「歸化」還是「異化」？—The Hound of the Baskervilles 三部清末民初中譯本研究

Abstract

在品目繁多的各類晚清翻譯小說中，偵探小說無疑極受讀者歡迎且值得學界關注。在偵探小說的譯介方面，又以柯南道爾塑造的福爾摩斯最具影響力。本文比較福爾摩斯長篇偵探小說The Hound of the Baskervilles（《巴斯克村獵犬》）清末民初的三種譯本。分別為光緒31年2月20日（1905年3月25日）由陸康華與黃大軍編譯，中國商務印書館出版的《降妖記》，另一譯本為同年8月22日（1905年9月20日）由人鏡學社編譯處編譯、發行，廣智書局印刷的《怪獒案》，另一譯本為陳霆銳翻譯，1916年中華書局出版12冊《福爾摩斯偵探案全集》中的第十冊《獒祟》。本文採用翻譯研究中的「歸化」（domesticating translation）及「異化」（foreignizing translation）理論，分析三種譯本在書名、人名與地名的翻譯特色，女主角Beryl佳人形象的塑造與「怪」、「妖」、「祟」，陰森恐怖氣氛營造的差異，並試圖解釋譯本與原著意義偏離背後的動機，以及這種偏離所具的文化意義。

Detective stories, a newly introduced literary genre for late Qing readers, became extremely popular in late Qing and early Republican China after Zhang Kunde 張坤德 translated and published four Sherlock Holmes short stories in Shiwu bao (The Chinese Progress 《時務報》) in 1896. From 1896 to 1916, almost all of Arthur Conan Doyle’s Sherlock Holmes novels and short stories were translated into Chinese, with most of them having multiple renditions. This paper describes three early-twentieth-century Chinese renditions of Conan Doyle’s The Hound of the Baskervilles. The three Chinese translations of The Hound of the Baskervilles are Xiangyao Ji (A Record of Subduing Demons 《降妖記》 1905), Guaiao An (A Case of a Strange Mastiff 《怪獒案》 1905) and Ao sui (A Haunting of a Mastiff 《獒祟》 1916). In this paper, I analyze how the translators of the aforementioned three works manipulated the English text of The Hound of the Baskervilles by using narrative techniques of traditional Chinese fiction that late Qing and early Republican readers were familiar with to create a detective story discourse in the Chinese context. I also answer the following questions: What are the differences between Conan Doyle’s original work and the three renditions? In addition, how and why is the hound of the Baskervilles different in these three translations?