全文转自英语论文网 如有需要可联系网站QQ：949925041 转载请注明出处    

    翻译中的文化误读是不可避免的因为文化上的差异不会消失。如果我们研究的文化视野中的误读,不同文化之间的碰撞会证明他们很明显。
    在传统的翻译理论中，翻译的很好总是接近原文。然而，源语言和目标语言都不相同，所以原作与译作不能相同。原作与译作之间的差异可以减轻文化之间的冲突，促进沟通。总之，避免差是无效的，不建议的意愿。因此，我们必须意识到原作与译作之间的分歧和历时的角度研究应该在TT误读了。
    英语论文文学翻译是一个过程，ST从源到目标语言文化。在旅行中，ST是会变的，甚至是被扭曲的文化因素的影响下。一般来说，ST可以扩大视野，丰富的意义，如果译者采取客观辩证的态度在翻译。（辛红娟，2007：156-160）
    在某种程度上，我们可以说，圣通过误读获得来世。这是误读使ST意义成为动态的、多元的。因此，源文化可以继续生活在目标文化环境。总之，我们应打破传统逻辑的约束，客观、辩证地探讨翻译中的误读
    It is widely accepted now translation is an activity of cultural exchange instead of a mere transform of language signs. Cultural misreading is inevitable in translation because the difference between cultures can never be diminished. The collision and distortion between cultures will show themselves clearly if we study the misreading in a cultural view. However, study about misreading is less than enough in China, it’s probably because we used to studying translation in linguistic view instead of a comparative literature view. (Xie Tianzhen, 1999: 204)
In traditional translation theory, a good translation is always close to the source text. However, the source language and the target language are by no means the same, so the ST and the TT cannot be identical. The difference between the ST and the TT can mitigate the conflicts between cultures thus to promote communication. In a word, the willing to avoid difference is invalid and not suggested. Therefore, we have to be aware of the divergence between the ST and the TT and a diachronic view should be taken in studying misreading in the TT.
    Literary translation is a process in which the ST travels from the source culture to the targe language. During traveling, the ST is bound to change, even to be distorted under the influence of cultural factors. Generally speaking, the ST can be enlarged in horizon and enriched in meaning if the translator take an objective and dialectic attitude in translating. (Xin Hongjuan, 2007: 156-160)
To some extent, we can say the ST gains its afterlife through misreading. It is misreading makes the ST become dynamic and plural in meaning. Consequently, the source culture can keep living in the target cultural surrounding. In a word, we should break off the restraints of traditional logic, and probe into the misreading in translation objectively and dialectically.
 
Bibliography:
Baker, Mona. In Other words: A Coursebook on Translation[M]. Beijing: Foreign Language Teaching and Research Press, 2000.
Bassnett, Susan. Translation Studies[M]. Shanghai: Shanghai Foreign Language Education Press, 2001.
Bassnett, Susan & Lefevere, A. Constructing Cultures: Essays on Literary Translation[M]. Shanghai: Shanghai Foreign Language Education Press, 2001.
Davis, K. Deconstruction and Translation[M]. Shanghai: Shanghai Foreign Language Education Press, 2004.
Eagleton, Terry. Literary Theory: An Introduction[M]. Oxford: Basil Blackwell, 1983.
Gadamer，H.G.. Garrett Barden and John Cumming(tr.) Truth and Method[M].London: Sheed and Ward Ltd，1975.
Gentzler, Edwin. Contemporary Translation Theories (revised 2nd edition)[M]. Shanghai: Shanghai Foreign Language Education Press, 2004.
Hall, Edward. The Silent Language[M]. New York: Anchor Press,1973.
Hatim, Basil. Teaching and Researching Translation[M].Beijing: Foreign Language Teaching and Research Press, 2005.
Heidegger. John Macquarrie & Edward Robinson(tr.). Being and Time[M].London: SCM Press Ltd，1962.
Hermans, Theo. Crosscultural Transgressions－Research Models in Translation Studies II: Historical and Ideological Issues[M]. Beijing: Foreign Language Teaching and Research Press, 2007.
Ingarden. The Work of Art[M]. Evanston: Northwestern University Press, 1973.
Katan, David. Translating Cultures: An Introduction for Translators, Interpreters and Mediators[M]. Shanghai: Shanghai Foreign Language Education Press, 2004.
Lefevere, A. Translation / History / Culture: A Sourcebook[M].Shanghai: Shanghai Foreign Language Education Press, 2004.
Nida, A. Eugene. Language, Culture, and Translating[M]. Shanghai: Shanghai Foreign Language Education Press, 1993.
Snell-hornby, M. Translation Studies: An Integrated Approach[M].  Shanghai: Shanghai Foreign Language Education Press, 2001.
Steiner, George. After Bable: Aspects of languages and Translation[M]. Shanghai: Shanghai Foreign Language Education Press, 2001.
Waley, Arthur. The Book of Songs[M]. Allen and Unwin,1937.
 
艾柯等著．王宇根译．诠释与过度诠释[M]．香港：牛津大学出版社，2005．
陈福康．中国译学理论史稿[M]．上海:上海外语教育出版社，2000．
程俊英．诗经译注[M]．上海：上海古籍出版社，2006．
德里达．张宁译．书写与差异[M]．北京：生活•读书•新知三联书店，2001．
董洪川．《荒原》早期译介：文化语境与译者阐释——兼论文学翻译与文学接受[J]，外语与外语教学，2004(11)．
——  接受理论与文学翻译中的“文化误读研究[J]，山东外语教学，2001(2)．
郭建中．当代美国翻译理论[M]．武汉：湖北教育出版社，2000．
哈罗德•布鲁姆著．朱立元，陈克明译．误读的图示[M]．台北：骆驼出版社，1992．
洪汉鼎．理解的真理—解读伽达默尔《真理与方法》[M]．济南:山东人民出版社，2001．
胡宝平．论布鲁姆“诗学误读”[J] ．国外文学季刊，1999(4) ．
伽达默尔．洪汉鼎译． 真理与方法(上下卷)[M] ．上海：上海译文出版社，1999．
江宁康．评当代美国文学批评中的唯美主义倾向 [J] ．江苏社会科学，2005(3)．
哈罗德•布鲁姆著．徐文博译．影响的焦虑[M]．北京：三联书店，1989．
孔慧怡．翻译•文学•文化[M]．北京：北京大学出版社，1999．
李玉良，王宏印．《诗经》英译研究的历史、现状与反思[J]．西安外国语学院学报，2006(4)．
刘宓庆．文化翻译论纲[M].武汉：湖北教育出版社，1999．
罗伯特•埃斯卡皮．文学社会学[M]．安徽文艺出版社，1987．
吕俊．哲学的语言论转向对翻译研究的启示[J]．外国语，2000(5)．
马祖毅，任荣珍．汉籍外译史[M].武汉：湖北教育出版社，1997．
秦洪武．读者反映在翻译理论和翻译实践中的意义[J]．外国语，1999(1).
孙艺风．视角　阐释　文化——文学翻译与翻译理论[M].北京：清华大学出版社，2004．
屠国元，廖晶．英汉文化语境中的翻译研究[M].合肥：安徽文艺出版社，2004．
王宁．视角：翻译学研究(第二卷)[M]．北京：清华大学出版社，2004．
汪榕培．比较与翻译[M].上海：上海外语教育出版社，1997．
谢天振．译介学[M].上海：上海外语教育出版社，1999．
辛红娟，高圣兵．旅行的文化研究及其对翻译学的启示[J] ．南京师大学报，2007(5)．
乐黛云，勒•比雄．独角兽与龙 [M].北京：北京大学出版社，1995．
张中载． 误读[J] ．外国文学, 2004(1)．