英汉动词性替代和省略的对比研究

论文摘要

前人通过对比分析指出,就动词性替代和省略而言,尽管汉语中的动词性替代和省略与英语中的动词性替代和省略情况非常相似,但同英语相比,汉语中的动词性替代和省略情况还是比较少。在很多情况下,汉语更倾向于对动词的重复。动词性替代和省略都是避免重复、突出信息并使上下文紧密连接的语法手段。使用动词性替代和省略,可以使句子简洁紧凑、生动有力。目前,在英汉语对比中有关动词性替代和省略的研究多限于对这两种形式的概念性描述。专门从动词性替代和省略出发,对英汉语进行比较找出它们综合表现的对比分析研究就比较少。本文以韩礼德和哈桑在1976年提出的语篇衔接理论为理论基础,在朱永生等(2001)关于英汉语衔接手段对比研究的基础上,运用归纳对比的方法,对所收集的英汉语语料中的动词性替代和省略进行综合对比分析,探讨两种语言中动词性替代和省略的特点及差异,并分析造成这些差异的因素。文章从大量例证出发,针对英汉动词性替代和省略的差异,系统性地探讨翻译策略。文章首先对英语中的替代动词“do”,及汉语中的替代动词“干”、“搞”、“弄”和“来”进行了尽可能详尽的描述和分类,分析两种语言中的动词性替代的异同及其原因。其次,通过综合分析,对英汉语中的动词性省略现象进行了细致地描述和分类,同时对两种语言中的动词性省略异同进行分析并探讨了造成差异的原因。最后,本文列举大量翻译实例,通过对动词性替代和省略翻译的方法和技巧的分析和总结,指出了英汉语动词性替代和省略的差异对英汉翻译的理解和表达两个阶段所造成的影响,并且尝试提出解决这些问题的方法和途径。

论文目录

• ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
• 摘要
• ABSTRACT
• Chapter 1 Introduction
• 1.1 The Motivation for the Present Research
• 1.2 Literature Review
• 1.2.1 Earlier Studies of Verbal Substitution
• 1.2.2 Earlier Studies of Verbal Ellipsis
• 1.2.3 Contrastive Studies on Verbal Substitution and Ellipsis in English and Chinese
• 1.3 Aim and Methodology
• 1.4 Layout of the Thesis
• Chapter 2 Cohesion,Context vs.Verbal Substitution and Ellipsis
• 2.1 Cohesion vs.Verbal Substitution and Ellipsis
• 2.1.1 Cohesion
• 2.1.1.1 Text Study and Cohesion
• 2.1.1.2 Cohesion
• 2.1.1.3 Cohesion and Coherence
• 2.1.2 Cohesion vs.Verbal Substitution and Ellipsis
• 2.2 Context vs.Verbal Substitution and Ellipsis
• 2.2.1 Context
• 2.2.2 Context vs.Verbal Substitution and Ellipsis
• Chapter 3 Comparison of Verbal Substitution between English and Chinese
• 3.1 Substitution
• 3.1.1 Substitution and Reference
• 3.1.2 Types of Substitution
• 3.2 Verbal Substitution in English
• 3.2.1 Verb "Do"
• 3.2.1.1 Halliday and Hasan's Classification of Verb "Do"
• 3.2.1.2 R.Quirk's Classification of Verb "Do"
• 3.2.2 Verbal Substitute "Do" with Its Varied Forms as a Cohesive Device
• 3.2.2.1 Verbal Substitute "Do"
• 3.2.2.2 Verbal Substitute "Do So"
• 3.3 Verbal Substitution in Chinese
• 3.3.1 Verbal Substitutes "干","弄","搞"
• 3.3.2 Verbal Substitute"来"
• 3.3.2.1 With Antecedents
• 3.3.2.2 Without Antecedents
• 3.4 A Contrastive Analysis of Verbal Substitution in English and Chinese
• 3.4.1 Similarities
• 3.4.2 Differences
• Chapter 4 Comparison of Verbal Ellipsis in English and Chinese
• 4.1 Ellipsis and Substitution
• 4.2 Classification of Ellipsis
• 4.2.1 Halliday and Hasan and Hu Zhuanglin's Classification of Ellipsis
• 4.2.2 Quirk et al's Classification of Ellipsis
• 4.3 Verbal Ellipsis in English
• 4.3.1 Lexical Ellipsis
• 4.3.1.1 Lexical Ellipsis in Terms of Sentence Constituents
• 4.3.1.2 Lexical Ellipsis in Terms of the Position of the Verbs
• 4.3.2 Operator Ellipsis
• 4.4 Verbal Ellipsis in Chinese
• 4.4.1 Lexical Ellipsis
• 4.4.2 Operator Ellipsis
• 4.5 A Contrastive Analysis of Verbal Ellipsis in English and Chinese
• Chapter 5 Application of Verbal Substitution and Ellipsis Study to Translation
• 5.1 Translation and Cohesion
• 5.2 Factors in Determining Frequency of Cohesive Devices
• 5.2.1 The Typology of Text
• 5.2.2 Psychological Pattern
• 5.3 Translation of Verbal Substitution and Ellipsis between English and Chinese
• 5.3.1 Translation of Verbal Substitution
• 5.3.1.1 Translation of Verbal Substitution from English to Chinese
• 5.3.1.1.1 Full Repetition of Substitute
• 5.3.1.1.2 Partial Repetition of Substitute
• 5.3.1.1.3 Omission of Substitute
• 5.3.1.1.4 Conversion of Other Cohesive Forms for Verbal Substitution
• 5.3.1.2 Translation of Verbal Substitution from Chinese to English
• 5.3.2 Translation of Verbal Ellipsis between English and Chinese
• 5.3.2.1 Translation of Verbal Ellipsis from English to Chinese
• 5.3.2.1.1 Repetition of Ellipsis
• 5.3.2.1.2 Complement of the Omitted
• 5.3.2.1.3 Conversion of Cohesive Devices
• 5.3.2.2 Translation of Verbal Ellipsis from Chinese to English
• Chapter 6 Conclusion
• BIBLIOGRAPHY