严复与梁启超关于译语之争的焦点透视

The Yan Fu-Liang Qichao Debate over the Linguistic Mode of Translation: An Reexamination

20世纪初,严复与梁启超曾就翻译语言发生过一场唇枪舌剑的争论。梁启超指责严复"太务渊雅"的译语语言不利于对粗通文墨的普通民众进行思想启蒙,因而提倡使用"流畅锐达"的白话文来翻译。而严复对此并不认同,反对使用"利俗文字"作为翻译的语言,认为用雅洁的先秦古文来翻译则更容易达意。本文拟探讨和分析这场争论的焦点之所在,从作文态度、语言观、预设读者和原本选择四个方面加以揭示。

At the beginning of the 20 th century, Yan Fu and Liang Qichao were engaged in a heated debate over the mode of language for translation. Liang criticized Yan for adopting classical rather than vernacular Chinese in his translation of Adam Smith's An Inquiry into Nature and Causes of the Wealth of Nations, arguing that Yan's choice was clearly against the purpose of enlightening ordinary people. Yan on his part rejected the accusation, claiming that only classical Chinese could properly convey the original meaning of the source text. This paper takes a new look into the debate, analyzing critically the way the two parties differed in their attitudes toward writing, their views on language, the intended readership they tended to assume, as well as the types of source texts they valorized.