【正文】 process of translation so as to accurately understanding the meaning of source language and pletely expressing the translated version. Only in this way can the translators choose the most appropriate version to fulfill the aim of translation, which is the reappearance of meaning and style of the original. 2. Studies related to context The definition of context Contexts are alignments of reality along five axes: linguistic, situational, interactional, cultural and intertextual. Because language is at the intersection of the individual and the social, it both reflects and construes the social reality called “context”. Context is the matrix created by language as discourse and as a form of social practice. It should be viewed not as a natural given, but as a social construct, the product of linguisic choices made by two or more individuals interacting through language. Broadly the term “context” refers to all the different situations involved in language munication. It consists of any elements invoked by any participants, and consequently participants conceptions of each other’s mental contexts may be wrong or, more likely, only partially right, any physical set of circumstances could lend itself to an infinity of possible shared conceptions and relevance. Longman Dictionary in Linguistics defines it as message existing before and after the word, phrase, utterance, and text under discussion。 it is helpful to the understanding of the specific meaning of the word, phrase, utterance, and text。 it also indicates the broader social environment in which a linguistic item exists. Context is not simply referred to the preceding linguistic text, or the environment in which the utterance takes place, but the set of assumptions brought to bear at the intended interpretation. These may be drawn from the preceding text, or from observation of the speaker and what is going on in the immediate environment, but they may also be drawn from cultural or scientific knowledge, monsense assumptions, and, more generally, any item of shared or idiosyncratic information that the hearer has access to at the time. With the concept of register, the definition of context rests on two basic premises. Firstly, lexical and syntactic choices are dictated by variables such as “field of discourse” (including social processes and institutions) tenor of discourse (including relations of power and solidarity) and mode of discourse (including channel or physical distance separating text production from reception). These register membership variables are ultimately determined by pragmatic considerations to do with the purposes of utterances, realworld conditions, and so on. The second premise we adopt in the definition of context is that in order to appreciate the full municative thrust of an utterance, We need to appreciate not only the socalled illocutionary force of the utterance (. to warn), but also its status as a token of a given type of sign. This semiotic dimension of context regulates the interaction of the various discoursal elements within a sociocultural system of meanings. In sum, the notion of context is a relational one. In each of its five dimensions: lingustic, situational, interactional, as well as cultural and intertextual, it is shaped by people in dialogue with one another in a variety of roles and status. Overseas studies of context . Bronislaw Malinowski: first putting forward the concept of the context The study of the context in the western countries can be dated back to the 1920s. The Polish anthropologists, Bronislaw Malinowski was the first to put forward the concept of context of the situation. He was a professor of anthropology at the London School of Economics and Political science from 1927. The most important aspects of his theory, apart of his ethnographic work, concerned with the function of language. According to him, (Malinowski, 1935, ) the meaning of an utterance does not e from the words but from their relation to the situational context in which the utterance takes place. He believed the utterance and situation are bound up inextricably with each other for the understanding of the words. During the time he stayed in Trobriand Island, he studied the inhabitants of the Trobriand Island and their language (Kiriwinian) and every time he had to make a number of changes in translating Kiviwinian conversations into English. Most importantly, he realized that he would need to add a mentary to make explicit for the Trobrianders. First, he needed to explain the immediate situation of the conversation to the English audience. Otherwise the English readers would not have realized what the Trobrianders were talking. Secondly, he realized that not only the immediate environment needed to be classified for the English, but also that Trobriand traditions and beliefs were encoded in the texts and were not immediately understandable in translation. Only when these two factors were taken into account could the texts be said to have meaning. ( Malinowski, 1935, ) When faced with problems of translation, Malinowski, concentrated on what the native people were doing when using language. He found that when people spoke, they not only used their knowledge of language, but also their knowledge of the situation. The situation is the context of situation in the verbal or nonverbal munication. So according to him, “Language is always contextualized.” Language features are a result of the particular context of situation. (楊潮光 , 2021, ) He meant that the language was the behavioral mode, not the thinking symbol. Utterance and environment were closely integrated together。 therefore, language environment was indispensable to the interpretation of the utterance. Later he classified the language context into the context of culture and conte