Introduction to the Skopos Theory 功能翻译理论

totheSkoposTheoryTheSkoposantowhichwasputforwardandininthelatefunctionallysocioculturallyconceptisconsiderednotasaasspecificformofhumanaction.ourmind,translationapurpose,andthe“SkoposwasfromGreek.usedasthetechnicalforpurposeofthetranslation.翻译目的论，"skopos"是希腊语目的的意思。其核心概念是翻译过程的最主要因素是整体翻译行为的目的。SkoposTheoryTheSkoposantowhichwasputforwardandininthelatefunctionallyandsocioculturallyconceptisconsiderednotasaasspecificformofhumanaction.ourmind,translationapurpose,andthe“SkoposwasfromGreek.usedasthetechnicalforthetranslation.Inframeworkofthisoneofthefactorsdeterminingtheoftheisoroftargettextwiththeirworldintendedaudience.Theallpurposeofthethemethodsstrategiesthatbeinordertoafunctionallyresult.regardsan“offerinformationthatispartlyorwhollyturnedinto“offerofinformation”forthetargetaudience.Fromthisview,thestatusofsourceisclearlymuchlowerinthantheory.ⅠisofGermanTheofistranslatorsshouldholdthethoughtfromtheofthereadersprocessoftranslation.Therefore,translatorsshouldbearmindtheoftranslationis,whatthedemandandwhatcommunicativesituationchoiceofdecidedbythepurposeoftext,intoachieveabetterfunctiontext.threeruleswhichareskoposcoherencefidelityrule.1.SkoposSkoposisawordfor"aim"or"purpose".top-rankingruleforthusthe'skoposatranslationactionisbyskopos;thatmeans'"bystressesrulegeneralrule,andtranslationandarebythetargetRuleTherulestatesthetargettextbeinterpretableascoherentwiththetextsituation".Inotherbetranslatedinsuch1itisfortargettextreceivers,giventheircircumstancesIntermsofrule,thetextisnomostbutpartofbeliefe.Itisofferinformationforinouthebemeaningfulinthereceiver'ssituation.FidelityTranslationaprecedingofferinformation.Itistobearsomerelationshipwiththecorrespondingsourcetext.Vermeercallsthiscoherence"Thisisasafurtherprinciple,rule"byReissVermeerin1984.ThemerelystatesthattheremustbebetweentheversionsourcetextamongFidelityisaretotherule.Ifskoposachangeoffunction,thewillbefidelitytothesourcebutadequacyorappropriatenesswithtotheskopos.Andiftheruleisvivid.Skoposanwhichininthelate(Vermeer1978),whichashiftfrompredominantlyformaltranslationtheoriestomorefunctionallysocioculturallyorientedconceptoftranslation.(cf.ACTIONOFACTION);COMMUNICATIVE/FUNCTIONALAPPROACHES).shiftfromcommunicationtheory,andtheory,asmovementsinliterarytheoriesfor1978).ApartHansVermeer,founderskoposscholarsinincludeAmmann(1989/1990),Paul(1982),Sigrid(1986),NordandHeidrunWitteseearticlesintheTEXTconTEXT,published1986byintakesseriouslystressedintheory,andwhichbroughtintosharpreliefwiththeinthehalfoftwentieththeofnon-literarytexttypes.Inthescientificpapers,foruse,touristguides,contracts,surroundingcannotbeTheseincludethecultureofintendedreadersoftextandofwhohascommissionedit,infunctiontheinthatcultureforthosereaders.SkoposistowardsnotasaasaspecificformofLikeotherhumanaction,translationapurpose,andthederivedfromGreek,istechnicalforoftranslation.bedefinedcaninhighlightingasretrospectiveattitudeadoptedintheorieswhichprescriptionsderivedthesource2Inadditiontoitsactionhasanoutcomeoftranslationalactionisa(Vermeer1979:174;translatinVermeer1984/1991:2),varietyVermeerskopostheoryasageneralitmustbepurposeoftheFromhederivesrule:Humanitssubcategory:translation)determinedbyitspurposeitpurpose.Theusingformula:IA(Trl)=f(Sk).Thepointofthisapproachfollowing:itisnottextasoronsource-textrecipient,orthefunctionassigneditthattheasbyprospectivefunctionorskoposthetextasdeterminedtheinitiatori.e.clientneeds.Consequently,islargelybytargettext(reader/listener)situationandculturalrulethefidelityrule.TheruletargetmustsufficientlycoherentallowtheuserstocomprehendassumedandsituationalThestartingpointfortextpartofacontinuum,writteninthesourcelanguage.Ithasbetranslatedintotargetlanguageinsuchathatitofacontinuumwhichcanbeinterpretedbytheascoherentwiththeirsituation1978:100).Thefidelityintertextualsourcetext,andmerelythatsomerelationshipremainbetweentheoncetheoverridingprincipleofandrule(intratextual)coherencebeensatisfied.ThetheoryofReissVermeerIncombininggeneralskopostheoryofwithspecifictranslationtheorybyReiss,Reissand(1984/1991)atranslationtheorysufficientlysufficientlytomultitudeofindividualcases.culturesaccountgeneralfactorsdeterminingwhichspecialtheoriesthatconcernproblemssubfieldsAtextisviewedasanofferof(Informationsangebot)maderecipient.isasinformationmembersofintheirlanguage(thelanguageandculture)offeredinanotherwithinanother(thesourcelanguageandAsecondaryofferofprimaryinformation.tomoreprecise,informationaspectsofaccordingtothespecifiedby(ReissVermeerNeitherthetheinthesourcetext,specificationofatrandom;theyneeds,expectations,ofreceivers.Translationdefinitioninterlingualitlinguisticandculturalinotheritisaculture-transcendingprocess(VermeerSinceskoposvarieswiththeskoposoftargettextsourcetextbeIncasestheisthesameforthetwotexts,3ofFunktionskonstanz(functionalconstancy),casesinthebetweenthetextsofofthethestandardforthetranslationwillnotintertextualwiththetext,butappropriatenesstheskopos,whichselectionarrangementofcontent.atranslatumisnotipsofaithfuloffidelitysourcetextonepossibleskopos.theorynot,understoodfreetranslationall,orevenamajorityAlthoughthetermsandareoftenusedinterchangeablybyfunctionisalsoinasensewhichderivesmainlyReiss.Insense,ittoaspects(Textsorte)andtexttypeThesourcetextcanaandgenre,andmakingthetranslatorcandecidehierarchyofwhichhastobetarget-textproduction(ReissandVermeer1984/1991:196).ReissandVermeertexttypology,basedonBühler(1934),includestextderivetheandSuchhelpfulmainlywherefunctionalconstancyisrequiredtargettexts.However,both(1989a)Reissrolegenre:thetextdoesdeterminethetargetdoesgenreipsoofthetext,indeed,theitistheofgenrefortranslatum,andthegenre,consequenceoftheit(Vermeer1989a:187).ofandtargetAccordingtotheory,then,isproductionoftextonexistingtext,relationshipbetweenthetheskoposofthepracticalconsequenceofthistheoryareconceptualizationofstatusofsourcetext.ItistranslatorsourceistointheTheistheskopos,thejustoneconstituentofthetheThetranslatorisrequiredtoaccordancewiththeandskoposdecidedseparatelyineachspecificItbeADAPTATIONtothetargetbutitwiththeculture.translatorshouldknowthepointofatranslationisithassome—anygivengoalisonepossiblegoals.Thetextonlyonecorrectorpreferable1989a:andthat,explicitlyimplicitlyskoposforthetargettextneednotbewiththatsourcetext;butunlessfortargettextiscannot,speaking,outall.CriticismofskopostheorytoskoposofandtherelationshiptextandtargetItarguedReissandinattempttotrulygeneralandtotallydisparateoftextrelationsintoaframewhichtheytotogethermeansofof41994:105).thereshouldbealimittowhatopposedto,forADAPTATION.Inproper(Koller1990),sourcetextbywhichbemeasured,oftheforwhichInitisalsoarguedthat,evenatranslationfulfilintendedwell,itassessedinadequateoncounts,particularlyasfarorstylisticonmicrolevelconcernedpointotherwiseacknowledgestheofskoposobjectionslinguisticallyorientedtotranslationthatfocusonaspectsofandreception.Forexample,(1991b:106)criticizesoversimplificationthatisinherentintheemphasisontherichnessofandtothedetrimentoftext.However,proponentsofforawideoftranslationReiss1990).soonasforpurposeofastrategiesthatunderforparaphraseandtextualwillcomeinnaturallyaspartoftranslation.criticsofmicroleveldecisionslifttheofenvironmentsforcomparativetheirfunctionalaspects.ReissandVermeersculturalapproachjudgedlessapplicabletotranslatiospecialofliteraryworkSnell-Hornbyarguessituationliterarytextsmorethanthoseoftexts,isahighlyimportantfactor.Therefore,althoughskopostheoryisbynomeansliterarytranslation,needcanbefullygenre.ItalsotoarguethattoskoposaliterarytextispossibiliInliterarytheorydistinctionistextaspotentialastheoryappearstoseetheasrealization,andnotapotentialwhichcanusedindifferentsituationswithdifferentanddifferentVermeer(1989a:181)argueswhenatextiscomposed,isdonewithorrestrictedinmind.notatextmaybeusedinwayshadbeenforeseenoriginally,aistextinitsright,withforuse.theorytobringtargettextintoAsatext,anotbyitsskopos.ThisafordescribingintermsoforiginaltextandagainstdescribinginEQUIVALENCEwithanothertextin(see1993:156).isaDECISIONfordecisionsbytheskopos,andaimsinheshiftofsourcetexttothemoreoftarget-textbroughttotranslationtheory.Ashasturnedtheaspectsofandtheexplanationoftranslationdecisions,eb