<好了歌>三種英譯本之比較

Abstract

《紅樓夢》由中國清代作家曹雪芹所著的著名長篇章回小說，自刊行問世以來便廣受讀者所愛。《紅樓夢》一書敘述金陵四大家族賈、史、王、薛之興衰，情節豐富、生動。小說中文白並陳，內含大量詩、詞、曲、賦等不同文體之創作與各種中國文化特色。 翻閱喬利、霍克斯與楊氏夫婦所譯的《紅樓夢》英譯本，在好了歌與好了歌注中，各譯者所採之翻譯策略因不同的時代脈絡、目標讀者與翻譯目的而有所不同，呈現出來的風格也各有特色。本研究旨在比較與分析三種英譯本呈現出的翻譯特色，並探討其中的得與失。 本論文共分為五章，第一章與第二章說明研究動機、介紹紅樓夢原文、英譯本之概況、四位譯者之生平與譯本，以及文獻回顧。第三章探討三本譯本在「好了歌」的形式體例與文化詞彙之翻譯。第四章則是研究「好了歌注」的形式體例與文化詞彙翻譯。第五章乃總結，歸納三種英譯本之翻譯策略，以期供未來研究者與《紅樓夢》譯者參考。

Since its first publication in 1791, Hong Lou Meng (紅樓夢) has enjoyed a unique status with wide readership in China. Apart from its literary merits, Hong Lou Meng serves as a good starting point for further understanding of Chinese society and culture. It is, however, a somewhat surprising fact that such a popular and widely-read masterpiece hadn’t been fully translated in English until in 1971 David Hawkes (1923-2009) decided to start translating this Chinese novel. Later on, another full English translation A Dream of Red Mansions done by the legendary couple Yang Xianyi (1915-2009) and Gladys Yang (1919-1999) was first published in 1978. In fact, early in the late 19th century Henry Bencraft Joly (1857-1898) had attempted to fully translate Hong Lou Meng, but his premature death prevented him from doing so. Though they were done by native English speakers, the popularity and circulation of the three translations greatly differ from one another. Published by Penguins, Hawkes’ translation The Story of the Stone owns a wider readership than Bencraft Joly’s The Dream of the Red Chamber and the Yangs’ A Dream of Red Mansions. With long-spanning years of publication, the translators have presented two very different English versions of Hong Lou Meng in the way they approached the forms of certain passages and culture-bound terms. Therefore, this thesis aims to examine and compare how Joly, Hawkes and the Yangs dealt with the “Hao liao ge” and “Hao liao ge zhu” that are of particular importance to the development of the plot of the novel. This thesis is divided into five chapters. Chapter One and Chapter Two state the motivation, give a brief introduction of the original Chinese work, provide publication information regarding the two translations and translators, and conduct literature reviews. Chapter Three examines the translators’ translations of the “Hao liao ge” to see how they dealt with culturally loaded forms, terms and ideas. Chapter Four studies how they employed strategies to approach the forms of the original and to deal with the culture-bound hints embedded within the “Hao liao ge zhu.” Chapter Five summarizes the respective translation strategies with which these translators employed and suggests how future translators may endeavor to face the challenges in translation of Chinese classics.