论文总字数：39738字

摘 要

《1984》是乔治奥威尔的经典名作，出版于1949年。书中描述了一个高度集权，独裁专政的政府。这本书被认为是世界上最著名的反乌托邦和文学性政治讽喻小说。《1984》被选为自1923年以来一百本最优秀的英文小说之一，已被翻译成超过60种语言。在所有的中文版本中，董乐山所翻译的版本极具代表并获1985年广东地区翻译一等奖。他的早年经历和政治观念使得他所翻译的《1984》获得了巨大的成功。本文从奈达功能对等理论的角度分析了董乐山《1984》的译本。

基于这个理论，本文从语义，语用和语体三个方面探讨了他的译文。他的翻译在很大程度上忠实于原文，取得了语义上的对等，其中包括词字对等，无相应对等词语以及一词多义。成语的运用也是一大特色。另外，终于中英文的文化差异，董乐山并没有完全遵从原著的语法和形式，而是用自然的语言做了相应的调整，从而取得了语用方面的对等。并且，通过夸张，明喻，拟人化和排比的运用再现原文的修辞特点以及调整特殊句子结构再现原文的句法特点，译文还实现了语体的对等。这些都使得董乐山的《1984》更加生动形象，自然。

关键词：《1984》 功能对等 董乐山 语义 语用 语体

1. Introduction

• 1. Need for the study

“Languages are different mainly because they have different language forms.” (Nida) Therefore, translation makes it possible to connect different languages. Meanwhile, by translating the source language into the target language, the culture, customs, political ideologies and other unique features of the source language will be known and learnt by other people.

As George Orwell’s most influential novel, Nineteen Eighty-Four, published in 1949, was a political classic novel in content, plot and style. It was known as a literary political fiction and dystopian science fiction, depicting a totalitarian or authoritarian state. Among all the Chinese versions of Nineteen Eighty-Four, Dong Leshan’s Chinese version was considered as a representative one, in which his personalities were fully embodied. Many Chinese scholars have made researches on his version from different perspectives. However, there are not so many researches that apply Nida’s functional equivalence into the analysis of Dong’s translation. Therefore, it is of vital importance to conduct an analysis on Dong Leshan’s translated Nineteen Eighty-Four from the perspective of the functional equivalence theory.

1.2 Purpose of the study

This study was undertaken with the aim of exploring the equivalence of George Orwell’s Nineteen Eighty-Four and Dong Leshan’s translated version. Specifically, the purpose of the present thesis can be divided into three parts: firstly, to review the studies on the Chinese versions of the Nineteen Eighty-Four and Nida’s functional equivalence theory; secondly, to make a comparison between the original text and Dong’s version from the angles of semantics, pragmatics and style.

1.3 Layout of the Paper

This thesis conducted a brief analysis concerning the equivalence between George Orwell’s Nineteen Eighty-Four and Dong Leshan’s translated version based on Eugene A. Nida’s functional equivalence theory. After a brief introduction in Chapter One, the purpose of this thesis was pointed out. Chapter Two was literature review, summarizing the studies on the Chinese Versions of Nineteen Eighty-Four and the studies on Dong Leshan’s Translated Version. In Chapter Three, theoretical basis for the thesis was introduced, which was about Nida’s functional equivalence theory from four aspects of its background, definition, content and application. As the major body of the thesis, chapter Four discussed the equivalence between the original text and Dong’s version from the perspectives of semantics, pragmatics and stylistics. The last chapter was the conclusion of the whole thesis.

2. Literature Review

2.1 Studies on the Chinese Versions of 1984

Nineteen Eighty-Four, written by English writer George Owell, is a resounding success. This book, regarded as the most famous dystopian and political allegoric novel, has enjoyed wide popularity since its publication in 1949. It depicts a highly centralized governemnt and totalitarian dictatorship. However, at that time, the practical situations of the translation of Nineteen Eighty-Four were quite different in Hongkong, Twain and Chinese mainland due to the different ideologies. Because of the relative freedom of the society in Twain, the first Chinese version, translated by Wang Heyi, was published in Twain in 1950, named 《一九八四年》 in Chinese. Chinese mainland didn’t publish any translated version until 1953. The version was translated by Niu Xianzhong, also named 《一九八四年》.

Many scholars have made many researches from different perspectives on the Chinese versions of Nineteen Eighty-Four. Gao (2008) chooses four Chinese versions of Nineteen Eighty-Four, seperately written by Dong Leshan, Liu Shaoming, Lin Shuhua and Sun Zhongxu, for a comparative study from domestication and foreignization, focusing on the choice of syntax and words as well as style. Zhang (2008) centers on the successful reproduction of literary stalistics and narratology in the translation of Nineteen Eighty-Four. Gu (2010), by comparing two Chinese versions, also consucted an analysis of the use of domestication and foreiniazation. Hu (2012) studies the translated version from a unique view, which is the translators’ subjectivity, speciafically exploring the embodiment of translators’ subjectivity in the stages of translation. By analysis, she proves that the subjectivity of the translators accounts for the differences of the Chinese versions of Nineteen Eighty-Four. Mo (2012) explores the influence of ideplogy on the translation strategies of the Chinese translated versions from the perspective of lexical, syntactic as well as rhetoric level. Wang (2013) made a comparison of two Chinese versions from the socio-semiotic translation concept.

2.2 Studies on Dong Leshan’s Translated Version of 1984

Dong Leshan, a famous Chinese translator blessed with the qualities of a thinker, plays a pivotal role in the tortuous course of the translation of Nineteen Eighty-Four in mainland China(Yin, 2010). Dong Leshan’s translated version, named 1984年in Chinese, was published in installments in 1979, while only internally distributed. Thereafter, Dong Leshan’s translated version was republished many times. Dong Leshan renamed it 一九八四 in 1988 as one in the “Dystopian Trilogy”. His translated version was awarded the outstanding translation award in Guangdong region in 1985.

Today, Dong Leshan’s translated Ninetenn Eighty-Four continues to be researched by Chinese scholars. Yang (2003) studies the dynamic equivalence between the source text and Dong’s translated version. Liang (2012) centers on the application of manipulation theory in Dong Leshan’s version. According to him, the praticability and validity of manipulation theory determines the ultimate style of Dong’s translation.

Through the analysis of Dong Leshan’s translated Nineteen Eighty-Four itself, some sholars summarize Dong’s translation style. From Yin’s (2010) point of view, Dong’s translation gives priority to foreignization with due consideration to domestication. His language is rustic, simple and colloquial. The Chinese idioms are used with great felicity. Dong Leshan endues his work with his unique personality, which reflects the perfect combination of his translation thoughts and practices. Zhang (2013) holds the opinion that the words that Dong Leshan uses are simple and the sentences are short, fluent and readable.

Some scholars give relatively thorough analysis of the influence of social environment on Dong’s translation. Gao (2008) believes that Dong’s translation of Nineteen Eighty-Four is certainly valuable because of Dong’s academic profile and the political movements he had undergone. Mo (2012) also argue that, due to the social backgound at that time, the ideology plays an important role in Dong Leshan’s political stand during translation. He took an objective and fair attitude on the translation of Nineteen Eighty-Four.

3. Theoretical Basis

3.1 Background of Functional Equivalence Theory

Eugene A. Nida, a famous American translation theorist and linguist, was recognized as “the father of modern translation theory”. In Toward a Science of Translating published in 1964, the two concepts of formal equivalence and dynamic equivalence were first presented. The former one, according to him, “focuses attention on the message itself, in both form and content”, while sometimes at the expense of natural expressions of the target language. To some extent, formal equivalence reflects the features of the vocabulary, grammar and syntactic structure of the source text. The later one attempts to convey the thoughts expressed in the source text, which is close to the target language. These two terms were originally used in his translation of the Bible.

In 1969, Eugene A. Nida points out in The Theory and Practice of Translation that “dynamic equivalence is therefore to be defined in terms of the degree to which the receptors of the message in the receptor language respond to it substantially the same manner as the receptors in the source language.” However, in order to avoid the misunderstanding of the word “dynamic”, Nida developed “dynamic equivalence” into “functional equivalence”.

3.2 Definition of Functional Equivalence Theory

Nida gave a maximal, ideal definition of “functional equivalence”, which was that “the readers of a translated text should be able to understood and appreciate it essentially the same manner as the original readers did”. The functional equivalence emphases that, in the process of translation, the most suitable and natural words will be used to reproduce the original text from its meaning to terms. The definition reflects the essence of functional equivalence theory, that is, the equivalence of the reaction of both the source readers and the target readers.

3.3 Content of Functional Equivalence Theory

According to Eugene A. Nida, the functional equivalence theory can be divided into four parts, namely, lexical equivalence, sentence equivalence, passage equivalence and stylistic equivalence.

Among the four aspects, Nida believes that meaning is the most important, followed by form. Form may change the cultural meaning of the source language and would erect barriers to cultural exchange. Therefore, according to his theory, the translators should regard the four aspects of functional equivalence as the basis of translation so as to reproduce the cultural connotation of the source language.

3.4 The Application of Functional Equivalence Theory

Nowadays, Nida’s functional equivalence theory is in widespread application in the field of translation, causing a revolutionary progress and having a deep influence on translation both home and abroad.

Over 800 articles, written based on Nida’s functional equivalence theory, are collected in CNKI from 2010 to 2014. About 50% use this theory when it comes to the cultural differences between the source language and the target language. They use it to eliminate the language barriers, such as in the translation of literary works, so that the target readers can appreciate the content and implications of the source text better and can have the same reaction as the source readers. In addition, due to functional equivalence theory’s emphasis of phatic function, about 35% of the papers also apply it into intercultural translation, business translation and advertisement translation, whose intentions are for communication, to produce the same effect as the source language. Moreover, about 10% use functional equivalence theory to deal with the problem of untranslatability, which makes it possible for the target readers to appreciate the source language as the source readers do.

4. Comparison between George Orwell’s 1984 and Dong Leshan’s Translated Version

4. 1Semantic Equivalence

No two words in two different languages can be exactly the same in meaning. However, different languages can express the same meaning through different forms. In this part, the equivalence between English words and Chinese words includes the word-for-word equivalence, words without corresponding equivalents and one word with several equivalents of different meanings.

4.1.1 Word- for- word Equivalence

In Dong Leshan’s translated version of Nineteen Eighty-Four, almost all the translatable words are translated word for word. Most of the time, he follows the original word orders and sentence structures. He adopts mostly the strategy of foreignization and domestication when necessary. An important feature of his translation is his good command of Chinese idioms.

It is written in the novel that when the arrests happened, “people simply disappeared, always during the night… You were abolished, annihilated: vaporize was the usual word”. The words “disappear” and “vaporize” are synonymous, both meaning no longer existed. They are separately translated into “销声匿迹” and “化为乌有”. The two Chinese idioms not only explain the literal meanings but also the underlying meanings. The idiom “销声匿迹” simply shows that someone can not be found, while “化为乌有” indicates that he is no longer existed in the world, just as the novel shows: people are disappeared at the night and they are vaporized from the world by the Party.

There are some other examples. The phrase “heroic early days” is translated into “峥嵘岁月”. “Heroic early days” refers to the imposing or impressive days when someone is young. Its translation exactly shows his grand old days. In addition, “heap of details” is translated into “细枝末节”. The word “reshape” is translated into “脱胎换骨”. The translation is rather precise in meaning and the use of Chinese idioms makes it more powerful in effect. As a successful Chinese translator, Dong Leshan succeeds in using the Chinese idioms, which contribute to a more vivid and more fluent translation.

4.1.2 Words without Corresponding Equivalents

In Nineteen Eighty-Four, George Orwell depicts the superstate Ocenia, a highly centralized government with omnipresent surveillance. Ingsoc(English Socialism) is the regnant ideology of Ocenia and Newspeak is its official language, in which many of its terms and concepts are created.

In the beginning, Winston Smith, the principle character of the novel, introduces four ministries between which the entire apparatus of government is divided: the Minitrue, Minipax, Miniluv and Miniplenty, corresponding to the Ministry of Truth(真理部), the Ministry of Peace(和平部), the Ministry of Love(友爱部) and the Ministry of Plenty(富裕部). The translations of the four names in the Newspeak are “真部” “和部” “爱部” “富部”, which shows the differences with their complete Chinese names, conveying the characteristics of the words used in the Newspeak.

There are many other examples, such as “the memory hole”, “facecrime” and “duckspeak”, translated correspondingly into “忘怀洞”, “脸罪” and “鸭话”. The memory holes are large oblong slits for the destruction of any waste documents. Its translation “忘怀洞” reveals that everything burnt in that hole is gone, just as the memories have been forgotten. “脸罪” and “鸭话” are literally translated from their original forms. The translation of the created words of the novel makes it easier for the target readers to understand.

4.1.3 One Word with Several Equivalents of Different Meanings

The word “middle-aged” refers to those people being roughly between 45 and 65 years old. As Winston walks into a dingy little pub, he meets a very old man, “the old man, who must be eighty at the least, had already been middle-aged when the Revolution happened”. (86) The word “middle-aged” is translated into “中年”, just reflecting the age of the old man. However, when Orwell prescribes the proletarians, it is said that “they married at twenty, they were middle-aged at thirty, they died, for the most part, at sixty”. (71) Dong Leshan translates the word into “衰老”. The existence of the highly centralized government makes the proletarians the only hope, but they will not conscious and never rebel. They are regarded as animals. So the word “middle-aged” not only shows the increase of their ages but also reflects the ignorance and corruption of their mind.

Another example is “animal”. Animal usually means a living organism characterized by voluntary movement. In this novel, Winton is regarded as a forgetful person “with the stupidity of an animal”. (58) “Animal” here is translated into “牲口”, referring to the animals only used for their physical strength in China. It echoes with its characteristic of stupidity. When Winston walks past two women, they study him with a kind of wariness, “as at the passing of some unfamiliar animal”. (83) Here the word “animal” is translated into “野兽” instead of “牲口”. “野兽” in Chinese are savage and cruel wild beasts. The two women regard Winston as a threat, extremely terrified that their conversation will be overheard, which shows their hostility to him.

4. 2Pragmatic Equivalence

Due to the different cultures and thoughts between English and Chinese, Dong Leshan doesn’t adhere to the grammar of the original text; instead, he achieves the equivalence of the source language pragmatically by making some adjustments.

4.2.1 Cultural Factors

In his book Language, Culture and Translation, Nida points it out that “for truly successful translating, biculturalism is even more important than bilingualism, since words only have meaning in terms of the cultures in which they function.” “All languages reflect the culture of which they form a part,” Nisa says: “Persons who wish to use the language of a different language community must learn how to use the words in a culturally acceptable manner.” So, in the process of translation, the differences of cultures between the target language and the source language have to be dealt with skillfully. Excellent translated works enable the readers to appreciate totally different and particular cultures through the well-translated imagoes, characters, plots, etc.

If the cultural differences between the source language and the target language are ignored, the meaning of the original text will inevitably cause deviation or mistakes. Ultimately, the meaning or implications that the original text intends to confer to the readers will be misinterpreted.

请支付后下载全文，论文总字数：39738字