论文部分内容阅读
【Abstract】
This article explores two translation models circling around the key concept “equivalence” in translation studies. They are the Jerome Model and the Horace Model. They differentiate from each other in the aspects of the translating priorities and purposes， etc. By analyzing some illustrative examples of literal translation， this article tries to make a comparison between the two western classical translation theoretical models.
【Key words】： equivalence; the Jerome Model; the Horace Model; comparison; literal translation
I. Introduction
Translating is a complex process involving a variety of factors， and the first key point in translation studies is the standard of a piece of good translation， and this is usually centered upon the idea “faithfulness” or how we can attain “equivalence” between the original text and the reproduced one.
Susan Bassnett and Andre Lefevere proposed （2001） three translation models： the Jerome Model， the Horace Model and the Schleiermacher Model. The first one emphasizes on the word-for-word translation or being faithful to the source text. The second one takes the customers or readers as the most important factors， thus a translator ought to negotiate between the two languages and satisfy both parties.
The the Jerome Model and the Horace Model are differentiate from each other in two main aspects： the purpose of translation and the priority a translator chooses while using the two models respectively. The Jerome Model functions as the religious tool based on a society dominated by a certain ideology， therefore， a translator need stay faithful to every word of God， for the original message must not be misinterpreted， in contrast， the Horace model is orientated towards the customers， or in a broad sense， the readers， therefore， a translator need fulfill customers’ requirements， provided that he can still rightly translate the original message into the target language， but not stick to every word exactly. This article will give some following illustrative examples of literal translation to make a comparison between the two translation models. In addition， further comparative analysis is needed to be done before we can apply them appropriately in translating practices.
II. The Jerome Model
Saint Jerome put forward the concept of equivalence， which is the heart of ‘Jerome’ model of translation. His Vulgate set the acknowledged and unacknowledge standards of much of translation in the Wet until about two hundred years ago. The model is characterised by the presence of a central， sacred text， that of the Bible， which must be translated with the utmost fidelity， and the early ideal of that fidelity was the interlinear translastion， in which one word would match another， indeed， in which the translated word would be written under the word it was supposed to translate. The truth is， the change that has occurred， then， is from the belif in one type of faithfulness， conveniently equated with ‘faithfulness as such， to the realisationn that there are different types of faithfulness that may be adequate in diffenert situations.
A. 天凈沙·秋思
枯藤老树昏鸦，
小桥流水人家，
古道西风瘦马。
夕阳西下，断肠人在天涯。
Tune to “Sand and Sky”
-----Autumn Thoughts
Dry vine，old tree，crow at dusk
Low bridge，stream running，cottages
Ancient road，west wind，lean nag
The sun westerning
And one with breaking heart at the sky’s edge
（Wayne Schlepp）
The translator uses the Jerome Model to keep the sentence similar to the original one， therefore， omitting article and “stuck to the word” in Englisn version. The translator attach great importance of absolute equivalence and gave the beauty of rhythm and melody just as original version. However， to overemphasis word-for-word translation results in losting original beauty of rhyme and poetic imagery.
B： 《小雅·采薇》
昔我往矣，
杨柳依依。
今我来思，
雨雪霏霏。
（《诗经》）
When I set out so long ago，
Fresh and green was the willow.
When now homeward I go，
There is a heavy snow.
The version emphasized “faithful to the text” followed by the Jerome Model. The translator applies end rhyme in an attempt to replace reiterative syllable of original text. To adhere to the utmost fidelity of translation， the translator highlights the foundamental meaning for readers， for example， “杨柳依依” is translated “Fresh and green was the willow” and “雨雪霏霏” is “There is a heavy snow”.
As far as I concerned， we can get from St. Jerome Model is that the options of translation methods must be adapted to specific historical background and the ideological dominance. Indeed， there are so many difficulties in adopting the Jerome Model， due to the great disparity between two languages， and then， they need think about the absolute faithfulness to the text or word-for-word translation impossible in many ways， and re-adjust the standard of equivalence.
III. The Horace Model
The Horace Model is associated with the name of the Roman poet Horace （65BC-8BC）. Although it predated the Jerome model， it had been overshadowed by it for about fourteen centuries. Horace insisted on the flexibility of translation， against the word-for-word translation. He advocated that translation should be done based on the idea of “sense for sense”. Furthermore， he suggested that when necessary， a translator can create new coined words or import foreign words to his translation to enrich the target language and enhance the effectiveness of the translated works to target language readers. According to Horace， A ‘fidus’ translator/interpreter was one who could be used， who got the job done on time and to the satisfaction of both parties. To do so， he had to negotiate between two clients and two languages. The fact that negotiation is the central concept here militates heavily against the kind of faithfulness traditionally associated with equivalence.
A： 天凈沙·秋思
枯藤老树昏鸦，
小桥流水人家，
古道西风瘦马。
夕阳西下，断肠人在天涯。
Tune： Sunny Sand
Autumn Thoughts
Over old trees wreathed with rotten vines fly crows;
Under a small beside a cot a stream flows;
On ancient road in western breeze a lean horse goes;
Westwards declines the setting sun.
Far， far from home is the heart-broken one.
Compared with the version of Wayne Schlepp， this version from Mr.
Xu Yuanchong followe by the Horace Model is more focus on the imagery of poetry and rhyme， which sounds smooth and readable. The translator starts the sentences with prepositions and omits some description in the text， such as “小桥” and “天涯”， rather than translate word-for-word.
B：《小雅·采薇》
昔我往矣，
杨柳依依。
今我来思，
雨雪霏霏。
When I left here，
Willows shed tear.
I come back now，
Snow bends the bough.
The version uses the Horace Model， which is obviously distinguished from the above example. The tranlator applied personification rhetoric that Chinese often uses in poetries or writings. It is not only full of the beauty of rhyme， but also subtly reflects the melancholy， sorrow and sadness of people who leaves sweet home through the vivid description of surrounding sceneries.
C：塑心源于联大，大泽师魂;衔道统于来兹，卓尔立行。
（云南师范大学70周年校庆序）
Conceived in the National Southwest Associated University that imparted illustrious virtues and rooted in the fine tradition of China that illuminated the world， Yunnan Normal University has been a witness to the vicissitudes of the modern education of China. （He Changyi）
To be honest， maybe Chinese cannot understand the fundamental and entire meaning and implication of original text， not to mention foreign readers. Therefore， given that acceptability， Mr. He explains and extends the original texts for readers. The translator uses the Horace Model， that is， “a given text is received by the target audience in optimal conditions”.
D： In the country of the blind， one-eyed man is king.
蜀中无大将，廖化作先锋。（盲人国里，独眼为王。） The Chinese version is a typical example of the Horace Model. The translator intergrets this popular British proverb with Chinese history， which makes easier for Chinese readers to read and understand. The version highlights the “negotiation” between two languages， just like Horace proposed， “’fidus interpres’ was not faithful to a text， but to his customers”.
The Horace Model takes the customers or readers as the most important factors and suggests that translators find the touchstone in orienting the translation towards the needs of readers or customers， because the actual purpose of translation， the target readership， and the demand of the designator of translation， etc.， may all affect the standard of translation required， which aims at a translation breaking target conventions by retaining some foreignness or exotic flavor of the original.
IV. Conclusion
By comparison， we have known that the Jerome Model， targeted at the Bible translation for ideological purposes， emphasizes “faithful to the text”， “stick to the word-for-word translation”， while the Horace Model goes against “word-for word ” translation， and puts priority on the needs of readers or customers， trying to negotiate between two languages. Although they emphases different fidelity， the two models hace practical sibnigicance on the translation practice and provide a solid theoretical basis for the development of translation theory.
Translating is a complex process involving a variety of factors， and the first key point in translation studies is the standard of a piece of good translation， and this is usually centered upon the idea “faithfulness” or how we can attain “equivalence” between the original text and the reproduced one. Definitely， all translators try to find the equivalence between source language and targeted language， but translating practices tell us “absolute equivalence” cannot be achieved， so what the most important is that translators ought to attach great importance of the coordination and “negotiation” between two languages. There is no one model which can be widely accepted by all people， thus tranlations should not be limited to one model. Today we know that translators must decide on the specific degree of equivalence and specific translation models they can realistically aim for in a specific text.
This article explores two translation models circling around the key concept “equivalence” in translation studies. They are the Jerome Model and the Horace Model. They differentiate from each other in the aspects of the translating priorities and purposes， etc. By analyzing some illustrative examples of literal translation， this article tries to make a comparison between the two western classical translation theoretical models.
【Key words】： equivalence; the Jerome Model; the Horace Model; comparison; literal translation
I. Introduction
Translating is a complex process involving a variety of factors， and the first key point in translation studies is the standard of a piece of good translation， and this is usually centered upon the idea “faithfulness” or how we can attain “equivalence” between the original text and the reproduced one.
Susan Bassnett and Andre Lefevere proposed （2001） three translation models： the Jerome Model， the Horace Model and the Schleiermacher Model. The first one emphasizes on the word-for-word translation or being faithful to the source text. The second one takes the customers or readers as the most important factors， thus a translator ought to negotiate between the two languages and satisfy both parties.
The the Jerome Model and the Horace Model are differentiate from each other in two main aspects： the purpose of translation and the priority a translator chooses while using the two models respectively. The Jerome Model functions as the religious tool based on a society dominated by a certain ideology， therefore， a translator need stay faithful to every word of God， for the original message must not be misinterpreted， in contrast， the Horace model is orientated towards the customers， or in a broad sense， the readers， therefore， a translator need fulfill customers’ requirements， provided that he can still rightly translate the original message into the target language， but not stick to every word exactly. This article will give some following illustrative examples of literal translation to make a comparison between the two translation models. In addition， further comparative analysis is needed to be done before we can apply them appropriately in translating practices.
II. The Jerome Model
Saint Jerome put forward the concept of equivalence， which is the heart of ‘Jerome’ model of translation. His Vulgate set the acknowledged and unacknowledge standards of much of translation in the Wet until about two hundred years ago. The model is characterised by the presence of a central， sacred text， that of the Bible， which must be translated with the utmost fidelity， and the early ideal of that fidelity was the interlinear translastion， in which one word would match another， indeed， in which the translated word would be written under the word it was supposed to translate. The truth is， the change that has occurred， then， is from the belif in one type of faithfulness， conveniently equated with ‘faithfulness as such， to the realisationn that there are different types of faithfulness that may be adequate in diffenert situations.
A. 天凈沙·秋思
枯藤老树昏鸦，
小桥流水人家，
古道西风瘦马。
夕阳西下，断肠人在天涯。
Tune to “Sand and Sky”
-----Autumn Thoughts
Dry vine，old tree，crow at dusk
Low bridge，stream running，cottages
Ancient road，west wind，lean nag
The sun westerning
And one with breaking heart at the sky’s edge
（Wayne Schlepp）
The translator uses the Jerome Model to keep the sentence similar to the original one， therefore， omitting article and “stuck to the word” in Englisn version. The translator attach great importance of absolute equivalence and gave the beauty of rhythm and melody just as original version. However， to overemphasis word-for-word translation results in losting original beauty of rhyme and poetic imagery.
B： 《小雅·采薇》
昔我往矣，
杨柳依依。
今我来思，
雨雪霏霏。
（《诗经》）
When I set out so long ago，
Fresh and green was the willow.
When now homeward I go，
There is a heavy snow.
The version emphasized “faithful to the text” followed by the Jerome Model. The translator applies end rhyme in an attempt to replace reiterative syllable of original text. To adhere to the utmost fidelity of translation， the translator highlights the foundamental meaning for readers， for example， “杨柳依依” is translated “Fresh and green was the willow” and “雨雪霏霏” is “There is a heavy snow”.
As far as I concerned， we can get from St. Jerome Model is that the options of translation methods must be adapted to specific historical background and the ideological dominance. Indeed， there are so many difficulties in adopting the Jerome Model， due to the great disparity between two languages， and then， they need think about the absolute faithfulness to the text or word-for-word translation impossible in many ways， and re-adjust the standard of equivalence.
III. The Horace Model
The Horace Model is associated with the name of the Roman poet Horace （65BC-8BC）. Although it predated the Jerome model， it had been overshadowed by it for about fourteen centuries. Horace insisted on the flexibility of translation， against the word-for-word translation. He advocated that translation should be done based on the idea of “sense for sense”. Furthermore， he suggested that when necessary， a translator can create new coined words or import foreign words to his translation to enrich the target language and enhance the effectiveness of the translated works to target language readers. According to Horace， A ‘fidus’ translator/interpreter was one who could be used， who got the job done on time and to the satisfaction of both parties. To do so， he had to negotiate between two clients and two languages. The fact that negotiation is the central concept here militates heavily against the kind of faithfulness traditionally associated with equivalence.
A： 天凈沙·秋思
枯藤老树昏鸦，
小桥流水人家，
古道西风瘦马。
夕阳西下，断肠人在天涯。
Tune： Sunny Sand
Autumn Thoughts
Over old trees wreathed with rotten vines fly crows;
Under a small beside a cot a stream flows;
On ancient road in western breeze a lean horse goes;
Westwards declines the setting sun.
Far， far from home is the heart-broken one.
Compared with the version of Wayne Schlepp， this version from Mr.
Xu Yuanchong followe by the Horace Model is more focus on the imagery of poetry and rhyme， which sounds smooth and readable. The translator starts the sentences with prepositions and omits some description in the text， such as “小桥” and “天涯”， rather than translate word-for-word.
B：《小雅·采薇》
昔我往矣，
杨柳依依。
今我来思，
雨雪霏霏。
When I left here，
Willows shed tear.
I come back now，
Snow bends the bough.
The version uses the Horace Model， which is obviously distinguished from the above example. The tranlator applied personification rhetoric that Chinese often uses in poetries or writings. It is not only full of the beauty of rhyme， but also subtly reflects the melancholy， sorrow and sadness of people who leaves sweet home through the vivid description of surrounding sceneries.
C：塑心源于联大，大泽师魂;衔道统于来兹，卓尔立行。
（云南师范大学70周年校庆序）
Conceived in the National Southwest Associated University that imparted illustrious virtues and rooted in the fine tradition of China that illuminated the world， Yunnan Normal University has been a witness to the vicissitudes of the modern education of China. （He Changyi）
To be honest， maybe Chinese cannot understand the fundamental and entire meaning and implication of original text， not to mention foreign readers. Therefore， given that acceptability， Mr. He explains and extends the original texts for readers. The translator uses the Horace Model， that is， “a given text is received by the target audience in optimal conditions”.
D： In the country of the blind， one-eyed man is king.
蜀中无大将，廖化作先锋。（盲人国里，独眼为王。） The Chinese version is a typical example of the Horace Model. The translator intergrets this popular British proverb with Chinese history， which makes easier for Chinese readers to read and understand. The version highlights the “negotiation” between two languages， just like Horace proposed， “’fidus interpres’ was not faithful to a text， but to his customers”.
The Horace Model takes the customers or readers as the most important factors and suggests that translators find the touchstone in orienting the translation towards the needs of readers or customers， because the actual purpose of translation， the target readership， and the demand of the designator of translation， etc.， may all affect the standard of translation required， which aims at a translation breaking target conventions by retaining some foreignness or exotic flavor of the original.
IV. Conclusion
By comparison， we have known that the Jerome Model， targeted at the Bible translation for ideological purposes， emphasizes “faithful to the text”， “stick to the word-for-word translation”， while the Horace Model goes against “word-for word ” translation， and puts priority on the needs of readers or customers， trying to negotiate between two languages. Although they emphases different fidelity， the two models hace practical sibnigicance on the translation practice and provide a solid theoretical basis for the development of translation theory.
Translating is a complex process involving a variety of factors， and the first key point in translation studies is the standard of a piece of good translation， and this is usually centered upon the idea “faithfulness” or how we can attain “equivalence” between the original text and the reproduced one. Definitely， all translators try to find the equivalence between source language and targeted language， but translating practices tell us “absolute equivalence” cannot be achieved， so what the most important is that translators ought to attach great importance of the coordination and “negotiation” between two languages. There is no one model which can be widely accepted by all people， thus tranlations should not be limited to one model. Today we know that translators must decide on the specific degree of equivalence and specific translation models they can realistically aim for in a specific text.