-
奈达翻译理论研究
A Study on Nida
’
s
Translation Theory
马会娟
著
English
Abstract
This book
makes a systematic
research on
Nida
’
s translation
theory
, clarify some
misunderstandings
concerning
his
theory
,
disclose
its
true
nature
and
explore
its
validity
and
limitations
in
literary
translations.
Examples
from
Today
’
s
English
V
ersion
and
Today
’
s
Chinese
V
ersion
of
the
Bible,
which
were
translated,
following
Nida
’
s
translation
theory
,
demonstrate
that
Nida
’
s
theory
,
contrary
to
some
popular
wrong
assumptions,
is
applicable
to
translation
practice
between
foreign
languages
and
Chinese.
A
comparative
study
of
Nida
’
s
theory
and
Jin
Di
’
s
theory
is
made
to
reveal
the
similarities
and
differences
between
the
two
theories,
and
the
reasons
for
their
discrepancies
are
also
explored.
Examples
from
Jin
’
s
Chinese
translation
of
Ulysses
are
examined
against
the
principle
of
“
equivalent
effect
”
.
This
book
also
explores
the
limitations
of
Nida
’
s
theory
in
literary
translation,
pointing
out
that
his
theory
fails
to
address
the
issue
of
transference
of
aesthetic
values
of
literary
work
into another language. Attempts have
been made to amend Nida
’
s
theory in respect of
transferring
aesthetic
values of
literary
work by
means of
“
formal aesthetic
markers
”
and
“
non-formal
aesthetic
markers
”
,
with aim of
marking
it
more suitable
for
literary
translation between Chinese and
English.
CHAPTER ONE
Introduction
1.1 Reasons for
further research on Nida
’
s
translation theory
His works on
translation set off the study of modern
translation as an
academic field (
Snell
—
Hornby
,
Heylen, Baker)
Before his theory was
introduced into China in the 1980s, people mainly
focused attention on traditional
Chinese theories, especially Y
an
Fu
’
s
three
—
character
principle of translation: faithfulness, smoothness
and elegance.
Since
Nida
’
s theory was grounded
solidly on contemporary developments of
linguistics, communication
theory
, information theory
,
semiotics and
anthropology
,
Chinese translation scholars took great interest
in his theory
.
Chang Namfung summarizes 4 kinds of
misunderstandings regarding
Nida
’
s theory in
China:
1)
“
Dynamic
equivalence”
is only an
ideal translation ctiterion
2)
Nida
’
s theory is
unfit to guide translation practice between
Chinese and
English because it grows
out of translation experience among
Indo
—
European
language
3)
Nida
’
s takes
“
reader
’
s
response
”
as a translation
criterion in evaluating
translation
4)
Nida
doesn’
t respect the cultural
factors in the source language and his
maintenance of complete naturalization
in translating is a kind of
cultural
hegemonism.
The term
“
equivalence
”
in
Nida
’
s theory never means
“
identical
”
< br>, but only
“substantially
the same
”
.
“
dynamic
equivalence”
is founded
on
information theory
, and
is has on direct
relationship with
“
reception
aesthetics
”
or
“
reader-response
theory”
at all.
Nida
’
s discussion
about kernels and deep structures is based on
semantic level
while Chomsky focuses on
syntactical level.
Nida
’
s
“
science of
translation
”
is totally
different from the debates of the debate
of whether
“
translation is a science or
an art
”
occurring among some
Chinese scholars.
When Nida talks about
“
science of
translation
”
, what he means
is that he tends to
“
deal
with the process of translation in a scientific
manner
”, drawing on the theories
of linguistics, information and
communication, etc.
1.2 A profile of
Nida
1.2.3 His academic contributions
to modern linguistics and translation
Eric M. North, the former General
Secretary of the American Bible Society of
the American Bible society
,
divides Nida
’
s academic
activity into 4 phases on his
writings
in chronological order:
1)
the phase of descriptive linguistics,
1943
—
1951
2)
the phase of
cross
—
cultural
communication. 1952
—
1960
3)
the
translation phase, 1961
—
1973
4)
the semantic
phase, 1974
—
Message and
Mission
was the most
significant book of the second phase.
Gentzler suggested that it was in this
book that Nida first outlined his translation
theory
. This book marked the
beginning of the third phase.
In the third
phase, in the book,
Toward a Science of
Translating
, Nida first
a
dvanced the proposition of
“
dynamic
equivalence”
, and the three-
stage model of the
translation process<
/p>
：
“
analysis,
transfer and restructuring
”
.
It is commonly agreed that
Toward a Science of
Translating
best summarizes
the various aspects of his
translation
theory
.
For Nida,
translating means translating meaning.
The most representative book of this
phase was
From One Language to
Another
. In this book, Nida
not only further explored the issues of meaning of
adopting a sociosemiotics approach, but
substituted
“
functional
equivalence
”
for
“
dynamic
equivalence
”
just to avoid
unnecessary misunderstandings.
1.3 A
survey of Nida
’
s translation
theory
We will review
Nida
’
s translation theory
from two important aspects:
1)
the scientific
study of translating
2)
the principle of
“
dynamic
equivalence
”
1.3.1 Nida
’
s
scientific study of translating
“
Science of
translating
”
means
“
for just as linguistics may
be classified as a
descriptive science,
so the transference of a message from one language
to another is
likewise a valid subject
for scientific description.
He suggests that it is more
effective to transfer the meaning from
the source language to the receptor language on
the kernel lever, because on this lever
the linguistic meaning of the original test is
structurally the simplest and
semantically most evident.
1
to analyze source-language
Nida advances a
three-step translation process:
○