文學的國籍、有國籍馬華文學、與「入臺」（前）馬華作家：兼與黃錦樹和張錦忠商榷

Literary Nationality, Ma Hua Literature with Nationality, and (Former) Ma Hua Writers with Taiwanese Citizenship: Cum Discussion with Ng Kim Chew and Tee Kim Tong

被指稱為「有國籍」與「無國籍華文文學」的馬華文學，其國籍該以何為判准？馬華旅臺、「在臺」文學與臺灣文學維繫著怎樣的交集關係，它們之間的邊際線為何？過去論者淺涉輒止，令它們處於模棱兩可的迷糊與曖昧地帶。本文取狹義的文學定義立論，以國籍作為文學的身份座標，以便妥當地界定並解答這些疑惑。文學國籍最大的含義是作家的語言與地域語境，作家身世能指的相應所指。此種身份隱喻並非集體編碼或政治掛帥，而是探掘國籍之於文學不可免除的影響，而翻譯馬華文學就是國籍賦予文學意義之歸位。馬華旅臺文學是臺灣週邊或外緣文學，而「在臺」文學也不是臺灣文學。旅臺、「在臺」文學與臺灣文學是歷時性關係，與馬華文學是共時性（又含小部分歷時性）關係，臺灣文學與馬華文學則是共時性關係。入籍臺灣的前馬華作家作品不能再視作馬華文學，否則等於挾臺灣文學劫持馬華文學。唯有強調文學的國籍、去離散精神與去悲觀現代主義，馬華文學方免於迷失方向。

What are the criteria of nationality when Ma Hua literature is known as Chinese-language literature “with nationality” and “without nationality”? What is the intersection among the literature of Ma Hua sojourners in Taiwan, Ma Hua literature in Taiwan, and Taiwanese literature per se? These questions have been examined inconclusively. The present study proposes that conclusions might be reached if a narrow definition of literature is brought to bear, i.e. literary nationality. Literary nationality means the personalized language and regional context of a writer. It deigns to explore the inevitable influences that nationality exerts on literature—but not in political respects. Thus, translation of Ma Hua literature into Malay language marks a significant return to literary nationality. The literature of Ma Hua sojourners in Taiwan might just be considered a peripheral or exotic part of Taiwanese literature, while Ma Hua literature in Taiwan is not an integral component of Taiwanese literature due to their diachronic relationship. As for the writers who became citizens of Taiwan, their works can no longer be called examples of Ma Hua literature, lest Ma Hua literature be appropriated by Taiwanese literature. The only way to prevent Ma Hua literature from losing its direction is by emphasizing its literary nationality, versus diasporic emotion and pessimistic modernism.