认知语言学视角下英汉学术翻译意义转移的性质研究——以《盖娅时代》翻译为例

外国语 ›› 2022, Vol. 45 ›› Issue (4): 81-88.

认知语言学视角下英汉学术翻译意义转移的性质研究——以《盖娅时代》翻译为例

范祥涛,李耀

南京航空航天大学外国语学院, 江苏南京 211106

收稿日期:2021-08-14 出版日期:2022-07-20 发布日期:2022-08-08
作者简介:范祥涛(1966—), 安徽定远人, 博士, 教授。研究方向: 翻译理论与实践、中华典籍翻译研究、语言学|李耀(1998—), 安徽宿州人, 硕士研究生。研究方向: 翻译理论与实践、中华典籍翻译研究
基金资助:
江苏省哲学社会科学基金项目(21ZWD004);南京航空航天大学基础研究重大项目(人文社科类)培育基金项目(1012-XBB20002)

A Cognitive Approach to the Nature of Semantic Shifts in E-C Academic Translation: A Case Study of the Translation of The Ages of Gaia

Xiangtao FAN,Yao LI

College of Foreign Languages, Nanjing University of Aeronautics and Astronautics, Nanjing 211106, China

Received:2021-08-14 Online:2022-07-20 Published:2022-08-08

摘要/Abstract

摘要：

认知语言学研究表明, 转喻和隐喻不仅是辞格, 更是两种思维方式。长期以来, 中外译界均直觉地视翻译为隐喻或转喻, 却没有实践证据。本研究基于小型学术翻译语料库, 采用实证研究方法, 考查了英汉翻译中意义转移的类型和方式。研究发现, 英汉学术翻译中的意义转移基本上是转喻性的, 译者翻译过程中自觉或不自觉地采用了转喻的思维方式。这就部分证实了翻译是转喻的观念, 同时部分证伪了翻译是隐喻的假设。

关键词: 认知语言学, 英汉翻译, 意义转移, 思维方式

Abstract:

Investigations in cognitive linguistics definitely show that metonymy and metaphor are not only figures of speech, but also ways of human thinking.For a long time, the academic circles of translation both at home and abroad have intuitively regarded translation as being metaphoric or metonymic, but there is no evidence from practice.Based on a small corpus, this study makes an attempt to explore the categories and manners of semantic shifts in E-C academic translation.It is found that the semantic shifts in E-C academic translation are fundamentally metonymic, and that translators tend to consciously or subconsciously adopt the metonymic mode of thinking in the process of translation, which partly verifies the concept of translation as metonymy, and partly falsifies the hypothesis of translation as metaphor.

Key words: cognitive linguistics, E-C translation, semantic shift, thinking mode

中图分类号:

H059

范祥涛,李耀. 认知语言学视角下英汉学术翻译意义转移的性质研究——以《盖娅时代》翻译为例[J]. 外国语, 2022, 45(4): 81-88.

Xiangtao FAN,Yao LI. A Cognitive Approach to the Nature of Semantic Shifts in E-C Academic Translation: A Case Study of the Translation of The Ages of Gaia[J]. Journal of Foreign Languages, 2022, 45(4): 81-88.

图/表 2

表1

表2

参考文献 32

1	Chamizo-Doninguez, P. False friends[C] // Allan, K. Concise Encyclopedia of Semantics. Amsterdam, London & New York: Elsevier, 2010.
2	Barcelona, A. Clarifying and applying the notions of metaphor and metonymy within cognitive linguistics: An update[C] // Dirven, R. & R. Porings. Metaphor and Metonymy in Comparison and Contrast. Berlin & New York: Mouton de Gruyter, 2002.
3	Divjak, D. , N. Levshina , and J. Klavan . Cognitive linguistics: Looking back, looking forward[J]. Cognitive Linguistics, 2016, 27 (4): 447- 463. doi: 10.1515/cog-2016-0095
4	Guldin, R. Translation as Metaphor[M]. London & New York: Routledge, 2016.
5	Jakobson, R. Two aspects of language and two types of aphasie disturbances[C] // Jakobson, R. Selected Writings (II): Word and Language. The Hague & Paris: de Gruyter Mouton, 1971.239-259.
6	Lakoff, G. , and M. Johnson . Metaphors We Live By[M]. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press, 1980.
7	Larson, M.L. Meaning-based Translation: A Guide to Cross-language Equivalence[M]. Washington, DC: University Press of America, 1998.
8	Lovelock, J. The Ages of Gaia[M]. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1988.
9	Newmark, P. Approaches to Translation[M]. Oxford, New York, Toronto, Sydney, Paris & Frankfurt: Pergamon Press, 1982.
10	Nida, E.A. Toward a Science of Translating: With Special Reference to Principles and Procedures Involved in Bible Translating[M]. Leiden: E.J.Brill, 1964.
11	Peirsman, Y. , and D. Geeraerts . Metonymy as a prototypical category[J]. Cognitive Linguistics, 2006, 17 (3): 269- 316.
12	Radden, G. & Z. Kövecses. Towards a theory of metonymy[C]// Evans, V., Bergen, B. & J. Zinken. The Cognitive Linguistics Reader. Sheffield: Equinox Publishing Ltd., 2007.335-359.
13	Rosch, E.H. , et al. Basic objects in natural categories[J]. Cognitive Psychology, 1976, 8 (3): 382- 439. doi: 10.1016/0010-0285(76)90013-X
14	Snell-Hornby, M. Translation Studies: An Integrated Approach[M]. Amsterdam & Philadelphia: Benjamins, 1988.
15	Surette, L. Metaphor and metonymy: Jakobson reconsidered[J]. University of Toronto Quarterly, 1987, 56 (4): 557- 574. doi: 10.3138/utq.56.4.557
16	Taylor, J.R. Linguistic Categorization: Prototypes in Linguistic Theory[M]. New York: Oxford University Press, 1995.
17	Tymoczko, M. The metonymics of translating marginalized texts[J]. Comparative Literature, 1995, 47 (1): 11- 24. doi: 10.2307/1771360
18	Tymoczko, M. Difference in similarity[C]// Arduini, S. & R. Hodgson. Similarity and Difference in Translation: Proceedings of the International Conference on Similarity and Translation. Philadelphia: American Bible Society, 2007.27-44.
19	Vinay, J-P. & J. Darbelnet. Comparative Stylistics of French and English: A Methodology for Translation[M]. Tr. Sager, J.C. & M. -J. Hamel. Amsterdam & Philadelphia: Benjamins, 1995.
20	范祥涛, 陆碧霄. 认知翻译研究的观念和方法[J]. 外语教学, 2019, 40 (4): 8- 12.
21	范祥涛. 英汉翻译中的意义推移[J]. 安徽大学学报, 2001, 25 (6): 115- 117.
22	冯友兰. 中国哲学史[M]. 上海: 神州国光社刊, 1932.
23	拉伍洛克. 盖娅时代[M]. 肖显静, 范祥东, 译. 北京: 商务印书馆, 2017.
24	刘艳梅, 冉诗洋, 李德凤. 眼动法在翻译过程研究中的应用与展望[J]. 外国语, 2013, 36 (5): 59- 66.
25	陆国强. 现代英语词汇学[M]. 上海: 上海外语教育出版社, 1983.
26	卢卫中, 王帅, 秦洪武. 翻译过程中语言转换的转喻机制[J]. 中国翻译, 2014, 35 (6): 14- 18, 128.
27	卢卫中. 基于认知的英汉词义对比研究——关于对比认知词义学的构想[J]. 外国语, 2015, 38 (3): 33- 40.
28	马克思, 恩格斯. 马克思恩格斯选集(第三卷)[M]. 北京: 人民出版社, 2012.
29	苏凤捷, 程梅花. 墨子[M]. 开封: 河南大学出版社, 2008.
30	谭业升. 转喻的图式-例示与翻译的认知路径[J]. 外语教学与研究, 2010, 42 (6): 465- 471, 481.
31	唐文辞书编委会. 唐文实用新华词典[Z]. 长沙: 湖南教育出版社, 2013.
32	张辉, 杨艳琴. 认知语言学的"三个轴线"与"三个层面"——第14届国际认知语言学大会侧记[J]. 山东外语教学, 2018, 39 (2): 10- 23.

Metrics

Viewed

Full text

Abstract

Cited

Shared

类型	替代	强化	弱化	降格	合计
数量	221	12	3	1	237
占比(%)	93.2	5.1	1.3	0.4	100

方式	HM-HP	HP-HM	RS-CS	CS-RS	RS-AC	SV-SV	SV-TM	CN-CT
数量	111	5	38	13	2	21	1	8
方式	ET-SM	ET-CH	WH-PT	PT-PT	PR-PD	PR-PD	CH-PS	CH-ET
数量	7	2	5	4	4	3	2	1
方式	RL-PY	PC-AC	AC-PT	AC- RS	AC-TM	NM-TM	CV-SV	WH-SV
数量	2	2	1	1	1	1	1	1

[1]	张建理,马书东. 论事件空时同体[J]. 外国语, 2022, 45(1): 36-44.
[2]	程琪龙. 语言研究的超学科意识[J]. 外国语, 2020, 43(2): 52-60.
[3]	王克非, 刘鼎甲. 基于超大型英汉平行语料库的英语被动结构汉译考察与分析[J]. 外国语, 2018, 41(6): 79-90.
[4]	张建理, 麻金星. 双层级事件模型展现的汉语及物动结构式[J]. 外国语, 2016, 39(5): 19-31.
[5]	魏在江. 认知语言学中的语境:定义与功能[J]. 外国语, 2016, 39(4): 39-46.
[6]	刘正光, 陈弋, 徐皓琪. 亚瑟·韦利《论语》英译“偏离”的认知解释[J]. 外国语, 2016, 39(2): 89-96.
[7]	张炜炜, 刘念. 认知语言学定量研究的几种新方法[J]. 外国语, 2016, 39(1): 71-79.
[8]	刘宇红 . 家用电风扇速度标示的非言语隐喻研究[J]. 外国语, 2011, 34(3): 62-66.