【正文】 XXXX大學(xué)本科畢業(yè)論文（設(shè)計(jì)）任務(wù)書編 號(hào)： 論文（設(shè)計(jì)）題目： 從功能對(duì)等角度論中式菜單的英譯 學(xué)院： XXX學(xué)院 專業(yè)： XXXX 班級(jí)： XXXX級(jí)英語(yǔ)筆譯X班 學(xué)生姓名： XX 學(xué)號(hào)： XXXX 指導(dǎo)教師： XX 職稱：XXX 1. 論文（設(shè)計(jì)）研究目標(biāo)及主要任務(wù)本論文的研究目標(biāo)是研究中式餐單的英譯方法。其主要任務(wù)是通過分析中式菜單英譯的現(xiàn)狀，探討菜單英譯過程中應(yīng)該遵循的原則以及方法。論文（設(shè)計(jì)）的主要內(nèi)容 本論文分為六章，第一章是對(duì)本文的總體介紹，第二章介紹功能對(duì)等理論，第三章探究中式餐單英譯的現(xiàn)狀，第四章與第五章研究中式菜單英譯的原則與策略，第六章為文章綜述。論文（設(shè)計(jì)）的基礎(chǔ)條件及研究路線 本論文的基礎(chǔ)條件是知名學(xué)者對(duì)功能對(duì)等理論的研究以及對(duì)中式餐單英譯的研究。 研究路線是在功能對(duì)等的角度討論中式菜單英譯的原則和策略。主要參考文獻(xiàn)Hans J. Vermeer. A skopos theory of translation[M]. Textcon Text Verlag, 1996Nida, Eugene A, and Charles R. Taber. 1969. The Theory and Practice of Translation. Leiden: Brill.楊天宇. 《禮記譯注》（上下）. 上海古籍出版社. 2007（4）：102—120丁一編. 中國(guó)菜肴詞典. 知識(shí)出版社. 2004.計(jì)劃進(jìn)度階段起止日期1確定初步論文題目3月16日前2與導(dǎo)師見面，確定大致范圍，填開題報(bào)告和任務(wù)書，導(dǎo)師簽字3月16日3月23日3提交論文提綱3月23日3月30日4交初稿和文獻(xiàn)綜述3月30日4月20日5交終稿和評(píng)議書5月8日前指 導(dǎo) 教師： 年 月 日教研室主任： 年 月 注：一式三份，學(xué)院（系）、指導(dǎo)教師、學(xué)生各一份 XXXX大學(xué)本科生畢業(yè)論文（設(shè)計(jì)）開題報(bào)告書XXX 學(xué)院 英語(yǔ)筆譯 專業(yè) XXXX 屆學(xué)生姓名XX論文（設(shè)計(jì)）題目從功能對(duì)等角度論中式菜單的英譯指導(dǎo)教師XXX專業(yè)職稱 XXX所屬教研室商務(wù)英語(yǔ)教研室研究方向20世紀(jì)英國(guó)文學(xué)課題論證：從功能對(duì)等角度討論中式菜單英譯的原則與方法。方案設(shè)計(jì)：第一章是對(duì)本文的總體介紹，第二章介紹功能對(duì)等理論，第三章探究中式餐單英譯的現(xiàn)狀，第四章與第五章研究中式菜單英譯的原則與策略，第六章為文章綜述。進(jìn)度計(jì)劃：3月16日前確定初步論文題目 3月30日前寫開題報(bào)告、任務(wù)書3月30日前提交論文提綱4月20日前提交初稿和文獻(xiàn)綜述5月8 日前交終稿和評(píng)議書指導(dǎo)教師意見： 指導(dǎo)教師簽名： 年 月 日教研室意見： 教研室主任簽名： 年 月 日XXX大學(xué)本科生畢業(yè)論文（設(shè)計(jì)）評(píng)議書姓 名XX學(xué)院XXX學(xué)院專業(yè)XXX年級(jí)（班）XXXX級(jí)英語(yǔ)筆譯X班論 文 題 目從功能對(duì)等角度論中式菜單的英譯完成時(shí)間XXX/5/13論文內(nèi)容摘要 隨著中國(guó)改革開放的快速發(fā)展，加之中國(guó)加入世貿(mào)組織，中國(guó)在國(guó)際上扮演的角色顯得日益重要。越來(lái)越多的外國(guó)客人紛紛到達(dá)中國(guó)，了解中國(guó)博大精深的文化。而中國(guó)的飲食文化作為其中重要的一部分，不容忽視。中國(guó)飲食文化作為傳遞信息與傳播文化的一個(gè)重要途徑，那么，中國(guó)飲食的英譯則顯得重中之重。然而，事實(shí)上，對(duì)于中式菜單英譯方面的研究并不是那么多，所以這方面的研究是很有必要的。本文主要是以翻譯理論中的功能對(duì)等理論為研究基礎(chǔ)。在此基礎(chǔ)上，討論了中式菜肴的特點(diǎn)，探討了中英飲食文化的差異，指出了現(xiàn)今社會(huì)上普遍存在的中式菜名英譯的混亂問題以及原因。最后，還討論了從功能對(duì)等理論出發(fā)，菜單英譯過程中應(yīng)該遵循的原則，以及在這些原則的指導(dǎo)下，應(yīng)該運(yùn)用什么樣的翻譯方法來(lái)達(dá)到準(zhǔn)確傳達(dá)信息及文化的目的。指導(dǎo)教師評(píng)語(yǔ) 年 月 日指 導(dǎo) 教 師職稱初評(píng)成績(jī)答辯小組姓名職稱教研室組長(zhǎng)成員答辯記錄： 記錄人簽字： 年 月 日答辯小組意見： 組長(zhǎng)簽字： 年 月 日學(xué)院意見： 評(píng)定成績(jī)： 簽章 年 月 日XXXX大學(xué)本科生畢業(yè)論文（設(shè)計(jì)）文獻(xiàn)綜述Literature ReviewSince the early 1950s, the modern theories about translation have undergone a rapid development, and all kinds of schools and thoughts gradually spring out. Among all of these, there are two theories attracting the world’s attention. Nida, Fedorov and some other scholars brought the modern linguistics into translation study。 another is that Holmes classified translation into “independent discipline”. As Nida puts it, “No holistic approach to translating can exclude semiotics as a fundamental discipline in encoding and decoding sign.” (Nida, 1993)As a matter of fact, Equivalence Theory was firstly put forward by Lie E. V. Rieu, and on the basis of these thoughts, Nida came up with his own thoughts. Therefore, in the early years of 1960s, Nida put forward Formal Equivalence Theory. And in the late of 1960s, he presented Functional Equivalence Theory in the book The Theory and Practice of Translation, written by him and Charles Taber. Around the 19th century, Yan Fu, a great translator, e up with the three principle of translation—faithfulness, expressiveness and elegance, which is known to most of us. Faithfulness means equivalence, mainly concerning the origional text and the author. Expressiveness refers to the relationship between the translation and the target readers. It focus on expressing the thought of the origional text through various techniques. In the following days, a lot of translators and translation theorist showed up, such as Lu Xun, Qu Qiubai and Ji Xianlin, and so on. They also put forward a lot of translation theories similar to equivalence theory in the western countries. The term “equivalence” in translation first appeared in ’s writing (1957) when he stated that “the socalled translation equivalence between two languages are never really equivalent” (SnellHornby, 1988). Briefly, , Nida, Catford, Baker, Newmark and Wilss, all of these theorists have contributed to explaining the connotation of equivalence, approached equivalence from different perspectives and all have contributed much to this area of research.Functional Equivalence Theory can be divided into dynamic equivalence and formal equivalence. The two terms are coined by Eugene Nida. They have been understood as free translation (translating the meanings of phrases or whole sentences) and literal translation (translating the meanings of individual words in their more or less exact syntactic sequence) respectively. In Nida’s opinion, the two methods for translation is really important, and they can be used in different translation situations. But his original definition of dynamic equivalence was rhetorical: the idea was that the translator should translate so that the effect of the translation on the target reader is roughly the same as the effect of the source text once was on the source reader. As Nida himself wrote in the glossary of The Theory and Practice of Translation, dynamic equivalence is the quality of a translation in which the message of the original text has been so transported into the receptor language that the response of the receptor is essentially like that of the original receptors. (1969:200) Nida tended to use the term so that the response of the receptor was mostly semantic– the target reader took the meaning of th