《少女杜拉的故事》：三種中譯本之比較

Abstract

佛洛伊德於1905年出版Dora: Fragment d’une analyse d’hystérie（以下簡稱 “Dora” ），是精神分析界首部將夢境和潛意識理論應用於實務的作品。1925年，佛洛伊德授權的 “Dora” 英語標準版就已經上市，爾後其學說也流傳至臺灣醫界，但一直到1973年志文出版社新潮文庫推出《少女杜拉的故事》，本書才有了第一本中譯本， “Dora” 也才有機會在臺灣發揚光大。 本文選擇臺灣出版的三種譯本，分別由文榮光、劉慧卿、丁偉所譯，參考傅大為（1994）對文榮光譯本的批評，結合Vermeer的目的論，試分別探討三個版本的翻譯目的、策略與錯誤，給予評價。筆者認為文譯翻譯目的為介紹佛洛伊德，故策略為節譯而簡要，細節缺漏較多，而傅大為對文榮光的批評過於偏頗；劉慧卿雖已具精神醫師身份，且欲在譯本中表現專業形象，但其翻譯能力不如傅大為所言優秀，對讀者來說反而難以吸收；最後分析丁偉譯本的翻譯策略與翻譯錯誤，同時也指出其分段如何改變讀者對該著作的理解，以及裸露插圖與圖片附註如何影響讀者對朵拉的看法。In 1905, Sigmund Freud published Dora: Fragment d’une analyse d’hystérie, which was the first case study to combine theories of the subconscious and the interpretation of dreams in psychoanalytic treatment. Although the authorized English translation of Dora was published in 1925, it was not until 1973 that a Chinese translation appeared in Taiwan, published by the Xin-Chao (Mandarin for “new trends”) Library of Chih-wen Press. This thesis takes Dai-Wie Fu’s 1994 critique of Jung-Kwang Wen’s Chinese translation of Dora as its starting point and then analyzes this translation alongside two others, translated by Hui-Ching Liu and Wei Ding respectively. This thesis discusses the purposes, strategies, and errors of each translation using Vermeer’s skopos theory. The author argues that Wen’s main objective was to provide readers with a simple introduction to psychoanalysis, and thus omitted details to produce an abridged text. Then the author discusses how Liu, in spite of her professional training and experience as a certified psychiatrist, produced a tedious, mediocre translation due to insufficient skill in translation. Finally, the thesis analyzes Ding’s translation, including how its structure and nude photographs and illustrations affect the work’s reception among readers and their perception of Dora.