知识翻译技术学:本体立命与逻辑理据

doi:10.3969/j.issn.1674-8921.2026.01.014

摘要/Abstract

摘要：

知识翻译技术学凸显了知识、翻译与技术之间的逻辑内涵,体现了技术时代下翻译研究内在的跨学科性及其范式转换的必然态势。但在人工智能引发的翻译研究认识论重构语境下,知识翻译技术学中的“技术”本体论定位及各组成要素间的逻辑联结等根本性问题,亟待考究与解答。基于此,本文以技术哲学视域下的知识翻译观与翻译知识视域下的技术观为视角,剖析知识翻译技术学本体立命与逻辑理据两大核心哲学命题,具体聚焦本质特征、核心要素的内在联系及生成逻辑、建构依据等方面。作为译学的一个跨学科思想,知识翻译技术学应进一步夯实其本体根基与逻辑理据路径,为推动其内涵式纵深发展提供认识论基础与方法论支撑。

关键词: 知识翻译技术学, 知识翻译观与技术观, 本体立命, 逻辑理据

Abstract:

Tech-Transknowletology has triadically integrated and converged knowledge, translation and technology, profoundly epitomizing the necessary trends of translation studies’ inherent interdisciplinarity and paradigmatic shift in the digital contexts. However, in the context of AI-triggered epistemological and ontological reconfiguration, Tech-Transknowletology has faced with ontological ambiguity and lacks logical articulation and other fundamental problems. In view of this, grounding itself in a reciprocal perspective: knowledge translation through a techno-philosophical lens and technology through the lens of translation knowledge, this paper dissects two core philosophical propositions: ontology grounding and rationale reasoning. Specifically, it focuses on its essential characteristics, intrinsic relationality, generative logics of conceptual items and underlying rationales of construction. As an interdisciplinary result, Tech-Transknowletology requires the consolidation of its ontological foundation and the clarification of its path to logical development to provide a robust epistemological foundation and methodological scaffolding for in-depth progress and enrichment.

Key words: Tech-Transknowletology, dual lens of views on knowledge translation and technology, ontology grounding, rationale reasoning

中图分类号:

H315.9

戴光荣, 黄栋樑. 知识翻译技术学:本体立命与逻辑理据[J]. 当代外语研究, 2026, 26(1): 174-184.

DAI Guangrong, HUANG Dongliang. Tech-Transknowletology: Ontology Grounding and Rationale Reasoning[J]. Contemporary Foreign Languages Studies, 2026, 26(1): 174-184.

参考文献 36

[1]	Benjamin, A. 2014. Translation and the Nature of Philosophy: A New Theory of Words (Routledge Revision)[M]. London: Routledge.
[2]	Bennett, K. 2023. Approaches to knowledge translation[A]. In R. Meylaerts & K. Marais (eds.). The Routledge Handbook of Translation Theory and Concepts[C]. London: Routledge. 443-462.
[3]	Buzelin, H. 2005. Unexpected allies: How Latour’s Network Theory could complement Bourdieusian analyses in translation studies[J]. The Translator 11(2):193-218.
[4]	Collins, H. 2010. Tacit and Explicit Knowledge[M]. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.
[5]	D’hulst, L. & L. Gambier. 2018. A History of Modern Translation Knowledge: Sources, Concepts, Effects[C]. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
[6]	Dupré, S. 2017. Doing it wrong: The translation of artisanal knowledge and the codification of error[A]. In M. Valleriani (ed.). The Structures of Practical Knowledge[C]. Cham: Springer. 167-188.
[7]	Gibbons, M., C. Limoges, P. Scott, et al. 1994. The New Production of Knowledge: The Dynamics of Science and Research in Contemporary Societies[M]. London: Sage Publications.
[8]	Gonne, M. 2023. Approaches to the sociology of knowledge[A]. In R. Meylaerts & K. Marais (eds.). The Routledge Handbook of Translation Theory and Concepts[C]. London: Routledge. 94-112.
[9]	Heidegger, M. 1977. The question concerning technology[A]. In M. Heidegger (ed.). The Question Concerning Technology and Other Essays (Trans. by W. Lovitt)[C]. New York: Harper & Row. 3-35.
[10]	Laudon, K. & J. Laudon. 2002. Essentials of Management Information System[M]. New Jersey: Prentice Hall.
[11]	Manning, P. & A. Owen. 2018. Knowledge in Translation: Global Patterns of Scientific Exchange, 1000-1800CE[M]. Pittsburgh: University of Pittsburgh Press.
[12]	Meylaerts, R. & K. Marais. 2023. The Routledge Handbook of Translation Theory and Concepts[C]. London: Routledge.
[13]	Searls, D. 2024. The Philosophy of Translation[M]. New Haven: Yale University Press.
[14]	Venuti, L. 2019. Contra Instrumentalism: A Translation Polemic[M]. Lincoln: University of Nebraska Press.
[15]	Vidal Claramonte, M. C. Á. 2025. Translating Indigenous Knowledges: Towards a Sensuous Translation[M]. London: Routledge.
[16]	陈家建、孙美玲. 2025. 从概念到命题:质性研究的理论化过程分析[J]. 广东社会科学(3):194-206,288.
[17]	戴光荣、黄栋樑. 2023. 知识翻译学的技术路径探讨[J]. 外语电化教学(6):12-19,107.
[18]	戴光荣、黄栋樑. 2024. 知识翻译技术学:体系框架初构[J]. 外语教学(6):86-93.
[19]	戴光荣、黄栋樑. 2025. 机器翻译中的低资源知识模型建构研究[J]. 外语教学与研究(1):106-117.
[20]	杜世洪、施金宏. 2025. 知识翻译学视域下翻译过程的描述知识与知识描述[M]. 当代外语研究(1):112-124,138.
[21]	黄瑶、马永红、王铭. 2016. 知识生产模式^Ⅲ促进超学科快速发展的特征研究[J]. 清华大学教育研究(6):37-45.
[22]	金山. 2023. 知识翻译学中“知识”的内涵、外延与定义[J]. 外语电化教学(6):20-24,108.
[23]	梁林歆、王迪. 2023. 知识翻译学视域下译者的立体性角色及作用探析[J]. 当代外语研究(2):40-48.
[24]	刘军平. 2024. 知识翻译学的理论命题探究[J]. 中国翻译(1):16-26,189.
[25]	刘润泽. 2021. 面向中国传统译学话语构建的术语重塑——文质论话语转型实践与反思[J]. 外语与外语教学(5):121-128,151.
[26]	米歇尔·福柯. 2016. 词与物-人文科学的考古学(莫伟民译)[M]. 上海: 上海三联书店.
[27]	潘文国. 2023. 翻译研究的新突破[J]. 外语电化教学(1):7-10,106.
[28]	吴建国. 1980. 中国逻辑思想史上类概念的发生、发展与逻辑科学的形成[J]. 中国社会科学(2):51-75.
[29]	杨枫. 2021a. 知识翻译学宣言[J]. 当代外语研究(5):2,27.
[30]	杨枫. 2021b. 翻译是文化还是知识?[J]. 当代外语研究(6):2,36.
[31]	杨枫. 2022. 知识翻译学的翻译定义与分类[J]. 当代外语研究(1):1-2.
[32]	杨枫. 2025. 知识是物学,翻译是人学[J]. 当代外语研究(1):1-2.
[33]	余静、刘康龙. 2024. 重塑翻译研究:AI技术影响下的范式转换与未来方向探索[J]. 外国语(上海外国语大学学报)(4):72-81.
[34]	喻旭东、傅敬民. 2022. 翻译知识约三重形态初探[J]. 当代外语研究(5):22-30.
[35]	张必胜. 2025. 从“翻译知识”到“知识翻译”:明清科技翻译的向度[J]. 清华大学学报(哲学社会科学版)(3):20-36,253.
[36]	周忠良、任东升. 2024. 国家翻译学之名实辩[J]. 外语教学(6):80-85.