中式英语之鉴 part3

油炸绿番茄

Summary of the Content:
Chapter 3, titled "Redundant Twins," addresses the common redundancy in English writing where two near-synonymous words are paired unnecessarily (e.g., help and assistance).
The author categorizes such redundancies into three types:
1. obvious repetitions (e.g., rough and bumpy)
2. implicit overlaps (e.g., consider and work out)
3. vague or overly broad terms (e.g., advances and developments).
Solutions include deleting redundant words (e.g., shortening geographical surveys and explorations to geographical surveys), replacing them with precise terms (e.g., remote areas for faraway, distant areas), or adapting phrases contextually (e.g., specifying conditions and environment as working conditions and social environment). Exceptions exist for legal terms, humorous styles, or rhythmic expressions (e.g., null and void, first and foremost), where redundancy is acceptable.  

Evaluation  
I think this chapter arise a significant question for translators--that translators should focus not on whether two words differ in meaning in general, but on whether their distinction matters in a specific context. It offers a nuanced and pragmatic approach to resolving redundancy. This perspective is both linguistically sound and translationally transformative.
Theoretical Strength:
By shifting the question from “Are these synonyms?” to “Does this distinction serve the text?,” the author acknowledges the inherent uniqueness of English vocabulary while prioritizing functional clarity. This aligns with translation theories emphasizing purpose over perfection, where context dictates fidelity. For instance, the critique of grow and develop highlights how even subtly distinct words can become redundant if their differences fail to enrich the intended message.
Practical Value:
This approach equips translators with a critical filter. For example, in phrases like conditions and environment, blindly retaining both terms might obscure meaning, whereas contextualizing them as working conditions and social environment adds specificity. It also discourages mechanical “word-for-word” translations of Chinese rhetorical devices (e.g., parallelism), fostering idiomatic English output.

Reflection  
This chapter prompts reflection on linguistic habits and cultural influences. For instance, Chinese often employs repetition for emphasis (e.g., "艰苦奋斗、自力更生"), but direct translation into English risks verbosity. It underscores the need to cultivate "English thinking" rather than mechanical equivalence. Socioculturally, redundancy mirrors language logic: Chinese prioritizes holistic expression, while English values precision.Beyond language, it reveals how cross-cultural communication requires understanding divergent logics—redundancy is not merely a linguistic error but a window into differing worldviews.