生态翻译学的还原论与整体论思考

doi:10.3969/j.issn.1674-8921.2021.01.010

摘要/Abstract

摘要：

本文以胡庚申关于"生态翻译学即‘三生相’关系学"的论断为思考的出发点,以生态翻译学的典型范例为分析对象,尝试探讨生态翻译学的范式要素。本文认为,生态翻译学应该坚持以下主张:翻译的本体性质是两种语言之间的互借、互明、互鉴、互惠和互生,翻译一种语言就是翻译该语言所对应的生活形式,即翻译就是在译出语生活形式(生活形式S)和译入语生活形式(生活形式T)之间建立平衡关系。生态翻译学应该秉持的理论原则是:译者在寻求平衡关系的过程中应该正确处理还原论和整体论之间的对立统一关系。在整体论视角下,系统内部的翻译选择是由两种语言相关的各种系统的整体性来决定;而在还原论视角下,系统内部的翻译选择却是以组成翻译内容的基本单位为基点。译者首先要在方法论上处理好整体论和还原论之间的平衡关系。其次,译者要解读生活形式S的系统平衡关系。译者还要构建生活形式T的系统平衡关系。另外,译者要发挥主观能动性,在作者和读者之间构建审美平衡关系。最后,译者要在生活形式S和生活形式T之间追求平衡关系。生态翻译学的价值标准是:翻译及其研究必定以上述五大关系是否达到平衡作为衡量标准,即这五大平衡关系就是检验某项翻译理论研究或翻译实践活动是否符合生态翻译学范式的价值标准。

关键词: 生态翻译学, 还原论, 整体论, 平衡关系, 胡庚申

Abstract:

The present paper attempts to provide a systematic reflection upon the holism and reductionism observed in translation practices, and based on Hu Gengshen’s idea about keeping textual life alive through “transplanting”, a supplementary remark is made in the present paper. It has been found that eco translation can be taken as a normal discipline, eco tranlatology, on the condition that the four essential paradigmatic elements are identified clearly and logically. As for the metaphysical part, it is generalized that translation is a bilingual practice of mutual borrowing, mutual understanding, mutual exemplifying, mutual gaining and mutual existing, in tune with which any inter translation between two languages must be regarded as interaction between two kinds of life form. That is, to translate a language is to translate a form of life. As for the symbolic generalization, translators are supposed to seek five kinds of balance in the process of translation practice in converting the source form of life into the target form of life. As for the value to be honored in eco translation, translators are supposed to seek a balance between holism and reductionism, and supposed to adapt translation to the five principles in tune with the five kinds of balance. As for the exemplar, a typical instance is any instance of translation capable of indicating the five kinds of balance and five principles. In a nutshell, eco translatology exists as a normal discipline on the condition that the five balances and five principles are observed in practice.

中图分类号:

H315.9

杜世洪, 王渝. 生态翻译学的还原论与整体论思考[J]. 当代外语研究, 2021, 21(1): 86-96.

Shihong DU, Yu WANG. Reflections upon Reductionism and Holism in Eco-translatology[J]. Contemporary Foreign Languages Studies, 2021, 21(1): 86-96.

图/表 3

参考文献 42

[1]	Austen J. 2006. Sense and Sensibility [M]. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
[2]	Bechtel W. & R. Richardson. 2010. Discovering Complexity: Decomposition and Localization as Strategies in Scientific Research[M]. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
[3]	Bramwell A. 1989. Ecology in the 20th Century: A History [M]. New Haven: Yale University Press.
[4]	Cronin M. 2017. Eco-Translation: Translation and Ecology in the Age of the Anthropocene[M]. London: Routledge.
[5]	Cummings E. E. 1972. Complete Poems (1913-1962)[M]. New York: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich, Inc.
[6]	Davidson D. 2005. Truth, Language and History: Philosophical Essays [M]. Oxford: Clarendon Press.
[7]	Dobzhansky T. 1973. Nothing in biology makes sense except in the light of evolution[J]. American Biology Teacher 35:125-129. doi: 10.2307/4444260 URL
[8]	Hardy T. 2005. Tess of the D’Urbervilles (New Edition)[M]. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
[9]	Heil J. 2005. Holism [A]. In T. Honderich (ed.). The Oxford Guide to Philosophy [C]. Oxford: Oxford University Press. 398-399.
[10]	Juniper T. 2019. Foreword [A]. In T. Juniper, G. Palffy, K. Cavanagh & J. Metcalf (eds.). The Ecology Book [C]. New York: DK Publishing. 13-19.
[11]	Kuhn T. S. 1970. The Structure of Scientific Revolutions (2nd edition) [M]. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.
[12]	Looijen R. C. 2000. Holism and Reductionism in Biology and Ecology[M]. Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers.
[13]	Nagel E. 1961. The Structure of Science: Problems in the Logic of Scientific Explanation[M]. New York: Harcourt, Brace and World.
[14]	Ruse M. 2005. Holism [A]. In T. Honderich (ed.). The Oxford Guide to Philosophy [C]. Oxford: Oxford University Press. 793-794.
[15]	Sarkar S. 2005. Ecology [DB/OL]. [2005-12-23]. https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/ecology/notes.html#1.
[16]	Wiegert R. G. 1988. Holism and reductionism in ecology: Hypotheses, scale and systems models[J]. Oikos 53(2):267-269. doi: 10.2307/3566072 URL
[17]	Worster D. 1994. Nature’s Economy: A History of Ecological Ideas [M]. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
[18]	奥斯汀. 1984. 理智与情感(吴力励译)[M]. 北京: 北京出版社.
[19]	陈圣白. 2017. 中国生态翻译学十五年文献计量研究[J]. 上海翻译 (5):6-9.
[20]	杜世洪. 2006. 汉语国俗语的几例英译问题剖析[J]. 长春大学学报 (4):36-38.
[21]	杜世洪. 2007. 从个案出发看 "不可译现象 "的可译潜势[J]. 外语研究 (1):48-52.
[22]	杜世洪. 2018. 新描写主义与假装的高阶描写[J]. 当代语言学 (4):537-551.
[23]	杜世洪. 2020a. 语言学是什么样的好箭?[J]. 当代外语研究 (1):36-43.
[24]	杜世洪. 2020b. 语言研究的范例与范式[J]. 当代外语研究 (3):26-38.
[25]	哈代. 1984. 德伯家的苔丝(张谷若译) [M]. 北京: 人民文学出版社.
[26]	胡庚申. 2001. 翻译适应选择论初探[R]. 香港:国际译联第五届亚洲翻译论坛.
[27]	胡庚申. 2010. 生态翻译学:产生的背景与发展的基础[J]. 外语研究 (4):62-67.
[28]	胡庚申. 2011. 生态翻译学的研究焦点与理论视角[J]. 中国翻译 (2):5-9.
[29]	胡庚申. 2013. 生态翻译学:建构与诠释[M]. 北京: 商务印书馆.
[30]	胡庚申. 2019. 翻译研究"生态范式"的理论建构[J]. 中国翻译 (4):24-33.
[31]	胡庚申. 2020. 文本移植的生命存续:"生生之谓译"的生态翻译学新解[J]. 中国翻译 (5):5-12.
[32]	覃江华. 2013. 生态翻译学的形上建构与学理反思[J]. 当代外语研究 (9):33-38+78.
[33]	罗迪江. 2019. 翻译研究中的问题域转换:生态翻译学视角[J]. 中国翻译 (4):34-41.
[34]	孟凡君. 2019. 论生态翻译学在中西翻译研究中的学术定位[J]. 中国翻译 (4):42-49.
[35]	孙致礼. 2001. 翻译与叛逆[J]. 中国翻译 (4):18-22.
[36]	唐其敏、杜世洪. 2016. 关于英语学习者语言意识与概念充实的思考[J]. 当代外语研究 (6):66-71+83.
[37]	滕梅、周婉婷. 2019. 基于科学知识图谱的国内生态翻译学研究现状及趋势研究[J]. 外语与翻译 (4):10-16.
[38]	王宁. 2011. 生态文学与生态翻译学:解构与建构[J]. 中国翻译 (2):14-19.
[39]	维特根斯坦. 2001. 哲学研究(陈嘉映译)[M]. 上海: 上海世纪出版集团.
[40]	维特根斯坦. 2019. 逻辑哲学论(杜世洪导读注释)[M]. 上海: 上海译文出版社.
[41]	叶洪. 2003. 卡明斯诗歌中的非常规因素及其翻译[J]. 湘潭大学社会科学学报 (3):141-143.
[42]	张淑媛、冷惠玲. 2003. 试论叛逆诗人卡明斯的实验主义诗歌[J]. 外语与外语教学 (12):49-51.