On Translating Chinese Philosophic Terms
Bibliographic Data
| ID | 4519214 |
|---|---|
| Authors | Derk Bodde (University of Pennsylvania, corresponding author) |
| Year | 1955 |
| Volume | 14 |
| Issue | 2 |
| Pages | 231 |
| Publication date | 1955-02-01 |
| Open Access | No |
| Type | ARTICLE |
| Venue | The Far Eastern Quarterly (JOURNAL) |
| Journal identifiers | ISSN: 0363-6917 • E-ISSN: 2326-3067 |
| Publisher | JSTOR (PUBLISHER) |
| DOI | 10.2307/2941733 |
| OpenAlex | W2113669271 |
| Language | EN |
| References cited | 4 |
The perennially fascinating problem of translating Chinese into Western languages (or vice versa) has evoked considerable discussion in recent years. My excuse for adding to it here is that Professor Boodberg, in his review (see foregoing note) of my translation of Fung Yu-lan's History of Chinese Philosophy, has raised questions which, while addressed specifically to my rendering of certain Chinese philosophic terms, at the same time bear importantly on the larger problems of Chinese translation as a whole. In the following pages, therefore, I shall begin by commenting—I trust in a spirit of friendly discussion—on what Professor Boodberg has said about these terms (indicating in parentheses for each of them the English equivalents used by me in my translation, the two volumes of which will hereafter be cited as Fung 1 and 2). Then, using some of these as illustrations, I shall comment on the theories of translation presented by Professor Boodberg in his own article on “semasiology,” as well as that by Professor Schafer on “two sinological maladies” (both cited in note 1 above). And having done this, I shall finally try to formulate a few general conclusions of my own
| Highly cited | No |
|---|