论文部分内容阅读
Abstract： Eugene.Albert.Nida is an influential figure in linguistics and translation field. One of his most significant contributions is putting forward the theory of “dynamic equivalence”. And in this essay the author will discuss the questions， what could we learn from Nida’s theory？ How can we apply this theory to translation practice and criticism？ What are its limitations？ Examples are employed in hope of providing some useful outcomes.
Key words： Nida; dynamic equivalence; source language; target language; criticism
1.Introduction
Eugene﹒Albert﹒Nida is one of the most well-known linguists and translation theorists of the contemporary era. He made great contributions to the translation field and accomplished a huge volume of works throughout his life. Among all his theories “dynamic equivalence” is the one that makes the whole world remember his name. This translation principle was put forward in the 1960s， which renovated the translation studies both in China and western world.
As we are aware， the translation practice came into being long before the existence of translation theories and no one ever thought that translation could be a form of science. However， Nida led us to a fresh new horizon by proposing dynamic equivalence which symbolized a progress from individual empiricism to a scientific and systematic generation in the translation studies.
2.The definition of translation by Nida and his translation theory
The definition of translation given by Nida himself in the article “Principles of Translation as Exemplified by Bible Translation” is as follows： “Translating consists in reproducing in the receptor language the closest natural equivalent of the source message， first in terms of meaning and second in terms of style.” In fact， along with his famous dynamic equivalence， he raised another term with it-formal equivalence. He illustrated that “Formal equivalence focuses attention on the message itself， in both form and content…One is concerned that the message in the receptor language should match as closely as possible the different elements in the source language.” While dynamic equivalence was defined as follows： “Dynamic， or functional， equivalence is based on what Nida calls ‘the principle of equivalent effect’， where ‘the relationship between receptor and message should be substantially the same as that which existed between the original receptors and the message’. The message has to be tailored to the receptor’s linguistic needs and cultural expectation and ‘aims at complete naturalness of expression’. ‘Naturalness’ is a key requirement for Nida. Indeed， he defines the goal of dynamic equivalence as seeking ‘the closest natural equivalent to the source-language message’. This receptor-oriented approach considers adaptations of grammar， of lexicon and of cultural references to be essential in order to achieve naturalness; the TT language should not show interference from the SL， and the ‘foreignness’ of the ST setting is minimized in a way that would now be criticized by later culturally oriented translation theorists.” 3. Practicability of dynamic equivalence
Obviously， Nida focused on dynamic equivalence rather than word-for-word translation. To him， the most crucial element is the similar response in the TL readers， which is reasonable in theory level but yet not very feasible on the practice level as response is so subjective a term that cannot be quantified. However， from my perspective， dynamic equivalence is applicable in many cases. For example， if we use formal equivalence to translate a sentence selected from Gone with the Wind “She could not desert Tara; she belonged to the red acres far more than they could ever belong to her.”， it would be “她不会放弃塔拉;她属于这些红土地，远比它们属于她更加真实。” In this way， it would cause difficulty in understanding the meaning among Chinese readers. Under this circumstance， dynamic equivalence is in favor--“她不能放弃塔拉，这块红土地是属于她的，而她更是永远属于这块红土地。”
Another example is from a famous movie Casablanca： “The drive back to my home in Edmoonton was an endless journey of destructive emotions and thoughts. In a truck-stop restaurant， I sat staring at a glass of cheap red wine. Of all the gin joints in all the towns in all the world， she walks out of mine.” Chinese readers would prefer the DE translation “在我开车回到埃德蒙顿的路上，我陷入了无尽的悲伤之中。随后，我来到一家汽车旅馆，端着一杯廉价红酒出神，弱水三千，终究我已不是她那瓢中的一壶水了。” rather than “在我开车回到埃德蒙顿的路上，我陷入了无尽的悲伤之中。随后，我来到一家汽车旅馆，端着一杯廉价红酒出神，觉着这世上有那么多家旅馆，她终究还是走出了我的那一家。” The latter version keeps exactly the same form as the English source text， while the former one does not obey the word-for-word translation but sticks to sense-for-sense translation. This kind of practice perfectly conveys what contains in the original version under a new face in the Chinese culture. Thus it will easily remove obstacles caused by cultural gap and arouse same feelings from the target readers as if this story happened in their country.
3.1 Dynamic equivalence in daily expressions
More cases are here to prove the practicability of dynamic equivalence. We’d like to use it quite often when it comes to daily expressions in communication. If someone says “I was reliably informed.” Could you take it as “我被很可靠地告知。”？ And “那個演员有一个较小的钦佩者的圈子。” for “The actor has a smaller circle of admirers.” ？ Apparently， we would not. If the translator is confined to the language form， there will not be authentic translation. The two translations are stubbornly shackled by one English grammatical concept-parts of speech. In fact， this concept is created to help us to understand the relationship among words in the sentences so that we can comprehend what is meant in them. In order to present the complicated relation among linguistic elements in a more clear way， Nida abandoned the long-established traditional concept and reclassified all the words into object， event， abstract and relations. Thus we get the translation that can make sense for the above two examples： “我得到的信息很可靠。” and “那个演员没有那么叫座。” As English language contains an enormous quantity of slang where words do not always accord with the meaning it meant to have， dynamic equivalence is quite appropriate under such a circumstance. Person A is bullied and he turns to Person B for help， most likely B would say “Don’t worry， I’ll clean his damn clock.” If we translate with formal equivalence as follows： “別担心，我会擦他的那块儿破表的”， it would be ridiculous and would fail to convey the correct message. To translate this right， a translator needs to obtain a solid grasp on the source language culture and then translate it in an understandable way despite the unfaithfulness on the form to the source text. This can be best supported by Chomsky’s generative-transformational model. Nida applied this to his translation studies. He believes this model equips translators with a technique for decoding the ST and a procedure for encoding the TT. Thus， the surface structure of the ST is analyzed into the basic elements of the deep structure; these are ‘transferred’ in the translation process and then restructured semantically and stylistically into the surface structure of the TT. Abide by this theory， the translation of the above example will be rendered naturally like this： “别担心，我会好好收拾他的。” Similarly， “It’s kinda embarrassing， so please keep it under your hat.” is rendered as “挺尴尬的，所以请别告诉别人.”
3.2 Dynamic equivalence in subtitle translation
Owing to the special language form of colloquial expression， dynamic equivalence makes its appearance frequently in subtitle translation. Another reason is that producers try very hard to impress the audience with up-to-date expressions as English movies and TV series have started to prevail in China in recent years. I will list some examples as follows：
1、There you are. I’ve been looking for you forever.
--众里寻他千百度，蓦然回首，那人却在，灯火阑珊处。
2、You’re so distinguished， but I’m just an ordinary person. I’m incapable of getting even a hint of what you’re thinking.
--娘娘您是人中之凤，奴婢只是常鳞凡介，试问又怎能猜得到娘娘的蕙质兰心呢？
3、You’d know， how the time flies. Only yesterday， was the time of our lives.
--莫道荏苒流岁月，余生所忆惟昨前。
4、I’ve always wanted to travel.
--我一生放荡不羁爱旅游。
3.3 Dynamic equivalence in advertisement translation
Also the same phenomenon is shown in advertisement translation. Generally speaking， the slogan of any advertisement needs to be concise， intelligible， catchy， novel and unique， topic-prominent. Accordingly， the translation version must meet those requirements as well. Given the readership of different cultures， which Nida laid much emphasis on， translators sometimes need to do some necessary recreations to achieve the goal. Some examples are listed below. 1、Good to the last drop. 滴滴香濃，意犹未尽。
-- Maxwell House Coffee
2、We lead. Others copy. 我们领先，他人仿效。
-- Ricoh Copier
3、No business too small， no problem too big. 没有不作的小生意，没有解决不了的大问题。
-- IBM Corporation
4、Ask for more. 渴望无限。
-- Pepsi-Cola
5、We integrate， you communicate. 我们集大成，您超越自我。
-- Mitsubishi Electrician
There is no doubt that we would prefer formal equivalence in some occasions， for instance， the translation of some proverbs. “Knowledge is power.” is commonly rendered as “知识就是力量。” and “Time is money.” rendered as “时间就是金钱。”
4. Criticism and limitations of “dynamic equivalence” theory
Not a single theory is all-purpose. Nor can “dynamic equivalence” theory have universal applicability. It gives guidance to the translation practices which give priority to conveying information while the form of expression is put in a less important position， such as the Bible translation， subtitle translation， advertisement translation and the translation of science and technology texts. That is because it can effectively and accurately convey information. But if the dynamic equivalence theory is used to guide all the translation practice， it is clearly not appropriate.
As his dynamic equivalence has enjoyed great popularity and applauded by many translators and translation theorists， it has gone through severe criticism in translation circle at the same time. After his theory was introduced into China， it exerted enormous influence upon the Chinese translation circle and many translation scholars started to take his theory as their criterion of translation practice. There was once a period when referring to translation everyone would speak of Nida. They think highly of him because they are set free from the fetters chained by the form of the original， shifting the main point of translation to the content of meaning and the response of the readers.
On the other hand， his dynamic equivalence received negative comments， in Chinese translation circle first witnessed by two articles named “The Significance and Limitation of Dynamic Equivalence” and “Should Reader’s Response be Considered as a Criterion in Assessment of Translated Works？” in 1988. It was stated that dynamic equivalence was initially intended for Bible translating and it was impracticable for literary translation. Literary work is so special and complicated kind of art that everyone feels differently towards the same work， just as the old saying goes “There are a thousand Hamlets in a thousand people’s eyes.” We cannot guarantee that the SL readers will have the same response， how can we manage to make the TL readers have the same response as the original receptors？ This is the theory’s first limitation that the role of readers has been laid too much emphasis by Nida. As a matter of fact， translation is a complicated process involving in plenty of factors， such as SL， ST， the translator， TL， readers and the different cultures of SL and TL. Second， the form and style of the original texts have been neglected. So when translators deal with texts where the style and form are the prominent factors of the original texts， poems in particular， dynamic equivalence losses its practicability. As we are concerned， classical Chinese poetry holds an extremely high position in Chinese culture and it is regarded as the essence of Chinese ancient wisdom. It contains a wide range of types， such as shi， ci， qu， fu， and so on. And each type can be classified further. For example， shi can be further divided into five-character quatrain， seven-character quatrain， seven-character octave， etc. Every type has a strict discipline on the number of characters， the rhyme， and also the images chosen to express different emotions. Let us look at one example below.
登鸛雀楼
唐 王之涣
白日依山尽，黄河入海流。
欲穷千里目，更上一层楼。
Tang Yihe applied dynamic equivalence to the translation of this poem， and his version is as follows：
Ascending the Stork Tower
The white sun sets behind mountains，
The Yellow River flows into the sea.
Go further up one flight of stairs，
And you’ll widen your view a thousand li.
Theoretically， this version of translation is a successful case applying dynamic equivalence. The position of the third and the forth line in Chinese has been exchanged when rendering into English. And this kind of treatment aims to accord with the English language code and thus enables English readers comprehend the poem clearly. The whole poem succeeds in preserving the meanings of the ST. However， since the form and the rhyme have been changed it fails to let the TL readers appreciate the aesthetic value in this famous poem.
Conclusion
In conclusion， Nida’s dynamic equivalence has got both merits and demerits. When and how should we apply this theory into practice is quite flexible. After all， there is no perfect translation theory that is applicable to all types of texts till now.
References
[1] James S. Holmes. Translated！ ： Papers on Literary Translation and Translation Studies [M]. Amsterdam： Rodopi B.V.， 1988.
[2] Munday， Jeremy. Introducing Translation Studies： Theories and Applications Second Edition [M]. London：Routledge. 2008.
[3] Nida， Eugene A. The Sociolinguistics of Interlingual Communication. [M]. Bruxelles： Editions du Hazard. 1996.
[4] 陳德鴻，張南峰.西方翻譯理論精選[M].香港：香港城市大學出版社，2000.
[5] 陳福康.中國譯學理論史稿[M].上海：上海外語教育出版社，1992.
[6] 郭建中.當代美國翻譯理論[M].武漢：湖北教育出版社，2000.
[7] 李田心.不存在所謂的翻譯（科）學[J].中國翻譯，2000，（5）.
[8] 譚載喜.西方翻譯簡史[M].北京：商務印書館，1991.
[9] 屠國元，肖錦銀.西方現代翻譯理論在中國的傳播與接受[J].中國翻譯，2000，（5）.
[10] 王東風.文化差異與讀者反應——評Nida的讀者同等反映論[A].郭建中.文化與翻譯[C].北京：中國對外翻譯出版公司，2000.
[11] 張經浩.與奈達的一次翻譯筆談[J].中國翻譯，2000，（5）.
[12] 張美芳.翻譯學的目標與結構——霍姆斯的譯學構想介評[J].中國翻譯，2000，（2）.
[13] 張南峰.特性與共性——論中國翻譯學與翻譯學的關係[J].中國翻譯，2000，（2）.
Key words： Nida; dynamic equivalence; source language; target language; criticism
1.Introduction
Eugene﹒Albert﹒Nida is one of the most well-known linguists and translation theorists of the contemporary era. He made great contributions to the translation field and accomplished a huge volume of works throughout his life. Among all his theories “dynamic equivalence” is the one that makes the whole world remember his name. This translation principle was put forward in the 1960s， which renovated the translation studies both in China and western world.
As we are aware， the translation practice came into being long before the existence of translation theories and no one ever thought that translation could be a form of science. However， Nida led us to a fresh new horizon by proposing dynamic equivalence which symbolized a progress from individual empiricism to a scientific and systematic generation in the translation studies.
2.The definition of translation by Nida and his translation theory
The definition of translation given by Nida himself in the article “Principles of Translation as Exemplified by Bible Translation” is as follows： “Translating consists in reproducing in the receptor language the closest natural equivalent of the source message， first in terms of meaning and second in terms of style.” In fact， along with his famous dynamic equivalence， he raised another term with it-formal equivalence. He illustrated that “Formal equivalence focuses attention on the message itself， in both form and content…One is concerned that the message in the receptor language should match as closely as possible the different elements in the source language.” While dynamic equivalence was defined as follows： “Dynamic， or functional， equivalence is based on what Nida calls ‘the principle of equivalent effect’， where ‘the relationship between receptor and message should be substantially the same as that which existed between the original receptors and the message’. The message has to be tailored to the receptor’s linguistic needs and cultural expectation and ‘aims at complete naturalness of expression’. ‘Naturalness’ is a key requirement for Nida. Indeed， he defines the goal of dynamic equivalence as seeking ‘the closest natural equivalent to the source-language message’. This receptor-oriented approach considers adaptations of grammar， of lexicon and of cultural references to be essential in order to achieve naturalness; the TT language should not show interference from the SL， and the ‘foreignness’ of the ST setting is minimized in a way that would now be criticized by later culturally oriented translation theorists.” 3. Practicability of dynamic equivalence
Obviously， Nida focused on dynamic equivalence rather than word-for-word translation. To him， the most crucial element is the similar response in the TL readers， which is reasonable in theory level but yet not very feasible on the practice level as response is so subjective a term that cannot be quantified. However， from my perspective， dynamic equivalence is applicable in many cases. For example， if we use formal equivalence to translate a sentence selected from Gone with the Wind “She could not desert Tara; she belonged to the red acres far more than they could ever belong to her.”， it would be “她不会放弃塔拉;她属于这些红土地，远比它们属于她更加真实。” In this way， it would cause difficulty in understanding the meaning among Chinese readers. Under this circumstance， dynamic equivalence is in favor--“她不能放弃塔拉，这块红土地是属于她的，而她更是永远属于这块红土地。”
Another example is from a famous movie Casablanca： “The drive back to my home in Edmoonton was an endless journey of destructive emotions and thoughts. In a truck-stop restaurant， I sat staring at a glass of cheap red wine. Of all the gin joints in all the towns in all the world， she walks out of mine.” Chinese readers would prefer the DE translation “在我开车回到埃德蒙顿的路上，我陷入了无尽的悲伤之中。随后，我来到一家汽车旅馆，端着一杯廉价红酒出神，弱水三千，终究我已不是她那瓢中的一壶水了。” rather than “在我开车回到埃德蒙顿的路上，我陷入了无尽的悲伤之中。随后，我来到一家汽车旅馆，端着一杯廉价红酒出神，觉着这世上有那么多家旅馆，她终究还是走出了我的那一家。” The latter version keeps exactly the same form as the English source text， while the former one does not obey the word-for-word translation but sticks to sense-for-sense translation. This kind of practice perfectly conveys what contains in the original version under a new face in the Chinese culture. Thus it will easily remove obstacles caused by cultural gap and arouse same feelings from the target readers as if this story happened in their country.
3.1 Dynamic equivalence in daily expressions
More cases are here to prove the practicability of dynamic equivalence. We’d like to use it quite often when it comes to daily expressions in communication. If someone says “I was reliably informed.” Could you take it as “我被很可靠地告知。”？ And “那個演员有一个较小的钦佩者的圈子。” for “The actor has a smaller circle of admirers.” ？ Apparently， we would not. If the translator is confined to the language form， there will not be authentic translation. The two translations are stubbornly shackled by one English grammatical concept-parts of speech. In fact， this concept is created to help us to understand the relationship among words in the sentences so that we can comprehend what is meant in them. In order to present the complicated relation among linguistic elements in a more clear way， Nida abandoned the long-established traditional concept and reclassified all the words into object， event， abstract and relations. Thus we get the translation that can make sense for the above two examples： “我得到的信息很可靠。” and “那个演员没有那么叫座。” As English language contains an enormous quantity of slang where words do not always accord with the meaning it meant to have， dynamic equivalence is quite appropriate under such a circumstance. Person A is bullied and he turns to Person B for help， most likely B would say “Don’t worry， I’ll clean his damn clock.” If we translate with formal equivalence as follows： “別担心，我会擦他的那块儿破表的”， it would be ridiculous and would fail to convey the correct message. To translate this right， a translator needs to obtain a solid grasp on the source language culture and then translate it in an understandable way despite the unfaithfulness on the form to the source text. This can be best supported by Chomsky’s generative-transformational model. Nida applied this to his translation studies. He believes this model equips translators with a technique for decoding the ST and a procedure for encoding the TT. Thus， the surface structure of the ST is analyzed into the basic elements of the deep structure; these are ‘transferred’ in the translation process and then restructured semantically and stylistically into the surface structure of the TT. Abide by this theory， the translation of the above example will be rendered naturally like this： “别担心，我会好好收拾他的。” Similarly， “It’s kinda embarrassing， so please keep it under your hat.” is rendered as “挺尴尬的，所以请别告诉别人.”
3.2 Dynamic equivalence in subtitle translation
Owing to the special language form of colloquial expression， dynamic equivalence makes its appearance frequently in subtitle translation. Another reason is that producers try very hard to impress the audience with up-to-date expressions as English movies and TV series have started to prevail in China in recent years. I will list some examples as follows：
1、There you are. I’ve been looking for you forever.
--众里寻他千百度，蓦然回首，那人却在，灯火阑珊处。
2、You’re so distinguished， but I’m just an ordinary person. I’m incapable of getting even a hint of what you’re thinking.
--娘娘您是人中之凤，奴婢只是常鳞凡介，试问又怎能猜得到娘娘的蕙质兰心呢？
3、You’d know， how the time flies. Only yesterday， was the time of our lives.
--莫道荏苒流岁月，余生所忆惟昨前。
4、I’ve always wanted to travel.
--我一生放荡不羁爱旅游。
3.3 Dynamic equivalence in advertisement translation
Also the same phenomenon is shown in advertisement translation. Generally speaking， the slogan of any advertisement needs to be concise， intelligible， catchy， novel and unique， topic-prominent. Accordingly， the translation version must meet those requirements as well. Given the readership of different cultures， which Nida laid much emphasis on， translators sometimes need to do some necessary recreations to achieve the goal. Some examples are listed below. 1、Good to the last drop. 滴滴香濃，意犹未尽。
-- Maxwell House Coffee
2、We lead. Others copy. 我们领先，他人仿效。
-- Ricoh Copier
3、No business too small， no problem too big. 没有不作的小生意，没有解决不了的大问题。
-- IBM Corporation
4、Ask for more. 渴望无限。
-- Pepsi-Cola
5、We integrate， you communicate. 我们集大成，您超越自我。
-- Mitsubishi Electrician
There is no doubt that we would prefer formal equivalence in some occasions， for instance， the translation of some proverbs. “Knowledge is power.” is commonly rendered as “知识就是力量。” and “Time is money.” rendered as “时间就是金钱。”
4. Criticism and limitations of “dynamic equivalence” theory
Not a single theory is all-purpose. Nor can “dynamic equivalence” theory have universal applicability. It gives guidance to the translation practices which give priority to conveying information while the form of expression is put in a less important position， such as the Bible translation， subtitle translation， advertisement translation and the translation of science and technology texts. That is because it can effectively and accurately convey information. But if the dynamic equivalence theory is used to guide all the translation practice， it is clearly not appropriate.
As his dynamic equivalence has enjoyed great popularity and applauded by many translators and translation theorists， it has gone through severe criticism in translation circle at the same time. After his theory was introduced into China， it exerted enormous influence upon the Chinese translation circle and many translation scholars started to take his theory as their criterion of translation practice. There was once a period when referring to translation everyone would speak of Nida. They think highly of him because they are set free from the fetters chained by the form of the original， shifting the main point of translation to the content of meaning and the response of the readers.
On the other hand， his dynamic equivalence received negative comments， in Chinese translation circle first witnessed by two articles named “The Significance and Limitation of Dynamic Equivalence” and “Should Reader’s Response be Considered as a Criterion in Assessment of Translated Works？” in 1988. It was stated that dynamic equivalence was initially intended for Bible translating and it was impracticable for literary translation. Literary work is so special and complicated kind of art that everyone feels differently towards the same work， just as the old saying goes “There are a thousand Hamlets in a thousand people’s eyes.” We cannot guarantee that the SL readers will have the same response， how can we manage to make the TL readers have the same response as the original receptors？ This is the theory’s first limitation that the role of readers has been laid too much emphasis by Nida. As a matter of fact， translation is a complicated process involving in plenty of factors， such as SL， ST， the translator， TL， readers and the different cultures of SL and TL. Second， the form and style of the original texts have been neglected. So when translators deal with texts where the style and form are the prominent factors of the original texts， poems in particular， dynamic equivalence losses its practicability. As we are concerned， classical Chinese poetry holds an extremely high position in Chinese culture and it is regarded as the essence of Chinese ancient wisdom. It contains a wide range of types， such as shi， ci， qu， fu， and so on. And each type can be classified further. For example， shi can be further divided into five-character quatrain， seven-character quatrain， seven-character octave， etc. Every type has a strict discipline on the number of characters， the rhyme， and also the images chosen to express different emotions. Let us look at one example below.
登鸛雀楼
唐 王之涣
白日依山尽，黄河入海流。
欲穷千里目，更上一层楼。
Tang Yihe applied dynamic equivalence to the translation of this poem， and his version is as follows：
Ascending the Stork Tower
The white sun sets behind mountains，
The Yellow River flows into the sea.
Go further up one flight of stairs，
And you’ll widen your view a thousand li.
Theoretically， this version of translation is a successful case applying dynamic equivalence. The position of the third and the forth line in Chinese has been exchanged when rendering into English. And this kind of treatment aims to accord with the English language code and thus enables English readers comprehend the poem clearly. The whole poem succeeds in preserving the meanings of the ST. However， since the form and the rhyme have been changed it fails to let the TL readers appreciate the aesthetic value in this famous poem.
Conclusion
In conclusion， Nida’s dynamic equivalence has got both merits and demerits. When and how should we apply this theory into practice is quite flexible. After all， there is no perfect translation theory that is applicable to all types of texts till now.
References
[1] James S. Holmes. Translated！ ： Papers on Literary Translation and Translation Studies [M]. Amsterdam： Rodopi B.V.， 1988.
[2] Munday， Jeremy. Introducing Translation Studies： Theories and Applications Second Edition [M]. London：Routledge. 2008.
[3] Nida， Eugene A. The Sociolinguistics of Interlingual Communication. [M]. Bruxelles： Editions du Hazard. 1996.
[4] 陳德鴻，張南峰.西方翻譯理論精選[M].香港：香港城市大學出版社，2000.
[5] 陳福康.中國譯學理論史稿[M].上海：上海外語教育出版社，1992.
[6] 郭建中.當代美國翻譯理論[M].武漢：湖北教育出版社，2000.
[7] 李田心.不存在所謂的翻譯（科）學[J].中國翻譯，2000，（5）.
[8] 譚載喜.西方翻譯簡史[M].北京：商務印書館，1991.
[9] 屠國元，肖錦銀.西方現代翻譯理論在中國的傳播與接受[J].中國翻譯，2000，（5）.
[10] 王東風.文化差異與讀者反應——評Nida的讀者同等反映論[A].郭建中.文化與翻譯[C].北京：中國對外翻譯出版公司，2000.
[11] 張經浩.與奈達的一次翻譯筆談[J].中國翻譯，2000，（5）.
[12] 張美芳.翻譯學的目標與結構——霍姆斯的譯學構想介評[J].中國翻譯，2000，（2）.
[13] 張南峰.特性與共性——論中國翻譯學與翻譯學的關係[J].中國翻譯，2000，（2）.