The editorial history of Wittgenstein's Nachlass can be divided into two"rounds"and seven"rungs".The first round was from rung one to rung four and taken by three Wittgenstein's literature executors:G.von Wright,G.E.Anscombe and R.Rhees.The later round was completed by the cooperation of many international Wittgenstein scholars.I argue that the three editors formed their own editorial approach and comprehension of the Nachlass during their editing:Von Wright's"text-originated"editorial approach, Anscombe's editorial and investigating approach by soly focusing on PI and TLP,and Rhees's"author-centered"editorial approach.The"later round"turned to be increasingly objective and digitalized.There are three tensions underneath:the characteristics of the original text can affect the editors'editorial approach and interpretation;an"editorial intervention"phenomenon occurs in the editing process;the evolution and ontological tension of the Nachass as it transits from"private property"to the"public domain".In a word, there must be a clear demarcation between the editor's intervention and the original text.We can neither surpass that boundary,nor can we overlap the two.Too much editorial intervention might be negative to the reader's comprehension of Wittgenstein's Nachlass.%维特根斯坦遗作编辑历史分为"两轮"和"七级阶梯"."第一轮"工作由维特根斯坦3位遗作执行人完成:冯·奈特、安斯康姆和里斯.该轮工作从"第一阶梯"开始到"第四阶梯"结束."稍后一轮"编辑工作由国际学者协作完成.3位整编者在编辑和出版过程中形成了自己的编辑方法:冯·奈特以遗作文本为源头的方法;安斯康姆以TLP和PI为焦点的编辑和研究方法;里斯以作者为中心的编辑方法."稍后一轮"编辑工作逐渐变得客观和"数字化".遗作编辑工作在三方面存在冲突:遗作文本自身特质对编者的理解与编辑方法的影响;编辑者对遗作文本的"编辑干预"现象;遗作从"私人财产"进入到"公共领域"的演变与冲突.我们只能通过阅读维特根斯坦著作来理解其哲学,而编者的首要工作是为读者提供维特根斯坦著作的客观编辑版本.在编者编辑和维特根斯坦原文间必须有条界限,我们既不能逾越这条界线,也不能将两者重叠.过多编辑干涉当然会影响,甚至损害读者对维特根斯坦遗作哲学思想的理解.
展开▼
