ReceptionTheorya_省略_teraryTranslator_宋安妮.docx

《ReceptionTheorya_省略_teraryTranslator_宋安妮.docx》由会员分享，可在线阅读，更多相关《ReceptionTheorya_省略_teraryTranslator_宋安妮.docx（3页珍藏版）》请在淘文阁 - 分享文档赚钱的网站上搜索。

1、本栏目责任编辑 :梁书 馨獅泌 155 ISSN 1009-5039 Overseas Engf/s/7 圃翻圍圍 收稿日期 ： 2011-10-05 修回日期 ： 2011-10-28 作者简介：宋安妮 （ 1981-)， 女 （ 土家族 ）， 讲师，硕士，重庆理工大学外国语学院教师，主要从事翻译理论与实践研究、大学英语教学 研究。 http:/ Tel:+86-551-5690811 5690812 Reception Theory and Creative Treason of Literary Translator 宋安妮 (重庆理工大学外国语学院 .重庆 400050) Abstr

2、act: In literary translation, creative treason or translation deviations will surely be a shadow in company with each translated work. A translator is both the reader of the source text and the producer of the target text. Applying much on Reception Theory, the present paper explores the issue of tr

3、anslators creative treason in literary translation in two aspects: one is the translators creative treason as reader and the other is the translators creative treason as producer. Keywords： creative treason; Reception Theory; literary translator; reader; producer 中图分类号 :H315.9 文献标识码 :A 文章编号： 1009-50

4、39(2012)05-0155-03Contemporary translation study, as an interdisciplinary subject, impels translation theorists to consider their research in various ways. Many translation theorists of literary school turn to incor- porate the literary theories or schools quite opposite to the traditional ones. The

5、y embrace the modern literary theories hermeneutics, reception and reader response theory, deconstructionism, feminism, post colonialism etc. to build new systems of reference, to which many breakthroughs or new ways of thinking are indebted. For the sake of exploring the issue of translators creati

6、ve treason in literary translation, the author will apply much on literary theories. The main theoretical reference will he obtained from the school of Reception Theory, including readerresponse theory since the two theories have adequate common points to he viewed as in the same school. And to some

7、 problems concerned, its hermeneutic origin will he referred to. 1 Creative treason in literary translation Given the fact that literary translation always involves creation and that the translator is always a person in the history, translation deviations should not cause resentment and indignation

8、in the linguisticoriented scholars. On this point, the French literary sociologist Robert Escarpit states, Translation is always a creative treason. 1 A Translation should be creative, since it is impossible to copy the source text without any changes in the target language. Also translation, as a h

9、uman activity to realize cross-cultural communication, requires the translator efforts to overcome various obstacles such as cultural, ideological, aesthetical differences in the re- ception of a literary text by different cultures in the translation process. Thus treason is in most cases inevitable

10、, for the analyst will always find something extra to the source text in the translated text. And another factor that makes creative treason almost inevitable is the hard fact that translation without exception is undertaken in a particular cultural context by an individual translator or translators

11、. Cultural constraints and mediation from the individual translator will unavoidably enter the actual process of translation, and in this sense, creative treason or translation deviations will surely be a shadow in company with each translated work. 2 Creative treason refers to Reception Theory Havi

12、ng shocked the critical circle with its early extreme reader-centered position, the reception school has turned to a field of communication and dialogue in accordance with the tendency that modern literary theories are more and more aware of the impossibility of any universal functional theory, and

13、the necessity of seeking communication between various theoretical paradigms and ways of tliinking.121 In such a background, and with its achievements and parameter in explaining the nature of literature, Reception Theory is found convenient and adequate in exploring the subject matter of this thesi

14、s. Robert Jauss, one of the representatives of the reception school, borrowed the philosophical concept horizon and creatively applied horizon of expectation to indicate the readers preunderstanding, which, paralleled by translation theorists norms, re- stricts the readers interpretation to a certai

15、n degree. Iser proposes the notions blank and concretizations, claiming the indeterminacy of a text will he concretized by individual readers.131 Fish puts forward his notion of informed reader and interpretative communities, which constrains the reader response from the sociocultural background as

16、well as the reader himself.4 In Robert Jausss views, the aesthetic values of a literary work is not objective, but is closely related to the readers experience of values. Different readers will have different understanding of the same text due to their different horizons of expectation. Just as Iser

17、 points out, literary work spurs the past reading memory of the reader and brings him into a specific experience which activates his expectation. Hence, the reader expectation will he reoriented and re- alized during the reading experience. The reception of a literary work is not a process of accumu

18、lation straightforward. Some associations, resulting from the preliminary stage of accumulation, can he used to explain the new reading experience. Conversely, the new reading experience will exert certain influence on the original association and understanding. Furthermore, due to different horizon

19、s of expectation of the readers, a literary work may bring about various meanings to the readers. Actually, the translator himself is also a member of the targettext reader. To some extent, his aesthetic value and reception capacities should be equivalent to the target-text reader. From the perspect

20、ive of the readerresponse theory, the au- Overseas English 洛 外 英 译 2012 年 03 月 156 本栏目责任编辑 :梁书 thor of the original text has lost monopoly on his text, for no understanding of the text can dispense with the readers active involvement. As the reader of the source text, the translator plays a vital ro

21、le in the process of the translation. His response to the text is of great importance to the production of the text meaning, and more im- portandy, the success of a intercultural communication. Reader response has been highlighted in this theory, for a translation is normally intended for a target l

22、anguage reader Traditional translation theories always neglect the active participation and creative force of the reader and regard the source text and target text as a static object with the aim to reproduce the original and produce an equivalent effect. Drawing on the concepts proposed by phenomen

23、ology, hermeneutics and other schools of theo- ries, readerresponse theory emphasizes reader is by no means a factor that can he neglected. According to this theory, translation means communication between the text and the reader. One important criterion for translation is to judge whether it meets

24、the requirements of the readers reception capacity, which is in a historical and dynamic context. Thus, even if one translation conforms to the readers aesthetic values in one historical period, the translator dare not to claim it will he accepted by the readers one hundred years later, for language

25、 is in a process of persistently changing. Reception Theory spurs us on a rather different way of viewing the essence of translation, i.e. the author of the original text, the original text, the reader and translator of the original text, the translated text, the reader of the translated text, and t

26、heir relationship. The author has lost his monopoly on his text in the receptionist sense that no understanding of the text can dispense with the reader involvement and hence his preunderstanding. As the reader of the source text, the translator plays a vital role in the process of translating. The

27、meaning he must transfer depends largely on his interaction, or dialogue with the text. During this interaction, his creative treason is restrained by his preunderstanding or horizon of expectation, which has been framed by the socio-cultural background he is in, and the interpretive communities he

28、should respect. He will have to, like the most careful and competent reader, concretize the indeterminacy or blank, as Reception Theory mentioned, form his own interpretation and realize it in another set of language codes. He is a receiver and producer, and his work determines the image of the sour

29、ce text and influences the receiving of his readers. When the translated work faces the audience, it will he at the mercy of the readers who are composed of critics, theorists, other translators, writers as well as common readers. Reader response for a translated work will gradually form and revise

30、the translation institutions or norms, which accordingly direct the following translational activities. 2.1 The translators creative treason as reader According to the readerresponse theory, traditional translating process, understanding and interpretation, can he termed as a process of receiving an

31、d producing. The translator is firstly the reader of the text. Unlike ordinary readers, however, he must he a careful reader and competent in creativity, with creative potential. And unlike common writers, he does not produce a primary text hut mediates something that has been produced by somebody e

32、lse. As a special kind of reader, a translator obtain his importance in the sense that his reading of a text is a preparation of an production process and this production will probably impose direct influence on a wide group of readers. The translator always try to get a full understanding of a sour

33、ce text in order to make the target text to he as close as possible to the original one. He leads himself into the specific historical time corresponding to the textual time when he reads the text, trying his best to eliminate the time distance in his reading. However, the translators response to th

34、e source text does not take place in a vacuum. All possible translators are socially and historically positioned, and how they interpret literary works will deeply be shaped by this fact. Here, some concepts on Reception Theory, such as Jauss horizon of expectation, make a sense. Those concepts have

35、 challenged the traditional notion of literary study that a literary text can he studied with a purely neutral or prejudice-free stance. Thats to say, they have encouraged the study on the involved factors that act upon the translators receiving process of a text. What are the factors that act upon

36、the translator receiving activity and eventually influence on his creative treason during the process of translating? We may start our analysis in two aspects: one is the macroaspect and the other is the microaspect. First, macroaspect includes the sociohistorical background and socio-cultural backg

37、round. No understanding of the text can escape itself from history, from the time the act of understanding takes place. Being in a certain point of history, the reader can not exceed his time, nor can he free his reading of a text from the previous reading experience and understanding. In addition,

38、the nature of language embraces the change of language in history, which is in conformity with the everchanging state of human beings. The source text language, by the translators in different historical phases, will he exerted new interpretations as time goes by. Here, we can also see the necessity

39、 of retranslation, in which creative interpretations under different historical referential frame are taken into consideration. As the translator is at a certain historical point, he is also in a certain social-cultural background. Culture can he defined by theorists from different disciplines. Acco

40、rdingly, the indication of socialcultural background here involves custom ingrained in the national mentality and institutions deposited in the matrix of social science and art, the latter restraining the reader to a certain territory known as literary tradition and prominent ideology, which means h

41、e has to regulate his reading act within a set value system. Secondly, microaspect cannot he neglected here. The translator may, in possession of certain horizon of expectation which has been brewed in a certain literary translation and the dominating poetics or literary norms, fuse his own horizon

42、with that of the text in a conventional way. Or realizing the unconventional characteristics of the text, he may revise his own horizon, taking another set of interpretive strategies he regards more proper in the light of that text. Or not rarely, he may paint something with more characteristics of

43、his own on the text. Furthermore, the translators prestructure of knowledge may play a very important role in his receiving of the source text. They may have different understanding of the language of the literary text. There is an example. When interpret Shakespeare xs To he or not to he, the trans

44、lators of the same source text, even under the same interpretive community in the same sociohistorical background, may have to choose a particular way of receiving, which conforms to his character and his viewpoint on literary phenomena and translation, among the various possibilities his literary c

45、ompetence may help him detect. 2.2 The translators creative treason as producer In the first reception stage, the translator acts as a reader and analyzes the source text as which serves the prerequisite for translation. In the second reception stage, the translator is just like a creator, whose tas

46、k is to produce the target text, to achieve similar re- sponse on the target reader. Generally, the reader of translated text consists of two groups: professional and nonprofessional. The former refers to translators, translation theorists, critics, editors, as well as some of the publishers and mem

47、bers of translation training institutions. Their comments on translation, critical writings or norm-like instructions, exert great influence on the translator creative treason. Few transla- tors can conduct their translating activity without consideration of the current notion of a good translation

48、epitomized by the various publishing of the professional. The relationship between the translator and critical professional suggests a circulate model, in which the translation product produced by the translator triggers the professionals analysis and deduction which finally leads to the abstract ru

49、le-setting and theoretical generalization. The mles generated by the professional, on the other hand, regulate the translators further operation, confining the 2012 年 03 月 Overseas English 洛夕卜英请 本栏目责任编辑 :梁书 translators creative treason to a tolerable degree. Non-professional readers of translated texts, usually called common readers, cannot he ignored in that their active feedback is not always in conformity with the expectations of the professional, tho