注册

韩国翻译家金泰成:我是专门接受外来文化影响的人


来源:凤凰文化

韩国文化很长时间被西欧文化和日本文化、日本式西欧文化(脱亚入欧以后的亚西欧文化)支配,出版界的情况不能例外。改变这种偏向的出版及阅读情况的最佳方法之一是让翻译不再留存于翻译的范围之内,把翻译的力量或权力尽量扩展到整个出版及阅读范围。

个人化写作与外来文化影响

10月21日上午,2016凤凰·鼓浪屿诗歌节第二天,主题为“个人化写作与外来文化影响”的诗歌国际论坛在鼓浪屿举办。诗人赵野,赵四,李少君,树才,李元胜,默默,韩庆成,廖伟棠,林于弘、黄冈、加拿大诗人洛尔娜·克罗奇(Lorna Crozier),英国诗人李道(Richard Bruns),印度汉学学者、诗人普利亚达西·墨普德教授、韩国翻译家金泰成等人在论坛做出精彩又有见地的发言。论坛由诗人、翻译家、评论家汪剑釗和诗人北塔主持。

鼓浪屿拥有“万国建筑博览”美誉,东方文化与西方文化交会于此,闽南文化与外来文化共融于此。“鼓浪屿女婿”林语堂自评“两脚踏东西文化,一心评宇宙文章”。于诗人而言,外来文化将如何影响个人写作?作为“世界人”的诗人,一方面孜孜不倦地从自身文化中汲取养分,另一方面又无时不刻不体会着全球化带来的“文化震撼”,从而形成观念的冲突、矛盾、变形、融合、促进,进而可能形成写作的自我革新。

韩国翻译家金泰成

我不是诗人而是翻译家。诗人的想像力无穷无尽, 而我的想像力卽局限于诗歌的文本, 不能超越此限界, 超越此限界不能是个好的翻译家。我算是专门接受外来文化而给韩国诗人与作家提供优秀的影响的人。接受中国当代文学的情况可能每一个国家都不一样。现在韩国的几乎所有的大学都有中文系,许多中文系敎授写有关中国文学的论文,从国家单位拏硏究费,然后在大学里编成论文集。问题在于这些论文与广大读者之间的隔絶。能够阅读、愿意阅读这些论文的人只有作者与审评人兩个而已, 其他人几乎都不知道有这些论文,也没与这些论文接触会的机会。我觉得这些没有读者的文章、爲论文本身的,没有其他效用的论文写作是一种知识的浪费。大学里很多人量産论文,大学外面的广大群众却依然不懂中国当代文学,严重地缺乏对中国当代文学的理解和知识。可以说有关中国文学的经验与知识在大学里被关难起来了。难道这种奇怪的现象不成问题吗?爲硏究的一种方法的论文是很重要,但是光有太专门性的论文,没有大众化的写作也是不能忽视的大问题。有关中国当代文学,缺乏大众化的写作就是在韩国推广中国当代文学的最重要的障碍,也是在韩国出版界不能形成大规模市场的最大原因。因爲一般读者对文学作品显露越了解越要阅读的倾向,大众化的写作是连结广大读者与中国当代文学的最短捷径,翻译就是最有代表性的大众化写作之一,也是与中国文学携手同行的最快樂的方式。

目前支配韩国图书市场的外国文学依然是西方文学和日本文学,这倂不是因爲文学作品的品质而是因爲出版界的即不合理又不公平的惯性。通过过去几十年的以西欧文化爲中心的全球化与日本的殖民统治,韩国文化很长时间被西欧文化和日本文化、日本式西欧文化(脱亚入欧以后的亚西欧文化)支配,出版界的情况不能例外。改变这种偏向的出版及阅读情况的最佳方法之一是让翻译不再留存于翻译的范围之内,把翻译的力量或权力尽量扩展到整个出版及阅读范围。其实翻译的权力不能单独存在。翻译、出版和阅读这三个层次形成一种正面的善循环结构,才能够发挥很多力量的翻译权力。21世纪初在韩国出版界与读书界突然发生日本小说热的主要背景是政治的抵抗文化的解构和民族主义思潮的衰退,正在这种文化的变革的动态当中就出现了一群比较优秀的翻译作品,影响追求斩新的文化滋养的读者群体,很快形成了不亚于西方文学的很大市场。相比之下在韩国出版界里的中国当代文学市场还没成熟,我以爲其主要原因之一是翻译品质不够好,还没形成贯通策划、翻译、阅读和扩展市场的一连串的善循环结构。控制出版系统的不是艺术性而是市场性。说起来有一点庸俗,通过高品质的翻译让出版社挣钱是获得翻译权力的最佳捷径。比如说一个翻译家给出版社提供高品质翻译,该出版社吃亏的可能性会比较低,那么该出版社尽量尊重有关策划及出书方面的该翻译家的意见,让他策划和翻译更多作品,这样来该翻译家会对整个出版系统更加有权力,会发生第二效应(synnergy)。文学翻译本质上是对文学的一种服务,翻译权力不是别的就是不让翻译的恶货驱逐翻译的良货。翻译的权力什么都不能控制,也不该控制。翻译的权力能够控製的只有翻译的恶货。因此我们可以说扩大翻译的权力,扩展翻译的边界的事应该从提高翻译品质开始。所有的中国文学翻译家基础于这种观念和对文本的责任感继续努力的话,终有一天在韩国出版市场里暴发性地开了中国当代文学的巨大市场。我会一直等待这一天,更加奋发。

朝鲜世宗大王于1443年完成韩文(当时称爲‘训民正音’),于1446年农曆9月上旬全面颁布使用,同时作序说“国之语音,异乎中国,与文字不相流通。故愚民,有所欲言,而终不得伸其情者多矣。予爲此悯然,新制二十八字,欲使人人易习便于日用耳。”在这一句话里我们能够很明显地发现到世宗大王创造韩文的重要动机之一是实现与汉语的更大幅度的、更加通畅的疏通的。这是明明白白的歷史的、学术的事实,也是象徵中国文化与韩国文化的亲缘性和同根性的重要标識。但是韩国的不少学者,尤其是国语学者却不承这种事实,一听这样的说法就生大气,盲目地反对。毋论如何,汉语与韩语之间有明显的亲缘性与同根性,把汉语文本翻译成韩文时发生兩价性现象,正面现象是被翻译的韩语文本与汉语原文之间的上差不太大,能保持原文的正确的意味、意象和神韵等,负面现象是就因这种亲缘性与同根性很容易发生误译的。韩语裏面的汉语成分爲大槪百分之七十以上,共用的词彙非常多,同词异意的也不少。比如‘深刻’此词汉语与韩语都用,其意思却截然不同。汉语的‘深刻’意味着‘(思想或作品的内容)很有深度’,韩语的‘深刻’意味着‘(某种负面现象)很严重的’,再比如汉语的‘恍惚’意味着‘朦胧’或‘隐隐约约’,韩语的‘恍惚’意味着‘引人入胜’,汉语的‘一网打尽’即有褒意也有贬意,韩语的‘一网打尽’只有贬意主要用于表现捕捉罪犯的。汉语与韩语之间的这种用例的分岐不计其数,但是有些人没有分别盲目的混用,因此经常发生误译。

除了这种同词异意的问题之外,当代汉语的扩展变化也造成翻译的困境,这种扩展与变化都反映着中国固有的文化现象。比如‘忽悠’、‘山寨’等词语则不加注释就不容易翻译,包括‘三肨(北韩的金正恩)’、‘領导(在一个组织里具有发言权的人)’、‘隔璧(论坛中的另一个主题’、‘菜鸟(初级水平的新人)’等隐语、俗语或网络用语也很容易引发误译。还有‘520(我爱你)’、‘065(原谅我)’、‘847(别生气)’等由数字代替文字的表现,也有‘BB(宝贝)’、‘BT(变态)’、‘PK(砍人)’等由英文字母代替汉语词语的。

语言是有生命的,随着社会与生活环境的变化而不断变化,反映出新的社会及生活的风景。解决因语言的这种变化与扩展而发生的各种翻译的困境,翻译家採用的唯一的措施是尽量接触新生或变化的语言表现,保持与语言变化的同步性。

我认为翻译是解释学的一种方法论,所以不会有不可翻译的文本,只有被翻译的出发文与到达文之间的一致性或逼眞性的问题。翻译的最重要、最本质的功能是把被翻译的文本不改也不损伤,用其他语言,则另一种修辞系统来传达读者的。但是每一个语言各有其独特的、不可代替的修辞系统,通过翻译把一种语言的文本没有改变、没有损伤,完完全全改成另一种语言的文本是不可能的事。因爲所谓修辞不是局限于语言本身的层次,而是指结合一个语言系统裏面的文化、思维、表现习惯和歷史记忆等所有因素的总和。比如把汉语固有的修辞技巧之一的‘谐音’、古典诗歌里的押韵、从自古以来中国人的生活和经验所发出的故事成语等翻译成西方语言肯定是很不容易的事,会发生各样各色的转换和变形,在其过程,文本上无法避免一定的损伤和歪曲。但是,毋论如何尽可能把原文与被翻译的文本之间的相差最小化的是翻译家的最重要的任务。擧个例子,有人把汉语‘豆浆和油条’翻译成‘豆乳和油炸餠’,一般读者如何理解此兩样食物?好多读者会想“原来中国人也与韩国人一样吃这些东西!”难道这不是原文的歪曲或损伤吗?难道这不是缩小或破坏‘豆浆和油条’此兩样食物包含的文化的含意吗? 我想在这一部分,与其找類似的等价物稀释其文化的细节不如直接翻爲‘豆浆和油条’,然后加简单的注释。因爲韩国人阅读中国小说的目的不是找中国与韩国的同质性,而是直接看见中国,了解纯粹的中国的。当然中国人常喝的‘豆浆’与韩国人常喝的‘豆乳’是大同小异的食物,但是喝的时间与地点、製造方法与其文化的含意都截然不同。把有一部分截然不同的翻译成大同小异的是不是非正常的翻译?是不是通过翻译的文本的破坏? 在任何语际书写基本上没有不可翻译的,只有一点点的相差。尽可能最小化此相差就是翻译家的最大任务。

I’m a Specialist of Absorbing ForeignCultures

Kim Tae-cheng

I’m not a poet but a translator. The poet'simagination is endless but mine is confined to the text of poetry which cannotbe exceeded, otherwise I cannot be a good translator. I’m a specialist ofabsorbing foreign cultures  and nurturingKorean poets and writers with excellent works. Chinese contemporary literaturemay not be accepted in the same degree in every country. Now almost all theuniversities in Korea have Chinese departments. Many Chinese professors writepapers on Chinese literature and are funded by national institutions to publishessay collections. The problem is isolation from general readers. The only twopeople who can read and would like to read these papers are the author and thereviewer, while others don’t even know the existence of these papers and haveno access to them. I think writing these papers which have no reader, noutility and for no good but themselves is a waste of knowledge. Many facultymembers have manufactured a mass of papers, but the public outside campus stilldo not understand Chinese contemporary literature. We can say that theexperience and knowledge of Chinese literature was siloed in universities.Isn’t this strange phenomenon a problem? Papers as a method of study areimportant, but the big problem that there are only specialized papers but nopopular articles cannot be ignored. Concerning Chinese contemporary literature,the lack of public-oriented articles is the most important obstacle topopularize them in Korea and it is also the biggest reason why they cannotestablish a large-scale market in the Korean publishing industry. The generalreaders have shown an increasing tendency to read literary works. Popular writing is theshort-cut to bring Chinese contemporary literature to the readers. Translationis one of the most representative popular writing and it’s also the readiestway to walk hand in hand with Chinese literature.

At present, the foreign literature that dominates the Korean book market isstill Western and Japanese works. This is not because of the quality ofliterary works but because of the irrational and unfair inertia of thepublishing industry. Through the decades of globalization that centers onWestern European culture and Japan’s colonial rule, Korean culture is dominatedfor a long time by the Western European culture, Japanese culture, and JapaneseWestern culture (a branch of Western culture in Japan after its determinationto enter the European world), and the publishing industry is no exception. Oneof the best ways to change the publication and reading of such biases is to gettranslation beyond its original circle, and expand the power of translation asfar as possible to the entire publication and reading. In fact, the power oftranslation cannot exist alone. Only when translation, publishing and readingform a positive cycle of good structure can translation be a notable power. Atthe beginning of the 21st century, the main background of love for Japanesenovels in publishing and reading circles in Korea is the deconstruction ofpolitical resistance culture and the decline of nationalism. In this dynamicchange of culture, a group of superior translation works appeared, whichinfluenced the readers who were pursuing new cultural nourishment and soonformed a market as large as Western literature. Compared with this situation,Chinese contemporary literature is an established genre in the Koreanpublishing industry. I think one of the main reasons is that the quality oftranslation is not good enough, not yet forming a series of good cyclestructure through the planning, translation, reading and market expansion. Thepublishing system is not ruled by the standards of artistry, but those ofmarket. It is a little vulgar to say the way that the press earn money throughhigh-quality translation is the best shortcut to get the power of translation.For example, if a translator provides high-quality translations to publishers,the publishers may be less likely to suffer losses, and the publishing housewill respect the translators' opinions on planning and publishing as far aspossible, so that he can plan and translate more works. Then translation willhave more say in the entire publishing system, and the synergy is expected to occur. Literary translation isessentially a service to literature, and the sole end of translation power isto protect good translations from bad translations. The power of translationcannot and should not control anything, but the bad translations. So we can saythat the expansion of the power and boundaries of translation should start fromimproving translation quality. If all the Chinese literary translators continueto work hard based on this idea and the sense of responsibility for the text,they will one day open the huge market of Korea. I will always wait for thisday and work harder.

The King Sejong in Chosun Dynasty invented Hangul,the Korean writing system in 1443(known as HunMinJungUm at that time) and fullyimplemented it in early September, 1446 (lunar calendar). At the same time, hemade a preface, “The language of our country is different from the Chineselanguage, and thus communication with the Chinese people is hard, if notimpossible. So, uneducated people cannot express themselves clearly. I feel sadabout this. So I have created 28 symbols to facilitate language learning anddaily communication.” In this paragraph, we can obviously find that one of themost important motives of the King Sejong to create Hangul is to achieve agreater, more unobstructed clarity with the Chinese language. This is a clearhistorical and academic fact, and it’s also an important identity whichsymbolizes the affinity and the same root of Chinese culture and the Koreanculture. But many scholars in Korea, especially Korean scholors do not acceptthis fact. On hearing this statement, they get angry and oppose the statementblindly. In any case, there is a clear affinity and similarity between Chineseand Korean. When the Chinese text was translated into Korean, the phenomenon ofduality occurred. The positive side is that the difference between thetranslated Korean text and the original Chinese text is small enough tomaintain the correct meaning, image and charm of the original text, while thenegative side is that it’s very prone to mistranslation due to this kind ofaffinity and same-rootedness. More than 70 percent of the Korean language haveconnections with Chinese, with a large shared vocabulary, and the meaning mayand may not be the same. For example, both Chinese and Korean use the word“deep”(深刻), but they have totallydifferent meanings. “Deep” in Chinese means (the content of one’s thought orworks are) thoughtful, while “deep” in Korean means negatively serious. Foranother example, “trance”(恍惚) in Chinese means “hazy”or “vague” , while “trance” in Korean means “enchanting”; “A clean sweep”(一网打尽) in Chineseis both commendatory and derogatory, while this phrase in Korean is onlyderogatory which mainly refers to catching criminals. There are countlessdifferences in the use between Chinese and Korean, but some people use thewords without differentiation, so mistranslation is prevalent.

In addition to the problem ofsynonymy, the expansion of contemporary Chinese language also arouses certainproblems in translation. This expansion and change all reflect the inherentcultural phenomenon of China. For example, the words of “Huyou”(忽悠), “Shanzhai”(山寨) cannot be translatedeasily without explanations. The enigmatic language, idiom or network languagesuch as ‘Sanpang (三胖,Kim Jong-un of NorthKorea)’, ‘lingdao(领导,a person who has the finalsay in an organization)’, ‘gebi (隔壁,another postin BBS)’, ‘cainiao(菜鸟,new comers of juniorlevel)’,etc. is easy to cause mistranslation. There are also the situations ofusing numbers to replace characters, such as ‘520(I love you)’, ‘065(excuseme)’, and ‘847(don’t be angry)’. And there are situations of using Englishletters directly such as ‘BB(baby)’, BT(metamorphosis), ‘PK(player killing)’,etc.

Language is a living existenceand constantly changes with the society and environment, reflecting the newphenomenon. To solve the various translation dilemmas caused by this change andexpansion of language, the only measure adopted by the translator is trying tocontact new or changed expressions and keep pace with language itself.

I think that translation is a methodology ofhermeneutics, so there are no untranslatable texts, but only issues ofconsistency or verisimilitude between the source language and target language.The most important and essential function of translation is to convey the translatedtext without any change or distortion in the rhetoric system of the reader’slanguage. But each language has its own unique, irreplaceable rhetoricalsystem, so it’s impossible to completely transform the text of one languageinto another language without any change or distortions. Because the so-calledrhetoric is not confined to the level of language itself, but points towardsthe sum of all the factors including culture, thoughts, habits and historicalmemory in a language system. For example, it’s not easy to translate'homophonic' (谐音) which is one of therhetorical skills inherent in Chinese, the rhyme of classical poetry, idioms ofstories of Chinese people's life and experience from ancient times into Westernlanguages, because all kinds of conversion and deformation will happen and inthe process, the text cannot avoid certain losses and distortions. However, to minimize thedifference between the original and the translated text is the most importanttask of the translator. For example, someone translated “豆浆和油条” in Chinese into “豆乳和油炸餠” in Korean (和means “and”).How can the general readers understand these two foods? Many readers may thinkthat Chinese people eat the same food with Koreans! Is this not a distortion ordamage of the original text? Is it not to diminish or destroy the culturalconnotations contained by these two foods, 豆浆and 油条?I think inthis part, it’s better to translate directly into “豆浆和油条” with simple notes rather than to find theequivalent of these food, and drain away its Chinese implications. Because the purpose forKorean people to read Chinese novels is not to find isomorphism between Chinaand South Korea, but directly see and understand the China as it is. Of course,Chinese “豆浆” is largelythe same food with Korean “豆乳” (both aresoy milk), but the time and place to drink, manufacturing methods and culturalimplications are completely different. Isn’t it inappropriate practice totranslate “a thing that is different from another thing in part” into “a thingthat is largely the same as the other thing”? Isn’t it a damage for thetranslated texts? Basically, there is no untranslatable texts in anyinter-lingual writing, and only slight differences exist. Minimizing thisdifference as much as possible is the biggest task of translators.

[责任编辑:冯婧 PN041]

责任编辑:冯婧 PN041

  • 好文
  • 钦佩
  • 喜欢
  • 泪奔
  • 可爱
  • 思考

凤凰文化官方微信

凤凰新闻 天天有料
分享到: