评析 the American Scholar

西南大学本科生课程论文
论文题目：评析The American Scholar
课程名称：翻译批评
任课教师：***
专业：英语
班级：2012级英语2班
学号：***************
*名：**
2015 年12 月26 日
西南大学外国语学院制
The American Scholar
①None is quite perfect. As no air-pump can by any means make a perfect vacuum, so neither can any artist entirely exclude the conventional, the local, the perishable from his book, or write a book of pure thought, that should be as efficient, in all respects, to a remote posterity, as to contemporaries, or rather to the second age. Each age, it is found, must write its own books; or rather, each generation for the next succeeding.②The books of an older period will not fit this.
Yet hence arises a grave mischief. The sacredness which attaches to the act of creation, the act of thought, is transferred to the record. The poet chanting was felt to be a divine man: henceforth the chant is divine also. The writer was a just and wise spirit: henceforth it is settled the book is perfect; as love of the hero corrupts into the worship of his statue. Instantly,③the book becomes noxious: the guide is a tyrant. The sluggish and perverted mind of the multitude, slow to open to the incursions of Reason, having once so opened, having once received this book, stands upon it, and makes an outcry, if it is disparaged. Colleges are built on it. Books are written on it by thinkers, not by Man Thinking; by men of talent, that is, who start wrong, who set out from accepted dogmas, not from their own sight of principles. Meek young men grow up in libraries, believing it their duty to accept the views which Cicero, which Locke, which Bacon, have given; forgetful that Cicero, Locke, and Bacon were only young men in libraries when they wrote these books.
Hence, instead of Man Thinking, we have the bookworm. Hence, the book-learned class, who value books, as such; not as related to nature and the human constitution, but as making a sort of Third Estate with the world and the soul. Hence, the restorers of readings, the emendators, the bibliomaniacs of all degrees.
Books are the best of things, well used; abused, among the worst. What is the right use? What is the one end which all means go to effect? They are for nothing but to inspire. I had better never see a book that to be warped by its attraction clean out of my own orbit, and make a satellite instead of a system. The one thing in the world, of value, is the active soul. This every man is entitled to; this every man contains within him, although in almost all men obstructed and as yet unborn. The soul active sees absolute truth; and utters truth, or creates. In this action it is genius; not the privilege of here and there a favorite, but the sound estate of every man.④In its essence it is progressive. The book, the college, the school of art, the institution of any kind, stop with some past utterance of genius. This is good, say they―let us hold by this. They pin me down.They look backward not forward. But genius looks forward: the eyes of man are set in his forehead, not in his hindhead: man hopes; genius creates. Whatever talent may be, if the man create not, the pure efflux of Deity is not his; cinders and smoke there may be, but no yet flame. There are creative manners, there are creative actions, and creative words; manners, actions, words, that is indicative of no custom or authority, but springing spontaneous from the mind’s own sense of good and fair.
On the other part, instead of being its own seer, let it receive from another mind its truth, though it were in torrents of light, without periods of solitude, inquest, and self-recovery, and fatal disservice is done. Genius is always sufficiently the enemy of genius by over-influence. The literature of every nation bears me witness. The English dramatic poets have Shakespearized now for two hundred years.
Undoubtedly there is a right way of reading, so it be sternly subordinated. Man Thinking must not be subdued by his instruments. B ooks are for the scholar’s idle times. When he can read God
directly, the hour is too precious to be wasted in other men’s transcripts of their readings. But when the intervals of darkness come, as come they must―when the sun is hid, and the stars withdraw their shining―we repair to the lamps which were kindled by their ray, to guide our steps to the East again, where the dawn is. We hear, that we may speak. The Arabian proverb says, “A fig tree, looking on a fig tree, becometh fruitful.” It is remarkable, the character of the pleasure we derive from the best books. They impress us with the conviction, that one nature wrote and the same reads. We read the verses of one of the great English poets, of Chaucer, of Marvell, of Dryden, with the most modern joy―wi th a pleasure, I mean, which is in great part caused by the abstraction of all time from their verses. There is some awe mixed with the joy of our surprise, when this poet, who lived in some past world, two or three hundred years ago, says that which lies close to my own soul, that which I also had well-nigh thought and said. But for the evidence thence afforded to the philosophical doctrine of the identity of all minds, we should suppose some preestablished harmony, some foresight of souls that were to be, and some preparation of stores for their future wants, who lay up food before death for the young grub they shall never see.
I would not be hurried by any love of system, by any exaggeration of instincts, to underrate the Book. We all know, that, as the human body can be nourished on any food, though it were boiled grass and the broth of shoes, so the human mind can be fed by any knowledge. And great and heroic men have existed who had almost no other information than by the printed page.⑤I only would say that it needs a strong head to bear that diet. One must be an inventor to read well. As the proverb says, “He that would bring home the wealth of the Indies, must carry out the wealth of the Indies.” There is then creative reading as well as creative writing. When the mind is braced by labor and invention, the page of whatever book we read becomes luminous with manifold allusion. Every sentence is doubly significant, and the sense of our author is as broad as the world. We then see, what is always true, th at, as the seer’s hour of vision is short and rare among heavy days and months, so is its record, perchance, the least part of his volume. The discerning will read, in his Plato or Shakespeare, only that least part―only the authentic utterances of the orac le; all the rest he rejects, were it never so many times Plato’s and Shakespeare’s.
Of course, there is a portion of reading quite indispensable to a wise man. History and exact science he must learn by laborious reading. Colleges, in like manner, have their indispensable office―to teach elements.But they can only highly serve us, when they aim not to drill, but to create; when they gather from far every ray of various genius to their hospitable halls, and, by the concentrated fires, set the hearts of their youth on flame. Thought and knowledge are natures in which apparatus and pretension avail nothing.⑥Gowns and pecuniary foundations, though of towns of gold, can never countervail the least sentence or syllable of wit. Forget this, and our American colleges will recede in their public importance, whilst they grow richer every year.
译文
论美国学者
①万事皆无极致。

正如没有气泵能够抽出绝对之真空，任何大师都无法免受习俗之束缚，不受时空之桎梏，创作出体现纯粹思想之书。

此书要能在方方面面都对同代、下代，乃至后代的后代产生相同的影响。

但据发现，一个时代书写一个时代的书，一代人最多为下一代写书。

②因此，历年经久之书在当代并不受用。

一种顽疾由此而生。

曾几何时，人们将创造、思辨之过程视为高贵神圣，如今却将创造、思辨之产物奉若神明。

游吟诗人被视为圣人，其诗歌即被视为圣歌。

作者是正义与智慧的化身，其著作即被定为极致之作；诚如对英雄精神的热爱已经堕落为对其色身雕像的膜拜。

随之，③书籍沦为流毒，思想导师变身暴政独夫。

冥冥大众迟钝歪曲的头脑，要想开启，达致理性已属不易。

其一旦被流毒的书籍开启，一旦接受这样的书籍，便只能在其划定的界限内亦步亦趋。

旁人稍加非议，还招来他们厉声抗议。

我们的大学就建立在这样的基础上。

我们的书籍就是在这样的基础上写成。

这些书的作者被称为思想家，却并非独立思考之人。

他们天资凛然，却误入歧途、难脱俗套，创作并非出自他们独立之洞见。

画地为牢的后生在图书馆里成长，误以为自己的任务就是接受西塞罗、洛克及培根的教条。

却忘了当西塞罗、洛克及培根著书立作之时也是图书馆里稚嫩的后生。

因此，我们培养了书呆子，而非独立思考之人。

因此，便有了惟书是从的一群人。

书，在他们眼中，既非天造地设的产物，也非人心营构的结果。

他们珍视书，是因为在他们看来，书籍洞开着天人之外的第三阶层。

于是便有了书籍补遗者、校勘家以及痴迷程度各不相同的藏书狂。

书，善用，则万物之灵；滥用，则万恶之魁。

然则何谓善用？何谓千方百计所要实现的读书目标？那无非是给人以启迪。

与其被书的引力牵引偏离自己的轨道，由星系沦为卫星，我宁可绝不读书。

世上唯一弥足珍贵的是活跃的心智。

此物，人人都能拥有。

因为人人都生而有之，只是大多数人的心智遭受阻梗，尚未开启。

活跃的心智能够洞察天理，阐发真理，抑或创造真理。

就此而言，心智即天资。

它并不特别眷顾任何宠儿，而是人皆有之的合法财产。

④心智的本质在于革新渐进。

而我们书本、大学、艺术团体、各类机构却都因先贤的教条而裹足不前。

他们会说，此言极是，我们且遵而循之。

我就这样被他们束缚。

他们总是顾后，而非瞻前。

天才却懂得放眼未来，因为人眼生于前额，而非长在脑后。

凡人懂得憧憬，天才却会创造。

即便天资卓绝，若不创造，此人也难通神明之德。

心中或有炭屑、生青烟，却尚未形成火焰。

世间不乏创新之方法、创新之行为、创新之言辞。

所谓创新，在于其不为传统所拘，不为权贵所惧，而是心灵良知的自然流溢。

再者，人，若自我之主意识不强，而在接受他人思想时又不加独立思辨、审慎分析、客观判断，即便他人思想之真理光芒如炬，其结果也会荼毒不浅。

大凡天才之名过盛便足以成天才之敌。

各国文学足以证明我此言不假。

两百年来，英国戏剧诗人都只是在莎士比亚的盛名之下呀呀学舌。

毫无疑问，世上存在正确的读书法，即让书籍严格听命于读者。

任何独立思考之人都绝不应沦为书本工具的奴隶。

书籍本为学者闲时所用。

若能直接解读上帝，断无必要耗费宝贵时光去解读他人对上帝的解读手稿。

但日有昼夜之别，间或黑夜来袭——当太阳受阻，群星隐耀——我们便借着日光、星光点亮的油灯摸索走向黎明所在的东方。

有句阿拉伯谚语，我们听说并挂在嘴边：一株无花果树注视着另一株无花果树，自己便已硕果累累。

我们从佳作中获得的那种喜悦可谓非凡。

它们足以使我们相信，作者、读者天性相通。

我们阅读英国大诗人乔叟、马维尔、德莱顿的诗篇时能得到最具现代气息的愉悦。

之所以有
这种喜悦，是因为他们的诗篇超脱了时间的局限。

惊喜之余伴随着敬畏，因为生活在两三百年以前过去世界的诗人竟如此贴近我的心灵，言我所思，言我所言。

但若要证明人心相通之哲学，还得假设存在某种先验和谐。

它能预见后世众生，并为其心灵所需提供储备。

正如芸芸众生会在死前为永远无法谋面的后世子孙储藏食物。

我绝不会因趋从社会建制或夸饰个人才思而低估书本的力量。

众所周知，人体可被任何食物滋养，即便是煮沸的野草或皮鞋炖制的羹汤。

心智同样能够从任何知识中汲取营养。

即便伟才英杰，若无书本也必将一无所知。

不过我仍想说，⑤若无健全的大脑，书籍的大餐人们也将无福消受。

善读者必定是创造者。

正如一句谚语所言：要想带回印度的财富，必先使其为你所有。

因此，创造性阅读以外还有创造性写作。

一旦心智勤勉，富于创见，则任何书籍都将页页生辉，启迪无限。

任何句子都将别具深意，而作者见识也将广博无边。

由此，我们得以了解一个普世之真理。

即比起岁月之悠长，人类生命短暂，视野有限。

其著作极少部分记录着自己的真知灼见。

读柏拉图和莎士比亚，审慎者只读这极少部分——这部分真实的先贤圣谕。

其余部分则完全略去，即便其同样出自柏氏、莎翁之手。

当然，要做智者，有些书不得不读。

如历史和科学就得全力苦读。

同理，大学也有不可或缺的职能——传承基础。

但只有当它们不以机械操练为目标，而致力于创造，只有当它们宜人的厅堂内满聚天下才俊的智慧光芒，并使这星星之火燎原在青年学子心中时，大学才能发挥更大作用。

思想和知识之为立身之本，任何自然之器物及虚妄之人心均无助于思想和知识的获取。

⑥学位和资金虽价值万金，但也难抵哪怕寥寥数语的真知灼见。

若不了然于此，即便我们大学的金钱财富逐年递增，其公众影响也必将逐年递减。

评析
爱默生的这篇《论美国学者》有许多版本的中文译文，但纵观各个译文，我以为这篇译文是翻译的很好的一篇，不仅与原文所表达的意思和句式十分贴近，也符合中国人的逻辑思维，除此之外，也表现出译者优秀的文笔。

下面我将从以下四个方面简要分析这篇译文。

一是增词法的使用。

增词法在英译汉的的过程中是极其常用的一种方法，这篇译文也在多处使用增词法。

比如在第一段中，句①十分复杂，尤其是翻译从句时，无法用一个句子就完整的表达出原文的含义，此时将句子拆分翻译的时候，就会增加“这本书”作为后一句译文的主语，使意思更为通顺。

同样，在最后一句话中，句②英语原文并没有使用任何连接词，但该句与前文有着明显的逻辑关系，所以在翻译成中文的时候，加上“因此”一次，使译文的逻辑更为明确。

二是词性的转换。

在将英语翻译为汉语时，常常会碰到将英文的形容词翻译成汉语的名词。

如句③，在翻译”noxious”一词时，译者将其翻译为“流毒”，而不是“书籍变成有害的”，这样的表达才是我们惯用的表达之法。

而在句④中，”progressive”一词表示的是“进步的”，在翻译的时候将其处理为“革新渐进”也对词性做了转化，但我认为将它翻译为“革新性”来表示它所具有的某一特性更为通顺。

三是反译法。

原文中，句⑤表达的是肯定意思，“需要一个健全的大脑来忍受这种食物”，当然，按照这样的语序来翻译也是可以的，但译者将其翻译为“若无健全的大脑，书籍的大餐人们也将无福消受”，以双重否定表肯定，虽然意思表达都一样，但不得不说后者的意境要更高。

四是名词抽象化。

句⑥中”Gowns”意指表学位服，在此处抽象表达“学位”的含义。

中文表达里也常常用到抽象的表达，我们将其称为一种修辞手法，但在翻译英文原文时，也要注意名词的抽象化，当然有时是抽象名词的具体化。

翻译并不是一件简单的事，这篇译文在尊重原文所表达的含义的基础上，更多的是采用意译，整篇译文逻辑清晰，措辞严谨，确是一篇优秀的译文。