就从背《论语》开始。
[ 本帖最后由 aoec 于 2009/7/16 16:39 编辑 ] 顶起来，让更多的人看到
施舟人五经翻译 感动中国
本帖最后由 osho1 于 2011/10/30 10:40 编辑配合王财贵大德，发一个好消息。见者传之。感动之。鼓励之。感恩这份无国界的大爱。意义深远。
《施舟人五经翻译 感动中国》
中华五经，八种语言定本翻译，国际学术工程。终于。
比起别国的经典，含义深邃的中国经典，在国际书籍视野中，几乎不存在。因为直至今日，仍然缺乏系统的、学术的、优美的外文翻译。而这，不是中国人自己能做得了的。
“由于历史原因，《五经》研究与翻译没有引起足够重视，不仅在世界范围内的认知度还不高，而且至今没有一套完整的适应世界各国人民进一步认识、学习中国文化需要的多语种译本，个别经文只有英文或法文译本，有的译本甚至还是一二百年前传教士翻译的。这种现状非常令人遗憾。”
《中华五经翻译》国际学术工程委员会委员名单
工程总主持人：施舟人
名誉委员（10 位）
饶宗颐 (Jao Tsung-i) 教授，香港中文大学艺术系及中国文化研究所伟伦荣誉艺术讲座教授
汪德迈 (Léon Vandermeersch) 教授，法国巴黎高等研究院研究主任
鲁惟一 (Michael Loewe) 教授，英国剑桥大学汉学系
李学勤 (Li Xueqin) 教授，清华大学历史系，出土文献研究与保护中心主任
康达维 (David Knechtges) 教授，美国华盛顿大学东亚系
汤一介 (Tang Yijie) 教授，北京大学哲学系，《儒藏》编撰中心主任
杜维明 (Tu Weiming) 教授，美国哈佛大学东亚系
许嘉璐 (Xu Jialu) 教授，北京师范大学汉语文化学院，世界汉语教学学会会长
袁行霈 (Yuan Xingpei) 教授，北京大学中文系，国学研究院院长
朱维铮 (Zhu Weizheng) 教授，复旦大学历史系中国思想文化研究室主任
委员（36 位）
施舟人 (Kristofer Schipper) 教授，法国巴黎高等研究院研究主任
伊维德 (Wilt Idema) 教授，美国哈佛大学东亚系主任
艾兰 (Sarah Allan) 教授，美国达特茅斯学院中文系主任
安乐哲 (Roger T. Ames) 教授，美国夏威夷大学哲学系
白杰明 (Geremie Barmé) 教授，澳大利亚国立大学亚太学院
卡多纳 (Alfredo Cadonna) 博士，意大利威尼斯大学副教授
陈德鸿 (Leo Tak-Hung Chan) 教授, 香港岭南大学翻译系主任
齐思敏 (Mark Csikszentmihalyi) 教授，美国威斯康辛大学东亚系
丁荷生 (Kenneth Dean) 教授，加拿大蒙特利尔麦基尔大学东亚系
包弼德 (Peter Bol) 教授，美国哈佛大学东亚系
戴卡琳 (Carine Defoort) 教授，比利时天主教鲁汶大学中文系
杜润德 (Stephen Durrant) 教授，美国俄勒冈大学东亚系
伊若泊 (Robert Eno) 教授，美国印第安纳大学东亚系
叶翰 (Hans van Ess) 教授，德国慕尼黑大学汉学院院长
何志华 (Ho Che Wah) 教授，香港中文大学中国文化研究所
柯马丁（Martin Kern）教授，美国普林斯顿大学东亚系
祁泰履 (Terry Kleeman) 教授，美国科罗拉多大学东亚系
李炽昌 (Archie Chi-Chung Lee) 教授，香港中文大学宗教系
李零 (Li Ling) 教授，北京大学中文系教授
李惠仪（Li Wai-yee）教授，美国哈佛大学东亚系
李集雅 (Tiziana Lippiello) 教授，意大利威尼斯大学中文系
梅约翰 （John Makeham）教授，澳大利亚阿德来德大学
闵福德 （John Minford）教授，澳大利亚国立大学亚太学院
裴宜理 (Elizabeth Perry) 教授，美国哈佛燕京学社社长
尤锐 (Yuri Pines) 教授，以色列希伯来大学东亚系主任
浦安迪 (Andrew Plaks) 教授，美国普林斯顿大学中文系
普鸣 (Michael Puett) 教授，美国哈佛大学东亚系
桂思卓（Sarah Queen）教授，美国康涅狄格大学中文系
李孟涛 (Matthias Richter) 教授，美国科罗拉多大学东亚系
夏含夷 ( Edward Shaughnessy) 教授，美国芝加哥大学东亚系
苏芳淑 (Jenny Fong-Suk So) 教授, 香港中文大学中国文化研究所所长
斯泰格 (Brunhild Staiger) 博士，欧洲汉学学会会长
袁冰凌 (Yuan Bingling) 教授, 福州大学西观藏书楼创办人，国家汉办特聘专家
乐黛云 (Yue Daiyun) 教授, 北京大学跨文化研究中心主任
马克 (Marc Kalinowski) 教授，法国巴黎高等研究院研究主任
胡司德 (Roel Sterckx) 教授，英国剑桥大学汉学系主任
TOWARDS A NEW TRANSLATION
The Five Classics are the Odes 詩, the Documents 書, the Rites 禮, the Changes 易 and the Annals 春秋. They are China’s oldest, most sacred books. For thousands of years, they have been the canons of Chinese culture, the very heart of its thought and the foundation of its statecraft. Formerly, they were learned by heart by all students. A thorough and profound knowledge of the Wujing and their exegesis was a prerequisite for all candidates at the imperial civil service examinations.
Over the centuries, the study of the Wujing gave rise to a vast corpus of erudite commentaries, philosophical interpretations and text critical editions, just as this has been the case for the sacred canons of other cultures.
This great tradition came to a sudden stop when the imperial examinations were abolished in 1905. Although the study of the Wujing was not abandoned, Chinese scholarship during the 20th century mainly turned to other aspects of China’s cultural heritage. Research on vernacular literature, on Buddhism and Daoism – fields that had been hitherto received little attention – greatly developed. Simultaneously, enormous advances were made in China’s archaeology. The knowledge of Early China, its history, its writing and its material culture, was completely renewed. On this basis, great strides were made in the understanding of the social and science history of later times. In consequence not only China itself has today greatly changed, but also our knowledge and understanding of its unique civilization.
As a corollary to all these new developments, the erstwhile so highly valued Classics have received far less attention. Only one of these sacred books, the Changes 易 has become internationally famous, whereas the others have entered into a relative oblivion. Today, except for a small number of Chinese and foreign scholars, most people do not know very much about the Wujing.
This neglect has certainly gone too far. As many young scholars in the field of classical studies have remarked, the fact so many ancient texts have been rediscovered these last decennia does not entitle us to forget the most ancient and revered Wujing. It is time that Five Classics finds their place among the sacred books of the great world civilizations. The Five Classics have been formerly translated and mainly in English, French and German. Most of these translations are very old, some dating from more than a century ago, whereas the knowledge and understanding of the history and culture have made enormous progress. Therefore new, modern translations should now be made and not only into the major Western languages, but in all important languages of the world. This is our ambition, our project and our great enterprise. Please help us to make it a success!
THE VALUE OF THE FIVE CLASSICS
One of the reasons that the Five Classics remain almost unknown outside China is because their value is not sufficiently understood. Although their importance in the context of world civilization is certainly not inferior to the ancient books of Israel (the Five Books of Moses, also called the Pentateuch) or the Four Veda’s of Ancient India, the Wujing are essentially different. The Sacred Books of Israel are traditionally accepted as the word of God as told to Moses. As to the Four Vedas of Ancient India, they are seen as to be not of the authorship of man, but of divine origin.
In the case of the Wujing, there is no such belief. They are not considered to be of supernatural origin. They rather deal with the human world and the natural universe. In the Songs are heard the voices of the people; in the Documents, we read the words of the ancient kings. The Changes reveal the structure of the natural universe. As to three books that now represent the Rites, they contain the words of the ancient sages for regulating the society and the government. Seen in this way, the Five Classics are to be understood as the fundamental texts for preserving peace and order in the world. As such, the Chinese Classics do not refer to metaphysics, but only to the human world. They thought is not seen as representing a religion, but rather as the basis of a philosophy. This philosophy can be said to be China's one of the most important contributions to mankind.
THE NATURE OF THE TRANSLATION
Until now, most translations of the Five Classics have followed the academic tradition. That is: texts were translated as close as possible to the meaning of the original Chinese, without much regard for the style and usage of the foreign language. Therefore the syntax of the translation often followed the Chinese syntax. Also Chinese idiomatic terms were translated literally.
A literal translation is not the same as a good translation. A good translation conveys more of the real meaning and also the literary value of the original. For this new translation of the five Classics, we aim at translating the texts in a way that the meaning is understandable for everyone and that the translated text is agreeable to read. Classical Chinese is very different from contemporary colloquial English. It is therefore necessary to understand the Chinese profoundly before adapting it in a flexible way so as to translate the meaning in a significant and easily comprehensible way that preserves the flavor of the original.
THE WUJING PROJECT
The idea of making a new translation of the five Chinese Classics into the major languages of the world was first conceived in 1979 by Jao Tsung-I and Kristofer Schipper. After having asked in vain for support from several academic and research institutions, it was tentatively put forward as a scholarly activity of the Library of the Western Belvedere (Xiguan cangshu lou) in Fuzhou but equally without success. . In the spring of 2008 the project was presented to the Confucius Institutes Headquarters in Beijing. After being evaluated by an ad-hoc committee composed of Chinese and foreign scholars, it was accepted by the above–mentioned institution with the undersigned as directing editors and with an international committee of scholars from China and abroad as advisors and supervisors.
The Five Classics represent the very basis of Chinese civilization, yet there are almost no modern translations. For the major part, the existing translations have been made a a hundred years ago. The best-known translation of the Five Classics is by James Legge. Legge first published the Shangshu, the Shijing and the Chunqiu with the Zuozhuan in Hong Kong in 1872. Later Legge also did the Liji and the Yijing. Although they were remarkable for the time when they were made, these translations are now completely out of date with regard to modern scholarship. The other old translation that is still used in the West is the French one by Seraphin Couvreur that appeared between 1889 and 1916. It is also more than outdated.
Among the Classics that have been translated individually, the most famous is the translation of the Yijing by Richard Wilhelm, with an introduction by C.G. Jung. Wilhelm’s translation was originally published in German in 1924. It was later translated into English by Cary F. Baynes and published by Princeton (Bollingen Series) in 1950. Wilhelm’s rendering remains inadequate on many counts, not the least because he added his own commentaries without distinguishing them from the original text. Another translation that remains popular today is the Shijing of Arthur Waley (1937). Although the English is at times beautiful, there are many shortcomings.
Among the scholarly translations, the great Swedish scholar Bernard Karlgren set the model. Along with learned glosses on many of the Classics, Karlgren also published a translation of the Shijing (1944 and 1950) and of the Shujing (1950). Both are only of interest to specialists.
Since the Second World War and until recently, a limited number of new renderings have been appeared, while many important translations, complete or otherwise, have remained unpublished.
From all this we can conclude that the Five Classics are today not available and that China therefore remains the only major civilization in the world whose primal scriptural inheritance remains largely unknown outside China itself. The present project for a new and accessible translation of the Five Classics into the world’s major languages aims to remedy this situation.
Since two thousand years, the definition of the Classics has been the object of much discussion and changes. As known, in ancient China there were not five but six Classics: Shi, Shu, Yi, Li, Yue and Chunqiu. When during the Han the Classics were again assembled, it was found that the Yue was lost. Of the remaining five, the Shi (Shijing), the Yi (Yijing) and the Chunqiu were more or less complete, whereas the Shu (Shangshu) and the Li (Yili) survived in fragmentary state. Many changes took place during the Han. Instead of the Shijing, the Yijing came to be considered as the first among the Classics. The Shu was completed and reedited in a way that has since become one of the most disputed issues in classical studies. The Li was completed by adding to the Yili the Ritual Records (Liji) of the Younger Dai as well as the Zhouli. The origins of this last text remain uncertain, but its influence has been very important.
We speak of the “Three of Rites” (sanli) when referring to the Lijing among the Five Classics, while often forgetting that most of the Classics are in fact composites. The Shi contains odes from different dynastic periods and intended for diverse ceremonials. The Shu, whatever the true dates of the fifty texts assembled therein may be is, even more diverse. The Liji is by all means a collection of different writings on a great variety of subjects. The Zhouyi is combines the sixty-four hexagrams (gua) with a set of oracular pronouncements. These are clearly two different entities and the exact relationship between the two remains a matter of discussion. And then there is the matter of the commentarial traditions, the zhuan. Both the Zhouyi and the Chunqiu obtained their status as Classics later than the others and both owe this status in the first place to the yuanyi that have been tagged on to them rather than to their core texts. The traditional title of “Five Classics” must therefore be understood in the sense that in China “five” may denote a total figure rather than the true number of texts. This exact number of different texts assembled under the general title of “Wujing” is for the moment hard to asses because, as noted above, in many instances the yuanyi may be considered as important as the core texts themselves. They should therefore be included in the tally and equally part of the translation program.
While keeping a traditional stance as to the definition of the Wujing, the present program will also take into account modern text critical research. The contribution of the studies in the phonology, etymology and syntax of the Wujing cannot be ignored. The data provided by archaeology are also extremely important. The ever increasing number of ancient manuscript versions for almost all the jing and zhuan is of paramount importance. For the Yili and for the Yijing we now have nearly complete early versions that offer important variant readings. The newly discovered “guwen” chapters of the Shangshu may well completely reverse the accepted views on the textual history of this canon. If it can be ascertained that the same hoard of bamboo slips from the middle of the Warring States period also contains parts from the now lost Yue (Book of Music), then we cannot bypass it. Thus our new translation of the Wujing must be based on up-to-date critical text editions and these have to be elaborated in conjunction with the translation work itself.
The initial translation will be in English. It will attempt to do justice to the original meaning (yuanyi) of the text, but without being literal. Neither should the translation be unduly influenced by a particular commentarial tradition. The general idea is to render the original text in a way that it conveys the sense of what is written in conformity to modern usage. Accuracy must be combined with readability.
For each of the Classics and their major subdivisions there will be short introductory essays providing information concerning the history and the significance of the text in question. After this, the Wujing should be read for themselves. There will be no footnotes. Truly important variant readings can be signaled in the margins. The remaining critical materials should be published, if deemed useful, in separate volumes.
On the basis of the English translation, but with continuous reference to the original texts, the Wujing will then be translated into the following languages: French, German, Spanish, Russian, Arabic, Hebrew, Hindi and Malay. These different languages have been chosen because of the number of speakers or for their cultural significance.
Fuzhou, November, 2008
Kristofer Schipper and Yuan Bingling
Annex: Biographical Notes of Kristofer Schipper and Yuan Bingling
Professor Kristofer Schipper (born 1934) is Member of the Royal Netherlands Academy of Arts and Sciences. He obtained his PhD from the University of Paris (Ecole Pratique des Hautes Etudes) in 1962, and his French State Doctorate in 1983. After having been a Fellow of the Ecole Française d’Extrême-Orient, he was appointed in 1972 professor of Chinese Religions in Paris. In 1992 he was also given the chair of Chinese History at the University of Leiden. As Director of the Daozang Project of the European Science Foundation, he organized and edited the first complete scientific study of the 1500 works contained in the Daoist Canon of the Ming Dynasty published by The University of Chicago Press in 2004. He received the Knighthood of the Legion of Honor of France, the Golden Medal of the Friendship of the Chinese People, the Lifelong Residence Permit of the People’s Republic of China, etc. Professor Schipper is presently Specially Appointed Professor of Fuzhou University.
Professor Yuan Bingling (born 1962) studied Chinese Classical Philology (Jingxue) at the University of Fudan, and Social History of China at Xiamen University. In 1992 she obtained a scholarship for advanced studies at the University of Leiden, where she obtained her PhD in 1998, under the supervision of Professor Leonard Blussé. Her PhD thesis was published by the University of Leiden under the title “Chinese Democracies – A Study of the Kongsi’s of West Borneo (1770-1884).” This book has earned her wide acclaim in scholarly circles. Professor Yuan returned to her Motherland in 2001, and is now full professor of Chinese History of Fuzhou University.
《中华五经》的系统翻译，是一项功在千秋的伟大工程。——中国教育部副部长郝平
由国家教育部汉办孔子学院总部主办的“五经”研究与翻译国际学术委员会第一次工作会议在北京香山饭店开幕。中共中央政治局常委李长春、国务委员刘延东发来贺信，预祝会议圆满成功。教育部副部长郝平致开幕词。开幕式由国家汉办主任许琳主持。据许琳介绍，包括饶宗颐、汪德迈、施舟人、许嘉璐、汤一介、浦安迪、袁行霈、裴宜理、李学勤、朱维铮、普鸣等在内的来自中国、美国、加拿大、英国、法国、德国、荷兰、比利时、意大利和以色列等国家和地区的30多位知名学者，将在3天会议期间商讨与项目有关的翻译体例、底本、出版等问题。委员会将首先对“五经”进行英译，力争三年半出齐“五经”的英译本。选定翻译的“五经”经文大约70万字，译成英文约100万个单词。法语、德语、西班牙语、俄语、阿拉伯语、希伯来语、印地语和马来语8个语种版本，也将在英译本定稿后尽快开始翻译。
2008年夏，国家汉办暨孔子学院总部正式立项“五经”翻译项目，并开始广泛接触海内外经学界、训诂学界、考古学界、翻译界等领域众多学者，筹备成立“五经”研究与翻译国际学术委员会，同时还在国内学术界、国际汉学界相关领域聘请杰出学者担任委员会首批成员，确保这项大型国际汉学合作项目的顺利实施。这也是新中国成立60年来，我国政府首次在世界范围内组织开展对中华核心文化典籍的翻译工作。
功在千秋——国际汉学盛举：施舟人主持多国学者用八种语言翻译《中华五经》。“五经”是指除了汉以前失传的《乐》以外的《诗》、《书》、《礼》、《易》和《春秋》。2000多年来，“五经”一直被公认为是中国文化最重要的经典。“五经”代表了中华文明的核心部分，虽然前人做过努力，“五经”中有的经曾有过英文、法文或德文译本，但大部分译本已经非常陈旧，有的甚至是在100多年前翻译的。迄今为止，一套适应世界各国人民学习、了解中国文化需要的多语种译本却不存在，翻译工作的实施旨在尽快结束“五经”缺少翻译译本、传播受限的的局面。
为系统翻译《五经》热烈鼓掌
据新华社电，国家汉办昨天在京宣布，将组织国际学术委员会，由海内外相关领域学者共同翻译《五经》。《五经》研究与翻译国际学术委员会由来自中国、美国、加拿大、英国、法国、德国、荷兰、比利时、意大利和以色列等国家的30多位知名学者组成，委员会第一次工作会议在已在北京召开，将用3天的时间具体商讨翻译的进程安排。
《五经》，即汉以前失传的《乐》以外的《诗》、《书》、《礼》、《易》和《春秋》，两千多年来，《五经》一直被公认为是中国古典文化最重要的经典，是中国古典思想体系的形成和中华帝国体制建立的主要理论依据，历代也将《五经》作为科举考试的经典文献。此次翻译《五经》，是一件有利于中国传统文化走向现代，并进入国际文化舞台的大好事，我们为此事击掌欢呼。
首先，此次翻译《五经》的重要意义在于，这是新中国成立以来，我国以政府部门的名义首次在世界范围内组织开展对中华核心文化典籍的翻译工作，这表明中国当前有力量也有号召力动员国际上的专家研究和传播中国优秀的古典文化，也说明中国传统文化越来越受到国际上的重视。
其次，此次翻译《五经》的重要意义还在于，作为中华文明的重要组成部分，《五经》将有系统性的，符合现代语言习惯的全新的多种语言译本，这对于中国古代的文化典籍为国际文化界所充分认识和正真接受，意义非常重大。以色列有古典的《摩西五经》，印度有古典的《四吠陀》，中国的《五经》与之相比，还不逊色，中国古人在《五经》中所阐述的人与自然统一的思想，以及天人和谐的理念，在当今世界，仍有重要的启示。
再次，此次翻译《五经》，将提供比较规范化的译本，据介绍，每一译本都将附有一篇导读性的前言，介绍该经书的历史背景、内容及意义。译文力求做到读者能够通过阅读经文而自明其义。而特别重要的经文异字将在页边空白处标明。必要时，还将出版专门的校勘记。这对于比较系统准确地了解中国《五经》典籍，将起非常重要的作用。
此外，此次翻译《五经》，将有国际学术委员会组织翻译多种语言的译本，在词义上风格上将是比较统一的。委员会首先对《五经》进行英译，将原文翻译成符合时代语言特色的译本，力争让不同文化背景的读者能够比较容易理解并接受，然后，根据英译本并参照经文底本，再组织人员翻译法语、德语、西班牙语、俄语、阿拉伯语、希伯来语、印地语和马来语等译本。显然，这是很系统的多语言译本，整体性地向世界推介中国古典文化，意义非凡。
长期以来，也陆续有对《五经》的翻译，但有的译本时间久，有的译本是节译；有的是中国人译的，有的是外国专家译的，并且多数是个人单干的，由一个多国专家组成的翻译研究团体来统一翻译，这是第一次，这可以使译本更准确，更符合时代风格和更具有所译语言的风格习惯，影响也将更大。
《五经》是中国文化典籍中之经典，是中国文化的精华表现，这次系统整体多语言的国际性翻译活动，是中国古典文化进军国际文化舞台的战略性行动，它将对于世界文化界了解中国，了解中国悠久的文化思想史，了解中国古典文化的现代意义等，都起重要的推动作用。
以前，由美国的汉学家费正清，日本的铃木大左，英国的科学史家李约瑟，瑞典汉学家马悦然等研究介绍中国古典文化，这对于中国文化传播世界当然是非常重要的，但，如今，中国的国际地位在提高，由我们来组织国际性的学术委员会译介中国典籍，这表明我们对自己的古典文化更有自信心，也表明我们自己能向世界喊出评价中国文化的更响亮的声音。这，当然该给予热烈的掌声！
《五经》研究与翻译国际学术委员会一次会议举行
以重新编译、传播中国儒家文化原典为宗旨，《五经》研究与翻译国际学术委员会第一次工作会议7月27日在京举行。中共中央政治局常委李长春、国务委员刘延东分别发来贺信。全国人大常委会原副委员长许嘉璐等出席。
教育部副部长郝平作大会致词。郝平指出，《五经》的系统翻译，是一项功在当代、利在千秋的伟大工程，中国政府高度重视这项工作的开展，希望各位专家学者献计献策，深入交流，密切合作。
郝平指出，《五经》不仅支配了2000多年中国封建社会的上层建筑和意识形态，而且影响到中国社会的各个方面，成为许多朝代科举取士的考试科目，也在全世界产生了广泛影响，堪与以色列古经《摩西五经》和印度古经《吠陀经》相媲美。其思想对当今世界仍具有重要的启迪意义。但由于历史原因，《五经》研究与翻译没有引起足够重视，不仅在世界范围内的认知度还不高，而且至今没有一套完整的适应世界各国人民进一步认识、学习中国文化需要的多语种译本，个别经文只有英文或法文译本，有的译本甚至还是一二百年前传教士翻译的。这种现状非常令人遗憾。
郝平强调，各位学者在《五经》翻译上达成的共识非常重要：一是要重视继承前人的成果；二是要参考借鉴近30年来中国对经学研究所取得的重要成果；三是要重视中国大陆的考古新发现和由此带来的经学研究新成果。
按照《五经》研究与翻译国际学术委员会的计划，新《五经》将根据英译本并参照经文底本，翻译成法语、德语、西班牙语、俄语、阿拉伯语、希伯来语、印地语和马来语等8种语言。目前，选定翻译的《五经》经文约70万字，译成英文约100万个单词，2500页，其他语种的译本有所不同。编译将忠实于原文，尽量不受某一注疏或学术流派的影响，将原文翻译成符合时代语言特色的译本，既保证译文的精确性，也考虑译文的可读性，使不同文化背景的读者都能理解并接受。英译本《五经》预计三年半后面世，其他语种版本《五经》的编译工作，将在英译本定稿后启动。
据了解，现存的《五经》译本大多是100多年前的作品。其中最著名的是，1872年英国人理雅各在香港出版的英译《尚书》、《诗经》和《春秋》，后来又出版的《礼记》和《易经》。另一套并不完全的早期《五经》译本，是1889年至1916年法国神父顾塞芬在河北陆续出版的法译本，但该版本早已绝版，内容也已陈旧。二战后，虽然也出现过为数不多的新译本，但因某些原因，一些质量较高的译本迟迟没有面世。
来自中国、美国、加拿大、英国、法国、德国、以色列等11个国家和地区的33名知名汉学家会聚一堂，就《五经》的翻译体例、底本、出版等问题，展开深入探讨。
已经实践了两年了 教育孩子其实应该是自己的成长让孩子看到，孩子的成长被自己关注到；伴着古典音乐诵读经典和孩子一同成长 王博士讲得太对了，我儿子小学为了升初中学奥数，结果到初中各科成绩就数学最差，而且畏惧思考，真是后遗症啊，早知就读经好了，就不会又浪费时间又伤了学习积极性。 打不开呀。。。。 传统文化难到没有弊端，中国女人那么多代人裹小脚，有哪个儒家的贤人站出来说应该禁止这种不人道的行为吗？ 回复 everns 的帖子
是的！你的奶奶是小脚，可是你爸爸却不说句公道话。呵呵！ 回复 wangweihua41 的帖子
请注意你的素质，维护儒家都是这种人吗？