東南アジア研究
Online ISSN : 2424-1377
Print ISSN : 0563-8682
ISSN-L : 0563-8682
論文
ポルトガル領ティモールにおける19世紀後半から20世紀初頭の宣教テキストのテトゥン語訳
―西洋中心主義的「誤訳」とその社会的・学問的影響―
土屋 喜生
著者情報
ジャーナル フリー

2018 年 55 巻 2 号 p. 139-168

詳細
抄録

Observers of Timorese culture have long maintained a preoccupation with the term Lulik. Its meanings have fluctuated in the past one-and-a-half centuries—with prominent associations including “idolatry,” “the sacred” or “prohibited,” “black magic,” “Timorese animist expression,” or “the core of Timorese culture.” But Timorese have also commonly used the word as an adjective. This paper attempts to trace the origin of the bifurcated usages of the word Lulik through a reading of early missionary efforts to translate Portuguese religious texts into Tetun since the 1870s. In the early European missionaries’ ethnographic reports, Lulik was identified as the Other of Catholicism, the opponent to be suppressed. It was adopted as the translation of “idolatry” in missionary Tetun texts. However, it was impossible to maintain the singular pejorative meaning of Lulik, as the Timorese preferred to call Catholic priests nai-lulik (Lord Lulik). A Timorese collaborator on Bible translation further took advantage of the missionaries’ ignorance of Timorese culture and language: Jesus was called Maromak Oan (the ritual ruler in Wehali) and liurai (the indigenous executive authority), while Caiaphas became the head sacerdote (the Portuguese word for “priest”) and Pontius Pilate was called Em-Boot (the title for a Portuguese governor). The upshot was that an attempt to present Catholicism as a European religion failed in Tetun, and the Passion became a story of an innocent native who was executed by the colonial and religious authorities. The missionaries’ Europe-centric mistranslation of Lulik and the Timorese cosmology, however, strongly influenced the way the academic discourse on Lulik has developed in the following generations.

著者関連情報
© 2018 京都大学東南アジア地域研究研究所
前の記事 次の記事
feedback
Top