论文部分内容阅读
【Abstract】As a newly created field， pragmatics has become more systematic during the years’ continuous development. It provides us a wide range of insights into other fields—translation， linguistics， discourse analysis， semantics and psychologist， etc. To some extent， pragmatics is the facilitator of translation in cross-cultural and cross-linguistic communication and is expected to achieve the fulfillment of communicative effect. With the enforcement of pragmatics， pragmatic translation got rapid improvement.
【Key words】equivalence； pragmatic equivalence； communicative effect； translation
1. Introduction
Pragmatics studies the use of language. Since it was first put forward in 1938 by Charles Morris it has aroused great attention in the academic world. It got approval as an independent branch of study after the publication of the book “Journal of Pragmatics” in 1977.
Translation deals with the transferred meaning from the source language to the target language. In the process of transferring， some factors， such as context and implicatures could hardly be neglected. One cannot concern about equivalence in translation as a single notion. A target text （TT） may be equivalent in one aspect but deviate greatly from the source text （ST） in another. Koller claims that simply requiring a TT to be “equivalent” to a ST is vacuous. Therefore， the conditions of equivalence related to a peculiar quality in the ST must be specified.
2. Pragmatic Equivalence and Translation
2.1 Categories of Equivalence
Equivalence， the central issue in translation， is classified into two categories by Christiane Nord in 2001： formal equivalence and dynamic equivalence. Formal equivalence focuses attention on the message itself， in both form and content. Dynamic equivalence is to reproduce in the receptor language the closest natural equivalent of the source-language message， firstly in terms of meaning and secondly in terms of style. The former is equivalence of low level， such as word， phrase， sentence and paragraph； while the latter is the equivalence of the integrated effect of the text.
Types of equivalence， including pragmatic equivalence， lay special emphasis on the function of language rather than its formal features. Meanwhile， equivalence does not refer to absolute and comprehensive similarities.
2.2 Pragmatic Equivalence
Translation equivalence can be categorized into three aspects： pragmatic equivalence， semantic equivalence and syntactic equivalence. Among the three， pragmatic equivalence is the most important. It is the equivalence in formal-aesthetic features， such as stylistic features， syntax， metaphor， and puns. This is equivalence in communicating the desired message to the readership， and in achieving the desired effect in them. It is also called “communicative equivalence”. Pragmatic equivalence is available to solve a series of translation problems. For instance：
（1）双枪老太婆。
It is a female revolutionist in the novel “红岩”， who always carries two pistols in her hand. If we translate her name into—the old woman with two pistols in her hand， readers would be puzzled and could not understand the characteristics of her， so that we translate her name as “super granny” who must be brave， wise， energetic and unique.
（2）今天饭菜不好，请多多包涵。来，先干一杯。
When a Chinese host says that to foreign friends at a reception， they might be puzzled： what does “our dishes are not good enough” mean？ If they tried to serve us， why the host said that？ In such a context， we should take pragmatic strategies into application： These are the best dishes we are able to prepare. Please make yourselves at home. Now， to everyone， cheers！ Here， pragmatic equivalence is expressive and communicative； meanwhile， it conveys culture differences.
2.3 Equivalent View of Translation
Nida once said “a set of principles which are helpful in understanding the nature of translating or in establishing criteria for evaluating a translated text.”
Pragmatic equivalence principle in translation in terms of pragmatics focuses on not only the explicit meaning， but the implicatures of ST as well， both of which should be taken into consideration in translation. Translator reproduces the two factors into the TT after pragmatic analysis. On the basis of this understanding， translators are challenged in how he/she understands the pragmatic meaning， especially the illocutionary meaning， then conveys it faithfully and elegantly to readers so as to perform the pragmatic equivalent effect.
See the following example：
（3）中国是一快肥肉。
To our Chinese people， “肥肉”is something opposite to the term“瘦肉”. For this reason， “肥肉”should be literally translated as “fat meat” which is sometimes too greasy to eat. And at most times， people， especially females do not like it. However， when dating back to the period of imperialism， and considering western culture， “China” is used to be so-called “choiced meat” in the view of imperialists who would always be watered when talking about China. In this case， importance of pragmatic meaning and pragmatic effect is emphasized.
（4）绿水，青山。
According to Chinese， “绿水” is “green water” and “青山”is “blue mountains”. But this literary translation does not fit the western culture. In the English language， “green water” seems to be polluted and not clear. And “blue mountains” do not exist. “青山”is dense and thick. Due to the culture transition and pragmatic equivalence， the proper translation should be “Blue water and green mountains”. The translator， in order to convey the specific cultural information in the source language， always makes some linguistic choices to adapt to both the expression of the specific information in source language and the target readers’ understanding by adding an explanation. For instance：
（5）巧媳妇做不出没米的饭菜，（叫我怎么样呢）？
a. Even the cleverest housewife can’t cook a meal without rice.
（Yang）
b. Even the cleverest housewife can’t make bread without flour.
（Hawkes）
In ancient times， the Chinese people ate rice rather western bread. Nevertheless， to meet the demand of TT readers， rice has to yield to bread， by means of which cross-culture and pragmatic effect is fulfilled.
3. Conclusion and Limitation
Translating means communicating. As what its definition indicates， it is the bridge between two languages. It is a cross-linguistic and cross-culture practice， which deals with the transfer of meaning between ST and TT. And it is inevitably more related to culture factors than linguistic elements. In this case， pragmatic approach can be effective and powerful.
Pragmatic translation concentrates on equivalence of the pragmatic meaning. Pragmatic equivalence has great resemblance to the dynamical equivalence. The pragmatic translation proposes that in translation we should make sufficient comprehension of the original in different contexts， and make thorough pragmatic analyses and try to deliver the original idea of it. To sum up， translation should make correlation with pragmatics in both theory and practice.
During the process of writing this thesis， I found that my limited understanding and the inadequate data could hardly make this thesis come to the level of creation. It is a pity that due to my limited power， some of the examples and theories are not systematic and could not as expressive and persuasive as I have expected. I hope scholars and experts in this field may reinforce it in the future.
References：
[1]Jacob L.Mey，Pragmatics：An Introduction，Oxford：Blackwell Publishers，1993.
[2]Nida，Eugene A.and Charles R.Jaber，The Theory and Practice of Translation，Netherlands：E.J.Brill，Leiden 1969.
[3]郭智颖.翻译的语用观[D].广西大学，2001.
[4]曹雪芹，高鄂，红楼梦[M].北京：人民文学出版社，1992.
【Key words】equivalence； pragmatic equivalence； communicative effect； translation
1. Introduction
Pragmatics studies the use of language. Since it was first put forward in 1938 by Charles Morris it has aroused great attention in the academic world. It got approval as an independent branch of study after the publication of the book “Journal of Pragmatics” in 1977.
Translation deals with the transferred meaning from the source language to the target language. In the process of transferring， some factors， such as context and implicatures could hardly be neglected. One cannot concern about equivalence in translation as a single notion. A target text （TT） may be equivalent in one aspect but deviate greatly from the source text （ST） in another. Koller claims that simply requiring a TT to be “equivalent” to a ST is vacuous. Therefore， the conditions of equivalence related to a peculiar quality in the ST must be specified.
2. Pragmatic Equivalence and Translation
2.1 Categories of Equivalence
Equivalence， the central issue in translation， is classified into two categories by Christiane Nord in 2001： formal equivalence and dynamic equivalence. Formal equivalence focuses attention on the message itself， in both form and content. Dynamic equivalence is to reproduce in the receptor language the closest natural equivalent of the source-language message， firstly in terms of meaning and secondly in terms of style. The former is equivalence of low level， such as word， phrase， sentence and paragraph； while the latter is the equivalence of the integrated effect of the text.
Types of equivalence， including pragmatic equivalence， lay special emphasis on the function of language rather than its formal features. Meanwhile， equivalence does not refer to absolute and comprehensive similarities.
2.2 Pragmatic Equivalence
Translation equivalence can be categorized into three aspects： pragmatic equivalence， semantic equivalence and syntactic equivalence. Among the three， pragmatic equivalence is the most important. It is the equivalence in formal-aesthetic features， such as stylistic features， syntax， metaphor， and puns. This is equivalence in communicating the desired message to the readership， and in achieving the desired effect in them. It is also called “communicative equivalence”. Pragmatic equivalence is available to solve a series of translation problems. For instance：
（1）双枪老太婆。
It is a female revolutionist in the novel “红岩”， who always carries two pistols in her hand. If we translate her name into—the old woman with two pistols in her hand， readers would be puzzled and could not understand the characteristics of her， so that we translate her name as “super granny” who must be brave， wise， energetic and unique.
（2）今天饭菜不好，请多多包涵。来，先干一杯。
When a Chinese host says that to foreign friends at a reception， they might be puzzled： what does “our dishes are not good enough” mean？ If they tried to serve us， why the host said that？ In such a context， we should take pragmatic strategies into application： These are the best dishes we are able to prepare. Please make yourselves at home. Now， to everyone， cheers！ Here， pragmatic equivalence is expressive and communicative； meanwhile， it conveys culture differences.
2.3 Equivalent View of Translation
Nida once said “a set of principles which are helpful in understanding the nature of translating or in establishing criteria for evaluating a translated text.”
Pragmatic equivalence principle in translation in terms of pragmatics focuses on not only the explicit meaning， but the implicatures of ST as well， both of which should be taken into consideration in translation. Translator reproduces the two factors into the TT after pragmatic analysis. On the basis of this understanding， translators are challenged in how he/she understands the pragmatic meaning， especially the illocutionary meaning， then conveys it faithfully and elegantly to readers so as to perform the pragmatic equivalent effect.
See the following example：
（3）中国是一快肥肉。
To our Chinese people， “肥肉”is something opposite to the term“瘦肉”. For this reason， “肥肉”should be literally translated as “fat meat” which is sometimes too greasy to eat. And at most times， people， especially females do not like it. However， when dating back to the period of imperialism， and considering western culture， “China” is used to be so-called “choiced meat” in the view of imperialists who would always be watered when talking about China. In this case， importance of pragmatic meaning and pragmatic effect is emphasized.
（4）绿水，青山。
According to Chinese， “绿水” is “green water” and “青山”is “blue mountains”. But this literary translation does not fit the western culture. In the English language， “green water” seems to be polluted and not clear. And “blue mountains” do not exist. “青山”is dense and thick. Due to the culture transition and pragmatic equivalence， the proper translation should be “Blue water and green mountains”. The translator， in order to convey the specific cultural information in the source language， always makes some linguistic choices to adapt to both the expression of the specific information in source language and the target readers’ understanding by adding an explanation. For instance：
（5）巧媳妇做不出没米的饭菜，（叫我怎么样呢）？
a. Even the cleverest housewife can’t cook a meal without rice.
（Yang）
b. Even the cleverest housewife can’t make bread without flour.
（Hawkes）
In ancient times， the Chinese people ate rice rather western bread. Nevertheless， to meet the demand of TT readers， rice has to yield to bread， by means of which cross-culture and pragmatic effect is fulfilled.
3. Conclusion and Limitation
Translating means communicating. As what its definition indicates， it is the bridge between two languages. It is a cross-linguistic and cross-culture practice， which deals with the transfer of meaning between ST and TT. And it is inevitably more related to culture factors than linguistic elements. In this case， pragmatic approach can be effective and powerful.
Pragmatic translation concentrates on equivalence of the pragmatic meaning. Pragmatic equivalence has great resemblance to the dynamical equivalence. The pragmatic translation proposes that in translation we should make sufficient comprehension of the original in different contexts， and make thorough pragmatic analyses and try to deliver the original idea of it. To sum up， translation should make correlation with pragmatics in both theory and practice.
During the process of writing this thesis， I found that my limited understanding and the inadequate data could hardly make this thesis come to the level of creation. It is a pity that due to my limited power， some of the examples and theories are not systematic and could not as expressive and persuasive as I have expected. I hope scholars and experts in this field may reinforce it in the future.
References：
[1]Jacob L.Mey，Pragmatics：An Introduction，Oxford：Blackwell Publishers，1993.
[2]Nida，Eugene A.and Charles R.Jaber，The Theory and Practice of Translation，Netherlands：E.J.Brill，Leiden 1969.
[3]郭智颖.翻译的语用观[D].广西大学，2001.
[4]曹雪芹，高鄂，红楼梦[M].北京：人民文学出版社，1992.