Scholarlink

The Daode jing or Laozi is the most translated work after the Bible. More than 800 versions into European languages have appeared, about half English. However, most are not “translations” but rewordings based directly or indirectly on earlier learned translations. These tend to be interpretive paraphrases by those who cannot read the original and thus often depart greatly from its literal meaning. These “scriptual” versions aim only at telling the reader what the text means to those who might use it today and are usually separated from its cultural and historical contexts. What passes for “translations” of the Laozi are based, by contrast, on a range of different “historical” approaches: (1) Scholarly translation, word for word, critically edited, arrived at with lingusitic and philological expertise and attention to literary, philosophical/religious, and historical contexts, aimed at recovering the original meaning and intent of the text. (2) Scholary translation with added explanatory material—usually a mixture of references (sometimes unacknowledged) to Chinese and/or Japanese commentaries and the translator’s own interpretations. (3) Yet another approach combines the first and second approaches and presents both an integral translation of an early Chinese commentary and a new translation of the classic text interpreted in light of and integrated with the commentary. Ideally, the text of the Daode jing and the commentary are thus fully integrated so that the interpretation of the one depends on interpretation of the other. As such, the two complement each other and are not at odds. Such a technique precludes independent presentation of the commentary: a translation of the commentary cannot be attached to some other translation of the Daode jing—it just would not fit. Western translations range from good to bad, from genuine authenticity to misleading paraphrase. The text obviously has a mysterious charm that inspires trained Sinologists and armchair Daoists alike to engage with it and render it in ever newer and hoped-for better words—a process for which there seems to be no end in sight.

错误：搜索内容不能为空，请输入英文关键词
错误：关键词超出字数限制，请精简
高级检索

Western Translations of the Daodejing

  • 章节

  • 发表日期：

    2026年

查看全文
  • Richard John Lynn

摘要

The Daode jing or Laozi is the most translated work after the Bible. More than 800 versions into European languages have appeared, about half English. However, most are not “translations” but rewordings based directly or indirectly on earlier learned translations. These tend to be interpretive paraphrases by those who cannot read the original and thus often depart greatly from its literal meaning. These “scriptual” versions aim only at telling the reader what the text means to those who might use it today and are usually separated from its cultural and historical contexts. What passes for “translations” of the Laozi are based, by contrast, on a range of different “historical” approaches: (1) Scholarly translation, word for word, critically edited, arrived at with lingusitic and philological expertise and attention to literary, philosophical/religious, and historical contexts, aimed at recovering the original meaning and intent of the text. (2) Scholary translation with added explanatory material—usually a mixture of references (sometimes unacknowledged) to Chinese and/or Japanese commentaries and the translator’s own interpretations. (3) Yet another approach combines the first and second approaches and presents both an integral translation of an early Chinese commentary and a new translation of the classic text interpreted in light of and integrated with the commentary. Ideally, the text of the Daode jing and the commentary are thus fully integrated so that the interpretation of the one depends on interpretation of the other. As such, the two complement each other and are not at odds. Such a technique precludes independent presentation of the commentary: a translation of the commentary cannot be attached to some other translation of the Daode jing—it just would not fit. Western translations range from good to bad, from genuine authenticity to misleading paraphrase. The text obviously has a mysterious charm that inspires trained Sinologists and armchair Daoists alike to engage with it and render it in ever newer and hoped-for better words—a process for which there seems to be no end in sight.