卡勒（Jonathan Culler）在这里说的意思是：“文本”是广义的，“互相参照”也是广义的：散文，可以参照诗歌，诗歌可以参照传记，传记可以参照社会政治或哲学美学论文。卡勒进一步论证，其所以如此是因为文学具有一种普遍的“自身反映”功能：
Now since to read a poem as literature is to relate it to other poems, to compare and contrast the way it makes sense with the ways others do, it is possible to read poems as at some level about poetry itself. They bear on the operations of poetic imagination and poetic interpretation. Here we encounter another notion that has been important in recent theory: that of the "self-reflexivity" of literature. Novels are at some level about novels, about the problems and possibilities of representing and giving shape or meaning to experience.
互文性首先是意义上的，即在文本的相互参照中从语义的、文化的、历史的角度加以对比、审视，从而获得意义上的联系，终于使疑义得以澄清、隐含义可以得到显现。屈原的《天问》中有很多疑义可以从《山海经》、《淮南子》、《吕氏春秋》中得到解释。互文性也可以表现为结构上的。《楚辞》中的句式结构常可在不同的篇章中作互文参照而定其机理、定其意义。如“其”字结构与“而”字结构句式：
“霜露惨凄而交下兮，心尚幸其弗济。”《九辩》
“山萧条而无冥兮，野寂寞其无人。”《远游》
“身被疾而不闲兮，心拂热其若得。”《七谏·自悲》
通过互文参照，就可以确定“以‘而’释‘其’”的解读法是可靠的。
互文参照可以打破某一文木所处的狭小时空维度，而将该文本推进到与另一些文本参照的更宽阔的映衬性时空领域中，以凸显该文本的独特性。因此它不仅在理解一位作家不同作品时是不可忽视的，而且在理解不同作家的不同作品时也同样不能忽视。中国文论史有十分重视诠注疏解的传统。应该说，从总体来看，训诂学在广泛利用互文参照时在保证典籍的准确理解上是功不可没的。
第五，诠释者没有摒除与客观实际相悖的主体认知盲点，将误解主观地、执着地认定为理解，忽略了依托文本的更大的、更基本的社会-政治-文化-历史背景。上面我们提到了韩非子在〈喻老〉中对老子《道德经》的理解问题。韩非子重功效，他的整个思想体系和政治理念集中于“法”、“术”“势”，锋芒犀利、说理致密、文采斑斓，可说是先秦理论散文的一个高峰。他这些“主体特征”和“思维定势”与老子的主张返朴归真（“复归于朴”，第二十八章）、朴素无为形成强烈反差，因而对《道德经》的理解不可能不带有鲜明的主体烙印。这是韩非误解老聃的价值观上的深刻原因：韩非之拙于王弼正是由于后者摒弃了自己的主体特征和思维定势，把握住了老子的“自然”主旨。例如，老子在第三章中说，“常使民无知无欲”，这句话极易使人产生误解，以为老子主张愚民政策。对此，王弼注曰：“守其真也。”（《道德真经注》）用“守真”来解释老聃之言，可谓至善。
在方法论上韩非也常以主体的直观判断来解释老子。例如韩非将第五十章“生之徒十有三，死之徒十有三”解释为四肢九窍，四加九恰恰等于十三。其实老子的“十有三”意思是“十中有三”（王弼注“十有三，犹云十分有三。”）。王弼在方法论上恪守魏晋玄学家所通用的“辨名析理”，非常注重词义的辨析(辨名），注重推究词之义理之所指(析理)，坚持科学态度，防止“以主夺客”的唯心主义方法论。
摒弃“以主夺客”或“以主代客”的主体凌驾性理解的唯一途径是坚持真理、尊重实际。皮尔士对此有一段很中肯的论证。皮尔士说人们可能具有不同甚至互相对抗的观点，但真理与实际的“great law”只有一个：
Different minds may set out with the most antagonistic views, but tbe progress of investigation carries them by a force outside of themselves to one and the same conclusion. This activity of thought by which we are carried, not where we wish, but to a foreordained goal, is like the operation of destiny. No modification of the point of view taken, no selection of other facts for study, no natural bent of mind even, can enable a man to escape the predestinate opinion. This great law is embodied in the conception of truth and reality. The opinion which is fated to be ultimately agreed to by all who investigate, is what we mean by the truth, and the object represented in this opinion is the real. That is the way I would explain reality.
But it may be said that this view is directly opposed to the abstract definition which we have given of reality, in as much as it makes the characters of the real depend on what is ultimately thought about them. But the answer to this is that, on the one hand, reality is independent, not necessarily of thought in general, but only of what you or I or any finite number of men may think about it; and that, on the other hand, though the object of the final opinion depends on what that opinion is, yet what that opinion is does not depend on what you or I or any man thinks.
对翻译而言，理解的鹄的正是尽一切努力接近文本的“truth”和“reality”。为此，我们倡导对原语文本的批判性、解析性阅读，摒除先入之见、已定之论或既成之规，让一切由译者按自己的审视来加以判断，达致真正的理解。
责任编辑：admin
上一篇：研究形式库和发现过程的确立
下一篇：吉迪恩·图里（Gideon Toury）的描述性研究
微信公众号搜索“译员”关注我们，每天为您推送翻译理论和技巧，外语学习及翻译招聘信息。