授课题目：                  第十四章翻译风格
 1. 风格标记
 2. 风格再现
教学目的、要求：
使学生对风格标记有所了解，并有意识地在翻译活动中正确把握原文的风格意义并使之得到较好的转换。
教学步骤、内容及学时分配：
1、译论补充。                                                   （45minutes） 

在上一章中，我们已经大致讨论了翻译单位，现在我们要探讨和翻译单位密切相关的风格标记，使同学们了解风格的含义及其传达的基本方法。

翻译风格论与风格有密切联系，但二者不可混为一谈。风格研究原文的语言形式所反映的独特的文体特征，而翻译风格论不但研究原文的风格意义，更要探讨这些风格意义如何在译文中得到恰如其分的对应。传统的风格分析常常带有直观的模糊思辨色彩，所谓“一说都知道，可一分析起来就觉得模糊”，有很强的主观性和印象性。由于翻译的对象是具体的语言形式，这种模糊性的分析不利于指导具体的翻译活动。因此，对语言形式的形式标记的分析很重要，而形式标记和非形式标记（印象分析）的有机结合将利于风格意义在译文中得到更客观而准确的反映。

风格意义的转换，即翻译中风格的表现手段问题，要旨在于发掘原文的全部风格意义。而在传统的风格分析中，风格的论述通常借助印象性术语，重点在用词分析，不能把原文的全部风格意义全部展现。因此，风格意义的分析不能忽视对语言形式的分析，这种分析将使风格得以完整再现，风格分析也不再是虚无缥缈的印象了。
the understanding and translation of style in fact involve two main procedures in the process of translation——understanding (analysis) of the sl and appropriate presentation in the tl.

in order to make clearer the relationship between the identification of style and appropriateness in translation, we’d like first to give the readers two examples of sentences.
1.although there have been clashes, only in a few cases were the injuries fatal.
2.some were killed.
according to wang zuoliang( 1980:112), the two sentences above both describe the same matter in which the policemen in the west cruelly beat the workers on strike, while the comments on it are radically different. we hearers can easily point out the difference between the two sentences in choice of words and sentence patterns. facing the death of the workers, the local authorities deliberately deny the serious result of the conflict with hypocritical officialese——complicated and long sentences and big words, while the angry workers speak out the truth directly with very simple sentence pattern and words. such difference definitely marks two different styles of speaking. when translating them into chinese, we must take into consideration their different stylistic features: the formal style of the former which shows the speaker’s bureaucracy and hypocrisy; the informal style of the latter which explicitly demonstrates the speaker’s rage. if we get a chinese version of the first sentence like,“尽管发生了冲突，可是只死了几个人”, we are sure to say the informal style of the tl is not appropriate to the formal style of the tl, for it just makes the vagueness of the speaker explicit.
perhaps the simplest definition of style is given by buffon, “ style is the man”
according to the revised edition of “a dictionary of literary terms”， style is subtly defined as “the characteristic manner of expression in prose or verse; how a particular writer says things.” “ style may be compared to the tone and voice of the writer himself, which is as much peculiar to him as his laugh, his walk, his handwriting and expression on his face.”
theodore savory regards style as “the essential characteristic of every piece of writing, the outcome of the writer’s personality and his emotions at the moment, and no single paragraph can be put together without revealing in some degree the nature of its author.”
the two definitions given above focus on the “spirit” or “truth” of the original text, which consists in the way the writer creates his own work. the study of literature has been regarded as a branch of aesthetics which is concerned with the total effect of literary texts as artistic wholes. if we want to translate the work of some writer, we must firstly grasp his exclusive literary style——his particular tone, voice and even his individuality, etc. therefore, the translators often dwell on the unique style of mr. x or mr. y. for example, li bai’s poems are elegant and forceful masterpieces, while du fu is famous for his profound and thoughtful style. the style of henry james is wordy and obscure, while that of ernest hemingway is brief and implicit. lu xun’s essays are brief, sharp and sarcastic, shakespeare’s works are full of witty puns, mark twain is humorous and bernard shaw is bitter and ironic. after fully comprehending and conveying the style of the original texts, many translators successfully enable the tl readers to enjoy the same spirit enjoyed by those sl readers . in fact, their hard labour would be highly valued if they could give the tl readers “a pushkinian style in translating  pushkin and a gorkian in doing gorki.”
stylistic analysis from literary angle alone emphasizes the importance of “ artistic meaning in another language” .to reveal or judge one writer’s personality and emotion from a macroscopic angle, we always describe his peculiar features with words or comments like “elegant”, “vulgar”,”plain”, “brief”, “ humorous” or “ sarcastic”. the analysis of the sl’s style is usually approached with the help of our impression, intuition or aesthetic feeling . therefore, the literary stylistic analysis will unavoidably be “ impressionistic”, “ subjective” or even “vague” and “ inaccurate” (liu miqing 1999:219). such macroscopic method of analyzing the sl’s style may help the translators to grasp the sl’s style ( esp. that of the literary works) in a whole, however, the “impressionistic” analysis is not objective and specific enough to describe those linguistic forms——words, phrases, sentences and paragraphs etc, which have their respective stylistic features. just as mr. ji xianlin said,“the terms such as ‘spirit’, ‘intelligence’ and ‘realm’ or the like, are somewhat difficult to explain.
according to mr. liu miqing, stylistic markers refer to a set of particular language forms that serve to mark or signal the stylistic features of the text. such stylistic markers may be divided as form and non-form markers.
the style of any good article can only be fully expressed by the text’s well-organized linguistic forms. in another word, what makes a style is “the selection of certain linguistic forms or features over other possible ones”( joanna thornborrow 2000:3).
in order to identify how the style of the sl is presented by the linguistic forms, mr. liu miqing (1999:218--221) suggests the idea of “ stylistic markers”, which may greatly help the translators to identify (recognize) the formal and non-formal characteristics of the sl’s style in a more objective and comprehensive way.
“form markers” and ‘non-form markers”. “non-form markers” refer to those stylistic features that are usually judged by readers’ aesthetic feeling from literary point of view. while “form markers” refer to the formal features of language which serve to mark (present) the style of sl (liu 1999:220-221). in translation, once we carefully analyze those respective forms, we will identify the sl’s “form markers” and find its style. thus, the identification of the “stylistic markers” will be the first step in the process of stylistic analysis.
according to linguistic regulations, mr. liu miqing classifies the “form markers” into six categories:

1. phonological markers
“phonological markers” mark the phonological features of the original texts. for example, different sound patterning (i.e. rhyme, alliteration, assonance, reverse rhyme and consonant patterning) are of significance in contributing beauty or emphasis to english poems. while hearing a chinese football fan shout “雄起”, we may guess that he comes from sichuan province. additionally, “wanna”, “kinda”, “ain’t”, “gonna” or the like always show the colloquial and casual tone of the speaker.
2.      register markers
register markers refer to those particular language forms (sound, words, sentence patterns and paragraphs, etc) which mark /signal the register features. register is a socio-linguistic term concerned with the different social situations in which people operate their language according to their various social statuses. identification of register may help the translators better understand the level of formality of the sl (whether its style is formal or informal). the four categories of register markers (esp. words) may properly present the formality of the sl’s register. for example, some professional terms or jargons are usually applied in a technical register. the learned (big) words with high-leveled formality often play an important role in a very formal paper, while an illiterate may speak in an informal way with lots of slang. we are to dwell on the level of formality in 2.5.3..

                    ——  spoken…….written ——
                    ——  informal…….formal ——
         slang      ——  familiar…….polite   ——     elevated english
         

               —— regional dialect……standard speech ——
                        ← common core   →
liu miqing defines “register” as the field (context) in which the lexis is used
while in p. newark’s eyes, the subdivisions of levels of formality can be more specific (p. newmark 2001:14,15). his general suggestion about formality is like the following:
taboo——slang——colloquial——informal——neutral——formal——official——officialese
for identifying the level of generality or difficulty, he suggests:
simple ——popular ——neutral ——educated ——technical ——opaquely technical
newmark even suggests the level of emotional tone:
intense  ——warm ——factual ——understatement

3.      syntactic markers
such markers refer to different sentence patterns that arrange the words into different orders. when some sentence patterns (i.e. coordination, subordination, parallel, antithesis, omission) are repeatedly or alternately used in one context or text, the syntactic markers indicating the style will be easily identified. for example, hemingway likes simple and forceful sentence, while faulkner prefers complex subordination patterns.
4. lexical markers
lexical markers sometimes can also be interpreted as “idiolect”, which indicate the writer’s personal tendency to choose lexis (words). compared with register markers (which always to some extent show the social relationship), the lexical markers mainly involve the personal tendency. for example, some writers tend to express their ideas with some simple and plain words (i.e. homer and hemingway), some may prefer elegant and archaic words, and others like to make his works vivid and humorous by many colloquial words or even slang and taboos. therefore, the identification of the lexical markers is vital for understanding one writer’s peculiar style in his works. sometimes, the register of one’s speech in literary work will greatly influence the writer’s idiolect. the relation between lexical markers and register markers will be discussed in the following parts of this thesis.
5.     textual markers
these markers mark (indicate) the organization of the text. how will one writer start his novel? how to develop and end? will the writer become the narrator of his story and from the first person’s angle give us an impression of shared reality or free commentary? are the texts composed of cohesive and logic paragraphs or somehow disordered and segmental speeches (i.e. the use of stream of consciousness technique in one novel)? in a word, textual markers will help the translators effectively analyze the style of sl’s textual structures (i.e. simple and plain analytic style or complicated and elegant synthetic style), and hence, make their translation conveyed more appropriately in style.
6.     markers of figures of speech
figures of speech in the past were just considered a very important means to present the writer or speaker’s style. someone even thought that a stylistician was equal to a rhetorician. as a deviation in stylistic expressions, figures of speech are frequently used in all varieties of language. such rhetorical means as simile, metaphor, analogy, personification, hyperbole, euphemism, metonymy, pun, irony, and parallelism etc. often create various stylistic features. many poets, novelists, statesmen, playwrights, philosophers and even ordinary people are good at applying figures of speech. it is often difficult to convey these rhetorical features, but we certainly need to find their appropriate counterparts in the translation. without these colorful rhetorical devices, cross-culture communication will definitely lose lots of shining points.