒菲弗爾的操控論看《圣經(jīng)》不同漢譯本的翻譯[D];黑龍江大學(xué);2011年

7 易歡歡;從勒菲弗爾的操控理論角度論權(quán)力關(guān)系對口譯的操控[D];湖南師范大學(xué);2011年

8 鄭靜;從勒菲弗爾的翻譯四層次理論分析《色·戒》英、德譯本[D];北京外國語大學(xué);2014年

9 武海燕;勒菲弗爾改寫理論下的《世界之戰(zhàn)》三個(gè)中譯本研究[D];廣東商學(xué)院;2013年

10 黃麗娟;安德烈·勒菲弗爾理論視角之《莊子》三英譯本研究[D];華中師范大學(xué);2008年

，

本文編號(hào)：2006293