论以忠实为取向的翻译标准——兼论严复的“信达雅”  

Some Tentative Reflections on Translation Criterion

作　　者：曹明伦[1,2] 

机构地区：[1]北京大学英语系 [2]河北大学外国语学院,河北保定071002

出　　处：《中国翻译》2006年第4期12-19,共8页Chinese Translators Journal

摘　　要：以忠实为取向的翻译标准从来都是译者主观上的自律准则,也是人们评判译作质量的客观准绳。当代西方翻译理论界仍然以推陈出新的方式使用‘忠实’这个术语。坚持"忠实"这个概念。甚至德里达著作的英文版译者也提出了"忠实原则系统"。但当今一些中国学者以客观上不存在绝对忠实的译作为由,主张译者应放弃时忠实的主观追求,这些学者为其主张提供了不少论据,其中最主要的是新批评理论、德里达的结构分解阅读法和比较文学的译介学理论。本文指出以忠实为取向的翻译标准永远不会过时,并对上述三个主要论据进行了解析,指出1)新批评理论的基本立场是提倡文字分析,强调原作意义应来自文本自身,2)德里达的结构分解阅读法强调"有解读经验就能看到真实",3)比较文学学科规定,译介学只研究译作在目标语文化中的传播、接收和影响等问题,不对译作忠实与否作出评判。鉴于此,要求译者放弃翻译忠实标准的主张缺乏真正的理论依据。Both in the West and in China, the translation criterion of faithfulness or fidelity was initially meant to stress the need for translators to be self-disciplined. Its use by critics to measure the extent to which a TT can be considered a fair representation of its ST was a later development. Whereas contemporary Western translation scholars, from Nida, Gutt, Popovic to Lewis, still make use of the notions of faithfulness and fidelity in innovative ways in their theory-building efforts, some Chinese scholars are advocating abandoning both terms and what they stand for. Opponents of ＂fidelity＂ often appeal to the New Criticism, to Derrida＇s reading strategy of déconstruction, and to the theory of Medio-Translatology as justifications for their stand, yet their way of drawing from these theories is hardly justifiable. The New Criticism insists on the possibility of an objective criticism, in which attantion would be focused upon the meaning of the text itself. Derrida＇s strategy of déconstruction similarly provides a useful way of reading in order to get at the meaning of a text. And the theory of Medio-Translatology is concerned only about the target text＇s transmission, reception and influences in the target language culture. None of the trio is of much help to opponents of fidelity.

关 键 词：翻译标准 忠实取向 新批评理论 德里达的结构分解阅读法 译介学 信达雅 

分 类 号：H059[语言文字—语言学]