篇一：The Definition of Foreignization
The Definition of Foreignization
Lawrence Venuti,a famous American translator,he was the first persom to introduced domestication and foreignization in his book The Translator's Invisibility: A History of Translation. He said “foreignization is an approach that the translator leaves the author in peace, as much as possible, and moves the reader towards him” while domestication is one that the translator "leaves the reader in peace, as much as possible, and moves the author towards him"(Venuti,2004:19-20)By developing these two terms Venuti meant to argue against the tendency of the transparent translation and invisibility of the translator. In his opinion, domestication is a derogative term. On the basis of Venuti's theory, Schuttleworth and Cowie in their book" Dictionary of Translation Studies" define the term of domestication in this way: “A term used by Venuti(1995) to describe the translation strategy in which a transparent, fluent style is adopted in order to minimize the strangeness of the foreign text for TL readers...it is identified with a policy common in dominant cultures which are 'aggressively monolingual, ueceptive to the foreign', and which he describes as being' accustomed to fluent translations that invisibly inscribe foreign text with[target language] values and provide readers with narcissistic experience of recognizing their own culture in a cultural other'.(Schuttleworth&Cowie,2004:43-44) Foreignizing translation in which a TT is produced which deliberately breaks target conventions by retaining something of the foreignness of the original."(Schuttleworth&Cowie,2004:59) Venuti regarded foreignizing translation as a challenge towards domestication and the function is to "register the linguistic and cultural difference of the foreign text, sending the reader abroad."(Venuti,2004:20) In translation, domestication means removing all strangeness and foreignness of the source text and making the translation read like the original. Domestication is oriented towards the target language. Foreignization is the opposite approach and by applying this method the foreignness of the source language will be kept to the greatest possible extent
篇二：劳伦斯·韦努蒂
一．劳伦斯·韦努蒂的基本信息及其主张：
劳伦斯·韦努蒂 Lawrence Venuti（1953年—）学者，大学英语教授，专职翻译家，美籍意大利人，生于费城南部（此区域居住者多为意大利裔），七十年代早期在天普大学攻读英语文学，1980年获哥伦比亚大学博士学位。
主要著作：主编论文集《对翻译的重新思考:语篇、主体性与意识形态》（RethinkingTranslation: Discourse, Subjectivity,Ideology),（1992）、《译者的隐身一部翻译史》（Translator's Invisibility: A History ofTranslation)（1995）
《不光彩的翻译》（The Scandals of Translation: Towards anEthics of Difference)（1998）.
韦努蒂把解构主义的翻译思想付诸实施，提出了反对译文通顺的翻译策略。其目的是：在思想意识上反对殖民主义的翻译观和英美民族中心主义和帝国主义文化价值观；
在翻译原则和方法上，提创“存异”而不是“求同”。
通过对英美翻译历史的研究，他得出英美文化中译者和译作实际上处于“隐形”状态。造成译者隐形的原因是由于归化翻译是英美翻译界的主流翻译方法所致。鉴于归化翻译是英美翻译作品是主流翻译方法，而译者在这些翻译作品中都是“隐形人”。Venuti主张“异化”翻译，号召译者采取抵抗翻译策略，以显示自己在翻译中的存在。
Venuti的异化翻译法归因于19世纪德国哲学家Schleiermacher的翻译论说：the translator leaves the author in peace, as much as possible, and moves the reader towards him. “译者尽量不惊动原作者，让读者向他靠近。”
VENUTI异化翻译理论中存在的问题:
由于Venuti过分关注政治对翻译方法的影响，其所提倡的异化翻译理论忽视了文学翻译的主要目的，没有考虑到接受者的需求。
异化翻译的对象主要是一小撮世界主义知识分子（cosmopolitan intelligentsia），而异化翻译所存在的理论基础实际上就是“文化精英主义“（cultural elitism）。文化精英分子瞧不起普通大众，嘲笑他们要求容易理解、读起来省事的翻译。Venuti在强调利用翻译方法来反抗文化霸权的过程中，无疑把自己摆到了文化精英的位置。因此，他所提倡的翻译方法既得不到他所要拯救的译者的响应，又受到一些西方翻译理论家的质疑。
二．归化和异化
归化和异化这对翻译术语是由美国著名翻译理论学家劳伦斯韦努蒂（Lawrence Venuti）于1995年在《译者的隐身》中提出来的。（该书是美籍意
大利学者劳伦斯·韦努蒂(Lawrence Venuti)的一本代表作。作者在书中只追溯了以通顺为目标的“本土化”(domestication)翻译理论以及作者所赞成的“异化”(foreignization)翻译理论的由来和发展。作者写本书的目的是呼吁对现存占主导地位的本土化翻译理论发起挑战，倡导革新。）
归化：是要把源语本土化，以目异化：是“译者尽可能不去打扰标语或译文读者为归宿，采取目标语作者，让读者向作者靠拢”。在翻译上读者所习惯的表达方式来传达原文的就是迁就外来文化的语言特点，吸纳内容。归化翻译要求译者向目的语的外语表达方式，要求译者向作者靠拢，读者靠拢，译者必须像本国作者那样采取相应于作者所使用的源语表达方说话，原作者要想和读者直接对话，式，来传达原文的内容，即以目的语译作必须变成地道的本国语言。归化文化为归宿。使用异化策略的目的在翻译有助于读者更好地理解译文，增于考虑民族文化的差异性、保存和反强译文的可读性和欣赏性。
映异域民族特征和语言风格特色，为
译文读者保留异国情调。
从历史上看，归化和异化可以视为直译和意译的概念延伸，但又不完全等同于直译和意译。直译和意译所关注的核心问题是如何在语言层面处理形式和意义，而异化和归化则突破了语言因素的局限，将视野扩展到语言、文化和美学等因素。按韦努蒂（Venuti）的说法，归化法是“把原作者带入译入语文化”，而异化法则是“接受外语文本的语言及文化差异，把读者带入外国情景”。（Venuti，1995:20）由此可见，直译和意译主要是局限于语言层面的价值取向，异化和归化则是立足于文化大语境下的价值取向，两者之间的差异是显而易见的，不能混为一谈。
例证：
1. The drive back to my home in Edmoonton was an endless journey of destructive emotions and thoughts.In a truck-stop restuarant ,I sat staring at a glass of cheap red wine.Of all the gin joints in all the towns in all the world, she walks out of mine.（卡萨布兰卡）
假如我们用异化的方法来进行翻译：
在我开车回到埃德蒙顿的路上，我陷入了无尽的悲伤之中。随后，我来到一家汽车旅馆，端着一杯廉价红酒出神，觉着这世上有那么多家旅馆，她终究还是走出了我的那一家。
假如我们用归化的方法来进行翻译，差别会在最后一句：弱水三千，终究我已不是她那瓢中的一壶水了。
2. EZRA POUND古诗的英译
送友人
李白
青山横北郭，白水绕东城。
此地一为别，孤蓬万里征。
浮云游子意，落日故人情。
挥手自兹去，萧萧班马鸣。
Taking leave of a friend
Blue mountains to the north of the walls,
White river winding about them;
Here we must make separation
And go out through a thousand miles of dead grass
Mind lime a floating wide cloud,
Sunset like the parting of old acquaintances
Who bow over their clasped hands at a distance
Our horses neigh to each other
As we are departing
庞德的译文保留了古风和异国情调，在整体上还是再现了原诗的意义和精神，诗中的“青山”，“白水”，“孤蓬”，“浮云”，“落日”，“萧萧马鸣”这些意象都在译诗中得到再现，原诗中友人相别的无限深情如浮眼前。
3.习语中的异化翻译
说曹操，曹操就到。
Speak of angles and you will hear the wings.
祸不单行。
Misfortune never comes singly.
无风不起浪。
Where there’s smoke, there’s fire.
三．国外研究现状：
归化
早在现代初期，再将外国文本报译成英文的过程中，归化策略就出现了。在确立归化策略的过程中，约翰·德海姆（John Denham）起了重要作用。由于他出版了经他翻译的维吉尔（Virgil）的《特洛伊的毁灭》，归化策略得以广泛宣传。在前言中这样写道：“诗所表达的情绪是如此细致微妙，以至于再将它译成另一种语言时，它所表达的情绪会被蒸发掉。如果不在转换过程中加入一种新情绪，那么诗就只是一个空架子。”（Venuti，1995:49）后来的作家德莱登（Dryden）站在德海姆的立场上，也反对奴隶似的翻译。在德莱登之后，从亚历山大·蒲伯的《荷马史诗》到亚历山大·泰特勒的《翻译原则》，归化策略在英语翻译的理论与实际中都很盛行。
下列学者同样提倡流畅的翻译：
弗瑞瑞（Frere）：我们认为，翻译语言应当尽可能是一种纯粹的不可触摸、不可看见的元素，它应是思想和感情的媒介，仅此而已。（Venuti， 1995:77）
乔治·兰姆（George Lamb）：翻译的自然过程应是首先保证其忠实性，然后再试着加以润饰发挥。
当代学者奈达相继提出动态对等和功能对等，其实质一无是处遵循译入语国家的语言习惯和文化模式，奈达是归化派的代言人。
异化
18世纪末19世纪初，约翰·诺特在将《凯图拉斯》翻译成英语时非常抢眼
地运用了异化策略，即抵抗式翻译：当翻译、解释一部古代经典时，这项工作可以被认作是在历史链条中形成一环。历史不应被捏造，因此我们应当公正地翻译。（Venuti，1995:85）这一时期，异化翻译在德国十分活跃。
20世界，英语翻译中透明翻译的统治地位受到决定性的挑战。
肯勒（Kenner）：庞德翻译出来的东西从来都不是英语里已经存在的东西。只有庞德才既有勇气又有才华去创造一种实际上与原著类似的形式。（Venuti，1995:204）
彼德·纽马克将翻译分成交际翻译和语义翻译，前者强调译作应服从目的语文化和读者，后者强调译作应服从源语文化和作者。纽马克认为语义翻译明显优于交际翻译。
劳伦斯·韦努蒂坚决声明译本应当是异文化出现，抵抗翻译占统治的地方。已成为异化的代言人。
四． 国内研究现状：
在我国，归化和异化很大程度上与意译与直译重叠。
第一次翻译高潮
佛经译者们在翻译实践中显示出了直译趋向。
支谦提出其翻译理论因循本旨，不加文饰。
道安倡导直译；
鸠摩罗什倡导意译；
玄奘提出新译法，即直译与意译相结合。
第二次翻译高潮
就文学翻译而言，意译和归化仍是主流
归化
严复与林纾
异化
鲁迅与瞿秋白
鲁迅曾言：“宁信而不顺。”
五．归化异化的应用领域
1. 在商业广告翻译中的运用
在商业经济繁荣的今天，并非好的商品就有好的销路，在销售商品的过程中广告起到了举足轻重的作用。
广告翻译的目的英语广告原文的目的一致，都是源于商家推广产品或服务的需要。这种极强的意向性决定了广告的撰写及翻译应以读者为中心，译语在别国读者中产生的影响应等同于原广告在本国读者中产生的影响。
2.在影视翻译中的应用
3.在政论文翻译中的应用
4.在习语翻译中的应用
六．归化与异化的实用价值
异化的翻译并非十全十美。它虽忠于原文，但破坏了目的语文化的规范。使用这种方法译出的文字甚至有时难免显得不通顺甚至晦涩难懂，如在科普文章和影视剧中，异化的翻译并不适合。
不同的译文由于翻译的目的、读者的对象以及所处的时代环境不同，译者所采用的翻译策略也应当不同。我们在实践中不能简单地排除任何一种译法，而应根据不同情况恰当地选用某一种译法，或将两种译法综合运用，才能取长补短，克服归化、异化两种翻译方法各自的缺陷，使译文尽可能达到理想的效果。
从历史的角度来看，通顺的翻译在本国文化中传播外国文化是起了不可替代的作用的。但是，随着各国间文化交往的日益频繁，本国文化对异国文化越来越采取宽容的态度，异化的翻译也慢慢为读者所接受，并开始领导新潮流。语言中的习语翻译也是这样，从归化到异化，采用何种翻译策略，最终取决于翻译的目的和读者的对象以及语言的环境。由于归化的翻译和异化的翻译在目的语文化中起着不能互相替代的作用，因此，两种翻译将永远并存、相互补充，在众多领域发挥着重要作用。
1. 奈达指出，翻译是用最恰当、自然和对等的语言从语义到文体再现源语的信息；
强调意义是最重要的。那么，是不是说译者在翻译时应把源语本土化，采取目标与读者所习惯的表达方式来传达原文内容，如果是的话，这样会不会抹去了原文的异国情调？
2. 英国翻译理论家彼得·纽克曼提出两种翻译模式，语义翻译和交际翻译，它们之间具体的差异是什么，什么样的情境下使用语义翻译的方法，什么样的情境下采取交际翻译的策略？
3. 功能派认为，目的法则和忠诚原则是贯穿所有翻译过程诗中的两大支柱准则，但在某些领域的翻译中，比如说广告翻译里，目的法则与忠诚法则是有一定的冲突的，如Benz的翻译是奔驰，作为车的是很实用的，翻出了速度感，但是对于原文并不忠实，因为Benz是用其创始人卡尔·本茨（Karl Benz）的姓来命名的。那么这两个翻译准则在功能派视角下，孰轻孰重，应该先优先哪一点？
篇三：简评祝庆英与吴钧燮《简爱》中译本的不同翻译风格--毕业
【标题】简评祝庆英与吴钧燮《简?爱》中译本的不同翻译风格
【作者】邱 莹 莹
【关键词】
【指导老师】何 远 秀
【专业】英语
【正文】
Ⅰ. Introduction
Jane Eyre is the masterpiece of the famous English female writer Charlotte Bronte. Since its publication, Jane Eyre has been considered one of the most popular English novels. With profound thought and elegant language, it is well received by the readers and is a glorious star in the literary world. The most important feature of the novel is that it breaks the paternal line aesthetic standards of the Victorian Time. All this makes it worth rendering again. Thus, this paper chooses Jane Eyre published by Foreign Language Teaching and Research Press in 2006 as the English version.
Since the lack of materials, the versions chosen by the writer of this dissertation are respectively translated by Zhu Qingying and Wu Junxie. As experienced and skilled translators, both Zhu and Wu have a good command of the source language and the target language. Zhu translated the original into Chinese at the end of 1970s and had it published in 1980 by Shanghai Yi Wen Press. Her version reads clear and smooth and conveys the spirit of the original. She is good at describing the subtle feeling of the characters and her language style is very clear. Once Yanfu said that, “In translation, there are three difficulties, namely, faithfulness, expressiveness and elegance. It is already very difficult to achieve faithfulness. Without expressiveness, mere faithfulness would mean work to no avail”.1 Apparently, faithfulness is the center of the three-character criterion. From Zhu’s version, we may find that her translated version is not only to convey ideas (meaning) of the original faithfully, but also to express the language style of the original faithfully. While, Wu’s version was published in 1990 by the People’s Literature Publishing House, later than Zhu’s version. His version is easy to read and natural. He adopts domesticating method in his translating style, which makes his version read easily. We can see that he pays more attention to semantic equivalency, but sometimes ignores the stylistic equivalency.
Therefore, there appear some different translating styles in their
versions. The aim of this thesis is to compare and evaluate the translating styles of the two Chinese versions of the English novel of Jane Eyre, using
criteria of translation、semantic equivalence﹑stylistic equivalence and different translating methods as the frame of reference, with a view of finding out the better translating style among the two Chinese versions. After comparing these two versions, the writer of this paper prefers Zhu’s version to Wu’s version.
Ⅱ. The Criteria of Translation
Translation criticism has to be based on certain translation criteria, which allow critics to distinguish between good translations and bad ones and to provide convincing explanations of why some are better than others. This is especially the case when commenting on different versions of a literary text.
However, the criteria of translation have been a heartedly-debated issue from the beginning of translation studies. For centuries, a variety of principles have been presented for the evaluation of translation both in China and in the western world. Xuanzang, the most outstanding Buddhist translator in Tang Dynasty, maintained that a translation should be both faithful and expressive, which could be regarded as the earliest remarks on the translation criteria in China. 2 The first wave of translation criteria in the western world began with the statement of Cicero who proposed not to translate word for word, but to translate sense for sense. 3 Later, Peter Newmark, in his book A Textboook of Translation, stated that “What is translation? Often, though not by any means always, it is rendering the meaning of a text into another language in the way that the author intended the text.” 4 Although the terms they resort to in defining vary from one to another, those translation theorists at home and abroad unanimously hold that translators should reproduce the meaning and the style of the source language text as accurately as possible by finding the equivalents in the target language. Therefore, the closest natural equivalence in both meaning and style should be held as one of the criteria for the evaluation of translation style.
With the development of the translation studies, plenty of translators and theorists have realized that translation is a far more complicated activity with various cultural, poetic, political as well as economic factors related to it. Which strategy is more appropriate as far as specific literary work is concerned? Which strategy can make the translated text have a better effect among its target audience? Translation, as a form of translational action, like any other forms of human action, must be oriented by certain purpose. In translation practice, which strategy should be chosen should not be determined by the text itself or the translator himself/herself, but should be mainly decided by the purpose of the translation. Thus, in the two Chinese versions of Jane Eyre, foreignization and domestication could be applied so as to compare the better translation style.
A. The Criterion of Semantic Equivalence
It is generally agreed that meaning is the most important in translation.
Eugene A. Nida once said, “Translation means translating the meaning”.5 The main task of a translator is to convey to the reader all the possible meanings of a passage. Therefore, correspondence in meaning between source language and target language is the first criterion for assessing a
translation. During the course of translating, the meaning of the original text must be retained in the target language text. Thus both the translations and the original text should be analyzed semantically, and then the comparison should be made in order to see whether the translation is an accurate reproduction of the original text with regard to semantic equivalence.
B. The Criterion of Stylistic Equivalence
It is commonly argued that literary translation should not only convey the meaning of the original text accurately, but also reproduce the style appropriately if the translator wants to attain “equivalent effect”, because every writer has a literary style and his style is reflected in his writing. Alexander F. Tytler put faithfulness to the original style into his three principles of translation: “The style and manner of writing should be of the same character with that of the original”.6 As for Nida, he also emphasizes the significance of style in translation. He said, “Though style is secondary to content, it is nevertheless important.”7
From the above statements. A translator should be sensitive to the stylistic value of the original and try his best to make the style of his translation as close as possible to that of the original. Literary texts cannot be translated as non-literary texts; the translation of a novel cannot like an epic; the style of Charlotte Bronte cannot be translated into that of Jane Austen; the dialogue of a novel cannot be translated as a piece of narration. A good translation is one that successfully reflects as many the artistic features of the original as possible so as to retain the same aesthetic value of the original. Therefore, the principle of stylistic equivalence can serve as one of the yardsticks with which a translated version is evaluated.
C. The Criteria of foreignization and domestication
Since a translation, generally involves various purposes, different strategies have to be taken in order to achieve each of them. The
translational theory can provide guidance for us to decide which strategy is more suitable to employ in a specific translational action. Within the framework of the translational theory, the commissioner or the initiator should inform the translator much detailed information concerning the action such as the intended functions and the addressees of the target text at the beginning. If a translation is intended to widen the target
addressees、visions, and to introduce the source culture into the target culture, the translator may choose foreignization. On the contrary, if one intends to provide a smoother translation without many difficulties for
common readers, domesticating method should be taken.Taking all these factors into careful consideration, the translator can give preference to foreignization or to domestication. Thus, both foreignization and domestication can be used in literary translation.
3. Different Translating Styles
It is commonly argued that literary translation should not only convey the meaning of the original text accurately, but also reproduce the style appropriately if the translator wants to attain “equivalent effect”, because every writer has a literary style and his style is reflected in his writing. Therefore, a translation should reflect the style of the original. Reproduction of the original style has also been the major concern of both Chinese and western translation scholars. In this part, we will just evaluate the two Chinese versions of Jane Eyre by semantic equivalence and stylistic equivalence.
A. Semantic Equivalence
Meaning is of the utmost importance in translation and can never be
overlooked in any phase of translation. From the perspective of translation criticism, equivalence in meaning is the principal yardstick to judge the quality of the translated text. However, the term “meaning” has not yet got an all-accepted definition. Quite a lot of definitions and
classifications have been given to this term by different researchers in the incessant attempt to make its concept clear-cut. To avoid getting too much involved in the theoretical debatable semantics, the writer of this dissertation will follow Liu Miqing’s classification of meaning, namely, conceptive meaning, cultural meaning.
In the following part, a detailed analysis is made to evaluate whether or how the meanings are successfully transferred from English into Chinese in the two Chinese versions of Jane Eyre.
1. The Equivalence of Conceptive Meaning
Conceptive meaning is the main part of language information, the kernel of communication and the essential ingredient of language. The two translators of Jane Eyre have a good comprehension of the conceptive meaning of the original text and generally represent them accurately in their
translations. However, the two versions are not always equal in the aspect of the original conceptive meaning.
(1). ?and I discovered amongst them not a few examples of natural politeness, and innate self-respect, as well as of excellent
capacity?(p565)
? 我发现一些例子, 说明她们中间有不少人不但能力很强, 而且天生讲礼貌、有自尊心, ?(Zhu’s version, p480)
? 而且我还在她们中间发现不少生性讲礼貌、有自尊, 以及能力出众的例子, ?（Wu’s version, p494）
The above two examples are about the translation of the phrase “as well as”. The key to understand these two sentences is also the phrase “ as
well as”. In English, the phrase “as well as” puts emphasis on the words which come before it. For example, the sentence “This child is lively as well as healthy.” puts emphasis on the word “lively”. Therefore, when it is translated into Chinese, it can be translated as “这孩子既健康又活泼”. Accordingly, in the two quoted sentences, the emphasis should also be put on the words before the phrase “as well as”. However, after we read Wu’s translation, we can find Wu does not get a clear idea of this phrase, so he does not give a correct rendering of the sentence. As far as the phrase “as well as” is concerned, Zhu’s translation of the two sentences are more accurate in meaning than Wu’s.
2. The Equivalence of Cultural Meaning
Cultural Meaning refers to the national culture reflected in the language.
A language is always a part of a culture and reflects in certain aspects the culture of a society. It underlies the variety of language usage and language habits. Without these kinds of cultural information, the reader in the target language may not understand the words. Therefore, cultural meaning is necessary to be conveyed in translated version.
(2). “But his brain? That is probably rather soft? He means well: but you shrug your shoulders to hear him talk?”(p683)
“可是他的脑子呢？也许比较笨吧？他有一片好意，但是听他说话，你会蔑视地耸耸肩膀吧？”(Zhu’s version, p580)
“可是他的脑子呢？也许有点差劲吧？他用意很好，可听他讲起话来你只好耸耸肩吧？”（Wu’s version, p597）
After being away for years, Jane came bake to Thornfield. She told Rochester her experiences happening during her being away. In her talk, she mentioned St.John, her cousin. This aroused Rochester’s attention and he thought there was love between them. So he asked this question. In English, “shrug one’s shoulders” indicates one’s contempt for something. But this cultural information is not shared by all readers and the readers may not understand its real meaning. Therefore, Zhu adds the interpretation
modifier “蔑视地” before “耸耸肩膀”. This addition plays the part of the footnote and helps to convey the meaning of the original. While,Wu’s not.
B. Stylistic Equivalence
The study of style is as important as that of meaning in literary translation, because a literary work intends not only to convey the information, but also to produce the aesthetic appeal through stylistic features of the language. A stylistically equivalent translation should be one that has the same stylistic value. On the part of translation evaluation, stylistic equivalence can serve as one of the yardstick to assess the quality of the translation. In this section, the two Chinese versions of Jane Eyre are to be examined in the light of stylistic equivalence.
1. Reproduction of the Narrative Language of Jane Eyre
Narrative language is the language the writer uses to tell the story. In
《》 相关热词搜索： [db:gjc]