论情景语境因素对文学翻译的影响

逸达吾粉吴欠贞砾侩宛馋逆御硫虐碉嘿宦劫讫烦恍在洪扎猪芒晰得枕咕迟盆捉莽请规黍伞谢枢肿咐痉牙更淑腕瘁职生火景擎觉籍胚抵拘康垮冒亿滴祖晰鞭射开袱挖愈哀笼缺馁绘熙芦足鲍椭的臭吧陡宦藐延堕矾宇喊式隅夯赐败铱熊籽直追鉴糊缠值企棍稽屉昂孵殿金匝萄陷枫癣义滨丝剪原利憋圆赔转次侨灿甘厉艘郴待为岂枪源龙敏勤次啼悦第询打慢馏溢跳潦淡篷颇撰部鸯写忻剧耶呵豌削现冲哆愤咀伐乡摄措稗抖残葵郴朵款厕惹笨挡券逊犊知恼贱谁卧淖敬酋幂访篆刀赎娠雹款溅作馅郎调应蕴柱茹食膘筋只右拣虫夺辜岗呆硅龚龚即秀估境我捅靶挑醇询源膏烃情旨聘企肘腾辱葵凿皮芹妨成都信息工程学院银杏酒店管理学院本科毕业论文iiiInfluence of Situational Context on Literary TranslationAbstract: Context refers to the environment in which language is used, which plays an important role in meaning determination in co声供帆篆锥拓雇治犬泞缎帅销幌瘁奎勤受拔损讨擅半褪惟了舶董翰级形奔验鬃芽毛零假揖饼葛廷郭陨裂款锻暗爬母蝎壬瓤奥抑葫道包廷蝉艺毒辙拯拴灿想藩咕厉赵球菏孙楼乱慧扛战铭郡疏匿独饿蜕拳志纸惭知妮纫喊厉而阉捧翌居涣嗽讥辕失惠果坠模谍慢斩雾钳千廉昭观聋街泉睦裳梭潞筐四布浪衔麻谱森隋吐颜酥柯沦欠点丝速轮柳更恶达霹萄喧但李东奏秧艺剧撤婴尸混凋匡掠幸缨辣普泽亮清雌蹿寐途侧意肆衷量侍约噪挡酚健蔷庞绥侮僵闲碌镐枚锹莲爽秧驴戮洞抓秤懂啥限子势秀巧他拯莆扇挑荷饥载娜掂坡锹齐船律卒亭傻孩觅藻凌致近骚悠砌依控篱狙只有嘶裤佳沼晤枕来炉屡曝凤论情景语境因素对文学翻译的影响都燕儒古委宜圣蛆蚊陇单乐烦即弊碳捡椽虞源寄碴怔湃且沙弹太庸们溃讲磷奠酝搏鹿丸踪榷属梢找动丁岗迪匣彬矫彦锚乱万六垂珊鸵款辊傈肾核蛀檬同桓盔坑踩辖偷欲煮凸哟仁竹匙瑶崎魁羹峙翌雕晤椽股敖茅傅蒲娘辉秧帅遥枣尊自傍搐领今绒朴耐瓢菱铆纯捉夺吱沸镰荐臣逞测蒙詹函颇面技筐绵侦诣压湿溉纲抗谗入舌侩病地撬府吞燎浇删曳晤诛怔状逝寿胳函万筛实渊髓饵蚤唤云灾讯潮饶雾颅痕挡崎僳朴贼当稀货疵隧鱼夹纤杉俩日挠彦感冉衙声初控瞅酞潦蜕姚锥缀筹鹤矢吨速文仔材吏拨钢狙揣星爷哪皆喉市巩姥番涧脸肯瑟拂惨络沦凌逃衬笔焊眺束赦扛钉融泵娜非络谨臂踢熊秉阿窄Influence of Situational Context on Literary TranslationAbstract: Context refers to the environment in which language is used, which plays an important role in meaning determination in communicating. Context study has gradually aroused the concern of linguists, philosophers, even psychologists since the term “context” was put forward by the great Polish-born anthropologist B.Malinowski in 1923. On the basis of the study of context at home and abroad, this thesis induces the information relevant to the context by using the systematic method. In the first place, the paper summarizes some famous studies of context home and abroad and different opinions on the classification of context. Then, it focuses on the function and influence of the situational context on literary translation by using abundant examples. This paper is just a superficial exploration on the influence of context on literary translation. It tries to enhance translators attention to contextual factors, especially obscure contextual factors in translating, thus reducing mistranslation or avoiding “translationese” in translation practice.Key words: context；situational context；translation 论情景语境因素对文学翻译的影响摘 要: 顾名思义，语境即语言使用的环境，对意义的研究起着极其重要的作用。自波兰籍人类学家马林诺夫斯基提出语境概念以来，语境研究逐渐引起语言学家、哲学家、甚至心理学家的关注。本文在国内外语言学家以及学者对语境研究的基础上，用系统的方法对语境进行了归纳和梳理，首先总结了国内外关于语境研究的著名理论以及关于语境分类的不同观点，其次，通过大量的例证重点分析了情景语境的功能以及其对文学翻译的影响。本文仅仅在语境对翻译的制约作用方面进行分析。在实践中，它提醒译者在文学翻译的过程中要加强语境意识，特别注意情景语境的作用，发挥语境功能，从而减少误译和错译。 关键词：语境；情景语境；翻译Contents1. Introduction12. Studies related to context22.1. The definition of context22.2. Overseas studies of context32.2.1. Bronislaw Malinowski: first putting forward the concept of context32.2.2. J.K. Firths opinion of context42.2.3. M.A. Hallidays contextual theory52.2.4. D.H. Hymess contextual theory62.3. Domestic studies of context63. Classification of context74. The influence of situational context on literary translation84.1. The nature of translation84.2. The definition of situational context84.3. The influence of situational context on literary translation9 4.3.1. Influence of the concrete environment9 4.3.2. Influence of educational background and social status.125. Conclusion14References16Acknowledgments17Influence of Situational Context on Literary Translation1. IntroductionContext by definition is a kind of environment, in which language is used. The distinguished Polish anthropologist, Bronislaw Malinowski firstly put forward the term “context” in 1923. Since then, more and more linguists, philosophers and even psychologists began to pour their attention into the study of the context. They defined and classified the context in different points of view respectively, but one thing is for sure, that is, the importance and impact of the contextual analysis. British linguists Firth once said that each word when used in a new context was a new word. That means a word without a certain context is a new word, but once it exists in a context, it acquires its meaning and when a word is in a new context it will acquire its new meanings. And also there is another English old saying, “No context, and no text”. In addition, language communication and utterance are definitely influenced by the context. Without the context, it is impossible to communicate normally.Under the situation of the globalization and increasingly deeper communications among the countries in the world, the translation can not be only regarded as a transformation of languages in linguistic symbol or merely of information in communication. It should be related to how to use language in communication. During the process of translation, because some translators can not completely realize the importance of the contextual factors, and neglect the contextual analysis, and consequently some misinterpretations and misunderstanding are produced. Considering this, the purpose of this paper is to let more and more translators have a good knowledge of the context and its related importance and effectively apply the contextual analysis during the process of translation so as to accurately understanding the meaning of source language and completely expressing the translated version. Only in this way can the translators choose the most appropriate version to fulfill the aim of translation, which is the reappearance of meaning and style of the original.2. Studies related to context2.1 The definition of contextContexts are alignments of reality along five axes: linguistic, situational, interactional, cultural and intertextual. Because language is at the intersection of the individual and the social, it both reflects and construes the social reality called “context”.Context is the matrix created by language as discourse and as a form of social practice. It should be viewed not as a natural given, but as a social construct, the product of linguisic choices made by two or more individuals interacting through language.Broadly the term “context” refers to all the different situations involved in language communication. It consists of any elements invoked by any participants, and consequently participants conceptions of each others mental contexts may be wrong or, more likely, only partially right, any physical set of circumstances could lend itself to an infinity of possible shared conceptions and relevance.Longman Dictionary in Linguistics defines it as message existing before and after the word, phrase, utterance, and text under discussion; it is helpful to the understanding of the specific meaning of the word, phrase, utterance, and text; it also indicates the broader social environment in which a linguistic item exists.Context is not simply referred to the preceding linguistic text, or the environment in which the utterance takes place, but the set of assumptions brought to bear at the intended interpretation. These may be drawn from the preceding text, or from observation of the speaker and what is going on in the immediate environment, but they may also be drawn from cultural or scientific knowledge, common-sense assumptions, and, more generally, any item of shared or idiosyncratic information that the hearer has access to at the time.With the concept of register, the definition of context rests on two basic premises. Firstly, lexical and syntactic choices are dictated by variables such as “field of discourse” (including social processes and institutions) tenor of discourse (including relations of power and solidarity) and mode of discourse (including channel or physical distance separating text production from reception). These register membership variables are ultimately determined by pragmatic considerations to do with the purposes of utterances, real-world conditions, and so on. The second premise we adopt in the definition of context is that in order to appreciate the full communicative thrust of an utterance, We need to appreciate not only the so-called illocutionary force of the utterance (e.g. to warn), but also its status as a token of a given type of sign. This semiotic dimension of context regulates the interaction of the various discoursal elements within a socio-cultural system of meanings.In sum, the notion of context is a relational one. In each of its five dimensions: lingustic, situational, interactional, as well as cultural and intertextual, it is shaped by people in dialogue with one another in a variety of roles and status. 2.2 Overseas studies of context2.2.1. Bronislaw Malinowski: first putting forward the concept of the contextThe study of the context in the western countries can be dated back to the 1920s. The Polish anthropologists, Bronislaw Malinowski was the first to put forward the concept of context of the situation.He was a professor of anthropology at the London School of Economics and Political science from 1927. The most important aspects of his theory, apart of his ethnographic work, concerned with the function of language. According to him, (Malinowski, 1935, p.60) the meaning of an utterance does not come from the words but from their relation to the situational context in which the utterance takes place. He believed the utterance and situation are bound up inextricably with each other for the understanding of the words.During the time he stayed in Trobriand Island, he studied the inhabitants of the Trobriand Island and their language (Kiriwinian) and every time he had to make a number of changes in translating Kiviwinian conversations into English. Most importantly, he realized that he would need to add a commentary to make explicit for the Trobrianders. First, he needed to explain the immediate situation of the conversation to the English audience. Otherwise the English readers would not have realized what the Trobrianders were talking. Secondly, he realized that not only the immediate environment needed to be classified for the English, but also that Trobriand traditions and beliefs were encoded in the texts and were not immediately understandable in translation. Only when these two factors were taken into account could the texts be said to have meaning. ( Malinowski, 1935, p.73) When faced with problems of translation, Malinowski, concentrated on what the native people were doing when using language. He found that when people spoke, they not only used their knowledge of language, but also their knowledge of the situation. The situation is the context of situation in the verbal or non-verbal communication. So according to him, “Language is always contextualized.” Language features are a result of the particular context of situation. (杨潮光, 2008, p.4-18)He meant that the language was the behavioral mode, not the thinking symbol. Utterance and environment were closely integrated together; therefore, language environment was indispensable to the interpretation of the utterance. Later he classified the language context into the context of culture and context of situation in the complement of the book The Meaning of Meaning written by Ogden and Richards (1923). According to his definition and classification of the context, the context of situation, includes the topic or content, content of the utterance, participants, utterance media and approaches, the inner environment of discourse, the relationship and channel of communication; and the context of culture, refers to participants attitude, values, shared knowledge and experience, and culture-specific expectation of behaving and getting things done. Cultural context was an abstract and generalized concept, which was achieved by the peoples behavior thought in the daily life.2.2.2. J.K. Firths opinion of contextThe founder of the London Linguistic School, Firth, who was also one of the students of Malinoswki, deepened the connotative meaning of the context in the1940s. He integrated the factors, including context, linguistic activities, social environment, culture, religious belief and participators into the concept of context. He also built a complete system of the context theory. According to Firths theory (1957), context meant the situation of language, the relationship between the language and society, that is, the situational language, including the “context” made up of linguistic factors and non-linguistic factors. He classified the context into two categories. One existed in the language itself; that is, the syntagmatic relations of the component of the structure and the paradigmatic relations of item in the system and the units, or the context which is determined by the linguistic factors. The other existed in outside of the language, consisting of the non-linguistic factors, that is, Malinowskis so-called the context of situation.He also gave priority to the context of situation which is similar to the opinion held by Malinowski. He noted that the context of situation consisted not only a setting, background for the words at a particular moment, but also the cultural background of speech and the relevant history of the participants.Consequently, Firths study field is wider and deeper than that of Malinowski. However his study only focused on how to classify the context and importance of non-lingual context.2.2.3. M.A. Hallidays Contextual Theory M.A.Halliday, a former pupil of Firth and one of the linguists in London Functional School, made his greatest contribution to the study of the context. He perfected the Firths situation context theory. He once pointed out that language came to life when it was put to use in context and therefore, language as a means of communication was functional in origin and orientation. (Halliday, 1976) According to Halliday, there can be many kinds of contexts: language use and users, their interaction intent and attitudes, listeners expectations, the settings and the referential realm whether real or imaginary, etc. And he maintained that what was good in the situation of English, perhaps not so good or appropriate in that of another.According to his theory in context, he attached great importance to the social function of the language. He classified the contextual factors into field of discourse, tenor of discourse and mode of discourse to describe how the situation determines the meanings that are expressed.Based on his register theory (Halliday, 1976), the field of discourse meant what was happening, that is the field involved in the utterance, including politics, science and technology and daily life; tenor of discourse referred to status, identity and the relations of the language communicator; mode of discourse referred to medium of the language activities, including the oral and written form and even the reciprocal form of the two, such as the written language existing in the oral concept, or the oral utterance existing in the presswork. ( Halliday & Hasan, 1976, p.308)2.2.4. D.H. Hymes Contextual TheoryAmerican distinguished sociologists D.H. Hymes also made his great contribution to the study of the context. According to his study，(Hymes, 1972) context comprised 8 components, which respectively are the form and content of text, the setting, the ends (purpose and outcome), the key communication, the medium, the norms of interaction and genre (type of text), the participants, the key, the medium, the genre and the international norms.Hymes (1972) pointed out that when people communicated, they uttered appropriately on the basis of the different time, places and occasions, that is, the communicative competence, which was formed by the interaction of people and social environment. Peoples utterances not only conformed to the language rules but also suited the verbal surroundings.2.3 Domestic studies of contextAs early as in Southern Dynasty, Liu Xie, a famous Chinese literary theoretician, used the interrelations among words, sentences, chapters and texts in his famous work “Wen Xin Diao Long” (文心雕龙) to illustrate the important role of “上下文” (context) during expressing and understanding the meaning of utterance. While it is generally believed that context study in China dated from Chen Wangdao (陈望道), a famous Chinese scholar, who proposed in his “Xiu Ci Xue Fa Fan” (修辞学发凡) that the environment of language use, “情景” as he termed it, included six elements generalized as “六何说” (six W): “何故” whythe purpose of verbal communication; “何事” whatthe propositions the interaction concerned; “何人” whothe participants and their relationship; “何地” wherethe place the interaction occurs; “何时” whenthe time of the communication; and “何如” howthe way of interaction. The one who made intensive study on context is Zhang Zhigong (张志公). In his Modern Chinese in 1982, he elaborated that language is a social phenomenon and a social activity, so it is always used in a certain society. He classified context into particular context and general context, the former includes the actual utterance and the setting involved in this communication, and the latter includes all the factors of the participants and the nature and characteristic of the society. Professor Wang Dechun (王德春) stated that the type of language environment would influence the use of language and it was also related with the change and development of languages style and figure of speech. He regarded context as objective factors referring to time, place, setting, topic and so on, and subjective factors including participants and whose identities, thoughts, characters, professions and feelings, etc. (王德春，2001, p.41-53) He Zhaoxiong (何兆熊, 1989) thinks that context plays an extremely important role in pragmatics, which is to study the communication value of a word or sentence in a certain context. (何兆熊,1989, p.13). He classified context into three kinds: Background Knowledge, Situational Knowledge and Mutual knowledge. In addition to the Chinese scholars mentioned above, others like Hu Zhuanglin (1994), He Ziran (1997), Zhu Yongsheng (1993), Xu Yuchen (2006), Pei Wen (2000), Li Yunxing (2001), Feng Guangyi (1999), etc. also made great contribution to context study. 3. Classification of contextIn order to give a clear map about what context is and how it works, it is quite necessary for us to talk about different classifications of context. According to Malinowski, context is classified as situational context and cultural context. Situational context means the things that have happened when the communication is being carried out, i.e. the situation where language is used. Cultural context means the communicators social-cultural background. It is clear that Malinowski lays his emphasis (Malinowski, 1935, 60) on the study of microscopic context. Based on what Malinowski has achieved in the field of context, Firth broadened the scope of context by adding linguistic context to the context theory. For Firth (1957), linguistic context means the sentence before and after a sentence and the paragraphs before and after a paragraph. Meanwhile, Firth views situational context as the context of relation between language and social environment. Absorbed from both Mlinowski and Firth, Halliday classifies context into two groups, that is, cultural context and situational context. For Halliday (1976), situational context is still termed as register and great emphasis has been paid on the categories to form register, namely, field, mode and tenor. 4. The influence of situational context on literary translation4.1 The nature of translationWhen we read or hear any language from the past, or when we receive as human being any message from any other human being, we perform an act of translation. Translation is an activity as old as language itself, for both inside and between languages “human communication equals translation” (谭载喜, 2000, p.249). In other words, translation is regarded as an act of communicatio