《三国演义》回目及回评翻译的阐释学研究

发布时间：2018-01-05 20:24

本文关键词：《三国演义》回目及回评翻译的阐释学研究　出处：《长沙理工大学》2012年硕士论文　论文类型：学位论文

【摘要】：中国古籍是中国传统思想文化的结晶，在思想内容、语言形式、文化意蕴等方面都有不同于现代作品的特点。一般的翻译需要沟通两种不同语言、文化和受众，而典籍作品还需跨越时间。中国四大名著之一的《三国演义》作为典籍，被研究的较少。仅有的一些文章也多是探讨罗慕士译本一些显而易见的问题：如量词、长度词的翻译等。邓罗的翻译因本身缺陷较多更受冷落。然邓罗译本在忠实度上虽远不及罗慕士译本，却正是在它的参照下，才有了备受推崇的罗慕士译本。作者将从阐释学角度出发，从语言、文化、思维等方面比较邓罗和罗慕士对《三国演义》回目及回评的翻译。结合阐释学理论探究两译者为何同中有异异中有同：罗慕士对《三国演义》的前理解受邓罗翻译的影响，所以异中有同；罗慕士对《三国演义》的前理解又因其主观性和所处的历史时代影响，所以同中有异。由此推断出译者对原著理解的历史性和主观性以及新的《三国演义》翻译版本产生的可能性。本文通过以下几部分来阐述作者的观点：引言部分扼要介绍研究背景，研究意义，文章的基本结构以及文献综述，指出《三国》翻译研究存在的问题及该对比研究的必要。第一部分简要介绍《三国演义》及其译本以及它们的生成文化环境，对邓罗和罗慕士两译者的翻译目的和手法进行演推，为第三部分的详细分析打下基础。第二部分是理论基础部分，阐述阐释学的主要思想及其在翻译中的应用。这部分主要阐述译者主观能动性在翻译中对译者翻译目的及翻译方法确定的影响。第三部分比较罗慕士和邓罗对回目和回评的翻译，分析异同，从阐释学角度阐述译者主体性的发挥，以实例说明两者之间目的和方法上的差异，由此照应上文：译者所处文化在翻译过程的影响，以及译者主观能动性的发挥。结论部分对全文主题进行归纳总结：由于理解的历史性，人们对文本的解释是多元的，在不同的时空、不同的视角下会产生不同的误读和偏见。理解是源语文本的过去视域与理解者由偏见（先结构）构成的现在视域的一种融合，这一过程给译者带来主动性、开放性与创造性。译者的文化背景及文化观是影响翻译的一个重要因素。它会直接影响译者翻译方法的选择，对文中内容的处理，尤其是体现文化内涵的词句。因此，，在翻译过程中，译者不可避免地会对文本进行创造性阐释。由于理解历史性的缘故，随着历史的进程，后来者会在前人认识的基础上及自己的知识文化水平影响下，不断改变自己的视界，产生新的更合理的解读。
[Abstract]:Ancient Chinese books are the crystallization of Chinese traditional ideology and culture. They are different from modern works in terms of ideological content, language form and cultural implication. General translation requires communication between two different languages, cultures and audiences. The Romance of the three Kingdoms, one of the four famous works of China, has been studied less. Only a few articles are devoted to exploring some obvious problems in Romance's translation: such as quantifiers. The translation of length words and so on. Dunro's translation is more and more neglected because of its own defects. However, although Dunro's translation is far less faithful than that of Romance, it is under its reference that Dunro has a highly respected Romulus translation. The author will proceed from the perspective of hermeneutics, from the perspective of language and culture. This paper compares Dunro's translation of Romance of the three Kingdoms with that of Romance of the three Kingdoms from the perspective of thinking. In the light of hermeneutical theory, this paper explores why there are differences and differences between the two translators:. Romance's understanding of the Romance of the three Kingdoms is influenced by Dunro's translation. So the difference has the same; Romance's former understanding of the Romance of the three Kingdoms was influenced by its subjectivity and the historical era in which it lived. Therefore, there are differences between them. The author inferred the historical and subjectivity of the translator's understanding of the original works and the possibility of the new translation version of the Romance of the three Kingdoms. This paper expounds the author's views in the following sections: The introduction briefly introduces the research background, significance, basic structure and literature review, and points out the problems in translation studies and the necessity of the contrastive study. The first part briefly introduces the Romance of the three Kingdoms and their translations and their cultural environment, and deduces the translation purposes and techniques of the translators Dunrou and Romusz, thus laying a foundation for the detailed analysis of the third part. The second part is the theoretical basis, which describes the main ideas of hermeneutics and its application in translation. The third part compares Romance and Dunro's translation of the review and review, analyzes the similarities and differences, expounds the exertion of the translator's subjectivity from the perspective of hermeneutics, and illustrates the differences in purpose and method between the two. The influence of the translator's culture in the process of translation and the exertion of the translator's initiative. The conclusion part summarizes the theme of the full text: because of the historical understanding, people's interpretation of the text is diverse, in different time and space. Different perspectives will produce different misreading and prejudice. Understanding is a fusion of the past horizon of the source language text and the present horizon composed of prejudice (prestructure), which brings initiative to the translator. Openness and creativity, the translator's cultural background and cultural outlook, are important factors affecting translation, which will directly affect the translator's choice of translation methods and the treatment of the content in the text. Therefore, in the process of translation, the translator will inevitably interpret the text creatively. As a result of the historical understanding, with the development of history. Under the influence of their knowledge and culture, the latecomers will constantly change their horizons and produce new and more reasonable interpretations.
【学位授予单位】：长沙理工大学
【学位级别】：硕士
【学位授予年份】：2012
【分类号】：H059;I046

【参考文献】