译本的文学性再现的研究 [5]
论文作者:www.51lunwen.org论文属性:硕士毕业论文 thesis登出时间:2014-03-31编辑:hynh1021点击率:5903
论文字数:58790论文编号:org201403291724315872语种:英语 English地区:中国价格:$ 66
关键词:戏剧翻译文学性可表演性暴风雨
摘要:本文借用文艺领域中的修辞理论、社会语言学领域中的关联原则等相关理论,从重诗意、修辞性、含蓄性和个性化语言这四个方面来考察两个中译本的文学性的再现。同时根据对可表演性三种不同角度的理解,将其细化为可说性、可演性和目的语观众可接受性,并以此来分析两译本的可表演性。
he whole message including the implications. Liang takes the cognitivegap between the SL audience and the TL audience into consideration, and bridges thegap by establishing some ground work for the Chinese audience, to make sure thatthey can get the implications as the SL audiences can. Zhu also notices the difficultyof getting the English implications across to Chinese audience, but he chooses a moredirect and rash way to deal with them- he throws away some of the connotations andloses the implications altogether. Another component of literariness in dramatic text isthe idiosyncrasy of each character, as it enriches their personalities and adds to thedrama of the story. Generally speaking, Liang sees a larger picture and understandseach character from the context, while Zhu seems to be limited in each line orscenario per se, thus the characters in his translation are less distinct and complete.e. In recreating the performability of The Tempest, Liang’s version surpassesZhu’s in the following concerns. To start with, Liang’s translation of the lines isgenerally more smooth and fluid with proper length, so the actors are able to speakthese lines on their natural breath, while Zhu’s translation tries too hard to achieve thebeauty of words, causing the translated lines too complicated to be pronounced byactors, let alone to be understood by audience. Secondly, Liang’s translation shows abetter sense of humor, which plays a key role in staging a comedy, while Zhu’stranslation sometimes seems so serious that it results in awkwardness. Thirdly, Lianggives more consideration to the match between the actors’ lines and their movementson stage. Though both translators aimed at offering a written translation in the firstplace, they still need to bear the audience in mind and take their possible reaction intoaccount. Gestures, facial expressions and other movements are the second language ofdrama, which also count on the translators to bring them out. Liang’s translation ofthe lines fit into the movements better than Zhu’s, making it easier for the actors toperform.f. The fact that Liang’s version is better than Zhu’s in both literariness andperformability suggests that these two elements can co-exist in theatre translation.Success in one of the two dimensions does not necessarily inhibit that in the other.g. Neither of the two Chinese versions has been officially and successfullystaged in China to a large audience, indicating their inadequate degree of acceptability.One of the reasons for this situation may be the translators’ strategies in translatingthe play. Both translators are in favor of foreignization, which shows their respect forexotic culture and their determination of bridging the English and Chinese culture.But total foreignization may lead to repulsion from the target-language culture, thusfailing the intentions of the translators. Therefore, a compromise betweenforeignization and domestication is suggested.h. A limitation of this study is that it has not completely solved the dilemmabetween the two trends in drama translation- whether to preserve the exoticcharacteristics of the text or to adapt them to the target culture. To bridge theconflicting trends, the semiotic approach can be taken into consideration for futureresearch.
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。