在英文裡看中國功夫

今天，上海《文匯報》的副刊【筆會】刊登了一篇拙作，題為〈在英文裡看中國功夫〉，以下為見報全文：

在英文裡看中國功夫

曾泰元

「功夫」的英文是依威妥瑪拼音直接音譯的 kung fu，絕大多數中型以上的英英詞典均有收錄，李小龍五十年前的貢獻功不可沒。

1966-67 年，李小龍（Bruce Lee）在美國電視劇《青蜂俠》（The Green Hornet）中擔綱功夫高手的要角加藤（Kato），廣受歡迎。1971-73 年，李小龍躍上大銀幕，主演了《唐山大兄》（The Big Boss）、《精武門》（Fist of Fury）、《猛龍過江》（Way of the Dragon）、《龍爭虎鬥》（Enter the Dragon）等四部功夫電影，狂掃歐美。從此中國功夫揚名於世，許多洋人甚至特地來華，不遠萬里拜師學藝。

李小龍的功夫根植於詠春拳（Wing Chun），他在 1967 年 11 月接受美國的武術與搏擊雜誌《黑帶》（Black Belt）採訪時說，「我的成就歸功於之前詠春拳的訓練」（I owe my achievement to my previous training in the Wing Chun style.），從此詠春拳（Wing Chun）為西方所知，廣東話音譯的 Wing Chun 也成為英文詞彙的一員。

李小龍自創了形式不拘、非典型非傳統的中國功夫「截拳道」（jeet kune do），以迅速截擊對手來拳為要義，後來也成為許多歐美流行文化、電子遊戲的重要元素。這個廣東話音譯的 jeet kune do 已收錄於權威詞典，是個地位穩固的英文詞彙。

李小龍在電影《精武門》裡首度將雙節棍搬上大銀幕，在隨後他出演的幾部電影裡也都有雙節棍精彩的演出。此後雙節棍便在全世界造成了一股風潮，連美國員警也開始佩戴雙節棍作為武器。雙節棍（nunchaku，又作 nunchuck）是來自琉球的沖繩日語，其最終源頭可能來自台灣閩南語的「兩截」。

1973 年 7 月 20 日李小龍在香港病逝，得年僅 33。次年 4 月 13 日，英國的雜誌週刊《書商》（The Bookseller）給當時的功夫熱做了總結：「近來，大眾對中國古老防身術『功夫』的興趣飆升，此乃受到李小龍的幾部電影……和《功夫》電視劇所激勵」（There has been a great upsurge of popular interest recently in kung fu, the ancient Chinese art of self-defence, encouraged by the films of Bruce Lee..and the television series Kung Fu.）。

李小龍的功夫電影橫掃歐美，確立了 kung fu（功夫）、Wing Chun（詠春拳）、jeet kune do（截拳道）、nunchaku（雙節棍）在武術與英文的地位。李小龍過世前後的 1972-75 年，美國播出了紅極一時的《功夫》（Kung Fu）電視劇，飾演主角少林武僧的演員大衛•卡拉丁（David Carradine）進一步鞏固了中國功夫的地位，並把少林武術引進歐美的流行文化，Shaolin、wushu 二詞也進入了英文詞彙的殿堂，我們也應該向他致敬。

至於最近頗多議論的太極拳，根據《牛津英語詞典》（Oxford English Dictionary），這個詞於 1962 年首度見諸英文文獻，以傳統「威妥瑪拼音」（Wade-Giles）的完整形態 t'ai chi ch'uan 出現，載於埃德加•斯諾（Edgar Snow）的《今日紅色中國：大河彼岸》（Red China Today: The Other Side of the River），是作為一種「健身操」（calisthenics）而為西方所知的。1968 年 11 月 22 日，英國的《泰晤士報》（The Times）也報導了太極拳，重點提到了其中的一式「抱虎歸山」（Embrace Tiger and Return to Mountain），並介紹說太極拳是中國的一種健身操體系（a Chinese system of callisthenics），能讓身體柔韌，強身健體，心平氣靜。這樣的觀點，也是長久以來外界對太極拳的認知。

英文《維基百科》（Wikipedia）對太極拳的表述十分詳盡，圖文並茂，開門見山指出，太極拳是「一種中國武術的內家功，是為了防身與健體而練的」（an internal Chinese martial art practiced for both its defense training and its health benefits）。此處明言太極拳並非只是柔而無剛的健身操，也能用來防身比武。

粽子的英文

端午節就要到了，今天上海的《新民晚報•夜光杯》刊登了一篇拙作，題為〈粽子的英文〉。欲覽全文者，可點選超連結或圖片。

Time to do away with ‘Year of the Republic’

今天 5 月 22 日，英文《台北時報》（Taipei Times）刊登了一篇我的文章，題為〈Time to do away with 'Year of the Republic'〉，此乃報社編譯自 5 月 18 日《自由時報》的拙作〈民國紀元不合時宜〉。英文的譯文為 Perry Svensson 所做，不過他似乎把民國 60 年代誤以為是公元 1950 年代。

Time to do away with 'Year of the Republic'

By Hugo Tseng 曾泰元

For many years, I have wondered if there was a possibility of replacing the Republic of China (ROC) chronology with the internationally accepted date format.

Saturday marked the anniversary of President Tsai Ing-wen's (蔡英文) and the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) government's first year in office. Perhaps this would be a good moment for the public to take a calm and detached look at the issue and reach an agreement that could be presented to the government in the hope that it would consider public opinion in future government policy.

The ROC date format is increasingly becoming a source of confusion that is complicating communication.

For example, when someone talks about "oldies from the 60s," are they talking about the 60s according to the ROC chronology — which would be the 1950s according to the international date format — or are they using the internationally accepted date format and referring to the 1960s?

Does "92" refer to the ROC date, which was the year that SARS reached Taiwan — 2003 in the international date format — or does it refer to the year of the "'92 consensus" — the Chinese expression leaves out the century — which of course was reached in 1992?

More detail-oriented people will add "Year of the Republic" before the year when they use ROC chronology and include the century when they talk about a certain decade using the international date format.

However, many people prefer brevity, and as communication is breaking down, we have now reached the point where it is becoming necessary to address the issue head on.

Fortunately, this confusing system has not been in place for long and if some common sense is applied together with some fact checking, sense can still be made of things.

However, if the situation is not addressed and the practice is allowed to continue, future generations will be unable to make heads or tails of things.

In addition to these communication problems, the ROC chronology replicates the Chinese system, which had a dynastic chronology that changed as one emperor replaced another.

This system has too many limitations. Looking internationally, it is easy to see that governments come and go and there is nothing anyone can do about it.

No one knows the future of the ROC or for how long it will remain a national designation. There is little doubt that using the internationally accepted date format would be a reliable and lasting policy as it would do away with the need to start again from scratch as governments change.

If the public were to reach an agreement, the international date format could be adopted as the new standard, while the ROC chronology could remain in use in the same way that the lunar calendar date format is used: It could be included as a reference date. This would lessen the impact of the change and make a transition less troublesome.

The DPP has been in control of both the government and the legislature for a year; would it not be possible to finally come up with a solution that puts this old controversy to rest?
Everyone is looking forward to an answer.

Hugo Tseng is an associate professor in Soochow University's English department.

Translated by Perry Svensson

民國紀元不合時宜

今天《自由時報》的【自由廣場】版刊登了一篇拙作，題為〈民國紀元不合時宜〉，以下為見報全文：

民國紀元不合時宜

◎  曾泰元

昨日讀了王伯仁先生的投書〈論文禁用公元 台大抱殘守缺〉，我深有同感。

多年來，我一直關心民國紀元是否有機會調整，改採世界通用的公元紀年。民進黨政府上任即將屆滿一週年，藉此契機，社會各界不妨平心靜氣，從各個方面認真討論一下當前的民國紀元，形成的共識，或可供政府作為施政的參考。

今年是中華民國一○六年，這民國紀元已經逐漸給我們的溝通造成了困擾。「六○年代的國語老歌」，指的是民國六○年代，還是公元的一九六○年代？「九二年」，到底是九二共識的一九九二年，還是 SARS 爆發的民國九十二年？

仔細一點的人，或許還會在民國年份之前加上「民國」，將公元紀年的四位數字完整呈現。可是許多人能省就省，所以雞同鴨講頻傳，到了我們都不得不正視的地步。

所幸這混淆經歷的時間還不算長，憑常識判斷再稍作求證，仍然可以辨別。要是現狀不改，長此以往，將來這年代恐怕是一團亂，後人想理個頭緒都很困難。

除了這個溝通上的困擾之外，民國紀元宛如中國朝代的另一個年號，侷限性較大。持平而論，放眼世界，政權興替乃歷史之必然，無人能擋。中華民國的未來如何，這個國號能延續多久，都仍在未定之天。採用全球通用的公元紀年，無疑是個可長可久的穩健之策，不必改朝換代就重新起算。

當然，如果社會上有共識，在把公元紀年作為國家標準的同時，民國紀元可先依循農曆的模式，作為輔助參考，以降低衝擊，平穩過渡。

民進黨完全執政一週年之際，這個民國紀元的老問題能否跳脫過往的窠臼，有所突破？我們大家都在拭目以待。

（作者現任東吳大學英文系副教授）

征服英文，先過希臘文這關

五月號的《英語島》雜誌持續刊登我的專文，題為〈征服英文，先過希臘文這關〉，請點擊照片瀏覽，或上網搜尋拙作。