{"title":"Soseki and Western Modernism","authors":"F. Jameson","doi":"10.2307/303206","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Analyzing translations-even in the era of the misreading (strong or otherwise)-can lead one into the comical situation in which it is the translator (in this case, V. H. Viglielmo) whom one is, in reality, comparing to Henry James, all the while imagining oneself to be thinking about Soseki. What has disappeared is not merely the resistance of the original language (its untranslatable sentence structure, or, the other way around, what it cannot, as one individual language among others, structurally do) but, above all, its historicity. Adorno is not the only one to have thought that the most immediate experience of history afforded by a literary work lies in the very texture of its language. But translations do not yield that sense of the passage of time any Japanese reader must feel on confronting a text written in 1916. Yet, whatever has become outmoded in Soseki's last, unfinished novel, Meian,1 is an index of its historical situation fully as much as those","PeriodicalId":155020,"journal":{"name":"Japan in the World","volume":"7 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"1991-01-23","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"9","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Japan in the World","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2307/303206","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 9
Abstract
Analyzing translations-even in the era of the misreading (strong or otherwise)-can lead one into the comical situation in which it is the translator (in this case, V. H. Viglielmo) whom one is, in reality, comparing to Henry James, all the while imagining oneself to be thinking about Soseki. What has disappeared is not merely the resistance of the original language (its untranslatable sentence structure, or, the other way around, what it cannot, as one individual language among others, structurally do) but, above all, its historicity. Adorno is not the only one to have thought that the most immediate experience of history afforded by a literary work lies in the very texture of its language. But translations do not yield that sense of the passage of time any Japanese reader must feel on confronting a text written in 1916. Yet, whatever has become outmoded in Soseki's last, unfinished novel, Meian,1 is an index of its historical situation fully as much as those
分析翻译——即使是在误读(或强或弱)的时代——会把一个人带入一种滑稽的境地,在这种情况下,实际上是译者(在这种情况下,V. H. Viglielmo)在与亨利·詹姆斯(Henry James)进行比较,同时一直想象自己在思考关。消失的不仅仅是原始语言的抵抗(它的不可翻译的句子结构,或者反过来说,它作为一种语言在其他语言中不能在结构上做到的事情),而且最重要的是,它的历史性。阿多诺并不是唯一一个认为文学作品提供的最直接的历史经验在于其语言的纹理的人。但是翻译并不能让任何日本读者在面对1916年写的一篇文章时感受到时间的流逝。然而,在关关最后一部未完成的小说《美,1》中,无论什么已经过时,它都是对其历史状况的充分反映