https://scholars.lib.ntu.edu.tw/handle/123456789/14522
標題: | 異(譯)者的體驗:精神分析與翻譯(2/2) | 作者: | 沈志中 | 關鍵字: | 精神分析;佛洛伊德;翻譯;詮釋;傳會;母語;外語;中文;psychoanalysis;Freud;translation;interpretation;transference;mother tongue;foreign language;translation in Chinese | 公開日期: | 31-七月-2005 | 出版社: | 臺北市:國立臺灣大學外國語文學系暨研究所 | 摘要: | 翻譯的本質為何?一方面若認為翻譯必須重現原文,則似乎「譯者即叛徒」 (traduttore traditore)!甚且是雙重背叛,既背叛原文亦背叛母語:必須捨棄 原文才能將它轉譯成母語,必須背棄母語才能讓它「稱呼」它所沒有之新事物。 反之,假使認為翻譯應著重譯文的雅達,則翻譯更無信實可言,甚至根本無翻 譯。忽略原文的存在就沒有翻譯。翻譯的本質正是不可能性的具體呈現。然而 翻譯引人之處正在於此不可能性:兩個文本之間不可化約的差異,才是翻譯存在的理由。 在這種兩難之下,所謂「精神分析翻譯」,「精神分析中的翻譯」或「精神 分析式翻譯」是否能提供另一種第三選項?這幾個詞組透露出整個問題的龐雜 脈絡。由於J. Lacan的重要角色,結構主義語言學對精神分析的影響廣泛地受到 重視。然而較常被忽視的或許是,反之,精神分析對語言學、翻譯理論的影響。 在精神分析理論、歷史上,乃至分析場景中,語言、多語、母語/外語、翻譯等 問題始終是重要的課題之一。一方面精神分析不僅視翻譯為一種精神智識的工 作,而且首先是精神內部的工作。翻譯作為精神內部的工作,這並非或不只是 一種理論隱喻, 而是用以解釋精神現象之具體過程或程序的原型 (prototype)——換言之,翻譯既是精神過程運作的模型,也是其運作的最早 產物。另一方面,這種既為外在亦為內在的翻譯工作所針對的卻正是精神分 析。若再細究,翻譯一詞在精神分析中,令人不安地凝縮了數個問題核心,猶 如夢中不解的臍點:德文Übertragung一詞具多重語義,其中特別是「翻譯」、「隱 喻」、「傳遞」、「傳會」。因此,應如何思考精神分析翻譯的問題,以及特別是 精神分析中文翻譯的問題?本研究計畫試圖從歷史、理論以及實踐三個面向進行探討。 What is translation? If one presupposes the existence of the original text, then traduttore traditore! To be a translator is to be treacherous, or even commit a double treason: treacherous not only to the original language, but also to the mother tongue. On the other hand, if one rejects the assumption of an original language, then translation has nothing to do with fidelity or there is no translation at all. The essence of translation is exactly the manifestation of the impossible. However, what interests us in translation, is precisely this impossibility: it is the irreducible difference between two texts that gives rise to translation. In face of these dilemmatic alternatives, can the “psychoanalytic translation” or the “translation in psychoanalysis” or the “translation of psychoanalysis” can be an issue? All these words represent indeed an extremely problematic complex. Thanks to J Lacan, the significant influence of structural linguistics on psychoanalysis is by now fully recognized. However, what is often ignored is the possible influence of the psychoanalysis on linguistics, and especially, on the theories of the translation. Undoubtedly, the question of language, of multilingualism, of difference between mother tongue and foreign language and of translation constitute one of the most important topics of the theory, the history and the scene of psychoanalysis. On the one hand, for the psychoanalysis, the translation is not only an intellectual work, but also and an intrapsychic work. This is more than a theoretical metaphor, because translation is a theoretical prototype for psychoanalysis, which has the function of explaining the concrete psychic process. In addition, the question becomes more complicated if the object of translation is psychoanalysis itself. In psychoanalysis, the word “translation” seems to be the umbilical point of a dream in which is condensed several crucial questions: the German word “Übertragung” has several meanings, including “translation”, “metaphor”, “transportation” and “transference”. Consequently, how to consider the question of translation of psychoanalysis, and especially that of the translation in Chinese of the psychoanalysis? This research tries to analyze this question from three different perspectives i.e. history, theory and practice. |
URI: | http://ntur.lib.ntu.edu.tw//handle/246246/10180 | 其他識別: | 932411H002021 | Rights: | 國立臺灣大學外國語文學系暨研究所 |
顯示於: | 外國語文學系 |
檔案 | 描述 | 大小 | 格式 | |
---|---|---|---|---|
932411H002021.pdf | 1.54 MB | Adobe PDF | 檢視/開啟 |
在 IR 系統中的文件,除了特別指名其著作權條款之外,均受到著作權保護,並且保留所有的權利。