This chapter focuses on translation studies from the perspective of image schema theory. The discussion that follows is primarily based on Yang (2019). The concept of Cognitive Translation and Interpreting Studies was proposed quite early in the academic community, but it has been named differently due to varying focuses. For example, Halverson (2010) referred to it as “Cognitive Translation Studies”, while Muñoz Martín (2010) called it “Cognitive Translatology”. Although Cognitive Translation and Interpreting Studies does not yet have a fully developed theoretical system, it has made significant strides beyond traditional translation studies by drawing on disciplines such as cognitive science, linguistics, psychology, and computer science. Traditional translation studies regard translation as a process of “transferring linguistic codes”. British linguist Catford (1965, p. 73) used the term “translation shift” to “describe departures from formal correspondence in the process of going from the source language (SL) to the target language (TL)”. Nida and Charles (1969) elaborated the process of transferring the surface structure of the source language to that of the target language as: Source Language → Analysis → Transfer → Restructuring → Target Language. In this process, “analysis” refers to the comprehension of the source language, including the analysis of its syntax, vocabulary, semantics, and pragmatics. “Transfer” refers to establishing correspondences between the two languages under the premise of functional equivalence, which may involve literal transfer, minimal transfer, and literary transfer. “Restructuring” involves reorganizing the transferred content in the target language according to its conventions, to suit the target audience’s expression norms. Newmark (1981, p. 63) proposed “semantic translation”, which aims to “render, as closely as the semantic and syntactic structures of the target language allow, the exact contextual meaning of the original”. Venuti (1995, p. 17) viewed translation as “a process by which the chain of signifiers that constitutes the source-language text is replaced by a chain of signifiers in the target language”, emphasizing the indeterminacy of meaning. Although the above-mentioned scholars differ in their specific emphases, they all focus on the transfer of linguistic forms between two languages. While viewing translation in this way is relatively intuitive and easy to understand and accept, it remains an inadequate account of the translation process. In actual translation practice, relying solely on the formal equivalence of linguistic forms is not feasible; at the very least, it obscures the translator’s subjectivity and the cognitive complexity inherent in the act of translating.

Translation Studies from the Perspective of Image Schema Theory

章节
发表日期：

2026年

查看全文

Xu Wen,
Jin Liu,
Kairong Xiao

摘要

This chapter focuses on translation studies from the perspective of image schema theory. The discussion that follows is primarily based on Yang (2019). The concept of Cognitive Translation and Interpreting Studies was proposed quite early in the academic community, but it has been named differently due to varying focuses. For example, Halverson (2010) referred to it as “Cognitive Translation Studies”, while Muñoz Martín (2010) called it “Cognitive Translatology”. Although Cognitive Translation and Interpreting Studies does not yet have a fully developed theoretical system, it has made significant strides beyond traditional translation studies by drawing on disciplines such as cognitive science, linguistics, psychology, and computer science. Traditional translation studies regard translation as a process of “transferring linguistic codes”. British linguist Catford (1965, p. 73) used the term “translation shift” to “describe departures from formal correspondence in the process of going from the source language (SL) to the target language (TL)”. Nida and Charles (1969) elaborated the process of transferring the surface structure of the source language to that of the target language as: Source Language → Analysis → Transfer → Restructuring → Target Language. In this process, “analysis” refers to the comprehension of the source language, including the analysis of its syntax, vocabulary, semantics, and pragmatics. “Transfer” refers to establishing correspondences between the two languages under the premise of functional equivalence, which may involve literal transfer, minimal transfer, and literary transfer. “Restructuring” involves reorganizing the transferred content in the target language according to its conventions, to suit the target audience’s expression norms. Newmark (1981, p. 63) proposed “semantic translation”, which aims to “render, as closely as the semantic and syntactic structures of the target language allow, the exact contextual meaning of the original”. Venuti (1995, p. 17) viewed translation as “a process by which the chain of signifiers that constitutes the source-language text is replaced by a chain of signifiers in the target language”, emphasizing the indeterminacy of meaning. Although the above-mentioned scholars differ in their specific emphases, they all focus on the transfer of linguistic forms between two languages. While viewing translation in this way is relatively intuitive and easy to understand and accept, it remains an inadequate account of the translation process. In actual translation practice, relying solely on the formal equivalence of linguistic forms is not feasible; at the very least, it obscures the translator’s subjectivity and the cognitive complexity inherent in the act of translating.