由晚明以降西學術語 “logic” 之華譯變遷管窺 “logic” 華譯格式之建構

Abstract

自晚明以降，西學術語 “logic” 便東傳中國，由此開啟了對舶來的 “logic” 一詞的華譯變遷歷程。從晚明至晚清，先後出現了 “logic” 從音譯到意譯的演變。不過，它們在當時或者影響甚微，難以普及與推廣；或者產生了一定的影響力，但持續時間不長。而甲午前後日人創制的譯名「論(ろん)理(り)」與「論(ろん)理(り)学(がく)」因其是音譯和意譯的巧妙結合，加之近代中國學者崇日、仿日、求便等錯綜複雜的心理，便全盤挪用了該譯名的字形與中文漢字發音，於是使譯名「論(lùn)理(lǐ)」與「論(lùn)理(lǐ)學(xué)」在近代中國大行其道，並對近代中國學者產生了廣泛影響。然而，當國人自己創制出新華譯名「邏輯」之後，便獲得了近代中國學界更大程度的認同，進而使得「邏輯」這一新華譯名獲得了更大的普及與推廣。也正因為如此，曾流行一時的譯名「論理」與「論理學」日趨冷落，最終「邏輯」與「邏輯學」成為了 “logic” 的華譯定名。據此，可建構出 “logic” 華譯格式——由三類譯者與三種譯法組合而成九項格式。通過分析此格式，能夠破解「顧有信之惑」，得出 “logic” 之華譯定名「邏輯」與「邏輯學」在九項格式中突破了其餘八項格式，從而很好地秉持了最優華譯格式——中國本土人合譯之格式。

The Western term “logic” was introduced eastward to China since the late Ming Dynasty, which started the process of Chinese translation change of the foreign word “logic”. From the late Ming Dynasty to the late Qing, the evolution of “logic” from the transliteration to the paraphrases was successively appeared. However, they either had little effect to the popularization and generalization, or generated a certain influence but not long at that time, while the translated names “lunli” and “lunlixue” in Chinese, of which the character patterns were wholesale taken from the translated names “ronri” and “ronri gaku” in Japanese created by Japanese scholars, as well as the pronunciations from Chinese characters, were popularized and had a widespread influence on modern Chinese scholars in modern China before and after the Sino-Japanese War of 1894-1895 due to the ingenious integration of transliteration and paraphrasis of “ronri” and “ronri gaku”, together with modern Chinese scholars’ complex mentality of the worship and imitation of Japan, as well as the pursuit of convenience. However, the Chinese created a new translated name “luoji” in Chinese all by themselves, after which it obtained a greater degree of identity, popularization and generalization in modern Chinese academia. For this reason, the translated names “lunli” and “lunlixue”, derived from Japan in shape and fashionable at one time during modern China, were gradually abandoned, while in the end, “luoji” and “luojixue” in Chinese became the definitely determined name in Chinese translation. According to this, a translative format of Western term “logic” in Chinese can be constructed by nine translation formats composed by three kinds of translators (Westerners, Japanese and Chinese) and that of translation methods (methods of transliteration, paraphrases and the synthetic method), which can answer Germany Sinologue Joachim Kurtz’s confusion and lead to advocate a optimal format of Chinese translation of Western term “logic”.