英语谚语隐喻性特征及其汉译 61页

山东大学硕士学位论文摘要谚语翻译一直以来备受翻译研究者的关注，研究成果中不乏真知灼见。以此为参考，并基于个人对谚语的观察和思考，本文试以英语谚语的隐语化特征为切入点，从一个新角度探讨英语谚语的汉译问题。隐喻从广义上讲指一种概念化过程，藉于一语义范畴来理解另一语义范畴，是源语义域向目标语义域的映射。而语言中的隐喻为隐喻思维在语言使用中的具体体现，其本体、喻体和喻底可由语言隐喻这一线型结构中某一单元充当。谚语同样具备隐喻化特征，体现隐喻思维。与一般意义上的隐喻不同的是，隐喻性谚语的本体、喻体和喻底并不直观地显现在线性结构中，而由隐喻作为一个整体所表达的各种意义充当，如下所示：广本体：谚语本身所表达的意义lI喻体：谚语的语境意义lL喻底：由谚语本体意义和语境意义抽象而来的意义谚语因此具有了隐喻化特征。需要指出并不是所有谚语具备隐喻化特征，本文也对谚语作出了区分，将谚语分为隐喻性谚语和表象性谚语两类。表象性谚语在任何语境中只传达本体意义，也就是说只具备其本身所表达的意义，如没有语境意义，比如说明气象规律的谚语。相应的本文提出三种谚语翻译方法：译其本体译其喻体译其喻底针对同一英语谚语，应用三种翻译方式将得到三类不同译本，翻译实践中任一谚语花样繁多的译文大都可分1"7，lll类，归入其中。应用三种翻译方法所得译文又分别保留了原谚语的一些特点，同时也造成部分信息流失，这样来看，谚语翻译要达到完全对等，基本不可能。对等理论不能解决谚语翻译实践中翻译方式的选择问题。本文转向翻译功能沦寻求理论支持。本文共分五部分，引论部分简单介绍了谚语翻译的基本问题，并概述了论文所表达的主要观点。第一章对以往隐喻研究作了总结整理，提炼出自己的隐喻观，为以后章节中对谚 山东大学硕士学位论文—■—罾皇量鲁量量皇皇量曹皇曾皇篁蔓■■■量墨曼舅舅舅蔓量罾鲁■置—量量量量曼量曼曼曼皇虽鼍曼蔓量置墨量量量量皇皇量曼量墨■——■—■鼻罾量量曼WIIIl语隐喻化的论述作了理论铺垫。第二章伊始分别区分谚语与成语、俗语和格言，并据此对谚语进行定义。界定了谚语的内涵与外延，接下来具体论述谚语的隐喻性特征。第三章是论文的主体部分，结合译例，详细介绍了谚语的三种翻译方法。本章末节尝试性地列出在选择谚语翻译方式过程中应考虑的一些因素。第四章具体介绍了德国翻译功能学派的翻译观，并将之应用到谚语翻译中，看能不能解决翻译方式的选择问题。本文末节为结论部分，进一步总结明确论文所论述的观点，并指出了研究存在的局限性。关键词：隐喻；谚语；隐喻化；语境化；翻译功能论 山东大学硕士学位论文AbstractProverbtranslationhaslongbeenallacademicfieldattractingmuchattentionoftranslationresearchers，whohavebroughtforwardmultitudinousinsightfulviewsandsystems．OnbasisofthoseintellectualfruitsandunderacomprehensiveobservationofEnglishproverbs，thisdissertationpresentsallattempttoprobeintoEnglishproverbtranslationfromtheviewpointofthemetaphorizationofEnglishproverbs．Metaphorinitsbroadsensereferstosomekindofconceptualization，aprocessofunderstandingandexperiencingasemanticdomainbyvirtueofanothersemanticdomain．Thereexistssomemappingfromthesourcetothetargetsemanticdomain．Alinguisticmetaphorturnsouttobetherealizationofthisconceptualizationinlanguageuse，withitstenor,vehicleandgroundbeingliabletobeclearlyspecifiedassomespecificunitsinalinearstructure．AnEnglishproverbCanalsobecharacterizedbymetaphor．However,ametaphoricalproverbisdistinguishedfromacommonlinguisticmetaphorinthatthetenor,vehicleandgroundofametaphoricalproverbarethreekindsofmeaningsconveyedbytheproverbasawholeinsteadofsomeintuitivelinguisticunits，asfollows：厂Tenor：context—freemeaning；IVehicle：context-dependentmeanings；"Ground：themeaningabstractedfromallthesemeanings，includingbothcontext．freeandcontext-dependentmeanings．HencethemetaphorizationofanEnglishproverb．Itshouldbeclarifiedthatnotallproverbsarequalifiedtobemetaphoricallyinterpreted．Thispaperthereforeputsforwardthedistinctionbetweenmetaphoricalandrepresentationalproverbs，thelatterbeingthoseonlyfeaturingcontext-freemeaning．Accordinglythisthesisadvancesthreeapproachesforproverbtranslation，asfollows：Theapplicationofthosethreeapproachesmayresultinthreekindsofrenderings，which，ei巧d唧：一hgn砒趾毛寻{吾E蓥}垂}星一～ 山东大学硕士学位论文asPracticeproves，allexistingChineseversionsofanEnglishmetaphoricalproverbinvariablyCanbecategorizedinto．EachkindoftranslationofallEnglishmetaphoricalproverbpreservessomefeaturesoftheoriginalwhilemeantimefailstoconveysomeothercharacteristics．ThereforenoabsoluteequivalenceCanbeestablished．Insteadoftheequivalencetheory,thisdissertationseekstheoreticalsupportfromfunctionalistapproachestowardstranslationinevaluatingthethreesortsofrenderingsofanEnglishmetaphoricalproverbandchoosingatranslatingapproach．Thisthesisconsistsoffiveparts．TheIntroductionpartisalead-intosomebasicissuesconcerningproverbtranslationaswellasabriefroad—mapofthemainideasthePaperistodissertateinsequence．ChapterOnepresentsanoverviewofthepreviousresearchonmetaphorsandprovidesthetheoreticalfoundationforthefollowingdelineationofthemetaphorizationofEnglishproverbs．ChapterTwofocusesonthemetaphorizationofEnglishproverbsbutfirstbringsforthatentativedefinitionofproverbviamakingclearthedifferentiationrespectivelybetweenproverbsandsetphrases，proverbsandsayings，andproverbsandmaxims．ChapterThree，theCOrepartofthethesis，investigatesindetailthetranslationofEnglishproverbs．Threeapproachesforproverbtranslationareadvanced，followingwhichfactorsthatneedtobeconsideredinchoosinganapproachaleexplored．ChapterFourthenseekstosolvetheproblemofchoosingatranslationapproachinrealpracticebyvirtueoffunctionalistapproachestowardstranslationandexemplifiesthefeasibilityofapplyingfunctionalistviewsinproverbtranslation．Theclosingpartaccountsfortheconclusionofthedissertation，summarizingwhathasbeenspecifiedandpointingoutthelimitationsofpresentstudyaswell．KeyWords：metaphor；proverb；’metaphorization；contextualization；FunctionalistApproachestowardsTranslation 原创性声明本人郑重声明：所呈交的学位论文，是本人在导师的指导下，独立进行研究所取得的成果。除文中已经注明引用的内容外，本论文不包含任何其他个人或集体已经发表或撰写过的科研成果。对本文的研究作出重要贡献的个人和集体。均已在文中以明确方式标明。本声明的法律责任由本人承担。论文作者签名：短丝：El期：巡：￡r关于学位论文使用授权的声明本人同意学校保留或向国家有关部门或机构送交论文的印刷件和电子版，允许论文被查阅和借阅；本人授权山东大学可以将本学位论文的全部或部分内容编入有关数据库进行检索，可以采用影印、缩印或其他复制手段保存论文和汇编本学位论文。(保密论文在解密后应遵守此规定)≯论文作者签名：邋导师签名蓦上鱼窖2日期：逝 山东大学硕士学位论文IntroductionAsfarasproverbtranslationisconcerned，theremayappeartwoormoreChineseversionsforasingleEnglishproverb，suchasNeveroffertoteachfishtOswim，whichmaybetranslatedinto不要教鱼儿游泳，不要班门弄斧，不要在行家面前炫耀，orthelike．AretheseChineseversionsjustproducedrandomlyoutoftranslators’owntastefortranslationorregularlybyfollowingsometranslatingapproaches?Aretheyseparatedorrelatedwitheachotherinadeepersense?WhilecurrenttranslationtheoriesmaysimplyclassifythoseChineseversionsintotwogroups：somebelongingtoliteraltranslation，asistheversion不要教鱼儿游泳andothersfallingintoliberaltranslation，such弱不要班门弄斧，不要在行家面前炫耀andthelike，thisdissertationrepresentsanattempttoprobeintoproverbtranslationandenunciatetheveryfoundationofallthoseseeminglyrandomlyproducedChineseversionsofasingleEnglishproverbandtherelationsamongthem，thereforesimultaneouslyfurnishingsomeinstructiveviewsaswellasapproachesforEnglishproverbtranslation．Withaviewtotheclassificationofliteralandliberaltranslation，whichhasbeenbroughtforwardmoreoutofapurposefordescription，thepaperpurportstoprovidesomeconstructive，orsomewhatprescriptive，suggestionsforproverbtranslation，centeringonilluminatingthemetaphorizationofEnglishproverbs．Theviewthatsomeproverbsaremetaphoricalhasbeenrecognizedbyscholars，likeShu(2000：37)，whogroupsproverbsintotwocategories，“onebeingunderstoodliterallyandtheothermetaphorically”，howevertheyhavejustbrushedsuperficiallyoverthequestionwithoutgoingfurthertoexploretheessenceofthemetaphorizationofaproverb．Asiscommonlyacknowledged，ametaphorischaracterizedbyitstenor,vehicleandground，allofthempossiblyCO—existinginthelinearstructureorinsomecasesoneortwoofthembeingabsent．WhilethisanalysisisnotapplicabletoproverbsinthatinanyconditionitCannotbeacceptedthatanyobservableelement，likeawordoraphrase，inametaphoricalproverbisqualifiedtoberecognizedasitstenor,vehicleorgroundasinthecaseofacommonlyrecognized 山东大学硕士学位论文metaphor．ThenhowCallweinterpretthemetaphorizationofproverbs?Underacarefulobservationofmetaphoricalproverbs，itcarlbefoundthatthemeaningofametaphoricalproverbasawhole，insteadofanyelementinthelinearstructure，isliabletobeinterpretedasitstenor．Asforitsvehicle，likeotherkindsoflinguisticunits，aproverbalwaysmaterializesitsvalueinrealcircumstancesandconveysinaparticularsituationaparticularmeaning．Thatkindofparticularmeaning，whichisinsomesensedistinctivefromitsliteralmeaningandinsomesenserelatedwithit，appearstobethevehicleofthemetaphoricalproverb．Thegroundofametaphoricalproverbneedstobeabstractedfromthesetwokindsofmeaning．Thusthemetaphorizationofaproverbisquitespecificwithitstenor,vehicleandgrounddesignatedassomeabstractmeaningsratherthanbeingabletobeintuitivelyrecognizedasinthecaseofaconventionalmetaphor．Inaddition，anotherpointdeservestobe．confirmedthatcontextplaysanessentialroleinthemetaphorizationofanEnglishproverbsimplyforthereasonthatitsvehicleCanonlyberecognizedinrealcircumstances，thatis，incontext．Hencethemetaphorizationofproverbsisalsoaprocessofcontextualization．Withthetenor,vehicleandgroundofametaphoricalproverbbeingclarified，somecorrespondencemayberecognizedbetweenthoseChineseversionsofanEnglishproverbanditstenor,vehicleorground．Toputitmoreclearly,anyChineseversionofanEnglishmetaphoricalproverbinvariablyturnsouttobethetranslationofitstenor，vehicleorground．Followingthediscussionabove，threeapproachesarerecommendedhereconcemingthetranslationofEnglishmetaphoricalproverbs：1．Translatingthetenor；2．Translationthevehicle；3．Translatingtheground．TheapplicationofthethreetranslatingapproacheswillresultindifferentChineseversionsofanEnglishmetaphoricalproverb．Ashasbeenclarifiedpreviously,thetenor，vehicleandgroundofametaphoricalproverbarerelatedwitheachother,withthegroundbeingtheabstractionofitstenorandvehicle．SoistherelationshipamongthosedifferentChineseversions．ThekindofChineseversionscorrespondingtothegroundoffillEnglishmetaphoricalproverbismorefundamentalandabstract，applicabletoanysituation．While2 山东大学硕士学位论文thoseversionscorrespondingtoitstenorandvehicle，moreculture-specificandcontext-related，arejusttherealizationsofthegroundoftheoriginalproverbinspecificsotuations．HencethefacthasbeenwelldelineatedthatthereareregularitiestofollowintranslatingallEnglishmetaphoricalproverbanditsseeminglyrandomlyproducedChineseversionsareinessencecloselyrelated、析廿leachother．Thenthefollowingquestionthatneedstobeconsideredresidesintheevaluationofthethreeapproachesfortranslatingametaphoricalproverb．DefinitelyintranslationpracticeonlyallowstheexistenceofonerenderingofanEnglishmetaphoricalproverbappropriatetoaspecificChinesetargettextandcorrespondinglytheapplicationofonetranslatingapproach．IstheChineseversionofanEnglishmetaphoricalproverbthatappearsinaChinesetextthebestofall?Istheappliedapproachthemostappropriateamongthethree?Herethefunctionalisttranslationtheoryispreferred，accordingtowhichthewholeprocessoftranslating，thechoiceofsometranslationstrategyandapproachincluded，shouldbedecidedbythepurposeatranslationbehaviorissupposedtofulfill．Besidestheintroductionpart，thethesisconsistsoffiveparts．Chapter1mainlypresentsanoverviewofthepreviousresearchonmetaphorsandthusprovidesatheoreticalfoundationforthefollowinganalysisofEnglishproverbsfromthepointofviewofmetaphors，whichexactlyconstitutesonesectofthemaincontentsofChapter2．ThisChapteralsodedicatesmuchofitsspaceonthemetaphorizationofEnglishproverbs，analyzingthetenor,vehicleandgroundofanEnglishmetaphoricalproverbandconcludingthatthemetaphorizationofanEnglishproverbisaprocessofcontextualization．Basedonthemetaphoricalinterpretationofproverbs，Chapter3，themainbodyofthisthesis，thenintroducesthreeapproachesfortranslatingEnglishproverbsandlistssomefactorsinfluencingthechoiceamongthem．Chapter4isintendedtoresolvetheproblemofchoosingwhichapproachintranslationpractice、析ththefunctionalistapproachesbeingfirstintroducedandusedforreference．Whilethelastpartastheclosingsectionoffersabriefconclusionofthewholethesis，aswellasadescriptionoflimitationsofthecontemporarystudyconductedinthisthesis． 山东大学硕士学位论文ChapterOneRetrospectionofPreviousResearchonMetaphorsThewordmetaphorarisesfromtheGreekwordmetapherein，(meaning)transfer．(Glucksberg，2001：3)TheresearchonmetaphorshaslongbeenatraditionandmaybetracedbacktoAristotle(1954)，whovolunteeredtosystematicallyprobeintothestructureandrhetoricfunctionofmetaphors．Thelonghistoryofmetaphorresearchsawscholars’continuouspassiononmetaphorsandalsogavebirthtoratherdiversifiedviewsandtheories．Forthepurposeofassimilatingvaluableviewpointstheoreticallyusefulforthefollowingdiscussionofaproverb’Smetaphorization，thispaperisthentomakeattemptstostraightenoutthosesomewhatkaleidoscopictheories．1．1TheoriesofMetaphor：AnIntroductionManyapproachesforclassifyingtheoriesofmetaphorspreviouslyproducedhavebeenproposedsincethe1960s，whenMaxBlack’Sdistinctionperhapsstandsasthemostoutstanding．MaxBlack(1962：25-47)advancesthedivisioninto“substitutionviews”，“comparisonviews”and“interactionviews．”(c￡Beardsley,1962)Otherwaysofmetaphorclassificationareputforwardby,amongothers，Mooij(1976)，Scherffler(1979)，Ortony(1993)，andAnkersmitandMooij(1993)，Leezenberg(2001)．Mooij(1976：31)makesasignificantattemptbydistinguishingbetween‘‘monistic’’and‘‘dualistic’’theories；Ortonyproposes，intheintroductionhewroteforMetaphorandThought(1993)，adistinctionbetween‘‘micro—research"’and‘‘macro—research’’．Mostrecently,Leezenberg(2001：10—11)bringsforwardthedivisionofthreemaincategories：“referentialistviews”，‘‘descriptivistviews’’and“conceptualistviews”：Chineseresearchersalsovoiceconstructiveviewsforassortingtheoriesofmetaphors．Shu(2004：428—429)distinguishesthreetraditionsofmetaphorresearch，thatis，rhetorictradition，philosophictradition,andlinguistictradition．4Thetheoriesmentionedabove，eitherbeingnotcomprehensiveenoughtogeneralizethe 山东大学硕十学位论文wholehistoryofmetaphorstudy,likeBlack(1962)，orsomewhattoocomplicatedoroversimplified，sayLeezenberg(2001)andOrtony(1993)，provetobeunsuitabletothispaper．Withaviewtothebrainfruitsproducedbythosepredecessorscholars，aswellausthewholecourseofthedevelopmentofmetaphorresearch，especiallyinthelaStfewdecades，guidedundertheprincipleofprovidingtheoreticalconvenienceforthesiscomposition,anotherschemeforclassifyingtheoriesofmetaphorsistobeproposed．Beforethat，onepointneedstobeclarifiedthatdifferentcriteriabreeddifferenttheoriesforclaSsificationandthusallthoseapproachesforclaSsificationalebasedontheirrespectivecriteria．Whiletheclassifyingtheories，thoughostensiblydiscrepantinanglesofanalyzingthesameobject-metaphortheories，embodyasimpleyetcommonunderstandingtheirproducersbearinmind，thatis，thehistoryofmetaphorstudyhasundergoneamajorshiftinapprehendingmetaphorsfrombeingextraordinarylinguisticexpressionstocommonuseoflanguage．ThenwhatCanmetaphorsbeapprehended髂，extraordinarylinguisticexpressionsorcommonuseoflanguage?Justtakingtheanswertothisquestion嬲acriterion,thispaperputsforwardthebipartitecategorizationoftheoriesofmetaphors：‘‘figurativelanguage’’viewsand‘‘commonlanguage’’views．1．2Figurative-LanguageViewsAsacategory,figurativelanguageviewsherearedesignatedtorefertothosetheoriesthatviewmetaphorsasamatteroflanguage，asetofextraordinaryorfigurativelinguisticexpressionswhosemeaningisreducibletosomesetofliteralpropositions．Accordingtothisview,metaphorsareprimarilydecorativeandornamental，andthusmaybenotnecessary．Duringaperiodofover2,000years，roughlyfromAristotle’Stimetothe1980s，thisviewdominatedmetaphorstudies．Aristotleinitiated．1．2．1Aristotle’STraditionofMetaphorsBeingSubstitutionAristotle’Scoreconceptisfullyexpressedinhisfar-reachingdefinitionofmetaphors：ametaphoris“theapplicationofanaliennamebytransferenceeitherfromgenustospecies，5 山东大学硕七学位论文orfromspeciestogenus，orfromspeciestospecies，orbyanalogy,thatisproportion．”(Aristotle，1956：1457b)HereinAristotle’Sunderstanding，ametaphorisinessencethesubstitution．【1：1】Somelawyersaresharks．ASinExample【1：l】，accordingtoAristotle’Stheory,metaphorizationarisesfromthesubstitutionofsharksforawordthatbelongstothesanlegenusasthemetaphortopicsomelawyers，eventhoughwhatispreciselysubstitutedforisunclearandbeyondAristotle’Sinvestigation．Fromhisclassicaldefinitionfourkindsofsubstitutionsaledistinguished．BythisAristotletouchesthematterofmetaphors’innermechanism，瑟callbesensedfromtheexplanationhegivesaboutanalogy,弱follows：“Analogyorproportioniswhenthesecondtermistothefirst骶theforthtothethird．Wemaythenusetheforthforthesecond，orthesecondfortheforth．Sometimestoowemayqualifythemetaphorbyaddingthetermtowhichtheproperwordisrelative．Thusoldageistolife嬲eveningtoday．Eveningmaythereforebecalledtheoldageoftheday，andoldage，theeveningof，咖，or，inthephraSesofEmpedocles，L／fe譬settingsun．Forsomeofthetermsoftheproportionthereisattimesnowordinexistence；stillthemetaphormaybeused．Forinstance，toscatterseediscallingsowing；buttheactionofthesuninscatteringhisraysisnameless．StillthisprocessbearstothesunthesamerelationaSsowingtotheseed．HencetheexpressionofthepoetsowingtheGod-createdtight．”(ibid．)Concludedfromtheabovewords，thesubstitution，inAristotle’Sview,mustbepreconditionedwiththefactthattwopairsoftermsareinvolvedandtherelationsbetweenthetwotermsofonepairissimilarwiththatoftheothertwoterms．Heexhibitsfurtherunderstandingbythewords‘"thegreatestthingbyfaristohaveacommandofmetaphor．ThisaloneCannotbeimpartedtoanother：itisthemarkofgenius，fortomakegood6 山东大学硕士学位论文metaphorsimpliesalleyeforresemblances．”(ibid．1956：1459a)Resemblanceherecountsasawordthatweighs．Asanoverview,Aristotleunderstandsametaphorasthesubstitutionbetweenalinguisticexpressionandanotherbasedonunderlyinganalogyorresemblance．Hisargumentationhasprovidedgreatinsightsandinspirationsforresearchersoflatergenerations．Histheoriesare“inheritedandcarriedforwardbyRomanthinkerslikeCicero，Horace，LonginusandQuintilian,’’(Van,2000：15)amongwhomQuintiliancountsastheprominentinhisexplicitlyputtingforward‘"thetheoryofsubstitution．”(Shu，2000：3)1．2．2MaxBlack’sTheoryofInteractionAristotleandhisfollowersonlysuperficiallytouchuponthematterofanalogyorresemblancewithoutfurtherinvestigation．Thisfailure‘‰explainthecreationofsimilarityhasbeenoneofthekeyfactorsbehindthedevelopmentofwhatisgenerallyknownastheinteractiontheory．”(Indurkhya，1992：65)TheideaofinteractionCanbetracedbacktoThePhilosophyofRhetoricbyRichards(1936)，butacquiresitsidentitymostlythrough。theviewpresentedbyMaxBlack．Asanoverview，theinteractiontheoryarguesthatthemetaphoricalmeaningisaresultofaninteractionbetweenametaphoricalexpression,termed‘‘focus’’andits‘‘surroundingliteralflame’’，inthetermbyBlack．(1993【1979]：27)Black(1962)distinguishesthetwosubjectsofmetaphor：theSOurCeandthetarget．AsinExample(1)，accordingtohim，itisnotjustthewordsharksthatactasthesource，butalotofourgeneralknowledgeandconventionallyheldbeliefsaboutshark，whiehBlackrefersto弱“associatedcommonplaces"’．FurthercommentaryispresentedbyBlackinhisremark‘‘、ⅣeCansaythatthe[target]is‘seenthrough’themetaphoricalexpressionor,ifweprefer,thatthe[target】is‘projectedupon’thefieldofthe【source]．”(1962：41)MeanwhileBlackalsoholdsthatmetaphorissymmetricand戗lattheresultofinteractionalsoaffectsthesource，asissuggestedinhiscommentonthemetaphorAman括awolf“Iftocallamanawolfistoputhiminaspeciallight，wemustnotforgetthatthemetaphormakesthewolfseemmorehumanthanheotherwisewould．”(1962：44)HenceitcailbeinferredthatinBlack’Sviewametaphorconsistsinteractionbetweenametaphoricalexpressionanditssurroundingliteralexpressions．FurtherinvestigationrelativewithinteractionviewCanbefoundinBeardsley(1962；1976；1981)，Ricoeur(1977；1981)，Hausman(1983；1984；7 山东大学硕十学位论文1989)，ete．，whoresemble，inheritormodifythosethoughtsofBlack．1．2．3ThePragmaticApproachesbyGrice，Searle，andDavidsonAsLeezenberg(200l：l08)observes，‘‘itisnotsentencesinisolationorsentencetypesthatreceiveametaphoricalinterpretation，butsentencesinacontext”．Thedevelopmentofpragmatictheoryfromthe1960sonwards，generallyembodiedintheworksbyGriceandSearle，unfoldsthepossibilityofasystematicformulationofthepragmaticperspectivetowardsmetaphors．Asanoverview,inapragmaticanalysis，theinterpretationofametaphorispreferredtobebasedonintentionsofthespeaker,ratherthanitsmeaningstructure．Asasimpleexample，aspeakeruRering“Manisawolf"’saysonthesurfacesomethingthatisliterallyfalse，butmeans，orintendstocommunicate，somethingthatCanbetrue，thatiS，“Thatmenarebrutal”．Griceinterpretsmetaphors，witllhyperbole，irony,andotherfiguresofspeech,asaparticularizedconversationalimplicaturearisingfromthedeviationofthefirstMaximofQumity(SeeGrice，1989：26—27)，ascanbeinferredfromhisfollowingremarks．ExampleslikeYou．arethecreaminmycoffeecharacteristicallyinvolvecategoricalfalsity,SOthecontradictoryofwhatthespeakerhasmadeasiftosaywill，strictlyspeaking，beatruism：SOitnotbethatsuchaspeakeristryingtogetacross．Themostlikelysuppositionisthatthespeakerisattributingtohisaudiencesomefeatureorfeaturesinrespectofwhichtheaudienceresembles(moreorlessfancifully)thementionedsubstance．(Grice，1989：34)Well，itdoesnotgiveanaccountofhowthehearergetstointerpretandunderstandametaphoricalexpression，buthowtheheareristriggeredofftofindtheimplicature．JohnSearle’Spragmaticapproachtometaphorsismainlyincarnatedinhispaper“Metaphor"’．(1979)Like(；flee，Searleholdsmetaphorsasamatterofspeaker’Sutterancemeaning；UnlikeGrice，however,wholargelyhingesonspeaker’Sutterancemeaningininterpretingmetaphors，hemaintainsagreaterroleforconventions．Diachronically,heargues，ametaphormayarosechangesinwordmeaning；butsynchronically,itCannotdoSO：8 山东大学硕士学位论文‘"totheextentthattherehasbeenagenuinechangeinmeaning⋯topreciselythatextentthelocutionisnolongermetaphorical．”(1979：100)Deducedfromthisremark，ametaphor,onceconventionalized，isdead，thatis，nOlongerametaphor．Inanothersense，Searleemphasizesthat“sentencesandwordshaveonlythemeaningthattheyhave．’’Thoughfarlessthaninformative，thatatthefewestmakesitslimlysensedthattoSearletheliteralmeaningofametaphoricalexpressiondeterminesallitsapplicationsinanycontext．LikeGriceandSearleDonaldDavidsontakesmetaphorsasbelongingtothedomainoflanguageuseratherthanitsliteralmeaning：“ItllinkmetaphorbelongsexclusivelytothedomainofUSe．Itissomethingbroughtoffbytheimaginativeemploymentofwordsandsentencesanddependsentirelyontheordinarymeaningsofthosewordsandhenceonthe、ordinarymeaningsofthesentencestheycomprise．”(Davidson，1979：31)However，DavidsongoesbeyondGriceandSearleindenyingthestandpointthatmetaphorsaresubjecttotheinterpretationofspeaker’Smeaningorutterancemeaning．Whatametaphorconveysisjustitsliteralmeaning：“metaphorsmeanwhatthewords，intheirmostliteralinterpretation，meail,andnothingmore．”(1979：30)“MetaphorsCan【．．．】makeusappreciatesomefact-butnotbystandingfor,orexpressing，thefact，”(1979：44)thatis，theydonotmakethehearernoticeanyspecificfactandtheyleadtoa‘‘seeing-as’’ratherthana‘‘seeing-that’’．(1979：44_45)Therefore，forDavidsonunderstandingametaphorhasmoreincommon嘶thperceivinganimagethan、析thinterpretingathought-expressingsentence：itinvolvesacreativeeffortonthepartofthehearer,andisnotguidedbyanyrulesorconventions．(1979：29)1．2．4AnOverviewofFigurative—LanguageViewsInthissectionareintroducedafewscholarsengagedinmetaphorresearch，thoughfarfrombeingafull—fledgedpresentationwithmanycelebritiesexcludedfortheconsiderationofthisdissertation’Slengthlimit．However,thisservessufficientlytodrawanoutlineofthedevelopmentofmetaphorstudies．Fromtheideaofsubstitution，tothetheoryofinteraction，andthenthepragmaticapproach，metaphorresearchhasbeenconductedinascopethatgraduallygrowingwiderandwider：firstly,metaphorsarestudiedinwordlevelor,moreprecisely,metaphorresearchisonlyrelativewithnounsornames；thentherangeextends9 山东大学硕士学位论文intothewholesentenceandeventhetext；andinpragmaticapproachthecontext，mainlythespeaker’Sintention，isincluded．However,alltheseviews，seeminglyvariant弱theyare，shareacomnlonfeature，嬲issummarizedbyYu，“theyviewmetaphor嬲alinguisticphenomenon,andassumeafundamentaldistinctionbetweenliteralandfigurative(ormetaphoricalinitsbroadsense)senses．’”(Yu，1998：10)Moreprecisely,Aristotletheinitiatorandnumerousscholarsofthefollowing2000yearsadvancevariousviewsonmetaphors，which，nevertheless，invariablydonotbreaktheconfinementoftakingmetaphorsmerelyasarhetoricandintendtoprovide“perspicuity,pleasure，andaforeignairinoration．”(Aristotle，1926：1405a)1．3Common-LanguageViewsViewingmetaphorsascommonlanguageusagecountsasthedividinglinebetweentraditionalandcontemporarymetaphortheories．Itimpliestheintroductionofcognitionintometaphorresearch．Thekeynotionofcommon-languageviewisthatmetaphors，intheirbroadsense，arepervaSiveandessentialinlanguageandthought；humanconceptualsystems‘‘arepervaSivelyandineliminablystructuredbymetaphor,metonymy,andotherkindsofimaginativestructure．”(Johnson，1995：158)Metaphorsinthisway,therefore，arenolongerextraordinaryusageoflanguageaSisembodiedinfigurative-languageviews，butfundamentallyconceptual．ThistransformationofmetaphorresearchemergeswiththepublicationofMetaphorsWeLiveBythemonumentbyLakoffandJohnson．(1980a)Intheirbook，theCO—producer(1980a：5)pointout：‘"theessenceofmetaphorisunderstandingandexperiencingonekindofthingintermsofanother”，andfurtherclaim：“Wehavefound，onthecontrary,thatmetaphorispervasiveineverydaylife，notjustinlanguagebutinthoughtandaction．Ourordinaryconceptualsystem，intermsofwhichweboththiI墩andact，isfundamentallymetaphoricalinnature．”(1980a：31HereLakoffandJohnsontouchtheinnermechanismofmetaphors，conceptualorlinguistic，thatis，“understandingandexperiencingonekindofthingintermsofanother．”Concerningthis，LakoffandTurner(1989：3-4)makeitmolelO 山东大学硕十学位论文perspicuous：‘‘Knowingthestructure．．．．．．meansl【Ilowinganumberofcorrespondencesbetweenthetwoconceptualdomains．．．．．．Wewillspeaksuchasetofcorrespondencesasa‘mapping’betweentwoconceptualdomains．”Accordingtotheirremarks，structurallymetaphorsaremappingsacrossconceptualdomains．Furthermore，itcanbereadilyobservedthatsuchmappingsareasymmetricinthattheyareone—directional，involvingprojectionsfromasourcetoatargetdomain；theyarepartialinthatonlypartofthestructIlreofasourcedomainisprojectedtothetargetdomain．AsisalsostatedbyLakoffandTurner(1989：38-39)，“WeuseametaphortomapceItainaspectsofthesourcedomainontothetargetdomain,therebyproducinganewunderstandingofthattargetdomain"’．Accordinglyafurtherdistinctionismadebetweenlinguisticandconceptualmetaphors，conceptualmetaphorsbeingthefundamentalandlinguisticmetaphorsbeingtherepresentationoftheformerinlanguage(Lakoff,1993；LakoffandJohnson，1980，1999)．MorediscussionsCanbefoundinGibbs(1994)，Lakoff(1990)，Sweetser(1992)，andTurner(1987；1991)．1．4AnOverviewofFigurative—languageandCommon—languageViewsAsanoverview,thefigurative-languageviewsstudymetaphorsasindividuallinguisticexpressionsorrhetoricaldevices：whatartisticoraesthetice蔬ctstheyhaveproduced．AsLakoff(1987：vii-viii)pointsout，“traditionaltheoriesofmetaphorassumethatmetaphorsOccuronebyone，thateachdistinctmetaphoricalexpressionisindividuallycreated．’’Incommon-languageviews，ontheotherhand，metaphorsisstudiedasasystemofhumanconceptualization，operatingde印inhumanthoughtandcognition，andatthesametime，surfacingineverydaylanguageinasystematicmanner．Accordingtothis，metaphoricalproverbsarenootherthanaspecialcaseofmetaphoringeneral．II 山东大学硕士学位论文ChapterTwoTheMetaphorizationofEnglishProverbsBeforemakingfurtherdiscussiononproverbs，itseemsquitcnecessarytodefinetheterm“metaphor"’inaplainersense．Basedontheconsiderationintegratingbothfigurative—languageviewsandcommon—languageviews，thispaper．intendstomakethedistinctionbetweenmetaphorinitsnarrowsenseandinitsbroadsense．Metaphor,inanarrowsense，referstoafigurativewayofusingthewordsandphrasesofalanguage，andCanbedefinedas，initsbroadsense，theprocessofconceptualization，thatis，theprocessofunderstandingandexperiencingasemanticdomainbyvirtueofanothersemanticdomain，theformerherenamedthetargetsemanticdomainandthelatterthesourcesemanticdomain．Toputitinanotherway,thereexistssomel(indofmappingbetweenthem：thesourcedomainismappedontothetargetdomain．Metaphorinitsnarrowsenseembodiessuchconceptualization．【2：1】Howdoyouspendyourtime?Asinexample【2：l】，timeCanbecomprehendedasthetargetsemanticdomain，whilethesourcesemanticdomainmoneyinthiscasedoesnotsurfaceuptothelinearstructure．乃朋Pisunderstoodviamoney．ThenaccordinglythemetaphorizationofEnglishproverbsconsistsincharacterizingproverbunderstandingtobeaprocessofunderstandingatargetsemanticdomainviaasourcesemanticdomain．BeforeexpoundingwhatCanbeinterpretedasaproverb’Ssourcesemanticdomainaswellasitstargetsemanticdomain,thepaperpreferstopresentsometentativedesignationconcerningwhatlinguisticexpressionsCanqualifytobeaproverb，whichfunctionsastheveryfoundationforexploringinthefollowingsectionsthemetaphoricalcharacteristicsofEnglishproverbs．2．1DefiningaProverb● 山东大学硕士学位论文Aproverb，inLongmanModernEnglishDictionary,(1976：899)isdesignatedtobe“abrieffamiliarmaximoffolkwisdom，usuallycompressedinform，ofteninvolvingaboldimageandfrequentlyajinglethatcatchesthememory’’；thedefinitionemerginginWebster§ThirdNewInternationalDh?tionary(1976：1827)readsasfollows：“a：Abriefepigrammaticsayingthatisapopularbyword：anoft-repeatedpithyandingeniouslyturnedmaxim；b：Aprofoundororacularmaxim，esp：atruthcouchedinanobscurelanguage；’’whileTheOxfordEnglishDictionary(1989：712)givesthedefinition：“Zshortsayingincommonandrecognizeduse；aconcisesentence，oftenmetaphoricaloralliterativeinform，whichisheldtoexpresssometruthascertainedbyexperienceorobservationandfamiliart0a11．”Besidesthose，variousdefinitionsseemratherconfusingorinsomesensesuperficialinthattheyturnouttobehelplessindistinguishinginrealoperationsproverbsfromsetphrases，sayings，maximsandexpressionsalike．Thereisnodoubtthatsimilaritiesexistamongthosesetexpressions，neverthelesstheirdifferenceswillbefocusedonatthemeantimeofattemptingtocircumscribeeachterm．2．1．1ProverbsandSetPhrasesWithregardstowhatlinguisticexpressionscanbecategorizedtobeproverbs，thesituationeverseemsratherconfusinginthepracticeofadoptinganidenticalcriterion．AugustoArthaber(1991)inhisdictionarycategoriesasproverbsexpressionslike‘‘putthecartbeforethehorse”，“lookforaneedleinabundleofhay”，“makeamountainofamolehill”；Shenker(1967)takesasaproverbinhisUniversalEnglish“killingtwobirds埘thonestone”；Yu(1980)editsaproverbcollection，amongwhichphraseslike“neitherfishnorflesh"’areembodied．Thoseexpressionsandthelikealeinnaturemoresetphrasesthanproverbs．Whilethedistinctionproposedhereinisnotarbitrarilyproducedbutoutofthefollowingcriteria,readilyrecommendedandexercisedinthispaper：①Functionally,proverbsarethosethatreflectandgeneralizethelifeexperienceofcommons，andthusassumethefunctionofimpartinglessonsandexperienceaswellasprovidingexhortation．Whilesetphrasesburdenthemselveswithnosuchafunctionofteaching；theyaremerelytoconveysomeconceptionorthoughtandconstructnocompleteidea,thusbythemselvesincapableofdeliveringany 山东大学硕士学位论文judgement．②Formally,aproverbisanindependentwholeconveyingacompletesense；asetphraseonlycountsasaphrase，partofaclause．Accordingtothesetwocriteria,expressionsmentionedabovearepreferredheretoberecognizedtosetphrasesratherthanproverbs．2．1．2ProverbsandSayingsSayingisdefinedinAdvancedLearners’English—ChineseDictionary(2004：1545)tobe“awell-knownphraseorstatementthatexpressessomethingaboutlifethatmostpeoplebelieveiswiseandtrue”．Obviouslysayingisaccountedforinthedictionaryinitswidesense，containingproverbs，whereasherewhatinvolvesisitsnarrowsense．Asayingistorefertoaclausethatexpressessomeabstractconceptincommon，vividandusuallyvisualizedlanguageandgrowsverypopularamongcommons，justlikeproverbs．Howeverproverbsaredistinctfromsayings，which，unliketheformer,juststopatexpressinganddescribingwithoutgoingfurtherforimpartingexperienceandteaching．SeeExamplesasfollows，【2：2】Themountainshavebroughtforthamouse．【2：3】Allyourswansaregeese．【2：4】Thedieiscast．Thoseexpressionsmentionedabovearedistinctfromproverbsinthattheyonlygiveexpressiontosomeabstractconceptioninlanguagevisual，vividandinmostcaseshumorous，withoutdeliveringanyevaluation，standpointorexperientialsum-up．Hencethoselinguisticunitsandthealikearedesignatedassayings．2．1．3ProverbsandMaximsMaximisdefinedinAdvancedLearners’English-ChineseDictionary(2004：1077)as“awell—knownphrasethatexpressessomethingthatisusuallytrueorthatpeopletIlinkistrueforsensiblebehavior”．Inlightofthisdefinition，maximaccountsforthemostsimilar 山东大学硕十学位论文、Ⅳitllproverbamongsetphrases，sayingsandmaxims．Amaxim，likeaproverb，isforconveyingwisdomandexperienceandtakesonthefunctionofteaching．However,inmostcasesasayingistonarrateaphilosophyoflife，generallycreatedbyespeciallyaliterarycelebrityandquotedfromtheirworks，seeasfollows：【2：5】KnowledgeisPower．．FrancisBagon【2：6】Thechildhoodshowstheman．-JohnMilton—JohnDryden【2：8】ByunitingWestand，bydividingwefall．-JohnDickinson【2：9】Tooswiftarrives弱tardy弱tooslow．-WilliamShakespeareComparatively,proverbscomedowntothesum—upofmass’Slifeexperience，coveringawiderrangeofcontents，andusuallyorallycreated．Thereforeproverbsarewide—spreadamongmasses，enjoyingalargerscopeofapplicationthanmaxims．Whilethedivisionisinnosenseaclear-cutonewhenthosemaximsarefrequentlyknownbypeopleandhavebeentransferredtobefamiliarproverbs．Thoseexamplesabove，Example【2：5】-【2：9】，arejustfewcaseswhereproverbandmaximsoverlap．ButitshouldbewellrealizedthatnotallmaximsCantransformtobeproverbs，onlythosethatreflectmass’slifeexperienceandwisdomandformallyenjoyagreatpopularityamongmasses．2．1．4DefiningaProverbItmaybetoodogmaticaltosticktoanyofthedivisiontoostifflyinmakingdistinctionsamongproverb，saying，setphraseandmaxim，whichturnsouttobenotclear-cutinallcases．Anyhowwithregardsthosediscussionsdeliveredabove，thisdissertationstilltendstopresentitstentativecircumscriptionconcerningproverbs：Aproverbisabriefclause，15 山东大学硕十学位论文widelyacceptedandappliedamongpeople，generallyinvisual，picturesqueandvividlanguagethatmaysuccessfullysurfacesomesimplephenomenonorconditionbutsubstantivelyexpressandimpartmass’slifeexperienceforthepurposeofteaching．FromthedefinitionitCanbeobservedthatbeingaproverbinmostcasesinvolvestwokindsofphenomenonorcondition,onebeingboldandintuitionisticanddepictedostensibly,whiletheothercomplicated，somewhatabstractandinconvenienttobeenounced．Thisiscompatiblewitlltheessenceofaproverb：aproverbisproducedoutofthepurposeofexpressingacomplicatedlifeexperienceinamoreeconomicandintuitionisticfashion，也atis，viagivingvoicetoaphenomenonorconditionbeingsimpleandeasytobeimaginedout．Tomakeitinadeepersense，therealsoappears，likeinthecaseofametaphor,somekiIldofmapping：asimplephenomenonorsituationismappedontothecomplicatedone．Henceitmayberewardingtointerpretaproverbfromtheviewpointofmetaphorconceptionandevenpredicativelyturnouttobefeasiblesincesimilaritiesvirtuallyoccurbetweenametaphorandaproverb．2．2TheMetaphorizationofaProverbasaProcessofContextualizationIntheimmediatesectionsabovehasbeenmentionedthemappingbetweenthetwokindsofphenomenonorsituationinvolvedinaproverbor,moreacademically,twosemanticdomains，aboutwhichfurtherexplorationwillbedeliveredinthefollowingsections．Respectingpreviousstudyinterrelatingproverbsandmetaphors，somescholarshaveconventionallyclassifiedproverbsintotwocategories，oneunderstoodliterallyandtheothermetaphorically．(Shu，2000：37)Toputitmoreplainly,someproverbsCanbemetaphoricallyinterpreted．Andfurtherillustrationsaregiventhatthefirstcategoryareoftenthosedepictingnaturalphenomenaordescribingpeople’Slifeexperience，suchasExample[2：10】and[2：11】，andtheothercategorytendtoconveysomephenomenonorphilosophyviasuperficiallyexpressingacomparativelymoreintuitionisticphenomenon，suchasExample[2：12】and[2：13]．16 山东大学硕平学位论文【2：10】春雾雨，夏雾日，秋雾凉风冬雾雪．【2：111燕子低飞蛇过道，大雨眨眼就来到．【2：12】Earlybirdscatchtheworm．【2：13】Velvetpawshidesharpclaws．【2：14】Friendsalelikefiddle—string,theymustnotbewoundtOOtight．【2：15】Experienceisthefatherof领visdomandthemotherofthememory．、Ⅳhile诵tllregardstothisclassification,thoughgenerallyapplicableinsomesense，someproblemcanbereadilydiscovered：someproverbs，likeExample【2：14】and【2：15]，arebythemselvesmetaphorsandthenwhichgroupshouldtheybecategorizedinto?Besides,thoseproverbslikeExample【2：5】-【2：9】maybeinnosenseappropriatelycategorizedinaccordancewitllthecriterionsincetheyneitherdepictsomenaturalphenomenanorexpressingmass’Slifeexperiencebyvirtueofsuperficiallyexpressingacomparativelymoreintuitionisticphenomenon．Beforeproceeding、=~ritlldissertationsconcerningthemetaphorizationofaproverb，itseemsquitenecessarytoilluminateclearseveralpoints．OnefactmustbeacknowledgedthatnotallproverbsCanbecharacterizedbymetaphorization，thatis，Canbeunderstoodmetaphorically,asisprovenbysomecaseslikeExample【2：5】，【2：10]，【2：11】andthelikementionedabove．Concemingthis，thepaperaccordinglyproposesthenamingofMetaphoricalProverb，asisdistinguishedfromRepresentationalProverb，whereasonlythosemetaphoricalproverbs，suchasExample【2：12】and【2：131，countaswhatthispaperconcentrateson．Anotherpoint，whichalsoCallbetimelyrecognizedafteracarefulscrutinyofmetaphoricalproverbs，isthatthoseproverbshavetwokindsofmeanings—theirliteralmeaningandthemeaningsrespectivelyparticulartothecircumstanceswheretheyareused，whichwemaynamerespectivelyascontext—freemeaningandcontext—dependentmeanings．Thenwecanre—distinguishthoseproverbsthatCanbemetaphoricallyunderstoodfromthoseonlysubjecttoliteralcomprehension．Thereforeitcanbesafelyconcludedthattherealetwocategoriesofproverbs：oneonlyhavetheircontext—freemeaningandtheotherhavebothcontext-freeandcontext-dependentmeanings，thesecondbeingthemetaphorizedproverbs．111eformercategoryisreferredtoasRepresentational17 山东大学硕十学位论文ProverbandthelatterMetaphoricalProverb．BacktotheclassificationofproverbslikeExample【2：14】and【2：15]，nowtheycallbeaccordinglyrangedintothecategoryofrepresentationalproverbssincetheirliteralmeaningremainsunchangedinanysituationtheyare雄叫砌into．Thereforethemetaphorizationofproverbshingesuponwhethertheyarecontextualized，toputitmoreplainly,whethertheyCanbeappliedtoothercontextsbesidesthesituationcompatible、Ⅳiththeoneliterallyconstructedbythemselves．Seeanexampleasfolkyws：【2：哂l越lthatglittersisnotgold．Itscontext-freemeaning：Notonlygoldbutalsoglass，plastic，iron,andthingslikethatCallglitter,buttheyarenotnecessarilySOvaluableasgold．1lscontext-dependentmeanings：1．Thosesingerstarsthatarewidelyknownandfrequentlyappearbeforethemediadonotnecessarilyownarealartofsinging．2．Thosescientiststhatusuallygiveacademicreportsandlecturesfarandneararenotnecessarilyreallyqualified．Asforthiscase,theproverbpossessesofbothcontext—freemeaningandcontext-dependentmeanings．Deservedly,thosecontext-dependentmeaningsarecloselyrelatedwith,or,putitinanotherway,derivefromitscontext-freemeaning，insteadofbeingarbitrarilyproducedandfreefromtheconstraintsoftheproverb’Sliteralmeaning．Asregardstherelationshipbetweenthem，detailedelucidationwillbegiveninfollowingSection．Thedistinctionmadebetweenrepresentationalproverbandmetaphoricalproverb，aswellasthatbetweencontext-freemeaningandcontext—dependentmeaning，maybeinessencecountedassomekindofpragmaticinterpretation．Eachproverbconstructsbyitselfasituationandgivesexpressiontoasemanticwhole，whichisnamedinthispaperascontext-freemeaningthoughitstillreckonsonthecontextpresupposedbyitself．Consideringtheconvenienceforspecificationinthisdissertation，thiskindofcontexttendsnottokexplainedasthecontextingeneralsense，andthereforethementionofcontextherereferstotheactuallinguisticsituationsinwhichaproverbisused．Its 山东大学硕士学位论文context-dependentmeaningscouldbenumerous，spongingonthenumberofthesituationswheretheproverbcanbeutilized．Contextthusfunctionsasacriterionfordecidingonwhetheraproverbismetaphoricalornot．HencethemetaphorizationofaproverbCallbeinsafetyinterpretedasaprocessofcontextualization．Thosemetaphoricalproverbsaccountforthemajorityofproverbs，forafterallpeoplecontriveproverbsoutofthepurposeofimpartinglivingexperienceandteachingbyvirtueofexpressionsthatcancreateimagessimplerandtobemoreeasilyunderstood．Proverbsfileproposedforpragmaticapplications，namely,expressingmorecomplicatedmeaningsrespectivelyinspecificcircumstances．2．3Tenor,VehicleandGroundofaMetaphoricalProverbPreviouslyhasbeenmentionedtheconditionsforbeingalinguisticmetaphor：sourcesemanticdomain,targetsemanticdomain，andthemappingbetweenthem．fromtheviewpointofitsinnermechanism，ametaphorconsistsinmappingsourcesemanticdomainontojhetargetsemanticdomain，whilethemappingisnotarbitrarybutpreconditionedthatthereexistsomesimilaritiesbetweenSOurCeandtargetsemanticdomain．FurtherexplorationCanbefoundinLakoffandJohnson．(1980a：147-155)HerethepaperadoptsthetermsbyRichards(1965)：‘‘Tenor"’and‘‘Vehicle’’，respectivelycorrespondingtothesourcesemanticdomainandtargetsemanticdomain，andthesimilaritiesthatconstructthebasisfortheexistenceofametaphoristermedas“Ground"’．Asforacommonmetaphor,itsvehicle，tenorandgroundmayCO—exist，orinothercasesoneortwoofthemOCCUr,simultaneouslyinalinearstructureandbesomewhateasilydistinguished，seeexamplesasfollows，【2：17】Thebuildingisasmoke-greyhair．f2：18]Theentireworldisastage．【2：19】Howdoyouspendyourtime?【2：20】YoucanalsodecidetoclickontheShutDownbuttontoquitthewholeknit．19 山东大学硕士学位论文[2：21】Thefaintwhisperofrain．瞳：22】Heopenedhiseyesagain雒ifhewerewalkingoutofadream．(Shu,2003：66-70)Regardingtheinstance-《mentionedabove，inExample[2：17】thevehicle，tenorandgroundCO—existsimultaneously,、espectivelycorrespondingto‘‘hair"’，‘"thebuilding’’and“smoke-grey"’；asforExample[2：18】thevehicleandtenorCanbefoundbutthegroundconceals；Example【2：19】onlypresentitstenor-‘"time”buthidesitsvehicleandgroundthatitrarelydemandsexcessiveefforttofigureout；inExample[2：20】onlyvehicleappears，谢t11thetenor-computerproceduresbeingabsent；Example[2：21】seemsalittlemorecomplicated，thetenorandgroundbeingexistentandrespectivelycorrespondingto‘"rain"’and‘"thefaintwhisper"’andthevehiclebeingabsent；withregardstoExample[2：22]，only‘‘dream’’appearsasthetenorandfactuallythetenorismetaphorizedtobe‘‘thespace’’thatCanbewalkedinandoutof．Anotherpointnecessarytobeelucidatedisthattheexistenceof‘‘ground’’functionsasthepreconditiontobeametaphor；inotherwordsametaphorisgeneratedundertheconstraintsofsomerule：somesimilaritiesmustOCCurbetweenitssourceandtargetsemanticdomain．SeeExample【2：23】[2：23】YouarewaStingyourtime．“Time”actsasthetargetsemanticdomainorthetenorinExample【2：23]，whilethesourcesemanticdomain，thatis，thevehicledoesnotOCCUr．Accordingtomodemsemantics，(Saeed，2000：231·262；Yule，2000：114—123)asemanticdomainiscomposedofmanysemanticcomponents．Accordinglythesourcesemanticdomainmaybefurtherdecomposedintothosesemanticcomponentsasfollows：①acommodity,usuallyvaluable；②usuallyofficiallyissued；③countable；④usedasanexchangeableequivalentofallothercommodities；⑤usuallythesymbolofrichness； 山东大学硕士学位论文Muchinthesameway,‘"time”callbedecomposed，andconsequentlythesemanticcomponents‘"time’’and“money"’sharetogetherCanbefoundasfollows，①beingindispensableforaperson’slife；②abletobequantified；WithnosuchsimilaritiesitCannotberecognized勰ametaphor．Whileasfarasametaphoricalproverbistakenintoconsideration,theanalysisproposedabovemaynotbeapplicable．Seethefollowingexample，【2：24】Romeisnotbuiltinaday．Wecannotrecognizewithinthislinearstructureanywordorphraseconvincingenoughtobequalified嬲itstenor,vehicleorground．Say,ifweregard“Rome”勰thevehicle，thenwhichCanbethetenor?Takinganypartofthemetaphoricalproverb锻atenor,vehicleorgroundsimultaneouslyimpliesthemetaphoricalunderstandingoftherestparts．Inthisc黜interpreting‘"Rome’’嬲thevehiclenecessitatesmetaphoricallyunderstanding‘"built"’，ortheproverbcallnotberegarded嬲ametaphoricalproverb．Takeforinstanceaspecificsituationwherethisproverbisspoken，asfollows：【2：25】Thereisnoneedtosay"yes’or。no’tosuchquestions．‘"Romeisnotbuiltinoneday．”Howcallateachermakehisdemonstrationclassactiveandlivelyifhehasnotgivenhisstudentsenoughpracticeinhisusualteachingtime?Obviously‘‘Rome’’inthiscasereferstotheexcellentperformancebyateacherandhisstudentsinademonstrationclaSs．Inlinewiththeapproachforinterpretingthosecommonproverbs，onemayunderstandthisproverbinthespecificcontextroughlylikethis：Theexcellentperformanceisnotbuiltinoneday．Suchillustrationisevidentlyincompatiblewimreaders’actualunderstanding．Henceitisinappropriatetoconstrueametaphorical2l 山东大学硕十学位论文proverbinthewayofanalyzingthosecommonproverbs．Ashavebeenelucidatedabove，ametaphoricalproverbhasitscontext-freemeaningandmanycontext—dependentmeanings．Thus谢tllregardstoExample[2：241，itCanbeanalyzedasfollows，Romeisnotbuiltinaday．Itscontext-freemeaning：Romeisnotbuiltinoneday．Itscontext—dependentmeanings：①Gainingapromotioninpositionistheresultoflong—timeeffortsinyourwork．②TheSuccessofJack’sbusinessresultsfromhisprolongedpersistenceanddetermination．Thenthepapertendstoproposethatametaphoricalproverbshouldbeviewedasasemanticwholeinvalidatingitstenor,vehicleandground．Itscontext-freemeaningisthetenor；anyoneofitscontext-dependentmeaningsCanfunctionasthevehicle．Asforitsground，itisthekindofmeaningthatintegratesitscontext-freemeaningandcontext—dependentmeanings．Compared诵mthosecommonmetaphorsthatmaybecharacterizedbytheCO-existenceoftheirtenor,vehicleandgroundortheabsenceofoneortwoofthem,ametaphoricalproverbasasemanticwholeisthetenorofitselfinlanguageuseandthusneversurfacesitsvehicleandground．TakeforinstanceExample【2：23]，itscontext—freemeaning-Romeisnotbuiltinoneday—servesasthetenor，whichOccursinanylinguisticcontext；anyofitscontext-dependentmeaningsfunctionstobethevehicleinaspecificlinguisticcontext，whichneversurfacesanddemandssomeeffoastofigurethemout；fromallthosemeanings，context·freeandcontext-dependent，anotherlayerofmeaningCanbeabstractedtobeitsgroundthat‘‘Someachievementhasbeenmadethroughlong-timeendeavorsorevenstruggles”．ThislayerofmeaningturnsouttObemoregeneralandfundamentalandothermeaningspracticallyserveasitsrepresentationsinactualsituationsoflanguageuse．Inthischapterisconcentratedoncircumscribingandenucleatingthemetaphoricalproverb．Asanoverview,tobeametaphoricalproverbdemandsthepossibilityof 山东大学硕士学位论文!II．．．．．IIlllllll——Ill囊单笪皇曼皇曼曼曼黛possessingcontext-dependentmeaningsbesidesitscontext-freemeaning；torefertoametaphoricalproverbimpliestreatingitasasemanticwholeindistinguishingitsvehicle，tenorand．ground．HoweveritCannotbedeniedthatsomeofthosemetaphoricalproverbsmaybebythemselvescommonmetaphors,suchasthefollowingexamples。【2：25】Patienceisthebestremedy．ASacommonmetaphor,Example【2：25】ischaracterizedbytheCO．occurrenceofitsvehicleandtenor,respectivelybeing‘"patient"’and‘‘thebestremedy"’；whiletobeametaphoricalproverb，itisviewedsemantically嬲awholeandsurfacesonlyitstenorinanylinguisticcontext．Toillustratetheviewpointinquestionmoreplainly,adiagramischartedasfollows：TheSemanticStructurefTenor：context-freemeaningOflVehicle：context-dependentmeaningsAMetaphoricalProverbLGround：themeaningabstractedfrom蕊lthesemeanings, 山东大学硕士学位论文ChapterThreeTranslationofMetaphoricalProverbsAsanoverview,previouschaptershavebeenarrangedaroundacentraltheme-whatCanberecognizedasametaphoricalproverb?Onlythosebriefandsetclauses，widelyacceptedandusedamongpeople，generallyinvisual，picturesqueandvividlanguage，takingonthefunctionofimpartinglifeexperienceandteaching，Canberecognizedasproverbs；onlythoseproverbsthatpossessbotIIcontext—freemeaningandcontext-dependentmeaningscanbeacknowledgedasmetaphoricalproverbs．MetaphoricalproverbsaccountforagreatproportionofEnglishproverbs，simplyforthereason,ashasbeenmentionedpreviouslyinthisdissertation，thatpeoplecreateproverbsoutofthepurposeofimpartinglifeexperiencebyvirtueofimpressive，visualandsuccinctlanguage．Well，allthosediscussionsareinsomesensedesignatedtoserveasthetheoreticalbasisforexploringthetranslationofmetaphoricalproverbsand，inadeepersense，figuringoutsomeregul撕t)runderlingtheirdiversifiedtranslations．3．1ThreeApproachesforProverbTranslationInChapter3havebeendiscussedametaphoricalproverb’Stenor,vehicleandground，whichrespectivelycorrespondtoitscontext-freemeaning，context—dependentmeaningsandthemeaningabstractedfromallthosemeanings．Basedonthis，threeapproachesareproposedfortranslatingmetaphoricalproverbs，thatis，(1)Translatingthetenor,thatisthecontext-freemeaning，ofametaphoricalproverb；(2)Translatingthevehiclethatisoneofthecontext—dependentmeanings，ofametaphoricalproverb；(3)Translatingtheground，thatisthemeaningabstractedfromallthesesituation-specificmeanings，bothcontext—freemeaningandcontext—dependentmeaningsincluded．NextisasegmentexcerptedfromHome,SweetHomewrittenbyanAmericanauthor 山东大学硕士学位论文皇曼置量皇—■量量舅寰曼曼皇曼曼曼量皇量量鼍量曼皇曼曼量曼喜葛IIII曼蔓曼量皇曼量置曼量曼皇曼皇量皇曼曼量量曼曼皇曼量皇皇量曼曼量皇暑曼皇曼量曼奠曼量【3：1】London，Paris，Rome，Tokyo-theyaleallverygoodplacestolivein，I"msure，butwhenonehasanapartmentandacarandallthemoneyonewantsforclothesandamusements，thereisnoplacelikeNewYork．WellParisianswillsaythesamethingabouttheirParis．SowillRomansabouttheirRome．Here“Thereisno#acelikeNewY0rk，’isreadilyrecognizedasametaphoricalproverb，itstenor，vehicleandgroundrespectivelybeing：。(1)NoplaceisbetterthanNewY0rk(orclausesconveyingsimilarmeaning)．(2)NoplaceisbetterthanParis⋯⋯(orclausesconveyingsimilarmeaning)(3)Noplaceisbetterthanhisorherhometownforaperson(clausesconveyingsimilarmeaning)．AccordinglythreekindsofChineseversionstailbeproduced，asfollows，(1)哪儿也赶不上纽约．(2)哪儿也赶不上巴黎；金窝银窝赶不上自己的草窝；山是故乡好，月是故乡明；甜不甜，故乡水，亲不亲，故乡人①．(3)哪儿也赶不上自己的家乡；天涯无处似家乡3．2EvaluatingtheThreeApproachesTheoreticallyallmetaphoricalproverbscanbetranslatedthroughapplyingthefirstapproach，thatis，theyCanbetranslatedliterally．However’therulemaynotbeapplicableforthosethatarequiteculture·specific．Ashasbeenalludedtoinpreviouschapters，a国VersionsgivenbyPmfessorLiShaoming 山东大学硕十学位论文proverbfunctionstoimpartlifeexperienceandthereforeinmostcasesreflectsthoselawsoperatinginnatureandsociety．SomeofthelawsareinvariablyoperatinginallnationsandculturesandthuswhatthoseproverbsconveyCanbereadilyrecognizedbypeopleallovertheworldorinmostpartsoftheworld．Seethefollowingexamples，【3：2】Ifwintercomes，Canspringbefarbehind?【3：3】Thechildisfatheroftheman．[3：4】Arollingstonegathersnomass．[3：5】Aburntchilddreadsthefire．ProverbsliketheseabovereflectthecommonnessamongdistinctiveculturesandtheirliteraltranslationCanbeacceptedwithoutbegettingmisunderstandinginadifferentnation．Therefore，thefkstapproachcanbesafelyutilizedandwegetthefollowingversionsrespectively：(1)冬天来了，春天还会远吗?(2)从小看大．(3)滚石不生苔．(4)烧伤的孩子最怕火．Whilemostproverbscreatedbyanationarecloselyrelatedtoitsspecifichistory,economy,politics，customs，naturalconditions，andthingsalike，thatis，theyareculture-specific，andthustheliteraltranslationofthemmaycausesomeproblemsinunderstandinginanothercultureforthosewhoareunfamiliar谢tlltheSOurCeculture．SeeExample【3：6】and[3：7】，【3：6】WhenGreekmeetsGreek，thencomesthetugofwar．[3：7】Carekilledacat．Inaccordancewiththefirstapproach，wegettheChineseversionrespectively：(1)希腊人遇上希腊人，定是一场好斗．(2)忧虑杀死猫．ThenthoseChineseunfamiliarwithwesternculturemayfeelconfusedaboutwhat26 山东大学硕士学位论文meaningtheproverbsreallyconvey．Factually"Example【3：6】isconnected晰廿lanancientWalt",whereAlexanderthekingofancientMacedoniainvaded、析mhisforcesthecityofGreecebutencounteredthestaunchresistance．BothsidesinvolvedintothewarareGreek．HencetheproverbisusuaUyusedtorefertothefiercecontestbetweentwosidesincounterbalance．Example【3：7】impliesaBritishsuperstition-Acathasninelives．Thereforehere“cat"issymbolized勰strongvitality．ProverbslikeExample【3：6】and【3：7】areculture··specificandthetranslationoftheircontext··freemeaningCanbeunadvisableinsomesituations．Whilebyapplyingthethirdapproach,thatis，translatingitsGround，theproblemcanbeappropriatelysolved．Accordinglytworevisedversionsfileproposedasfollows，(1)两雄相争，其斗必烈．(2)忧虑伤身．Tosumup，thefirstapproachmaycausesomedifficultiesinunderstandingfortargetculturereaderswhoaleunfamiliarwithsourceculture，whileontheotherhandthiscallalsoarousereaders’interesttolearnaforeigncultureandhencepromotethemutualunderstandingbetweentwonations．Theapplicationoftranslatingthetenorofametaphoricalproverbfeaturesmerits舔wellasdemerits．Soarethesecondandthethirdapproach．TheChineseversion“两雄相争，其斗必烈”providestheconvenienceforChinesereaderstoreadbutconcealsallancientquotation．Whenitcomestothequestionofchoosingwhichversioninpracticaloperation，manyfactorsneedstobetakenintoconsideration．3．3FactorsConsideredinChoosingaTranslatingApproachFollowingthesectionabovemoreillustrationsaleconsiderednecessary．SeeExamplef3：8】and【3：9】．【3：8】Afterastormcomesacalm．【3：9】Fishbeginstosinkatthehead． 山东大学硕士学位论文【3：10】Homersometimesnods．Example【3：8】callbetranslatedliterallyinto“雨过天晴”，丽tlIthetenorbeingtransferred．WhileasforExample【3：9】，ifitistranslatedinto“鱼头最先沉下去”，theChineseversionisnotonlyinconsistent、析tllthecriteriatobeaproverbbutratheropaqueinconveyingitssense，SOweadopttheversion“上梁不正下梁歪”，whichconveysaChinese—specificcontext-dependentmeaning；butinthecaseofExample【3：10]，botllitsChineseversions-‘‘荷马也有打盹的时候”and“人非圣贤，孰能无过”seemfeasible．Bothversionshavetheirmerits嬲wellaSdemerits，thefirstpossibleinarousingChinesereaders’interesttoprobeinto“Homer"’andthuseffectivelyplayingtheroleofdeepeningthemutualunderstandingandcommunicationsbetweenChinesenationandwesternsociety,butalsolikelytoresultinsomeobstaclesforthosewhoarenotfamiliar、jl，itllwesternculture．thesecondcreatingasmoothreadingandapropercorrespondenceofefficiencyandclarityinexpression．Sofartheculturalelementcounts弱ourmajorconcerninchoosingatranslationapproach．Otherfactorswillalso．beelucidatedintheimmediatesections3．3．1CulturalSpecificityofMetaphoricalProverbsAccordingtowhathavebeenremarked，metaphoricalproverbsmayberoughlyclassifiedintotwogroups：culture·unspecificproverbsandculture-specificproverbs．Theformerreferstothosethatreflectthecommonnessamongdifferentcultures；thelatterarethosethatarespecifictoadistinctiveculture．Inviewoftheculturalspecificityofmetaphoricalproverbs，theacceptabilityoftranslatedproverbsshouldbepre—consideredbeforechoosingatranslatingapproach．Ashasbeenmadeout，thefirstapproachmaygivebirthtoversionsthatcausemisunderstandingsduetoculturaldifferenceandthusfeaturelowacceptabilityintargetcultm"e．T11isistrueespeciallytothoseculture—specificmetaphoricalproverbs．ForabettercharacterizationofculturalspecificityofEnglishproverbs，thedissertationheremakestentativeattempttoclassifyEnglishproverbsintofourcategories，asfollows，1．Metaphoricalproverbsfromanation’Slong-timelifeandworkexperience，likethe2R followingexample【3：11】Afterastormcomesacalm雨过天晴／否极泰来；WeedswantnoSOWS杂革不需要种子；Fishbeginstosinkatthehead鱼头最先沉下去／上梁不正下梁歪：Emptyvesselsmakethegreatestsound空桶声最响，一瓶子不晌半瓶子咣当；．Abirdinthehandisworthtwointhebush．双鸟在林不如一鸟在手7赊欠的不如拿现的／今日给只蛋强似明日给只鸡；Makehaywhilethesunshines．晒草要赶太阳；2．Thosefromanation’Sreligiousbelief,thinkingandmentality,舔follows【3：12】Itisafoolishsheepthatmakesthewolfhisconfessor．只有蠢羊才向狼忏Whenthedevilisdead，heneverlacksachiefmourner．魔鬼死了也会有人哀悼；秦桧也有三个好朋友；HethatservesGodformoneywillservethedevilforbetterwages．为金钱替上帝效劳的入，为更多的钱也愿意被魔鬼驱使／为钱敬神，就能为钱捣鬼；3．Thosefrommyths，fables，literature，celebrities’remarksandtheBible，likethefollows【3：13】WhenGreekmeetsGreek，thencomesthetugofwar．两雄相争，其斗必烈Homersometimesnods．(Greece)荷马也有打盹的时候／老虎也有打盹的时候／(人非圣贤)孰能无过；Oneswallowdoesnotmakeasummer．(Greece)一燕不成夏／一花独放不成春／一花独放红一点，酉花盛开春满园；Judasbetrayedhismasterwithakiss．(Bible)犹大吻了师傅却背叛了／13蜜 山东大学硕士学位论文腹剑①；Don’tcountyourkitchensbeforethey’rehatched．(Aesop’SFables)蛋未孵出，莫数小鸡／未孵数鸡；4．Thosefromforeignproverbsthroughtranslation．SeeExample[4：14】[3：14JNothingcomesfromnothing．(fromLatin)无风不起浪／不是空穴来风／无火不生烟Putthecartbeforethehorse．(fromFrench)本末倒置／颠倒次序／套车拉牛Ablackhenlayswhiteegg．(fromFrench)丑妇生俊儿Appetitecomeswitheating．(fromFrench)胃口越吃越大Burntbairnsdreadthefire．(fromRussian)烫伤的孩子常怕火Category(1)accountsforagreatproportionofEnglishproverbs．Thoseproverbsreflectspeople’Slifeandworkexperiencethatarecommonthroughouttheworld，andthereforewhattheyconveyCanbesimplyrecognizedandacceptedbyanothernation，SOculturalspecificitydoesnotcountasafactorthatneedstobeconsideredintranslatingmetaphoricalproverbslikethoseinExample【3：12]．WhilesomeproverbsinCategory(2)and(3)turnouttobequiteculture-specific，andthustheacceptabilityoftheirChineseversionsoughttobetakenintoconsiderationinchoosingatranslatingapproach．Asawhole，themajorityofEnglishproverbsarerootedinpeople’Slifeandworkexperienceandnotculture-specific．Whileforthoseculture-specificproverbs，thedecisionofwhethertheirculturalflavoristobemaintainedshouldbeworkedout．Byutilizingthefu"stapproach，thatis，translatingthetenorofthosemetaphoricalproverbs，theculturalspecificitymaybewellreserved．However,ifconcemisdeliveredontheacceptabilityoftheirChineseversions，thentheapproachoftranslatingthevehicleorgroundisadvisable．3．3．2CriteriaforBeingaProverbInthesection3．1．4hasbeengivenadefinitionofproverbaftercomparisonsaremade。TranslatedbyreferencetoversionsgivenbyProfessorLiShaoming30 山东大学硕士学位论文betweenproverbsandothersetexpressionslikesetphrases，sayingsandmaxims．Thissectionisschemedtomakefurtherexplorationsuponthecriteriaforbeingaproverb．Tosumup，aproverbfeaturesafewtypicalcharacteristics，asfollows，(1)Linguistically,aproverbcanbecharacterizedtobeconcise，vulgarandsomewhatrhythmic．Itneedstobenotedthatmostproverbsareproducedorallybytheworkingmasses，ascanbefullytestifiedbYthefollowingexamples．【3：15】Everydoghashisday．Everymallhasafoolinhissleeve．Nolongandliterarywordscanbefoundinproverbsabove，andsimplythecombinationofthosevividwordsatalltimeproducesboldimagesthatarehighlyimplicativeandsuccessfullygivesexpressiontothoseintricateanddullrules．Thatiswhereaproverbdisplayitscharm．(2)Structurally,aproverbisasetclause，briefbutinitsfullsense，notaphraseorallincompleteclause；anditsstructuremaintainshighstabilityinkeepingitscomponentsfrombeingsubstituted．SeeExample【3：16】【3：16】Theearlybirdcatchestheworm．WeCannotsay‘‘Theearlybirdscatchesthebug’’though‘‘bug"’conveysasimilarmeaningwith“worm”．(3)Semantically,aproverbdeliversacompletesense，healthy,philosophicandalwaysloadedwitllpeople’Slifeexperience，whichtendstobeeducationalandinstructivebutnotmerelydescriptive．Themassesconvergetheirwisdomintoproverbsforthepurposeofimpartingtheirexperiencetoothers．Hencetheeducationalandinstructivefunctioncountsasthemostfundamentalandprimaryforaproverbtocarryout．What’Smore，thesecomplicatedlawsarealwaysexpressedoutbyvirtueofsimpleandpicturesquelanguage．Example[2：2】，[2：3】，and【2：4】andrelevantdiscussionsthathavebeengiveninChapter3Canwellillustratethisview． 山东大学硕士学位论文Indecidingonwhetheranexpressionisaproverbornot，thesecriteriamaybehelpful．Nevertheless，aviewCOJInotbedeniedthatmanysetexpressionsareconventionallyrecognizedandaccepted嬲proverbsbypeople，SOitisunadvisabletoarbitrarilyjudgealinguisticexpressiontobeaproverb．Abovehasbeenprobedintothecriteriaforbeingaproverb．WhenitcomestothetranslationofEnglishproverbs，questionsemerge．DotheChineseversionsofanEnglishproverbabidebythecriteriaforbeingaproverb?ShouldtheChineseversionofanEnglishmetaphoricalproverbbealsoaproverb，aChineseproverb?AshaSbeenmentioned，mostproverbsareconventionMlyrecognizedandaccepted．ThereforeinrealpracticeitCanbeobservedthatmostChineseversionsofEnglishproverbsfallshortofthecriterialistedaboveandalenotproverbsintheirrealsense．TheviewfindsitsechoinDagut’SremarkswhenwenarrowourconcernontoEnglishmetaphoricalproverbs，“SinceametaphorintheSL(sourcelanguage)is，bydefinition,asemanticnovelty,itCanclearlyhaveno‘equivalence’intheTL(targetlanguage)：whatisuniqueCanhavenocounterpart．’’(Bassnett，2004：31)3．3．3EquivalenceAsWilss(2001：134)remarks，“TheconceptofTE(translationequivalence)hasbeenanessentialissuenotonlyintranslationtheoryoverthelast2000years，butalsoinmodemtranslationstudies．’’HeretheintroductionofequivalenceasaconceptisoutoftheconcernaboutaquestionmentionedinSection4．3．2：ShouldtheChineseversionofanEnglishmetaphoricalproverbbealsoaproverb，aChineseproverb?Proverbsfeaturetheirspecificcharacteristicsandenjoypopularityamongthemasses、ⅣitIltheirlanguagebeingsimple．vulgar,highlyimplicativebuteaSytounderstand．HerebytheequivalencebetweenanEnglishproverbanditsChineseversionbecomesanidealmosttranslationpractitionersmakeeveryefforttoachieve．AsissummedupbyPeterNewmark,“ithaSsometimesbeensaidthattheoverridingpurposeofanytranslationshouldbetoachieve‘equivalenteffect’，i．e．toproducetheSatlleeffect(orone嬲closeaspossible)onthereadershipofthetranslationaswasobtainedonthereadershipoftheoriginal”．32Characteristically,‘"theconceptofequivalenceappearsatfu"stinMathematics”，Wilss 山东大学硕士学位论文(2001：138)remarks，“Mathematiciansllsethetermequivalenceifbetweentheelementsof(two)setsareversiblyunambiguousrelmionprevails．Withintheframeworkofthescienceoftranslation，itwaspresumablyJakobsonwhointroducedthetermequivalenceinhisarticleOnLinguisticAspectsofTranslation"’．Thisarticlehas，intheinterim，becomeaclassicofthescienceoftranslationbecauseofJakobson’Scoinageoftheconceptof‘equivalenceindifference’whichhasturnedouttobevitalforthefuturedevelopmentofthescienceoftranslation．Regardlessoftheoriginoftheterm，heretheimportanceistobe、attachedtothecontentsofequivalence．Manytranslationtheoristshavebroughtforwardtheirflamesconcerningequivalence．AmongthemEugeneNida(1964)distinguishesformalequivalenceanddynamicequivalenceasbasicorientationsratherthanasabinarychoice．Formalequivalenceistoachievetheclosestmatchofformandcontentbetweensourcetextandtargettext；dynamicequivalenceconsistsinaprincipleofequivalenceofeffectonreaderoftargettext．O．Kade(1968)putsforwardfourtypesofequivalenceinprobingintoGermany-Englishtranslation．Theyaretotalequivalence，facultativeequivalence，approximateequivalence，andzeroequivalence．Kadeexploresequivalencefromtheviewpointofthedegreeofequivalence．WhilePopovic(1976)distinguishesfourtypesofequivalenceintermsofitscontents：(1)Linguisticequivalence，wherethereishomogeneityonthelinguisticlevelofbothSLandTLtexts，i．e．wordforwordtranslation(2)Pragmaticequivalence，wherethereisequivalenceof‘theelementsofaparadigmaticexpressiveaxis’，i．e．elementsofgrammar,whichPopovicseesasbeingahighercategorythanlexicalequivalence．(3)Stylistic(translational)equivalence，wherethereis‘functionalequivalenceofelementsinbothoriginalandtranslation’aimingatanexpressiveidentitywithaninvariantofidenticalmeaning．(4)Textual(syntagmatic)equivalence，wherethereisequivalenceofthesyntagmaticstructuringofatext，i．e．equivalenceofformandshape．(BassneR，2004：32)W．Koller(1983)advancesmoredetailedclassificationsconcemingtheconceptofequivalence：denotativeequivalence，connotativeequivalence，text-normativeequivalence，33 山东大学硕}学位论文pragmaticequivalence，andformal-aestheticequivalence．Byreferencetothepreviousstudyconductedonequivalenceandwithaviewtometaphoricalproverbtranslation，thepapertendstoproposetwolayersofequivalencetobeachievedinproverbtranslation：(1)SemanticEquivalence．Ashasbeenapproached，ametaphoricalproverbholdsthreekindsofmeanings：context—freemeaning，context—dependentmeaningsandthemeaningabstractfromallthosemeanings，respectivelybeingitstenor,vehicleandground．Factuallyallthesemeaningsareinahierarchicalstructure．Asforametaphoricalproverb，theabstractedmeaningcountsasthefundamentalandiscovea；itscontext·-freeandcontext·-dependentmeaningsareoveaandtheexplicitrepresentationofitsabstractedmeaning．Seethefollowingexample．【3：17】Caesar’S嘶femustbeabovesuspicion．Thismetaphoricalproverbissubjecttothefollowinginterpretation：①TheTenor：AsCaesar’swife,she(mustpreservehermoralintegrityand)keepherselffromsuspicion．②TheVehicle：Aspresidem’Sson，hemust(watchthebehaviorofhimselfeverandagainand)avoidothers’suspicion．③TheGround：Anybodycloselyrelatedtogreatpersonagesshouldrestrainhimselforherselfandnotallowanychancetoexistforbeingsuspected．Byapplyingthethreeapproachesmentionedinpreviouschapters，wegetitsChineseversionscorrespondingly：①身为恺撒妻，必须无可疑．②身为总统子，必须无可疑；伴君者必洁身①；③跟伟大人物有密切联系的人，必须洁身自爱，无容怀疑．oVersiongivenbyProfessorLiShaoming 山东大学硕士学位论文Asforthiscase，thefirstChineseversionisinthesamehierarchywiththeoriginalproverb，whileotherversionscannotberegarded弱equivalenttothesourceproverb，atleastfromthepointofviewofsemanticllier盯chy．SeeExample【3：18】【3：18】Anewbroomsweepsclean．Acommontranslationis“新官上任三把火”，whichisnotequivalenttoitsoriginalproverbbecameoftheinconsistencybetweenthemonsemantichierarchy．(2)StylisticEquivalence．Thestyleofproverbshasbeennoticedpreviously．Mostproverbsfindtheirrootinthemasses’lifeandwork，andthereforearequitecolloquialinvulgar,simpleandcompactlanguage．ThustoattainstylisticequivalencebetweenanEnglishproverbanditsChineseversionmeanstoretainaflavorsimilarwiththeoriginalinverbiage，mood，tone，andthingsalike．SeeExample【3：19】【3：19】Twodogsstriveforaboneandathirdrunsaway、^，i廿lit．Zeng(1983：77)presentstwoChineseversions：①两狗相争一骨头，第三只狗衔起走．②鹬蚌相争，渔翁得利．Compared谢ththefirstversion，thesecondisobviouslymoreneatlyarrangedandhappenstobeaChinesesetphrase．Henceitseemstobebetteratranslationthanthefirstandyettooliteraryandgenteeltobeaproverbliketheoriginalone．Inviewofthestylisticequivalence，thesecondversionisofnosuperiority．Ascanbeobserved，theconceptofequivalencehereisadoptedinanalTOWsense．ItturnsoutthateventheChineseversionsthathaveachievedthetwolayersofequivalence、析ththeoriginalEnglishmetaphoricalproverbareinmostcasesdivergentfromthecriteriaforbeingaChineseproverb．Someofthefactorsaremutuallyrepellent．Thatistosay,itisimpossiblefortheChineseversionofanEnglishproverbtofulfilltherequirementforequivalenceatthesametimeofaccordingwitllthecriteriaforbeingaproverb．35 山东大学硕士学位论文3．3·4SummaryThissectionfocusesonfactorsinfluencingthechoiceoftranslatingapproachesinproverbtranslation．Threefactorshavebeenlistedandprobedintoindetails：theculturalspecificity,thecriteriaforbeingaproverb，andequivalence．Undercarefulexamination,afactcanbediscoveredthatthethreefactorsareinter-relatedwitheachotherandsubstantivelyalltouchupononematter：CananEnglishproverbbetranslatedintoaChineseproverbinitsrealsense?AnEnglishproverbfeatures，besidesthosecommoncharacteristicssharedbyallproverbsasacategory,itsspecificcultural，formalandstylistictraits．Generally,noall—sidedcorrespondencebetweenanEnglishmetaphoricalproverbandaChineseproverbCanbeestablishedwiththeculturalflavor,form，andstyleofanEnglishproverballbeingretainedinitsChineseversion．Thiscallbetestifiedintranslationpractice．Sincenoperfectionisachieved，thencomesthequestion：whichfeatureorfeaturesofametaphoricalproverbaletoberetainedinitsChineseversion,itsculturalflavor,linguisticfeaturesormeanings?HerethedissertationistodrawinspirationfromFunctionalistApproaches，whichproposestodecide，onthetranslationstrategyaccordingtotheskopos(inVermeer’Sterm)tobeachieved，tohandlethisproblem．． 山东大学硕士学位论文ChapterFourFunctionalistApproachesandTheirApplicationinProverbTranslation．AboveinSection4．3．3hasbeenmentionedtheequivalence—basedapproaches，whichconcentratesonthesourcetextandadvocatesthatthefeaturesofthesourcetexthavetobepreserved．ForWemerKoller,Thereexistsequivalencebetweenagivensour(d．贮textandagiventargettextifthetargettextfulfilscertainrequirementswithrespectstotheseframeconditions．Therelevantconditionsarethosehavingtodo、Ⅳimsuchrespectsascontent,styleandfunction．Therequirementofequivalencethushasthefollowingform：quality(orqualities)XintheSLtextmustbepreserved．Thismeansthatthesource—languagecontent,form，style,function，etc．mustbepreserved，oratleast-thatthetranslationmustseektopreservethemasfaraspossible．(Chesterman，1989：100)Asfarasproverbtranslationisconcerned,featuresoftheoriginalproverbcannotbepreservedinanall-roundway,ashasbeenconcludedinSection4．3．Henceequivalence—basedapproachesprovideUSlimitedhelpinsettlingthematteLModemfunctionalismwasintroducedintranslationstudiesinthe1970s，originallyinGermany．Accordingtothefunctionalisttranslationtheory,ashaspoimedoutbyKussmaul，(1995：92)weshould‘"trytoreproducejustthatsemanticfeatureorjustthosefeatureswhichis／arerelevantinagivencontextwithregardtothefunctionofyourtranslation"’．Thisisperfectlyapplicabletotheproverbtranslationthatthedissertationcenterson．Immediatelyfollowsahistoricalreviewoffunctionalisttranslationapproacheswiththefocusontheviewsofthreecelebrities：KatharinaReiss，HansVermeerandJustaHolzManttari．37 山东大学硕士学位论文4．1AHistoricalReviewFunctionalisttranslationtheorycomestoshapeinGermanyin1970sandwitnessesthreephasesofdevelopment．KatharinaReisspresentsinherbookPossibilitiesandLimitations加TranslationCriticismpublishedin1971somefunctionalistviewsthatarecommonlyrecognizedastherudimentsoffunctionalistapproaches．IfwesayReissstillsticktotheequivalencetheory,thenVermeercompletelyforsakesitandbringsforwardSkopostheory．BasedonVermeer’Sresearch,ManttariprecipitatesfurtherdevelopmentthroughhistheoryofTranslationalAction．洲lefunctionalistapproachestotranslationisnotwithoutasoul"ce．Inthefollowingfirstpartwillbeexhibitedsomeearlyviewsimplyingsomehintoffunctionalism．’4．1．1EarlyViews，Functionalisttranslationtheorydidnotcomeintobeingallofasudden，butinacircumstancewheremanytransitionpractitioners，especiallyBibletranslators，haveintheirtranslationpracticereachedacommonpoim：differentsituationsrequirecorrespondingrenderings．AsNord(2001：4)observes，“ManyBibletranslatorshavefeltthattheprocessoftranslatingshouldinvolvebotllprocedures：afaithfulreproductionofformalsource—textqualitiesinonesituationandanadjustmenttothetargetaudienceinanother"’．NordalsoexemplifiesJeromeandMartinLuther,whoholdtheviewthattherearepassagesintheBiblewherethetranslatormustreproduce“eventheword-order"’orkeep‘‘totheletter"’；inotherpassagestheybelieveditwasmoreimportant‘‘torenderthesense’’ortoadjustthetexttothetargetaudience’Sneedsandexpectations．TheseviewsstilldonotdisplaydirectcontactwithfunctionalismbutatleastindicateafocusshiRfromsourcetexttotargettextanditsreaders．Amongthosescholars，EuegneA．Nida,whomainlygothisreputationintranslationtheoreticalresearchforthedistinctionheadvancesbetweenformalanddynamicequivalence，maybeCountedasonewhoexplicitlystatesafunctionalistview．InAFrameworkfortheAnalysisandEvaluationofTheoriesof 山东大学硕士学位论文Translation，Nida(1976：64)attachesspecialimportanceonthepurposeoftranslation：Whenthequestionofthesuperiorityofonetranslationoveranotherisraised，theanswershouldbelookedforintheanswertoanotherquestion,‘bestforwhom?’TherelativeadequacyofdifferenttranslationsofthesametextcanonlybedeterminedintermsoftheextenttowhicheachtranslationsuccessfullyfulfillsthepurposeforwhichitWaSintended．Inother、Ⅳords，therelativevalidityofeachtranslationisseeninthedegreetowhichthereceptorsareabletorespondtoitsmessage(intermsofbotllformandcontent)incomparison、)~，itll(1)whattheoriginalauthorevidentlyintendedwouldbetheresponseoftheoriginalaudienceand(2)howthataudiencedid，infact,respond．Theresponsescan，ofcourse，neverbeidentical，forinterlingualcommunicationalwaysimpliessomedifferencesinculturalsetting，withaccompanyingdiversitiesinvaluesystems，concepmMpresuppositions，andhistoricalantecedents．ThoughNidaexploresthetranslationpurposefromtheviewpointoftranslationcriticismandstillhoverswithintheframeworkofequivalenceheputsforward，thisdiscourseconveysaninclinationtotakeintoconsiderationsthefunctionatranslationisintendedtoachieve．4．1．2KatharinaReissandHerViewsKatharinaReiss’Sinterestismainlyputintranslationcriticism．Takingequivalence嬲herbaSis，ReissdevelopsamodeloftranslationcriticismbaSedonthefunctionalrelationshipbetweensourceandtargettexts．AccordingtoReiss，theidealtranslationwouldbeone‘‘inwhichtheaimintheTL(targetlanguage)isequivalenceasregardstheconceptualcontent，linguisticformandcommunicativefunctionofaSL(sourcelanguage)text．”(1977，translationin1989：112)Reissrealizesthatreallifepresentssituationswhereequivalenceisnotpossibleand，insomecaSes，notevendesired．Onesituationiswhenthetargetlanguageisintendedtoachieveapurposeorfunctionotherthanthatoftheoriginal．39 山东大学硕十学位论文Afurthersituationiswhenthetargettextaddressesanaudiencedifferentfromtheintendedreadershipoftheoriginal．ExamplesincludetranslatingGuHiver≥Travelsforchildrenandvariousformsofideologicaleditingmotivatedbyreligious，ethicalorcommercialcriteria．Insuchsituationsthefunctionalperspectivetakesprecedenceoverthenormalstandardsofequivalence．ThusforReiss，“itgoeswithoutsayingthatallthetypesoftranslationmentionedmaybejustifiedinparticularcircumstances．”([1977】1989：114f)4．1．3HansJ．VermeerandSkopostheoryIfitCanbeadmittedthatReissonlypresentswithintheframeworkofequivalencesomefunctionalperspectivethatmainlydeals谢thsomeexceptivesituations，Vermeercallberegardedasmorethorougharevolutionist，whobreaksawayfromequivalencetheory．Vermeerconsiderstranslationtobeatypeoftransferwherecommtmicativeverbalandnon-verbalsignsaretransferredfromonelanguageintoanother(othertypeswouldincludethetransferfrompicturestomusic，orfromablueprinttoabuilding)，translationisthusalsoatypeofhumanaction,whichthenVermeerdefinesasintentional，purposefulbehaviorthattakesplaceinagivensituation．(Nord，2001：11)ThereforeinVermeer’Sapproach,translationisaformoftranslationalActionbasedonasourcetcxt，whichmayconsistofverbaland／ornon-verbalelements，thisgeneralframeisexplainedasfollows：Anyformoftranslationalaction，includingthereforetranslationitself,maybeconceivedasaIlaction，asthenameimplies．Anyactionhasallaim，apurpose．【⋯】Thewordskopos，then，isatechnicaltermfortheaimorpurposeofatranslation．【⋯】Further：anactionleadstoaresult，anewsituationorevent，andpossiblytoa‘"new"object．(Vermeer,1989a：1730ThisiswhatVermeercallshistheorySkopostheorie，atheoryofpurposefulaction，underwhichtheaddresseeasoneofthemostimportantfactorsdeterminingthepurposeofatranslation，thatistheskopos，ishighlyemphasized．Everytranslationisdirectedatall 山东大学硕十学位论文intendedaudience，sincetotranslatemeans‘‘toproduceatextinatargetsettingforatargetpurposeandtargetaddresseesintargetcircumstances．’’(Vermeer,1987：29)4．1．4JustaHolz-ManttariandtheTheoryofTranslationalActionJustaHolz—ManttaribearsmuchsimilaritywimVermeerinseeingtranslationasanactionwinlspecificpurposeorintention，whileshegoesonestepfurtherthanVermeerinthathertheoryisdesignedtocoverallformsofinterculturaltransfer,includingthosewhichdonotinvolveanysourceortargettext．Shepreferstospeakof‘"messagetransmitters”，ratherthantranslation，whichconsistsoftextualmaterialcombined、Ⅳimothermediasuchaspictures．soundsandbodymovements．AsHilz—Manttariputsit：Translationalactionistheprocessofproducingamessagetransmitterofacertainkind，designedtobeemployedinsuper-ordinateactionsystemsinordertocoordinateactionalandcommunicativecooperation．(Holz-Manttari，1984：17)Holz-Manttariplacesspecialemphasisontheactionalaspectsofthetranslationprocess，analyzingtherolesoftheparticipants(initiator,translator,user,messagereceiver)andthesituationalconditions(time，place，medium)inwhichtheiractivitiestakeplace．Oneofherprimeconcernsisthestatusoftranslators．4．1．5SummaryofFunctionalistApproachestowardsTranslationAsisrecognizedbyReiss，thereexistsituationswhereequivalenceCannotbeachieved．Factuallynoabsoluteequivalencecanbereachedintranslationpractice，whichhasbeendiscussedinSection4．3．Compared谢mequivalence—basedtheories，functionalistapproachesontranslationshiftthefocusfromtheoriginaltexttothetargetcontextandtheintendedaudienceandtakethepurposeorfunctionatargettextisintendedtoachieveasthecriteriontodecideonatranslationversion．Thepurposeorfunctionoftranslmion，aSanactionorbehavior,istermedasSkopos，thekeyconceptinfunctionalismapproaches．Accordingtoskoposrule，atranslationalactionisdeterminedbyitsskopos；thatis，“the4l 山东大学硕十学位论文endjustifiesthemeans．”(ReissandVermeer,1984：101)Vermeerexplainstheskoposruleinthefollowingway：Eachtextisproducedforagivenpurposeandshouldservethispurpose．TheskoposrulethusreadsaSfollows：translate／interpret／speak／writeinawaythatenablesyourtext／translationtofunctioninthesituationinwhichitisusedandwiththepeoplewhowanttuseitandpreciselyinthewaytheywantittofunction．(Vermeer,1989b：20)TheSkopostheoriewellsolvestheeternaldilemmasoffreeandfaithfultranslation，dynamicandformalequivalence，andSOon．TheSkoposofaparticulartranslationtaskrequiresafreeorfaithfultranslation，oranythingbetweenthesetwoextremes，dependingonthepurposeforwhichthetransitionisneeded．Asfarasproverbtranslationisconcerned，threeapproachesmayproducethreekindsoftranslation，whichrespectivelypreservesomecharacteristicsoftheoriginalwhileatthesametimefailtoconveysomeinformation．Whichoneistobechosen?Itshouldbedecidedaccordingtowhattheskopostheproverbisintendedtoachieveinthetargetcontext．4．2ApplicationofFunctionalistApproachesinProverbTranslationInaccordancewitIltheprinciplesoffunctionalistapproachestowardstranslation，thechoiceofanapproachfortranslatingallEnglishproverbhingesontheskopostheproverbisintendedtofulfillinthetargetcontext．4．2．1ThreeKindsofSkoposThetermskoposingeneralreferstothepurposeofthetargettext．Vermeer(1989b：100)makesmoreminutesubdivisionofthisconcept．Threepossiblekindsofpurposesinthefieldoftranslationaredistinguished：thegeneralpurposeaimedatbythetranslatorinthe42 山东大学硕士学位论文translationprocess(perhaps‘toearnaliving’)，thecommunicativepurposeaimedatbythetargettextinthetargetsituation(perhaps‘toinstructthereader’)andthepurposeaimedatbyaparticulartranslationstrategyorprocedure(forexample，‘totranslateliterallyinordertoshowthestructuralparticularitiesofthesottrcelanguage’)．UsingVermeer’Sframeworkforreference，thispapermaytentativelypresentatripartitedistinctionofskopos：thegeneralskopostobefulfilledundersomeexteriorforceliketherequirementso，fthesponsororpublisher,thecommunicativeskopostobefulfilledfortheconsiderationoftargetcontextortargetteXtreaders’convenientunderstanding，andthelinguisticskopostobefulfilledinviewofachievingthelinguisticaswell舔stylisticequivalencebetweenthesourceandthetargettext．Seethefollowingexample：【4：1】(Morocco)AcarrionDeath,withinwhoseemptyeyeThereisawrittenscroll．I"llreadthewriting．Allthatglittersisnotgold；Oftenhaveyouheardthattold：ManyamanhislifehathsoldButmyoutsidetobehold：．．Gildedtombsdowormsinfold．Hadyoubeen弱wiseashold，．Younginlimbs，injudgmentold，Youranswerhadnotbeeninscroll’d：Fareyouwell；yoursuitiscold．Shakespeare，TheMerchantofVenice(ActII，SceneVII)(1)倒霉!这是什么?是个骷髅，眼窟窿里有个纸卷。我念念上面的词。发亮光的不全是金：这道理你听取在心：许多人把性命丧了，只为看看我的外表：镀金的坟墓包着蠕虫。43 山东大学硕士学位论文你若是有勇敢又聪明，＼四肢强健，思想老成，你不至得到这样的回话”．、．再会!你的婚事算是作罢。、@(2)哎哟，该死!这是什么?一个死人的骷髅。那空空的眼眶里藏着一张有字的纸卷。让我读读上面写着什么。发光的不全是黄金，古人的说话没有骗人；多少世人出卖了一生，不过看到了我的外形，蛆虫占据着镀金的坟你要是又大胆又聪明手脚壮健，见识却老成，就不会得到这样的回音：再见，劝你冷却这片心。@．TheabovetwoversionsareproducedbytwogreatChinesem嬲tersintranslationandexhibitgreatsimilaritywitlleachother．Obviouslythelinguisticskoposishighlightedbythetwotranslatorsforthepurposeofreproducingthesemanticandstylisticfeaturesoftheoriginaltextfitsmuchaspossible．Insuchasituationthegeneralskoposandthecommunicativeskoposmaynotbetakenintoconsiderationassomedecisivefactorswitllanexceptionthatthesponsor’S，ifthereexists，requirementistoachievethelinguisticequivalenceasmuchaspossible．Inthepassagethereisametaphoricalproverb“Allthatglittersisnotgold”，whichwesternaswellasChinesepeoplehavebeenquitefamiliarwith．ThetwoChineseversionsofthisproverbseemalmostidentical，simpleforthereasonthatbotlltranslatorsinthissituationadoptthesameapproachofproverbtmnslation：translatingthetenoLProvidedsomedifferenttranslatingapproacheswereapplied,renderingswould。TranslatedbyLiangShiqiu。TranslatedbyZhuShenghao 山东大学硕士学位论文beproduced勰follows：(1)显赫的摩洛哥亲王并不是如此伟大和卓越。(2)名不副实。WhiletheaboveChineseversionsturnouttobeinharmonious、析ththeotherlinguisticunitsinthattheyappeartooforthrighttoaccord、航mMorocco’Sstyle(ratherroundabout)inspeakingthosewords．、Onepointworthtobeclarifiedisthatthethreeskoposareinmostcasesinterrelated、^，itlleachotherandtakeeffectcorporately,eventhoughsomeskoposmayinsomecasestal