I take the title of this article from Peter Cole’s recent assertion that translation must not merely be justified, but presumed. But translation is not always presumed and is, on the contrary, commonly viewedwith suspicion in literary studies, especially undergraduateworld and comparative literature curricula. This presents a difficult because it is hardly possible to expect or demand proficiency from undergraduate students in another language, never mind several other languages besides English. Even the most consummate multilingual scholar could not meet those expectations. Thus, translation is built into the very enterprise of literary study. For this andmany other reasons, the defense of translation can never be exhausted, given its perpetual treatment as a “stepchild” in the academic world.1 In this article, I argue that the quandaries and quarrels over the place of translation in literary curricula are best approached, not by the implementation of any particular method or paradigm for teaching translated texts, but rather by perspectival shifts occasioned by revisiting and vanquishing the idea of translation as a problem in the negative sense, and recasting it as a problem in the heuristic sense, an invitation to inquire into the paradoxes, mysteries, and potentialities of translation. And so this article is not only a defense and presumption but also a celebration of translation, that phenomenon that lies somewhere, as Walter Benjamin might put it, between art and doctrine.2 In what follows, I address some of the principal historic origins of the prejudice toward translation and how this prejudice has survived in the academic study of literature in different guises. As a response to this prejudice, I underscore the rewards and gains of literary translation, as well as its ubiquity in all language, which is to say that translation is a pathway and technology of all language and not just the process of changing one code into another. Before I begin, I want to be clear that not all criticisms of literary translation stem from some reactionary hermeticism. Some of these criticisms do indeed rest on sound principles and concerns. Among them is a basic preservation instinct, the wish to see a complete education include the enriching experience of learning other languages. Scholars and teachers of language and literature can never foreclose on the dream of teaching students other languages so that they can

中文翻译：

---

假设翻译

我从 Peter Cole 最近的断言中取这篇文章的标题，即翻译不仅必须是合理的，而且必须是假定的。但翻译并不总是被假定，相反，在文学研究中，尤其是本科世界和比较文学课程中，人们普遍怀疑翻译。这是一个困难，因为几乎不可能期望或要求本科生精通另一种语言，更不用说除了英语之外的其他几种语言。即使是最完美的多语言学者也无法满足这些期望。因此，翻译是文学研究的一项事业。由于这个和许多其他原因，翻译的辩护永远不会穷尽，因为它在学术界永远被视为“继子”。 1 在本文中，我认为，解决文学课程中关于翻译位置的困惑和争论的最佳方法，不是通过实施任何特定的教学翻译文本的方法或范式，而是通过重新审视和消除翻译作为一种语言的观念而引起的视角转变。 ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?否定意义上的问题，并将其重铸为启发式意义上的问题，邀请探究翻译的悖论、奥秘和潜力。因此，这篇文章不仅是一种辩护和推定，而且是对翻译的颂扬，正如沃尔特·本雅明所说，这种现象存在于艺术与教义之间。 2 在下文中，我阐述了翻译偏见的一些主要历史根源，以及这种偏见如何在不同形式的文学学术研究中幸存下来。作为对这种偏见的回应，我强调文学翻译的回报和收获，以及它在所有语言中的普遍性，也就是说翻译是所有语言的一种途径和技术，而不仅仅是将一个代码变成一个代码的过程。其他。在开始之前，我想说明的是，并非所有对文学翻译的批评都源于某种反动的封闭主义。其中一些批评确实基于合理的原则和关注。其中有一种基本的保存本能，希望看到完整的教育包括学习其他语言的丰富经验。