클라우제비츠의 『전쟁론』 번역 비교 분석
A Comparative Analysis of Korean Translations of Clausewitz’s Vom Kriege
0
조회
0
다운로드
1
인용
0
참고문헌
키워드
초록
This paper analyzes seven Korean-translated texts of Clausewitz’s Vom Kriege, according to the methodology of so-called micro-analysis, meaning a detailed and exhaustive study of the texts. The criteria for analysis is the faithfulness and readability, which are in general accepted in translation studies. The serious problem in four texts originates from the fact that they were retranslated to Korean from those originally translated into Japanese. These retranslations inevitably made large and small errors in the form of words, terms, concepts etc. In these texts some Korean-translated sentences that were overly influenced by Chinese characters were too difficult to understand. Two texts are the abridged translations. Here some sentences were unnaturally long, or a French geographical name was incorrectly transcribed into Korean. Only one Korean translation is acceptable in terms of faithfulness and readability. If the analysis of this kind is continued and accumulated, and the micro-analysis is extended into macro-analysis, we may expect a reliable Korean translation of Vom Kriege in the future.
Abstract
This paper analyzes seven Korean-translated texts of Clausewitz’s Vom Kriege, according to the methodology of so-called micro-analysis, meaning a detailed and exhaustive study of the texts. The criteria for analysis is the faithfulness and readability, which are in general accepted in translation studies. The serious problem in four texts originates from the fact that they were retranslated to Korean from those originally translated into Japanese. These retranslations inevitably made large and small errors in the form of words, terms, concepts etc. In these texts some Korean-translated sentences that were overly influenced by Chinese characters were too difficult to understand. Two texts are the abridged translations. Here some sentences were unnaturally long, or a French geographical name was incorrectly transcribed into Korean. Only one Korean translation is acceptable in terms of faithfulness and readability. If the analysis of this kind is continued and accumulated, and the micro-analysis is extended into macro-analysis, we may expect a reliable Korean translation of Vom Kriege in the future.
참고문헌 (33)
- 클라우제비츠, "전쟁론" (1972), 하서출판사
- 클라우제비츠, "전쟁론" (1972), 대양서적
- 클라우제비츠, "전쟁론" (1982), 삼성출판사
- 클라우제비츠, "전쟁론" (1991), 병학사
- 클라우제비츠, "전쟁론" (1998), 책세상
- 클라우제비츠, "전쟁론" (2009), 동서문화사
- 클라우제비츠, "전쟁론" (2009), 갈무리
- 클라우제비츠, "戰爭論" (1968), 岩波書店
- Clausewitz,Carl von, "On War" (1993), Alfred A. Knopf
- Clausewitz,Carl von, "Vom Kriege" (1999), Ullstein
- 강대진, "잔혹한 책읽기" (2004), 작은이야기
- 구하나, "번역평가와 “용인성(acceptabilité)”", 통번역학연구, 13(2), pp.1~28 (2010), 통번역연구소
- 김만수, "전쟁론 번역서 유감", 군사학연구, (창간), pp.1~34 (2003)
- 김만수, "전쟁론 완역 후기", 군사학연구, (7), pp.305~331 (2009)
- 김만수, "수량 표현과 문화의 이해 —클라우제비츠의 전쟁론을 중심으로—", 번역학연구, 11(1), pp.97~126 (2010), 한국번역학회
- 김효중, "번역의 역사와 이론－독일의 전통을 중심으로", 번역학연구, (창간), pp.33~57 (2000)
- 밀턴, "언론 자유의 경전 아레오파기티카" (1999), 소나무
- 발리바, "전쟁으로서의 정치, 정치로서의 전쟁: 포스트-클라우제비츠적인 변이들", 사회운동, (68), pp.108~142 (2006)
- 손지봉, "번역에서 글쓰기의 위상과 전략", 번역학연구, 9(3), pp.73~92 (2008), 한국번역학회
- 아리스토텔레스, "형이상학" (2007), 이제이북스
- 안정효, "번역의 공격과 수비" (2006), 세경
- 서경희, "영미명작, 좋은 번역을 찾아서" (2005), 창비
- 윌리엄스와 체스터먼, "번역학 연구의 길잡이" (2006), 이지북스
- 이근희, "번역의 이론과 실제" (2008), 한국문화사
- 한국 출판 번역 독자들의 번역 평가 규범 연구, "이상원", 한국학술정보, ~ (2005)
- 이인규, "찰스 디킨즈 소설의 번역 점검", 안과밖:영미문학연구, 13, pp.254~279 (2002), 영미문학연구회
- 이재호, "문화의 오역" (2005), 동인
- 이종학, "클라우제비츠 『전쟁론』 재번역에 관한 단상", 군사논단, 통권 : 32, pp.143~149 (2002)
- 이종학, "클라우제비츠 『전쟁론』의 연구(1)", 통권 : 33, pp.156~166 (2002)
- 전성기, "번역인문학과 번역비평" (2008), 고려대학교 출판부
- 전성기, "탐구번역론 —하나의 인문학 번역론", 번역학연구, 10(2), pp.133~157 (2009), 한국번역학회
- 전현주, "번역 비평의 패러다임" (2008), 한국학술정보
- Duden, "Das Universalwörterbuch" (1990), Dudenverlag