《瓦尔登湖》译海拾贝——岁月的足迹,译者的痕迹?

A Comparative Study of Three Translations of Walden:Time's Footprint or Translator's Trace?

笔者曾撰文《外国文学翻译体例的时代演变:基于<瓦尔登湖>不同译本的比较》,对比《瓦尔登湖》在改革开放后三个阶段的代表性译本,发现这一时期我国的外国文学翻译体例在归化、异化趋势上有清晰的岁月足迹可循,暗合多元系统论。而该文从词汇、句法和语篇三方面对比以上译本后发现,正文并没有在归化、异化方面呈现一定趋势,岁月的足迹并非清晰可见,相比之下,译者的痕迹似乎更为明显,不符合基于多元系统论的推测。究其原因,笔者认为:对目标读者以及翻译文学在文学多元系统中的地位,三位译者都有清晰的认识,有意勾勒出译本框架,采用一定的体例,试图达到预期目的,因而在体例上岁月的足迹清晰可循。但在实际翻译过程中,译者难以摆脱各种主体因素的影响,如译者的身份、个人性情、文化背景及成长环境等,难免偏离预设轨迹,给译文烙上深深的译者痕迹。

The author once wrote Evolution of the Translation Layout of Foreign Literature ： Based on Different Translations of Walden which compared the three representative translations of Walden after the Reform and Opening-up. It revealed clearly that time＇s footprint on the layout of the three translations in terms of naturalization and alienation which is in consistence with the polysystem theory. Comparing the lexical, syntactical and textual features of the three translations, this paper finds no clear time＇s footprint in the three translations. Instead, the translator＇s trace seems to be more distinct, against the presumption made based on the polysystem theory. The three translators all had a clear understanding of the target audience and the literary status of the translated literature in the polysystem, and intended to outline the translation framework and used certain styles to achieve the intended purpose, and so in the style there is clear time＇s footprint to follow. However, in their actual work, it was difficult to get rid of various subject factors, such as their identity, personal temperament, cultural background, upbringing, etc. , which inevi- tably deviated their work from the original track and branded deep translator＇s traces.