Contemporary Foreign Languages Studies >
Stylistic Features of Six Full English Translations of Mencius: A Corpus-Based Multidimensional Analysis
Based on the corpus of six full English translations of Mencius, this study uses hierarchical clustering and multidimensional analysis to examine the similarities and differences of the stylistic features, and explores the potential factors affecting the retranslation of classics. It is found that, in terms of genre, most translations and the non-literary genre of popular reading are grouped into one category. In terms of text type, the translations generally show the characteristics of Involved Persuasion and there exist stylistic variations in certain chapters, possibly due to the influence of the source text and individual differences of translators. In terms of style feature, the differences among translations are mainly reflected in the dimensions of Overt Expression of Persuasion and Abstract/Non-Abstract Information, and the differences in linguistic features can verify the results of genre and text type features. This study contributes to expanding the scope of the studies on the translation of classics and can serve as a significant reference for the translation of Chinese thought and culture.
LOU Baocui, ZHAO Dongyang . Stylistic Features of Six Full English Translations of Mencius: A Corpus-Based Multidimensional Analysis[J]. Contemporary Foreign Languages Studies, 2023 , 23(5) : 157 -166 . DOI: 10.3969/j.issn.1674-8921.2023.05.016
| [1] | Biber, D. 1984. A Model of Textual Relations within the Written and Spoken Modes[D]. Los Angeles: University of Southern California. |
| [2] | Biber, D. 1989. A typology of English texts[J]. Linguistics 27(1): 3-43. |
| [3] | Bloom, I. 2009. Mencius (Translations from the Asian Classics)[M]. New York: Columbia University Press. |
| [4] | Hinton, D. 1998. Mencius[M]. New York: Counterpoint. |
| [5] | Ji, M. 2017. A multidimensional analysis of the translational Chinese genre system[A]. In M. Ji, L. Hareide, D. Li & M. Oakes (eds.). Corpus Methodologies Explained: An empirical approach to translation studies [C].London & New York: Routledge. 53-102. |
| [6] | Lau, D. C. 1970. Mencius[M]. London: Penguin Books. |
| [7] | Legge, J. 1970. The Works of Mencius[M]. 1970. New York: Dover Publications Inc. |
| [8] | Sardinha, T. & M. Pinto. 2014. Multi-dimensional Analysis, 25 Years on[M]. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. |
| [9] | 蔡新乐. 2019. 内充实才有“形色”:孟子“践形”语内语际译解的中庸之道释义[J]. 上海翻译(2): 27-32. |
| [10] | 胡扬. 2020. 语篇连接词的连接性及其在广义论证中的作用(英文)[J]. 逻辑学研究(3): 82-105. |
| [11] | 季红琴. 2016. 基于读者接受的《孟子》英译与传播研究[D]. 长沙: 湖南师范大学. |
| [12] | 姜峰. 2020. 基于多维分析的学术语篇语体特征的历时考察[J]. 外语教学与研究(5): 663-673. |
| [13] | 金学勤. 2010. 通俗简练瑕不掩瑜——评戴维·亨顿的《论语》和《孟子》英译[J]. 孔子研究(5): 117-123. |
| [14] | 鞠玉梅. 2018. 基于语料库的《论语》英译文语篇连接词使用对比研究[J]. 外国语文研究(1): 59-72. |
| [15] | 李学勤. 1999. 十三经注疏·孟子注疏[M]. 北京: 北京大学出版社. |
| [16] | 廖福涛. 2012. 英语系动词语法化现象研究[J]. 外语学刊(1): 35-37. |
| [17] | 刘单平. 2011. 《孟子》三种英译本比较研究[D]. 济南: 山东大学. |
| [18] | 刘连娣. 2021. 中国英语学习者口试配对讨论话轮转换行为实证研究[J]. 外语学刊(3): 58-64. |
| [19] | 罗志野. 2017. 《诗经》《论语》《孟子》英译[M]. 南京: 东南大学出版社. |
| [20] | 欧亚美、 刘正光. 2021. 英汉时间性与语法标记的关联模式[J]. 外语教学与研究(1): 16-28. |
| [21] | 庞双子. 2020. 翻译文本的语体特征——多维度语料库考察[J]. 上海翻译(6): 29-34. |
| [22] | 童庆炳. 2008. 童庆炳谈文体创造[M]. 开封: 河南大学出版社. |
| [23] | 王汶成. 2016. 论作为“劝导”的文学言语行为[J]. 烟台大学学报(哲学社会科学版)(4): 37-42. |
| [24] | 谢韶亮. 2021. 中国学生英语议论文的多维分析[J]. 解放军外国语学院学报(3): 111-119. |
| [25] | 谢群、 马媛媛. 2021. 中外博士学位论文英文摘要的多维度对比分析[J]. 外语学刊(4): 39-44. |
| [26] | 杨枫. 2021. 知识翻译学宣言[J]. 当代外语研究(5): 2. |
| [27] | 易明华. 2013. 分隔性后置定语的翻译[J]. 中国科技翻译(3): 5-7. |
| [28] | 于培文. 2016. 英语世界的《四书》英译研究——基于EBOSCO和JESTOR数据库的期刊论文调查[J]. 苏州大学学报(哲学社会科学版)(5): 158-166. |
| [29] | 赵朝永. 2019. 基于语料库的《红楼梦》英文全译本域变异多维分析[J]. 翻译研究与教学(1): 83-94. |
| [30] | 赵甄陶、张文庭、周定之. 1999. 孟子(大中华文库)[M]. 长沙: 湖南人民出版社. |
/
| 〈 |
|
〉 |