Abstract:

This paper explores the origin of dun as rhythmic unit in new Chinese metrical poetry by re-examining a well-known dispute between Sun Dayu and He Qifang, which was initiated by Sun Dayu. After comparing the differences between dun and yinzu (or meter in Sun Dayu’s term), the paper concludes that Sun Dayu’s accusation that He Qifang stole “his creativity” in terms of yinzu is in fact invalid, and there is also a general misunderstanding of the concept of Sun Dayu’s yinzu among poets and poetic scholars, who consider it to be a “sound group” instead of meter in Sun Dayu’s sense of the term. As the mainstream translation method for contemporary Chinese poetry translation is “dun for foot”, the clarification of the difference between dun and yinzu, as well as of the origin of the rhythmic unit promoted by new Chinese poets, is of great significance in the further identification of the poetic defects of dun in the construction of poetic meter. On one hand, it is conducive to enabling Chinese poetry translators to better understand the essence of dun; on the other hand, it is also helpful for allowing us to identify the problems in the development of new poetry with meter.

Keywords: Sun Dayu; He Qifang; yinzu; dun; poetry translation; meter

摘要：

本文以孙大雨引发的一场诗坛“公案”为切入点，对汉语格律体新诗节奏单位“顿”的起源进行了梳理。在比较了“顿”和孙大雨所提出的“音组”之间的区别后，本文指出，孙大雨认为何其芳“窃取”其音组“造意”之说与事实不符，而且学术界对孙大雨“音组”的概念也普遍存在误解，以为“音组”是语音小组的意思，但事实上按孙大雨的意思，该词的概念取自于英语的meter（格律）。由于当代中国诗歌翻译界的主流译法是“以顿代步”，因此，厘清“顿”与“音组”的区别，确定新诗节奏单位的起源，一方面有利于诗歌翻译界进一步认识“顿”的本质，另一方面也有助于我们认清格律体新诗在发展过程中存在的问题，对于我们进一步认识“顿”在诗歌格律建构上所存在的诗学缺陷有重大意义。

关键词: 孙大雨, 何其芳, 音组, 顿, 诗歌翻译, 格律