他乡石头记：《红楼梦》百年英译史

【中文摘要】《红楼梦》在英语世界中的译介史可追溯到1830年德庇时发表于英国皇家亚洲学会会刊的长文《汉文诗解》，至今经历了一百七十多年的历程，本文首次尝试对这一历史进行全面而详尽的系统研究。为了对极为庞杂的《红楼梦》英文译介行为进行准确的定义，我们引入了“改写”这一概念，将“译”与“介”统一到“跨文化改写”这一框架之中，以揭示译介行为的实质。在具体研究过程中，我们分别对翻译史和翻译以外的评介历程进行描述，发现两者的不同发展脉络，并从不同角度探讨两者的相互影响和相互作用。在此基础上，我们对“译”、“介”互动所形成的各种张力作用进行了总结，描绘出《红楼梦》在这些张力作用之下所呈现的作品形象，并对《红楼梦》在英美语境下的世界文学体系中所处的地位进行了探讨。最后，我们对中国文学对外译介的行为方式提出了一些启发性意见。第一章是《红楼梦》英文翻译史研究。《红楼梦》的英译历程可以分为三个历史阶段——1830年至19 世纪末，20世纪初至50年代末，20世纪60年代至今。19世纪的四种片段译本均由英国在华外交官员完成，特殊的出版发行方式以及奇异的“行间翻译”倾向都体现出译者的实用主义翻译目的，并说明了在华殖民圈将《红楼梦》作为语言学习材料和晚近中国流行作品的特殊接受方式。20世纪初到50年代末的四种节译本均由美国本土的畅销书出版社首先出版，译者以不同方式简化原文语言内容，并采取种种手段以提高读者的阅读兴趣，译本呈现出鲜明的市场化特点。本阶段的译本在专业读者中遭到冷遇，但在普通读者中的影响力却超过了其它时期的译本。20世纪60年代至今，英国出版了一种全译本，中国对外出版机构出版了一种全译本和一种节译本。由于相关学术机构的激增和市场需求的剧减，英语世界的《红楼梦》英译体现出学术性转向的特点：译本由专业读者的需求所催生，出版商请权威专业人士担任译者，译本自身含有很重的学术分量，同时，译本的翻译出版行为体现出经典化的追求与尝试。译本受到了专业读者群的广泛认同，但在普通读者中的影响力却不及前一阶段的译本。

综上所述，《红楼梦》英译史呈现出“实用主义翻译——市场化翻译——学术化翻译”的发展脉络，专业学术研究对翻译行为的影响由弱渐强，译本的实用性和普及性则日渐降低，与普通读者群日渐疏离。同时，以本章研究成果为基础，可以发现目前国内《红楼梦》英译研究中存在的一些偏差。第二章是《红楼梦》英文评介史研究。《红楼梦》的英文评介包括报章杂志、译本序跋、中国文学及世界文学选集、文学史、教材、教学参考书、学位论文、期刊论文、专著、百科全书等等对《红楼梦》的介绍、评论和研究。以20世纪60年代为转折点，《红楼梦》英文评介史分可为两个阶段：评介方式多样化时期和评介方式高度学术化时期。在评介方式多样化时期，在华殖民圈的《红楼梦》英文评介文章的关注点从原作语言逐渐转向了情节内容，这印证了前一章的发现，即英语世界对《红楼梦》的接受定位逐渐从语言材料转向了文学作品；英美本土与普通读者相关的《红楼梦》英文评介始于20世纪初，至20世纪50年代末达到顶点也开始凋零，这也间接印证了前一章所指出的英美本土对中国古典文学译本的市场需求的兴起和消退；早期的学术性《红楼梦》英文评介则体现出日渐专精和细化的过程。在评介方式高度学术化时期，西方文艺理论观照下的文本细读成为《红楼梦》评介文章的绝对主流，而各类西方现代批评理论，尤其是女性主义批评的解读，又构成了其中主体，这与其它同类作品的英文解读形成了一定区别；中国和亚洲文学史、文学选集、文学概论对《红楼梦》不约而同地给予了同类作品中的最高评价，在此基础上，世界文学选集于2004年收入了《红楼梦》，将其作为亚洲文学的极少数代表之一进行了讨论；文学研究以外的社会学、历史学、政治学研究也时时将《红楼梦》所描述的现象当作研究素材进行讨论，在英语世界的区域研究者眼中，《红楼梦》在同类作品中最能代表中国形象。第三章是前两章研究内容的总结和提炼。

目前，《红楼梦》在英语世界中的译介对作品形象的塑造可以总结为两方面的趋势：首先是一般性文学阅读与研究中的“非经典化”趋势；其次是区域性研究和通识层面的“经典化”趋势。在不同张力的共同作用下，作为文学商品、世界文学作品以及学术研究对象的《红楼梦》经历了复杂的演变过程，在英语世界中呈现出特殊的“边缘经典”形象。与此同时，英美语境中“世界文学经典”概念体系自身也经历了不断演变的过程。大卫•达姆洛什认为，英美语境中的“世界文学经典”新体系具有三个层面：超经典、对等经典以及影子经典。英语世界中的《红楼梦》译本片段被收入了世界文学名著选集，在通识层面具有较高的知名度，在读者的实际阅读和一般性文学研究的讨论中却遭到冷遇，这些“边缘经典”的特点都符合达姆洛什提出的“对等经典”的特征。本研究以翔实的一手资料为基础，首次对《红楼梦》在英语世界中的译介历程进行了全面的梳理和深入的分析，并尝试对这部中国文学名著在英美语境中的作品形象和作品定位进行了探讨。同时，我们在研究过程中所揭示的一些现象对于由国内机构发起的中国文学对外译介的行为方式也不无启发性意义。

【英文摘要】 This thesis is an unprecedented attempt to make an overall study on the history ofthe dissemination and translation of Hongloumeng in the English-speaking world,which can be traced back to 1830, when John Francis Davis, in his well-known "Onthe Chinese Poetry", translated some poetic accounts of Chia Pao-yu into English andcommented on them as well. For the purpose of highlighting the common nature ofnumerous activities translating and disseminating the work, I define them as"cross-cultural rewritings" with the reference to AndréLefevere\'s term "rewriting",thus unifying all these activities into one conception system. In practice, I investigatethe translation history and the dissemination history separately, with the latterincluding all the rewriting forms beyond translation. On the basis of the previousstudies, I try to clarify the entangling shaping forces for the image of the work in thenew cultural context and then proceed to explore the image, the position and theliterary fame of Hongloumeng in the world literature system within Anglo-Americancontext.ChapterⅠthoroughly analyses the translation history of Hongloumeng in theEnglish-speaking world, which can be divided into three periods: 1830-1900,1901-1959, 1960-present. In the 19th century, all of the four fragmentary translationswere made by British diplomats to China. The frequency of translation, theirregularity of publication, and the tendency of "interlinear translation" demonstratethe practical purpose of the translators and the reception of Hongloumeng as atextbook of Chinese language instead of a literary work. During the second period, theway of reception changed and the publishing houses in the United States played acentral role in producing four English versions of Hongloumeng which were intendedfor general English readers interested in Chinese literature. The translators madeadaptations rather than translations of the original work, eliminating a great manydetails while keeping the episodes they thought interesting to Westerners. Since the1960s, there has been an upsurge of educational institutions of Asian studies and adecline of market demand for Classical Chinese literature in the English-speakingworld, which led to an "academic turn" in English translation of Hongloumeng: Theincreasing number of professional readers quickened the birth of a completetranslation by David Hawkes in 1973, and the translation in turn was highly academic as to fulfill the demand of these professional readers. Therefore, this English versionof Hongioumeng is universally acknowledged by a restricted scholarly audience but isless popular among general readers than the versions of the previous period. Onething worth, knowing is that another complete English translation issued by ForeignLanguage Press in Beijing is considered far outmatched by Hawkes\' version by bothscholarly audience and general readers in the English-speaking world. To concludethis chapter, I outline the trend of English translation history of Hongloumeng,summarizing the increasing influence of academic researches on translation activitiesand the decreasing popularity of the translations among general public. In addition,based on the findings out of this chapter, I point out some limitations of currentstudies in China on English translation of Hongloumeng.ChapterⅡis a historical study on the dissemination of Hongloumeng in theEnglish-speaking world. By the term "dissemination", I mean all the rewriting formsof the work beyond translation, including reviews, criticism, reference works, literaryhistories and anthologies, etc.. With the 1960s as a watershed, the dissemination ofHongloumeng in the English-speaking world is divided into two periods: the earlierperiod in which a variety of rewriting forms coexisted and the latter one preoccupiedby academic rewritings. In the first period, the residents of English-Speakingcountries in China were major contributors of review articles and their interestsshifted, around the beginning of 20th century, from the linguistic aspects to the literaryvalue of this book, which confirms the changed way of reception of the work Iassumed in ChapterⅠ. Since the 1920s, on the other hand, both the introductoryarticles for general English readers and the reviews by these readers themselves hadflourished, reaching its heyday in 1950s, and then declined, which, again, confirmsthe ebb and flow of market demand for classical Chinese literature I pointed out inChapterⅠ. Besides, the academic interpretations of the work underwent progressivespecialization during these early years. In the second period, academic researchesconstituted the mainstream of the rewritings of the work, among which theinterpretations from the angles of some Western critical theories, especially feminism,and the rewritings in the introductions, histories and anthologies of Chinese or Asianliterature have been functioning as major forces creating the image of Hongloumengin the English-speaking world. Thanks to the literary reputation gained in theserewritings, Hongloumeng was admitted into the Longman World Literature Anthology in 2004. Meanwhile, the fact that many historians, politics scholars and sociologistsalso take Hongloumeng as the subject of their researches further illustrates the imageof the work as an encyclopaedia of Chinese culture.Based on the findings in preceding chapters, ChapterⅢtries to explore whatexactly the image of Hongloumeng is like in the English-speaking world and todetermine its position as a world literature piece. Up to now, the process of thetranslation and dissemination of Hongloumeng has displayed two major tendencies increating the image of the work: the decanonizing of the work among thenon-professional readers and in general literary studies; the canonizing of the workamong area-specialist audiences and in terms of common sense. It is my contentionthat, under the tension caused by the concurrent forces decanonizing and canonizingthe original work, Hongloumeng, as a literary commodity, a world literature piece,and an object of academic studies, has assumed a certain image of "peripheralcannon" in the English-speaking world. As David Damrosh argued, the worldliterature system within Anglo-American context has developed into a new systemconsisting of a hypercanon, a countercanon and a shadow canon. Hongloumeng isadmitted into the world literature anthology and is highly reputable in terms ofcommon sense, but is neglected by general readers and in general literary studies. Allthese features of "peripheral canon" are in accordance with the properties ofDamorosh\'s "countercanon", therefore, the latter is the relevant term I employ todefine precisely the position of the great Chinese masterpiece in the new culturalenvironment.The study is based on substantial and authentic first-hand references and isinnovative for the attempt to explore the image-creating process of Hongloumeng andits position as a world literature piece in the English-speaking world. Furthermore,more illuminations would derive from this study for the output of Chinese literaturepatronized by domestic institutions.