知识翻译学

知识翻译学之体认解读(上)

展开
  • 四川外国语大学,重庆, 400031
王寅,四川外国语大学资深教授、博士生导师。主要研究方向为语言哲学、体认语言学、翻译学。电子邮箱:angloamerican@163.com

网络出版日期: 2023-11-16

基金资助

* 2021年四川外国语大学哲学社会科学研究重大招标项目(sisuzd202101)

An Embodied-Cognitive Interpretation of Transknowletology(I)

Expand

Online published: 2023-11-16

摘要

国内外学者为追寻翻译本质而苦苦思索若干年,终未修成正果,杨枫深刻反思了传统译论中“因用忘体、见器失道”的方向性失误,认为“知识”才是翻译的本质特征,并据此提出了“知识翻译学”,当致力于研究跨语言知识加工、重构和再传播中的行为、关系、运动和规律。认识论认为人类知识主要源自经验(感性)和心智(理性),前者可用“体”表示,后者可用“认”体现,这便是川外团队近年来所论述的“语言体认观”,它不仅可解释语言和知识的起源,也可用来深化知识翻译学。如果说翻译的本质为知识,而知识的本质就是体认,因此知识翻译学与体认翻译学为同路人。

本文引用格式

王寅 . 知识翻译学之体认解读(上)[J]. 当代外语研究, 2023 , 23(5) : 16 -22 . DOI: 10.3969/j.issn.1674-8921.2023.05.002

Abstract

Scholars both at home and broad have been seeking hard for the essence of translation for many years, but without any result. Yang Feng has rethought this orientational error of “Forgetting essence because of usage; Losing Dao (doctrine) in sight of Qi (utensil)” in traditional translation studies, thus considering only knowledge as the essence of translation, based on which Transknowletology has been proposed. So we should devote ourselves to the behaviour, relationship, movement and regulation in the processing of cross-language knowledge, its reconstructing and redisseminating. Epistemology thinks that human knowledge mainly originates from our experience (perception) and mind (rationality), the former being named “ti (body)” and the latter “ren (cognition)”, which is so-named “Linguistic Embodiment-Cognition View” being recently discussed by SISU Team. The present paper thinks that this view can not only explain the origin of language and knowledge, but also deepen the research of Trnasknowletology. If the essence of translation is knowledge, the essence of knowledge is embodiment-cognition, thus Transknowletology and Embodied-Cognitive Tanslatology are on the same track.

参考文献

[1] Berman, A. 2021. 异域的考验——德国浪漫主义时期的文化与翻译(章文译)[M]. 北京: 生活·读书·新知三联书店.
[2] Lakoff, G. & M. Johnson. 1980. Metaphors We Live By[M]. Chicago & London: University of Chicago Press.
[3] Polanyi, M. 1958. Personal Knowledge: Towards a Post-Critical Philosophy[M]. London: Routledge.
[4] Wittgenstein, L. 1963. Tractatus logico-philosophicus[M]. Berlin: Suhrkamp.
[5] 陈大亮. 2022. 知识翻译学的元反思[J]. 当代外语研究(2):45-57.
[6] 陈东成. 2015. 大易翻译学初探[J]. 周易研究(2):72-78.
[7] 李瑞林. 2022. 知识翻译学的知识论阐释[J]. 当代外语研究(1):47-59.
[8] 胡庚申. 2008. 生态翻译学[J]. 中国翻译(6):11-15.
[9] 唐代兴. 2013. 生境伦理学的知识论构建[M]. 上海: 上海三联书店.
[10] 王洪涛. 2011. 建构“社会翻译学”:名与实的辨析[J]. 中国翻译(1):14-18.
[11] 王洪涛. 2016. “社会翻译学”研究:考辨与反思[J]. 中国翻译(4):6-13.
[12] 王寅. 2021. 体认翻译学(上下卷)[M]. 北京: 北京大学出版社.
[13] 王寅. 2022. 王寅文集·第三卷:英语学习与教育实践[M]. 安徽: 黄山出版社.
[14] 吴志杰. 2011. 和合翻译研究刍议[J]. 中国翻译 (4): 5-13.
[15] 杨枫. 2021. 知识翻译学宣言[J]. 当代外语研究(5):2.
[16] 杨枫. 2022a. 知识翻译学的翻译定义与分类[J]. 当代外语研究(1):1-2.
[17] 杨枫. 2022b. 知识翻译学:出发与抵达[J]. 当代外语研究(5):1-2.
[18] 张凌. 2014. 波兰尼的默会知识论与翻译研究[J]. 语言教育(3):56-60.
[19] 张凌. 2015. “奈达悖论”的默会知识论消解[J]. 外文研究(1):94-98.
文章导航

/