姜敏浩

Abstract：This thesis is based on the translation of scientific texts taken from Pictures of the Future. The characteristics and understanding of the scientific texts causes many difficulties to the translation. Guided by skopos rule， coherence rule and fidelity rule， the author studies the application of three rules of Skopostheorie in translating scientific texts by taking typical examples from his own translation project. This translational experience is expected to shed much light on the translation of similar text types in future.

Key words：ⅣⅢⅤSkopostheorie;Sci-Tech Translation;skopos rule;coherence rule;fidelity rule

Ⅰ、An overview of Skopostheorie

Since the middle of the 20th century， western translation theories have been making significant breakthroughs， such as Nidas Social Semiotics Translation Theory and J. C. Catfords Systemic Functional Grammar Theory. Among so many translation theories， Skopostheorie proposed by functionalist theorists in Germany advocates something unique， which provides a new perspective to translation studies and practice.

Ⅱ、Applications of Skopostheorie in E-C translation of scientific text

1. Guided by the skopos rule

The top-ranking rule for any translation is the “skopos rule”， which says that a translational action is determined by its skopos; that is，“the end justifies the means”（Reiss and Vermeer 1984：101）.

The receiver is the main factor determining the target text skopos. There are many cases where relative literalism is precisely what the receiver needs， for example in the translation of a marriage certificate or drivers license， foreign legal texts for comparative purpose or direct quotations in newspaper reports.

Ex. 1

ST： Buildings literally gobble up energy.

TT：毫不夸張地說(shuō)，建筑物極其耗費(fèi)能源。

In the example， “gobble up” is translated into “極其耗費(fèi)”. Looking up the dictionary， it is easy to get the Chinese meaning of “gobble up”——吞噬. However， if we use the original meaning of “gobble up”， it will cause confusion to the Chinese reader——because “吞噬” is mostly related to human; however， the subject in ST is “buildings”， which cannot eat something. In order to make the target readers understand the sentence. We need to bring the basic meaning to them.

2. Guided by the fidelity rule

According to the fidelity rule， the TT must be coherent with the ST， or intertextually coherent. More specifically， the TT must provide the ST information and the translators interpretation of it. The intertextual coherence should exist between source and target text， while the form it takes depends both on the translators interpretation of the source text and on the translation skopos. One possible kind of intertextual coherence could be a maximally faithful imitation of the source text.

Ex. 3

ST： In his hand is a thin， palm-sized sheet of non-reflective glass that glows a pleasant white.

TT： 他手里拿著一塊手掌大小的Orbeos OLED磨砂面板，發(fā)著柔和的白光。

In this practice， “palm-sized”， “non-reflective”， “glows”， “pleasant white” find their counterparts in Chinese version “手掌大小的”“磨砂”“發(fā)著”“柔和的白光”. The interpretation made by the translator is embodied in the following two aspects：

First， the ST is an inverted sentence， which can avoid a long subject. The translator gasps the main idea of the ST and interprets it in statement form.

Second， “sheet” is put into “Orbeos OLED面板”. Actually， “sheet” only means “面板”. The source text readers， of course， know what the sheet is; however， the target reader may not know what the sheet refers to for lack of background knowledge. According to the translators understanding of the whole passage， “sheet” refers to the Orbeos OLED sheet.

3.Guided by the coherent rule

The coherence rule specifies that a translation should be acceptable in a sense that it is coherent with the receivers situation （Reiss and Vermeer 1984：113）. Being ‘coherent with is synonymous with being ‘part of the receivers situation （cf.Vermeer [1978] 1983：54）. What the translator can do， and should do， is to produce a text that is at least likely to be meaningful to target-culture receivers. In Vermeers terms， the target text should conform to the standard of ‘intratextual coherence（Reiss and Vermeer 1984： 109ff）. This means the receiver should be able to understand it; it should make sense in the communicative situation and culture in which it is received.

Ex. 3

ST： There， Osram made the topic of OLEDs a special focus of its presentation and pulled out all the stops by showing a variety of lighting installations and illumination techniques in order to give architects and light designers food for thought.

TT：在展會(huì)上，歐司朗將OLED燈作為展示重點(diǎn)，吸引人們紛紛駐足觀看。同時(shí)也展示了多種多樣的照明裝置和照明技術(shù)，以便為建筑設(shè)計(jì)師和燈光設(shè)計(jì)師提供更多的靈感。

In this practice， the underlined sentence in ST is a very long sentence， which definitely shows the feature of English language--- hypotaxis. Hypotaxis means the dependent or subordinate construction or relationship of clauses with connectives. However， the feature of Chinese language is parataxis， which is the juxtaposition of syntactic units without use of a conjunction. If the long sentence is not translated into short pieces without loosing information， it is hard and unaccustomed for the TT reader to understand. According to coherence rule and the features of Chinese and English language， the ST is put into two Chinese completed sentences.

References：

[1]Catford， J. （1965）. Linguistic theory of translation. London： Oxford University Press.

[2]Nida. E.A.， Taber， C.R.. （1969）. The theory and practice of translation. Leiden： E. J. Brill.

[3]Nord. C. （2001）. Translating as a purposeful activity： Functionalist approaches explained. Shanghai： Shanghai Foreign Language Education Pres.

[4]Vermeer， H.J. （1989）. Skopos and Tanslationsauftrag-Aufsatze. Heidelberg： University.

[5]黃忠廉.變譯理論. 北京：中國(guó)對(duì)外翻譯出版公司， 2002.

[6]仲偉合， 鐘鈺. 德國(guó)的功能派翻譯理論，1999.

（責(zé)編 張景賢）