(Translation) 蝴蝶夢 - 편집 역사

2018년 7월 18일 (수) 23:50에 Admin님의 편집

2018-07-18T23:50:52Z

2018년 7월 18일 (수) 23:43에 Admin님의 편집

2018-07-18T23:43:29Z

Jelenagledic: /* Translation */

2018-07-16T12:52:48Z

‎Translation

Chof: /* Student Translation : Jelena Gledić */

2018-07-12T11:13:03Z

‎Student Translation : Jelena Gledić

Youngoh64: /* Translation */

2018-07-11T14:56:06Z

‎Translation

Youngoh64: /* Student Translation : Jelena Gledić */

2018-07-11T14:39:42Z

‎Student Translation : Jelena Gledić

Jelenagledic: /* Translation */

2018-07-09T15:08:05Z

‎Translation

Jelenagledic: /* Translation */

2018-07-09T15:07:32Z

‎Translation

Jelenagledic: /* Translation */

2018-07-09T15:06:22Z

‎Translation

Youngoh64: /* Translation */

2018-07-06T08:47:20Z

‎Translation

@@ 9번째 줄: / 9번째 줄: @@
 |Year =
 |Key Concepts=
-|Translator = [[2018 Hanmun Summer Workshop (Intermediate)#Participants | Participants of 2018 Hanmun Summer Workshop (Intermediate Training Group)]]
+|Translator = [[2018 Summer Hanmun Workshop (Intermediate)#Participants | Participants of 2018 Summer Hanmun Workshop (Intermediate Training Group)]]
 |Editor =
 |Translation Year = 2018
@@ 48번째 줄: / 48번째 줄: @@
 (JG) As for the first comment, I agree, it is a better solution - thank you! As for 物化, it is bit of a rabbit hole :) However, briefly (if that is possible), here is my reasoning. As Prof. Oh noted, the usual translation is "transformation of things", but this term is mostly used in post-hoc interpretations of Zhuangzi's entire philosophy, so I don't think it is necessary to blindly adhere to that solution. Furthermore, I think the usual translation misses the strength of the N+化 pattern, because 物化 literally means "thingization" :) I don't think my suggestion is perfect, but I believe it does bring us closer to the original focus - 物 as a generic term (when you say "things" for me it sounds there are different kinds, whereas 物 is all things), and 化 as a process not necessarily happening to the 物 (you become a thing, but it is not stated here that a thing becomes a thing, as the term "transformation of things" implies).
-[[Category:2018 Hanmun Summer Workshop]]
+[[Category:2018 Summer Hanmun Workshop]]
 [[Category:Intermediate Training Group]]

← 이전 판		2018년 7월 18일 (수) 23:43 판
14번째 줄:		14번째 줄:

	}}		}}
		+
		+	__TOC__
		+

	=='''Original Script'''==		=='''Original Script'''==

@@ 34번째 줄: / 34번째 줄: @@
 + I found a brief but very good (and in line with my view :)) discussion on the sentence 不知周也 in Chong, Kim-chong. ''Zhuangzi's Critique of the Confucians: Blinded by the Human'', SUNY Press, 2016, page 46. The author translated it even more vaguely in an attempt to keep the plurality of interpretations of the original: "No awareness of Zhou."<br />
 (YO) Right. If we say "I did not know I was Zhou", then it would presuppose that I be Zhou as a fact.
-+ (YO) 栩栩然胡蝶也 is an emphatic pattern, so: "Vivid and joyous was the butterfly, content and at ease, unaware of Zhou!"<br />
+(JG) Great! Thank you. Finally :)
-+ A usual translation of 物化 is 'transformation of things' but "becoming/transforming into a thing" is quite appropriate here.
++ (YO) 栩栩然胡蝶也 is an emphatic pattern, so: "Vivid and joyous was the butterfly, content and at ease, unaware of Zhou!"<br />
-(Fran): The transition from talking about Zhuang Zhou in the third person to the first person voice in the third sentence might be confusing to some readers. I might render the first sentence into: "Once I, Zhuang Zhou, dreamed of being a butterfly." I'm curious about your line, "This is called becoming a thing," though I suspect this would take us down the rabbit hole of interpreting Zhuangzi's philosophy!
++ A usual translation of 物化 is 'transformation of things' but "becoming/transforming into a thing" is quite appropriate here.<br />
 [[Category:2018 Hanmun Summer Workshop]]
 [[Category:Intermediate Training Group]]

@@ 37번째 줄: / 37번째 줄: @@
 + A usual translation of 物化 is 'transformation of things' but "becoming/transforming into a thing" is quite appropriate here.
+(Fran): The transition from talking about Zhuang Zhou in the third person to the first person voice in the third sentence might be confusing to some readers. I might render the first sentence into: "Once I, Zhuang Zhou, dreamed of being a butterfly." I'm curious about your line, "This is called becoming a thing," though I suspect this would take us down the rabbit hole of interpreting Zhuangzi's philosophy!
 [[Category:2018 Hanmun Summer Workshop]]
 [[Category:Intermediate Training Group]]

@@ 34번째 줄: / 34번째 줄: @@
 + I found a brief but very good (and in line with my view :)) discussion on the sentence 不知周也 in Chong, Kim-chong. ''Zhuangzi's Critique of the Confucians: Blinded by the Human'', SUNY Press, 2016, page 46. The author translated it even more vaguely in an attempt to keep the plurality of interpretations of the original: "No awareness of Zhou."<br />
 (YO) Right. If we say "I did not know I was Zhou", then it would presuppose that I be Zhou as a fact.
-+ (YO)
++ (YO) 栩栩然胡蝶也 is an emphatic pattern, so: "Vivid and joyous was the butterfly, content and at ease, unaware of Zhou!"<br />

← 이전 판		2018년 7월 11일 (수) 14:39 판
33번째 줄:		33번째 줄:
	*Discussion Questions:		*Discussion Questions:
	+ I found a brief but very good (and in line with my view :)) discussion on the sentence 不知周也 in Chong, Kim-chong. ''Zhuangzi's Critique of the Confucians: Blinded by the Human'', SUNY Press, 2016, page 46. The author translated it even more vaguely in an attempt to keep the plurality of interpretations of the original: "No awareness of Zhou."<br />		+ I found a brief but very good (and in line with my view :)) discussion on the sentence 不知周也 in Chong, Kim-chong. ''Zhuangzi's Critique of the Confucians: Blinded by the Human'', SUNY Press, 2016, page 46. The author translated it even more vaguely in an attempt to keep the plurality of interpretations of the original: "No awareness of Zhou."<br />
		+	(YO) Right. If we say "I did not know I was Zhou", then it would presuppose that I be Zhou as a fact.
		+	+ (YO)
		+

← 이전 판		2018년 7월 9일 (월) 15:08 판
32번째 줄:		32번째 줄:

	*Discussion Questions:		*Discussion Questions:
−	+ I found a brief but very good (and in line with my view :)) discussion on the sentence 不知周也 in Chong, Kim-chong. ''Zhuangzi's Critique of the Confucians: Blinded by the Human'', SUNY Press, 2016, page 46. The author translated it even more vaguely in an attempt to keep the plurality on interpretations of the original: "No awareness of Zhou."<br />	+	+ I found a brief but very good (and in line with my view :)) discussion on the sentence 不知周也 in Chong, Kim-chong. ''Zhuangzi's Critique of the Confucians: Blinded by the Human'', SUNY Press, 2016, page 46. The author translated it even more vaguely in an attempt to keep the plurality of interpretations of the original: "No awareness of Zhou."<br />

← 이전 판		2018년 7월 9일 (월) 15:07 판
32번째 줄:		32번째 줄:

	*Discussion Questions:		*Discussion Questions:
−	+ I found a brief but very good (and in line with my view :)) discussion on ~~this~~ sentence in Chong, Kim-chong. ''Zhuangzi's Critique of the Confucians: Blinded by the Human'', SUNY Press, 2016, page 46. The author translated it even more vaguely in an attempt to keep the plurality on interpretations of the original: "No awareness of Zhou."<br />	+	+ I found a brief but very good (and in line with my view :)) discussion on the sentence 不知周也 in Chong, Kim-chong. ''Zhuangzi's Critique of the Confucians: Blinded by the Human'', SUNY Press, 2016, page 46. The author translated it even more vaguely in an attempt to keep the plurality on interpretations of the original: "No awareness of Zhou."<br />

@@ 26번째 줄: / 26번째 줄: @@
-==='''Student Translation : (Write your name)'''===
+==='''Student Translation : Jelena Gledić'''===
 ----
 *Discussion Questions: