中、英文詞組的結構具有語法功能上的差異，因此在進行這兩種語言的互譯時，譯者必須通權達變，講究功能對等的，切忌墨守成規，拘泥於結構型式上的對應關係，造成強譯、硬譯的弊病。 本篇論文旨在探討英語主修生在翻譯英語詞組時所採取的變通策略，並分析牨前的翻譯經驗以及由語言學的訓練是否有助於此類策佃的運用。為，研究者特地挑選一組大三學生(A組)和一組大一學生(B組)充當參與者，人數各為50人和48人。前者在本研究進行之前已經接受一年的翻譯、語言學、及中英語言比較課程的 訓練；後者係次接受翻譯課程的訓練，並正在修習語言學科目。每一名參與者均接受一項「英語詞組翻譯測試」，其內容含15個題目。每個題目的句子中存在一、兩個目標詞組，句子均採文學性之文體風格，要求參與者採取特定的翻譯策略予以變通處理。 測試之後，研究者將參與者的回應收妥善，鏈入語料，並隨即進行量性及質性的資料分析。研究者先計算兩組使用預期策略的人數頻率和百分比，並施行獨立樣本t考驗，以便瞭解組間差異的情況。此外，研究並逐一分析參與者的譯文，審視他們在題目上的表現概況，以便明瞭其採用的變通策略究竟為何。統計結果發現，兩組參與者的平均百分比雖然有所不同，但是其差異並未達到顯著水準。此一趨勢顯示先前的翻譯經驗及語言學科目的修習並未發揮預期的影響力。質性的分析結果則證實參與者比較善於運用移位、詞性轉換兩項策略，對於增益、刪減策略亦能掌握完善，但是對於切分策略仍感陌生。此外，他們對於中心詞難免疏於掌，導致理解上的偏誤，間接阻礙了變通策略的運用。

The translation of English phrases into Chinese necessitates adaptive strategies that aim to achieve functional rather than formal equivalence. These strategies have to be observed because of the extensive differences between Chinese and English syntax. Violation of this practice may result in compelled or stiff rendering. This article reports a study on the adaptive strategies taken by English majors to translate English phrases into Chinese. Participants included 50 juniors (Group A) and 48 freshmen (Group B) from a university. Group A had had experiences in translation and had completed courses such as Linguistic and Contrastive Analysis of Chinese and English. In contrast, Group B had not received systemic training in translation and were just taking Linguistics during the research. Both groups were administrated a Test of English Phrase Translation which comprised 15 test questions. The questions were with literary stylistic features and thus called for adaptive measures that led to functional equivalence in renderings. The participants’ written responses were collected and analyzed using both the quantitative and qualitative paradigms. Descriptive statistics was conducted to pinpoint group frequency and percentage in applying an intended strategy for each question. An independent-samples t-test was then carried out to compare group means of the percentages. Qualitatively, item-by-item content analyses were observed to identify group responses and individual participants’ application of intended strategies. The result of t-test indicated no significant groups difference, suggesting absence of influence of translation experience and linguistics course training on strategy use. Qualitative analyses revealed that, as a whole, the groups were competent in using strategies such as shifting and conversion in the part of speech. They were less capable of using the strategies of amplification and omission and were unfamiliar with the strategy of division. Moreover, they were blocked from an effective use of the intended strategies largely due to their failure to grasp the heads and meanings of certain target phrases.