Omission is universal in language,but different languages may employ the device in different ways.Thisstudy compares the absence of subject in Mandarin Chinese and Modern Standard English to figure out the shared feat...Omission is universal in language,but different languages may employ the device in different ways.Thisstudy compares the absence of subject in Mandarin Chinese and Modern Standard English to figure out the shared featuresand differences of zero subjects in both languages,analyses Chinese-specific subjectless phenomena for its causes andunderlying guiding principles,and explains the implication of the study in language teaching and translation.展开更多
对于《红楼梦》译本,杨宪益夫妇的A Dream of Red Mansions与Hawkes的The Story of the Stone在翻译策略上总体并无显著性差异(p<.01),归化策略在两版本中都占有主要地位;明显差异在杨译的习语几乎无省略不译(仅占1%),而霍译则有约15...对于《红楼梦》译本,杨宪益夫妇的A Dream of Red Mansions与Hawkes的The Story of the Stone在翻译策略上总体并无显著性差异(p<.01),归化策略在两版本中都占有主要地位;明显差异在杨译的习语几乎无省略不译(仅占1%),而霍译则有约15%的习语舍弃未译。两位译者在翻译原则和指导思想上的一些相似性指出了归化翻译在翻译理论和实践中的重要地位,表明译本的可接受性与可读性是影响翻译策略的一个重要因素。展开更多
文摘Omission is universal in language,but different languages may employ the device in different ways.Thisstudy compares the absence of subject in Mandarin Chinese and Modern Standard English to figure out the shared featuresand differences of zero subjects in both languages,analyses Chinese-specific subjectless phenomena for its causes andunderlying guiding principles,and explains the implication of the study in language teaching and translation.
文摘对于《红楼梦》译本,杨宪益夫妇的A Dream of Red Mansions与Hawkes的The Story of the Stone在翻译策略上总体并无显著性差异(p<.01),归化策略在两版本中都占有主要地位;明显差异在杨译的习语几乎无省略不译(仅占1%),而霍译则有约15%的习语舍弃未译。两位译者在翻译原则和指导思想上的一些相似性指出了归化翻译在翻译理论和实践中的重要地位,表明译本的可接受性与可读性是影响翻译策略的一个重要因素。
