论文部分内容阅读
【Abstract】 Relevance theory is a modern psychological theory used to explain the cognitive process of human being. In this essay， the author is going to use Relevance theory to redefine Yan Fu’s xin da.
【Key words】xin; da; ya; relevance theory
【作者簡介】胡雪婷，广西民族大学。
In the year 1901， Tian Yan Lun， a translation of Thomas Henry Huxley’s Evolution and Ethics， was published. In the preface， Yan Fu raises three principles for translation， i.e.， xin， da and ya （literally， faithfulness， expressiveness and elegance）， which then became the fundamental translation theory in China. Since the definitions and standards have changed over years， xin da and ya can still be applied to present translation practices. In this essay， I am going to use Relevance theory to redefine Yan Fu’s xin da and ya.
Relevance theory is initially a psychological approach to the study of human communication， raised by Dan Sperber and Deirdre Wilson. They argued that the cognitive processes of human are linked to achieving maxim possible context effect for the minimum possible processing effort. In order to achieve this， people has to focus his/her attention on what seems to him/her the most relevant （Sperber and Wilson， 1986）. In a relevance sense， how can we understand xin， da and ya？
In the translation process， the author communicates with the translator first and the translator communicates with his/her readers then. The translator has to find what is most relevant in order to make the communication successful. In MacKenzie’s word， the translator now is the one who actively engages with the text （MacKenzie 2002：3）. When the act of the translation begins， the translator then have to make assumptions of the cognitive environment of the target reader and of what would be most relevant in that cognitive environment. Later， in he/she translation， the translator will try to offer the same contextual effects that he/her obtained as a reader of the source text （ST） without unnecessary processing efforts. Xin means dual honesties. Here， in terms of relevance theory， that being honest to the ST then suggests that conveying the same effects is being honest to the ST whereas that being honest to the target reader expresses the willingness of minimizing the unnecessary processing effort.
Since the second honesty of xin is a result of da， then the act of reducing unnecessary processing effort is actually taken into practice in da. In English， one may be able to form an extremely long sentence if he wants. However， in Chinese， long sentences often cause logical confusion which may lead to incapability of understanding. Therefore， when translating a long sentence from English to Chinese， usually， we will divide it into several short sentences. In the preface to Tian Yan Lun， Yan Fu is very keen to do these kinds of changes. In his view， the translation should be natural and comprehensible in Chinese so that the reader may be able to understand. This is what da attempts to convey. In terms of relevance theory， da then means minimizing the processing effort. Only when da is achieved can we say that the translation is xin. In ostensive communication， stimulus is necessary. According to the relevance theory， a stimulus is ‘a phenomenon designed to achieve cognitive effects’ （Sperber and Wilson， 1986： 153）. And ‘someone who wants to achieve a specific cognitive effect must therefore try to produce a stimulus which， when optimally processed， will achieve just the intended effect’ （ibid）. The specific effect that Yan Fu wants to achieve is to make the scholar-bureaucrats aware of the existence the target text and read it and then realize that it is time to catch up with the advanced western technologies. The stimulus he produced is the pre-Han language and the political comment style. In this case， is ya equal to stimuli？ As to Sperber and Wilson， a stimulus has to fulfill two conditions： ‘first， they must attract the audience’ attention; and second， they must focus it on the communicator’s intensions’ （ibid）. Yan Fu’s intention is quite obvious. However， did it attract the audience’ intension？ From the hot debate about Tian Yan Lun’s translation， we could assume that it did， for the stimulus that Yan Fu produced was most relevant to the scholar-bureaucrats. It can be seen above that xin and da are an impartibly whole whereas ya is an additional requirement. A translation cannot be xin without da. However， it can be xin and da without ya.
Since the translation process is also a cognitive process， relevance theory is able to explain the deep meaning of xin， da and ya. In a relevance sense， the inner connection among xin da and ya is clearer.
[1]MacKenzie， Lan Paradigms of reading： relevance theory and deconstruction[J]. Basingstoke： Palgrave，2002.
[2]Sperber， Dan and Wilson， Deirdre Relevance[J]. Oxford： Basil Blackwell，1986.
【Key words】xin; da; ya; relevance theory
【作者簡介】胡雪婷，广西民族大学。
1. Introduction
In the year 1901， Tian Yan Lun， a translation of Thomas Henry Huxley’s Evolution and Ethics， was published. In the preface， Yan Fu raises three principles for translation， i.e.， xin， da and ya （literally， faithfulness， expressiveness and elegance）， which then became the fundamental translation theory in China. Since the definitions and standards have changed over years， xin da and ya can still be applied to present translation practices. In this essay， I am going to use Relevance theory to redefine Yan Fu’s xin da and ya.
2. Relevance Theory and Xin， Da and Ya
Relevance theory is initially a psychological approach to the study of human communication， raised by Dan Sperber and Deirdre Wilson. They argued that the cognitive processes of human are linked to achieving maxim possible context effect for the minimum possible processing effort. In order to achieve this， people has to focus his/her attention on what seems to him/her the most relevant （Sperber and Wilson， 1986）. In a relevance sense， how can we understand xin， da and ya？
In the translation process， the author communicates with the translator first and the translator communicates with his/her readers then. The translator has to find what is most relevant in order to make the communication successful. In MacKenzie’s word， the translator now is the one who actively engages with the text （MacKenzie 2002：3）. When the act of the translation begins， the translator then have to make assumptions of the cognitive environment of the target reader and of what would be most relevant in that cognitive environment. Later， in he/she translation， the translator will try to offer the same contextual effects that he/her obtained as a reader of the source text （ST） without unnecessary processing efforts. Xin means dual honesties. Here， in terms of relevance theory， that being honest to the ST then suggests that conveying the same effects is being honest to the ST whereas that being honest to the target reader expresses the willingness of minimizing the unnecessary processing effort.
Since the second honesty of xin is a result of da， then the act of reducing unnecessary processing effort is actually taken into practice in da. In English， one may be able to form an extremely long sentence if he wants. However， in Chinese， long sentences often cause logical confusion which may lead to incapability of understanding. Therefore， when translating a long sentence from English to Chinese， usually， we will divide it into several short sentences. In the preface to Tian Yan Lun， Yan Fu is very keen to do these kinds of changes. In his view， the translation should be natural and comprehensible in Chinese so that the reader may be able to understand. This is what da attempts to convey. In terms of relevance theory， da then means minimizing the processing effort. Only when da is achieved can we say that the translation is xin. In ostensive communication， stimulus is necessary. According to the relevance theory， a stimulus is ‘a phenomenon designed to achieve cognitive effects’ （Sperber and Wilson， 1986： 153）. And ‘someone who wants to achieve a specific cognitive effect must therefore try to produce a stimulus which， when optimally processed， will achieve just the intended effect’ （ibid）. The specific effect that Yan Fu wants to achieve is to make the scholar-bureaucrats aware of the existence the target text and read it and then realize that it is time to catch up with the advanced western technologies. The stimulus he produced is the pre-Han language and the political comment style. In this case， is ya equal to stimuli？ As to Sperber and Wilson， a stimulus has to fulfill two conditions： ‘first， they must attract the audience’ attention; and second， they must focus it on the communicator’s intensions’ （ibid）. Yan Fu’s intention is quite obvious. However， did it attract the audience’ intension？ From the hot debate about Tian Yan Lun’s translation， we could assume that it did， for the stimulus that Yan Fu produced was most relevant to the scholar-bureaucrats. It can be seen above that xin and da are an impartibly whole whereas ya is an additional requirement. A translation cannot be xin without da. However， it can be xin and da without ya.
3. Conclusion
Since the translation process is also a cognitive process， relevance theory is able to explain the deep meaning of xin， da and ya. In a relevance sense， the inner connection among xin da and ya is clearer.
References：
[1]MacKenzie， Lan Paradigms of reading： relevance theory and deconstruction[J]. Basingstoke： Palgrave，2002.
[2]Sperber， Dan and Wilson， Deirdre Relevance[J]. Oxford： Basil Blackwell，1986.