外交家譯者─從《鹿鼎記》英譯本看譯者操縱

Abstract

1969年三月，中國和蘇聯為了烏蘇里江的珍寶島發生武裝衝突，同年十月，金庸武俠小說《鹿鼎記》開始連載於香港《明報》，直至1972年連載完畢，內含許多不利俄、荷甚至其他歐洲國家形象的內容。1997年，《鹿鼎記》英譯本問市，2002年，譯本三卷全數出版，譯本內，侮辱俄、荷等國的內容卻被大幅刪除、淡化甚至改寫，本研究試圖透過文本分析法，觀察譯本遭操縱的情形，並根據比利時學者勒菲弗爾（André Lefevere）的翻譯改寫理論探究譯者操縱譯文的原因。

本研究發現譯者干預譯文是基於自身的譯者定位、自己的族群身分和承襲的翻譯傳統。譯者以文化外交官自居，因此小心不讓譯文引發任何負面效應，此外，譯者身為英國人（歐洲人），自然傾向擁護符合歐洲人利益和信念的價值觀，並排斥毀損同胞形象或違背歐洲人觀念的內容。譯者也尊崇他們從前輩或老師那裏承接的一套翻譯觀和翻譯傳統，這套傳統認為譯者為了幫助讀者理解甚至喜歡譯文，可以改寫譯文，甚至發揮創意，增添原文沒有的文句。

由此可證《鹿鼎記》英譯者確實基於意識形態因素操縱譯文，研究結果符合勒菲弗爾的翻譯改寫理論。

本研究顯示當翻譯研究脫離「忠於原文」的標準，將譯本置於歷史社會脈絡下檢視，才可突顯譯本「失真」問題背後的千絲萬縷因素，並培養研究者對翻譯及翻譯研究的深度視野，這是《鹿鼎記》英譯者在娛樂讀者之外，另一個重要貢獻。This thesis examines, through the perspective of Belgium translation theorist Andre Lefevere's rewriting theory, how and why the English translation of Luding Ji, the last of Chinese Wuxia novelist Louis Cha’s 15 works, was rewritten by its translators.

According to Lefevere, translation is a kind of rewriting, and it is usually subject to ideological influences. In the case of Luding Ji, in March, 1969, the Zhenbao Island conflict broke out between China and the Soviet Union. The Soviet Union was perceived as an invader of China and drew a lot of criticism from Hong Kong, among others, which was still a British colony. In October, 1969, Luding Ji was serialized in Hong Kong’s Ming Pao, a newspaper daily founded by Cha. The novel contains many paragraphs that depict Russia (as well as the Netherlands and a few other European countries) in the most negative light.

But in the English translation that was published in 1997 (volume 1), 1999 (volume 2) and 2002 (volume 3), much of the negative content about Russia and other European countries in the original text are either non-existent, toned down or changed to hold positive meanings, whereas contents that indicate the superiority of the Qing dynasty and the Chinese culture are left out of the translation, toned down or changed to possess negative meanings.

The researcher compares the original text and the translation text of the novel, studies the backgrounds of the translators and the social context in which the translation came into being and interviews one of the translators and a scholar who was involved in the translation project. Based on the examples of manipulated texts found during the research and the analysis of the backgrounds of the translators and other afore-mentioned factors, the researcher concludes that the translators did manipulate the translation text due to their self-identity as translators and as Europeans and the translation traditions they have inherited from their teachers or predecessors.

This thesis shows translation research would have more breadth and depth if it is conducted from the perspective of ideology and not solely from the linguistic approach of adherence to the original text.