从《飘》两个中文译本的对比研究论英汉翻译中归化的重要作用.doc

太原理工大学硕士学位论文从飘两个中文译本的对比研究论英汉翻译中归化的重要作用姓名：董秀静申请学位级别：硕士专业：指导教师：20100401太原理工大学硕士研究生学位论文从飘两个中文译本的对比研究论英汉翻译中归化的重要作用摘 要翻译是推动不同语言和文化之间交流的桥梁，在跨文化交际中起着重要作用。国内普遍将两种主要的翻译策略归化与异化看作是直译和意译的延伸。归化和异化不仅涉及语言层面，也涉及到了文化层面。归化与异化之争在翻译界由来已久。争论开始，双方各执一词，只强调一种策略的优点，完全否定另一种策略，认为二者完全对立。 进入 21 世纪，由于各种新思潮的影响，许多学者认为这两种策略之间是对立统一的关系，二者是互补的而不是对立的。近来，讨论的焦点已经由哪个策略更好转向文学翻译中哪个策略应处于主导地位。自归化与异化之争以来，有时归化策略占优势，有时是异化策略占优势。随着全球化的进程不断加快以及跨文化交流越来越频繁，了解外国文化变得越来越重要。在这种情况下，越来越多的学者开始推崇异化策略，但是归化在翻译当中的重要基础地位没有改变。翻译中不加选择地一味使用异化策略必将导致过度异化现象的产生。过度异化不仅不能实现译者的初衷，促进文化交流，反而会造成译文难于阅读理解，最终阻碍文化的交流。基于对飘的两个中文译本的个案研究，本文意在在异化策略呼声日益强烈的情况下重申归化策略的重要性。因此，本文的理论基础主要是归化翻译和异化翻译的文化导向。我们知道，在翻译界尤金奈达主张“动态对等”或者“功能对等”，这种“动态对等”或者“功能对等”就类似于归化策略。与之形成对比的是，后殖民主义翻译理论家劳伦斯维努蒂提出了异化策略，目的是要发展一种“抵抗以目的语文化价值观占主导地位的翻译理论和实践,以表现外国文本在语言和文化上的差异”。他的主要目的是反对文化霸权。但是，中国翻译归化和异化研究的前提是各种语言和文化是平等的，因此他的观点在国内并不完全适用。本文作者认为好的译本应该迎合读者口味，以读者认可为主要目标。当然，本文也探讨了归化策略的局限性，避免过度归化现象发生。总之，翻iv太原理工大学硕士研究生学位论文译成功与否关键在于能否恰当地运用归化和异化策略，也就是说，二者缺一不可但又不能走极端。我们应当尽可能避免过度异化与过度归化，创作出更优秀的翻译作品，从而真正促进中国与西方国家的文化交流。本文主要分为七章。第一章为前言，引出全文的论题。第二章主要介绍了 “归化” 与 “异化”的定义，回顾了国内外对于归化与异化进行的研究。同时简要介绍了飘及两个相关的中文译本。第三章、第四章与第五章对这两个中文译本进行了细致的研究。经过对照，首先论述了异化的必要，而后主要论证归化的优势所在以及过度异化的缺陷。第六章给出了造成过度异化的可能原因以及归化策略的局限性。最后，作者得出结论，归化策略在现代翻译中依然举足轻重。过度异化现象相比于过度归化要普遍得多也严重得多。当然，要创造更优秀的翻译作品，过度异化与过度归化都应当尽力避免。关键词： 翻译，归化，异化，过度异化v太原理工大学硕士研究生学位论文ON THE IMPORTANCE OF DOMESTICATIONIN ENGLISH-CHINESE TRANSLATIONBASED ON A CONTRASTIVE STUDY OF TWOCHINESE VERSIONS OF GONE WITH THE WINDABSTRACTAs a bridge that facilitates the communication of different languages and cultures,translation plays a very important role in intercultural communication. Foreignizationand domestication as two major strategies are considered to be the extension of literaltranslation and free translation in China. They involve not only linguistic level but alsocultural level. The choice between domestication and foreignization has always been acontroversial issue in the translation circles. At first, each side emphasizes the merits ofone strategy and completely negates the other on the basis of a rigid dichotomy betweendomestication and foreignization. In the 21st century, affected by numerous new theories,more scholars tend to take the two strategies as dialectical; regarding them ascomplementary rather than contradictory. Recently, the discussion has shifted fromwhich strategy is better to which one should be the dominant strategy in literarytranslation. In the whole process, domestication or foreignization takes the upper handin turn.With globalization unceasingly picking up speed and intercultural communicationever-increasing, the transmission of foreign culture becomes more and more important.In this background, foreignization is favored by more and more scholars, neverthelessthe fundamental role domestication plays in translation cannot be changed. Invariablyclinging to foreignization in the process of translation will inevitably lead tooverforeignization. Overforeignization will not facilitate cultural communication as thei太原理工大学硕士研究生学位论文translator has originally expected. On the contrary, it poses difficulty for readers tounderstand the translation and finally obstructs the cultural flow. Based on a case studyof two Chinese versions of Gone with the Wind , this thesis aims to reaffirm theimportance of domestication when the call for foreignization is becoming louder andlouder. Therefore, this paper is based mainly on the “cultural orientation” ofdomestication and foreignization. We know that in the translation circles, Dr. EugeneNida strongly advocates “dynamic equivalence” or “functional equivalence” which ismuch the same as domesticating strategy. In contrast, the post-colonial translationtheorist Lawrence Venuti puts forward the strategy of foreignization to “resist dominanttarget language cultural values so as to signify the linguistic and cultural difference ofthe foreign text”. His main purpose is to fight against cultural hegemony. However, thestudy of domestication and foreignization in China is based on the equality betweendifferent languages and cultures. In this sense, Venutis theory cannot be completelyadapted to the translation study at home. As a result, the author holds that a successfultranslated text should cater for the need of readers and focus on the acceptability.In this thesis, limitations of domestication are also discussed to avoid anyoccurrence of over-domestication. To conclude, the key to a good translation lies in theproper manipulation of domestication and foreignization, that is, neither of the two canbe dispensed with, nor can either go to extremes. Both overforeignization andoverdomestication should be reduced to a minimum so as to produce more excellenttranslations and authentically contribute to the cultural exchange between China and theWest.This paper mainly consists of seven parts.Chapter one serves as the introduction to the whole thesis. Chapter two mainlyintroduces the definitions of foreignization and domestication and a literature review ofthe studies about the two strategies in the West and China. A brief introduction to Gonewith the Wind and the two Chinese versions concerned is also conducted. In Chapterthree, Chapter four and Chapter five, a detailed case study of the two Chinese versionsis carried out. Through comparison and contrast, the necessity of foreignization isanalyzed; then the advantages of domestication and the awkwardness ofoverforeignization are clearly presented. Chapter six provides the possible causes ofii太原理工大学硕士研究生学位论文overforeignization and limitations of domestication. In the last part, the authorconcludes that domestication is still rather important in modern translation.Overforeignization is more prevalent and serious than overdomestication. Of course,both overforeignization and overdomestication should be avoided as much as possibleto bring about more splendid translations.KEY WORDS: translation, domestication, foreignization, overforeignizationiii太原理工大学硕士研究生学位论文Chapter 1 IntroductionWe are living at an age when different cultures conflict with and learn from each othermore than any time in the history. People speaking one language need and would like more thanever to communicate with those speaking different languages. Translation is the most importantand effective tool to achieve this goal. Yet, translation is a brain-exhausting activity. Since eachlanguage has its peculiar cultural connotations, sometimes it is difficult for translators totransmit the cultural implication of one language to another. In the process of translation, thetranslator is continually faced with choices, puzzled by various contradictions and alwaysplaced in a dilemma as to which strategy is more suitable. A most important one among them ishow to choose between domestication and foreignization, two basic translation strategiesconcerned with linguistic and cultural differences between two languages.1.1 The background of this researchForeignization and domestication have long been the focus of the debate in the translationfield both at home and abroad. As a result, different viewpoints spring up like mushrooms.In the West, Dr. Eugene Nida strongly advocates “dynamic equivalence” based on histranslation practice of the Bible. He puts much emphasis on the readers response, that is, hegives priority to “functional equivalence”. This “dynamic equivalence” or “functionalequivalence” is much the same as domesticating strategy. In contrast, the post-colonialtranslation theorist Lawrence Venuti is regarded as a famous representative of foreignization.Influenced by Deconstruction, he puts forward the strategy of foreignization to “resist dominanttarget language cultural values so as to signify the linguistic and cultural difference of theforeign text” (1995:20).Domestication and foreignization were introduced into China in the late 20th century, buttheir connotations in Chinese have changed to certain extent. Translators in China do not pay somuch attention to the unequalness between different cultures as Western translators (QiaoCengrui, 2000:22). As a matter of fact, the study of domestication and foreignization in China isbased on the equality between different languages and cultures and has its own characteristics.Some scholars like Guo Moruo (郭沫若) and Fu Lei (傅雷) argue that domestication isbetter while others like Lu Xun(鲁迅) favor foreignization. Yet even more people would rather2太原理工大学硕士研究生学位论文choose the compromise, saying that foreignization and domestication are not opposite butcomplementary to each other. Their relationship is “symbiosis” (Wang Baorong, 2004:40).Another strategy “hybridization” is also proposed by a postgraduate Fu Weifeng(傅伟锋), that is,at the linguistic level domestication is preferable while foreignization is favorable at the culturallevel.In recent years, the issue of domestication and foreignization becomes the focus of debatesagain, triggered by an article “Domestication: the Wrong Track in Translation” (Liu Yingkai,1987:36). He regards domestication as the extreme of free translation. Qin Hongwu (秦洪武)holds that proper application of domestication is a flexible and extended use of faithfulnessprinciple in translation practice (2000: 368).At the threshold of the 21st century, application of many new Western translation theoriessuch as text typology, skopos theory, polysystem theory, the ideological approach to translationand the post-colonial theory, to studying domestication and foreignization becomes popular.Thus, another round of debate over the two strategies takes place. Sun Zhili (孙致礼) observesthe tendency of foreignization in Chinese literary translation (2002:44). Wang Dongfeng (王东风) argues that certain translators cultural attitudes play a key role in his selection of translationstrategy in technical translation (2003:26).1.2 The purpose of this researchUp to now, these various viewpoints of domestication and foreignization are from differentperspectives and many translators and theorists tend to favor one strategy and exclude the other.Of course, every theory is put forward under its specific social and political background. Atpresent, with the globalization of the international economy, the call for foreignization inliterary translation is becoming louder and louder. More and more translators advocateforeignization as they think foreignization can better promote cultural communication. Sometranslators invariably cling to foreignization, which may result in overforeignization. And its apity that they are not aware of the deficiency of overforeignization. They believe theirtranslation is rich in foreign taste and can push forward cultural exchange. As a matter of fact,overforeignization not only undermines the readability of the rendering but also hinders culturalcommunication as readers may fail to grasp the messages contained in the original text.Therefore, it should be noted that domestication is still indispensable. We couldnt and3太原理工大学硕士研究生学位论文shouldnt ignore domestication due to its important role in translation. In this paper, the authoradopts the method of descriptive research and carries out a detailed contrastive study betweentwo Chinese versions of Gone with the Wind. Through this case study, the author aims toanalyze in detail the advantages of domestication and the disadvantages of overforeignization soas to remind translators of the importance of domestication in translation practice. On the otherhand, limitations of domestication are also presented. Finally, the author concludes that thequality of translation will be improved and thus cross-cultural communication can be betterfulfilled only by reducing both over-foreignization and over-domestication to a minimum.1.3 The significance of this researchAs has been mentioned above, in translation practice, translators are constantly faced withdilemmas as to which strategy is a better choice. They may always ponder over this issue:domestication or foreignization and to what degree should domestication or foreignization beemployed. Although there have been many theories on this topic, the concrete examples are notsufficient. Through this case study of two Chinese versions of Gone with the Wind, the authorintends to provide guidance for translators when they hesitate over the choice betweendomestication and foreignization. Hopefully, this thesis will bring about more discussions onthis issue and help to produce more and more excellent translated works.In the following part, the author will survey briefly the previous studies at home andabroad on domestication and foreignization and present her understanding on this topic based onlimited previous research.4太原理工大学硕士研究生学位论文Chapter 2 Fundamental issues of domestication and foreignizationAs has been mentioned above, the choice between domestication and foreignization hasbeen a long-debated issue in both China and the West. Numerous theorists and translators haveexpressed their standpoints respectively on this issue. Before digging into this topic, we shouldfirst look back to the previous studies and achievements. Most important of all, we must clarifythe definitions of domestication and foreignization.2.1 The origin of foreignization and domestication and their definitionsThe idea of foreignization was first brought up by Schleiermacher, a famous Germantranslator, in 1813. In his lecture “On the Different Methods of Translating”, the Germantheologian and philosopher argues: “There are only two translation approaches. Either thetranslator leaves the author in peace, as much as possible, and moves the reader toward him orhe leaves the reader in peace, as much as possible, and moves the author towards him” (Venuti,1995:19-20). To put it briefly, domesticating translation is to be TL culture-oriented and