趙詠梅

Key words： communicative translation； equivalent translation； pragmatic equivalence

1 A Brief Introduction to Equivalent Translation

Translation is an operation performed on languages： a process from a source language into a target language. So translation is the replacement of textual material in one language by equivalent textual material in another language， which is regarded as a textual translation equivalence. But in the recent years， in the field of translation， scholars understanding of translation has shifted. Translation is no longer merely a cross-linguistic activity but essentially As an activity of communication， equivalence is not only the target of translation， but also the standard which is used to value translation.

The concept of equivalence translation was first put forward in Jakbsons （1959） essay On Linguistic Aspect of Translation. He noted that “equivalence in difference is the cardinal problem of language and the pivotal concern of linguistics.” Ever since then， there have been many theories and approached emerging. For example， Catford is famous for his “textual equivalence”， which is generally regarded as l linguistic approach， there are still many defects in his theory. With the development of translation study in the 20th century， communicative translation emerged. Nida established communicative translation. He offered the notion of dynamic equivalence， where “the relationship between receptor and message should be substantially the same as that which existed between the original receptors and message” （Nida 1964：159）. Nidas reader-based theory has brought new life in translation area. He was the first person to point out the road away from strict word-for-word equivalence. But his functional equivalence puts much emphasis on readers response， and tries to minimize the strangeness of the foreign culture for the sake of target language readers. Under the guidance of his functional equivalence， target language text readers never can get knowledge of source language text culture， so it is an obstacle for translators to introduce foreign cultures into his own by means of cross-culture communication. Later， Newmarks Approaches to Translation and A Textbook of Translation combine a wealth of practical examples of linguistic theories of meaning with practical applications for translation. He made a sharp comparison between semantic translation and communicative translation. Although these translation methods contributed too much to equivalence， there are still many defects， and need to be perfected.

With the development of linguistics， a new subject pragmatics was borne. The study of pragmatics provides us with a new prospect to study translation， that is pragmatic equivalence， In translation， pragmatic equivalence focuses not only on the denotative meaning but also on “the way utterances are used in communication situations and the way we interpret in context”.

2 Pragmatic Equivalence

Leech classified general pragmalinguistics which relates to grammar and sociopragmatica related to sociology. So in term of the pragmatic approach to translation， this thesis will discuss the problem if pragmalinguistic and sociopragmatic equivalent effect. The standard of dynamic equivalent will be adopted to evaluate the effect of translation in this thesis.

2.1 Pragmalinguistic Equivalence

Pragmalinguistics is about the degree of cross-linguistic variability in strategy form， examining linguistic repertoire available in a particular language for converying a specific pragmatic function.

In translation， pramalinguistics studied the pragmatic force， which is also named language use， in the context， deixis and style， so how to get pragmalinguistic equivalent effect by inferring the pragmatic force in different contexts， some deixis and different styles？

2.1.1 Pragmatic Force in Context

Translators should consider the source texts a pragmatic force in its context get the pragmatic equivalent effect.

Example 1：

She is a cat.（賀學(xué)耕：203）

When we translate this sentence， we can not just translate it into “她是一只貓”，for it has different context. If the context is about a cat， it is right. But if the context is about a woman， “她是一只貓” will be improper. “Cat” has no docile meaning， but is metaphor of guile. In order to achieve pragmatic force in the target language， “Cat” has no docile meaning， but is metaphor of guile. In order to achieve pragmatic force in the target language， here free translation is necessary . So when “she” is referred to a woman， it is translated as “她很陰險或她很狡詐?！?/p>

Obviously， the pragmatic forces of the sentences are based on their particular verbal context. With correct understanding of the contexts， we can give versions that are pragmatically equivalent to the source texts.

2.1.2 Pragmatic Force in Deixis

The most obvious way to reflect the relationship between language and context is through the phenomenon of deixis. Now an example will illustrate the first person in deixis in pragmatic equivalence.

Example 2：

SL 要記住我們是學(xué)生，我們的主要任務(wù)是學(xué)習(xí)

TL We are students， so our main task is studying.

In this sentence， no matter the speaker is paterfamilias or a supervisor of school， the person deixis does not include the speaker， but only the address. The reason why the speakers uses “we” is that she or he wants to narrow the distance between the speaker and the listeners for the purpose of a perfect effect.

2.1.3 Pragmatic Force in Language Style

Style is the essential characteristic of every piece of writing， the outcome of the writers personality and his emotions at the moment and no single paragraph can be put together without revealing some degree the name of its author.（Savory 1957，p.54）

2.2 Sociopragmatic Equivalence

Socioporagmatics studies “the degree of cross-cultural variation in the choice of strategies across different situation， examining the way in which pragmatic performance is subjected to social and cultural conditions “（Blum-Kulka，1997，p56）

From He Zirans opinion （2005），social-pragmatic equivalent effect refers to the condition that depends on the translators beliefs as well as his or her social and cross-cultural knowledge. When a translator holds a correct conception of the different social institutions or cultural background between the SL and the TT， the social-pragmatic equivalent effect will be achieved， so how to achieve social-pragmatic equivalent effect？

2.2.1 Cultural –specific Expression in Synonymous

In translation， for the cultural-specific expression， an equivalent of the message in both the SL and the TL should be achieved.

Example 3：

SL Back in the old rut

TL 外甥打燈籠，照舅（舊）

2.2.2 Cultural –specific Expression in Replenishment

In translation， sociopragmatic equivalent effect can be achieved by applying some necessary words that can be accepted by the readers of TL. That is， translate a cultural-specific expression literally， but replenish it with brief interpretations， to reveal the intended meaning.

Example 4：

SL A bull in china shop

TL 公牛闖進了瓷器店—肆意搗亂

The replenishment is necessary in the TL to render the original meaning. According to the added information， the render can the knowledge of different cultural backgrounds， and the version can achieve the perfect pragmatic effect.

2.2.3 Cultural – specific Expression in Annotation

Sometimes， cultural-specific expression will be literal translated， but target readers can hardly grasp the characters real meaning if it is translated literally. So in order to get social-pragmatic equivalent effect， some annotations should be added to show their implied meaning. In the way the original intended mean be revealed， the source cultural feature can be kept an the social –pragmatic equivalent effect can be achieved：

3 Conclusion

In brief， the pragmatic equivalence can be achieved through these pragmatic approaches. But it is not realistic to adopt as the absolute way， for sometimes equivalence translation can be achieved at all. Besides that， these pragmatic methods are not yet so well-knits as to reckon with all problems of translation， However， it does a great to help translations to sort things out when an entangled heap of problems in translation.

作者單位：

河北廊坊中國人民武裝警察部隊學(xué)院