Keywords: translation culture turn to Lefevere, Basnet
Looking at the study of translation studies in the 20th century, it can be said that there are various schools, which compete with each other and influence each other, which makes translation studies flourish in recent decades and establish its status as an independent discipline. As the translation theory with the highest decibel in recent years, the cultural turn in translation was first put forward by Basnet and Andre Lefevere in 1990. The cultural turn has brought new horizons and breakthroughs to translation studies that have long been bound by linguistics. This paper will comment on this school of translation studies below.
Translation Studies 1 Historical Origin of Cultural Turn
In 1950s and 1960s, the concept of language translation dominated translation studies, and translation was regarded as the transformation between different languages. Such researchers try to apply linguistic theories (such as semantics, semiotics, pragmatics, etc. ), whose representatives are Jacobson, Catford, Nida and Newmark. However, this view of language translation cannot solve the social, cultural and historical problems encountered in translation, and translation is influenced by the differences of different cultures in ways of thinking, national mentality and ways of expressing emotions. (Zhang Jing, Li Shuchun, 2006: 83) In addition, the application of linguistic theory has not made translation studies as fruitful as other scientific disciplines and other humanities.
Since the 1960s, some scholars in Europe, especially in Britain, have published some articles and monographs to study the class system and re-examine the cultural connotation, which indicates the rise of culturology. (Basnet & Lefevere:1998/2001:130)
In the 1970s, Zohar, an Israeli scholar, put forward the pluralistic system theory, arguing that "literary works are an integral part of the overall framework of society, culture, literature and history" and "the study of a single text is placed in multiple systems of culture and literature in isolation" (Munday, 2001:109; 1 1 1)。 This view breaks through the traditional view of linguistic translation and can be regarded as the bud of cultural turn, although it is still not completely free from the constraints of linguistics. Later, Lambotte and Robbins thought that "less as an interlingual process, more as an intra-cultural activity" (Genzler, 1993: 186), Mary? Snell Hornby suggested that the unit of translation should be culture, not text, and that cultural studies should be incorporated into the study of translation theory (188).
From 65438 to 0976, the academic conference held in Leuven, Belgium marked the establishment of translation studies as an independent discipline. Basnet and Lefevere inherited and developed the multi-system theory, published a series of papers and monographs on translation from a cultural perspective in the 1980s, and formally put forward a "cultural turn" in translation studies in their book Translation, History and Culture. The school of translation culture breaks through the linguistic school's emphasis on comparison and transformation between different languages, and links translation with society, history and culture.
Main representatives, works and opinions.
2. 1 Basnet
Susan. Basnet is a professor at the British Center for Comparative Cultural Studies at the University of Warwick and a leading figure in the theory of cultural turn in translation studies. His representative works include Translation Studies, Comparative Literature and Translation, History and Culture co-edited with Lefevere.
Basnet pointed out in his book Translation Studies published in 1980 (the third revised edition in 2002) that translation studies should pay attention to the holistic thinking of translation from the cultural level, thus opening the prelude to the cultural turn of translation studies. Basnet's views on cultural turn are mainly reflected in the following aspects.
First of all, Basnet broadened the horizon of translation studies. Traditional translatology is largely confined to the internal language, but Basnet thinks that linguistics is only an important category of translation studies, and translation history, translation and the study of target culture, translation and poetics are equally important, which is also the basic category of translation studies.
Secondly, it defines the basic fields of the school of translation culture. In the first edition of Translation Studies, Basnight expounded the basic ideas of the school of translation culture: paying attention to the historical and cultural background behind the text, trying to understand how the complicated process of manipulating the text occurs, what criteria determine the strategies adopted by the translator, and how the text may be accepted by the target language system. It is these viewpoints that liberate translation studies from the linguistic analysis of language machinery and expand the translation discipline with new vitality.
Thirdly, it has contributed to the cultural turn in translation studies. After 1990 formally put forward the cultural turn of translation, Basnet continued to do a lot of research in this field, which attracted great attention in the translation field and many scholars joined in. Later, she proposed that translation studies should not only use linguistic methods, but also transcend linguistics. A cultural turn in translation studies has taken shape. Lefevere,1998/2001:123-139).
2.2 Lefevere
Lefevere (1946- 1966), a Belgian scholar, immigrated to the United States. He used to be a professor of German Department and Comparative Literature Department at the University of Texas at Austin, USA, and was an internationally renowned writer, comparative writer and translation theorist. His views are closely related to the polysystem theory and the manipulation school (Munday, 200 1: 16). His works are very rich, including Translation, History and Culture: A Data Set, Poetry Translation: Seven Strategies and a Blueprint, Translation, Rewriting and the Manipulation of Literary Voice, etc.
One of Lefevere's main viewpoints is that translation is the most obvious form of rewriting (Lefevere, 1992: 9). Translation is influenced by three factors in the literary system: professionals in the literary system, such as critics, critics, teachers and translators themselves; Sponsors outside the literary system, such as authorities, publishers, political parties, academic journals, etc. They are often influenced by three factors: economy and status; Mainstream poetics. (Mondi, 2001:128-129). At the same time, he believes that both ideology and poetics determine translation strategies and methods to solve specific problems in translation. (Lefevere, 1992:4 1)
Another main point of Lefevere is that literature is a system and a series of interrelated components with certain characteristics. Literature system is just one of the complex systems composed of many systems, and this system is called culture. On the other hand, culture and society are the environment in which the literary system exists. Literature system and other writing systems belong to social system, and each subsystem influences and restricts each other. (Zhang Jing, Li Shuchun, 2006: 83)
3 Reflections on the Cultural Turn of Translation Studies
In recent years, the cultural turn theory in translation studies has undoubtedly brought great vitality to translation studies. It can be imagined that without the rise of the theory of cultural turn, translatology would probably still wander under the framework of linguistics or comparative literature, and the research results of translatology would be few and far between, lacking originality. However, the theory of cultural turn in translation studies has also caused a lot of controversy and criticism.
One of the controversies is that the cultural turn of translation studies will blur the ontological study of translation, which will lead to the blurring of disciplinary boundaries and hinder the establishment of research paradigms of translation disciplines. Translatology is translatology and culturology is culturology. The similarity between them is not enough to make them the same theme. "The cultural school has not objectively and comprehensively described the essence of translation. Its research tendency leads to the diversity, confusion and dispersion of translation studies, downplays the ontological category of translation studies, fails to find and clearly establish universal translation principles, and certainly fails to describe and predict the translation process and various phenomena in translated works. " (Zeng, 2006: 92) We do not deny that studying translation from the perspective of culturology will bring new horizons and achievements, but if translation turns to culture too much, translation studies that have just jumped out of the barriers of linguistics and comparative literature will fall into the cage of culturology again.
Secondly, in recent years, the cultural turn in translation studies has increasingly linked translation with rights, ideology, manipulation, hegemony, feminism and post-colonialism, resulting in translation being labeled with too many political labels, which has also weakened the ontological study of translation.
In short, while absorbing the advantages of cultural transformation, we should prevent cultural translation from depriving translation studies, leading to the end of translation studies, the generalization of translation studies, the immersion of translation studies in cultural studies, historical studies and ideological studies, and the loss of independent translation studies.
References:
Zeng Xiong Wen. The Core Problems and Solutions of Cultural Turn [J]. Journal of Foreign Languages, 2006, (2).
[2] Zhang Jing, Li Shuchun. "Cultural turn" and its importance in translation [J]. Journal of Cangzhou Normal University, 2006, (4).
[3] Basnet, Susan & Andre Lefevere. Build culture. Shanghai: Shanghai Foreign Language Education Press, 1998/200 1.
[4] Basnet, Susan & Andre Lefevere. Translation, history and culture [M]. Shanghai: Shanghai Foreign Language Education Press, 1998/200 1.
[5] Edwin G?nc Le. Contemporary translation theory [M]. London and new york: routledge, 1993.
[6] Andre Lefevere. Translation, rewriting and manipulation of literary reputation [M]. London and new york: routledge, 1992.
[7] Jeremy Mundy. Introduction to Translation Studies: Theory and Application [M]. London: routledge, 200 1.