本文是一篇翻译实践报告，对科技英语文本的翻译进行了分析。原文《TimeDistributed-CNN-LSTM: 消融实验下一种基于CNN-LSTM混合网络的3D MRI脑肿瘤分类法》选自IEEE。脑瘤是全球癌症死亡的主要原因之一，而脑瘤的及时诊断有助于降低死亡率。对此，该文本比较了两种基于深度学习的脑肿瘤分类方法，以寻求一种具有最高精度的自动脑肿瘤分类法。

本报告以Fillmore的框架理论为指导，从框架元素、原型、视角和框架关系四个方面探讨翻译问题。框架元素是框架所描述情境的参与者，包括核心框架元素、非核心框架元素和主题外框架元素；框架理论中的原型被认为是定义和理解一个词的意义的框架或背景；框架与认知视角紧密相关，不同的视角可以激活不同的背景框架。不同词法单元的选择反映着背后不同的视角，也就是说视角影响着词语的句法实现；框架关系将框架划分了等级，同时框架与框架之间通过框架关系建立了连接。

基于此，本文根据原文文本特征选择利用框架理论中的框架元素、原型、视角和框架关系来指导翻译实践。在翻译过程方面，译者需要充分理解原文构建的场景并在译语中与源语框架相对应的框架。科技文本含有大量专业性知识，译者需要理解这些科技内容所呈现的原文场景，激活读者脑中对应框架，从而将该科技文本蕴含的专业知识内容准确地传达给读者。在实际操作方面看，译者对框架元素进行了调整，一方面使句子更简洁，另一方面保证译文的可读性。通过原型背景框架分析，解决一词多义和词汇空白的语言现象。译者通过理解框架背后的视角向读者呈现用词的差异，利用视角的转换进行句法语义分析。最后通过框架关系，译者根据读者认知结构以及英汉差异来转换框架等级，令译文更符合科技文本特征且更易被读者接受。本报告旨在为今后翻译研究提供一定的借鉴，希望能推动进一步的科技翻译研究。

This translation practice report analyzes the translation of an EST text. Titled Time Distributed-CNN-LSTM: A Hybrid Approach Combining CNN and LSTM to Classify Brain Tumor on 3D MRI Scans Performing Ablation Study, this source text is selected from IEEE. Brain tumor is one of the leading causes of cancer mortality worldwide, and a timely diagnosis of brain tumor can aid significantly in decreasing the mortality rate. This source text discusses the classification of brain tumor using deep learning with two approaches introduced, aiming to develop a fully automated method with the highest accuracy.

 

This report, guided by Fillmore's frame theory, explores the translation issues from four aspects including frame elements, prototype, perspective and frame relations. Frame elements are participants of a situation described by a frame, including core frame elements, non-core frame elements and extra-thematic frame elements; Prototype in frame theory is considered as the frame or background against which the meaning of a word is defined and understood; For perspectives, frames are closely connected to cognitive perspectives and different perspectives can activate the different background frames. Moreover, a specific choice of a lexical unit reveals a particular perspective. In other words, perspective influences the syntactic realization of words; As for the frame relations, they make frames hierarchically related and connect frames to each other.

 

Based on the analysis of the language features of the source text, this translation practice is conducted with selective adoption of the four notions related to the frame theory which include frame elements, prototype, perspective and frame relations. For the translation process, it requires the ability to comprehend the scenes in the source text and to match ideal frames corresponding to the frames of the source text. Enriched with lots of technical knowledge, this EST text requires the translator to fully comprehend the scenes behind the knowledge. With the activation of the corresponding frames in the readers' mind the professional knowledge is correctly delivered. For the specific procedures, the translator adjusts the frame elements in order to make the sentences more concise and readable for target readers. Then the language phenomenon about polysemy and lexical gaps are analyzed under the prototype background frame. Besides, the translator presents the word difference through understanding the perspectives behind the frames and analyzes the syntactic realization through transforming the perspectives. To fit the readers' taste and conform to the stylistic features of the technical text, the translator shifts the hierarchies of frames under frame relations based on the cognitive structures of readers and the language differences in the end. This report intends to provide some reference for further study in the field of EST translation and make contributions to further promotion of EST translation study. 

 

[1] Bartlett, F.C. Remembering: A Study in Experimental and Social Psychology[M]. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1932:65-76.
[2] Bateson, G. A theory of play and fantasy[J]. Psychiatric research reports, 1955, 2(3):39-51.
[3] Fillmore, C.J. An alternative to checklist theories of meaning[A]. In Cogen, C., et al.(eds.) Proceedings of the First Annual Meeting of the Berkeley Linguistic Society, Vol. 1[C], Berkeley: University of California Press, 1975:123-131.
[4] Fillmore, C.J. Frame semantics and the nature of language[C]//Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences: Conference on the origin and development of language and speech. 1976, 280(1): 20-32.
[5] Fillmore, C.J. The case for case reopened[M]//Grammatical relations. Brill, 1977: 59-81.
[6] Fillmore, C.J. Frame Semantics. [A]. In the Linguistic Society of Korea, (ed.) Linguistics in the Morning Calm. [C], Seoul: Hanshin Publishing, 1982:111-137．
[7] Fillmore, C.J. Frames and the semantics of understanding[J]. Quaderni di semantica, 1985(6): 222-254.
[8] Fillmore, C.J. & Atkins B.T. Toward a frame-based lexicon: The semantics of RISK and its neighbors[C]. Hillsdale: Lawrence Erlbaum Assoc, 1992:75-102.
[9] Hasegawa, Y., Lee-Goldman, R., Kong, A., et al. FrameNet as a resource for paraphrase research[J]. Constructions and Frames, 2011, 3(1): 104-127.
[10] Kabbach, A. Debugging Frame Semantic Role Labeling[J]. arXiv preprint arXiv:1901.07475, 2019.
[11] Kussmaul, P. Training the translator[M]. Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing, 1995.
[12] Kussmaul, P. Types of creative translating [A]. In A. Chesteman, N. Gallardo & Y. Gambier (eds). Translation in Context: Selected Contributions from the EST Congress, Granada 1998[C]. Amsterdam: John Benjamins, 2000：117-126.
[13] Minsky, M. A framework for representing knowledge [A]. P.H. Winston (ed.). The Psychology of Computer Vision [C]. New York: McGraw-Hill, 1975:211-277.
[14] Neubert, A. & Shreve, G. Translation as text[J]. Campanotto Editore Udine, 1992, 24 (95): 63-76.
[15] Ruppenhofer, J., Ellsworth, M., Petruck, M.R., et al. FrameNet II: Extended theory and practice[R]. International Computer Science Institute, 2016.
[16] Sikos, J. & Padó, S. FrameNet's using relation as a source of concept-based paraphrases[J]. Constructions and Frames, 2018, 10(1): 38-60.
[17] Snell-Hornby M. Translation studies: An integrated approach[M]. Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing, 1988.
[18] Ungerer, F. & Schmid, H.J. An introduction to cognitive linguistics[M]. London: Longman, 1996.
[19] 程琪龙. 语义框架和认知操作[J]. 外语教学, 2007(01):1-4.DOI:10.16362/j.cnki.cn61-1023/h.2007.01.004.
[20] 邓静. 翻译研究的框架语义学视角评析[J]. 外语教学与研究, 2010,42(01):66-71+81.
[21] 江百涛, 张树德. 框架语义学对科技翻译的启示[J]. 科技视界, 2018(25):170-172.DOI:10.19694/j.cnki.issn2095-2457.2018.25.078.
[22] 林丽. 从Fillmore文献分析框架语义学发展态势[J]. 韶关学院学报, 2016,37(11):98-103.
[23] 吕英莉. 科技英语的翻译特点与翻译策略研究[J]. 有色金属工程, 2022,12(07):195-196.
[24] 潘艳艳. 框架语义学:理论与应用[J]. 外语研究, 2003(05):14-18+80.
[25] 秦枫, 郎曼. 人称代词we在英语科技论文中的人际意义研究[J]. 西安电子科技大学学报(社会科学版), 2013,23(05): 161-166.DOI:10.16348/j.cnki.cn61-1336/c.2013.05.006.
[26] 田兵. 多义词的认知语义框架与词典使用者的接受视野——探索多义词义项划分和释义的认知语言学模式(一)[J]. 现代外语, 2003(04):339-350.
[27] 汪立荣. 从框架理论看翻译[J]. 中国翻译, 2005(03):27-32.
[28] 文旭. 国外认知语言学研究综观[J]. 外国语(上海外国语学院学报), 1999(01):35-41.
[29] 肖开容. 翻译中的框架操作[D]. 西南大学,2012.
[30] 俞晶荷. 框架语义学角度下的翻译研究[J]. 中国俄语教学, 2008(03):54-57.
[31] 严梦宁. 框架语义学视角下的英汉科技翻译研究[D]. 西南石油大学, 2013.
[32] 张建理. 词义场·语义场·语义框架[J]. 浙江大学学报(人文社会科学版), 2000(03):112-117.