TRA CỨU
Các bộ sưu tập
Skip Navigation Links.
Thư mục - Vốn tư liệu
张充和傅汉思、孙大雨英译《书谱》比较——以汉籍外译策略与意识形态的关系为中心 =

张充和傅汉思、孙大雨英译《书谱》比较——以汉籍外译策略与意识形态的关系为中心 = : A Comparison of the Two Versions of Treatise on Calligraphy by Sun Guoting

 胡, 志国.
 语言文字工作委员会, 2013.
 新疆维吾尔自治区乌鲁木齐市 : p. 51-54+92. 中文 ISSN: 1001-0823
Chang Ch’ung-ho and H.FrankelSun DayuTranslation strategyTreatise on Calligraphy《书谱》翻译傅汉思孙大雨张充和+ 1 từ khóa
Tác giả CN 胡, 志国.
Nhan đề 张充和/傅汉思、孙大雨英译《书谱》比较——以汉籍外译策略与意识形态的关系为中心 = A Comparison of the Two Versions of Treatise on Calligraphy by Sun Guoting /胡志国; 廖志勤.
Thông tin xuất bản 新疆维吾尔自治区乌鲁木齐市 :语言文字工作委员会,2013.
Mô tả vật lý p. 51-54+92.
Tóm tắt A comparison of the two English translations of Treatise on Calligraphy by Sun Guoting the Tang calligraphic theorist,one by Sun Dayu,the other by Chang Ch’ung-ho and Hans Frankel,shows that Sun’s translation,owing to his poetic propensity,emphasizes lingual beauty,sometimes regardless of semantic accuracy.By contrast,hang and Frankel prefer to literal translation to transmit objectively the original ideas,and thus produce a version faithful in meaning and rigid in style on account of their sinological background and the demand of calligraphic education in America.Therefore,translation strategies are not mechanically corresponding to the ideological propensity of translators.Recognition of this point is helpful to establish a friendly relationship between Chinese translators and the co-working western translators.
Tóm tắt 文章比较唐代孙过庭书法理论名著《书谱》的孙大雨译本与张充和、傅汉思合译本,发现具有完全中国文化背景的孙大雨因个人的诗性偏好而强调语言优美,但对语义客观性关注不够;张、傅译本则因为汉学背景和美国书法教学的需要,追求客观地传达知识,多用异化译法,体例完备,风格整饬。这个例子说明,翻译策略和译者的意识形态倾向不是一一对应的。认识到这一点有利于在汉籍外译工作中与西方译者建立相互信任的合作关系.
Thuật ngữ chủ đề Chang Ch’ung-ho and H.Frankel
Thuật ngữ chủ đề Sun Dayu
Thuật ngữ chủ đề Translation strategy
Thuật ngữ chủ đề Treatise on Calligraphy
Từ khóa tự do 《书谱》翻译
Từ khóa tự do 傅汉思
Từ khóa tự do 孙大雨
Từ khóa tự do 张充和
Từ khóa tự do 翻译策略
Tác giả(bs) CN 廖, 志勤.
Nguồn trích 语言与翻译 = Language and translation- No. 3, 2013.
MARC
Hiển thị đầy đủ trường & trường con
TagGiá trị
00000000nab a2200000 a 4500
00136917
0022
00447379
005202503271644
008160226s2013 ch| a 000 0 chi d
0091 0
022[ ] |a 1001-0823
035[ ] |a 1456412182
039[ ] |a 20250327164635 |b namth |c 20241129103039 |d idtocn |y 20160226110432 |z svtt
041[0 ] |a chi
044[ ] |a ch
100[0 ] |a 胡, 志国.
245[1 0] |a 张充和/傅汉思、孙大雨英译《书谱》比较——以汉籍外译策略与意识形态的关系为中心 = |b A Comparison of the Two Versions of Treatise on Calligraphy by Sun Guoting / |c 胡志国; 廖志勤.
260[ ] |a 新疆维吾尔自治区乌鲁木齐市 : |b 语言文字工作委员会, |c 2013.
300[ ] |a p. 51-54+92.
362[0 ] |a No. 3 (2013)
520[ ] |a A comparison of the two English translations of Treatise on Calligraphy by Sun Guoting the Tang calligraphic theorist,one by Sun Dayu,the other by Chang Ch’ung-ho and Hans Frankel,shows that Sun’s translation,owing to his poetic propensity,emphasizes lingual beauty,sometimes regardless of semantic accuracy.By contrast,hang and Frankel prefer to literal translation to transmit objectively the original ideas,and thus produce a version faithful in meaning and rigid in style on account of their sinological background and the demand of calligraphic education in America.Therefore,translation strategies are not mechanically corresponding to the ideological propensity of translators.Recognition of this point is helpful to establish a friendly relationship between Chinese translators and the co-working western translators.
520[ ] |a 文章比较唐代孙过庭书法理论名著《书谱》的孙大雨译本与张充和、傅汉思合译本,发现具有完全中国文化背景的孙大雨因个人的诗性偏好而强调语言优美,但对语义客观性关注不够;张、傅译本则因为汉学背景和美国书法教学的需要,追求客观地传达知识,多用异化译法,体例完备,风格整饬。这个例子说明,翻译策略和译者的意识形态倾向不是一一对应的。认识到这一点有利于在汉籍外译工作中与西方译者建立相互信任的合作关系.
650[0 0] |a Chang Ch’ung-ho and H.Frankel
650[0 0] |a Sun Dayu
650[0 0] |a Translation strategy
650[0 0] |a Treatise on Calligraphy
653[0 ] |a 《书谱》翻译
653[0 ] |a 傅汉思
653[0 ] |a 孙大雨
653[0 ] |a 张充和
653[0 ] |a 翻译策略
700[0 ] |a 廖, 志勤.
773[ ] |t 语言与翻译 = Language and translation |g No. 3, 2013.
890[ ] |a 0 |b 0 |c 0 |d 0