纽马克的翻译理论.docx

1、纽马克的翻译理论Chapter 2Peter NewmarkSemantic and Communicative TranslationGuided ReadingPeter Newmark (1916) is an accomplished translation scholar as well as an experienced translator. He has translated a number of books and articles and published extaensively on translation. His publications on translat

2、ion include Approaches to Translation (1981), About Translation(1983), Paragraphs on Translation段落翻译(1985), A Textbook of Translation翻译教程(1988), and More Paragraphs on Translation(1993).In his work Approaches to Translation, Newmark proposes two types of translation: semantic translation语义翻译 and com

3、municative translation交际翻译. Semantic translation focuses primarily upon the semantic content of the source text whereas communicative translation focuses essentially upon the comprehension and response of receptors. This distinction results from his disapproval of Nidas assumption假定，假设，设想；假装；承担，担任 t

4、hat all translating is communicating, and the overriding最主要的，最优先的 principle of any translation is to achieve equivalent effect. For Newmark, the success of equivalent effect is illusory, and that the conflict of loyalties, the gap between emphasis on source and target languages will always remain as

5、 the overriding problem in translation theory and practice(1981:38). To narrow the gap, Newmark 系统地阐述，确切地表达；规划，构想出formulates his concepts of communicative translation and semantic translation, which in a sense从某种意义上说 are similar to Nidas dynamic equivalent translation and formal equivalent translati

6、on. Newmarks admits communicative translation is a common method and could be used in many types of translation. Nevertheless, he justifies证明正当/有理，为辩护 the legitimacy合法性，正当；合理性，妥当；嫡出，正统 of semantic translation in the following three aspects. Firstly, all translations depend on the three 一分为二，二分法；本质对立

7、dichotomies, namely, the foreign and native cultures, the two languages, the writer and the translator. Hence, it is unlikely to have a universal theory that could include all these factors. Secondly, previous discussions on methods of translation, either Nidas dynamic equivalence or Nabokows litera

8、l translation, does not reflect the actual reality of translation method, for each of them either recommends one or 贬低，轻视disparages the other. Thirdly, the social factors, especially the readers of the second language, only play a partial部分的；偏爱/袒/心的 role发挥部分作用 in translation. Some texts, such as an

9、expressive one, require a semantic translation(1981:62). It can be seen that可以看出 by proposing the coexistence of communicative translation and semantic translation, Newmark suggests a correlation相互关系，关联；相关性 between translation method and text type.It should be pointed out that应该指出的是 Newmarks semanti

10、c translation differs from literal translation直译 because the former respects context, interprets and even explains while the latter sticks very closely to source text at word and syntax level(1981:62). Literal translation, however, is held to be the best approach in both semantic and communicative t

11、ranslation, provided that如果 equivalent effect is secured, the literal word-for-word translation is not only the best, it is the only valid method of translation(1981:39). Here Newmark seems to only take account of考虑到，顾及，体谅 literary translation rather than non-literary translation, which is often ren

12、dered more freely in order to communicate the meaning. But he also states that when there is a conflict between semantic and communicative translation, the latter would win out胜出. For instance, it is better to render communicatively the public sign公共标志 bissiger Hund and chien mechant into beward the

13、 dog! in order to communicate efficiently the message, but not semantically as dog that bites! and bad dog!(1981:39). Nevertheless, it is difficult for a translator to follow Newmarks translation methods in practice, which should be adopted flexibly according to the specific context and text type.A

14、Textbook of Translation is an expansion and a revision of Approaches to Translation in many aspects在很多方面. In this book, Newmark, follwing the German linguist Karl Buhlers functional theory of language, proposes three main types of texts . expressive有表现力的，富有表情的, informative提供大量资料或信息的，授予知识的 and vocati

15、ve呼格的) as well as methods of translating them (Chapters 4 and 5). Although he lists many translation methods from word-for-word translation to adaptation, he insists that only semantic and communicative translation fulfill the two main aims of translation, which are first, accuracy, and second, econ

16、omy. While semantic translation is used for expressive texts, communicative translation is for informative and vocative texts although he admits that few texts are purely expressive, informative or vocative. By stressing the wide applicability of these two translation methods, Newmark seems to overl

17、ook the function of other translation methods frequently adopted in translation practice.Newmarks semantic and communicative translation ahve been quoted frequently among translation scholars. His concern about the coexistence of semantic and communicative translation shows that in his view effect-o

18、riented translation以效果为导向的翻译 such as Nidas dynamic equivalence should not be overstressed in translation practice, but is just one type of translation. Newmarks types of translation, however, are less influential than Nidas dynamic equivalence in the field of translation studies because they raise s

19、ome of the same points concerning the translation process and the importance of the TT reader译文读者 (Munday 2000:46). Further, his views and comments are still very traditional and prescriptive规定的，指定的，规范的, bearing some traces of traditional translation theories. The strength of his writing lies in tha

20、t his discussion on translation covers a wide range of topics, and he always provides useful advice and guidance for translator 接受训练的人，实习生，培训生trainees with a large number of interesting and useful examples, which are more convincing than abstract theoretical arguments抽象的理论论证. The following excerpt i

21、s selected from Chapter 3 of Newmarks Approaches to Translation. In this chapter he 假定，要求postulates his two main methods of translation . Semantic and communicative translation), and tries to apply them into different types of text.Communicative and Semantic Translation1. A translation must give the

22、 words of the original.2. A translation must give the ideas of the original.3. A translation should read like an original work.4. A translation should read like a translation.5. A translation should reflect the style of the original.6. A translation should possess the style of the translation.7. A t

23、ranslation should read as a contemporary of the original.8. A translation should read as a contemporary of the translation.9. A translation may add to or omit from the original.10. A translation may never add to or omit from the original.11. A translation of verse should be in prose.12. A translatio

24、n of verse should be in verse.(The Air of Translation, . Savory, Cape, 1968, In the pre-linguistics period of writing on translation, which may be said to date from Cicero through St. Jerome, Luther, Dryden, Tytler, Herder, Goethe, Schleiermacher, Buber, Ortega y Gasset, not to say Savory, opinion s

25、wung between literal and free, faithful and beautiful, exact and natural translation, depending on whether the bias was to be in favour of赞成 the author or the reader, the source or the target language of the text. Up to the nineteenth century, literal translation represented a philological语言学的，文献的，文

26、学的 academic exercise语言学学术活动 from which the cultural reformers文化改革者 were trying to rescue literature. In the nineteenth century, a more scientific approach was brought to bear on对有影响，和有关 translation, suggesting that certain types of texts must be accurately translated, while others should and could n

27、ot be translated at all! Since the rise of modern linguistics (philology语言学 was becoming linguistics语言学 here in the late fifties), and anticipated by预计到 Tytler in 1790, Larbaud, Belloc, Knox and Rieu, the general emphasis, supported by communication-theorists as well as by non-literary translators,

28、has been placed on the reader-on informing the reader effectively and appropriately, notably显著地，明显地；尤其，特别 in Nida, Firth, Koller and the Leipzig School. In contrast相反, the brilliant essays of Benjamin, Valery and Nabokov (anticipated by Croce and Ortega y Gasset) advocating literal translation have

29、appeared as isolated孤立的，被隔离的, paradoxical phenomena自相矛盾的现象, relevant only to与有关 translating works of high literary culture. Koller (1972) has stated that the equivalent-effect principle of translation is tending to rule out把排除在外，排除的可能性；不把考虑在内 all others, particularly the predominance of any formal e

30、lements such as word or structure.The apparent triumph of the consumer is, I think, illusory. The conflict of loyalties, the gap between emphsis on source and target language will always remain as the overriding problem in translation theory and practice. However, the gap could perhaps be narrowed i

31、f the previous terms were replaced as follows:SOURCE LANGUAGE BIAS TARGET LANGUAGE BIAS LITERAL FREE FAITHFUL IDIOMATIC SEMANTIC / COMMUNICATIVECommunicative translation attempts to produce on its readers an effect as close as possible to that obtained on the readers of the original. Semantic transl

32、ation attempts to render, as closely as the semantic and syntactic造句法的，句子结构的 structures of the second language allow, the exact contextual上下文的，前后关系上的 meaning of the original.In theory, there are wide differences between the two methods. Communicative translation addresses itself solely to the second reader, who does not anticipate difficulties or obscurities, and would expect a generous transfer of foreign elements into his own culture as well as his language where necessary. But even here the translator still has to respect and work on the form of the source lang