Views: 18850|Replies: 37

“我”生我的娃,关你什么样事? [Copy link] 中文

Rank: 4

Post time 2009-6-30 23:12:45 |Display all floors

可贵的“他人意识”
Keep Others in Mind: A Consciousness That Should Be Treasured


上世纪中叶的中国式“集体主义”,自从在世纪末之前,逐渐分解以及还原为对个人和个体的尊重,初步建立起个人的权益保障系统之后,“我们”——这个在计划经济时代使用频率极高的词,已被更为普遍的"我"所代替。我喜欢说“我”,也因此欣赏其他的那些“我”。如果没有“我”的确立,没有无数“我”的合作,“我们”必定是空洞、脆弱、空心化以至于不堪一击的。

Since before the end of last century, which witnessed the gradual dissolution of the Chinese-style “collectivism” that prevailed in the middle of the century and the restoration of respect for individuals as well as the initial establishment of a system that is geared toward protecting the legitimate rights and interests of individuals, the most frequently used pronoun in the era of planned economy, i.e. “we”, has been replaced by “I”, a pronoun that is enjoying an even wider circulation. I like to refer to myself as “I”, and am therefore ready to appreciate the “I” of others. Without the establishment of “I” and the ensuing cooperation of innumerable “I’s”, the entity referred to as “we” is necessarily void, fragile and hollow and cannot withstand even a single blow.


然而,在“我”和“我们”之间,是以“他人”作为连接点的。“我”因“他人”而成为“我 ”;“我们”因“他人”而成为“我们”。当“我们”过度地强化、放大“我”,而舍弃“他人”的时候,“我”便处于四面受敌的孤立无援之中。在我们的传统习性中,“他人”这一概念,更多的情况下,只是一种被供奉的虚设牌位。我们的成语中曾有“以邻为壑”一词,可以佐证;有“只扫自家门前雪,哪管他人瓦上霜” 的谚语,可以证言。即便在集体主义理想教育最为鼎盛之时,“他人”不仅未能成为国人的自觉意识,“他人”反而意味着告密、背叛、异己、危险、离间等等。这种体制下的集体主义文化,终于导致了“他人即地狱”的严酷后果。闻“他人”而心颤,近“他人”而丧胆。也许正是由于对“他人”的恐惧,“文革”之后,“我们”迅速土崩瓦解,“我”自仰天长啸——而“他人”却不得不退出公众的视线,淡化为一个可有可无的虚词,成为公民道德的模糊地带。

But between “I” and “we”, be it noted, stands “others” which acts as a connection point. It is in relation to “others” that both “I” and “we” derive their respective identities. When “we” excessively strengthens and magnifies “I” while at the same time showing no regard for “others”, “I” will find itself in an isolated and helpless position beset by enemies on all sides. In our tradition, the concept of “others”, more often than not, is nothing but an empty term to which we do not attach the slightest importance, as attested by such idioms and sayings in our language as “use your neighbor’s field as drain (shift your trouble onto others)” and “let every man sweep the snow from before his own door, and not trouble himself about the frost on his neighbor’s tiles”. Even in the height of collectivistic education, “others” not only did not become part of the people’s self-consciousness, but became a synonym for informing, betraying, alienating, jeopardizing and estranging etc. The collectivistic culture fostered under this kind of regime eventually led to the harsh consequence of “Hell is other people”, where you would feel a chill down your spine at the mere mention of “others” and you would never approach “others” without due precaution. Perhaps it is precisely out of this dread of “others” that after the political chaos caused by the “cultural revolution” (1966-1976), “we” rapidly disintegrated and fell apart, followed by “I” being given free rein while “others” withdrawing from public sight as an empty word void of substance and becoming a blurred field of civic virtues.

五十年代以来,人口的高速增长,造成生存空间的高密度化;人口压力长期形成经济发展与卫生保健的沉重负担;部分农村以及偏远地区的计划生育仍然阻力重重。“我”生我的娃,关你什么样事?在人口问题上,可有“他人”的意识么?餐馆大肆收购、杀戮、烹煮野生动物为牟取暴利;食客面不改色食用野生动物以饱“口福”或炫耀财富;官吏不惜以野生珍稀动物作为最高规格的宴席;“贿赂”上级领导为自己铺设升官晋级的阶梯——在这个破坏自然生态的“人链”中,可有“他人”的位置么?长期以来,城市与乡村的公共卫生系统始终没有得到真正重视:办公室的脏乱差、公共场所的日常消毒防护、公共厕所的洗手设备、污水处理、生活垃圾等等。但公共卫生的管理者与被管理者的心态,却有着惊人的共识:这又不是我一个人的事情。在这些被忽略的公共卫生死角中,可有“他人”的概念?日积累月的民众生活卫生习惯中,沉淀下多少恶习陋性——随地吐痰、随地大小便、随地抛弃果皮塑料袋、就餐分餐制难以推行、酒后驾车、公共场所吸烟等等……“我们”的传统文化是“不患寡,患不均”——在这利益与灾祸均享均沾、“同甘共苦”的行为惯性中,可有愿为“他人”避免灾祸而自控自律的一份责任感?

The rapid growth of population since the 1950s has caused the high density of our living space. The population pressure has long become a heavy burden on the economic development and the healthcare system. Birth control in some rural and remote areas is still confronted with numerous obstacles. It’s none of your business how many babies “I” chooses to have! On the issue of population, can there be seen any consideration for “others”? Restaurants procuring, slaughtering and cooking wild animals for staggering profit, diners relishing with an easy conscience these “delicacies” either for the food’s own sake or just as a way of showing off their wealth, and government officials deeming wild-animal food as an indispensable component of the banquet given in honor of their higher authorities with an eye to winning their favor and having quicker promotions: in this “human chain” that causes damage to the natural ecology, is there any position reserved for “others”? For a long time, the public health systems in the urban and rural areas have never been given serious attention, as witnessed by messy office environment, neglected daily disinfection of public places, unavailability of hand-washing facilities in some public lavatories, poorly-managed sewage treatment, and scattered household rubbishes etc. But, strikingly, what underlies the attitudes of the administrators and the public alike is the same mentality: It is not my sole responsibility. In this neglected corner of public health, can there be seen any concept of “others”? The corrupt customs developed and accumulated in the course of time from folks’ bad living habits are simply beyond count, including, among others, spitting on the ground, defecating and urinating all over the place, littering, stubborn preference for dish sharing rather than the more hygienic practice of separate dining, drunk driving, and smoking in the public place. Given the traditional culture of “we” in which one concerns himself not with scarcity but rather with uneven distribution, in this conduct norm of sharing benefits and burdens equally and staying together for better or for worse, who would take on the responsibility of exercising self-control and self-discipline to prevent disaster from befalling others?


我们似乎一直在无意中铺设着迎接它到来的无障碍通道。然而,在公共领域里,“零距离”是有害的。距离便是“他人”,而“他人”即社会公德。因为在这个世界上,除了“你”和“我”之外,地球上更多存在的是陌生的“他”——“他人”,还有“它” ——与人类共存的动物朋友们。正是为了“我”的安全与自由,请不要再“唯我独尊”,而多些对“他人”的关爱吧。“我”的自由是他人自由的终结。而他人的自由,最终才能成全“我”的自由。

We seem to have been unwittingly paving the way for the realization of this prospect. In public field, however, “zero-distance” is harmful, because distance means “others”, which in turn means civic virtues. In this world, besides “you” and “I”, the earth is populated by multitudinous unfamiliar “others”, including other people and other animals that co-inhabit the earth with human beings. It is precisely in the interests of the safety and freedom of “I” that, please, renounce egoism and show more concern and care for “others”, because, while the freedom of “I” is the termination of that of others, giving freedom to others will ultimately fulfill the freedom of “I”.

把自己未跳过龙门的译文贴在这里,请大家批评指正 :)

[ Last edited by chienl at 2009-7-1 02:17 PM ]
The bluest of all souls

Use magic tools Report

Rank: 4

Post time 2009-6-30 23:22:36 |Display all floors
上世纪中叶的中国式“集体主义”
the Chinese-style “collectivism” that prevailed in the middle of the century


首先,jordan_c_fan和laoxianggg在“上世纪中叶”的译法上对sympathizer的批评,对我也适用,确实在该时间的内涵上,不够敏感,没有进行更客观的界定。

[ Last edited by chienl at 2009-6-30 11:28 PM ]
The bluest of all souls

Use magic tools Report

Rank: 6Rank: 6

Post time 2009-7-1 16:39:37 |Display all floors
这篇中文,有些地方不是那么好懂,或者说表达有毛病,恐怕翻译的时候要先“消化”一番。否则,按中文字面直译难以叫英文读者理解。比如最后一句:
“我”的自由是他人自由的终结。而他人的自由,最终才能成全“我”的自由。
... because, while the freedom of “I” is the termination of that of others, giving freedom to others will ultimately fulfill the freedom of “I”.

抛开中文,你如何理解这句英文?

Use magic tools Report

Rank: 6Rank: 6

Post time 2009-7-1 17:03:46 |Display all floors
上世纪中叶的中国式“集体主义”,自从在世纪末之前,逐渐分解以及还原为对个人和个体的尊重,初步建立起个人的权益保障系统之后,“我们”——这个在计划经济时代使用频率极高的词,已被更为普遍的"我"所代替。

Since before the end of last century, which witnessed the gradual dissolution of the Chinese-style “collectivism” that prevailed in the middle of the century and the restoration of respect for individuals as well as the initial establishment of a system that is geared toward protecting the legitimate rights and interests of individuals, the most frequently used pronoun in the era of planned economy, i.e. “we”, has been replaced by “I”, a pronoun that is enjoying an even wider circulation.


这个句子似太长。虽然中文是一句,在英文中可以考虑断开,否则句子结构弄得太复杂,从句套从句,不易理解。

"In the era of planned economy", 在 planned前要有 the.

Use magic tools Report

Rank: 4

Post time 2009-7-1 17:10:58 |Display all floors
Originally posted by ptbptb at 2009-7-1 16:39
这篇中文,有些地方不是那么好懂,或者说表达有毛病,恐怕翻译的时候要先“消化”一番。否则,按中文字面直译难以叫英文读者理解。比如最后一句:
“我”的自由是他人自由的终结。而他人的自由,最终才能成全 ...


确实,ptb老师提出了一个值得每一个译者认真思考和注意的问题,就是:译者在翻译完后,是否能确保译文的每个句子,在所在的语境中,make sense? 以及更大的层面上,译文本身,能否脱离原文,而独立成篇,构成一个有机的整体,具有独立的生命?

说实话,最后这一段,及其与前面的衔接关系,以及其思想逻辑和内涵,从文字形式看,我确实比较茫然。所以在翻译上,只是尽力忠实原文形式,没有过多考虑译文到底传达的是什么意思,读者读到这样的信息,会是什么反应,等等。
The bluest of all souls

Use magic tools Report

Rank: 4

Post time 2009-7-1 17:20:38 |Display all floors
Originally posted by ptbptb at 2009-7-1 17:03


这个句子似太长。虽然中文是一句,在英文中可以考虑断开,否则句子结构弄得太复杂,从句套从句,不易理解。

"In the era of planned economy", 在 planned前要有 the.


确实少了一个the。

至于断句,虽然原文句子确实挺长,而且不是很顺,但其框架是单一的,意思也只有一层,前后关系比较紧密,感觉如果能用一句表达,还是不分开的比较好。当然,我的句子,确实失之臃肿。如果大家来处理,也许同样可以一句完成,且句子顺畅,意思清楚。很希望看到这样的译文。

真要分开,恐怕会有些破坏文意,毕竟原句本身就是一个复杂的单句,就是,从什么以来,什么取代了什么。:)
The bluest of all souls

Use magic tools Report

Rank: 4

Post time 2009-7-1 17:28:35 |Display all floors
上世纪中叶的中国式“集体主义”
原译: the Chinese-style “collectivism” that prevailed in the middle of the century
改译: the Chinese-style “collectivism” that prevailed following the kommunist vicotry in 1949
The bluest of all souls

Use magic tools Report

You can't reply post until you log in Log in | register

BACK TO THE TOP
Contact us:Tel: (86)010-84883548, Email: blog@chinadaily.com.cn
Blog announcement:| We reserve the right, and you authorize us, to use content, including words, photos and videos, which you provide to our blog
platform, for non-profit purposes on China Daily media, comprising newspaper, website, iPad and other social media accounts.