原文： It is certain no literal translation can be just to an excellent original in a superior language: but it is a great mistake to imagine (as many have done) that a rash paraphrase can make amends for this general defect; which is no less in danger to lose the spirit of an ancient, by deviating into the modern manners of expression. If there be sometimes a darkness, there is often a light in antiquity, which nothing better preserves than a version almost literal. I know no liberties one ought to take, but those which are necessary to transfusing the spirit of the original, and supporting the poetical style of the translation: and I will venture to say, there have not been more men misled in former times by a servile, dull adherence to the letter, than have been deluded in ours by a chimerical, insolent hope of raising and improving their author. It is not to be doubted, that the fire of the poem is what a translator should principally regard, as it is most likely to expire in his managing: however, it is his safest way to be content with preserving this to his utmost in the whole, without endeavouring to be more than he finds his author is, in any particular place. It is a great secret in writing, to know when to be plain, and when poetical and figurative; and it is what Homer will teach us, if we will but follow modestly in his footsteps. Where his diction is bold and lofty, let us raise ours as high as we can; but where his is plain and humble, we ought not to be deterred from imitating him by the fear of incurring the censure of a mere English critic. Nothing that belongs to Homer seems to have been more commonly mistaken than the just pitch of his style: some of his translators having swelled into fustian in a proud confidence of the sublime; others sunk into flatness, in a cold and timorous notion of simplicity. Methinks I see these different followers of Homer, some sweating and straining after him by violent leaps and bounds (the certain signs of false mettle), others slowly and servilely creeping in his train, while the poet himself is all the time proceeding with an unaffected and equal majesty before them. However, of the two extremes one could sooner pardon frenzy than frigidity; no author is to be envied for such commendations, as he may gain by that character of style, which his friends must agree together to call simplicity, and the rest of the world will call dulness. There is a graceful and dignified simplicity, as well as a bold and sordid one; which differ as much from each other as the air of a plain man from that of a sloven: it is one thing to be tricked up, and another not to be dressed at all. Simplicity is the mean between ostentation and rusticity. 译文：
论古典文学的翻译
可以肯定，对于高贵语言著成的作品来说，直译是不恰当的：但认为粗略的解释可以弥补这一普遍的过失更是大错特错;滥用现代的表达方式，也会使古代作品的精神丧失殆尽。如果说在古典作品中不时有黑暗愚昧之处，其中也常有光明智慧的地方。而这些光明与智慧在近乎直译的译文中能更好地留存。我认为，文字的自由取决于是否是传达原作精神所必需，是否有助于译作诗风的保存。我敢说，过去虽有不少亦步亦趋、机械地追求字面对应的迷途译者，但狂妄地抱有改进原作的不实理想的译者也不在少数。毋庸置疑，诗的火焰是每个翻译者都理应重视的，因为它在翻译过程中更加容易消失：然而，最安全的做法就是满足于从整体篇章上尽力保留这种特质，不要试图在任何细节上超越作者。写作的奥秘在于知道何时平淡，何时绮丽；如果我们肯虚心追随荷马的脚步，一定能从他身上学到这一点。他用词豪放恢宏之处，我们也要努力挥毫泼墨；他用词平淡朴素之处，我们也不能因怕受到几个评论家的责难便不加以模仿。对于荷马来说，其最遭人考(试*大误解之处莫过适当的风格高度：有些译者一味盲信其无处不崇高，而致使译文浮夸失真；另外的一些译者沉迷于其简朴，因而过于拘谨呆板。我看到荷马的追随着不尽相同：有些人奋步急追，汗流浃背（这是愚勇的表现），另外一些人缓慢、卑恭地追随其后，而诗人自己却庄严从容地继续前行。然而，在两个极端当中，狂热比冷淡更加容易得到宽容；没有人会嫉妒由冷淡的风格而博得赞赏的作家，其友人一定称之为简朴，而他人则称之为枯燥。优雅庄严的简朴是存在的，同样也有突兀暗淡的简朴；两者的区别犹如朴素人与邋遢者面貌的不同：着装打扮与衣着不整完全是两码事。简朴乃是介于虚饰与粗鄙之间的一种品性。
