本文以中港臺及日韓各地設有翻譯研究所的10 所大學為對象， 分析其口筆譯圖書典藏的數量及類別，透過以研究所為主體的教學單 位圖書典藏內涵，探索其教學及研究上的思考方向及屬性定位。由於 中港臺各翻譯研究所碩士班，都以中英文為最重要的語言組合。也為 了便於比較對照，本文的調查對象也將以中英文圖書為觀察分析的目 標。至於日韓兩國，則僅以英文書籍為調查對象，以收比較對照之功。 在分類基準方面，參酌Holmes（1972/2001）及Toury（1995, p. 10）提出的翻譯學結構圖為基礎，做為本研究的分類指標。其中包含 翻譯理論、描述性翻譯研究、應用翻譯研究等三大類，其次類劃分之 細項則共計10 項。 透過本研究的調查與分析，可以回顧過去數十年來，翻譯教學 在東亞地區的發展特徵，並作為今後本學科前瞻性規劃時的佐證。而 另一方面，則對於翻譯學科的分類，藉由圖書館藏去重新檢視前人研 究的有效性，並補充其中尚未涵蓋的內容，以重新審視本學科分類的 階層架構。

This paper examines the translation and interpretation book archives at ten universities with graduate institutes of translation and interpretation, focusing on the quantities of the books and how the books are categorized. The universities are located in China, Hong Kong, Taiwan, Japan and South Korea. This paper also explores the concepts and positioning for education and research that can be derived from the book archives at graduate institutes. Masters level graduate programs of translation and interpretation in China, Hong Kong and Taiwan emphasize Chinese and English as the most important language combination. To facilitate comparison, this paper focuses its observations and analyses on books about translation between Chinese and English. In order to produce a meaningful comparison, the analysis for Japanese and South Korean institutes is limited to English language books. The basic criteria for classification in this paper are based on the map of translation studies by Holmes (1972/2001) and Toury (1995, p. 10). The three primary categories are theoretical translation studies, descriptive translation studies and applied translation studies. These three primary categories are further divided into ten subcategories. The research and analysis in this paper will allow researchers to reexamine the development of translation and interpretation education in East Asia over the last few decades, and can also be used as validating evidence in the future development of the translation and interpretation field. Additionally, the study of book archives assists in the reexamination of the effectiveness of prior research in the classification of translation studies, and helps to fill the gaps that prior research failed to address. Through this, the hierarchical structure of the classification of translation studies can be reexamined.