Research on the Relationship Between Intertextuality and Translation Research
摘 要：英国翻译理论家哈提姆和梅森的著作《语篇与译者》将互文性理论正式引入翻译理论中。作为一种新文本理论的互文性理论给翻译研究带来了很多新的启示本文作者从两方面讨论了这一问题。
Abstract: It was in the works entitled Discourse and Translator by Hatim and Mason, British translation theorists , that Intertextuality Theory was formally introduced into Translation Theory. Intertextuality brings a lot of new enlightenments to the circle of translation.The author discusses this issue from two aspects.
关键词：互文性理论，翻译研究，启示
Key Words: intertextuality theory, translation research, enlightenments
作者简介：何芳（1977-），女，湖南省湘潭市人，学历硕士研究，湖南长沙航空职业技术学院英语教师，职称为讲师，湖南师范大学外国语学院英语语言文学专业硕士研究生，研究方向：英汉翻译理论与实践。
The theory of intertextuality is a kind of textual theory shaped in post-modern cultural thoughts in the contemporary Western society. According to Keep and Mclaughlin（1992：56）, the term of intertextuality is originated from a Latin word “intertexto”, which means to interweave or systemize things during intertexture. Concerning the origin of this term, generally it is believed that the term was invented by Julia Kristeva, who is a French master in semiology.
Since Julia Kristeva’s proposition of this concept in 1969, intertextuality has been an important subject researched by many scholars and it was appropriated and modified by many theoreticians. Intertextuality was formally introduced to translation circle by British theoretician Hatim and Mason in their book of “Discourse and the Translator”. In this book, it points out that “the consistency between intertextuality and translation lies with that translation itself is a kind of intertextual activity”. (Hatim B & Mason I 1990:45)
Intertextuality brings a lot of new enlightenments to the circle of translation, which are mainly represented in the flowing two perspectives:
Firstly,the explosition on the generation of text significance made of intertextual theory breaks the significance concept of traditional translation.
Throughout the translation history in China and western countries, the history of translation actually is the history of meaning conversion. Although the Chinese and western theories on translation differ with one another a lot, concerning the judgment standard for translation, it is usually determined by the faithfulness of version to the source text, or determined by the extent of such faithfulness of meaning ( Zhu Chaowei & Lin Ping 2002 : 61).
Secondly, intertextuality provides new theoretical basis for the macro construction of translation researches.
The present researches on translation has became an independent subject crossing literature, linguistics, philosophy, esthetics, psychology, and culture from a former subject subordinated to Applied Linguistics and Comparative Literature. In western countries, researches on translation are diversified with various genres, appearing a flourishing vision. These genres include genres of translation (culture) research genre, translation science, America translation training, pluralistic system and deconstruction, which are numerous and complicated. Behind such prosperity, the translation research circle is unrestrained and extended constantly. Intertextuality provides new theoretical basis and logic support to the macro construction of such translation researches.
Kristeva and Barthes’ broad-based intertextuality attached great importance to the relation between literature factors and non-literature ones and researches on those untraceable codes and the everywhere-existed influence of cultural tradition (Culler 1991 : 103 ). This has broken the restrained and closed research mode of traditional literature. And literature was introduced to relevant researches on non-literature language, code and cultural sighs.
To conclude, the enlightenments brought by intertextuality are extensive and diversified. Since Kristeva’s proposition of this concept, intertextuality has experienced various genres and changes. With the emergence of various genres, intertextuality became once of the most complicated theories. To introduce this theory to translation research will be undoubtedly of great value of theoretical innovation.
Bibliography:
1.Hatim, B. &Mason, I. The Translator as Comm unicator. London &New York: Routledge, 1997.17,32-33.
2.Hatim, B. Comm unication Across Cultures: TranslationTheory and Contrastive Tex t L inguistics . Shanghai:Shanghai Foreign Language Education Press,2001.203.
3.Julia Kristeva . “Word , dialogue and novel”. TheKristevaReader . TorilMoi, ed.Oxford : Basil Blackwell , 1986.101-104.
4.KeepC&McLaughlinT.“Intertexuality”.10July,2009http://web.unic.ca/ckeep/hfl0276.
5.New Mark&Perter.A Textbook of Translation. Shanghai:Shanghai Foreign Language Education Press,2001.
6.Nida, Eugene,A & Charles R. Taber. The Theory and Practice of Translation . Shanghai: Shanghai Foreign Language Education Press,2004.
7.陈永国：互文性，外国文学1 (2003): 80
8.刘泌庆：文体与翻译，北京：中国对外翻译出版公司，1998.21
9.蒋骁华：近十年来西方翻译理论研究，外语教学与研究1998.13
