【作者】 耿强；

【导师】 谢天振；

【作者基本信息】 上海外国语大学 ， 翻译学， 2010， 博士

【摘要】 主动对外翻译中国文学的活动自晚清时期便已经开始。1949年中华人民共和国建国之前,个人翻译方式成为中国文学“走向世界”的主导模式。之后,由中国国家对外宣传机构主持的对外翻译项目开始大规模、有系统地主动对外译介中国文学。1981年,中国外文出版发行事业局(外文局)下属中国文学杂志社负责翻译出版“熊猫丛书”,意图通过翻译将中国文学和文化(重点是现当代文学)译介至西方主要国家,以扩大中国文学在世界的影响。至此,国家机构对外译介成为中国文学“走向世界”的主要渠道和方式。然而2000年,中国文学出版社被撤销,《中国文学》杂志停刊,“熊猫丛书”也几近停办。现实表明,国家机构对外翻译的译本接受不佳,对外译介事业遭遇了前所未有的困境。本文从译介学及文化学派的翻译理论出发,以“熊猫丛书”为描述和分析对象,深入探索国家机构对外主动译介中国文学所涉及的理论和实践难题,以回应当前国家提出的中国文化“走出去”战略,为促进中国文学更好地对外传播提供理论支持和实践意见。本文自始至终坚持译介学的理论立场,将“熊猫丛书”的译介实践视作“文学交流、文学影响和文学传播”行为,即文学译介行为,而不是简单的文字或文学翻译活动。单纯从语言翻译的角度思考这一问题并无法根本解决中国文学对外译介效果不佳这一难题。因为语言翻译过程不是整个文学译介过程的全部,在它之前还有选择什么来译的问题,在它之后还有译本如何流传、阅读与阐释的问题。从根本上讲,真正影响甚至左右“熊猫丛书”域外接受效果的要素来自目标语文化系统内部的“意识形态、诗学和赞助人”等方面。这便是本文第一章绪论的内容。本文第二章将“熊猫丛书”的翻译活动置于本土文化语境之内,全面考察作为文化生产的“熊猫丛书”在1980年代的历史语境中与各种话语实践之间的复杂关系,理清丛书出版的来龙去脉及隐藏的多重目的。显然,“熊猫丛书”出版的根本动机来自本土文化语境。国家外宣机构意欲借文学译介重新塑造崭新的国家形象,为改革开放和社会主义现代化建设创造良好的外部环境;精英知识分子参与译介是为了在新的时代塑造自我的文化和文学身份。在80年代的特殊历史语境下,后者利用主流意识形态改革所提供的空间努力通过译本选择和翻译来表达自己对纯文学的追求,从一个方面体现了文学摆脱政治束缚的渴望。两者之间既有合作,同时也少不了摩擦和冲突。这表明,即便是国家外宣机构主持的对外译介项目,它也不全是服务主流意识形态的召唤,纯粹是政治宣传。丛书在可能允许的有限空间内表达着精英知识分子对文学性的诉求。在充分描述与分析“熊猫丛书”的本土文化生产后,第三章转向对“熊猫丛书”域外文学场域内传播的研究。本章的目的在于通过追踪“熊猫丛书”译本在英美两国文学场域中的传播,研究影响丛书接受的众多因素。在引入布迪厄社会学理论的“场域”与“资本”概念后,本章追溯了从1981年至1989年“熊猫丛书”在英美文化/文学场域中的传播情况。现有的数据表明,“熊猫丛书”的少量译本在英美读者当中产生了反响,英美主流报刊杂志(包括专业刊物在内)对丛书进行了评论。接下来,本章着重分析了影响“熊猫丛书”在英美读者中接受和阅读的主要因素,结果发现在整个80年代,英美读者在阅读“熊猫丛书”所代表的中国现当代文学时采取了政治的审美视角。之所以说是“政治”的,原因在于包括专业研究者在内的读者更青睐小说主题与政治或文革叙事相关的作品,相对忽略作品形式上的文学性;一般读者则倾向于从社会学视角阅读中国文学,并钟情小说中的“苦难叙事”。之所以说是“审美”的,原因在于一些读者以西方文学典律为标准来衡量中国文学在美学上的表现,认为中国现当代文学并不成熟。但毋庸置疑,以西方文学的诗学标准来判断中国文学的做法自身就体现了某种政治性或意识形态的意图。如果“熊猫丛书”的译本符合上述政治的审美视角,作品一般会得到很好的接受;而大部分译本的默默无闻也与此有因果上的联系。第四章继续探讨“熊猫丛书”从1989年春夏的政治风波之后至2009年之间在英美文化场域中的传播情况。1989年发生的政治风波对“熊猫丛书”的冲击体现在一定时期内相当程度上改变了中国文学在英美文化场域传播的内容。首先,它强化了西方国家对中国所谓“极权社会”的政治想象,或多或少增加了持不同政见者的文化资本。其次,它强化了英美民众普遍存在的对中国“极权政府”形象的想象,这种氛围进而刺激了英美图书出版商在选择翻译出版中国文学作品的时候采取保守与迎合的态度,选择那些能够反映、批判并讽刺中国“极权政治”的作品,而不太考虑文学作品的文学性价值。再次,1989年的政治风波之后,西方读者包括专业研究者普遍对中国官方意识形态持警觉态度,并开始质疑官方所指定和推出的文学作品和作家。“熊猫丛书”正好属于国家外宣机构主持的译介项目,受到国外研究者的质疑也毫不奇怪。最后,“熊猫丛书”的负责人杨宪益先生因学潮期间的言行被调离工作岗位,丛书在90年代的出版日趋保守,选材尽量避免在政治方面与主流意识形态发生紧张和冲突。这一切都对“熊猫丛书”的域外接受不利。整个90年代“熊猫丛书”面临前所未有的困境,在英美国家很难再吸引读者的注意,发行量日渐减少,处于长期亏损的状态。与丛书出版的第一个十年相比,“熊猫丛书”在这一时期的英美读者中没有产生多大反响。进入新世纪后,即便英美国家对中国文学的兴趣持续升温,“熊猫丛书”也尝试拓宽生存渠道,可仍然无法扭转不利局面,最终走向历史的记忆深处。上述分析表明,国家机构对外译介以本土需求为基本动力,发出方除了可以在选材及翻译质量等少数方面能有所作为之外,译本能否受到欢迎在很大程度上取决于接受方对译本的选择性阐释和接受。如果发出方推出的译本与接受方读者的期待视野产生偏差甚或冲突,译本很有可能不会产生任何反响。这种冲突既可能源自双方在意识形态上的不同,也可能源自双方在诗学和赞助人方面的差异。面对译本如此复杂的接受语境,发出方企图单单从控制译本质量入手实现译本的良好接受,这是难以实现的。据此,我们应该充分认识到,通过翻译将中国文学推向世界,从本质上而言是文学译介,而不是简单的文字或文学翻译。整个译介过程不仅要考虑译本选材、翻译方法、营销策略等内容,更需要时刻注意目标语文化系统内部的政治、经济和文化语境。只有充分考虑上述因素,在对外译介的过程中注意翻译选材和译介渠道的多样化,翻译方法和译介策略的灵活性,才可能更有效地使中国文学“走出去”。更多还原

【Abstract】 From the last decades of Qing Dynasty to the foundation of the People’s Republic of China in 1949, few Chinese people attempted to get Chinese literature“walk toward the world”via translation. After 1949, the Foreign Language Bureau, a government-manipulated institute, took the lead in translating Chinese literature to the outside world in a large and systemic scale. In 1981, the Panda Books Series was initiated by Chinese Literature Press, a branch under the leadership of China International Publishing Group (the Foreign Language Bureau its antecedent), to enable a wide dissemination of both Chinese literature and culture among major western countries through translation, in which modern and contemporary Chinese novels were given a top priority. Since then, governmental institutes played a dominant role in making Chinese literature“walk toward the world”, however, whether such practice can be successful remains to be questioned, especially when Chinese Literature Press, opened in 1987 to take a full charge of the translation and publication of the Panda Books Series, was closed in 2000 for a couple of problems, with its financial crisis in book marketing as one. It is obvious that the project of translating Chinese literature to foreign countries by governmental institutes meets an unprecedented dilemma, which calls for a systemic analysis from empirical and theoretical perspectives. The dissertation, taking the Panda Books Series characteristic of institutional translation project as its research object, attempts to probe into the theoretical and empirical mechanisms in translating Chinese literature by governmental institutes from the perspectives of medio-translatology and newly-developed theories in Translation Studies. As a positive response to the national strategy of introducing Chinese culture to foreign countries, the study will further provide a series of suggestions over how to better disseminate Chinese literature globally. Judged from medio-translatology and newly-developed theories in Translation Studies, the practice of Panda Books Series for actual fact can be viewed more as a quintessence of literary communication, influence and dissemination than a simple lingual translation. To ensure a better distribution and dissemination of Chinese literature in western countries, we had better take the whole translation process into consideration because besides the lingual translation from the original text to the target, what really counts here is a couple of questions to be answered like what texts according to which criteria are selected, for whom the texts are translated and how they are read and interpreted by the target readers. To be specific, the tri-causes of“ideology, poetics and patronage”in the target culture will, to a large extent, determine how the Panda Books Series is received.Based on the above-mentioned Introduction, Chapter Two aims to examine the Panda Books Series as a type of domestic cultural production in its 1980s context, in which other discourses praxis joined so as to complicate the book series’motives. Generally speaking, the Panda Books Series was an original-culture-oriented project that was launched by the state to maintain a friendly relationship with foreign countries by reshaping a new image of the state with translating Chinese literature. Besides, the elite intellectuals then actively engaged themselves in such a state-manipulated project with a hope to pursue their dream of literary autonomy free of political interference, thereafter to shape their cultural identities. In such a translation project pregnant with ideologies, both sides more or less appear either cooperative or oppositional. It is true that making use of the reforms carried on by the dominant ideology, the elite intellectuals can modestly express their own aesthetical interests within certain limits, which proves that even a governmental institute initiated translation project can harbor different voices in a partly harmonious way.In Chapter Three, our focus shifts from domestic production to the book series’distribution and reception in the USA and the UK. By introducing Pierre Bourdie’s concepts of“field”and“capital”, the chapter tries to have a panoramic view of the Panda Books Series’distribution and reception in the cultural and literary fields in the two countries. The relevant data shows that from 1981 to 1989, only a few translations from the book series enjoyed a better reception among readers from the two above-mentioned countries. Book reviews and articles on the book series appear frequently in some important journals and newspapers, such as New York Times Book Review and World Literature Today, to name just two. In the reading of modern and contemporary Chinese literature, including the Panda Book Series, foreign readers prefer interpreting the novels from a politically aesthetic perspective, by which means some of the readers expect to read narrations concerning either politics or cultural revolution, thus to some extent neglecting the aesthetic novelties; whereas other readers tend to appreciate Chinese literature from western poetics based upon western canons, but to find that Chinese literature is by comparison immature aesthetically. Nevertheless, such practice of interpreting Chinese literature, for actual fact, implies that it smells of something ideological in aesthetical judgment. It can be asserted that if some translations from the Panda Books Series can be read in accordance with the politically aesthetic perspective, the translations will be warmly accepted, or they are woefully overlooked by western readers.As in Chapter Three, Chapter Four tries to draw a full picture of the book series’distribution in the next ten years from the“June Forth Event”in 1989 to 2000. The“June Forth Event”had a great impact on the distribution of Chinese literature in the cultural and literary fields in the USA and the UK. First, after the political event, western countries tented to imagine China as a“totalitarian society”with no freedom and human rights, as a result to increase the cultural capitals shared by those dissident writers from China. Second, the event itself drove the general public in the west to view Chinese government a political regime, which in turn encourages the publishers in the west to try every means to cater to western readers’political and literary imagination. Novels with symbolic and allegorical parodies will be comparatively welcomed warmly, whereas the aesthetic readings of Chinese novels are overlooked. Third, right after the“June Fourth”event, western readers including professional readers began to question the selection lists of works and writers advertised by Chinese official institutes, among which China International Publishing Group, responsible for the publication and translation of the Panda Books Series, was affected. Finally, after the“June Fourth”event, Yang Xianyi, who took charge of the book series, was forced to leave the general editor’s post, for what he has done during the Students’Movement in 1989. Without his effort, the Panda Books Series published through the whole 1990s appear to be more conservative in its book selection, in order to avoid a tension with the Bureau’s party cadres. The above-mentioned factors join together to get the book series to decline in marketing overseas. It can no longer appeal to western readers, who came to realize how to get what they want through other medias, like touring, visiting, watching films and Telecommunications, to name a few. Under such new circumstances, the Panda Books Series was finally ended in a failure, though it attempted every means possible to get out of the dilemma after 2000.The above analysis leads to the following conclusions. First, the state-institute manipulated translation project is generally speaking source-oriented. The sender countries can have fewer choices in controlling the reception of translations, because translated texts need to be read and interpreted by readers from the receiving countries. Second, if translated texts run against its receivers’expectation, they will not be better received. Third, the reasons why a translation is badly received can be ideological, poetical and economic. Taking the three points into consideration, we need to realize that the translating project like the Panda Books Series involves not only linguistic transfer from original language to target language, but also cultural communication. During the whole translation process, our attention must be paid to the ideology, poetics and patronage in the target system. With those points in mind, we can better get Chinese literature“Walk Outside of China”, if we persist in cooperating actively with others and finding more different methods of introducing Chinese literature into other countries.更多还原