英语论文网

ation”(刘英凯，归化－翻译的歧路，现代外语，1987（2）：58) In 1995, a debate between the two views within a national scope was organized by academic institutions concerned, centering on the evaluation of several versions of The Red and The Black. Chinese Translators Journal, in 2002, offered a special column for scholars to air their views on this issue. Traditionally, Chinese views of domestication and foreignization are expressed in expressionistic terms, lacking in analytical depth and philosophical insight when compared with the Western ones. It spans back to the Roman Age when both Horace and Cicero, in their remarks on the translation, first eloquently formulated an important distinction between word for word translation and sense for sense ( or figure for figure) translation. (Bassnett, Susan.(1980) Translation Studies. London and New York: Methuen. P43.) As Niethzsche remarked: “Translation was a form of conquest”, Latin poets like Horace and Propertius translated Greek texts into the Roman. (Baker, Mona. (1998) Routledge Encyclopedia of Translation Studies. London and New York: Routledge. P240~241.) With the spread of Christianity, translation came to acquire another role, that of disseminating the word of God. In the Bible translation, St Jerome (400) had a bent for rendering the text colloquially and naturally rather than word for word. King Alfred (reign 871~99) rendered the text sometimes word for word, sometimes sense for sense. In 1530, Luther proposed free translation as opposed to the church authorities of his time over the translation of the Bible into German, and he used the verbs ubersetzen (to translate) and verdeutschen (to Germanize) almost indiscriminately. In 1790, Tytler propounded his widespread three principles: (1) The translation should give a complete transcript of the ideas of the original work. (2) The style and manner of writing should be of the same character with that of the original. (3) The translation should have all the ease of the original composition. (Nida, Eugene A. (1964) Toward A Science of Translation. Leiden: E. J. Brill. P19) In the 19th century, Goethe (1813, 1814), Humaboldt (1816), Novalis (1798), Schleiermacher (1813), Schopenhawer (1851) and Nietzche (1882) inclined towards more literal translation while Arnold subscribed to a free translation. (Newmark, Peter. (1981) Approaches to translation. Oxford: Pergamon Press. P4) Schleiermacher expounded that translations from different languages into German should read and sound different: the reader should be able to guess the Spanish behind a translation from Spanish, and the Greek behind a translation from Greek. He argued that if all translations read and sounded alike, the identity of the source text would be lost and leveled in the target culture. (Baker, Mona. (1998) Routledge Encyclopedia of Translation Studies. London and New York: Routledge. P242.) In the 20th century, Benjamin recommended foreignizing translation by saying: “The sentence is a wall blocking out the language of the original, whilst word for word translation is the arcade.” (Newmark, Peter.(1981) Approaches to Translation. Oxford: Pergamon Press. P4) In the 60’s and the 70’s of the 20th century, Eugene A. Nida constructed a grand theory system of structuralist domesticating translation. In his theory, Nida gives the first place to the target reader. The translation should adjust itself to the norms of the target language and culture in order to sound natural and standard to th