論錢鍾書的翻譯觀

Abstract

錢鍾書先生（1910~1998）或許是中國當代最博學及具批判意識的一位人文學者。他的「化境」翻譯觀，對中國翻譯話語帶來極大的影響，而且也對提升中國傳統翻譯理論帶來實質貢獻，廣受學界認可。然而，對於錢鍾書翻譯論述的確實性，評論家們有諸多批評，認為是個人經驗談、自相矛盾、甚至是幻象，並與中國翻譯傳統產生斷裂。本論文主要即是針對這些挑戰，做出有效的回應，並對錢鍾書的翻譯觀進行全面分析。作者認為我們無法單獨地理解錢鍾書的翻譯思想，而必須檢視該思想所依據的社會、文化、與歷史脈絡，才能理解錢的想法。因此，本論文嘗試將錢鍾書主要的中英文著作中，散落至各處的翻譯評論與批判觀點串連起來，對他的翻譯觀提供邏輯連貫的論述與分析。首先，探索錢鍾書對佛經翻譯史的論述，並檢視錢鍾書於探討翻譯時運用的闡釋學概念，能全面理解他所支持的忠信翻譯觀的複雜性。第二，本論文也指出錢鍾書的化境翻譯觀，是大多數的中國翻譯理論家們都認識，但只有極少數論者對此觀點仔細地研究。因此，本論文試著對化境觀作出哲學性的詮釋，並探討隱與露的辯證議題。錢鍾書於探討化境這個重要的概念時，即時常提及此重要的文學主題。最後，本論文對晚清當時的社會與文化氛圍做了歷史性的回顧，並試著解釋錢鍾書為何會讚賞林紓於其翻譯作品中作出的種種操作。同時也論證了錢鍾書與林紓兩位知識份子，有雷同的想法，對使用古文與尋找中西方文學的相似性方面，都抱持相似的觀點。錢鍾書作為翻譯批評家與文學批評家的雙重角色，也會在本論文做出討論。整體而言，本論文澄清了前人對錢鍾書翻譯觀的普遍誤解，並深入分析他的翻譯思維在整體翻譯研究的理論潛能。Qian Zhongshu (1910-1998) is arguably the most learned and critical-minded humanist scholar in contemporary China. His translation concept, huajing or the realm of transformation, has been highly influential in the Chinese discourse of translation and has made widely recognized and significant contribution to the advancement of the traditional Chinese translation theory. Critics, however, dispute the authenticity of Qian’s theorizing of translation, arguing that it is impressionistic, paradoxical, or even illusionary as well as a radical break with the Chinese translation tradition. This project aims to develop an effective response to these challenges and provides a comprehensive analysis of Qian’s translation concept. It argues that we cannot understand Qian’s idea of translation in isolation but examine it in relation to the social, cultural and historical context that his concept of translation is based on. In this sense, the present project tries to piece together Qian’s critical remarks and insights about translation that are scattered over his major works in both Chinese and English and provides a logically-jointed line of argument and analysis of Qian’s conceptualization of translation. Firstly, by exploring the history of Buddhist sutra translation, together with the examination of hermeneutics employed by Qian in his discussion of translation, we have a comprehensive understanding of the complexity of faithfulness or xin信that Qian upholds. Secondly, it is also argued in this project that Qian’s huajing concept is the idea that most Chinese translation theorists know but very few have studied carefully. Therefore, this project attempts to provide a philosophical account of huajing and deal with the issue of concealment and revelation, an important literary motif that Qian frequently refers to in the discussion of this seminal concept. Finally, this project gives a historical review of the social and cultural milieu of the late Qing period and tries to explain why Qian praises Lin Shu’s manipulation in the translations. It also proves that Qian and Lin are two like-minded intellectuals and they all share similar views of the use of classical Chinese as well as find affinities between Chinese and Western literature. It also explores Qian’s dual roles as both the translation and literary critics. By and large, this project clarifies the predominant misconception toward Qian’s translation concept and provides an in-depth analysis of his idea as well as its theoretical potential to the overall translation studies.