2015年韩素音翻译大赛翻译原文
第26届韩素音青年翻译奖大赛参赛试卷(英译汉)
![第26届韩素音青年翻译奖大赛参赛试卷(英译汉)](https://img.taocdn.com/s3/m/62e0dfeb710abb68a98271fe910ef12d2af9a9ab.png)
第26届韩素音青年翻译奖大赛参赛试卷(英译汉)请按照以下格式在答卷上填写选手信息栏姓名:_______性别:_____ 学号:_______年级专业:______________ 学院(全称):_________________ 联系方式:_____________英译汉竞赛原文:How the News Got Less MeanThe most read article of all time on BuzzFeed contains no photographs of celebrity nip slips and no inflammatory ranting. It’s a series of photos called “21 pictures that will restore your faith in humanity,” which has pulled in nearly 14 million visits so far. At Upworthy too, hope is the major draw. “This kid just died. What he lef t behind is wondtacular,” an Upworthy post about a terminally ill teen singer, earned 15 million views this summer and has raised more than $300,000 for cancer research.The recipe for attracting visitors to stories online is changing. Bloggers have traditionally turned to sarcasm and snark to draw attention. But the success of sites like BuzzFeed and Upworthy, whose philosophies embrace the viral nature of upbeat stories, hints that the Web craves positivity.The reason: social media. Researchers are discovering that people want to create positive images of themselves online by sharing upbeat stories. And with more people turning to Facebook and Twitter to find out what’s happening in the world, news stories may need to cheer up in order to court an audience. If social is the future of media, then optimistic stories might be media’s future.“When we started, the prevailing wisdom was that snark ruled the Internet,” says Eli Pariser, a co-founder of Upworthy. “And we just had a really different sense of what works.”“You don’t want to be that guy at the party who’s crazy and angry and ranting in the corner —it’s the same for Twitter or Facebook,” he says. “Part of what we’re trying to do with Upworthy is give people the tools to express a conscientious, thoughtful and positive identity in social media.”And the science appears to support Pariser’s philosophy. In a recent study from the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, researchers found that “up votes,” showing that a visitor liked a comment or story, begat more up votes on comments on the site, but “down votes” did not do the same. In fact, a single up vote increased the likelihood that someone else would like a comment by 32%, whereas a down vote had no effect. People don’t want to support the cranky commenter, the critic or the troll. Nor do they want to be that negative personality online.In another study published in 2012, Jonah Berger, author of Contagious: Why Things Catch On and professor of marketing at the Wharton School of the University of Pennsylvania, monitored the most e-mailed stories produced by the New York Times for six months and found that positive stories were more likely to make the list than negative ones.“What we share [or like] is almost like the car we drive or the clothes we wear,” he says. “It says something about us to other people. So people would much rather be seen as a Positive Polly than a Debbie Downer.”It’s not always that simple: Berger says that though positive pieces drew more traffic than negative ones, within the categories of positive and negative stories, those articles that elicited more emotion always led to more shares.“Take two negative emotions, for example: anger and sadness,” Berger says. “Both of those emotions would make the reader feel bad. But anger, a high arousal emotion, leads to more sharing, whereas sadness, a low arousal emotion, doesn’t. The same is true of the positive side: excitement and humor increase sharing, whereas contentment decreases sharing.”And while some popular BuzzFeed posts —like the recent “Is this the most embarrassing interview Fox News has ever done?” —might do their best to elicit shares through anger, both BuzzFeed and Upworthy recognize that their main success lies in creating positive viral material.“It’s not that people don’t share negative stories,” says Jack Shepherd, editorial director at BuzzFeed. “It just means that there’s a higher potential for positive stories to do well.”Upworthy’s mission is to highlight serious issues but in a hopeful way, encouraging readers to donate money, join organizations and take action. The strategy seems to be working: barely two years after its launch date (in March 2012), the site now boasts 30 million unique visitors per month, according to Upwort hy. The site’s average monthly unique visitors grew to 14 million people over its first six quarters — to put that in perspective, the Huffington Post had only about 2 million visitors in its first six quarters online.But Upworthy measures the success of a story not just by hits. The creators of the site only consider a post a success if it’s also shared frequently on social media. “We are interested in content that people want to share partly for pragmatic reasons,” Pariser says. “If you don’t have a g ood theory about how to appear in Facebook and Twitter, then you may disappear.”Nobody has mastered the ability to make a story go viral like BuzzFeed. The site, which began in 2006 as a lab to figure out what people share online, has used what it’s le arned to draw 60 million monthly unique visitors, according to BuzzFeed. (Most of that traffic comes from social-networking sites, driving readers toward BuzzFeed’s mix of cute animal photos and hard news.) By comparison the New York Times website, one of the most popular newspaper sites on the Web, courts only 29 million unique visitors each month, according to the Times.BuzzFeed editors have found that people do still read negative or critical stories, they just aren’t the posts they share with their friends. And those shareable posts are the ones that newsrooms increasingly prize.“Anecdotally, I can tell you people are just as likely to click on negative stories as they are to click on positive ones,” says Shepherd. “But they’re more likely to sh are positive stories. What you’re interested in is different from what you want your friends to see what you’re interested in.”So as newsrooms re-evaluate how they can draw readers and elicit more shares on Twitter and Facebook, they may look to BuzzFe ed’s and Upworthy’s happiness model for direction.“I think that the Web is only becoming more social,” Shepherd says. “We’re at a point where readers are your publishers. If news sites aren’t thinking about what it would mean for someone to share a story on social media, that coul be detrimental.”PS:1.请各位参赛选手关注我们的新浪微博:@安徽师范大学翻译协会2014,和腾讯微博:@安徽师范大学译协。
韩素音青翻译奖赛中文原文及参考译文和解析
![韩素音青翻译奖赛中文原文及参考译文和解析](https://img.taocdn.com/s3/m/7162f95b50e2524de5187ef8.png)
老来乐Delights in Growing Old六十整岁望七十岁如攀高山。
不料七十岁居然过了。
又想八十岁是难于上青天,可望不可即了。
岂知八十岁又过了。
老汉今年八十二矣。
这是照传统算法,务虚不务实。
现在不是提倡尊重传统吗?At the age of sixty I longed for a life span of seventy, a goal as difficult as a summit to be reached. Who would expect that I had reached it? Then I dreamed of living to be eighty, a target in sight but as inaccessible as Heaven. Out of my anticipation, I had hit it. As a matter of fact, I am now an old man of eighty-two. Such longevity is a grant bestowed by Nature; though nominal and not real, yet it conforms to our tradition. Is it not advocated to pay respect to nowadays?老年多半能悟道。
孔子说“天下有道”。
老子说“道可道”。
《圣经》说“太初有道”。
佛教说“邪魔外道”。
我老了,不免胡思乱想,胡说八道,自觉悟出一条真理: 老年是广阔天地,是可以大有作为的。
An old man is said to understand the Way most probably: the Way of good administration as put forth by Confucius, the Way that can be explained as suggested by Laotzu, the Word (Way) in the very beginning as written in the Bible and the Way of pagans as denounced by theBuddhists. As I am growing old, I can't help being given to flights of fancy and having my own Way of creating stories. However I have come to realize the truth: my old age serves as a vast world in which I can still have my talents employed fully and developed completely.七十岁开始可以诸事不做而拿退休金,不愁没有一碗饭吃,自由自在,自得其乐。
韩素音翻译大赛原文
![韩素音翻译大赛原文](https://img.taocdn.com/s3/m/258ff30b650e52ea551898e1.png)
Irritability is the tendency to get upset for reasons that seem – to other people – to be pretty minor. Your partner asks you how work went and the way they ask makes you feel intensely agitated. Your partner is putting knives and forks on the table before dinner and you mention (not for the first time) that the fork should go on the left hand side, not the right. They then immediately let out a huge sigh and sweep the cutlery onto the floor and tell you that you can xxxx-ing do it yourself if you know better. It was the most minor of criticisms and technically quite correct. And now they’ve exploded.There is so much irritability around and it exacts a huge daily cost on our collective lives, so we deserve to get a lot more curious about it: what is really going on for the irritable person? Why, really, are they getting so agitated? And instead of blaming them for getting het up about “little things”, we should do them the honour of working out why, in fact, these things may not be so minor after all.The journey begins by recognising the role of fear in irritability in couples. Behind most outbursts are cack-handed attempts to teach the other person something. There are things we’d like to point out, flaws that we can discern, remarks we feel we really must make, but our awareness of how to proceed is panicked and hasty. We give cack-handed, mean speeches, which bear no faith in the legitimacy (even the nobility) of the act of imparting advice. And when our partners are on the receiving end of t hese irritable “lessons”, they of course swiftly grow defensive and brittle in the face of suggestions which seem more like mean-minded and senseless assaults on their very natures rather than caring, gentle attempts to address troublesome aspects of joint life.The prerequisite of calm in a teacher is a degree of indifference as to the success or failure of the lesson. One naturally wants for things to go well, but if an obdurate pupil flunks trigonometry, it is – at base – their problem. Tempers can stay even because individual students do not have very much power over teachers’ lives. Fortunately, as not caring too much turns out to be a critical aspect of successful pedagogy.Yet this isn’t an option open to the fearful, irritable lover. They feel ineluctably led to deliver their “lessons” in a cataclysmic, frenzied manner (the door slams very loudly indeed) not because they are insane or vile (though one could easily draw these conclusions) so much as because they are terrified; terrified of spoiling what remains of their years on the planet in the company of someone who it appears cannot in any way understand a pivotal point about conversation, or cutlery, or the right time to order a taxi.One knows intuitively, when teaching a child, that only the utmost care and patience will ever work: one must never shout, one has to use extraordinary tact, one has to make ten compliments for every one negative remark and one must leave oneself plenty of time…All this wisdom we reliably forget in love’s cla ssroom, sadly because increasing the level of threat seldom hastens development. We do not grow more reasonable, more accepting of responsibility and more accurate about our weaknesses when our pride has been wounded, our integrity is threatened and our self-esteem has been violated.The complaint against the irritable person is that they are getting worked up over “nothing”. But symbols offer a way of seeing how a detail can stand for something much bigger and more serious. The groceries placed on the wrong table are not upsetting at all in themselves. But symbolically they mean your partner doesn’t care about domestic order; they muddle things up; they are messy. Or the question about one’s day is experienced as a symbol of interrogation, a lack of priva cy and a humiliation (because one’s days rarely go well enough).The solution is, ideally, to concentrate on what the bigger issue is. Entire philosophies of life stir and collide beneath the surface of apparently petty squabbles. Irritations are the outward indications of stifled debates between competing conceptions of existence. It’s to the bigger themes we need to try to get.In the course of discussions, one might even come face-to-face with that perennially surprising truth about relationships: that the other person is not an extension of oneself that has, mysteriously, gone off message. They are that most surprising of things, a different person, with a psyche all of their own, filled with a perplexing number of subtle, eccentric and unforeseen reasons for thinking as they do.The decoding may take time, perhaps half an hour or more of concentrated exploration for something that had until then seemed as if it would more rightfully deserve an instant.We pay a heavy price for this neglect; every conflict that ends in sour stalemate is a blocked capillary within the heart of love. Emotions will find other ways to flow for now, but with the accumulation of unresolved disputes, pathways will fur and possibilities for trust and generosity narrow.A last point. It may just be sleep or food: when a baby is irritable, we rarely feel the need to preach about self-control and a proper sense of proportion. It’s not simply that we fear the infant’s intellect might not quite b e up to it, but because we have a much better explanation of what is going on. We know that they’re acting this way –and getting bothered by any little thing – because they are tired, hungry, too hot or having some challenging digestive episode.The fact is, though, that the same physiological causes get to us all our lives. When we are tired, we get upset more easily; when we feel very hungry, it takes less to bother us. But it is immensely difficult to transfer the lesson in generosity (and accuracy) that we gain around to children and apply it to someone with a degree in business administration or a pilot’s license, or to whom we have been married for three-and-a-half years.We should try to see irritability for what it actually is: a confused, inarticulate, often shameful attempt to get us to understand how much someone is suffering and how urgently they need our help. We should – when we can manage it – attempt to help them out.。
韩素音翻译
![韩素音翻译](https://img.taocdn.com/s3/m/557250c99ec3d5bbfd0a7482.png)
Globalization全球化A fundamental shift is occurring in the world economy.世界经济正在发生巨大转变We are moving rapidly away from a world in which national economies were relatively self-contained entities, isolated from each other by barriers to cross-border trade and investment; by distance, time zones, and language; and by national differences in government regulation, culture, and business systems.由于距离、时区、语言差异,再加上各国的国家调控、文化和商业体系的不同,我们正在快速地脱离这个世界。
然而,在这个世界里,各国之间通过跨边界的贸易和投资壁垒与彼此相分离,各国的经济体曾经是相当独立的。
And we are moving toward a world in which barriers to cross-border trade and investment are tumbling;因为跨边界的贸易和投资壁垒正在被击破,所以我们正朝着这个世界前进perceived distance is shrinking due to advances in transportation and telecommunications technology;由于先进的运输和通讯技术,感知距离在缩短。
material culture is starting to look similar the world over;同样的,物质文化也开始渗透其中and national economies are merging into an interdependent global economic system.因此,各国经济正在步入一个全球相互依赖的经济体系The process by which this is occurring is commonly referred to as globalization.人们普遍称这个正在发展的过程为全球化Correspondent: Globalization has been one of the most important factors to affect business over the last twenty years.在近20年来,全球化已经成为影响商业发展的最重要的因素之一How is it different from what existed before? 现在于过去又有怎样的差异呢?Companies used to export to other parts of the world from a base in their home country.过去公司往往从本国的一个基地出口物品到世界各地Many of the connections between exporting and importing countries had a historical basis.过去的出口国和进口国的许多贸易关系是有历史根源的。
评第十三届韩素音翻译奖英译汉参考译文
![评第十三届韩素音翻译奖英译汉参考译文](https://img.taocdn.com/s3/m/1085d841a8956bec0975e385.png)
评第十三届“韩素音青年翻译奖”英译汉参考译文朱志瑜(香港理工大学中文及双语系)近年中国翻译研究发展很快,但翻译批评始终落后。
理论界早就注意到了这一点,但到目前为止,对翻译批评却还是说得多做得少。
其中原因是多方面的。
要批评就要将原文、译文从头至尾或者至少将重要章节对照一遍,费时费力;批评写出来,可能牵涉到译者和译文出版者的利益(如译者声誉、译文销量等),学报是否支持发表,译文出版者是否欢迎──几年前听说过译文出版者打电话给学报编辑阻止评论发表的事情──这些都是在撰写批评之前需要慎重考虑的,否则费力不讨好,说得严重点,可能影响到评者的人际关系以至声誉。
这本不是健康学术的表现,但在中国这个大的学术环境之下,批评始终难以开展确实是个事实。
翻译批评的落后不但是中国翻译学科不成熟的反映,而且还会阻碍学科的发展。
本文仅就第十三届“韩素音青年翻译奖”英译汉“参考译文”(以下简称“译文”)和评者在“译文评析”(简称“评析”)中对参赛译文的评述提出一些看法,也算是一种翻译批评,希望对青年翻译家、学者能有所帮助。
两篇文章都载于《中国翻译》2001年第一期。
今年十月在广州开会的时候,我也顺便征求了广外部分参与奖项评议的同事的意见,回来又做了些修改,写成了这篇文章。
我首先要指出的是,“译文”经过认真的研究、讨论,是了一篇相当优秀的译文;“评析”也指出了一些粗心的译者常犯的错误和应该注意的问题。
“译文”和“评析”虽然有值得讨论的地方,但瑕不掩瑜,这恰恰说明了“译无止境”这个道理。
我这里只是抱着精益求精、共同提高的态度,对评委的“评析”和“译文”提出一些意见。
还有一点要指出的是,没有不犯错误的翻译家;尤其是比赛参考译文,一旦刊出,几万只眼睛挑毛病,实在不容易讨好;但是指出别人的翻译错误却是很容易的一件事情。
原文是一篇散文,属于文学类型。
根据功能主义的原则,原文为“表情类”(expressive)。
“评析”提出的“字斟句酌、形义并重”的原则,是正确的翻译策略,即译文不仅要表达原文的内容,而且要反映原文为了表达这个内容所使用的修辞、句法等手段。
韩素音翻译大赛-英译汉一等奖
![韩素音翻译大赛-英译汉一等奖](https://img.taocdn.com/s3/m/5366452f58fb770bf78a5531.png)
GlobalizationA fundamental shift is occurring in the world economy. We are moving rapidly away from a world in which national economies were relatively self-contained entities, isolated from each other by barriers to cross-border trade and investment; by distance, time zones, and language; and by national differences in government regulation, culture, and business systems. And we are moving toward a world in which barriers to cross-border trade and investment are tumbling; perceived distance is shrinking due to advances in transportation and telecommunications technology; material culture is starting to look similar the world over; and national economies are merging into an interdependent global economic system. The process by which this is occurring is commonly referred to as globalization.Correspondent: Globalization has been one of the most important factors to affect business over the last twenty years. How is it different from what existed before? Companies used to export to other parts of the world from a base in their home country. Many of the connections between exporting and importing countries had a historical basis. Today, to be competitive, companies are looking for bigger markets and want to export to every country. They want to move into the global market. To do this many companies have set up local bases in different countries. Two chief executives will talk about how their companies dealt with going global. Percy Barnevik, one of the world’s most admired business leaders when he was Chairman of the international engineering group ABB and Dick Brown of telecommunications provider Cable & Wireless.Cable & Wireless already operates in many countries and is well-placed to take advantage of the increasingly global market for telecommunications. For Dick Brown globalization involves the economies of countries being connected to each other and companies doing business in many countries and therefore having multinational accounts.Dick Brown: The world is globalizing and the telecommunications industry is becoming more and more global, and so we feel we’re well-positioned in that market place. You see currency markets are more global tied, economies are globally connected, more so nowadays with expanded trade, more and more multinational accounts are d oing business in many, many more countries. We’re a company at Cable & Wireless now, well-positioned to carry the traffic and to provide the services to more and more companies that now need to get to five countries or twelve countries, we’re often there.Correspondent: When Percy Barnevik became head of the international engineering group ABB, his task was to make globalization work. He decided to divide the business into over a thousand smaller companies. In this way he believed the company could be both global and local. In answering the question “How do you make globalization work?”, Percy Barnevik describes the “global glue” that keeps the many different people in ABB together. He then looks at the need to manage the three contradictions of company: it is decentralized but centrally controlled, it is big and small at the same time and it is both global and local.Percy Barnevik: We have now for ten years after our big merger created a “global glue” where people are tied together, where they don’t interna lly compete, but support each other, and you have global leaders with global responsibility and your local managers working with their profit centers, and if you have the right, so to say, agenda for these people and the right structure, you can use a scale of economy and your advantages of bigness but being small. We used to say you have three contradictions: decentralized and still centrally controlled, big and small, global and local, and, of course, to try to make these contradictions work together effectively, then I think youhave a big organizational competitive edge.Correspondent: Globalizations can bring advantage to a business, but how does a company go global? Dick Brown mentions three ways companies can achieve “globalness”. Firstly, companies can work together in alliances. Secondly, they can acquire or buy other companies, and thirdly they can grow organically by expanding from their existing base.Dick Brown: Well, as you go global, and a handful or more of companies are going to really push out, in my view, to be truly global companies, and some of them, maybe all of them, will also work to be local. They’ll be local in chosen markets and global in their ability to carry their customers’ needs from continent A to continent B. We want to be one of the companies that’s both global and local. Alliances are one way to be global, it’s not the only way to be global; you can acquire your way to “globalness”, you can organically grow your way to “globalness”, you can have alliances which help you get global quicker, so you take your pick.Percy Barnevik: You have to start from the top with local people who understand language, culture and so on, and I think in this global world where the East is coming up now, that’s a winning recipe.Correspondent: ABB already found the winning recipe. Its theory of globalization has become the company’s working practice. So how do you make theory work in practice? Percy Barnevik believes that successful globalization involves getting people to work together, overcoming national, cultural barriers and making the organization customer-driven.Percy Barnevik: You see the easy thing is to have the theory, but then to make the systems work, to make people really work together, to trust each other — Americans, Europeans, Asians, to get over these national cultural barriers and create a common glue, ABB, and then make them customer-driven. If you can achieve that, and create that culture deep down then I think you have an important competitive edge.Correspondent: What Dick Brown and Percy Barnevik have shown is that there are different routes to globalization and that companies have to work hard to succeed in going global. Actually one of the disadvantages of the Global Strategy is that integrated competitive moves can lead to the sacrificing of revenues, profits, or competitive positions in individual countries — especially when the subsidiary in one country is told to attack a global competitor in order to convey a signal or divert that competitor’s resources from another nati on. The challenges managers of transnational corporations face are to identify and exploit cross-border synergies and to balance local demands with the global vision for the corporation. Building an effective transnational organization requires a corporate culture that values global dissimilarities across cultures and markets.英译汉一等奖参赛译文来源:中国译协网EC301全球化1世界经济正在发生根本性的转变。
二十五届韩素音参赛译文(汉译英)
![二十五届韩素音参赛译文(汉译英)](https://img.taocdn.com/s3/m/e804df89b9d528ea81c77959.png)
Traditional Department Stores:A"Lost Industry"To Be?Tr.Woo FenbyStatistics show that the total transaction volume of China's e-commerce market reached7trillion RMB(about1.13trillion USD)in 2011,registering a46.4percent year-on-year increase.This impressive e-marketing performance poses a significant challenge to the market share of traditional general merchandise industry,because as long as there is no big change in short-term demand,the fact that more and more people are gravitating towards online shopping indicates the loss of customer resources for relevant department stores.In recent years,the product categories witnessing a slump in sales within the industry, according to insiders,have been exactly those more convenient for online purchasing,such as household appliances,IT products,textiles,and even luxuries.Meanwhile,some traditional department stores may also have to confront the embarrassment of being degraded to"fitting rooms"for e-commerce,in which case many people go to the physical stores to confirm the style and size of the products(for example clothes)and then make their purchase online later on,hence the birth of"number-copying clan"and"candid-camera party".With the gradual expansion of online market,products like apparel,cosmetics and home supplies all fall into the hunting scope of consumers,who select offline and purchase online.Apart from the market occupation by e-business,the cut-throat competition within the industry can not be overlooked either.Traditional department stores have already been exposed to fierce horizontal competition due to relatively serious homogeneity among themselves; moreover,added to this is the vigorous construction of superstores(like shopping centers)in many cities during the past few years,thus making it even more difficult for their business operations.A stroll through the commercial districts will reveal that nearly all department stores vary little in their items for sale,storefront design or product layout.Just as a doctoral student had put it,from Beijing down to Fuzhou,stores in different cities are almost the same.Under the"attack from both inside and outside",will traditional general merchandise business be the next"lost industry"?In spite of the pressure of keen competition,general merchandise industry still stands a chance,said several experts interviewed,of successful"counterattack" through integration of online and offline operations,adoption of diversified competition strategy and innovation of business models,etc.According to some information,not a small number of department stores have currently been hit by an"electro-shock".Since2012,large department stores in Beijing have launched their own e-commerce platforms in succession while the e-business operations of Tianjin Grand Department Store have also got underway.Besides,department stores should aim at their target customer group by following the path of multi-position management and differentiated marketing.As was emphasized by a doctorial tutor,although the business environment is getting more bleak and competition from e-commerce and large-scale commercial complexes more intense in recent years,only a fraction of the customer group have been shunted for department stores. Therefore,they need to dig deep into the existing customer base,improve after-sale service and explore personalized service for customers.Furthermore,general merchandise industry should also seize the opportunity to transform itself by relying on the development momentum of shopping centers.It has been understood that there are certain rules of correspondence between retail format structure and per capita GDP level—when per capita GDP ranges from3000to5000US dollars,the retail format structure is dominated by large-scale comprehensive supermarkets;when per capita GDP ranges from5000to10,000US dollars,shopping centers,franchised stores,specialty shops and convenience stores prevail.In consideration of Chinese per capita GDP surpassing5000US dollars in2011,the industry can take advantage of this occasion to shift its development direction to shopping centers and the like.(624words)。
韩素音英译汉原文
![韩素音英译汉原文](https://img.taocdn.com/s3/m/f52dfe1ee2bd960590c677f0.png)
Outing A.I.: Beyond the Turing TestThe idea of measuring A.I. by its ability to “pass” as a human – dramatized in countless scifi films – is actually as old as modern A.I. research itself. It is traceable at least to 1950 when the British mathematician Alan Turing published “Computing Machinery and Intelligence,” a paper in which he described what we now call the “Turing Test,” and which he referred to as the “imitation game.” There are different versions of the test, all of which are revealing as to why our approach to the culture and ethics of A.I. is what it is, for good and bad. For the most familiar version, a human interrogator asks questions of two hidden contestants, one a human and the other a computer. Turing suggests that if the interrogator usually cannot tell which is which, and if the computer can successfully pass as human, then can we not conclude, for practical purposes, that the computer is “intelligent”?More people “know” Turing’s foundational text than have actually read it. This is unfortunate because the text is marvelous, strange and surprising. Turing introduces his test as a variation on a popular parlor game in which two hidden contestants, a woman (player A) and a man (player B) try to convince a third that he or she is a woman by their written responses to leading questions. To win, one of the players must convincingly be who they really are, whereas the other must try to pass as another gender. Turing describes his own variation as one where “a computer takes the place of player A,” and so a literal reading would suggest that in his version the computer is not just pretending to be a human, but pretending to be a woman. It must pass as a she.Passing as a person comes down to what others see and interpret. Because everyone else is already willing to read others according to conventional cues (of race, sex, gender, species, etc.) the complicity between whoever (or whatever) is passing and those among which he or she or it performs is what allows passing to succeed. Whether or not an A.I. is trying to pass as a human or is merely in drag as a human is another matter. Is the ruse all just a game or, as for some people who are compelled to pass in their daily lives, an essential camouflage? Either way, “passing” may say more about the audience than about the performers.That we would wish to define the very existence of A.I. in relation to its ability to mimic how humans think that humans think will be looked back upon as a weird sort of speciesism. The legacy of that conceit helped to steer some older A.I. research down disappointingly fruitless paths, hoping to recreate human minds from available parts. It just doesn’t work that way. ContemporaryA.I. research suggests instead that the threshold by which any particular arrangement of matter can be said to be “intelligent” doesn’t have much to do with how it reflects humanness back at us. As Stuart Russell and Peter Norvig (now director of research at Google) suggest in their essential A.I. textbook, biomorphic imitation is not how we design complex technology. Airplanes don’t fly like birds fly, and we certainly don’t try to trick birds into thinking that airplanes are birds in order to test whether those planes “really” are flying machines. Why do it for A.I. then? Today’s serious A.I. research does not focus on the Turing Test as an objective criterion of success, and yet in our popular culture of A.I., the test’s anthropocentrism holds such durable conceptual importance. Like the animals who talk like teenagers in a Disney movie, other minds are conceivable mostly by way of puerile ventriloquism.Where is the real injury in this? If we want everyday A.I. to be congenial in a humane sort of way, so what? The answer is that we have much to gain from a more sincere and disenchanted relationship to synthetic intelligences, and much to lose by keeping illusions on life support. Some philosophers write about the possible ethical “rights” of A.I. as sentient entities, but that’s not my point here. Rather, the truer perspective is also the better one for us as thinking technical creatures.Musk, Gates and Hawking made headlines by speaking to the dangers that A.I. may pose. Their points are important, but I fear were largely misunderstood by many readers. Relying on efforts to program A.I. not to “harm humans” (inspired by Isaac Asimov’s “three laws” of robotics from 1942) makes sense only when an A.I. knows what humans are and what harming them might mean. There are many ways that an A.I. might harm us that have nothing to do with its malevolence toward us, and chief among these is exactly following our well-meaning instructions to an idiotic and catastrophic extreme. Instead of mechanical failure or a transgression of moral code, the A.I. may pose an existential risk because it is both powerfully intelligent and disinterested in humans. To the extent that we recognize A.I. by its anthropomorphic qualities, or presume its preoccupation with us, we are vulnerable to those eventualities.Whether or not “hard A.I.” ever appears, the harm is also in the loss of all that we prevent ourselves from discovering and understanding when we insist on protecting beliefs we know to be false. In the 1950 essay, Turing offers several rebuttals to his speculative A.I., including a striking comparison with earlier objections to Copernican astronomy. Copernican traumas that abolish the false centrality and absolute specialness of human thought and species-being are pricelessaccomplishments. They allow for human culture based on how the world actually is more than on how it appears to us from our limited vantage point. Turing referred to these as “theological objections,” but one could argue that the anthropomorphic precondition for A.I. is a“pre-Copernican” attitude as well, however secular it may appear. The advent of robust inhuman A.I. may let us achieve another disenchantment, one that should enable a more reality-based understanding of ourselves, our situation, and a fuller and more complex understanding of what “intelligence” is and is not. From there we can hopefully make our world with a greater confidence that our models are good approximations of what’s out there.。
历届韩素音翻译大奖赛竞赛原文及译文
![历届韩素音翻译大奖赛竞赛原文及译文](https://img.taocdn.com/s3/m/446646e6360cba1aa811da4e.png)
历届韩素音翻译大奖赛竞赛原文及译文英译汉部分 (3)Beauty (excerpt) (3)美(节选) (3)The Literature of Knowledge and the Literature of Power byThomas De Quincey (8)知识文学与力量文学托马斯.昆西 (8)An Experience of Aesthetics by Robert Ginsberg (11)审美的体验罗伯特.金斯伯格 (11)A Person Who Apologizes Has the Moral Ball in His Court by Paul Johnson (14)谁给别人道歉,谁就在道义上掌握了主动保罗.约翰逊 (14)On Going Home by Joan Didion (18)回家琼.狄迪恩 (18)The Making of Ashenden (Excerpt) by Stanley Elkin (22)艾兴登其人(节选)斯坦利.埃尔金 (22)Beyond Life (28)超越生命[美] 卡贝尔著 (28)Envy by Samuel Johnson (33)论嫉妒[英]塞缪尔.约翰逊著 (33)中译英部分 (37)在义与利之外 (37)Beyond Righteousness and Interests (37)读书苦乐杨绛 (40)The Bitter-Sweetness of Reading Yang Jiang (40)想起清华种种王佐良 (43)Reminiscences of Tsinghua Wang Zuoliang (43)歌德之人生启示宗白华 (45)What Goethe's Life Reveals by Zong Baihua (45)怀想那片青草地赵红波 (48)Yearning for That Piece of Green Meadow by Zhao Hongbo (48)可爱的南京 (51)Nanjing the Beloved City (51)霞冰心 (53)The Rosy Cloud byBingxin (53)黎明前的北平 (54)Predawn Peiping (54)老来乐金克木 (55)Delights in Growing Old by Jin Kemu (55)可贵的“他人意识” (58)Calling for an Awareness of Others (58)教孩子相信 (61)To Implant In Our Children’s Young Hearts An Undying Faith In Humanity (61)英译汉部分Beauty (excerpt)美(节选)Judging from the scientists I know, including Eva and Ruth, and those whom I've read about, you can't pursue the laws of nature very long without bumping撞倒; 冲撞into beauty. “I don't know if it's the same beauty you see in the sunset,”a friend tells me, “but it feels the same.”This friend is a physicist, who has spent a long career deciphering破译(密码), 辨认(潦草字迹) what must be happening in the interior of stars. He recalls for me this thrill on grasping for the first time Dirac's⑴equations describing quantum mechanics, or those of Einstein describing relativity. “They're so beautiful,” he says, “you can see immediately they have to be true. Or at least on the way toward truth.” I ask him what makes a theory beautiful, and he replies, “Si mplicity, symmetry .对称(性); 匀称, 整齐, elegance, and power.”我结识一些科学家(包括伊娃和露丝),也拜读过不少科学家的著作,从中我作出推断:人们在探求自然规律的旅途中,须臾便会与美不期而遇。
2015翻译大赛原文
![2015翻译大赛原文](https://img.taocdn.com/s3/m/aead702c590216fc700abb68a98271fe910eaf12.png)
2015翻译⼤赛原⽂A Garden That Welcomes StrangersBy Allen LacyI do not know what became of her, and I never learned her name. But I feel that I knew her from the garden she had so lovingly made over many decades.The house she lived in lies two miles from mine – a simple, two-story structure with the boxy plan, steeply-pitched roof and unadorned lines that are typical of houses built in the middle of the nineteenth century near the New Jersey shore.Her garden was equally simple. She was not a conventional gardener who did everything by the book, following the common advice to vary her plantings so there would be something in bloom from the first crocus in the spring to the last chrysanthemum in the fall. She had no respect for the rule that says that tall-growing plants belong at the rear of a perennial border, low ones in the front and middle-sized ones in the middle, with occasional exceptions for dramatic accent.In her garden, everything was accent, everything was tall, and the evidence was plain that she loved three kinds of plant and three only: roses, clematis and lilies, intermingled promiscuously to pleasant effect but no apparentdesign.She grew a dozen sorts of clematis, perhaps 50 plants in all, trained and tied so that they clambered up metal rods, each rod crowned intermittently throughout the summer by a rounded profusion of large blossoms of dark purple, rich crimson, pale lavender, light blue and gleaming white.Her taste in roses was old-fashioned. There wasn’t a single modern hybrid tea rose or floribunda in sight. Instead, she favored the roses of other ages – the York and Lancaster rose, the cabbage rose, the damask and the rugosa rose in several varieties. She propagated her roses herself from cuttings stuck directly in the ground and protected by upended gallon jugs.Lilies, I believe were her greatest love. Except for some Madonna lilies it is impossible to name them, since the wooden flats stood casually here and there in the flower bed, all thickly planted with dark green lily seedlings. The occasional paper tag fluttering from a seed pod with the date and record of a cross showed that she was an amateur hybridizer with some special fondness for lilies of a warm muskmelon shade or a pale lemon yellow.She believed in sharing her garden. By her curb there was a sign: “This is my garden, and you are welcome here. Take whatever you wish with your eyes,but nothing with your hand.”Until five years ago, her garden was always immaculately tended, the lawn kept fertilized and mowed, the flower bed free of weeds, the tall lilies carefully staked. But then something happened. I don’t know what it was, but the lawn was mowed less frequently, then not at all. Tall grass invaded the roses, the clematis, the lilies. The elm tree in her front yard sickened and died, and when a coastal gale struck, the branches that fell were never removed.With every year, the neglect has grown worse. Wild honeysuckle and bittersweet run rampant in the garden. Sumac, ailanthus, poison ivy and other uninvited things threaten the few lilies and clematis and roses that still struggle for survival.Last year the house itself went dead. The front door was padlocked and the windows covered with sheets of plywood. For many months there has been a for sale sign out front, replacing the sign inviting strangers to share her garden.I drive by that house almost daily and have been tempted to load a shovel in my car trunk, stop at her curb and rescue a few lilies from the smothering thicket of weeds. The laws of trespass and the fact that her house sits across the street from a police station have given me the cowardice to resisttemptation. But her garden has reminded me of mortality; gardeners and the gardens they make are fragile things, creatures of time, hostages to chance and to decay.Last week, the for sale sign out front came down and the windows were unboarded. A crew of painters arrived and someone cut down the dead elm tree. This morning there was a moving van in the driveway unloading a swing set, a barbecue grill, a grand piano and a houseful of sensible furniture. A young family is moving into that house.I hope that among their number is a gardener whose special fondness for old roses and clematis and lilies will see to it that all else is put aside until that flower bed is restored to something of its former self.(选⾃Patterns: A Short Prose Reader, by Mary Lou Conlin, published by Houghton Mifflin Company, 1983.)。
韩素音翻译大赛英译汉
![韩素音翻译大赛英译汉](https://img.taocdn.com/s3/m/20218edfce2f0066f533222f.png)
原文
译文
It’s Time to Rethink ‘Temporary’
“短暂”—我们该重新想想了
We tend to view architecture as permanent, as aspiring to the status of monuments. And that kind of architecture has its place. But so does architecture of a different sort.
In November, I had the pleasure of moderatingMSouthern California’sSchool of Architecture, with Robert Kronenburg, an architect, professor at University of Liverpool and portable/temporary/mobile guru. Author of a shelf full of books on the topic, including “Flexible: Architecture that Responds to Change,” “Portable Architecture: Design and Technology” and “Houses in Motion: The Genesis,” Kronenburg is a man obsessed.
韩素音翻译原文(1)
![韩素音翻译原文(1)](https://img.taocdn.com/s3/m/42289916964bcf84b9d57b76.png)
英译汉竞赛原文:How the News Got Less MeanThe most read article of all time on BuzzFeed contains no photographs of celebrity nip slips and no inflammatory ranting. It’s a series of photos called “21 pictures that will restore your faith in humanity,” which has pulled in nearly 14 million visits so far. At Upworthy too, hope is the major draw. “This kid just died. What he left behind is wondtacular,” an Upworthy post about a terminally ill teen singer, earned 15 million views this summer and has raised more than $300,000 for cancer research.The recipe for attracting visitors to stories online is changing. Bloggers have traditionally turned to sarcasm and snark to draw attention. But the success of sites like BuzzFeed and Upworthy, whose philosophies embrace the viral nature of upbeat stories, hints that the Web craves positivity.The reason: social media. Researchers are discovering that people want to create positive images of themselves online by sharing upbeat stories. And with more people turning to Facebook and Twitter to find out what’s happening in the world, news stories may need to cheer up in order to court an audience. If social is the future of media, then optimistic stories might be media’s future.“When we started, the prevailing wisdom was that snark ruled the Internet,”says Eli Pariser, a co-founder of Upworthy. “And we just had a really different sense of what works.”“You don’t want to be that guy at the party who’s crazy and angry and ranting in the corner — it’s the same for Twitter or Facebook,” he says. “Part of what we’re trying to do with Upworthy is give people the tools to express a conscientious, thoughtful and positive identity in social media.”And the science appears to support Pariser’s philosophy. In a recent study from the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, researchers found that “up votes,”showing that a visitor liked a comment or story, begat more up votes on comments on the site, but “down votes” did not do the same. In fact, a single up vote increased the likelihood that someone else would like a comment by 32%, whereas a down vote had no effect. People don’t want to support the cranky commenter, the critic or the troll. Nor do they want to be that negative personality online.In another study published in 2012, Jonah Berger, author of Contagious: Why Things Catch On and professor of marketing at the Wharton School of the University of Pennsylvania, monitored the most e-mailed stories produced by the New York Times for six months and found that positive stories were more likely to make the list than negative ones.“What we share [or like] is almost like the car we drive or the clothes we wear,”he says. “It says something about us to other people. So people would much rather be seen as a Positive Polly than a Debbie Downer.”It’s not always that simple: Berger says that though positive pieces drew more traffic than negative ones, within the categories of positive and negative stories, those articles that elicited more emotion always led to more shares.“Take two negative emotions, for example: anger and sadness,” Berger says. “Both of those emotions would make the reader feel bad. But anger, a high arousal emotion, leads to more sharing, whereas sadness, a low arousal emotion, doesn’t. The same is true of the positive side: excitement and humor increase sharing, whereas contentment decreases sharing.”And while some popular BuzzFeed posts — like the recent “Is this the most embarrassing interview Fox News has ever done?”— might do their best to elicit shares through anger, both BuzzFeed and Upworthy recognize that their main success lies in creating positive viral material.“It’s not that people don’t share negative stories,” says Jack Shepherd, editorial director at BuzzFeed. “It just means that there’s a higher potential for positive stories to do well.”Upworthy’s mission is to highlight serious issues but in a hopeful way, encouraging readers to donate money, join organizations and take action. The strategy seems to be working: barely two years after its launch date (in March 2012), the site now boasts 30 million unique visitors per month, according to Upworthy. The site’s average monthly unique visitors grew to 14 million people over its first six quarters — to put that in perspective, the Huffington Post had only about 2 million visitors in its first six quarters online.But Upworthy measures the success of a story not just by hits. The creators of the site only consider a post a success if it’s also shared frequently on social media. “We are interested in content that people want to share partly for pragmaticreasons,” Pariser says. “If you don’t have a good theory about how to appear in Facebook and Twitter, then you may disappear.”Nobody has mastered the ability to make a story go viral like BuzzFeed. The site, which began in 2006 as a lab to figure out what people share online, has used what it’s learned to draw 60 million monthly unique visitors, according to BuzzFeed. (Most of that traffic comes from social-networking sites, driving readers toward BuzzFeed’s mix of cute animal photos and hard news.) By comparison the New York Times website, one of the most popular newspaper sites on the Web, courts only 29 million unique visitors each month, according to the Times.BuzzFeed editors have found that people do still read negative or critical stories, they just aren’t the posts they share with their friends. And those shareable posts are the ones that newsrooms increasingly prize.“Anecdotally, I can tell you people are just as likely to click on negative stories as they are to click on positive ones,” says Shepherd. “But they’re more likely to share positive stories. What you’re interested in is different from what you want your friends to see what you’re interested in.”So as newsrooms re-evaluate how they can draw readers and elicit more shares on Twitter and Facebook, they may look to BuzzFeed’s and Upworthy’s happiness model for direction.“I think that the Web is only becoming more social,” Shepherd says. “We’re at a point where readers are your publishers. If news sites aren’t thinking about what it would mean for someone to share a story on social media, that could be detrimental.”汉译英竞赛原文:城市的迷失沿着瑗珲—腾冲线,这条1935年由胡焕庸先生发现并命名的中国人口、自然和历史地理的分界线,我们看到,从远距离贸易发展开始的那天起,利益和权力的渗透与分散,已经从根本结构上改变了城市的状态:城市在膨胀,人在疏离。
第28届韩素音翻译比赛汉译英原文和参考译文(下)
![第28届韩素音翻译比赛汉译英原文和参考译文(下)](https://img.taocdn.com/s3/m/ff56e8d7bceb19e8b8f6bad7.png)
韩素音青年翻译奖竞赛 | 译文评析(下) 原创: 中国译协 中国翻译协会 2017-01-10第28届韩素音青年翻译奖竞赛参考译文及评析—(下)汉译英汉译英竞赛原文屠呦呦秉持的,不是好事者争论的随着诺贝尔奖颁奖典礼的临近,持续2个月的“屠呦呦热”正在渐入高潮。
当地时间7日下午,屠呦呦在瑞典卡罗林斯卡学院发表题为“青蒿素——中医药给世界的一份礼物”的演讲,详细回顾了青蒿素的发现过程,并援引毛泽东的话称,中医药学“是一个伟大的宝库”。
对中医药而言,无论是自然科学“圣殿”中的这次演讲,还是即将颁发到屠呦呦手中的诺奖,自然都提供了极好的“正名”。
置于世界科学前沿的平台上,中医药学不仅真正被世界“看见”,更能因这种“看见”获得同世界对话的机会。
拨开层层迷雾之后,对话是促成发展的动力。
将迷雾拨开、使对话变成可能,是屠呦呦及其团队的莫大功劳。
但如果像部分舆论那样,将屠呦呦的告白简单视作其对中医的“背书”,乃至将其成就视作中医向西医下的“战书”,这样的心愿固然可嘉,却可能完全背离科学家的本意。
听过屠呦呦的报告,或是对其研究略作了解就知道,青蒿素的发现既来自于中医药“宝库”提供的积淀和灵感,也来自于西医严格的实验方法。
缺了其中任意一项,历史很可能转向截然不同的方向。
换言之,在“诺奖级”平台上促成中西医对话之前,屠呦呦及其团队的成果,正是长期“对话”的成果。
而此前绵延不绝的“中西医”之争,多多少少都游离了对话的本意,而陷于一种单向化的“争短长”。
持中医论者,不屑于西医的“按部就班”;持西医论者,不屑于中医的“随心所欲”。
双方都没有看到,“按部就班”背后本是实证依据,“随心所欲”背后则有文化内涵,两者完全可以兼容互补,何必非得二元对立?屠呦呦在演讲中坦言,“通过抗疟药青蒿素的研究历程,我深深地感到中西医药各有所长,两者有机结合,优势互补,当具有更大的开发潜力和良好的发展前景”。
这既是站在中医药立场上对西方科学界的一次告白,反过来也可理解为西医立场上对中医拥趸们的提醒。
韩素音 汉译英
![韩素音 汉译英](https://img.taocdn.com/s3/m/4a6d1af55ef7ba0d4b733b1d.png)
汉译英竞赛原文:屠呦呦秉持的,不是好事者争论的随着诺贝尔奖颁奖典礼的临近,持续2个月的“屠呦呦热”正在渐入高潮。
当地时间7日下午,屠呦呦在瑞典卡罗林斯卡学院发表题为“青蒿素——中医药给世界的一份礼物”的演讲,详细回顾了青蒿素的发现过程,并援引毛泽东的话称,中医药学“是一个伟大的宝库”。
对中医药而言,无论是自然科学“圣殿”中的这次演讲,还是即将颁发到屠呦呦手中的诺奖,自然都提供了极好的“正名”。
置于世界科学前沿的平台上,中医药学不仅真正被世界“看见”,更能因这种“看见”获得同世界对话的机会。
拨开层层迷雾之后,对话是促成发展的动力。
将迷雾拨开、使对话变成可能,是屠呦呦及其团队的莫大功劳。
但如果像部分舆论那样,将屠呦呦的告白简单视作其对中医的“背书”,乃至将其成就视作中医向西医下的“战书”,这样的心愿固然可嘉,却可能完全背离科学家的本意。
听过屠呦呦的报告,或是对其研究略作了解就知道,青蒿素的发现既来自于中医药“宝库”提供的积淀和灵感,也来自于西医严格的实验方法。
缺了其中任意一项,历史很可能转向截然不同的方向。
换言之,在“诺奖级”平台上促成中西医对话之前,屠呦呦及其团队的成果,正是长期“对话”的成果。
而此前绵延不绝的“中西医”之争,多多少少都游离了对话的本意,而陷于一种单向化的“争短长”。
持中医论者,不屑于西医的“按部就班”;持西医论者,不屑于中医的“随心所欲”。
双方都没有看到,“按部就班”背后本是实证依据,“随心所欲”背后则有文化内涵,两者完全可以兼容互补,何必非得二元对立?屠呦呦在演讲中坦言,“通过抗疟药青蒿素的研究历程,我深深地感到中西医药各有所长,两者有机结合,优势互补,当具有更大的开发潜力和良好的发展前景”。
这既是站在中医药立场上对西方科学界的一次告白,反过来也可理解为西医立场上对中医拥趸们的提醒。
毋宁说,这是一个科学家对科学研究实质的某种揭示。
科学研究之艰深莫测,科学家多有体认,作为旁观者的我们也屡屡耳闻。
第十二届“韩素音青年翻译奖”竞赛原文及参考译文(汉译英)
![第十二届“韩素音青年翻译奖”竞赛原文及参考译文(汉译英)](https://img.taocdn.com/s3/m/83f08506e87101f69e3195b3.png)
第十二届“韩素音青年翻译奖”竞赛原文及参考译文(汉译英)霞冰心四十年代初期,我在重庆郊外歌乐山闲居的时候,曾看到英文《读者文摘》上,有个很使我惊心的句子,是:May there be enough clouds in your life to make a beautiful sunset.我在一篇短文里曾把它译成:“愿你的生命中有够多的云翳,来造成一个美丽的黄昏。
”其实,这个sunset 应当译成“落照”或“落霞”。
霞,是我的老朋友了!我童年在海边、在山上,她都是我的最熟悉最美丽的小伙伴。
她每早每晚都在光明中和我说“早上好”或“明天见”。
但我直到几十年以后,才体会到云彩更多,霞光才愈美丽。
从云翳中外露的霞光,才是璀璨多彩的。
生命中不是只有快乐,也不是只有痛苦,快乐和痛苦是相生相成,互相衬托的。
快乐是一抹微云,痛苦是压城的乌云,这不同的云彩,在你生命的天边重叠着,在“夕阳无限好”的时候,就给你造成一个美丽的黄昏。
一个生命会到了“只是近黄昏”的时节,落霞也许会使人留恋、惆怅。
但人类的生命是永不止息的。
地球不停地绕着太阳自转。
东方不亮西方亮,我床前的晚霞,正向美国东岸的慰冰湖上走去……The Rosy CloudBingxinDuring the early 1940s I was living a retired life in the Gele Mountains in the suburbs of Chongqing (Chungking). One day, while reading the English language magazine Reader's Digest I found a sentence that touched me greatly. It read: "May there be enough clouds in your life to make a beautiful sunset."In a short article of mine, I quoted this sentence and translated it as "Yuan ni de shengming zhong you guo duo de yunyi, lai zaocheng yige meili de huanghun. " (literally: May there be enough clouds in your life to make a beautiful sunset.) *As I see it now, the word "sunset" in the English sentence should have been translated as luozhao (the glow at sunset) or luoxia (the rosy cloud at sunset), instead of dusk.She has been my dear old friend, the Rosy Cloud! She was my closest and most beautiful little companion when, in my childhood, I played on the beach or in the hills. Bathed in the brilliant sunshine, she would say to me "Good morning!" at dawn and "See you tomorrow!" at dusk. But not until several decades later did I come to realize that the more clouds there are the more beautiful the rays of sunlight will be, and the glow of the sun breaking through the clouds becomes most resplendent and colorful.Life contains neither unalloyed happiness nor mere misery. Happiness and misery beget, complement and set off each other.Happiness is a wisp of fleecy cloud; misery a mass of threatening dark cloud. These different clouds overlap on the horizon of your life to create a beautiful dusk for you when "the setting sun is most lovely indeed."**An individual's life must inevitably reach the point when "dusk is so near,"*** and the rosy sunset cloud may make one nostalgic and melancholy. But human life goes on and on. The Earth ceaselessly rotates on its axis around the sun. When it is dark in the east, it is light in the west. The rosy sunset cloud is now sailing past my window towards Lake Waban on the east coast of America ...*This sentence appears in Chinese and English in the article "For Young Readers Again, Newsletter No.4", written by Bing Xin in the Gele Mountains, on December 1, 1944.** and *** These two poetic lines are taken from a poem "On the Plain of Tombs" by Li Shangyin (813-858), a well-known poet of the Tang Dynasty (618-907). The two lines read like this: "The setting sun appears sublime, / But O! 'Tis near its dying time." (Tr. Xu Yuanchong) They imply that the setting sun has infinite beauty, but it is a pity that it is near the dusk, and the beautiful scene cannot last long. The two lines are often used to deplore the ephemeral nature of things, and to express the feelings at the loss of past glory and at the advent of old age.。
韩素音英译汉原文教学文稿
![韩素音英译汉原文教学文稿](https://img.taocdn.com/s3/m/7c8cfbea9b6648d7c1c746ee.png)
韩素音英译汉原文Outing A.I.: Beyond the Turing TestThe idea of measuring A.I. by its ability to “pass” as a human – dramatized in countless scifi films – is actually as old as modern A.I. research itself. It is traceable at least to 1950 when the British ma thematician Alan Turing published “Computing Machinery and Intelligence,” a paper in which he described what we now call the “Turing Test,” and which he referred to as the “imitation game.” There are different versions of the test, all of which are revealing as to why our approach to the culture and ethics of A.I. is what it is, for good and bad. For the most familiar version, a human interrogator asks questions of two hidden contestants, one a human and the other a computer. Turing suggests that if the interrogator usually cannot tell which is which, and if the computer can successfully pass as human, then can we not conclude, for practical purposes, that the computer is “intelligent”?More people “know” Turing’s foundational text than have actually read it. This is unfortunate because the text is marvelous, strange and surprising. Turing introduces his test as a variation on a popular parlor game in which two hidden contestants, a woman (player A) and a man (player B) try to convince a third that he or she is a woman by their written responses to leading questions. To win, one of the players must convincingly be who they really are, whereas the other must try to pass as another gender. Turing describes his own variation as one where “a computer takes the pla ce of player A,” and so a literal reading would suggest that in his version the computer is not just pretending to be a human, but pretending to be a woman. It must pass as a she.Passing as a person comes down to what others see and interpret. Because everyone else is already willing to read others according to conventional cues (of race, sex, gender, species, etc.) the complicity between whoever (or whatever) is passing and those among which he or she or it performs is what allows passing to succeed. Whether or not an A.I. is trying to pass as a human or is merely in drag as a human is another matter. Is the ruse all just a game or, as for some people who are compelled to pass in their daily lives, an essential camouflage? Either way, “passing” may say mo re about the audience than about the performers.That we would wish to define the very existence of A.I. in relation to its ability to mimic how humans think that humans think will be looked back upon as a weird sort of speciesism. The legacy of that conceit helped to steer some older A.I. research down disappointingly fruitless paths, hoping to recreate human minds from available parts. It just doesn’t work that way. Contemporary A.I. research suggests instead that the threshold by which any particular arrangement of matter can be said to be “intelligent” doesn’t have much to do with how it reflects humanness back at us. As Stuart Russell and Peter Norvig (now director of research at Google) suggest in their essential A.I. textbook, biomorphic imitation is not how we design complex technology. Airplanes don’t fly like birds fly, and we certainly don’t try to trick birds into thinking that airplanes are birds in order to test whether those planes “really” are flying machines. Why do it for A.I. then? Today’s serious A.I. research does not focus on the Turing Test as an objective criterion of success, and yet in our popular culture of A.I., the test’s anthropocentrism holds such durable conceptual importance. Like the animals who talk like teenagers in a Disney movie, other minds are conceivable mostly by way of puerile ventriloquism.Where is the real injury in this? If we want everyday A.I. to be congenial in a humane sort of way, so what? The answer is that we have much to gain from a more sincere and disenchanted relationship to synthetic intelligences, and much to lose by keeping illusions on life support. Some philosophers write about the possible ethical “rights” of A.I. as sentient entities, but that’s not my point here. Rather, the truer perspective is also the better one for us as thinking technical creatures.Musk, Gates and Hawking made headlines by speaking to the dangers that A.I. may pose. Their points are important, but I fear were largely misunderstood by many readers. Relying on efforts to program A.I. not to “harm humans” (inspired by Isaac Asimov’s “three laws” of robotics from 1942) makes sense only when an A.I. knows what humans are and what harming them might mean. There are many ways that an A.I. might harm us that have nothing to do with its malevolence toward us, and chief among these is exactly following our well-meaning instructions to an idiotic and catastrophic extreme. Instead of mechanical failure or a transgression of moral code,the A.I. may pose an existential risk because it is both powerfully intelligent and disinterested in humans. To the extent that we recognize A.I. by its anthropomorphic qualities, or presume its preoccupation with us, we are vulnerable to those eventualities.Whether or not “hard A.I.” ever appears, th e harm is also in the loss of all that we prevent ourselves from discovering and understanding when we insist on protecting beliefs we know to be false. In the 1950 essay, Turing offers several rebuttals to his speculative A.I., including a striking comparison with earlier objections to Copernican astronomy. Copernican traumas that abolish the false centrality and absolute specialness of human thought and species-being are priceless accomplishments. They allow for human culture based on how the world actually is more than on how it appears to us from our limited vantage point. Turing referred to these as “theological objections,” but one could argue that the anthropomorphic precondition for A.I. is a “pre-Copernican” attitude as well, however secular it may appear. The advent of robust inhuman A.I. may let us achieve another disenchantment, one that should enable a more reality-based understanding of ourselves, our situation, and a fuller and more complex understanding of what “intelligence” is and is not. From there we can hopefully make our world with a greater confidence that our models are good approximations of what’s out there.。
2015年韩素音翻译比赛英译汉难句译析
![2015年韩素音翻译比赛英译汉难句译析](https://img.taocdn.com/s3/m/10423ec00875f46527d3240c844769eae109a355.png)
2015年韩素音翻译比赛英译汉难句译析译其心译其意2015年06月06日2015年韩素音翻译比赛英译汉难句译析【英语原文】(2)Lit Theory is supposed to be the class where you sit at the back of the room with every other jaded sophomore wearing skinny jeans, thick-framed glasses, an ironic tee-shirt and over-sized retro headphones, just waiting for lecture to be over so you can light upa Turkish Gold and walk to lunch while listening to Wilco.(3)That’s pretty much the way I spent the cour se, too: through structuralism, formalism, gender theory, and post-colonialism, I was far too busy shuffling through my Ipod to see what the patriarchal world order of capitalist oppression had to do with Ethan Frome. (4)But when we began to study postmodernism, something struck a chord with me and made me sit up and look anew at thesee mingly blasé college-aged literati of which I was so self-consciously one.【原文解读】(2) is supposed to…具有肯定性判断语气,“where…toWilco”为定于从句,起描写作用补充说明theclass的具体情况。
汉译英短文翻译(5篇)
![汉译英短文翻译(5篇)](https://img.taocdn.com/s3/m/52bea9e3c0c708a1284ac850ad02de80d5d8065c.png)
汉译英短文翻译(5篇)第一篇:汉译英短文翻译汉译英短文翻译近年来,中国城市化进人加速阶段,取得了极大的成就,同时也出现了种种错综复杂的问题。
今天的城乡建设速度之快、规模之大、耗资之巨、涉及面之广、尺度之大等已远非生产力低下时期所能及,建筑已成为一种重大的经济活动。
(102字)难点注释:1)城市化urbanization2)加速阶段an accelerating phase3)错综复杂的问题some complicated problems4)远非?一所能及surpass5)重大的经济活动a major economic pursuit世界各地有3,600万人染上了艾滋病—这比整个澳大利亚的人口还多。
目前,艾滋病是全球第4大死因,而在非洲则是头号罪魁。
在非洲,艾滋病使工人丧失工作,使家庭丧失经济来源,使父母丧失孩子。
在7个非洲国家中,巧岁至49岁的人口中艾滋病病毒感染者占到20%以上。
(119字)难点注释:1)染上艾滋病suffer from AIDS2)头号罪魁the chief culprit3)使……丧失deprive of 4)艾滋病病毒感染者people infected with HIV当今中国,对传真机的使用已十分普及,并成为现代重要的通讯终端设备。
据一项调查显示,2002年,中国市场对传真机的需求量约为200万台,国内产量仅满足了约30%的需求,进口机占据市场的主导地位。
(89字)难点注释:1)传真机fax machines2)通讯终端设备telecommunications terminal equipment3)占主导地位dominate2000年,美国数码相机的销量达到惊人的510万台,而1999年只有310万台。
数码相机的流行其原因非常简单:成像质量好且花费少。
此外,使用数码相机还能省去不少麻烦。
你不用买胶卷,所有的照片都被存在可反复使用的存储卡上。
一按快门,就可以马上在液晶显示屏上观察照片的效果。
韩素音青年翻译
![韩素音青年翻译](https://img.taocdn.com/s3/m/276fb4e5f61fb7360b4c65bc.png)
英译汉竞赛原文:The Posteverything GenerationI never expected to gain any new insight into the nature我从未想过要对我们这一代人的本质,of my generation, or the changing landscape of American 或者说在美国大学变化中的风景,colleges, in Lit Theory. Lit Theory is supposed to be the class 在理论上获得任何新的见解。
文学理论应该是where you sit at the back of the room with every other jaded 你和其他穿着sophomore wearing skinny jeans, thick-framed glasses, an 紧身牛仔裤和一件夸张的T恤,带着厚框眼镜和ironic tee-shirt and over-sized retro headphones, just waiting 超大号的复古耳机的疲惫不堪的学生们坐在教室的后排,等待for lecture to be over so you can light up a Turkish Gold and着讲座结束,然后你可以点亮一根土耳其黄金,walk to lunch while listening to Wilco. That’s pretty much 听着Wilco去吃中饭。
这也是the way I spent the course, too: through structuralism,我度过课程最好的方式:通过结构主义,formalism, gender theory, and post-colonialism, I was far too 形式主义,性别理论,后殖民主义,我相当busy shuffling through my Ipod to see what the patriarchal world 忙碌的通过我的iPod看资本主义order of capitalist oppression had to do with Ethan Frome. But 压迫的男权世界秩序跟伊坦。
英汉互译的三种基本方法
![英汉互译的三种基本方法](https://img.taocdn.com/s3/m/788e7ed690c69ec3d4bb7502.png)
英汉互译的三种基本方法上海理工大学教授,第十四、第十五届韩素音青年翻译奖竞赛汉译英三等奖、英译汉二等奖获得者张顺生1999年笔者到高校工作以后,参加了第十四届和第十五届韩素音青年翻译竞赛。
参加第十四届竞赛纯属偶然,竞赛截止的几天前我刚好浏览了《中国翻译》杂志,不经意间读到了上面刊登的竞赛活动,其中汉译英“想起清华种种”不长,自己特感兴趣,因此连忙回家认真翻译了初稿,后来又校对了几遍,便投了出去。
没想到竞幸运地获得了三等奖。
第十五届韩素音青年翻译竞赛汉译英我虽未获奖,英译汉却幸运地获得了二等奖。
我对第十五届韩素音青年翻译竞赛的印象非常深刻,比如汉译英的题目“常想一二,不思八九”的翻译,我当时的翻译为“Always Bear in Mind the Few Happy Things,Never Take to Heart the Many Unhappy Ones”,而对英译汉的题目“A Person Who Apologises Has the Moral Ball in His Court”(参考译文译作“谁给别人道歉,谁就在道义上掌握了主动”)的翻译,当时也颇费周折,我觉得汉译宜简洁些,故经再三考虑,将其译作“主动道歉理不亏”。
两次参赛荣幸获奖提振了我对英汉互译的信心,也点燃了我对翻译的兴趣。
近年来我不仅一直鼓励学生参加韩素音青年翻译奖竞赛,还举办了两次校级翻译竞赛,出了2014年姑苏区翻译竞赛试题。
从事翻译和翻译教学工作过程中,自己也有一些心得体会,籍此机会跟大家分享一下。
以往的翻译方法多是从“直译和意译”和“归化和异化”等角度而谈的,我这里则想从译语与源语的关系来探讨英汉互译方法。
我认为英汉互译基本方法有三种,即直接套用、结构模仿和融会创新。
一、直接套用所谓“直接套用”指翻译时如能采用“拿来主义”的即采用“拿来主义”,不必另起炉灶,尤其是单词、词组和句子层面。
比如,翻译“石头剪子布”就可以直接将英语中对应的词找出,直接套用英语中的rock- paper-scissors;“口水战”可套用英语中的a war of words;游戏“打水漂”可套用英语中的词组play ducks and drakes;“傻人有傻福”可套译为Fortune favors fools;“谋事在人,成事在天”可套译为Man proposes, God disposes;从交际角度而言“人非圣贤,孰能无过”可视具体情况套用蒲柏(Alexander Pope,1688-1744) 的To err is human或Even Homer sometimes nods;翻译“喊破嗓子,不如甩开膀子”时孙宁巧妙地套用了英语中的“Talking the talk is not as good as walking the walk”。
- 1、下载文档前请自行甄别文档内容的完整性,平台不提供额外的编辑、内容补充、找答案等附加服务。
- 2、"仅部分预览"的文档,不可在线预览部分如存在完整性等问题,可反馈申请退款(可完整预览的文档不适用该条件!)。
- 3、如文档侵犯您的权益,请联系客服反馈,我们会尽快为您处理(人工客服工作时间:9:00-18:30)。
The Posteverything GenerationI never expected to gain any new insight into the nature of my generation, or the changing landscape of American colleges, in Lit Theory. Lit Theory is supposed to be the class where you sit at the back of the room with every other jaded sophomore wearing skinny jeans, thick-framed glasses, an ironic tee-shirt and over-sized retro headphones, just waiting for lecture to be over so you can light up a Turkish Gold and walk to lunch while listening to Wilco. That’s pretty much the way I spent the course, too: through structuralism, formalism, gender theory, and post-colonialism, I was far too busy shuffling through my Ipod to see what the patriarchal world order of capitalist oppression had to do with Ethan Frome. But when we began to study postmodernism, something struck a chord with me and made me sit up and look anew at the seemingly blasé college-aged literati of which I was so self-consciously one.According to my textbook, the problem with defining postmodernism is that it’s i mpossible. The difficulty is that it is so...post. It defines itself so negatively against what came before it –naturalism, romanticism and the wild revolution of modernism –that it’s sometimes hard to see what it actually is. It denies that anything can be explained neatly or even at all. It is parodic, detached, strange, and sometimes menacing to traditionalists who do not understand it. Although it arose in the post-war west (the term was coined in 1949), the generation that has witnessed its ascendance has yet to come up with an explanation of what postmodern attitudes mean for the future of culture or society. The subject intrigued me because, in a class otherwise consumed by dead-letter theories, postmodernism remained an open book, tempting to the young and curious. But it also intrigued me because the question of what postmodernism –what a movement so post-everything, so reticent to define itself – is spoke to a larger question about the political andpopular culture of today, of the other jaded sophomores sitting around me who had grown up in a postmodern world.In many ways, as a college-aged generation, we are also extremely post: post-Cold War, post-industrial, post-baby boom, post-9/11...at one point in his famous essay, “Postmodernism, or the Cultural Logic of Late Capitalism,” literary critic Frederic Jameson even calls us “post-literate.” We are a generation that is riding on the tail-end of a century of war and revolution that toppled civilizations, overturned repressive social orders, and left us with more privilege and opportunity than any other society in history. Ours could be an era to accomplish anything.And yet do we take to the streets and the airwaves and say “here we are, and this is what we demand”? Do we plant our flag of youthful rebellion on the mall in Washington and say “we are not leaving until we see change! Our eyes have been opened by our education and our conception of what is possible has been expanded by our privilege and we demand a better world because it is our right”? It would seem we do the opposite. We go to war without so much as questioning the rationale, we sign away our civil liberties, we say nothing when the Supreme Court uses Brown v. Board of Education to outlaw desegregation, and we sit back to watch the carnage on the evening news.On campus, we sign petitions, join organizations, put our names on mailing lists, make small-money contributions, volunteer a spare hour to tutor, and sport an entire wardrobe’s worth of Live Strong bracelets advertising our moderately priced opposition to everything from breast cancer to global warming. But what do we really stand for? Like a true postmodern generation werefuse to weave together an overarching narrative to our own political consciousness, to present a cast of inspirational or revolutionary characters on our public stage, or to define a specific philosophy. We are a story seemingly without direction or theme, structure or meaning –a generation defined negatively against what came before us. When Al Gore once sai d “It’s the combination of narcissism and nihilism that really defines postmodernism,” he might as well have been echoing his entire generation’s critique of our own. We are a generation for whom even revolution seems trite, and therefore as fair a target for bland imitation as anything else. We are the generation of the Che Geuvera tee-shirt.Jameson calls it “Pastiche” –“the wearing of a linguistic mask, speech in a dead language.” In literature, this means an author speaking in a style that is not his own – borrowing a voice and continuing to use it until the words lose all meaning and the chaos that is real life sets in. It is an imitation of an imitation, something that has been re-envisioned so many times the original model is no longer relevant or recognizable. It is mass-produced individualism, anticipated revolution. It is why postmodernism lacks cohesion, why it seems to lack purpose or direction. For us, the post-everything generation, pastiche is the use and reuse of the old clichés of social change and moral outrage – a perfunctory rebelliousness that has culminated in the age of rapidly multiplying non-profits and relief funds. We live our lives in masks and speak our minds in a dead language –the language of a society that expects us to agitat e because that’s what young people do. But how do we rebel against a generation that is expecting, anticipating, nostalgic for revolution?How do we rebel against parents that sometimes seem to want revolution more than we do? We don’t. We rebel by not reb elling. We wear the defunct masks of protest and moral outrage, but the real energy in campus activism is on the internet, with websites like . It is inthe rapidly developing ability to communicate ideas and frustration in chatrooms instead of on the streets, and channel them into nationwide projects striving earnestly for moderate and peaceful change: we are the generation of Students Taking Action Now Darfur; we are the Rock the Vote generation; the generation of letter-writing campaigns and public interest lobbies; the alternative energy generation.College as America once knew it – as an incubator of radical social change – is coming to an end. To our generation the word “radicalism” evokes images of al Qaeda, not the Weathermen. “Campus takeover” sounds more like Virginia Tech in 2007 than Columbia University in 1968. Such phrases are a dead language to us. They are vocabulary from another era that does not reflect the realities of today. However, the technological revolution, the revolution, the revolution of the organization kid, is just as real and just as profound as the revolution of the 1960’s – it is just not as visible. It is a work in progress, but it is there. Perhaps when our parents finally stop pointing out the things that we are not, the stories that we do not write, they will see the threads of our narrative begin to come together; they will see that behind our pastiche, the post generation speaks in a language that does make sense. We are writing a revolution. We are just putting it in our own words.保护古村落就是保护“根性文化”传统村落是指拥有物质形态和非物质形态文化遗产,具有较高的历史、文化、科学、艺术、社会、经济价值的村落。