文章学视野下的林译研究
|
摘要
文章学是中国历史最悠久的诗学理论,事实上也是中国传统译论之枢机,我国翻译史上的数次翻译讨论高潮,基本上均以“文章作法”为核心。这一文章学翻译传统在晚清发展到了巅峰,严复提出的“文章正轨”之说成为其最后的总结性陈述,而实践最成功、理论体现最完整的则是“林译”——林纾及其合作者独具特色的文言译著,值得专题研究。本文认为林译的灵魂在于以文章学的理论和方法,有机整合“语内翻译”、“语际翻译”、“符际翻译”,重识度、讲义法、有词采,译著独得一境。
本研究的目的和意义在于从文章学入手还林译之本真,构建林纾“三译合一”的文章学翻译体系并确立其译学地位,深化中国古典译学研究、近代翻译史研究和翻译批评研究。所运用的理论主要包括文章学理论、文人画理论、中国古典译学、翻译类型学、翻译模因论、翻译伦理等。立论视角创新,立足古典译学思想一脉相传的文章学理论,在严格的翻译学范围内专论林纾及其合作者之“译”。
本研究分为七章。第一章论证林译的译学本真、林译的时代译学背景和林译的文章学体系,确立本研究采用的理论视角的适用性和实用性。主体部分包括从翻译类型学对林译“三译合一”之本质的重新认识、文章学翻译的内涵和方法、晚清以严译和林译为代表的文章学翻译理论与实践、林译的文章学特色。核心在于发明识度、义法、词采在林纾的文章学翻译体系当中的内涵和功能及其对严复“文章正轨”之说的继承和发展。为深化中国古典译学研究、沟通中西译学理论提供了一套有效的术语和比较合理的理论体系。
林译研究纵横谈以文章学翻译思想为线索,综述中外有关林译研究的文献。重点揭示文章学翻译思想从晚清的鼎盛时期逐渐被西方译学理论取代的过程,及这一译学发展背景下林译研究的成果和不足。用事实论证本文设定的研究目标、研究对象和研究方法的原由及其必要性,有助于反思五四以来我国的译学建设,依托林译研究延续文章学翻译理论体系的译学地位。
林译之识度重点阐述“识度”作为文章学翻译立意造境之根本保证的两方面,即守正和立言,并通过文本细读阐释其具体内涵。文章首先依据林纾和魏易的译论阐述“守正”的具体表现,肯定林、魏的翻译伦理,并提出林译独有的翻译热情。在此基础上分析林译籍译著“立言”的文章学翻译方法,及其瀹启民智的翻译策略。林纾的“识度论”对译者才学以及热情的关注足资为西方译学偏重理性分析之补充。
林译之义法一方面通过文本细读再现林纾依据语篇翻译程式对魏易的视译产品的结构性加工,并以林译比照魏易的独立译著,发掘林译文本中合作者的痕迹。阐明林译对文法规范的自觉接受以及合作者对译本语篇、语句层面的贡献,展示语际翻译和语内翻译在文章学翻译体系中的协作方式。另一方面,文章以林译迭更司的配图小说为据,揭示林译参考插图的现象,并例证林译运用符际翻译的主要方式。以上完成“三译合一”及其在文章学翻译体系中运作方式的论证。林译在“语内翻译”和“符际翻译”两方面打开了翻译类型学在全球译学中的困境,值得另题专门研究。
林译之词采剖析林译标志性风格主要的三方面“师法”来源。首先通过整理林译使用的史传文学、古典散文笔法,实例探究“师古”这一文章学翻译规定的风格规范在林译中的系统体现。继而通过对比林译与林纾的古文创作,阐明林译沿袭林纾本人文章风格的具体方式,并证之原文说明林译风格应用之恰当。文章最后通过考察魏易以其西学功力和翻译技术为林译带来的风格特征,论证文章学翻译兼收并蓄的风格生成方式。“师法”提供了建立相对独立的译学风格理论的思考方向,值得专业译者借鉴。
通过以上研究,本文认为林译的成功之根本在于译者精湛的文章学翻译素养,从纯粹的文章之学反观林译可启迪当代译学建设、丰富世界译学理论体系。林纾的文论与译论相互发明,其论“理解”、“文气”、“神味”可据为当代进一步发展文章学翻译理论、丰富现代翻译诗学的重要思想资源。本研究的不足之处在于“符际翻译”的材料有待继续搜集整理,文章学翻译的传统未能充分向前拓展,立足林纾“意境论”构建的文章学翻译体系需进一步丰富。
As the oldest theoretical system on written texts, writing-studies possesses central topics in traditional Chinese translation discussions prior to the "May Fourth Movement". This academic lineage of traditional translation study reached its peak in the later Qing Dynasty(清朝)when its theoretical essentials were concluded into "wen zhang zheng gut"(文章正轨)by Yan Fu who synthesized a systematic Writing-intentioned Translation (Abbr., WIT) Theory. At the same time, WIT theory witnessed its most successful and systematic practice in the decent renderings of Western writings co-translated by the monolingual translator Lin Shu (1852-1924) and his multilingual partners, including fictions, academic works, and numerous news writings, thus presenting a worthy research subject. This dissertation argues that the transalation of Lin Shu (hereinafter Lin 's Translation) owns its success to the translators' exquisite accomplishments in writing-intentioned translation. It claims Lin s Translation emphasises Insights, Approaches, and Wording during its text-processing, and in nature is a successful integration of "Translation Proper""Rewording" and "Transmutation" into theories and methods of traditional writing-studies, which benefits its translations with a unique flavour.
The purpose and significance of this research lies in attempting to explore the nature of Lin's integrated translation from the perspective of traditional Chinese writing-studies, to restore the academic position of WIT Theory in global translation studies, and to deepen the research on traditional Chinese translation theories, modern translation history and translation criticism. The important theories employed include theories of traditional writing-studies (mainly Lin Shu's theory), theories of Literati Painting, Chinese classical translation theories, translation typology, translation memes, and translation ethics. The dissertation is creative in its theoretical perspective, namely theories of traditional writing-studies, and it uses these to closely analyse the text-processing of Lin's TRANSLATION.
This dissertation consists of seven chapters. Chapter Ⅰ A reacquaintance with Lin's Translation opens with an introduction to three aspects of Lin's Translation, its nature in both translation typology and WIT Theory, its ideological background in the WIT studies of the later Qing dynasty, and finally, its specific WIT system. The main content includes a new interpretation of Lin's integrated translation in translation typology and a theoretical exploration of WIT, which is followed by a detailed account of the features of the theories and translations of its two representatives during the later Qing period:Yan Fu and Lin Shu. After a systematic analysis of the connotation and function of the three key components in Lin's integrated translation, namely Insights. Approaches and Wording, efforts are made to investigate its unique system and memes inherited from Yan Fu's WIT theory. Not only do these efforts provide a new theoretical framework for deepening the research on traditional Chinese translation theories, they also offer a set of effective terms for communicating with global translation studies.
Chapter II A WIT-based review of the literature on Lin's Translation assesses the strengths and weaknesses of related researches in China and abroad, with special reference to the evolution of Chinese modern translation theories and its comprehensive influence on modern translation criticism, including that of Lin's Translation. After unveiling the Western-sourced development of Chinese translationology since the "May Fourth Movement", the main content demonstrates the theoretical significance and necessity of this paper's main objective, discusses methods to be used as well as their intent, and asserts that a reappraisal of Lin's Translation can be a meritorious chance for reestablishing the academic position of WIT Theory in contemporary translationology discourse.
Chapter III The Insights of Lin's Translation looks into the two aspects of Insights in Lin Shu's integrated translation,"shou zheng"(守正)a Confucianism-oriented translation ethic, and "li yan"(立言), an opinion-intentioned translation strategy, the two of which serve as the foundation of Lin's WIT Theory. The nature of these strategies is illustrated by abundant close readings of Lin's translations. Special attention is paid to Lin's passion for translating following a detailed discussion of the Confucianism-oriented translation ethic of Lin Shu and his most successful co-translator, Wei I, based on which attempts are made to explore the opinion-intentioned translation strategies Lin employed while conducting the noble task of enlightening the mass of his countrymen in rendering Western fictions. By emphasizing translators'passion and learning, the ideas of Insights should accord with the more analytical bent of Western translation theory.
Chapter IV The Approaches of Lin's Translation focuses on Lin's integration of "Intralingual Translation", or Translation Proper."Interlingual Translation", or Rewording and "Intersemiotic Translation", or Transmutation. Lin's WIT approaches to textual processing are first presented by means of close reading carried out under the theoretical framework of traditional writing-studies, with which textural features in the independent translations of Wei I are compared in the hope of elaborating co-translators'contributions at a text level where "Intralingual Translation" and "Interlingual Translation" are integrated into Lin's WIT system. A further effort is made to elucidate the functionality of "'Intersemiotic Translation" in Lin's WIT system with examples from Lin's rendering of Dickens' illustrated fictions, and some others Victorian writings. The functionality of "Interlingual Translation" and "Intersemiotic Translation" in Lin's WIT system should help to liberate global translation typology studies, and is worthy in itself of another specific study.
Chapter V The Wording of Lin's Translation dissects three major shi fa(师法：stylistic resources in writing), in the formation of a writing style. Rich examples of wording techniques stemming from gu wen (古文),among them classical prose and historical and biographical writings, are employed to determine Lin's acceptance of the stylistic rule of WIT Theory:shi gu(师古),that is. to build translation styles according to gu wen writing conventions. The stylistic comparisons among Lin's translations, source texts and his gu wen writings claim that the styles in Lin's translations are both effective and appropriate. A study of Wei I's contribution to the Western styles in Lin's translations indicates that Lin's integrated translation is all-encompassing in terms of style-building. Lin's WIT style methods would help in founding a specialized style theory for translation studies, which would be beneficial to professional translators.
Chapter VI The Way to a Writing-intentioned translation endeavours to conclude the essence of Lin's integrated translation. Being the major contributor to Lin's Translation. Lin Shu's own ideas in writing-studies can be a valuable source for the future development of WIT Theory and even that of Western translation theories, especially his arguments on li jie(理解),he philosophical interpretation of writings, wen qi (文气),text principles for writing, and shen wei(神味)the stylistic taste based on shi-fa, all three of which would be appropriate for future study. Although much of the theoretical aspects of Lin's integrated translation will be discussed, it is also necessary to mention those parts of the dissertation that could be built upon:more examples of "Intersemiotic Translation" in Lin's translations are waiting to be discovered, there are more trends and traditions of WIT Theory than will be discussed here, and WIT Theory is only addressed insofar as it relates to Lin's Translation.
本研究的目的和意义在于从文章学入手还林译之本真,构建林纾“三译合一”的文章学翻译体系并确立其译学地位,深化中国古典译学研究、近代翻译史研究和翻译批评研究。所运用的理论主要包括文章学理论、文人画理论、中国古典译学、翻译类型学、翻译模因论、翻译伦理等。立论视角创新,立足古典译学思想一脉相传的文章学理论,在严格的翻译学范围内专论林纾及其合作者之“译”。
本研究分为七章。第一章论证林译的译学本真、林译的时代译学背景和林译的文章学体系,确立本研究采用的理论视角的适用性和实用性。主体部分包括从翻译类型学对林译“三译合一”之本质的重新认识、文章学翻译的内涵和方法、晚清以严译和林译为代表的文章学翻译理论与实践、林译的文章学特色。核心在于发明识度、义法、词采在林纾的文章学翻译体系当中的内涵和功能及其对严复“文章正轨”之说的继承和发展。为深化中国古典译学研究、沟通中西译学理论提供了一套有效的术语和比较合理的理论体系。
林译研究纵横谈以文章学翻译思想为线索,综述中外有关林译研究的文献。重点揭示文章学翻译思想从晚清的鼎盛时期逐渐被西方译学理论取代的过程,及这一译学发展背景下林译研究的成果和不足。用事实论证本文设定的研究目标、研究对象和研究方法的原由及其必要性,有助于反思五四以来我国的译学建设,依托林译研究延续文章学翻译理论体系的译学地位。
林译之识度重点阐述“识度”作为文章学翻译立意造境之根本保证的两方面,即守正和立言,并通过文本细读阐释其具体内涵。文章首先依据林纾和魏易的译论阐述“守正”的具体表现,肯定林、魏的翻译伦理,并提出林译独有的翻译热情。在此基础上分析林译籍译著“立言”的文章学翻译方法,及其瀹启民智的翻译策略。林纾的“识度论”对译者才学以及热情的关注足资为西方译学偏重理性分析之补充。
林译之义法一方面通过文本细读再现林纾依据语篇翻译程式对魏易的视译产品的结构性加工,并以林译比照魏易的独立译著,发掘林译文本中合作者的痕迹。阐明林译对文法规范的自觉接受以及合作者对译本语篇、语句层面的贡献,展示语际翻译和语内翻译在文章学翻译体系中的协作方式。另一方面,文章以林译迭更司的配图小说为据,揭示林译参考插图的现象,并例证林译运用符际翻译的主要方式。以上完成“三译合一”及其在文章学翻译体系中运作方式的论证。林译在“语内翻译”和“符际翻译”两方面打开了翻译类型学在全球译学中的困境,值得另题专门研究。
林译之词采剖析林译标志性风格主要的三方面“师法”来源。首先通过整理林译使用的史传文学、古典散文笔法,实例探究“师古”这一文章学翻译规定的风格规范在林译中的系统体现。继而通过对比林译与林纾的古文创作,阐明林译沿袭林纾本人文章风格的具体方式,并证之原文说明林译风格应用之恰当。文章最后通过考察魏易以其西学功力和翻译技术为林译带来的风格特征,论证文章学翻译兼收并蓄的风格生成方式。“师法”提供了建立相对独立的译学风格理论的思考方向,值得专业译者借鉴。
通过以上研究,本文认为林译的成功之根本在于译者精湛的文章学翻译素养,从纯粹的文章之学反观林译可启迪当代译学建设、丰富世界译学理论体系。林纾的文论与译论相互发明,其论“理解”、“文气”、“神味”可据为当代进一步发展文章学翻译理论、丰富现代翻译诗学的重要思想资源。本研究的不足之处在于“符际翻译”的材料有待继续搜集整理,文章学翻译的传统未能充分向前拓展,立足林纾“意境论”构建的文章学翻译体系需进一步丰富。
As the oldest theoretical system on written texts, writing-studies possesses central topics in traditional Chinese translation discussions prior to the "May Fourth Movement". This academic lineage of traditional translation study reached its peak in the later Qing Dynasty(清朝)when its theoretical essentials were concluded into "wen zhang zheng gut"(文章正轨)by Yan Fu who synthesized a systematic Writing-intentioned Translation (Abbr., WIT) Theory. At the same time, WIT theory witnessed its most successful and systematic practice in the decent renderings of Western writings co-translated by the monolingual translator Lin Shu (1852-1924) and his multilingual partners, including fictions, academic works, and numerous news writings, thus presenting a worthy research subject. This dissertation argues that the transalation of Lin Shu (hereinafter Lin 's Translation) owns its success to the translators' exquisite accomplishments in writing-intentioned translation. It claims Lin s Translation emphasises Insights, Approaches, and Wording during its text-processing, and in nature is a successful integration of "Translation Proper""Rewording" and "Transmutation" into theories and methods of traditional writing-studies, which benefits its translations with a unique flavour.
The purpose and significance of this research lies in attempting to explore the nature of Lin's integrated translation from the perspective of traditional Chinese writing-studies, to restore the academic position of WIT Theory in global translation studies, and to deepen the research on traditional Chinese translation theories, modern translation history and translation criticism. The important theories employed include theories of traditional writing-studies (mainly Lin Shu's theory), theories of Literati Painting, Chinese classical translation theories, translation typology, translation memes, and translation ethics. The dissertation is creative in its theoretical perspective, namely theories of traditional writing-studies, and it uses these to closely analyse the text-processing of Lin's TRANSLATION.
This dissertation consists of seven chapters. Chapter Ⅰ A reacquaintance with Lin's Translation opens with an introduction to three aspects of Lin's Translation, its nature in both translation typology and WIT Theory, its ideological background in the WIT studies of the later Qing dynasty, and finally, its specific WIT system. The main content includes a new interpretation of Lin's integrated translation in translation typology and a theoretical exploration of WIT, which is followed by a detailed account of the features of the theories and translations of its two representatives during the later Qing period:Yan Fu and Lin Shu. After a systematic analysis of the connotation and function of the three key components in Lin's integrated translation, namely Insights. Approaches and Wording, efforts are made to investigate its unique system and memes inherited from Yan Fu's WIT theory. Not only do these efforts provide a new theoretical framework for deepening the research on traditional Chinese translation theories, they also offer a set of effective terms for communicating with global translation studies.
Chapter II A WIT-based review of the literature on Lin's Translation assesses the strengths and weaknesses of related researches in China and abroad, with special reference to the evolution of Chinese modern translation theories and its comprehensive influence on modern translation criticism, including that of Lin's Translation. After unveiling the Western-sourced development of Chinese translationology since the "May Fourth Movement", the main content demonstrates the theoretical significance and necessity of this paper's main objective, discusses methods to be used as well as their intent, and asserts that a reappraisal of Lin's Translation can be a meritorious chance for reestablishing the academic position of WIT Theory in contemporary translationology discourse.
Chapter III The Insights of Lin's Translation looks into the two aspects of Insights in Lin Shu's integrated translation,"shou zheng"(守正)a Confucianism-oriented translation ethic, and "li yan"(立言), an opinion-intentioned translation strategy, the two of which serve as the foundation of Lin's WIT Theory. The nature of these strategies is illustrated by abundant close readings of Lin's translations. Special attention is paid to Lin's passion for translating following a detailed discussion of the Confucianism-oriented translation ethic of Lin Shu and his most successful co-translator, Wei I, based on which attempts are made to explore the opinion-intentioned translation strategies Lin employed while conducting the noble task of enlightening the mass of his countrymen in rendering Western fictions. By emphasizing translators'passion and learning, the ideas of Insights should accord with the more analytical bent of Western translation theory.
Chapter IV The Approaches of Lin's Translation focuses on Lin's integration of "Intralingual Translation", or Translation Proper."Interlingual Translation", or Rewording and "Intersemiotic Translation", or Transmutation. Lin's WIT approaches to textual processing are first presented by means of close reading carried out under the theoretical framework of traditional writing-studies, with which textural features in the independent translations of Wei I are compared in the hope of elaborating co-translators'contributions at a text level where "Intralingual Translation" and "Interlingual Translation" are integrated into Lin's WIT system. A further effort is made to elucidate the functionality of "'Intersemiotic Translation" in Lin's WIT system with examples from Lin's rendering of Dickens' illustrated fictions, and some others Victorian writings. The functionality of "Interlingual Translation" and "Intersemiotic Translation" in Lin's WIT system should help to liberate global translation typology studies, and is worthy in itself of another specific study.
Chapter V The Wording of Lin's Translation dissects three major shi fa(师法：stylistic resources in writing), in the formation of a writing style. Rich examples of wording techniques stemming from gu wen (古文),among them classical prose and historical and biographical writings, are employed to determine Lin's acceptance of the stylistic rule of WIT Theory:shi gu(师古),that is. to build translation styles according to gu wen writing conventions. The stylistic comparisons among Lin's translations, source texts and his gu wen writings claim that the styles in Lin's translations are both effective and appropriate. A study of Wei I's contribution to the Western styles in Lin's translations indicates that Lin's integrated translation is all-encompassing in terms of style-building. Lin's WIT style methods would help in founding a specialized style theory for translation studies, which would be beneficial to professional translators.
Chapter VI The Way to a Writing-intentioned translation endeavours to conclude the essence of Lin's integrated translation. Being the major contributor to Lin's Translation. Lin Shu's own ideas in writing-studies can be a valuable source for the future development of WIT Theory and even that of Western translation theories, especially his arguments on li jie(理解),he philosophical interpretation of writings, wen qi (文气),text principles for writing, and shen wei(神味)the stylistic taste based on shi-fa, all three of which would be appropriate for future study. Although much of the theoretical aspects of Lin's integrated translation will be discussed, it is also necessary to mention those parts of the dissertation that could be built upon:more examples of "Intersemiotic Translation" in Lin's translations are waiting to be discovered, there are more trends and traditions of WIT Theory than will be discussed here, and WIT Theory is only addressed insofar as it relates to Lin's Translation.
引文
①参照图瑞绘制的“赫姆斯翻译研究基本路线图Holmes' bansic 'map' of translation studies "。根据这个图,林译的第一个内涵属于“翻译产品研究”,后一个内涵属于“翻译过程研究”。Toury, G. Descriptive translation studies and beyond. Shanghai: Shanghai Foreign Language Education Press,2001, Page 10.
①严培南、严璩二人与林纾合作一种,《伊索寓言》。
②黄濬,字秋岳,又称哲维,号壶舟,室名花随人圣庵。光绪十四年戊子科举人,十六年庚寅科进士,签分户部主事,供职北京。民国后得汪精卫赏识供职国民政府,1937年8月,以通日罪伏法白门。
① Yakobson. R.(1959). On linguistic aspects of translation studies. In Venuti. L. (Eds). The translation studies reader. U. S. & Canada: Routledge.2004. P.138-143中文为笔者所译,原文作：For us. both as linguists and as ordinary word-users, the meaning of any linguistic sign is its translation into some further, alternative sign, especially a sign "in which it is more fully developed" as Peirce, the deepest inquirer into the essence of signs, insistently stated. We distinguish three ways of interpreting a verbal sign:it may be translated into other signs of the same language, into another language, or into another, nonverbal system of symbols. These three kinds of translation are to be differently labeled:
1 Intralingual translation or rewording is an interpretation of verbal signs by means of other signs of the same language.
2 Interlingual translation or translation proper is an interpretation of verbal signs by means of some other language.
3 Intersemiotic translation or transmutation is an interpretation of verbal signs by means of signs of nonverbal sign systems.
② Translation Proper是个比较难译的术语,proper这个词置于名词之后,通常作“狭义的”,“自身的”解,李德凤等译作“严格意义上的翻译”,字而看不错,不过我觉得置于上下文略嫌不通。雅氏明确说了他的定义立足“符号”,rewording和transmutation都是针对语言符号而言的,不存在“严格”和“宽泛”之分,我译成“充分”的原因是希毕表达原文“某一语言符号自身被完整地译入另一种语言”之义；同理,李把transmutation译作“变形”也有些丢失语境,让人莫名其妙,变成什么形呢?李德凤的译文见于杰里米·芒迪著,李德凤等译,《翮译学导论》,商务印书馆,2007年第10页。
① Anthony Pym. Exploring Translation Theories. Taylor & Francis.2009:150中文为笔者所译.原文作："intersemiotic translation" privileges verbal signs (like those of "translation proper") as the point of departure. In this. he was preceded by the Danish semiotician Louis Hjelmslev.whose view of intersemiotic translation was similarly directional: In practice, a language is a semiotic into which all other semiotics may be translated-both all other languages and all other conceivable semiotic structures. This translatability rests on the fact that all languages, and they alone, are in a position to form any purport whatsoever.笔者按：叶尔姆斯列夫用“符际翻译”方法描述语言的特性,很有新意。
①详见本研究第四章第一节之四。
②详见本研究第三章。
③林译当中有某些“译文”离不开合作者的辅助,如直接使用外文词汇的情况,详见本研究第五章第三节。
④梁启超称赞《几何原本》“字字精金美玉,为千古不朽之作”,梁启超,《中国近三百年学术史》,上海：上海三联书店,2006年,第7页。
①鲁迅,“关于翻译的通讯”,《鲁迅全集》第4卷,人民文学出版.1981年,第381页。
②鲁迅,“致增田涉”,《鲁迅全集》第13卷,人民文学出版,1981年,第473页。
③近年有学者用新思维研究《域外小说集》,把译著当作“潜文本”来研究,阐发其对现代译学、文学的影响。“比较林纾翻译小说的历史局限性,周氏兄弟的《域外小说集》,以系统、直译的风格和明确的思潮意识,宣告了中国文学翻译‘林纾时代’的结束,标志着文学翻译规范化、学术化的来临。”(杨联芬,2003：127)这个看法无论从事实、逻辑还是理论方法上讲,都难以让人接受。鲁迅确实伟大,但我觉得这样的研究似乎太过。诚如先生自己所说,这部译著彻头彻尾就是失败了,没必要掩饰,更不能夸大。杨的论调只是在给先生抹黑。事实上,即便是当下“80后”们在网络上掀起的“再读鲁迅/仿写鲁迅”热潮,也没有人提及《域外小说集》。从文章学的历史发展轨迹来看,我更愿意接受这种看法：“在中国历史上,如果要举出一位与鲁迅有可比性的人物,那应该是韩愈。他们都有聪慧的头脑、卓越的语言运用能力,激烈的好辩性格和文学创造力：此外他们两个的文笔都时而饶有风趣。鲁迅不喜欢韩愈的事实,与其说否定了这种相像,勿宁说是反方面的肯定。”David E.Pollard. The True Story ofLu Xun, Hong Kong: Chinese University Press. 2002:116-7.
①中文为笔者所译,原文作：[...]intralingual translation is not such a minor issue as the existing literature on translation might suggest (...) I know of no research that looks specifically at the phenomena of intralingual or intersemiotic translation. We do have classifications such as Jakobson's. which alert us to the possibility of such things as intersemiotic and intralingual translation, but we do not make any genuine use of such classifications in our research. (Baker,1998. p. xvii)
①潘文国.从文章正轨看中西译论的不同传统.载张柏然.ed.中国译学：传承与创新.上海：上海外语教育出版社.2008.
②Some memes encapsulate concepts and ideas about translation itself. and about the theory of translation. Let us eall them translation memes (ef. Chesterman.1996a). [...]]but first I shall introduce five supermemes of translation. They are ideas of such pervasive influence that they come up again and again in the history of the subject, albeit sometimes in slightly different guises. Some appear to be distinctly more beneficial than others.
①切斯特曼在提出“源-宿”(Source-Target)时也认为,在由此模因而来的翻译思想中,翻译是具有指向性的,但他没有说明方向为何：The source-target supermeme is the idea that translation is directional, going from somewhere to somewhere. The widespread acceptance of this supermeme has. in modern translation studies, given us the notions of Source Text (ST) and Target Text (TT). The dominant metaphor underlying this supermeme is that of movement along a path:cognitive linguistics would talk of a "path schema", with the translation itself being the "trajector" moving along this path. Translations are thus seen as "moving" from A to B. Belonging to this same meme-complex there is also the accompanying idea that translations are "containers" for something else:as they are formed. translations "carry across" something from A to B.(Chesterman.1997:8)特别强调一下.这是切氏“客观地”归纳出来西方译学思想本源之一种,他本人并不认同" Source-Target"所衍生的翻译思想的合理性。
①朱志瑜认为：“不过总的来说,佛经翻译无论在理论上还是实践上,都是偏‘质’的。”(朱志瑜,2006：8)我很怀疑这个结论,单就支谦《法句经》所论,任继愈则认为：“这场争论,质派在理论上获得胜利,但实际的结果,却是由文派最后成书。”任继愈,《中国佛教史》,第1卷,北京：中国社会科学出版社,1981第177页。我自己读《十三经》也不觉得经文偏“质”。另外,朱还说：“支谦和鸠摩罗什的很多译文大量删减原文,这是他们被称为文派的原因之一。”支谦的译文我不清楚,但我却比较了罗什和玄装的不少译文,似乎不能一概而论,如玄奘脍炙人口的名译《般若波罗蜜多心经》就比罗什的译文短。
②好比教学法研究,讨论“负反馈”总比“正反馈”容易,大概因为解释不正确的现象话头好找一些吧。林译研究也是如此,批评其不足的多是“理论研究”,好像林译尽著天下之丑,照任何一而镜子都是八戒嘴脸。
①王世贞著,罗仲鼎校注,《艺苑卮言校注》,济南：齐鲁书社,1992年,第43-4。这是《艺苑卮言》目前比较好的一个校注本。
①“学易”足我国重要的学术文化传统,《周易》为儒家十三经之首,古代知识分子目之不下于《论语》。如果要追寻贯穿中国古代思想文化的超级模因,《周易》的本源性影响是无可比拟的。
②这里只就“修辞立其诚”的本源讲,实际上“立诚”经宋明理学的发展内涵极其丰富-在某种程度上可以说是理学各派实践论的第一要义。钱穆先生认为,王阳明讲“集义致良知”便以“立诚”为知行本体,成功地解决了宋儒在实践论上的分歧。原文叙述较复杂,略去不引,参见钱穆,《阳明学述要》,北京：九州出版社,2010年,第63页。
①从这一点看,张德让教授认为严复走的是徐光启“翻译-会通-超胜”一条路线,确有见地。张德让,《翻译会通研究——从徐光启到严复》,华东师范大学博士学位论文,2010年。
①胡适评《闽中新乐府》说：“先生的《新乐府》不但可以表明他文学观念的变迁,而且可以使我们知道：五六年前的反动领袖在三十年前也曾做过社会改革的事业。我们这一辈的少年人只认得守旧的林琴南,而不知道当日的维新党林琴南。只听得林琴南老年反对白话文学,而不知道林琴南壮年时曾作过很通俗的白话诗,——这算不得公平的舆论。”胡适,“林琴南先生的白话诗”.《(北京)晨报六周年纪念赠刊》,1924年12月。
①这也是文章学在当代的尴尬,文章学本来包含“文”和“学”两个方而,但因为其中的“学”涉及大量文法、小学内容,结果现在搞文学的认为是语言学内容,搞语言学的又认为属于文章学。潘文国先生指出：“由于我们自己的传统长期受到忽视,因而当我说我们有丰厚的文章学传统时许多人可能还不一定知道。不但是语言学界,而且包括文学界。在20世纪以来的一百年里,传统文章学几乎处于‘两不管’的境地：搞文学的以为这属于语言而不感兴趣,而搞语言的又以为这已超出了‘语言学’研究的范围(在篇章语言学产生前,语言研究一般只研究到句子)。”潘文国,“英汉语篇对比与中国的文章之学”,《外语教学》,2007(5)。
②张胜璋说,“林纾的‘识度’说,源自曾国藩《古文四象》的‘太阴识度’说,”其实以“阴阳刚柔”论文章风格在清代始见于姚鼐。详见陆德海,《明清文法理论研究》,2007年,第239页。
②不少学者批评林纾“发明义理”、求“道”等主张较桐城派的本体论更有倒退(周振甫,2005：156；陆德海,2007：279；),我认为根源在此,“守正”注定林纾最终是个保守派。当然,保守派并不一定总是贬义的,其实任何一个健康的社会群体都需耍保守派。
①“义法”一词最先见于《史记·十二诸侯年表序》,是司马迁总结孔子写《春秋》时的褒贬原则和行文特点,“约其辞文,去其烦重,以制义法”。欧阳修在《代人上王枢密求先集序书》对史传文学提出“言以载事,而文以饰言。事信言文,乃能表见于世,”即“事信言文”的原则。“事信”后来成为“义法”说中的“义”的先声,“言文”成为“法”的先声。清桐城诸家大力提倡“义法”-然各有所重。林纾的文法理论不以“义”见长,学界甚至多认为开了倒车,但其论“法”却集历代文法研究之大成,且又有创见。(范文渊,1959：140-1；周振甫,2005：166-7；王宜瑗,2006：6325-6：陆德海,2007：280-1)
②“故惟理醇而后法立,法立则以意遣词。”(林纾,《中学国文读本(唐文)序》)
①如果我所说的“林纾的翻译和古文创作实践所体现的语言使用价值之‘义’超过前人”还只是个人意见,则林纾在“法”上精进向来为世所公认,就我目前的研究材料来看,没有反对意见。“义法”在明清两代的研究流变非常复杂,我主要参考了陆德海的《明清文法理论研究》,上海：上海l’,籍出版社,2007年
①严复,“甲辰出都呈同里诸公”,王拭编,严复集,第二卷,北京：中华书局：1986年,第365页。
②徐念慈,“余之小说观”,《小说林》,1908年第10期。
①松岑,“论写情小说于新社会之关系”,原载《新小说》,1905年第五期,转引自阿英编,《晚清小说从钞》第一卷,中国都市芸能研究会官方网站：http://wagang.econ.hc.keio.ac.jp
②皞皞子,《林严合钞·序》,国学扶轮社,1909年,第一页。原文没有标点。
③ 《撒克逊劫后英雄传略》到1947年都还是“中学国文读本”
①王敬轩,“给《新青年》编者的一封信”,原载《新青年》1918年3月15日,第4卷,第3号。转引自鲍晶编,《刘半农研究资料》,天津人民出版社,1985年,第162页。
②半农,“覆王敬轩书”,原载《新青年》1918年3月15日,第4卷,第3号。lbid.第150页。
③如钱锺书说：“后来我阅读能力增进了,我也听到舆论指摘林译的误漏百出,就不再而也不屑再看它。它 只成为我生命里累积的前尘旧蜕的一部分了。”钱锤书,“林纾的翻译”,钱锤书等,《林纾的翻译》,北京：商务印书馆,1981年,第23页。
①罗家伦(署名志希),“今日中国之小说界”,《新潮》1919年1卷1号,转引自郑振铎编,《中国新文学大系·文学论争集》,上海：良友图书公司,1935年,第356页。
②尤其是1919年2月发表于上海《新申报》的“蠡叟丛谈”栏的短篇小说《荆生》,新文化阵营故意将荆生附会为徐树铮,使得林纾在相当长的一段时间内声名狼藉。
③梁启超,《清代学术概论》,上海古籍出版社,1998年,第98页。
①即刘镩江,时与陈衍(署名陈石遗)一起主编《文艺从刊》。苦海余生,“小说从话”,原载《小说月报》,1911年,第三期.薛绥之、张俊才编,《林纾研究资料》,福州：福建人民出版社,1983年,第216页。
②1919年胡适曾经批评过林纾用古文翻译小说必有损失,故此有“平心而论”一说。
③钱锺书,“林纾的翻译”,钱锺书等,《林纾的翻译》,北京：商务印书馆,1981年,第39页。
④即注释51,载钱锤书,“林纾的翻译”,钱锺书,《七缀集》,北京：三联书店,2002年,第111-2页。这个注释在1984年之前的本子里都见不到,根据钱锺书的叙述,应该是1984年修改《旧文四篇》时的增改。
①郑振铎,“林琴南先生”,《小说月报》,1924年,第15卷第11号,转引自钱锺书等,《林纾的翻译》,北京：商务印书馆,1981年,第11-6页。
③寒光的林译作品考证不大讨好,马泰来批评他“每以意测度”,见马泰来,“林纾翻译作品全目”,钱锤书等,《林纾的翻译》,北京：商务印书馆,1981年,第99页。
④寒光,《林琴南》,上海：商务印书馆,1935年,第210-1页。着重号为笔者所加。
②钱锤书,“林纾的翻译”,载钱锺书等,《林纾的翻译》,北京：商务印书馆,1981年,第30页。
①新版没有继承林译作品中一些优秀历史版本,如新版收录的《撒克逊劫后英雄略》有沈德鸿的校注本,《拊掌录》有严既澄的注释本,均收录在1933年出版的《万有文库》中,都是极好的点评本。而《黑奴吁犬录》本来有魏易的序,新版不知何故删除了,殊为可惜。
②杨联芬,《晚清至五四：中国文学现代性的发生》,北京大学出版社,2003年,第88页。
③杨联芬,《流动的瞬间：晚清与五四文学关系论》,台北：联经出版社,2006年,第25页。
①黄俊贤,叙事与视野融合：重述林译狄更斯小说,香港大学图书馆,2010年学位论文。
②孙致礼：中国的文学翻译：从归化趋向异化,《中国翻详》2002年,第一期。
①樽本照雄,“林纾冤罪事件簿序”,樽本照雄,《林纾冤罪事件簿》,清末小税研究会,2009年。
① The translator must use the tools that he knows best how to handle. And this reflection reminds me at once of what Lin Shu. the great early 19th century translator of European fiction into Chinese, said when he was asked why he translated Dickens into ancient Chinese instead of into modern colloquial. His reply was:'Because ancient Chinese is what I am good at.' Arthur Waley. "Notes on Reanslation", The Atlantic Monthly, the 100th anniversary issue. Nov.1948. in Arthur Waley. Secret History Of The Mongols. House of Stratus.2008, page 199.中文为笔者所译,其中"early 19th century"本当作"early 20th century",原文有误。
②Ibid.page 201。中文为笔者所译,原文作：I have compared a number of passages with the original....The humour is there, but is transmuted by a precise, economical style:every point that Dickens spoils by uncontrolled exuberance, Lin Shu makes quietly and efficiently. You may question at this point whether it is right to call him a t translator at all. But at any rate in the case of the Dickens novels it would be misleading. I think, to use such terms as 'paraphrase' or 'adaptation'.
③Ibid, page 201:What made him so remarkable as a translator was the immense force and vivacity of his style and the intensity with which he felt the stories that were communicated to him....I have spoken or the lessons that can be drawn from Lin Shu's achievement. First, then, what matters most is that the translator, whether working at first or at second-hand, should be someone who delights in handling words.....中文为笔者所译,着重号对应原文的斜体。
①"As to the desirability of programmes and schedules, the question is one which has again come conspicuously to the fore. As part of a new pre-occupation with cultural propaganda, various government-sponsored organizations are busy drawing up lists of works that ought to be translated. Young men with linguistic knowledge but often without any literary gifts are roped in to translate, without any particular enthusiasm, works whose only claim to attention is that they have got into an officially compiled list of'master-pieces'. I have a feeling that this system is not going to work very well. What matters is that a translator should have been excited by the work he translates, should be haunted day and night by the feeling that he must put it into his own language, and should be in a state of restlessness and fret till he has done so.'Masterpieces' were not always masterpieces and may at any minute cease to be so." Ibid, page 203中文为笔者所译。
②严复,“译《天演论》自序”,赫胥黎著,严复译,《天演论》,北京：商务印书馆,第ⅷ页。
Hawkes. David. "An Introductory Note", in Hawkes. David. Ed. John Minford. Siu-Kit Wong. Classical. modern, and humane: essays in Chinese literature. Hong Kong: Chinese University Press.1989. page 70.原文作；The voluminous output of the great translator Lin Shu included a good deal of modish trash. But the people who read his elegant classical renderings of Rider Haggard and Conan Doyle were not in search merely of entertainment. They were in conscious pursuit of the Occident, and were constantly reminded in the prefaces to these translations of the morals they might be expected to draw from them.
①康普顿的考证非常严谨,不依附旁人。他只证出林译89部作品的原著,但均经得起推敲-这种学术精神值得肯定。
② Robert William Compton, A study of the translations of Lin Shu, PhD dissertation. Stanford Unversity,1971, page ⅲ原文作：It must be conceded that Lin Shu was not destined to play a major role in the intellectual or literary currents of modem China. Although he was well-known and his translations were widely read in the last years of the Ch'ing dynasty, his contributions proved to be minor in view of the tremendous upheavals that have shaken the Chinese literary world since his time.
③底本考订与原著考证不同,明确到林译所用原本的具体版本,研究难度很大,但极有价值。
②"Although his Confucian leanings prompted him embrace the all-encompassing "three bonds"(san-kang三纲).his own life experience denied him their fulfillment. Loyal to the emperor, he could not serve him in office:filial to his father, he suffered from his early death:devoted to his wife, he became widower at the age of forty-five. Then, in his middle age. the despairing scholar found a source of income and spiritual consolation in the world of his translations."Leo Ou-fan. "Lin Shu and His Translation:Western Fiction in Chinese Perspective". Papers on China. Volume 19. East Asian Research Center. Harvard University,1965. page163.括号内的中文为原文所有。
①"The Pandora's box of Lin Shu's translations has released a swarm of new legacies of which he himself was unware, just as his interpretation of Western novels have pointed toward new horizons perhaps beyond the range of recognition of Western authors and Western readers."Leo Ou-fan. "Lin Shu and His Translation:Western Fiction in Chinese Perspective". Papers on China, Volume 19. East Asian Research Center. Harvard University.1965. page 187
"The purpose of this adaptation was to increase the readability so as to boost sales....As a dead language burdened with cultural associations, the literary language was not flexible or 'innocent' enough to recast foreign narrative without colouring it with Chinese culture.... Lin Shu...thought that turning foreign fiction into elegant literary language would strengthen the claim that these works of fiction were refined enough to be considered literature of high status."I-heng Zhao, The uneasy narrator: Chinese fiction from the traditional to the modern. London: Oxford University Press,1995, page 229-30.
① Yu Zhang对林译本的总体评价：Lin Shu first translated the novel with the help of his co-translators. His translation is characterized by its deletions and alterations. In his effort to make his work read more like a Chinese novel than a translation, he used vocabulary, images and allusions familiar to the Chinese audience. He even changed basic features of some of his characters to adapt to Chinese social conventions. Yu, Zhang. "Chinese Translations of David Copperfield: Accurracy and Acculturation". PhD dissertation. Southern Illinois University (Carbondale),1991.
②高万隆论文的总结：To conclude, Lin Shu was undoubtedly an initiator of modem Chinese literary translations as well as a pioneer of the New Culture Movement....Examined in its given cultural context, Lin Shu's translation practice and strategy were also successful, and fitted in with the needs of the Chinese culture and readers at that time....This is the goal of this thesis in recasting Lin Shu. Wanlong Gao, "Recasting Lin Shu: A Cultural Approach to Literary Translation". PhD dissertation. Griffith University.2003.
③吕立的结论The conclusion I reach is that Lin Shu's translation of Uncle Tom's Cabin is politically driven, with additional considerations of marketability and literary fame. Li Lu. "Translation and Nation:Negotiating China in the translation of Linshu. Yanfu. and Liang Qichao". PhD dissertation. University of Massachusetts (Amherst). 2007.
①杨文莹,字雪渔,浙江杭州人,清光绪二年进士,曾任贵州学政,工书法。
①寒光,《林琴南》,上海：中华书局,1935,第209页
② 《巴黎茶花女遗事》的问世非林纾从事翻译之本意。
①林纾、魏易,《黑奴吁天录》,北京：商务印书馆,1981,第2页
②Ibid.第二页。
③这是文章学翻译传统当中比较有影响力的模因。释法云《翻译名义集》曰：“译之言易也,为以所有,易其所无。”钱铺书评释道安“三失本”论日：“盖失于彼乃所以得于此也,安未克圆览而疏通其理矣。”
①邹振环,《影响中国近代社会的一百种译作》,北京：中国对外翻译出版公司,1996,第48页。邹先生此书这一段叙述不清,所以没有直接引用,大致意思是：此书是某位法国作者用法语写成,纳约约翰和李约瑟两位英国人合作将其译为英文,前者是口译,后者笔录。《听夕闲谈》即据此英译本译成。
②邹先生认为,两版改头换名无非有哗众取宠以拓展销路的用意。
③说“仅有”其实也不确,1981年商务印书馆重版林译小说丛书十本,收录了《黑奴吁天录》(这本书历史上商务印书馆一直没有得到版权),保存了原著当中林纾的跋、例言,却把魏易的序删了。现在学界基本上没有人知道魏易还在林译小说中有过序文。
①寒光,《林琴南》,上海：中华书局,1935,141页
②《块肉余生述》中Mr.译作“密司忒”,或“密司脱”,译法并不完全一致。林译小说中,作“密司忒”更多,如《滑稽外史》,钱锺书没有注意到这个细节。
①Chesterman. Andrews (1997),转引自 Jeremy Munday, The Routledge companion to translation studies (ed.). New York:Routledg,2009, pp 96.
①这个时间是推断出来的。笔者用的本子是商务印书馆《林译小说从书》第六编的版本,但这个本子竟然没有刊任何时间信息。根据1915年商务印书馆出版《新译罗刹录》上刊登的广告,笔者用的应对时1915年的再版。新式标点是笔者加上的。
①道安,《道行经序》。从“识度”来看,我认为道安“本无宗”师祖、般若学大法的身份才是他的翻译主张的根本,道安认为佛经存往的最终目的即让人们遗忘语言的描述.达到佛经文字和烦恼“药病双亡”之“观”,进而结合“智”求“般若”。所以道安讲“文”“质”主要意图在于突出佛经文字中的“般若”：“率初以要其终,或忘文以全其质者,则大智玄通,居可知也。”罗新璋在《翻译论集》只保留了此序的最后部分,应该说道安的原旨失其大半,“五失本、三不易”的本源隐匿无踪。我进而发现.很少有学者注意到《道行经序》前半部分极具“语言哲学”意味的论述。朱志瑜《中国佛籍译论选辑评注》摘引的内容超过罗新璋,应该是注意到了一些,不过没有任何说明。
②文章学的一大特点是对“文体”(大致相当于现在的"genre"和"style"之和,吴汝纶指的应当是前者)的研究非常细致,在古文写作当作,“明体”是很重要的一步。吴氏作为桐城派最后重镇,依据的虽然是文章学,但提的建议却很中肯。严复的翻译思想中吴汝纶的影响不可轻视。
③陈之展,“近代翻译文学”,载罗新璋编《翻译论集》,商务印书馆,1984年,第200页
④林纾在翻译中遇到有语言表现方式困难的原著以迭更司著作为多,详见本研究第五章。
①原文引自Harriet Beecher Stowe, Uncle Tom's cabin, or Life among the lowly. Boston:John P. Jewett & Co..1893,第73页,括号为笔者添加,斜体原文已有。林纾的译文引自林纾、魏易,《黑奴吁天录》,北京：商务印书馆,1981年,第20-1页。下同。
②黄继忠,《汤姆大伯的小屋》,上海：上海译文出版社,1993年,第45页。下同。这是Uncle Tom's Cabin在中国最早的一个白话文译本。
①有人认为“被酒时时带剑行”一诗中的“剑”即为方赠。陆建德,“再说‘荆生’兼及运动之术”,南方周末,2008年12月31日。
①金为,《金缕曲——<玉雪留痕>题词和补柳翁》,上海：商务印书馆,1905年
②林纾,《畏庐漫录》,转引自寒光,《林琴南》,上海：商务印书馆,1935年,第153页。这也是林纾对“开民智”的文学题材的思考。笔者还看到一则轶事也与此相关。林纾在北大教书的时候一次看到下面的学生恹恹欲睡,便说：“现在给大家讲个故事。从前有个风流和尚,某日经过一座桥,见一位美女姗姗而来。学生们全来神了,林纾却突然不讲了。学生请问后来事如何,林纾说：“没什么,一个向西,一个向东，走了。”顾晓绿,《一言难尽1912-1949民国映画》,团结出版社,2010年,第46-7页。
①转引自寒光,《林琴南》,上海：商务印书馆,1937年,第48页。寒光引用这段材料之后说,陈炳垫能够拿着佛洛依德之学说的眼光来分析林氏翻译言情小说的心理的确是一个创见。这倒未必就是佛洛依德之学说,笔者更认为传统文人有自成体系的“心性”修养观。如果寒光仔细往传统文论的方向想想,还是能找到本土的线索。不过,换个角度来说,寒光的观点倒也可以说明,东西方文论创作论对作家的性情和精神状态都有一定层而的关注。只是四方的译论与文论却不像中国的译论与文论走得那么近,这固然能保持翻译理论独立的特点,但也容易导致无法有效地、及时地汲取文论中更丰富的养分。
①寅半生(钟骏文,浙江萧山人,时主编《游戏世界》),读《迦茵小传》两译本书后.1907年《游戏世界》第三期。
②原文：“盖我一寰甲,饮酒,立誓,狎妓,节节无所讳。
①很多学者认为林纾欣赏“俗”是对古文理论最大程度的破坏.(陆海德,2007：284)实际上,这恰恰是传统文章之学彻底现代化最宝贵的一次机遇,遗憾的是林纾的实践成果还没有足够的沉淀便被“五四”洪流冲得七零八落。
②杨自检,《关于译学研究的一些想法》,载张柏然、许钧主编,《面向21世纪的译学研究》,北京：商务印书馆,2002年,第13页。
①司马光,《资治通鉴》,北京：中华书局,1956年.第三册,第1390页。时宗室诸母因酣悦相与语曰：“文叔少时谨信,与人不款曲,唯直柔耳,今乃能如此”1帝闻之,大笑曰：“吾治天下,亦欲以柔道行之。”光武帝所说的“柔道”指的是“不轻易兴兵,并借此以剥夺将帅军权,”见《资治通鉴》第1381页“建武十三年”,这只是一种帝王之术罢了,后代君主多有采用。光武帝本人并不“柔”,“平生见小敌怯,今见大敌勇,”晚年尤有暴行。
①林纾,《离恨天》,北京：商务印书馆,1981,第4页。
①Taifel.Henri.Human Groups and Social Categories: Studies in Social Psychology,London:Cambridge university Press.1981,第147页.
②林纾没有区分“畜”和“蓄”。古文里“蓄奴仆”和“畜奴仆”都用,但后者更常见。《说文》：蓄：积也；畜,田畜。又：家养谓之畜,野生谓之兽,可见后者有贬损的意思,现在都统一改用“蓄奴”
①灵石,《读黑奴吁天录》,载薛绥之主编,《林纾研究资料汇编》,福州：福建人民出版社,1982年,130页。
①严复,《原强序》。
②洪堡特说知识分子的责任是在社会生活中起到匡正的作用。
③鲁迅,《摩罗诗力说》。
①数字即该书在A descriptive guide to the best fiction. British and American中出现的贞码,下同。参见：Ernest Albert Baker. A descriptive guide to the best fiction. British and American. London: S. Sonnenschein,1903
②原作未入选,但作者的另外两部小说" A Dash for a Throne" " In the Name of a Woman "入选。根据Baker的评述,均为爱情小说。
①Ernest Albert Baker. A descriptive guide to the best fiction. British and American. London: S. Sonnenschein. 1903
②"It must not be thought that the literature which translators made available was always the best. The voluminous output of the great translator Lin Shu included a good deal of modish trash. But the people who read his elegant classical renderings of Rider Haggard and Conan Doyle were not in search merely of entertainment. They were in conscious pursuit of the Occident, and were constantly reminded in the prefaces to these translations of the morals they might be expected to draw from them. In introducing Allan Quatermain Lin Shu lectures his readers on the white man's love of adventure and innovation: and in his preface to People of the Mist he reflects that if an Englishman would endure the sufferings and hardships that its hero underwent for the sake of a bag of rubies, the outlook for China with her vast resources of gold, silver, silk, and tea was very poor indeed." Classical, modern, and humane: essays in Chinese literature. Ed. John Minford. Siu-Kit Wong. Hong Kong:Chinese University Press. 1989. Page 70.
①韦利有个精当的比喻形容林纾的翻译,“盲人观画”：Knowing no foreign language he was. as he more or less confesses in his analogy about footsteps, rather in the position of a blind man at a picture gallery,whose friends are able to tell him everything about the pictures except what they actually look like. (Waley.2008:190)
②1981年商务印书馆重版了十本林译小说,其中有七本是与魏易合作的；《吟边燕语》,《撒克逊劫后英雄略》,《拊掌录》,《黑奴吁天录》,《块肉余生述》,《迦茵小传》,《不如归》。邹振环《影响中国近代社会的一百种译作》里林译小说占了6本,除了《巴黎茶花女遗事》之外,其余全是与魏易口述。寒光说,没有魏易林纾不会取得这样的成就。
①钱锺书先生曾详细考证过林纾早期翻译中的“摇摆”现象,见钱锺书等,《林纾的翻译》,北京：商务印书馆,1981年,第42页。
②1873年蠡勺居士在《听夕闲谈》译序里仍在强调“小说四弊”：虽然,执笔者于此则不可视为笔墨烟云,可以惟吾所欲言也。邪正之办不可混,善恶之镒不可淆.使徒作風花雪月之词,记兄女缠绵之事,则未近於尊淫,其蔽一也。使徒作豪侠失路之谈,纪山林行劫之事,则未近於诲盗,其蔽二也。使徒写奸邪倾轧之心,为机械变诈之事,则未近于纵奸,其蔽三也。使徒记十戈满地之事,逞将帅用武之谋,则未近于好乱,其蔽四也。去此四蔽,而小说乃可传矣。
③林纾,《译林序》,载载罗新璋编《翻译论集》,商务印书馆,1984年,第161-2页。
3施蛰存,《中国近代文学大系·翻译文学集·导言》,上海书店1990年
1郑振铎先生对哈葛德及柯南道尔的作品实际上是持排斥的态度：“我们见了这个统计之后.一方面自然是非常的感谢林琴南先生,因为他介绍了这许多重要的世界名著给我们,但‘方而却不免可惜他的劳力之大半归于虚耗,因为在他所译的一百五十六种的作品中,仅有这六七十种是著名的(其中尚杂有哈葛德及科南道尔二人的第二等的小说二十七种,所以在一百五十六种中,重要的作品尚占不到三分之一),其他的书却都是第二三流的作品,可以不必译的。”郑振铎,《林琴南先生》,转引自商务印书馆《林纾的翻译》,1981年第11-2灭。
1 《冰櫱余生记》1916年商务印书馆出版,文言文译出。译本版权页载“原著者法国勒东路易,译述者双石轩”,寒光、魏惟仪均认为是魏易所译,现在多采此说,除此之外没有其它佐证,魏易也没有再用“双石轩”这个名字译过其它著作。
2“魏易是第一个将《游记》译为中文的人。”张跃铭,“《马可波罗游记》在中国的翻译与研究”,江淮论坛,1981年第3期
① “这大概不能十分归咎于林先生,因为他是不懂得任何外国文字的,选择原本之权全操于与他合作的口译者之身上。如果口译者是具有较好的文学常识呢,他所选择的书便为较重要的,如果门译者没有什么知识呢,他所选择的书便为第二流的毫无价值的书了。林先生吃了他们的亏不浅,他的一大半的宝贵的劳力是被他们所虚耗了。这实是一件很可惋惜的事!(只有魏易及王庆通是他的较好的合作者。)”郑振铎,“林琴南先生”,钱锺书等,《林纾的翻译》,北京：商务印书馆,1981年。
①这里说的是一件很有名的故事,曾朴去北京探访林纾,劝他有计划地翻译西方名著。Arthur Waley在Notes on translation一文中引此事说明翻译选材不必搞“系统工程”。The Secret History of Mongos.第191-2页。
②曾虚白,“为林魏合译小说影印本欢呼”,《传记文学》,第六十五卷第四期。
③《张元济日记》1917年6月12日写到：“竹庄昨日来信,言琴南近来小说译稿多草率,又多错误,且来稿太多。余复言稿多只可收受,惟草率错误应令改良。”见张元济：《张元济日记》(北京：商务印书馆,1981年),页233。
Multilingual2010年12月(Volume 21 Issue 8)就translation ethics(?)故了一期专刊。大多数译者表示,在职业伦理与经济需要抵触时,他们会选择服从后者,理由是：“即便我不译也总会有人译。”
①魏易序《黑奴吁天录》,武林魏氏刻本。
②原著的另一重要角色“哲而治”有3/4的白人血统,肤色儿近十白人。因此,“译本”冠以“黑奴”之名未必尽妥,但的确起到了对“黄种人”的警醒效果。
③但这并不是“(原文的)意义则服从于主方语言使用者的实践需要”(刘禾,2008：88),“黑奴”并没有新的意义产生,魏易提的是“奴隶性质”而非“黑奴性质”。从这个角度看,那种认为“国民性的概念最初由梁启超等晚清知识分子从日本引入中国”(刘禾,2008：74)的说法实际上是给五四最激进的倡导者帮腔,对晚明、季清的有识之士长期主张的“翻译——会通——超胜”战略及实践则视而不见。魏易对理学八股的批评虽然毫不留情,但对“支那人种”追求自由之信念仍满怀希望,这种品质在五四时代激进的国民性翻译者身上就不那么清晰。
③中国第二历史档案馆编,中华民国史档案资料汇编(第三辑：文化),南京：江苏古籍出版社,1991年,第152页。
①蔡元培,“庄北京通俗教育研究会演说词”,东方杂志(第14卷),1917年第四期,第15页。文章署名蔡孑民。
②钱锤书,“林纾的翻译”,载《七缀集》,北京：三联书店,2002年,第111页。
③钱锺书等,“林纾的翻译”,载《林纾的翻译》,北京：商务印书馆,1981年,第35页。
①按：这里的翻译可以确定不是译书,而是为了挣钱为别人做实用翻译。
②钱锺书列举了林译中“讹字”,“脱漏字”,“杜撰字”及“错字”等现象,证明林纾本人没有看过自己的译稿,见钱锺书,“林纾的翻译”,钱锺书,《七缀集》,北京：三联书店,2002年,第86-7页。
①历代文法家所持“义法”的差异并不体现在具体的写作程式上,而是体现在“师法”对象,以及由师法对象推演出来各类文体的风格。详见第五章“林译之词采”
②古典文论中的“文体”含义十分丰富,很难讲实某个兼容并包,相互不打架的定义。我个人认为主要原因在于传统的文法研究按“语言使用的对象”定义文体,但随着语言实践的发展,文章的“对象”趋于“泛化”(不妨理解成“大众化”,语言超脱了贵族的掌握逐渐为普罗大众所用),开始萌发从“语言使用的方式”上定义文体。郭英德在《中国古代文体学论稿》中提出：“文体的基本结构应由体制、语体、体式、体性四个层次构成。体制是指外在的形状、面貌、构架,语体指文体的语言系统、语言修辞和语言风格,体式指文体的表现方式,体性指文体的表现对象和审美精神。”笔者认为郭氏的分类及描述虽然未必绝对清晰,个别术语的名称亦可改进,但目前来看他的说法算是比较可靠的。郭英德,《中国古代文体学论稿》,北京：北京大学出版社,2005年,第2贞。
②转引自王先霈、王又平编《文学理论批评术语汇释》,北京：高等教育出版社,2006年,第275页。
①吴汝纶,《吴汝纶尺犊》,黄山：黄山书社,1990年,第161页。
②笔者用的底本即是James H. Loewe的翻译本,J.M. Dent.1900年出版。
①这与合作者不无关系,详见本章第三节。
②《黑奴吁天录》中一共有八首歌,分别是：“Die in the Field ", " Bright Canaan ", " The Wings of the Morning", "A World of Spirits Bright", "The Hebrew Children", "Amazing Grace", " When I Can Read My Title Clear", " Blow Ye the Trumpet "。这些歌曲现在某些场合仍然诵唱,链接是弗吉尼业大学提供的wav,mp3和rm三种格式的录音：http://utc.iath.virginia.edu/christn/chsohp.html
①Dale Cockrell. Demons of Disorder:Early Blackface Minstrels and Their World. Cambridge:Cambridge University Press,1997:Dena Epstein. Sinful Tunes and Spirituals:Black Folk Music to the Civil War. Urbana: University of Illinois Press.1977:Richard Crawford. America's Musical Life:A History. New York:W. W. Norton. 2001.
② "Nearly every character in Uncle Tom's Cabin is defined by the sort of music he or she performs. prefers, or scorns... For Stowe and her readers, music was the supreme art of affection...it was a clue to character." The Music of Uncle Tom's Cabin BY DEANE L. ROOT. DEPARTMENT OF MUSIC. UNIVERSITY OF PITTSBURGH. http://utc.iath.virginia.edu/interpret/interframe.html
③根据Stephen Railton的研究,这九种音乐题材是：1)Methodist hymns 2)Camp-meeting hymns.3)Psalm-singing.4) Catholic (Latin) hymns and organ pieces.5)Secular songs and piano pieces.6) Opera, theater music.7) Dancing.8) Whistling. Minstrel song & dance。
①这首歌叫"Wings of the morning":Oh, had I the wings of the morning./I'd fly away to Canaan's shore,/Bright angels should convey me home,/To the new Jerusalem./O Thou Almighty Father./Come help me now to praise thy glory./Methinks I hear the trumpet sound,/Before the break of day./Oh. had I the wings of the morning./I'd fly away to Canaan's shore./Bright angels should convey me home./To the new.Jerusalem.按：“/”为笔者所添加,表示换行。这首歌在基督教徒中仍然流行,笔者听到的是1999年知名歌剧表演者James Bryant在Virginia Arts Recording Studios录制的版本,见http://utc.iath.virginia.edu/christn/wingsfr.html
②原歌出自Charles Wesley的Funeral Hymns.second series,1759斯土活的引文稍有出入,原文应当作“I see a world of spirits bright. Who taste the pleasures there."全部歌词比较长,这里不引,可参见：http://www.cy berhymnal.org/htm/a/l/e/aletthis.htm。Wesley的这本唱诗集很有名,“the best Methodist hymn book which had appeared up to that." (J. Alfred Faulkner.A new History of Methodism, vol. ii. p.146.)
①这倒不为林纾所独有,桐城文家研究义法最得力者方苞论叙事文即主此见。“义法”在写作程式方面并不能体现历代文法家的文论差异,所不同的是写作程式的“师法”对象,并师法对象推演出来各类文体的风格。
②Lin Shu was already famous as a writer of essays and criticism in a terse, clear, and vigorous style of literary Chinese when, more or less accidentally, his career as a translator began.... It is perhaps by his translation of Dickens that he is best known. He translated all the principal Dickens novels, and I have compared a number of passages with the original. To put Dickens into classical Chinese would on the face of it seem to be a grotesque undertaking. But the results are not at all grotesque. Dickens, inevitably, becomes a rather different and to my mind a better writer. All the over-elaboration, the overstatement and uncurbed garrulity disappear. The humour is there, but is transmuted by a precise, economical style: every point that Dickens spoils by uncontrolled exuberance. Lin Shu makes quietly and efficiently.
① Waley的见解在西方有不同意见。C T Hsia(夏志清)说"Granted that Lin Shu's 'precise, economical style' makes better reading than Dickens' 'uncontrolled exuberance,' shouldn't a translator's primary duty be fidelity to the spirit and style of the original? " (CT Hsia) R. M. Campton连Hsia这一点点的宽容也不允许,他在质疑Waley的同时批评Hsia上了Waley的当,‘'Incidentally this praise of Lin Shu by Waley has induced C T Hsia to comment:Granted that Lin Shu's precise...." (R. M. Camton,1971:1148)
①此据张俊才说,笔者并不同意。删减多少与译得认不认真完全是两回事,《天演论》译得不认真吗?《块肉余生述》是不是林纾译得最认真的一本书不得而知,但根据我的比较,林纾的精品译作当中,删减最少的要数《撒克逊劫后英雄略》,1981年商务印书馆重印的林译本约14万字。
②张世君认为这是受到了流浪汉小说的影响：事实上,西方创作实践中,并非都是严格遵守情节整一性的,它们有很多与情节整一性不相吻合的插曲式的描写。突出的例子是文艺复兴时期的流浪汉小说picaresque novels"。张世君：明清小说评点的空间性观念.载《明清小说评点叙事概念研究》,北京：中国社会科学出版社,2007年,第86页。
①林纾谈《左传》及《史记》用“插笔”：“左传为文家叙事祖庭,每到插叙处,辄用一“初”字领起。如宣公二年叙晋灵不君,以伏甲困赵盾,至提弥明斗死,盾儿不出,忽得灵辄而免。然灵辄事与本事相隔至远,只得用一“初”字补入灵辄前迹,则救盾始非无因。史家全循此例,用为插补之法,而《史记》用之尤极自然……顾左氏之长惟此也：能于百忙中紧紧穿插,又紧紧叫应,使读者惊其捷敏,而又不见针线之迹。”见林纾：《左孟庄骚精华录》卷上,上海：商务印书馆,1925年,第29页。可见,林纾对于“初”这样的明显痕迹也并不卞张。
②原文太长,与本研究也无直接相关,略去不引。参见John Mullan. "Inset Narratives". How Novels Work. Oxford and New York:Oxford University Press.2006. p.165-6.
① Mark Ford说：Nicholas Nickleby is made up, nevertheless, of all manner of different kinds of writing—melodrama, political satire, class comedy, social criticism, domestic farce—while its loose, episodic narrative style allows Dickens to push the story at almost any moment in whatever direction happens to appeal. Its open, haphazard progress harks back to the picaresque traditions of the eighteenth century—particularly Smollett and Fielding—and contrasts absolutely with the nightmarish world of Oliver Twist, which was only half written at the time his manic schedule obliged him to begin work on his new serial. It is revealing that Dickens so arranged his contracts that for six months he was producing novels embodying such different visions of the world simultaneously." Mark Ford, "Introduction", in Charles Dickens. Nicholas Nickelby, ed. Mark Ford (London Penguin Books.2003). p.xiv此外,Paul Davis也有类似考证,参见Paul Davis, "Nicholas Nickleby. The Life and Adventures of Nicolas Nickleby", The Penguin Dickens Companion: The Essential Reference to His Life and Work (Harmondsworth: Penguin Books,1999).第331页。
②林译本把这16页的“闲笔”压缩成了一句话“于是有谈鬼谈盗者”,见林译《滑稽外史》.卷1,第五章,第39页。我觉得可能是林译不满意原著的内容,故而删减。译文“谈”引起的两个动宾短语并置表达的是作者带有批判意味地省略了一些内容,比如我们说某人“讲东讲西”,实际表明的是我们的态度,故而有意隐去此人究竟说了什么。
③陈平原：中国小说叙事角度的转变,载《中国小说叙事模式的转变》,香港：中文大学出版社,2003年,第57-90页
④林纾的翻译有过不少“心理描写”的译写尝试,这与“全知视角”的叙事程式或有关联。
①潘文国,《汉英语对比纲要》,北京：北京语言文化大学出版社.2003年,第206页。
①Since both oral and visual forms of information processing are involved, sight translation can be defined as a specific type of written translation as well as a variant of oral interpretation.
②Most expression failures were syntactic or grammatical...'subjucts seem to have suffered from coordination problems and short-term memory failures.
① Whereas the English novel often describes a scene or a person from an Olmpian angle or viewpoint, the Chinese describes it from the angle of a character. For example, the scene in which... At one point in the novel the English opens in this manner:'One morning, three men were seen entering Paris on foot through the Porte St. Denis. It was a fine day in spring.' The translator could not accept the impersonal'were seen', characteristic though it is of traditional English narrative. He changes the order and the angle of view, beginning with the date and the weather, and only then remarks that'the soldiers guarding the wall saw three men entering the Tianni gate." Patrick Hanan. "On the First Novel Translated into Chinese". In Patrick Hanan, Chinese Fiction of the Nineteenth and Early Twentieth Centuries. New York: Columbia University Press,2004.韩南没有交代到底是哪部小说,笔者只能按自己的理解翻原文所及的一句引文。
① 《文心雕龙·丽辞》在提出“至于诗人偶章,大大联辞,奇偶识变,不劳经营”之前有“夫心生文辞,运裁百虑”
②邵宏,《衍义的“气韵”中国画论的观念史研究》,南京：江苏教育出版社,2005年,第172页。我认为邵所指的“技术”更准确地说就是“创作的程式”。
③《周礼·天官·大宰》记载：“正月之吉,县治象之法于象魏”,郑注“象魏,阙也”。可见“象魏”是种在楼台之中绘图治事的方法。
④《通志·图谱略·索象》记载：“古之学者,为学有要,置图于左,置书于右.索象于图,索理于书,故人亦易为学,学亦易为功”
⑤参见王伯敏：《中国版画史》,上海美术出版社,1961年10月版,第18页。
①于德山,中国古代小说“语一图”互文现象及其叙事功能.《明清小说研究》,2003年第3期
②据说底版被著名林纾研究专家林薇先生收藏了。
③转引自黄霖,韩同文,《中国历代小说论著选》,南昌：江西人民出版社,1985年,第73页
④寒光写《林琴南》一书时,《春觉斋论画遗稿》尚未出版,因此寒光一再致歉材料匮乏,无法探究林纾的绘画思想。
①载《春觉斋论画遗稿》,北京(北平)：燕京大学图书馆,1935年,第十二页。
②傅彦长、朱应鹏、张若谷,《艺术三家言》,上海：上海良友图书印刷公司,1927年
③林纾魏易用的底本是Cheap Edition参见黄俊贤.叙事与视野融合：重述林译狄更斯小说,香港大学图书馆,2010年学位论文。我数过David Copperfield的Cheap Edition一共配有39幅插图。
④狄更斯的小说里的配图,贡献最多的是Browne参见Robert Patten. "Browne. Hablot Knight", in Paul Schlicke ed..Oxford Reader's Companion to Dickens. Oxford & New York: Oxford University Press.2000).第58页。
①John Harvey. Victorian Novelists and their Illustrators, London: Sidgwick & Jackson,1970,第12页
②Ibid, pp 13.
③Paradoxically, when Stowe wrote Unde Tom's Cabin, she was not particularly familiar with blacks or the conditions of their existence. Phrenology helped mitigate that want of knowledge by supplying information about mental orientation and its consequences on outward appearances. The importance of the latter for Stowe is suggested by the contention that her "vocation is simply that of a painter, and my object will be to hold up in the most lifelike and graphic manner possible slavery, its reverses, changes, and the negro character, which I have had ample opportunities for studying. There is no arguing with pictures and everybody is impressed by them whether they mean to be or not." Charles Colbert, A measure of perfection: phrenology and the fine arts in America. New Baskerville:UNC Press Books,1997,第241页.
①所谓“变相”,就是根据语言叙述描绘图像：“变文”则是依据图像铺演语言叙述,叙与画合、叙画交映,其叙述特征正表现在“变相(文)”绘抽象为具象、化呆板为生动的通俗化叙事功能与品格,二者的互变关系十分明显。参见周绍良：《唐代变文及其它》,《敦煌文学作品选》,中华书局,1987年12月版,第25页。
②图画来源：全景博物馆丛书编辑委员会,《中国名画博物馆》,郑州：海燕出版社,2002年,第47页。说来有趣,这部画集、评画集是笔者在University of Massachusetts Amherst Translation Center发现的,Edwin Gentzler说看这些画作可以最便利地了解中国的文艺思想。
①“图式想象”相当大程度上需要依靠“语际翻译”产品,但本图把“语际翻译”和“符际翻译1”分开表述并无错误。在“林纾的翻译”全过程中,语际翻译产品和图像化想象经“意境”整合后进入“语内翻译”,详见第五章。
②参见Basil Hatim. Jeremy Munday. Translation: an advanced resource book, New York:Psychology Press.2004
③狄更斯小说中的配图外部原因极其重要,究其源起而言,外部功能甚至超过内部功能,但本研究从文章学的角度考量林纾的翻译,与其在本土的出版情况关涉不大,因此省略。可参见：John Harvey. Victorian Novelists and their Illustrators, London:Sidgwick & Jackson.1970
④这是就现在已经“结集成书”的小说文本而言,庄“连载”的时候,第二种功能依然很重要。参见：Leavis、Q. D.. The Dickens Illustrations: Their Function. IN Leavis, F. R. and Leavis. Q. D. Dickens the Novelist. London: Chatto & Windus,1970. P429-78.
① “插图”对狄更斯的小说有着决定性的影响,他的第一部插图连载小说The Pickwick Papers(《匹克威克外传》)的出版方式和销售奇迹彻底改变了英国十九世纪小说的发行甚至创作模式。《外传》的问世实由“插图”而来,当时著名的捅而家Robert Seymour提议出版商为他的连载漫画Nimrod Club找作家配上文字,出版商接连被几个作家拒绝后找到了刚出道的狄更斯。然而狄更斯却成功说服了出版商让他自由写作然后配上插较,Symour勉强与狄更斯合作了一期即自杀弃世.第四期开始狄更斯终于遇到他最满意的搭档,Hablot Knight Browne《外传》从1836年3月开始发行,前三期如出版商所预料,每期售出约500份,但从第四期开始销量剧增,到1837年2月销量达14000份,年底最后一期竟然售出40000。狄更斯由此走上小说创作的道路。Paul. Schlicke. "The Pickwick Papers". In Paul Schlicke ed.. Oxford Reader's Companion to Dickens. Oxford & New York: Oxford University Press.2000:P451-5.
①有研究说这是因为笔译也涉及到" short-term memory ", Agrifoglio,2004
① 《先秦诗鉴赏辞典》,上海：上海辞书出版社,1998年,第84页。
①我对照了《说部初集》和《林译小说丛书》中的两个本子,段落设置相同。第一章到第三章分段非常细致,但此后的段落设置就越来越少了,也有一些章节完全不分段。
②我看了手上的三种版本,1905年上海商务本和1981年北京商务本均如此,1932年上海商务本中沈德鸿在校注时,按照语义设置了详细的段落。
③我没有找到这部书的初版,只能依据1981年北京商务印书馆的新式标点本。从1981年北京商务的《撒克逊劫后英雄略》和1932年上海商务的校点本对比结果看,商务印书馆这套“林译小说从书”没有继承历史上的校点本,均是原版。
④笔者所用的版本分别是：《二城故事》,1992年魏惟仪影印本,取自芝加哥大学图书馆：《冰櫱余生记》,1916年商务印书馆本,取自哈佛大学图书馆：《苏后马丽惨史》,《德皇威廉二世少年生活自传》均为1935年商务印书馆本、取自香港大学图书馆：《泰西小说名家传略》,1917年通俗文学研究会本,取自哈佛大学图书馆；《元代客卿马可博罗游记》(中国国家图书馆影印本).1913年正蒙书局本。
①除去《巴黎茶花女遗事》,林译人物对话方式基本上采用了“文言小说及笔记的传统文体,和当时的报章杂志文体”,详见《林纾的翻译》,第43-5页。
②参见林纾、魏易译,《拊掌录》,严既澄校注,上海：商务印书馆,1933：8-9页
③正如钱锺书所考证,古文中省略“日”、“对日”的情况少之又少。钱锺书等,《林纾的翻译》,第43页。
①苦海余生,“小说从话”,原载《小说月报》,1911年,第三期,转引自薛绥之、张俊才编,《林纾研究资料》,福州：福建人民出版社,1983年,第216页。
①如蔡登山,曾虚白等人多采此说。魏惟仪的《我的父亲——魏易》一文是目前有关魏易生平的唯一第一手资料。这篇文章最先刊登于1982年11月23日《中国时报副刊》上,1987年收入魏惟仪的散文集《不如归》,大地出版社出版。
③魏易与林纾其他的合作者不一样,他只肯为林纾口述。和林纾合作最多的陈家麟就不是这样,此君可谓四处误人。见寒光,《林琴南》,第68-9页。
①陈敬之,《新文学运动的阻力》,台北：成文出版社有限公司,1980年,第35-6页。
②陈希澎,“十字军英雄记序”,载林纾、魏易译《十字军英雄记》,上海：商务印书馆,1906年,第一页。
3王国伟,“当世蒲松龄,古笔谱新曲——林纾短篇小说艺术新论”,《西华师范大学学报(哲社版)》2004年第3期,第19页。
①林纾,“矣字用法”,引自郭绍虞、罗根泽编,《中国古典文学理论批评专著选辑》,北京：人民文学出版社出版,第133-4页。八种用法是笔者根据林纾的论述整理所得,为方便下文检阅对照,添加了序号。
①郭、罗二人编的《中国古典文学理论批评专著选辑》由范先渊校点,笔者只是把一些竖排用的标点转换了一下,不涉及断句。郭的这个本子有些断句经不住推敲,如“严助、朱买臣等招徕东瓯事,两粤、江、淮之间,肃然烦费矣”错得比较明显,文法、地理、史实均经不住推敲。文法上讲,“招徕”的自然是“东瓯”而不能是“东瓯事”：地理上看,“两粤、江、淮”怎么能“之间”呢?最主要的原因恐怕还是没搞清史实,这是汉朝我国南方地区民族融合、疆土拓展的大事。建元三年,武帝在没有控兵虎符的情况下遣严助持“皇帝节杖”调动“会稽”(朱买臣的老家)一带的兵力救援被闽越(粤)国围困的东瓯国,后以闽越国主动撤兵告终。但东瓯国新君迫于闽越压力,率领族属军队四万多人北上,“请举国徙中国”——这是“严助、朱买臣等招徕东瓯”：元封元年至三年间,武帝又先后以武力把“闽越(粤)国”和“南越(粤)国”纳入汉朝政府管辖——这就是“事两粤”(此处的“事”应作“治理”解,如《战国策》有“齐、魏得地葆利而详事下吏。”)；最后的“江淮之间,肃然烦费”要更复杂,除了当年的东瓯国,闽越国后来也同样被武帝迁移到江淮一带。所以,林纾引的这句话应当断作“严助、朱买臣等招徕东瓯,事两粤,江淮之间肃然烦费矣。”我参考过中华书局的数版《汉书》,均做此断,没有争议。郭绍虞主编的这个版本里类似的断句问题不止一处,以郭在学界的身份,似不该。下文引“也字用法”举《史记》为例,也有几处文理不通。如果说郭本作为《春觉斋论文》的第一个现代标点本,些许疏漏或可原谅,则王水照2007年的十卷本《历代文话》可谓以讹传讹。王本录《春觉斋论文》一字不差地照收了郭本所有的讹误,这有些说不过去。王本称其底本为“1916年北京都门印书局本”,亦无可信矣。见王水照编,《历代文话》(7),上海：复旦大学出版社,2007年,第6431页。
①林纾,“也字用法”,引自郭绍虞、罗根泽编,《中国古典文学理论批评专著选辑》,北京：人民文学出版社出版,第135-7灭。六种用法是笔者根据林纾的论述整理所得,为方便下文检阅对照,添加了序号。
②为了节约篇幅,这里不再引迭更司的原文对照。
①其实林纾对佛教经典文学也很熟悉,《洪罕女郎传·序》引用的佛典表明,至少《楞严经》他看得很熟。此经虽有真伪之争,但却素以其文学水平为人称道,执笔者房融乃房玄龄之嫡孙,学养尤高。
②孔庆貌,《林纾传》,团结出版社,1998年,第121页。笔者按：《水浒传》第二回：鲁达坐下,道：“奉着经略相公钧旨：要十斤精肉,切做臊子,不要见半点肥的在上面。”
③章炳麟,“与人论文书”,转引自钱基博,《现代中国文学史》,北京：东方出版社,2008年,第39页。
④林纾,“与姚叔节书”,载林纾,《畏庐续集》,台北：文津出版社1978年,第16页。这是林纾惹火烧身、与章炳麟论战的开端。
⑤这二十则故事分别为：《肉券》The Merchant of Venice,《驯悍》The Taming of the Shrew《挛误》The Comedy of Errors《铸情》Romeo and Juliet《仇金》Timon of Athens,《神合》Pericles, Prince of Tyre,《蛊征》Macbeth《医谐》All's Well that Ends Well,《狱配》Measure for Measure,《鬼诏》Hamlet, Prince of Denmark《环证》Cymbeline《女变》King Lear)《林集》As You Like It《礼哄》Much A do about Nothing《仙狯》Midsummer Night's Dream,《珠还》The Winter's Tale《黑瞀》Othello,《婚诡》Twelfth Night:or. What You Will, 《青惑》The Two Gentlemen of Verona,《飓引》The Tempest。英文底本用的是：Charles Lamb. Mary Lamb. Winston Stokes. All shakespeare's tales: Tales from Shakespeare by Charles and Mary Lamb, and Tales from Shakespeare by Winston Stokes, New York:Frederick A. Stokes company,1911。顺便插一句,国学扶轮社出《林严合钞》时.林纾从二十则故事里选了八则送去,取名《泰西故事八则》。钱锺书在《林纾的翻译》里,举《春觉斋论文·论文十六忌·忌糅杂》中林纾批评自己写《洪罕女郎传·序》用了佛典,说明“这充分证明林纾认为翻译小说和‘古文’是截然两回事。”这个结论有两点值得商榷。第一曲解引文,钱氏所引曰“糅杂者,杂佛氏之言也。……适译《洪罕女郎传》,遂以《楞严》之旨,掇拾为序言,颇自悔其杂。幸为游戏之作,不留稿。”“游戏之作”明显指“序文”而不是整部译著,钱误会了。第二,就笔者举的《林严台钞》而言,林纾亲—把他的译文选进了“文钞”,可见翻译对他来说,与“古文”并无差别。不少学者被钱氏误导。我仔细看过钱锤书先生的注释,他可能的确没有看到过《林严合钞》,不过此公素来引西文详注出处,征引中文则不然。
①纪昀的《阅微草堂笔记》文法更单调。比较起来林译《吟边燕语》尚可称善。
②本研究立足翻译,因而对“林纾的古文”及“林纾的古文研究”,不作详细讨论。这两个方面的内容笔者参考了寒光,《林琴南》,141-7；周振甫,《周振甫讲古代文论》,第165-74；张俊才,《林纾评传》,第38-45、198-209页：钱基博,《现代中国文学史》,第190-5页：陈敬之,《新文学运动的阻力》,第32-8页。张胜璋,林纾的古文论综述,福州师范大学2009年博士论文。张的博士论文没有写完,“韩柳文研究法”一节只列了标题写上“暂缺”
③吴汝纶的意思是林纾学的是韩愈,且学得像。得到这样的赞誉,也难怪林纾后来成了铁杆遗老。《清史稿》载：“纾所作务抑遏掩蔽,能伏其光气,而其真终不可自閟。”笔者注意到,一些文章引吴汝纶的话作“抑遏掩蔽,能伏光气者”,或“是抑遏掩蔽,能伏光气”,除了文理不通,人概也没有细想吴氏和《清史稿》的言外之意。臧博平、王震亚著,《二十世纪中国小说发展史》,北京：首都师范大学出版社,1997年,第 34页；汤哲声,《中国文学的现代化转型》,南京：南京大学出版社,1995年；朱碧森,《女国男儿泪 林琴南传》,中国文联出版公司,1989年,第188页。
①英文选自Stowe. Harriet. Uncle Tom's Cabin. Boston:Houghton Osgood and Company.1879. Page 7;译文选自黄继忠译本,《汤姆大伯的小屋》,上海：上海译文出版社,1982年,第8页
①沈既澄,《抚掌录·导言》,上海：商务印书馆,1933年,第5页。此本《抚掌录》系商务印书馆《万有文库》“汉译世界名著”系列选本。沈既澄校点、注释,并作了一篇长达35页的序,极有参考价值。我认为沈校本是《抚掌录》各版中最好的一种。这里摘录的原文是：“我们这位《抚掌录》的作者络绎地发表出他的诙奇而雅驯的故事创作来。像天然风景一般地自然,像人人在儿童时代所同嗜的故事一般地清凉而多趣。他的格调是高华的,雅丽的。
①郑振铎,“林琴南先生”,载钱锤书等,《林纾的翻译》,北京：商务印书馆,1981年,第1-17页。
①这部译著笔者没有找到。
②《块肉余生述》计297千字,《不如归》计68千字,取两者平均数,则1914年开始发行的《林译小说丛书》每个页面应该有530字左右。
③这本书的语言难度比UTC并不容易很多,不妨试观开头：‘①Love laughs at locks and bolts and bars and every other kind of obstacle, and so Celia and I were sitting hand-locked on a bit of rock on Moreby Point, watching the waves as they dashed against the cliffs below us. and churned themselves into foam on which the thin April sunlight danced and sparkled brilliantly. "Arthur Williams Marchmont. For love or crown: a romance. New York: A.L. Burt,1901, P1
①钱锺书,《林纾的翻译》,北京：商务印书馆,1981年,第39-41页：张俊才,《林纾评传》,北京：中华书局,2007年,第123-33页：黄俊贤,叙事与视野融合——重述林译狄更斯小说,香港大学图书馆,2010年学位论文。
③黄俊贤,叙事与视野融合——重述林译狄更斯小说,得港大学图书馆,2010年博士学位论文。
①重印“严译名著丛刊”前言,商务印书馆编辑部,1981年。
①曾虚白,翻译中的神韵与达——西滢先生《论翻译》的补充,载罗新璋,《翻译论集》,第412页。
②Gile特别强调"=does not mean 'equality', but refers to the result of the interaction between KL and EKL."; "+means 'addition by interaction' rather than arithmetic additions." (Gile,1995:78)
①以上均转引自张跃铭.马可波罗游记在中国的翻译与研究[J].江淮论坛,1981(3)：50-56.张星娘的批评太过,我比较接受冯秉均的看法。魏易的译本我完整地看过,英文底本我也浏览了大部分,读起来“意思”不难理解,但根本做不到“字过”,我想动手译起来可能不如魏易。顺便说一句,用不着说外文,整理古文资料的开创性尝试也都可能出现知识性错误。笔者用到的凡是涉及古典文献著述,均可谓无错不成书。当然这些开创性的努力也正是本研究的基础,还是应该感谢他们的工作.笔者批评的只是那些显见的扭曲。②以上引文均见潘文国译,《赫兹列散文精选》,上海外语教育出版社,2011年,第287页。斜体为原文所有。上外教这套翻译研究读本可以作为翻译研究当中的“细论文的文章学”教材。传统的文法评点在林纾之后难得一见,近代译学在发展过程中又非常刻意地与创作保持距离,以至于“翻译评点”得不到重视。
①贺麟,严复的翻译,载罗新璋,《翻译论集》,第149页。
②转引自张俊才,《林纾评传》,146页。
①当然,我并不认为意义的整体性可以无限扩大,正如袁筱一所说：“假如过于强调意义的单位在任何情况下都要无限放大到语言系统,那么,翻译也就不可能了。”袁筱一、邹东来,“意义单位与翻译单位”,《外语研究》,2008年第2期,第90-2页。
②改动之前的译文：“这些和许多类似的事例显示,农神的祭祀形成农民和自然灾害长期斗争的一部分,作为面临共同危机时社会意识和集体行动的重新集合点。”思果译作：“由这些事可以看出,农民祭祀农神,是他们长期和天灾搏斗少不了的举动。大家遇到共患难的时候祭祀农神,就会同舟共济。由其他很多类似的事也可以看到这种情形。”给出的理由是：“这样译法把一句分成三句,读者容易透气一点。”(思果.2001：68)
②陆谷孙编,《英汉大词典》(第二版),第386页。
① "In any case he was the transmitter, on the grandest possible scale, of European fiction to China, and through him Chinese fiction (which had been tied down to ancient storyteller's conventions that no longer fitted what the contemporary novelist wanted to say) was revitalized when it was at its last gasp."(Waley,2008:191)
1. 阿英.晚清戏曲小说目录.上海：上海古典文学出版社,1957.
2. 阿英.晚清小说史.北京：作家出版社,1955.
3. 班固.汉书.北京：中华书局,1986.
4. 包天笑.钏影楼回忆录.香港：大华出版社,1971.
5. 包天笑.钏影楼回忆录续篇.香港：大华出版社,1973.
6. 蔡登山.林纾的“口译者”之一：魏易.《(台湾)全国新书资讯月刊》,2008年11月号.
7. 蔡元培(署名蔡孑民).在北京通俗教育研究会演说词.《东方杂志》,1917年,第四期.
8. 曹素璋.林纾的翻译小说与近代社会思潮.《贵州师范大学学报》(社科版),2002年第2期.
9. 曾锦漳.林译小说研究(上).《新亚学报》,1966年,第2期.
10.曾锦漳.林译小说研究(下).《新亚学报》,1967年,第1期.
11.曾虚白.为林魏合译小说影印本欢呼.《传记文学》,第六十五卷,第四期.
12.陈福康.中国译学理论史稿.上海：上海外语教育出版社,2000.
13.陈敬之.新文学运动的阻力.台北：成文出版社,1980.
14.陈平原、夏晓红,ed.,二十世纪中国小说理论资料：北京大学出版社,1989.
15.陈荣捷.传习录详注集评.台北：台湾学生书局,1992.
16.陈秀.论译者的介入.《中国翻译》.2002年第1期.
17.陈逸.从《林纾的翻译》看钱钟书的翻译主张.《华南师范大学学报》,2006年1期.
18.陈永国编.翻译与后现代性.北京：中国人民大学出版社,2005.
19.董英.从《格列佛游记》的两种译本看林纾的翻译.《语文学刊》1998年第4期.
20.傅彦长、朱应鹏、张若谷.艺术三家言.上海：上海良友图书印刷公司,1927.
21.傅勇林.文脉、意脉与语篇阐释.《外语与外语教学》2000年第1期.
22.傅勇林.中西合徂集.成都：四川文艺出版社,2010.
23.耿传明.在“新”“旧”对峙的背后——从林纾看“五四人”与“晚清人”的代际文化心态差异.《天津师范大学学报》(社会科学版)2004年第4期.
24.郭绍虞、罗根泽,ed.,中国古典文学理论批评专著选集,北京：人民文学出版社,1959.
25.郭绍虞.照隅室古典文学论集.上海：上海古籍出版社,2009.
26.郭延礼.中国近代翻译文学概论.武汉：湖北教育出版社,1998.
27.郭英德.中国古代文体学论稿.北京：北京大学出版社,2005.
28.寒光.林琴南.上海：中华书局,1935.
29.郝岚.林译小说与意识形态、出版机构的关系.《天津师范大学学报》,2006年3期.
30.皞皞子ed.,林严合钞.北京：国学扶轮社.1909.
31.何浚.西学与晚明思想的裂变.上海：上海人民出版社,1998.
32.贺志刚.林纾和林纾的翻译.《国外文学》,2004年第2期.
33.洪峻峰.林纾晚年评价的两个问题.《齐鲁学刊》,1995年第1期.
34.胡翠娥.文学翻译与文化参与,上海：上海外语教育出版社,2007年.
35.黄俊贤.叙事与视野融合：重述林译狄更斯小说,香港大学2010年博士学位论文.
36.黄侃.文心雕龙札记.上海：上海古籍出版社,2000.
37.黄霖、韩同文,《中国历代小说论著选》,南昌：江西人民出版社,1985.
38.蒋述卓.佛经传译与中古文学思潮.南昌：江西人民出版社,1990.
39.蒋英豪.林纾与桐城派、改良派及新文学的关系.《文史哲》1997年第1期.
40.金圣叹.金圣叹读批《水浒传》.北京：蓝天出版社.1998.
41.孔力.林纾和“林译小说”.北京：中华书局,1981.
42.孔庆茂.林纾传.北京：团结出版社,1998.
43.来裕恂.汉文典.天津：南开大学出版社,1994.
44.赖永海ed.,佛教十三经.北京：中华书局,2010.
45.郎琳.小说叙事传统与小说翻译策略.《四川外国语学院学报》,2003年第2期.
46.李贽,毛宗岗,鲁迅,钟宇,罗贯中,三国演义：名家汇评本.北京：北京图书馆出版社,2007.
47.李贽,吴承恩,西游记：李卓吾评本,上海：上海古籍出版社,1994.
48.历史研究杂志社编辑部,ed.,《历史研究》五十年论文选：20世纪中国历史学回顾.北京：社会科学文献出版社,2005年.
49.梁启超.清代学术概论.台湾：台湾商务印书馆,1994.
50.梁启超.饮冰室合集.北京：中华书局,1989.
51.林佩璇.林纾翻译研究新探.《福建师范大学学报》(哲学社会科学版)2003年第2期.
52.林元彪.从语言规划看公示语翻译的规范化.《东方翻译》,2011年第5期.
53.林纾,ed.,师范学校中学校修身讲义.上海：商务印书馆,1916.
54.林纾,ed.,中学国文读本.上海：商务印书馆,1919.
55.林纾,ed.,慕容真点校.林纾选评古文辞类纂.杭州：浙江古籍出版社,1986.
56.林纾.春觉斋论画遗稿.北平：燕京大学图书馆,1935.
57.林纾.左孟庄骚精华录.上海：商务印书馆,1925.
58.林纾.畏庐论文等三种.台北：文津出版社,1978.
59.林薇.百年沉浮—林纾研究综述.天津：天津教育出版社,1990.
60.林薇.清代小说论稿.北京：北京广播学院出版社,2000.
61.林薇.林纾自撰的武侠小说——《技击余闻》最早版本辨正.《新文学史料》,1999年第3期.
62.林薇.为君持酒劝斜阳,且向花间留晚照——记翻译家、近代文学家林纾.《名人谱》,1998年第5期.
63.刘绶松.中国新文学史初稿.北京：人民文学出版社,1979.
64.刘克敌.晚年林纾与新文学运动.《文艺理论研究》,1996年第4期.
65.刘绍棠ed.,民国人物小传.台北：传记文学出版社,1977.
66.刘树森.论中国近代外国小说翻译的叙事语态特征.《上海外国语大学学报》,1997年第5期.
67.陆建德.再说“荆生”,兼及运动之术.南方周末,2008年12月31日.
68.卢前.卢前笔记杂钞.北京：中华书局,2006.
69.罗新璋ed.,翻译论集.北京：商务印书馆,1984.
70.罗志田.林纾的认同危机与民初的新旧之争.《历史研究》,1995年第5期.
71.马祖毅.中国翻译简史：五四以前部分.北京：中国对外翻译出版公司,1984.
72.南怀瑾.《金刚经》说什么.戒幢佛学教育网：http://www.jcedu.org/fxzd/jgj/yanjiu/jgjssm02.htm#1
73.潘文国(署名帕安).古文今译例析(1-7).《中文自学指导》,1988年,第1-7期.
74.潘文国等eds.,文三百篇.上海：华东师范大学出版社,1999.
75.潘文国.严复及其翻译理论.杨自俭,ed.英汉语比较与翻译(5).2004年,610-24.
76.潘文国.从文章正轨看中西译论的不同传统.张柏然,ed.中国译学：传承与创新.上海：上海外语教育出版社,2008.
77.潘文国.当代西方的翻译学研究(1-3).《中国翻译》,2002年,第1-3期.
78.潘文国.对比语言学：哲学与历史思考.上海：上海教育出版社,2006.
79.潘文国.汉英语对比纲要.北京：北京语言文化大学出版社,1997.
80.潘文国.译入与译出：谈中国学者从事汉籍英译的意义.《中国翻译》,2004年,第2期.
81.潘文国.译学研究的哲学思考.《中国外语》,2009年,第5期.
82.潘文国.英汉语篇对比与中国的文章之学。《外语教学》,2007年,第5期.
83.钱基博.现代中国文学史.上海：世界书局,1933.
84.钱锺书.管锥编(1-4).北京：三联书店,2001.
85.钱锺书.七缀集.北京：三联书店,2002.
86.钱锺书等.林纾的翻译.北京：商务印书馆,1981.
87.全景博物馆丛书编辑委员会.中国名画博物馆.郑州：海燕出版社,2002.
88.人民文学出版社.编辑部ed.,唐传奇鉴赏集.北京：人民文学出版社,1983.
89.任继愈.中国佛教史.北京：中国社会科学出版社,1981.
90.尚文鹏.论林纾“误译”的根源.《中山大学学报论丛》,2000年第6期
91.邵宏.衍义的“气韵”中国画论的观念史研究.江苏教育出版社,2005.
92.沈苏儒.论信达雅：严复翻译理论研究.北京：商务印书馆,1998.
93.沈玉成,左丘明.《左传》译文.北京：中华书局,1981.
94.施蛰存,ed.,中国近代文学大系：翻译文学集,1840-1919.上海：上海书店,1991.
95.释赞宁.宋高僧传.艺术中国网,1999.
96.舒芜.中国近代文论选.北京：人民文学出版社,1959.
97.司马光.资治通鉴.北京：中华书局,1956.
98.司马迁.史记.北京：中华书局,1982.
99.司显柱.对我国传统译论的反思——关于翻译技巧研究的思考.《中国翻译》,2002年,第2期.
100.孙绿怡.《左传》与中国古典小说.北京：北京大学出版社,1992.
101.孙之梅.林译小说序跋的文学史意义.《山东大学学报》(哲社版)1998年第4期.
102.孙致礼.中国的文学翻译：从归化趋向异化.《中国翻译》,2002年,第1期.
103.谈风粱.历代文言小说鉴赏辞典.南京：江苏文艺出版社.1991.
104.唐弢.文章修养.北京：三联书店,2007.
105.王伯敏.《中国版画史》,上海美术出版社,1961.
106.王枫.五四前后的林纾.《中国现代文学研究丛刊》,2000年第1期.
107.王国良.魏晋南北朝志怪小说研究.台北：文史哲出版社,1984.
108.王国伟.当世蒲松龄,古笔谱新曲—林纾短篇小说艺术新论.《西华师范大学学报(哲社版)》,2004年,第3期.
109.王国伟.简论林纾的中长篇小说创作.《商丘师范学院学报》2004年第1期.
110.王宁.翻译文学与中国文化现代性.《清华大学学报(哲学社会科学版)》,2002年第1期.
111.王宁.浅谈林纾的翻译思想.《聊城大学学报》,2004年第6月.
112.王世贞著,罗仲鼎校注.艺苑卮言校注.济南：齐鲁书社,1992.
113.王先霈、王又平,ed.,文学理论批评术语汇释.北京：高等教育出版社,2006.
114.王秀云.是翻译还是整理——质疑林纾的“翻译”.《中国科技信息》2005年第17期.
115.魏惟仪.归去来.台北：大地出版社.1987.
116.文林.林纾先生家藏旧稿问世.《山东师大学报(社会科学版)》,1995年第3期.
117.吴晗、黎钺、北京教师进修学院历史教研室.中国历史小丛书.北京：中华书局.1960.
118.吴慧坚.严林翻译的社会效应与文本和信息传递方式的选择.《广州师院学报》,2000年10期.
119.吴汝纶.吴汝纶全集.合肥：黄山出版社,2002.
120.夏晓红.晚清女性与近代中国.北京：北京大学出版社,2004.
121.谢海燕.从权力话语看林纾翻译中的改写.《郑州轻工业学院学报》,2006年1期.
122.谢飘云.林纾与严复散文、译述之比较.《华南师范大学学报(社科版)》,2002年第2期.
123.熊琬.文章结构学：文章运思结构之艺术.台北：五南出版社,1998.
124.熊月之.西学东渐与晚清社会.上海：上海人民出版社,1994.
125.徐志啸.试论林纾的中西文学比较.《学术月刊》,2002年第8期.
126.许海燕,论《巴黎茶花女遗事》对清末民初小说创作的影响.《民清小说研究》,2001年第4期.
127.薛绥之、张俊才,ed.林纾研究资料.福建人民出版社,1982.
128.严复.严复集.北京：中华书局,1986.
129.杨联芬.林纾与中国文学现代性的发生.《中国现代文学研究丛刊》,2002年4期.
130.杨联芬.流动的瞬间：晚清与五四文学关系论.台北：联经出版社,2006.
131.杨联芬.晚清至五四：中国文学现代性的发生.北京：北京大学出版社,2003.
132.叶良旋.《春觉斋论文》与当代散文教学.《安庆师范学院学报》1999年第6期.
133.于德山.中国古代“语-图”互文现象及其叙事功能.《明清小说研究》,2003年第3期.
134.袁荻涌.林纾的文学翻译思想.《中国翻译》1994年第3期.
135.袁筱一、邹东来.意义单位与翻译单位.《外语研究》2008年第2期.
136.詹锳.刘勰与《文心雕龙》.北京：中华书局,1980.
137.张爱萍.略谈林纾现实主义小说理论.《安徽大学学报》(哲学社会科学版)2004年第6期.
138.张柏然、许钧ed.,面向21世纪的译学研究.北京：商务印书馆,2002.
139.张德让.翻译会通研究——从徐光启到严复.华东师范大学博士学位论文,2010.
140.张恩普.才性评析与中古文论的文品理论.《东北师范大学学报》2007年第6期.
141.张俊才.林纾评传.北京：中华书局,2007.
142.张俊才.“悠悠百年,自有能辨之者”——重评林纾及五四新旧思潮之争.《河北师范大学学报(哲社版)》,2005年第4期.
143.张俊才.重评林纾及五四新旧思潮之争.《河北师范大学学报(哲社版)》,2005年4期.
144.张佩瑶.从话语的角度重读魏易与林纾合译的《黑奴吁天录》.《中国翻译》,2003年第2期.
145.张少康.中国文学理论批评史教程.北京：北京大学出版社,1999.
146.张胜璋.林纾的古文论综述.福州师范大学博士学位论文,2009.
147.张世君.明清小说评点叙事概念研究.北京：中国社会科学出版社,2007.
148.张跃铭.《马可波罗游记》在中国的翻译与研究.《江淮论坛》,1981年第3期.
149.赵光育.林纾与“林译小说”.《浙江师大学报(社会科学版)》,1999年第1期
150.郑延国.从林纾的翻译说开去——谈翻译界的两种文化现象.《上海科技翻译》,1995年3期.
151.中国第二历史档案馆编.中华民国史档案资料汇编(第三辑：文化).南京：江苏古籍出版社,1991.
152.中国社会科学院语言研究所古代汉语研究室编.古代汉语虚词词典.北京：商务印书馆,1999.
153.周绍良.敦煌文学作品选.北京：中华书局,1987.
154.周振甫.文章例话.北京：中国青年出版社,2006.
155.周振甫.周振甫讲古代文论.南京：江苏教育出版社,2005.
156.周忠元、张磊.中国古代“人品与文品”理论的衍变.《东方论坛》,2007年第5期.
157.周作人.中国新文学的源流.上海：华东师范大学出版社,1995.
158.朱宏清.从《林纾的翻译》看钱钟书先生的翻译观.《东南大学学报(哲社版)》,2001年第2期.
159.朱羲胄.春觉斋著述记.上海：世界书局,1949.
160.朱志瑜.中国佛籍译论选辑评注.北京：清华大学出版社,2006.
161.朱自清.诗言志辩.北京：古籍出版社,1956.
162.祝朝伟.翻译研究中的庞德/林纾现象.《淮海工学院学报》,2006年1期.
163.祝朝伟.林纾与庞德翻译思想比较研究.《解放军外国语学院学报》,2002年第3期.
164.邹振环.影响中国近代社会的一百种译作.北京：中国对外翻译出版公司,1996.
165.樽本照雄(日本).林纾冤罪事件簿.(日本)清末小说研究会,2009.
1. Abbott, H. Porter, The Cambridge Introduction to Narrative. Cambridge and New York: Cambridge University Press,2002
2. Agrifoglio, M. (2004). Sight translation and interpreting:A comparative analysis of constrains and failures. Interpreting 6:1 p.43-67.
3. Anthony Pym, Exploring Translation Theories. Taylor & Francis,2009
4. Baker, Mona. Encyclopedia of Translation Studies. Shanghai:Shanghai Foreign Language Education Press,2004
5. Baker, Mona. In Other Words:Coursebook on Translation. New York & London: Routledge,1992.
6. Baker, William and Kenneth Womack (eds.), A Companion to the Victorian Novel. London: Greenwood Press,2002.
7. Baker. Ernest. A Guide the best Fiction, English and American, including from Foreign Languages. New York:The Macmilian Company,1932
8. Benjamin, Walter. Illuminations. Trans. Harry Zohn. New York:Schocken Press,1969.
9. Bhabha, Homi K. Nation and Narration. London and New York:Routledge,1990.
10. Butt, John and Kathleen Tillotson, Dickens at Work. London:Methuen & Co. Ltd,1957.
11. Cecil, David. Early Victorian Novelists:Essays in Revaluation. London:Constable and Company Ltd.,1966.
12. Chang, Hao. Liang Ch'i-ch'ao and Intellectual Transition in China,1890-1907. Cambridge: Harvard University Press,1971.
13. Chatterjee, Partha. Nationalist Thought and the Colonial World. London:Zed Books for the United Nations University,1986.
14. Chesterman, Andrew. Memes of Translation. Amsterdam:John Benjamins Publishing Company,1997
15. Cheung, Martha P. Y. "The Discourse of Occidentalism Wei Yi and Lin Shu's Treatment of Religious Material in Their Translation of Uncle Tom's Cabin." In Translation and Creation: Readings of Western Literature in Early Modern China,1840-1918. Ed. David Pollard. Amsterdam:John Benjamins,1998.
16. Ching, Leo T. S. Becoming'"Japanese":Colonial Taiwan and the Politics of Identity Formation. Berkeley and Los Angeles:University of California Press.2001
17. Cockrell, Dale. Demons of Disorder:Early Blackface Minstrels and Their World. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press,1997
18. Colbert, Charles. A measure of perfection:phrenology and the fine arts in America, New Baskerville:UNC Press Books,1997,
19. Compton, Robert W. A Study of the Translations of Lin Shu,1852-1934. Ph.D. Diss. Stanford University,1971.
20. Coolidge, Archibald C., Charles Dickens as Serial Novelist. Ames, Iowa:The Iowa State University Press,1967.
21. Crawford, Richard. America's Musical Life:A History. New York:W. W. Norton.2001.
22. Eoyang, Eugene Chen. The Transparent Eye:Reflections on Translation, Chinese Literature, and Comparative Poetics. Honolulu:University of Hawaii Press,1993.
23. Dale Cockrell. Demons of Disorder: Early Blackface Minstrels and Their World. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press,1997.
24. Dena Epstein. Sinful Tunes and Spirituals:Black Folk Music to the Civil War. Urbana: University of Illinois Press,1977.
25. Danks, J.& End, L.(1987). Processing strategies for reading and listening. In R. Horowitz & S. J. Samuel (Eds.), Comprehension oral and written language. London:Academic Press, p. 271-293
26. Epstein, Dena. Sinful Tunes and Spirituals:Black Folk Music to the Civil War. Urbana: University of Illinois Press,1977.
27. Evan-Zohar, Itamar. "Polysystem Theory." Poetics Today 1:2 (1979):237-310.
28. Evan-Zohar,Itamar. "Translation Theory Today:A Call for Transfer Theory." Poetics Today 2:4(1981):1-7.
29. Gentzler, Edwin. Contemporary Translation Theories. London and New York:Routledge, 1992.
30. Gile, Daniel. Basic Concepts and Models for Interpreter and Translator Training. Amsterdam/Philadelphia:John Benjamins Publishing Company,1995.
31. Gries, Peter Hays. China's New Nationalism:Pride, Politics, and Diplomacy. Berkeley: University of California Press,2004.
32. Hanan, Patrick. Chinese Fiction of the Nineteenth and Early Twentieth Centuries. NY:Columbia University Press,2004.
33. Hanan, Patrick. The Chinese Vernacular Story. Cambridge:Harvard University Press,1981.
34. Harvey, John, Victorian Novelists and their Illustrators. London:Sidgwick & Jackson,1970.
35. Harvie, Christopher T. Centre of Things:Political Fiction in Britain from Disraeli to the Present. London:Unwin Hyman,1991.
36. Hawkes, David, "An Introductory Note", in Hawkes, David. Ed., Classical, modern, and humane:essays in Chinese literature, Hong Kong:Chinese University'of Hong Kong Press. 1989.
37. Hermans, Theo, ed., Crosscultural Transgressions:Research Models in Translation Studies 1:
38. Hermans, Theo, ed., The Manipulation of Literature:Studies in Literary Translation London & Sydney:Croom Helm,1985.
39. Hermans. Theo. "Cross-Cultural Translation Studies as Thick Translation." Bulletin of the School of Oriental & African Studies 66 (2003):380-89.
40. Holmes, James S. (1972/1988). "The Name and Nature of Translation Studies". In: James S. Holmes, Translated Papers on Literary Translation and Translation Studies, Amsterdam: Rodopi, pp.67-80.
41. Hsia, C.T. "Yen Fu and Liang Ch'i-Ch'ao as Advocates of New Fiction." Chinese Approaches to Literature from Confucius to Liang Ch'i-Ch'ao. Ed. Adele Richett. New Heaven:Princeton University Press,1978.
42. Hsia, C.T. A History of Modern Chinese Fiction. New Haven:Yale University Press,1961.
43. Hsia, C.T. The classic Chinese Novel:A Critical Introduction. Bloomington:Indiana University Press,1968.
44. Hu, Ying. Tales of Translation:Composing the New Women in China,1899-1918. Stanford: Stamford Uiversity Press,2000.
45. Huang, Ko-wu. In Search of Power, Wealth, and Freedom:Yan Fu and the Origins of Modern Chinese Liberalism. Diss. Stanford University,2001.
46. Huang, Philip. Liang Ch'i-ch'ao and Modern Chinese Liberalism. Seattle:University of Washington Press,1972.
47. Huters, Theodore. "A New Way of Writing:The Possibilities for Literature in Late Qing China,1895-1908." Modern China 14.3 (1988):243-76.
48. Huxley, Thomas Henry. Evolution and Ethics, and Other Essays. New York:D. Appleton and company,1911.
49. Keene, Donald. Dawn to the West:Japanese Literature of the Modern Era, Fiction. New York: Holt, Rinehart & Winston,1984.
50. Lamb, Lynton, Drawing for Illustration. London:Oxford University Press,1962.
51. Lambert, S. (2004). Shared attention during sight translation, sight interpretation and simultaneous interpretation. Meta XLIX,2 p.294-306
52. Lee, Leo Ou-fan. "Lin Shu and His Translations:Western Fiction in Chinese Perspective."Papers on China 19,1965.
53. Lee, Leo Ou-fan. Land Without Ghosts:Chinese Impressions of America From the Mid-nineteenth Century to the Present. Berkeley:London University of California Press,1989.
54. Leavis, Q. D., The Dickens Illustrations:Their Function. IN Leavis, F. R. and Leavis, Q. D. Dickens the Novelist. London:Chatto & Windus,1970.
55. Lefevere, Andre. Translation, Rewriting, and the Manipulation of Literary Fame. London and New York:Routledge,1992.
56. Levenson, Joseph Richmond. Liang Ch'i-ch'ao and the Mind of Modern China. Cambridge: Harvard University Press,1953.
57. Liu, Lydia. Translingual Practice:Literature, National Culture, and Translated Modernity—China,1900-1937. Stanford:Stanford University Press,1995.
58. Luo Xuanming & He Yuanjian. Translating China. Bristol, Buffalo, Toronto:Multilingual Matters.2010
59. Masini, Federico. The Formation of Modern Chinese Lexicon and its Evolution:Toward a National Language:the Period from 1840-1898. In:Journal of Chinese Linguistics, Monograph Series 6 (1993).
60. Mori, Tokihiko. "Liang Qichao and Western Modernity:An Analysis of His Translations of the Term "Political Economy"." The Role of Japan in Liang Qichao's Introduction of Modern Western Civilization to China. Ed. Joshua A. Fogel. Berkeley:Center for Chinese Studies, Institute of East Asian Studies, University of California,2004.15-39.
61. Mullan,John. How Novels Work. Oxford and New York:Oxford University Press,2006
62. Munday, Jeremy. Introducing Translation Studies:Theories and Applications. London and New York:Routledge,2001.
63. Niranjana, Tejaswini. Siting Translation:History, Post-structuralism, and the Colonial Context. Berkeley:University of California Press,1992.
64. Owen, Stephen, ed. Readings in Chinese Literary Thought. Combridge, Mass:Harvard University Press,1992.
65. Pan, Wenguo, ed., Translation and Contrastive Studies, Shanghai:Shanghai Foreign Language Education Press,2005.
66. Reiss, Katharina. "Text Types, Translation Types and Translation Assessment". In: Chesterman, Andrew eds.. Readings in Translation Theory. Helsinki:Oy Finn Lectura Ab,1989.
67. Richard Crawford. America's Musical Life:A History. New York:W. W. Norton,2001.
68. Rolston, David L. Traditional Chinese Fiction and Fiction Commentary:Reading and Writing Between the Lines. Stanford:Stanford University Press,1997.
69. Said, Edward. Orientalism. Toronto:Random House,1994.
70. Sakaki, Atsuko. "Kajin No Kigu:The Meiji Political Novel and the Boundaries of Literature." Monumenta Nipponica 55.1 (2000):83-108.
71. Schwartz, Benjamin. In Search of Wealth and Power:Yen Fu and West. Cambridge:Harvard UP,1964.
72. Spivak, Gayatri Chakravorty. Outside in the Teaching Machine. New York:Routledge,1993.
73. Stowe, Harriet Beecher. Uncle Tom's Cabin. New York:Random House,1985.
74. Tajfel, Henri. Human Groups and Social Categories:Studies in Social Psychology, London: Cambridge University Press,1981
75. Tang, Xiaobing. Global Space and the Nationalist Discourse of Modernity:The Historical Thinking of Liang Qichao. Stanford, Calif.:Stanford University Press,1996.
76. Tarumoto, Teruo. "A Statistical Survey of Translated Fiction 1840-1920." In Translation and Creation:Readings of Western Literature in Early China,1840-1918. Ed. David Pollard. Amsterdam and Philadelphia:John Benjamins Publishing Company,1998.
77. Toury, Gideon. "Translated Literature:System, Norm, Performance:Toward a TT Oriented Approach to Literary Translation." Poetics Today 2.4 (1981):9-27.
78. Tsai, Benjamin. Enemies of the Revolution:Ideology and Practice in Making of Chinese Liberalism 1890-1927. Diss. University of Chicago,2000.
79. Tytler, Alexander Fraser. Essay on the Principles of Translation. Amsterdam Studies in the Theory and History of Linguistic Science:Series I, Amsterdam Classics in Linguistics; V.13. Amsterdam:J. Benjamins,1978.
80. Venuti, Lawrence (ed.), The Translation Studies Reader. London and New York:Routledge, 2000
81. Venuti, Lawrence. The Scandals of Translation:Towards an Ethics of Difference. London and New York:Routledge,1998.
82. Viezzi, M. (1989b). Information retention as a parameter for comparison of sight translation and simultaneous translation:An experimental study. The Interpreter's Newsletter no.2, p. 65-69
83. Waley, Arthur, The Secret History of the Mongols. London:George Allen & Unwin Ltd., 1963.
84. Wang Ning & Sun Yifeng, ed., Translation Globalisation and Localisation:A Chinese Perspective. Clevedon, Buffalo, Toranto:Multilingual Matters.2010.
85. Wang, Der-wei David. Fin-De-Siecle Splendor:Repressed Modernities of Late Qing Fiction, 1849-1911. Stanford:Stanford University Press,1997.
86. Wechsler, Robert. Performing without a stage:the art of literary translation. Connecticut: Catbird Press,1998
87. Wei Tat. An exposition of the I-CHING. Hong Kong:Dai Nippon Printing Co.. (H.K.) Ltd.
88. Wei, C. X. George and Yang, Xiaoyuan, ed. Chinese Nationalism in Perspective:Historical and Recent Cases. Westport:Greenwood Press,2001.
89. Zhao, I-heng, The Uneasy Narrator, Chinese Fiction from the Traditional to the Modern. London:Oxford University Press,1995.
①严培南、严璩二人与林纾合作一种,《伊索寓言》。
②黄濬,字秋岳,又称哲维,号壶舟,室名花随人圣庵。光绪十四年戊子科举人,十六年庚寅科进士,签分户部主事,供职北京。民国后得汪精卫赏识供职国民政府,1937年8月,以通日罪伏法白门。
① Yakobson. R.(1959). On linguistic aspects of translation studies. In Venuti. L. (Eds). The translation studies reader. U. S. & Canada: Routledge.2004. P.138-143中文为笔者所译,原文作：For us. both as linguists and as ordinary word-users, the meaning of any linguistic sign is its translation into some further, alternative sign, especially a sign "in which it is more fully developed" as Peirce, the deepest inquirer into the essence of signs, insistently stated. We distinguish three ways of interpreting a verbal sign:it may be translated into other signs of the same language, into another language, or into another, nonverbal system of symbols. These three kinds of translation are to be differently labeled:
1 Intralingual translation or rewording is an interpretation of verbal signs by means of other signs of the same language.
2 Interlingual translation or translation proper is an interpretation of verbal signs by means of some other language.
3 Intersemiotic translation or transmutation is an interpretation of verbal signs by means of signs of nonverbal sign systems.
② Translation Proper是个比较难译的术语,proper这个词置于名词之后,通常作“狭义的”,“自身的”解,李德凤等译作“严格意义上的翻译”,字而看不错,不过我觉得置于上下文略嫌不通。雅氏明确说了他的定义立足“符号”,rewording和transmutation都是针对语言符号而言的,不存在“严格”和“宽泛”之分,我译成“充分”的原因是希毕表达原文“某一语言符号自身被完整地译入另一种语言”之义；同理,李把transmutation译作“变形”也有些丢失语境,让人莫名其妙,变成什么形呢?李德凤的译文见于杰里米·芒迪著,李德凤等译,《翮译学导论》,商务印书馆,2007年第10页。
① Anthony Pym. Exploring Translation Theories. Taylor & Francis.2009:150中文为笔者所译.原文作："intersemiotic translation" privileges verbal signs (like those of "translation proper") as the point of departure. In this. he was preceded by the Danish semiotician Louis Hjelmslev.whose view of intersemiotic translation was similarly directional: In practice, a language is a semiotic into which all other semiotics may be translated-both all other languages and all other conceivable semiotic structures. This translatability rests on the fact that all languages, and they alone, are in a position to form any purport whatsoever.笔者按：叶尔姆斯列夫用“符际翻译”方法描述语言的特性,很有新意。
①详见本研究第四章第一节之四。
②详见本研究第三章。
③林译当中有某些“译文”离不开合作者的辅助,如直接使用外文词汇的情况,详见本研究第五章第三节。
④梁启超称赞《几何原本》“字字精金美玉,为千古不朽之作”,梁启超,《中国近三百年学术史》,上海：上海三联书店,2006年,第7页。
①鲁迅,“关于翻译的通讯”,《鲁迅全集》第4卷,人民文学出版.1981年,第381页。
②鲁迅,“致增田涉”,《鲁迅全集》第13卷,人民文学出版,1981年,第473页。
③近年有学者用新思维研究《域外小说集》,把译著当作“潜文本”来研究,阐发其对现代译学、文学的影响。“比较林纾翻译小说的历史局限性,周氏兄弟的《域外小说集》,以系统、直译的风格和明确的思潮意识,宣告了中国文学翻译‘林纾时代’的结束,标志着文学翻译规范化、学术化的来临。”(杨联芬,2003：127)这个看法无论从事实、逻辑还是理论方法上讲,都难以让人接受。鲁迅确实伟大,但我觉得这样的研究似乎太过。诚如先生自己所说,这部译著彻头彻尾就是失败了,没必要掩饰,更不能夸大。杨的论调只是在给先生抹黑。事实上,即便是当下“80后”们在网络上掀起的“再读鲁迅/仿写鲁迅”热潮,也没有人提及《域外小说集》。从文章学的历史发展轨迹来看,我更愿意接受这种看法：“在中国历史上,如果要举出一位与鲁迅有可比性的人物,那应该是韩愈。他们都有聪慧的头脑、卓越的语言运用能力,激烈的好辩性格和文学创造力：此外他们两个的文笔都时而饶有风趣。鲁迅不喜欢韩愈的事实,与其说否定了这种相像,勿宁说是反方面的肯定。”David E.Pollard. The True Story ofLu Xun, Hong Kong: Chinese University Press. 2002:116-7.
①中文为笔者所译,原文作：[...]intralingual translation is not such a minor issue as the existing literature on translation might suggest (...) I know of no research that looks specifically at the phenomena of intralingual or intersemiotic translation. We do have classifications such as Jakobson's. which alert us to the possibility of such things as intersemiotic and intralingual translation, but we do not make any genuine use of such classifications in our research. (Baker,1998. p. xvii)
①潘文国.从文章正轨看中西译论的不同传统.载张柏然.ed.中国译学：传承与创新.上海：上海外语教育出版社.2008.
②Some memes encapsulate concepts and ideas about translation itself. and about the theory of translation. Let us eall them translation memes (ef. Chesterman.1996a). [...]]but first I shall introduce five supermemes of translation. They are ideas of such pervasive influence that they come up again and again in the history of the subject, albeit sometimes in slightly different guises. Some appear to be distinctly more beneficial than others.
①切斯特曼在提出“源-宿”(Source-Target)时也认为,在由此模因而来的翻译思想中,翻译是具有指向性的,但他没有说明方向为何：The source-target supermeme is the idea that translation is directional, going from somewhere to somewhere. The widespread acceptance of this supermeme has. in modern translation studies, given us the notions of Source Text (ST) and Target Text (TT). The dominant metaphor underlying this supermeme is that of movement along a path:cognitive linguistics would talk of a "path schema", with the translation itself being the "trajector" moving along this path. Translations are thus seen as "moving" from A to B. Belonging to this same meme-complex there is also the accompanying idea that translations are "containers" for something else:as they are formed. translations "carry across" something from A to B.(Chesterman.1997:8)特别强调一下.这是切氏“客观地”归纳出来西方译学思想本源之一种,他本人并不认同" Source-Target"所衍生的翻译思想的合理性。
①朱志瑜认为：“不过总的来说,佛经翻译无论在理论上还是实践上,都是偏‘质’的。”(朱志瑜,2006：8)我很怀疑这个结论,单就支谦《法句经》所论,任继愈则认为：“这场争论,质派在理论上获得胜利,但实际的结果,却是由文派最后成书。”任继愈,《中国佛教史》,第1卷,北京：中国社会科学出版社,1981第177页。我自己读《十三经》也不觉得经文偏“质”。另外,朱还说：“支谦和鸠摩罗什的很多译文大量删减原文,这是他们被称为文派的原因之一。”支谦的译文我不清楚,但我却比较了罗什和玄装的不少译文,似乎不能一概而论,如玄奘脍炙人口的名译《般若波罗蜜多心经》就比罗什的译文短。
②好比教学法研究,讨论“负反馈”总比“正反馈”容易,大概因为解释不正确的现象话头好找一些吧。林译研究也是如此,批评其不足的多是“理论研究”,好像林译尽著天下之丑,照任何一而镜子都是八戒嘴脸。
①王世贞著,罗仲鼎校注,《艺苑卮言校注》,济南：齐鲁书社,1992年,第43-4。这是《艺苑卮言》目前比较好的一个校注本。
①“学易”足我国重要的学术文化传统,《周易》为儒家十三经之首,古代知识分子目之不下于《论语》。如果要追寻贯穿中国古代思想文化的超级模因,《周易》的本源性影响是无可比拟的。
②这里只就“修辞立其诚”的本源讲,实际上“立诚”经宋明理学的发展内涵极其丰富-在某种程度上可以说是理学各派实践论的第一要义。钱穆先生认为,王阳明讲“集义致良知”便以“立诚”为知行本体,成功地解决了宋儒在实践论上的分歧。原文叙述较复杂,略去不引,参见钱穆,《阳明学述要》,北京：九州出版社,2010年,第63页。
①从这一点看,张德让教授认为严复走的是徐光启“翻译-会通-超胜”一条路线,确有见地。张德让,《翻译会通研究——从徐光启到严复》,华东师范大学博士学位论文,2010年。
①胡适评《闽中新乐府》说：“先生的《新乐府》不但可以表明他文学观念的变迁,而且可以使我们知道：五六年前的反动领袖在三十年前也曾做过社会改革的事业。我们这一辈的少年人只认得守旧的林琴南,而不知道当日的维新党林琴南。只听得林琴南老年反对白话文学,而不知道林琴南壮年时曾作过很通俗的白话诗,——这算不得公平的舆论。”胡适,“林琴南先生的白话诗”.《(北京)晨报六周年纪念赠刊》,1924年12月。
①这也是文章学在当代的尴尬,文章学本来包含“文”和“学”两个方而,但因为其中的“学”涉及大量文法、小学内容,结果现在搞文学的认为是语言学内容,搞语言学的又认为属于文章学。潘文国先生指出：“由于我们自己的传统长期受到忽视,因而当我说我们有丰厚的文章学传统时许多人可能还不一定知道。不但是语言学界,而且包括文学界。在20世纪以来的一百年里,传统文章学几乎处于‘两不管’的境地：搞文学的以为这属于语言而不感兴趣,而搞语言的又以为这已超出了‘语言学’研究的范围(在篇章语言学产生前,语言研究一般只研究到句子)。”潘文国,“英汉语篇对比与中国的文章之学”,《外语教学》,2007(5)。
②张胜璋说,“林纾的‘识度’说,源自曾国藩《古文四象》的‘太阴识度’说,”其实以“阴阳刚柔”论文章风格在清代始见于姚鼐。详见陆德海,《明清文法理论研究》,2007年,第239页。
②不少学者批评林纾“发明义理”、求“道”等主张较桐城派的本体论更有倒退(周振甫,2005：156；陆德海,2007：279；),我认为根源在此,“守正”注定林纾最终是个保守派。当然,保守派并不一定总是贬义的,其实任何一个健康的社会群体都需耍保守派。
①“义法”一词最先见于《史记·十二诸侯年表序》,是司马迁总结孔子写《春秋》时的褒贬原则和行文特点,“约其辞文,去其烦重,以制义法”。欧阳修在《代人上王枢密求先集序书》对史传文学提出“言以载事,而文以饰言。事信言文,乃能表见于世,”即“事信言文”的原则。“事信”后来成为“义法”说中的“义”的先声,“言文”成为“法”的先声。清桐城诸家大力提倡“义法”-然各有所重。林纾的文法理论不以“义”见长,学界甚至多认为开了倒车,但其论“法”却集历代文法研究之大成,且又有创见。(范文渊,1959：140-1；周振甫,2005：166-7；王宜瑗,2006：6325-6：陆德海,2007：280-1)
②“故惟理醇而后法立,法立则以意遣词。”(林纾,《中学国文读本(唐文)序》)
①如果我所说的“林纾的翻译和古文创作实践所体现的语言使用价值之‘义’超过前人”还只是个人意见,则林纾在“法”上精进向来为世所公认,就我目前的研究材料来看,没有反对意见。“义法”在明清两代的研究流变非常复杂,我主要参考了陆德海的《明清文法理论研究》,上海：上海l’,籍出版社,2007年
①严复,“甲辰出都呈同里诸公”,王拭编,严复集,第二卷,北京：中华书局：1986年,第365页。
②徐念慈,“余之小说观”,《小说林》,1908年第10期。
①松岑,“论写情小说于新社会之关系”,原载《新小说》,1905年第五期,转引自阿英编,《晚清小说从钞》第一卷,中国都市芸能研究会官方网站：http://wagang.econ.hc.keio.ac.jp
②皞皞子,《林严合钞·序》,国学扶轮社,1909年,第一页。原文没有标点。
③ 《撒克逊劫后英雄传略》到1947年都还是“中学国文读本”
①王敬轩,“给《新青年》编者的一封信”,原载《新青年》1918年3月15日,第4卷,第3号。转引自鲍晶编,《刘半农研究资料》,天津人民出版社,1985年,第162页。
②半农,“覆王敬轩书”,原载《新青年》1918年3月15日,第4卷,第3号。lbid.第150页。
③如钱锺书说：“后来我阅读能力增进了,我也听到舆论指摘林译的误漏百出,就不再而也不屑再看它。它 只成为我生命里累积的前尘旧蜕的一部分了。”钱锤书,“林纾的翻译”,钱锤书等,《林纾的翻译》,北京：商务印书馆,1981年,第23页。
①罗家伦(署名志希),“今日中国之小说界”,《新潮》1919年1卷1号,转引自郑振铎编,《中国新文学大系·文学论争集》,上海：良友图书公司,1935年,第356页。
②尤其是1919年2月发表于上海《新申报》的“蠡叟丛谈”栏的短篇小说《荆生》,新文化阵营故意将荆生附会为徐树铮,使得林纾在相当长的一段时间内声名狼藉。
③梁启超,《清代学术概论》,上海古籍出版社,1998年,第98页。
①即刘镩江,时与陈衍(署名陈石遗)一起主编《文艺从刊》。苦海余生,“小说从话”,原载《小说月报》,1911年,第三期.薛绥之、张俊才编,《林纾研究资料》,福州：福建人民出版社,1983年,第216页。
②1919年胡适曾经批评过林纾用古文翻译小说必有损失,故此有“平心而论”一说。
③钱锺书,“林纾的翻译”,钱锺书等,《林纾的翻译》,北京：商务印书馆,1981年,第39页。
④即注释51,载钱锤书,“林纾的翻译”,钱锺书,《七缀集》,北京：三联书店,2002年,第111-2页。这个注释在1984年之前的本子里都见不到,根据钱锺书的叙述,应该是1984年修改《旧文四篇》时的增改。
①郑振铎,“林琴南先生”,《小说月报》,1924年,第15卷第11号,转引自钱锺书等,《林纾的翻译》,北京：商务印书馆,1981年,第11-6页。
③寒光的林译作品考证不大讨好,马泰来批评他“每以意测度”,见马泰来,“林纾翻译作品全目”,钱锤书等,《林纾的翻译》,北京：商务印书馆,1981年,第99页。
④寒光,《林琴南》,上海：商务印书馆,1935年,第210-1页。着重号为笔者所加。
②钱锤书,“林纾的翻译”,载钱锺书等,《林纾的翻译》,北京：商务印书馆,1981年,第30页。
①新版没有继承林译作品中一些优秀历史版本,如新版收录的《撒克逊劫后英雄略》有沈德鸿的校注本,《拊掌录》有严既澄的注释本,均收录在1933年出版的《万有文库》中,都是极好的点评本。而《黑奴吁犬录》本来有魏易的序,新版不知何故删除了,殊为可惜。
②杨联芬,《晚清至五四：中国文学现代性的发生》,北京大学出版社,2003年,第88页。
③杨联芬,《流动的瞬间：晚清与五四文学关系论》,台北：联经出版社,2006年,第25页。
①黄俊贤,叙事与视野融合：重述林译狄更斯小说,香港大学图书馆,2010年学位论文。
②孙致礼：中国的文学翻译：从归化趋向异化,《中国翻详》2002年,第一期。
①樽本照雄,“林纾冤罪事件簿序”,樽本照雄,《林纾冤罪事件簿》,清末小税研究会,2009年。
① The translator must use the tools that he knows best how to handle. And this reflection reminds me at once of what Lin Shu. the great early 19th century translator of European fiction into Chinese, said when he was asked why he translated Dickens into ancient Chinese instead of into modern colloquial. His reply was:'Because ancient Chinese is what I am good at.' Arthur Waley. "Notes on Reanslation", The Atlantic Monthly, the 100th anniversary issue. Nov.1948. in Arthur Waley. Secret History Of The Mongols. House of Stratus.2008, page 199.中文为笔者所译,其中"early 19th century"本当作"early 20th century",原文有误。
②Ibid.page 201。中文为笔者所译,原文作：I have compared a number of passages with the original....The humour is there, but is transmuted by a precise, economical style:every point that Dickens spoils by uncontrolled exuberance, Lin Shu makes quietly and efficiently. You may question at this point whether it is right to call him a t translator at all. But at any rate in the case of the Dickens novels it would be misleading. I think, to use such terms as 'paraphrase' or 'adaptation'.
③Ibid, page 201:What made him so remarkable as a translator was the immense force and vivacity of his style and the intensity with which he felt the stories that were communicated to him....I have spoken or the lessons that can be drawn from Lin Shu's achievement. First, then, what matters most is that the translator, whether working at first or at second-hand, should be someone who delights in handling words.....中文为笔者所译,着重号对应原文的斜体。
①"As to the desirability of programmes and schedules, the question is one which has again come conspicuously to the fore. As part of a new pre-occupation with cultural propaganda, various government-sponsored organizations are busy drawing up lists of works that ought to be translated. Young men with linguistic knowledge but often without any literary gifts are roped in to translate, without any particular enthusiasm, works whose only claim to attention is that they have got into an officially compiled list of'master-pieces'. I have a feeling that this system is not going to work very well. What matters is that a translator should have been excited by the work he translates, should be haunted day and night by the feeling that he must put it into his own language, and should be in a state of restlessness and fret till he has done so.'Masterpieces' were not always masterpieces and may at any minute cease to be so." Ibid, page 203中文为笔者所译。
②严复,“译《天演论》自序”,赫胥黎著,严复译,《天演论》,北京：商务印书馆,第ⅷ页。
Hawkes. David. "An Introductory Note", in Hawkes. David. Ed. John Minford. Siu-Kit Wong. Classical. modern, and humane: essays in Chinese literature. Hong Kong: Chinese University Press.1989. page 70.原文作；The voluminous output of the great translator Lin Shu included a good deal of modish trash. But the people who read his elegant classical renderings of Rider Haggard and Conan Doyle were not in search merely of entertainment. They were in conscious pursuit of the Occident, and were constantly reminded in the prefaces to these translations of the morals they might be expected to draw from them.
①康普顿的考证非常严谨,不依附旁人。他只证出林译89部作品的原著,但均经得起推敲-这种学术精神值得肯定。
② Robert William Compton, A study of the translations of Lin Shu, PhD dissertation. Stanford Unversity,1971, page ⅲ原文作：It must be conceded that Lin Shu was not destined to play a major role in the intellectual or literary currents of modem China. Although he was well-known and his translations were widely read in the last years of the Ch'ing dynasty, his contributions proved to be minor in view of the tremendous upheavals that have shaken the Chinese literary world since his time.
③底本考订与原著考证不同,明确到林译所用原本的具体版本,研究难度很大,但极有价值。
②"Although his Confucian leanings prompted him embrace the all-encompassing "three bonds"(san-kang三纲).his own life experience denied him their fulfillment. Loyal to the emperor, he could not serve him in office:filial to his father, he suffered from his early death:devoted to his wife, he became widower at the age of forty-five. Then, in his middle age. the despairing scholar found a source of income and spiritual consolation in the world of his translations."Leo Ou-fan. "Lin Shu and His Translation:Western Fiction in Chinese Perspective". Papers on China. Volume 19. East Asian Research Center. Harvard University,1965. page163.括号内的中文为原文所有。
①"The Pandora's box of Lin Shu's translations has released a swarm of new legacies of which he himself was unware, just as his interpretation of Western novels have pointed toward new horizons perhaps beyond the range of recognition of Western authors and Western readers."Leo Ou-fan. "Lin Shu and His Translation:Western Fiction in Chinese Perspective". Papers on China, Volume 19. East Asian Research Center. Harvard University.1965. page 187
"The purpose of this adaptation was to increase the readability so as to boost sales....As a dead language burdened with cultural associations, the literary language was not flexible or 'innocent' enough to recast foreign narrative without colouring it with Chinese culture.... Lin Shu...thought that turning foreign fiction into elegant literary language would strengthen the claim that these works of fiction were refined enough to be considered literature of high status."I-heng Zhao, The uneasy narrator: Chinese fiction from the traditional to the modern. London: Oxford University Press,1995, page 229-30.
① Yu Zhang对林译本的总体评价：Lin Shu first translated the novel with the help of his co-translators. His translation is characterized by its deletions and alterations. In his effort to make his work read more like a Chinese novel than a translation, he used vocabulary, images and allusions familiar to the Chinese audience. He even changed basic features of some of his characters to adapt to Chinese social conventions. Yu, Zhang. "Chinese Translations of David Copperfield: Accurracy and Acculturation". PhD dissertation. Southern Illinois University (Carbondale),1991.
②高万隆论文的总结：To conclude, Lin Shu was undoubtedly an initiator of modem Chinese literary translations as well as a pioneer of the New Culture Movement....Examined in its given cultural context, Lin Shu's translation practice and strategy were also successful, and fitted in with the needs of the Chinese culture and readers at that time....This is the goal of this thesis in recasting Lin Shu. Wanlong Gao, "Recasting Lin Shu: A Cultural Approach to Literary Translation". PhD dissertation. Griffith University.2003.
③吕立的结论The conclusion I reach is that Lin Shu's translation of Uncle Tom's Cabin is politically driven, with additional considerations of marketability and literary fame. Li Lu. "Translation and Nation:Negotiating China in the translation of Linshu. Yanfu. and Liang Qichao". PhD dissertation. University of Massachusetts (Amherst). 2007.
①杨文莹,字雪渔,浙江杭州人,清光绪二年进士,曾任贵州学政,工书法。
①寒光,《林琴南》,上海：中华书局,1935,第209页
② 《巴黎茶花女遗事》的问世非林纾从事翻译之本意。
①林纾、魏易,《黑奴吁天录》,北京：商务印书馆,1981,第2页
②Ibid.第二页。
③这是文章学翻译传统当中比较有影响力的模因。释法云《翻译名义集》曰：“译之言易也,为以所有,易其所无。”钱铺书评释道安“三失本”论日：“盖失于彼乃所以得于此也,安未克圆览而疏通其理矣。”
①邹振环,《影响中国近代社会的一百种译作》,北京：中国对外翻译出版公司,1996,第48页。邹先生此书这一段叙述不清,所以没有直接引用,大致意思是：此书是某位法国作者用法语写成,纳约约翰和李约瑟两位英国人合作将其译为英文,前者是口译,后者笔录。《听夕闲谈》即据此英译本译成。
②邹先生认为,两版改头换名无非有哗众取宠以拓展销路的用意。
③说“仅有”其实也不确,1981年商务印书馆重版林译小说丛书十本,收录了《黑奴吁天录》(这本书历史上商务印书馆一直没有得到版权),保存了原著当中林纾的跋、例言,却把魏易的序删了。现在学界基本上没有人知道魏易还在林译小说中有过序文。
①寒光,《林琴南》,上海：中华书局,1935,141页
②《块肉余生述》中Mr.译作“密司忒”,或“密司脱”,译法并不完全一致。林译小说中,作“密司忒”更多,如《滑稽外史》,钱锺书没有注意到这个细节。
①Chesterman. Andrews (1997),转引自 Jeremy Munday, The Routledge companion to translation studies (ed.). New York:Routledg,2009, pp 96.
①这个时间是推断出来的。笔者用的本子是商务印书馆《林译小说从书》第六编的版本,但这个本子竟然没有刊任何时间信息。根据1915年商务印书馆出版《新译罗刹录》上刊登的广告,笔者用的应对时1915年的再版。新式标点是笔者加上的。
①道安,《道行经序》。从“识度”来看,我认为道安“本无宗”师祖、般若学大法的身份才是他的翻译主张的根本,道安认为佛经存往的最终目的即让人们遗忘语言的描述.达到佛经文字和烦恼“药病双亡”之“观”,进而结合“智”求“般若”。所以道安讲“文”“质”主要意图在于突出佛经文字中的“般若”：“率初以要其终,或忘文以全其质者,则大智玄通,居可知也。”罗新璋在《翻译论集》只保留了此序的最后部分,应该说道安的原旨失其大半,“五失本、三不易”的本源隐匿无踪。我进而发现.很少有学者注意到《道行经序》前半部分极具“语言哲学”意味的论述。朱志瑜《中国佛籍译论选辑评注》摘引的内容超过罗新璋,应该是注意到了一些,不过没有任何说明。
②文章学的一大特点是对“文体”(大致相当于现在的"genre"和"style"之和,吴汝纶指的应当是前者)的研究非常细致,在古文写作当作,“明体”是很重要的一步。吴氏作为桐城派最后重镇,依据的虽然是文章学,但提的建议却很中肯。严复的翻译思想中吴汝纶的影响不可轻视。
③陈之展,“近代翻译文学”,载罗新璋编《翻译论集》,商务印书馆,1984年,第200页
④林纾在翻译中遇到有语言表现方式困难的原著以迭更司著作为多,详见本研究第五章。
①原文引自Harriet Beecher Stowe, Uncle Tom's cabin, or Life among the lowly. Boston:John P. Jewett & Co..1893,第73页,括号为笔者添加,斜体原文已有。林纾的译文引自林纾、魏易,《黑奴吁天录》,北京：商务印书馆,1981年,第20-1页。下同。
②黄继忠,《汤姆大伯的小屋》,上海：上海译文出版社,1993年,第45页。下同。这是Uncle Tom's Cabin在中国最早的一个白话文译本。
①有人认为“被酒时时带剑行”一诗中的“剑”即为方赠。陆建德,“再说‘荆生’兼及运动之术”,南方周末,2008年12月31日。
①金为,《金缕曲——<玉雪留痕>题词和补柳翁》,上海：商务印书馆,1905年
②林纾,《畏庐漫录》,转引自寒光,《林琴南》,上海：商务印书馆,1935年,第153页。这也是林纾对“开民智”的文学题材的思考。笔者还看到一则轶事也与此相关。林纾在北大教书的时候一次看到下面的学生恹恹欲睡,便说：“现在给大家讲个故事。从前有个风流和尚,某日经过一座桥,见一位美女姗姗而来。学生们全来神了,林纾却突然不讲了。学生请问后来事如何,林纾说：“没什么,一个向西,一个向东，走了。”顾晓绿,《一言难尽1912-1949民国映画》,团结出版社,2010年,第46-7页。
①转引自寒光,《林琴南》,上海：商务印书馆,1937年,第48页。寒光引用这段材料之后说,陈炳垫能够拿着佛洛依德之学说的眼光来分析林氏翻译言情小说的心理的确是一个创见。这倒未必就是佛洛依德之学说,笔者更认为传统文人有自成体系的“心性”修养观。如果寒光仔细往传统文论的方向想想,还是能找到本土的线索。不过,换个角度来说,寒光的观点倒也可以说明,东西方文论创作论对作家的性情和精神状态都有一定层而的关注。只是四方的译论与文论却不像中国的译论与文论走得那么近,这固然能保持翻译理论独立的特点,但也容易导致无法有效地、及时地汲取文论中更丰富的养分。
①寅半生(钟骏文,浙江萧山人,时主编《游戏世界》),读《迦茵小传》两译本书后.1907年《游戏世界》第三期。
②原文：“盖我一寰甲,饮酒,立誓,狎妓,节节无所讳。
①很多学者认为林纾欣赏“俗”是对古文理论最大程度的破坏.(陆海德,2007：284)实际上,这恰恰是传统文章之学彻底现代化最宝贵的一次机遇,遗憾的是林纾的实践成果还没有足够的沉淀便被“五四”洪流冲得七零八落。
②杨自检,《关于译学研究的一些想法》,载张柏然、许钧主编,《面向21世纪的译学研究》,北京：商务印书馆,2002年,第13页。
①司马光,《资治通鉴》,北京：中华书局,1956年.第三册,第1390页。时宗室诸母因酣悦相与语曰：“文叔少时谨信,与人不款曲,唯直柔耳,今乃能如此”1帝闻之,大笑曰：“吾治天下,亦欲以柔道行之。”光武帝所说的“柔道”指的是“不轻易兴兵,并借此以剥夺将帅军权,”见《资治通鉴》第1381页“建武十三年”,这只是一种帝王之术罢了,后代君主多有采用。光武帝本人并不“柔”,“平生见小敌怯,今见大敌勇,”晚年尤有暴行。
①林纾,《离恨天》,北京：商务印书馆,1981,第4页。
①Taifel.Henri.Human Groups and Social Categories: Studies in Social Psychology,London:Cambridge university Press.1981,第147页.
②林纾没有区分“畜”和“蓄”。古文里“蓄奴仆”和“畜奴仆”都用,但后者更常见。《说文》：蓄：积也；畜,田畜。又：家养谓之畜,野生谓之兽,可见后者有贬损的意思,现在都统一改用“蓄奴”
①灵石,《读黑奴吁天录》,载薛绥之主编,《林纾研究资料汇编》,福州：福建人民出版社,1982年,130页。
①严复,《原强序》。
②洪堡特说知识分子的责任是在社会生活中起到匡正的作用。
③鲁迅,《摩罗诗力说》。
①数字即该书在A descriptive guide to the best fiction. British and American中出现的贞码,下同。参见：Ernest Albert Baker. A descriptive guide to the best fiction. British and American. London: S. Sonnenschein,1903
②原作未入选,但作者的另外两部小说" A Dash for a Throne" " In the Name of a Woman "入选。根据Baker的评述,均为爱情小说。
①Ernest Albert Baker. A descriptive guide to the best fiction. British and American. London: S. Sonnenschein. 1903
②"It must not be thought that the literature which translators made available was always the best. The voluminous output of the great translator Lin Shu included a good deal of modish trash. But the people who read his elegant classical renderings of Rider Haggard and Conan Doyle were not in search merely of entertainment. They were in conscious pursuit of the Occident, and were constantly reminded in the prefaces to these translations of the morals they might be expected to draw from them. In introducing Allan Quatermain Lin Shu lectures his readers on the white man's love of adventure and innovation: and in his preface to People of the Mist he reflects that if an Englishman would endure the sufferings and hardships that its hero underwent for the sake of a bag of rubies, the outlook for China with her vast resources of gold, silver, silk, and tea was very poor indeed." Classical, modern, and humane: essays in Chinese literature. Ed. John Minford. Siu-Kit Wong. Hong Kong:Chinese University Press. 1989. Page 70.
①韦利有个精当的比喻形容林纾的翻译,“盲人观画”：Knowing no foreign language he was. as he more or less confesses in his analogy about footsteps, rather in the position of a blind man at a picture gallery,whose friends are able to tell him everything about the pictures except what they actually look like. (Waley.2008:190)
②1981年商务印书馆重版了十本林译小说,其中有七本是与魏易合作的；《吟边燕语》,《撒克逊劫后英雄略》,《拊掌录》,《黑奴吁天录》,《块肉余生述》,《迦茵小传》,《不如归》。邹振环《影响中国近代社会的一百种译作》里林译小说占了6本,除了《巴黎茶花女遗事》之外,其余全是与魏易口述。寒光说,没有魏易林纾不会取得这样的成就。
①钱锺书先生曾详细考证过林纾早期翻译中的“摇摆”现象,见钱锺书等,《林纾的翻译》,北京：商务印书馆,1981年,第42页。
②1873年蠡勺居士在《听夕闲谈》译序里仍在强调“小说四弊”：虽然,执笔者于此则不可视为笔墨烟云,可以惟吾所欲言也。邪正之办不可混,善恶之镒不可淆.使徒作風花雪月之词,记兄女缠绵之事,则未近於尊淫,其蔽一也。使徒作豪侠失路之谈,纪山林行劫之事,则未近於诲盗,其蔽二也。使徒写奸邪倾轧之心,为机械变诈之事,则未近于纵奸,其蔽三也。使徒记十戈满地之事,逞将帅用武之谋,则未近于好乱,其蔽四也。去此四蔽,而小说乃可传矣。
③林纾,《译林序》,载载罗新璋编《翻译论集》,商务印书馆,1984年,第161-2页。
3施蛰存,《中国近代文学大系·翻译文学集·导言》,上海书店1990年
1郑振铎先生对哈葛德及柯南道尔的作品实际上是持排斥的态度：“我们见了这个统计之后.一方面自然是非常的感谢林琴南先生,因为他介绍了这许多重要的世界名著给我们,但‘方而却不免可惜他的劳力之大半归于虚耗,因为在他所译的一百五十六种的作品中,仅有这六七十种是著名的(其中尚杂有哈葛德及科南道尔二人的第二等的小说二十七种,所以在一百五十六种中,重要的作品尚占不到三分之一),其他的书却都是第二三流的作品,可以不必译的。”郑振铎,《林琴南先生》,转引自商务印书馆《林纾的翻译》,1981年第11-2灭。
1 《冰櫱余生记》1916年商务印书馆出版,文言文译出。译本版权页载“原著者法国勒东路易,译述者双石轩”,寒光、魏惟仪均认为是魏易所译,现在多采此说,除此之外没有其它佐证,魏易也没有再用“双石轩”这个名字译过其它著作。
2“魏易是第一个将《游记》译为中文的人。”张跃铭,“《马可波罗游记》在中国的翻译与研究”,江淮论坛,1981年第3期
① “这大概不能十分归咎于林先生,因为他是不懂得任何外国文字的,选择原本之权全操于与他合作的口译者之身上。如果口译者是具有较好的文学常识呢,他所选择的书便为较重要的,如果门译者没有什么知识呢,他所选择的书便为第二流的毫无价值的书了。林先生吃了他们的亏不浅,他的一大半的宝贵的劳力是被他们所虚耗了。这实是一件很可惋惜的事!(只有魏易及王庆通是他的较好的合作者。)”郑振铎,“林琴南先生”,钱锺书等,《林纾的翻译》,北京：商务印书馆,1981年。
①这里说的是一件很有名的故事,曾朴去北京探访林纾,劝他有计划地翻译西方名著。Arthur Waley在Notes on translation一文中引此事说明翻译选材不必搞“系统工程”。The Secret History of Mongos.第191-2页。
②曾虚白,“为林魏合译小说影印本欢呼”,《传记文学》,第六十五卷第四期。
③《张元济日记》1917年6月12日写到：“竹庄昨日来信,言琴南近来小说译稿多草率,又多错误,且来稿太多。余复言稿多只可收受,惟草率错误应令改良。”见张元济：《张元济日记》(北京：商务印书馆,1981年),页233。
Multilingual2010年12月(Volume 21 Issue 8)就translation ethics(?)故了一期专刊。大多数译者表示,在职业伦理与经济需要抵触时,他们会选择服从后者,理由是：“即便我不译也总会有人译。”
①魏易序《黑奴吁天录》,武林魏氏刻本。
②原著的另一重要角色“哲而治”有3/4的白人血统,肤色儿近十白人。因此,“译本”冠以“黑奴”之名未必尽妥,但的确起到了对“黄种人”的警醒效果。
③但这并不是“(原文的)意义则服从于主方语言使用者的实践需要”(刘禾,2008：88),“黑奴”并没有新的意义产生,魏易提的是“奴隶性质”而非“黑奴性质”。从这个角度看,那种认为“国民性的概念最初由梁启超等晚清知识分子从日本引入中国”(刘禾,2008：74)的说法实际上是给五四最激进的倡导者帮腔,对晚明、季清的有识之士长期主张的“翻译——会通——超胜”战略及实践则视而不见。魏易对理学八股的批评虽然毫不留情,但对“支那人种”追求自由之信念仍满怀希望,这种品质在五四时代激进的国民性翻译者身上就不那么清晰。
③中国第二历史档案馆编,中华民国史档案资料汇编(第三辑：文化),南京：江苏古籍出版社,1991年,第152页。
①蔡元培,“庄北京通俗教育研究会演说词”,东方杂志(第14卷),1917年第四期,第15页。文章署名蔡孑民。
②钱锤书,“林纾的翻译”,载《七缀集》,北京：三联书店,2002年,第111页。
③钱锺书等,“林纾的翻译”,载《林纾的翻译》,北京：商务印书馆,1981年,第35页。
①按：这里的翻译可以确定不是译书,而是为了挣钱为别人做实用翻译。
②钱锺书列举了林译中“讹字”,“脱漏字”,“杜撰字”及“错字”等现象,证明林纾本人没有看过自己的译稿,见钱锺书,“林纾的翻译”,钱锺书,《七缀集》,北京：三联书店,2002年,第86-7页。
①历代文法家所持“义法”的差异并不体现在具体的写作程式上,而是体现在“师法”对象,以及由师法对象推演出来各类文体的风格。详见第五章“林译之词采”
②古典文论中的“文体”含义十分丰富,很难讲实某个兼容并包,相互不打架的定义。我个人认为主要原因在于传统的文法研究按“语言使用的对象”定义文体,但随着语言实践的发展,文章的“对象”趋于“泛化”(不妨理解成“大众化”,语言超脱了贵族的掌握逐渐为普罗大众所用),开始萌发从“语言使用的方式”上定义文体。郭英德在《中国古代文体学论稿》中提出：“文体的基本结构应由体制、语体、体式、体性四个层次构成。体制是指外在的形状、面貌、构架,语体指文体的语言系统、语言修辞和语言风格,体式指文体的表现方式,体性指文体的表现对象和审美精神。”笔者认为郭氏的分类及描述虽然未必绝对清晰,个别术语的名称亦可改进,但目前来看他的说法算是比较可靠的。郭英德,《中国古代文体学论稿》,北京：北京大学出版社,2005年,第2贞。
②转引自王先霈、王又平编《文学理论批评术语汇释》,北京：高等教育出版社,2006年,第275页。
①吴汝纶,《吴汝纶尺犊》,黄山：黄山书社,1990年,第161页。
②笔者用的底本即是James H. Loewe的翻译本,J.M. Dent.1900年出版。
①这与合作者不无关系,详见本章第三节。
②《黑奴吁天录》中一共有八首歌,分别是：“Die in the Field ", " Bright Canaan ", " The Wings of the Morning", "A World of Spirits Bright", "The Hebrew Children", "Amazing Grace", " When I Can Read My Title Clear", " Blow Ye the Trumpet "。这些歌曲现在某些场合仍然诵唱,链接是弗吉尼业大学提供的wav,mp3和rm三种格式的录音：http://utc.iath.virginia.edu/christn/chsohp.html
①Dale Cockrell. Demons of Disorder:Early Blackface Minstrels and Their World. Cambridge:Cambridge University Press,1997:Dena Epstein. Sinful Tunes and Spirituals:Black Folk Music to the Civil War. Urbana: University of Illinois Press.1977:Richard Crawford. America's Musical Life:A History. New York:W. W. Norton. 2001.
② "Nearly every character in Uncle Tom's Cabin is defined by the sort of music he or she performs. prefers, or scorns... For Stowe and her readers, music was the supreme art of affection...it was a clue to character." The Music of Uncle Tom's Cabin BY DEANE L. ROOT. DEPARTMENT OF MUSIC. UNIVERSITY OF PITTSBURGH. http://utc.iath.virginia.edu/interpret/interframe.html
③根据Stephen Railton的研究,这九种音乐题材是：1)Methodist hymns 2)Camp-meeting hymns.3)Psalm-singing.4) Catholic (Latin) hymns and organ pieces.5)Secular songs and piano pieces.6) Opera, theater music.7) Dancing.8) Whistling. Minstrel song & dance。
①这首歌叫"Wings of the morning":Oh, had I the wings of the morning./I'd fly away to Canaan's shore,/Bright angels should convey me home,/To the new Jerusalem./O Thou Almighty Father./Come help me now to praise thy glory./Methinks I hear the trumpet sound,/Before the break of day./Oh. had I the wings of the morning./I'd fly away to Canaan's shore./Bright angels should convey me home./To the new.Jerusalem.按：“/”为笔者所添加,表示换行。这首歌在基督教徒中仍然流行,笔者听到的是1999年知名歌剧表演者James Bryant在Virginia Arts Recording Studios录制的版本,见http://utc.iath.virginia.edu/christn/wingsfr.html
②原歌出自Charles Wesley的Funeral Hymns.second series,1759斯土活的引文稍有出入,原文应当作“I see a world of spirits bright. Who taste the pleasures there."全部歌词比较长,这里不引,可参见：http://www.cy berhymnal.org/htm/a/l/e/aletthis.htm。Wesley的这本唱诗集很有名,“the best Methodist hymn book which had appeared up to that." (J. Alfred Faulkner.A new History of Methodism, vol. ii. p.146.)
①这倒不为林纾所独有,桐城文家研究义法最得力者方苞论叙事文即主此见。“义法”在写作程式方面并不能体现历代文法家的文论差异,所不同的是写作程式的“师法”对象,并师法对象推演出来各类文体的风格。
②Lin Shu was already famous as a writer of essays and criticism in a terse, clear, and vigorous style of literary Chinese when, more or less accidentally, his career as a translator began.... It is perhaps by his translation of Dickens that he is best known. He translated all the principal Dickens novels, and I have compared a number of passages with the original. To put Dickens into classical Chinese would on the face of it seem to be a grotesque undertaking. But the results are not at all grotesque. Dickens, inevitably, becomes a rather different and to my mind a better writer. All the over-elaboration, the overstatement and uncurbed garrulity disappear. The humour is there, but is transmuted by a precise, economical style: every point that Dickens spoils by uncontrolled exuberance. Lin Shu makes quietly and efficiently.
① Waley的见解在西方有不同意见。C T Hsia(夏志清)说"Granted that Lin Shu's 'precise, economical style' makes better reading than Dickens' 'uncontrolled exuberance,' shouldn't a translator's primary duty be fidelity to the spirit and style of the original? " (CT Hsia) R. M. Campton连Hsia这一点点的宽容也不允许,他在质疑Waley的同时批评Hsia上了Waley的当,‘'Incidentally this praise of Lin Shu by Waley has induced C T Hsia to comment:Granted that Lin Shu's precise...." (R. M. Camton,1971:1148)
①此据张俊才说,笔者并不同意。删减多少与译得认不认真完全是两回事,《天演论》译得不认真吗?《块肉余生述》是不是林纾译得最认真的一本书不得而知,但根据我的比较,林纾的精品译作当中,删减最少的要数《撒克逊劫后英雄略》,1981年商务印书馆重印的林译本约14万字。
②张世君认为这是受到了流浪汉小说的影响：事实上,西方创作实践中,并非都是严格遵守情节整一性的,它们有很多与情节整一性不相吻合的插曲式的描写。突出的例子是文艺复兴时期的流浪汉小说picaresque novels"。张世君：明清小说评点的空间性观念.载《明清小说评点叙事概念研究》,北京：中国社会科学出版社,2007年,第86页。
①林纾谈《左传》及《史记》用“插笔”：“左传为文家叙事祖庭,每到插叙处,辄用一“初”字领起。如宣公二年叙晋灵不君,以伏甲困赵盾,至提弥明斗死,盾儿不出,忽得灵辄而免。然灵辄事与本事相隔至远,只得用一“初”字补入灵辄前迹,则救盾始非无因。史家全循此例,用为插补之法,而《史记》用之尤极自然……顾左氏之长惟此也：能于百忙中紧紧穿插,又紧紧叫应,使读者惊其捷敏,而又不见针线之迹。”见林纾：《左孟庄骚精华录》卷上,上海：商务印书馆,1925年,第29页。可见,林纾对于“初”这样的明显痕迹也并不卞张。
②原文太长,与本研究也无直接相关,略去不引。参见John Mullan. "Inset Narratives". How Novels Work. Oxford and New York:Oxford University Press.2006. p.165-6.
① Mark Ford说：Nicholas Nickleby is made up, nevertheless, of all manner of different kinds of writing—melodrama, political satire, class comedy, social criticism, domestic farce—while its loose, episodic narrative style allows Dickens to push the story at almost any moment in whatever direction happens to appeal. Its open, haphazard progress harks back to the picaresque traditions of the eighteenth century—particularly Smollett and Fielding—and contrasts absolutely with the nightmarish world of Oliver Twist, which was only half written at the time his manic schedule obliged him to begin work on his new serial. It is revealing that Dickens so arranged his contracts that for six months he was producing novels embodying such different visions of the world simultaneously." Mark Ford, "Introduction", in Charles Dickens. Nicholas Nickelby, ed. Mark Ford (London Penguin Books.2003). p.xiv此外,Paul Davis也有类似考证,参见Paul Davis, "Nicholas Nickleby. The Life and Adventures of Nicolas Nickleby", The Penguin Dickens Companion: The Essential Reference to His Life and Work (Harmondsworth: Penguin Books,1999).第331页。
②林译本把这16页的“闲笔”压缩成了一句话“于是有谈鬼谈盗者”,见林译《滑稽外史》.卷1,第五章,第39页。我觉得可能是林译不满意原著的内容,故而删减。译文“谈”引起的两个动宾短语并置表达的是作者带有批判意味地省略了一些内容,比如我们说某人“讲东讲西”,实际表明的是我们的态度,故而有意隐去此人究竟说了什么。
③陈平原：中国小说叙事角度的转变,载《中国小说叙事模式的转变》,香港：中文大学出版社,2003年,第57-90页
④林纾的翻译有过不少“心理描写”的译写尝试,这与“全知视角”的叙事程式或有关联。
①潘文国,《汉英语对比纲要》,北京：北京语言文化大学出版社.2003年,第206页。
①Since both oral and visual forms of information processing are involved, sight translation can be defined as a specific type of written translation as well as a variant of oral interpretation.
②Most expression failures were syntactic or grammatical...'subjucts seem to have suffered from coordination problems and short-term memory failures.
① Whereas the English novel often describes a scene or a person from an Olmpian angle or viewpoint, the Chinese describes it from the angle of a character. For example, the scene in which... At one point in the novel the English opens in this manner:'One morning, three men were seen entering Paris on foot through the Porte St. Denis. It was a fine day in spring.' The translator could not accept the impersonal'were seen', characteristic though it is of traditional English narrative. He changes the order and the angle of view, beginning with the date and the weather, and only then remarks that'the soldiers guarding the wall saw three men entering the Tianni gate." Patrick Hanan. "On the First Novel Translated into Chinese". In Patrick Hanan, Chinese Fiction of the Nineteenth and Early Twentieth Centuries. New York: Columbia University Press,2004.韩南没有交代到底是哪部小说,笔者只能按自己的理解翻原文所及的一句引文。
① 《文心雕龙·丽辞》在提出“至于诗人偶章,大大联辞,奇偶识变,不劳经营”之前有“夫心生文辞,运裁百虑”
②邵宏,《衍义的“气韵”中国画论的观念史研究》,南京：江苏教育出版社,2005年,第172页。我认为邵所指的“技术”更准确地说就是“创作的程式”。
③《周礼·天官·大宰》记载：“正月之吉,县治象之法于象魏”,郑注“象魏,阙也”。可见“象魏”是种在楼台之中绘图治事的方法。
④《通志·图谱略·索象》记载：“古之学者,为学有要,置图于左,置书于右.索象于图,索理于书,故人亦易为学,学亦易为功”
⑤参见王伯敏：《中国版画史》,上海美术出版社,1961年10月版,第18页。
①于德山,中国古代小说“语一图”互文现象及其叙事功能.《明清小说研究》,2003年第3期
②据说底版被著名林纾研究专家林薇先生收藏了。
③转引自黄霖,韩同文,《中国历代小说论著选》,南昌：江西人民出版社,1985年,第73页
④寒光写《林琴南》一书时,《春觉斋论画遗稿》尚未出版,因此寒光一再致歉材料匮乏,无法探究林纾的绘画思想。
①载《春觉斋论画遗稿》,北京(北平)：燕京大学图书馆,1935年,第十二页。
②傅彦长、朱应鹏、张若谷,《艺术三家言》,上海：上海良友图书印刷公司,1927年
③林纾魏易用的底本是Cheap Edition参见黄俊贤.叙事与视野融合：重述林译狄更斯小说,香港大学图书馆,2010年学位论文。我数过David Copperfield的Cheap Edition一共配有39幅插图。
④狄更斯的小说里的配图,贡献最多的是Browne参见Robert Patten. "Browne. Hablot Knight", in Paul Schlicke ed..Oxford Reader's Companion to Dickens. Oxford & New York: Oxford University Press.2000).第58页。
①John Harvey. Victorian Novelists and their Illustrators, London: Sidgwick & Jackson,1970,第12页
②Ibid, pp 13.
③Paradoxically, when Stowe wrote Unde Tom's Cabin, she was not particularly familiar with blacks or the conditions of their existence. Phrenology helped mitigate that want of knowledge by supplying information about mental orientation and its consequences on outward appearances. The importance of the latter for Stowe is suggested by the contention that her "vocation is simply that of a painter, and my object will be to hold up in the most lifelike and graphic manner possible slavery, its reverses, changes, and the negro character, which I have had ample opportunities for studying. There is no arguing with pictures and everybody is impressed by them whether they mean to be or not." Charles Colbert, A measure of perfection: phrenology and the fine arts in America. New Baskerville:UNC Press Books,1997,第241页.
①所谓“变相”,就是根据语言叙述描绘图像：“变文”则是依据图像铺演语言叙述,叙与画合、叙画交映,其叙述特征正表现在“变相(文)”绘抽象为具象、化呆板为生动的通俗化叙事功能与品格,二者的互变关系十分明显。参见周绍良：《唐代变文及其它》,《敦煌文学作品选》,中华书局,1987年12月版,第25页。
②图画来源：全景博物馆丛书编辑委员会,《中国名画博物馆》,郑州：海燕出版社,2002年,第47页。说来有趣,这部画集、评画集是笔者在University of Massachusetts Amherst Translation Center发现的,Edwin Gentzler说看这些画作可以最便利地了解中国的文艺思想。
①“图式想象”相当大程度上需要依靠“语际翻译”产品,但本图把“语际翻译”和“符际翻译1”分开表述并无错误。在“林纾的翻译”全过程中,语际翻译产品和图像化想象经“意境”整合后进入“语内翻译”,详见第五章。
②参见Basil Hatim. Jeremy Munday. Translation: an advanced resource book, New York:Psychology Press.2004
③狄更斯小说中的配图外部原因极其重要,究其源起而言,外部功能甚至超过内部功能,但本研究从文章学的角度考量林纾的翻译,与其在本土的出版情况关涉不大,因此省略。可参见：John Harvey. Victorian Novelists and their Illustrators, London:Sidgwick & Jackson.1970
④这是就现在已经“结集成书”的小说文本而言,庄“连载”的时候,第二种功能依然很重要。参见：Leavis、Q. D.. The Dickens Illustrations: Their Function. IN Leavis, F. R. and Leavis. Q. D. Dickens the Novelist. London: Chatto & Windus,1970. P429-78.
① “插图”对狄更斯的小说有着决定性的影响,他的第一部插图连载小说The Pickwick Papers(《匹克威克外传》)的出版方式和销售奇迹彻底改变了英国十九世纪小说的发行甚至创作模式。《外传》的问世实由“插图”而来,当时著名的捅而家Robert Seymour提议出版商为他的连载漫画Nimrod Club找作家配上文字,出版商接连被几个作家拒绝后找到了刚出道的狄更斯。然而狄更斯却成功说服了出版商让他自由写作然后配上插较,Symour勉强与狄更斯合作了一期即自杀弃世.第四期开始狄更斯终于遇到他最满意的搭档,Hablot Knight Browne《外传》从1836年3月开始发行,前三期如出版商所预料,每期售出约500份,但从第四期开始销量剧增,到1837年2月销量达14000份,年底最后一期竟然售出40000。狄更斯由此走上小说创作的道路。Paul. Schlicke. "The Pickwick Papers". In Paul Schlicke ed.. Oxford Reader's Companion to Dickens. Oxford & New York: Oxford University Press.2000:P451-5.
①有研究说这是因为笔译也涉及到" short-term memory ", Agrifoglio,2004
① 《先秦诗鉴赏辞典》,上海：上海辞书出版社,1998年,第84页。
①我对照了《说部初集》和《林译小说丛书》中的两个本子,段落设置相同。第一章到第三章分段非常细致,但此后的段落设置就越来越少了,也有一些章节完全不分段。
②我看了手上的三种版本,1905年上海商务本和1981年北京商务本均如此,1932年上海商务本中沈德鸿在校注时,按照语义设置了详细的段落。
③我没有找到这部书的初版,只能依据1981年北京商务印书馆的新式标点本。从1981年北京商务的《撒克逊劫后英雄略》和1932年上海商务的校点本对比结果看,商务印书馆这套“林译小说从书”没有继承历史上的校点本,均是原版。
④笔者所用的版本分别是：《二城故事》,1992年魏惟仪影印本,取自芝加哥大学图书馆：《冰櫱余生记》,1916年商务印书馆本,取自哈佛大学图书馆：《苏后马丽惨史》,《德皇威廉二世少年生活自传》均为1935年商务印书馆本、取自香港大学图书馆：《泰西小说名家传略》,1917年通俗文学研究会本,取自哈佛大学图书馆；《元代客卿马可博罗游记》(中国国家图书馆影印本).1913年正蒙书局本。
①除去《巴黎茶花女遗事》,林译人物对话方式基本上采用了“文言小说及笔记的传统文体,和当时的报章杂志文体”,详见《林纾的翻译》,第43-5页。
②参见林纾、魏易译,《拊掌录》,严既澄校注,上海：商务印书馆,1933：8-9页
③正如钱锺书所考证,古文中省略“日”、“对日”的情况少之又少。钱锺书等,《林纾的翻译》,第43页。
①苦海余生,“小说从话”,原载《小说月报》,1911年,第三期,转引自薛绥之、张俊才编,《林纾研究资料》,福州：福建人民出版社,1983年,第216页。
①如蔡登山,曾虚白等人多采此说。魏惟仪的《我的父亲——魏易》一文是目前有关魏易生平的唯一第一手资料。这篇文章最先刊登于1982年11月23日《中国时报副刊》上,1987年收入魏惟仪的散文集《不如归》,大地出版社出版。
③魏易与林纾其他的合作者不一样,他只肯为林纾口述。和林纾合作最多的陈家麟就不是这样,此君可谓四处误人。见寒光,《林琴南》,第68-9页。
①陈敬之,《新文学运动的阻力》,台北：成文出版社有限公司,1980年,第35-6页。
②陈希澎,“十字军英雄记序”,载林纾、魏易译《十字军英雄记》,上海：商务印书馆,1906年,第一页。
3王国伟,“当世蒲松龄,古笔谱新曲——林纾短篇小说艺术新论”,《西华师范大学学报(哲社版)》2004年第3期,第19页。
①林纾,“矣字用法”,引自郭绍虞、罗根泽编,《中国古典文学理论批评专著选辑》,北京：人民文学出版社出版,第133-4页。八种用法是笔者根据林纾的论述整理所得,为方便下文检阅对照,添加了序号。
①郭、罗二人编的《中国古典文学理论批评专著选辑》由范先渊校点,笔者只是把一些竖排用的标点转换了一下,不涉及断句。郭的这个本子有些断句经不住推敲,如“严助、朱买臣等招徕东瓯事,两粤、江、淮之间,肃然烦费矣”错得比较明显,文法、地理、史实均经不住推敲。文法上讲,“招徕”的自然是“东瓯”而不能是“东瓯事”：地理上看,“两粤、江、淮”怎么能“之间”呢?最主要的原因恐怕还是没搞清史实,这是汉朝我国南方地区民族融合、疆土拓展的大事。建元三年,武帝在没有控兵虎符的情况下遣严助持“皇帝节杖”调动“会稽”(朱买臣的老家)一带的兵力救援被闽越(粤)国围困的东瓯国,后以闽越国主动撤兵告终。但东瓯国新君迫于闽越压力,率领族属军队四万多人北上,“请举国徙中国”——这是“严助、朱买臣等招徕东瓯”：元封元年至三年间,武帝又先后以武力把“闽越(粤)国”和“南越(粤)国”纳入汉朝政府管辖——这就是“事两粤”(此处的“事”应作“治理”解,如《战国策》有“齐、魏得地葆利而详事下吏。”)；最后的“江淮之间,肃然烦费”要更复杂,除了当年的东瓯国,闽越国后来也同样被武帝迁移到江淮一带。所以,林纾引的这句话应当断作“严助、朱买臣等招徕东瓯,事两粤,江淮之间肃然烦费矣。”我参考过中华书局的数版《汉书》,均做此断,没有争议。郭绍虞主编的这个版本里类似的断句问题不止一处,以郭在学界的身份,似不该。下文引“也字用法”举《史记》为例,也有几处文理不通。如果说郭本作为《春觉斋论文》的第一个现代标点本,些许疏漏或可原谅,则王水照2007年的十卷本《历代文话》可谓以讹传讹。王本录《春觉斋论文》一字不差地照收了郭本所有的讹误,这有些说不过去。王本称其底本为“1916年北京都门印书局本”,亦无可信矣。见王水照编,《历代文话》(7),上海：复旦大学出版社,2007年,第6431页。
①林纾,“也字用法”,引自郭绍虞、罗根泽编,《中国古典文学理论批评专著选辑》,北京：人民文学出版社出版,第135-7灭。六种用法是笔者根据林纾的论述整理所得,为方便下文检阅对照,添加了序号。
②为了节约篇幅,这里不再引迭更司的原文对照。
①其实林纾对佛教经典文学也很熟悉,《洪罕女郎传·序》引用的佛典表明,至少《楞严经》他看得很熟。此经虽有真伪之争,但却素以其文学水平为人称道,执笔者房融乃房玄龄之嫡孙,学养尤高。
②孔庆貌,《林纾传》,团结出版社,1998年,第121页。笔者按：《水浒传》第二回：鲁达坐下,道：“奉着经略相公钧旨：要十斤精肉,切做臊子,不要见半点肥的在上面。”
③章炳麟,“与人论文书”,转引自钱基博,《现代中国文学史》,北京：东方出版社,2008年,第39页。
④林纾,“与姚叔节书”,载林纾,《畏庐续集》,台北：文津出版社1978年,第16页。这是林纾惹火烧身、与章炳麟论战的开端。
⑤这二十则故事分别为：《肉券》The Merchant of Venice,《驯悍》The Taming of the Shrew《挛误》The Comedy of Errors《铸情》Romeo and Juliet《仇金》Timon of Athens,《神合》Pericles, Prince of Tyre,《蛊征》Macbeth《医谐》All's Well that Ends Well,《狱配》Measure for Measure,《鬼诏》Hamlet, Prince of Denmark《环证》Cymbeline《女变》King Lear)《林集》As You Like It《礼哄》Much A do about Nothing《仙狯》Midsummer Night's Dream,《珠还》The Winter's Tale《黑瞀》Othello,《婚诡》Twelfth Night:or. What You Will, 《青惑》The Two Gentlemen of Verona,《飓引》The Tempest。英文底本用的是：Charles Lamb. Mary Lamb. Winston Stokes. All shakespeare's tales: Tales from Shakespeare by Charles and Mary Lamb, and Tales from Shakespeare by Winston Stokes, New York:Frederick A. Stokes company,1911。顺便插一句,国学扶轮社出《林严合钞》时.林纾从二十则故事里选了八则送去,取名《泰西故事八则》。钱锺书在《林纾的翻译》里,举《春觉斋论文·论文十六忌·忌糅杂》中林纾批评自己写《洪罕女郎传·序》用了佛典,说明“这充分证明林纾认为翻译小说和‘古文’是截然两回事。”这个结论有两点值得商榷。第一曲解引文,钱氏所引曰“糅杂者,杂佛氏之言也。……适译《洪罕女郎传》,遂以《楞严》之旨,掇拾为序言,颇自悔其杂。幸为游戏之作,不留稿。”“游戏之作”明显指“序文”而不是整部译著,钱误会了。第二,就笔者举的《林严台钞》而言,林纾亲—把他的译文选进了“文钞”,可见翻译对他来说,与“古文”并无差别。不少学者被钱氏误导。我仔细看过钱锤书先生的注释,他可能的确没有看到过《林严合钞》,不过此公素来引西文详注出处,征引中文则不然。
①纪昀的《阅微草堂笔记》文法更单调。比较起来林译《吟边燕语》尚可称善。
②本研究立足翻译,因而对“林纾的古文”及“林纾的古文研究”,不作详细讨论。这两个方面的内容笔者参考了寒光,《林琴南》,141-7；周振甫,《周振甫讲古代文论》,第165-74；张俊才,《林纾评传》,第38-45、198-209页：钱基博,《现代中国文学史》,第190-5页：陈敬之,《新文学运动的阻力》,第32-8页。张胜璋,林纾的古文论综述,福州师范大学2009年博士论文。张的博士论文没有写完,“韩柳文研究法”一节只列了标题写上“暂缺”
③吴汝纶的意思是林纾学的是韩愈,且学得像。得到这样的赞誉,也难怪林纾后来成了铁杆遗老。《清史稿》载：“纾所作务抑遏掩蔽,能伏其光气,而其真终不可自閟。”笔者注意到,一些文章引吴汝纶的话作“抑遏掩蔽,能伏光气者”,或“是抑遏掩蔽,能伏光气”,除了文理不通,人概也没有细想吴氏和《清史稿》的言外之意。臧博平、王震亚著,《二十世纪中国小说发展史》,北京：首都师范大学出版社,1997年,第 34页；汤哲声,《中国文学的现代化转型》,南京：南京大学出版社,1995年；朱碧森,《女国男儿泪 林琴南传》,中国文联出版公司,1989年,第188页。
①英文选自Stowe. Harriet. Uncle Tom's Cabin. Boston:Houghton Osgood and Company.1879. Page 7;译文选自黄继忠译本,《汤姆大伯的小屋》,上海：上海译文出版社,1982年,第8页
①沈既澄,《抚掌录·导言》,上海：商务印书馆,1933年,第5页。此本《抚掌录》系商务印书馆《万有文库》“汉译世界名著”系列选本。沈既澄校点、注释,并作了一篇长达35页的序,极有参考价值。我认为沈校本是《抚掌录》各版中最好的一种。这里摘录的原文是：“我们这位《抚掌录》的作者络绎地发表出他的诙奇而雅驯的故事创作来。像天然风景一般地自然,像人人在儿童时代所同嗜的故事一般地清凉而多趣。他的格调是高华的,雅丽的。
①郑振铎,“林琴南先生”,载钱锤书等,《林纾的翻译》,北京：商务印书馆,1981年,第1-17页。
①这部译著笔者没有找到。
②《块肉余生述》计297千字,《不如归》计68千字,取两者平均数,则1914年开始发行的《林译小说丛书》每个页面应该有530字左右。
③这本书的语言难度比UTC并不容易很多,不妨试观开头：‘①Love laughs at locks and bolts and bars and every other kind of obstacle, and so Celia and I were sitting hand-locked on a bit of rock on Moreby Point, watching the waves as they dashed against the cliffs below us. and churned themselves into foam on which the thin April sunlight danced and sparkled brilliantly. "Arthur Williams Marchmont. For love or crown: a romance. New York: A.L. Burt,1901, P1
①钱锺书,《林纾的翻译》,北京：商务印书馆,1981年,第39-41页：张俊才,《林纾评传》,北京：中华书局,2007年,第123-33页：黄俊贤,叙事与视野融合——重述林译狄更斯小说,香港大学图书馆,2010年学位论文。
③黄俊贤,叙事与视野融合——重述林译狄更斯小说,得港大学图书馆,2010年博士学位论文。
①重印“严译名著丛刊”前言,商务印书馆编辑部,1981年。
①曾虚白,翻译中的神韵与达——西滢先生《论翻译》的补充,载罗新璋,《翻译论集》,第412页。
②Gile特别强调"=does not mean 'equality', but refers to the result of the interaction between KL and EKL."; "+means 'addition by interaction' rather than arithmetic additions." (Gile,1995:78)
①以上均转引自张跃铭.马可波罗游记在中国的翻译与研究[J].江淮论坛,1981(3)：50-56.张星娘的批评太过,我比较接受冯秉均的看法。魏易的译本我完整地看过,英文底本我也浏览了大部分,读起来“意思”不难理解,但根本做不到“字过”,我想动手译起来可能不如魏易。顺便说一句,用不着说外文,整理古文资料的开创性尝试也都可能出现知识性错误。笔者用到的凡是涉及古典文献著述,均可谓无错不成书。当然这些开创性的努力也正是本研究的基础,还是应该感谢他们的工作.笔者批评的只是那些显见的扭曲。②以上引文均见潘文国译,《赫兹列散文精选》,上海外语教育出版社,2011年,第287页。斜体为原文所有。上外教这套翻译研究读本可以作为翻译研究当中的“细论文的文章学”教材。传统的文法评点在林纾之后难得一见,近代译学在发展过程中又非常刻意地与创作保持距离,以至于“翻译评点”得不到重视。
①贺麟,严复的翻译,载罗新璋,《翻译论集》,第149页。
②转引自张俊才,《林纾评传》,146页。
①当然,我并不认为意义的整体性可以无限扩大,正如袁筱一所说：“假如过于强调意义的单位在任何情况下都要无限放大到语言系统,那么,翻译也就不可能了。”袁筱一、邹东来,“意义单位与翻译单位”,《外语研究》,2008年第2期,第90-2页。
②改动之前的译文：“这些和许多类似的事例显示,农神的祭祀形成农民和自然灾害长期斗争的一部分,作为面临共同危机时社会意识和集体行动的重新集合点。”思果译作：“由这些事可以看出,农民祭祀农神,是他们长期和天灾搏斗少不了的举动。大家遇到共患难的时候祭祀农神,就会同舟共济。由其他很多类似的事也可以看到这种情形。”给出的理由是：“这样译法把一句分成三句,读者容易透气一点。”(思果.2001：68)
②陆谷孙编,《英汉大词典》(第二版),第386页。
① "In any case he was the transmitter, on the grandest possible scale, of European fiction to China, and through him Chinese fiction (which had been tied down to ancient storyteller's conventions that no longer fitted what the contemporary novelist wanted to say) was revitalized when it was at its last gasp."(Waley,2008:191)
1. 阿英.晚清戏曲小说目录.上海：上海古典文学出版社,1957.
2. 阿英.晚清小说史.北京：作家出版社,1955.
3. 班固.汉书.北京：中华书局,1986.
4. 包天笑.钏影楼回忆录.香港：大华出版社,1971.
5. 包天笑.钏影楼回忆录续篇.香港：大华出版社,1973.
6. 蔡登山.林纾的“口译者”之一：魏易.《(台湾)全国新书资讯月刊》,2008年11月号.
7. 蔡元培(署名蔡孑民).在北京通俗教育研究会演说词.《东方杂志》,1917年,第四期.
8. 曹素璋.林纾的翻译小说与近代社会思潮.《贵州师范大学学报》(社科版),2002年第2期.
9. 曾锦漳.林译小说研究(上).《新亚学报》,1966年,第2期.
10.曾锦漳.林译小说研究(下).《新亚学报》,1967年,第1期.
11.曾虚白.为林魏合译小说影印本欢呼.《传记文学》,第六十五卷,第四期.
12.陈福康.中国译学理论史稿.上海：上海外语教育出版社,2000.
13.陈敬之.新文学运动的阻力.台北：成文出版社,1980.
14.陈平原、夏晓红,ed.,二十世纪中国小说理论资料：北京大学出版社,1989.
15.陈荣捷.传习录详注集评.台北：台湾学生书局,1992.
16.陈秀.论译者的介入.《中国翻译》.2002年第1期.
17.陈逸.从《林纾的翻译》看钱钟书的翻译主张.《华南师范大学学报》,2006年1期.
18.陈永国编.翻译与后现代性.北京：中国人民大学出版社,2005.
19.董英.从《格列佛游记》的两种译本看林纾的翻译.《语文学刊》1998年第4期.
20.傅彦长、朱应鹏、张若谷.艺术三家言.上海：上海良友图书印刷公司,1927.
21.傅勇林.文脉、意脉与语篇阐释.《外语与外语教学》2000年第1期.
22.傅勇林.中西合徂集.成都：四川文艺出版社,2010.
23.耿传明.在“新”“旧”对峙的背后——从林纾看“五四人”与“晚清人”的代际文化心态差异.《天津师范大学学报》(社会科学版)2004年第4期.
24.郭绍虞、罗根泽,ed.,中国古典文学理论批评专著选集,北京：人民文学出版社,1959.
25.郭绍虞.照隅室古典文学论集.上海：上海古籍出版社,2009.
26.郭延礼.中国近代翻译文学概论.武汉：湖北教育出版社,1998.
27.郭英德.中国古代文体学论稿.北京：北京大学出版社,2005.
28.寒光.林琴南.上海：中华书局,1935.
29.郝岚.林译小说与意识形态、出版机构的关系.《天津师范大学学报》,2006年3期.
30.皞皞子ed.,林严合钞.北京：国学扶轮社.1909.
31.何浚.西学与晚明思想的裂变.上海：上海人民出版社,1998.
32.贺志刚.林纾和林纾的翻译.《国外文学》,2004年第2期.
33.洪峻峰.林纾晚年评价的两个问题.《齐鲁学刊》,1995年第1期.
34.胡翠娥.文学翻译与文化参与,上海：上海外语教育出版社,2007年.
35.黄俊贤.叙事与视野融合：重述林译狄更斯小说,香港大学2010年博士学位论文.
36.黄侃.文心雕龙札记.上海：上海古籍出版社,2000.
37.黄霖、韩同文,《中国历代小说论著选》,南昌：江西人民出版社,1985.
38.蒋述卓.佛经传译与中古文学思潮.南昌：江西人民出版社,1990.
39.蒋英豪.林纾与桐城派、改良派及新文学的关系.《文史哲》1997年第1期.
40.金圣叹.金圣叹读批《水浒传》.北京：蓝天出版社.1998.
41.孔力.林纾和“林译小说”.北京：中华书局,1981.
42.孔庆茂.林纾传.北京：团结出版社,1998.
43.来裕恂.汉文典.天津：南开大学出版社,1994.
44.赖永海ed.,佛教十三经.北京：中华书局,2010.
45.郎琳.小说叙事传统与小说翻译策略.《四川外国语学院学报》,2003年第2期.
46.李贽,毛宗岗,鲁迅,钟宇,罗贯中,三国演义：名家汇评本.北京：北京图书馆出版社,2007.
47.李贽,吴承恩,西游记：李卓吾评本,上海：上海古籍出版社,1994.
48.历史研究杂志社编辑部,ed.,《历史研究》五十年论文选：20世纪中国历史学回顾.北京：社会科学文献出版社,2005年.
49.梁启超.清代学术概论.台湾：台湾商务印书馆,1994.
50.梁启超.饮冰室合集.北京：中华书局,1989.
51.林佩璇.林纾翻译研究新探.《福建师范大学学报》(哲学社会科学版)2003年第2期.
52.林元彪.从语言规划看公示语翻译的规范化.《东方翻译》,2011年第5期.
53.林纾,ed.,师范学校中学校修身讲义.上海：商务印书馆,1916.
54.林纾,ed.,中学国文读本.上海：商务印书馆,1919.
55.林纾,ed.,慕容真点校.林纾选评古文辞类纂.杭州：浙江古籍出版社,1986.
56.林纾.春觉斋论画遗稿.北平：燕京大学图书馆,1935.
57.林纾.左孟庄骚精华录.上海：商务印书馆,1925.
58.林纾.畏庐论文等三种.台北：文津出版社,1978.
59.林薇.百年沉浮—林纾研究综述.天津：天津教育出版社,1990.
60.林薇.清代小说论稿.北京：北京广播学院出版社,2000.
61.林薇.林纾自撰的武侠小说——《技击余闻》最早版本辨正.《新文学史料》,1999年第3期.
62.林薇.为君持酒劝斜阳,且向花间留晚照——记翻译家、近代文学家林纾.《名人谱》,1998年第5期.
63.刘绶松.中国新文学史初稿.北京：人民文学出版社,1979.
64.刘克敌.晚年林纾与新文学运动.《文艺理论研究》,1996年第4期.
65.刘绍棠ed.,民国人物小传.台北：传记文学出版社,1977.
66.刘树森.论中国近代外国小说翻译的叙事语态特征.《上海外国语大学学报》,1997年第5期.
67.陆建德.再说“荆生”,兼及运动之术.南方周末,2008年12月31日.
68.卢前.卢前笔记杂钞.北京：中华书局,2006.
69.罗新璋ed.,翻译论集.北京：商务印书馆,1984.
70.罗志田.林纾的认同危机与民初的新旧之争.《历史研究》,1995年第5期.
71.马祖毅.中国翻译简史：五四以前部分.北京：中国对外翻译出版公司,1984.
72.南怀瑾.《金刚经》说什么.戒幢佛学教育网：http://www.jcedu.org/fxzd/jgj/yanjiu/jgjssm02.htm#1
73.潘文国(署名帕安).古文今译例析(1-7).《中文自学指导》,1988年,第1-7期.
74.潘文国等eds.,文三百篇.上海：华东师范大学出版社,1999.
75.潘文国.严复及其翻译理论.杨自俭,ed.英汉语比较与翻译(5).2004年,610-24.
76.潘文国.从文章正轨看中西译论的不同传统.张柏然,ed.中国译学：传承与创新.上海：上海外语教育出版社,2008.
77.潘文国.当代西方的翻译学研究(1-3).《中国翻译》,2002年,第1-3期.
78.潘文国.对比语言学：哲学与历史思考.上海：上海教育出版社,2006.
79.潘文国.汉英语对比纲要.北京：北京语言文化大学出版社,1997.
80.潘文国.译入与译出：谈中国学者从事汉籍英译的意义.《中国翻译》,2004年,第2期.
81.潘文国.译学研究的哲学思考.《中国外语》,2009年,第5期.
82.潘文国.英汉语篇对比与中国的文章之学。《外语教学》,2007年,第5期.
83.钱基博.现代中国文学史.上海：世界书局,1933.
84.钱锺书.管锥编(1-4).北京：三联书店,2001.
85.钱锺书.七缀集.北京：三联书店,2002.
86.钱锺书等.林纾的翻译.北京：商务印书馆,1981.
87.全景博物馆丛书编辑委员会.中国名画博物馆.郑州：海燕出版社,2002.
88.人民文学出版社.编辑部ed.,唐传奇鉴赏集.北京：人民文学出版社,1983.
89.任继愈.中国佛教史.北京：中国社会科学出版社,1981.
90.尚文鹏.论林纾“误译”的根源.《中山大学学报论丛》,2000年第6期
91.邵宏.衍义的“气韵”中国画论的观念史研究.江苏教育出版社,2005.
92.沈苏儒.论信达雅：严复翻译理论研究.北京：商务印书馆,1998.
93.沈玉成,左丘明.《左传》译文.北京：中华书局,1981.
94.施蛰存,ed.,中国近代文学大系：翻译文学集,1840-1919.上海：上海书店,1991.
95.释赞宁.宋高僧传.艺术中国网,1999.
96.舒芜.中国近代文论选.北京：人民文学出版社,1959.
97.司马光.资治通鉴.北京：中华书局,1956.
98.司马迁.史记.北京：中华书局,1982.
99.司显柱.对我国传统译论的反思——关于翻译技巧研究的思考.《中国翻译》,2002年,第2期.
100.孙绿怡.《左传》与中国古典小说.北京：北京大学出版社,1992.
101.孙之梅.林译小说序跋的文学史意义.《山东大学学报》(哲社版)1998年第4期.
102.孙致礼.中国的文学翻译：从归化趋向异化.《中国翻译》,2002年,第1期.
103.谈风粱.历代文言小说鉴赏辞典.南京：江苏文艺出版社.1991.
104.唐弢.文章修养.北京：三联书店,2007.
105.王伯敏.《中国版画史》,上海美术出版社,1961.
106.王枫.五四前后的林纾.《中国现代文学研究丛刊》,2000年第1期.
107.王国良.魏晋南北朝志怪小说研究.台北：文史哲出版社,1984.
108.王国伟.当世蒲松龄,古笔谱新曲—林纾短篇小说艺术新论.《西华师范大学学报(哲社版)》,2004年,第3期.
109.王国伟.简论林纾的中长篇小说创作.《商丘师范学院学报》2004年第1期.
110.王宁.翻译文学与中国文化现代性.《清华大学学报(哲学社会科学版)》,2002年第1期.
111.王宁.浅谈林纾的翻译思想.《聊城大学学报》,2004年第6月.
112.王世贞著,罗仲鼎校注.艺苑卮言校注.济南：齐鲁书社,1992.
113.王先霈、王又平,ed.,文学理论批评术语汇释.北京：高等教育出版社,2006.
114.王秀云.是翻译还是整理——质疑林纾的“翻译”.《中国科技信息》2005年第17期.
115.魏惟仪.归去来.台北：大地出版社.1987.
116.文林.林纾先生家藏旧稿问世.《山东师大学报(社会科学版)》,1995年第3期.
117.吴晗、黎钺、北京教师进修学院历史教研室.中国历史小丛书.北京：中华书局.1960.
118.吴慧坚.严林翻译的社会效应与文本和信息传递方式的选择.《广州师院学报》,2000年10期.
119.吴汝纶.吴汝纶全集.合肥：黄山出版社,2002.
120.夏晓红.晚清女性与近代中国.北京：北京大学出版社,2004.
121.谢海燕.从权力话语看林纾翻译中的改写.《郑州轻工业学院学报》,2006年1期.
122.谢飘云.林纾与严复散文、译述之比较.《华南师范大学学报(社科版)》,2002年第2期.
123.熊琬.文章结构学：文章运思结构之艺术.台北：五南出版社,1998.
124.熊月之.西学东渐与晚清社会.上海：上海人民出版社,1994.
125.徐志啸.试论林纾的中西文学比较.《学术月刊》,2002年第8期.
126.许海燕,论《巴黎茶花女遗事》对清末民初小说创作的影响.《民清小说研究》,2001年第4期.
127.薛绥之、张俊才,ed.林纾研究资料.福建人民出版社,1982.
128.严复.严复集.北京：中华书局,1986.
129.杨联芬.林纾与中国文学现代性的发生.《中国现代文学研究丛刊》,2002年4期.
130.杨联芬.流动的瞬间：晚清与五四文学关系论.台北：联经出版社,2006.
131.杨联芬.晚清至五四：中国文学现代性的发生.北京：北京大学出版社,2003.
132.叶良旋.《春觉斋论文》与当代散文教学.《安庆师范学院学报》1999年第6期.
133.于德山.中国古代“语-图”互文现象及其叙事功能.《明清小说研究》,2003年第3期.
134.袁荻涌.林纾的文学翻译思想.《中国翻译》1994年第3期.
135.袁筱一、邹东来.意义单位与翻译单位.《外语研究》2008年第2期.
136.詹锳.刘勰与《文心雕龙》.北京：中华书局,1980.
137.张爱萍.略谈林纾现实主义小说理论.《安徽大学学报》(哲学社会科学版)2004年第6期.
138.张柏然、许钧ed.,面向21世纪的译学研究.北京：商务印书馆,2002.
139.张德让.翻译会通研究——从徐光启到严复.华东师范大学博士学位论文,2010.
140.张恩普.才性评析与中古文论的文品理论.《东北师范大学学报》2007年第6期.
141.张俊才.林纾评传.北京：中华书局,2007.
142.张俊才.“悠悠百年,自有能辨之者”——重评林纾及五四新旧思潮之争.《河北师范大学学报(哲社版)》,2005年第4期.
143.张俊才.重评林纾及五四新旧思潮之争.《河北师范大学学报(哲社版)》,2005年4期.
144.张佩瑶.从话语的角度重读魏易与林纾合译的《黑奴吁天录》.《中国翻译》,2003年第2期.
145.张少康.中国文学理论批评史教程.北京：北京大学出版社,1999.
146.张胜璋.林纾的古文论综述.福州师范大学博士学位论文,2009.
147.张世君.明清小说评点叙事概念研究.北京：中国社会科学出版社,2007.
148.张跃铭.《马可波罗游记》在中国的翻译与研究.《江淮论坛》,1981年第3期.
149.赵光育.林纾与“林译小说”.《浙江师大学报(社会科学版)》,1999年第1期
150.郑延国.从林纾的翻译说开去——谈翻译界的两种文化现象.《上海科技翻译》,1995年3期.
151.中国第二历史档案馆编.中华民国史档案资料汇编(第三辑：文化).南京：江苏古籍出版社,1991.
152.中国社会科学院语言研究所古代汉语研究室编.古代汉语虚词词典.北京：商务印书馆,1999.
153.周绍良.敦煌文学作品选.北京：中华书局,1987.
154.周振甫.文章例话.北京：中国青年出版社,2006.
155.周振甫.周振甫讲古代文论.南京：江苏教育出版社,2005.
156.周忠元、张磊.中国古代“人品与文品”理论的衍变.《东方论坛》,2007年第5期.
157.周作人.中国新文学的源流.上海：华东师范大学出版社,1995.
158.朱宏清.从《林纾的翻译》看钱钟书先生的翻译观.《东南大学学报(哲社版)》,2001年第2期.
159.朱羲胄.春觉斋著述记.上海：世界书局,1949.
160.朱志瑜.中国佛籍译论选辑评注.北京：清华大学出版社,2006.
161.朱自清.诗言志辩.北京：古籍出版社,1956.
162.祝朝伟.翻译研究中的庞德/林纾现象.《淮海工学院学报》,2006年1期.
163.祝朝伟.林纾与庞德翻译思想比较研究.《解放军外国语学院学报》,2002年第3期.
164.邹振环.影响中国近代社会的一百种译作.北京：中国对外翻译出版公司,1996.
165.樽本照雄(日本).林纾冤罪事件簿.(日本)清末小说研究会,2009.
1. Abbott, H. Porter, The Cambridge Introduction to Narrative. Cambridge and New York: Cambridge University Press,2002
2. Agrifoglio, M. (2004). Sight translation and interpreting:A comparative analysis of constrains and failures. Interpreting 6:1 p.43-67.
3. Anthony Pym, Exploring Translation Theories. Taylor & Francis,2009
4. Baker, Mona. Encyclopedia of Translation Studies. Shanghai:Shanghai Foreign Language Education Press,2004
5. Baker, Mona. In Other Words:Coursebook on Translation. New York & London: Routledge,1992.
6. Baker, William and Kenneth Womack (eds.), A Companion to the Victorian Novel. London: Greenwood Press,2002.
7. Baker. Ernest. A Guide the best Fiction, English and American, including from Foreign Languages. New York:The Macmilian Company,1932
8. Benjamin, Walter. Illuminations. Trans. Harry Zohn. New York:Schocken Press,1969.
9. Bhabha, Homi K. Nation and Narration. London and New York:Routledge,1990.
10. Butt, John and Kathleen Tillotson, Dickens at Work. London:Methuen & Co. Ltd,1957.
11. Cecil, David. Early Victorian Novelists:Essays in Revaluation. London:Constable and Company Ltd.,1966.
12. Chang, Hao. Liang Ch'i-ch'ao and Intellectual Transition in China,1890-1907. Cambridge: Harvard University Press,1971.
13. Chatterjee, Partha. Nationalist Thought and the Colonial World. London:Zed Books for the United Nations University,1986.
14. Chesterman, Andrew. Memes of Translation. Amsterdam:John Benjamins Publishing Company,1997
15. Cheung, Martha P. Y. "The Discourse of Occidentalism Wei Yi and Lin Shu's Treatment of Religious Material in Their Translation of Uncle Tom's Cabin." In Translation and Creation: Readings of Western Literature in Early Modern China,1840-1918. Ed. David Pollard. Amsterdam:John Benjamins,1998.
16. Ching, Leo T. S. Becoming'"Japanese":Colonial Taiwan and the Politics of Identity Formation. Berkeley and Los Angeles:University of California Press.2001
17. Cockrell, Dale. Demons of Disorder:Early Blackface Minstrels and Their World. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press,1997
18. Colbert, Charles. A measure of perfection:phrenology and the fine arts in America, New Baskerville:UNC Press Books,1997,
19. Compton, Robert W. A Study of the Translations of Lin Shu,1852-1934. Ph.D. Diss. Stanford University,1971.
20. Coolidge, Archibald C., Charles Dickens as Serial Novelist. Ames, Iowa:The Iowa State University Press,1967.
21. Crawford, Richard. America's Musical Life:A History. New York:W. W. Norton.2001.
22. Eoyang, Eugene Chen. The Transparent Eye:Reflections on Translation, Chinese Literature, and Comparative Poetics. Honolulu:University of Hawaii Press,1993.
23. Dale Cockrell. Demons of Disorder: Early Blackface Minstrels and Their World. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press,1997.
24. Dena Epstein. Sinful Tunes and Spirituals:Black Folk Music to the Civil War. Urbana: University of Illinois Press,1977.
25. Danks, J.& End, L.(1987). Processing strategies for reading and listening. In R. Horowitz & S. J. Samuel (Eds.), Comprehension oral and written language. London:Academic Press, p. 271-293
26. Epstein, Dena. Sinful Tunes and Spirituals:Black Folk Music to the Civil War. Urbana: University of Illinois Press,1977.
27. Evan-Zohar, Itamar. "Polysystem Theory." Poetics Today 1:2 (1979):237-310.
28. Evan-Zohar,Itamar. "Translation Theory Today:A Call for Transfer Theory." Poetics Today 2:4(1981):1-7.
29. Gentzler, Edwin. Contemporary Translation Theories. London and New York:Routledge, 1992.
30. Gile, Daniel. Basic Concepts and Models for Interpreter and Translator Training. Amsterdam/Philadelphia:John Benjamins Publishing Company,1995.
31. Gries, Peter Hays. China's New Nationalism:Pride, Politics, and Diplomacy. Berkeley: University of California Press,2004.
32. Hanan, Patrick. Chinese Fiction of the Nineteenth and Early Twentieth Centuries. NY:Columbia University Press,2004.
33. Hanan, Patrick. The Chinese Vernacular Story. Cambridge:Harvard University Press,1981.
34. Harvey, John, Victorian Novelists and their Illustrators. London:Sidgwick & Jackson,1970.
35. Harvie, Christopher T. Centre of Things:Political Fiction in Britain from Disraeli to the Present. London:Unwin Hyman,1991.
36. Hawkes, David, "An Introductory Note", in Hawkes, David. Ed., Classical, modern, and humane:essays in Chinese literature, Hong Kong:Chinese University'of Hong Kong Press. 1989.
37. Hermans, Theo, ed., Crosscultural Transgressions:Research Models in Translation Studies 1:
38. Hermans, Theo, ed., The Manipulation of Literature:Studies in Literary Translation London & Sydney:Croom Helm,1985.
39. Hermans. Theo. "Cross-Cultural Translation Studies as Thick Translation." Bulletin of the School of Oriental & African Studies 66 (2003):380-89.
40. Holmes, James S. (1972/1988). "The Name and Nature of Translation Studies". In: James S. Holmes, Translated Papers on Literary Translation and Translation Studies, Amsterdam: Rodopi, pp.67-80.
41. Hsia, C.T. "Yen Fu and Liang Ch'i-Ch'ao as Advocates of New Fiction." Chinese Approaches to Literature from Confucius to Liang Ch'i-Ch'ao. Ed. Adele Richett. New Heaven:Princeton University Press,1978.
42. Hsia, C.T. A History of Modern Chinese Fiction. New Haven:Yale University Press,1961.
43. Hsia, C.T. The classic Chinese Novel:A Critical Introduction. Bloomington:Indiana University Press,1968.
44. Hu, Ying. Tales of Translation:Composing the New Women in China,1899-1918. Stanford: Stamford Uiversity Press,2000.
45. Huang, Ko-wu. In Search of Power, Wealth, and Freedom:Yan Fu and the Origins of Modern Chinese Liberalism. Diss. Stanford University,2001.
46. Huang, Philip. Liang Ch'i-ch'ao and Modern Chinese Liberalism. Seattle:University of Washington Press,1972.
47. Huters, Theodore. "A New Way of Writing:The Possibilities for Literature in Late Qing China,1895-1908." Modern China 14.3 (1988):243-76.
48. Huxley, Thomas Henry. Evolution and Ethics, and Other Essays. New York:D. Appleton and company,1911.
49. Keene, Donald. Dawn to the West:Japanese Literature of the Modern Era, Fiction. New York: Holt, Rinehart & Winston,1984.
50. Lamb, Lynton, Drawing for Illustration. London:Oxford University Press,1962.
51. Lambert, S. (2004). Shared attention during sight translation, sight interpretation and simultaneous interpretation. Meta XLIX,2 p.294-306
52. Lee, Leo Ou-fan. "Lin Shu and His Translations:Western Fiction in Chinese Perspective."Papers on China 19,1965.
53. Lee, Leo Ou-fan. Land Without Ghosts:Chinese Impressions of America From the Mid-nineteenth Century to the Present. Berkeley:London University of California Press,1989.
54. Leavis, Q. D., The Dickens Illustrations:Their Function. IN Leavis, F. R. and Leavis, Q. D. Dickens the Novelist. London:Chatto & Windus,1970.
55. Lefevere, Andre. Translation, Rewriting, and the Manipulation of Literary Fame. London and New York:Routledge,1992.
56. Levenson, Joseph Richmond. Liang Ch'i-ch'ao and the Mind of Modern China. Cambridge: Harvard University Press,1953.
57. Liu, Lydia. Translingual Practice:Literature, National Culture, and Translated Modernity—China,1900-1937. Stanford:Stanford University Press,1995.
58. Luo Xuanming & He Yuanjian. Translating China. Bristol, Buffalo, Toronto:Multilingual Matters.2010
59. Masini, Federico. The Formation of Modern Chinese Lexicon and its Evolution:Toward a National Language:the Period from 1840-1898. In:Journal of Chinese Linguistics, Monograph Series 6 (1993).
60. Mori, Tokihiko. "Liang Qichao and Western Modernity:An Analysis of His Translations of the Term "Political Economy"." The Role of Japan in Liang Qichao's Introduction of Modern Western Civilization to China. Ed. Joshua A. Fogel. Berkeley:Center for Chinese Studies, Institute of East Asian Studies, University of California,2004.15-39.
61. Mullan,John. How Novels Work. Oxford and New York:Oxford University Press,2006
62. Munday, Jeremy. Introducing Translation Studies:Theories and Applications. London and New York:Routledge,2001.
63. Niranjana, Tejaswini. Siting Translation:History, Post-structuralism, and the Colonial Context. Berkeley:University of California Press,1992.
64. Owen, Stephen, ed. Readings in Chinese Literary Thought. Combridge, Mass:Harvard University Press,1992.
65. Pan, Wenguo, ed., Translation and Contrastive Studies, Shanghai:Shanghai Foreign Language Education Press,2005.
66. Reiss, Katharina. "Text Types, Translation Types and Translation Assessment". In: Chesterman, Andrew eds.. Readings in Translation Theory. Helsinki:Oy Finn Lectura Ab,1989.
67. Richard Crawford. America's Musical Life:A History. New York:W. W. Norton,2001.
68. Rolston, David L. Traditional Chinese Fiction and Fiction Commentary:Reading and Writing Between the Lines. Stanford:Stanford University Press,1997.
69. Said, Edward. Orientalism. Toronto:Random House,1994.
70. Sakaki, Atsuko. "Kajin No Kigu:The Meiji Political Novel and the Boundaries of Literature." Monumenta Nipponica 55.1 (2000):83-108.
71. Schwartz, Benjamin. In Search of Wealth and Power:Yen Fu and West. Cambridge:Harvard UP,1964.
72. Spivak, Gayatri Chakravorty. Outside in the Teaching Machine. New York:Routledge,1993.
73. Stowe, Harriet Beecher. Uncle Tom's Cabin. New York:Random House,1985.
74. Tajfel, Henri. Human Groups and Social Categories:Studies in Social Psychology, London: Cambridge University Press,1981
75. Tang, Xiaobing. Global Space and the Nationalist Discourse of Modernity:The Historical Thinking of Liang Qichao. Stanford, Calif.:Stanford University Press,1996.
76. Tarumoto, Teruo. "A Statistical Survey of Translated Fiction 1840-1920." In Translation and Creation:Readings of Western Literature in Early China,1840-1918. Ed. David Pollard. Amsterdam and Philadelphia:John Benjamins Publishing Company,1998.
77. Toury, Gideon. "Translated Literature:System, Norm, Performance:Toward a TT Oriented Approach to Literary Translation." Poetics Today 2.4 (1981):9-27.
78. Tsai, Benjamin. Enemies of the Revolution:Ideology and Practice in Making of Chinese Liberalism 1890-1927. Diss. University of Chicago,2000.
79. Tytler, Alexander Fraser. Essay on the Principles of Translation. Amsterdam Studies in the Theory and History of Linguistic Science:Series I, Amsterdam Classics in Linguistics; V.13. Amsterdam:J. Benjamins,1978.
80. Venuti, Lawrence (ed.), The Translation Studies Reader. London and New York:Routledge, 2000
81. Venuti, Lawrence. The Scandals of Translation:Towards an Ethics of Difference. London and New York:Routledge,1998.
82. Viezzi, M. (1989b). Information retention as a parameter for comparison of sight translation and simultaneous translation:An experimental study. The Interpreter's Newsletter no.2, p. 65-69
83. Waley, Arthur, The Secret History of the Mongols. London:George Allen & Unwin Ltd., 1963.
84. Wang Ning & Sun Yifeng, ed., Translation Globalisation and Localisation:A Chinese Perspective. Clevedon, Buffalo, Toranto:Multilingual Matters.2010.
85. Wang, Der-wei David. Fin-De-Siecle Splendor:Repressed Modernities of Late Qing Fiction, 1849-1911. Stanford:Stanford University Press,1997.
86. Wechsler, Robert. Performing without a stage:the art of literary translation. Connecticut: Catbird Press,1998
87. Wei Tat. An exposition of the I-CHING. Hong Kong:Dai Nippon Printing Co.. (H.K.) Ltd.
88. Wei, C. X. George and Yang, Xiaoyuan, ed. Chinese Nationalism in Perspective:Historical and Recent Cases. Westport:Greenwood Press,2001.
89. Zhao, I-heng, The Uneasy Narrator, Chinese Fiction from the Traditional to the Modern. London:Oxford University Press,1995.