It has been translated into different versions which bring about different effects. This thesis analyzes two different translation versions by Yang Qishen and Xu Hanlin respectably, from the Skopos Theory angle, aiming to confirm again that the applicability and effect of even better the Skopos Theory and to realize the literary translations.
II. Theoretical Foundation of This Research
2.1 Definition of Skopos Theory
The word “skopos” belongs to Greek language, meaning “purpose”. Hans J. Vermeer defines the Skopos Theory in his Skopos and Commission in Translation Action as:
Any form of translation action, including therefore translation itself, may be conceived as an action, as the name implies. Any action has an aim, a purpose. The word skopos, then, is a technical term for the aim or purpose of a translation. (235)
Christiane Nord defines Skopos Theory in Translating as a Purposeful Activity—Functionalist Approaches Explained as:
Skopos is a Greek word for ‘purpose’. According to Skopostheorie (the theory that applies the notion of skopos to translation), the prime principle determining any translation process is the purpose (skopos) of the overall translational action. This fits in with intentionality being part of the very definition of any action. (27)
In the Routledge Encyclopedia of Translation Studies, it says:
Skopos Theory is an approach to translation which was developed in Germany in the late 1970s, and which reflects a general shift from predominantly LINGUISTIC and rather formal translation theories to a more functionally and socio-culturally oriented concept of translation. Translation is viewed not as a process of transcending, but as a specific form of human action. Like any other human action, translation has a purpose, and the word ‘skopos’, derived from Greek, is used as the technical term for the purpose of a translation. (Baker and Saldanha 235 )
In the Dictionary of Translation Studies, it defines Skopos Theory as:
Skopos Theory (German Skopostheorie, from Greek skopos ‘purpose, goal’): An approach to translation proposed in the late 1970s and early 1980s by Reiss and Vermeer. Skopos stresses the interactional, PRAGMATIC aspects of translation, arguing that the shape of TT (target text) should above all be determined by the function or ‘skopos’ that it is intended to fulfill in the target context. Reiss and Vermeer formulate this principle into two skopos rules: an interaction is determined by (or is a function of) its purpose’, and ‘the skopos can be said to vary with the recipient’. (Shuttleworth and Cowie 156)
2.2 Development of the Skopos Theory
The first stage is about Katharina Reiss’s Functionalism. She is the first one that brought up the functional category into the translation criticism. She combined the linguistic function, discourse types, and the translation strategy together; developed the translation critical pattern based on the relation of the source text and the translated text; and presented the rudiment of the functionalist theories. Reiss believed that the ideal translation should be comprehensive communicative translation, that is to say, equivalence with the conceptual content, linguistic form, and communicative function but giving the priority to the functional characteristics of the translation in practice.
The second stage is Hans J. Vermeer’s presentation of skopostheorie. He freed the translation studies from restrictions of the domination of source-text-oriented approach. He believed that translation is based on the source test and has its own intentions and consequences. The action must be finished by negotiation; translation has to follow a series of rules, among which the skopos rule is in the first place. What’s more, translation should follow the intralingual coherence rule and the intertextual coherence rule. The former rule means that the translation should be coherent internally and accessible to receptors. The latter one means that there should be coherence between the source text and its translation. After the three principles being proposed, the criterion of the translation is not equivalence anymore, instead, the adequacy of the realization of the expected purposes before translating. He also thought that it should be the translator that decided whether, when, how to finish the translation tasks. In other words, translators must adopt the corresponding translating strategies according to different purposes, and have the right to save or leave out or change some parts of the original. 从目的论角度研究《献给艾米莉的一朵玫瑰花》的两个中译本(2):http://www.751com.cn/yingyu/lunwen_11363.html