首页> 外文OA文献 >What’s Modern in Chinese Translation Theory? Lu Xun and the Debates on Literalism and Foreignization in the May Fourth Period
【2h】

What’s Modern in Chinese Translation Theory? Lu Xun and the Debates on Literalism and Foreignization in the May Fourth Period

机译:中国翻译理论的现代性是什么?鲁迅与五四时期的扫盲与外交争论

代理获取
本网站仅为用户提供外文OA文献查询和代理获取服务,本网站没有原文。下单后我们将采用程序或人工为您竭诚获取高质量的原文,但由于OA文献来源多样且变更频繁,仍可能出现获取不到、文献不完整或与标题不符等情况,如果获取不到我们将提供退款服务。请知悉。

摘要

This article attempts to assess the contribution of Chinese translators and theorists of the twenties and thirties, in particular the famous writer Lu Xun, whom I consider the first modern translation theorist in China. It is with him that China entered its modern phase in translation. Not only did he advocate retaining the foreignness of the original text, in a way reminiscent of the entire tradition of German Romantic translation theorists from Schleiermacher to von Humboldt to Goethe; he also explored in his own translations the possibilities for enriching the Chinese language through the importation of Europeanized structures and expressions. It is these foreignizing impulses that set Lu Xun apart most clearly from pre-modern Chinese theorists. At the same time, these impulses connect him with leading giants of translation theory like Nabokov and Benjamin (who emphasized the importance of the literal method in translation) on the one hand, and Venuti and Holmes (who highlighted processes of indigenization and exoticization in translation) on the other.Lu Xun’s ideas had a particular place in the wider cultural and historical context. Views similar to his had been advocated by his predecessors at the beginning of the century, whose attempt to Europeanize the classical language did not, unfortunately, find a large following. In his own time, Lu found ardent supporters among friends and colleagues who either (a) suggested thorough Europeanization, or (b) preferred limited Europeanization. Dissenting views, however, were clearly voiced by some of the other leading writers of the day. So there were (a) those who favored the use of a language based on the actual words spoken by the populace and (b) those who queried why one should not learn a foreign language and read the original instead. My article deals at length with the debates among these theorists and seeks to understand them from the perspective of contemporary Western translation theory.
机译:本文试图评估20​​到30年代的中国翻译家和理论家的贡献,特别是著名作家鲁迅,我认为他是中国第一位现代翻译理论家。正是与他一起,中国进入了现代翻译阶段。他不仅主张保留原始文本的异国情调,以使人联想起从施莱尔马赫(Schleiermacher)到冯·洪堡(von Humboldt)到歌德(Goethe)的德国浪漫主义翻译理论家的整个传统;他还通过自己的翻译探索了通过引入欧洲化的结构和表达来丰富中文的可能性。正是这些异化的冲动使鲁迅与前现代中国理论家之间的区别最为明显。同时,这些冲动将他与翻译理论的领先巨人联系起来,例如纳博科夫和本杰明(他们强调了直译方法在翻译中的重要性),以及维努蒂和福尔摩斯(他们强调了翻译中的本土化和异化过程)鲁迅的思想在更广泛的文化和历史背景中占有特殊地位。本世纪初,他的前辈曾提倡类似的观点,不幸的是,他们试图将古典语言欧洲化。在他自己的时间里,卢在朋友和同事中找到了热情的支持者,他们要么(a)建议彻底的欧洲化,要么(b)倾向于有限的欧洲化。但是,当时的其他一些主要作家明确表达了反对意见。因此,有(a)那些赞成根据民众的实际语言使用某种语言的人,以及(b)那些质疑为什么不应该学习外语并改为阅读原始语言的人。我的文章详细讨论了这些理论家之间的争论,并寻求从当代西方翻译理论的角度来理解它们。

著录项

  • 作者

    Tak-hung Chan, Leo;

  • 作者单位
  • 年度 2001
  • 总页数
  • 原文格式 PDF
  • 正文语种 en
  • 中图分类
  • 入库时间 2022-08-20 21:05:17

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
代理获取

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号