本文约 4 200 字，认真阅读约需 15 分钟，无聊指数 ★★★★☆——如非中等水平及以上的英语深度爱好者，建议直接关掉。
上个月，我在分享日常阅读体会的直播里——收费的，别惦记了哈——讲解了 葛公讳传椝先生 1980 年代给《英语世界》杂志写的一篇英文短文（见附录），主题是谈熟悉常用词各项意思的重要性。
初学英语者往往有一种偏见，以为“大词”，生僻词，认识得越多，英语就越好。
词汇量大，当然不是坏事，可能茶余饭后还能凡一把尔赛。但不重视常用词，不熟悉常用词的语义、用法，往往会导致看不懂“人话”，说不来“人话”。毕竟，任何一门语言的词汇，其核心肯定是常用词。
说到常用词，不得不提上半年，我带着学生孙寒潮读完的英国文学史上的名著 Tales from Shakespeare 。作者是 Charles Lamb 和 Mary Lamb ，Mary 是 Charles 的姐姐（港台文艺范叫“姊姊”？），精神问题比弟弟更严重。看到 Mary Lamb 这个名字，我马上想到 matricide （弑母行为；弑母者）这个非常用词。没错，Mary 发起疯来，把 Charles 他亲娘给捅死了。
▲《玛丽·兰姆、查尔斯·兰姆姐弟肖像》，Francis Stephen Cary（1808～1880）绘，1895 年入藏 the National Portrait Gallery, London 。
说是“带着”，不过是偶尔问问他：“今天，你读了吗？”“前几章复习了吗？”“从头再读一遍吧？”
他说“读完了”“正在读”，我总是相信的，这是一个自觉自律的格致娃，可惜邯郸路某大学的英语翻译专业并没有给他打下很好的基础……没事，补呗。
▲ 1958 年左右 Ward, Lock & Co. Ltd. 出版的《莎士比亚故事集》，A. E. Jackson 绘制插图。
至于上中毕业的我自己，细细读完全书的每一个词之后，还翻了两页出版社朋友送的新汉译本。
说是新汉译本（下称“新译”），是因为以前至少有萧乾的译本（下称“萧译”）。
萧先生据说是英文名家，有他的译本为参考，相信新译只会更好。据出版社的朋友说，新译的译者很好学，很勤奋，很踏实。于是，新译让我也很期待。
不过，我读了新译前几页，就很不幸，照例发现了问题，常用词理解上出的问题。啊，我终于绕回了常用词。
译文：他们居住在一座用石头凿成的洞窟（或者说洞室）里……
原文：They lived in a cave or cell, made out of a rock[.]
大概不会有人质疑把 or 翻译成“或者”的做法吧？
▲《费迪南向米兰达求爱》，William Hogarth（1697～1764）约 1736 年绘，题材取自莎士比亚戏剧《暴风雨》第一场第二景。
且慢！人不疑处，我当生疑。
这个 or ，在我看来，不是二选一的“或者”，而是后对前的修正。
▲《朗文当代英语辞典》在线版 or 条，北京时间 2021 年 08 月 25 日查阅所见。
作者先说 Prospero 和 Miranda 父女住的是洞（cave），随即作出修正：别误会，可不是自然形成的山洞啊，乃是窟（cell），是在一块巨岩（a rock）上开凿（made）出来（out of）的。这里的 made out of a rock ，前面虽然有逗号，却是限定性的定语（restrictive modifier），a cell, made out of a rock 相当于 a cell that was made out of a rock 。
你也许会问：为什么不径直写 They lived in a cell, made out of a rock[.] 呢？
原因很简单，作者姐弟写的是儿童读物——你现在不再认为童话书都是“小儿科”了吧？——他们假设，孩子们都认识 cave 和 rock 这两个常用词，但不一定知道 cell 。于是，先说 cave ，再说 cell ，接着说这个 cell 是 rock 里挖出来的，是用孩子懂的东西，前后夹击，去解释他们不懂的东西。
这种由浅入深、循序渐进的笔法，和《自序》里展现的创作思路，一脉相承。
▲《梅里厄姆—韦伯斯特词典》在线版 cell 条，北京时间 2021 年 08 月 25 日查阅所见。
可惜，新译的译者大概没有理解到这层意思。这是第一处问题。
▲ 1939 年 Garden City Publishing 出版的《莎士比亚故事集》，Fritz Kedel 绘制插图。
在一共四段的《自序》（“Preface”）的第三段末，有这么一句话，很长：
原文：When time and leave of judicious friends shall put them into their hands, they will discover in such of them as are here abridged (not to mention almost as many more, which are left untouched) many surprising events and turns of fortune, which for their infinite variety could not be contained in this little book, besides a world of sprightly and cheerful characters, both men and women, the humour of which it was feared would be lost if it were attempted to reduce the length of them.
新译：当时间和那些离去的明智的朋友把莎士比亚原作交到他们的手中时，他们会在其中发现许多在这里被删去的（不提那些同等数量但又保持着原貌的）人世间的无常与命运的多舛。而这其中的千变万化丰富万千是不可能包含在这本小书里的，除了这个充满活泼可喜、形形色色的男女人物的世界——如果连这些都被减少，恐怕作品的幽默也会消失殆尽。
新译的译者认为，leave of judicious friends 里的名词 leave 是“离去”的意思。
假设这样理解是正确的，毕竟我们初学英文时，单词 leave 就是用汉语“离开”二字来记的。再深挖一下：“离去的明智的朋友”是用什么方式“把莎士比亚原作交到他们的手中”的呢？
都“离去”了，难道托人转交？或者，叫顺丰？
或者，不是“已经”离去，而是“正在”离去吧，或者“将要”离去？
然而，原文是 leave 而不是 leaving ，也不是 left 啊！能表达“正在”“将要”这么丰富的意思吗？
其实，把这里的名词 leave 理解成“离开”，无论怎么离开，是“已经”“正在”，还是“将要”，都是错的。因为这里的 leave ，是“允许”。
▲《梅里厄姆—韦伯斯特学习者词典》在线版 leave 条，北京时间 2021 年 08 月 25 日查阅所见。
整个 time and leave of judicious friends shall put them into their hands 这一 phrase 的意思是，两样东西把 them 放入 their hands 。第一样，time ，光翻译成“时间”是不充分的，应该是“时间的流逝”，孩子长大了；第二样，leave of judicious friends ，即明智的朋友们给出的许可。许可什么？许可 them 读莎士比亚的戏剧原作（不是新译里笼统的“莎士比亚原作”，因为莎士比亚不光写戏剧）。
这个常用词 them 指代的是谁呢？“他们”吗？
又错了，这里不是“他们”，是“她们”。因为前文提到的是——拳师们，请息怒——男孩开化早，可以小小年纪就有资格读父亲的藏书：because boys being generally permitted the use of their fathers' libraries at a much earlier age than girls are（新译把常用词 libraries 译为“图书馆”，太机械了），但女孩要贞良贤淑啊，对莎士比亚原作里那些诲淫诲育（《十四行诗》一多半就是劝人早生多生——没提生三个还是四个）的淫词艳曲，抵抗力不强，只能等待 time 流逝，她们年纪大些了，再读；等待在大是大非问题上毫不含糊的 judicious friends 判断她们道德上不太容易堕落了，才允许她们去读。
你可能要问：前面说了“萧先生据说是英文名家，有他的译本为参考，相信新译只会更好”，既然可以参考萧译，还理解错了原文，难道萧译也理解错了吗？
感谢在漂亮国某名校任理科教授、藏书宏富（到开不出“图书馆”）的我的书友 Eric さま，他有萧译原书的某一版在手边，拍照给我一看，顿时解答了初步的疑惑——为什么新译错了？哈哈！因为中国青年出版社 1956 年这一版的萧译，压根就没有翻译第三段硕大的腹部，只留了头尾！详见下图第一段。
这个版本的萧译，独缺这段译文，不知何故。我只知道，整本原著里，文字难度最高的，就是这篇短短的 Preface 。Preface 里， 文字难度最高的，就是这第三段。
所以，这里我提醒任何一位有志于细读 the Lambs 写的 Tales from Shakespeare 的朋友：
二、你读不懂 Preface ，别怕，先读正文。当然，如果两百多年前写的这部儿童文学的正文也读不懂，那就对自己诚实一点，放弃吧，读点本世纪的英文作品。
新译的译者翻译了第三段——切成了两段来翻译，不知何故——不谈正确度多高，毛估估只有40%，但至少可能，我是说可能，填补了这个空白啊。
因为我知道翻译，太难，太累，太寂寞了——我太知道了。
但是，也正因为太难，太累，太寂寞，我们更要用理性批评的精神，去审视翻译这项文化事业，实现译本修正，鼓励译者提高，最终达到共同富裕。
第一句，衷心希望，在萧译、新译之后，能看到 Tales from Shakespeare 更精良的汉译本。
第二句，衷心劝告，有志于学好任何一门外语的朋友们，在常用词上，多下点功夫。
第三句，衷心祝愿，孙寒潮同志生日快乐，学业进步，早日超过不学无术的我！重光会今早还特意为“寒”潮种了一棵“冷”杉。
Reading Comprehension and Vocabulary
“LANGUAGE IS A LIVING THING”
Looking at the above group of words in capital letters, you might think that I am going to talk about the growing, developing, and changing of language or languages in general or of the English language in particular.
No, I am not. I have an “ulterior” motive in calling your attention to that group of words—I want to ask you to answer the question whether those words constitute a phrase or a sentence. I am almost certain that your answer will be “Of course a sentence, not a phrase.” I fully agree; there is not the least doubt about it.
However, I have another sentence for you to consider, which is as follows.
“We often read and hear the phrase ‘language is a living thing’, but most of us do not stop to think about how and why this is true.”
This is the very first sentence in the fourth edition (1978) by Jennifer Seidl of the well-known book by W. McMordie, English Idioms and How to Use Them, first published as long ago as 1909.
Read the sentence again and ask yourself whether the word “phrase” in it is misused or not.
Well, as a grammatical term, the word is misused here, because, as has been said above, what follows it is a sentence, not a phrase.
But the author of the sentence does not use the word “phrase” as a grammatical term but in the non-grammatical sense of a brief expression, which, grammatically, may be a phrase, a sentence, or a word.
I have the impression that a great many Chinese students of English first learn the word “phrase” as a grammatical term rather than in any other sense. I did so sixty-seven years ago, and it was years before I came to meet the word used in another sense.
“What is your ‘ulterior’ motive after all?” I take it that you are getting impatient to ask. Well, I must not keep you in suspense any longer. I hasten to point a “moral”—that when you fail to understand a sentence or even a passage, it may be merely because you do not happen to know a certain sense of a very common word other than the one or two you do happen to know.
I do not know whether you know the linguistic term “polysemy,” which means a word’s having many senses. You either know this word or do not know it. You cannot possibly know only one sense of this word and not any more senses of it, because it has only one sense—technically it is a monoseme.
It seems that many people are likely to be more interested in the stock of words a dictionary records than in the senses and uses it gives and illustrates of the common words it records.
Far be it from me to try to discourage you from enlarging your vocabulary at all costs, but I must say that to know the various senses and uses of many common words is as important as, if not more important than, to know as many less common words as possible.
What I have just said may remind you of what I said in my article on learning vocabulary in the third issue of The World of English of 1983. I do not regret having repeated myself here, because I believe my point is important enough to be worth repeating. Whenever I have occasion to talk about English language learning, especially to self-taught students, I cannot resist repeating myself in this regard, even at the risk of being considered platitudinarian.
I have just used the rather uncommon word “platitudinarian” advisedly—to show that I am not at all prejudiced against learning and using uncommon words. The fact remains, however, that common words are far more useful than uncommon words and also more difficult to master.
Language teachers speak of active vocabulary and passive vocabulary. The former is the vocabulary one uses in writing and speaking, and the latter is the vocabulary one understands in reading and listening. No doubt one’s active vocabulary is smaller than one’s passive vocabulary. Even in one’s native language one may know many words that one has never once used in expressing oneself with pen or tongue.
Even if you do not think you will ever need to write or speak, or to listen to, English (I believe that if your work or speciality requires a knowledge of English of you at all, the first skill you will need will most probably be that of reading), you will nevertheless do well to learn the various senses and uses of many common words.
By the skill of reading is meant what is generally known as reading comprehension. There appears to be a general belief that reading and understanding what one reads is far easier than writing or speaking to say what one has to say. It is quite right in certain ways. But not in all. One may be able to express well enough in speaking and writing a language and yet fail to understand a short and normally constructed sentence in what is called general literature as opposed to technical writing and elevated prose.
If I am allowed to give some advice in a single sentence, I should like to say:
In addition to committing to memory as many as you can of the words you regard as closely connected with your work or speciality, whatever it may be, spend as much time and energy as you can in the study of the various senses and uses of the common words that you may think too familiar to you to deserve much attention.
▲ 1975 年 Gramercy 出版的《莎士比亚故事集》，Arthur Rack ham 绘制插图。
原文始发于微信公众号（文冤阁大学士）：英语童话书，也是你随随便便能看懂的？
发表评论