林语堂《古文小品译英》(The Importance of Understanding)是向西方世界译介中国文化的极佳译本,其中蕴含着内容丰富、形式多元、功能各异的副文本资源,是对正文本的有效补充。该书的内副文本由译者和出版社提供,以装帧设计、译序、导...林语堂《古文小品译英》(The Importance of Understanding)是向西方世界译介中国文化的极佳译本,其中蕴含着内容丰富、形式多元、功能各异的副文本资源,是对正文本的有效补充。该书的内副文本由译者和出版社提供,以装帧设计、译序、导读、注释、附录等多种形式存在。正、副文本交相辉映的互文作用推动译者、出版社和读者的良性互动,该书内副文本通过构建译者身份、调适读者认知、转化文化异质的三维功能体系,在典籍译介中发挥了文化传译的枢纽作用,体现出强烈的“译者主体性”和“读者友好性”,有效助推中国文化传播。副文本反映出林氏“中西融通”的文化观念和“入西述中”的翻译策略及出版社在成书出版中的重要推手角色,对推动中国故事和中国声音的全球化表达、构建有中国特色的对外话语体系和中华文化海外译介与传播具有重要启示。展开更多
Although T. S. Eliot＇s ＂The Journey of the Magi＂ is a religious poem in the profoundest sense, the title of my paper is intended to give only a sly wink at Trinitarianism. My real object is to explain how Eliot con...Although T. S. Eliot＇s ＂The Journey of the Magi＂ is a religious poem in the profoundest sense, the title of my paper is intended to give only a sly wink at Trinitarianism. My real object is to explain how Eliot contrived to manufacture a poem which, at fu＇st glance, resembles a dramatic monologue （generally understood as a poem for one voice----that of a historical/fictional/mythological character addressing a silent listener, group of listeners or reader）, yet which is slowly revealed as a lyrical monologue （for the poet＇s own voice） which yet--and this quite intentionally----contains considerably more than mere echoes of another two speakers： namely a Magus and the biblical translator and, most famously, sermon writer Archbishop Launcelot Andrewes （1555-1626） court preacher to James 1 and Charles 1 of England. I wish to show how Eliot, in writing what is ultimately confessional verse, goes out of his way to hoodwink the reader by allowing the first two of his ＂{The} Three Voices of Poetry＂ （1957） to overlap with and then incorporate the third. His own descriptions of these voices are （i） lyric, defined as ＂the poet talking to himself＂, （ii） that of the single speakerwho gives a （dramatic） monologuel ＂addressing an {imaginary} audience in an assumed voice＂ and （iii） that of the verse dramatist ＂who attempts to create a dramatic character speaking in verse when he {i.e. the author} is saying.., only what he can say within the limits of one imaginary character addressing another imaginary character＂ yet adding ＂some bit of himself that the author gives to a character may be the germ from which that character starts＂ （Eliot, 1957, pp. 38, 40）. The basis of my argument is that such an act of＂giving of the self＇ as the raw material for the creation of a dramatic monologue persona as well as a character designed for the stage had been part and parcel of Eliot＇s modus operandi up to and including ＂Prufrock＂ and The Waste Land; further, that in ＂The Journey of the Magi＂ and his later commentary upon it he fmally comes out and admits the fact, and in far clearer a manner than he does when defining the Objective Correlative in his essays on Hamlet. Far from attempting to erase the sense of selfhood from his poetry, I believe that Eliot, consciously or not, ended up by demonstrating to those who worshipped the Romantics and their cult of personality just how difficult it was to express the purely subjective self in poetry.展开更多
文摘林语堂《古文小品译英》(The Importance of Understanding)是向西方世界译介中国文化的极佳译本,其中蕴含着内容丰富、形式多元、功能各异的副文本资源,是对正文本的有效补充。该书的内副文本由译者和出版社提供,以装帧设计、译序、导读、注释、附录等多种形式存在。正、副文本交相辉映的互文作用推动译者、出版社和读者的良性互动,该书内副文本通过构建译者身份、调适读者认知、转化文化异质的三维功能体系,在典籍译介中发挥了文化传译的枢纽作用,体现出强烈的“译者主体性”和“读者友好性”,有效助推中国文化传播。副文本反映出林氏“中西融通”的文化观念和“入西述中”的翻译策略及出版社在成书出版中的重要推手角色,对推动中国故事和中国声音的全球化表达、构建有中国特色的对外话语体系和中华文化海外译介与传播具有重要启示。
文摘Although T. S. Eliot＇s ＂The Journey of the Magi＂ is a religious poem in the profoundest sense, the title of my paper is intended to give only a sly wink at Trinitarianism. My real object is to explain how Eliot contrived to manufacture a poem which, at fu＇st glance, resembles a dramatic monologue （generally understood as a poem for one voice----that of a historical/fictional/mythological character addressing a silent listener, group of listeners or reader）, yet which is slowly revealed as a lyrical monologue （for the poet＇s own voice） which yet--and this quite intentionally----contains considerably more than mere echoes of another two speakers： namely a Magus and the biblical translator and, most famously, sermon writer Archbishop Launcelot Andrewes （1555-1626） court preacher to James 1 and Charles 1 of England. I wish to show how Eliot, in writing what is ultimately confessional verse, goes out of his way to hoodwink the reader by allowing the first two of his ＂{The} Three Voices of Poetry＂ （1957） to overlap with and then incorporate the third. His own descriptions of these voices are （i） lyric, defined as ＂the poet talking to himself＂, （ii） that of the single speakerwho gives a （dramatic） monologuel ＂addressing an {imaginary} audience in an assumed voice＂ and （iii） that of the verse dramatist ＂who attempts to create a dramatic character speaking in verse when he {i.e. the author} is saying.., only what he can say within the limits of one imaginary character addressing another imaginary character＂ yet adding ＂some bit of himself that the author gives to a character may be the germ from which that character starts＂ （Eliot, 1957, pp. 38, 40）. The basis of my argument is that such an act of＂giving of the self＇ as the raw material for the creation of a dramatic monologue persona as well as a character designed for the stage had been part and parcel of Eliot＇s modus operandi up to and including ＂Prufrock＂ and The Waste Land; further, that in ＂The Journey of the Magi＂ and his later commentary upon it he fmally comes out and admits the fact, and in far clearer a manner than he does when defining the Objective Correlative in his essays on Hamlet. Far from attempting to erase the sense of selfhood from his poetry, I believe that Eliot, consciously or not, ended up by demonstrating to those who worshipped the Romantics and their cult of personality just how difficult it was to express the purely subjective self in poetry.
