• 全国中文核心期刊
  • 中国人文社会科学核心期刊
  • 中文社会科学引文索引(CSSCI)来源期刊
  • 国家社会科学基金学术期刊资助入选期刊
LIU Zhengguang, DENG Zhong, DENG Ruoyu. Cognitive Equivalence and Its Epistemological Significance[J]. Journal of Foreign Languages, 2020, 43(1): 34-47.
Citation: LIU Zhengguang, DENG Zhong, DENG Ruoyu. Cognitive Equivalence and Its Epistemological Significance[J]. Journal of Foreign Languages, 2020, 43(1): 34-47.

Cognitive Equivalence and Its Epistemological Significance

More Information
  • Received Date: June 07, 2018
  • The ideal pursuit of formal or functional equivalence in translation has been a conundrum for translation theorizing, in that its theoretical prerequisites are derived from structuralist linguistic theory which is, in itself, deficient in separating form from meaning.The paper instead advocates "Cognitive Equivalence" and defines it as the ontological commonalities or cognitive schemas across languages.This concept achieves an explanatory consistency for both translation practice and theorizing, for it is based on the Cognitive Linguistics view that language consists of an inventory of conventional symbolic units, and thus unifies the subjective and objective, the general and the individual, the static and the dynamic in translation.The paper also points out that inequivalence results from the translator's cognitive subjectivity which leads to conceptualisation differences in construal and ways of expression.The theoretical advantage of Cognitive Equivalence lies in the fact that it has expounded the root cause for formal or functional inequivalence and clarified the logic of plausibility in translation, which paves the way for efficient communication across languages and cultures.
  • [1]
    Baker,M.Equivalence[C]//Baker, M.Routledge Encyclopedia of Translation Studies.London/New York:Routledge.1978.77-79.
    [2]
    Goldberg, A.E.& R.Jackendoff.The English resultative as a family of constructions[J].Language, 2004, 80(3):536-568.
    [3]
    Hudson,R.Word Grammar, Cognitive Linguistics, and second language learning and teaching[C]//Robinson, P.& N.Ellis.Handbook of Cognitive Linguistics and Second Language Acquisition.New York/London:Routledge, 2008.
    [4]
    Jackendoff, R.Semantics and Cognition[M].Cambridge/Massachusetts:The MIT Press, 1983.
    [5]
    Langacker,R.W.Foundations of Cognitive Grammar[M].Stanford:Stanford University Press,1987.
    [6]
    Langacker, R., W.Virtual Reality[J].Studies in the Linguistic Science, 1999a, 27(2):77-103.
    [7]
    Langacker,R.W.Grammar and Conceptualization[M].Berlin/New York:Mouton de Gruyter, 1999b.
    [8]
    Langacker, R.W.The English present tense[J].English Language and Linguistics, 2001, 5(2):251-272.
    [9]
    Langacker, R.W.Cognitive grammar as a basis for language instruction[C]//Robinson, P.& Nick.C.Ellis.Handbook of Cognitive Linguistics and Second Language Acquisition.New York/London:Routledge, 2008.66-88.
    [10]
    Nida, E.A.Toward a Science of Translating[M].Leiden:E.J.Brill, 1964.
    [11]
    Nida, E.A.Language, Culture, and Translating[M].上海:上海外语教育出版社, 1993.
    [12]
    Nida, E.A.& C.R.Taber.The Theory and Practice of Translation [M].Leiden:United Bible Societies, 1969.
    [13]
    Tomasello, M.Constructing a Language:A usage-based theory of language acquisition[M].Cambridge,MA:Harvard University Press, 2003.
    [14]
    Talmy, L.Toward a Cognitive Semantics, Vol I:Concept Structuring System [M].Cambridge/Massachusetts:The MIT Press, 2000.
    [15]
    Srinivasan, M & H.Rabagliati.How concepts and conventions structure the lexicon:Cross-linguistic evidence from polysemy[J].Lingua, 2015, 157:124-152.
    [16]
    刘正光,徐皓琪.英汉时空概念化方式差异:时空分立与时空同态[J].外语教学与研究, 2019, 51(2):163-175.
    [17]
    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.
    [18]
    陆俭明,沈阳.汉语和汉语研究十五讲[M].北京:北京大学出版社, 2003.
    [19]
    陆俭明.现代汉语语法研究教程(第四版)[M].北京:北京大学出版社, 2013.

Catalog

    Article views (2000) PDF downloads (12) Cited by()

    /

    DownLoad:  Full-Size Img  PowerPoint
    Return
    Return