韋努蒂異化翻譯思想探源與在地應用評析

On Venuti's Theory of Foreignization, Its Origins and Local Applications

10.29912/CTR.202203_15(1).0002

伍啟鴻(Kai Hong Ng)

韋努蒂 ； 施萊瑪赫 ； 貝曼 ； 歸化 ； 異化 ； Venuti ； Schleiermacher ； Berman ； domestication ； foreignization

編譯論叢

15卷1期（2022 / 03 / 01）

29 - 57

繁體中文

自從韋努蒂（Lawrence Venuti）發表《譯者的隱形》（The Translator's Invisibility），提出著名的「歸化、異化」譯法區別以後，華語翻譯（學）界對此應用、引用、討論不絕。本文之「探源」乃分兩路進行：（1）探索韋努蒂的理論來源、與前人學說的差異，乃至從源頭處分析「歸化、異化」二分的弊端；（2）說明華語譯學界會出現對韋努蒂異化理論的誤用與誤解，並究其原因為何。本文目的，一則為澄清並凸顯韋努蒂學說的特異處，說明它不能與前人的異化觀念混為一談—但與此同時，韋努蒂在陳述其異化理論時又常援引施萊瑪赫（Friedrich Schleiermacher）、貝曼（Antoine Berman）等人說法，與前人糾纏不清，此乃造成華語圈學者混淆的原因。再者，本文亦強調「歸化、異化」的架構本來出自文化與政治考量，在使用時必須注意其普遍化的不良後果。因此，在本地應用上應盡量結合華語圈乃至臺灣本土的文化因素。畢竟，以翻譯與譯學研究進行本地文化介入，這才是韋努蒂學術精神所在。

Since the publication of Venuti's book, The Translator's Invisibility, in which the author famously proposed the distinction between the two methods of translation, namely domestication and foreignization, the Sinophone translation-studies community has continued to apply, cite, and discuss this methodology. In this article, we explore the origins of these methods from two perspectives: First, we return to the origin of Venuti's foreignization theory to identify the differences between this theory and its predecessors, analyzing the problems of the domestication-foreignization dichotomy; second, we address the original reasons for the occasional abuses of this theory at the local level. The first objective of this article is therefore to clarify and highlight the distinctive features of Venuti's theory, demonstrating that it should not be confused with its predecessors' concepts of foreignness. We explain that Venuti's presentation of his foreignization theory quoted Schleiermacher and Berman, sometimes resulting in conceptual confusion and prompting misreadings of certain Sinophone scholars. Second, this paper suggests that as the domestication-foreignization distinction was originally based on cultural and political considerations, when such a distinction is drawn in other contexts, attention must be paid to the possibility of overgeneralization (and the adverse consequences that ensue). Applications of the distinction must be integrated with local cultural factors of Sinophone communities, particularly those in Taiwan, since the true spirit of Venuti's theory suggests intervening in local cultures through translation and translation studies.

1. 陳榮彬（2020）。〈異化與歸化之間：論〈最後的獵人〉的英譯〉。《編譯論叢》，13（2），37－72。http://dx.doi.org/10.29912/CTR.202009_13(2).0002【Chen, R. B. (2020). Between foreignization and domestication: On the four translations of “The Last Hunter”. Compilation and Translation Review, 13(2), 37-72. http://dx.doi.org/10.29912/CTR.202009_13(2).0002】
   連結：
2. 王力（2014）。《王力全集（七）：中國現代語法》。中華書局。【Wang, L. (2014). Wangli quanji (Vol. 7): Zhongguo xiandai yufa. Chung Hwa Book.】
3. 王火青（1991）。《清代文言小說選譯》。巴蜀書社。【Wang, H. Q. (1991). Qingdai wenyan xiaoshuo xuanyi. Bashu Shushe.】
4. 史書美（2013）。〈反離散：華語語系作為文化生產的場域〉（趙娟譯）。載於香港大學中文學院（編），《百川滙海：文史譯新探》（頁 1－15）。中華書局。（原著出版年：2010）【Shih, S. M. (2013). Against diaspora: The Sinophone as places of cultural production (J. Zhao, Trans.). In School of Chinese, The University of Hong Kong (Ed.), Myriad streams maketh the ocean: New currents in Chinese studies (pp. 1-15). Chung Hwa Book. (Original work published 2010)】
5. 胡適（1917）。〈文學改良芻議〉。《新青年》，2（5）。https://zh.m.wikisource.org/zh-hant/文學改良芻議【Hu, S. (1917). Wenxue gailiang chuyi. La Jeunesse, 2(5). https://zh.m.wikisource.org/zh-hant/文學改良芻議】
6. 胡適（1923）。〈五十年來中國之文學〉。維基文庫。https://zh.wikisource.org/zh-hant/五十年來中國之文學。【Hu, S. (1923). Wushi nian lai Zhongguo zhi wenxue. Wikisource. https://zh.wikisource.org/zh-hant/五十年來中國之文學】
7. 張景華、蔣驍華（2009）。〈重新解讀韋努蒂的異化翻譯理論〉（代譯序）。載於韋努蒂，《譯者的隱形》（頁 5－8）。外語教學與研究出版社。【Zhang, J. H., & Jiang X. H. (2009). Zhongxin jiedu Weinudi de yihua fanyi lilun (Translators’ preface). In L. Venuti, The translator’s invisibility (pp. 5-8). Foreign Language Teaching and Research Press.】
8. 錢玄同（1918）。〈中國今後之文字問題〉。《新青年》，4（4）。https://zh.m.wikisource.org/zh-hant/中國今後之文字問題。【Qian, X. T. (1918). Zhongguo jinhou zhi wenzi wenti. La Jeunesse, 4(4). https://zh.m.wikisource.org/zh-hant/中國今後之文字問題】
9. 錢鍾書（2001）。《槐聚詩存》。三聯。【Qian, Z. S. (2001). Huaiju shicun. Joint Publishing.】
10. 羅新璋（1984）。《翻譯論集》。商務印書館。【Luo, X. Z. (1984). Fanyi lunji. Commercial Press.】
11. Bassnett, S. (1998). The translation turn in cultural studies. In S. Bassnett & A. Lefevere, Constructing cultures: Essays on literary translation (pp. 123-140). Multilingual Matters.
12. Chan, L. T. (2001). What’s modern in Chinese translation theory? Lu Xun and the debates on literalism and foreignization in the May Fourth period. TTR: Traduction, Terminologie, Rédaction, 14(2), 195-223. https://www.erudit.org/fr/revues/ttr/1900-v1-n1-ttr409/000576ar/
13. Chan, L. T. (2004). Twentieth-century Chinese translation theory: Modes, issues and debates. John Benjamins.
14. Dai, Y. (2020). Lin Shu as a translator: Striking a balance between domestication and foreignization at the turn of the twentieth century. Forum, 18(2), 111-126. https://doi.org/10.1075/forum.20006.dai
15. Gentzler, E. (2001). Contemporary translation theories (2nd ed.). Cromwell Press.
16. Hermans, T. (2009). Translation, ethics, politics. In J. Munday (Ed.), The Routledge companion to translation studies (pp. 93-105). Routledge.
17. Pym, A. (1995). Schleiermacher and the problem of Blendlinge. Translation and Literature, 4(1), 5-30. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/237661736_Schleiermacher_and_the_Problem_of_Blendlinge
18. Robinson, D. (2014). Translation and empire. Routledge.
19. Venuti, L. (1991). Genealogies of translation theory: Schleiermacher. TTR: Traduction, Terminologie, Rédaction, 4(2), 125-150. https://www.erudit.org/fr/revues/ttr/1991-v4-n2-ttr1475/037096ar.pdf
20. Venuti, L. (1998). The scandals of translation: Towards an ethics of difference. Routledge.
21. Venuti, L. (2008). The translator’s invisibility: A history of translation (2nd ed.). Routledge.
22. Venuti, L. (2013). Translation changes everything: Theory and practice. Routledge.
23. Venuti, L. (2019). Contra instrumentalism: A translation polemic. University of Nebraska Press.
24. Benjamin, W. (1991). La tâche du traducteur [The translator’s task] (M. Broda, Trans.). Po&sie, 55, 150-158. (Original work published 1917)
25. Berman, A. (1984). L’épreuve de l’étranger: Culture et traduction dans l’Allemagne romantique: Herder, Goethe, Schlegel, Novalis, Humboldt, Schleiermacher, Hölderlin [The test of the stranger: Culture and translation in Romantic Germany: Herder, Goethe, Schlegel, Novalis, Humboldt, Schleiermacher, Hölderlin]. Gallimard.
26. Berman, A. (1999). La traduction et la lettre, ou, l‘auberge du lointain [The translation and the letter, or, the inn from afar]. Seuil.
27. Schleiermacher, F. (1999). Ueber die verschiedenen Methoden des Uebersezens/Des différentes méthodes du traduire [About the different methods of translation] (A. Berman, Trans.). In Des différentes méthodes du traduire et autre texte (pp. 30-93). Seuil. (Original work published 1813)

1. 伍啟鴻(2022)。跨語際的撕裂與和解：評莎慕玉《翻譯與暴力》。中外文學，51(4)，227-236。