《懷舊》的三個英譯本（第2/2頁）

（2）Wang had told me that Yaozong's father had met the Long Hairs：he had flung himself on to the ground and begged for his life, knocking a big red lump up on his forehead.But he managed to stay alive, at least—and ingratiated himself by running a kitchen to keep them fed, turning a healthy profit on the proceeds.After the Long Hairs were defeated, he managed to get away from them and return to Wushi, where he gradually succeeded in becoming comfortably off.Yaozong's current plan—of winning them over with a single square meal—was nothing to his father's ingenuity.

藍譯確實做到了踵事增華，後出轉精。此外藍譯還有一個特點（如果不是缺點）：凡是翻譯人物年齡時都減去一歲。如耀宗“二十一歲無子”到了藍氏筆下就成了“二十歲無子”（failed to generate a son by the age of twenty），藍氏這樣做的理由是中國人計算年齡時往往都用虛歲，而西方人則用實際歲數。

可惜藍詩玲譯本問世時，萊爾已經去世（2005年）而無緣得見了。萊爾在翻譯《懷舊》時曾參考過馮余聲的譯本，這是筆者所知到目前為止唯一由中國人完成的譯本（楊憲益夫婦翻譯了全部《呐喊》和《仿徨》，但沒有譯過《懷舊》），發表於民國上海的英文刊物《天下》（T'ien Hsia Monthly）第6卷第2期（1938年2月）。由於母語並非英語，馮譯略顯刻板。就準確性來看，馮譯基本做到了“信”，但也存在一處嚴重的錯誤，有意思的是，他犯錯的地方正是萊爾的第一個錯誤所在：

I tried to find out the reason, and learned that Yiu Chung had bought three concubines when he was twenty-one, under the pretext of wanting a male child.To justify Yiu Chung's actions Mr.Baldhead had quoted Confucius' saying, “Of the three crimes against filial piety, not having a son comes first.” Because of that, Yiu Chung had given Mr.Baldhead the sum of thirty-one dollars as a present, and with this Mr.Baldhead had also bought a concubine for himself.So his courtesy to Yiu Chung was due to the latter's friendly gift.

這裏馮余聲也把“三十一金”看成是禿先生所接受的耀宗的饋贈，至於說因為這份大禮禿先生因而敬重耀宗（his courtesy to Yiu Chung was due to the latter's friendly gift）固然照顧到了譯文的邏輯，但卻不符合原文的意思，原文說得很清楚，“優禮之故，自因耀宗純孝”。可以推測，萊爾在這段話上的翻譯錯誤很可能受到了馮譯的影響。但需要立刻指出的是，馮譯在上文所引的第二段上沒有犯任何錯誤，他準確地翻譯出了耀宗“其父”的故事，沒有把“其父”錯認作王翁的父親。所以在這後一段的翻譯上，萊爾應該對其錯誤負完全的責任。

關於馮余聲的生平，《魯迅大辭典》（人民文學出版社2009年版）有這樣的記錄：“馮余聲，又作馮余生，廣東人，中國左翼作家聯盟成員。1931年，他將魯迅的《野草》譯成英文，曾致函請求作序並索取照片。魯迅於同年11月6日‘回馮余聲信並英文譯本《野草》小序一篇，往日照相兩枚。’後來他將譯稿賣給商務印書館，毀於上海‘一·二八’戰火（魯迅1933年11月5日致姚克信），將序文編入《二心集》。”在現有的這份記錄之上，我們應該增加一句：“他是《懷舊》最早的英譯者。”

原載《魯迅研究月刊》2014年第3期