“CATTI杯”第二十七届韩素音青年翻译奖竞赛-英译汉

“CATTI杯”第二十七届韩素音青年翻译奖竞赛-英译汉
“CATTI杯”第二十七届韩素音青年翻译奖竞赛-英译汉

英译汉竞赛原文:

The Posteverything Generation

I never expected to gain any new insight into the nature of my generation, or the changing landscape of American colleges, in Lit Theory. Lit Theory is supposed to be the class where you sit at the back of the room with every other jaded sophomore wearing skinny jeans, thick-framed glasses, an ironic tee-shirt and over-sized retro headphones, just waiting for lecture to be over so you can light up a Turkish Gold and walk to lunch while listening to Wilco. That’s pretty much the way I spent the course, too: through structuralism, formalism, gender theory, and post-colonialism, I was far too busy shuffling through my Ipod to see what the patriarchal world order of capitalist oppression had to do with Ethan Frome. But when we began to study postmodernism, something struck a chord with me and made me sit up and look anew at the seemingly blasécollege-aged literati of which I was so self-consciously one.

According to my textbook, the problem with defining postmodernism is that it’s impossible. The difficulty is that it is so...post. It defines itself so negatively against what came before it – naturalism, romanticism and the wild revolution of modernism – that it’s sometimes hard to see what it actually is. It denies that anything can be explained neatly or even at all. It is parodic, detached, strange, and sometimes menacing to traditionalists who do not understand it. Although it arose in the post-war west (the term was coined in 1949), the generation that has witnessed its ascendance has yet to come up with an explanation of what postmodern attitudes mean for the future of culture or society. The subject intrigued me because, in a class otherwise consumed by dead-letter theories, postmodernism remained an open book, tempting to the young and curious. But it also intrigued me because the question of what postmodernism –what a movement so post-everything, so reticent to define itself – is spoke to a larger question about the political and popular culture of today, of the other jaded sophomores sitting around me who had grown up in a postmodern world.

In many ways, as a college-aged generation, we are also extremely post: post-Cold War, post-industrial, post-baby boom, post-9/11...at one point in his famous essay, “Postmodernism, or the Cultural Logic of Late Capitalism,”literary critic Frederic Jameson even calls us “post-literate.”We are a generation that is riding on the tail-end of a century of war and revolution

that toppled civilizations, overturned repressive social orders, and left us with more privilege and opportunity than any other society in history. Ours could be an era to accomplish anything.

And yet do we take to the streets and the airwaves and say “here we are, and this is what we demand”? Do we plant our flag of youthful rebellion on the mall in Washington and say “we are not leaving until we see change! Our eyes have been opened by our education and our conception of what is possible has been expanded by our privilege and we demand a better world because it is our right”? It would seem we do the opposite. We go to war without so much as questioning the rationale, we sign away our civil liberties, we say nothing when the Supreme Court uses Brown v. Board of Education to outlaw desegregation, and we sit back to watch the carnage on the evening news.

On campus, we sign petitions, join organizations, put our names on mailing lists, make small-money contributions, volunteer a spare hour to tutor, and sport an entire wardrobe’s worth of Live Strong bracelets advertising our moderately priced opposition to everything from breast cancer to global warming. But what do we really stand for? Like a true postmodern generation we refuse to weave together an overarching narrative to our own political consciousness, to present a cast of inspirational or revolutionary characters on our public stage, or to define a specific philosophy. We are a story seemingly without direction or theme, structure or meaning – a generation defined negatively against what came before us. When Al Gore once said “It’s the combination of narcissism and nihilism that really defines postmodernism,” he might as well have been echoing his entire generation’s critique of our own. We are a generation for whom even revolution seems trite, and therefore as fair a target for bland imitation as anything else. We are the generation of the Che Geuvera tee-shirt.

Jameson calls it “Pastiche”–“the wearing of a linguistic mask, speech in a dead language.” In literature, this means an author speaking in a style that is not his own – borrowing a voice and continuing to use it until the words lose all meaning and the chaos that is real life sets in. It is an imitation of an imitation, something that has been re-envisioned so many times the original model is no longer relevant or recognizable. It is mass-produced individualism, anticipated revolution. It is why postmodernism lacks cohesion, why it seems to lack purpose or direction. For us, the post-everything generation, pastiche is the use and reuse of the old clichés of social change

and moral outrage – a perfunctory rebelliousness that has culminated in the age of rapidly multiplying non-profits and relief funds. We live our lives in masks and speak our minds in a dead language – the language of a society that expects us to agitate because that’s what young people do. But how do we rebel against a generation that is expecting, anticipating, nostalgic for revolution?

How do we rebel against parents that sometimes seem to want revolution more than we do? We don’t. We rebel by not rebelling. We wear the defunct masks of protest and moral outrage, but the real energy in campus activism is on the internet, with websites like https://www.360docs.net/doc/2a10511605.html,. It is in the rapidly developing ability to communicate ideas and frustration in chatrooms instead of on the streets, and channel them into nationwide projects striving earnestly for moderate and peaceful change: we are the generation of Students Taking Action Now Darfur; we are the Rock the Vote generation; the generation of letter-writing campaigns and public interest lobbies; the alternative energy generation.

College as America once knew it –as an incubator of radical social change –is coming to an end. To our generation the word “radicalism”evokes images of al Qaeda, not the Weathermen. “Campus takeover” sounds more like Virginia Tech in 2007 than Columbia University in 1968. Such phrases are a dead language to us. They are vocabulary from another era that does not reflect the realities of today. However, the technological revolution, the https://www.360docs.net/doc/2a10511605.html, revolution, the revolution of the organization kid, is just as real and just as profound as the revolution of the 1960’s – it is just not as visible. It is a work in progress, but it is there. Perhaps when our parents finally stop pointing out the things that we are not, the stories that we do not write, they will see the threads of our narrative begin to come together; they will see that behind our pastiche, the post generation speaks in a language that does make sense. We are writing a revolution. We are just putting it in our own words.

韩素音青年翻译奖

On Irritability Irritability is the tendency to get upset for reasons that seem – to other people – to be pretty minor. Your partner asks you how work went and the way they ask makes you feel intensely agitated. Your partner is putting knives and forks on the table before dinner and you mention (not for the first time) that the fork should go on the left hand side, not the right. They then immediately let out a huge sigh and sweep the cutlery onto the floor and tell you that you can xxxx-ing do it yourself if you know better. It was the most minor of criticisms and technically quite correct. And now they’ve exploded. There is so much irritability around and it exacts a huge daily cost on our collective lives, so we deserve to get a lot more curious about it: what is really going on for the irritable person? Why, really, are they getting so agitated? And instead of blaming them for getting het up about “little things”, we should do them the honour of working out why, in fact, these things may not be so minor after all. The journey begins by recognising the role of fear in irritability in couples. Behind most outbursts are cack-handed attempts to teach the other person something. There are things we’d like to point out, flaws that we can discern, remarks w e feel we really must make, but our awareness of how to proceed is panicked and hasty. We give cack-handed, mean speeches, which bear no faith in the legitimacy (even the nobility) of the act of imparting advice. And when our partners are on the receiving end of these irritable “lessons”, they of course swiftly grow defensive and brittle in the face of suggestions which seem more like mean-minded and senseless assaults on their very natures rather than caring, gentle attempts to address troublesome aspects of joint life. The prerequisite of calm in a teacher is a degree of indifference as to the success or failure of the lesson. One naturally wants for things to go well, but if an obdurate pupil flunks trigonometry, it is – at base – their problem. Tempers can stay even because individual students do not have very much power over teachers’ lives. Fortunately, as not caring too much turns out to be a critical aspect of successful pedagogy. Yet this isn’t an option open to the fearful, irritable lover. They feel ineluctably led to deliver their “lessons” in a cataclysmic, frenzied manner (the door slams very loudly indeed) not because they are insane or vile (though one could easily draw these

韩素音翻译大赛原文

Irritability is the tendency to get upset for reasons that seem – to other people – to be pretty minor. Your partner asks you how work went and the way they ask makes you feel intensely agitated. Your partner is putting knives and forks on the table before dinner and you mention (not for the first time) that the fork should go on the left hand side, not the right. They then immediately let out a huge sigh and sweep the cutlery onto the floor and tell you that you can xxxx-ing do it yourself if you know better. It was the most minor of criticisms and technically quite correct. And now they’ve exploded. There is so much irritability around and it exacts a huge daily cost on our collective lives, so we deserve to get a lot more curious about it: what is really going on for the irritable person? Why, really, are they getting so agitated? And instead of blaming them for getting het up about “little things”, we should do them the honour of working out why, in fact, these things may not be so minor after all.

短文翻译答案版

英译汉短文翻译 1. Job security is extremely hard to come by these days, no matter what profession you choose. It isn't enough to pursue a field with perceived stability, say the experts. You'll want to find something you feel passionate about, can make a living doing and that involves using skills you can easily apply to other fields. 在当前的经济形势下,无论你从事何种职业,就业稳定都很难找到稳定的就业机会。专家们表示,光是追求预计能够带来稳定就业的领域是不够的。你希望追求的方向应该是你所热爱的、能够借以维持生计的职业,并且能够运用到一些你可以轻松转换到其它领域的技能。 2. Love plays a pivotal role on out life. Love makes you feel wanted. Without love a person could go hayward and also become cruel and ferocious. In the early stage of our life, our parents are the ones who shower us with unconditional love and care, they teach us about what is right and wrong, good and bad. But we always tend to take this for granted. It is only after marriage and having kids that a person understands and becomes sensitive to others feelings. Kids make a person responsible and mature and help us to understand life better. 爱在生活之外扮演了一个关键的角色。爱使你想要得到些什么。没有爱,一个人将走向不归路,变得凶暴、残忍。在我们最初的人生道路上,我们的父母给予了我们无条件的关爱,他们教会我们判断正确与错误、好与坏。然而我们常常把这想当然了,只有等到我们结了婚并且有了孩子之后,一个人才会懂得并注意别人的感受。孩子让我们变得富有责任心、变得成熟稳重,并且更好的理解人生 3. When companies have different employees on the same job and one of them is paid differently, many unfairness issues surface. "It can happen in any 'open shop' that differentiates pay for any reason (seniority, performance, etc.)," says Dauphinais. You could run the risk of alienating valued colleagues if they learn you earn more for what they perceive to be the same job. 公司雇佣不同的人员从事同一岗位的工作时,如果其中有个人的薪资不同时,很多不公平的问题就会浮出水面。Dauphinais 说:“这种情况在任何开放行业都有可能发生,因为不同的原因(资历,表现等)员工的薪酬不同”。如果你让同事知道你们在做相同的工作,而你的工资比他们高,那么你就可能会被你很重视的同事疏远。 4. Spouses are a bigger source of stress than bosses, research shows. There may be no place like home, but if you want to relax then you might be better off at work, according to the survey.

韩素音青年翻译奖赛20

第二十届韩素音青年翻译奖竞赛参赛原文 1楼2008-05-14 15:00回复查看(800) 回复(2) 1楼 cathyhello cathy 积分2008等级6入室弟子 英译汉部分:Philosophy vs. Emerson (Excerpt)“HE is,” said Matthew Arnold of Emerson, “the friend and aider of those who would live in the spirit.” These well-known words are perhaps the best expression of the somewhat vague yet powerful and inspiring effect of Emerson,s courageous but disjointed philosophy. Descended from a long line of New England ministers, Emerson, finding himself fettered by even the most liberal ministry of his day, gently yet audaciously stepped down from the pulpit and, wi t h little or no modification in his interests or utterances, became the greatest lay preacher of his time. From the days of his undergraduate essay upon “The Present State of Ethical Philosophy” he continued to be preoccupied wi t h matters of conduct: whatever the object of his attention—an ancient poet, a fact in science, or an event in the morning newspaper—he contrives to extract from it a lesson which in his ringing, glistening style he drives home as an exhortation to a higher and more independent life. Historically, Emerson marks one of the largest reactions against the Calvinism of his ancestors. That stern creed had taught the depravity of man, the impossibility of a natural, unaided growth toward perfection, and the necessity of constant and anxious effort to win the unmerited reward of being numbered among the elect. Emerson starts with the assumption that the individual, if he can only come into possession of his natural excellence, is the most godlike of creatures. Instead of believing with the Calvinist that as a man grows better he becomes more unlike his natural self (and therefore can become better only by an act of divine mercy), Emerson believes that as a man grows in excellence he becomes more like his natural self. It is common to hear the expression, when one is deeply stirred, as by sublime music or a moving discourse: “That fairly lifted me out of myself.” Emerson would have said that such influences lift us into ourselves. For one of Emerson’s most fundamental and frequently recurring ideas is that of a “great nature in which we rest as the earth lies in the soft arms of the atmosphere,” an “Over-Soul, within which every man’s particular being is contained and made one wi t h all other,”which “evermore tends to pass into our thought and hand and become wisdom and virtue and power and beauty.”This is the incentive—the sublime incentive of approaching the perfection which is ours by nature and by divine intention—that Emerson holds out when he asks us to submit us to ourselves and to all instructive influences. Natur e, which he says“is loved by what is best in us,”is all about us, inviting our perception of its remotest and most cosmic principles by surrounding us with its simpler manifestations.“A man does not tie his shoe without recognizing laws which bind the fart hest regions of nature.”Thus man “carries the world in his head.” Whether he be a great scientist, proving by his discovery of a sweeping physical law that he has some such constructive sense as that which guides the universe, or whether he be a poet behol ding trees as“imperfect men,”who“seem to bemoan their imprisonment, rooted in the ground,”he is being brought into his own by perceiving “the virtue and pungency of the influence on the mind of material objects, whether inorganic or organized.”Ranging over time and space with astonishing rapidity and binding names and things together that no ordinary vision could connect, Emerson calls the Past also to witness the need of self-reliance and a steadfast obedience to intuition.The need of such independence, he thought, was particularly great for the

2015年韩素音翻译大赛翻译原文

The Posteverything Generation I never expected to gain any new insight into the nature of my generation, or the changing landscape of American colleges, in Lit Theory. Lit Theory is supposed to be the class where you sit at the back of the room with every other jaded sophomore wearing skinny jeans, thick-framed glasses, an ironic tee-shirt and over-sized retro headphones, just waiting for lecture to be over so you can light up a Turkish Gold and walk to lunch while listening to Wilco. That’s pretty much the way I spent the course, too: through structuralism, formalism, gender theory, and post-colonialism, I was far too busy shuffling through my Ipod to see what the patriarchal world order of capitalist oppression had to do with Ethan Frome. But when we began to study postmodernism, something struck a chord with me and made me sit up and look anew at the seemingly blasé college-aged literati of which I was so self-consciously one. According to my textbook, the problem with defining postmodernism is that it’s i mpossible. The difficulty is that it is so...post. It defines itself so negatively against what came before it –naturalism, romanticism and the wild revolution of modernism –that it’s sometimes hard to see what it actually is. It denies that anything can be explained neatly or even at all. It is parodic, detached, strange, and sometimes menacing to traditionalists who do not understand it. Although it arose in the post-war west (the term was coined in 1949), the generation that has witnessed its ascendance has yet to come up with an explanation of what postmodern attitudes mean for the future of culture or society. The subject intrigued me because, in a class otherwise consumed by dead-letter theories, postmodernism remained an open book, tempting to the young and curious. But it also intrigued me because the question of what postmodernism –what a movement so post-everything, so reticent to define itself – is spoke to a larger question about the political and

英译汉练习短文6篇

英译汉练习短文6篇· Passage 1 Satiric Literature1 Perhaps the most striking quality of satiric literature is its freshness, its originality of perspective. Satire rarely offers original ideas. Instead, it presents the familiar in a new form. Satirists do not offer the world new philosophies. What they do is look at familiar conditions from a perspective that makes these conditions seem foolish, harmful, or affected. Satire jars us out of complacence into a pleasantly shocked realization that many of the values we unquestioningly accept are false. Don Quixote makes chivalry seem absurd; Brave New World ridicules the pretensions of science; A Modest Proposal dramatizes starvation by advocating cannibalism. None of these ideas is original. Chivalry was suspected before Cervantes2, humanists objected to the claims of pure science before Aldous Huxley3, and people were aware of famine before Swift4. It was not the originality of the idea that made these satires popular. It was the manner of expression,the satiric method, that made them interesting and entertaining. Satires are read because they are aesthetically satisfying works of art, not because they are

第二十六届“第二十六届“韩素音青年翻译奖”竞赛”竞赛原文

第二十六届“韩素音青年翻译奖”竞赛原文 英译汉竞赛原文: How the News Got Less Mean The most read article of all time on BuzzFeed contains no photographs of celebrity nip slips and no inflammatory ranting. It’s a series of photos called “21 pictures that will restore your fait h in humanity,” which has pulled in nearly 14 million visits so far. At Upworthy too, hope is the major draw. “This kid just died. What he left behind is wondtacular,” an Upworthy post about a terminally ill teen singer, earned 15 million views this summer and has raised more than $300,000 for cancer research. The recipe for attracting visitors to stories online is changing. Bloggers have traditionally turned to sarcasm and snark to draw attention. But the success of sites like BuzzFeed and Upworthy, whose philosophies embrace the viral nature of upbeat stories, hints that the Web craves positivity. The reason: social media. Researchers are discovering that people want to create positive images of themselves online by sharing upbeat stories. And with more people turning to Facebook and Twitter to find out what’s happening in the world, news stories may need to cheer up in order to court an audience. If social is the future of media, then optimistic stories might be media’s future. “When we started, the prevailing wisdom was that snark ruled the Internet,” says Eli Pariser, a co-founder of Upworthy. “And we just had a really different sense of what works.” “You don’t want to be that guy at the party who’s crazy and angry and ranting in the c orner—it’s the same for Twitter or Facebook,” he says. “Part of what we’re trying to do with Upworthy is give people the tools to express a conscientious, thoughtful and positive identity in social media.” And the science appears to support Pariser’s philosophy. In a recent study from the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, researchers found that “up votes,” showing that a visitor liked a comment or story, begat more up votes on comments on the site, but “down votes” did not do the same. In fact, a single up vote increased the likelihood that someone else would like a comment by 32%, whereas a down vote had no effect. People don’t want to support the cranky commenter, the critic or the troll. Nor do they want to be that negative personality online. In another study published in 2012, Jonah Berger, author of Contagious: Why Things Catch On and professor of marketing at the Wharton School of the University of Pennsylvania, monitored the most e-mailed stories produced by the New York Times for six months and found that positive stories were more likely to make the list than negative ones. “What we share [or like] is almost like the car we drive or the clothes we wear,” he says. “It

二十二届韩素音翻译大赛汉译英优秀译文

汉译英原文: 居在巷陌的寻常幸福 隐逸的生活似乎在传统意识中一直被认为是幸福的至高境界。但这种孤傲遁世同时也是孤独的,纯粹的隐者实属少数,而少数者的满足不能用来解读普世的幸福模样。 有道是小隐隐于野,大隐隐于市。真正的幸福并不隐逸,可以在街市而不是丛林中去寻找。 晨光,透过古色古香的雕花窗棂,给庭院里精致的盆景慢慢地化上一抹金黄的淡妆。那煎鸡蛋的“刺啦”声袅袅升起,空气中开始充斥着稚嫩的童音、汽车 启动的节奏、夫妻间甜蜜的道别,还有邻居们简单朴素的问好。巷陌中的这一切,忙碌却不混乱,活泼却不嘈杂,平淡却不厌烦。 巷尾的绿地虽然没有山野的苍翠欲滴,但是空气中弥漫着荒野中所没有的 生机。微黄的路灯下,每一张长椅都写着不同的心情,甜蜜与快乐、悲伤与喜悦,交织在一起,在静谧中缓缓发酵。谁也不会知道在下一个转角中会是怎样的惊喜,会是一家风格独特食客不断的小吃店?是一家放着爵士乐的酒吧?还是一家摆着高脚木凳、连空气都闲散的小小咖啡馆?坐在户外撑着遮阳伞的木椅上, 和新认识的朋友一边喝茶,一边谈着自己小小的生活,或许也是一种惬意。 一切,被时间打磨,被时间沉淀,终于形成了一种习惯,一种默契,一种文化。 和来家中做客的邻居朋友用同一种腔调巧妙地笑谑着身边的琐事,大家眯起的眼睛都默契地着同一种狡黠;和家人一起围在饭桌前,衔满食物的嘴还发着 含糊的声音,有些聒噪,但没人厌烦。 小巷虽然狭窄,却拉不住快乐蔓延的速度…… 随着城市里那些密集而冰冷的高楼大厦拔地而起,在拥堵的车流中,在污 浊的空气里,人们的幸福正在一点点地破碎,飘零。大家住得越来越宽敞,越来越私密。自我,也被划进一个单独的空间里,小心地不去触碰别人的心灵,也 不容许他人轻易介入。可是,一个人安静下来时会觉得,曾经厌烦的那些嘈杂回想起来很温情很怀念。 比起高楼耸立的曼哈顿,人们更加喜欢佛罗伦萨红色穹顶下被阳光淹没的古老巷道;比起在夜晚光辉璀璨的陆家嘴,人们会更喜欢充满孩子们打闹嬉笑的万航渡路。就算已苍然老去,支撑起梦境的应该是老房子暗灰的安详,吴侬软语的叫卖声,那一方氤氲过温馨和回忆的小弄堂。 如果用一双细腻的眼眸去观照,其实每一片青苔和爬山虎占据的墙角,是 墨绿色的诗篇,不会飘逸,不会豪放,只是那种平淡的幸福,简简单单。 幸福是什么模样,或许并不难回答。幸福就是一本摊开的诗篇,关于在城市的天空下,那些寻常巷陌的诗。 夜幕笼罩,那散落一地的万家灯火中,有多少寻常的幸福正蜗居在巷陌……

英译汉1994-2010年考研阅读理解真题全文翻译

英译汉历年真题全文翻译 1994年真题参考译文 新学派科学家们认为,在扩大科学知识范围的过程中,技术是一股被忽视了的力量(71)他们认为,科学之所以向前发展,与其说是因为天才伟人的真知灼见,还不如说是因为像改进了的技术和工具之类更为普遍的东西。(72)一位新学派的领袖人物坚持说,简言之,所谓的科学革命主要是指一系列工具的改进、发明和使用;这一系列工具的改进、发明和使用在无数个方面拓展了科学的领域。(73)多年来,工具和技术本身作为根本性革新的源泉在很大程度上被历史学家和思想家们所忽视了。肯定技术的现代派认为,诸如伽利略、牛顿、麦克斯韦、爱因斯坦这样的著名科学大师以及像爱迪生这样的发明家都十分重视各种不同的、可用于科学实验的工艺信息和技术装臵并从中获益匪浅,提倡肯定技术、

否定天才的论点之核心是对伽利略在科学革命的初期所起作用的分析。当时人们对天体的认识源于公元二世纪时的天文学家托勒密。他认为,在复杂的天体系统中所有的天体都围绕着地球运动。(74)伽利略最伟大的成就在于,在l 609年他是第一个用新发明的望远镜来观察天空的人,以证实行星是围绕太阳旋转而不是围绕地球旋转的。但故事中真正的英雄,新学派科学家们认为,是改进制作眼镜的机器的漫长过程。 联邦政府的政策不可避免地卷入了这场?技术?对?天才?之争。(75)政府是应该以牺牲技术作为代价来增加对纯理论科学的经费投入,还是相反,这常常取决于人们把哪一个看作驱动力量。 1995年真题参考译文

广泛用来帮助选拔、分类、委派或者提拔学生、雇员和军事人员的标准化教育或心理测试最近在图书、杂志、日报甚至国会中成了攻击的目标。(71)把标准化测试作为抨击的目标是错误的,因为在抨击这些测试的时候,批评家没有注意到错误在于那些不甚了解或者是不能胜任的使用者。测试本身只是工具,其特点是在具体条件下可以得到相当精确的测定。测试结果究竟是有价值、无意义或者有误导作用在部分程度上取决于工具本身,但在很大程度上取决于使用者。 所有对未来表现有根据的预测都取决于对相关的过去表现的一些了解:学习成绩、研究能力、销售纪录或者任何合适的信息。(72)这些测试将在多大程度上为后来的表现所证实,这取决于所采用信息的数量、可靠性和适应性,还取决于解释这些信息的技能和才智。任何认真记分的人都知道,能获得的信息往往不全面,而且预测很容易出现错误。

韩素音青年翻译奖赛13

第十三届“韩素音青年翻译奖”竞赛原文及参考译文(汉译英)2010-3-26 23:32|发布者: sisu04|查看: 881|评论: 0 摘要: 韩素音青年翻译奖 歌德之人生启示 宗白华 人生是什么?人生的真相如何?人生的意义何在?人生的目的是何?这些人生最重大最中心的问题,不只是古来一切大宗教家哲学家所殚精竭虑以求解答的。世界上第一流的大诗人凝神冥想,深入灵魂的幽邃,或纵身大化中,于一朵花中窥见天国,一滴露水参悟生命,然后用他们生花之笔,幻现层层世界,幕幕人生,归根也不外乎启示这生命的真相与意义。宗教家对这些问题的方法与态度是预言的说教的,哲学家是解释的说明的,诗人文豪是表现的启示的。荷马的长歌启示了希腊艺术文明幻美的人生与理想,但丁的神曲启示了中古基督教文化心灵的生活与信仰,莎士比亚的剧本表现了文艺复兴时人们的生活矛盾与权力意志。至于近代的,建筑于这三种文明精神之上而同时开展一个新时代,所谓近代人生,则由伟大的歌德以他的人格,生活,作品表现出它的特殊意义与内在的问题。 歌德对人生的启示有几层意义,几种方面。就人类全体讲,他的人格与生活可谓极尽了人类的可能性。他同时是诗人,科学家,政治家,思想家,他也是近代泛神论信仰的一个伟大的代表。他表现了西方文明自强不息的精神,又同时具有东方乐天知命宁静致远的智慧。德国哲学家息默尔(Simmel)说:“歌德的人生所以给我们以无穷兴奋与深沉的安慰的,就是他只是一个人,他只是极尽了人性,但却如此伟大,使我们对人类感到有希望,鼓动我们努力向前做一个人。“我们可以说歌德是世界一扇明窗,我们由他窥见了人生生命永恒幽邃奇丽广大的天空! 再狭小范围,就欧洲文化的观点说,歌德确是代表文艺复兴以后近代人的心灵生活及其内在的问题。近代人失去了基督教对一超越上帝虔诚的信仰。人类精神上获得了解放,得到了自由;但也就同时失所依傍,彷徨摸索,苦闷,追求,欲在生活本身的努力中寻得人生的意义与价值。歌德是这时代精神伟大的代表,他的主著《浮士德》是这人生全部的反映与其问题的解决。歌德与其替身浮士德一生生活的内容就是尽量体验这近代人生特殊的精神意义,了解其悲剧而努力以解决其问题,指出解救之道。所以有人称他的浮士德是近代人的圣

韩素音青年翻译奖赛

摘要: 韩素音青年翻译奖 歌德之人生启示 宗白华 人生是什么人生的真相如何人生的意义何在人生的目的是何这些人生最重大最中心的问题,不只是古来一切大宗教家哲学家所殚精竭虑以求解答的。世界上第一流的大诗人凝神冥想,深入灵魂的幽邃,或纵身大化中,于一朵花中窥见天国,一滴露水参悟生命,然后用他们生花之笔,幻现层层世界,幕幕人生,归根也不外乎启示这生命的真相与意义。宗教家对这些问题的方法与态度是预言的说教的,哲学家是解释的说明的,诗人文豪是表现的启示的。荷马的长歌启示了希腊艺术文明幻美的人生与理想,但丁的神曲启示了中古基督教文化心灵的生活与信仰,莎士比亚的剧本表现了文艺复兴时人们的生活矛盾与权力意志。至于近代的,建筑于这三种文明精神之上而同时开展一个新时代,所谓近代人生,则由伟大的歌德以他的人格,生活,作品表现出它的特殊意义与内在的问题。 歌德对人生的启示有几层意义,几种方面。就人类全体讲,他的人格与生活可谓极尽了人类的可能性。他同时是诗人,科学家,政治家,思想家,他也是近代泛神论信仰的一个伟大的代表。他表现了西方文明自强不息的精神,又同时具有东方乐天知命宁静致远的智慧。德国哲学家息默尔(Simmel)说:“歌德的人生所以给我们以无穷兴奋与深沉的安慰的,就是他只是一个人,他只是极尽了人性,但却如此伟大,使我们对人类感到有希望,鼓动我们努力向前做一个人。“我们可以说歌德是世界一扇明窗,我们由他窥见了人生生命永恒幽邃奇丽广大的天空! 再狭小范围,就欧洲文化的观点说,歌德确是代表文艺复兴以后近代人的心灵生活及其内在的问题。近代人失去了基督教对一超越上帝虔诚的信仰。人类精神上获得了解放,得到了自由;但也就同时失所依傍,彷徨摸索,苦闷,追求,欲在生活本身的努力中寻得人生的意义与价值。歌德是这时代精神伟大的代表,他的主著《浮士德》是这人生全部的反映与其问题的解决。歌德与其替身浮士德一生生活的内容就是尽量体验这近代人生特殊的精神意义,了解其悲剧而努力以解决其问题,指出解救之道。所以有人称他的浮士德是近代人的圣经。 但歌德与但丁莎士比亚不同的地方,就是他不单是由作品里启示我们人生真相,尤其在他自己的人格与生活中表现了人生广大精微的义谛。

相关文档
最新文档