Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item:
|Keywords: ||《金剛經》;鳩摩羅什;玄奘;漢譯佛典;語言風格學;Diamond Sutra;Kumarajiva;Xuanzang;Chinese Buddhist translation;linguistic stylistics|
|Issue Date: ||2015-09-23 10:29:21 (UTC+8)|
;In the past studies, scholars indicate that Kumarajiva’s translation can not completely reflect exactly the original text, but the word of his translation was fluent in Chinse, and this make it been popular in Chinese readers community. On the contrary, even though Xuanzang’s translation is loyal to the original Text, it is difficult to spread among the people. The fact which involves the problems of the old translation and new translation in the Chinese Buddhist translation history, the past studies often discuss abstractly in this topic. This paper attempt to investigate the Chinese Buddhist scriptures under two different translation strategies, whether it can be popular at the aspect of language by the approaches of the linguistic stylistics and Sanskrit-Chinese comparative analysis. The object of my study is " Diamond Sutra ".
This paper is divided into five chapters, the first chapter described my motivation, purpose, method, and review of previous studies, and discusses the value of "Diamond Sutra" as a corpus, and present the core issue of my paper. The second chapter compare the style of content words of Kumarajiva’s translation and Xuanzang’s translation. This analysis can show different understanding problems between Chinese and Sanskrit in culture or thought aspect. Besides that, I will also analysis the related issues of loanwords and transliterated-and-liberally-translated words. The third chapter compare the style of function words of Kumarajiva’s translation and Xuanzang’s translation. I hope to observe how they translate Sanskrit grammar to Chinese grammar. The fourth chapter is relative to comparative analysis sentence style. The first part will investigate the "conjunctive words ", the main objects of discussion are conjunctions and adverbs. The second part is to investigate different translator who considerations different from each other, and consequently to its translation to translate the Sanskrit sentence into Chinese. There are three ways of their translation: increase translation, ellipsis, and conversion of sentence structure of source language. Finally, through above results of the analysis, I try to reflect the appraisal about Kumarajiva’s translation and Xuanzang’s translations in the past studies.
|Appears in Collections:||[中國文學研究所] 博碩士論文|
Files in This Item:
All items in NCUIR are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved.