Chapter One Introduction
1.1The Application of Nominalization in College Students' Chinese-English and English-Chinese Translation
早在2011年，我离开了我的学生英语到汉语和中国到英语翻译的分配，以测试他们的获取和应用物化。他们之间的实际性能和标准，唤醒我的迫切需要向他们灌输英语的表达方式（尤其是在书面话语）的名词字符的意识，并发展自己的能力，在这方面有一个显着的差异。为了推动这一点回家，请快速浏览一下一些他们的翻译：Early in 2011, I left my students an assignment of English-to-Chinese andChinese-to-English translation in order to test their acquisition and application ofnominalization. There is a marked discrepancy between their actual performance andthe criteria, which awakes me to the pressing need to instill in them the awareness ofthe nominalizing character of English ways of expression (especially in writtendiscourses) and to develop their competence in this regard. To drive this point home，please take a quick look at some of their translations:
不可否认的是有好的翻译，名词化的应用，甚至是非常正确的。但是，上面的翻译也使我认识到，他们的翻译中存在的问题不容忽视。在第1句，“[S为？？，所以？？，不适当地翻译成”因为“？”，如果它被翻译成“我的家庭作业迟交的原因是疾病我的父亲“，它更根据的英语讲的人的方式表达的因果关系。2句子和句子5显示的翻译，有些学生是不知道，形容词修饰文章”的“参考人谁承担形容词所示的素质。学生有困难搞清楚含义“防」吨的3句：”在中国的句子和差异源于英文单词“禁止的意思。4句的翻译太口语化，因为它是法律文章翻译句子6清楚地表明，学生甚至有明确意义的“应用程序”这个词在英语句子翻译的麻烦。It is undeniable that there are good translations, even very correct application ofnominalizations. But their translations above do make me realize that the problems in their translation must not be neglected. In sentence 1, “ [S 为???，所以???，，isinappropriately translated into ”because of so"?”，if it is translated into “thereason for the late submission of my home work was the illness of my father”，itwould be much more in accordance with the English speaking people's way ofexpressing the causal relationship. The translations of sentence 2 and sentence 5 showthat some students are not aware that adjectives modified with article "the" refer tothe people who bear the qualities shown by the adjectives. Sentence 3 shows thatstudents have difficulties in figuring out meaning of “防』t:” in the Chinese sentenceand its difference from the English word “banning，，in meaning. The translation ofsentence 4 is too colloquial since it is to translate law articles. Sentences 6 clearlyshows that students even have trouble in making clear the meaning of the word“application” in the English sentence to be translated.
1.2Introduction to Nominalization
Nominalization is not a new term in linguistics, but a universal phenomenon inhuman languages which has attracted the attention of scholars of different schools.First and foremost, scholars have made painstaking efforts to define thisphenomenon from different perspectives;
Roiitledge Dictioncuy of Language and Linguistics, defines nominalization asfollows; 1 .broadly speaking, every derivation of nouns from another word class, e.g.from verbs (feeling vs feel) or adjectives (redness vs red)，but also from another noun(womanhood vs woman); 2.productive process of word formation through whichwords of all word classes can be used as nouns (Bussmann, 2000: 327).The definition of nominalization in Oxford Concise Dictioncuy of Linguistics(Matthews, 2006: 300) is: any process by which either a noun or a syntactic unitfunctioning as a noun phrase derived from any other kind of unit.M.A.K Halliday in his book An Introduction to Functional Grammar says thatnominalization refers to any element or group of elements which can fianction as anoun or noun phrase in a clause (Halliday, 1994:41).
1.3Literature Review
Long before the definition of nominalization was put forward, it had become a hotspot for many linguists.
1.3.1Studies Abroad
The earliest study dates back to the ancient Greece，when Plato and Aristotleclassified words into two categories: nominal group and verbal group. Though unableto define nominalization, they further discussed the transformation between the twocategories of words (Liu Guohui, 2000:5).According to the information known to us, Danish linguist Otto Jesperson is sofar the first scholar who attempted and made great contribution in the study ofnominalization. In his book The Philosophy of Grammar, his proposal of "Nexus" andthe classification of nexus-substantive contributed greatly to the study of the linguisticphenomenon——nominalization. Jesperson studied nominalization from various aspects,such as: the syntax, the semantics, the function, however he failed to explore thephenomenon from lexical and textual perspectives, and his classification ofnominalization is not detailed enough. (Fan Wen fang & Wang Minejie, 2003:15-16)
Chapter Two Theoretical Foundation
A thorough understanding of this linguistic phenomenon of nominalization lies notonly in a complete mastering of its definition，but also in clear knowledge of the basicfacts about it. Based on the introduction to the definition of nominalization andscholars researches in the previous chapter, the relations between nominalization，metaphor and grammatical metaphor are also going to be discussed in this chapter.What's more，this chapter makes further discussions about the classification ofnominalization.
2.1 Metaphor
Metaphor is a linguistic phenomenon which is closely related to human cognitionand thinking. According to Metaphors We Live by (1980: 10), 70% of the expressionsin our language are related to metaphor. Metaphor has attracted the attention ofscholars since more than 2000 years ago. Earliest studies on metaphor can be tracedback to Aristotle who went into the details of metaphor in his books Poetics andRhetoric. As what was presented in Part XXI in the book Poetics (1996), metaphor isthe transference of an alien term: transference from genus to species, from species togenus, from species to species, or by analogy. Aristotle argued that when usingmetaphor, two things which do not belong to the same category are compared witheach other. His Comparison Theory claims that the metaphors are matters of languageand not matters of thought or action. His theory of metaphor has exerted greatinfluence on rhetoricians in their explanation of metaphor for over 2000 years.
Chapter Three A Comparative Study about Chinese.........30-56
3.1 Word-formnation .........30-32
3.1.1 Prefix(Prefixation)......... 31
3.1.2 Suffix(Suffixation)......... 31-32
3.1.3 Conversion......... 32
3.2 Comparative Study about Chinese and English .........32-47
3.3 Similarities between English and Chinese......... 47-51
3.3.1 Increase of Conciseness .........48-49
3.3.2 Increase of Cohesion and Coherence.........49-50
3.3.3 Increase of Objectivity .........50-51
3.4 Differences between English and Chinese Nominalization .........51-52
3.5 Reasons for the Differences in Chinese and English.........52-56
3.5.1 Different Language Systems .........52-53
3.5.2 Different Ways of Thinking......... 53-56
Chapter Four The Effects upon College Student's Chinese-English......... 56-70
4.1 A General Survey into the Application of Nominalization.........56-59
4.2 Implication for the Strategies in Translation Teaching......... 59-61
4.3 Significance of the Study to Translation Study......... 61-70
4.3.1 Translation of English Nominalization......... 62-66
4.3.2 Nominalization in Chinese-Ehglish......... 66-70
Chapter Five Conclusion .........70-74
5.1 A Summary of the Major Findings......... 70-71
5.2 Direction for Further Researches .........71-74
Conclusion
Although this paper is coming to the end, the research and exploration should betaken a point of departure. With the three limitations mentioned above in mind, theresearcher is going to further pursue the study in the following two aspects:
First, further contrastive studies can be conducted, for example, betweennon-English majors in different regions of China (e.g. students in Chaohu College andtheir counterpart in Fudan University) and between non-English majors and Englishmajors, to get a more clear overview of Chinese college students" acquisition andapplication of nominalization in their bilingual translation, thus giving morepersuasive data and practical suggestions to the ongoing College English reform.
Second, as we all know, proper use of nominalization can make the translationconcise，fluent, natural, objective, more persified in wording, but the excessive useof nominalization can also cause the text unnecessarily pedantic, making theexpression cumbersome, thus unnecessarily increasing the students' psychological burden in translation; and the frequency of nominalization applied is closely related tothe genre of the texts to be translated. Therefore, the proper frequency ofnominalization applied in texts of different genres would be another concern in thefuture research, so that students can be guided to tailor the application ofnominalizations to specific situations and contexts.
Bibliography
[1]Aristotle Poetics, translated with an introduction and notes by Malcolm HeathLondon; New York, N.Y.: Penguin Books, 1996.
[2]Biber, Douglas, Stig Johansson, et al., Longman Grammar of Spoken and WrittenEnglish. Beijing: Foreign language Teaching and Research Press, 2000.
[3]Black, M. More about Metaphor In Metaphor and thought. Cambridge:Cambridge University Press, 1979
[4]Bussmann Hadumod, Roiitledge Dictionary of Language and Linguistics, Beijing:Foreign language Teaching and Research Press, 2000.
[5]Comrie，B. Language Universals and Linguistic Typology. Beijing:PekingUniversity Press, 2009.
[6]Chomsky, Noam, Syntactic Structures.The Hague: Mouton, 1957.
[7]Chomsky,of the Theoty of Syntax. Ma: The MIT Press, 1965
[8]Chomsky,N., Language and Mind, New York: Harcourt，1972.
[9]Fowler, R. Linguistic Criticism. New York: Oxford University Press，1996.
[10]Halliday, M.A.K. Introduction to Functional Grammar. Hodder London:Arnold，1994/1985.