Exploration of the Translation of Chinese Literary Theory from the Perspective of Modern Hermeneutics: A Case Study of the Translation of Wenxin Diaolong

doi:10.12002/j.bisu.309

Abstract

Abstract:

The magnum opus Wenxin Diaolong epitomizes Chinese literary theory, which has been recognized as the most suitable literary theory for reinterpretation, modern application, and dissemination. This paper explores the three representative English versions of Wenxin Diaolong from the perspective of modern hermeneutics. It has found that both the translation strategy of translation and interpretation adopted by Vincent Yu-chung Shih and that of “translation and criticism” adopted by Stephen Owen emphasize on the academic interpretation of the English version. They are more likely to attract the attention and research of overseas scholars and sinologists with high literariness and academic value, which is helpful to promote the canonical process of overseas interpretation of Wenxin Diaolong and pave the way for the equal dialogue between Chinese and Western literary theory. In contrast, Siu-Kit Wong, who tends to give priority to mass readers, adopted the strategy of cultural interpretation, which focuses on the modern aesthetic value and cultural orientation of the translation. Wong’s translation is elegant, readable, and easy to understand, and this accelerated the dissemination and popularization of Wenxin Diaolong. The different English versions of Wenxin Diaolong have different characteristics, but they are complementary to each other and cater to different readers. The polyphonic harmony of different translations can also meet the needs of audiences at different aesthetic levels, which is conducive to the dissemination and acceptance of ancient Chinese literary theory classics in western countries and provides strong support for the overseas study of Wenxin Diaolong.

Keywords: Wenxin Diaolong; Chinese literary theory; translation; interpretation; the study of Wenxin Diaolong

摘要：

作为中华文论龙祖的《文心雕龙》被公认为最宜优先成为重新诠释、现代应用、向外输出的文学理论。本文通过梳理《文心雕龙》的译介谱系,考察《文心雕龙》三个代表性译本,发现施友忠采取的“译释并举”和宇文所安采取的“译评相融”的翻译策略侧重于译本的学术性阐释,使其具有较高的文学性及学术价值,更易引起海外学界及汉学家的关注和探讨,有助于推进《文心雕龙》海外传译的经典化进程,为中西文论的平等对话铺设道路;而偏向于大众读者优先的黄兆杰倾向于采用文化性阐释策略,更侧重于译本的现代审美价值及文化取向,他的译本优雅可读,通俗易懂,对《文心雕龙》海外传译的普及化起到了很好的促进作用。《文心雕龙》译声复调,针对不同读者对象的各译本互为补充,不同层次译本的复调调和可以满足不同审美层次受众的需求,有利于中国古代经典文论在异域的传播与接受,为海外龙学研究提供了有力保证。

关键词: 文心雕龙, 中国文论, 译介, 阐释, 龙学

CLC Number:

H315.9

Dai Wenjing. Exploration of the Translation of Chinese Literary Theory from the Perspective of Modern Hermeneutics: A Case Study of the Translation of Wenxin Diaolong[J]. Journal of Beijing International Studies University, 2020, 42(6): 68-81.

戴文静. 现代阐释学视角下中国文论外译研究——以《文心雕龙》三个英译本为例[J]. 北京第二外国语学院学报, 2020, 42(6): 68-81.

References 27

[1]	Bishop J L. Reviewed work: The Literary Mind and the Carving of Dragons by Liu Hsieh and Vincent Yu-chung Shih[J]. Books Abroad, 1961,35(2):186~187.
[2]	Bloom H. A Map of Misreading[M]. New York: Oxford University Press, 1975: 85.
[3]	Chu M. Reviewed work: Early Chinese Literary Criticism by Siu-Kit Wong[J]. Journal of American Oriental Society, 1985,105(4):764~766.
[4]	Eoyang E C. Reviewed work: Dragon-carving and the Literary Mind Review[J]. China Review International, 2005,12(2):587~589.
[5]	Hawkes D H. Reviewed work: The Literary Mind and the Carving of Dragons[J]. The Journal of Asian Studies, 1960,19(3):331~332.
[6]	Hightower J R. Reviewed work:The Art of Letters,Lu Chi’s “Wen Fu”,A.D. 302: A Translation and Comparative Study by E. R. Hughes and Lu Chi[J]. Journal of the American Oriental Society, 1952,72(4):184~188.
[7]	Hirsch E D. Validity in Interpretation[M]. New Haven: Yale University Press, 1967.
[8]	Holzman D. Reviewed work: The Literary Mind and the Carving of Dragons. A Study of Thought and Pattern in Chinese Literature by Liu Hsieh and Vincent Yu-chung Shih[J]. Artibus Asiae, 1960,23(2):136~139.
[9]	Hughes E R. The Art of Letters:Lu Chi’s “Wen fu”,A. D. 302: A Translation and Comparative Study[M]. New York:Pantheon Books, 1951.
[10]	Lanciotti L. Reviewed work: The Literary Mind and the Carving of Dragons. A Study of Thought and Pattern in Chinese Literature by Liu Hsieh[J]. Istituto Italiano per l’Africa e l’Oriente(IsIAO), 1960,11(1):58~59.
[11]	Liu J J Y. The Interlingual Critic:Interpreting Chinese Poetry[M]. Bloomington: Indiana University Press, 1982.
[12]	Liu Wu-chi. Reviewed work: The Literary Mind and the Carving of Dragons by Liu Hsieh and Vincent Yu-chung Shih[J]. Journal of the American Oriental Society, 1960,80(3):275~277.
[13]	Lynn R J. Reviewed work: Readings in Chinese Literary Thought[J]. China Review International, 1994,1(2):43~57.
[14]	Pollard D E. Reviewed work: Readings in Chinese Literary Thought[J]. The China Quarterly, 1994(137):279~280.
[15]	Steiner G. After Babel:Aspects of Language and Translation[M]. Shanghai: Shanghai Foreign Language Education Press, 2001: 1, 189~190.
[16]	Wong S K. Early Chinese Literary Criticism[M]. Hong Kong: Joint Publishing Company, 1983:xiii~xxii.
[17]	Wong S K, Lo A C H & Lam K T. The Book of Literary Design[M]. Hong Kong: Hong Kong University Press, 1999: 101~103.
[18]	Yang H-Y & Yang G. Carving a Dragon at the Core of Literature[J]. Chinese Literature, 1962,8:58~71.
[19]	曹顺庆. 中西比较诗学史[M]. 成都:巴蜀书社, 2008: 370.
[20]	戴文静. 中国文论英译的译者行为批评分析——以《文心雕龙》的翻译为例[J]. 解放军外国语学院学报, 2017,40(1):28~34.
[21]	戴文静. 世界诗学视域下中国文论海外传播的跨学科路径探索——兼谈中国文论“走出去”四步并举法[J]. 燕山大学学报(哲学社会科学版), 2019,20(2):43~48.
[22]	黄晞耘. 关于中国文论外译与当代中国文论原创问题的几点思考[J]. 学习与探索, 2012(11):126~129.
[23]	李凤亮. 移动的诗学——中国古典文论现代观照的海外视野[M]. 广州: 暨南大学出版社, 2012: 311.
[24]	王宁. 中国文论如何有效地走向世界?[J]. 学习与探索, 2012(11):122~125.
[25]	杨乃乔. 偏见与误读文学阐释学的哲学反思[J]. 文艺争鸣, 1996(3):40~49.
[26]	宇文所安. 中国文论:英译与评论[M]. 王柏华,陶庆梅,译. 上海: 上海社会科学院出版社, 2003: 5, 13~14.
[27]	周领顺. 译者行为研究十周年:回顾与前瞻——兼评“全国首届‘译者行为研究’高层论坛”[J]. 北京第二外国语学院学报, 2019,41(2):21~34.