本文選題：關(guān)聯(lián)理論 + 法律術(shù)語翻譯��； 參考：《西南政法大學(xué)》2013年碩士論文

【摘要】：法律術(shù)語在法律語言中占據(jù)著重要的地位。長期以來，法律翻譯學(xué)者也都將其視為最難以解決的問題之一。源語言與目的語之間并非完全等同的關(guān)系使得法律術(shù)語的翻譯引起了國內(nèi)外學(xué)者廣泛的關(guān)注。迄今為止，大部分學(xué)者的研究都局限在對比語言學(xué)的框架之內(nèi)，很少有學(xué)者嘗試過應(yīng)用順應(yīng)理論來研究法律術(shù)語翻譯中翻譯者的思維過程。法律術(shù)語翻譯不應(yīng)當(dāng)僅僅被視為一個(gè)簡單的語碼轉(zhuǎn)換過程，或是一種交際活動(dòng)。事實(shí)上，它是一個(gè)明示——推理的過程。在該過程中很多因素都起著重要的作用。通過斯珀波和威爾遜關(guān)聯(lián)理論，本文對法律術(shù)語的翻譯進(jìn)行了研究，探討了不同文化翻譯間法律術(shù)語翻譯的影響因素。此外，本文探討了導(dǎo)致翻譯者在翻譯過程中做出不同語言選擇的影響因素，以解釋法律術(shù)語翻譯時(shí)的不一致現(xiàn)象。 根據(jù)關(guān)聯(lián)理論，交流與認(rèn)知的實(shí)質(zhì)就是一個(gè)尋求關(guān)聯(lián)的過程。他們認(rèn)為語言交流就是一種有目的有意圖的活動(dòng)。在交流的過程中，說話者必須將聽話者的認(rèn)知指引到他們欲傳達(dá)的目的意圖上。而翻譯是一個(gè)明示推理的動(dòng)態(tài)過程，，譯者的翻譯過程就是尋找最佳關(guān)聯(lián)的過程。本文試圖考察關(guān)聯(lián)理論對于法律術(shù)語翻譯的借鑒意義。為了達(dá)到最佳關(guān)聯(lián)，翻譯者可直接使用相對應(yīng)的詞匯或近義詞匯，也可根據(jù)具體情況采用間接翻譯法。同時(shí)通過借用關(guān)聯(lián)理論，本文總結(jié)了影響翻譯質(zhì)量的三大因素：法律的概念，用語差異及語境。 本研究試圖從關(guān)聯(lián)理論的角度解釋法律術(shù)語翻譯過程中譯者的思維過程。其結(jié)論是在法律術(shù)語翻譯過程中，關(guān)聯(lián)理論可以用于產(chǎn)出優(yōu)質(zhì)的譯本，即對于源語言讀者和目標(biāo)語讀者產(chǎn)生相同影響且目標(biāo)語讀者所需加工努力最少的譯本。 本文通過使用關(guān)聯(lián)理論評估不同版本的法律術(shù)語翻譯，以期對今后術(shù)語翻譯質(zhì)量的比較有所裨益，同時(shí)對譯者的培訓(xùn)工作有所啟示。
[Abstract]:Legal terms play an important role in legal language.For a long time, legal translation scholars have also regarded it as one of the most difficult problems to solve.The relationship between the source language and the target language is not completely equivalent, so the translation of legal terms has attracted wide attention from scholars both at home and abroad.Up to now, most of the researches have been confined to the framework of contrastive linguistics, and few scholars have tried to apply adaptation theory to study the thinking process of translators in the translation of legal terms.Legal term translation should not be regarded as a simple code-switching process or a communicative activity.In fact, it is an ostensive-inferential process.Many factors play an important role in this process.Based on Sperber's and Wilson's relevance Theory, this paper studies the translation of legal terms and explores the factors affecting the translation of legal terms among different cultures.In addition, this paper explores the factors that cause translators to make different language choices in the process of translation, in order to explain the inconsistency in the translation of legal terms.According to relevance theory, the essence of communication and cognition is a process of seeking relevance.They think that language communication is a purposeful activity.In the process of communication, the speaker must direct the hearer's cognition to their intended intention.Translation is a dynamic process of ostensive-inference, and the translator's translation process is to find the best relevance.This paper attempts to examine the significance of relevance theory in the translation of legal terms.In order to achieve the best relevance, the translator can use the corresponding vocabulary or synonym directly or indirectly according to the specific circumstances.At the same time, through borrowing relevance theory, this paper sums up three factors that affect translation quality: the concept of law, the difference of terms and context.The present study attempts to explain the translator's thinking process in the translation of legal terms from the perspective of relevance theory.The conclusion is that relevance theory can be used to produce a good translation in the process of translating legal terms, that is, the translation that has the same influence on the readers of the source language and the target language, and the target language readers need the least processing effort.This paper uses relevance theory to evaluate the translation of different versions of legal terms in order to benefit the comparison of translation quality in the future and to enlighten translators in their training work.
【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】：2013
【分類號】：H059

【參考文獻(xiàn)】

相關(guān)期刊論文 前1條

1 趙彥春;關(guān)聯(lián)理論對翻譯的解釋力[J];現(xiàn)代外語;1999年03期

本文編號：1765966