浅谈旅游景点解说词的特点及翻译策略其他英语论文.doc

《浅谈旅游景点解说词的特点及翻译策略其他英语论文.doc》由会员分享，可在线阅读，更多相关《浅谈旅游景点解说词的特点及翻译策略其他英语论文.doc（7页珍藏版）》请在淘文阁 - 分享文档赚钱的网站上搜索。

1、帝国时代古典风格的风光好大方和热河后场长传论文关键词：景点介绍翻译功能对等理论论文摘要：随着我国加入世贸组织和成功申办2008年奥运会，在未来的几年内将会有越来越多的外国游客来中国旅游。英语作为一种全球性的语言，在接待外国游客时将会是最重要的语言。为了迎合外国旅游者的需要，很多旅游机构和出版社都出了许多旅游资料，如景点介绍、旅游广告、景点告示、公共标识和旅游指南等。编辑。旅游景点解说词是旅游资料翻译的难点。由于中西方巨大的文化差异，把中国旅游景点的解说词翻译成英文是一件非常困难的事情。现在，中国旅游景点解说词翻译的质量还远不尽如人意。因此，在这一方面的研究是非常必要和紧迫的。本论文以奈达的功能

2、对等理论为理论基础，采用一些中国旅游景点解说词的英文翻译作为例子，来对旅游景点解说词英译中的现存问题进行研究并提供一些可能性的解决办法。Introductionuristsmaterialsamongwhichscenic-spotintroductionisoneofthemostimportantpartshavebecomeaneffectivewaytopublicizeChinaandpromoteChinastouristindustry.However,variousproblemsarestillprevalentinformalandinformaltouristmateri

3、alsandthetranslationqualityofscenic-spotintroductionsandothertouristmaterialsneedstobeimprovedurgently.Therefore,thepresentthesisattemptstogiveanin-depthanalysisoftheexistingproblemsintheC-Etranslationofscenic-spotintroductions.Onthebasisoftheanalysis,tentativesolutionsaresuggested.Boththeanalysisan

4、dthesuggestionarebasedonNidasfunctionalequivalencetheory.oemploysNidas“functionalequivalencetheory”asthetheoreticalbasisofthewholethesis.Partthreepresentsussometypicalexamplesofscenic-spotintroductions,bothChineseandEnglish.Thenadetailedanalysiswillbeconductedontheseexamples,inordertodiscoverthecomm

5、onproblemsintranslationofChinesescenic-spotintroduction.AndthedifferentfeaturesbetweenChineseandEnglishscenic-spotintroductionswillbesummedupthroughacomparisonbetweenthesetwokindsoftext.Inpartfour,sometentativesolutionsdirectingattheexistingproblemsinthetranslationofChinesescenic-spotintroductionswi

6、llbeprovided.ThepresentauthorhopesthatthetranslationqualityofChinesescenic-spotintroductionbeimproved,andmoreresearchesinthisfieldbeunderwayinthefuturebytranslatorsandrelevantprofessionalsinourcountry.ofscenic-spotintroductiontranslationTouristmaterialsincludescenic-spotintroductions,touristadvertis

7、ements,noticesandpublicsignsattouristattractions,tourschedules,andcoupletshungonthecolumnsofthetouristattractions,etc.c-spotintroductionsScenic-spotintroductionsconveycertainparticularinformationtotouristsviasomewaysofexpression,thusfulfillsthegoalsofaestheticeducationandinformationservice.According

8、tothedifferencesofthewaysofexpression,scenic-spotintroductioncanbeclassifiedintotwocategories:onekindistheguidingintroductionmadebyprofessionaltourguides,theotherisself-guidingintroductionthroughintroductionsigns,introductionbrochures,guidemaps,vocalintroductions,videotapesorslidesandotherstaticways

9、.Bycomparingthesetwokindsofintroductions,thelatterisbetterfortouriststotakeinusefulinformationfreelyaccordingtothEIrowninterests.Somostscenicspotsadoptself-guidingintroductions,whichmostlyrelyonintroductionsigns.Therefore,thepresentthesiswillmainlyfocusonthisaspect.resenttranslationlevelofscenic-spo

10、tintroductionression.Asaresult,inaccuraciesandmistakescanoftenbeseeninthetranslatedtexts.IntodaysChina,thetranslationqualityofscenic-spotintroductionsisfarfromsatisfactoryduetocountlessspellingmistakes,grammaticalmistakes,andculturalmisinterpretations,etc.Therefore,thetranslationofscenic-spotintrodu

11、ctionsandtheresearchonitisnecessaryandurgent.referredto“faithfulness”or“fidelity”,ormorepredominantly,thenotionof“equivalence”.Theterm“equivalence”intranslationfirstappearedinJ.R.Firthswriting(1957)whenshestatedthat“theso-calledtranslationequivalentsbetweentwolanguagesareneverreallyequivalent”(Snell

12、-Hornby,1988:37).Withthedevelopmentoflinguisticsandthestudyoftranslationin1960s,“translationequivalence”becamethefocusofstudy.sFunctionalEquivalenceTheorya,aworld-famousAmericanlinguistandtranslationtheorist,hasanoverwhelminginfluenceinthetranslationfield.OneofNidasgreatestcontributionstotranslation

13、theoryistheconceptoffunctionalequivalence,whichwasfirstputforwardasdynamicequivalencesopposedtoformalequivalenceinhisbookTowardsaScienceofTranslatingin1964.Hearguesthattherearetwotypesofequivalence:formalequivalenceanddynamicequivalence.Formalequivalence“focusesattentiononthemessageitself,inbothform

14、andcontent”,whiledynamicequivalenceisbasedupon“theprincipleonequivalenteffect”(Nida,1964:159).Informalequivalencetranslation,oneisconstantlyconcernedwithsuchcorrespondenceaswordtoword,andsentencetosentence,whichmeansthattwolanguagesareconstantlycomparedtoensureaccuracyandcorrectness.However,translat

15、ionismorethanmerelyalinguisticactivity.Itattemptstobringtogethertwoethnographicallydifferentwords.Enlightenedbycommunicativelinguistictheorywhichbelievesthatlanguageisusedforcommunication,Nidaintroducestheconceptof“dynamicequivalence”intotranslation,whichisdefined“intermsofthedegreetowhichtherecepto

16、rsofthemessageinthereceptorlanguagerespondtoitinsubstantiallythesamemannerasthereceptorsinthesourcelanguage”.(Nida,1969:24)Atranslationofdynamicequivalenceaimsatcompletenaturalnessofexpression,andtriestorelatereceptortomodesofbehaviorrelevantwithincontextofhisownculture.InNidastheory,“dynamicequival

17、ence”isdefinedwith“receptorsresponse”asitsnature.Unliketraditionaltheories,whichfocusonverbalcomparisonbetweentheoriginaltextanditstranslation,Nidasconcepttranslatingshiftsfrom“theformofthemessage”to“theresponseofthereceptor”.Thus,anewandextremelyimportantfactoristobetakenintoconsideration:therecept

18、or,thejudgeofthetranslationseffect.InhisworkFromOneLanguagetoAnother,Nidastartstousetheterm“functionalequivalence”toavoidmisunderstanding,butheexplainsthatthemeaningoffunctionalequivalenceisthesameasthatofdynamicequivalence.Astothecontentoffunctionalequivalence,Nidadescribesitasfollows:“Basically,dy

19、namicequivalencehasbeendescribedintermsoffunctionalequivalence.Thetranslationprocesshasbeendefinedonthebasisthatthereceptorsofatranslationshouldcomprehendthetranslatedtexttosuchanextentthattheycanunderstandhowtheoriginalreceptorsmusthaveunderstoodtheoriginaltext.”(Nida,1986:103)2.Inthe1990s,Nidaperf

20、ectshistheorybytakingthelanguageandculturaldifferencesintoconsideration.InhisbookLanguage,CultureandTranslating,Nidaputsfunctionalequivalenceintotwolevelsaccordingtothedegreeofadequacy:theminimalequivalenceandthemaximumequivalence.Thedefinitionofminimalfunctionalequivalenceis“Thereadersofatranslated

21、textshouldbeabletocomprehendittothepointthattheycanconceiveofhowtheoriginalreaderofthetextmusthaveunderstoodandappreciatedit.”(Nida,1993:118)Anythinglessthanthisdegreeofequivalenceshouldbeunacceptable.Themaximumfunctionalequivalencecanbestatedas“Thereadersofatranslatedtextshouldbeabletounderstandandappreciateitinessentiallythesamemannerastheoriginalreadersdid.”(ibid)Themaximumlevelofequivalenceisrarelyachievedexceptfortextshavinglittleornoaestheticvalueandinvolvingonlyroutineinformationsinceitrequiresahigherdegreeoflanguage-c