《黄帝内经》“百”字英译探析

Tentative analysis of the translation of Character bai in Huangdi's Internal Classic

中医语言具有显著的模糊性特征。中医典籍中的语义模糊现象引起了不少研究者的兴趣,但目前研究尚不充分。文章根据代表性、权威性和译者的文化背景三个原则,将李照国英译本(以下称李本)和文树德英译本(以下称文本)《黄帝内经》进行对比分析,研究他们持不同译观对数词"百"字及其所在句子的英译策略。研究发现文本和李本在处理"百"字及其所在句子时存在巨大差异。就"百"字英译而言,文本常采用"字面含义+脚注模式"而李本直接将其解读并英译,这些不同的翻译策略与译者的翻译文化观密不可分。文树德注重从历史文化背景角度看待中医翻译,尊重源语的历史和文化,并尽力展现文本后的历史和文化解读,这是文树德对中医典籍翻译一贯秉持的态度和原则;文树德认为翻译中医典籍的目的是提供一个文化背景,因而,对于"百"字存在争议的地方,文树德常常采用脚注等深度翻译策略为读者展现可能的解读,由读者来选择和重构信息。然而,李照国教授认为,译者在翻译典籍的首要难题是难解古文之意;鉴于此,在翻译《黄帝内经》时,他会参考一些白话译本以确定某句话或某个概念的确切含义,因而"百"字的英译处理时,他直接采用了历代医家的结论,或实指、或泛指、或有意漏译,这从一定程度上反映了译者的主观能动性。由于中医典籍成书年代早,所以历代医家对某些章节的真正含义存在着不同的解释,译者在处理此类信息时,若直接揉入自己的理解,有时效果适得其反。"百"字虽小,却折射出中医典籍的英译的艰难,译者的理解在很大程度上决定译作的质量。

The language of traditional Chinese medicine(TCM)is fuzzy in characteristics.Semantic fuzziness in TCM classics has aroused increasing interest in many researchers,yet such research is far from sufficient.Based on the three principles of representativity,authority and the translator’s cultural background,our study compared the translation of the Chinese character'bai(百)'and its translation strategies in Huangdi’s Internal Classic translated by Li Zhao-guo and Paul U.Unschuld.Our findings showed that there were huge differences in the translation of'bai'in the two English versions.Unschuld often adopted the mode of the literal meaning plus footnotes,whereas Li adopted free translation strategies.These different translation strategies are inseparable from the translator’s view of translation.The former sees TCM translation from the perspective of history and culture.'Respecting the history and culture of the original texts and exemplifying the textual history and culture'has always been the attitude and principles he upholds in the translation of TCM classics.He believes that the translation of TCM classics is to provide cultural background.Thus,accordingly,for the Chinese character'bai(百)'where controversies exist,he usually adopts such strategies as footnotes to give readers a space for possible interpretations.In contrast,Prof.Li Zhao-guo believes that,when it comes to the transition of TCM classics,the first tough issue facing the translator is the difficulties in understanding ancient texts.In view of this,when translating Yellow Emperor’s Internal Classic,he would refer to its vernacular translation to figure out the exact meaning of a sentence or concept.Accordingly,in dealing with the Chinese character'bai(百)',Li applied different strategies,i.e.,direct use of the conclusions of ancient physicians,referring to things,referring to things at large or intentionally missing translation.This,anyway,reflects the translator’s subjective initiative.As many of the TCM classics were written long ago,various interpretations and understandings exist with regard to the intended meanings by its original texts.When dealing with this type of information,if translators put directly into it their own understanding and interpretations,sometimes counterproductive reader reactions may be achieved.To conclude,the character'bai(百)',though,is seemingly small,its translation sheds light on the dilemma that translations of TCM classics are in.The factor of the translator should not be underestimated,let alone ignored,as it may largely determine the quality of translation,to some extent.