“改写”理论关照下《名利场》两种中译本比较研究

论文摘要

《名利场》是批判现实主义作家萨克雷的传世之作,在该小说中作家描述了十九世纪上半页英国贵族阶级的生活百态,并批判了上流社会各色人等的糜烂生活。该书于二十世纪初进入中国,之后,各家译本层出不穷,其中50年代的杨必译本和90年代的彭长江译本最为引人注意。杨译本用词冼炼,颇具中国古典白话小说遗风,而彭译本则以其鲜明的异化特色博得了读者的青睐。为何两译本的特色如此不同?又是什么原因让两名译者选择了不同的翻译策略?带着这些问题,本论文作者决定对两译本进行比较以一探究竟。传统的译本比较方法侧重于语言分析和文本对照,并以对原文的忠实程度来衡量译文质量的好坏,很少涉及翻译活动如何在主体文化里面运作的问题。在这样的研究范畴之内,从事研究的人很难脱离“原文”观念的限制,也因此绝少触及翻译活动和主体文化间的互动作用。由于传统比较方法的种种不足,本论文将杨必和彭长江翻译《名利场》作为个案进行对比研究,以历史的功能的文化的描述和细致入微的文本分析为两条主线,主要解决两个研究问题:一、影响两译本面貌的外在因素有哪些?二、这些因素如何产生作用?为了回答这些问题,本文采用比利时翻译家勒菲弗尔的“改写”论为理论框架,并引入他的影响翻译的四个因素(意识形态、诗学、赞助方、专业人士)作为研究对象,考察这些因素在两名译者各自时代是否对译者的翻译活动产生了影响。经过仔细研究,本文得出结论证明这四个因素对两名译者都产生了巨大的影响,而这些因素常常共同产生作用,因而难分彼此。结论同时证明了勒氏“改写”理论的正确性,并为该理论补充了大量的文本案例。另外,在研究外部因素对译者的作用的同时,本文也研究了两名译者对各自时代主流翻译观的接受程度,证明译者翻译策略的选择是译者主体性与社会规范和限制之间协调的结果。这一结论进一步丰富了勒菲弗尔的“改写”理论,表明译者并非是外在因素“操控”下的木偶,而是文化交流中的调停者与协调人。

论文目录

• Abstract
• 摘要
• Introduction
• 1.William Makepeace Thackeray and His Masterpiece Vanity Fair
• 2.The Two Translators and Their Versions:the Afterlives of Vanity Fair
• 3.Previous Researches on the Two Versions
• 4.Research Scope of This Dissertation
• Chapter One An Overview of Lefevere's "Rewriting" Theory
• 1.1 Brief Introduction of Lefevere and His Translation Studies
• 1.1.1 Conventional Studying Phase
• 1.1.2 Turning Phase
• 1.1.3 Maturing Phase
• 1.2 Lefevere's Description of Translation and His Concepts of Norms and Constraints
• 1.2.1 Ideological Constraint
• 1.2.2 Poetical Constraint
• 1.2.3 The Power of Patronage and the Professional
• 1.3 Application of Lefevere's "Rewriting" Theory in This Study
• Chapter Two The Influence of Ideology and Patronage on the Two Versions of Vanity Fair
• 2.1 Political Background of Vanity Fair and the Dominant Political Ideology in China:in 1950's and 1990's
• 2.1.1 William Thackeray's Ideological Tendency in Vanity Fair
• 2.1.2 Dominant National Political Ideology in China:in 1950's and 1990's
• 2.2 Self Image of the Chinese Culture
• 2.2.1 The Self-image of Chinese Culture Around 1957
• 2.2.2 The Self-image of Chinese Culture Around 1996
• 2.2.3 Impact of the Self-image of the Chinese Culture on the Two Translators
• 2.3 Ideology of Patrons Influencing the Two Versions
• 2.3.1 The Role of Patronage in Yang Bi's Translation
• 2.3.2 Patronage and Peng Changjiang's Translation
• Chapter Three The Influence of Poetics and the Professional on the Two Versions of Vanity Fair
• 3.1 Redefine Lefevere's "Poetics" and Its Role in Influencing the Image of a Translation
• 3.2 Dominant Poetics of Translation Advocated by the Professional of the Two Eras
• 3.2.1 Dominant Poetics of Translation Advocated by the Professional at Yang's Time
• 3.2.2 Dominant Poetics of Translation Advocated by the Professional at Peng's Time
• 3.3 Translator's Acceptance of the Dominant Poetics of Translation
• 3.3.1 Yang's Acceptance of the Dominant Poetics of Translation in 1950's
• 3.3.2 Peng's Acceptance of the Dominant Poetics of Translation in 1990's
• 3.4 A Comparative Study of the Two Versions from Perspective of Translation Strategies Adopted
• Conclusion
• Bibliography
• Acknowledgements