메뉴 건너뛰기
.. 내서재 .. 알림
소속 기관/학교 인증
인증하면 논문, 학술자료 등을  무료로 열람할 수 있어요.
한국대학교, 누리자동차, 시립도서관 등 나의 기관을 확인해보세요
(국내 대학 90% 이상 구독 중)
로그인 회원가입 고객센터 ENG
주제분류

추천
검색
질문

논문 기본 정보

자료유형
학술저널
저자정보
신진원 (부산대학교)
저널정보
한국번역학회 번역학연구 번역학연구 제16권 제2호
발행연도
2015.6
수록면
63 - 85 (23page)

이용수

표지
📌
연구주제
📖
연구배경
🔬
연구방법
🏆
연구결과
AI에게 요청하기
추천
검색
질문

초록· 키워드

오류제보하기
The purpose of this study is to examine how important the right use of metadiscourse as rhetorical devices is for translation of genre-specific text. For this, this study examines the use of metadiscourse in news editorials given by Korea’s leading news agencies and their translations; and investigates the differences between professional and trainee translators’choice.
The results revealed that ‘interactional resources’ were more present than ‘interactive resources’ in both Korean ST and English TT. This finding substantiated the view that ‘interactional resources’ were an essential feature of newspaper-genre writing.
Concerning differences between professional and trainee choices, the results suggested that trainee translators tended to make more translation shifts in ‘interactive resources’ than their counterparts. On the contrary, professional translators made a variety of shifts in ‘interactional resources’ such as boosters, attitude markers, engagement markers, self-mention. These differences could be attributed to the amount of translator’s knowledge on the generic convention.
The findings of this study might be beneficial to pedagogical grounds for trainee translators’ writing. Metadiscourse is not easy for non-native speakers to fully understand and produce in a genre-specific text. Unfortunately, however, a lack of understanding in metadiscourse use may result in unintentionally unnatural translation. Therefore, The results of this study can be used to inform trainee translators of the differences that occur in the conventions of metadiscourse use between ST and TT. This knowledge can help trainee translators produce texts that are more effective or reader-based.

목차

1. 서론
2. 이론적 배경
3. 사례분석
4. 결론
참고문헌
[Abstract]

참고문헌 (0)

참고문헌 신청

함께 읽어보면 좋을 논문

논문 유사도에 따라 DBpia 가 추천하는 논문입니다. 함께 보면 좋을 연관 논문을 확인해보세요!

이 논문의 저자 정보

이 논문과 함께 이용한 논문

최근 본 자료

전체보기

댓글(0)

0

UCI(KEPA) : I410-ECN-0101-2016-800-001637902