翻译中的连贯

IF 0.4 3区 文学 0 LANGUAGE & LINGUISTICS Journal of Historical Pragmatics Pub Date : 2023-01-31 DOI:10.1075/jhp.18011.san
J. Sanders, J. Evers-Vermeul
{"title":"翻译中的连贯","authors":"J. Sanders, J. Evers-Vermeul","doi":"10.1075/jhp.18011.san","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\n When comparing old and new Bible translations, differences are striking at all discourse levels. This paper\n concentrates on variations in the representation of subjective cognition and reasoning of subjects in the discourse. A\n corpus-based analysis was conducted that compared the domains of use of causal fragments in Dutch Bible translations that were\n either old, contemporary and loyal, or “easy”. In a close comparison of Bible translations, differences between domains of use\n are analysed in more detail. In old translations, the character’s subjective reasoning is clearly separated from the narrator’s\n utterances. By contrast, in modern translations, causal reasoning is more intertwined between character and narrator, resulting in\n shared reasoning.","PeriodicalId":54081,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Historical Pragmatics","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.4000,"publicationDate":"2023-01-31","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Coherence in translation\",\"authors\":\"J. Sanders, J. Evers-Vermeul\",\"doi\":\"10.1075/jhp.18011.san\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"\\n When comparing old and new Bible translations, differences are striking at all discourse levels. This paper\\n concentrates on variations in the representation of subjective cognition and reasoning of subjects in the discourse. A\\n corpus-based analysis was conducted that compared the domains of use of causal fragments in Dutch Bible translations that were\\n either old, contemporary and loyal, or “easy”. In a close comparison of Bible translations, differences between domains of use\\n are analysed in more detail. In old translations, the character’s subjective reasoning is clearly separated from the narrator’s\\n utterances. By contrast, in modern translations, causal reasoning is more intertwined between character and narrator, resulting in\\n shared reasoning.\",\"PeriodicalId\":54081,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Historical Pragmatics\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-01-31\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Historical Pragmatics\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"98\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1075/jhp.18011.san\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"文学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"0\",\"JCRName\":\"LANGUAGE & LINGUISTICS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Historical Pragmatics","FirstCategoryId":"98","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1075/jhp.18011.san","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"文学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"0","JCRName":"LANGUAGE & LINGUISTICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

当比较新旧圣经译本时,在各个话语层面上的差异都是惊人的。本文主要研究语篇中主体主观认知和推理表征的变化。进行了一项基于语料库的分析,比较了荷兰圣经翻译中因果片段的使用领域,这些领域要么是旧的、现代的、忠诚的,要么是“容易的”。在对圣经翻译的仔细比较中,更详细地分析了使用领域之间的差异。在旧译本中,人物的主观推理与叙述者的话语明显分离。相比之下,在现代翻译中,因果推理更多地交织在人物和叙述者之间,从而产生共同的推理。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Coherence in translation
When comparing old and new Bible translations, differences are striking at all discourse levels. This paper concentrates on variations in the representation of subjective cognition and reasoning of subjects in the discourse. A corpus-based analysis was conducted that compared the domains of use of causal fragments in Dutch Bible translations that were either old, contemporary and loyal, or “easy”. In a close comparison of Bible translations, differences between domains of use are analysed in more detail. In old translations, the character’s subjective reasoning is clearly separated from the narrator’s utterances. By contrast, in modern translations, causal reasoning is more intertwined between character and narrator, resulting in shared reasoning.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
1.90
自引率
12.50%
发文量
11
期刊介绍: The Journal of Historical Pragmatics provides an interdisciplinary forum for theoretical, empirical and methodological work at the intersection of pragmatics and historical linguistics. The editorial focus is on socio-historical and pragmatic aspects of historical texts in their sociocultural context of communication (e.g. conversational principles, politeness strategies, or speech acts) and on diachronic pragmatics as seen in linguistic processes such as grammaticalization or discoursization. Contributions draw on data from literary or non-literary sources and from any language. In addition to contributions with a strictly pragmatic or discourse analytical perspective, it also includes contributions with a more sociolinguistic or semantic approach.
期刊最新文献
Women’s voices in the public sphere Democratisation Colloquialisation A corpus-pragmatic analysis of linguistic democratisation in the British Hansard Speaking for the downtrodden
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1