论文总字数：33963字

摘 要

为了不断突破可译性限度，许多中外翻译学者与专家运用各式各样的翻译策略和方法，使译文可以达到一个相对完善的境界。在使用翻译策略时，要进行多方面考虑。其中，译语取向便是一个重要的方面。译文取向主要有两种，一为归化，二为异化。这两个取向看似对立，实则可以融合在一起从而实现可译性的最大化。

关键词：可译性；不可译性；归化；异化

Contents

1. Introduction 1

2. Literature Review 1

3. The Definition of Translatability and Untranslatability 2

4. The Definition of Domestication and Foreignization 3

5.The Relationship of Domestication, Foreignization and Translatability 3

6. The Choice between Domestication and Foreignization 4

6.1 The strengths and weaknesses of domestication and foreignization 4

6.2 Target language culture oriented (domestication) examples 6

6.3 Source language culture oriented (foreignization) examples 8

7. The Dynamic Combination of Domestication and Foreignization 10

8. Conclusion 12

Works Cited 14

1. Introduction

Thanks to the advent of globalization, the communication between countries is on the rise and the planet is becoming as small as a village. While this has brought about many advantages—one example is that people’s horizon has been broadened, some problems such as cultural misunderstandings have also emerged. As a matter of fact, it is different traditions, cultures and languages that have caused those misunderstandings. On this condition, a growing number of people realize the significant role of translation whose main job is to achieve an efficient idea exchanges between two different languages. Nowadays, translation is essential in many countries. China, as the biggest emerging economy, is setting foot in the international community, so efficient translation is part and parcel for China and for its people to participate in global affairs. However, Chinese and English are two completely different languages rooted in stark various soils. Thus, translation entails great efforts. To achieve a better version of cross-cultural translation, many translators devote much time and energy to studying how to narrow the gap and how to achieve efficient communication at large.

2. Literature Review

In the past, there was a controversial discussion on which one, domestication or foreignization, has an edge over the other. However, such argument was substituted by the idea of the dynamic combination of the two strategies recently. Just as Zhang Haili considers, in order to maximize the translatability of a text, translators are supposed to combine the two strategies so that the fortes of the two can be given into full play. (Zhang Haili,70) Also, Guo Jianzhong sees eye to eye with Zhang. He contends that both methods may be justified in their own right if we take into consideration the differences in the purpose of translation, the type of texts, the intention of the author and the readership. (Guo Jianzhong,12) Nevertheless, in spite of favoring the dynamic combination, some scholars may still prefer to one rather than the other. Take Sun Zhili for instance. He stresses that neither of the two translating strategies should be understated, but foreignization will be the preferred strategy of literary translation in China in the 21st century. (Sun Zhili,40) By contrast, Cai Ping strongly advocates that for the sake of smoothness, foreignization should always give way to domestication. (Cai Ping,39) At the same time, he never denies the importance of the combination. As to the author, both adaptation and alienation should be given fair emphasis. This is a point which is often ignored by some specialists. Thus, this paper is intended to focus on the dynamic integration of the aforementioned two translating strategies. The thesis comprises 3 parts. The first one will give a brief introduction to translatability, domestication, foreignization and the relationship between them. Then, the second part will make full use of typical cases to make a comparison between the two translating strategies. Finally, the last part will pay special attention to the dynamic combination of domestication and foreignization. In this way, readers are able to get a closer look at the advantages brought by the combination.

3. The Definition of Translatability and Untranslatability

Translation is full of paradoxes. Among the most ancient ones is the debate over translatability and untranslatability. This pair of terminologies was first come up with by the linguistic translation faction. On the basis of Dictionary of Translation Studies，translatability along with its opposite, untranslatability, is used to discuss the extent to which it is possible to translate either individual words and phrases or entire texts from one language to another.(Shuttleworth and Cowie 2004:179) In accordance with the interpretation of the two terms, it can be learnt that untranslatability refers to a relatively small extent to which source language can not be translated into target language. Namely, because of various reasons, the process of translating cannot achieve a perfect result. In ancient Italy, some philosophers asserted that translation was traitorous. In other words, they held the view that languages were untranslatable. Dante(1266-1321)，a great poet in Renaissance, once expressed his opinion in his work Convivo: any piece of work with lyrical beauty cannot be translated without losing its beauty. (Alighieri 1903:12) Hence, Dante saw eye to eye with the philosophers on untranslatability. As to the reasons constituting such untranslatability, several aspects may be involved.

Liu Miqing, a renowned Chinese translator, once concluded in his book The Basics of Translation that the main factors which cause untranslatability are as follows: different language structure, conventional method barriers, different expressional habits, semantic expression barriers as well as cultural gaps. (Liu Miqing 2010:13) The last factor will be given particular attention in this paper.

In the process of stepping up communication and cultural exchanges, many experts and translators have changed their attitude toward untranslatability. Nowadays, it is generally accepted that by using efficient strategies and principles, untranslatability could be converted. That is to say, languages are translatable with appropriate methods; the extent of translatability can be expanded. Eugene Albert Nida once said one must in translating seek to find the closest possible equivalent. (Nida 1964:23) This indicates that he thought with efforts we could find the “closest” equivalent, namely, the largest extent of translatability.

Due to the growing demand for high-quality translation to quicken the communication between peoples and countries, it is becoming particularly urgent for translators to break the barriers existing in distinct cultures. Then, how to maximize the extent of translatability comes to the point. In order to achieve a better version of rendition, translators are cudgeling their brains and trying all kinds of strategies. Under this condition, one subject is indispensable; that is, the orientation of translation, or to be more precise, the choice between domestication and foreignization.

4. The Definition of Domestication and Foreignization

In Nida’s book Toward a Science of Translating, with Special Reference to Principles and Procedures Involved in Bible Translating, he claimed that there are two basic orientations in translating with which translators can find the closest equivalent. One is formal and the other is primarily dynamic equivalent. As a matter of fact, they are similar to the terms of adaptation and alienation (or domestication and foreignization). The latter pair is more generally recognized today.

They are termed by American translation theorist L.Venuti. In line with Venuti, the former refers to ―an ethnocentric reduction of the foreign text to target language cultural values, bringing the author back home, while the latter is ―an ethnodeviant pressure on those (cultural) values to register the linguistic and cultural difference of the foreign text, sending the reader abroad. (Venuti 1995:20) Generally speaking, domestication designates the type of translation in which a transparent, fluent style is adopted to minimize the strangeness of the foreign text for target language readers, while foreignization means a target text is produced which deliberately breaks target conventions by retaining something of the foreignness of the original. (Shuttleworth and Cowie 2004:59)

1. The Relationship of Domestication, Foreignization and Translatability

Even though there long exists a debate on which strategy is better than the other, a consensus has been reached; that is, both of them are ways used to expand the extent of translatability.

As we all know, cultural gaps often serve as the biggest impediment in cross-cultural translation. Some cultural images are unique in one country and it is difficult to find an exact equivalent in another nation. For example, 缶 is a special instrument in China, which is so distinctive that it can’t be found in any other nations. Therefore, 缶 is an untranslatable word. A translator must try his best to render the word. Whichever he chooses, adaptation or alienation, the goal is to handle the problem of untranslatability and then to maximize the extent of translatability.

For instance, a translator may choose “Chinese drums” to represent 缶. In this connection, he selected domestication as his translating principle so as to make sure that the word won’t be an obstacle for target language readers. As for another translator, he may opt for Fou drums to explain the instrument which is new to foreign readers. So foreignization is his translating principle.

Just as the author said above, no matter which principle the translator chooses, 缶，the untranslatable word, have to be successfully translated into the target language. That is to say, translators use diverse principles including domestication and foreignization to maximize the extent of translatability.

6. The Choice between Domestication and Foreignization

6.1 The strengths and weaknesses of domestication and foreignization

Supporters of domestication may argue that doing translating work means not only language shift but also idea conveying. Hence, translation must help readers completely understand the intention of the original author. In this connection, when coming across some exotic images, translators are supposed to shoulder the responsibility of diminishing the strange cultural factors. In addition, adaptation helps avoid culture conflicts. In other words, some conventions or expressions may be common in one culture, but they are stark unacceptable in another. If the translator neglected the differences between two different cultures and were determined to foreignize the text, confusion may thus be triggered. And what’s more, for readers’ sake, it is more likely for them to understand the work when they are not disturbed by some opaque cultural images. Finally, since readers intend to put texts into their cultural context, foreignization will, conversely, bring more problems.

In comparison, favorers of foreignization mainly hold that people read books for getting a better understanding of exotic cultures. If the translators use the familiar images to substitute the strange ones, the readers can’t learn anything new. Second, translators should trust readers’ ability of understanding, which means they can figure out the most of the exotic parts. What’s more, foreignizing the text is conducive to enriching the target culture because the source culture remaining in the translation will add something new to the target one. And moreover, since cultural exchanges are the ultimate goal of translating, preserving the original images is of great importance. Last but not least, the translation can’t be defined as faithful if it didn’t loyally convey the ideas of the original work.

In the book Theory of Translation, Liu Miqing pointed out that sometimes, when it comes to barriers caused by different cultures, a text can be translated into the target language with limited meaning loss in that one culture may have deeply affected the other. For example, we can easily figure out what 巴士 is, which is literally translated from the word of bus. In fact, we are not strange to such things, and some even have permeated our daily life. We call a sofa 沙发; we call a T-shirt T恤; we call a chocolate 巧克力 and so on. Also, some cultures, say Britain and France, have fewer difficulties in understanding each other than others like China and Britain. In this case, Chinese translators should pay more attention to translating work than French counterparts.

For example:

Forbidden fruit is sweeter.

In European countries which enjoy the similar religious beliefs, it is not difficult for their peoples to understand the idiom. On the contrary, because of the lack of related knowledge, Chinese people may feel rather confused when coming across the phrase forbidden fruit. At that time, translators must consider how to render it so as to expand the extent of translatability. One may opt for the strategy of domestication and translate it into:

偷吃的饭分外香。

The translator substitutes forbidden fruit with 偷吃的饭(stolen rice), which is far more common in China, a country treating rice as its staple food. By this means, the meanings of the sentence have been conveyed. As Nida said, in such a translation one is not so concerned with matching the receptor-language message with 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. (Nida 1964:68) That is to say, even though the original images of the idiom have lost, the translation has the same influence on the target language readers just as the original work does on the native speakers.

Possibly, another translator prefers the strategy of foreignization and he wrote down the following rendition:

禁果分外香。

This version retains the image of the original proverb. With a little knowledge of the western culture, people can make sense of it easily. But to those who are strange to the exotic, it may still be puzzling. But through this version, people may learn more about the foreign cultures, which lays a foundation for the future reading. Namely, they will fully understand it when meeting it again. Still as Nida said, a gloss translation of this type is designed to permit the reader to identify himself as fully as possible with a person in the source language context, and to understand as much as he can the customs, manner of thought, and means of expression. (Nida 1964:67)

So it is very difficult to judge which one is better for both versions have their own irreplaceable fortes respectively.

6.2 Target language culture oriented (domestication) examples

Douglas Robinson argued that another important aspect in the translator’s work is the process of pretending to be a source-language reader, understanding the source text as a reader for whom it was intended, and then a target language writer, addressing a target language readership in some effective way that accords with the expectations of the translation commissioner. (Robinson 2002:64) It seems that he is a fan of domestication. In fact, in China, most professionals also support Mr. Robinson’s idea. Domestication enjoys a larger popularity than foreignization.

For example:

Oedipus Complex

More people prefer to render it into 恋母情结 rather than into 俄狄浦斯情结.

From the first version, one can exactly tell what the phrase represents. By contrast, the latter is difficult for those who are devoid of relevant knowledge. The term is derived from a Greek tragedy. It describes a man named Oedipus who is born with a curse that after he grows up, he will kill his father and marry his mother. To prevent such an immorality from happening, the king, his father, orders someone to abandon the child. Later, a shepherd adopts him and finally he becomes the son of another king whose territory just adjoins Oedipus’s biological father’s country. After Oedipus grows up, he also hears about the curse about him, so he leaves his foster parents to escape his fate. However, he kills a man on his way to the neighbored country. And yes, the man he killed is his biological father. After that, Oedipus unravels the Sphinx Riddle, becomes the king and marries the queen, namely, his mother. All the prediction comes true finally. On the basis of the story, Freud, a well-known psychologist invented the terminology of Oedipus Complex to describe a kind of psychological activity.

So, in this case, the exact meaning of Oedipus Complex requires readers to not only equip with some knowledge about the tragedy but also be aware of the role Freud played in creating this terminology. To most readers, the version of 恋母情结 may be a better one.

Now, let’s study the different translating versions of The Dreams of Red Mansions so as to get a closer look at the two different orientations. One example is as follows:

至于才子佳人等书, … …(Cao Xueqin)

Yang Xianyi, a famous Chinese translator, rendered it into English as:

As for books of the beauty-and-talented type, …(Yang Xianyi)

Another translator, Hawkes, who is famous for his translating version of The Dreams of Red Mansions, used “boudoir romances” to represent “才子佳人书”.

Another example from The Dreams of Red Mansions is that:

更有一种风月笔墨，… …（Cao Xueqin）

Still Yang Xianyi, he translated the sentence into English as:

剩余内容已隐藏，请支付后下载全文，论文总字数：33963字