【英语论文】浅谈散文翻译中的形合与意合以《背影》为例A Comparative Study on the Hypotaxis and Parataxis in Prose Translation of Beiying

浅谈散文翻译中的形合与意合-以背影为例A Comparative Study on the Hypotaxis and Parataxis in Prose Translation of BeiyingA paper submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements of the degree of Bachelor of ArtsThe Institute of Online EducationBeijing Foreign Studies University摘要近年来特别是中国加入世贸组织后， 由于中外经济交往密切，中外文化交流也迅速发展。但在翻译作品中， 相比起大量涌现的英译中作品， 汉译英作品是寥寥无几。从事汉译英的翻译人才也甚为缺乏。究其原因， 一方面是学界普遍认为翻译应该是由外语译入为母语， 非母语翻译人员是很难作好翻译的。但考虑到我国的大量优秀作品需要走出去，汉译英的工作只能依靠中国人来担任。 要作好这项工作， 首先要充分认识汉英两种语言的差异。而两种语言的不同构成方式，汉语重意合， 英语重形合，被认为是两者最大的差别。 本文因此希望探讨解决此问题的翻译策略性。 本论文以散文背影及其两个英文翻译版本为分析材料，从中选取了15组句子作为例子， 对每一组例句进行比较与分析， 着重是观察其采取的翻译策略，是保留原文的意合为主的中文构成方式， 还是将其转化为行合为主的英文表达方式。 而在转化的过程中， 译者是如何运用英文的连贯手法，再具体到对衔接词语的选择上，作者是如何运用其翻译技巧的。 由此得出结论， 汉语翻译成英语，特别是如散文之类的艺术文，应特别注意意合与形合之间的转换。 译者应兼重对原文的忠实同时关照读者的可接受性， 力求理解原文的精神，用正确的符合英语习惯的的表达方式。把原作的意思表达出来。要作好这点，需要译员不仅对两种语言相当熟悉，同时对汉英的不同思维方式与由此而来的形合与意合现象保持敏的触角。 本文所选的翻译本都是出自于翻译大家，透过分析，希望能从中学习借鉴优秀的翻译策与技巧， 并为以后的翻译实践提供理论指导。并希望在翻译界能更多地重视探讨汉译英的主题。 关键词：形合与意合， 翻译策略，衔接词 Abstract Recent years has seen the rapid development of cultural exchange between China and the world, this is brought about by more frequent economical and social activities after China joint the WTO in1995. In compare with thousands of E-C translation that flood into China, few C-E translation has been produced, and few translators engage in C-E translation. One of the reasons is the believe that C-E translation can only be taken on by native speakers. However we can not rely English native speakers to do C-E translation, which is impractical. Chinese translators have to take on this task. One of the difficulties confronted to Chinese translators is the difference in cohesion type between two languages. As it is said that Chinese is parataxis dominated whereas English is hypotaxis dominated, and the difference in discourse cohesion is considered to be the most significant distinguish between two languages. How to tackle this problem with appropriate translation strategies is the main concern of this paper. In order to find out this answer, the author chose a popular Chinese prose named Beiying with two English versions translated by famous translators. 15 examples have been selected. Each consists of a paragraph from the original and two translations accordingly. The analyze focus on the strategies in dealing with the problem of parataxis and hypotaxis, the inclination of translators while choosing different strategies. Further more, it is also the authors interest to find out how the translator applies different types of English cohesion such as reference, conjunction and lexical cohesion in his translation practice, and how he choose the proper connective words.The paper comes to the conclusion that a competent translation in C-E translation, especially in the art articles, requires the translator to equip with not only adequate knowledge of both language but a cute sense of parataxis and hypotaxis shifting between them. The author hopes to appreciated and learn from the good C-E translations, to find out the suitable strategies and the techniques applied in them, in order that this knowledge CAN1. DIRECTIONS FOR LEARNERS1) Analyze the data in no less than 1,000 words by using one or some of the methods recommended in Step 2 and Step 3 of Stage 7 in Writing Your BA Paper Through Practical Translation Project Design. The analysis should be based on the examples from the data, or no less than 3 samples from each category of the data.2) The heading for this section has been given. You may decide on your own subheadings if there are any.3) Insert your analysis of the data in paragraphs, tables, diagrams or listings in the space below.4.Data AnalysisParataxis and hypotaxis are considered to be the most significant difference between English and Chinese linguistic structure. Chinese is parataxis dominated, by that it means the lack of functional or signal words, the frequent use of short sentences, and loosen structure in sentence building. In general, coherence in Chinese rely on readers understanding based on the context. Whereas English is hypotaxis dominated, featured with the frequent use of long sentence with rigid logical connection and hierarchy structure with principle and subordinate clauses. The character of Chinese prose is to concentrate in meaning but to be free in style, whereas English requires much attention in the form. This difference between two language is apparent in Prose writing. is a Chinese prose with typical Chinese style. The strong sense of national character makes a great contribution to its popularity among Chinese readers. Like his many other works, this article of Mr. Zhu is featured with the following character:1. Being Simple and plain in wording and loosen in sentence building2. Being colloquial, without complicated words 3. Free from empty words and sentences. Compact in meaning but in nature and free in form4. Passionate and strong feelings presented in plain narration rather than dialogues. There are two strategies that are most commonly used by translators in E-C translation. They are literal translation and free translation. Literal translation is designed to translate the original adequately without changing the form, structure and wording so as to help achieve a translation that is smooth, faithful to the original meanwhile easy to be understand by the target readers. On the other hand, free translation aims to regenerate the message in a readers-tailor way, which pays little attention to details though considers the original seriously. The translator usually knows well of both languages and their cultures, therefore he can produce a translation that is not necessarily adhesive to the form, bu is still accurate, fluent and faithful to the original, at the same time nature and close to the style of the target readers. Which strategy will translator prefer to use in translating Chinese prose, and how do they use these strategies technically remains to be the authors interest in this paper. Baring in mind this curiosity, the author will examine some abstracts from both translations now. In example 1, “有朋友约去.上车北去”is translated by Mr. Zhang by a long sentence with 42 words, among which “and” appears two times, and the short sentence “上车北去”is put as “taking a train to Beijing on the afternoon of the same day”. When comparing with Mr. Yangs version, the latter seems to be more concise, for it just consist of 32 words. The clue lies on the translators use of cohesion words. Here he used the word “afternoon” as a modifier for the noun “train”, hence save the use of clause and the repetition use of “and” as in tr1. This is an inspiring translation which use the method of noun to serve as head modifier and the reference to achieve cohesion in the target language. Both translation are accurate and faithful to the original, but as to the English readers, tr2 might be easier for them as tr1 seems a bit more wording which does not match the style of English. In example 2, the original consists of two short sentences. In tr1, the original text is translated into two English sentences accordingly. In tr2, however, it is combined into one complex sentence by skillfully use the connective “where” and “while”. Two short sentence are then connected by the conjunction “where”, which makes the sentence more fluently, and at the same time keep the cohesion of its Chinese original. In example 3, the original text is literally translated in tr1, as a result it takes 47 words in translating. Whereas in tr2, the translator uses a connective word “as” to connect together several seemingly loosen Chinese sentences, thus indicate their invert cohesion of cause and effect, and successfully in changing his translation from Parataxis-dominated Chinese original to hypotaxis-dominated English. Although the cohesion in the original is not apparent, but it does exist. If translated in a way of Parataxis like tr1 does, the translation not only can not convey this cohesion in the original, but also lack of cohesion in English. In example 4, tr1 uses four connective words”after/in which/except for/or”, but tr2 uses only two connective words “after/so”. It shows that that tr2 is more efficient and effective. The result shows us that the structural connectives make a contribution in building up the cohesion in English, because it serves as a dispensable components and at the same time the connectives in a sentence. On the other hand, non-structural connectives is not necessary and sometimes even become redundant in a sentence. In example 5, the original sentence is a typical example of parataxis. To understand the meaning, readers need to refer to the context outside the sentence. “看见那肥胖的，青布棉袍， 黑布马褂的背影”here actually means the remembrance of the father when the son saw him walking away when they part. As Chinese cohesion is inverted, the readers can easily interpreted the meaning by working out the insight cohesion without indicating the reference. However when it comes to English translation, the target readers will get confused by the literal translation of the original without necessary addition. Tr1 is a literal translation as described. In contrast, tr2 is a free translation. The connective word “as” indicate the time when the father and the son part and thus make it clear and easy for the target readers to interpret what actually “the back of father” means. Example 6 is another example of shifting from parataxis to hypotaxis. It is about a detailed description of the sight of the fathers back when the father crossed the railway track to buy oranges for his son. Because of the habitual way of expression in Chinese, the original sentence is arranged in a “see+sb.+do sth. Pattern. In tr1 this pattern has been transferred without any change in the word order.By contrast, in tr2 this order has been changed by the addition of a connective word “as” and the change in word order of the propositional phrase “in .” that describes the fathers dressing. By doing this, the original short verb phrases “ 蹒跚地走到铁道边，慢慢探身下去” have been connected together by the connective “as” and serves as a adverbial clause. More over, Mr. yang uses the conjunction words “but when” in the end of the sentence, which implies the inflection meaning in the following sentence. Two sentences are then connected together with perfect coherence. In Example 7, the fathers movement is described with several successive verb phrases “他先将橘子散放.，.爬下.，.抱起.”. In tr1 the sentence is simply translated in its original word order, whereas in tr2 the translator uses three connectives as “before/which/after” in an attempt to achieve cohesion. However the overuse of connectives makes the translation even more difficult to understand. The word “which” is overused which not only makes the sentence complicated but also confuses the target readers. It shows us that it is sometimes appropriated to transfer parataxis in Chinese into English without changing to hypotaxis.In example 8, the original Chinese text is consist of two sentences. In tr1 the translator s strategy is to translate it into two English English sentences accordingly. In tr2, however, the translator discovers the inflection between these two sentences and uses a connective “but” to join them together. In example 9, both translation use connectives. The comparison is focus on the chose of connectives, that is “and” in tr1 and “while” in tr2. We can find that “and” can only serves as a connective between two parallel parts, but when it is lack of the sense of formality and contrast, therefore it fails to reflect the relation of comparison between two sentences in its original. The connective word “while” is a better choice in this circumstances. In example 10, “那年冬天” is translated in tr1 as “the winter of more than two years ago”. The adverbial phrase “more than two years ago” has already appeared in the previous sentence, so it is not necessary to repeat it again. In tr2 the translator uses a word “that winter” instead of “the winter of more than two years ago”, thus shorten the sentence and sounds more fluent in expression. In example 11, the conjunction word “though” in tr2 discloses the relations of sentences in its Chinese original, that is the inflection relation. In example 12, unlike tr1 which replicate the original in form, in tr2 the translator uses a conjunction word “beside” to connect three loosen phrases in Chinese.In example 13, the phrase “even so” is used in tr2 which help avoid the repetition and the sentence sounds more accurate and nature than those of tr1. In example 14, in comparing with tr1, tr2 is a more inspiring one. The simile led by “even if” successfully presents the spirit of the original text in a form of English cohesion.In example 15, both translation use connective words, though “so.that” seems to be more appropriate than “and” as the former indicates the inflection relations. The above analyze can be summarized by the following chart.Example No. Parataxis vs. hypotaxis Cohesion typeConnective words used in English conhesion tr1 tr21parataxis hypotaxisreference afternoon2parataxis hypotaxisconjunctionwhere, while3hypotaxishypotaxissubstitute and conjunctionthat is why, and meanwhile (tr1)/ as, that is why (tr2)4hypotaxishypotaxisNon-structured (tr1) conjunction(tr2)in which (tr1)so (tr2) 5parataxis hypotaxisconjunctionas6parataxis hypotaxisconjunction as, but thenreferencenot so7parataxis hypotaxisNon-structuralwhich8parataxis hypotaxisconjunctionbut9hypotaxis hypotaxisConjunction (tr2)while(tr2)Lexical cohesion(tr2)moving from, going from(tr2)conjunction(tr1)and 10parataxis hypotaxisconjunctionfor11hypotaxishypotaxisconjunctionand (tr1) though(tr2)12parataxis hypotaxisconjunctionbeside13parataxishypotaxisreferenceeven so14parataxishypotaxisconjunctionAs if15hypotaxishypotaxisreference(tr2)this(tr2)conjunction(tr2)so.that(tr2)conjunction(tr1)andASSESSMENT CHECKLIST FOR TUTORSPlease tick in the proper cell and write your overall comments in the box of “Tutors Comments” below. In-text comments should also be offered if necessary.评价项目(Assessment Items)评价指标(Assessment Criteria)评估(Acceptable/Revise)请打勾进行评估（）合格需修改语料分析 Data Analysis 1. 与研究目标相关。The analysis is related to the objective of the research.2. 以“文献综述”中引用的概念或理论为支持。The Analysis is supported by the concepts or theories quoted in the Rationale.3. 针对语料中原语与译语的差异（建议从语言、体裁、修辞或文化等角度比较），或同一原语的不同译语间的差异（建议从翻译的社会背景、目标、对象或译者的翻译倾向等角度比较），具体分析语言、文化或社会因素对翻译的影响。The analysis illustrates the effects of linguistic, cultural or social variants on translation by comparing and contrasting the source language with the target language (from the linguistic, stylistic, rhetorical, cultural or other perspectives), or different translation version (in terms of the social background, translation purpose, target reader, translators approach to translation, etc.).4. 分析充分详细，涵盖语料中的相关示例或相关示例代表，代表不少于3例。The analysis is adequate and detailed, based on the examples from the data, or no less than 3 samples from each category of the data.5. 语言准确，表意清楚，逻辑连贯。The analysis is presented in clear, correct and coherent English.6. 字数不少于1,000字。The analysis contains no less than 1，000 English words.7 格式（标题、字体和行间距）符合要求。 The analysis is formatted as required.Tutors Comments:2. DIRECTIONS FOR LEARNERS1) Derive the results from the analysis you have made above, and then based on these results, make some suggestions on the future translating practice. The section of results and suggestions should contain no less than 1,000 English words.2) The heading for this section has been given. You may decide on your own subheadings if there are any.3) Insert the results and suggestions in the space below. 5. Results and SuggestionsThe above analyze shows us the different strategies in translating Chinese prose into English. The version of Mr. Zhang is more text-oriented, which brings about the not only the meaning but also the form of cohesion in the original, whereas the version of Mr. Yang is readers-oriented. In most cases the the form of the original has been restructured. Then what is the more appropriate method in these kind of translation? According to the “function equivalence” theory, a competent translation is to “have a natural and easy form of expression and to produce a similar response”, the version of Mr. Yang seems to be more appropriate in this prospect. Here the shift of the cohesion is the decisive factor that counts. As both versions are faithful and accurate to the same extent, what makes the difference is the adoption of English cohesion. According to Shoushana Blum-kulka (1986), the process of translation brings about shift of coherence and cohesion. Coherence is a covert potential meaning relations between parts of a text, made overt by the readers through the procedure of interpretation. Besides faithfulness, a translated text must be coherent. A text must be translated in such a way that it can be interpreted by the recipient as coherent with their situation. (Vermeer 1978;100, Baker 1998;236). As seen in the above analyze, coherence in English is better represented in Mr Yangs translation. It can be assumed that his version has a much similar response among English readers as its Chinese original does in Chinese readers. In reviewing the Mr. Yangs translation, we can find that it is a hypotaxis-dominated one, which is different from its parataxis-dominated Chinese counterpart. The realization of the shift from parataxis to hypotaxis. The way how Mr. Yang successfully deal with the problem of difference between Chinese and English cohesion gives us good orientation when we come across C-E translation.First of all, it is important to aware of the difference. As mentioned above, faithfulness and accuracy are thought to be the most important by many translators. However this can lead to the rigid adhere to the original and the neglect of readers acceptability. Some translators tries to convey the same style in the original to their target readers in order to present them the same style of the original. However, as a result of difference in cultural and value, what is appreciated by the Chinese readers is not necessarily appreciated by the English readers, and even cause misunderstanding and confusion. Readers-orientation should be bare in mind when doing C-E translation.Chinese is believed to be a mature language by some theorists, by that they mean the cohesion in Chinese is an invert one. Although there are few connective words in a sentence or between sentences, the cohesion does exist. The relations of parts can be interpreted by readers according to the context. When it comes to E-C translation, these invert cohesion should have to be transferred to an overt one, which fits in the linguistic form of English. In tr2 we can see the translator is so familiar with both language that he can shift from two styles smoothly. The original Chinese prose is full of short sentences without connective words. It seems that there are no connection between theses sentences. However the translator is very sensitive about cohesion in Chinese, as a result he figure out th