| Implicitness,as a consequence of being implied or indirect,means that the target text intentionally neglects certain parts of the source text by generalizing,replacing,or deleting conjunctions while explicitness is the opposite.Although it is a common-used approach for translators,the present translation studies on implicitness/explicitness mostly focus on explicitness,with implicitness less investigated.Based on parallel corpus,this thesis makes contrastive analysis over the implicitness in progressive conjunctions translation in the two English versions,Hawkes' and Yang's,aiming at enriching the studies on implicitness.This corpus-based thesis first explores and contrasts the frequency of Chinese conjunctions and its equivalent translations in two versions.Then,it examines the similarities and differences of implicitness in two versions and subsequently provides account for the differences on Skopos Theory.The major findings include:First,although English prefers to use connective words,i.e.,explicit approach is commonly adopted in translation,for the translation of progressive conjunctions,implicitness approach also takes a higher frequency,in comparison with the translation of other types of conjunctions,in the two versions in question.To be specific,for those with strong logical relations,Yang adopts literal translation or explicitness while Hawkes prefers implicitness,specially generalization.For those with weak logic relations,both Yang and Hawkes prefer implicitness,particularly replacement or omission.Second,both similarities and differences exist in the translation of progressive conjunctions in two versions.As to the similarities,both Yang and Hawkes frequently adopt implicitness,a noteworthy phenomenon.Specifically,for the translation of progressive conjunctions with weak logic relations,they both use replacement or omission as the implicitness approach.But they differ in the frequency of implicitness:Hawkes'(P=0.598)is higher than that of Yang's(P=0.914),i.e.,the smaller the “P” is,the higher frequency the implicitness occupies.Besides frequency,they differ in translating the progressive conjunctions with strong logical relations,particularly those heavily loaded with culture associations.To be specific,Yang,in order to reproduce theoriginal meanings authentically,tends to adopt literal translation,i.e.,less implicitness,while Hawkes employs comparatively more implicitness,i.e.,neglect,replace or generalize those complicated underlying meanings,facilitating readers' understanding.Third,in terms of Skopos rule,Yang prefers copy-based translation,i.e.,more literal translation less implicitness,while Hawkes to being reader-friendly,i.e.,more implicitness to simplify the expressions.In addition,the purpose is largely subjected to its receivers,context and cultural background.To be specific,the target readers of Yang are mostly those who have some basic knowledge of Chinese cultural background inherent in Hong Lou Meng.Therefore,Yang adopts literal translation,i.e.,less implicitness.However,the vast majority of Hawkes' readers are Anglo-American readers,who know little about Chinese culture.That's why generalization and omission,i.e.,more implicitness is preferred in Hawkes'.In terms of coherence rule,Hawkes,as an English speaker,values explicit coherence,entailing more implicitness by transferring into other conjunctions.Last but not least,according to the purpose of copy-based translation,Yang gives priority to fidelity rules,i.e.more literal translation less implicitness.However,too much emphasis on the fidelity rule,i.e.,less implicitness,may ignore the readability of the target language,which puzzles the readers.This study has implications for both theoretical research and application.On one hand,it casts new light on implicitness of progressive conjunctions,providing substantial support for implicitness hypothesis.On the other hand,the findings are insightful for providing guidance and methods for the translation of progressive conjunctions. |
PDF Full Text Request