Philosophy of 'Translation'

1)当我们做翻译或口译时，不可能整理出任何单一的规则。也不是不可能把任何一条规则变成适用于各种不同解释的标准。但我们有一个假设，即我们可以从语用主义或功能主义的观点来理解解释的过程。这一假设引发了一些问题：语言与人类行为的联系有多密切，或者对人类行为有多重要？这个问题需要进一步研究，但我们在这个项目中不能给予足够的考虑。2)某种语言使用与其他语言使用领域是不可同化或不可简化的。我们在谈论死亡的语言中看到了这种语言的一个例子。这样的语言照亮了个体不可替代的“我”的领域。同时，当我们采用相对性本体论而不是一元论本体论时，就有了一种类比的谈话方式，在这种方式中，一切事物都是有关系的，而不是绝对的。当我们把属于一种文化的东西引入另一种文化时，不可避免地会产生一种意识形态。建立公共性不可避免地与暴力联系在一起。这些问题需要放在政治哲学的语境中加以考虑。例如，在日本，外来文化（西欧文化、中国文化）传入日本，肯定是接受和吸收的，但是占有某种特殊的地位，这种地位总是与某种意识形态联系在一起的。

1) It is impossible to sort out any single rule for a translation or interpretation when we make such. Nor is it impossible to make any single rule into a gournd for every various interpretation. But we have come to an assumption that we can understand the procedure of interpretation from the pragmatic viewpoint, or fuctionalistic one. This assumpiton gives rise to some problems : how far language is connected to, or essential to human behavior? This question needs further inquiry, but we cannot give enough consideration in this project.2) Some kind of language-using is unassimilable or irreducible to other sphere of language-using. We see an example of such language-using in the language to talk about death with. Such kind of language elluminate the sphere of individual irreplacable "I". Meanwhile when we adopt the relativistic ontology instead of monadological ontology, an analogical way of talking is available, in which everything is described in ralation, not absolutely.3) When we introduce something belonging to one culture to some another culture, it inevitably gives rise to an ideology. And establishing publicness is inevitably connected to violence. These problems needs a consideration in a political-philosophical context. For example, in Japan, the foreign culture (western European culture, Chinese culture) introduced into Japan is certainly received and absorbed, but occupies some special position, which is always tied to some ideology.