Creat App Theo EN 4 - Revision history

Root at 16:03, 16 February 2022

2022-02-16T16:03:29Z

Yi Yangfan at 05:47, 16 December 2021

2021-12-16T05:47:18Z

Yin Meida: /* 1.3 Principles of skopos theory */

2021-12-15T12:02:22Z

1.3 Principles of skopos theory

Yin Meida: /* 3.2 Improvement of skopos theory on literary translation */

2021-12-15T11:59:01Z

3.2 Improvement of skopos theory on literary translation

Yin Meida: /* 3.Appropriateness theory */

2021-12-15T11:55:01Z

3.Appropriateness theory

Yin Meida: /* Introduction */

2021-12-15T11:52:32Z

Introduction

Yin Meida: /* 3.Appropriateness theory */

2021-12-15T11:07:58Z

3.Appropriateness theory

Yin Meida: /* 3.1 Appropriateness Theory and skopos theory */

2021-12-15T11:06:18Z

3.1 Appropriateness Theory and skopos theory

Yin Meida: /* 3.3 Translation ethics */

2021-12-15T10:58:41Z

3.3 Translation ethics

Yin Meida: /* 5.References */

2021-12-15T03:45:13Z

5.References

@@ Line 4: / Line 4: @@
 Chapters（4/4)
-[[Creat_App_Theo_EN_1]] [[Creat_App_Theo_EN_2]] [[Creat_App_Theo_EN_3]] [[Creat_App_Theo_EN_4]]
+[[Creat_App_Theo_EN_1]] [[Creat_App_Theo_EN_2]] [[Creat_App_Theo_EN_3]] [[Creat_App_Theo_EN_4]] [[Creat_App_Theo_EN_5]]
 [[Book_projects|Back to translation project overview]]

@@ Line 2: / Line 2: @@
 [[App_Theo|Overview Page of Appropriateness Theory]]
-Chapters（0/30)
+Chapters（4/4)
-[[Creat_App_Theo_EN_1]] [[Creat_App_Theo_EN_2]] [[Creat_App_Theo_EN_3]] [[Creat_App_Theo_EN_4]] [[Creat_App_Theo_EN_5]] [[Creat_App_Theo_EN_6]] [[Creat_App_Theo_EN_7]] [[Creat_App_Theo_EN_8]] [[Creat_App_Theo_EN_9]] [[Creat_App_Theo_EN_10]] [[Creat_App_Theo_EN_11]] [[Creat_App_Theo_EN_12]] [[Creat_App_Theo_EN_13]] [[Creat_App_Theo_EN_14]] [[Creat_App_Theo_EN_15]] [[Creat_App_Theo_EN_16]] [[Creat_App_Theo_EN_17]] [[Creat_App_Theo_EN_18]] [[Creat_App_Theo_EN_19]] [[Creat_App_Theo_EN_20]] [[Creat_App_Theo_EN_21]] [[Creat_App_Theo_EN_22]] [[Creat_App_Theo_EN_23]] [[Creat_App_Theo_EN_24]] [[Creat_App_Theo_EN_25]] [[Creat_App_Theo_EN_26]] [[Creat_App_Theo_EN_27]] [[Creat_App_Theo_EN_28]] [[Creat_App_Theo_EN_29]] [[Creat_App_Theo_EN_30]] ...
+[[Creat_App_Theo_EN_1]] [[Creat_App_Theo_EN_2]] [[Creat_App_Theo_EN_3]] [[Creat_App_Theo_EN_4]]
 [[Book_projects|Back to translation project overview]]

@@ Line 40: / Line 40: @@
 ===='''1.3 Principles of skopos theory'''====
-There are mainly four principles in skopos theory, namely, the principle of purpose, the principle of coherence, the principle of fidelity and the principle of loyalty, the last one being added by Christina Nord to improve the skopos theory. [Please put citation for this information.]--[[User:EIMONKYAW|EIMONKYAW]] ([[User talk:EIMONKYAW|talk]]) 18:09, 13 December 2021 (UTC)Ei Mon Kyaw
+There are mainly four principles in skopos theory, namely, the principle of purpose, the principle of coherence, the principle of fidelity and the principle of loyalty, the last one being added by Christina Nord to improve the skopos theory.
 ====='''1.3.1 Principle of purpose'''=====
 Principle of purpose is the predominant one in skopos theory, in which the purpose determines the whole process of translating. Purposes of translation could be roughly devided into three kinds, namely, basic purposes for translators(such as make a living), communicative purpose of the source-text as well as the purpose of using a particular means of translation, the most important being the communicative purpose of the source-text. The purpose determines the process of translating.
@@ Line 48: / Line 48: @@
 Fidelity rule refers to the inter-textual coherence between the source text and the target text. This principle stresses the importance of the source text and claims that the target text should be loyal to the source text. But the degree of loyalty lies on the purpose of the target text and the understanding of the source text for target audiences.
 ====='''1.3.4 Principle of loyalty'''=====

@@ Line 72: / Line 72: @@
 Although it is very important to help target reader better understand and accept the source text, it’s also of significant importance to be loyal to the author and the source text. Many scholars such as Yanfu and Luxun regarded “faithfulness” as the predominant principle in translation. Considering the huge cultural gap between China and western countries, it is impossible to achieve the absolute equivalence between the source text and target text, skopos theory may provide a new perspective on it. However, in literary translation, it is not the end that justifies the means but the purpose and the equivalence. And loyalty should be the top principle rather than skopos. No matter what purposes the translator tries to achieve, the source text should never be disregarded.
-“Gone with the Wind” is a good example of fulfilling both standards. Translated by Fu Donghua, the name of people and places are localized and the plots and ideas are well protected, this version is widely accepted by Chinese people. The translator respects the source text and the author, which helps us have a better know of the life of people in the southern states of America before and after the American civil war. At the same time, we wouldn’t be so confused at so many strange names. In the “Rickshaw Boy” translated by Evan King, the target reader fail to appreciate the real life of Chinese people decades ago and the value and ideas that the author strived to express through the text, which makes the translation lose its value and significance. Therefore, it is not an appropriate translation but it’s a good rewrite. While in “Gone with the Wind”, the translator put the source text in the highest state, and the expectation of the target text is fulfilled. So it is a good translation under the appropriateness theory.
+“Gone with the Wind” is a good example of fulfilling both standards. Translated by Fu Donghua, the name of people and places are localized and the plots and ideas are well protected, this version is widely accepted by Chinese people. The translator respects the source text and the author, which helps us have a better know of the life of people in the southern states of America before and after the American civil war. At the same time, we wouldn’t be so confused at so many strange names. In the “Rickshaw Boy” translated by Evan King, the target reader fail to appreciate the real life of Chinese people decades ago and the value and ideas that the author strived to express through the text, which makes the translation lose its value and significance. Therefore, it is not an appropriate translation but it’s a good rewrite. While in “Gone with the Wind”, the translator put the source text in the highest state, and the expectation of the target text is fulfilled. So it is a good translation under the appropriateness theory.(Chen Daliang,2007(03):49-52)
 Therefore, in literary translation, translators should follow the principles of “loyalty plus function” and should regard loyalty as the guiding principle.

@@ Line 61: / Line 61: @@
 ==='''3.Appropriateness theory'''===
-“Appropriateness Theory” is the final theory of all translation theories. There may be different answers to the question of appropriateness in different times and from different actors, perspectives, disciplines, etc. Appropriateness theory, as an integrative theory, accepts all existing translation theories for certain aspects of the translation process(Woesler, 2021:2). [Please put page number for this information.] --[[User:EIMONKYAW|EIMONKYAW]] ([[User talk:EIMONKYAW|talk]]) 18:12, 13 December 2021 (UTC)Ei Mon Kyaw Appropriateness theory absorbs all the strengths of other translation theories and also include the advice for improvement of other theories. Therefore, appropriateness theory is a generous translation theory that could guide the translation of various kinds.
+“Appropriateness Theory” is the final theory of all translation theories. There may be different answers to the question of appropriateness in different times and from different actors, perspectives, disciplines, etc. Appropriateness theory, as an integrative theory, accepts all existing translation theories for certain aspects of the translation process(Woesler, 2021:2). Appropriateness theory absorbs all the strengths of other translation theories and also include the advice for improvement of other theories. Therefore, appropriateness theory is a generous translation theory that could guide the translation of various kinds.
 ===='''3.1 Appropriateness Theory and skopos theory'''====
-Appropriateness theory poses the question to what extent a translation can be called "appropriate" in certain sub‐aspects and as a whole. Skopos theory called for iconoclasm against the sanctity of the original, focused on the translator and the purpose of the text to functionally (or dynamically) achieve equivalence in the target culture. In fact, the focus of research is currently evolving more towards the processes in the translator's brain (neurological research), as this is to be mapped by AI. Moreover, the translator's environment, his relationship with translation tradition, principal, author (sender), reader (receiver) and their expectations.(Woesler, 2021:2) [Please put citation page number for this information.]--[[User:EIMONKYAW|EIMONKYAW]] ([[User talk:EIMONKYAW|talk]]) 18:12, 13 December 2021 (UTC)Ei Mon Kyaw
+Appropriateness theory poses the question to what extent a translation can be called "appropriate" in certain sub‐aspects and as a whole. Skopos theory called for iconoclasm against the sanctity of the original, focused on the translator and the purpose of the text to functionally (or dynamically) achieve equivalence in the target culture. In fact, the focus of research is currently evolving more towards the processes in the translator's brain (neurological research), as this is to be mapped by AI. Moreover, the translator's environment, his relationship with translation tradition, principal, author (sender), reader (receiver) and their expectations.(Woesler, 2021:2)
 ===='''3.2 Improvement of skopos theory on literary translation'''====
@@ Line 78: / Line 78: @@
 ===='''3.3 Translation ethics'''====
 Translation and interpreting theories can each explain particularly well individual aspects of translation processes and the creation of target texts. This allows the existing theories to be used eclectically. In addition, the eclectic use must be supplemented with an enrichment by the final judgment possibility of all theories on superordinate categories such as ethics and human dignity in the form of the theory of "appropriateness" (Woesler, 2021, p. 1-5).
-The Appropriateness Theory goes beyond the previous theories that measure the correctness of a translation by the content, semantics, grammar, situation of the principal, translator and reader. Here, an overall assessment is asked for, in which the principal, the equivalence in the source and target culture or the effectin the target culture are no longer a measure of translation quality. These translations must also be measured against even more general, human yardsticks. And this is where human dignity and ethics come into play(Woesler, 2021:3). [Please put page number citation for this information.]--[[User:EIMONKYAW|EIMONKYAW]] ([[User talk:EIMONKYAW|talk]]) 18:12, 13 December 2021 (UTC)Ei Mon Kyaw
+The Appropriateness Theory goes beyond the previous theories that measure the correctness of a translation by the content, semantics, grammar, situation of the principal, translator and reader. Here, an overall assessment is asked for, in which the principal, the equivalence in the source and target culture or the effectin the target culture are no longer a measure of translation quality. These translations must also be measured against even more general, human yardsticks. And this is where human dignity and ethics come into play(Woesler, 2021:3).
 And there are some basic translation ethics that translators should take into consideration in the process of translating. Number one, don’t manipulate the source text with one’s ideologies or values to achieve some purposes or expectations. Number two, respect different cultures and overcome prejudices.

@@ Line 24: / Line 24: @@
 ===Introduction===
-Skopos theory is an approach to translation firstly put forward by German scholars Reiss and Vermeer in 1970s, which reflects a general shift from predominantly LINGUISTIC and rather formal translation theories to a more functionally and socioculturally oriented concept of translation[1]. This theory is developed on the basis of action theory, text type theory, skopostheorie, as well as the theory of function plus loyalty by C. Nord. “Skopos” is a Greek word for “purpose”, ”aim” or “intention”. According to skopostheorie, the basic principle which determines the process of translation is the purpose (skopos) of the translational action[3]. The idea of intentionality is part of the very definition of any action (Nord,1997:27).
+Skopos theory is an approach to translation firstly put forward by German scholars Reiss and Vermeer in 1970s, which reflects a general shift from predominantly LINGUISTIC and rather formal translation theories to a more functionally and socioculturally oriented concept of translation. This theory is developed on the basis of action theory, text type theory, skopostheorie, as well as the theory of function plus loyalty by C. Nord. “Skopos” is a Greek word for “purpose”, ”aim” or “intention”. According to skopostheorie, the basic principle which determines the process of translation is the purpose (skopos) of the translational action. The idea of intentionality is part of the very definition of any action (Nord,1997:27).
 Functional translation theory originated in Germany in the 1970s. It provides a new perspective on translation action, which inherits the essence of traditional translation theories and at the same time, break away the shackles of traditional translation theories. Skopos theory is the foundation of the functional theory of translation whose development has gone through the following four stages.

@@ Line 91: / Line 91: @@
 ==='''5.References'''===
-[1]Schäffner C. Skopos theory[J]. Routledge encyclopedia of translation studies, 1998, 17: 235-238.
+Chen Daliang 陈大亮.针对翻译目的论的一种批判性反思——兼论文学翻译主体性的困境 A Critical Reflection on Skopos Theory of Translation--The Dilemma of Subjectivity in Literary Translation[J].西安外国语大学学报 Journal of Xi'an International Studies University,2007(03):49-52.DOI:10.16362/j.cnki.cn61-1457/h.2007.03.009.
-[2]Nord C(1997). Translating as a Purposeful Activity Functionalist Approaches Explained[M].Manchester: St. Jerome.
+Guo Xuming 郭旭明.从“Dragon”到“loong”——论意识形态对“中国龙”英译实践的操纵 On Manipulation of Ideology to Translation of Chinese Dragon/Loong[J].云梦学刊 Cloud Dream Journal,2009,30(04):143-145.
-[3] Jabir J K. SKOPOS THEORY: BASIC PRINCIPLES AND DEFICIENCIES[J]. Journal of the College of Arts. University of Basrah No, 2006, 41: 2.
+Jabir J K. SKOPOS THEORY: BASIC PRINCIPLES AND DEFICIENCIES[J]. Journal of the College of Arts. University of Basrah No, 2006, 41: 2.
-[4] Zhang Meifang 张美芳.功能加忠诚——介评克里丝汀·诺德的功能翻译理论 Function plus Loyalty--Evaluation on Functional Translation Theory by Christina Nord[J].外国语(上海外国语大学学报) Journal of Shanghai International Studies University,2005(01):60-65.
+Li Longquan, Luo Peiya 李龙泉,骆裴娅.“目的论”的弊端与缺陷 Deficiencies and Drawbacks of Skopos Theory[J].英语研究 English Studies,2009,7(02):51-55.
-[5]Newmark , Peter (2000). The Deficiencies of Skopos Theory: A Response to Anna Trosborg. Current Issues in Language & Society , 7(3),259-260.
+Nord C(1997). Translating as a Purposeful Activity Functionalist Approaches Explained[M].Manchester: St. Jerome.
-[6] Wang Jinhai 王金海.目的论在文学翻译中的局限性 Limitations of Skopos Theory on Literary Translation[J].长沙铁道学院学报(社会科学版)Journal of Changsha Railway University(Social Science Edition),2014,15(03):124-125.
+Newmark , Peter (2000). The Deficiencies of Skopos Theory: A Response to Anna Trosborg. Current Issues in Language & Society , 7(3),259-260.
-[7]Woesler, M. (2021). Ending the “100-schools” dispute between translation theories by integrating them and measuring the “appropriateness”. Facing up to the challenges posed by ethics and artificial intelligence to the transformation of the translator’s and interpreter’s professional role.
+Schäffner C. Skopos theory[J]. Routledge encyclopedia of translation studies, 1998, 17: 235-238.
-[8] Zhang Wannian 张万年.从意识形态操控的视角看伊万·金译《骆驼祥子》A Study of Evan King's Rickshaw Boy from Perspective of Ideology Manipulation[J].阜阳师范学院学报(社会科学版)Journal of Fuyang Normal University(Social Science Edition),2018(05):78-82.DOI:10.14096/j.cnki.cn34-1044/c.2018.05.14.
+Wang Jinhai 王金海.目的论在文学翻译中的局限性 Limitations of Skopos Theory on Literary Translation[J].长沙铁道学院学报(社会科学版)Journal of Changsha Railway University(Social Science Edition),2014,15(03):124-125.
-[9] Li Longquan, Luo Peiya 李龙泉,骆裴娅.“目的论”的弊端与缺陷 Deficiencies and Drawbacks of Skopos Theory[J].英语研究 English Studies,2009,7(02):51-55.
+Woesler, M. (2021). Ending the “100-schools” dispute between translation theories by integrating them and measuring the “appropriateness”. Facing up to the challenges posed by ethics and artificial intelligence to the transformation of the translator’s and interpreter’s professional role.
 Written by--[[User:Yin Meida|Yin Meida]] ([[User talk:Yin Meida|talk]]) 12:58, 13 December 2021 (UTC)
 Corrected by --[[User:EIMONKYAW|EIMONKYAW]] ([[User talk:EIMONKYAW|talk]]) 18:16, 13 December 2021 (UTC)Ei Mon Kyaw -Ei Mon Kyaw-[[User:EIMONKYAW|EIMONKYAW]] ([[User talk:EIMONKYAW|talk]]) 18:16, 13 December 2021 (UTC)