It is certain no literal translation can be just to an excellent original in a superior language: but it is a great mistake to imagine (as many have done) that a rash paraphrase can make amends for this general defect; which is no less in danger to lose the spirit of an ancient, by deviating into the modern manners of expression. If there be sometimes a darkness, there is often a light in antiquity, which nothing better preserves than a version almost literal. I know no liberties one ought to take, but those which are necessary to transfusing the spirit of the original, and supporting the poetical style of the translation: and I will venture to say, there have not been more men misled in former times by a servile, dull adherence to the letter, than have been deluded in ours by a chimerical, insolent hope of raising and improving their author. It is not to be doubted, that the fire of the poem is what a translator should principally regard, as it is most likely to expire in his managing: however, it is his safest way to be content with preserving this to his utmost in the whole, without endeavouring to be more than he finds his author is, in any particular place. It is a great secret in writing, to know when to be plain, and when poetical and figurative; and it is what Homer will teach us, if we will but follow modestly in his footsteps. Where his diction is bold and lofty, let us raise ours as high as we can; but where his is plain and humble, we ought not to be deterred from imitating him by the fear of incurring the censure of a mere English critic. Nothing that belongs to Homer seems to have been more commonly mistaken than the just pitch of his style: some of his translators having swelled into fustian in a proud confidence of the sublime; others sunk into flatness, in a cold and timorous notion of simplicity. Methinks I see these different followers of Homer, some sweating and straining after him by violent leaps and bounds (the certain signs of false mettle), others slowly and servilely creeping in his train, while the poet himself is all the time proceeding with an unaffected and equal majesty before them. However, of the two extremes one could sooner pardon frenzy than frigidity; no author is to be envied for such commendations, as he may gain by that character of style, which his friends must agree together to call simplicity, and the rest of the world will call dulness. There is a graceful and dignified simplicity, as well as a bold and sordid one; which differ as much from each other as the air of a plain man from that of a sloven: it is one thing to be tricked up, and another not to be dressed at all. Simplicity is the mean between ostentation and rusticity.
參考譯文：
論古典文學(xué)的翻譯
可以肯定，對(duì)于高貴語(yǔ)言著成的作品來(lái)說(shuō)，直譯是不恰當(dāng)?shù)模旱J(rèn)為粗略的解釋可以彌補(bǔ)這一普遍的過(guò)失更是大錯(cuò)特錯(cuò);濫用現(xiàn)代的表達(dá)方式，也會(huì)使古代作品的精神喪失殆盡。如果說(shuō)在古典作品中不時(shí)有黑暗愚昧之處，其中也常有光明智慧的地方。而這些光明與智慧在近乎直譯的譯文中能更好地留存。我認(rèn)為，文字的自由取決于是否是傳達(dá)原作精神所必需，是否有助于譯作詩(shī)風(fēng)的保存。我敢說(shuō)，過(guò)去雖有不少亦步亦趨、機(jī)械地追求字面對(duì)應(yīng)的迷途譯者，但狂妄地抱有改進(jìn)原作的不實(shí)理想的譯者也不在少數(shù)。毋庸置疑，詩(shī)的火焰是每個(gè)翻譯者都理應(yīng)重視的，因?yàn)樗诜g過(guò)程中更加容易消失：然而，最安全的做法就是滿足于從整體篇章上盡力保留這種特質(zhì)，不要試圖在任何細(xì)節(jié)上超越作者。寫作的奧秘在于知道何時(shí)平淡，何時(shí)綺麗;如果我們肯虛心追隨荷馬的腳步，一定能從他身上學(xué)到這一點(diǎn)。他用詞豪放恢宏之處，我們也要努力揮毫潑墨;他用詞平淡樸素之處，我們也不能因怕受到幾個(gè)評(píng)論家的責(zé)難便不加以模仿。對(duì)于荷馬來(lái)說(shuō)，其最遭人誤解之處莫過(guò)適當(dāng)?shù)娘L(fēng)格高度：有些譯者一味盲信其無(wú)處不崇高，而致使譯文浮夸失真;另外的一些譯者沉迷于其簡(jiǎn)樸，因而過(guò)于拘謹(jǐn)呆板。我看到荷馬的追隨著不盡相同：有些人奮步急追，汗流浹背(這是愚勇的表現(xiàn))，另外一些人緩慢、卑恭地追隨其后，而詩(shī)人自己卻莊嚴(yán)從容地繼續(xù)前行。然而，在兩個(gè)極端當(dāng)中，狂熱比冷淡更加容易得到寬容;沒(méi)有人會(huì)嫉妒由冷淡的風(fēng)格而博得贊賞的作家，其友人一定稱之為簡(jiǎn)樸，而他人則稱之為枯燥。優(yōu)雅莊嚴(yán)的簡(jiǎn)樸是存在的，同樣也有突兀暗淡的簡(jiǎn)樸;兩者的區(qū)別猶如樸素人與邋遢者面貌的不同：著裝打扮與衣著不整完全是兩碼事。簡(jiǎn)樸乃是介于虛飾與粗鄙之間的一種品性。
