Contemporary Foreign Languages Studies >
The “Corresponding Translation” Theory: The Ideal State of Literary Translation
The “corresponding translation” theory has a deep origin with Chinese traditional philosophy categories of “Tao” and “boundary”. It refers to the ideal literary translation state and reveals the poetic and speculative nature which can be described in the involvement of the “free imagination” and “subtle enlightenment” in the translation process. Thus, the communication beyond space and time which reflects the ontology of translation can be made between the author, the translator (the reader), the source text and the target text. In terms of ideal translation state, the “corresponding translation” theory was put forward on the basis of traditional translation theory such as Yanfu’s faithfulness, expressiveness and elegance, Fulei’s similarity in spirit and Qian Zhongshu’s sublimation; concerned with the translation process, the theory combined Chinese traditional artistic category of “free imagination” and “subtle enlightenment” with Charles Pierre Baudelaire’s “correspondence” and Hans-Georg Gadamer’s “horizon fusion”. In addition, the poetry theory of “Neo-Hsingling” enrich the connotation of “corresponding” translation theory, through which, the relationship between translation style and translators’ “Hsingling” can be expounded. The close study of the poetic and speculative nature of “corresponding translation” theory should be advised to involve the construction of traditional translation theories positively.
GONG Gang, ZHAO Jiao . The “Corresponding Translation” Theory: The Ideal State of Literary Translation[J]. Contemporary Foreign Languages Studies, 2020 , 20(1) : 102 -110 . DOI: 10.3969/j.issn.1674-8921.2020.01.012
[1] | Kübler, G. 2015. Emiliy Dickinson Smtliche Gedichte, Zweisprachig[M]. München: Hanser Verlag. |
[2] | Steiner, G. 2001. After Babel: Aspects of Language and Translation[M]. Shanghai: Shanghai Foreign Language Education Press. |
[3] | 安贝托·艾科、 斯特凡·柯里尼. 1997. 诠释与历史[A]. 诠释与过度诠释(王宇根译)[C]. 北京: 生活·读书·新知三联书店. 106-114. |
[4] | 陈良运. 1998. 中国诗学体系论[M]. 北京: 中国社会科学出版社. |
[5] | 陈竹、 曾祖荫. 2003. 中国古代艺术范畴体系[M]. 武汉: 华中师范大学出版社. |
[6] | 顾彬、 魏育青、 姜林静. 2016. 翻译对社会发展的意义--顾彬与魏育青对谈录[J]. 东方翻译(1): 55-63. |
[7] | 龚刚. 2019. 文学翻译当求妙合[J]. 太原学院学报(社会科学版)(5): 108. |
[8] | 龚刚. 2014. 钱锺书与文艺的思潮[M]. 天津: 南开大学出版社. |
[9] | 龚刚. 2020. 文学翻译神理说兼及狄金森的中译[J]. 澳门人文学刊(1): 1-2. |
[10] | 郭宏安. 1987. 波德莱尔美学论文选[M]. 北京: 人民文学出版社. |
[11] | 郭建玲. 2012. 在中国文学里栖居--顾彬访谈录[J]. 当代作家评论(5): 52-59. |
[12] | 郭齐勇、熊十力. 1999. 学术文化随笔[M]. 北京: 中国青年出版社. |
[13] | 郭外岑. 1997. 意象文艺论[M]. 敦煌: 文艺出版社. |
[14] | 胡庚申. 2004. 翻译适应选择论[M]. 武汉: 湖北教育出版社. |
[15] | 胡桑. 2017. 翻译-民族国家-现代性和传统型--论顾彬的汉语诗歌批评[J]. 扬子江评论(4): 63-69. |
[16] | 胡经之、 李健. 2006. 中国古典文艺学[M]. 北京: 光明日报出版社. |
[17] | 季进、 余夏云. 2011. 我并不尖锐,只是更坦率---顾彬教授访谈录[J]. 书城(7): 28-39. |
[18] | 刘军平. 2019. 西方翻译理论通史(第二版)[M]. 武汉: 武汉大学出版社. |
[19] | 刘军平. 2007传统的守望者--张岱年哲学思想研究[M]. 北京: 人民出版社. |
[20] | 梁宗岱. 1975. 诗与真[M]. 北京: 商务印书馆. |
[21] | 雷纳·韦勒克. 1997. 近代文学批评史(卷四)[M]. 上海: 上海译文出版社. |
[22] | 钱锺书. 1984. 谈艺录(补订本)[M]. 北京: 中华书局. |
[23] | 王弼. 2008. 老子道德经[M]. 北京: 中华书局. |
[24] | 许钧. 2003. 翻译论[M]. 武汉: 湖北教育出版社. |
[25] | 约瑟夫·布罗茨基. 2014. Less Than One (小于一) (黄灿然译)[M]. 杭州: 浙江文艺出版社. |
[26] | 宗白华. 2002. 美学散步[M]. 上海: 上海人民出版社. |
[27] | 宗白华. 1994. 宗白华全集(第一、二卷)[M]. 合肥: 安徽教育出版社. |
[28] | 张泽鸿. 2015. 宗白华现代艺术学思想研究[M]. 北京: 文化艺术出版社. |
[29] | 周振甫. 1980. 文心雕龙选译译[M]. 北京: 中华书局出版社. |
[30] | 张思洁、 余斌. 2007. 翻译的哲学过程论[J]. 外语学刊(3): 130-133. |
[31] | 赵岩. 2017. 艾米莉·狄金森诗作选译[J]. New World Poetry 159: 30. |
[32] | 赵岩. 2019. 艾米莉·狄金森诗一首[J]. New World Poetry 174: 28. |
/
〈 |
|
〉 |