返回上一页 文章阅读 登录

颜德如 毕彩云:严复对分权说的理解:以孟德斯鸠为中心

更新时间:2014-12-10 19:30:21
作者: 颜德如 (进入专栏)   毕彩云  
严复此前把moderate还译为"礼让",二者有何差异,不甚清楚。独治的精神是"礼"或"荣宠",与此有何关联,也是不甚了了。严复对"But constant experience shows us that every man invested with power is apt to abuse it, and to carry his authority as far as it will go."这一句译得大致不错。综观全文,"此人道所以重可叹也"之添句是成功的。该句如果直译的话,应该是这样的:"但是,历久不断的经验告诉我们:握有权力的人都倾向于滥用权力,并尽其所能地发挥其权威。"最后一句意译得比较不错。如果直译应是:"说品德本身也需要限制,难道不奇怪吗?然而,这是真的。"

   紧接上一段的下一段也是有关权力制约的名言:

   To prevent this abuse, it is necessary from the very nature of things that power should be a check to power. A government may be so constituted, as no man shall be compelled to do things to which the law does not oblige him, nor forced to abstain from things which the law permits.[13]

   严复的译文如下:

   将欲使之无倒行而逆施,则自人情物理言,凡立一权,不可不更立一权焉,以为之限制。是故治制之成也,宜使凡法所不责者莫之强也,凡法所不禁者莫之夺也。[14]

   从整体来看,严复的这段译文比较简洁,富有条理。Abuse译为"倒行而逆施",from the very nature of things译为"自人情物理言",以及as no man shall be compelled to do things to which the law does not oblige him, nor forced to abstain from things which the law permits,译得都是不错的。A government may be so constituted,译为"是故治制之成也",从直译来看,他是曲解了孟氏的意思。但是联系上下文,严复加一个"是故",正是对应于power should be a check to power。该段第一句直译应是:"为了防止这种滥用,从事物的性质来说,权力应该限制权力是必需的。"由此来看,严复译为"将欲使之无倒行而逆施,则自人情物理言,凡立一权,不可不更立一权焉,以为之限制"是有问题的。孟氏的意思是要对权力进行限制,不是说设立一种权力,就不得不另立一种权力来加以限制。

   第十一章第6节,孟氏专门论述英国政治制度时对分权说进行了集中阐述:"In every government there are three sorts of power: the legislative; the executive in respect to things dependent on the law of nations; and the executive in regard to matters that depend on the civil law."[15]严复是这样翻译的:

   无论何等政府,其中皆有三权之分立:曰立法之权,曰行政之权,曰刑法之权。行政者,执国家之宪典,以奉行庶政者也。刑法者,凭国家之刑章,以裁决庶狱者也。[16]

   严复翻译时首先对语句进行了调整:先总说有三种权力,后说这些权力涉及的内容。这体现了翻译的技巧。其次,突出了"三权之分立"。事实上是这样吗?第一句的翻译应是:"每一个政府都有三种权力。"并非如严复所译的"皆有三权之分立。"正是为了突出"三权之分立",他对三权的译法也别有意味:"曰立法之权,曰行政之权,曰刑法之权。"这与此前他对三权的称呼一致。至于何谓"行政之权"、"刑法之权",严复都曲解了孟氏之意。事实上,第二种权力是指"有关国际法事项的行政权力",第三种权力是指"有关民法事项的行政权力。"

   再看下一段:

   By virtue of the first, the prince or magistrate enacts temporary or perpetual laws, and amends or abrogates those that have been already enacted. By the second, he makes peace or war, sends or receives embassies, establishes the public security, and provides against invasions. By the third, he punishes criminals, or determines the disputes that arise between individuals. The latter we shall call the judiciary power, and the other simply the executive power of the state.[17]

   严复翻译为:

   为一国之君相师尹,议法令于朝堂,而颁之于其国,或为永建,或为暂立,不足者补之,不便者更之,凡此皆立法权之行也。其于邻国也,决战媾,联外交,而于国中也,奠治安,巩牖户,则行政之权在耳。他若攘寇贼,惩奸宄,明国民之畛畔,而杜私家之争者,又刑法之权用也。今谓第一为宪权,第二为政权,第三为刑权。[18]

   客观地说,严复用旧时词汇进行的翻译,基本上表达出了孟氏的意思。不过,由于他倾向于意译,难免扭曲原意。此处与上一段一样,强调"三权之分立。"所以,第一句话末尾才说"凡此皆立法权之行也",第二句话末尾则说"行政之权在耳",第三句话末尾特意指明是"刑法之权用也。"最后一句,严复译为"今谓第一为宪权,第二为政权,第三为刑权",可以说基本上不合原文,直译应是:"我们将称后者为司法权力,而把另外的权力简称为国家的行政权力。"根据前一段话,所谓的三种权力实质上是两种:立法权力与行政权力。孟氏虽没有明言三权,但严复在这里依然强调是三种权力,他可能是体会出了其中的真意。当然,他也许是根据上下文才这样翻译的。不妨看以下三段话:

   When the legislative and executive powers are united in the same person, or in the same body of magistrates, there can be no liberty; because apprehensions may arise, lest the same monarch or senate should enact tyrannical laws, to execute them in a tyrannical manner.

   Again, there is no liberty, if the judiciary power be not separated from the legislative and executive. Were it joined with the legislative, the life and liberty of the subject would be exposed to arbitrary control; for the judge would be then the legislator. Were it joined to the executive power, the judge might behave with violence and oppression.

   There would be an end of everything, were the same man or the same body, whether of the nobles or of the people, to exercise those three powers, that of enacting laws, that of executing the public resolutions, and of trying the causes of individuals.[19]

   严复的翻译是:

   故其国宪政二权合而归之一君,或统之以一曹之官长者,其国群之自由失矣。盖君不尽圣,吏不皆贤,彼既总二权而握之矣,将有时立烦苛之法令,而以威力行之,是固民之所甚畏也。有如是之畏者,不得谓之有自由也。

   又其国之刑权,不与宪、政二权分立,而与其一合者,则其国为无自由也。盖使刑权而与宪权合,是断曲直者即为议法令之人,如是则是非无定,而民之性命财产举以危矣;又使刑权与政权合,是行法令者即为审是非之人,如是则断狱者可滥其淫威,而狱之锻炼周内者众矣,故曰无自由也。

   极之而三权者合,即议其法令,又主其施行,又审其所行者与法之离合,是宪政刑三权者聚而集于一人一众之身,是一人一众者,无论为贵族,为平民,其治皆真专制,虽有粟且不得食,国群自由云乎哉![20]

   先看第一段。the same person、the same monarch均译为"君",there can be no liberty译为"其国群之自由失矣",前者译得不错,后者与前面Political liberty的译法一致,未必准确。"盖君不尽圣,吏不皆贤"与"有如是之畏者,不得谓之有自由也",都是严复有意加上的,但并不损害大意。这一段明显提到两权:the legislative and executive powers,他照例译为"宪权"与"政权",简称即为"宪政二权。"

   次看第二段。第一句的翻译基本不错,从中可见三权:the judiciary power、the legislative and executive。这就解释了前面严复为何说"今谓第一为宪权,第二为政权,第三为刑权。"不过,把the judiciary power译为"刑权"未必确切,尽管中国读者较能明白。第二句译得也不错,"如是则是非无定"是严复添上的。他依据对前两句的理解,翻译第三句时,添加了两处:"是行法令者即为审是非之人"与"故曰无自由也。"实事求是地说,严复对孟氏原意体会较深,增加一些语句并无大碍。

最后看第三段。严复翻译此段在语序上做了大调整,先译"to exercise those three powers, that of enacting laws, that of executing the public resolutions, and of trying the causes of individuals,"再译"were the same man or the same body,(点击此处阅读下一页)


爱思想关键词小程序
本文责编:张容川
发信站:爱思想(http://m.aisixiang.com)
本文链接:http://m.aisixiang.com/data/81171.html
文章来源:作者授权爱思想发布,转载请注明出处(http://www.aisixiang.com)。
收藏