1、淺談散文翻譯中的形合與意合-以背影為例a comparative study on the hypotaxis and parataxis in prose translation of beiyinga paper submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements of the degree of bachelor of artsthe institute of online educationbeijing foreign studies university摘要近年來特別是中國加入世貿組織后， 由于中外經濟交往密切，中外文化交流也迅

2、速發展。但在翻譯作品中， 相比起大量涌現的英譯中作品， 漢譯英作品是寥寥無幾。從事漢譯英的翻譯人才也甚為缺乏。究其原因， 一方面是學界普遍認為翻譯應該是由外語譯入為母語， 非母語翻譯人員是很難作好翻譯的。但考慮到我國的大量優秀作品需要走出去，漢譯英的工作只能依靠中國人來擔任。 要作好這項工作， 首先要充分認識漢英兩種語言的差異。而兩種語言的不同構成方式，漢語重意合， 英語重形合，被認為是兩者最大的差別。 本文因此希望探討解決此問題的翻譯策略性。 本論文以散文背影及其兩個英文翻譯版本為分析材料，從中選取了15組句子作為例子， 對每一組例句進行比較與分析， 著重是觀察其采取的翻譯策略，是保留原文的

3、意合為主的中文構成方式， 還是將其轉化為行合為主的英文表達方式。 而在轉化的過程中， 譯者是如何運用英文的連貫手法，再具體到對銜接詞語的選擇上，作者是如何運用其翻譯技巧的。 由此得出結論， 漢語翻譯成英語，特別是如散文之類的藝術文，應特別注意意合與形合之間的轉換。 譯者應兼重對原文的忠實同時關照讀者的可接受性， 力求理解原文的精神，用正確的符合英語習慣的的表達方式。把原作的意思表達出來。要作好這點，需要譯員不僅對兩種語言相當熟悉，同時對漢英的不同思維方式與由此而來的形合與意合現象保持敏的觸角。 本文所選的翻譯本都是出自于翻譯大家，透過分析，希望能從中學習借鑒優秀的翻譯策與技巧， 并為以后的翻譯

4、實踐提供理論指導。并希望在翻譯界能更多地重視探討漢譯英的主題。 關鍵詞：形合與意合， 翻譯策略，銜接詞 abstract recent years has seen the rapid development of cultural exchange between china and the world, this is brought about by more frequent economical and social activities after china joint the wto in1995. in compare with thousands of e-c transl

5、ation that flood into china, few c-e translation has been produced, and few translators engage in c-e translation. one of the reasons is the believe that c-e translation can only be taken on by native speakers. however we can not rely english native speakers to do c-e translation, which is impractic

6、al. chinese translators have to take on this task. one of the difficulties confronted to chinese translators is the difference in cohesion type between two languages. as it is said that chinese is parataxis dominated whereas english is hypotaxis dominated, and the difference in discourse cohesion is

7、 considered to be the most significant distinguish between two languages. how to tackle this problem with appropriate translation strategies is the main concern of this paper. in order to find out this answer, the author chose a popular chinese prose named beiying with two english versions translate

8、d by famous translators. 15 examples have been selected. each consists of a paragraph from the original and two translations accordingly. the analyze focus on the strategies in dealing with the problem of parataxis and hypotaxis, the inclination of translators while choosing different strategies. fu

9、rther more, it is also the authors interest to find out how the translator applies different types of english cohesion such as reference, conjunction and lexical cohesion in his translation practice, and how he choose the proper connective words.the paper comes to the conclusion that a competent tra

10、nslation in c-e translation, especially in the art articles, requires the translator to equip with not only adequate knowledge of both language but a cute sense of parataxis and hypotaxis shifting between them. the author hopes to appreciated and learn from the good c-e translations, to find out the

11、 suitable strategies and the techniques applied in them, in order that this knowledge can1. directions for learners1) analyze the data in no less than 1,000 words by using one or some of the methods recommended in step 2 and step 3 of stage 7 in writing your ba paper through practical translation pr

12、oject design. the analysis should be based on the examples from the data, or no less than 3 samples from each category of the data.2) the heading for this section has been given. you may decide on your own subheadings if there are any.3) insert your analysis of the data in paragraphs, tables, diagra

13、ms or listings in the space below.4.data analysisparataxis and hypotaxis are considered to be the most significant difference between english and chinese linguistic structure. chinese is parataxis dominated, by that it means the lack of functional or signal words, the frequent use of short sentences

14、, and loosen structure in sentence building. in general, coherence in chinese rely on readers understanding based on the context. whereas english is hypotaxis dominated, featured with the frequent use of long sentence with rigid logical connection and hierarchy structure with principle and subordina

15、te clauses. the character of chinese prose is to concentrate in meaning but to be free in style, whereas english requires much attention in the form. this difference between two language is apparent in prose writing. is a chinese prose with typical chinese style. the strong sense of national charact

16、er makes a great contribution to its popularity among chinese readers. like his many other works, this article of mr. zhu is featured with the following character:1. being simple and plain in wording and loosen in sentence building2. being colloquial, without complicated words 3. free from empty wor

17、ds and sentences. compact in meaning but in nature and free in form4. passionate and strong feelings presented in plain narration rather than dialogues. there are two strategies that are most commonly used by translators in e-c translation. they are literal translation and free translation. literal

18、translation is designed to translate the original adequately without changing the form, structure and wording so as to help achieve a translation that is smooth, faithful to the original meanwhile easy to be understand by the target readers. on the other hand, free translation aims to regenerate the

19、 message in a readers-tailor way, which pays little attention to details though considers the original seriously. the translator usually knows well of both languages and their cultures, therefore he can produce a translation that is not necessarily adhesive to the form, bu is still accurate, fluent

20、and faithful to the original, at the same time nature and close to the style of the target readers. which strategy will translator prefer to use in translating chinese prose, and how do they use these strategies technically remains to be the authors interest in this paper. baring in mind this curios

21、ity, the author will examine some abstracts from both translations now. in example 1, “有朋友約去.上車北去”is translated by mr. zhang by a long sentence with 42 words, among which “and” appears two times, and the short sentence “上車北去”is put as “taking a train to beijing on the afternoon of the same day”. whe

22、n comparing with mr. yangs version, the latter seems to be more concise, for it just consist of 32 words. the clue lies on the translators use of cohesion words. here he used the word “afternoon” as a modifier for the noun “train”, hence save the use of clause and the repetition use of “and” as in t

23、r1. this is an inspiring translation which use the method of noun to serve as head modifier and the reference to achieve cohesion in the target language. both translation are accurate and faithful to the original, but as to the english readers, tr2 might be easier for them as tr1 seems a bit more wo

24、rding which does not match the style of english. in example 2, the original consists of two short sentences. in tr1, the original text is translated into two english sentences accordingly. in tr2, however, it is combined into one complex sentence by skillfully use the connective “where” and “while”.

25、 two short sentence are then connected by the conjunction “where”, which makes the sentence more fluently, and at the same time keep the cohesion of its chinese original. in example 3, the original text is literally translated in tr1, as a result it takes 47 words in translating. whereas in tr2, the

26、 translator uses a connective word “as” to connect together several seemingly loosen chinese sentences, thus indicate their invert cohesion of cause and effect, and successfully in changing his translation from parataxis-dominated chinese original to hypotaxis-dominated english. although the cohesio

27、n in the original is not apparent, but it does exist. if translated in a way of parataxis like tr1 does, the translation not only can not convey this cohesion in the original, but also lack of cohesion in english. in example 4, tr1 uses four connective words”after/in which/except for/or”, but tr2 us

28、es only two connective words “after/so”. it shows that that tr2 is more efficient and effective. the result shows us that the structural connectives make a contribution in building up the cohesion in english, because it serves as a dispensable components and at the same time the connectives in a sen

29、tence. on the other hand, non-structural connectives is not necessary and sometimes even become redundant in a sentence. in example 5, the original sentence is a typical example of parataxis. to understand the meaning, readers need to refer to the context outside the sentence. “看見那肥胖的，青布棉袍， 黑布馬褂的背影”

30、here actually means the remembrance of the father when the son saw him walking away when they part. as chinese cohesion is inverted, the readers can easily interpreted the meaning by working out the insight cohesion without indicating the reference. however when it comes to english translation, the

31、target readers will get confused by the literal translation of the original without necessary addition. tr1 is a literal translation as described. in contrast, tr2 is a free translation. the connective word “as” indicate the time when the father and the son part and thus make it clear and easy for t

32、he target readers to interpret what actually “the back of father” means. example 6 is another example of shifting from parataxis to hypotaxis. it is about a detailed description of the sight of the fathers back when the father crossed the railway track to buy oranges for his son. because of the habi

33、tual way of expression in chinese, the original sentence is arranged in a “see+sb.+do sth. pattern. in tr1 this pattern has been transferred without any change in the word order.by contrast, in tr2 this order has been changed by the addition of a connective word “as” and the change in word order of

34、the propositional phrase “in .” that describes the fathers dressing. by doing this, the original short verb phrases “ 蹣跚地走到鐵道邊，慢慢探身下去” have been connected together by the connective “as” and serves as a adverbial clause. more over, mr. yang uses the conjunction words “but when” in the end of the sen

35、tence, which implies the inflection meaning in the following sentence. two sentences are then connected together with perfect coherence. in example 7, the fathers movement is described with several successive verb phrases “他先將橘子散放.，.爬下.，.抱起.”. in tr1 the sentence is simply translated in its original

36、 word order, whereas in tr2 the translator uses three connectives as “before/which/after” in an attempt to achieve cohesion. however the overuse of connectives makes the translation even more difficult to understand. the word “which” is overused which not only makes the sentence complicated but also

37、 confuses the target readers. it shows us that it is sometimes appropriated to transfer parataxis in chinese into english without changing to hypotaxis.in example 8, the original chinese text is consist of two sentences. in tr1 the translator s strategy is to translate it into two english english se

38、ntences accordingly. in tr2, however, the translator discovers the inflection between these two sentences and uses a connective “but” to join them together. in example 9, both translation use connectives. the comparison is focus on the chose of connectives, that is “and” in tr1 and “while” in tr2. w

39、e can find that “and” can only serves as a connective between two parallel parts, but when it is lack of the sense of formality and contrast, therefore it fails to reflect the relation of comparison between two sentences in its original. the connective word “while” is a better choice in this circums

40、tances. in example 10, “那年冬天” is translated in tr1 as “the winter of more than two years ago”. the adverbial phrase “more than two years ago” has already appeared in the previous sentence, so it is not necessary to repeat it again. in tr2 the translator uses a word “that winter” instead of “the wint

41、er of more than two years ago”, thus shorten the sentence and sounds more fluent in expression. in example 11, the conjunction word “though” in tr2 discloses the relations of sentences in its chinese original, that is the inflection relation. in example 12, unlike tr1 which replicate the original in

42、 form, in tr2 the translator uses a conjunction word “beside” to connect three loosen phrases in chinese.in example 13, the phrase “even so” is used in tr2 which help avoid the repetition and the sentence sounds more accurate and nature than those of tr1. in example 14, in comparing with tr1, tr2 is

43、 a more inspiring one. the simile led by “even if” successfully presents the spirit of the original text in a form of english cohesion.in example 15, both translation use connective words, though “so.that” seems to be more appropriate than “and” as the former indicates the inflection relations. the

44、above analyze can be summarized by the following chart.example no. parataxis vs. hypotaxis cohesion typeconnective words used in english conhesion tr1 tr21parataxis hypotaxisreference afternoon2parataxis hypotaxisconjunctionwhere, while3hypotaxishypotaxissubstitute and conjunctionthat is why, and me

45、anwhile (tr1)/ as, that is why (tr2)4hypotaxishypotaxisnon-structured (tr1) conjunction(tr2)in which (tr1)so (tr2) 5parataxis hypotaxisconjunctionas6parataxis hypotaxisconjunction as, but thenreferencenot so7parataxis hypotaxisnon-structuralwhich8parataxis hypotaxisconjunctionbut9hypotaxis hypotaxis

46、conjunction (tr2)while(tr2)lexical cohesion(tr2)moving from, going from(tr2)conjunction(tr1)and 10parataxis hypotaxisconjunctionfor11hypotaxishypotaxisconjunctionand (tr1) though(tr2)12parataxis hypotaxisconjunctionbeside13parataxishypotaxisreferenceeven so14parataxishypotaxisconjunctionas if15hypot

47、axishypotaxisreference(tr2)this(tr2)conjunction(tr2)so.that(tr2)conjunction(tr1)andassessment checklist for tutorsplease tick in the proper cell and write your overall comments in the box of “tutors comments” below. in-text comments should also be offered if necessary.評價項目(assessment items)評價指標(asse

48、ssment criteria)評估(acceptable/revise)請打勾進行評估（）合格需修改語料分析 data analysis 1. 與研究目標相關。the analysis is related to the objective of the research.2. 以“文獻綜述”中引用的概念或理論為支持。the analysis is supported by the concepts or theories quoted in the rationale.3. 針對語料中原語與譯語的差異（建議從語言、體裁、修辭或文化等角度比較），或同一原語的不同譯語間的差異（建議從翻譯的社會

49、背景、目標、對象或譯者的翻譯傾向等角度比較），具體分析語言、文化或社會因素對翻譯的影響。the analysis illustrates the effects of linguistic, cultural or social variants on translation by comparing and contrasting the source language with the target language (from the linguistic, stylistic, rhetorical, cultural or other perspectives), or differ

50、ent translation version (in terms of the social background, translation purpose, target reader, translators approach to translation, etc.).4. 分析充分詳細，涵蓋語料中的相關示例或相關示例代表，代表不少于3例。the analysis is adequate and detailed, based on the examples from the data, or no less than 3 samples from each category of t

51、he data.5. 語言準確，表意清楚，邏輯連貫。the analysis is presented in clear, correct and coherent english.6. 字數不少于1,000字。the analysis contains no less than 1，000 english words.7 格式（標題、字體和行間距）符合要求。 the analysis is formatted as required.待添加的隱藏文字內容3tutors comments:2. directions for learners1) derive the results from

52、the analysis you have made above, and then based on these results, make some suggestions on the future translating practice. the section of results and suggestions should contain no less than 1,000 english words.2) the heading for this section has been given. you may decide on your own subheadings i

53、f there are any.3) insert the results and suggestions in the space below. 5. results and suggestionsthe above analyze shows us the different strategies in translating chinese prose into english. the version of mr. zhang is more text-oriented, which brings about the not only the meaning but also the

54、form of cohesion in the original, whereas the version of mr. yang is readers-oriented. in most cases the the form of the original has been restructured. then what is the more appropriate method in these kind of translation? according to the “function equivalence” theory, a competent translation is t

55、o “have a natural and easy form of expression and to produce a similar response”, the version of mr. yang seems to be more appropriate in this prospect. here the shift of the cohesion is the decisive factor that counts. as both versions are faithful and accurate to the same extent, what makes the di

56、fference is the adoption of english cohesion. according to shoushana blum-kulka (1986), the process of translation brings about shift of coherence and cohesion. coherence is a covert potential meaning relations between parts of a text, made overt by the readers through the procedure of interpretatio

57、n. besides faithfulness, a translated text must be coherent. a text must be translated in such a way that it can be interpreted by the recipient as coherent with their situation. (vermeer 1978;100, baker 1998;236). as seen in the above analyze, coherence in english is better represented in mr yangs translation. it can be assumed that his version has a much similar response among english re