跨越隱喻的鴻溝－論森舸瀾道家容器隱喻研究的開創性與可議性

Crossing the Chasm of Metaphors: Innovations and Controversies in Slingerland's Analysis of Daoist Container Metaphors

10.6210/JNTNU.202103_66(1).0003

陳寅清(Yin-Ching Chen)

文化會通 ； 自我觀 ； 森舸瀾 ； 道家容器隱喻 ； 翻譯與詮釋 ； cross-cultural studies ； Self ； Edward Slingerland ； Daoist container metaphors ； translation and interpretation

師大學報

66卷1期（2021 / 03 / 01）

67 - 88

繁體中文

美國漢學家森舸瀾（Edward Slingerland）是以「概念隱喻理論」解析中國哲學文本的先行者，他將認知語言學的研究成果跨域應用至中國先秦子書的解讀，引起中西學界高度的關注和探討。森舸瀾之首部代表作《不費力的行動：「無為」的喻意以及早期中國的精神理想》（Effortless Action: Wu-wei as Conceptual Metaphor and Spiritual Ideal in Early China）係針對「無為」之概念為考察核心而展開，本文考察森舸瀾著墨最多的道家隱喻－「容器」隱喻，分四部分評述：一、以「容器」隱喻「自我」；二、「控制自我」如「控制物體」；三、以容器概念解析《莊子》的「內外之分」；四、森舸瀾對「封」、「閉」及「無郤」的強調和翻譯問題。盼藉由譯介森舸瀾對先秦道家的隱喻解析，呈現並揭示當代西方概念隱喻研究在中國哲學領域的新議題與研究動向，另方面也期能探討異域文化進行交流研究時所引發的翻譯問題、異同問題、詮釋問題及會通問題。

The American sinologist Edward Slingerland is a pioneer who introduced conceptual metaphor theory into the discipline of Chinese philosophy. His book Effortless Action centers on the idea of wu-wei, a term first seen in the Daoist text the Loazi, and has generated extensive attention and debate among Western sinologists over the past two decades. This article reviews and examines Slingerland's analysis of Daoist metaphors in the Laozi and the Zhuangzi, among which the ＂container metaphor＂ is given the most comprehensive discussion. Slingerland's analysis of the Daoist container metaphor is explored in four sections: (1) the ＂Self as Container＂ metaphor, (2) self-control as object possession, (3) ＂Division between Inner and Outer,＂ as seen from the container image schema, and (4) difficulties in translating and interpreting the metaphors of being ＂sealed,＂ ＂closed off,＂ and ＂without cracks.＂ Through a close examination and comparison of Western and Eastern scholars' studies of Daoist metaphors, this article considers salient topics in the contemporary study of Chinese philosophy and explores the challenges of translation and interpretation in cross-cultural comparative research.

1. 曾春海(2007)。莊子的形神觀及其依道製器之藝術實踐觀。哲學與文化，34(8)，3-19。
   連結：
2. 楊儒賓(2014)。遊之主體。中國文哲研究集刊，45，1-39。
   連結：
3. 劉冠伶(2014)。論《莊子》思想的「矛盾性」─「渾圓」原型提供的線索。漢學研究，32(4)，33-62。
   連結：
4. (1995).聖經.香港:香港聖經公會.
5. （晉）郭象（注）,（唐）成玄英（疏）,（清）郭慶藩（集釋）(1971).莊子集釋.臺北市:廣文書局.
6. Ames, Roger T.(1984).The Meaning of Body in Classical Chinese Thought.International Philosophical Quarterly,24(1),39-54.
7. Burneko, Guy C.(1986).Chuang Tzu’s Existential Hermeneutics.Journal of Chinese Philosophy,13(4),393-409.
8. Campany, Robert Ford(2005).Review of Edward Slingerland, Effortless Action: Wu-wei as Conceptual Metaphor and Spiritual Ideal in Early China.History of Religions,45(2),181-182.
9. Camus, Rina Marie(2017).Comparison by Metaphor: Archery in Confucius and Aristotle.Dao: A Journal of Comparative Philosophy,16(2),165-185.
10. Chan, Wing-Tsit(1963).A Source Book in Chinese Philosophy.Princeton, NJ:Princeton University Press.
11. Clarke, J. J.(2000).The Tao of the West.New York, NY:Routledge.
12. Cline, Erin(2003).Review of Effortless Action: Wu-wei as Conceptual Metaphor and Spiritual Ideal in Early China.China Review International,10(2),452-457.
13. Deutsch, Eliot(1993).The Concept of the Body.Phenomenology East and West,Dordrecht, the Netherlands:
14. Fox, Alan(2004).Review of Effortless Action: Wu-wei as Conceptual Metaphor and Spiritual Ideal in Early China.Journal of Asian Studies,63(1),172-173.
15. Fraser, Chris(2007).On Wu-wei as a Unifying Metaphor.Philosophy East & West,57(1),97-106.
16. Geaney, Jane(2003).Review of Effortless Action: Wu-wei as Conceptual Metaphor and Spiritual Ideal in Early China.Journal of Chinese Religions,31,294-295.
17. Geaney, Jane(2012).Self as Container? Metaphors We Lose by in Understanding Early Chinese Texts.Antiquorum Philosophia: An International Journal,5,11-30.
18. Graham, Angus C.(1990).The Book of Lieh-tzŭ.New York, NY:Comlumbia University Press.
19. Hamm, Matthew James(2020).A Dream of the Self: Identity in the ‘Inner Chapters’ of the Zhuangzi.Early China,43,29-60.
20. Ivanhoe, Philip. J.(2007).The Paradox of Wuwei?.Journal of Chinese Philosophy,34(2),277-287.
21. Knightly, Nickolas(2013).The Paradox of Wuwei? Yes (and No).Asian Philosophy,23(2),115-136.
22. Lakoff, George,Johnson, Mark(1999).Philosophy in the Flesh: The Embodied Mind & Its Challenge to Western Thought.New York, NY:Basic Books.
23. Lakoff, George,Johnson, Mark(1980).Metaphors We Live by.Chicago, IL:The University of Chicago Press.
24. Liu, Xiao-Gan,Slingerland, Edward(Trans.)(1999).An Inquiry into the Central Value in Laozi’s Philosophy.Religious and Philosophical Aspects of the Laozi,Albany, NY:
25. Mason, Joshua(2018).Generalizations, Cultural Essentialism, and Metaphorical Gulfs.Dao: A Journal of Comparative Philosophy,17,479-497.
26. Moeller, Hans-Georg(2006).The Philosophy of the Daodejing.New York, NY:Comlumbia University Press.
27. Partridge, Eric(2009).Origins: An Etymological Dictionary of Modern English.New York, NY:Routledge.
28. Schofer, J. W.(2007).Embodiment and Virtue in a Comparative Perspective.Journal of Religious Ethics,35(4),715-728.
29. Shun, Kwong-Loi(2004).Review of Effortless Action: Wu-wei as Conceptual Metaphor and Spiritual Ideal in Early China by Edward Slingerland.Harvard Journal of Asiatic Studies,64(2),511-516.
30. Slingerland, Edward(2004).Conceptions of the Self in the Zhuangzi: Conceptual Metaphor Analysis and Comparative Thought.Philosophy East & West,54(3),322-342.
31. Slingerland, Edward(2017).Metaphor, Blending, and Cultural Variation: A Reply to Camus.Dao: A Journal of Comparative Philosophy,16(3),431-435.
32. Slingerland, Edward(2014).Trying Not to Try: Ancient China, Modern Science and the Power of Spontaneity.New York, NY:Broadway Books.
33. Slingerland, Edward(2003).Effortless Action: Wu-wei as Conceptual Metaphor and Spiritual Ideal in Early China.New York, NY:Oxford University Press.
34. Watson, Burton(1968).The Complete Works of Chuang Tzu.New York, NY:Columbia University Press.
35. Winnicott, Donald W.(1960).Ego Distortion in Terms of True and False Self.The Maturational Processes and the Facilitating Environment: Studies in the Theory of Emotional Development,New York, NY:
36. Zhang, Dai-Nian,Ryden, Edmund(Trans.)(2002).Key Concepts in Chinese Philosophy.London, UK:Yale University Press.
37. 方東美,孫智燊（譯）(1984).中國哲學之精神及其發展.臺北市:成均出版社.
38. 王叔岷(1988).莊子校詮.臺北市:中央研究院歷史語言研究所.
39. 余舜德（編）(2015).身體感的轉向.臺北市:臺灣大學出版中心.
40. 沈清松(1987)。莊子的人觀。哲學與文化，14(6)，13-23。
41. 陳鼓應(1993).老莊新論.臺北市:五南圖書公司.
42. 陳鼓應(1992).莊子今註今譯.臺北市:臺灣商務印書館.
43. 陳鼓應(1988).老子今註今譯.臺北市:臺灣商務印書館.
44. 陸基洋(2007)。評斯林格蘭對《老子》無為之詮釋。中國哲學與文化，桂林市:
45. 森舸瀾, Edward,史國強（譯）(2018).為與無為：當現代科學遇上中國智慧.北京市:現代出版社.
46. 湯一介(1996)。自我和無我。道家文化研究，上海市:
47. 萊可夫, George,詹森, Mark,周世箴（譯）(2006).我們賴以生存的譬喻.臺北市:聯經出版公司.
48. 楊儒賓(2007)。莊子的「卮言」論—有沒有「道的語言」。中國哲學與文化，桂林市:
49. 楊儒賓(1999)。道與玄牝。台灣哲學研究，2，163-195。
50. 楊儒賓（編）(1993).中國古代思想中的氣論及身體觀.臺北市:巨流圖書公司.
51. 劉笑敢(1995)。試論老子哲學的中心價值。中州學刊，1995(2)，67-73。
52. 劉滄龍(2016)。自然與自由─莊子的主體與氣。國立政治大學哲學學報，35，1-36。
53. 蕭兵,葉舒憲(1993).老子的文化解讀—性與神話學之研究.武漢市:湖北人民出版社.
54. 賴錫三(2008).莊子靈光的當代詮釋.新竹市:國立清華大學出版社.
55. 蘇以文（編）,畢永峨（編）(2009).語言與認知.臺北市:臺灣大學出版中心.