중역(重譯)의 인식론 - 그 모든 중역들의 중역과 근대 한국어 = Epistemology of the Double-translation

다국어 초록 (Multilingual Abstract)

<P>It is hard to define double-translation. Although it is an important topic considering its relation with practice of writing, predominantly, it has been viewed as negatively. However, double-translation has played an important role in creating the Korean modern literature identity. Except for Yim Wha, most authors of Korean literature did not study the relationship between Korean modern literature and double-translation. From its negative point of view, double-translation is nothing more than forging. However, it is practically impossible to translate Japanese directly which was translated from the works of Western literature. Even if the translation was conducted on the Japanese translation, it is reasonable to conclude that the Korean modern language has formed its basis through transformation and refraction in the double-translation process. Moreover, double-translation was a method that necessitated at the time. It was the best alternative way when Western literary works were not readily available. There are three reasons why most of the translation works were relying on double-translation during the period of Enlightenment to Liberalization. The first reason lies in the pressing need of enlightenment at the time. As a means of enlightenment, rather than mere translation it emphasized on spreading knowledge of the modern Western society. Secondly, the logic of the weak is applied. As LuXun points out, countries such as Korea and China were considered as relatively weak because they were either going through a time of enlightenment or revolution. Third is immanency. A time of enlightenment for Korea and revolutionary periods in China spared no room to consider for the method of translation as importing Western knowledge as quickly as possible was the foremost priority. Today the prospects of double-translation are different, because the historical situation is different. Double-translation is no more at the source of a complex, but instead it is recognized as the “mark of the translator’s efforts” (Kim Hyun). The fact that translation studies stress the need to consult previous translations in order to enhance one’s own translation, tells us that double-translation is no longer a taboo nor a mis-translation.</P>