布迪厄社会学理论下A Rose for Emily中译本对比研究
A Comparative Study of Two Chinese Translations of A Rose for Emily Based on Pierre Bourdieu’s Reflexive Sociology Theory
摘要: 本文基于布迪厄社会学理论对A Rose for Emily杨岂深译本和何欣译本进行综合对比考察，通过分析译者所处场域、惯习、翻译策略，揭示两中译后各因素彼此关联的运作逻辑，并探究译本中翻译策略的差异体现。杨岂深力求平实，倾向采用归化求“达”，使译文顺畅符合汉语表达习惯，更易于目标读者理解；何欣舍弃“达”而忠实于作品，倾向采用异化使译文符合源语表达习惯，以求原文的再现。
Abstract: This paper conducts a comparative analysis of the Chinese translations of A Rose for Emily by Yang Qishen and He Xin, grounded in Pierre Bourdieu’s theory of reflexive sociology. By examining the translators’ respective fields, habitus, and translation strategies, this study elucidates the interrelated logic behind the two translations, demonstrating how divergences in translation approaches manifest in the target texts. Yang Qishen pursues domestication and prioritizes clarity and fluency, aligning the translation with Chinese linguistic conventions to enhance readability. He Xin, however, adheres more closely to the source text, favoring foreignization that preserves the original linguistic features, even at the expense of fluency, in pursuit of fidelity.
文章引用：周子熙. 布迪厄社会学理论下A Rose for Emily中译本对比研究[J]. 现代语言学, 2025, 13(5): 675-681. https://doi.org/10.12677/ml.2025.135525

参考文献

[1] Bourdieu, P. (1984) Distinction: A Social Critique of the Judgment of Taste. Harvard University Press.
[2] Gouanvic, J.-M. (2005) A Bourdieusian Theory of Translation, or the Coincidence of Practical Instances: Field, ‘Habitus’, Capital and‘Illusio’. The Translator, 11, 147-166. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] 
[3] Bourdieu, P. (1993) The Field of Cultural Production: Essays on Art and Literature. Columbia University Press.
[4] Bourdieu, P. and Wacquant, L.J.D. (1992) An Invitation to Reflexive Sociology. University of Chicago Press.
[5] Bourdieu, P. (1986) The Forms of Capital. In: Richardson, J., Ed., Handbook of Theory and Research for the Sociology of Education, Creenwood, 241-258.
[6] 编者. 编后记[J]. 外国文艺, 1978(1): 319.
[7] 李文俊. 关于《福克纳随笔》的随笔[J]. 名作欣赏, 2012(7): 52-53.
[8] 何欣. 迎文艺节[N]. 新生报《文艺》周刊, 1947(05).
[9] Simeoni, D. (1998) The Pivotal Status of the Translator. Target, 10, 1-39. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] 
[10] 王洪涛. 社会翻译学视阈中中国文学在英国传译的历时诠释[J]. 外语学刊, 2016(3): 146-151.
[11] 巴金, 等. 当代文学翻译百家谈[M]. 北京: 北京大学出版社, 1989.
[12] 雷纳∙韦勒克. 近代文学批评史[M]. 杨岂深, 杨自伍, 译. 上海: 上海译文出版社, 1987.
[13] 严复. 严复集[M]. 王栻, 编. 北京: 中华书局, 1984.
[14] 尉天骢. 回首我们的时代[M]. 印刻文学生活杂志出版有限公司, 2011.
[15] 何欣. 佛克纳短篇小说集[M]. 重光文艺出版社, 1960.
[16] 安克强. 专访何欣先生[J]. 文讯, 1992(77): 117-122.
[17] 邵惟韺. 抽象化与具体化——英汉表达方法认知对比与翻译中的范畴转换[J]. 华东理工大学学报(社会科学版), 2017, 32(3): 102-109.
[18] 蓝仁哲. 福克纳小说文本的象似性——福克纳语言风格辨析[J]. 外国语(上海外国语大学学报) 2004, 27(6): 65-70.
[19] 魏在江. 英汉语篇连贯认知对比研究[D]: [博士学位论文]. 上海: 华东师范大学, 2004.