【作者】 胡显耀；

【导师】 张春柏；

【作者基本信息】 华东师范大学 ， 英语语言文学， 2006， 博士

【摘要】 本文用语料库语言学的工具和方法来描写、分析和解释当代汉语翻译小说中的翻译规范。本文所谓的“翻译规范”是指：特定社会文化条件下，人们对什么是翻译和应当如何翻译等问题达成的社会共识。这种共识体现为社会成员通过翻译政策对翻译文本、语种和译者的选择与对翻译总体性质的期待；带有一定的规约性和奖惩性；译者作为译语社会文化成员，在社会化过程中习得翻译规范；它的存在使翻译文本的总体呈现出特定的语言特征。 翻译规范是翻译行为社会性的体现，它与翻译行为的本质具有必然的联系。本文用德国社会哲学家哈贝马斯(Habermas)的“交往行为理论”重新阐释了翻译行为的性质：翻译行为的本质是一种交往行为，即至少两个具有语言和行为能力的主体之间为达到相互理解而进行的交往。翻译行为涉及三个不同的世界：一是原文所构成和呈现的客观世界；二是译文赖以生存的译语社会世界；三是译者自身的主观(主体)世界。作为行为主体的译者必须协调与这三个世界的关系，使翻译行为满足交往合理性的三原则：一、表述的真实性，指翻译行为应准确反映与客观世界的关系，即与原文的关系，包括原文的结构和原文所呈现的事件和事实。二、表述的规范性，指译者应当遵循有效的社会规范、道德规范和技术规范，正确处理主体与社会世界(读者、出版商、政治经济结构、诗学、意识形态等等)的关系。三、主体表达的真诚性。意义的生成不是纯客观的，理解和再现都必然伴随着主体性。译者必须让读者相信他／她真诚地表达了自己的主观世界。交往合理性默认语言的可理解性。对翻译而言，语言的可理解性，即译语的可理解性。交往行为及其合理性理论为翻译规范的研究提供了一个合理的基础。真实性、规范性和真诚性都是翻译作为一种交往行为的本质属性。片面强调某一属性，忽略其它属性的翻译行为和翻译理论不能完整地实现翻译的功能和解释翻译的本质。 本文认为，翻译规范只是翻译本质属性的一方面，即翻译的社会性。规范的社会性与再现原文的客观世界和发挥译者的创造性并不矛盾，因为三种属性分别面向不同的世界：规范的作用是协调译者与其它主体构成的社会世界的关系，而其它两者分别应对客观世界和主体世界。规范的存在并不意味否定译者的主体性和创造性。译者享有遵循或违背规范的自由。但是，一旦翻译的目的是进入社会世界，它就必须遵循与其它主体交往的社会规范。研究翻译规范的意义在于揭示翻译社会性的真实规律。作为翻译性质的一个方面，它也将推动对翻译的真实性和创造性的认识。 翻译规范的存在使特定时期的翻译文本总体呈现某些规律性和倾向性的语更多还原

【Abstract】 This thesis is a corpus-based study on the translational norms of contemporary Chinese translated fiction. It applies corpus linguistic tools and methods to the description and analysis of the norms of translation. Translational norms are defined, in the thesis, as "the social reality of the correctness of translation, i.e. the common knowledge about how translation should be done within a social cultural context, which are acquired by translators in the process of socialization, under certain pressures, and represented by regularities in translational activities."Translational norms are thought to be the embodiment of translation action as a social communication, an essential aspect of translation. Translation per se is redefined as a tripartition of objective, social, subjective aspects based on the German social philosopher Jurgen Habermas’ "Theory of Communication". Translation action is believed to be basically an act of communication, i.e. the communication between two subjects, who have equal competence in language and action, in order to reach mutual understanding. Translation action deals with the relationship among three worlds, i.e. the objective world constructed and represented by the Source Text, the social world where the Target Text exists, and the subjective world of the translator. As the subject of the action, the translator should coordinate the three worlds in order to reach the rationality of translation: (a) the facticity of translation, i.e. the relationship between the translator and the objective world constructed and represented by the ST. The translator should truthfully represent the facts and/or the structures of the ST; (b) the normativity of translation, i.e. the relationship with the social world, which consists of the readers of the TT, publishers, politico-economic structures, poetics, ideology, etc., by complying with effective social, moral and technical norms; (c) the sincerity of translation, i.e. the subjectivity of understanding and translating. The creation and representation of Meaning is not a purely objective process, but a process necessarily accompanied by the subjectivities of the interpreter. Accordingly, the translator should express his/her subjective experience and sense of the reality faithfully; in other words, the translator should convince the readers of TT that he/she has faithfully express his/her subjective world. The rationality of communication involves the comprehensibility of language, i.e. the comprehensibility of the Target Language in terms of translation. This thesis argues that the Theory of Communication and Rationality has offered a reasonable basis for research into translational norms. The facticity, normativity and sincerity of translation form the essence of translation as a Communication Action. Any ex parte emphasis upon one of the three fundamental aspects will result in incomplete understanding and partial更多还原