中国士大夫与民本思想.doc

原文：中国的士大夫与民本思想译文：Chinese Scholar-officials and Populist Ideas改译：Scholar-officials and people-based thought in China说明：Populism 与孟子提出的“民本思想”没有太大的交集。Populism 指： 一种政治理念，中文译为“平民主义”或者“民粹主义”，特指 1892 年在美国成立的一个政党，它宣称代表人民整体，主要政策包括国家控制铁路、限制私人拥有土地、自由铸造银币； 还指 20 世纪二三十年代法国兴起的一个小说作家团体，他们重视观察普通人，同情普通人； 作为普通政治词汇，它指试图代表或者诉诸于普通人的意见。这一政治理念只是“看起来很美”，善良的人千万不要被蒙蔽。它貌似跟孟子的“民本”差不多，但事实并非如此。这一理念的前提是“普通人在任何情况下 都是对的”，“只要普通人高兴就行”。因此，这是很个大的政治范畴，秉持这一理念的政党和个人可以做出从好事到坏事的任何事情。从不好的方面来说： 红色革命时代的俄罗斯，民粹主义者为了自己的理想可以搞恐怖活动； 南美洲的民粹主义领导人“贿赂”人民，“有钱就吃光喝光”，只考虑眼前，不解决问题，不考虑国家未来，没有长远的发展战略（阿根廷、委内瑞拉等南美多个国家曾有机会跻身发达国家行列，但都错失良机）； 台湾岛上也徘徊着民粹幽灵，在经济发展和生活质量方面不知不觉地已经亚洲其他“小龙”甩在后面； 泰国的民粹们，对政府稍有不满就要求上街游行，围攻政府，制造社会混乱，视宪法和法律为无物。这些“迎合”普通民众的民粹做法对广大民众未必是好事，而“以民为本”的精髓是在当前生活和未来发展之间找到最好的平衡点，而不能过分偏向某一边，从而在根本上维护广大人民的利益。原文：翻开历史我们会看到，中国历史上充满了残酷的压迫、剥削、残杀，但是欧洲也一样。我们没有公民概念，但是有所谓民本思想。人民生活的保障，不是通过伸张权利，而是通过例如官员和士人为民请命诸如此类。译文：A glimpse of Chinese history offers, like that of Western history, a daunting array of poignant persecution, demeaning exploitation and brutal killings. Unlike the Western world, we have no concept of citizenship. Instead, we hold populist ideas. The improvement of peoples life stems not from legal justice, but from pleading by scholar-officials and officials to top-rank officials or emperors on behalf of the general public.改译：In examining history, we can see that China has a past full of cruel oppressions, exploitations and killings, just as Europe does. In ancient China, there was no such concept as “citizenship”, just min ben si xiang (“people-based thought”). The life of the people was safeguarded not by their asserting the rights, but by officials and scholars pleading for it on behalf of the people.“说明：1. 这里用 glimpse 会有一个逻辑问题，“简单一看”就能看到这么多内容，谁能做到？2. poignant、demeaning 这两个词用的真有点让人觉得不明觉厉，我没见过，也想象不到这两个词可以这样跟后面的词搭配。 Poignant 是“对情感和感觉造成痛苦”，压迫确实也能造成这种痛苦，但远不止此。 Demeaning 是让人“有失身份”，剥削如何有失身份了呢？3. legal justice：如果伸张权利通过“法律正义”来实现，还要欧洲一场接一场的革命干什么？原文哪里说“法律正义”了？4. 译文“无中生有”的地方较多，横生枝节，又无法自圆其说，这个是译文方向性的问题。5. 时态问题：原文讲的是中国古代的情况，理应用过去时描述。原文：民本思想和中国独特的政治结构有关系。简短地说，这个政治结构就是，中国有士和士大夫的阶级。士不像贵族或草莽英雄，由于血统或英雄气概获得 权力，他们的长处是受过教育、富有理性。他们本身不是权力的来源，而只是皇帝的办事员。士大夫之所以要服从于皇帝，是因为需要皇帝的权力，皇帝赋予他权力 才能保证民本的实现。所以，他们劝谏皇帝，上疏、进谏，有时候是不要命的。在很大程度上，民本思想是因士大夫阶层的存在而存在的。而西方更多的是通过每一 个公民自己以及公民社会进行权利上的斗争来保障自己的利益。虽然今天的中国跟传统上的中国相比已经面目全非了，但这一特点仍然依稀可见，在中国人的政治心 理上仍然相当明显。译文：Populist ideas are related to the distinctive political fiber of China which, if put briefly, is characterized by the stratum of scholar-officials. Unlike greenwood outlaws and the noble clan, who gain power by blood or by heroic spirit, scholar-officials are cultivated and sensible in human dealings. They are no source of power, but run errands for Emperors with utter obedience, which arises from the need for royal authority to materialize populist ideas. Scholar-officials resort to persuasion and suggestion, sometimes even at the risk of their own lives. To a large extent, populist ideas exist due to scholar-officials. Westerners safeguard their own interests by fighting for rights as an individual or a civil society. Though Chinas present differs vastly from its past, the association of scholar-officials with populist ideas remains a salient feature in the political psyche of Chinese people.改译：The people-based thought was closely related to Chinas unique political structure, which, if put simply, was unique in the sense that it had a class of scholars and scholar-officials. Unlike the nobility who inherited power or rebels who gained it by heroic valor, they distinguished themselves by their good education and sound senses. They themselves were not the source of power, but only executed orders from the Emperor. Their obedience to the Emperor was out of their need for imperial aegis to achieve the goals of the people-based thought. They admonished or submitted memorials to the Emperor, sometimes risking their necks. The existence of the people-based thought was largely attributable to that of scholar-officials as a class. In contrast, the interests of the people in the West was protected more by the fight for rights by individual citizens severally and civil society as a whole. Today, the people-based thought features prominently in the political mindset of the Chinese people, though China is no longer the same as it was in the old days.说明：“这一特点”指代不明。上一句说的是西方的公民和公民社会通过斗争保障自己的权利，显然指的不是这个。那么就接着往前找： 民本思想的存在是因为士大夫阶层存在； 士大夫劝诫皇帝； 士大夫需要皇帝的支持； 士大夫本人没有权力，只是为皇帝办事； 士大夫受教育良好，思考理性； 中国有民本思想是因为中国政治体制里面有士大夫。这一段都看完了，也没看出“这一特点”到底是什么特点，只好找回到本篇的标题“中国的士大夫与民本思想”，可还是感觉“不大像”。另外，一个东西既 “依稀可见”（看不太清楚）又“相当明显”，那它到底能不能看清？他想说的也许就是：在当代中国的政治体制下，人民的权利 还是“皇帝”施舍的，得不到有效保障，人民没机会、没能力、没胆量发声，仍然要靠明君、青天大老爷、拦轿喊冤的办法维护自己的权利，而不是按现代文明社会 （其实就是西方社会）的民主自由、法律法规、公平正义办事。说明：1. greenwood outlaws：原文说的“草莽英雄”可不是一般的英雄，而是获得了权力的英雄，即远如刘邦近如宋江等先“落草为寇”后“坐龙庭”或成为“朝廷命官”的一 干人，远不是罗宾汉或者佐罗那种西方传说中的平民侠客。其实，greenwood outlaws 跟金庸笔下的侠客才是一类人。把“绿林好汉”翻译成“greenwood outlaws”后，读者就不知道其实中国的 greenwood outlaws 后来是飞黄腾达了的。2. human dealings：human 这个词用得比较奇怪，难道全篇哪里谈到“非人类”“动物界”、“神界”的问题了吗？Human 用词又是一个横生枝节又不能自圆其说的例子。在这个哲学世界里，有“公民社会”就有“主子与奴才社会”，没有“丑”就无所谓“美”，一切概念都在相对、相 互有关系的网络里才有意义。一个词的含义和多义词含义的确定都是通过放在相互关联的网络里才能实现的。比如，“民”这个字就至少有与政府和官办对应的 “民”、与军人、军事对应的“民”两个含义。翻译成英语时，就必须要搞清“民”到底与哪个对应：民防（civil defense）、民间交流（如果是相对于政府的）（non-government exchanges）、民间交流（如果是相对于军队的）（non-military exchanges）、民政（civil affairs）、民用设施（军事打击目标）（civilian facilities）、民办学校（privately run schools）、民间资本（private capital）。原文：无论从社会身份上说，还是从思想内容上说，中国的士人都不大像西方的自由知识分子。他们在学问上、知识上，首先有的是政治关怀。他们的研究、 思考方式始终都是高度的政治化、社会化或者伦理化的。对于中国读书人来说，很难设想他会去从事纯粹智性的追求，而和政治伦理无关。任何知识上的追求都是要 跟“齐家、治国、平天下”连在一起，否则大家会觉得他太古怪，几乎要把他当成一个异类。译文：Socially or ideologically, scholar-officials in China bear little resemblance to liberal intellectuals in the West. Political concern permeates their pursuit of knowledge. The political, social and ethical tint in their research or thinking is marked. Its hard for an intellect in China to pursue purely intellectual knowledge. Any knowledge should be pursued in connection to the management of a family and the government of a country, and the failure to do so will be deemed weird and unacceptable.改译：The social roles and thoughts of the scholars in ancient China made them in every possible way different from the liberal intellectuals in the West. The Chinese scholars gave priority to political concerns over other considerations in their learning and knowledge. The ways in which they pursued intellectual aims and were engaged in thinking were highly political, social and ethical. It is thus very difficult to imagine a Chinese scholar who was only interested in purely intellectual pursuits that were not relevant to political ethics. For them, all the pursuits were linked with regulating the family (qi jia), managing the local region (zhi guo), or governing the country in a fair and orderly way (ping tian xia). If not, they would seem very strange an