첸중수(錢鍾書)의 번역가 인식의 의의와 한계
The significance and limitations of Qian Zhongshu's perceptions of translators
0
조회
0
다운로드
0
인용
0
참고문헌
키워드
초록
This study set out to investigate Qian Zhongshu's perceptions of translators in his Lin Shu's Translations and shed light on their significance and limitations. Qian Zhongshu was one of the greatest translation theorists during the period of the Republic of China along with Fu Lei. Before him, Lin Shu was considered as the figure of authority on novel translation, but he also received negative evaluations. When Lin Shu's translation was assessed in the style of writing, method, content, and mistranslation, some were positive about his translation, saying that his style of writing was superior and that his method was inevitable. Many others were negative, pointing out that his style of writing was anachronistic, that his method was wrong, that the content was immoral, and that he had many cases of mistranslation. In his Lin Shu's Translations, Qian Zhongshu depicted him as one of the translators with superior force in the style of writing among his contemporary translators. He admitted that there were some cases of mistranslation in Lin Shu's translation, but he argued that they were derived from Lin Shu's intention to overcome the shortcomings of original works. He even maintained that Lin Shu used a desirable method of translation to supplement and overcome the shortcomings of original works. Qian Zhongshu showed limitations in his attempt at making Lin Shu, who was a translator with little regard to original authors and strong consciousness for "Chinese culture as Ti and Western culture as Yong" in Qing Dynasty, a modern model. Qian Zhongshu, however, holds significance in raising the status of translators by showing that translators could be superior to original authors.
Abstract
This study set out to investigate Qian Zhongshu's perceptions of translators in his Lin Shu's Translations and shed light on their significance and limitations. Qian Zhongshu was one of the greatest translation theorists during the period of the Republic of China along with Fu Lei. Before him, Lin Shu was considered as the figure of authority on novel translation, but he also received negative evaluations. When Lin Shu's translation was assessed in the style of writing, method, content, and mistranslation, some were positive about his translation, saying that his style of writing was superior and that his method was inevitable. Many others were negative, pointing out that his style of writing was anachronistic, that his method was wrong, that the content was immoral, and that he had many cases of mistranslation. In his Lin Shu's Translations, Qian Zhongshu depicted him as one of the translators with superior force in the style of writing among his contemporary translators. He admitted that there were some cases of mistranslation in Lin Shu's translation, but he argued that they were derived from Lin Shu's intention to overcome the shortcomings of original works. He even maintained that Lin Shu used a desirable method of translation to supplement and overcome the shortcomings of original works. Qian Zhongshu showed limitations in his attempt at making Lin Shu, who was a translator with little regard to original authors and strong consciousness for "Chinese culture as Ti and Western culture as Yong" in Qing Dynasty, a modern model. Qian Zhongshu, however, holds significance in raising the status of translators by showing that translators could be superior to original authors.
참고문헌 (32)
- 손지봉, "郭沫若의 번역론 연구", 중국어문학지, (28), pp.183~204 (2008), 중국어문학회
- 손지봉, "傅雷의 번역관 고찰", 중국학연구, (52), pp.163~183 (2010), 중국학연구회
- 손지봉, "林語堂 번역론 연구", 중국학보, (62), pp.173~189 (2010), 한국중국학회
- 손지봉, "중국의 번역론에 대한 전통문학론의 영향 고찰 -嚴復, 郭沫若, 林語堂, 錢鍾書-", 통번역교육연구, 8(2), pp.133~149 (2010), 한국통번역교육학회
- 손지봉, "량치차오의 번역론에 나타난 국가번역사업 고찰", 통역과 번역, 14(2), pp.79~102 (2012), 한국통역번역학회
- 손지봉, "린수(林紓)의 소설번역에 대한 평가", 통역과 번역, 15(2), pp.101~129 (2013), 한국통역번역학회
- 이성규, "태사공서의법연구", 중어중문학, 21, pp.425~453 (1997)
- 姜海佳, "論傅雷的飜譯觀", 金陵科技學院學報, 20(3), pp.81~85 (2004)
- 關詩珮, "從林紓看文學翻譯規範由晚清中國到五四的轉變: 西化、現代化和以原著為中的觀念", 中國文化研究所學報, 17, pp.343~371 (2008)
- 梁啓超, "梁啓超論淸學史二種" (1985), 复旦大學出版社
- 劉麗華, "王佐良的译者观", 西南民族学院学报, 23(5), pp.172~175 (2002)
- 林語堂, "民國叢書第一編51-語言學論叢"
- 林元彪, "视译者与 “林纾的翻译” -基于口译精力负荷模型的考察", 上海翻译, 2, pp.23~30 (2018)
- 孟昭毅, "中國飜譯文學史" (2005), 北京大學出版社
- 方華文, "20世紀中國飜譯史" (2005), 西北大學出版社
- 北京大學, "文學運動史料選1" (1979), 上海敎育出版社
- 徐敬修, "文學常識" (1925), 大東書局
- 薛綏之, "林紓研究資料" (1982), 福建人民出版社
- 聂友军, "「林纾的翻译」与钱锺书的翻译观", 粤海风, 2, pp.92~97 (2015)
- 孫德謙, "太史公書義法" (1983), 中華書局
- 楊麗華, "林紓飜譯硏究", 博士, pp.2012
- 楊全紅, "钱锺书飜譯思想硏究", 博士, pp.2007
- 吳俊, "林琴南書話" (1999), 浙江人民出版社
- 王秉欽, "20世紀中國飜譯思想史" (2005), 南開大學出版社
- 劉宏照., "林紓小說飜譯硏究", 博士, pp.2010
- 錢鍾書, "林纾的翻译" (1981), 商務印書館
- 鄭振鐸, "林琴南先生" (1981), 商務印書館
- 鍾叔河, "周作人文類編" (1998), 湖南文藝出版社
- 陳福康, "譯學理論史稿" (2000), 上海外語敎育出版社
- 夏曉虹, "二十世紀中國小說理論資料" (1997), 北京大學出版社
- 胡適, "胡適全集" (2003), 安徽敎育出版社
- 黄元军, "翻译视域下的林纾现象-兼论林纾的翻译", 重庆邮电大学学报, 22(2), pp.72~77 (2010)
