英语论文网

编织出来的是千篇一律，缺乏差异，甚至完全雷同的图案”（Gorlee 1994：195）。显而易见的是，这个以发展为宗旨的观点与上文提及的以对等为宗旨的观点互为矛盾，难以调和。在书中，这两种观点有时相互渗透，混淆不清。它们对译者提出了两种完全不同的要求，译者很可能会感到无所适从。如果说，以等值为重的观点容易为译者所接受并身体力行的话，以发展为重的观点则是相当难以付诸实施的。该书要求译者破坏他们的‘传统’职责，背叛原文，但是却没有通过任何实例来说明怎样才能完成这一任务。 该书在相当大的程度上与翻译实践相脱节。值得注意的是，皮尔斯将翻译与同一语言内部的符号阐释等同起来，忽略了翻译这一跨语言文化的符号阐释过程的特点。戈尔莱在书中也不时表现出类似的片面性。如前所述，皮尔斯的符号阐释过程呈线性递进形态：原符号[通过阐释者的阐释]导致第一个阐释符号的诞生，后者又[通过阐释者的阐释]导致第二个阐释符号的诞生，后者又导致第三个阐释符号的诞生，如此等等。戈尔莱将这个阐释符号生成阐释符号的模式直接用于描述翻译：原文[通过译者的翻译]导致译文甲的诞生，译文甲又[通过译者的翻译]导致译文乙的诞生，译文乙又导致译文丙的诞生，如此等等。但实际上，除了通过一种中介语言的间接翻译，一位译者通常不会翻译前人的译本。无论前面已有多少译本，后面的译者还是会翻译原文。从实际情况出发，我们不妨这么描述翻译中的符号阐释过程：原文本符号[原文]导致第一个阐释符号[译文甲]的诞生；然后，[已经经过一次翻译的]原文本符号导致第二个阐释符号[译文乙]的诞生；然后，[已经经过两次翻译的]原文本符号导致第三个阐释符号[译文丙]的诞生，如此等等。此外，还应该考虑到前面的译文对后面的译文或大或小的影响。也就是说，从第二个符号阐释行为开始，我们在考虑原文本符号时，不仅要考虑原文，还需考虑已有的译文在译者阐释过程中所起的作用。（详见Shen 1996） 总的来说，戈尔莱的《符号学与翻译问题》一书有两大长处。一是综合了各种与翻译有关的语言符号理论，将之应用于翻译理论研究，可以说这是一个可喜的跨学科研究的尝试。二是借助皮尔斯等人的有关理论，为考察翻译提供了一个新的角度，将翻译视为一个旨在帮助原文不断获取新的生命力的进化过程。但令人遗憾的是，由于不注重实际分析，该书的理论探讨有一些脱离实际之处。这是该书的一大弱点，也可谓译学的纯理论研究或大或小的一个通病。 以上探讨的三本著作各具特色，各有其特定的分析原则、阐释框架和研究对象。通过对它们的考察，我们管中窥豹，分别看到了当今几个较有影响的译学研究派别的一些特点，看到了其不同的长处和局限性。当然，西方译学界派别繁多，研究方法纷呈不一，本文主要通过三本著作所展示的画面难免具有笼统性和片面性。但希望能够通过这样的探讨，帮助增进对西方译学研究新发展的了解。 [英文] Translation of research areas in the West in recent years can be said to hold a dominant position there are two main factions : One generalized to the linguistic basis of commitment to the translation of scientific nature of the building and development experience; The other, from a historical perspective by describing the approach to the study of translation. Although both are widely divergent, but there is a conspicuous common point, that is strong empirical. a pure research and control. This paper seeks approval of three representative works of the inspection to a Limited. Translation Studies look at the two main factions in Western certain characteristics, but also some understanding of the West pure research. Recent Developments in Translation Studies as Seen from Three Representative Books Published in the 1990’s Dan SHEN Abstract: In the field of translation studies, despite the existence of multiple approaches, two trends of development seem to have been dominating in recent years: one based on linguistics in thewide sense; the other marked by a historical-descriptive orientation. While the two trends of development are contrastive with each other, they share one thing in common, namely, both being essentially empirical, forming a contrast to translation studies with a somewhat ‘purely’ theoretical orientation. The present paper offers a discussion of some recent developments in the field by way of reviewing three representative books published in the 1990’s. Through the present review, we may get a glimpse not only of the characteristics of the two major trends of development, but also of certain features of the theoretical versus the empirical orientation. Since the early 1980s of the 20th century, the rapid progress in translation studies. If Western Translation Studies in the 1960s and 1970s was largely attributed to the rapid development of the rapid development of Linguistics, In the past two decades, cultural studies, literature, anthropology, information science, cognitive science, Generalized psychology and linguistics and so on the subject of translation played a larger role in the development (see Gentzle r 1993, elastin & Shreve 1992). Although the translation of a scene vary, but in recent years can be said to hol本论文由英语论文网提供整理，提供论文代写，英语论文代写，代写论文，代写英语论文，代写留学生论文，代写英文论文，留学生论文代写相关核心关键词搜索。