英语论文网

g thelinguistic and cultural difference of the foreign text” while “domesticating translation”is to bring the author back home by “ethnocentric reduction of the foreign text totarget-language cultural values” (Venuti, 2004:20).Venuti’s binary division roots back to Friedrich Schleiermacher’s dichotomy oftranslation methods: “either the translator leaves the author in peace, as much aspossible, and moves the reader towards him; or he leaves the reader in peace, as muchas possible, and moves the author towards him” (ibid. :19). Schleiermacher privilegesthe first method, which is “subsequently revised in Antoine Berman’s notion of a translation ethics that respects cultural otherness by manifesting the foreignness of thesource text in the translation” (Venuti, 2013:2). Berman argues that translation is theexperience of the foreign and that “the properly ethical aim of the translating act” is“receiving the foreign as foreign” (Munday, 2005:149).
.........

Chapter Three Foreignization withinAT.........13
3.1 Introduction.......13
3.2 Foreignization from a General Pragmatic Perspective.....13
3.3 Foreignization as a Process of Choice-making.........14
3.4 Foreignization as a Process ofAdaptation........16
3.5 Summary...........23
Chapter Four Data Analysis of Foreignization underAT...... 25
4.1 Introduction.......25
4.2 Adaptation to Contextual Correlates........ 25
4.3 Adaptation to Structural Objects.......45
4.4 Dynamic Adaptation......... 56
4.5 Degrees of Salience in Adaptation....61
4.5.1 Salience in ST Culture Perception....62
4.5.2 Salience in TT Culture Generation...........63
4.6 Summary...........64
Chapter Five Conclusion...........66
5.1 Major Findings..........66
5.2 Limitations of the Study and Suggestions for Future Research.......68

Chapter Four DataAnalysis of Foreignization underAT

4.1Introduction
Theoretical endeavor is made in the last chapter to prove that foreignizationinvolves making continuous choices and is a dynamic process of making adaptationsto contextual correlates and structural objects. This chapter is devoted to the casestudy of the foreignization in the four English Versions of Mencius, translated byJames Legge, Leollard A.Lyall, D.C.Lau and Zhao Zhentao. They are analyzed indetails from Verschueren’s four angles of investigation. In sections 4.2 and 4.3,translators’ adaptation to different contexts is first investigated, both communicativecontext and linguistic context included. The dynamics of adaptability and degrees ofsalience are then probed into in sections 4.4 and 4.5. Comparisons of culturetranslations in different versions are also made to show translator’s culture position inthe practice of foreignization. The final object of the chapter is to reveal the trianglerelationship among translator, culture, and language in foreignization, and to find outthe underlying mechanism of culture interaction behind the practice of foreignization.
.........

Conclusion

From the perspective of Verschueren’s Adaptation Theory, this thesis makes adescriptive and explanatory study on the translation practice of foreignization byanalyzing and comparing the data of foreignizing translations from the four differentEnglish versions of Mencius. It aims to find out the underlying pragmatic mechanismof foreignizat