当代外语研究 ›› 2017, Vol. 17 ›› Issue (04): 81-89.doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1674-8921.2017.04.014

• 翻译研究 • 上一篇    下一篇

礼貌原则下《红楼梦》敬称的英译——基于语料库的对比研究

颜静兰, 陈逸飞   

  1. 华东理工大学,上海,200237
  • 出版日期:2017-07-28 发布日期:2020-07-25
  • 作者简介:颜静兰,华东理工大学外国语学院教授、博士生导师。主要研究方向为跨文化交际学、文化研究、英美文学。电子邮箱:yanjinglan@ecust.edu.cn
    陈逸飞,华东理工大学外国语学院研究生。主要研究方向为跨文化交际学、跨文化翻译研究。电子邮箱:319930723@qq.com

Translation of Honorifics in A Dream of Red Mansions from the Perspective of Politeness Principles: A Corpus-based Comparative Research

YAN Jinglan, CHEN Yifei   

  • Online:2017-07-28 Published:2020-07-25

摘要: 采用汉英平行语料库的研究方法,根据礼貌原则对《红楼梦》杨宪益译本和霍克斯译本中“令”、“尊”、“贵”、“世”字敬称的翻译进行对比研究,探讨两译本翻译方法的异同。研究发现,杨译本多用含“尊人”之意的词,让读者意识到汉语礼貌原则;霍译本高频使用不含“尊人”之意的词,符合英语语言文化习惯。两译本在翻译四种敬称上存在差异:“令”字敬称中都用不含“尊人”之意的名词短语,杨译本也频繁使用表敬形容词;“尊”字敬称中“尊人”之意在杨译本中得到保留,在霍译本中却被淡化;“贵”字敬称在两译本中都再现原文的礼貌原则;“世”字敬称在两译本中多翻为代词或表敬名词。这些说明了译者不同的翻译特点,也体现了四种敬称在礼貌程度上的差异。

关键词: 《红楼梦》, 敬称, 语料库, 翻译, 礼貌原则

Abstract: Chinese-English Parallel Corpus is employed to study Yang Hsien-yi's and David Hawkes' translation of honorifics with Chinese characters “Ling”, “Zun”, “Gui” and “Shi” in A Dream of Red Mansions from the perspective of Politeness Principles, in order to find out the similarities and differences of translation methods in the two versions. The study finds that generally Yang tends to apply words or phrases with politeness to show English readers the politeness principles in Chinese, but Hawkes frequently uses words or phrases without politeness which conform to English language and culture. Specifically, similarities and differences are found in the translation of the four categories of honorifics in both versions. Phrases without politeness are preferred by both translators in the translation of honorifics with “Ling”, while adjectives with politeness are also of high frequency in Yang's version. The politeness in honorifics with “Zun” is retained by Yang and is removed by Hawkes, but that in honorifics with “Gui” is transplanted in both versions. Honorifics with “Shi” are mostly translated into pronouns or nouns with politeness by both translators. The results not only reveal the features of the two translation versions, but also the differences among the four classifications of honorifics in terms of politeness.

中图分类号: