發(fā)布時(shí)間：2018-04-11 02:37

  本文選題：《沉沒之魚》 + 解構(gòu)主義翻譯理論��； 參考：《西南石油大學(xué)》2012年碩士論文

【摘要】：2005年10月,譚恩美的《沉沒之魚》(英文版)在美國出版,剛一問世便登上了《紐約時(shí)報(bào)》暢銷書排行榜。2006年,蔡駿的《沉沒之魚》中文版在中國問世。與譚恩美不同的是,蔡駿的《沉沒之魚》中文版受到了業(yè)內(nèi)人士的聲聲質(zhì)疑。質(zhì)疑源自其封面上的“蔡駿譯寫”,對(duì)于一部作品不采用翻譯而用譯寫(翻譯+改寫),到底能否反映作品原貌,人們抱有懷疑的態(tài)度。然而,《沉沒之魚》確實(shí)在中國讀者中創(chuàng)造了首印量高達(dá)85000冊的好成績。中譯本可以說是譚恩美原作的“來世”。本論文從解構(gòu)主義翻譯理論角度出發(fā),采用定量和定性研究相結(jié)合的方法,分析蔡駿譯寫的《沉沒之魚》中譯本。 解構(gòu)主義源于20世紀(jì)60年代末法國的一股后現(xiàn)代主義思潮,最早由德里達(dá)提出。后來,德里達(dá)、本雅明、巴爾特和�？碌热藢⒃摾碚撘敕g研究,解釋語際之間的交際行為。他們都否定傳統(tǒng)“忠實(shí)”觀,否定文本的終極意義,消解原作者至高無上的權(quán)威,宣稱譯者是創(chuàng)造主體,譯文是原文的來世,譯文延續(xù)著原文的生命。德里達(dá)認(rèn)為,翻譯具有“延異”的特點(diǎn),總是一種延遲和變異,必然導(dǎo)致理解和表達(dá)的差異,在此基礎(chǔ)上他提出“散播”這一概念,即不同讀者在閱讀同一文本時(shí)會(huì)有不同的感受。本雅明認(rèn)為譯作是原作的來世,如果沒有譯作,原作的生命即休止。巴爾特提出“作者已死”的觀點(diǎn),否定作者的權(quán)威,宣稱譯者是創(chuàng)造主體。�？路磳�(duì)作者是作品的源泉。 本文認(rèn)為,蔡駿的“譯寫”策略,其本身就是一種解構(gòu)主義翻譯方法�！冻翛]之魚》中譯本顛覆了傳統(tǒng)翻譯“忠實(shí)觀”,宏觀方面表現(xiàn)于對(duì)原文章節(jié)的大幅度調(diào)整、段落的重組,微觀方面表現(xiàn)于表達(dá)法的歸化、增加文化特色詞語、刪除性愛描寫與政治敏感語等。該譯本賦予了譚恩美原作新的生命：解構(gòu)主義認(rèn)為,沒有翻譯,在目標(biāo)語言中該作品就不存在。蔡駿的譯作如此成功,其本身就是創(chuàng)作的盛舉。不僅如此,譯作還在結(jié)構(gòu)、語言等方面超越了原作。該譯本突出了譯者的翻譯主體地位,原作本是幽靈小說和旅行小說的綜合體,蔡駿在此基礎(chǔ)上加以發(fā)揮,融合自身寫作習(xí)慣,增加了不少心理懸疑成分。因此,本文認(rèn)為,蔡駿的《沉沒之魚》中譯本是解構(gòu)主義翻譯理論的典范之作。
[Abstract]:In October 2005, Amy Tan's "sunken Fish" (English version) was published in the United States and immediately appeared on the New York Times best-seller list. In 2006, Cai Jun's "sunken Fish" was published in China.Unlike Amy Tan, Cai Jun's Chinese version of sunken Fish was questioned by the industry.People doubt whether the translation and writing of Cai Jun, which originates from its cover, can reflect the original appearance of the work instead of translation.However, the sunken Fish did produce a good first print run of 85000 copies among Chinese readers.The Chinese translation can be said to be Tan En-mei 's original "afterlife".From the perspective of deconstruction translation theory, this thesis uses a quantitative and qualitative approach to analyze Cai Jun's translation of the sunken Fish.Deconstruction originated from a post-modernism trend in France in the late 1960 s, which was first put forward by Derrida.Later, Derrida, Benjamin, Barter and Foucault introduced the theory into translation studies to explain interlingual communication.They all deny the traditional view of "faithfulness", deny the ultimate meaning of the text, dispel the supreme authority of the original author, claim that the translator is the subject of creation, that the translation is the afterlife of the original, and that the translation continues the life of the original.Derrida believes that translation is characterized by "variation", which is always a kind of delay and variation, which inevitably leads to differences in understanding and expression. On this basis, he puts forward the concept of "dissemination".That is, different readers will have different feelings when reading the same text.Benjamin believes that the translation is the afterlife of the original, but without it, the life of the original ends.Balter puts forward the idea that the author is dead, denies the authority of the author and claims that the translator is the subject of creation.Foucault's opposition to the author is the source of his work.This paper argues that Cai Jun's "translation and writing" strategy is itself a kind of deconstruction translation method. The Chinese version of "sunken Fish" subverts the traditional translation "view of faithfulness", which is reflected in the substantial adjustment of the original chapters and the reorganization of the paragraphs.The micro aspect is embodied in the domestication of expression, the addition of cultural features, the deletion of sexual description and political sensitivities, and so on.The translation gives Amy Tan a new life: deconstructionism holds that it does not exist in the target language without translation.Cai Jun's translation is such a success, it is the creation of the great.Not only that, the translation also surpassed the original in terms of structure, language, etc.This translation highlights the translator's position as the subject of translation. The original novel is a combination of ghost novels and travel novels. On this basis, Cai Jun exerts his own writing habits and adds a lot of psychological suspense.Therefore, this paper argues that Cai Jun's Chinese translation of sunken Fish is a model of deconstruction translation theory.
【學(xué)位授予單位】：西南石油大學(xué)
【學(xué)位級(jí)別】：碩士
【學(xué)位授予年份】：2012
【分類號(hào)】：H315.9;I046

【參考文獻(xiàn)】

相關(guān)期刊論文 前7條

1 郭建中;論解構(gòu)主義翻譯思想[J];上海科技翻譯;1999年04期

2 朱伊革;;林紓與龐德誤讀和誤譯的解構(gòu)主義理據(jù)[J];上海師范大學(xué)學(xué)報(bào)(哲學(xué)社會(huì)科學(xué)版);2007年06期

3 盧俊;;譚恩美的新作《拯救溺水小魚》[J];外國文學(xué)動(dòng)態(tài);2007年03期

4 龍利;;論漢譯英的段落本位及段落調(diào)整問題[J];新西部(下半月);2009年11期

5 楊玲;;“譯寫”:文學(xué)翻譯的新嘗試——從“格式塔理論”看蔡駿對(duì)《沉默之魚》的譯寫[J];新鄉(xiāng)學(xué)院學(xué)報(bào)(社會(huì)科學(xué)版);2010年01期

6 林曉雯;“邊緣”文化與文化多元化——解讀《灶神之妻》[J];徐州師范大學(xué)學(xué)報(bào);2005年02期

7 蔡駿;;譯寫:一種翻譯的新嘗試[J];譯林;2007年02期

，

本文編號(hào)：1734085