The literary translator as invisible, channeling the writing of the source author into the target language with minimal intervention, remains an assumed ideal. Excepting scenarios wherein the foreignness of the text should, for possible ethical reasons of representation, surface in a new rendering, as argued by Lawrence Venuti in The Translator’s Invisibility: A History of Translation, in general one attempts to bring a work of literature into a different language with little subjective agency. However, at times, linguistic and cultural underpinnings of source and target texts necessitate greater editing, and even radically revisionist decisions. Closer interrogation of an esteemed Persian translator’s comments on the impossibility of bringing the verse of Hafez into English, as well as my own practical attempts to reconcile such difficulties, begins to suggest how and why aspects of the source text that seem especially difficult to render provoke, and at times even insist upon, creative intervention. Rather than considering such a mediating presence anathema to the goal of some kind of elusive objectivity, analysis of the translator’s response in relation to the domestic verse tradition of English reveals the potential benefits of taking a more visible and inventive role. Ironically, the most problematic elements deemed “impossible” to translate invite the most creatively productive interventions. Though to a certain extent the idea that the translator must significantly alter the source author’s text seems intuitive, critically foregrounding the process of rendering a work of literature into a new language helps account for what invariably becomes a negotiation between fidelity and creative intervention. As Jean Boase-Beier and Michael Holman explain, “There will always be a compromise between faithfulness and freedom, between the need to be true to one’s own and the author’s voice.” Certain literary works obviously demand more inventive strategies, while others greatly benefit from stricter equivalence of meaning. Regardless of the approach taken, some kind of intervention by the translator remains inevitable. As James Underhill aptly states, “Translators cannot be self-effacing; they manifest themselves in all of the choices—linguistic, aesthetic, and ethical—that they make in the process of rendering the foreign accessible.” Such self-interjection, however, often gets described as threatening to the integrity of the original source literature, an ethical violation that oversteps the boundaries of established meaning and style. In part this accounts for the tendency of translation studies to focus upon the anxiety of confronting what proves difficult to render into a new language. Commentary on approaches taken remains important when reflecting upon choices made, yet simply citing blocks to translation as inevitably “lost” shuts down both new creative approaches and any real critical reckoning with such possibilities. To

中文翻译：

---

可见的干预：文学翻译者在理论和实践中的中介存在

作为无形的文学翻译者，以最少的干预将源作者的写作引导到目标语言，仍然是一种假设的理想。除了文本的外来性，出于可能的表现伦理原因，在新的翻译中浮出水面，正如劳伦斯·维努蒂在《译者的隐形：翻译史》中所说的那样，一般来说，人们试图将文学作品带入不同的语言，几乎没有主观能动性。然而，有时，源文本和目标文本的语言和文化基础需要更多的编辑，甚至是激进的修正主义决定。仔细审问一位受人尊敬的波斯译者关于不可能将哈菲兹的诗句翻译成英文的评论，以及我自己解决这些困难的实际尝试，开始建议源文本中似乎特别难以激发、有时甚至坚持创造性干预的方面和原因。与其将这种中介在场视为某种难以捉摸的客观性的目标，不如分析译者对英语国内诗歌传统的回应，揭示了扮演更显眼和更具创造性的角色的潜在好处。具有讽刺意味的是，被认为“不可能”翻译的最有问题的元素会邀请最具创造性的干预措施。虽然在某种程度上，译者必须显着改变源作者的文本的想法似乎很直观，批判性地将文学作品呈现为一种新语言的过程有助于解释忠诚和创造性干预之间的谈判。正如让·博阿斯-拜尔 (Jean Boase-Beier) 和迈克尔·霍尔曼 (Michael Holman) 所解释的那样，“在忠实与自由之间，在忠于自己的需要与作者的声音之间，总会有妥协。” 某些文学作品显然需要更多的创造性策略，而另一些文学作品则从更严格的意义等同中受益匪浅。无论采取何种方法，翻译人员的某种干预仍然不可避免。正如詹姆斯·安德希尔 (James Underhill) 恰当地指出的那样，“译者不能自谦；他们在语言、审美和伦理方面的所有选择中都体现了自己，他们在使外国易于访问的过程中做出了选择。” 然而，这种自言自语，经常被描述为威胁到原始文献的完整性，这是一种超越既定意义和风格界限的道德违规行为。这在一定程度上解释了翻译研究倾向于关注面对难以翻译成新语言的焦虑。在反思所做的选择时，对所采取的方法的评论仍然很重要，但简单地将翻译障碍称为不可避免的“丢失”会关闭新的创造性方法和对这种可能性的任何真正的批判性思考。至 这在一定程度上解释了翻译研究倾向于关注面对难以翻译成新语言的焦虑。在反思做出的选择时，对所采取的方法的评论仍然很重要，但简单地将翻译障碍称为不可避免的“丢失”会关闭新的创造性方法和任何对此类可能性的真正批判性思考。至 这在一定程度上解释了翻译研究倾向于关注面对难以翻译成新语言的焦虑。在反思做出的选择时，对所采取的方法的评论仍然很重要，但简单地将翻译障碍称为不可避免的“丢失”会关闭新的创造性方法和任何对此类可能性的真正批判性思考。至