摘要

英汉翻译时到底哪些语言结构成分在译文中必须采用直译方法予以保留，哪些成分无须保留，才能完全表达其信息？这个问题经常困扰着译者。叶子南指出前景化理论可以成为译者在翻译决策过程中使用的有效工具，因此本文将从前景化理论的角度来讨论直译和意译的理据性。根据此理论，译者在翻译过程中有必要区别两种不同的前景化：第一种是由于英汉语言体系不同所造成的前景化，第二种是由于原作者刻意安排语言材料所构成的前景化。
本文首先比较英汉两种语言的常态形式，其次根据不同功能的前景化来讨论翻译方法，最后根据原文中没有前景化，译文也不应有前景化这一原则，并结合例子分析，得出以下结论：当原文是常态表达，如果直译会造成前景化，而且这种前景化是由英汉语言体系不同形成的，此时应采用意译，使译文也属于译语常态表达；对于原文作者为了取得特别的修辞或交际效果而刻意安排语言材料所构成的前景化，本文根据纽马克关于三大功能文本的翻译方法来探讨此类前景何时直译，何时意译：表情功能的前景化语言应采用直译方法以保留其形式，信息功能和呼唤功能的前景应采用意译方法以保证功能对等。本文仅讨论提到的这两种前景化，旨在为译者提供一个新的视角来考虑直译和意译的问题，还有一些前景化没有讨论，它们对直译和意译的影响还需要进行深入探讨。

关键词：前景化，直译，意译，语言功能

ABSTRACT

In the process of translation, it is a big headache for the translator to make choice between literal translation and free translation. So it is necessary to discuss how to make the proper choice between free translation method and literal translation method. Foregrounding theory in translation as an effective perspective to look at this problem was first put forward by Ye Zinan. This paper aims to explore the justification for the choice of translation methods from the perspective of foregrounding theory, and provide insights into the choice of literal translation and free translation for the translator. In order to elaborate the choice of translation methods, the paper also introduces Newmark’s discussion about language functions to provide a pragmatic perspective.
In view of Foregrounding theory, the translator has to differentiate between two kinds of foregrounding: one originates from the differences between Chinese and English as two linguistic systems; the other one is achieved by the author himself deliberately arranging linguistic resources. To identify and differentiate these two types of foregrounding, this paper first exemplifies the linguistic norms of the two languages, and then looks at the choice of translation methods in different contexts of foregrounding.
Based on the equivalence principle that if there is no foregrounding in the original, there should be no foregrounding in the translation, the analysis of the paper leads to the following conclusions: i) that when the structure of the original does not deviate from the source language norms, free translation method is preferred so that its translation fits into the TL norms and carries no foregrounding, either; ii) that as for the foregrounding achieved by the author himself deliberately arranging linguistic resources, the foregrounding in an expressive text should be literally translated in order to preserve the form, and that in a informative-function or vocative-function text should be rendered in free translation method in order to achieve functional equivalence.

Key words: foregrounding, literal translation, free translation, language functions