【作者】 文炳；

【导师】 陈嘉映；

【作者基本信息】 华东师范大学 ， 外国哲学， 2010， 博士

【副题名】兼及对a priori、transcendent的考察

【摘要】 A priori、transcendental与transcendent是一些西方哲学中最重要的概念。尤其是自从康德划分了transcendental与transcendent的区别并声称自己的哲学为transzendentalphilosophie之后,transcendental的重要性日益凸显出来。在此之后,众多的哲学家的思想围绕transcendental这条主线而生发开去,在某种意义上甚至可以说,整个西方近代哲学都是transzendentalphilosophie。但是,后来的哲学家们对transcendental的理解和认识却几乎从未取得一致；而研究者们对transcendental的误解,更是伴随着这个概念发展的始终。造成误解的因素主要来自两个方面：其一、容易把a priori与transcendental相等同,进而混淆；其二容易把transcendent与transcendental相等同,进而混淆。正是由于这种情况,在西方学界和中国学界中的相关争议几乎从未间断。由于中西方语言和中西方哲学思想上的巨大差异,西方哲学的概念词在中文里很难找到完全对应的中文词,使得哲学概念的翻译矛盾就更加突出,国内学界对a priori、transcendental与transcendent的争议的焦点最终落在了对这些概念词的中译名的选择上。在中国百余年的康德哲学传播与研究历史上,不同的学者对这些哲学概念的理解和翻译可谓是见仁见智。根据笔者的不完全统计,目前仅apriori与transcendent的中译名就各自多达10种以上,而transcendental的中译名更是多达24种,译名的混乱为学术交流增添了许多障碍,统一译名的呼声日渐强烈。有鉴于此,就非常有必要对这些概念本身进行梳理,对这些概念在中国的传播与翻译的历史进行必要的梳理；籍此来弄清楚这些概念在西方哲学中的发展史,考察出这些概念在中文中的译名流变史,进而为将来的概念词翻译提供借鉴。日本人在翻译西学术语时不是使用日文原语,而是借用汉字的组合创造新词汇来表达西文中的相应概念。而由于历史的原因,在19世纪至20世纪初这段时间内,中国在接受西学上要远落后于日本,本着学术交流中“求便”的目的,国人有普遍袭用日译名的风气,造成至今汉语中尚存大量的日文汉字词汇。“先天”作为a priori的译名,最早源自日本启蒙哲学家西周根据《易经》上的古语而创译的。而“先验的”与“超验的”作为transcendental与transcendent的译名,既不是像大多数当今学者所认为的那样源自蓝公武,也不是像贺麟先生认为的那样源自翻译《纯粹理性批判》的日本哲学家天野贞祐,而是源自更早的桑木严翼。西周和桑木严翼在翻译康德这些哲学术语所采用的翻译方法,源自最初在“兰学”典籍翻译中所形成的“翻译”和“义译”二种译法。20世纪二、三十年代,日本学界基本上已通行用“先天的”、“先验的”与“超验的”来翻译A priori、transcendental与transcendent。但是,不同的意见始终存在,早年留学欧洲的九鬼周造受海德格尔哲学思想的影响,提出了用“超越论的”与“超越的”来译transcendental与transcendent的主张。这一主张直到20世纪70年代的时候,随着“超越”作为哲学问题再次引起人们的关心,而逐步取代了桑木严翼的“先验的”与“超验的”的译法,最终成为transcendental与transcendent在当今日本学界最通行的译名。自从20世纪初康德哲学传入中国伊始,国人对康德的研究历经风雨,几度兴衰。在1920年前国人对康德哲学思想还只是零星地接受,而且国人对康德哲学的了解基本上是通过日本进行中转之后才引入的。在1924年康德诞辰200周年之际,《学艺》杂志1924年六卷五号和《民铎》杂志1925年六卷四期上相继刊行了“康德纪念专号”,共刊登纪念康德的文章35篇,在国内掀起了研习康德哲学的学术高潮。而其中大多数文章的康德哲学译名是袭用日本学界的译语。中国学界早期的普遍袭用日文译名的习惯直到1930年之后才‘逐步改观,有识之士如贺麟、张东荪、余又荪等公开提出了要对日译学术名词进行“正名”,反对日译,号召国人从日译学术名词的影响中摆脱出来,争取学术自立。在这期间,熊伟、郑昕、贺麟、张东荪等在报刊上对康德哲学中transcendental等概念的义理和译名进行公开讨论,掀起了国内康德哲学译名第一次的大讨论。除开在报刊上发表康德研究的学术文章外,范寿康等开始着手撰写研究康德的专著,一部分学者也开始着手翻译康德的著作。胡仁源的《纯粹理性批判》中译本于1931年率先在国内出版,而稍晚一点完成翻译的蓝公武的《纯粹理性批判》中译本直到1957年才公开出版,并一度成为国内流传最广的《纯粹理性批判》译本。早年曾经留学日本的蓝公武,在翻译《纯粹理性批判》时,实际上参考了日本哲学家天野贞祐1921年所翻译的《纯粹理性批判》的相关译名。尽管对部分译名存在分歧,蓝公武之后的《纯粹理性批判》的中译者韦卓民、邓晓芒、李秋零基本上仍然沿用了蓝译本的相关译名,从而奠定了我们今天的康德哲学译名的话语体系。近20年来,曾经一度凋零的国内康德研究再度繁荣,针对康德哲学译名的讨论不时出现在书籍及报刊上,尤其是针对transzendental的含义及中译的争论异常激烈,先后有孙周兴对王炳文的改译建议的质疑,邓晓芒对牟宗三观点的批驳,倪梁康与赵汀阳间的交锋,掀起了国内学界对transzendental的中译名的第二次大讨论,而是否采用日译名“超越论的”则成为了争论的焦点。纵览整个康德哲学在中国传播的历史,对transzendental等概念的中译名论争贯穿其始终。造成译名的分歧的最深层次的原因在于中西方语言的异质性和中西方哲学思想的巨大差异。具体表现在：其一、西方思想中的某些概念恰恰是中国思想中所缺失的东西,何况通常情况下概念往往又连着概念,概念词的不可翻译性就特别明显。其二、不同哲学家对同一个哲学概念的理解和使用也存在着差异,transzendental在康德那里、在胡塞尔那里、在海德格尔那里、在维特根斯坦那里都意味着不同的哲学思想。即使对同一个康德的transzendental概念,不同的研究者的理解和认识也可能会不一样。即使有相同的理解,研究者们在用自己的母语来表达这种理解时,也会由于个人语感的差异,而从众多的同义词中选择出自己所偏好的词汇,这些情况也为译名的统一增加了障碍。其三、西方语言中的某个词汇本身就有不止一种意思,在不同的语境中甚至可能多达十余种意思。翻开任意一本英汉词典都会发现在某一个单独的词条下往往有多条义项。西方语言如此,中文又何尝例外。因此,要想在在中文中为西方的思想概念词寻找一个绝对匹配的中文词汇,其困难程度可想而知。鉴于这些情况,解决译名的分歧的办法又何在呢?克里普克的历史-因果命名理论可以给我们提供一些新的启示。从某种意义上看,概念词的翻译其实就是在目的语中为其“再命名”。名称和对象的关系是由命名仪式确立的,译名和源语词的关系也是由某一特定的译者确立的。名称／译名一旦确立之后就不再变动,但是随着我们对其认识的不断增加,我们也就不断赋予名称／译名(例如丘吉尔／“先验的”／马克思主义)以更多的内涵。不过,由于命名是具有一定的必然性,因此我们需要进一步探索的是译名和源语词之间的必然性联系。更多还原

【Abstract】 "A priori", "transcendental" and "transcendent" belong to the most important concepts in Western Philosophy. Especially when Kant distingished "transcendental" from "transcendent" and decalared that his philosophy is a kind of transcendental philosophy, the importance of "transcendental" became more prominent. Later, many philosophical ideas stem from Kant’s transcendental theory, hence the whole western philosophy can be called transcendental philosophy in some sense. Yet the philosophers always hold different views about "transcendental". The misunderstandings about "transcendental" often comes from two aspects:on the one hand, people would confuse "transcendental" with "a priori"; on the other hand, people would confuse "transcendental" with "transcendent". Therefore, the disputes about "transcendental" never ceases.As there are great differences between western languages and Chinese language, and great differences between western philosophical ideas and Chinese philosophical ideas, the contradiction in the translation of conceptional words becme more consicuous, and the disputes about "a priori", "transcendental" and "transcendent" transform into the disputes on the the selection of the Chinese translative names for them. Throughout Chinese history of the reception and research of Kant’s philosophy in the past hundred years, different scholoars hold different views on the understanding and translative names for these conceptional words. According to my statistics, more than 10 different Chinese translative names have been created for "a priori" and "transcendent" respectively; and even more than 24 Chinese translative names for "transcendental". Definitely, so many different Chinese names for these conceptional words caused a great chaos in the academic communication. The cry for single translative names for these conceptional words can be heard more loudly. Hence it is necessary to explore the developing history of these conceptional words in western philosophy, moreover it is necessary to explore their reception history and translating history in China. Based on these explorations, people would get some valuable references for the future translation of conceptional words.In the early times, the Japanese often translated the western conceptional words into chinese Characters instead of coining a new Japanese Characters. During 19th-20th century, Chinese fell behind Japanese in the recption of western knowledge, and Chinese scholars always copied Japanese translative names for the convenience in academic communication. As a result, we can still find a number of words coming from Japanese language. As a translative name for "a priori", "xiantian" orignated from Japanese philosophers Nishi Amane, who selected it from the ancient words in Chinese Classical Book named as Yi. As translative names for "transcendental" and "transcendent", "xianyande" and "chaoyande" neither orignated from Chinese philosopher Lan Gongwu nor from Japanese philosophersあまの·ていゆうbut originated from another Japanese philosopher Sangmuyanyi in a earlier time. The two Japanese philosophers created these translative names via to the translating ways formed in the early translation of Netherlandish classicals.During 1920s to 1930s, "xiantian", "xianyande" and "chaoyande" bacame the set translative names for "a priori", "transcendental" and "transcendent" in Japanese. However, different views about these translative names always existed. Under the influence of Heidegger’s thoughts, Japanese philosopherくき·しゆうぞう) who once studied in Europe proposed to translate "transcendental" into "chaoyuelunde" and translate "transcendent" into "chaoyuede". His proposal did not become popular until 1970s when people became much more interested in "transcendenz" philosophical issues. And eventually "chaoyuelunde" and "chaoyuede" replaced "xianyande" and "chaoyande" as the set translative names for "transcendental" and "transcendent" in Japan.Since Kant’s thoughts landed in China at the beginning of 20th century, the academic researches on Kant’s philosophical ideas became wax and wane several times. Before 1920s, piece by piece, people touched Kant’s ideas via to the introduction made by Japanese philosophers first, not by Germany philosophers. In memory of Kant’s 200th birthday, the No.5 Issue in Vol.6 of Xueyi Magazine and the No.4 Issue in Vol.6 of Minduo Magazine published a series of memorial papers only on Kant, bringing the research and memorial activities into climax, however most of these memorial papers adopted current Japanese translative names at that time.Before 1930, it almost became an academic custom to adopt the Japanese translative names directly. In 1930s, in order to struggle for an independent academic research, such scholars of insight as He Lin, Zhang Dong-sun and Yu You-sun proposed to correct the Japanese translative names publicly and to get rid of the custom of copying the Japanese translative names. During that period, Such schololars as Xiong Wei, Zheng Xin, He Lin and Zhang Dongsun published a series of papers to discuss the meaning of such conceptional words as "transcendental" and and so on in Kant’s philosophy. It is the first time when the discussion on how to translate Kant’s conceptional words into Chinese became heated in China.In addition to publish academic papers on the magazines, some scholars (such as Fan Shou-kang) began to wrote books about Kant, some scholars bagan to translate Kant’s works. Hu Ren-yuan was the first man who translated The Critique of Pure Reason into Chinese in 1931. Two years later, Lan Gongwu began to translate The Critique of Pure Reason into Chinese too, he finished the translation in 1935, yet he got his works published until 1957. Among the six Chinese version of The Critique of Pure Reason, Lan Gongwu’s works had the most readers for a long time. In fact, Lan Gongwu once studied in Japan and good at Japanese. He borrowed a number of translative names from the Japanese philosopherあまの·ていゆうwho translated The Critique of Pure Reason into Japanese in 1921. Although the following translators—Wei Zhuo-min, Deng Xiao-mang and Li Qiu-ling disagreed with Lan Gongwu on some translative names, they still adopted most of his translative names. Therefore, the translative names among Lan Gongwu’s works became the set translative names, they eventually became jargons when people discuss Kant’s thoughts.In recent twenty years, being neglected for a long period, academic researches on Kant become flourish again. A number of articles on the tranlative names for Kant’s conceptional words appeared in the books and magazines, especially the discussion on "transcendental" and its translative names became more conspicuous. Among the discussions, the most significant events such as Sun Zhou-xing opposed to Wang Bing-wen’s proposal to translate "transcendental" into "chaoyulunde", Deng Xiao-mang refuted Mou Zong-san’s argument of "chaoyue" in Chinese Philosophy, and the disputes between Ni Liang-kang and Zhao Ting-yang, made the discussion burst into flame. It is the second time when the discussion on how to translate Kant’s conceptional words into Chinese became heated again among Chinese scholars. Whether translate "transcendental" into "chaoyulunde" or not became the focus of the heated discussion.The disputes about the translative names for such conceptional words as "transcendental" continued throughout the reception history of Kant’s philosophy in China. The rooted causes for many divergent opinions lies in the different nature existing between western languages and Chinese language, the great differences existing between western thoughts and Chinese thoghts. At first, some western concepts virtually miss in Chinese thoughts, and vice versa; moreover, one concept usually interlinks with some others. Consequently, most conceptional words are untranslable. Secondly, different philosophers have different understandings about the same philosophical concept, and they may endow the same concept with some specific meanings. For example, "transcendental" in Kant’s philosophy, Husserl’s philosophy, Heidegger’s philosophy, and Wittgenstein’s philosophy, mean different philosophical ideas. Even for the same "transcendental" in Kant’s philosophy, different researchers may have different understandings. In addition, they may choose different words among a group of synonyms in mother tongue to express the same understanding because different people have different language awareness. All of these set more obstacles for the translation of conceptional words. Thirdly, as dictionaries demonstrate, the words in western languages usually have more than one meaning, some even have more than ten meanings according to different contexts. And the same thing can be encountered in Chinese language too. Therefore, it is extremly difficult to find a well-matched Chinese word for a western conceptional word.Given these conditions, how can we solve the problem of so many divergent opinions in the translation of western conceptional words? Kripke’s Causal-Historical Naming Theory may provide some useful inspiration if we make an analogy between them. To some degree, the translation of western conceptional words is to rename them in the target language. The relation between name and object is established on the naming ceremony; and the relation between the translative name and the conceptional word is established by one specific translator, too. After that, the name or the translative name does not change any longer, while its connotation becomes richer and richer as we know more about the object or the conceptional word, and gradually we endow the name or translative name(e.g. Churchill, transcendental, Marxism) with more connotation. As some necessities exist between name and object, so it is necessary to take it into full consideration of the necessities between the translative name and the conceptional word.更多还原