期刊文献+

语用充实与语用饱和及其在翻译中的作用——以《论语》英译为例 被引量:1

Pragmatic enrichment and saturation with their roles in translation——Illustrated with English translation of Analects of Confucius
下载PDF
导出
摘要 语用学对翻译分析具有解释力,因为从原文的内容形式过渡到译文的内容实体需要一系列的语用推理。在翻译的语用推理过程中,译者通过语用充实来实现译文的语用饱和,因此语用充实与语用饱和成为核心的翻译环节。从语用充实的调控方式来看,饱和潜势需满足语言解码获得的意义以及语用充实获得的意义。在翻译过程中,语用充实促进语用饱和,其作用具体体现于惯例规约的语用饱和与认知规约的语用饱和。 The transition from content and form in ST to the entity of the TT can be regarded as a series of pragmatic inference,and pragmatics can shed light on translation analysis.Pragmatic enrichment and saturation are the vital part in translation pragmatic inference,in which translators attain pragmatic saturation through pragmatic enrichment.In the view of the regulating methods,the saturation potentials can be rea-lized on the basis of meanings from language decoding and pragmatic enrichment.In translation,pragmatic enrichment can promote pragmatic saturation,which is embodied in convention-constraint pragmatic saturation and cognition-constraint pragmatic saturation.
作者 陈吉荣 Chen Jirong(School of Foreign Languages, Liaoning Normal University, Dalian 116029, China)
出处 《辽宁师范大学学报(社会科学版)》 2021年第4期104-109,共6页 Journal of Liaoning Normal University(Social Science Edition)
基金 国家社会科学基金一般项目“当代中国文学英译与澳洲后汉学的形成研究”(17BYY058)。
关键词 语用充实 语用饱和 翻译过程 pragmatic enrichment pragmatic saturation translation process
  • 相关文献

参考文献2

二级参考文献38

  • 1陈新仁.试探“经济原则”在言语交际中的运行[J].外语学刊,1994(1):8-12. 被引量:76
  • 2Ariel, M. 2008. Pragmatics and Grammar [M]. Cambridge.. CUP.
  • 3Bach, K. 1984. Default reasoning: Jumping to conclusions and knowing when to think twice [J]. Pacific Philosophical Quarterly 65: 37-58.
  • 4Bach, K. 1987. Thought and Reference [M]. Oxford: Clarendon Press.
  • 5Bach, K. 1994a. Conversational impliciture [J]. Mind and Language 9: 124-162.
  • 6Bach, K. 1994b. Semantic slack: What is said and more [A]. In S. Tsohatzidis (ed.). Foun- dations of Speech Act Theory: Philosophical and Linguistic Perspectives [C]. London: Routledge. 267-291.
  • 7Bach, K. 1999a. The semantics-pragmatics distinction: What it is and why it matters [A]. In K. Turner (ed.). The Semantics-Pragmatics Interface from Different Points of View [C]. New York: Elsevier Science. 65-84.
  • 8Bach, K. 1999b. The myth of conversational impliciture [J]. Linguistics and Philosophy 22: 327-366.
  • 9Bach, K. 2001. You don't say? [J]. Synthese 128: 15-44.
  • 10Barsalou, L. 1983. Ad hoc categories [J]. Memory and Cognition 11: 211-227.

共引文献24

同被引文献4

引证文献1

相关作者

内容加载中请稍等...

相关机构

内容加载中请稍等...

相关主题

内容加载中请稍等...

浏览历史

内容加载中请稍等...
;
使用帮助 返回顶部