中共黨史外文著作中譯的「減法」

對照大陸出版的有關中共黨史的外文著作中譯，是一件十分有趣的事。從中可以具體地看到在中共黨史中，哪些史實迄今仍是敏感的，不方便如實翻譯的。例如以下一段文字，出自Benjamin Yang（楊炳章）From Revoluton to Politics: Chinese Communists on the Long March (Boulder, Colo.: Westview Press, 1990)頁161，但郭偉（2006）中譯本沒有譯出，關鍵可能即是出在原文裡若干「太過敏感」的敘述，現將重點字句用加粗黑體字標識出來：

Zhang and Mao had both fought with the KMT troops for years -- not always infallibly -- and both were afraid of the KMT in a certain sense and to a certain extent. Neither side was willing to fight back in the direction from which it had just come: the east for Zhang and the south for Mao; and each side thought that the other side might be facing some less competent enemy, so that Mao thought they could go east back to northern Sichuan, and Zhang thought that turning south to Chengdu was a possibility. While both were fearful of the enemy in this sense, Mao was perhaps more so. The Central Red Army had been chased all the way from Jiangxi to western Sichuan, trying to win some decisive battle to open a new prospect many times without success. It wanted to make a long distance transfer and could hardly imagine staying at the present location of fighting back to the south. Although Zhang's withdrawal from northern Sichuan was partly due to his concern about the KMT's new suppression, he had reasons other than military defeat. He was less beaten, less scared, and thus more inclined to maintain his troops in the Sichuan-Xikang area rather than moving far away to north. All in all, we might say that Mao was more "rightist" and "flightist" than Zhang, but whether "rightism" or "flightism" should be regarded as a great evil is quite another matter.

楊炳章的這本英文書中譯本，由中國人民大學出版，書名是《從革命到政治：長征與毛澤東的崛起》。上引這段英文是原文書第六章的結語，中譯本沒有譯出，可能是鑑於文中講到毛澤東與張國燾都與國民黨征戰多年，都怕國民黨，而毛可能更怕，而若論「右傾逃跑主義」，毛可能比張更為「右傾」也更會「逃跑」等字句，太過敏感，也「褻瀆」了毛澤東。此外，除了略過最末一段文字外，該章倒數第二段開頭的一段文字也作了相應的修飾甚至改寫：
原文：After the split, each side accused the other of committing a line of "rightist flightism," which literally means fear of fighting the enemy or retreat for saving one's skin.
中譯：不少人曾過分強調張國燾紅四方面軍南下與毛澤東紅一方面軍北上的對抗爭執，......。
這種「翻譯上的減法」，在中國人民大學出版的史華慈（Benjamin Schwartz）著作《中國的共產主義與毛澤東的崛起》（Chinese Communism and the Rise of Mao）一書中，要減得更多，在該書中譯本中，有連續兩三頁共六段文字關於「富田事變」的描述與討論全被略過，甚至還把「富田」寫成「福田」。照理講，會來翻譯中共黨史英文書的人，不會不知道「富田事變」，而大陸的歷史研究者也許對毛澤東在富田事變中的角色不好說話，但有資料顯示，「富田事變」並非不能碰的議題，只要小心處理毛的角色就好。所以《中國的共產主義與毛澤東的崛起》避譯「富田事變」的有關段落，也許只能說是譯者在這方面非常謹慎了。