Articles

On National Translation Capacity from the Perspective of Speech Act Theory

Expand

Online published: 2023-07-31

Abstract

National Translation Practice (NTP) is essentially cross-linguistic speech acts, thus correlates closely with the theoretical terms from Speech Act Theory (SAT) like intention and intentionality, constitutional rules and regulative rules, brute facts and institutional facts. Nevertheless, these facets are largely underexplored in the study of NTP. In terms of the subject of NTP, collective intentionality could expound how the nation, as an abstract subject, carries out the translation process. With regard to the implementing process, NTP starts with brute facts and regulative rule of the source text for code-switching, and is relatively less competent in grasping the institutional facts and constitutional rules of the target language. This paper thus concludes that National Translation Capacity (NTC) is a capacity of collective intentionality gathering by certain authorized institutions. And NTC can be enhanced by subsuming the predication of the realization degree of NTP, the recovery of institutional rules and the effect examination from the recipients.

Cite this article

JIANG Qingsheng, WU Yun . On National Translation Capacity from the Perspective of Speech Act Theory[J]. Contemporary Foreign Languages Studies, 2023 , 23(3) : 51 -58 . DOI: 10.3969/j.issn.1674-8921.2023.03.006

References

[1] Austin, J. 1962. How to Do Things with Words[M]. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
[2] Baker, M. 1993. Corpus linguistics and translation studies—implications and applications [A]. In M. Baker & E. Tognini-Bonellli (eds.). Text and Technology: In Honour of John Sinclair [C]. Philadelphia/Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing Company. 233-252.
[3] Chesterman, A. 1997. Memes of Translation: The Spread of Ideas in Translation Theory[M]. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
[4] Elder-Vass, D. 2015. Collective intentionality and causal powers[J]. Journal of Social Ontology (2): 251-269.
[5] Hickey, L. 2001. Perlocutionary equivalence: Making, exegesis and recontextualization [A]. In L. Hickey (ed.). The Pragmatics of Translation[C]. 上海: 上海外语教育出版社. 217-232.
[6] Sch?ffner, C. & B. Adab. 2000. Developing Translation Competence[M]. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
[7] Searle, J. 1969. Speech Acts: An Essay in the Philosophy of Language[M]. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
[8] Searle, J. 1979. Expression and Meaning: Studies in the Theory of Speech Act[M]. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
[9] Searle, J. 1990. Collective intentions and actions [A]. In P.Cohen, J. Morgan & M.Pollack (eds.). Intentions in Communication[C]. New York: MIT Press. 401-415.
[10] Searle, J. 1998. Mind, Language and Society[M]. New York: Basic Books.
[11] Seemann, A. 2011. Joint attention: Toward a relational account [A]. In A. Seemann (ed.). Joint Attention: New Developments in Psychology, Philosophy of Mind, and Social Neuroscience[C]. New York: MIT Press. 183-202.
[12] Sperber, D. & D. Wilson. Wilson. 1986. Relevance: Communication and Cognition[M]. Oxford: Blackwell Publishers.
[13] 耿强. 2012. 国家机构对外翻译规范研究——以“熊猫丛书”英译中国文学为例[J]. 上海翻译(1): 1-7.
[14] 刘景钊. 2005. 意向性:心智关指世界的能力[M]. 北京: 中国社会科学出版社.
[15] 任东升、 高玉霞. 2015. 国家翻译实践初探[J]. 中国外语(3): 92-97, 103.
[16] 孙艺凤. 2003. 翻译规范与主体意识[J]. 中国翻译(3): 3-9.
[17] 吴赟. 2020. 图书外译传播的公共外交实践研究——美国富兰克林图书项目的解析与启示[J]. 外语教学与研究(4): 594-606.
[18] 杨枫. 2021. 国家翻译能力建构的国家意识与国家传播[J]. 中国翻译(4): 15-19.
[19] 杨逢彬. 1999. 《大中华文库·论语》前言[A]. 杨伯峻. 大中华文库·论语[C]. 长沙: 湖南人民出版社.17-35.
Outlines

/