摘  要

关于翻译标准的讨论持续很久。本文研究的两个标准是严复的信达雅和耐达的功能对等。本文作者试图从广告文体中探究出方法，并且通过语言学手段比较这两家不同标准，然而，本文尚有局限，只存在于非文学性文本研究并未指出两者绝对优劣。结合利弊，本文作者不区别待遇的前提下说明本文是广告更适合奈达的理论，然而西方的学者也提出了一堆自己的理论。纯粹以翻译的角度，英语广告不易翻译的，尤其从更深的词句的水准需要更深的理论指导，我们不难得出仅针对广告，奈达的功能对等更适合这类非文学文体翻译。

关键词：功能对等；翻译标准；广告翻译

Abstract

There exists a long history with unceasing discussions of its criteria in ads translation. The objectives of this paper are ads translation. The author is trying his best to give an exhaustive selection on two criteria in the considerable texts notably ads. And the paper views these two criteria by measure of semantics and pragmatics with different schools of opinions in non-literature contexts. However, this study is confined to several views of linguistics and it has no clear lines to say which is better when it is fit to two criteria. Offering the disadvantage as well as advantages, the author opts for the former, not attempting to be different. A lot of translation theories similar to equivalence theories in the countries are also put forward In the view of translation. Advertisement translation is not so easy to be mastered. Advertisement translation is not only affected by words and sentence, paragraph and context, but also the culture of the target market. Therefore translation theories are needed to guide translation when translating proceeds. It shows that when it is only a limited view of non-literature translation, the paper safely conclude that Nida’s Functional Equivalence is more applicable to non-literature translation.

Key words: faithfulness; expressiveness and elegance; Functional Equivalence; criteria; advertising translation