综合性文献翻译

3.6　综合性文献翻译

综合性文献翻译，从方法上讲，集上述选译、改译、译要、编译于一体，对译员来说，无论在语言上或是专业知识上都有较高的要求。综合性文献翻译对了解国外政治、经济、文化、科技等方面特定专题的历史、现状和趋势，对掌握动向、制定政策和规范都有重要的参考价值，它往往是重大工程和科研立项的前期工作。有时，由于专业针对性强、文献涉及面广、原文语种不一，综合性文献翻译常非一人所为，而由二三人，甚至更多人合作完成。如某单位编印的《世界节能概况》，包括节能政策、节能措施、节能设备、节能方案、节能效果等，选译日本、俄国以及西方国家的有关文献数十篇，集世界节能之精华。又如上海翻译出版公司1991年出版的《混沌学传奇》，原名Chaos，“本书的史料局限于美国，但在此学科形成过程中，苏联、日本等国也有其独特和平行的工作，我国虽起步较晚，但也不乏值得介绍之成果。为此在此译本中另辟专章撰文补上，使译者得窥全貌。”（摘自概述“序”）这样，译者在翻译英文文献的同时，也补充翻译了相关的俄文文献和日文文献。综合性文献翻译的操作步骤是：确立专题→检索文献→提取符合专题需要的文本→分篇节译→译文的综合编排，如有必要，译者或主编可加上前言或后记。综合性文献翻译稿的最后部分列出来原文献的目录。综合性文献翻译时虽有删节，但仍然强调忠于原义，保留原文有关论述的精要。当综合性文献翻译涉及某一学科或专业的进展、现状和前景时，常保留原文文本中的数据、公式和图表。现按上述步骤说明如下：

[1] 确立专题——按委托人或译者本人的需要定题。（本例的题目是“翻译的性质”）

[2] 检索文献——通过各种检索工具（包括计算机），利用关键词检索并收集相关文献。

[3] 提取文本——检索到的大量文本并非都是有用的，需要去粗取精，提取确实有用的文本。这里，为便于说明问题，减少篇幅，只取有代表性的三种文本。

[4] 分篇选译——从提取的各文本中摘要核心信息，以便进一步编排。

[5] 综合编排——将译出的信息按编章结构的要求合理安排。第一段导言，引出论题（对翻译性质的两种不同看法），第二、三段分别介绍艺术派和科学派的不同观点，第四段介绍调和派（或综合派）的观点，第五段说奈达由科学派转向艺术派（段首译者根据需要加上奈达曾是科学派的事实）。

[6] 译者后语——第六段是译者自拟的结语，以使这篇编译稿成为首尾呼应、整体连贯的语篇。

[7] 最后部分——写出综译稿的来源文献。现将三篇原文及其综合译稿列在下面（注意原文黑体部分均能在综译稿中找到相应的译文）：

Nature of Translation

1

By translation here I specifically mean translating，the process of translation，in which something is translated，instead of the work translated.So far as the definition of translation is concerned，of course，it is very easy for us to copy one from a dictionary；that is，a rendering from one language into another，but that seems to be too general and simple.Various definitions have been given to translation． Now I'd like to cite some of them：

Translation is a science.

Translation is an art.

Translation is a craft.

Translation is a skill.

Translation is an operation.

Translation is a language activity.

Translation is communicating.

All the definitions mentioned above may be taken for reference because each of them is true when looked at from a certain angle.

Among them the first two are most important for they represent two schools — the school of science and the school of art.The former maintains that translating should reproduce the message of the original by means of the transformation of linguistic equivalence.It puts stress on the study of description of the process of translation，and the structures and forms of language so as to reveal the objective laws inherent in translating.The latter school advocates re-creating a literary work by using expressions of another language.It emphasizes the effect of translation.Lin Yutang（1895-1976）was once a representative.In his essay On Translation he declares that translation is an art whose success depends upon one's artistic talent and enough training.Besides these，there are no set rules for translation and there is no short cut for art.

In my opinion，both schools have their strong points and weak points so far as literary translation is concerned.Now there is a tendency to combine their theories into a comprehensive one.As a matter of fact，literary translation has a double nature.That's to say，on the one hand，it is a science with its own laws and methods and on the other hand，it is an art.Now let’s have a further discussion of its double nature in the following…

Excerpts from Ten Lectures on Literary Translation by Liu Zhongde

2

A continuous concomitant of contact between two mutually incomprehensible tongues and one that does not lead either to suppression or extension of either is translation．As soon as two speakers of different languages need to converse，translation is necessary，either through a third party or directly.

Before the invention and diffusion of writing，translation was instantaneous and oral；persons professionally specializing in such work were called interpreters.In predominantly or wholly literate communities，translation is thought of as the conversion of a written text in one language into a written text in another，though the modern emergence of the simultaneous translator or professional interpreter at international conferences keeps the oral side of translation very much alive.

At the other end of the translator's spectrum，technical prose dealing with internationally agreed scientific subjects is probably the easiest type of material to translate，because cultural unification（in this respect），lexical correspondences，and stylistic similarity already exist in this type of usage in the languages most commonl yinvolved，to a higher degree than in other fields of discourse.

Significantly, it is this last aspect of translation to which mechanical and computerized techniques are being applied with some prospects of limited success． Machine translation，whereby ultima- tely，a text in one language could be fed into a machine to produce an accurate translation in another language without further human intervention，has been largely concentrated on the language of science and technology，with its restricted vocabulary and overall likeness of style，for both linguistic and economic reasons．Attempts at machine translation of literature have been made，but success in this field，more especially in the translation of poetry，seems very remote at present.

Translation on the whole is an art，not a science.Guidance can be given and general principles can be taught，but after that it must be left to the individual's own feeling for the two languages concerned.Almost inevitably，in a translation of a work of literature something of the author's original intent must be lost；in those cases in which the translation is said to be a better work than the original，an opinion sometimes expressed about the English writer Edward Fitzgerald's “translation”of The Rubaiydt of Omar Khayydm，one is dealing with a new，though derived work，not just a translation.The Italian epigram remains justified： Traduttore traditore “The translator is a traitor.”

Excerpts from the Entry “Translation” in New Encyclopaedia Britannica，Macropaedia.

3

Most successful and creative translators have little or no use for theories of translation.In fact，some insist that only those who cannot translate become theorists of translating.In reality，outstanding translators are born，not made，since without an innate potential for the creative use of language，the study of procedures and principles of translating is unlikely to produce outstanding results．According to G.V.Chernov of the Maurice Thorez Institute in Moscow，this institute has not produced a top-flight translator during the last 25 years．Those who have the ability for outstanding creative work（and there are many such Russian translators） simply have not felt the need for such instruction.The institute has，however，been quite successful in training translators for less significant levels of competence.

We should not attempt to make a science out of translating，since it is essentially not an isolatable discipline，but a creative technology，a way of doing something which employs insights from a number of different disciplines.Translating can never be any more holistic or comprehensive than the disciplines on which it depends．Furthermore，translating，like language，must be open-ended，since it must deal with different kinds of texts，designed for quite different audiences with very different presuppositions about what a translation should be.There is no way in which these multiplicities of use，so subject to change without notice，can be neatly categorized and quantified.No methodology can stipulate all the steps in procedure which should be followed in order to arrive at proper solutions.But decisions have to be made，and great translators instinctively grasp the solutions in unpredictable ways and in a manner often unrecognized by the translators.

In a sense translating is both discouraging and challenging：discouraging because there are no simple rules to follow and no way to know in advance if a solution is completely correct and acceptable，but also challenging because it is excitingly creative.The very tensions within translating bring out the best in those who instinctively learn to play the game．

Excerpts from Translation：Possible and Impossible by Eugene A.Nida，1991．In Translation Beyond the Boundaries of Translation Spectrum，Translation Perspecties IX 1996，Edited by M.G.Rose，Center for Research in Translation，State University of New York.

翻译的性质（综合编译稿）

[1] 对于“翻译”，现有多种多样的定义，其中最重要的分歧在于翻译是科学，还是艺术，由此分成两派：科学派和艺术派。

[2] 科学派着重研究对翻译过程以及语言形式和结构的描写，以揭示翻译过程固有的客观规律。而艺术派则强调翻译的效果，林语堂曾是代表人物之一。他在《论翻译》⁽¹⁾一文中说：“翻译是一种艺术。凡艺术的成功，必赖个人相当之艺术，及其对于该艺术相当之训练。此外别无成功捷径可言，因为艺术素来是没有成功捷径的。”

[3] 《不列颠百科全书》（详编）解释“翻译”时认为：“翻译总的说来是一种艺术，不是一门科学。翻译可以加以指导，讲授一般的原理。但除此之外，译品的优劣要看译者本人对两种语言的感知了。”同时，该书编者也注意到机器翻译的事实：也许最终能够把一种语言的文本输入机器，然后产生另一种语言的确切译文，而不需要人的进一步润湿修改，不过这种方法现在主要集中应用于科技语言的翻译。该书也写到文学作品的机器翻译，认为“在这个领域里，特别在诗歌翻译方面，似乎目前离成功还很远。”

[4] 综合两派的长处和短处，刘重德先生就文学翻译提出这样的观点：现在的趋势是把它们合而为一，因为文学翻译有双重性——有其自身规律与方法的科学的一面，又有艺术的一面。

[5] 现在，译界普遍注意到美国著名翻译家和翻译理论家尤金·奈达对这个问题的观点有一百八十度的转变。奈达曾在1964年出版过专著《翻译科学探索》（Towards a Science of Translation），竭力推行翻译的科学论。但是时隔二十余年，奈达开始否定他原先的看法。在1991年发表的《翻译的可能与不可能》一文中，他写道：“我们不应该试图把翻译变成一门学科，因为它本质上不是一门独立的学问，而是一种有创造性的技艺，一种靠综合多学科的见识来处事的本领。”他还认为，跟语言一样，翻译是无止无境的，译者面对为不同读者而作的用途各异、变化多端的原文，不可能对此作明确分类和定量分析。在操作过程中也不能一步步地规定方法来解决翻译中的诸多问题。大多数成就卓著、富于创造精神的翻译家很少用得着，或者根本用不着翻译理论。

[6] 总之，对于翻译是科学，还是艺术，抑或是两者的综合，至今仍是公说公有理，婆说婆有理。

注：本篇综译稿由三篇原文综合编译而成，各篇之末均已注明出处，来源文献不另列。

【注释】

(1) 林语堂，《论翻译》，罗新璋编，《翻译论集》，商务印书馆，1984年。