1、方夢之主編：譯學詞典，上海外語教育出版社，第29頁功能翻譯理論 functionalist translation theory又稱“功能目的論(Skopos theory)。1971年，德國的萊斯(K. Reiss) 首先提出“把翻譯行為所要達到的特殊目的”作為翻譯評價的新模式。 1984 年她在與費米爾(H. J. Vermeer)合寫的 General Foundation of Translation Theory 一書中聲稱：譯者在整個翻譯過程中的參照系不應 是“對等”翻譯理論所注重的原文及其功能，而應是譯文在譯語文化 環境中所預期達到的一種或若鐘交際功能。20世紀90年代初，德國

2、學者克利斯蒂安諾德(Christiane Nord)進一步拓展了譯文功能理 論。她強調譯文與原文的聯系，但這種聯系的質量與數量由譯文的預 期功能確定。這就是說，根據譯文語境，原文中的哪些內容或成分可 以保留，哪些需調整或改寫，該由譯文的預期功能確定。功能目的理論的兩項基本原則是：1.翻譯各方面的交互作用受翻 譯目的所決定；2.目的隨接受對象的不同而變化。按照這兩項原則， 譯者可以為了達到目的而采用任何他自己認為適當的翻譯策略。換句 話說，目的決定方式(The end justifies the means )o作為受文化制約的語言符號，原文語篇和譯文語篇受到各自交際 環境的影響，譯文功能與原文

3、功能可相似或保持一致，也可能完全不 同。根據不同的語境因素和預期功能，選擇最佳的處理方法，這是功 能翻譯理論比以對等為基礎的翻譯理論或極端功能主義的翻譯理論 更為優越之處。翻譯功能理論指導下的翻譯方法表現出較大的靈活 性，較高的科學性和易操作性。Toury把“功能目的論”看作是“譯文文本中心論”的翻版。Skopos theory (plural Skopos theories)1. (translation studies) The idea that translating and interpreting should primarily take into account the fun

4、ction of both the source and target text.o 1995, Paul Kussmaul, Training The Translator, John Benjamins Publishing Co, p. 149:The functional approach has a great affinity with Skopos theory. The function of a translation is dependent on the knowledge, expectations, values and norms of the target rea

5、ders, who are again influenced by the situation they are in and by the culture. These factors determine whether the function of the source text or passages in the source text can be preserved or have to be modified or even changed.Introduction to the Skopos TheoryThe Skopos theory is an approach to

6、translation which was put forwardby Hans Vemeer and developed in Germany in the late 1970s and which oriented a more functionally and socioculturally concept of translation. Translation is considered not as a process of translation, but as a specific form of human action. In our mind, translation ha

7、s a purpose, and the word “Skopos” was from Greek. Its used as the technical term for the purpose of the translation.翻譯目的論，skopos是希臘語“目的”的意思。其核心概念是翻譯過 程的最主要因素是整體翻譯行為的目的。1. Introduction to the Skopos TheoryThe Skopos theory is an approach to translation which was put forward by Hans Vemeer and develo

8、ped in Germany in the late 1970s and which oriented a more functionally and socioculturally concept of translation. Translation is considered not as a process of translation, but as a specific form of human action. In our mind, translation has a purpose, and the word “Skopos” was from Greek. Its use

9、d as the technical term for the purpose of the translation. In the frame work of this theory, one of the most important factors determining the purpose of a translation is the address, who is the intended receiver or audience of the target text with their world language. Every translation is directe

10、d at an intended audience. The theory focuses above all on the purpose of the translation, which determines the translation methods and strategies that are to be employed in order to produce a functionally adequate result. Vermeer regards it as an “offer of information” that is partly or wholly turn

11、ed into an “offer of information” for the target audience. From this view, the status of the source is clearly much lower in Skopos theory than the equivalence theory.I .Introduction of the Skopos TheorySkopos theory is the nucleus of German Functional School. The main idea of Skopos theory is that

12、translators should hold the thought from the perspective of the target readers during the process of translation. Therefore, translators should bear in mind what the function of translation text is, what the target readers demand is and even what communicative situation is. Consequently, the choice

13、of translation strategies is decided by the purpose of the translation text,in order to achieve a better function text.There are three main rules which are skopos rule, coherence rule and fidelity rule.1.Skopos RuleSkopos is a Greek word foraimorpurpose. The top-ranking rule for any translation is t

14、hus theskopos rule,which means that a translation action is determined by its skopos;that is,the end justifies the meansbyReiss and Vermeer.Vermeer also stresses on many occasions that the skopos rule is a general rule,and translation strategies and methods are determined by the purpose and the inte

15、nded function of the target text.2.Coherence RuleThe coherence rule states that the target text must be interpretable as coherent with the target text receivers situation.In other words,the target text must be translated in such a way that it is coherent for the target text receivers,given their cir

16、cumstances and knowledge.In terms of coherence rule,the source text is no longer of most authority but only part of the translation beliefe.It is only an offer of information for the translator,who in turn picks out what he considers to be meaningful in the receivers situation.2. Fidelity RuleTransl

17、ation is a preceding offer of information. It is expected to bear some relationship with the corresponding source text.Vermeer calls this relationship intertextual coherence or fidelity. This is postulated as a further principle, referred to as the fidelity rule by Reiss and Vermeer in 1984.The fide

18、lity rule merely states that there must be coherence between the translated version and the source text4.The Relationship among the RulesFidelity rule is considered subordinate to coherence rule,and both are subordinate to the skopos rule.If the skopos requires a change of function,the criterion wil

19、l no longer be fidelity to the source text but adequacy or appropriateness with regard to the skopos.And if the skopos demands intra-textual incoherence,the standard of coherence rule is no longer vivid.Skopos theorySkopos theory is an approach to translation which was developed in Germany in the la

20、te 1970s (Vermeer 1978), and which reflects a general shift from predominantly LINGUISTIC and rather formal translation theories to a more functionally and socioculturally oriented concept of translation. (cf. ACTION (THEORY OF TRANSLATORIAL ACTION); COMMUNICATIVE/FUNCTIONAL APPROACHES). This shift

21、drew inspiration from communication theory, action theory, text linguistics and text theory, as well as from movements in literary studies towards reception theories (see for example Iser 1978). Apart from Hans Vermeer, the founder of skopos theory, other scholars working in the paradigm include Mar

22、gret Ammann (1989/1990), Hans Ho nig and Paul Kussmaul (1982), Sigrid Kupsch-Losereit (1986), Christiane Nord (1988) and Heidrun Witte (1987a); see also articles in the journal TEXTconTEXT, published since 1986 by Groos in Heidelberg.Skopos theory takes seriously factors which have always been stres

23、sed in action theory, and which were brought into sharp relief with the growing need in the latter half of the twentieth century for the translation of non-literary text types. In the translation of scientific and academic papers, instructions for use, tourist guides, contracts, etc., the contextual

24、 factors surrounding the translation cannot be ignored. These factors include the culture of the intended readers of the target text and of the client who has commissioned it, and, in particular, the function which the text is to perform in that culture for those readers. Skopos theory is directly o

25、riented towards this function.Translation is viewed not as a process of transcoding, but as a specific form of human action. Like any other human action, translation has a purpose, and the word skopos, derived from Greek, is used as the technical term for the purpose of a translation. Skopos must be

26、 defined before translation can begin; in highlighting skopos, the theory adopts a prospective attitude to translation, as opposed to the retrospective attitude adopted in theories which focus on prescriptions derived from the source text.In addition to its purpose, any action has an outcome. The ou

27、tcome of translational action is a translatum (Vermeer 1979:174; translat in Reiss and Vermeer 1984/1991:2), a particular variety of target text.Vermeers skopos theory Vermeer (1978:100) postulates that as a general rule it must be the intended purpose of the target text that determines translation

28、methods and strategies. From this postulate, he derives the skopos rule: Human action (and its subcategory: translation) is determined by its purpose (skopos), and therefore it is a function of its purpose. The rule is formalized using the formula: IA(Trl) = f(Sk).The main point of this functional a

29、pproach is the following: it is not the source text as such, or its effects on the source-text recipient, or the function assigned to it by the author, that determines the translation process, as is postulated by EQUIVALENCE-based translation theories, but the prospective function or skopos of the t

30、arget text as determined by the initiators, i.e. clienfs, needs. Consequently, the skopos is largely constrained by the target text user (reader/listener) and his/her situation and cultural background.Two further general rules are the coherence rule and the fidelity rule. The coherence rule stipulat

31、es that the target text must be sufficiently coherent to allow the intended users to comprehend it, given their assumed background knowledge and situational circumstances, The starting point for a translation is a text as part of a world continuum, written in the source language. It has to be transl

32、ated into a target language in such a way that it becomes part of a world continuum which can be interpreted by the recipients as coherent with their situation(Vermeer 1978:100).The fidelity rule concerns intertextual coherence between translatum and source text, and stipulates merely that some rela

33、tionship must remain between the two once the overriding principle of skopos and the rule of (intratextual) coherence have been satisfied.The general translation theory of Reiss and VermeerIn combining Vermeers general skopos theory of 1978 with the specific translation theory developed by Katharina

34、 Reiss, Reiss and Vermeer (1984/1991) arrive at a translation theory that is sufficiently general (allgemeine Translationstheorie), and sufficiently complex, to cover a multitude of individual cases. They abstract from phenomena that are specific to individual cultures and languages an account of ge

35、neral factors determining the translation process, to which special theories that concern individual problems or subfields can be linked consistently.A text is viewed as an offer of information (Informationsangebot) made by a producer to a recipient. Translation is then characterized as offering inf

36、ormation to members of one culture in their language (the target language and culture) about information originally offered in another language within another culture (the source language and culture). A translation is a secondary offer of information, imitating a primary offer of information. Or, t

37、o be more precise, the translator offers information about certain aspects of the source-text-in-situation,according to the target text skopos specified by the initiator (Reiss andVermeer 1984/1991:76). Neither the selection made from the information offered in the source text, nor the specification

38、 of the skopos happens at random; rather, they are determined by the needs, expectations, etc. of the target-text receivers. Translation is by definition interlingual and intercultural, it involves both linguistic and cultural transfer; in other words, it is a culture-transcending process (Vermeer 1

39、992:40).Since skopos varies with text receivers, the skopos of the target text and of the source text may be different. In cases where the skopos is the same for the two texts, Reiss and Vermeer (1984/1991:45) speak of Funktionskonstanz (functional constancy), whereas cases in which the skopos diffe

40、rs between the two texts undergo Funktionsanderung (change of function). In cases of the latter type, the standard for the translation will not be intertextual coherence with the source text, but adequacy or appropriateness to the skopos, which also determines the selection and arrangement of conten

41、t.Although a translatum is not ipso facto a faithful imitation of the source text, fidelity to the source text is one possible or legitimate skopos. Skopos theory should not, therefore, be understood as promoting (extremely) free translation in all, or even a majority of cases.Although the terms sko

42、pos， purpose and function are ofte interchangeably by Reiss and Vermeer (1984/1991), function is also usedin a more specific sense which derives mainly from Reiss. In this sense, it is linked to aspects of genre (Textsorte) and text type (Texttyp). The source text can be assigned to a text type and

43、to a genre, and in making this assignment, the translator can decide on the hierarchy of postulates which has to be observed during target-text production (Reiss and Vermeer 1984/1991:196). Reiss and Vermeer,s text typology, based on Buhler (1934), includes the informative, the expressive and the op

44、erative text types, which derive from the descriptive, the expressive and the appellative functions of language, respectively. Such a typology is helpful mainly where functional constancy is required between source and target texts.However, both Vermeer (1989a) and Reiss (1988) have expressed reserv

45、ations about the role of genre: the source text does not determine the genre of the target text, nor does the genre determine ipso facto the form of the target text, or, indeed, the skopos; rather, it is the skopos of the translation that determines the appropriate genre for the translatum, and the

46、genre, being a consequence of the skopos, is secondary to it (Vermeer 1989a: 187).Status of source text and target textAccording to skopos theory, then, translation is the production of a functionally appropriate target text based on an existing source text, and the relationship between the two text

47、s is specified according to the skopos of the translation. One practical consequence of this theory is a reconceptualization of the status of the source text. It is up to the translator as the expert to decide what role a source text is to play in the translation action. The decisive factor is the p

48、recisely specified skopos, and the source text is just one constituent of the commission given to the translator. The translator is required to act consciously in accordance with the skopos, and skopos must be decided separately in each specific case.It may be ADAPTATION to the target culture, but i

49、t may also be to acquaint the reader with the source culture. The translator should know what the point of a translation isthat it has some goalbut that any given goal is only one among many possible goals. The important point is that no source text has only one correct or preferable translation (Ve

50、rmeer 1989a: 182), and that, consequently, every translation commission should explicitly or implicitly contain a statement of skopos. The skopos for the target text need not be identical with that attributed to the source text; but unless the skopos for the target text is specified, translation can

51、not, properly speaking, be carried out at all.Criticism of skopos theoryObjections to skopos theory mainly concern the definition of translation and the relationship between source text and target text.It has been argued that Reiss and Vermeer, in their attempt to establish a truly general and compr

52、ehensive translation theory, force totally disparate cases of text relations into a frame which they attempt to hold together by means of the notion of information offer (Schreitmu ller 1994:105). But there should be a limit to what may legitimately be called translation as opposed to, for example,

53、ADAPTATION. In translation proper (Koller 1990), the source text is the yardstick by which all translations must be measured, independently of the purpose for which they were produced.In this context it is also argued that, even though a translation may indeed fulfil its intended skopos perfectly we

54、ll, it may nevertheless be assessed as inadequate on other counts, particularly as far as lexical, syntactic, or stylistic decisions on the microlevel are concerned (a point made by Chesterman 1994:153, who otherwise acknowledges the important contributions of skopos theory). Such objections come ma

55、inly from linguistically oriented approaches to translation that focus on bottom-up aspects of text production and reception. For example, Newmark (1991b: 106) criticizes the oversimplification that is inherent in functionalism, the emphasis on the message at the expense of richness of meaning and t

56、o the detriment of the authority of the source-language text.However, proponents of skopos theory argue for a wide definition of translation (e.g. Reiss 1990). As soon as one asks for the purpose of a translation, strategies that are often listed under adaptation, for example reformulation, paraphra

57、se and textual explication, will come in naturally as part of translation. And critics of microlevel decisions usually lift the texts out of their respective environments for comparative purposes, ignoring their functional aspects.Reiss and Vermeers cultural approach has also been judged less applic

58、able to literary translation, due to the special status of a literary work of art. Snell-Hornby (1990:84) argues that the situation and function of literary texts are more complex than those of non-literary texts, and that style is a highly important factor. Therefore, although skopos theory is by n

59、o means irrelevant to literary translation, a number of points need rethinking before the theory can be made fully applicable to this genre.It is also possible to argue that to assign a skopos to a literary text is to restrict its possibili ties of interpretation. In literary theory a distinction is o