奈达翻译理论研究 第五章 笔记

Chapter Five Attempts to further amend Nida’s

translation theory

5.1 The application of Nida’s theory to literary translation

The significance or the validity of Nida s theory: 1) the application of “dynamic equivalence”, 2) the significance of the concept of the decoder s channel capacity, and

3) the important role of receptors play in evaluating literary translation.

5.1.1 The application of Dynamic equivalence

The principle of “dynamic equivalence”, which is defined as “the closest natural equivalent to the source-language message”, points out two ways to achieve the goal of “equivalent effect”: 1) the closest equivalent, 2) the natural equivalent.

By “the closest equivalent”, Nida means a rendering that has the highest degree of approximation to the original text.

“Natural equivalent” refers to a “stylistically acceptable rendering”, about which a bilingual and bicultural person might say “That is just the way we would say it”.

A natural translation has no trace of awkwardness or strangeness in its grammatical and stylistic forms. The principle of “natural equivalent” helps the translator consciously avoid “translationese” in their work, and improves the quality of literary translation.

A natural expression “tries to relate the receptor to modes of behavior relevant within the context of his own culture”, and it “does not insist that he understand the cultural patterns of the source-language context in order to comprehend the message”. Following the principle of “naturalness”, the translator is entitled to make certain cultural adaptations to make the monolingual reader understand the translated message with ease.

5.1.2 The significance of the concept of the decoder’s channel capacity

Nida borrows the concept of the decoder’s channel capacity from information theory to explain why good translations tend to be longer than the original text.

In his view, any well-constructed text is designed to fit the channel capacity of the intended reader. However, the channel capacity of the average reader in the receptor language is much narrower than that of the reader in the source language. In order that the translated message fits the channel capacity of the receptor language reader, the translator is obliged to make implicit information in the original text explicit in the translated text. Only by doing so can the translators ensure the realization of the objective of equivalent effect.

5.1.3 The important role receptors play in evaluating literary translation

By examining the response of the reader, for whom a translation is intended, we can make a more objective judgment of literary translation.

5.2 The limitation of Nida’s theory in literary translation

His definition of translating seems to have put equal emphasis upon transference

of meaning and that style. But his discussions of style are not adequate for literary translation,

It is generally agreed that literary translation should not only convey accurately the sense of the original text, but also reproduce appropriately the style if the translator wants to attain “equivalent effect”. But in Nida s theory, the focus is on transference of meaning instead of transference of style.

When discussing the first stage of translating process, Nida adopts various techniques of modern semantics to deal with meanings but makes no mention of style.

In the second stage of “transferring”, Nida shows a complete disregard for style. In the third stage of “restructuring”, style is treated in a broad sense, referring to varieties of language.

According to Nida, features of style are classified into “formal features” and “lexical features”, and functions of style into “efficiency” and “special effect”.

“Formal features” are arrangement of words, and “lexical features” are words or lexical units.

Formal Lexical

Efficiency A C

Special effects B D

The style in Nida s theory is mainly related to “efficiency” of a text in terms of both lexical features and formal features.

Since Nida mainly provides guidelines for the popular translation of the Bible (also called the common-language version”), it is understandable that his discussion of style is predetermined by the purpose of making the Word of God acceptable to the average reader. His immediate concern with Bible translation for evangelism prompts him to place his focus on the functional approach to style on the part of receptors.

According to Nida., the Bible translator for a popular version is justified to “sacrifice many features of B and D in order to concentrate on A and C. That is to say, the translator can make his translation simpler in terms of lexical features and formal features.

By and large, although Nida s functional approach to style has its validity for general translation practice, it fails to explore the transference of aesthetic values in literary translation.

5.3 The importance of transferring aesthetic values in literary translation

Why is the transference of aesthetic values so important in literary translation? Well, we could say that it is determined by the nature of literature.

Lu Xun says that literature is an art of beauty with three beautiful features:

1)beautiful thought that appeals to the heart, 2)beautiful sound that pleases the ear, 3)beautiful form that attracts the eye.

Geoffrey N. Leech and Michael H. Short present an equation to illustrate the

crucial role of stylistic values in literary work:

SENSE +STYLISTIC VALUE=(total) SIGNIFICANCE

Sense here refers to “the basic logical, conceptual, paraphrasable meaning.

Significance refers to “the total of what is communicated to the world by a given sentence or text”.

Stylistic value is “a writer choice to express his sense in this rather than that way”. It is stylistic value that distinguishes the uniqueness of a literary work.

The quality of literary translation depends on the successful representation of aesthetic values. Only when aesthetic values of the original text are satisfactorily conveyed in the receptor language can the reader of the translated text have similar response as the original reader.

In a word, to neglect the artistic nature of literary translation is to neglect its social function and, if that is the case, it is bound to end up in formalism of translation, thus reproducing works that are linguistically correct but artistically pale and weak”.

Dryden stated that the translator should make his translation graceful “by the spirit which animates the whole”.

By comparison, in the field of traditional Chinese translation theory there have been abundant discussions about transference of aesthetic values or spirit. From Yan Fu s “faithfulness, expressiveness and elegance” through Lin Yutang s “fidelity, smoothness and beauty” to Zhu Shenghao and Fu Lei s “spirit resemblance” and Qian Zhongshu s “sublimation”, all emphasized the importance of transference of spirit in translating.

Regrettably, most discussin about spirit transference have not gone beyond the sphere of the translator s subjective perception and appreciation. Such terms as “雅” “意境” “神韵” “神似” “化境”, borrowed from Chinese classic literary criticism and painting criticism, are characterized by fuzziness and do not provide any practical approach as to how to reach for the objective of “spirit resemblance”.

5.4 Transference aesthetic values in literary translation

The beauty of literary translation is determined by the artistic nature of the original work. Therefore, how to represent its aesthetic values should be considered the ultimate objective of literary translation.

Liu Miqing has classified aesthetic values into formal aesthetic constituents and non-formal aesthetic constituents. Formal constituents are visible and audible, while non-formal constituents are "of a non-material nature that cannot be felt by intuitive association ( 直觉想象）---the upgraded intuitive association".

Based on his classification, the transference of aesthetic values can be dealt with from two aspects, (1)formal aesthetic markers (2) non-formal aesthetic markers.

Formal markers are perceptible aesthetic features, which can be identified by salient formal features such as choice of words, syntactical structures and textual construction.

Non-formal markers are intangible aesthetic features that the reader can feel, but find it difficult to pinpoint out where the beauty resides in a text.

5.4.1 Transferring formal aesthetic markers

Liu Xie states that the spirit of a text can never go without language:

Sentences are made up of words, paragraphs of sentences and a whole article of paragraphs. That an article is excellent is due to its flawless paragraphs, that a paragraph is fine is due to its blemishless sentences and that a sentence is good is due to proper words.

The translator can convey aesthetic values by means of formal markers at five levels: phonological, lexical, syntactical, rhetorical and textual level.

(1) phonological level

The British writer W. Somerset Maugham states, "words have weight, sound and appearance; it is only by considering these that you can write a sentence that is good to look at and good to listen to"

Zhu Guangqian also says that the spirit of language depends largely on sound and rhythm, which are the most direct means to convey the feeling of the writer and the flavor of the text.

(2) lexical level

Words play a significant role in transferring the spirit of a literary text. In order to convey the spirit, the writer usually selects the most appropriate words to express his meaning.

(3) syntactical level

(4) rhetorical level

(5) textual level

At textual level, we are mainly concerned with cohesiveness and coherence.

Nida rightly points out: For Chinese and English, perhaps one of the most important linguistic distinctions is the contrast between the hypotaxis and parataxis. In English and in most Indo-European languages, a great deal of subordination is clearly marked conjunctions. One may, however, communicate essentially the same concepts by means of parataxis; that is to say, placing propositions together without marking the relationship but indicating by content what is the evident relationship.

5.4.2 Transferring non-formal aesthetic markers

意境, which in traditional Chinese aesthetic and literary criticism refers to a harmonious relationship between the writer's personal feeling and the outside world.

Liu Xie says, "Languages are like leaves of a tree, but the soul of a literary text is the writer's feeling and thought". (辞为肤叶，志实骨髓）

liu Shicong also points out: The weightiness of a writing, however, is determined first and foremost by the profundity of the thought and the loftiness of the moral character on the part of the author, and its elegance and strength by the brevity, clarity and the appropriateness of syntactic structure.

In a sense, non-formal aesthetic markers rely in large measure on the writer's personality. Hence before translating, the translator should try to familiarize himself with the writer, and feel the way the writer feels about what he writes.

Imagery is an aesthetic object created by the writer. It is not simply an image (either an object or a person), but is an artistic one that combines an objective image with the subjective feeling of the writer. [意象是经过艺术构思后形成的审美对象， 寄托着作者的感情。它并不等于简单的物象（人或物），而是融合主观的意（情思）和客观的景

（景物）为一体的艺术形象。]

Mao Dun says: Literary translation is to reproduce the artistic imagery of the original in another language so that the reader of the translation may be inspired, moved and aesthetically entertained in the same way as they read the original the original. In a sense, any work of art is an expression of feeling. The French sculptor Robin says that "art is feeling" (艺术就是情感，罗丹）.

Liu Xie even advocates "writing for feeling" (为情而造文），taking feeling as the fundamental basis of beauty in an article.

Mao Dun says, “if a translator cannot produce the tone of sentence in the original, the spirit of the text cannot be fully conveyed in his translation”.

Huang Yushi expresses a similar view in stating that if the translator uses the same tone to render the speeches of different characters in a novel, his rendering will end in failure even if the meaning of each sentence is “correctly” rendered.

5.4.3 Transferring aesthetic values of a literary text as a whole

Robert L. Waller in his“Analysis destroys wholes. Some things, magic things, are meant to stay whole. If you look at their pieces, they go away”. Waller s assertion shows that it is of great importance to appreciate the beauty of a literary work as a whole.

5.5 Testing the representation of aesthetic values in literary translation

The ultimate goal of translation is to convey the message of the source language to receptor language readers, who are entitled to point out the strength and weakness of the translation.

5.5.1 Objective factors: partiality of translation

There are only “partial translations”, which means that “no text can ever be fully translated in all its aspects: perfect homology is impossible between translation and source”. In other words, the translator cannot convey all the information in the original, and he must choose what aspects of a text to transpose.

(1) Incompatibilities between linguistic systems

(2) Differences between cultural systems

(3) Different information load between different readers

It deserves to be mentioned that partiality of translation is not a defect. Rather, it implies that there is no absolute equivalence in translation, and an equivalent effect is always in a relative sense. And it also helps translators decide on what aspect they should translate.

5.5.2 Subjective factors: the translator and the reader

Nida thinks it is advisable to rely on both the response of monolingual readers and the judgment of the competent bilingual.

Arnold argues that we cannot trust the common readers for the precision and accuracy of a translation, but the knowledgeable scholar who is familiar with the original.

Jin Di holds that it is the translator who is responsible for the equivalence of effect.

In traditional translation theory, the competent bilingual scholar was regarded as a legitimate judge to evaluate the adequacy of a translation, for he was an expert at the original text. Nevertheless, the scholar-judge has his own limitations. Just as Nida says, “for the scholar who is himself well acquainted with the original, even the most labored, literal translation will be correct , for he will not misunderstand it”. (This is one of the reasons why Nida takes “readers response” as an important factor in evaluating translation.)

I think it is necessary to take account of the translator s role. If the translator consciously makes every effort to grasp what the writer intends to convey and the way he expresses it, and imagines how the readers in the source language respond to the original text, he can deal with his work more efficiently.

5.5.3 Questionnaire analysis of literary translation

Some main results are summarized as follows:

(1) In general, Nida s “functional equivalence” is applicable to literary translation between Chinese and English.

(2) On the whole, readers are reliable in evaluating literary translation.

(3) The translator s conscious effort to predict the readers response is justifiable.

(4) The aesthetic values of literary work can be successfully represented in the translation.

本文来源：https://www.bwwdw.com/article/pkd4.html