|
|
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
論《阿彌陀經》漢文異譯本的詞彙與篇章風格=On the Lexicon and Discourse Style of "the Smaller Sukhāvatī-vyūha" in Different Chinese Translations |
|
|
|
| 著者 |
高婉瑜 (著)=Kao, Wan-yu (au.)
|
|---|
| 掲載誌 |
淡江中文學報=Tamkang Journal of Chinese Literature
|
|---|
| 巻号 | n.21 |
|---|
| 出版年月日 | 2009.12.01 |
|---|
| ページ | 89 - 118 |
|---|
| 出版者 | 淡江大學中文系 |
|---|
| 出版地 | 臺北縣, 臺灣 [Taipei hsien, Taiwan] |
|---|
| 資料の種類 | 期刊論文=Journal Article |
|---|
| 言語 | 中文=Chinese |
|---|
| ノート | 高婉瑜，淡江大學中國文學學系助理教授。
|
|---|
| キーワード | 《阿彌陀經》="The smaller Sukh vat -vy ha" ("The Amitabha Sutra"); 同經異譯=the same sutra with two different Chinese translations; 語言風格= language style; 鳩摩羅什=Kumarajiva; 玄奘=Xuanzang |
|---|
| 抄録 | 《阿彌陀經》是淨土三經之一，通行本為鳩摩羅什所譯，另有異譯本，為玄奘所譯。在中國的佛經翻譯史上，鳩摩羅什代表了舊譯（第二階段），玄奘代表新譯（第三階段），本文利用比較法，試圖透過同經異譯的對比，進一步瞭解兩位譯經家的譯經風格。
本文認為不宜簡單地以對立的評語評定譯經，如一般所謂「鳩摩羅什採意譯，玄奘採直譯」。因為從詞彙語篇章來看，某些名詞鳩摩羅什採意譯，玄奘採音譯，有時剛好相反。雖然玄奘提出「五不翻」，但實際操作時沒有嚴格遵守「五不翻」，例如同樣是名號，羅漢名、菩薩名與佛名的翻譯方法並不一致。在篇章和通順度方面，鳩摩羅什譯本雖然簡潔，仍有費解之處，反觀玄奘的翻譯卻比較流暢。
"T he smaller Sukh vat -vy ha" ("The Amitabha Sutra") is one of the three sutras of Pure Land Buddhism. This sutra had two different Chinese translations, one by Kum raj va and one by Xuanzhuang, with Kum raj va's translation being the more popular of the two. In the history of the translations of Chinese Buddhist scriptures, Kum raj va is a second-stage translation representative, and Xuanzhuang is a third-stage translation representative. In comparing these two translations of the same sutra, we are able to understand the styles of the two translators.
The opinion put forth in this paper is that we should not criticize translations of Buddhist Scriptures in a simplistic and contrastive way, for example saying, "Kum raj va's interpretation is a free translation, and Xuanzang's is a literal translation." This paper has actually discovered that some nouns are based on free translation in Kum raj va's translation, and the same nouns were transliterated in Xuanzang's version, and sometimes the reverse is true. Although Xuanzang advocated "Five Untranslatables," that is, five instances where one should transliterate, his translation did not strictly comply with these five rules, for instance the names of Ahrats, Bodhisattvas, and Buddha were not translated consistently. Although Kum raj va's translation is fluent, there are some areas that are difficult to understand, whereas Xuanzang's translation is more fluent and easier to understand. |
|---|
| 目次 | 提要 89
一、問題脈絡 90
二、考察對象 92
三、詞彙分析 94
(一)經名 94
(二)與會羅漢與菩薩 95
(三)佛名 97
(四)七寶 102
(五)經行與遊天住 103
(六)具玄奘特色的翻譯 104
四、篇章分析 107
(一)譯經特色 107
(二)底本問題 109
(三)有語病的翻譯 112
五、結語 114
主要參考及引用書目 115
一、古代典籍 115
二、現代中西論著專書 115
三、單篇論文 116
Abstract 117
|
|---|
| ISSN | 18197469 (P) |
|---|
| DOI | 10.6187/tkujcl.200912.21-3 |
|---|
| ヒット数 | 92 |
|---|
| 作成日 | 2022.10.24 |
|---|
| 更新日期 | 2022.10.24 |
|---|
 |
Chrome, Firefox, Safari(Mac)での検索をお勧めします。ＩＥではこの検索システムを表示できません。
|
|
|
