首页--语言、文字论文--常用外国语论文--英语论文--写作、修辞论文--翻译论文

A Comparative Study of the Two Chinese Versions of Vanity Fair from the Perspective of Descriptive Translation Studies

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS第8-9页
Abstract第9-10页
摘要第11-14页
CHAPTER I INTRODUCTION第14-18页
    1.1 Research Background第14-16页
    1.2 Significance of the Research第16-17页
    1.3 Layout of the Thesis第17-18页
CHAPTER II LITERATURE REVIEW第18-23页
    2.1 Previous Retranslation Studies in China第18-20页
    2.2 Previous Studies on the Translation of Vanity Fair第20-22页
    2.3 Limitations of Previous Studies第22-23页
CHAPTER III THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK第23-32页
    3.1 The Evolvement of DTS第23-25页
    3.2 Internal Organization of DTS第25-27页
    3.3 About Norms第27-30页
    3.4 The Methodology for the Study第30-32页
CHAPTER IV A COMPARATIVE STUDY OF THE TWO CHINESE VERSIONS第32-58页
    4.1 Situating Translated Texts within the Recipient Culture System第32-38页
        4.1.1 General Contextualization of the Two Translated Texts第32-34页
        4.1.2 Readability and Reception第34-38页
    4.2 Textual Analysis of the Two Versions from the Comparative Perspective第38-52页
        4.2.1 Systematic Characteristics of the Two Versions第39页
        4.2.2 Micro-level Analysis第39-52页
    4.3 Generalization about the Underlying Concept of Translation第52-58页
        4.3.1 The Initial Norm第53页
        4.3.2 Preliminary Norms第53-55页
        4.3.3 Operational Norms第55-58页
CHAPTER V THREE MAJOR FACTORS INFLUENCING THE TRANSLATIONAL NORMS OF THE TWO TRANSLATORS第58-64页
    5.1 Translation Ideas of Individual Translators第58-60页
    5.2 The Dominant Poetics in Different Periods第60-62页
    5.3 The Position of Translating in the Target Culture第62-64页
CHAPTER VI CONCLUSION第64-66页
    6.1 Major Findings第64-65页
    6.2 Limitations and Suggestions for Further Studies第65-66页
REFERENCES第66-68页

论文共68页,点击 下载论文
上一篇:A Study on the Treatment of Culture-loaded Terms in the English Version of Jia Pingwas Fu Zao
下一篇:An Empirical Study on Teaching of English Vocabulary: Comparative Study of Teacher-centered Definition-based Approach VS. Student-centered Corpus-based Approach