水滸傳小說論文

水滸傳(節(jié)選)三種譯文賞析Inthisessay,I’mtryingtomakesomecomparisonsamongthethreeEnglishversionsoftheChinesenovel《水滸傳》(ALLMENAREBROTHERStranslatedbyPealS.Buck;WATERMARGINworkedoutbyJ.H.Jackson;OUTLAWSOFTHEMARSHbySidneyShapiro.IwouldpickoutsomesentencesfromtheChapter47oftheirworksforanalysisandappreciation.TheversionofPeal’swaspublishedin1933,itisalsotheearliestEnglishversionfor《水滸傳》.ThemethodPealadoptedwasliteraltranslation.Intheprefaceshesaidshetriedtokeeptheauthenticstyleoftheoriginalwork.Butsheactuallyskippedmanypoemsinthenovel.WATERMARGINworkedoutbyJ.H.Jacksonhasbeenlargelydeletedandrewritten,itismoreinastyleofwesternculture.SidneyShapiro’sOUTLAWSOFTHEMARSHwastranslatedbyboththemethodofliteraltranslationandliberaltranslation.FollowingIwouldgivesomeexamplestookfromtheChapter47totellthedifferencesamongthesethreeversions.Example1李應(yīng)出到廳前，連忙問道:“你且言備細(xì)緣故，怎么地來？”杜興氣定了，方才道：“小人赍了東人書札，到他那里第三重門下，卻好遇見祝龍，?；?，祝彪弟兄三個坐在那里。小人聲了三個喏，祝彪喝道：‘你又來做甚么？’小人躬身稟道：‘東人有書在此拜上?！１肽菑P變了臉，罵道：‘你那主人恁地不曉人事！早晌使個潑男女來這里下書，要討那個梁山泊賊人時遷，如今我正要解上州去，又來怎地？’……”InPeal’sversion,thefirstsentenceLiYingsaidwastranslatedas:"Tellusindetail,whathappened?";inJackson’sversion:"takeyourtimeandtellusallaboutit.";inSidney’sversion:"Prayspeakoutallthecauseforthis.Howhasthiscomeabout?"Thefirstversion,Pear’s,isconcise,andfollowsthesequenceoftheoriginalsentence,itiskindofstereotypical.Jacksonmadesomealteration,butthephrase"takeyourtime"maynotaccordwiththeoriginalmeaning,andhedeletedthepartofaskingforthereason.Shapiro’sversionseemstobemoresuitable,itdoesnotchangethestructureofthesentence,andconformtothemeaningoftheoriginalsentence.Theword“prey”showsthecalmnessofLiYingatthattimeandhisself-cultivation.Thenextsentence:“你那主人恁地不曉人事！”.InversionofPeal’s,shetranslateditas:”howcanyourmasterbesoignorant?”,theninJackson’sversion:"Whydoesyourmasternotunderstandhumanaffairs?”,Shapirotranslateditas:"Thatlordofyours---howisitheknowssolittleofpropriety?”Theword“ignorant”Pealchosecan’texactlyexpresstherealmeaningof“不曉人事”，"ignorant"canbeapprehendedas“stupid”.Andthe“humanaffairs”Jacksonchosedoesnotexactlyconformtothemeaningof“人事”，"humanaffairs"emphasizesmoreonthethingsintherelatedtohuman，but“人事”hereismorerelatedtothehumanrelationships.AndabouttheversionofShapiro’s,heusedtheword“l(fā)ord”insteadof“master”,itseemstomethatthiswordshowedthenobilityofLiYing’sstatus,and“knowssolittleofpropriety”ismoresimilartothemeaningof“不曉人事”。Example2且說石秀挑著柴擔(dān)先入去，行不到二十來里，只見路徑曲折多雜，四下里彎環(huán)相似，樹木叢密，難認(rèn)路頭，石秀便歇下柴擔(dān)不走。聽得背后法環(huán)響得漸近，石秀看時，卻見楊林頭帶一個破笠子，身穿一領(lǐng)舊法衣，手里擎著法環(huán)，于路搖將進(jìn)來。石秀見沒人，叫住楊林說道：“看見路徑彎雜難認(rèn)，不知那里是我前日跟隨李應(yīng)來時的路。天色已晚，他們眾人都是熟路，正看不仔細(xì)。”楊林道：“不要管他路徑曲直，只顧揀大路走便了?！盜nPeal’sversionshetranslated“里”as"li",whiletheothertwotranslatorconverteditintomiles.Ithinkthisisbasedonifthetranslatorisonthesideoftheauthororiftheywantsthereadertogeteasiercomprehension.Andthesame,inPeal’sversionshetriedbesttofollowthelogicalsequenceoftheauthor,andrarelymadechangesontheplot.ButwecanfindthatinJackson’sversion,thetimefortheirleavingwaschanged,hesaidtheywenttogether,healsoomittedthepartofthedescriptionofYangLin’sattire,whichforallIconcernedwillgreatlyaffectreader’scomprehensionforthefollowingparts.InShapiro’sversion,notliketheconcisewordsinPeal’sversion,hegavedetaileddescription,andpayedmuchattentiononthechoosingofthewords.Butthisalsomakesthesentencestoolongtocomprehend,andmaymakethereadersfeelboredsoon.Thesentence“不要管他路徑曲直”.Pealtranslateditas"stayoffthepaths",Jacksonagain,omittedit,andaddedthesentence:"weneednotworryaboutthat";inShapiro’sversion:"butlet’spaynoheedtowhetherthepathsgostraightorcrooked".WecanseeShapirotriedtokeeptheoriginalmeaningofthesentence,Jacksonaddedmuchofhisownthoughts,Peal,though,omittedpartsofthesentence,readerscangotthemeaningofthewriter.Fromtheexamplesabove,wecanseeallthethreetranslatorshavegoodpointsaswellassomeweaknesses.Pealemphasizedontheformofthesentence,shetriedtokeepthesamesequencewiththewriter,butitresultedinthatherversiononlyappearstobethesamewiththeoriginalversion.AndforJackson’sversion,peoplecriticisedhisversionasanculturalaggression.Beingputmuchofhisownthoughtsintotheplot,thetranslationversionmightnotbeabletopassonthemeaningoftheoriginalversi