☆☆☆☆☆
簡體網頁||繁體網頁



點擊這裡下載

類似圖書 點擊查看全場最低價

---

內容簡介

《翻譯文體學研究》首先追溯瞭早期的文體觀，闡明文體對翻譯的影響，又從讀者視角和譯者視角分彆探討文體的作用和文體再創作過程中的選擇。作者隨之提齣翻譯研究的認知轉嚮和文體學的認知觀，最後全麵總結翻譯研究的文體學途徑，並介紹其在翻譯實踐中的作用。

作者簡介

博厄斯·貝耶爾，東英吉利大學高級講師，教授翻譯和文體學。在相關領域著作頗豐，除閤作主編瞭《文學翻譯實踐》（The Practices of Literary Translation）外，還編撰瞭《看得見的詩人》（Visible Poets）等係列詩歌集。

內頁插圖

目錄

Acknowledgements
Introduction： Style in Translation
1. The Role of Style in Translation
1.1 Reading and writing style in translation
1.2 Before stylistics： the spirit of a text
1.3 Universals of style and creative transposition
1.4 Contextual， pragmatic and cognitive aspects of style and translation
1.5 Relativity and thinking for translation
1.6 Translating literary and non-literary texts

2. Theories of Reading and Relevance
2.1 Reading， style and the inferred author
2.2 Implication， relevance and minimax
2.3 Relevance theory and translating for relevance

3. The Translator's Choices
3. l Style and choice
3.2 Clues， games and decisions
3.3 Recreated choices in translation

4. Cognitive Stylistics and Translation
4.1 The cognitive turn in stylistics and translation studies
4.2 Translating the mind in the text
4.3 Ambiguity and textual gaps
4.4 Foregrounding， salience and visibility
4.5 Metaphor， mind and translation
4.6 Iconicity， mimesis and diagesis
4.7 Cognitive stylistics and the pretence of translation

5. A Stylistic Approach in Practice
5.1 Elements of a stylistic approach to translation
5.2 Using style to translate mind
5.3 Ambiguous translation
5.4 Attracting attention： patterns and other deviant structures
5.5 Metaphorical thought translated
5.6 Keeping the echo： translating for iconicity
6. Conclusion
Bibliography
Index

精彩書摘

Views of the nature and importance of reading vary greatly， however， inthe degree of open-endedness they envisage， and the role they assign to sty-listic features of the text. Put simply， the question for translation is this： ifmeaning cannot simply be read off from the source text （（i） above） and meas-ured against the real world （（ii） above）， how does the translator find it？Whatever answers we give to this question will apply equally to the readersof the target text. The answer a formalist critic such as Jakobson would havegiven would have been that， for any text， meaning was put there by the au-thor （cf. Hirsch 1967； Dowling 1999：x）， whose intention drove a set oflinguistic choices. These choices， which constituted the style， could be un-covered in the text by the reader. Through close stylistic analysis of the text，such as was also favoured by English close-reading critics like Richards（e.g. 1924） or American New Critics such as Wimsatt （1954a）， the readercould then decode the meaning which in every sense preceded the text.Dowling's parallel is the Rosetta Stone， which， he says， had meaning beforeit was decoded （1999：16）. The comfortable notion that meaning was put intoa text by its author， to be decoded and re-encoded by the translator， makesthe job of a translator， if not straightforward， at least clearly defined.
But though the New Critics shared with the formalist critics the viewthat meaning resides in the text， they did not necessarily equate it with themeaning intended by the author. Beardsley （1982：189）， for example， statesexplicitly that knowledge of an author's intentions will not help the reader orcritic to interpret a text； the belief that it will is the "intentional fallacy"（Wimsatt 1954b）. It is not what the author intended， but what a text actuallysays， that makes interpretation possible. The author's choices which underliestyle thus become less important： the translator must pay close attention tothe style itself and it will reveal the meaning to be transferred into the targetlanguage.
A writer like Fish to some extent opposes both these views： it is thereader who creates the interpretation； however， the reader always tries "todiscern and therefore to realize an author's intention" （1980：161）. But"intention" is here not to be understood in a narrow sense； it is simply arecognition that readers "are dealing with intentional beings" （ibid.） whenthey read a text. This does not， in Fish's view， lead to a notion of concrete-ness or stability of meaning； but there is a "community" （ibid.） of readerswho will agree to some extent. This suggests that a translator must be awareof such commonality of interpretation， a view endorsed by Snell-Hornby，who emphasizes the role of "group convention" （1995：24）， particularly ifispecialized texts.
……
翻譯文體學研究 [Stylistic Approaches to Translation] 下載 mobi epub pdf txt 電子書

評分☆☆☆☆☆

好書，值得閱讀，寫論文專用

評分☆☆☆☆☆

真的不錯哦

評分☆☆☆☆☆

這本書理論論證很嚴密 適閤作為文學翻譯研究方麵的參考讀物，書很薄也很容易讀者消化 就是體例不夠多 有些地方讀起來自我感覺稍顯抽象 書本質量好 也是同係列裏的一本精品

評分☆☆☆☆☆

全英文，原汁原味，比買外國齣版的劃算

評分☆☆☆☆☆

填補瞭本方嚮的空白，建立在功能語言學上，相當於功能文體學的翻譯研究

評分☆☆☆☆☆

好書，對開展翻譯文體學研究很有幫助

評分☆☆☆☆☆

翻譯研究的必備書目！

評分☆☆☆☆☆

好看，真好看，書也好?

評分☆☆☆☆☆

好書，值得閱讀，寫論文專用

類似圖書 點擊查看全場最低價