Chapter 7 Systems theories 系统理论

1. Polysystem theory 多元系统系统理论

Basic Concept: Polysystem theory, which saw translated literature as a system
operating in the larger social, literary and historical systems of the target culture.
Proposer: Itamar Even-Zohar
Borrowing ideas: Russian Formalists and the Czech Structuralists
 For the Formalists, a literary work was not studied in isolation but as part of a
literary system, which itself is defined as ‘a system of functions of the literary
order which are in continual interrelationship with other orders.’ Literature is
thus part of the social, cultural, literary and historical framework and the key
concept is that of the system, in which there is an ongoing dynamic of ‘mutation’
and struggle for the primary position in the literary canon.
 Even-Zohar reacts against ‘the fallacies of the traditional aesthetic approach’,
which had focused on ‘high’ literature and had disregarded as unimportant
literary systems or genres.
 Even-Zohar emphasizes that translated literature operates as a system:运作形式表现在
(1) in the way the TL selects works for translation;
目标语文化应选择哪些作品翻译；
(2) in the way translation norms, behaviour and policies are influenced by other
co-systems.
翻译规范、行为和政策受到其他并存系统的影响
Even-Zohar focuses on the relations between all these systems in the overarching
concept to which he gives a new term, the polysystem.
Definition:
“a multiple system, a system of various systems which intersect with each other and
partly overlap, using concurrently different options, yet functioning as one structured
whole, whose members are interdependent.”
多元系统由众多系统集合而成，各系统间彼此交叉、重合，同时作出不同的选择； 但多元系统以一个整体发挥作用，内里众多系统
相互作用，彼此影响
Explanation:
Importantly, the interaction and positioning of these systems occurs in a dynamic
hierarchy, changing according to the historical moment.
This ‘dynamic process of evolution 动态演进的过程’ is vital to the polysystem, indicating
that the relations between innovatory and conservative systems are in a constant state
of flux and competition.
Because of this flux, the position of translated literature is not fixed either. It may
occupy a primary or a secondary position in the polysystem.
Even-Zohar gives three major cases when translated literature occupies the
primary position:
(1) when a ‘young’ literature is being established and looks initially to ‘older’
literatures for ready-made models;
当该文学尚属“年轻”，需要参考较“资深”的文学，借用现成的模型
(2) when a literature is ‘peripheral’ or ‘weak’ and imports those literary types which
it is lacking. This can happen when a smaller nation is dominated by the culture
 of a larger one;
当该文学处于“边缘”或“弱势”时，必须“进口”其欠缺的文学类型；当小国文化为大国文化所支配，这种情况就会发生。
(3) when there is a critical turning point in literary history at which established
models are no longer considered sufficient, or when there is a vacuum in the
literature of the country. Where no type holds sway, it is easier for foreign models
to assume primacy.
当文学史上出现重要的转折点，现有的模型若有所缺，或该国文学呈现真空状态。如果没有任何一种类型独领风骚，外来的
模型容易“乘虚而入”，占据主导位置。
If translated literature assumes a secondary position, then it represents a peripheral
system within the polysystem. It has no major influence over the central system and
even becomes a conservative element, preserving conventional forms and conforming
to the literary norms of the target system.
Even-Zohar suggests that the position occupied by translated literature in the
polysystem conditions the translation strategy.
翻译策略取决于翻译文学在多元系统中的地位
Primary: translators do not feel constrained to follow target literature models and are
more prepared to break conventions, they thus often produce a TT that is a close
match in terms of adequacy, reproducing the textual relations of the ST. This in itself
may then lead to new SL models.
Secondary: translators tend to use existing target-culture models for the TT and
produce more ‘non-adequate’ translations.
Comments:
Advantages:
(1) literature itself is studied alongside the social, historical and cultural forces;
(2) Even-Zohar moves away from the isolated study of individual texts towards the
study of translation within the cultural and literary systems in which it functions;
(3) the non-prescriptive definition of equivalence and adequacy allows for variation
according to the social, historical and cultural situation of the text.
Criticisms:
(1) overgeneralization to ‘universal laws’ of translation based on relatively little
evidence;
(2) an over-reliance on an historically based Formalist model which, following Even
Zohar’s own model of evolving trends, might be inappropriate for translated texts in
the 1970s and beyond;
(3) the tendency to focus on the abstract model rather than the ‘real-life’ constraints
placed on texts and translators;
(4) the question as to how far the supposed scientific model is really objective.
 In addition, Even-Zohar restricts the application of the theory to literature.
 Polysystem theory has had a profound influence on translation studies, moving it
forward into a less prescriptive observation of translation within its different
contexts.

2. Toury and descriptive translation studies (DTS)描述性翻译研究

Name: Gideon Toury,
Works: Descriptive Translation Studies – And Beyond
Basic Ideas: Toury calls for the development of a properly systematic descriptive
branch of the discipline to replace isolated free-standing studies that are
commonplace:
“What is missing is not isolated attempts reflecting excellent intuitions and supplying
fine insights (which many existing studies certainly do) 目前，个别的研究并不缺乏，它们显示出学术
的专业性，提供了优秀的洞见（目前许多研究的确如此）, but a systematic branch proceeding from clear
assumptions and armed with a methodology and research techniques made as explicit
as possible and justified within translation studies itself 反之，我们欠缺的是一支具有系统的学派，从
清晰的假设出发，配合尽可能明确的方法论和研究手段，在翻译研究的自身领域内进行论证. Only a branch of this
kind can ensure that the findings of individual studies will be intersubjectively
testable and comparable, and the studies themselves replicable.只有这种研究学派，方可确保每个
研究的结果可以进行主体间性的测试和比较，而研究本身也可以重复”
Explanations:
For Toury, translations first and foremost occupy a position in the social and literary
systems of the target culture; they are ‘facts of target cultures: on occasion facts of a
peculiar status, sometimes even constituting identifiable (sub)-systems of their own’.
Their position determines the translation strategies that are employed.
Approches:
He proposes three-phase methodology for systematic DTS, incorporating a
description of the product and the wider role of the sociocultural system:
(1) Situate the text within the target culture system, looking at its significance or
acceptability. 把文本置于目标文化系统之中，观察它的重要性和可接受程度
(2) Undertake a textual analysis of the ST and the TT 将原文和译文进行文本比较 to identify
relationships between corresponding segments in the two texts 找出两个文本对应的段落关
系 . Toury calls these segments ‘coupled pairs 耦 合 对 子 .’ This leads to the
identification of translation shifts 翻 译 转 移 , both ‘obligatory’ 必 需 and ‘non-
obligatory’非必需.
(3) Attempt generalizations, reconstructing the process of translation for this ST–TT
pair. 归纳两个文本的对应模式，帮助重构这个原文-译文文本对的翻译过程
An important additional step: Repeating these phases for other pairs of similar texts.
This replicability allows the corpus 语料库 to be extended and a descriptive profile of
translations to be built up according to genre, period, author, etc. In this way, the
norms pertaining to each kind of translation can be identified. As more descriptive
studies are performed, the ultimate aim is to state laws of behaviour for translation in
general.
2.1 The concept of norms of translation behaviour
The aim of Toury’s case studies is to distinguish trends of translation behaviour, to
make generalizations regarding the decision-making processes of the translator and
then to ‘reconstruct’ the norms that have been in operation in the translation and make
hypotheses that can be tested by future descriptive studies
Definition of norms:
“the translation of general values or ideas shared by a community – as to what is
right or wrong, adequate or inadequate – into performance instructions appropriate
for and applicable to particular situations.”
将某一群体共享的普遍价值或理念，转换为行为指示
These norms are sociocultural constraints specific to a culture, society and time.
In terms of their ‘potency 效能’ Toury places norms between rules and idiosyncrasies.

Rules 规则 supported by legislation, are the strongest constraints, since breaking a rule
will normally incur a formal legal penalty or caution. (the breaking of a
confidentiality agreement, committing a gross grammatical error)
Norms 规范, as generally agreed forms of behaviour, are partly prescriptive in nature
but weaker than rules. Violating them might well lead to negative evaluation. (e.g.
informal translation commentary in an academic setting)
Toury considers translation to be an activity governed by norms, and these norms
‘determine the (type and extent of) equivalence manifested in actual translations’.
Conventions are more informal and may be acquired by trial and error.
Toury considers translation to be an activity governed by norms, and these norms
‘determine the (type and extent of) equivalence manifested in actual translations’.规范制
约翻译，规范决定对等程度
His hypothesis is that the norms that have prevailed in the translation of a particular
text can be reconstructed from two types of sources:
规范可能来源于
(1) from the examination of texts 考察文本, the products of norm-governed activity 亦即规
范制约下的活动的产品. This will show up ‘regularities of behaviour 行为的规律性’ (i.e. trends
of relationships and correspondences between ST and TT segments). It will point
to the processes adopted by the translator and, hence, the norms that have been in
operation;
(2) from the explicit statements made about norms by translators, publishers,
reviewers and other participants in the translation act
译者、出版社、书评人等其他翻译参与者的声明.
Toury sees different kinds of norms 规 范 类 型 operating at different stages of the
translation process.
(1) Initial norm 初始规范: a general choice made by translators.
 Subject to the norms realized in the ST 服从源语文化规范
towards the ST, then TT – adequate 充分
 Subject to the norms of the target culture or language.服从目标语文化规范
target culture norms prevail, then TT - acceptable.可接受
(2) Preliminary norm 预备规范: translation policy and directness of translation.
 Translation policy refers to factors determining the selection of texts for
translation in a specific language, culture or time.
翻译政策：影响翻译文本的选择的因素
 Directness of translation relates to whether translation occurs through an
intermediate language.
翻译的直接性：是否有中介语言(e.g. Finnish to Greek via 经过 English)
(3) Operational norms 操作规范 : describe the presentation and linguistic matter of the
TT.
 Matricial norms relate to the completeness of the TT 母 体 规 范 （ 文 本 完 整 度 ） .
Phenomena include omission or relocation of passages, textual segmentation, and
the addition of passages or footnotes.
 Textual-linguistic norms govern the selection of TT linguistic material 文本语言规范:
lexical items, phrases and stylistic features.
DTS aims to reconstruct the norms that have been in operation during the translation
process.

2.2 ‘Laws’ of translation

Toury hopes that the cumulative identification of norms in descriptive studies will
enable the formulation of probabilistic ‘laws’ of translation and thence of ‘universals
of translation’.
Tentative Laws:尝试性法则
(1) The law of growing standardization 标准化法则, which states that ‘in translation,
textual relations obtaining in the original are often modified, sometimes to the
point of being totally ignored, in favour of [more] habitual options offered by a
target repertoire’. This refers to the disruption of the ST patterns in translation
and the selection of linguistic options that are more common in the TL. 译文改动原文
模式，选取目标语中常见的语言措辞
variation in style
e.g. the translation of non-core forms into more general TL items (glisten and
glint translated as shrine)
(2) The law of interference 干涉法则, which sees interference from ST to TT as ‘a kind
of default 默 认 ’ . Interference refers to ST linguistic features (mainly lexical and
syntactical patterning) being copied in the TT 在 译 文 中 复 制 原 文 的 语 言 特 征 , either
‘negatively’消极 (because they create non-normal TT patterns) or ‘positively’ 积极
(the existence of features in the ST that will not be non-normal in the TL makes
them more likely to be used by the translator).
Toury considers tolerance of interference to depend on sociocultural factors and the
prestige of the different literary systems.
Comments:
Toury’s theory that have had an important impact on translation studies:
(1) the abandonment of one-to-one notions of correspondence as well as the
possibility of literary/linguistic equivalence (unless by accident);
(2) the involvement of literary tendencies within the target cultural system in the
production of any translated text;
(3) the destabilization of the notion of an original message with a fixed identity;
(4) the integration of both the original text and the translated text in the semiotic web
of intersecting cultural systems.
 Toury’s two laws themselves seem to some extent to be contradictory, or at least
pull in different directions: the law of growing standardization depicts TL-
oriented norms, while the law of interference is ST-oriented.

Pym seeks to resolve the apparent contradiction in the two laws:

“The main point is that, thanks to these probabilistic formulations, it becomes quite
reasonable to have contradictory tendencies on the level of linguistic variables. If
social conditions A apply, then we might expect more standardization. If social
conditions B are in evidence, expect interference. And there is no necessary
contradiction involved.”
The link to social conditions is crucial, since it recognizes that they influence and to
some extent determine the translation patterns.

3. Chesterman’s translation norms

3.1 Chesterman pursues this link between Toury’s laws and different types of
universals 共性, suggesting a division into the following:
(1) ‘S-universals’源语共性. These relate to ‘universal differences between translations
and their source texts’ 翻译及原文的普遍差异. These patterns of shifts that occur in ST–TT
pairs encompass Toury’s two laws of interference and growing standardization as well
as some of the trends of shifts:
 TTs tend to be longer than STs; 译文常常长于原文
 dialect tends to be normalized; 方言往往被标准化
 explicitation is common; 明晰化翻译很普遍
 repetition is perhaps reduced; 重复有时遭删除
 retranslation may lead to a TT that is closer to the ST.
重译可能产生更贴近原文的译文
(2) ‘T-universals’目标共性. These are features that characterize translated language as
compared to naturally occurring language 区别于自然语言的翻译语言的特征, irrespective of the
source language. They are identified by examining TTs without reference to their STs.
These might include:
 lexical simplification and conventionalization (including reduced variety in TTs);
词汇简化与程式化
 a contrary move towards non-typical patterns (e.g. unusual collocations such as
do a mistake rather than make a mistake);倾向非典型的模式，例如不寻常的搭配
 under-representation of lexical items that are specific to the TL (e.g. the reduced
use of culture-specific items such as sophomore or informal words such as pester
which are associated with specific varieties of English).少用目标语特有的词汇
Although S-universals are derived from a ST–TT pair comparison and T-universals
are based on the study of TTs vs. non-translated TL texts, some of the features may
overlap.
3.2 Chesterman’s translation norms 翻译规范
(1) Product or expectancy norms 产品或期待规范‘are established by the expectations of
readers of a translation 基于译作读者对译作的期待 (of a given type) concerning what a
translation (of this type) should be like’.
Factors governing these norms include the predominant translation tradition in
the target culture, the discourse conventions of the similar TL genre, and
economic and ideological considerations.
Chesterman makes two important points about these norms:
a) They allow evaluative judgements about translations 允 许 读 者 评 价 译 作 since
readers have a notion of what is an ‘appropriate’ or ‘acceptable’ translation of
the specific text variety and will approve of a translator who conforms to
these expectations.
b) They are sometimes ‘validated by a norm-authority of some kind’.
有时是由规范权威所确认的
(2) Professional norms 专业规范‘regulate the translation process itself’ 约束翻译过程本身 .
They are subordinate to and determined by expectancy norms.
Chesterman proposes three kinds of professional norm:
a) The accountability norm 责任规范: This is an ethical norm 道德规范, dealing with
professional standards of integrity and thoroughness. The translator will
accept responsibility for the work produced for the commissioner and reader.
 b) The communication norm 交际规范: This is a social norm 社会责任. The translator,
the communication ‘expert’, works to ensure maximum communication 最充分
的交际 between the parties 当事人 (第五章 compare translatorial action model).
c) The ‘relation’ norm 关系规范: This is a linguistic norm 语言规范 which deals with
the relation between ST and TT. Chesterman rejects narrow equivalence
relations and sees the appropriate relation being judged by the translator
‘according to text-type, the wishes of the commissioner, the intentions of the
original writer, and the assumed needs of the prospective readers’.（比较第五章）

4. Other models of DTS: Lambert and van Gorp and the Manipulation School
4.1 Manipulation School 操纵学派
Works: The Manipulation of Literature: Studies in Literary Translation, edited by
Theo Hermans
Name: Theo Hermans
In the Introduction - ‘Translation studies and a new paradigm’, Hermans summarizes
the group’s view of translated literature:
“What they have in common is a view of literature as a complex and dynamic system;
a conviction that there should be a continual interplay between theoretical models
and practical case studies; an approach to literary translation which is descriptive,
target-organized, functional and systemic; and an interest in the norms and
constraints that govern the production and reception of translations, in the relation
between translation and other types of text processing, and in the place and role of
translations both within a given literature and in the interaction between literatures.
The link with polysystem theory and DTS can be seen to be strong and the
Manipulation School proceeded on the basis of ‘a continual interplay between
theoretical models and practical case studies’.
Name: José Lambert and Hendrik van Gorp
Works: ‘On describing translations’
Brief Introduction: Comparison of the ST and TT literary systems and for the
description of relations within them. Each system comprises a description of author,
text and reader.
Lambert and van Gorp divide the scheme into four sections:
(1) Preliminary data: information on title page, metatexts (preface, etc.) and the
general strategy (whether the translation is partial or complete). The results should
lead to hypotheses concerning levels 2 and 3.
(2) Macro-level: the division of the text, titles and presentation of the chapters, the
internal narrative structure and any overt authorial comment. This should generate
hypotheses about the micro-level (level 3).
(3) Micro-level: the identification of shifts on different linguistic levels. These
include the lexical level, the grammatical patterns, narrative, point of view and
modality. The results should interact with the macro-level (level 2) and lead to their
‘consideration in terms of the broader systemic context’.
(4) Systemic context: here micro- and macro-levels, text and theory are compared
and norms identified. Intertextual relations (relations with other texts including
translations) and intersystemic relations (relations with other genres, codes) are also
described.
Words:
“It is not at all absurd to study a single translated text or a single translator, but it is
absurd to disregard the fact that this translation or this translator has (positive or
negative) connections with other translations and translators.” (Lambert and van
Gorp 1985/2006: 45)
“The discipline generally, but the descriptive school in particular, urgently needs to
take account of developments in some of the more vigorous intellectual and social
movements of our time, including gender studies, poststructuralism, postcolonial and
cultural studies, and the new interdisciplinarity of human sciences.” (Hermans 1999:
159–60)

Summary
Even-Zohar’s polysystem theory moves the study of translations out of a purely
linguistic analysis of shifts and a one-to-one notion of equivalence and into an
investigation of the position of translated literature as a whole in the historical and
literary systems of the target culture. Toury then focuses attention on finding a
methodology for descriptive translation studies. His TT-oriented theoretical
framework combines linguistic comparison of ST and TT and consideration of the
cultural framework of the TT. His aim is to identify the patterns of behaviour in the
translation and thereby to ‘reconstruct’ the norms at work in the translation process.
The ultimate aim of DTS is to discover probabilistic laws of translation 或然法则, which
may be used to aid future translators and researchers. The exact form of ST–TT
comparison remains to be determined; scholars of the related Manipulation School led
an interplay of theoretical models and case studies in the 1980s, among which was
Lambert and van Gorp’s systematic ‘cheme’ for describing translations. Chesterman
has later developed the concept of norms.