# 1 Sept 15 - Studies on Translation Theories
#1 What Is Translation? Roman Jakobson ‘On Linguistic Aspects of Translation’ & James S. Holms, ‘The Name and Nature of Translation Studies’ in Venuti ed. (2004): 113-18; 180-92
skip to main |
skip to sidebar
Blog Archive
-
▼
2010
(102)
-
▼
9月
(40)
-
▼
9月 17
(38)
- # 17 Jan 5 - Studies on Translation Theories
- # 18 Jan 12 - Studies on Translation Theories
- # 16 Dec 29 - Studies on Translation Theories
- # 15 Dec 22 - Studies on Translation Theories
- # 14 Dec 15 - Studies on Translation Theories
- # 13 Dec 8 - Studies on Translation Theories
- # 12 Dec 1 - Studies on Translation Theories
- # 11 Nov 24 - Studies on Translation Theories
- # 10 Nov 17 - Studies on Translation Theories
- # 9 Nov 10 - Studies on Translation Theories
- # 8 Nov 3 - Studies on Translation Theories
- # 7 Oct 27 - Studies on Translation Theories
- # 6 Oct 20 - Studies on Translation Theories
- # 5 Oct 13 - Studies on Translation Theories
- # 4 Oct 6 - Studies on Translation Theories
- # 3 Sept 22 - Studies on Translation Theories
- # 2 Sept 22 - Studies on Translation Theories
- # 1 Sept 15 - Studies on Translation Theories
- Studies on Translation Theories
- # 18 Jan 13 - Translation and Globalization
- # 17 Jan 6 - Translation and Globalization
- # 16 Dec 30 - Translation and Globalization
- # 15 Dec 23 - Translation and Globalization
- # 14 Dec 16 - Translation and Globalization
- # 13 Dec 9 - Translation and Globalization
- # 12 Dec 2 - Translation and Globalization
- #11 Nov 25 - Translation and Globalization
- # 10 Nov 18 - Translation and Globalization
- # 9 Nov 11 - Translation and Globalization
- # 8 Nov 4 - Translation and Globalization
- # 7 Oct 28 - Translation and Globalization
- # 6 Oct 21 - Translation and Globalization
- # 5 Oct 14 - Translation and Globalization
- # 4 Oct 7 - Translation and Globalization
- # 3 Sept 30 - Translation and Globalization
- # 2 Sept 23 - Translation and Globalization
- # 1 Sept 16 -Translation and Globalization
- Translation and Globalization
-
▼
9月 17
(38)
-
▼
9月
(40)
Copyright 2009
NTNU GITI BLOG
All rights reserved | Powered by
Blogger
Blogger Templates created by Deluxe Templates
Wordpress Theme by EZwpthemes
Blogger Templates created by Deluxe Templates
Wordpress Theme by EZwpthemes
1 意見:
Fawcett在前言裡提及此書的目的在於介紹” the love-hate relationship between linguistics and translation theory”, 也提到以語言學為翻譯理論基礎的黃金時代為1950中期-1980中期。事實也是，自翻譯理論的文化轉向以來，以語言學做為翻譯理論的基礎，往往被忽略了。Fawcett也提及有的譯者認為根本不需要懂語言學，但這樣的理論顯然又太偏激了。我自己就是在學翻譯後，又重新去讀語言學（過去我的主修是文學，大學時的語言學讀得很糟），並覺得語言學確實對翻譯有所助益。Fawcett寫此書也是想要將翻譯和語言學相連接，書中也舉了許多對實際的翻譯頗有用的例子。事實也是，對翻譯教學來說，若要結合翻譯實踐與教學，後現代的翻譯理論或許比不上立基於語言學的實際例子有用……
當然，翻譯也不能只用語言學來概括。由索緒爾的學說引發出來的“結構主義語言學”在全盛期以“科學”之名，認為一切都可以“科學化／結構化”(如巴特就將其Paradigmatic/ syntagmatic（chain and choice）的概念，用在食譜、穿衣／時尚上。不只如此，此一概念甚至可以用在敍事學的公式裡)，但語言或翻譯顯然不是這麼簡單（不然機器翻譯就可以大行其道了）。其中，第二章提到的Componential analysis更是問題重重，充滿二元對立的意識型態，如對Man的定義為[+ adult] [ +male]，但為什麼不是[+ adult] [ -female]──顯然男／女是有分位階的高下的，而這也是女性主義者所詬病的。另，Snell-Hornby也舉bachelor＝ [+ adult] [ +male] [-married]為例，強調分類總是有模糊的灰色地帶，並主張integrated approach.（但由此例，也可以看到married/unmarried的位階高下……）
張貼留言