为《译文》溯源——从茅盾的《译文·发刊词》说起 = A study on Mao Dun’s "Editor’s Opening Statement" for translation magazine

• Main Author: 崔峰 Cui Feng
• Other Authors: School of Humanities and Social Sciences
• Format: Article
• Language: Chinese
• Published: 2017
• Subjects: Translation Magazine; Origin; 起源; 《译文》
• Online Access: https://hdl.handle.net/10356/83173; http://hdl.handle.net/10220/42464; http://gb.oversea.cnki.net/kcms/detail/detail.aspx?recid=&FileName=ZBJW200904013&DbName=CJFD2009&DbCode=CJFD
• Institution: Nanyang Technological University

1930 年代鲁迅主编的《译文》是中国翻译文学史上第一份专门译介外国文学的期刊，1950 年代茅盾主编的《译文》是中华人民共和国成立之后的“十七年”间唯一一份公开发行的专门译介外国文学的期刊。作为这两份杂志创立和编排的重要参与者，茅盾在为 50 年代《译文》写的《发刊词》中不仅介绍了 30 年代《译文》的创刊背景和方针，也指出新《译文》要“纪念鲁迅先生当年艰苦创办的‘译文’并继承其精神”，但显然又与鲁迅写于 30 年代的《译文·前记》所介绍的办刊方针背道而驰。茅盾为何要在《发刊词》中以三分之一篇章提及老《译文》？他是如何为新《译文》追溯起源的？要“继承”的究竟是老《译文》怎样的“精神”？如何解决两位主编在办刊方针上的“矛盾”之处？本文将通过具体史料，结合相关时代背景，并联系茅盾和鲁迅的翻译观念和实践，探寻茅盾为《译文》的溯源方式。The Translation Magazine edited by Lu Xun in 1930s was the magazine wholly devoted to translation of foreign literature in Chinese history of translated literature. The Translation Magazine edited by Mao Dun in 1950s was the magazine wholly devoted to translation of foreign literature during 17 years after the foundation of People’s Republic of China. In his “Editor’s Opening Statement” for Translation Magazine in 1950s, Mao Dun introduced the background and guidelines of the Translation Magazine in 1930s and insisted that the new Translation Magazine should “carry on the Translation Magazine created by Lun Xun in difficulties and his spirit”. Nevertheless, Mao Dun’s guideline for magazine is quite different from that of Lun Xun embodied in the “Preface to Translation Magazine” in 1930s. Why does Mao Dun devote one third of the “Opening Statement” to the old Translation Magazine? How can we understand the “conflict” between the two editors’ standpoints on the guidelines for magazine? The paper intends to study Mao Dun’s treatment of old Translation Magazine by taking into consideration historical background and translation ideal and practice of both Mao Dun and Lu Xun.