长期以来,我国翻译批评的标准都着眼于“忠实于作者原意”、“译者应透明”等理论,强调译者对作者原意的追寻,忽视了译者的主观能动性。阐释学理论关于“理解历史性”、“效果历史”、“视界融合”的论述强调了译者对原文本的理解在翻译过程中所起的作用,客观指出译者对作品原意的理解必然融合了译者本身的文化背景、历史背景等因素。在进行翻译批评的过程中,应当同时考虑到阐释的多样性和客观有效性,更恰当地对译本做出评价。 For a long time, the standards of translation criticism in our country all focus on the theories of “faithful to the original intention of the author” and “the translator should be transparent”, emphasizing the translator’s pursuit of the original intention of the author and ignoring the subjective initiative of the translator. Hermeneutics on “understanding history”, “history of effects”, “horizons fusion” emphasizes the translator’s understanding of the original text in the process of translation, objectively pointed out that the translator’s The understanding of the original intention of the work necessarily incorporates the translator’s own cultural background, historical background and other factors. In the process of translation criticism, we should consider the diversity and objective validity of interpretation at the same time and make a more appropriate assessment of the translation.