显示标签为“翻译”的博文。显示所有博文
显示标签为“翻译”的博文。显示所有博文

2007年3月11日星期日

Burton Watson 翻译的《史记 · 伯夷列传》/ Records of the Grand Historian

这是 Burton Watson 翻译的《史记》里面的第一篇列传:〈伯夷列传〉。抄写了一遍,不仅细细品味了翻译严谨,而且更借此对照并细读了司马迁的原文。

Shih chi 61: The Biography of Po Yi and Shu Ch’i

Although in the world of learning there exist a large number and variety of books and records, their reliability must always be examined in the light of the Six Classics. In spite of deficiencies in the Odes and Documents, we can nevertheless know something about the culture of the times of Emperor Shun and the Hsia dynasty. When, for instance, Emperor Yao wished to retire from his position, he yielded the throne to Shun, and Shun in turn yielded it to Yü. But in each case the high court officials first unanimously recommended these men for the position and they were given the throne for a period of trial. Only after they had discharged the duties of the imperial office for twenty or thirty years, and their merit and ability had become manifest, was the rule finally ceded to them. This proves that the empire is a precious vessel, its ruler part of a great line of succession, and that its transmission is a matter of extreme gravity. Yet there are theorists who say that Yao tried to yield the empire to Hsü Yu and that Hsü Yu was ashamed and would not accept it but instead fled into hiding. Again, for the time of the Hsia dynasty we have similar stories of men called Pien Sui and Wu Kuang. Where do people get stories like this?

The Grand Historian remarks: When I ascended Mount Chi I found at the top what is said to be the grave of Hsü Yu. Confucius, we know, eulogizes the ancient sages and men of wisdom and virtue, and quite specifically mentions such figures at T’ai-po of Wu and Po Yi. Now I am told that Hsü Yu and Wu Kuang were men of the highest virtue, and yet in the Classics there appears not the slightest reference to them. Why would this be?

Confucius said, “Po Yi and Shu Ch’I never bore old ills in mind and hence seldom had any feelings of rancor.” “They sought to act virtuously and they did so; what was there for them to feel rancor about?”

I am greatly moved by the determination of Po Yi. But when I examine the song that has been attributed to him, I find it very strange.

The story of these men states that Po Yi and Shu Ch’i were elder and younger sons of the ruler of Ku-chu. Their father wished to set up Shu Ch’i as his heir but, when he died, Shu Ch’i yielded in favor of his elder borther Po Yi. Po Yi replied that it had been their father’s wish that Shu Ch’i should inherit the throne and so he departed from the state. Shu Ch’i like wise, being unwilling to accept the rule, went away and the people of the state set up a middle brother as ruler. At this time Po Yi and Shu Ch’i heard that Ch’ang, the Chief of the West, was good at looking after old people, and they said, “Why not go and follow him?” But when they had gone they found that the Chief of the West was dead and his son, King Wu, had taken up the ancestral tablet of his father, whom he honored with the posthumous title of King Wen, and was marching east to attack the emperor of the Yin dynasty. Po Yi and Shu Ch’i clutched the reins of King Wu’s horse and reprimanded him, saying, “The mourning for your father not yet completed and here you take up shield and spear—can this conduct be called filial? As a subject you seek to assassinate your sovereign—can this conduct be called humane?” The king’s attendants wished to strike them down, but the king’s counselor, T’ai-kung, interposed, saying, “These are righteous men,” and he sent them away unharmed.

After this, King Wu conquered and pacified the people of the Yin and the world honored the house of Chou as its ruler. But Po Yi and Shu Ch’i were filled with outrage and considered it unrighteous to eat the grain of Chou. They fled and hid on Shouyang Mountain, where they tried to live by gathering ferns to eat. When they were on the point of starvation, they composed a song:

We climb this western hill
and pick its ferns;
replacing violence with violence,
he will not see his own fault.
Shen Nung, Yü, and Hsia,
great men gone so long ago—
whom shall we turn to now?
Ah—let us be off,
for our fate has run out!

They died of starvation on Shou-yang Mountain. When we exaine this song, do we find any rancor or not?

Some people say, “It is Heaven’s way to have no favorites but always to be on the side of the good man.” Can we say then that Po Yi and Shu Ch’i were good men or not? They piled up a record for goodness and were pure in deed, as we have seen, and yet they starved to death.

Of his seventy disciples, Confucius singled out Yen Hui for praise because of his diligence in learning, yet Yen Hui was often in want, never getting his fill of even the poorest food, and in the end he suffered an untimely death. Is this the way heaven rewards the good man?

Robber Chih day after day killed innocent men, making mincemeat of their flesh. Cruel and willful, he gathered a band of several thousand followers who went about terrorizing the world, but in the end he lived to a ripe old age. For what virtue did he deserve this?

These are only the most obvious and striking examples. Even in more recent times we see that men whose conduct departs from what is prescribed and who do nothing but violate the taboos and prohibitions enjoy luxury and wealth to the end of their lives, and hand them on to their heirs for generations without end. And there are others who carefully choose the spot where they will place each footstep, who “speak out only when it is time to speak,” who “walk no bypaths” and expend no anger on what is not upright and just, and yet, in numbers too great to be reckoned, they meet with misfortune and disaster. I find myself in much perplexity. Is this so-called Way of Heaven right or wrong?

Confucius said, “Those whose ways are different cannot lay plans for one another.” Each will follow his own will. Therefore he said, “If the search for riches and honor were sure to be successful, though I should become a groom with whip in hand to get them, I would do so. But as the search might not be successful, I will follow after that which I love.” “When the year becomes cold, then we know that the pine and cypress are the last to lose their leaves.” When the whole world is in muddy confusion, then is the man of true purity seen. Then must one judge what he will consider important and what important and what unimportant.

“The superior man hates the thought of his name not being mentioned after his death.” As Chia Yi has said:

The covetous run after riches,
the impassioned pursue a fair name;
the proud die struggling for power,
and the people long only to live.

Things of the same light illumine each other; things of the same class seek each other out. Clouds pursue the dragon; the wind follows the tiger. The sage arises and all creation becomes clear.

Po Yi and Shu Ch’i, although they were men of great virtue, became, through Confucius, even more illustrious in fame. Though Yen Hui was diligent in learning, like a fly riding the tail of a swift horse, his attachments to Confucius made his deeds renowned. The hermit-scholars hiding away in their caves may be ever so correct in their givings and takings, and yet the names of them and their kind are lost and forgotten without receiving a word of praise. Is this not pitiful? Men of humble origin living in the narrow lanes strive to make perfect their actions and to establish a name for themselves, but if they do not some how attach themselves to a great man, a “man of the blue clouds,” how can they hope that their fame will be handed down to posterity?


2007年2月8日星期四

William Strunk Jr., E. B. White, and Chuang-tzu

William Strunk Jr. 和 E. B. White 是两位文体专家,提倡简洁干净的文风。他们认为,成功的写作过程是从错综复杂的想绪里抽出最有效的语句呈现给读者。好语言的标准是应该使读者念起来不觉得有累赘和障碍。

下面是从他们合著的小书《风格的要素》 (The Elements of Style, 3rd Edition) 里挑出的两段话:

Vigorous writing is concise. A sentence should contain no unnecessary words, a paragraph no unnecessary sentences, for the same reason that a drawing should have no unnecessary lines and a machine no unnecessary parts. (William Strunk Jr.)

If one is to write, one must believe—in the truth and worth of the scrawl, in the ability of the reader to receive and decode the message. No one can write decently who is distrustful of the reader’s intelligence, or whose attitude is patronizing. (E. B. White)

第一段是说要力求没有废话。就象一台机器不应该有多余的零件一样,每个多余的字都是对读者阅读的干扰。我再添一句:就好象好的音乐里不应该有多余的音符。第二段是说要把读者放在第一位。读者才是真正的裁判。任何的华而不实、故弄玄虚,都是皇帝的新衣,不会被读者买帐。(我也插一句:反常的情况也有,比如读者预先被“忽悠”了。)

两位的忠告让我联想到了《庄子》里的解牛高手庖丁。解牛提炼准确的语句一样,都是剖析和剔除的工作。解牛要找准骨节和关键。同样,写作也是化繁为简,不是化简为繁,更不是无中生有。写作不精心,就有可能把“血肉相连”的思路弄成“血肉模糊”的文字,最终吃苦的是无辜的读者。

在庄子的这则寓言里,庖丁已经十九年没有换过一把刀,技艺早就出神入化了。但是每次干活时,他还是认真对待。每次完成了活计以后,那份痛快的感觉也不会改变。这里是一小段原文:

遲,解,滿(莊 C.3)

Burton Watson 是翻译中国古代典籍的大师级“庖丁”。且看他的翻译:

“However, whenever I come to a complicated place, I size up the difficulties, tell myself to watch out, and be careful, keep my eyes on what I’m doing, work very slowly, and move the knife with the greatest subtlety, until—flop! the whole thing comes apart like a clod of earth crumbling to the ground. I stand there holding the knife and look all around me, completely satisfied and reluctant to move on, and then I wipe off the knife and put it away.”

翻译如同写作。这段翻译,准确、简洁、生动,将原文里的关键和脉络一一化解,达到了 William Strunk Jr. 和 E. B. White 的要求。

© by Dun Wang (王敦). All rights reserved. 著作权拥有者:Dun Wang (王敦)。

2007年1月14日星期日

Hu Ying 胡缨 on late Qing translation/ 晚清的翻译

Never an innocent or neutral linguistic exercise, translation during this period proved even more to be a tension-ridden "contact zone," where different traditions met and wrestled on the solid ground of language, and where the cultural implications of global and local politics manifested themselves in submerged, though no less intense, ways.[1]

这从来不是一个中立的纯语言问题。翻译在此历史阶段更表现为一个充满张力的“接触地带”。这里,不同的文化传统互相遭遇,语言成为角力场。同时,国际和本土的政治意图也暗含在鲜明的文化立场里。(笔者翻译)


[1] Tales of Translation: Composing the New Woman in China, 1899-1918 (Stanford: Stanford University Press, 2000), 12.

2007年1月11日星期四

The 1900 Plague of San Francisco: Perspective from the Chinese Community/ 1900年的“瘟疫”与旧金山唐人街

本人对此消息的英译

The Monkey Is Dead

Yesterday[1]some Western newspaper[2]reported that the suspicion—a coming plague voiced by that doctor—is now “dead” and has returned to the “Neverland” without a trace. The previously infected monkey was still healthy. Alas! The life and death of the monkey is critical to the reputation of the Chinatown. Isn’t it a serious situation? If the monkey knew that its being alive could remove the panic of the whole Chinatown, the money would be very happy when thinking about it. Of course the Chinese were also happy to know the news.[3]Was the news in Western newspapers a blessing for the monkey, or for the Chinatown? It was happy news for the Chinese population, but a bad one for that doctor. Unexpectedly, this morning a Western newspaper reports that the monkey is dead. The news also indicates that the reason for its demise is starvation, not disease. Well, poor monkey, you are unlucky to fall into hands of such a doctor!



[1]March 13, 1990.

[2]Means American newspapers, since Americans are “Westerners” to the Chinese.

[3] The monkey is alive and healthy.



(Zhongxi ribao, March 14, 1900, issue 23, Item # 18

Controversy concerning the death of a monkey; uncertainties surrounding the diagnosis)

© by Dun Wang (王敦). All rights reserved. 著作权拥有者:Dun Wang (王敦)。