從句長與句中成份觀察譯者語言選擇模式－基於中日雙向平行語料庫之描述性研究

Exploring Translation Behavior Regarding Sentence Length and Sentence Constituents: A Descriptive Study Based on Chinese-Japanese Bi-directional Parallel Corpus

10.29912/CTR.201103.0004

鄧敏君(Min-Chun Teng)

描述性翻譯研究 ； 中日語言對照 ； 語料庫為本之翻譯研究 ； descriptive translation studies ； Chinese and Japanese contrastive linguistics ； corpus-based translation studies (CTS)

編譯論叢

4卷1期（2011 / 03 / 01）

99 - 131

繁體中文

本研究採取語料庫語言學的質性以及量化的研究手法，建置雙向、對比、特定文類的中日日中平行語料庫，描述翻譯文本與非翻譯文本在句子與句中成份的使用特徵，並探討中文與日文在語言使用習慣不同的情況下，譯者的語言選擇的傾向，藉此推演出翻譯行為的選擇模式。由語料分析結果得知，譯者傾向在不違背目標語的語言使用習慣之下，接受、沿用源文的語言表現，不會選擇複雜而特殊的語言表現，譯者所採取的策略因而累積、堆砌出翻譯文本的特徵，使得翻譯文本與非翻譯文本在語言使用上呈現不同的篇章構成的特徵。本研究透過分析結果建構出一套翻譯行為特質的理論解釋，希望在中日翻譯實踐以及翻譯教育的應用方面，提供審視譯文、檢討翻譯策略的參考依據。

This research investigates the features of translated text and non-translated texts through analyzing the sentence length and constituent format in Chinese to Japanese and Japanese to Chinese translation. It uses a corpus-based methodology and sets up a model to describe translators' linguistic choice patterns. The small-scaled bi-directional, comparable and parallel corpus is constructed to facilitate a detailed investigation into the relationship between language usage of SL and TL. This study concludes that translators tend to avoid complex and unique linguistic features in SL and TL and tend to accept features of source texts with the condition that the rules of TL will not be violated. This paper intends not only to contribute to the theoretical consideration of specific features of translation, but also offer insight into translation pedagogy and practices between Japanese and Chinese.

1. Baker, M.(ed.)(1993).Text and technology: In honor of John Sinclair.Philadelphia:John Benjamins Publishing Company.
2. Biber, D.(1995).Dimensions of register variation: A cross-linguistic comparison.Cambridge:Cambridge University Press.
3. Chen, H.-H.(1994).The contextual analysis of Chinese sentences with punctuation marks.Literary and Linguistic Computing,9(4),281-289.
4. Dimitrova, B. E.(ed.)(2000).Översättning och tolkning. Rapport från ASLA: S höstsymposium, Stockholm, 5-6 november 1998.Uppsala:ASLA.
5. Ghadessy, M.(ed.),Henry, A.(ed.),Roseberry, R. L.(ed.)(2001).Small corpus studies and ELT.Amsterdam:John Benjamins Publishing Company.
6. House, J.(2008).Beyond intervention: Universals in translation?.trans-kom,1(1)
7. Laviosa, S.(1997).How comparable can 'comparable corpora' be?.Target,9(2),289-319.
8. Laviosa, S.(1998).Core patterns of lexical use in a comparable corpus of English narrative prose.Meta,43(4),557-570.
9. Mauranen, A.(ed.),Kujamäki, P.(ed.)(2004).Translation universals: Do they exist?.Philadelphia:John Benjamins Publishing Company.
10. Olohan, M.(ed.)(2000).Intercultural faultlines: Research models in translation studies I: Textual and cognitive aspects.Manchester:St. Jerome Pub.
11. Øverås, L.(1998).In search of the third code: An investigation of norms in literary translation.Meta,43(4),571-588.
12. Puurtinen, T.(2003).Nonfinite constructions in Finish children's literature: Features of Translationese contradicting translation universals?.Corpus-based approaches to contrastive linguistics and translation studies,Amsterdam:
13. Somers, H.(ed.)(1996).Terminology, LSP and translation: Studies in language engineering in honour of Juan C. Sager.Amsterdam:John Benjamins Publishing Company.
14. Teich, E.(2003).Cross-linguistic variation in system and text- A Methodology for the investigation of translations and comparable texts.Berlin:Mouton de Gruyter.
15. Thomson, E. A.(2005).Theme unit analysis: A systemic functional treatment of textual meanings in Japanese.Functions of Language,12(2),157-179.
16. Tirkkonen-Condit, S.(2002).Translationese- A myth or an empirical fact? A study into the linguistic identifiablity of translated language.Target,14(2),207-220.
17. Toury, G.(1995).Descriptive translation studies and beyond.Philadelphia:John Benjamins Publishing Company.
18. Tsao, F. F.(1990).Sentence and clause structure in Chinese: A functional perspective.Taipei:Student Book Company.
19. Wang, L. M.,Horie K.,Pardeshi, P.(2009).Toward a functional typology of noun modifying constructions in Japanese and Chinese: A corpus-based account.Studies in language sciences,Tokyo:
20. Willems, D.(ed.),Defrancq, B.(ed.),Colleman, T.(ed.),Noël, D.(ed.)(2004).Contrastive analysis in language: Identifying linguistic units of comparison.New York:Palgrave Macmillan.
21. 三上章(1960)。象は鼻が長い。東京:????出版。
22. 久野暲(1978)。談話の文法。東京:大修館書店。
23. 砂川有里子(2005)。文法と談話の接点。東京:????出版。
24. 陸松齡(1995)。日漢翻譯藝術。台北:台灣商務印書館。
25. 湯庭池(1980)。國語的分裂句、分裂變句與準分裂句的結構與限制之研究。師大學報，25，249-296。
26. 遠藤紹徳編、武吉次郎編(1990)。新編‧東方中国語講座第4卷【翻訳編】。東京:東方書店。
27. 鄧敏君(2008)。日本語・中国語間の翻訳テキストにおける文長の傾向―双方向パラレルコーパスを用いた翻訳行為の特徴の分析―。翻訳研究への招待，2，133-145。
28. 戴光榮(2010)。译文中“源语透过效应”研究─基于语料库的英译汉被动句研究。國際譯聯第六屆「亞洲翻譯家論壇」論文精選集，澳門:
29. 蘇琦(1993)。漢日翻譯教程。台北:大新書局。
30. 斉藤泰治(1985)。連体修飾語の処理をめぐって。中国文学研究，11，1-16。

1. 鄧敏君(2013)。原文との対照からみた翻訳者個人のスタイルに関する研究—劉慕沙の翻訳作品を例に―。日本語日本文學，39，90-114。