再论理雅各之“合儒”与柯大卫之“攻儒”--以《孟子》译本为例

James Legge's Adoption versus David Collie's Rejection of Confucianism:A Case Study of Two English Versions of Mencius

自利玛窦开创文化适应的传教策略以来,西方传教士译者对待中国儒学一直有“攻儒”与“合儒”两种主要倾向。柯大卫和理雅各分别被认为是19世纪新教传教士中“攻儒”与“合儒”的典型代表。前者备受批判而后者备受推崇。理雅各的《中国经典》被学界奉为“标准译本”,至今仍是西方人解读中国文化的重要依据。本文以二者《孟子》译本为核心,同时结合其他相关文献材料,深入探讨传教士译者“攻儒”、“合儒”之本质与异同。

Since Matteo Ricci initiated the acculturating strategy for preaching Christianity in China,western missionaries-cum-translators have shown two conflicting inclinations toward Confucianism:either they“adopt”the traditional Chinese doctrine or they reject it,with the former represented in the 19th century by James Legge and the latter by David Collie during the same period.While Collie's stance has met with much criticism,Legge's approach has been praised in general,with his English translations collected in The Chinese Classics still considered“standard versions”and serving as important sources of Westerners'knowledge of Chinese culture.This paper takes a close look at the two versions of Mencius offered by Legge and Collie respectively,taking into consideration some other relevant materials as well,in an investigation into the essence,the differences and the similarities between protestant missionary translators'two opposing attitudes toward Confucianism.