基于演繹邏輯的翻譯明晰化假說證偽
發(fā)布時(shí)間：2018-09-12 15:57
【摘要】：本論文是基于演繹邏輯的,對(duì)由Blum-Kulka提出并得到一些語料庫的實(shí)證研究支持的翻譯中明晰化假說的證偽。該假說主張“明晰化是翻譯過程本身固有的,普遍的策略”。論文試圖證明無論基于語料庫的研究或是基于譯例的研究,提供什么統(tǒng)計(jì)數(shù)據(jù),明晰化假說在邏輯上是不成立的。研究分兩個(gè)步驟進(jìn)行：首先分析了上述研究的共同特點(diǎn),即用語料庫研究得出的數(shù)據(jù)來證明明晰化假說；然后運(yùn)用演繹邏輯對(duì)這些研究進(jìn)行分析,逐一指出其推理有悖邏輯的地方,從而證明其結(jié)論是不成立的。 嘗試以演繹邏輯為手段來證偽翻譯中的明晰化假說,是研究“翻譯普遍性”的一種新的途徑,它具有以下幾點(diǎn)意義。 首先,本文就翻譯中的明晰化和明晰化假說進(jìn)行集中和比較深入的研究,對(duì)明晰化假說進(jìn)行比較全面和深刻的考察。通過批判地回顧翻譯研究的基于語料庫研究的支持明晰化假說的學(xué)術(shù)思潮,本文認(rèn)為,這種研究只可能得出翻譯中明晰化出現(xiàn)的某種或然性,而不可能(如明晰化假說所認(rèn)為的那樣)為明晰化普遍存在于一切翻譯中提供證據(jù)。 其次,對(duì)翻譯中明晰化假說的反思,可以啟發(fā)對(duì)其他基于語料庫的有關(guān)“翻譯過程本身固有的普遍策略”或“翻譯普遍性”的進(jìn)一步思考。本文認(rèn)為,除了隱含在翻譯的定義之中的普遍特征(如“翻譯涉及兩種語言”、“翻譯涉及思維”等)之外,證明翻譯過程中存在其他不受相關(guān)語言文化系統(tǒng)影響的普遍的、固有的翻譯策略,如簡略化(simplification)、規(guī)范化(normalization)、整齊化(leveling out)和集中化(convergence)等等的企圖,同樣是注定要失敗的。 第三,本文將邏輯演繹作為方法論基礎(chǔ),在明晰化假說的研究中引進(jìn)了一種新的研究思路,凸顯在翻譯研究中以邏輯來考察理論假說(尤其是新出現(xiàn)的假說)的可行性和實(shí)際意義。 本文研究的主要問題如下： (1)翻譯中明晰化現(xiàn)象的本質(zhì)是什么? (2)翻譯中明晰化假說的核心是什么? (3)基于語料庫的對(duì)明晰化假說理論的研究能否證明其理論的真?zhèn)?為什么? (4)如果對(duì)于第(3)個(gè)問題的第一部分的回答是否定的,如何證明翻譯中明晰化假說理論不成立? 本研究屬于純理論研究,其目標(biāo)是用演繹邏輯從理論上駁斥明晰化假說,而不是為支持或反對(duì)這一假說提供更多的經(jīng)驗(yàn)證據(jù)。 本文分為五章。 第一章是緒論,概述研究的緣起,目的,問題,方法以及全文的基本結(jié)構(gòu)。 第二章主要探討翻譯中的明晰化。首先界定與明晰化相關(guān)的幾個(gè)概念,例如,語言中的“明晰”概念,對(duì)其表現(xiàn)的程度和層面進(jìn)行具體的描述。然后指出基于語料庫的已有翻譯研究中“明晰化”定義存在的問題,在此基礎(chǔ)上提出了“明晰化”的工作定義,接著討論“明晰化”的幾種類型,隨后歸納出翻譯中“明晰化”的本質(zhì)：一是明晰化首先是一種翻譯技巧,二是翻譯中明晰化是指讓目的語文本中某一片斷在明晰程度上超越原語文本中對(duì)應(yīng)的片斷。 第三章介紹翻譯中的明晰化假說及支持這一假說的基于語料庫的研究。以Blum-Kulka最先在任選例句的基礎(chǔ)上提出的明晰化假說為起點(diǎn),詳細(xì)分析基于語料庫的研究用以證明明晰化假說的常見的方式,即首先以語料庫提供的統(tǒng)計(jì)數(shù)據(jù),說明翻譯中明晰化出現(xiàn)頻率較高所顯示的一種傾向,然后試圖證明這種明晰化傾向是翻譯過程本身固有的普遍策略。 第四章從演繹邏輯的角度對(duì)基于語料庫的明晰化假說進(jìn)行證偽。這一章首先剖析Blum-Kulka明晰化假說的真正內(nèi)涵,指出該假說實(shí)際上包含兩個(gè)次命題：一是明晰化是翻譯過程本身所固有的策略,二是明晰化是翻譯過程本身中普遍地存在的策略。Blum-Kulka證明這兩個(gè)次命題所用的理由,以演繹邏輯來檢驗(yàn),顯出了其邏輯上的謬誤,所以這一假說從一開始就不成立。然后本章逐一分析基于不同種類語料庫的證明明晰化假說的研究所憑借的理由,同樣用演繹邏輯進(jìn)行檢驗(yàn),發(fā)現(xiàn)那些推理也是不符合邏輯的。 第五章為本文的結(jié)論。這部分針對(duì)研究問題總結(jié)本研究的主要發(fā)現(xiàn),指出存在的不足,并對(duì)今后的研究提出一些建議。 本文的主要結(jié)論如下： (1)關(guān)鍵概念的厘定對(duì)任何理論探討都是至關(guān)重要的。支持“明晰化假說”的研究沒有對(duì)其所用的關(guān)鍵概念如“翻譯”、“普遍”、“固有”、“策略”的內(nèi)涵及外延進(jìn)行考察,導(dǎo)致這些關(guān)鍵概念缺乏準(zhǔn)確、全面的理解,使其研究從一開始就有了可能影響研究結(jié)論正確性的方法論上的缺陷, (2)由于沒有厘清關(guān)鍵概念,這種研究不能進(jìn)行嚴(yán)密的邏輯推理,不得不訴諸一些不相關(guān)的理由來支持明晰化假說,這些不相關(guān)的理由因此經(jīng)不起演繹邏輯的檢驗(yàn)。 (3)基于語料庫的關(guān)于“翻譯普遍性”的研究產(chǎn)生的數(shù)據(jù)顯示的是或高或低的傾向或曰或然性,因此除了暗含在翻譯的定義之中的普遍的、固有的本質(zhì)特性之外,此類研究不可能提供證據(jù)來證明包括明晰化在內(nèi)的任何策略是翻譯過程本身中固有的或普遍的策略。此類基于語料庫的研究轉(zhuǎn)向比較語言學(xué)更為有益,目的是為譯者和翻譯軟件設(shè)計(jì)師提供幫助,告訴他們處理特定的兩種語言間、特定方向的翻譯中的特定問題,恰當(dāng)?shù)姆绞胶芸赡苁鞘裁础?br/>[Abstract]:This dissertation is based on deductive logic and is intended to prove the hypothesis of clarification in translation, which is proposed by Blum-Kulka and supported by some corpus-based empirical studies. The research is divided into two steps: first, it analyzes the common characteristics of the above-mentioned studies, that is, the data obtained from corpus studies to prove the clarification hypothesis; then it uses deductive logic to analyze these studies, pointing out one by one the illogical aspects of their inferences, and so on. It is proved that the conclusion is untenable.
The attempt to falsify the clarification hypothesis in translation by means of deductive logic is a new approach to the study of "translation universality". It has the following significance.
Firstly, this paper makes a concentrated and in-depth study of the hypothesis of clarification and clarification in translation, and makes a comprehensive and profound study of the hypothesis. It is impossible, as the clarification hypothesis suggests, to provide evidence for the ubiquity of clarification in all translations.
Secondly, reflections on the hypothesis of clarification in translation can inspire further reflection on other corpus-based theories such as "universal strategies inherent in the process of translation" or "universality of translation". Besides, it is also doomed to fail to prove that there are other common and inherent translation strategies, such as simplification, normalization, leveling out and convergence, which are not influenced by the relevant linguistic and cultural systems.
Thirdly, logical deduction as the methodological basis is introduced into the study of the clarification hypothesis, which highlights the feasibility and practical significance of applying logic to the study of theoretical hypothesis (especially the emerging hypothesis) in translation studies.
The main problems of this study are as follows:
(1) what is the essence of clarity in translation?
(2) what is the core of the clarity hypothesis in translation?
(3) can a corpus based study of the theory of clarity hypothesis prove its authenticity? Why?
(4) If the answer to the first part of question (3) is negative, how can the theory of clarification hypothesis in translation be proved to be untenable?
The purpose of this study is to refute the clarification hypothesis theoretically with deductive logic, rather than to provide more empirical evidence to support or oppose the hypothesis.
This article is divided into five chapters.
The first chapter is the introduction, which summarizes the origin, purpose, problems, methods and the basic structure of the full text.
Chapter Two is devoted to the study of clarification in translation. Firstly, several concepts related to clarification are defined, such as the concept of "clarity" in language, and the degree and level of its expression are described in detail. The definition of "clarification" is discussed, and then several types of "clarification" are discussed. The essence of "clarification" in translation is summed up as follows: first, clarification is a translation skill, and second, clarification in translation is to let a certain segment of the target text surpass the corresponding segment in the source language to a certain degree of clarity.
Chapter Three introduces the hypothesis of clarification in translation and the corpus-based research that supports it. Starting with the hypothesis of clarification proposed by Blum-Kulka on the basis of the first optional sentence, this paper analyzes in detail the common ways in which corpus-based research proves the hypothesis, i.e. the statistical data provided by the corpus. This paper attempts to prove that the tendency of clarification in translation is a common strategy inherent in the translation process.
In Chapter Four, the corpus-based clarification hypothesis is falsified from the perspective of deductive logic. Firstly, this chapter analyzes the true connotation of Blum-Kulka's clarification hypothesis and points out that the hypothesis actually contains two sub-propositions: one is that clarification is an inherent strategy in the translation process itself, and the other is that clarification is a universal existence in the translation process itself. Blum-Kulka proves the reasons for these two sub-propositions, and tests them with deductive logic, revealing their logical fallacies, so this hypothesis does not hold from the outset. Then this chapter analyzes one by one the reasons on which the research institutes based on different types of corpus demonstrate the clarification hypothesis, and tests them with deductive logic as well. Finding those reasoning is also illogical.
The fifth chapter is the conclusion of this paper. This part summarizes the main findings of this study, points out the shortcomings, and puts forward some suggestions for future research.
The main conclusions of this paper are as follows:
(1) The definition of key concepts is essential to any theoretical discussion. The study supporting the "clarification hypothesis" does not examine the connotation and extension of the key concepts such as "translation", "universality", "intrinsic", "strategy". This leads to the lack of accurate and comprehensive understanding of these key concepts, which makes the study from the very beginning. There are methodological flaws that may affect the correctness of the research conclusions.
(2) Without clarifying the key concepts, this study can not carry out rigorous logical reasoning, and has to resort to some unrelated reasons to support the clarification hypothesis, which can not withstand the test of deductive logic.
(3) Data from corpus-based studies of "translation universality" indicate a tendency or probability of high or low, so it is impossible for such studies to provide evidence that any strategy, including clarification, is a translation process, except for the universal and intrinsic nature of the implied definition of translation. Such corpus-based research has turned to comparative linguistics as a more useful tool for translators and translation software designers to help them deal with specific problems in particular directions between two languages.
【學(xué)位授予單位】：湖南師范大學(xué)
【學(xué)位級(jí)別】：博士
【學(xué)位授予年份】：2013
【分類號(hào)】：H059
本文編號(hào)：2239515
The attempt to falsify the clarification hypothesis in translation by means of deductive logic is a new approach to the study of "translation universality". It has the following significance.
Firstly, this paper makes a concentrated and in-depth study of the hypothesis of clarification and clarification in translation, and makes a comprehensive and profound study of the hypothesis. It is impossible, as the clarification hypothesis suggests, to provide evidence for the ubiquity of clarification in all translations.
Secondly, reflections on the hypothesis of clarification in translation can inspire further reflection on other corpus-based theories such as "universal strategies inherent in the process of translation" or "universality of translation". Besides, it is also doomed to fail to prove that there are other common and inherent translation strategies, such as simplification, normalization, leveling out and convergence, which are not influenced by the relevant linguistic and cultural systems.
Thirdly, logical deduction as the methodological basis is introduced into the study of the clarification hypothesis, which highlights the feasibility and practical significance of applying logic to the study of theoretical hypothesis (especially the emerging hypothesis) in translation studies.
The main problems of this study are as follows:
(1) what is the essence of clarity in translation?
(2) what is the core of the clarity hypothesis in translation?
(3) can a corpus based study of the theory of clarity hypothesis prove its authenticity? Why?
(4) If the answer to the first part of question (3) is negative, how can the theory of clarification hypothesis in translation be proved to be untenable?
The purpose of this study is to refute the clarification hypothesis theoretically with deductive logic, rather than to provide more empirical evidence to support or oppose the hypothesis.
This article is divided into five chapters.
The first chapter is the introduction, which summarizes the origin, purpose, problems, methods and the basic structure of the full text.
Chapter Two is devoted to the study of clarification in translation. Firstly, several concepts related to clarification are defined, such as the concept of "clarity" in language, and the degree and level of its expression are described in detail. The definition of "clarification" is discussed, and then several types of "clarification" are discussed. The essence of "clarification" in translation is summed up as follows: first, clarification is a translation skill, and second, clarification in translation is to let a certain segment of the target text surpass the corresponding segment in the source language to a certain degree of clarity.
Chapter Three introduces the hypothesis of clarification in translation and the corpus-based research that supports it. Starting with the hypothesis of clarification proposed by Blum-Kulka on the basis of the first optional sentence, this paper analyzes in detail the common ways in which corpus-based research proves the hypothesis, i.e. the statistical data provided by the corpus. This paper attempts to prove that the tendency of clarification in translation is a common strategy inherent in the translation process.
In Chapter Four, the corpus-based clarification hypothesis is falsified from the perspective of deductive logic. Firstly, this chapter analyzes the true connotation of Blum-Kulka's clarification hypothesis and points out that the hypothesis actually contains two sub-propositions: one is that clarification is an inherent strategy in the translation process itself, and the other is that clarification is a universal existence in the translation process itself. Blum-Kulka proves the reasons for these two sub-propositions, and tests them with deductive logic, revealing their logical fallacies, so this hypothesis does not hold from the outset. Then this chapter analyzes one by one the reasons on which the research institutes based on different types of corpus demonstrate the clarification hypothesis, and tests them with deductive logic as well. Finding those reasoning is also illogical.
The fifth chapter is the conclusion of this paper. This part summarizes the main findings of this study, points out the shortcomings, and puts forward some suggestions for future research.
The main conclusions of this paper are as follows:
(1) The definition of key concepts is essential to any theoretical discussion. The study supporting the "clarification hypothesis" does not examine the connotation and extension of the key concepts such as "translation", "universality", "intrinsic", "strategy". This leads to the lack of accurate and comprehensive understanding of these key concepts, which makes the study from the very beginning. There are methodological flaws that may affect the correctness of the research conclusions.
(2) Without clarifying the key concepts, this study can not carry out rigorous logical reasoning, and has to resort to some unrelated reasons to support the clarification hypothesis, which can not withstand the test of deductive logic.
(3) Data from corpus-based studies of "translation universality" indicate a tendency or probability of high or low, so it is impossible for such studies to provide evidence that any strategy, including clarification, is a translation process, except for the universal and intrinsic nature of the implied definition of translation. Such corpus-based research has turned to comparative linguistics as a more useful tool for translators and translation software designers to help them deal with specific problems in particular directions between two languages.
【學(xué)位授予單位】：湖南師范大學(xué)
【學(xué)位級(jí)別】：博士
【學(xué)位授予年份】：2013
【分類號(hào)】：H059
【參考文獻(xiàn)】
相關(guān)期刊論文 前10條
1 陳小慰;翻譯中的語用明晰化處理[J];福建外語;1997年04期
2 胡開寶;毛鵬飛;;國外語料庫翻譯學(xué)研究述評(píng)[J];當(dāng)代語言學(xué);2012年04期
3 賀顯斌;英漢翻譯過程中的明晰化現(xiàn)象[J];解放軍外國語學(xué)院學(xué)報(bào);2003年04期
4 周紅民;;論翻譯中的“顯化”現(xiàn)象[J];外語研究;2007年06期
5 肖忠華;戴光榮;;尋求“第三語碼”——基于漢語譯文語料庫的翻譯共性研究[J];外語教學(xué)與研究;2010年01期
6 黃立波;王克非;;語料庫翻譯學(xué):課題與進(jìn)展[J];外語教學(xué)與研究;2011年06期
7 劉敬國;陶友蘭;;語料庫翻譯研究的歷史與進(jìn)展——兼評(píng)《語料庫翻譯研究:理論、發(fā)現(xiàn)和應(yīng)用》[J];外國語(上海外國語大學(xué)學(xué)報(bào));2006年02期
8 陳振東;夏天;;理解過程的明晰化在翻譯教學(xué)中的意義與操作[J];中國翻譯;2007年02期
9 陳琳;;論陌生化翻譯[J];中國翻譯;2010年01期
10 戴光榮;肖忠華;;基于自建英漢翻譯語料庫的翻譯明晰化研究[J];中國翻譯;2010年01期
，本文編號(hào)：2239515
本文鏈接：http://sikaile.net/wenyilunwen/yuyanxuelw/2239515.html
最近更新
教材專著
