- 學位論文
作者之為譯者－以譚恩美的作品為例
Author as Translator: On the Study of Amy Tan's Works
摘要
只要一談到翻譯，多數人便以為翻譯必定牽涉語言的轉換，但是忽略了翻譯有時候隱身於「非翻譯」的表面底下。事實上，作者寫作的時候，可能依賴翻譯去完成他／她的「原作」。表面上名為「原作」，但表面下卻隱藏著翻譯。縱然翻譯的過程並不可見於檯面，卻不代表翻譯不曾存在。因此，是時候重新定義翻譯與原作了。 本論文以華裔美國文學作家：譚恩美的作品為例子，從翻譯的角度去探討。雖然她被貼上「作者」的標籤，作品中的翻譯可證明她也是譯者，除此之外，還是一名富有創造性的譯者，她的作品中隱含其對中國文化的翻譯。在翻譯過程中，譚恩美使目標讀者感受異於美國主流文化的另一個文化，顯現譚恩美譯者的身分現身於翻譯中。此外，譚恩美是作者也是譯者，但是她受到時空上的限制。因此她在作品中重寫與改編中國文化，使目標讀者可以理解中國文化，同時也打破目標讀者對於中國文化的想像。 譚恩美的作品並不符合傳統翻譯研究上對翻譯的定義：忠於原文、牽涉語言轉換，或是必有兩個獨立文本。本論文認為她的創作並非傳統歸類的「原作」，而是翻譯。因此藉由譚恩美的例子可知翻譯的定義必須擴大。加上原作與翻譯的界線很難分得清楚，所謂的第一手資料可能已不再是「原作」。如果原作的概念可以被解構，翻譯就不該被視為背叛原作、位居次等地位。原作與翻譯的關係、作者與譯者之間的關係也不再處於穩定的狀態。
並列摘要
When dealing with translation, most people would consider language transfer as translation. However, most of them neglected that translation sometimes is hidden as non-translation. It is indeed when an author writes, he/she may rely on translation to complete the “original”. It is “original” on the surface, but under the surface, there lies translation. Though the process cannot be seen, it does not mean translation never exists. Thus, it is time to redefine the predestined definition of translation and original. The thesis will take literary works of a well-known Asian American writer, Amy Tan, as examples to shed light on the translation interface. Though she was labelled as author, the translations in her works could prove that she was a translator who exerted creativity in translations. Under this underlying translation process, Amy Tan made herself “visible”, and enabled the target readers to feel something different from their culture. Amy Tan, as an author as well as a translator, is constrained by the time and space, which results in rewriting and adaptation of her texts. Tan’s translations were not what traditional translation studies used to define: an equivalence to original source, a negotiation between languages and as two separate products. The thesis argues that her creative writing are not what traditionally used to categorize as “original”, but as translation. In this sense, the definition of translation needs to be broadened. The distinction between original and translation is hard to make clear, and what one considers as a first hand source may not be original at all. As a result, if the concept of original is deconstructed, why should translation be seen as a secondary product? The relationship between original and translation, between author and translator, and the idea of translation will be no longer stable.