首页> 外文学位 >A postcolonial perspective on James Legge's Confucian translation: Focusing on his two versions of the 'Zhongyong'.
【24h】

A postcolonial perspective on James Legge's Confucian translation: Focusing on his two versions of the 'Zhongyong'.

机译:詹姆斯·理雅各(James Legge)的儒家译本的后殖民主义视角:关注他的两个版本的《中庸》。

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例

摘要

James Legge (1815-1897) was a monumental figure in nineteenth-century European Sinology. His five-volume The Chinese Classics (1861-1872), produced during his missionary years in Hong Kong, won him international acclaim and secured for him the first Chinese professorship in Oxford University, where he completed his Confucian translation project with the four-volume Sacred Books of China: Texts of Confucianism (1879-1885). These colonial products have functioned as standard translations of the Confucian texts ever since their publication, and continue to exert influence in a postcolonial era.; This thesis subjects Legge's Confucian translation project to postcolonial scrutiny to uncover the workings of ideology within the seemingly innocent and transparent act of translation. Legge's two versions of the Zhongyong ---a central Confucian text of metaphysics, produced in 1861 and 1885 respectively, are brought into focus to gauge Legge's evolving translational approaches to Confucianism.; Close textual reading reveals Legge's 1861 version to be highly critical of the Zhongyong: its cosmic vision, central ontological concepts, and structure are all challenged and attacked. Although Legge sometimes poses strategically as a Confucian fundamentalist in critiquing the Zhongyong or wrestling with Confucian commentators, this version ultimately reflects his missionary will to deconstruct and decanonize the sacred text of a "heathen" culture. As such it constitutes an act of missionary Orientalism and cultural imperialism.; In his 1885 version, Legge drops his confrontational missionary approach and virtually all his previous charges against the Zhongyong. He appears unimpassioned and open, and is willing to allow the text to speak through the Chinese commentaries. As a result his new version testifies to a fusion of horizons between Legge and the Zhongyong. Viewed in the larger context of Legge's Oxford translations and writings, however, Legge's sympathetic openness to the Zhongyong proves to be little more than a common Orientalist technique of stooping to understand things Oriental. His Sacred Books of China could be seen as products of academic Orientalism because these translations were produced to document the inferiority of the East and its need for Western civilizing missions.; A postcolonial reading of Legge's two versions of the Zhongyong demonstrates that even "faithful", scholarly translation can be a site of intense ideological contention, control and manipulation. It is the subtle and pervasive workings of colonialist ideology that prompted Legge to use translation, wittingly or unwittingly, as a tool of intellectual colonialism. This study highlights the need for postcolonial translators to critically reflect on their ideological commitments and the ethics of translation in cultural representation. Only when translators realize their power and responsibility can there be hope for turning translation into an effective channel for decolonization.
机译:詹姆斯·列格(James Legge,1815-1897年)是19世纪欧洲汉学界的重要人物。他在香港传教期间创作的五卷本《中国经典》(1861-1872年)赢得了国际赞誉,并为他赢得了牛津大学的第一位中文教授职位,在那里他完成了四卷本的儒家翻译项目《中国圣书:儒学文献》(1879-1885年)。自出版以来,这些殖民地产品就成为儒家文本的标准译本,并在后殖民时代继续发挥影响。本论文对理雅各的儒家翻译项目进行了后殖民主义的审查,以揭示看似无辜透明的翻译行为中意识形态的作用。来格(Legge)的两种版本的中庸(一种分别于1861年和1885年产生的中央形而上学的儒家文字)成为人们关注的焦点,以衡量来格(Lege)对儒家思想发展的翻译方法。仔细的文字阅读表明,理雅各的1861年版本对中庸有高度的批判:它的宇宙视野,中心本体论概念和结构都受到挑战和攻击。尽管勒格有时在批判中庸或与儒家评论家搏斗时在战略上扮演儒家原教旨主义者的角色,但该版本最终反映了他的传教士对“异教徒”文化的神圣文本进行解构和反经典化的意愿。因此,它构成了传教东方主义和文化帝国主义的行为。在1885年的版本中,理雅各放弃了对抗性的传教方法,几乎​​放弃了他以前对中庸的一切指控。他显得热情洋溢,态度开放,愿意通过中文评论说出这段话。结果,他的新版本证明了Legge和Zhongyong之间的视野融合。然而,从理格在牛津的翻译和著作的更广泛的角度来看,理格对中庸的同情开放被证明仅仅是弯腰去理解东方事物的一种东方东方技巧。他的《中国圣书》可以看作是学术东方主义的产物,因为这些译本是为了证明东方的自卑和西方文明使命的需要而编写的。对列格的《中庸》的两个版本进行后殖民的解读表明,即使是“忠实的”学术翻译也可能是激烈的意识形态争夺,控制和操纵的场所。正是殖民主义意识形态的微妙而普遍的工作促使莱格(Legge)有意或无意地将翻译用作知识殖民主义的工具。这项研究强调了后殖民译者需要批判性地反思他们在文化表征中的意识形态承诺和翻译伦理。只有译者意识到自己的力量和责任,才有希望将翻译变成非殖民化的有效渠道。

著录项

  • 作者

    Wang, Hui.;

  • 作者单位

    Hong Kong Baptist University (People's Republic of China).;

  • 授予单位 Hong Kong Baptist University (People's Republic of China).;
  • 学科 Literature Classical.; Literature Asian.; Philosophy.
  • 学位 Ph.D.
  • 年度 2007
  • 页码 223 p.
  • 总页数 223
  • 原文格式 PDF
  • 正文语种 eng
  • 中图分类 世界文学;哲学理论;
  • 关键词

  • 入库时间 2022-08-17 11:40:38

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号