崔玉军 中国社会科学院
Cui, Yujun, Chinese Academy of Social Sciences
原文Original
作为文化对话的《论语》英译：历史、视角与经典的可译性
据不完全统计，《论语》英译本（含节译本）迄今已经超过40种，如果加上这些译本的重印版、增订版，以及英译中国文献中的选译，这一数量则要接近百部。如果说《论语》是中国最重要的经典之一，那么《论语》英译本就是英语读者了解中国人价值观、伦理观的最重要的文献之一，而英译《论语》则是我们通过译者的视角反观自身、提升我们自我认识的重要途径。
《论语》英译是多个研究课题的中心。《论语》是儒家学派的经典著作之一，是儒家思想的政治主张、伦理思想、道德观念及教育原则等的集中表现，同时它也是中华民族文化传统变迁的载体；同时，由于英语在国际交往中的主流地位，《论语》英译本成为世界各国了解中国历史、社会和文化的重要资源。当然，还要把《论语》英译放在其发生、发展的世界史和学术史脉络中：《论语》英译首先是在近代以来的中外交锋、冲突及同时展开的中西文化交流和冲突的背景下开始的，它既是中外文化交流和对话的产物，也是中外关系的一个线索和应有之义。在全球化的背景下，《论语》英译还意味着中国（东方）文化如何与其他文明对话和融会的时代课题。
19世纪初期开始的《论语》英译是理解这一事业发展历程的关键。从某种角度上讲，中国的近代史是被迫开始的，新教传教士东来及后来的西方列强入侵改变了中外文化交流和中国历史发展进程的固有线路，以至于中国此后的方方面面都摆脱不了中/西（外）、世界/本土、现代/传统的两元冲突。首先，正处在上升时期的西方资本主义列强对中国和中国文化的态度已经发生了本质上的变化，中国已经从天朝帝国变为东亚病夫，山河破碎，民不聊生。负有塑造和培养国民精神的文化经典（如《论语》等）因而被看作是阻碍中国进入近（现）代发展的绊脚石，要为中国的落后挨打负责；其次，除了辜鸿铭一人之外，早期《论语》英译都是由英美学者（传教士、外交官等）来完成的。也就是说，外国学者是这一时期中国文化经典的演说主体，最有资格的中国人反而缺席了；第三，由于当时宗教力量在西方社会中的主宰地位，经由传教士之手的《论语》在被赋予了更多的神学精神的同时，其内在的哲学的、美学的和文学的精神却或者被减弱、淡化，或者失真。
1950年代之前的《论语》英译者是英、中、美学者三分天下。从数量上看，英国译者占据绝对多数，他们分别是J. Marshman，1809年）、David Collie、（1828年）、James Legge （1861年）、William Jennings （1895年）、Lionel Giles（1907年）、Leonard A. Lyal （1909年）、W. E. Soothill（1910年）和Arthur Waley（1938年）。其中Legge和Waley的译本最受欢迎。辜鸿铭是把《论语》翻译成英语的第一位华人。此外，美国诗人庞德（Ezra Pound）先是出版了《论语》节译本（1937年），其后（1950年）才出版全译本。同在1950年，美国汉学家魏鲁男（James R. Ware）也出版了《论语》节译本，5年后其《论语》全译本出版。
魏鲁男之后，《论语》英译的进程减缓。W. E. Soothill是最后一位传教士译者，从Arthur Waley开始，《论语》英译者逐步转向专业学者（其中包括汉学家和文学家）。1979年刘殿爵（D. C. Lau）的《论语》英译本出版并获得巨大的成功，这在《论语》英译史具有重要的意义，它标志着华人学者的译作得到国际汉学界的普遍肯定。1981年英国学者Raymond Dawson的译本问世。这是90年代之前国外出版的两个新译本中。当然，此一时期国外还出版了一些与中国经典有关的译作，如林语堂的《孔子之智慧》（The Wisdom of Confucius）、陈荣捷（Wing-tsit Change）的《中国哲学文献选编》（A Source book of Chinese Philosophy）以及陈荣捷与狄百瑞（W. T. de Bary）等人编译的《中国传统诸源》（Sources of Chinese Tradition），也收录了《论语》的部分章节。但总的来说，较之此前和此后，60—90年代期间的《论语》英译数量不多。
90年代之后，《论语》英译呈现出多元化发展的特征。单从译者群体来看，就有几个重要的变化。除了原来的中、英、美三国学者之外，欧洲和东南亚也有学者加入其中。译者队伍中除了原来的文学家和华人学者之外，还增加了专业汉学家和哲学家；另外一个重要变化就是，大陆及台湾的本土学者也有多人出版了《论语》英译。在不到20年的时间内，世界各地出版的《论语》新英译本超过20种。同时，新近问世的这些《论语》英译中有多部表现出超越前期译本专注单纯的文化翻译的倾向，表现出试图从社会学、文学、哲学、考据学等不同面向诠释《论语》的倾向，其多元化特征迥然有异于早期译本。我们倾向于认为，《论语》英译的自主性正在逐步确立，换言之，《论语》英译正在转向其本来的意义和发展途径，即作为文化对话的经典转译，本来就该是多元化和开放性并立而行。
从1809年近代首部英译本问世至今，《论语》英译已经走过百年，期间为国内外学术界留下了诸多话题。按照萨义德（Said）的东方主义理论，作为百年中外文化对话见证的《论语》英译不过是西方强势话语系统的创造物，尽管东方学者的主题意识逐渐觉醒，但包括《论语》在内的中国经典仍面临“被诠释”的困窘。如果说在最初的时候对话的双方既不平等也不对称，那么这种情形在百年之后仍未有实质上的变化。《论语》英译不会中断，还会有更多的西文译本问世。在这方面，经典本身的复杂品格固然是原因之一，但如果译者不能创造性的诠释（增加和扩大）中国经典解释世界的能力，《论语》英译恐怕只能长时间地停留在重复翻译的水平。
译文Translation
The English Translation of the Analects as a Dialogue of Cultures: History, Perspectives, and the Translatability of Classics
According to some preliminary statistics there are more than 40 different English translations of the Analects (Lunyu) today (including translations of text selections), but if we would add the reprints, revised versions and the selected English translations from diverse Chinese compilations, then we would arrive at a number close to one hundred. If we say that the Lunyu is one of China’s most important classics, then the English translations of the Lunyu are among the most important documents which can help English readers to understand the value system and morality of the Chinese people. The English translations of the Lunyu are also an important way for us (Chinese) to think about the perspective of the translators and thus reflect on ourselves, it can heighten our self-awareness.
The English translations of the Lunyu are at the center of many inquiries and studies. The Lunyu is one of the classics of the Confucianist school, it embodies the political views, ethical and moral thought and educational principles of the Confucianists, and at the same time it has been the carrier and catalyst of changes within the Chinese culture. As English is of leading importance for international communication, the English versions of the Lunyu have become an important resource for people all over the world which helps them to understand Chinese history, society, and culture. Of course, it is necessary to put the English versions of the Lunyu into the context of that part of world history and intellectual history which gave rise to these translations: the English translations of the Lunyu were begun at the time of the modern encounter and conflict between China and the West, and they give a clue to the relationship between China and the West. Within the context of globalization, the English translations of the Lunyu also lead to the modern question of how Chinese (Eastern) culture can dialogue and mix with other cultures.
The decisive period in the process of the English translation of the Lunyu was constituted by the first efforts at the beginning of the 19th century. Seen from a certain perspective, the modernization of China was initially forced upon China; Protestant missionaries came, and after them the invasions of the strong western powers changed the old habits of China’s ways in dealing with foreign cultures, and since then all questions of China were bound to face this conflict of Chinese / Western (foreign), global / native, modern / traditional. First, there was a substantial change in the attitudes of the rising western capitalist nations towards China and Chinese culture, China had changed from a great empire to the “sick man of Asia”, the country was divided and the people poor. The classics that had shaped and nourished the national spirit of the Chinese (like the Lunyu and others) were seen as an obstacle to the progress of China, they prevented China from entering the modern world and thus were blamed for China’s backwardness and defeats. Secondly, the early English translations of the Lunyu were all produced by English and American scholars (missionaries, diplomats etc.), the only exception is Gu Hongming’s translation. In other words, foreign scholars were the main interpreters of the classics of Chinese culture at that time, and those Chinese who were most qualified in this respect did not make any contribution. Third, since the force of religion had a leading influence in western societies at that time, the Lunyu that was translated by missionaries was imbued with some theological and spiritual values, but at the same time its philosophical, esthetic and literary aspects were either reduced, watered down or misrepresented.
Before 1950 the English translations of the Lunyu were produced by English, Chinese, and American scholars. As to the quantitative aspect, the English scholars were in the absolute majority, their names are J. Marshman (1809), David Collie (1828), James Legge (1861), William Jennings (1895), Lionel Giles (1907), Leonard A. Lyal (1909), W. E. Soothill (1910), and Arthur Waley (1938), among these the translations of Legge and Waley were most popular. The first Chinese to translate the Lunyu into English was Gu Hongming. Besides that the American poet Ezra Pound first published a translations of selections from the Lunyu (in 1937), and only in 1950 the translation of the whole book was published. In the same year (1950) the American sinologist James R. Ware published a selection of the Lunyu, and 5 years later he edited the translation of the whole Lunyu.
After James R. Ware the speed of English translations of the Lunyu decreased. W. E. Soothill was the last missionary translator, and starting from Arthur Waley the translators of the Lunyu gradually turned into professional scholars (among them sinologists and experts of literature). In 1979 the English version of D. C. Lau (Liu Dianjue) appeared and became a huge success. This marked an important event in the history of the translation of the Lunyu, because it implied that the translation of a Chinese scholar was universally approved by the circles of international sinology. In 1981 the translation of the English scholar Raymond Dawson was published, which was one of the two new versions published before the 1990s. In this period some other books concerning the Chinese classics were published, for example Lin Yutang’s The Wisdom of Confucius, Wing-tsit Chan’s A Source Book of Chinese Philosophy, and the Sources of Chinese Tradition (edited and translated by Wing-tsit Chan, W. T. de Bary and others). These books also contain selections from the Lunyu. However, in general the number of English translations between the 1960s and 1990s was much lower than in the period before or after.
Since the 1990s there is a trend to pluralism in the English translations of the Lunyu. Seen from the group of translators, there are several important changes. Formerly there were only scholars from China, England, and America, but now there are also translators from Europe and South-East Asia. The translators used to be experts of literature and Chinese scholars, but now some professional sinologists and philosophers joined. Another important change is, that native scholars from China mainland and Taiwan produced many different English versions of the Lunyu. Within less that 20 years in many parts of the world more than 20 new English translations of the Lunyu were published. At the same time, many of these new versions of the English Lunyu seem to transcend the former tendency of a simple cultural translation aspect, they attempt to explain the Lunyu from the point of sociology, literature, philosophy, textual criticism etc., and this pluralist features are very different from the earlier translations. We tend to believe that the sovereignty of the English translation of the Lunyu is in the process of being established, or in other words, the English translation of the Lunyu is moving towards its original meaning and development, namely to become a transmission of a classic as a dialogue of cultures, and this should be done in an open and pluralist atmosphere.
Since the first English version of 1809 the translation of the Lunyu into English has already a history of 200 years, and in this process it has presented many issues which may concern Chinese and foreign scholars. According to Said’s theory of “orientalism”, the cultural dialogue between China and the West as witnessed by a century of English translations of the Lunyu is only the product of the dominating language system of the West. Even if the “subject awareness” of eastern scholars is gradually increasing, there is still the danger that Chinese classics (including the Lunyu) are “being interpreted” (by scholars from outside). If we say that in the beginning the two sides were not equal and balanced, then we must admit that even now, after hundred years, this situation has not changed substantially. In the future the English translations of the Lunyu will not be interrupted, and even more Western versions will be published. One of the reasons for this is the complicated structure of the classics themselves, but if the translators cannot creatively interpret (increase and expand) the ability of the Chinese classics to interpret the world, then I am afraid that the English versions of the Lunyu will only stop at the level of repeated translations for a long time.