| （摘要内容经过系统自动伪原创处理以避免复制，下载原文正常，内容请直接查看目录。） 《庄子》作为道家经典读物译介至东方已逾百年。跟着第一本德语译本于1921年问世，后续又有选节本及全译本陆续涌现，道家文明也在德语世界中赓续掀起西方高潮。个中最具代表性及作用力的译天职别为R。 Wilhelm于1912年所译《庄子：南华真经》1和1998年由S。 Schuhmacher从美国汉学家Victor Mair英译本翻译而来的完全版《庄子：天然之书一无用之用及慢文明》2。而对《庄子》译本体系性的翻译批驳则尚乏人试足，故笔者试图以互文性的视角解读以上两个译本中译者主体性的施展。起首须说明的是选用以上两个译本作为翻译批驳研究对象的缘由：两本德语译本都为转译著作，在作翻译比较时处于统一比较层面。Wilhlem版本的译本虽由其直接从汉语翻译至德语，但因为Wilhelm汉语程度无限，对于原文中晦涩的白话懂得程度无限，由其时的清代年夜儒劳乃宣帮助翻译，Wilhelm再依据劳的解读译成德语，这个进程也可视为“转译”，所以同Schuhmacher由英译文转译成德语译本有异曲同工的地方，故两个译本有可比性，并作为翻译研究的对象有其公道性。且Schuhmacher版本的译本出书商即为英译本的译者Mair，意味着Schuhmacher的转译被原译者所承认。为了彰显如许的译者关系，本文分离将译本触及的译者并列例举，视为德语译本的配合译者。《庄子》原文本中丰富精湛的说话文明因其充斥了层层叠叠的指涉互文关系而深邃难解，故译本对于互文性的阐释及再现组成了译文最年夜的难点，同样成为译者主体性施展的一年夜空间。互文性在本文中有两层寄义：一，原文本中的互文性景象；二，译者看待互文性所采用的翻译办法，德语论文范文，也即以如何的手段再现原文中的互文性。所以本文的容身点在于，从互文性视角动身，对译者就互文性景象的处置手段停止剖析以解读出译者主体性的施展。而本文的立异的地方也在于，本文的立意在于解读译者对互文性的处置措施，而非对其停止翻译办法好坏与否的评价。本文的主体由以下两部门组成：其一，对两个译本中派生文本的比较剖析。依据互文性实际，派生文本是互文性文本的一种，平日之前言、导言、编者注、辞汇索引等措施涌现。经由过程对两本译作中派生文本的剖析，可以窥见译者对于原文本的小我立场、翻译理念等主体性选择趋势。其二，对译本中重要文本的比较剖析。这一部门剖析的重点在于译者对原文本互文性景象的再现手段。所以笔者重点摘取了《庄子》中互文性最具代表的两类景象：道家名词及庄子寓言中的症结性名词。从对这两类名词的翻译再现上不雅察译者的主体性选择。经由过程以上两部门的剖析比拟，我们可以看出，即便受异样的翻译理念的驱动，行将原作以最好的措施出现在目标语读者眼前，但因为小我对于原作解读措施，译者的职业配景和译作发生的时期配景等身分的差别，两位译者对于原作中互文性的处置手段也判然不同。Wilhelm/Lao的版本更着重于引入目标语中的互文文原来从新阐释原作中的互文性想象，好比从《浮士德》及德语版《圣经》中抽取相干联的元素，使得20世纪初对于西方哲学简直无所知的东方读者能更好的接收异文明，从而激发东方世界研读《庄子》的兴致。而S。 Schuhmacher版本的英译者Mair在1994年译介《庄子》时，各类版本的《庄子》译本也已存在百年，译语世界的读者对于原作也有必定的认知程度，作为汉学家的Mair试图重点凸起原著中庄子汪洋肆意的文学性。所以Schuhmacher/Mair版本的译尴尬刁难原文更偏向于逐字逐句亦步亦趋的再现，对于原文中的互文性景象也是尽量采用意译，并在附录的辞汇索引中再对相干名词停止具体的阐释。弗成疏忽的是，Schuhmacher/Mair版本的意译所用辞汇也或多或少带有目标语互文文本。因而可知，两版的译者皆运用了互文性的手段去再现原文的互文景象，德语论文范文，只是详细手段各有所长。诚如哈罗德·布鲁姆所言，任何一种浏览或阐释都是“误读”，但“误读”绝非是毛病的懂得，而是一种发明性的懂得，这对于翻译也异样实用。所以本文只容身于解读两本译作而不作任何情势的价值断定，且这两本译本至今的作用力早已证实了其胜利性。再者，分歧译本的涌现也丰硕了目标语世界中《庄子》文本的内在。 Abstract: "Chuang-tzu" as a Taoist classics translation to the East for more than one hundred years. Along with the first German translation appeared in 1921, follow-up and selected abridged and translated gradually emerged, the Taoist culture also in the German speaking world ceaselessly off Western climax. The day the most representative position and influence of R. In 1912 Wilhelm translated by Chuang-tzu: "South China" in 1 and 1998 by S. The full version of "Chuang-tzu Schuhmacher from the American Sinologist Victor Mair English version of the translation of the book: natural a useless and slow" 2 civilization. The translation of "Zhuangzi" translation system of criticism is attracting little meet the test. Therefore, the author attempts to display of the translator's subjectivity in the perspective of intertextuality above two versions. Chapeau to be explained is the selection of more than two versions as a translation criticism study the reason: the German translation for the translation work, in translation in the United level. Wilhlem versions of translation although the directly translated from Chinese to German, but because of the degree of Wilhelm Chinese infinite, on the original obscure vernacular know how infinite, at the time of the Qing Dynasty to the eve of the Confucianism Lao Naixuan help translation, Wilhelm according to interpretation and translation of the work into German, the process can also be regarded as "translation", so Schuhmacher by the English translation of the translation into German translation has similar place, so two versions have compared, and as the object of translation studies has the fair sex. And publishers Schuhmacher version of the translation of the Mair translators in the translation, means a Schuhmacher translation is acknowledged by the original translator. In order to highlight the translator of such a relationship. In this paper, the touch the translation the translator will be exemplified in parallel, as a translator with the German translation. The Zhuangzi "in the source text rich superb speak of civilization because of its full of layer upon layer refers to the intertextual relationship involving deep and obscure, so versions on intertextuality of interpretation and reproduction formed most of the eve of the translation difficulties, also become a large space of the display of the translator's subjectivity. Intertextuality has two layers of meaning in this paper: first, the original text of intertextuality in sight; two, look at the translator's intertextual translation methods, which means how to reproduce intertextuality in the original text. So the shelter is Intertextual Perspective to start from, the translator on intertextuality scene disposal means stop analysis to interpret the display of translator's subjectivity. And the innovation place lies in, the conception of this paper is analyze the translator's disposal methods of intertextuality, rather than for the evaluation of the translation is good or not. The main body of this paper consists of the following two parts: first, comparative analysis of the two versions of the text derived. On the basis of intertextuality, derived text is an intertextual text, the emergence of the preface, the introduction, on weekdays, editor's note vocabulary indexing method. Through the analysis of derived text in the translation process, can get a glimpse of the translator on the original text personal position, translation concepts, such as subjectivity trend. Second, the comparison analysis of important text in translation. Focus on this sector is the representation of the original text intertextuality scene of the translator. So the key to pick the "Zhuangzi" intertextuality in the most representative two kind of scene: Taoist terms and Zhuangzi's fables in the crux of nouns. From the subjective choice of the two kinds of noun translation on observing the translator. Through the analysis of the above two sector comparison, we can see, even by the strange translation ideas driven, releasing the original to the best way to appear in the eyes of the target readers, but because of the ego with regard to the original interpretation method, the identity of the translator's professional background and the translation period background, and so different, the two translators on intertextuality in the original means of disposal has distinct. Wilhelm/Lao version of the focuses more on introducing the intertextual text in the target language the original from the new interpretation of the original intertextuality imagination, like from Faust and the German version of the Bible in extraction related elements, making at the beginning of the 20th century on western philosophy is simply no known to orient the reader to better receive different civilization, so as to stimulate the eastern world reading Zhuangzi's high spirits. S. Version of the Schuhmacher translators Mair in 1994 translation of "Zhuangzi", various versions of "Zhuangzi" version has existed a hundred years, the readers of the target language in the world of the original works also have certain cognitive degree, as a Sinologist Mair attempts to highlight the original Zhuangzi. Wanton literature. So awkward Schuhmacher/Mair version of translation difficulties original is more biased in favor of the reproduced verbatim lockstep, on the original intertextuality scene also try to use free translation and in the discourse of the appendix sinks index of coherent nouns ending in - specific interpretation. Not neglect is that the free version of the Schuhmacher/Mair language exchange more or less with the target language text intertextuality. Therefore, it is known that version of the two translators all use the intertextuality means to reproduce the original intertextual scene, only with methods have their own strengths. As Harold Bloom said, any kind of browsing or explanation is "Misreading", but "Misreading" is by no means is wrong know, but a creative know, about this translation is equally useful. So this paper only shelter on the interpretation of the two translation without determine the value of any situation, and both of the two versions to date influence has confirmed the victory. Furthermore, different versions of the emergence of the target language in the world is rich "Chuang-tzu" text inside. 目录: |
