『맹자』 번역의 몇 가지 문제제기-번역의 목적과 논리, 체재의 맥락에서-

Abstract

The translation of the Confucian scriptures has different pattern and implication from other general publications. The translation of the Confucian scriptures has accompanied the critical mind of substantial period without stationing only in translation of classics only. This is the reason to review the purpose and reasoning of diverse translation works. Looking more in details for the translation of 『Mencius』, it demonstrates that a significant number of translation works is based on the Collected Annotation of the Analects of Confucius and it is attributable to the fact that there is a tendency of interpreting Neo-Confucianism as its foundation. In the academic aspect, it may be caused by the completeness contained in the annotation of Zhu Xi, but even more important cause is that it is closely related to the historic deployment of Neo-Confucianism that retained its academic focus persisting during the Joseon Dynasty. Therefore, in order to read the literature collection by the literary men of Joseon, one must understand the basic literature in Confucian scriptures, and it is reasonable to facilitate the Confucius insight that is the basis to read and record Confucian scriptures and this logic has substantial power of persuasion to share the same in the coriander class of the contemporary Confucian scriptures. However, looking into the process of translation of scriptures deployed after Annotation of Scripture that had been the critical turning point to translate Chinese writings in Korean, there is a need to review the purpose and reasoning of translation along with the system of realistic translation as much as the contents of translation and selection of translated version. As a result of inspecting the main translation outcome around the purpose and reasoning for translation of Confucian scriptures and Mencius. The focus and insight of the translation of the scripture is confirmed to gradually take the routes of bold changes. The best and most recently assessed translated publication of Mencius included Mencius Jipju of Sung Baek-hyo, Hangul-version Mencius of Cha Ju-hwan, Mencius Gangseol of Lee Ki-dong, Mencius of Park Kyung-hwan, and Hangul Mencius of Lee Gil-ho, and for a rare case of translation by a foreign scholar, 『Mencius Annotation』 of Yang Baek-chun were assessed. The issue of erroneous translation, full translation of substantial data, translation in an aspect other than interpretation of Zhu Xi, reflection of Dasan's annotations and so forth are offers as the basis. If this trend is continued, the translated Jiao Xun(焦循)'s Definition of Mencius, Genuine Copy of Mencius of Japan's An Jung-hyung(안정형) and others will soon be assessed, and in addition, the translated publications that reflected on the annocation outcome of Joseon's scholars, including Dasan and Sungho along with various scholars would soon be assessed. What is clear is that the direction has been processed gradually toward the academic aspect, and the view to the interpretation has been gradually expanding. However, the outcome of Mencius Annotation that is intended to display the contents of the Confucian scriptures to children and women brings up the critical mind on the translation of scriptures that cannot be overlooked.