The consistency between the functionalism
and the literal translation
姓名：常首鸣
学号：2008142
班级：08级外应2班
Abstract: Although the skopos theory has t a new ground for translation theories, it has been regarded as a perspective with no relevance to such concepts as “literal translation” and“loyalty”. The functionalism, pursuing the “loyalty” principle on a macro-level, belongs to the translation system of “loyalty”. The Functionalism and the literal translation, sharing a deeper relationship, is consistent in nature.
Key words: the functionalism, the literal translation, loyalty , information
设计师语录
祝老板生意兴隆的词语
1. the theory of the functionalism
(1) .the functionalism
In the 1970s, Reiss, Vermeer and Christiane Nord propod the theory of the functionalism in which the focus, with the purpo of translation as its theoretical core, changes from the relation between the original writing and the translation to the expected effect of the translation. The functionalism offered a new study perspective.
Reiss, the founder of the school, regarded the text function as the object of the translation study, arguing that the asssment of translation should be conducted through the analysis of relation between the function of the original text and the translation. The relation is the functional equivalence between the original writing and the translation.
As Reiss’ student, Vermeer followed the theory of functionalism, proposing the skopos th工商管理系统
eory—the core theory of functionalism. She pointed out that translators should consider the expected effect(s) of the target context rather than the cloness between the original and the translation. And later, Christiane Nord developed this theory, putting forward the concept of “Function plus Loyalty”, in which she holds that “translation should create a target text with specific functions, and the relation between the two writings should be also made clear according to the expected function or the requirement asked by the target context.” It is obvious that although the translated text, according to Nord, needs processing “loyally”, it could be changed at some specific requirement; for the translator needs to handle the interpersonal relationship between him and the author, the reader of the original writing, even the publisher so as to highlight certain purpo of the translation.
(2). the uniqueness of the functionalism
Now we can distinguish the differences between the functionalism and the traditional translation theory: the focus is changed from the internal problems——the skills at transla
ting word, phra, ntence or paragraph, to the external ones——reproduction of the expected effect of the source text or realization of the specific requirement of the translation effect by the initiator. In translation, the expected purpo determines the translating process, that is to say, the specific effect determines the means of translating. According to the functionalism, the original text, as one of the sources of information that the translator us to realize the expected function, should be subject to the expected function, not having the only decisive meaning; but the authority of the original text can not be over-impaired. The functionalism is scientific that the function of the original is consistent with the expected function on the macro-level, in other words, no matter how the expected function changes, it will not depart from the initial function of the source text, and hereby there will be a sufficient guarantee of the accuracy, and this standpoint rves as the theoretical background for Nord’s “Function plus Loyalty”. But this criterion also stands at the center of controversy: how could the “loyalty” be guaranteed? And how could the translation be considered accurate if the original text is adjusted according to the function rather than being translated loyally?
日不落英文 2.the controversial “literal translation”
小孩吃什么补脑子增强记忆力
Why is the source text translated loyally, and which form is adopted to realize the “loyal translation”? The analysis of this question will facilitate the further understanding of the distinction between the functional translation strategy and the re-creation, and of the dialectical relationship between the theory of functionalism and the literal translation. 咳嗽心口窝疼怎么回事
(1). the early development of the literal translation
Loyalty means the correct understanding and expression of the original meaning. That is a generally acknowledged concept of the literal translation. But there is much controversy about how to do it for hundreds of years.
The early theory of literal translation can be traced back to the ancient Greek when, under the influence of religious belief, translation must be conducted literally, placing the original text on a pedestal, and the translator has to right to alter the original, any translati
on catering for the reader being regarded as unbearable. This view, although at the early stage of translation theory, has exerted great influence upon later study. Till now there are still many supporters, among whom the most influential figures are Lu Xun and Vladimir Nabokov. Lu Xun holds “to be faithful rather than smooth”, claiming that he would rather have his reader “suffer” his translation than alter the original text; Nabokov advocates the absolutely accurate copy of the original, stating that he would rather u annotation to keep the formal correspondence between the original and the translation.
(2). the influence of modern linguistics
Actually, the early translation theory is the so-called interlinear translation. Peter Newmark has pointed out the boundary between the literal translation and the interlinear translation: he thinks that in the translated text the grammatical form of the original should be renounced, while the meaning of the original remains; on the contrary, the interlinear translation copies both the form and the content of the original, but the grammatical structure is destroyed at the same time.
创新学
The development of modern linguistics supplies new theoretical support for the literal translation—translation should focus on the content behind the forms rather than the simple correspondence of word and ntence. The modern linguistics hold that among the various linguistic forms there is a universal meaning which shares a kind of information that could be understood by all the people speaking different languages, and all the forms containing the information could be transformed into different languages; and the action in the opposite way is translation. The position has won many supporters, among whom Chomsky and Halliday are the backbone. This view is a progress in the literal translation theory, for it pays more attention to the “functional equivalence” instead of the traditional formal equivalence, it is, however, a pity that the perspective excludes the factors outside the mantic structure.
But the theory of literal translation is the most thorough one that sticks to the original text, and what’s more, its comparative accuracy stands out from other theories. Although the standard of loyalty is changed from the narrow n to the broad n, namely, from the pudo-literal translation to the real one, the accurate understanding of the original m
eaning is never changed.
3. the literal-translation nature of the functionalism
手机usb调试开关在哪 From the discussion above, it can be said that the literal translation aims to comprehensively convey the accurate information so as to help readers obtain the most “original information” with the least interference. In literal translation, “literal” refers to the degree that the translation sticks to the original information, while the theory is flexible when adopting the specific translation strategy—this attempt is the source of inspiration of functionalism. It is certain that there exists a common ground between the functionalism and the literal translation theory.
