簡易檢索 / 詳目顯示

研究生: 施詠溱
Yung-Jen Shih
論文名稱: 造成翻譯過程變緩的語言匹配問題研究
Mismatch Problems That Slow Down Translation Process
指導教授: 陳献忠
Shian-Jung Chen
口試委員: 陳聖傑
Sheng-Jie Chen
周中天
Chung-tien Chou
學位類別: 碩士
Master
系所名稱: 人文社會學院 - 應用外語系
Department of Applied Foreign Languages
論文出版年: 2016
畢業學年度: 104
語文別: 英文
論文頁數: 184
中文關鍵詞: 翻譯的思維過程雙語缺乏對應匹配的翻譯英語語言剖析器「誰對誰做啥」的格框資訊造句法第三語碼語意表達翻譯理論研究
外文關鍵詞: mental process in translation, mismatch, English parser, case frame of Who Did What to Whom, sentence construction rules, the Third Code, meaning representation, translation studies
相關次數: 點閱:494下載:14
分享至:
查詢本校圖書館目錄 查詢臺灣博碩士論文知識加值系統 勘誤回報

翻譯時如果遭遇匹配的問題,不管是詞彙上或結構上不對應,可預期的整個翻譯過程就會慢下來。如果找不到對應或者任何轉換動作都改善不了無法對應的情況,譬如”P is for parking”與「P是用來表示泊車」之間的對譯,那就更讓人傷腦筋,原因是譯者找遍整顆腦袋就是找不到現成可以用的東西。收集那些會讓翻譯趨緩無法輕易轉換的例子,必然有助於翻譯的訓練,因為透過孰悉這些例子、預先多做練習,可以幫學習者準備好如何在遭遇類似的情況下安然脫困。
本研究使用英語語言剖析器在分析完英文文件之後自動以「誰對誰做啥」加註每個事件的格框資訊,並以所使用的造句法註記事件之間的關係,作為電腦的閱讀報告。至於中文的句子則以人工的方式比照英文的註記內容加註分析所得的資料。如此中英翻譯的原文與譯文所傳達的事件指稱以及事件內和事件間的指稱關係得以詳實對照比較。本研究主要的目標放在深入探討中英原文譯文無法對應匹配的部分如何造成無法轉換,或謀合困難的窘境。本研究從語言相對論與中英對比分析的角度切入歸納無法對應的中文與英文的差異,切入的角度包括不同語言的溝通偏好、採用的造句法的異同、詞類與結構的互動變化、還有格框格位和語言觀點的出入等。期望對比分析結果有助於了解翻譯的本質,找出解決翻譯問題的關鍵,並提出翻譯訓練的方向。


In the mental process of translation from one language to another, the processing time is expected to increase when different kinds of mismatch such as lexical mismatch or structural mismatch are encountered. Among them, the mismatches that defy transferring, or the ones that have no easy counterparts, for example, “P is for parking” vs. “P是用來表示泊車”, are sure to be more challenging because no corresponding or ready-made expressions come to mind right away. The collection of transfer-defying structures will certainly help translator training programs in that student translators will have the chance to prepare themselves for how to find their way out in similar situations.
In this study, an English parser is used to annotate English sentences of different corpora automatically by representing each event in each sentence with a case frame of normalized Who Did What to Whom and its inter-event relations between related events in the same sentence. Then, an annotation in Chinese similar to the automatic annotation in English will be manually performed to each sentence’s translation in Chinese. Comparing the case frames and the inter-event relations between the original English text and its Chinese counterpart, it is expected to identify sentences that defy transferring in translation, ranging from missing some parts of speech to having entirely different case frames. Those sentences are expected to show mismatch of different kinds, based on linguistic relativity and contrastive analysis. The paired case frames of events of the same meaning in different languages will be used to show how a cure may be found for such transfer-defying mismatch with a hope to accelerating translation speed or easing processing burden.

Table of Content4 ABSTRACT7 中文摘要8 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS9 Chapter One Introduction10 1.1 Motivaton11 1.2 Research questions…13 Chapter Two Literature Review15 2.1 Garden Path Sentence15 2.1.1 Even-related brain potentials elicited by syntactice anomaly16 2.1.2 Eye movement and eye tracking17 2.2 Ambiguity and mistatch17 2.3 Translatin study 17 2.3.1 Frawley’s Third Code19 2.4 Contrastive analysis31 2.5 Linguistic relativity33 2.6 Language typology35 2..6.1 Hypotaxis versus parataxis35 2..6.2 Head-first right-branching vs. head-last left-branching 36 2..6.3 The non-finite clauses and tense-agreementversus aspect 37 2.7 English parser used as a computer reader37 2.7.1 Meaning representation41 2.7.2 Case Grammar and case frame of Who Did What to Whom42 2.8 Sentence construction rules43 2..8.1 PADS gaps and PADS restoration43 2.9 Summary44 Chapter Three Methodology48 3.1 Data collection48 3.1.1 Translability versus untranslability49 3.1.2 Beauty lies in the eyes of the beholders50 3.2 Automatic and manual annotation51 3.3 Contrastive analysis57 3.4 Explanation 58 3.5 Summary 58 Chapter Four Results60 4.1 What is the most important guideline of efficient communicaiton? 48 4.2 English and Chinese have different sets of sets of sentence construction rules.73 4.2.1 Conjoining74 4.2.2 Embedding 80 4.2.3 Branching 84 4.2.4 Insertion 88 4.2.5 Apposition 97 4.2.6 Norminalization 99 4.2.7 Serial VPs 101 4.2.8 Topic fronting 110 4.3 Mismatch in sets of sentence construction rules 114 4.4 Use of an English parser to identify sentence construction rules in English sentences 117 4.5 Mismatch between the case frame of Who Did What to Whom in both languages 120 4.6 Frawley’s Third Code 127 4.7 Contrastive analysis between Chinese and Egnlish – different sets of parameters 137 4.7.1 Language typology 137 4.7.2 syntactic categories versus semantic categories 141 4.7.3 Structure type mismatch 145 4.7.4 Hypotaxis versus Parataxis 146 4.8 PADS and linking device 148 4.9 Lexicalization 150 4.10 Lexical mismatch 154 4.11 Linguistic relativity 163 4.12 Summary 165 Chapter Five Disscusion165 5.1 One definetion of writing165 5.2 Paraphrasing and intra-language traanslation.165 5.3 What can be learned from paraphrasing167 5.4 Abiguity plus mismatch in cross-language translation168 5.5 What are the daunting challenges for English-Chinese translation169 5.5.1 How English and Chinese build their sentences differetnly and the challenges that follow169 5.5.2 English and Chinese has different sets of construction rules171 5.5.3 Language typology172 5.5.4 Linguistic relativity173 5.5 Translation defenition173 Chapter Six Conclusion175 6.1 Discoveries175 6.2 Final Remark 176 References180

Alford, Dan Moonhawk (2002 ), The Great Whorf Hypothesis Hoax: Sin, Suffering and Redemption in Academe. Chapter Seven from The Secret Life of Language, October 17, 2002 DRAFT.
ARPA (1994) Introduction to predicate-argument bracketing (a.k.a. Treebank II), ARPA '94.
Bates, M. 1978. The theory and practice of augmented transition network grammars. In L. Bolc, Natural Language Communication with Computers. Lecture Notes on Computer Science, No. 63. Springer Verlag, Berlin.
Bever, T.G. (1970). The cognitive basis for linguistic structure. In J.R. Hayes (Ed.), Cognitive development of language. New York: Wiley.
Carroll, John B. (ed.) (1997). Language, Thought, and Reality: Selected Writings of Benjamin Lee Whorf. Cambridge, Mass.: Technology Press of Massachusetts Institute of Technology.
Chen, S. -J. (1996). Analysis of Chinese for Chinese-English Machine Translation. Ph.D. diss., Department of Linguistics, Georgetown University, Washington, DC.
Chen, Shian-jung (2010). Linguistic relativity revisit. In 2010 年跨文化研究國際研討會,輔仁大學. https://ntust.academia.edu/ShianjungChen
Chen, Shian-jung (2013). PADS restoration and its importance in reading comprehension and meaning representation. Proceedings of The 27th Pacific Asia Conference on Language, Information, and Computation (PACLIC 27).
Chen, Shian-jung (2014). Computer reading and human reading. International Conference on Applied Linguistics & Language Teaching (ALLT). National Taiwan University of Science and Technology, Taipei.
Chen, Shian-jung and Lu, Kevin (2012). Clause boundary detection and relational marking for MT reordering. Special Issue in the Studies in English Language and Literature (2013) National Taiwan University of Science and Technology.
Chen Yueh-Ching (陳玥菁 1996) 傲慢與偏見 (Chinese translation of Pride and Prejudice) 希代 (Xi Dai Publishing)
Chomsky, N. (1957). Syntactic Structures, Mouton & Co.
Eckman, F. (1977). "Markedness and the contrastive analysis hypothesis". Language Learning 27.315 – 330.
Eckman, Fred (2006). "Markedness and the Contrastive Analysis Hypothesis" in Language Learning 27(2):315 - 330 · October
Eco, Umberto (1976). A Theory of Semiotics (Bloomington: Indiana University Press, , pp. 250–6.
Fillmore, C. (1968) "The Case for Case" (1968). In Bach and Harms (Ed.): Universals in Linguistic Theory. New York: Holt, Rinehart, and Winston, 1-88.
Frawley, W. (1984). "Prolegomenon to a theory of translation" in Translation. Literary, Linguistic & Philosophical Perspectives, W. Frawley (ed.) Delaware Press.
Frazier, L., & Clifton, C., Jr. (1996). Construal. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Frazier, Lyn (1987), "Sentence processing: A tutorial review", in Coltheart, M., Attention and Performance XII: The Psychology of Reading, Lawrence Erlbaum Associates
Friederici, A. D., Hahne, A., & Mecklinger, A. (1996). Temporal structure of syntactic parsing: Early and late event- related brain potential effects. Journal of Experimental Psychology: learning, Memory, and Cognition, 22, 1219–1248.
George Steiner (1975), After Babel. London: Oxford University Press.
Greenberg, J. (1963). "Some Universals of Grammar with Particular Reference to the Order of Meaningful Elements," Universals of Language, London: MIT Press, pp. 110-113.
Haegeman, Liliane (1992). Introduction to Government and Binding theory. Oxford & Cambridge, MA: Basil Blackwell
Huey, E. B. (1908). The psychology and pedagogy of reading. New York: Macmillan
Arnold, D., et al. (2001), Machine Translation: An Introductory Guide, Manchester & Oxford, Blackwell.
Katz, Jerrold (1978)“Effability and Translation,” in Meaning and Translation, ed. F. Guenthner and M.Guenthner-Reutter (New York: NYU Press, 1978), pp. 191–234.
Keenan, Edward (1978)“Some Logical Problems in Translation,” in Meaning and Translation, ed. F. Guenthner and M.Guenthner-Reutter (New York: NYU Press, 1978), pp. 157–89.
Klaudy, Kinga (2001). “Explicitation” In Encyclopedia of Translation Studies (ed. Baker, Mona). London. Routledge.
Lado, R. (1957). Linguistics across cultures: Applied linguistics for language teachers. University of Michigan Press: Ann Arbor.
Lenneberg, Eric (1953), “Cognition in Ethnolinguistics”, Language (Linguistic Society of America) 29 (4): 463–471
Loritz, D. (1992). Generalized Transition Network Parsing for Language Study: The GPARS System for English, Russian, Japanese and Chinese. In CALICO Journal, Volume 10 Number 1.
Lu, Kevin (2012) A Study of the Relational Marking and Clause Boundary Detection as the Keys to Solving Reordering Problems in Machine Translation Systems, NTUST
MacDonald, M. C., Pearlmutter, N. J., & Seidenberg, M. S. (1994). The lexical nature of syntactic ambiguity resolution. Psychological Review, 101, 676–703.
Munday, Jeremy (2001). Introducing Translation Studies. Theories and Applications. London: Routledge
Newmark, Peter. (1988). A Textbook of Translation, Prentice Hall.
Nida, Eugene. (1964). Toward a Science of Translating. E.J. Brill.
Osterhout, L., & Holcomb, P. (1992). Event-related brain potentials elicited by syntactic anomaly. Journal of Memory and Language, 31, 785–806.
Pinker, Steven (1994), The Language Instinct: How the Mind Creates Language, Perennial
Quine, W.V.O. (1960) Word and Object (Cambridge: MIT Press), p. 69.
Sequeiros, Rosales (2006) "Translation: Pragmatics". The Encyclopedia of Language & Linguistics. Elsevier.
Sun Zhili (孫致禮 1993) 傲慢與偏見 (Chinese translation of Pride and Prejudice) 林鬱 (Lin Yu Cultural Enterprise)
Tse, Y.K. (2010). "Parataxis and hypotaxis in modern Chinese." In International Journal of Arts & Sciences, 2010, v. 3 n. 16, p. 351-359
Wen Guo editors (文國編譯 1991) 傲慢與偏見 (Chinese translation of Pride and Prejudice) 文國 (Wen Guo Publishing)
Wang, Amy (2013) Function Word Translation: A Case Study on English Prepositions, NTUST
王力(1954),中國語法理論(上下冊),中華書局
呂致寬 (2016) 兩岸成語英譯策略之比較研究:以台灣與中國的官方出版物為例, 國立台灣師範大學翻譯研究所。
黃建豪(2014)。中文成語翻譯策略之探討:以《光華雜誌》為例。國立彰化師範大學翻譯研究所。

QR CODE