推而行之 : 《中庸》英译研究

Contents　丛书序 　前言 Chapter One Introduction 　1.1 Research Background 　1.2 Research Topic and Research Questions 　1.3 The Significance of the Research 　1.4 Methodological Considerations 　1.5 Creation as the Primary Object of Study 　1.6 Procedural Considerations Chapter Two From "Extending" to "Extending theFamiliar" 　2.1 Deriving a Methodology from the Zhongyong 　　2.1.1 The Relationship Between Philosophy and TranslationStudies 　　2.1.2 Differences Between Western Philosophy and ClassicalConfucian Philosophy 　　2.1.3 The Three Features of Classical Confucian Philosophy 　2.2 An Introduction to the Zhongyong 　　2.2.1 The Reasons for Choosing the Zhongyong 　　2.2.2 The Context of the Zhongyong 　　2.2.3 The Text of the Zhongyong 　2.3 The Way to Read the Zhongyong 　　2.3.1 Learning from the Zhongyong 　　2.3.2 Accessing the Zhongyong from the Analects 　2.4 Taking the Way from the Analects to the Zhongyong 　　2.4.1 "Extending" in the Analects 　　2.4.2 "Extending the Familiar" in the Zhongyong 　2.5 "Extending the Familiar" and the Study of Translation 　　2.5.1 The Trouble with Translation Studies 　　2.5.2 "Extending the Familiar"： A Subject-Oriented Approach 　2.6 Summary Chapter Three Extending Christian Monotheism 　3.1 James Legge： the Missionary and Scholar 　3.2 Discovering God in Confucianism 　3.3 Extending Christian Monotheism in Legge's Translations 　　3.3.1 Extending Christian Monotheism Aggressively 　　3.3.2 Extending Christian Monotheism Sympathetically 　3.4 Gu Hongming's Response 　　3.4.1 Gu Hongming as a Cultural Amphibian 　　3.4.2 Extending the Religion of Good-Citizenship Proudly 　3.5 Summary Chapter Four Extending the Two-Wheel Pattern 　4.1 Two Predecessors 　　4.1.1 Lyall and King's The Centre， The Common 　　4.1.2 Hughes's The Mean-in-Action 　4.2 Wing-tsit Chan and His Translation of the Zhongyong 　　4.2.1 Wing-tsit Chan and A Source Book in Chinese Philosophy 　　4.2.2 Discovering the Two-Wheel Pattern in the ConfucianTradition 　　4.2.3 Extending the Two-Wheel Pattern Objectively 　　4.2.4 The Zhongyong as a Metaphysical Work 　4.3 Summary Chapter Five Extending Process-Relational Thought 　5.1 Ames and Hall's Collaborative Work 　5.2 Discovering Process-Relational Thought in ClassicalChinese Philosophy 　5.2.1 Hall's Critiques of the Dominant Tradition in WesternPhilosophy 　　5.2.2 Hall and Ames's Studies in Comparative Philosophy 　5.3 Extending Process-Relational Thought Responsibly 　　5.3.1 From the Language of Substance to the Language of Focusand Field 　　5.3.2 The Central Argument 　　5.3.3 Shendu (慎独) 　　5.3.4 Zhongyong (中庸) 　　5.3.5 Cheng (诚) 　5.4 The Chinese Way of Transcendence 　5.5 Andrew Plaks's Translation of the Zhongyong 　5.6 Summary Chapter Six The Translation/Creation of theZhongyong 　6.1 The Zhongyong： Translatable or Untranslatable? 　6.2 Translation as Phenomenological and HistoricalCreation 　6.2.1 The Phenomenological Creation 　6.2.2 The Historical Creation 　6.3 Cheng (诚) as the Translation Criterion 　6.4 Summary Chapter Seven Conclusion 　References

侯健编著的这本《推而行之（中庸英译研究）》试图运用源自《中庸》的方法论，来对《中庸》的英译进行研究。提出的新的方法论是“推而行之”，简言之，亦即以熟悉推及陌生。就《中庸》英译而言，“推而行之”意味着推及文化他者，用西方文化中熟悉的宗教和哲学理论来理解、翻译陌生的中国文化概念。通过研究理雅各、辜鸿铭、赖发洛和经乾堃、休中诚、陈荣捷、安乐哲与郝大维、浦安迪等的译本来展示“推而行之”的运用，旨在阐明，中国经典是如何被译入西方文化的，确切地说，在西方文化中被创造出来的过程。