Traducciones de Zhi

De Gongsunlongzi
Saltar a: navegación, buscar

指 / Zhi es un término misterioso y numinoso.

A.C. Graham 1955 indicó:

'Every he says would fall into place'

Traducciones de 指 / Zhi

  • Point, habitual entre traductores no filosóficos.
  • Definition. Traducción de Forke en 1901-1902. Tal vez el primer occidental que se aventura en indicar el sentido lógico.
  • Attributes, traducción de Hu en 1922.
  • Universals, usada por Fung en 1952, Hughes en 1942 y Needgam en 1956. A nuestro ver, no es acertada por ser un conceptp sobresaturado, que ademas Gong Sun Long, no define.
  • Marks, la traducción de Chan de 1963. Un intento arriesgado.
  • Object of reference, traducción de 1979 de Cheng y Swain. Interesante relectura.
  • Signifiant-signifié. De Kou en 1953. Una de las traducciones al frances más bellas, que da luz a relecturas.
  • Signs, traducción de Thomson en 1995. Extraña visión semiótica.

La traducción de Alfred Forke de Zhi Wu Lun

Forke es un ejemplo legendario. Su traducción fue publicada en 1901.

Thesis. — There are no things which are not defined, but those definitions are no definitions. Antithesis. — So far as there are no definitions on earth, things cannot be called things. If what is on earth, is not defined, can things be said to be defined ? Thesis. — Definitions there are none on earth , things there are on earth. It is impossible to maintain that, what exists on earth, is the same with what does not exist. Antithesis. — If there are no definitions on earth, things cannot be said to be defined. If they cannot be said to be defined, they are not defined. Thesis. — Things though not defined are nevertheless not undefined. There are no definitions on earth, and things cannot be said to be defined, but that does not mean that they are not defined. It does not mean that they are not defined, for there are none but defined things. There being none but defined things, definitions are not definitions. Antithesis. — There being no definitions on earth, all that is produced from things, though having its proper name, is not to be considered as defined. To call things defined, which are not considered defined, would lead to the co-existence of definiteness and indefiniteness. It is impossible to assert that, what is thought not to be defined, is not undefined. Definitions, moreover, are connected with the world. Thesis. — Because there are no definitions on earth, one must not pretend that things are not defined. Since they cannot be said to be not defined, there are none not defined. There being none undefined, all things are defined. A definition is not no definition, but a definition referred to an object is no definition. Antithesis. — Supposing there are no definitions of objects in the world, who would boldly say that there are no definitions ? And if there are no objects, who could boldly say that there are definitions ? Thesis. — There are definitions in this world, but no definitions of objects. Who would flatly assert that they are not definitions, contending that without objects there are no definitions ? Besides, definitions are of themselves not definitions, they do not become definitions, when they have been referred to an object.

Herramientas personales