‘譯述’의 번역관습과 근대적 번역관습의 충돌 ― 1930년대 초 梁白華의 「阿Q正傳」 번역과 그에 대한 반응
The Clash of “Paraphrase” Translation and Modern Translation: Yang Baek-hwa’s Translation of The True Story of Ah Q (阿Q正傳) in the Early 1930s and Reactions Toward Yang’s Translation
0
조회
0
다운로드
5
인용
0
참고문헌
키워드
초록
Around 1930, an unprecedented number of the Chinese New Culture Movement’s and Lu Xun’s literary works were introduced in Korea. The greatest reason lay in the existence of a group of scholars such as Yang Baek-hwa, Kim Tae-jun and Chong Nae-dong who were able to translate and critique the New Culturalists’ writings. Moreover, Korea’s interest in China’s New Culture Movement was heightened by the situational similarity between Chinese literary circles, which was going through radical changes as “revolutionary literature (proletarian literature)” rose to the mainstream, and Korean literary circles, where the ideological dispute was unfolding around proletarian literature. Lu Xun’s The True Story of Ah Q (A Q zhengzhuan), translated by Yang Baek-hwa and published in Chosun Ilbo in January 1930, received particular interest from readers. Widely known around the world as the representative work of Lu Xun, The True Story of Ah Q was finally introduced to the Korean public through Yang’s translation. However, it is notable that Yang’s rendering of The True Story of Ah Q was a secondhand translation of a Japanese translation. Yang based his own Korean adaptation of The True Story of Ah Q on Inoue Kobai’s translation which Yang discovered by chance in the Japanese magazine Kitan, but Inoue’s Japanese-language rendition had numerous errors. Judging that a Korean translation of The True Story of Ah Q was urgently needed, Yang used the Japanese version as soon as he found it, not realizing that Inoue’s work had serious mistranslations which naturally caused the first Korean translation of the work to be full of errors. Consequently Chong Nae-dong, who studied China’s New Culture Movement in Beijing, scathingly criticized Yang’s The True Story of Ah Q with a line-by-line comparison of the original. Yang Baek-hwa, however, called his translation of The True Story of Ah Q a “paraphrase”, implying that it was a secondhand translation of a Japanese-language translation, as was the translating custom of the early 20th century modern enlightenment period. By contrast, Chong Nae-dong who studied in China in the late 1920s, was used to the modern translating custom of staying faithful to the “original text.” Therefore, Yang’s secondhand translation and Chong‘s criticism of the mistranslation was an ideological conflict between the custom of “paraphrase” translation (which included “secondhand translation”) and modern translating customs. Perhaps Chong’s scathing criticism of Yang‘s mistranslation was an essential occurrence in the conversion from the translating custom of paraphrasing toward modern translating customs. Although Lu Xun and his works were actively introduced and critiqued in Korea around 1930, they lost the moral and material foundation for further development with the reinforced political and ideological control of the Japanese colonial authorities which brought about the dissolution of the KAPF and the inclusion of Lu Xun’s works in the prohibitory index among other steps. As a result, the sound translation of Lu Xun’s works only happened with Korea’s liberation in 1945. The 1946 publication of Lu Xun’s Short Stories (Volumes 1 and 2) by Kim Kwang-ju and Yi Yong-gyu, both of whom studied in China, heralded the first systematic translation of Lu Xun’s works in Korea. In particular, The True Story of Ah Q was translated by Kim Kwang-ju based on the “original text” and in a relatively sophisticated Korean style, at once overcoming the problems of Yang’s second-hand translation and mistranslation.
Abstract
Around 1930, an unprecedented number of the Chinese New Culture Movement’s and Lu Xun’s literary works were introduced in Korea. The greatest reason lay in the existence of a group of scholars such as Yang Baek-hwa, Kim Tae-jun and Chong Nae-dong who were able to translate and critique the New Culturalists’ writings. Moreover, Korea’s interest in China’s New Culture Movement was heightened by the situational similarity between Chinese literary circles, which was going through radical changes as “revolutionary literature (proletarian literature)” rose to the mainstream, and Korean literary circles, where the ideological dispute was unfolding around proletarian literature. Lu Xun’s The True Story of Ah Q (A Q zhengzhuan), translated by Yang Baek-hwa and published in Chosun Ilbo in January 1930, received particular interest from readers. Widely known around the world as the representative work of Lu Xun, The True Story of Ah Q was finally introduced to the Korean public through Yang’s translation. However, it is notable that Yang’s rendering of The True Story of Ah Q was a secondhand translation of a Japanese translation. Yang based his own Korean adaptation of The True Story of Ah Q on Inoue Kobai’s translation which Yang discovered by chance in the Japanese magazine Kitan, but Inoue’s Japanese-language rendition had numerous errors. Judging that a Korean translation of The True Story of Ah Q was urgently needed, Yang used the Japanese version as soon as he found it, not realizing that Inoue’s work had serious mistranslations which naturally caused the first Korean translation of the work to be full of errors. Consequently Chong Nae-dong, who studied China’s New Culture Movement in Beijing, scathingly criticized Yang’s The True Story of Ah Q with a line-by-line comparison of the original. Yang Baek-hwa, however, called his translation of The True Story of Ah Q a “paraphrase”, implying that it was a secondhand translation of a Japanese-language translation, as was the translating custom of the early 20th century modern enlightenment period. By contrast, Chong Nae-dong who studied in China in the late 1920s, was used to the modern translating custom of staying faithful to the “original text.” Therefore, Yang’s secondhand translation and Chong‘s criticism of the mistranslation was an ideological conflict between the custom of “paraphrase” translation (which included “secondhand translation”) and modern translating customs. Perhaps Chong’s scathing criticism of Yang‘s mistranslation was an essential occurrence in the conversion from the translating custom of paraphrasing toward modern translating customs. Although Lu Xun and his works were actively introduced and critiqued in Korea around 1930, they lost the moral and material foundation for further development with the reinforced political and ideological control of the Japanese colonial authorities which brought about the dissolution of the KAPF and the inclusion of Lu Xun’s works in the prohibitory index among other steps. As a result, the sound translation of Lu Xun’s works only happened with Korea’s liberation in 1945. The 1946 publication of Lu Xun’s Short Stories (Volumes 1 and 2) by Kim Kwang-ju and Yi Yong-gyu, both of whom studied in China, heralded the first systematic translation of Lu Xun’s works in Korea. In particular, The True Story of Ah Q was translated by Kim Kwang-ju based on the “original text” and in a relatively sophisticated Korean style, at once overcoming the problems of Yang’s second-hand translation and mistranslation.
참고문헌 (47)
- 金台俊, "外國文學專攻의 辯(6): 新文學의 飜譯紹介 ― 支那文學", 東亞日報, ~ (1939)
- 丁來東, "韓國現代小說理論資料集(十五卷)", pp.23~24 (1985), 韓國學術振興院
- 權煥, "조선예술운동의 당면한 구체적 과정", 中外日報, ~ (1930)
- 김성수, "한국 근대문학과민족-국가 담론", pp.185~186 (2005), 소명출판
- 김준형, "길과 희망삶과 학문세계(上)", 민족문학사연구, (28), pp.386~423 (2005), 민족문학사학회
- 백지운, "한국의 1세대 중국문학 연구의 두 얼굴 ―정내동과 이명선", 대동문화연구, (68), pp.397~422 (2009), 대동문화연구원
- 이시활, "일제강점기 한국 작가들의 중국 현대문학 바라보기와 수용양상 -梁建植, 李東谷, 梁明을 중심으로-", 중국학, (33), pp.433~472 (2009), 대한중국학회
- 박진영, "중국 근대문학 번역의 계보와 역사적 성격", 민족문학사연구, (55), pp.121~152 (2014), 민족문학사학회
- 홍석표, "근대 한중 교류의기원 ― 문학과 사상 그리고 학문의 교섭" (2015), 이화여자대학교출판부
- 長白山人, "梁建植君", 開闢, (44) (1924)
- 梁白華, "支那의 小說과 戱曲에 대하여", 每日申報, ~ (1917)
- 남윤수, "梁白 華文集 3", pp.160~ (1995), 江原大學校出版部
- 梁白華, "東光 제9호", pp.6~ (1927)
- 梁白華, "梁白華文集 3", pp.304~, 梁白華文集
- 趙演絃, "韓國現代文學史", pp.129~ (1956), 現代文學社
- 梁白華, "反新文學의 출판물이 유행하는 중국문단의 기현상", 開闢, (44) (1924)
- 홍석표, "류수인(柳樹人)과 루쉰(魯迅)―〈광인일기〉 번역과 사상적 연대", 중국문학, 77, pp.109~132 (2013), 한국중국어문학회
- 丁來東, "『阿Q正傳』을 읽고(一)", 朝鮮日報, ~ (1930)
- 牛山學人, "中國新興文學의 ‘阿Q’時代와 魯迅", 東方評論, (2), pp.96~ (1932)
- "文藝家名簿", 朝鮮文學, ~ (1934)
- "韓國現代小說理論資料集(十五卷)", pp.41~ (1985), 韓國學 術振興院
- 梁白華, "阿Q正傳(一) 中國 魯迅 作 白華 譯", 朝鮮日報, ~ (1930)
- 梁白華, "筆談하다 대실수", 別乾坤, (11) (1928)
- 박진영, "중국문학의 발견과 전문 번역가 양건식의 초상", 근대서지, (10), pp.217~ (2014)
- 梁白華, "阿Q正傳(一) 中國 魯迅 作 白華 譯", 朝鮮日報, ~ (1930)
- 井上紅梅, "支那革命畸人傳", 奇譚, 2(11), pp.176~ (1929)
- 丸山昇, "日本的魯迅硏究", 魯迅硏究月刊, 11 (2000)
- 袁荻涌, "魯迅與中國現代小說的對外傳播", 貴州文史叢刊, pp.50~ (1998)
- 魯迅, "書信" (2005), 人民文學出版社
- 丁來東, "『阿Q正傳』을 읽고(一)", 朝鮮日報, ~ (1930)
- 丁來東, "『阿Q正傳』을 읽고(二)", 朝鮮日報, ~ (1930)
- 丁來東, "『阿Q正傳』을 읽고(三)", 朝鮮日報, ~ (1930)
- 魯迅, "吶喊", 吶喊
- 梁白華, "阿Q正傳(五) 中國 魯迅 作 白華 譯", 朝鮮日報, ~ (1930)
- 梁白華, "阿Q正傳(十八) 中國 魯迅 作 白華 譯", 朝鮮日報, ~ (1930)
- 丁來東, "『阿Q正傳』을 읽고(四)", 朝鮮日報, ~ (1930)
- 金台俊, "琉璃廠 北平圖書館 等, 北平紀行: 멍텅구리 遊燕草", 新興, (6) (1932)
- 丁來東, "丁來東全集 Ⅰ" (1971), 금강출판사
- 김남이, "20세기 초 한국의 문명전환과 번역 -重譯과 譯述의 문제를 중심으로-", 어문논집, (63), pp.141~172 (2011), 민족어문학회
- 全光鏞, "韓國現代文學論考", pp.251~ (1986), 민음사
- 金秉喆, "韓國近代飜譯文學史硏究", pp.238~ (1975), 乙酉文化社
- 丁來東, "『阿Q正傳』을 읽고(四)", 朝鮮日報, ~ (1930)
- 天台山人, "文學革命後의 中國文藝觀(十四)", ~ (1930)
- 天台山人, "新興中國文壇에 活躍하는 重要作家(四)", 每日申報, ~ (1931)
- 金光洲, "幸福된 家庭", 朝鮮日報, ~ (1933)
- 洪曉民, "中國文學과 朝鮮文學", 京鄕新聞, ~ (1947)
- 丁來東, "魯迅短篇小說集 第1輯", pp.5~ (1946), 서울출판사
