摘要:Nowadays, advertising plays a more and more important role in our life. With the integration of the global economy, most of countries develop their economy at a high speed. And more and more national products aspire to enter the international market and become international brands.
eness of the foreign text for target language readers. Venuti described the term domestication as “aggressively monolingual, unreceptive to the foreign”, and “accustomed to fluent translations that invisibly inscribe foreign texts with (target language) value and provide readers with the narcissistic experience of recognizing their own culture in a culture other” (Venuti, 1995:15).
Foreignization is a term to describe the translation strategy in which a target text is produced which deliberately breaks target conventions by retaining something of the foreignness of the original. Venuti stated that “the translator leaves the author in peace, as much as possible, and moves the reader towards him” (Venuti, 1995:19).
4.1.2 The Debate over Domestication and Foreignization Home and Abroad
As Wang Dongfeng said that, the debate over domestication and foreignization is the extension of literal translation and liberal translation can be dated back to the ancient times. No matter in eastern or western, when the original translation developed from conscious to non-conscious, the conflict occurred.
4.1.2.1 The Debate Home
In ancient China, the debate over domestication and foreignization can trace back to the debate over “wen” and “zhi” in Buddhist translation. The famous translator ZhiQian (支谦) discussed the choice between “wen” and “zhi” in his work Fajujingxu(《法句经序》). And the controversy last till the time of Tang Dynasty, the famous monk Xuanzang (玄奘), he mentioned that it should make good use of both “wen” and “zhi”, and pay more attention to the style of the original text.
The second period of the debate, took place in the 1920s-1930s. At that time, the controversy concerned the literal translation and the liberal translation.
In early 20th century, after the Movement of May Fourth Movement, the domestication occupied the absolute place. Yanfu was one of the representatives. His translation work Tianyanlun(《天演论》) adopted the domestication.
After 1919, with the New Cultural Movement arouse, a group of left wing led by Luxun began to put the foreignization to the climax. And Luxun once put forward a question: “before translating, you have to solve this problem: domestication or maintaining the foreignness?”
In the late 1930s-1970s, Zhang Guruo and so on, made the domestication to the leading position.
In the contemporary, with more and more cultural elements launched in translation field, there occurred another debate over domestication and foreignization, which was Liu Yingkai aroused. He firmly held the foreignization in his paper, and he said that, “Domestication is the wrong direction of Chinese translation”. This debate began hot all over the world. After ten years, Xu Jun (许均) discussed the same subject and push this to a new high.
4.1.2.2 The Debate Abroad
In western, the domestication and foreignization can date back to the ancient Roman period. At that time, Cicero, Horace and St Jerome, etc. discussed the word-for-word translation (直译) and sense-for-sense translation (意译), however, the dispute between domestication and foreignization was put forward by Nida. His notion for domestication is close natural equivalence.
However, the famous American scholar Lawrence Venuti, profoundly discussed the domestication and foreignization. And he was deeply affected
本论文由英语论文网提供整理,提供论文代写,英语论文代写,代写论文,代写英语论文,代写留学生论文,代写英文论文,留学生论文代写相关核心关键词搜索。