“文化转向”无向可转?——巴斯奈特论文《文化与翻译》批判

“Cultural Turn”: A Turn to Nowhere?A Critique on Bassnett's Article“Culture and Translation”

巴斯奈特,如其文章《文化与翻译》所明白显示的,英文写作水平不高,习惯性地无视理论探索的规范;首先,她对几乎所有的关键词不加工作界定,致使"文化资本"等术语无法成为合理的概念,更谈不上"方法论工具"。由此而来的所谓"文化转向"便丧失了理论支撑;其次,文章的前提与结论形成矛盾,致使此一"转向"之中的文化与语言的不可区分。这位作者同时也因倡导翻译只有从优势语言到力量较弱(或曰,权力较小的)语言此一"唯一"有效的、合法的途径,而陷入了文化帝国主义的观点之中,进而诱其读者倒退到殖民时期。至于"转向"之后的种种理论,依海德格尔对"U字形转向"的批判的检测揭示,因为它们执著于作为一个学科的翻译研究的"立场变化",而不是关注其"内在连续性的标记",因而,已经堕入"致命的常识的方法"。此一令人惊骇的现象,呼唤新的思考。

Bassnett, poor in English writing as clearly seen in her article ＂Culture and Translation＂, tends to ignore the norms of theoretical exploration, first in making no working definition of almost all of the key words –thus making terms like ＂cultural capital＂no plausible concepts, let alone ＂methodological instruments,＂to the result that the so-called＂Cultural Turn＂has no theoretical support; and second by making her conclusion in a contrast with her hypothesis, in the inseparability of culture and language in the ＂Turn＂. The author is also trapped in the view of cultural imperialism in advocating the ＂only＂one valid and legitimate way of translation： from the dominant language to the less powerful ones, thus luring her readers back to the colonial age. As for the theories after the ＂Turn＂, a test against Heidegger＇s critique on the＂U-turn＂tells us that they, sticking to the＂change of standpoint＂rather than drawing attention to＂the sign of inner continuity＂of translation studies as a discipline, have fallen into the ＂fatal method of common sense＂, a shocking phenomenon that calls for a new thinking.