资料：《当代西方翻译理论选读》笔记

Chapter 1 Eugene Nida Dynamic Equivalence and Formal Equivalence GUIDED READING Eugene Nida: a distinguished American translation theorist and linguist. Principles of Translation as Exemplified by Bible Translation(1959): theory of dynamic equivalence Toward a Science of Translation(1964): dynamic equivalent translation---- In such a translation one is not so concerned with matching the receptor-language message with the source-language message, but with the dynamic relationship, that the relationship between receptor and message should be substantially the same as that which existed between the original receptors and the message. The Theory and Practice of Translation(1969): Dynamic Equivalence definition----in terms of degree to which the receptors of the message in the receptor language respond to it in substantially the same manner as the receptors in the source language. From One Language to Another(1986):Dynamic Equivalence is superseded by Functional Equivalence Language,Culture and translating(1993):Functional Equivalence(minimal level, maximal level) minimal level:The readers of a translated text should be able to comprehend it to the point that they can conceive of how the original readers of the text must have understood and appreciated it. maximal level:The readers of a translated text should be able to understand and appreciate it in essentially the same manner as the original readers did. traditional translating theories: focus on verbal comparison between the original text and its translation. Nina's concept of translating: shift from "the form of the message" to the response of the receptor. Principles of Correspondence by Eugene Nida There can be no correspondence between languages. There can be no fully exact translations. The total impact of a translation may be reasonably close to the original, but there can be no identity in detail. DIFFRENT TYPES OF TRANSLATIONS extremes: free or paraphrastic translation v.s. close and literal translation three basic factors in translating: (1) the nature of the message; (2) the purpose or purposes of the author and, by proxy, of the translator; (3) the type of audience Messages differ primarily in the degree to which content or from is the the dominant consideration. The content of a message can never be completely abstracted from the form, and form is nothing apart from content; but in some messages the content is of primary consideration, and in others the form must be given a higher priority. the particular purposes of the translator are also important factors in dictating the type of translation. the primary purpose of the translator may be information as to both content and form. a largely informative translation may, on the other hand, be designed to elicit an emotional response of pleasure from the reader of listener. a translator's purposes may involve much more than information. He may, for example, want to suggest a particular type of behavior by means of a translation (aim at fully intelligibility): to change one's mid about sin----repentance; white as snow----white as egret feathers.