法律翻译对等理论延伸

翻译对等理论研究延伸高级法商翻译课程刘云龙、张萌2016年10月8日RogerT.Bell:translationistheexpressioninanotherlanguage(ortargetlanguage)ofwhathasbeenexpressedinanother,sourcelanguage,preservingsemanticandstylisticequivalences.

EquivalenceTheoryTheconceptofequivalenceisquitecontroversial.Scholarshavedifferentexplorationsabouttranslationequivalence.Amongtheseexplorations,iwillexplaintheequivalencetheoriesofNidaandJinDi.一、EquivalencetheoryofNidaNidaisknownfordynamicequivalence.Dynamicequivalencederivesfrom“theprincipleofequivalenceeffect”.Inatranslationthattrytoproducedynamicequivalence,thetranslatorissupposedtochangehisfocusfrommatchingthereceptor-languagemessagewiththesourcelanguagemessagetoadynamicrelationshipNida：“therelationshipbetweenreceptormessageshouldbesubstantiallythesameasthatwhichexistedbetweentheoriginalreceptorsandthemessage”.“onewayofdefiningaDE(Dynamicequivalence)translationistodescribeitastheclosestnaturalequivalencetothesource-languagemessage”Thistypeofdefinitioncontainsthreeterms:(1)Equivalent,whichpointstothesource-languagemessage(2)Natural,whichpointstothereceptorlanguage(3)Closest,whichbindsthetwoorientationstogetheronthebasisofthehighestdegreeofapproximation(1)Thetermequivalencefocusonthesource-languagemessage.Thecontentofsourcelanguagemessageisimportant.Themessageofsourcelanguageisthestartingpointandthecheckingstandardoftranslation.Forexample:灭火器=fireextinguisherTheChinese灭火器andtheEnglishFireextinguisherrefertothesameobject,andbothofthemareinaccordancewiththeirlanguagerespectively.(2)Theterm“natural”isthekeypointofDE.Nidathinksthewordnaturalisapplicabletothreeareasofthecommunicativeprocess.Foranaturalrenderingmustfitthereceptorlanguageandcultureasawholeisanessentialingredientinanystylisticallyacceptablerendering.Languageandculturearecloselyrelatedtoeachother.Alanguageisalwaysapartofcultureandthemeaningofanytextrefersdirectlyorindirectlytothecorrespondingculture.Finally,wordsonlyhavemeaningintermsofthecorrespondingculture.Nida:“Bilingualcompetencehasalmostalwaysbeenregardedasanessentialrequirementfortranslators……Fortrulysuccessfultranslating,biculturalismisevenmoreimportantthanbilingualism,sincewordsonlyhavemeaningsintermofculturesinwhichtheyfunction”.(3)Theterm“closest”isthecombinationoftheabovetwoelements.AsNidaclaims,itbindsthetwoorientationstogetheronthebasisofthehighestdegreeofapproximation.Theequivalencebetweenthesourcelanguageandthetargetlanguageisnotalwayspossible.Thuswhatatranslatorcandoistobalancethetwotoapossiblehighestdegreeofapproximation.Nidaoffersthreefundamentalcriteriawhicharebasictotheevaluationofalltranslating,andindifferentwayshelptodeterminetherelativemeritofparticulartranslations.Theseare(1)generalefficiencyofthecommunicationprocess.(2)comprehensionoftheintent(3)equivalenceofresponse.二、EquivalenceTheoryofJinDiTherearethreeimportanttheoriesinJinDi’stheory：1、Theconceptofthereceptor.Thetheorystressesthereceptorofthetranslatedtext,butitdoesnotnecessarilymeanthatthereceptorismoreimportantthantheauthor.InsteadoffocusingonthecomparisonoftheSLtextandtheTLtext,thetheoryofequivalenteffectstressesthecomparisonbetweenthetwocommunicatingprocess.Thetranslatingprocessisaccomplishedonlywhenthetranslatedtextisacceptedbythereaders.Otherwise,thetranslationisinvain.Allcommunicationistwoway.2、Theconceptoftheeffect.Itmeansthatthereceptorisacceptedbythetransferredinformationinthetranslatedtext,fromunderstandingtotheexperienceandthentofeelings,thesameoralmostthesameasthoseofthesourcetextreaders.Inthecommunicativetranslationofvocativetexts,equivalenteffectisnotonlydesirable,butalsoessential.Itisthecriterionbywhichtheeffectiveness,andthereforethevalue,ofthetranslationofnotices,instructions,publicity……istobeassessed.Effectisthebasicelementofavocativetext3、Theconceptoftheequivalence.Equivalenceisamorescientifictermthanfaithfulness.Theformerismoreobjectiveandimpartial,referringtothequalityofthetranslatedtext,whilethelatterismoresubjective,referringtothetranslator’sattitude.Theequivalenteffectscontainmanyaspects,includinglexical,semantic,pragmaticlevel,subtletiesandovertoneswhichareimpliedincultureandthought.Itisanoverallequivalentbetweentwolanguagesandcultures.Pragmaticequivalence：Tounderstandpragmaticequivalence,oneneedstoknowsomethingaboutthepragmaticmeaning.Itreflectssuchinformationaboutthespeakerasidentity,age,socialstatus,geographicallocation,attitude,intentionandpersonality,themainpurposesofthecommunication-informationexchange,andtheunderstandabilityofcommunicatingcontents.Whentalkingaboutpragmaticsintranslation,professorHeZiranthinksthatpragmaticsdeals,ontheonehand,withpragmalinguistics,withthecontextwhichisformallyencodedinthestructureofalanguage,ontheotherhand,withsociopragmatics,withthelanguageusage,understandandappropriatenessinthesocialandculturalcontext.Themaintaskofatranslatoristoconveytothereaderallthepossiblemeaningsofmessage.Sincemeaningsarecoatedinagivencontext,itisquitedifficultforawriterorspeakertobringoutthebothintendedmeaninginthecontextandcultural,linguisticaspectsoftheoriginalmessage.Thepragmaticsapproachtotranslationcanbeadoptedtohelpsolvethisproblembystrivingforthepragmaticsequivalenceeffectbetweenthesourceandtargetmessage.AccordingtoProfHe,thepragmaticsequivalenceeffectaimsattranslatingmeaninginfull,takingfullaccountofdifferencesbetweenSLandTLinpragmalinguisticsandsociopragmatics.Pragmalingusticsintranslationisrefertothestudyofthepragmaticsforceorlanguageuseinthecontextfromtheviewpointoflinguisticssources.Pragmaticsforce,alsocalledillocutionaryforceinspeechacttheoryofpragmatics,istheintendedmeaningforagivenmessage.ProfHedistinguishestwomainkindsofpragmaticsforce,theimplicitonewhichisbelowthesurfaceandunstated,andtheexplicitonewhichisonthesurfaceandstated.Hethinksitisimportanttoidentitytheimplicitforcesastheyappearintheirvarioussocialcontexts,forfrequentlyapparentintentionofamessageisnotthesameastheactualintent.Pragmalingulisticsintranslationcontainschoosingtheappropriateformsoflanguagetoconveytheintendedmeaningorpragmaticsforceofthegivenmassage.However,anequationbetweenlinguisticformsandcommunicativefunctionsshouldnotbeassumedwhenoneisengagedintranslation.Sociopragmaticsreferstothepragmaticstudieswhichexaminetheconditionsonlanguageusethatderivefromthesocialandculturalsituation.Itdependsonthetranslator’sbeliefaswellashissocialandcross-culturalknowledge.ThesocialpragmaticsequivalenteffectintranslationusuallyoccurswhenthetranslatorholdsacorrectconceptionofthedifferentsocialinstitutionsorculturalbackgroundsbetweentheSLandTL.Culturalfactorisanindispensablepartforthesocialpragmaticsequivalenteffectintranslation,whichisthefocusoftranslation.ProfessorWangZuoliangsaid“atranslatormustbearealculturist.Itissaidthetranslatormustgraspthetwolanguages,indeed,hemust.Butwithouttheunderstandingofthesocialculturalconnotationinonelanguagenoonecanreallymasterthelanguage”.Duffholdsthat“translationistheprocessofconveyingthemessageacrosslinguisticandculturalbarriers,itisaneminentlycommunicativeactivity”Luhongmeievensays“asfarastranslationisconcerned,translatingaSLtextisakindoftranslatingSLculturalandhabitofthecountrywheretheSLisspoken”.LiumiqingviewstheculturalfactorsastheoneoftheessentialelementsamongthetraditionalChinesetranslation.翻译理论界对“对等”理论研究——基于语料库数据分析根据出现的时间以及总数，上述“对等”术语集能够大致呈现中国当代翻译“对等”研究由语言向文化及其他多元视角转移的历时趋势。同时，对等理论具有传递性、生发性。这些词组型术语是奈达“对等”译论跨语传播的积极成果，是基于新术语的理论传承与创新的体现。此外，术语“对等”的跨语应用对源语术语equivalence的概念内涵有进一步充实作用。这是术语翻译理论生发功能的另一体现。InotherwordsLikethedivisionoflanguageintodiscreteareas,thetermequivalenceisadoptedinthisbookforthesakeofconvenience–becausemosttranslatorsareusedtoitratherthanbecauseithasanytheoreticalstatus.Itisusedherewiththeprovisothatalthoughequivalencecanusuallybeobtainedtosomeextent,itisinfluencedbyavarietyoflinguisticandculturalfactorsandisthereforealwaysrelative.对等（equivalent）只是一个相对的概念，不对等才是绝对的，完全的对等是不存在的。

法律翻译具体实践中存在的主要问题

（金朝武，胡爱平,2000:45）可归纳为以下几种：1.拼写和语法错误；2.省译、增译和望文生义；3.术语翻译不妥；4.译文文体不当；5.对原文理解不透；6.语言修养欠佳；7.法律文化差异引起的错误。

Ageneralproblemconstantlyoccurredinlegaltranslation：

Non-equivalence（lexical/terminological,semantic,syntactic（collocational）,textual,pragmatic,stylistic,cultural,etc.）SusanSarcevic:TerminologicalincongruenceSusanSarcevic关于法律名词术语翻译的理论主要

集中在“法律术语的不完全对等现象及翻译”问题

上。法律专门术语是用来准确表达特有的法律概

念的专门用语,法律翻译中的“专门术语不一致”

(terminologicalincongruence)是指在法律翻译过

程中(即从源语到目的语的转换过程中)源语某一

专门术语的内涵或外延在目的语中发生了变化并

导致了该术语在译前译后出现差异的情形。

与法律概念有关的各种不对等情形解读

（王建：2013）1.这种不对等有时是语言方面空缺。比如assembly，assemblyman，president，Congress，Senator，lynch（私刑）等词在英国法律中并不存在；相反，Lords，LordChancellor（御前大臣，大法官，上议院议长），CourtofKing’sBench（王座法庭）,PrivyCouncil，Suitor，Chancellor等词在美国法律中并不存在。2.这种不对等有时是语言方面的差异，即同一个指称有不同的表达方式。例如大陆地区“劳教所”、“刑事警察”、“夫妻”和“再婚”在我国台湾地区分别称为“升教所”、“刑事”、“翁某”和“接脚”。这种因地域差异而造成术语称谓不同的情况在术语同一个法系的英国和美国也不例外，其各自的法律发展受到不同因素的影响。如“原告”一词，在离婚诉讼中称为petitioner；一般民事诉讼称为plaintiff或complainant3.不对等还体现在同一个符号所指称的对象不同

dominion民法：完全所有权；国际法：主权

estoppel

合同法：不得反悔、允诺禁反言；刑诉法：禁止翻供。

By-law英国：地方法规；美国：公司章程4.这种不对等，有时是两种语言系统中有类似的指称物（equivalent），但该类似指称在两种语言中并不具有对等的概念或意义功能，即在意义层面具有一定的偏差。比如，大陆法系bonafides（诚实信用）与普通法系的goodfaith（诚实信用）存在下列区别：前一概念包括过失，后一概念却不包括过失；前者范围更广，包括信任关系以及商业交易中的最低的行为道德准则（StandardsofBusinessConduct）,这可能是因大陆法系国家的“法律”与政治和道德关系密切之故。

与法律概念有关的各种不对等情形解读

（王建：2013）Examples法律术语“物证”如何翻译？1998年出版的《中华人民共和国法律法规汉英对照词语手册》译成：materialevidence评议：望文生义，实则生缪——并非字面完全对等就是正确的翻译的

materialevidence：evidencehavingsomelogicalconnectionwiththeconsequentialfactsortheissues”（Black’sLawDictionary,7th.edition），其意为“与案件的事实或结果存在逻辑关系的证据”，它既可能是言词证据也可能是实物证据。而汉语中的“物证”在英语中是另有专门的法律术语与之对应的，这就是“realevidence”。

我国刑法上“非法侵入住宅罪”如何翻译？有人直接译成burglary（thebreakingandenteringofthedwellinghouseofanotherperson）殊不知burglary一罪，其犯罪构成的客观方面是行为人持刀撬窗入室后进行行窃的，类似我国认定的盗窃罪。元照英美法词典解释burglary为：

(1)普通法夜盗罪指怀着犯重罪意图在夜里打开并且进入他人住宅的行为。(2)制定法夜盗罪与普通法夜盗罪相比，制定法夜盗罪在三个要件方面有所区别：１现代制定法已把住宅〔dwelling〕这一概念扩大到工厂车间、商店、办公处以及一切建筑物；２多数制定法取消了「夜里」这个时间要素；３有些制定法把「意图犯重罪」要件扩大为「意图犯重偷盗罪或轻偷盗罪或任何重罪」。Burglary在普通法法域还强调夜间侵入他人住宅并行窃，与我国的“非法侵入住宅罪”在法律概念（该罪在我国刑法上规定：客观方面表现为行为人实施非法入侵他人住宅的行为，或经主人要求退出而拒不退出的行为）上并不完全对等,实际上体现出一种法律文化的差异。笔者认为译成crimeofhousebreaking或者释译成unlawfulintrusionintoanotherperson’sresidence更为稳妥。SusanSarcevic

在其著作NewApproachtoLegalTranslation

中指出法律翻译不仅是语言转换的过程，而是在法律机制中进行的交际活动。法律术语依据对等程度可以划分为接近对等、部分对等、不对等三类(SusanSarecvic1997:113)。法律翻译同其他翻译一样，是一种交际活动(杜金榜2004:11-14)。但是，法律翻译不同于其他翻译的一个显著特点正在于它的可操作性，即在跨法系交际中，不仅要在语言文字层操作，更重要的是对语言表象背后的没有用文字表述出来的法律文化和法律规约要有清楚的认识。李克兴：法律文本静态对等翻译该人为香港理工大学翻译研究中心教授，长期从事法律英语翻译研究。该人曾发表论文，在评价了动态对等、异化与归化、功能主义、语义翻译和传意/交际翻译之后，提出适合法律文本的静态对等翻译策略，认为法律文本是静态的元、信息型文本、模式化语言，读者群较为单一，应采取严格的翻译准则。“静态对等翻译虽然与直译或语义翻译相似，但是它并不等同于直译或语义翻译，更不等同于“死译”。她的内涵和外延都比直译或语义翻译更丰富、更宽泛但又更严格。真正的静态对等的译本要求深层意思、表层意思、语言结构、风格、格式与原文的这些方面完全对等，还要求译文最大程度地再现原文作者的每一个写作意图。”Example任何人籍恐吓