《典型英汉句型的对比和转化研究Contrast and Transformation Between Typical English and Chinese Sentence Patterns.doc》由会员分享，可在线阅读，更多相关《典型英汉句型的对比和转化研究Contrast and Transformation Between Typical English and Chinese Sentence Patterns.doc（29页珍藏版）》请在三一办公上搜索。
1、典型英汉句型的对比和转化研究Contrast and Transformation Between Typical English and Chinese Sentence PatternsAbstract：The British people have a tendency towards analytical，lineal and abstract thinking mode, separating subjects from objects, while the Chinese are prone to synthetic，spiral and concrete thinking mod
2、e, unifying the subject and the object. The difference in thinking mode has contributed to different typical sentence patterns：in English，the typical sentence pattern is S=NP+VP；in Chinese，it is S=Topic+ Comment. The two formulas pose contrasts to each other in such aspects as thematic，preference fo
3、r sentence style，syntactic unit and the nature of subject. Knowledge about those contrasts can provide insight into and offer guidance on the transfor- mation of sentence patterns between the two languages. During transformation from Chinese into English, hypotaxis can be preferred to, while paratax
4、is is usually favored during transformation from English into Chinese. Key words：typical sentence patterns, contrast, transformationIntroductionEugene A. Nida (1983:12) once remarked, “Translation consists in the receptor language the closet natural equivalence of the source language.” Fully aware o
5、f the notion as translators are, they have always found elusive the approach to achievement of such “closest natural” equivalence. The difficulty has defied much attempt at complete solution because of innate differences between cultures and languages, among which the difference between sentence pat
6、terns is most frequently confronted. The reason resides in the fact that while trans1ating, the translator takes sentence as the translation unit consciously, sentence patterns between languages can directly influence, or even determine the quality of a piece of trans1ationIn this book Syntactic Str
7、uctures published in 1957，Chomsky proposed that a sentence has two levels of structures：the deep structure and the surface structure(胡壮麟，2001：235)The former refers to the underlying relationship between the constituents of a sentence such as that between the subject and the verb；the latter refers to
8、 the phonological representation of the former and is usually considered to be close to what people can discern and receiveFrom this point of view，translation is the process of seeking for the equivalent surface structure in another language. Hence adequate knowledge about the differences between se
9、ntence patterns in the target language and those in the source language becomes even more importantOf course，Some cardinal principles are also to be applied to make such transformation successful 1. Different Typical Sentence Patterns and Their Separate Underlying Thinking Modes 1.1 Different Typica
10、l Sentence PatternsTraditional English grammar defined sentence as a linguistic unit, complete with a subject and a predicateIn the 1960s，American grammarian Noam Chomsky(胡壮麟, 2001:115) proposed the following formula for English sentences: S=NP+VP. Despite the difference in expression, the two defin
11、itions are identical in connotation: subject and verb are essential to typical English sentence patternChinese grammar，developed under the influence of English grammar，also attempted to define sentences in much the same wayFor instance，Chinese scholar Wang Li and Gao Mingkai once remarked that Chine
12、se sentences a1so follow the same patternSubject +Verb-as English sentences do.(蔡基刚，2001：172)However, the recent studies have revealed that such a definition does not apply to almost 50 percent Chinese sentencesShen Xiaolong analyzed the sentence patterns adopted in Lu Wenhuis novel The Well and con
13、cluded that 49.6 percent of its sentences, or 1054 in total，fell out of the category of“Subject +Verb”A typical example is the sentence” 那场大火，幸好消防队员及时赶到”，which can not be analyzed in the“Subject +Verb”formulaInstead, it would be more appropriate to analyze the sentence as“S=Topic + Comment”，with“那场大
14、火”as the topic and“幸好消防队员及时赶到”as the comment. In one word，the English typical sentence pattern is S=NP+VP，while that of Chinese is S= Topic + CommentThe difference has its origin in different thinking modes 1.2 Contrast in Thinking Mode 1.2.1 Analytical Thinking Mode vsSynthetic Thinking ModeUnder t
15、he impact of such masters as Francis Bacon, the British have developed an analytical thinking mode. In other words, they tend to take objects apart and consider them in terms of their componential parts. Accordingly, emphasis is placed upon individual parts and their interrelations. The fact that we
16、stern medicine treats the human system as an assembly of different organs shall testify to the trait. On the other hand, Ancient Chinese believed in the unity of Man and Nature, and the belief has deeply influenced the Chinese mode of thinking: objects, whether concrete or abstract, are deemed as in
17、tegrated wholes. Naturally, emphasis is laid on the whole instead of its individual components. Take the traditional Chinese medicine as an example: it regards the human system as an integrated whole and medicine is not only prescribed for the treatment of the ailing parts. As in thinking mode, so i
18、n language. The difference in thinking mode has generated the different tendency in language: the English language tends to be hypotactic, with its emphasis on formal connection; the Chinese language tends to be paratactic, with much stress on logical and chronic coherence. 1. 2. 2 Lineal Thinking M
19、ode vs. Spiral Thinking ModeSuppose that an English student and a Chinese student are to borrow a dictionary from the same teacher. The English student would state his intention immediately after some brief greetings. The Chinese student, however, is most likely to present a great deal of pleasantry
20、 before he comes to the point, in compliance with the virtue attached to politeness and euphemism since ancient times. The difference in their approaches bespeaks the difference in their thinking modes: the English tend to follow a lineal one, with its stress on “first things first”, while the Chine
21、se is more likely to follow a spiral one, with its stress on circumlocution，that is to say，“pleasantry first”. Accordingly, the English language emphasize the correspondence between form and function；while Chinese restriction on such correspondence is relatively loose. Instead，emphasis is 1aid upon
22、semantic coherence and consistency. 1. 2. 3 Separation of Subject and Object vs. Their Unification The British cherish the separation of subject from object. Such a thinking mode is directed at outward objects，exploring their influence. In other words, outside objects take the primary position，while
23、 the self becomes involved only because of the influence exerted upon it by those external objectsOn the other hand，the ancient Chinese philosophy emphasized the importance of human being, The emphasis is demonstrated in the famous sayings of Confucius, one of the greatest scholars in ancient China，
24、who once remarked (蔡基刚，2001：195)，“According to the intention of the heaven, human being is most important.” Mencius，another scholar in ancient China also said(蔡基刚，2001：195)，“All the things are to serve man.” These remarks are a demonstration of the importance placed upon human being in the Chinese t
25、hinking modeActually，people from China regard man as the only one capable of conscious acts. In accordance with the difference in thinking mode, the English language attaches great value to being concrete，objective and impersonal，while the Chinese language regards it as a virtue to be general and pe
26、rsonal. 1. 2. 4 Abstract Thinking Mode vs. Concrete Thinking ModeAccording to the English, the world is made up of abstract units, following certain corresponding rules. In other words, they tend to be abstract in thinking mode. On the other hand, the Chinese tend to describe abstract concepts with
27、concrete terms, that is, they are prone to concrete thinking mode. The contrast has unavoidably left its mark upon languages: English emphasizes the correspondence between form and function; Chinese is prone to stress on semantic consistency. As a result, the English language has more and much stric
28、ter rules governing formal coherence and compactness; the Chinese language, in contrast, calls for more reader participation in decoding. Thinking mode provides the underlying mechanism for the generation and development of language; in turn, it finds its expression in the latter. One language is no
29、t only integral to, but also the major carrier for a certain thinking mode. To the last analysis, the difference in thinking mode has bred the difference between hypotaxis and parataxis. In his Outline of Classical Chinese Grammar, Edwin G. Pulleyblank once wrote:Where English and many other languag
30、es use hypostatic construction, with relationship of subordination explicitly marked by connectives and verbal morphology, Chinese very often uses parataxis, leaving the semantic relationships to be inferred from the test. In other words, English has a tendency towards hypotaxis or formal coherence
31、and smoothness, joining words, phrases, word groups and clauses with connectives, references and other linking devices. On the other hand, Chinese has a propinquity towards parataxis or semantic consistency; its words, word groups and clauses are relatively loosely connected in form. Such contrast n
32、aturally results in different sentence patterns: the NP + VP of the English language and the Topic + Comment of the Chinese language. 2. Contrast between Typical Sentence Patterns 2. 1 Contrast in Thematic Structure A thematic structure consists of two componential parts: the theme and the rhyme. (T
33、hompson, 2000:132) The former is defined as the starting point of the message or the ground from which the clause is taking off. The latter refers to the remainder of the structure. Broadly speaking, thematic structure or topic structure has two differing components: marked and unmarked, If the subj
34、ect and the theme are one, the structure is unmarked; if not, it is marked. So, in She works in the afternoon., the thematic structure is unmarked, while in In the afternoon she works., it is marked. In the narrow sense, thematic structure only includes marked ones. 2. 1. 1 English :Subject-prominen
35、t According to A New English Course Book by Zhang Zhenbang, there are five typical sentence patterns in English (章振邦, 1999:23 ):a. Subject + Verb. Here the verb is intransitive, no object is to follow it, for example, no subject can be added to the verb rusts” in the sentence Iron rusts. b. Subject
36、+ Verb + Complement. In this case, the verb is called a linking verb, including like, seem, be and so on. c. Subject + Verb + Object + Complement. The verb is called complex transitive verb, since it takes an object and a complement. An example: We elected him president. d. Subject + Verb + Indirect
37、 Object + Direct Object. The verb in this case is labeled as Ditransitive. Just as the prefix di- indicates the number of two, the verb takes two objects, for instance, I give my brother some toys. e. Subject + Verb + Object. The verb used here is transitive and takes one object only, for instance,
38、I want a cup. The five basic patterns provide the basis for all the other sentences, which are expanded, condensed or otherwise evolved in form. So it is obvious that grammatical subject is indispensable to any typical sentences in English, that is to say, English is subject-prominent. The subject c
39、an be easily located in any type of sentences, however intricate their structure may be. For example, in the sentence In the corner diagonally opposite the door, Mrs. Higgins, now over 60 and long past taking the trouble to dress out of faction, sits writing at an elegantly simple writing table, wit
40、h a bell bottom within reach of her hand.” the subject is obviously Mrs. Higgins. The prominence of the subject also explains the phenomenon of constant reference to the subject within some sentences. In Another bomb gave the town of Nagasaki the same fatal blow, it killed an estimated 54, 000 peopl
41、e. the pronoun is intended to refer to the subject of the sentence Another bomb”. Moreover, any English thematic structure can be converted into the SVO order after some alterations. For instance, “To John he gave nothing, but to Ann he gave ten shillings.” can be converted into the normal order He
42、gave nothing to John, but he gave ten shillings to Ann.” It is the same case with Up into the sky shot the rocket, which can be converted into The rocket shot up into the sky.2. 1. 2 Chinese: Topic-prominent On the other hand, Chinese has the characteristic of topic-prominence; the Topic + Comment s
43、tructure applies to almost 50 percent of its sentences. On many occasions, the thematic subject, the topic, takes place of the grammatical subject, which, as a result, is often omitted without jeopardizing the original semantic interpretation. For example, 把成功的三个条件拿来分析一下, 天资是由”天”决定的, 我们无能为力, 机遇是不期而来
44、的, 我们也无能为力。(季羡林, 2000:1 )” The subject of the main clause is 我们, and it is omitted. Yet the omission does not interfere with the correct interpretation of the whole sentence; the topic把成功的三个条件拿来分析一下 has made clear about what the sentence is going to deal with. So it would be more appropriate to desc
45、ribe Chinese as topic-prominent. The very characteristic has led to the arbitrariness of subject existence. Since the existence of the grammatical subject can be arbitrary, some Chinese sentences are not so readily convertible into the SVO order, especially in such cases that the thematic subject-th
46、e theme-is marked. Following are two instances(李瑞华, 1996:305): 他们那帮死脑筋, 我们每人都开导了一番。看戏, 我最喜欢看京剧。 In the first sentence the topic is 他们那帮死脑筋 and the grammatical subject is 我. Obviously, in no way can the sentence be rearranged in the normal sequence of SVO, neither can the second sentence be. All in a
47、ll, the contrast in thematic structure is conspicuous: in an English structure, there is always a thematic subject, as well as a grammatical subject, to be located and the structure is always readily convertible into the normal word order; in Chinese structure, however, more often than not, there is
48、 no grammatical subject to be found, so the thematic subject, the topic, is made more prominent. 2. 2 Contrast in Preference for Sentence Style and Hierarchy between Clauses The contrast fails into two aspects: preference for sentence style and hierarchy between clauses. Following are two texts cite
49、d to illustrate the point:Also secure, by 1689, was the principle of a representative government, as tested against the two criteria for valid constitutions proposed in the previous chapter. As to the first criterion, there was a genuine balance of power in English society, expressing itself in the Whig and Tory parties. As narrowly confined to the privi
