归化与异化 
naturalisation and dissimilation

国内学者将归化 / 异化等同的现象在葛校琴文章中得到了讨论。葛在探讨这一对概念时有一个前提，即在抛开归化 / 异化的当下语境，而且根据的是字面意思。 [4] 归化 / 异化的两种翻译倾向自有翻译以来就经常交锋，在上一个世纪，有围绕鲁迅的 “ 硬译 ” 而展开的洋化与归化之争。在此以前，严复、林纾、梁启超等人的翻译，均可视为归化的翻译。 “ 鲁迅的 ‘ 硬译 ' 及他的翻译思想是出于他 ‘ 反对封建主义，改造国民性 ' 的理念。但鲁迅的意图招致了误读， ‘ 硬译 ' 的倡议最终淹没在归化论的喧嚣声中。后来傅雷的 ‘ 神似 ' 论、钱钟书的 ‘ 化境 ' 说可以说都是归化论的延伸。可见，归化 / 异化的讨论往往都是归化论占上风，虽说大家都赞成要保留洋味。 ” （葛校琴， 2002 ： 33 ）葛文是针对国内兴起的新一轮归化 / 异化讨论而来的。因为在这次关于异化 / 归化的讨论中，人们几乎 “ 一边倒地认为翻译应该提倡异化 ” 。 
客观地说，葛的提醒不无道理。但笔者觉得葛所提醒国内有关归化 / 异化翻译学者的问题，要辨证地对待。我们的一些学者在响应西方学者提出的归化 / 异化翻译主张的同时，提高了欧化翻译即当年鲁迅所提倡的并受到梁实秋等人诘责的 “ 硬译 ” 的地位。当年鲁迅曾希望翻译能够给传达新思想，并为中国的语言引进新的表现形式，从而给中国文化输入新的血液，带来新的生机。遗憾的是，在上世纪，归化 / 异化的讨论往往都是归化论占上风。虽然我们不能排除今天的一些学者存在理论上的误读，即他们希望接受 Venuti 等西方学者的观点，但在实践上却未能得到很好的贯彻，但他们的呼吁和实践却创造了异化 / 直译的前所未有的大好局面，使翻译研究从过去的语言层面上升到文化的层面，直译的方法得到广泛的认可。 
所以，我们要辨证地对待这一问题。首先，我们对西方的归化 / 异化翻译策略要有更多的评介，如果理论上浅尝辄止，我们的研究的可行性就会大打折扣；其次，位于语言文化层面的异化 / 归化讨论是可以接受的，但这些研究不应该脸谱化，带个面具，放进一些例句，就把文章写出来了，这样做，无疑会降低翻译研究的学术地位。再其次，异化 / 归化策略的讨论如何能同翻译的理论与实践结合的更紧一些，这可能是翻译理论建设中的一个重要课题，我们不仅要从传统的翻译理论上考虑，还要从跨学科角度去考虑翻译理论的建构，惟有如此，我们的翻译研究才能不断保持生机勃勃。 

Domestic scholars will naturalization / alienation of the same phenomenon in GE Xiao Qin has been discussed in the article. GE to explore the concept of a premise, that is set aside naturalization / alienation of the current context, and based on the literal meaning. [4] naturalization / alienation of the two tend to its own translation of translation has been frequently and, in the last century, around the Lu Xun's "hard Translation" and launched the Yanghua and naturalization dispute. Prior to this, Yan Fu, Lin Shu, Liangqichaodeng the translation, can be regarded as the translation of naturalization. "Lu Xun's' hard Translation 'and the translation of his thinking is out of his' opposition feudalism, and transformation of national character,' the idea. However, Lu Xun's intention to invite a misunderstanding, 'hard Translation' initiative eventually drowned in the naturalization On the sound of the city. Later, Fu Lei's' spirit likeness' On, Qian Zhongshu 'delivering' that can be said is an extension of naturalization. Clearly, naturalization / alienation of the discussions are often naturalization On the upper hand, Although that we have all agreed to retain the foreign flavor. "(GE Xiao Qin, 2002: 33) GE is for the domestic rise of a new round of naturalization / alienation from the discussion. In this regard alienation / naturalization in the discussion, almost "one-sided that the translation should promote alienation." 
Objectively speaking, GE reminder is not unreasonable. But I think GE reminded by the relevant domestic naturalization / alienation translation scholars, we should treat Syndrome. Some of our scholars in response to Western scholars put the naturalization / alienation that the translation at the same time, enhance the Europeanization of translation that was advocated by the Lu Xun and Liang Shiqiu, who Jieze by the "hard Translation" status. Lu Xun had hoped that the translation was able to convey new ideas, and for the Chinese language to introduce new forms, thus to the Chinese culture to enter a new blood, new vitality. Unfortunately, in the last century, naturalization / alienation of the discussions are often naturalization On the upper hand. Although we can not rule out the existence of some scholars today's misreading of the theory, that is, they want to accept Venuti and other Western scholars point of view, but in practice has not been properly implemented, but their appeals and practice has created the alienation / literal translation The unprecedented good situation so that the translation of research from the past up to the level of language and cultural level, the literal translation method is widely recognized. 
Therefore, we have to deal with this issue Syndrome. First of all, we in the West of naturalization / alienation translation strategies should be more review, if the theory Qianchangzhezhi, we will study the feasibility of greatly reduced; Secondly, the language and culture at the level of alienation / naturalization is discussed Acceptable, but these studies should not be profiling, with a mask, put some phrases, they wrote the article, to do so, it will undoubtedly lower the academic status of translation studies. Third, the alienation / naturalization strategy of how to discuss with the translation of theory and practice of combining some of the more aggressive, which could translate theory is in the construction of an important subject, we should not only consider the traditional theory of translation, but also Interdisciplinary perspective to consider the translation of theory building, only that we can continue the translation of research to maintain vitality.