This article re-examines Humboldt’s comparative linguistics by analyzing two cases: the reception... more This article re-examines Humboldt’s comparative linguistics by analyzing two cases: the reception of Chinese philosophy in France and the translation of Greek philosophy in China. Humboldt’s legacy is treated in opposite ways which result in two translation methods. I argue that Humboldt’s statement about the inferiority of Chinese should not be taken in a literal sense. It highlights the grammatical differences between Greek and Chinese, and can lead to questioning some basic assumptions about the concept of being. Humboldtian comparativism, understood as the recognition of differences and the respect for the foreign, can shed light on transcultural understanding in general.
Si l’on admet que la philosophie prend son origine en Grèce, cela signifie qu’elle se développe i... more Si l’on admet que la philosophie prend son origine en Grèce, cela signifie qu’elle se développe initialement dans un monolinguisme, tout en ayant une prétention à l’universalité. Dans la mesure où les philosophes, en général, pensent toujours en une seule langue, même quand ils abordent le problème du langage, le multilinguisme entre rarement dans leur réflexion. Cependant, l’universalité d’une pensée philosophique est mise en question dès que celle-ci est traduite d’une langue dans une autre. Il semblerait ainsi qu’on puisse se servir de la traduction pour défendre ou bien l’universalité de la philosophie, ou bien la pluralité des langues. Lorsqu’on croit à la traductibilité, on est partisan de la première hypothèse ; de la seconde lorsqu’on croit à l’intraductibilité. Mais ce n’est pas aussi simple, car il n’est pas toujours possible de trancher entre la traductibilité et l’intraductibilité. Que la traduction parfaite n’existe pas, c’est une évidence. L’objectif de cet article consiste à montrer que si l’on considère la traductibilité comme un argument en faveur de l’universalisme philosophique et contre le multilinguisme, on rencontra des difficultés d’ordre conceptuel et méthodologique.
The objective of this article is not to furnish a new interpretation of the problem of the “white... more The objective of this article is not to furnish a new interpretation of the problem of the “white horse” but to problematize certain presuppositions that western commentators have been taking as their starting point when approaching Gongsun Long’s text. These presuppositions rest principally on misunderstandings caused by the translation of the Chinese text, which is at least disconcerting if not erroneous. To some extent, it is the translation from Chinese into a European language that conditions the interpretation. The commentators often analyze the target language of the translation instead of the Chinese. Moreover, they share the practice of using so-called western concepts and theories to analyze the thought of Gongsun Long.
The universality of Aristotle’s categories raises two questions in relation to the Chinese langua... more The universality of Aristotle’s categories raises two questions in relation to the Chinese language: (1) Can these categories be translated into Chinese? (2) Are the same categories to be found in Chinese thought? We examine both of these questions here by means of the famous aporia: “White horse is not horse” – case in which the two philosophical traditions are most “comparable”, since we are dealing with the same problem of the relationship between the colour white and a white body, but also most “incomparable”, as the linguistic and philosophical differences are very striking. By reconsidering the positions of certain modern researchers who defend either the universality of Aristotelian logic or the uniqueness of Chinese thought we highlight the difficulty of getting away from Western concepts when interpreting Chinese thought, a prime example of the difficulty of any transcultural dialogue.
This is my Chinese translation of L. Rossetti's review of Early Greek Philosophy by G. Most and A... more This is my Chinese translation of L. Rossetti's review of Early Greek Philosophy by G. Most and A. Laks
This article re-examines Humboldt’s comparative linguistics by analyzing two cases: the reception... more This article re-examines Humboldt’s comparative linguistics by analyzing two cases: the reception of Chinese philosophy in France and the translation of Greek philosophy in China. Humboldt’s legacy is treated in opposite ways which result in two translation methods. I argue that Humboldt’s statement about the inferiority of Chinese should not be taken in a literal sense. It highlights the grammatical differences between Greek and Chinese, and can lead to questioning some basic assumptions about the concept of being. Humboldtian comparativism, understood as the recognition of differences and the respect for the foreign, can shed light on transcultural understanding in general.
Si l’on admet que la philosophie prend son origine en Grèce, cela signifie qu’elle se développe i... more Si l’on admet que la philosophie prend son origine en Grèce, cela signifie qu’elle se développe initialement dans un monolinguisme, tout en ayant une prétention à l’universalité. Dans la mesure où les philosophes, en général, pensent toujours en une seule langue, même quand ils abordent le problème du langage, le multilinguisme entre rarement dans leur réflexion. Cependant, l’universalité d’une pensée philosophique est mise en question dès que celle-ci est traduite d’une langue dans une autre. Il semblerait ainsi qu’on puisse se servir de la traduction pour défendre ou bien l’universalité de la philosophie, ou bien la pluralité des langues. Lorsqu’on croit à la traductibilité, on est partisan de la première hypothèse ; de la seconde lorsqu’on croit à l’intraductibilité. Mais ce n’est pas aussi simple, car il n’est pas toujours possible de trancher entre la traductibilité et l’intraductibilité. Que la traduction parfaite n’existe pas, c’est une évidence. L’objectif de cet article consiste à montrer que si l’on considère la traductibilité comme un argument en faveur de l’universalisme philosophique et contre le multilinguisme, on rencontra des difficultés d’ordre conceptuel et méthodologique.
The objective of this article is not to furnish a new interpretation of the problem of the “white... more The objective of this article is not to furnish a new interpretation of the problem of the “white horse” but to problematize certain presuppositions that western commentators have been taking as their starting point when approaching Gongsun Long’s text. These presuppositions rest principally on misunderstandings caused by the translation of the Chinese text, which is at least disconcerting if not erroneous. To some extent, it is the translation from Chinese into a European language that conditions the interpretation. The commentators often analyze the target language of the translation instead of the Chinese. Moreover, they share the practice of using so-called western concepts and theories to analyze the thought of Gongsun Long.
The universality of Aristotle’s categories raises two questions in relation to the Chinese langua... more The universality of Aristotle’s categories raises two questions in relation to the Chinese language: (1) Can these categories be translated into Chinese? (2) Are the same categories to be found in Chinese thought? We examine both of these questions here by means of the famous aporia: “White horse is not horse” – case in which the two philosophical traditions are most “comparable”, since we are dealing with the same problem of the relationship between the colour white and a white body, but also most “incomparable”, as the linguistic and philosophical differences are very striking. By reconsidering the positions of certain modern researchers who defend either the universality of Aristotelian logic or the uniqueness of Chinese thought we highlight the difficulty of getting away from Western concepts when interpreting Chinese thought, a prime example of the difficulty of any transcultural dialogue.
This is my Chinese translation of L. Rossetti's review of Early Greek Philosophy by G. Most and A... more This is my Chinese translation of L. Rossetti's review of Early Greek Philosophy by G. Most and A. Laks
Uploads
http://mimesisinternational.com/asian-philosophical-texts-exploring-hidden-sources/
http://mimesisinternational.com/asian-philosophical-texts-exploring-hidden-sources/