History of Translation Studies 1

这里是《翻译学史》的书稿第一部分(Part 1)。麻烦各位同学看一下已经存在的章回（样品），自己再加进去新的一个章回（就是你们的学期论文）。请也帮助同学们把他们的论文改正。这样多次修改，大家的论文会越来越好。

学期论文（结合学期所学，撰写一篇5000以上单词的英文论文，按照专业杂志的格式，题目、摘要、关键词和参考文摘需要英中，文章英）。学期论文成绩占70%，平时成绩（含课堂表现、展示及作业）占30%。

• Link back to course homepage: Course Homepage Intro. to TS
• Link back to the final exam paper section of the course homepage: Final Exam Papers
• Link to other parts of the final exam papers' website: Part 1, Part 2, Part 3, Part 4; Part 5, Part 6, Part 7, Part 8; Part 9, Part 10.

Acknowledgement

I am indebted to the more than 300 students of the Master Course "Introduction to Translation Studies" conducted in the two fall terms 2019/2020 and 2020/2021 at Hunan Normal University, Foreign Studies College. They have enriched this monograph with their ideas, their creativity and the top students even have contributed short passages to this book on single aspects. They have also helped to arrange that the monograph could appear in different languages simultaneously. The Foreign Studies College is one of the top places of Translation and Interpreting Studies in China.

Foreword

Interpretation theories and interpretation studies are as old as human languages, since interpretation practise is not just necessary between full fledged languages, but is practised as soon as two different individuals meet, like a grandmother and her grandchild. The first lay interpreters naturally reflected on their interpreting work and this was the start of theories and studies. As soon as written language was invented, critical reflection also started and with it translation theories and translation studies.

The first thoughts about transponing the meaning of one language into a similar one of another language were prescriptive with precepts and principles, sometimes exaggerated into dogma and people not adhering to them being tortured or murdered.

In the 1960s, the translation studies started to become aware of itself as an academic discipline.

The Emergence of Translation and Interpretation and a Brief Overview of its Development

Appropriateness as the Least Common Denominator of Translation and Interpreting

Foreword by Martin Woesler, Hunan Normal University, China

Interpreting theories and interpreting studies are as old as human languages. Interpreting practice is exercised as soon as two individuals meet, with verbal and non-verbal languages both being an individual and a shared thing. Every person has his or her personal language and therefore is used to processing input by interpreting.When the person modifies its output according to the recipient, this is also interpreting from the personal language into one which he or she believes is better to be understood by the recipient.

适当性是翻译和口译的最不常见的特征 中国湖南师范大学，吴漠汀的前言 翻译理论和翻译研究和人类语言一样古老。两个人一碰面，翻译实践就开始了，此时，口头语言和非口头语言都既是个人又是两人共享的东西。每个人都有自己的个人语言，因此习惯通过口译来处理输入的信息。人通过接收的信息修改其输出，也是将自己的个人语言翻译成他或她所认为的能更好地理解的语言。--Zhang Yinliu (talk) 14:21, 9 October 2020 (UTC)

Similarly, a grandmother and her grandchild communicate in the (supposed) language of the grandchild, the grandmother constantly interpreting complex language into a simpler one. This concept of interpreting, also called polyphony, is still valid when it comes to different (‘national’) languages. Depending on personal language abilities, the Anglophone grandmother would also choose simple French to explain things to her francophone grandchild. And in the case of any lack of respective language abilities, she would simplify things in nonverbal communication.​

同样，祖母和孙辈用孙辈(假定)的语言交流，祖母会不断地把复杂的语言解释为较简单的语言。这种解释的概念，也称为复调，同样适用于用不同(“国家的”)语言进行交流的情况。根据个人的语言能力，以英语为母语的祖母也会选择用简单的法语向讲法语的孙子解释事情。在缺乏各自语言能力的情况下，她会用非语言交流的方式来简要表达自己的想法。--Xu Jia (talk) 06:21, 11 October 2020 (UTC)Xu Jia

The earliest evidence of interpreters dates back to 4th millennium BCE Egypt: They were held in high esteem, they were noblemen or priests. Of course translation as opposed to interpreting needs media (text and/or images etc.). In general, translation started with the introduction of the written script and the first texts around 3000 BCE in Mesopotamia, with Ancient Egyptian and the Yi language in the area of presentday China. The earliest Chinese texts date around 1500 BCE.

最早证明口译者存在的证据可追溯到公元前四世纪的埃及，他们备受崇敬，多为贵族或者牧师。当然，翻译不是解释，需要借助媒介（文本和形象，或者单纯是形象等）。总而言之，翻译始于公元前三世纪在美索不达米亚发现书面稿件和第一份文本，以及古埃及文字和目前中国所用的彝语出现之时。而中文文本最早可追溯至公元前一千五百年。--Zhang Xueyi (talk) 05:59, 11 October 2020 (UTC)

Along the trade route which later was called the Silk Road to Europe. Along this Trade Route, archetype stories were transported and transformed into the languages along the Silk Road, so that we find the archetype of the great flood both in the Gilgamesh Epos around 3000-2500 BCE in Mesopotamia, around 1850 BCE in Egypt, around 950 BCE in the Shijing, around 350 BCE in the Shanhaijing, in ancient Indian tales and in 440 BCE in the Old Testament (of the bible).

这条贸易路线，后来被称为通往欧洲的丝绸之路。沿着这条贸易路线，原型故事经沿丝绸之路传播并翻译为各种语言，因此我们能在大约公元前3000-2500年的美索不达米亚和公元前1850年的埃及、公元前950年左右的石景，山海经和古代印度传说中记载的公元前350年， 旧约圣经中公元前440年时，都能找到这次巨大洪水的原型。--Yi Zichu (talk) 12:22, 10 October 2020 (UTC)

Translators had an impact on the historical development of languages. The Roman dramatist Livius Andronicus (c. 285-204 BC) wrote a Latin version of the Odyssey (250 BCE) and a number of plays commissioned for the Roman Games of 240 BCE. His translations of Greek dramas into Latin founded the Roman drama tradition and shaped the Latin language. Already in the 2nd century BC translations from Greek to Latin were so popular that, for the first time in history, two translators (Plautus and Terence) were able to make a living from it.

翻译者们对语言的历史发展产生了影响。罗马剧作家卢修斯·李维乌斯·安得罗尼库斯（公元前285至204年）撰写了拉丁语版本的《奥赛罗》（公元前250年），并为公元前240年的罗马游戏舞台创作了大量剧本。他将希腊的戏剧翻译成了拉丁语，开创了罗马戏剧的传统，同时也塑造了拉丁语言。在公元前2世纪，将希腊语翻译成拉丁语的翻译活动就已经非常流行了，因此历史上第一次有两位翻译者(普劳图斯和特伦斯)能够以翻译作品来谋生。--Wen Xiaoyi (talk) 04:48, 9 October 2020 (UTC)

The German language, for its part, was shaped by a translator Martin Luther, who translated the Bible, commonly read in Latin at the time, into German. The prescription, to translate “word for word” was raised both in China and in Europe at a very early time: In the 5th century Dao An, Director of the Imperial Translation School, advocated strict literal translation of the Buddhist scriptures into Chinese. His prescription came from the fear to miss something from the original. It is important to mention that he did not know Sanskrit at all.

德语则是由翻译家马丁·路德塑造的，他把当时读者众多的拉丁语版的《圣经》翻译成德语。“逐字逐句”的翻译这种准则很早就在中国和欧洲提出：在公元5世纪，皇家翻译学院的院长道安主张严格将佛经翻译成中文。他这样做的出发点是因为害怕丢失一些原始的东西。值得一提的是，他根本不懂梵语。--Yu Ni (talk) 03:56, 11 October 2020 (UTC)

The Indian Buddhist monk Kumarajiva (350-410) carried out a great reform of the principles and methods for the translation of Sanskrit sutras. He advocated a free translation approach with the aim to transfer the true essence of the Sanskrit Sutras. He was the first person in the history of translation in China to suggest that translators should sign their names to the translated work.

印度佛教僧侣鸠摩罗吉瓦（350-410）对梵文佛经的翻译原则和方法进行了重大改革，他主要提倡意译的方法，目的是传达梵文佛经的真谛。他是中国翻译史上建议译者在译著上签名的第一人。--Yang Yue (talk) 02:35, 8 October 2020 (UTC)

Dao An’s prescription was partly based upon the understanding that the original texts were somehow “sacred”. A similar dogma of literal translations of religious texts was raised in Europe and even determined an ideological battle on free/literal bible translation for centuries. The translator Dolet in 1546 was burned for adding the phrase “Rien du tout. (Nothing.)” to a rhethorical passage about what existed after death.

原文某种程度上是“神圣的”。道安的译文正是部分基于这一理解而出的。在欧洲，对宗教文章进行直译时，就有一种类似于他这种观点的教条思想，这甚至可以说是几个世纪以来对《圣经》进行直译还是意译的思想之战。1546年，翻译家多莱因为在一篇描写死后有什么东西还存在的辞藻华丽的文章里面加入了“Rien du tout. (意思是“什么都没有”)”这一短语而被处以火刑。--Yuan Tianyi (talk) 02:57, 10 October 2020 (UTC)

Cicero in his book De optimo genere oratum (The Best Kind of Orator) opposed word-for-word translation. For the orator, the target text had to be as forceful and convincing as the original text. Horace called translators, who translated word for word “slavish”. St. Jerome in his book De optimo genere interpretandi (The Best Kind of Interpreting) in 395 CE advocated: “Non verbum de verbo sed sensum de senso.” (Not word for word but sense for sense.)

西塞罗在其著作《论演说家》中反对逐字逐句的翻译。对于演说家来说，目标文本必须与原文一样有强大的说服力。贺拉斯称逐字逐句翻译的人为“奴隶”。圣·杰罗姆在公元395年所著的《最好的解释》一书中主张“不要逐字逐句翻译，要意译。”--Zhang Yujie (talk) 06:40, 11 October 2020 (UTC)

However, Apuleius altered Greek dramas beyond recognition. Quintilian understood that translations shape also the target language, which he called “enrichment”. He further developed translation studies by establishing terms like metaphrasis (word-for-word translation) and paraphrasis (sentence-by-sentence translation), later further developed by Dryden (1680). Tytler (1797) advocated instead, that the translation should give a complete transcript of the ideas of the original work, with the same style, manner and ease.

然而，阿普列尤斯采用意译方法所译的希腊戏剧却令人难以理解。昆体良认为，翻译也可以对目的语进行塑造，这一观点被其称为“增润”（enrichment）。他通过建立诸如metaphrasis（逐词翻译）和paraphrasis（逐句翻译）之类的术语发展了翻译研究，随后德莱顿（1680）对此有了进一步的完善。而泰特勒（1797）则主张，译作应该完全复写出原作的思想，拥有与原作同一性质的风格和手法，并具备原作的通顺。--Zeng Fangyuan (talk) 08:31, 8 October 2020 (UTC)

In Republican times, Lu Xun and Qu Qiubai were among the prominent advocates of a literal translation. Chinese translation studies has embraced the English term “translatology”, while internationally, the research is named “translation and interpreting studies”, which is also the term for the volume in hand.

But the dichotomy of free/literal did not shape the whole discourse in translation studies. Other dichotomies were foreignizing/localizing and imitation/re-creation (Dong Qiusi 1946).

民国时期，鲁迅和瞿秋白是直译的杰出倡导者。中国翻译研究中已涵盖“翻译学”这一英文术语，但在国际上，该研究被命名为“翻译和口译研究”，这也是我手头这卷书中的术语。 但意译和直译二分法并没有决定整个翻译研究的论述，其它二分法还包括异化/归化二分法及模仿/再创造二分法。--Zeng Xinyuan (talk) 09:29, 10 October 2020 (UTC)Zeng Xinyuan

A prominent advocate of foreignizing was Schleiermacher in the 19th century, who advocated that the source text should shine through the target text, since thoughts would shape the language. This was further elaborated by Walter Benjamin and Ortega y Gasset. The Sapir/Whorf hypothesis is the assumption that different languages lead to a different understanding of the world.

19世纪的施莱尔马赫是异化论的著名倡导者，他主张语言的形成是由思想决定的，所以源文本应该贯穿于目的文本。沃特·本杰明和奥特嘉·伊·加塞特对此做了进一步的阐述。萨丕尔-沃尔夫假说认为不同的语言会导致对世界的不同理解。--Yao Jia (talk) 00:37, 11 October 2020 (UTC)

Chinese translation studies is not at all referring to a Chinese tradition of translation studies, but to translation studies dealing (also) with Chinese as a language. However, most of the research conducted in this area holds also true for other languages and therefore for interpreting and translation studies in general. It might be questioned if a Chinese tradition of translation theories exists. Students of translation studies often choose the topic “Comparison of Chinese and Western Theories of Translation”.

中文翻译研究根本不是指翻译研究的中国传统，而是指（也）涉及中文作为语言的翻译研究。 但是，在该领域进行的大多数研究对于其他语言也是如此，因此对于一般的口译和翻译研究也是如此。 可能会质疑中国是否存在翻译理论的传统。 翻译研究的学生经常选择“中西翻译理论的比较”这一主题。--Fancy (talk) 10:26, 11 October 2020 (UTC)

However, they get frustrated because they cannot find elaborated theories coming from China and they end up calling normative prescriptive concepts like “xin, da, ya” (faithfulness, expressiveness and elegance) by Yan Fu “translation theory”. Yan Fu’s three ideals are better called a prescriptive recommendation for practical translation strategies. Of course the ideals are questionable, for why should a postmodern poem including the stuttering line “I, I c…, I can’t breath!” be translated into an elegant line in a different language?

然而，他们却因为找不到来自中国的精辟理论而灰心丧气，最终把严复的“信、达、雅”等规范性概念称为“翻译理论”。严复的这三个理想标准，更确切地说是实用翻译策略的规范性建议。当然，这些理想标准是值得怀疑的，因为难道一首后现代主义诗歌，包括结巴的诗句“我，我…我不能呼吸！“，也应该被翻译成另一种语言的优雅诗句吗？--Zhu Suyao (talk) 13:21, 12 October 2020 (UTC)

Similarly, the “transfiguration theory” by Qian Zhongshu with his concept of the “sublime” may count as an important statement, that translation and interpreting cannot be analyzed and understood to the last resort and keep their air of mystery. However, recent neurological research and artificial intelligence research have been tackling this last resort already.

同样的是，钱钟书所提出的化境翻译理论，以“崇高”作为其概念，是一种重要的陈述，而笔译和口译不能被分析或理解成最后一种方式来保证其神秘。然而，最近的神经研究和人工智能研究已经开始处理这一最后步骤。--Yang chenting (talk) 01:43, 10 October 2020 (UTC)Yang Chenting

Still, Chinese is an important language and it has some characteristics, which make research especially on Chinese in translation and interpreting studies valuable. One characteristic is that the meaning of a sentence may change totally until the very end of the sentence. Imagine just a “……的说法我反对。” (… is a statement I oppose.) at the end. Therefore, the decalage for conference interpreters interpreting from Chinese into other languages is quite long.

汉语仍然是一门重要的语言，并且具有一定的特征。这也就使得这些研究，尤其是关于汉语翻译和口译方面，更具有价值。汉语的特征之一就是，即使是到了一个句子的最后，这个句子的意思还可能会完全改变，（比如）想象一个句子的最后是“……的说法我反对“。因此，会议口译人员将中文翻译成其他语言的时间会比较长。--Fang Jieling (talk) 15:51, 11 October 2020 (UTC)

Seyed Hossein Heydarian has analyzed the statistical occurrences of certain translation strategies with different pairs of languages. According to his findings, every language has a specific fingerprint of translation strategies, each fingerprint referring to specific language pairs.

The first lay interpreters naturally reflected on their interpreting work and this was the start of theories and studies. As soon as the written language was invented, critical reflection also started and with it translation theories and translation studies.

Seyed Hossein Heydarian分析了不同语言对中某些翻译策略的统计出现情况。根据他的发现，每种语言都有一个特定的翻译策略指纹，每个指纹指向特定的语言对。第一批外行译员反思自己的口译工作，这是理论和研究的开始。书面语言一出现，批评性反思也随之开始，翻译理论和翻译研究也随之开始。--Zhang Peiwen (talk) 03:34, 12 October 2020 (UTC)

The first thoughts about transferring the meaning of one language into a similar one of another language were prescriptive with precepts and principles, sometimes exaggerated into dogma with people not adhering to them being tortured or executed, especially in the religious context, when the original was declared “holy” and certain groups claimed the monopoly authority of interpreting. During translation history, the perspective changed from “prescriptive” to “descriptive”, reflecting a more neutral approach of analysis.

一开始将一种语言的含义转换为另一种相似含义的语言的想法是要遵循约定俗成的规定和原则的，它有时被夸大为教条，人们便不会遵循这些规定因而遭受酷刑或处决，尤其是在宗教环境中，当宣布原语言为标准或某些团体声称拥有口译权的时候。 在翻译历史中，观点从“规定性”变为“描述性”，反映了一种更为中立的分析方法。--You Yuting (talk) 03:47, 9 October 2020 (UTC)

However, translation theory needs to be able to go beyond the description of translation to show parallels and differences between different translation processes in order to come to a generalized model which could serve to help understand the process better. Translation theories can also offer different translation methods/strategies depending on intersubjectively comprehensible criteria.

然而，翻译理论不仅仅是对翻译的简单描述，还应该要指出不同翻译过程中的异同，得出一个广义模型，以便人们更好的理解翻译过程。此外，翻译理论还可以根据主体间可理解的标准来提供不同的翻译方法/策略。--Zhang Peiwen (talk) 03:20, 12 October 2020 (UTC)

In the Renaissance, the most extensive treatise on the topic of translation is the Interpretatio linguarum (1559) by Laurence Humphrey. It is situated in the context of a debate initiated by Joachim Périon in 1540, who analyzed Cicero’s recommendations on translation. Cicero proposed, that the purpose of a translated speech was to be persuasive, therefore the translator needed to be free in his translation and not be bound by the original and by the request of a literal translation.

文艺复兴时期，在翻译这个主题上最广泛的专著是劳伦斯•汉弗莱的《翻译语言》（1559）。此专著的写作背景是约阿希姆•佩里翁于1540年发起的一场辩论，约阿希姆•佩里翁对西塞罗的翻译建议进行了分析。西塞罗提出，翻译演讲的目的是有说服力，因此译者在翻译时必须是自由自在的，不受原文和直译要求的束缚。--Zhang Xueyi (talk) 05:30, 11 October 2020 (UTC)

Périon shifted the focus from the dichotomy of literal/free to the people involved in translation and to the interpersonal act. Humphrey understood translation as self-expression, a very modern understanding. There is an interesting new study by Sheldon Brammall (2018) in the Review of English Studies 68 (288) documenting the debate. It includes an annotation of the Interpretatio in 1570 by Gabriel Harvey. He recognized the text as an important document of early English translation studies. The text questions the applicability of the concepts in Interpretatio.

佩里昂将关注点从直译或意译的二分法转向了翻译人员和人际交往行为上。汉弗莱将翻译视作自我表达，这是一种非常现代化的理解。谢尔顿·布拉姆莫尔在2018年做了一项有趣的新研究，他在《英语研究评论》第68期第288页中记录了这场辩论。这个研究包含了加布里埃尔·哈维在1570年对《翻译》的注释。他认为这一文本是早期英文翻译研究的重要文献。这一文本对概念在《翻译》中的应用提出了质疑。--Zeng Liang (talk) 02:59, 10 October 2020 (UTC)

In the 1960s, translation was simply an element of language learning. Translations of Aesop’s Fables in several languages (including in Chinese by Jesuit missionaries in China) were efforts at transmitting language learning textbooks. Only in the 1970s, did translation studies start to become aware of itself as an academic discipline, starting with a volume edited by André Lefevere. Some scholars chose the perspective of the contrastive approach.

在20世纪60年代，翻译只是语言学习的一个要素。为了传播语言学习教材,《伊索寓言》被翻译成多种语言(包括耶稣会传教士在中国翻译的中文)。直到20世纪70年代，翻译研究才开始意识到自己是一门学术学科，其始于安德烈·莱弗维尔(Andre Lefevere)编辑的一部著作。一些学者选择从对比分析法的角度开始研究。--ZHOUYUJUAN (talk) 08:29, 9 October 2020 (UTC)

Eugene Nida, a bible translator, derived theory from practice while introducing linguistic theory and formal equivalency into translation studies. He defined verbatim translation, literal translation, faithful translation, semantic translation, compilation, free translation, authentic translation and communicative translation. Later, his research was further elaborated with strong linguistic approaches and theories of equivalency and was followed by methods from discourse analysis and the speech act theory (translation as a communicative act in a social cultural context).

圣经翻译家尤金·奈达在实践中总结了理论，又将语言学理论和形式对等引入了翻译研究。 他定义了逐字翻译，直译，忠实翻译，语义翻译，编译，意译，真实翻译和交际翻译。 后来，他用强大的语言学方法和对等理论以及后来的话语分析和言语行为理论（将翻译视为在社会文化语境中一种交流行为）将研究进一步完善。--Zhang Yujie (talk) 06:27, 11 October 2020 (UTC)

There was a revival of the descriptive approach, which regards the target text as most important, and then the Skopos theory, which advocats functional equivalency and values the translator as most important. In the early 1990s, as a reaction to linguistic ‘scientific’ analysis, the theoretical and methodological shift in Translation Studies towards cultural studies is primarily associated with the works of Susan Bassnett, André Lefevere, and Lawrence Venuti.

描述方法再次兴起，其认为目标文本最为重要，其次才是目的论理论（Skopos theory），而后者主张功能对等并强调了译员的重要性。在20世纪90年代初，翻译研究在理论和方法方面向文化研究转变，以对语言“科学”分析进行回应，这主要与苏珊·巴斯奈特，安德烈·勒弗弗雷和劳伦斯·文努蒂的著作有关。--Zhang Yuxing (talk) 09:52, 11 October 2020 (UTC)

The volume at hand is both from practitioners in the field and scholars who embed their research in the theoretical framework of the field as well as into its development. In the field of translation and interpreting studies, the claim about Asian or Western traditions is overcome. We have international scholars from both sides whose only qualification is their expertise in the field. Still the voices are diverse, since they cover a large range of topics and perspectives, symbolizing how diverse the research is today. The key word today is transdisciplinary research.

现有的这个版本是由该领域的从业人员和研究理论框架及其发展的学者所编写的。在口笔译研究领域，关于亚洲或西方的传统言论已经消除。我们拥有来自亚洲和西方专业的国际学者。至今人们对此仍持有不同的看法，因为它们涵盖了广泛的主题和观点，体现着当代研究的多样性，关键词是跨学科研究。--Yu Ni (talk) 01:57, 12 October 2020 (UTC)

In translation history, especially when translation studies consisted mostly of prescriptions, ideals were pursued and equivalency was sought for, although a source text and a target text can never be totally equivalent. The myth of untranslatability was created by Wilhelm von Humboldt in the 19th century and further elaborated by L. Weisgerber in the 20th century, although everything is translatable.

在翻译史上，尤其是当翻译研究主要集中在翻译方法方面时，翻译就开始追求完美和对等，即使源文本和目标文本根本不可能完全对等。虽然一切语言都是可译的，但是19世纪威廉·冯·洪堡创造了不可译性这个谬误，20世纪里奥·韦斯伯格又对这一观念进行了进一步的阐释。--Zhang Hui (talk) 15:06, 8 October 2020 (UTC)

It is more a question of appropriateness and acceptance of a translation. Evaluation criteria for the quality assessment of translations have been developed, although it can never objectively be judged, how far the translation result (also called “translat”) corresponds to the source text. In certain situations, it is appropriate to translate a pear into an apple (for example if the function of this fruit in the story stays the same and for the target audience apples are as common as for the source audience pears).

这更多的是一个翻译的适当性和接受性的问题。翻译质量评估的评价标准已经形成，但翻译结果(又称“译文”)与原文的对应程度始终无法客观地加以评判。在某些情况下，把一个梨翻译成一个苹果是合适的(例如，如果这个水果在故事中的功能保持不变，并且苹果对于目标读者而言跟梨对于原文读者而言一样常见）。--Zheng Huajun (talk) 04:57, 11 October 2020 (UTC)

As we have witnessed during the history of translation studies, the concentration has been on the different actors in the field of translation: “Skopos” concentrating on the function for the target audience and on the person and intention of the translator, “foreignizing” the text by moving it closer to the source author (and staying loyal to him/her) or “localizing” it, thus moving it closer to the target audience.

在翻译研究史上，对翻译领域不同角色均有所关注：“目的论”关注目标受众，注重译者自身及其目的，“异化”强调使译本尽量接近原文作者（并忠实于原文作者），亦或“本土化”，强调使译文尽量接近目标语受众。--Cheng Yusi (talk) 02:03, 9 October 2020 (UTC)

“Hybrid men-machine translation” moves the focus to the individualization of the target texts, tailoring translations to the needs of individual readers/spectators. Neurology will map the thought processes necessary to create a thinking artificial intelligence and even tackles issues like consciousness, (self-)awareness, understanding as well as artificially enhanced human translation, swarm intelligence and consciousness.

“人机结合翻译”关注的是目标文本的个性化，根据读者或观众的个人需求提供量身定制的翻译服务。神经学将编制出一套思维程序，必要时打造出一个可以像人一样思考的机器人，甚至还能解决问题，不仅具有意识、自我认知和理解能力，同时具有人为强化的人工翻译、集群智能和集体意识。--Yuan Yuchen (talk) 08:52, 8 October 2020 (UTC)

Besides this trend towards individualization, there is a growing interest in sociology to understand translations as social processes and to concentrate on the interaction between the different actors.

除了这种个性化的趋势外，社会学也越来越把翻译理解为社会过程，并且越来越关注不同行为者之间的相互作用。--Blank (talk) 00:30, 12 October 2020 (UTC)

Certain things have turned out to be of eternal wisdom. It is also important to know your native language well, not just the foreign language.

结果证明有些事是永恒的智慧。不仅是学习外语，学习母语也很重要。--Zhou Siqing (talk) 14:24, 8 October 2020 (UTC)

有些事本是永恒的智慧。学习外语的同时，更应擅长母语。--Zhang Weihong (talk) 15:07, 10 October 2020 (UTC) Zhang Weihong

We have also witnessed a journey of theories over the centuries, which all highlight different aspects of the phenomenon. They constrain themselves to the medium, the area, the grammatical level, the text-type, to certain problems (like establishing equivalence), they are oriented at products, functions or processes.

纵观数世纪以来翻译理论的发展，都从不同方面强调了这一现象。翻译理论面向产品，功能和过程，并从媒介，地域，语法，文本类型和诸如建立对等关系等特定问题入手进行研究。--Zhou Yiwen (talk) 10:21, 10 October 2020 (UTC)

All these theories are at hand today to explain different parts of the translation process. We see different functional approaches, empirical-pragmatic ones, including didactic questions instead of old normative/prescriptive translation studies, approaches from the neurological and the social sciences, all trying to become aware of the translation process.

所有的这些理论都可以用来解释翻译过程中的不同部分。我们所看到的功能派理论、经验主义-实用主义派理论（采用说教式的提问方法而非老式的规范化的翻译研究方式）以及从神经学和社会科学衍生出来的理论都在力图掌握诠释翻译的过程。--Zhou Yuanqu (talk) 09:19, 10 October 2020 (UTC)

However, as Mary Snell-Hornby requested already in 1988 with her proposition of “integrated translation studies”, these theories need to be seen together as one today.

然而，正如Mary Snell-Hornby在1988年提出的“整合翻译研究”的主张所要求的那样，这些理论在今天需要被看作是一个整体。

All of these theories can be boiled down to one question they serve: Is the translation appropriate? In other words, is it adequate, suitable, reasonable, fair, just, apt, situationally fitting, does it work in the target language/culture?

所有这些理论都可以归结为一个问题:这样翻译合适吗? 换句话说，它是否充分、合适、合理、公平、公正、恰当、应景，在目标语言/文化中是否仍适用?--ZHOUYUJUAN (talk) 08:23, 9 October 2020 (UTC)

Therefore, the “Appropriateness Theory” is the final theory of all translation theories. Of course there may be different answers to the question of appropriateness in different times and from different actors, perspectives, disciplines etc. An evaluation of the appropriateness of a translation can only be relative and never absolute.

因此,"得体论"是所有翻译理论的终极理论.当然,不同的时代,不同的译者,不同的观点,不同的学科对"得体论"的解释也会有所不同.对译文是否恰当的评价只能是相对的,而不能是绝对的.--Su Lin (talk) 12:58, 10 October 2020 (UTC)

Therefore it is necessary to establish a system of evaluation, valuing the different aspects such as the function of the text, loyalty to the author, the ideals of literal/free translation, and how far a translation can ‘work’ in the target language.

Of historical importance is the question for appropriateness, which in turn leads us to fundamental ethical questions: Should you report things you overheard from the foreign negotiation team to your own team to enhance your own team’s chances?

因此有必要建立一个评估体系，从文本的功能，对作者的忠实度，直译或者意译的标准程度以及在目的语中译文能发挥多大的作用等不同角度对译文进行评估。

翻译得体问题是一个具有历史意义的问题，它反过来又引导我们提出基本的伦理问题。你是否应该把你在国外谈判团队无意中听到的消息汇报给自己的队伍，以增加自己团队的机会呢？--Zhu Suyao (talk) 02:37, 12 October 2020 (UTC)

Is it appropriate to tell a standard joke in the target language when the country’s leader has told a racist joke? What implications does it have about the foreign country’s leader, when he laughs at your standard joke? The country’s leader may think he laughed at his (racist) joke. Is it appropriate to take over the role of a negotiation participant when you are hired for interpreting? (See the contribution in this volume.) When you are a wartime interpreter: Is it appropriate to translate propaganda and to interpret for a dictator?

当国家领导人说了一个种族主义笑话时，译员用目的语说一个普通笑话是否合适？外国领导人因译员的普通笑话发笑，这对他有什么影响？国家领导人可能认为外国领导人在笑种族主义笑话。受聘为口译员后，接管谈判参与者的身份是否合适？（详见本文内容）当你作为一个战时口译员，为独裁者翻译宣传和口译是否合适？--Zhu Xu (talk) 07:24, 11 October 2020 (UTC)

Is it appropriate to translate the German order “Feuer!” [Shoot!] by the German commander into French if the collaborating French soldiers would commit a crime against humanity when they understood and executed the order? Where to draw the line to refuse to translate? What consequences does it have if you refuse? What responsibilities do interpreters and translators have? The Appropriateness Theory is complex and shows us that a Code of Ethics needs to be established.

Bochum/Germany, September 30, 2020

当德国指挥官手下的法国士兵一旦听懂其长官用德语说的“开火”命令，就会执行军令，做出违背人道主义的行为时，是否还应该将德语的“开火”翻译为对应的法语？什么时候可以不翻？如果不翻会产生怎样的后果？口笔译译员承担着怎样的责任？适当性理论较为复杂，告诉了我们道德规范准则建立的重要性。

德国，波鸿 2020年9月30日 --Zhou Yuanqu (talk) 09:55, 10 October 2020 (UTC)