This study takes as a point of departure a Chinese translation from one single chapter of Nietzsches work Beyond Good and Evil (1886) prepared in 1925. It focuses on the controversy that soon broke out and resulted in...This study takes as a point of departure a Chinese translation from one single chapter of Nietzsches work Beyond Good and Evil (1886) prepared in 1925. It focuses on the controversy that soon broke out and resulted in not less than four different versions of one single Nietzsche aphorism published within one year. Closer scrutiny reveals that the yet unnoticed controversy may be seen as an indicator of a sociological shift in translation work, marked by the move to a paradigm of first-hand mediation. Briefly tracing the channel via Japanese and/or English intermediary sources, then well-established for some three decades, it concludes that despite contrary, claim in contemporary discussions, conceptual and thus misreadings presented transcultural obstacles rather than linguistic obstacles. It therefore opts for reading translations as sources for the intellectual landscape in the target audience in a given historical moment, hitherto considered deficient.展开更多
文摘This study takes as a point of departure a Chinese translation from one single chapter of Nietzsches work Beyond Good and Evil (1886) prepared in 1925. It focuses on the controversy that soon broke out and resulted in not less than four different versions of one single Nietzsche aphorism published within one year. Closer scrutiny reveals that the yet unnoticed controversy may be seen as an indicator of a sociological shift in translation work, marked by the move to a paradigm of first-hand mediation. Briefly tracing the channel via Japanese and/or English intermediary sources, then well-established for some three decades, it concludes that despite contrary, claim in contemporary discussions, conceptual and thus misreadings presented transcultural obstacles rather than linguistic obstacles. It therefore opts for reading translations as sources for the intellectual landscape in the target audience in a given historical moment, hitherto considered deficient.
