从Equivalence看奈达与卡特福德的翻译理论

从Equivalence看奈达与卡特福德的翻译理论

摘要：西方翻译理论的不断发展对中国翻译研究产生了深远的影响，奈达的动态对等翻译理论传入中国打破了严复“信达雅”一统翻译天下的局面，卡特福德的语言学翻译理论又从一个全新的角度阐释了翻译的实质，本文比较二者的翻译理论及各自对实践的指导意义。 关键词：对等; 形式; 翻译理论

Abstract: The development of western translation theory have a great influence upon Chinese translation studies. The “dynamic equivalence” of Nida changed the state of monopoly by traditional Chinese translation of YanFu’s “faithfulness, expressiveness and elegance”. In addition, J. C. Catford explained the nature of translation in linguistic angle, which is novel and scientific. The article compares the two theories and their respective meanings in translation practice. Key words: equivalence; form; translation theory

In 1970s, American translation theorist Eugene A. Nida’s book The Theory and Practice of Translation which is based on TG Grammar was published. The translation process put forward in this book has a different angle with the traditional Chinese impressive and empirical translation method. Besides, the translation model described in this book makes translation accessible to technical operation and the translation theory discussed in this book also sets a standard and basis for translation practice. It is believed that Nida has made great contribution to translation practice in a more specific and concrete way with his “functional equivalence” theory. While by

contrast, Catford proclaimed the nature of translation from abstract linguistic level and solved the problem of what is translation. A Linguistic Theory of Translation by Catford reveals the nature of translation and translation equivalence from a new angle based on systematic functional grammar.

1. Equivalence in Nida and Catford’s explanation

Nida proposed that “Translating consists in reproducing in the receptor language the closet natural equivalent of the source-language message, first in terms of meaning and secondly in terms of style.”(Nida, 12) Catford suggests that “Translation is the replacement of textual material in one language (SL) by equivalent textual material in another language (TL)”(Catford, 1965:20).

Although they mentioned the same concept “equivalent”，the meaning is different. “Equivalent’ in Nida’s view is on the meaning and style level. Translation is translating meaning at the first place to reproduce information of the original text and stir the same feeling of the receptors with the original readers. In the style aspect, the translated text should reappear the style of the original one. And the style includes similar response of the receptors and original readers through linguistic equivalence. what “equivalent” refers to in Catford’s opinion is that translation is to substitute the same linguistic part of the original and the target text. The concept of “equivalent ’put forward by Catford can be explained and distinguished in two levels------ abstract and concrete levels: “textual equivalence ” and “formal correspondence” respectively. The former one refers to “in a given circumstance, any original text or part of the original text can be translated into the equivalent part of the target text, which is

required to relate with concrete circumstance” (廖七一，101). While the latter refers to “in any translated category, ”后者指“在任何译语范畴（单位、类别、结构、结构成分等等）the translated category is made to be equivalent to the original category as much as possible.（”廖七一，102）. In this sense, the more similar the two languages are, the more possible it is to make translation close.

After comparing what Nida’s and Catford’s view of translation nature, we can find out that Nida held the idea that target readers have the final say to judge the effect of translation while Catford thought that equivalence is dependent on translators competency in both source and target languages. Both of their views have limit. It is impossible to make readers have similar response and the competency of translators’ command is difficult to evaluate. 二、Nida’s and Catford’s Form

“Form” in Nida’s opinion is “the overt structure of a discourse in terms of its words, grammatical classes, and syntactic and stylistic patterns; the vehicle by which the message is conveyed.”(Nida, 203). While Catford claimed that “Language is form , not substance”(Catford, 3). Nida thought that if a translator makes every effort to follow the style of original text, translation will become a mechanical work. In this way, Nida suggested that translation is not necessary to be in accordance with original text in style, otherwise, translation may destroy the original meaning. Catford brought the language categories of systematic grammar; grammatical/ lexical form, medium form , medium substance, situation and context meaning and unit, structure, class and system(廖七一，99). The equivalence in his explanation is the equivalence between

categories. Translation is linguistic activities, and different languages belong to different linguistic systems, thus translation is untenable in this sense. However, in translation practice, Translation is the replacement of substance between different languages.

三、The application of Nida’s and Catford’s theory

Both Nida and Catford is linguistic-oriented, and both of them proposed that their theory are universal and can direct al translation practice.

The Theory and Practice of Translation is produced to direct The Bible’s translation and make pubic the Christianity. When translate information text, it is reasonable to take contents and effect into top consideration at the cost of style. But when literature translation is concerned, style is an important factor to convey emotion and attitude, so in this sense, translation with no regard to style is not acceptable. Thus, Nida’s translation theory is not applicable to literature translation. However, Nida’s theory includes four steps from the perspectives of semantic categories, and kernel sentence which make translation practicable and concrete, they are analysis、transfer、restructuring and testing. Nida is optimistic in translation, and he thought that translation is tenable in every language because he considered that if one thing can be described in one language, it is certainly can be described in another language.

Catford’s theory 卡特福德的翻译理论从语言的本质上揭示了翻译过程，理论比较抽象，难以理解和接受，他认为意义是不可翻译的，为整个翻译活动定了一个悲观的基调。虽然卡特福德为翻译实践提供了科学的依据，使翻译不再是经验

式的活动，但其限制翻译中的语音翻译和字形翻译具有局限性。提出语音翻译提醒教师在教授外语时不能使用“翻译”的方法，即 “book”就是指“书”， 而要引导学生通过原文字典来学习每个单词的意思， book 不仅有“书”的意思，还有“本”的意思。这在具体操作中也存在困难，首先对于初学者来说，原文词典的每个单词的词条对初学者都存在困难，只能依靠简单的办法学习单词。其次，中国人在学习汉语的时候，也不是一次性都掌握了一个发音的所有汉字，也是从最常用的汉字学起，比如ma, 在学汉字的过程中先接触的是“妈”，然后随着接受能力逐渐增强，接触的文本逐渐增多才学会了“麻”、“马”、“骂”等。在学习英语的过程中，也可以遵照这种方法，先学习某个单词最常用的意思，然后在教科书中逐渐加入其其他用法，比如 “book”，可以在了解了“书”的意思后加入“本”的意思。这样才能最终学好外语。 四、结语

奈达与卡特福德的翻译理论都为翻译人员的翻译实践提供了指导，奈达的理论要比卡特福德的理论更容易接受，因其操作模式也使得其具有可操作性。卡特福德的翻译理论抽象、概括，但其给外语学习者很多启发，通过查原文字典学习外语，摆脱词汇学习一一对应的误区，时刻铭记“对等词不对等”。两种理论各有其侧重，如果说奈达的理论为翻译者提供了艺术上的指导，那么卡特福德则为翻译者提供了科学指南。 参考文献：

[ 1 ] J. C. Catford. A L inguistic Theory of Translation [M ]. Oxford: OUP, 1965. [ 2 ] Eugene A. Nida & Charles R. Taber. The Theory and Practice of Translation [M ]. Shanghai: Shanghai Foreign Language Education Press, 2010.

[ 3 ] 廖七一. 当代西方翻译理论探索[M ]. 南京:译林出版社, 2000. [ 4 ] 穆雷. 翻译的语言学理论[M ]. 北京:旅游教育出版社,1991. [ 5 ] 谭载喜. 翻译理论与实践[M ].

[ 6 ] 吴义诚. 对翻译等值问题的思考. 中国翻译 [J ], 1994, (1): 4-6.

本文来源：https://www.bwwdw.com/article/z0y2.html