23届韩素音翻译竞赛英译汉原文

合集下载

第二十三届韩素音英汉翻译稿

第二十三届韩素音英汉翻译稿

走出幽谷此番美国经济复苏比以往都要缓慢,各种政府措施也是收效甚微。

“美利坚,汝欲何去何从?”美国垮掉一代的代表杰克凯鲁亚克半个世纪前发出的这一问,也是如今威胁世界经济的最大不确定因素。

美国的选民最担忧的便是。

他们即将顶着近10%居高不下的失业率,去参加十一月二号中期选举。

他们要准备好了,前路会异常艰辛漫长。

三十年代以来最严重的经济衰退在一年前终于止步。

原本起步乏力的复苏在年初又急剧放缓。

第二季度GDP缓慢爬升了1.6%,过后更是徘徊不前。

临时购房优惠政策截止后,房市也随之暴跌。

私人企业可提供的就业岗位很少,失业率看似不降反升。

整个夏季担忧与日俱增,如果复苏的脚步继续放慢,美国经济有可能再次步入衰退。

幸运的是,现在看来这些忧虑似乎有点夸大其词。

第二季度GDP 的乏力表现部分是由对中国进口额暂时激增引起的。

据最新统计,八月份还不错的零售额,失业救济申请人数也有所减少,这些都表明,尽管经济依旧疲软,但至少不会继续下滑。

经验表明,虽然经济复苏在起初一两个季度内都会出现动荡,但是很少再次陷入衰退。

目前,最有可能的情况是,美国的经济会在大概2.5%左右缓慢爬升,不至于止步不前,却也远远不足以改善失业率。

以往美国都能走出经济衰退,为何此次前景这般不堪?因为以往经济衰退多数是由紧缩的货币政策引发的。

一旦放宽货币政策,需求便随之回弹。

而这次衰退则是由金融危机引发的。

由于需要修复银行体系,重组资产负债表,金融危机后的复苏一般都显得疲缓。

通常,这种减债期会长达七年之久,也就是说美国要到2014年才能走出经济衰退。

民众可以通过一些方式更快地减少负债,但即使是乐观的市场分析人也认为行程尚未过半。

政治博弈美国最大的问题在于,政客们尚未认识到经济将长期处于缓慢发展的状态,更别提去应对其后果了。

少数敢于直言的官员们开始呼吁:失业率可能居高不下。

但是政治辩论更多的是在归咎经济衰退的责任而不是提出有建设性的方法给此次复苏注入活力。

2023catti杯翻译原文

2023catti杯翻译原文

2023 Catti Cup 是一项国际性的比赛,旨在促进不同语言之间的交流与理解。

作为一名翻译工作者,我们时常需要面对各种各样的翻译挑战,而这个比赛无疑是一个很好的机会,让我们可以在这个评台上展示自己的翻译技能,与其他翻译人才共同探讨翻译中的难题,共同提高翻译水平。

在本次比赛中,我们将有机会接触到来自不同国家和地区的原文,这为我们提供了一个难得的机会,可以接触到不同的语言和文化。

在翻译过程中,我们可能会遇到很多难题,比如文化差异导致的理解歧义,语言结构差异带来的表达困境等等。

但是,正是这些挑战,让我们更好地认识到翻译工作的复杂性和多样性,不断地完善和提高自己的翻译能力。

比赛还能够帮助我们积累更多的翻译经验,在实践中不断总结和提高自己的翻译技巧。

通过参加这个比赛,我们可以了解到翻译领域的最新发展和趋势,与同行交流共享经验和心得,共同进步。

另外,比赛也是一个很好的展示自己的评台,优秀的翻译作品不仅可以在比赛中脱颖而出,还可以为我们在职场上增添亮点,提高我们的专业声誉和知名度。

然而,要取得好成绩并不容易,我们需要充分准备,提前对比赛的相关要求和规则进行了解,多加练习,不断反思和改进自己的翻译技巧。

也要不断学习和积累相关的专业知识和词汇量,提高自己的语言能力和翻译水平。

参加 2023 Catti Cup 是一次难得的机会,无论是对于我们个人的职业发展,还是对于整个翻译行业的发展来说,都具有重要意义。

让我们抓住这个机会,充分发挥我们的优势,不断提高我们的翻译水平,为推动翻译行业的发展做出自己的贡献。

很多人可能会问,为什么要参加翻译比赛?参加翻译比赛能够带来哪些好处?参加翻译比赛可以提高我们的翻译技能和水平。

参加比赛需要我们面对各种各样的挑战和困难,在这个过程中,我们会不断学习,积累经验,得到成长。

比赛的压力会促使我们更加努力地学习和练习,以期在比赛中取得好成绩。

并且在比赛中,我们有机会接触到各种领域、各种类型的文本,这些都可以为我们的翻译积累宝贵的经验,提高我们的翻译水平。

第23届韩素音青年翻译奖竞赛参考译文2

第23届韩素音青年翻译奖竞赛参考译文2

摩天大楼指数——如影随形的经济危机作为一种以巨大的经济力量为支撑的建筑物,摩天大楼常被民众和政客视为展示经济繁荣、社会进步的标志。

有些经济学家则持完全相反的看法,认为摩天大楼的出现,特别是摩天大楼的纪录被刷新,往往预示着经济即将衰退。

“高楼建成之日,即是市场衰退之时”,这是德意志银行的证券分析师安德鲁•劳伦斯于1999年发表的判言。

2006年2月15日,雷曼兄弟公司在北京召开全球经济会议,其全球首席经济学家卢埃林向我国客户提及“摩天大楼指数”的预言:“如果全球有发生经济危机的可能性,那很可能会在2007年或2008年。

”雷曼的首席经济学家预见了2007年到2008年的经济危机,但却不曾想到,雷曼的百年基业正是在这场危机中化为泡影。

对于经济而言,摩天大楼是荣耀还是诅咒?其与经济危机之间是否真的存在这样密切的联系呢?1999年,安德鲁•劳伦斯经过研究验证了摩天大楼与经济危机的关联,并将这种关联称为“摩天大楼指数”。

每一幢刷新世界纪录的摩天大楼的崛起,往往都伴随着经济的衰退。

自20世纪初以来,全球共出现了四轮摩天大楼热,而每一次,都伴随着经济危机或金融动荡。

20世纪20年代,美国经济转好,证券市场再度空前繁荣,民用、商用房产建设高歌猛进。

这期间,三座刷新纪录的摩天大楼先后兴建。

纽约的华尔街40号、克莱斯勒大厦和帝国大厦相继于1929年至1931年的三年中落成,但随之而来的不是新的繁荣,而是空前的大萧条。

在经历了被美国人称之为“黄金时代”的20世纪60年代强劲、持续的经济繁荣后,纽约的世贸中心和芝加哥的西尔斯大厦开始兴建。

1972年和1974年,两座再次刷新世界纪录的摩天大楼相继落成,随后,全球经济发生了严重滞胀。

摩天大楼与经济危机的关联如此密切,很难用巧合来理解,那么究竟是什么原因让经济危机总是与摩天大楼如影随形呢?首先,人性使然。

人性当中有盲目自信的一面。

具体体现在对客观事物认识不足,偏执于对事物的主观看法上。

韩素音英译汉原文

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 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.。

第23届韩素音青年翻译奖竞赛译文5

第23届韩素音青年翻译奖竞赛译文5

第23届"韩素音青年翻译奖"竞赛译文5:如何翻译“Payroll-tax cuts”?高斋翻译TransElegant整理的CATTI和MTI备考资料英译汉Are We There Yet?我们到了吗?Cleaning up the housing market would help cut America’s unemployment rate, by making it easier for people to move to where jobs are. But more must be done to stop high joblessness becoming entrenched. Payroll-tax cuts and credits to reduce the cost of hiring would help. (The health-care reform, alas, does the opposite, at least for small businesses.) Politicians will also have to think harder about training schemes, because some workers lack the skills that new jobs require.清理房市有利于人们把家搬往能够找到工作的地方,从而有助于降低美国的失业率。

但为了防止高失业率积重难返,政府需要做的工作还有许多。

可以减免和抵免工资所得税以降低企业的雇佣成本将有助于降低失业率。

(至少医疗保健改革,哼,效果只会适得其反,至少对小企业是这样。

)政客们还需要就职业培训计划多动动脑子,因为一些工人缺乏新近出现的工作所需要的技能。

Americans are used to great distances. The sooner they, and their politicians, accept that the road to recovery will be a long one, the faster they will get there.美国人早已习惯了长途跋涉。

韩素音英语竞赛24-27届原文

韩素音英语竞赛24-27届原文

―CATTI杯‖第二十七届韩素音青年翻译奖竞赛英译汉竞赛原文: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 impossible. 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 itactually 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 and popular 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 fa mous 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 dema nd‖? 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 segregation, 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 S trong 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 we refuse 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 againstwhat ca me before us. When Al Gore once said ―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 blind 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 s peaking 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 agitate 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 rebelling. 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 in the 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 V ote 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 Qa eda, 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 arenot, 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.汉译英竞赛原文: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。

第23届韩素音青年翻译奖竞赛汉译英原文

第23届韩素音青年翻译奖竞赛汉译英原文

汉译英竞赛原文:摩天大楼指数——如影随形的经济危机作为一种以巨大的经济力量为支撑的建筑物,摩天大楼常被民众和政客视为展示经济繁荣、社会进步的标志。

有些经济学家则持完全相反的看法,认为摩天大楼的出现,特别是摩天大楼的纪录被刷新,往往预示着经济即将衰退。

“高楼建成之日,即是市场衰退之时”,这是德意志银行的证券分析师安德鲁·劳伦斯于1999年发表的判言。

2006年2月15日,雷曼兄弟公司在北京召开全球经济会议,其全球首席经济学家卢埃林向我国客户提及“摩天大楼指数”的预言:“如果全球有发生经济危机的可能性,那很可能会在2007年或2008年。

”雷曼的首席经济学家预见了2007年到2008年的经济危机,但却不曾想到,雷曼的百年基业正是在这场危机中化为泡影。

对于经济而言,摩天大楼是荣耀还是诅咒?其与经济危机之间是否真的存在这样密切的联系呢?1999年,安德鲁·劳伦斯经过研究验证了摩天大楼与经济危机的关联,并将这种关联称为“摩天大楼指数”。

每一幢刷新世界纪录的摩天大楼的崛起,往往都伴随着经济的衰退。

自20世纪初以来,全球共出现了四轮摩天大楼热,而每一次,都伴随着经济危机或金融动荡。

20世纪20年代,美国经济转好,证券市场再度空前繁荣,民用、商用房产建设高歌猛进。

这期间,三座刷新纪录的摩天大楼先后兴建。

纽约的华尔街40号、克莱斯勒大厦和帝国大厦相继于1929年至1931年的三年中落成,但随之而来的不是新的繁荣,而是空前的大萧条。

在经历了被美国人称之为“黄金时代”的20世纪60年代强劲、持续的经济繁荣后,纽约的世贸中心和芝加哥的西尔斯大厦开始兴建。

1972年和1974年,两座再次刷新世界纪录的摩天大楼相继落成,随后,全球经济发生了严重滞胀。

摩天大楼与经济危机的关联如此密切,很难用巧合来理解,那么究竟是什么原因让经济危机总是与摩天大楼如影随形呢?首先,人性使然。

人性当中有盲目自信的一面。

具体体现在对客观事物认识不足,偏执于对事物的主观看法上。

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

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英译汉部分 (3)Hidden within Technology‘s Empire, a Republic of Letters (3)隐藏于技术帝国的文学界 (3)"Why Measure Life in Heartbeats?" (8)何必以心跳定生死? (9)美(节选) (11)The Literature of Knowledge and the Literature of Power byThomas De Quincey (16)知识文学与力量文学托马斯.昆西 (16)An Experience of Aesthetics by Robert Ginsberg (18)审美的体验罗伯特.金斯伯格 (18)A Person Who Apologizes Has the Moral Ball in His Court by Paul Johnson (21)谁给别人道歉,谁就在道义上掌握了主动保罗.约翰逊 (21)On Going Home by Joan Didion (25)回家琼.狄迪恩 (25)The Making of Ashenden (Excerpt) by Stanley Elkin (28)艾兴登其人(节选)斯坦利.埃尔金 (28)Beyond Life (34)超越生命[美] 卡贝尔著 (34)Envy by Samuel Johnson (39)论嫉妒[英]塞缪尔.约翰逊著 (39)《中国翻译》第一届“青年有奖翻译比赛”(1986)竞赛原文及参考译文(英译汉) (41)Sunday (41)星期天 (42)四川外语学院“语言桥杯”翻译大赛获奖译文选登 (44)第七届“语言桥杯”翻译大赛获奖译文选登 (44)The Woods: A Meditation (Excerpt) (46)林间心语(节选) (47)第六届“语言桥杯”翻译大赛获奖译文选登 (50)第五届“语言桥杯”翻译大赛原文及获奖译文选登 (52)第四届“语言桥杯”翻译大赛原文、参考译文及获奖译文选登 (54) When the Sun Stood Still (54)永恒夏日 (55)CASIO杯翻译竞赛原文及参考译文 (56)第三届竞赛原文及参考译文 (56)Here Is New York (excerpt) (56)这儿是纽约 (58)第四届翻译竞赛原文及参考译文 (61)Reservoir Frogs (Or Places Called Mama's) (61)水库青蛙(又题:妈妈餐馆) (62)中译英部分 (66)蜗居在巷陌的寻常幸福 (66)Simple Happiness of Dwelling in the Back Streets (66)在义与利之外 (69)Beyond Righteousness and Interests (69)读书苦乐杨绛 (72)The Bitter-Sweetness of Reading Yang Jiang (72)想起清华种种王佐良 (74)Reminiscences of Tsinghua Wang Zuoliang (74)歌德之人生启示宗白华 (76)What Goethe's Life Reveals by Zong Baihua (76)怀想那片青草地赵红波 (79)Yearning for That Piece of Green Meadow by Zhao Hongbo (79)可爱的南京 (82)Nanjing the Beloved City (82)霞冰心 (84)The Rosy Cloud byBingxin (84)黎明前的北平 (85)Predawn Peiping (85)老来乐金克木 (86)Delights in Growing Old by Jin Kemu (86)可贵的“他人意识” (89)Calling for an Awareness of Others (89)教孩子相信 (92)To Implant In Our Children‘s Young Hearts An Undying Faith In Humanity (92)心中有爱 (94)Love in Heart (94)英译汉部分Hidden within Technology’s Empire, a Republic of Le tters 隐藏于技术帝国的文学界索尔·贝娄(1)When I was a boy ―discovering literature‖, I used to think how wonderful it would be if every other person on the street were familiar with Proust and Joyce or T. E. Lawrence or Pasternak and Kafka. Later I learned how refractory to high culture the democratic masses were. Lincoln as a young frontiersman read Plutarch, Shakespeare and the Bible. But then he was Lincoln.我还是个“探索文学”的少年时,就经常在想:要是大街上人人都熟悉普鲁斯特和乔伊斯,熟悉T.E.劳伦斯,熟悉帕斯捷尔纳克和卡夫卡,该有多好啊!后来才知道,平民百姓对高雅文化有多排斥。

第三十二届韩素音国际翻译大赛英译汉原文

第三十二届韩素音国际翻译大赛英译汉原文

第三十二届韩素音翻译大赛英译汉原文Aesthetic Education and National Progress[1]The diminution of emphasis on the arts and the humanities and the corresponding increased emphasis on business and STEM disciplines (Science, Technology, Engineering, and Math) has resulted in a normative conception of national progress that excludes aesthetic education. In this essay, I argue that aesthetic educators should challenge the normative understanding of national progress. (In the humanities, aesthetic educators typically are educators of English, foreign languages and literature, philosophy, art history and film studies.) To this end, I call attention to the writings of the French philosopher Germaine de Staël (1766-1817) because in the adaptation of her notion of progress lies possible hope for the future of the humanities and the arts.[2][2] In contemporary American society, national progress is more often than not equated with job creation, and job creation is linked to advancement in business and the STEM disciplines. For example, in his 2012 acceptance speech after the national election, President Obama called for the United States to remain the leader in science and technology, and then he exclaimed, “America, I believe we can build on the progress we've made and continue to fight for new jobs and new opportunities and new security for the mi ddle class.”[3]Lip service is paid to civic responsibility and its role in national progress, while federal and state governments, as well as institutions of higher education, drastically cut budgets and/or entire programs in the humanities and the arts. Aesthetic educators know that these cuts will, in the long term, be devastating to civil society because the humanities and the arts are precisely the programs that convey cultural capital. More precisely, they cultivate in students the critical judgment and the independence of thought needed to be able to make informed decisions about their place in civil society. Given the number of indicators that point to a decline in public and institutional support for the humanities and the arts, however, it has become easy for aesthetic educators to become demoralized, feel irrelevant, and even believe that we, in fact, have little or no role in national progress.[4]As examples of indicators that point to the increasing irrelevance of the humanities, in FY 2014, the appropriations to both the National Endowment for the Humanities (NEH) and the National Endowment for the Arts(NEA) were cut by 13 percent from their peak 2010 numbers, while the National Science Foundation (NSF) appropriations increased by almost 4percent from 2010. Perhaps the 13 percent cut would not have been so shocking if the NEH and NEA allocations did not represent a mere 2 percent of the total NSF allocation. The pill is even harder to swallow when one considers that, in 1979, the NEH and the NEA, respectively, received funding equivalent to approximately 16 percent of the NSF.[5]Salaries represent a second measure of the diminishing consideration for the humanities and the arts within university structures. The Oklahoma Faculty Survey by Discipline, a study that surveys the salaries of professors at 114 “Research University/Very High Research Activity” institutions, lists average salaries for all ranks of tenure-track faculty in a number of disciplines. According to the 2013-14 study, the average salary of a faculty member in the arts was $71,463; in English, $76,627; in philosophy and religious studies, $81,971; in physical sciences, $102,636; in engineering, $114,827; and in business management, $139,093. While salaries in 2013-14 increased from 2011-12 in the physical science, engineering, and business management, they decreased in the fine arts, English, and philosophy. If markets drive salaries, the arts and the humanities are clearly not high in market demand. This lack of demand for the humanities and the arts is further underscored in Governor Rick Scott's proposal that tuition rates for Florida state universities be frozen for students who major in “strategic areas”. Lizette Alvarez from the New York Times states of Scott’s proposal, “The messa ge from Tallahassee could not be blunter: Give us engineers, scientists, health care specialists and technology experts. Do not worry so much about historians, philosophers, anthropologists and English majors.” From multiple perspectives, then, we see an explicit shift to STEM disciplines and a discouragement of humanities and arts education, whether in program development, faculty salaries, or student tuitions. Faced with what seems to be such overwhelming confirmation of aesthetic educators’ irrelevance t o today’s understanding of national progress—namely, advancement in business, science and technology—aesthetic educators in the humanities and the arts are struggling to communicate to others outside our field, and to the public at large, our vital role.[6]As demoralizing as the perceived irrelevance of arts and humanities education may be and as disappointing as our attempts to articulate our relevance have been, we may be able to begin to find hope and purpose in renewed debate around how we think about “progress” and, more precisely, the role of aesthetic education in “progress”. The writings of Germaine de Staël are particularly illuminating because they situate aesthetic education squarely in the progress of the nation and have bearing on the dilemma facing the humanities and the arts today. Her prescient philosophy turns the definition of progress on its head and could give aestheticeducators a powerful tool to fight for the increased relevance and vitality of the humanities and the arts in the broader notion of progress.[7]Germaine de Staël’s notion of progress—namely, the alignment of the perfectibility of the human mind (accretion of knowledge) with the perfectibility of the human species (interplay between individual morality and public morality) —has direct bearing on the difficulties that we as aesthetic educators are having today in articulating our essential role in national progress. Obviously, both types of progress (perfectibility of the human mind and perfectibility of the human species) are essential to the progress of the nation, but Germaine de Staël argues convincingly that they must align. Aesthetic educators might thus remind the public that business and the STEM disciplines neither have as their mandate the watchful alignment of individual and public morality (the vector that guarantees freedom and the continual perfecting of the nation) nor do they have as their directive resistance against dogma. Furthermore, investment in STEM at the expense of the arts and the humanities parallels th e Enlightenment’s obsession with progress as defined as the conservation and accretion of empirical knowledge and material gain. This obsession, at least in Germaine de Staël’s view, contributed to the neglect of the interior moral life of the individual. It, furthermore, diminished emphasis on moral responsibility and independence of judgment, which consequently led to increased partisanship, culminating in the fanaticism of the Reign of Terror. While it is hard to imagine the advent of a Reign of Terror in the United States, it can be argued that obsession with unbridled advancement in science and business at the expense of aesthetic education could lead to the weakening of individual morality—defined by Staël as the devotion to freedom, human rights, and the possibility of collective happiness for all.[8] If Germaine de Staël were alive today, she might argue that the solution to our current humanities and arts crisis is a relatively simple one. First, argue for national progress to be understood as the alignment of the perfectibility of the human mind with the perfectibility of the human species. Scientific advancement at the expense of the watchful alignment of individual and public morality poses a threat to the stability of our nation. Consequently, any call for national progress must include sufficient support of and funding for precisely the disciplines (the humanities and the arts) that have this alignment as their mandate. Secondly, encourage educational models that allow for the combination of a “useful” subject that contributes to a knowledge-based economy and a subject in which they will receive an aesthetic education.。

23届韩素音翻译大赛英译汉译文

23届韩素音翻译大赛英译汉译文

路漫漫其修远兮美国经济复苏的进程会比以往任何经济萧条之后都慢很多,但政府或许能帮上一点小忙。

“尔欲何往,美利坚?”半个世纪前,“垮掉的一代”的代表杰克·凯鲁亚克提出的这个问题,是悬在世界经济头上的最大的不定性因素。

而且,它反映了美国选民们最大的担忧,他们要顶着全国失业率卡在一成,而且居高不下的严峻形势,去参加11月2号举行的国会中期选举。

他们要为打持久战、攻坚战做好准备。

1930年以来最棘手的经济萧条终于在一年前结束了。

但复苏的进程在起步阶段并不强劲,而且在今年年初突然变缓。

第二季度的GDP(国民生产总值)年增长速度只有可怜的1.6%,而且自那之后,就一直萎靡不振。

从短期的税收鼓励购房政策到期后,房产市场就一泻千里。

所以,我们在私营方面几乎没有创造什么工作岗位,失业率不降反升。

整个夏天充斥着恐慌,因为如果复苏的速度持续走低,美国经济又会重新陷入萧条的困境。

幸运的是,现在这种担忧似乎被夸大了。

第二季度GDP疲软的部分原因也许是从中国进口的暂时激增。

从八月可喜的零售业绩,到对失业补贴的需求持续减少,最新的数据都表明,尽管现在经济仍然很疲软,但不会再继续下跌了。

而历史证实,就算最初的经济复苏在一两个季度内会有摇摆,经济萧条却很少会故态复萌。

就现在来说,最有可能发生的是美国经济会在大约2.5个百分比的速度下缓慢增长:虽然比没有速度强,但也慢得难以给失业率带来什么明显的改善。

为什么通常美国经济都会在萧条后反弹,但这次的前景却一片黯淡呢?这是因为过去大多数的经济萧条都是紧缩的货币政策造成的,政策放宽了,需求也就反弹了。

但这次经济萧条是金融危机造成的。

而通常发生金融危机之后,从萧条中的复苏都是疲软和缓慢的,原因是银行系统需要修复,资产负债表需要重建。

一般来说,债务减持的过程要持续七年左右,这意味着美国要在2014年才能从中抽身。

一些家庭通过一些手段以非同寻常的速度减少债务负担,但就算是最乐观的估计,漫漫长征路也才刚刚走过一半。

翻译竞赛英译汉参赛原文

翻译竞赛英译汉参赛原文

翻译竞赛英译汉参赛原文Africa on the Silk RoadThe Dark Continent, the Birthplace of Humanity . . . Africa. All of the lands south and west of the Kingdom of Egypt have for far too long been lumped into one cultural unit by westerners, when in reality, nothing could be further from the truth. Africa is not one mysterious, impenetrable land as the legacy of the nineteenth Century European explorers suggests, it is rather an immensely varied patchwork of peoples that can be changed not only by region and country but b y nature’s way of separating people – by rivers and lakes and by mountain ranges and deserts. A river or other natural barrier may separate two groups of people who interact, but who rarely intermarry, because they perceive the people on the other side to be “different” from them.Africa played an important part in Silk Road trade from antiquity through modern times when much of the Silk Road trade was supplanted by European corporate conglomerates like the Dutch and British East India Companies who created trade monopolies to move goods around the Old World instead. But in the heyday of the Silk Road, merchants travelled to Africa to trade for rare timbers, gold, ivory, exotic animals and spices. From ports along the Mediterranean and Red Seas to those as far south asMogadishu and Kenya in the Indian Ocean, goods from all across the continent were gathered for the purposes of trade.One of Africa’s contributions to world cuisine that is still widely used today is sesame seeds. Imagine East Asian food cooked in something other than its rich sesame oil, how about the quintessential American-loved Chinese dish, General Tso’s Chicken? How ‘bout the rich, thick tahini paste enjoyed from the Levant and Middle East through South and Central Asia and the Himalayas as a flavoring for foods (hummus, halva) and stir-fries, and all of the breads topped with sesame or poppy seeds? Then think about the use of black sesame seeds from South Asian through East Asian foods and desserts. None of these cuisines would have used sesame in these ways, if it hadn’t been for the trade of sesame seeds from Africa in antiquity.Given the propensity of sesame plants to easily reseed themselves, the early African and Arab traders probably acquired seeds from native peoples who gathered wild seeds. The seeds reached Egypt, the Middle East and China by 4,000 –5,000 years ago as evidenced from archaeological investigations, tomb paintings and scrolls. Given the eager adoption of the seeds by other cultures and the small supply, the cost per pound was probably quite high and merchants likely made fortunes offthe trade.Tamarind PodsThe earliest cultivation of sesame comes from India in the Harappan period of the Indus Valley by about 3500 years ago and from then on, India began to supplant Africa as a source of the seeds in global trade. By the time of the Romans, who used the seeds along with cumin to flavor bread, the Indian and Persian Empires were the main sources of the seeds.Another ingredient still used widely today that originates in Africa is tamarind. Growing as seed pods on huge lace-leaf trees, the seeds are soaked and turned into tamarind pulp or water and used to flavor curries and chutneys in Southern and South Eastern Asia, as well as the more familiar Worcestershire and barbeque sauces in the West. Eastern Africans use Tamarind in their curries and sauces and also make a soup out of the fruits that is popular in Zimbabwe. Tamarind has been widely adopted in the New World as well as is usually blended with sugar for a sweet and sour treat wrapped in corn husk as a pulpy treat or also used as syrup to flavor sodas, sparkling waters and even ice cream.Some spices of African origin that were traded along the Silk Road havebecome extinct. One such example can be found in wild silphion which was gathered in Northern Africa and traded along the Silk Road to create one of the foundations of the wealth of Carthage and Kyrene. Cooks valued the plant because of the resin they gathered from its roots and stalk that when dried became a powder that blended the flavors of onion and garlic. It was impossible for these ancient people to cultivate, however, and a combination of overharvesting, wars and habitat loss cause the plant to become extinct by the end of the first or second centuries of the Common Era. As supplies of the resin grew harder and harder to get, it was supplanted by asafetida from Central Asia.Other spices traded along the Silk Road are used almost exclusively in African cuisines today – although their use was common until the middle of the first millennium in Europe and Asia. African pepper, Moor pepper or negro pepper is one such spice. Called kieng in the cuisines of Western Africa where it is still widely used, it has a sharp flavor that is bitter and flavorful at the same time – sort of like a combination of black pepper and nutmeg. It also adds a bit of heat to dishes for a pungent taste. Its use extends across central Africa and it is also found in Ethiopian cuisines. When smoked, as it often is in West Africa before use, this flavor deepens and becomes smoky and develops a black cardamom-like flavor. By the middle of the 16th Century, the use and trade of negro pepper in Europe,Western and Southern Asia had waned in favor of black pepper imports from India and chili peppers from the New World.Traditional Chinese ShipGrains of paradise, Melegueta pepper, or alligator pepper is another Silk Road Spice that has vanished from modern Asian and European food but is still used in Western and Northern Africa and is an important cash crop in some areas of Ethiopia. Native to Africa’s West Coast its use seems to have originated in or around modern Ghana and was shipped to Silk Road trade in Eastern Africa or to Mediterranean ports. Fashionable in the cuisines of early Renaissance Europe its use slowly waned until the 18th Century when it all but vanished from European markets and was supplanted by cardamom and other spices flowing out of Asia to the rest of the world.The trade of spices from Africa to the rest of the world was generally accomplished by a complex network of merchants working the ports and cities of the Silk Road. Each man had a defined, relatively bounded territory that he traded in to allow for lots of traders to make a good living moving goods and ideas around the world along local or regional. But occasionally, great explorers accomplished the movement of goods across several continents and cultures.Although not African, the Chinese Muslim explorer Zheng He deserves special mention as one of these great cultural diplomats and entrepreneurs. In the early 15th Century he led seven major sea-faring expeditions from China across Indonesia and several Indian Ocean ports to Africa. Surely, Chinese ships made regular visits to Silk Road ports from about the 12th Century on, but when Zheng came, he came leading huge armadas of ships that the world had never seen before and wouldn’t see again for several centuries. Zheng came in force, intending to display China’s greatness to the world and bring the best goods from the rest of the world back to China. Zheng came eventually to Africa where he left laden with spices for cooking and medicine, wood and ivory and hordes of animals. It may be hard for us who are now accustomed to the world coming on command to their desktops to imagine what a miracle it must have been for the citizens of Nanjing to see the parade of animals from Zheng’s cultural Ark. But try we must to imagine the wonder brought by the parade of giraffes, zebra and ostriches marching down Chinese streets so long ago –because then we can begin to imagine the importance of the Silk Road in shaping the world.[文档可能无法思考全面,请浏览后下载,另外祝您生活愉快,工作顺利,万事如意!]。

韩素音英译汉原文

韩素音英译汉原文

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 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 approachto 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”?Mor e people “know” Turing’s foundational text than have actually read it. This is un fortunate 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. Tur ing 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. Itmust 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 p lanes “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, andyet 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 entit ies, 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. T o 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 al so in the loss of all that we prevent ourselves from discovering and understanding when we insist on protecting beliefs we know tobe 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.。

韩素音翻译原文(1)

韩素音翻译原文(1)

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23届韩素音青年翻译奖竞赛参考译文

第23届韩素音青年翻译奖竞赛参考译文

英译汉原文:Are We There Yet?America’s recovery will be much slower than that from most recessions; but the government can help a bit.“WHITHER goest thou, America?” That question, posed by Jack Kerouac on behalf of the Beat generation half a century ago, is the biggest uncertainty hanging over the world economy. And it reflects the foremost worry for American voters, who go to the polls for the congressional mid-term elections on November 2nd with the country’s unemployment rate stubbornly stuck at nearly one in ten. They should prepare themselves for a long, hard ride.The most wrenching recession since the 1930s ended a year ago. But the recovery—none too powerful to begin with—slowed sharply earlier this year. GDP grew by a feeble 1.6% at an annual pace in the second quarter, and seems to have been stuck somewhere similar since. The housing market slumped after temporary tax incentives to buy a home expired. So few private jobs were being created that unemployment looked more likely to rise than fall. Fears grew over the summer that if this deceleration continued, America’s economy would slip back into recession.Fortunately, those worries now seem exaggerated. Part of the weakness of second-quarter GDP was probably because of a temporary surge in imports from China. The latest statistics, from reasonably good retail sales in August to falling claims for unemployment benefits, point to an economy that, though still weak, is not slumping further. And history suggests that although nascent recoveries often wobble for a quarter or two, they rarely relapse into recession. For now, it is most likely that America’s economy will crawl along with growth at perhaps 2.5%: above stall speed, but far too slow to make much difference to the jobless rate.Why, given that America usually rebounds from recession, are the prospects so bleak? That’s because most past recessions have been caused by tight monetary policy. When policy is loosened, demand rebounds. This recession was the result of a financial crisis. Recoveries after financial crises are normally weak and slow as banking systems are repaired and balance-sheets rebuilt. Typically, this period of debt reduction lasts around seven years, which means America would emerge from it in 2014. By some measures, households are reducing their debt burdens unusually fast, but even optimistic seers do not think the process is much more than half over.Battling on the busAmerica’s biggest problem is that its poli ticians have yet to acknowledge that the economy is in for such a long, slow haul, let alone prepare for the consequences.A few brave officials are beginning to sound warnings that the jobless rate is likely to “stay high”. But the political debate is mor e about assigning blame for the recession than about suggesting imaginative ways to give more oomph to the recovery. Republicans argue that Barack Obama’s shift towards “big government” explainsthe economy’s weakness, and that high unemployment is proof t hat fiscal stimulus was a bad idea. In fact, most of the growth in government to date has been temporary and unavoidable; the longer-run growth in government is more modest, and reflects the policies of both Mr Obama and his predecessor. And the notion that high joblessness “proves” that stimulus failed is simply wrong. The mechanics of a financial bust suggest that without a fiscal boost the recession would have been much worse.Democrats have their own class-warfare version of the blame game, in which Wall Street’s excesses caused the problem and higher taxes on high-earners are part of the solution. That is why Mr. Obama’s legislative priority before the mid-terms is to ensure that the Bush tax cuts expire at the end of this year for households earning more than $250,000 but are extended for everyone else.This takes an unnecessary risk with the short-term recovery. America’s experience in 1937 and Japan’s in 1997 are powerful evidence that ill-timed tax rises can tip weak economies back into recession. Higher taxes at the top, along with the waning of fiscal stimulus and belt-tightening by the states, will make a weak growth rate weaker still. Less noticed is that Mr. Obama’s fiscal plan will also worsen the medium-term budget mess, by making tax cuts for the middle class permanent.Ways to overhaul the engineIn an ideal world America would commit itself now to the medium-term tax reforms and spending cuts needed to get a grip on the budget, while leaving room to keep fiscal policy loose for the moment. But in febrile, partisan Washington that is a pipe-dream. Today’s goals can only be more modest: to nurture the weak economy, minimize uncertainty and prepare the ground for tomorrow’s fiscal debate. To that end, Congress ought to extend all the Bush tax cuts until 2013. Then they should all expire—prompting a serious fiscal overhaul, at a time when the economy is stronger.A broader set of policies could help to work off the hangover faster. One priority is to encourage more write-downs of mortgage debt. Almost a quarter of all Americans with mortgages owe more than their houses are worth. Until that changes the vicious cycle of rising foreclosures and falling prices will continue. There are plenty of ideas on offer, from changing the bankruptcy law so that judges can restructure mortgage debt to empowering special trustees to write down loans. They all have drawbacks, but a fetid pool of underwater mortgages will, much like Japan’s loans to zombie firms, corrode the financial system and harm the recovery.C leaning up the housing market would help cut America’s unemployment rate, by making it easier for people to move to where jobs are. But more must be done to stop high joblessness becoming entrenched. Payroll-tax cuts and credits to reduce the cost of hiring would help. (The health-care reform, alas, does the opposite, at least for small businesses.) Politicians will also have to think harder about training schemes, because some workers lack the skills that new jobs require.Americans are used to great distances. The sooner they, and their politicians, acceptthat the road to recovery will be a long one, the faster they will get there.译文:我们到达目的地了吗?与大多数衰退之后的复苏相比,这次美国经济的复苏会慢得多。

第23届韩素音青年翻译奖竞赛英译汉原文

第23届韩素音青年翻译奖竞赛英译汉原文

英译汉竞赛原文:Are We There Yet?America’s recovery will be much slower than that from most recessions; but the government can help a bit.美国的经济复苏将会比经历衰退后更加缓慢;但政府会有所帮助“WHITHER goest thou, America?” That question, posed by Jack Kerouac on behalf of the Beat generation half a century ago, is the biggest uncertainty hanging over the world economy. And it reflects the foremost worry for American voters, who go to the polls for the congressional mid-term elections国会中期选举投票on November 2nd with the country’s unempl oyment rate stubbornly stuck at nearly one in ten. They should prepare themselves for a long, hard ride.“美国今后的去向如何?”这是半个世纪前由杰克·凯鲁亚克代表“美国垮了的一代”提出的问题,它是笼罩着世界经济的最大的不确定因素。

这反应出了美国选民最关注的问题The most wrenching recession since the 1930s ended a year ago. But the recovery—none too powerful to begin with—slowed sharply earlier this year. GDP grew by a feeble 1.6% at an annual pace in the second quarter, and seems to have been stuck somewhere similar since. The housing market slumped after temporary tax incentives to buy a home expired. So few private jobs were being created that unemployment looked more likely to rise than fall. Fears grew over the summer that if this deceleration continued, America’s economy would slip back into recession.Fortunately, those worries now seem exaggerated. Part of the weakness of second-quarter GDP was probably because of a temporary surge in imports from China. The latest statistics, from reasonably good retail sales in August to falling claims for unemployment benefits, point to an economy that, though still weak, is not slumping further. And history suggests that although nascent recoveries often wobble for a quarter or two, they rarely relapse into recession. For now, it is most likely that America’s economy will crawl along with gro wth at perhaps 2.5%: above stall speed, but far too slow to make much difference to the jobless rate.Why, given that America usually rebounds from recession, are the prospects so bleak? That’s because most past recessions have been caused by tight monetary policy. When policy is loosened, demand rebounds. This recession was the result of a financial crisis. Recoveries after financial crises are normally weak and slow as banking systems are repaired and balance-sheets rebuilt. Typically, this period of debt reduction lasts around seven years, which means America would emerge from it in 2014. By some measures, households are reducing their debt burdens unusually fast, but even optimistic seers do not think the process is much more than half over.Battling on the busAmerica’s biggest problem is that its politicians have yet to acknowledge that the economy is in for such a long, slow haul, let alone prepare for the consequences. A few brave officials are beginning to sound warnings that the jobless rate is li kely to “stay high”. But the political debate is more about assigning blame for the recession than about suggesting imaginative ways to give more oomph to the recovery.Republicans argue that Barack Obama’s shift towards “big government” explains the econo my’s weakness, and that high unemployment is proof that fiscal stimulus was a bad idea. Infact, most of the growth in government to date has been temporary and unavoidable; the longer-run growth in government is more modest, and reflects the policies of both Mr Obama and his predecessor. And the notion that high joblessness “proves” that stimulus failed is simply wrong. The mechanics of a financial bust suggest that without a fiscal boost the recession would have been much worse.Democrats have their own class-warfare version of the blame game, in which Wall Street’s excesses caused the problem and higher taxes on high-earners are part of the solution. That is why Mr. Obama’s legislative priority before the mid-terms is to ensure that the Bush tax cuts expire at the end of this year for households earning more than $250,000 but are extended for everyone else.This takes an unnecessary risk with the short-term recovery. America’s experience in 1937 and Japan’s in 1997 are powerful evidence that ill-timed tax rises can tip weak economies back into recession. Higher taxes at the top, along with the waning of fiscal stimulus and belt-tightening by the states, will make a weak growth rate weaker still. Less noticed is that Mr. Obama’s fiscal plan will also worsen the medium-term budget mess, by making tax cuts for the middle class permanent.Ways to overhaul the engineIn an ideal world America would commit itself now to the medium-term tax reforms and spending cuts needed to get a grip on the budget, while leaving room to keep fiscal policy loose for the moment. But in febrile, partisan Washington that is a pipe-dream. Today’s goals can only be more modest: to nurture the weak economy, minimize uncertainty and prepare the ground for tomorrow’s fiscal debate. To t hat end, Congress ought to extend all the Bush tax cuts until 2013. Then they should all expire—prompting a serious fiscal overhaul, at a time when the economy is stronger.A broader set of policies could help to work off the hangover faster. One priority is to encourage more write-downs of mortgage debt. Almost a quarter of all Americans with mortgages owe more than their houses are worth. Until that changes the vicious cycle of rising foreclosures and falling prices will continue. There are plenty of ideas on offer, from changing the bankruptcy law so that judges can restructure mortgage debt to empowering special trustees to write down loans. They all have drawbacks, but a fetid pool of underwater mortgages will, much like Japan’s loans to zombie firms, corrode the financial system and harm the recovery.Cleaning up the housing market would help cut America’s unemploy ment rate, by making it easier for people to move to where jobs are. But more must be done to stop high joblessness becoming entrenched. Payroll-tax cuts and credits to reduce the cost of hiring would help. (The health-care reform, alas, does the opposite, at least for small businesses.) Politicians will also have to think harder about training schemes, because some workers lack the skills that new jobs require.Americans are used to great distances. The sooner they, and their politicians, accept that the road to recovery will be a long one, the faster they will get there.。

历届韩素音翻译大奖赛竞赛原文及译文详解

历届韩素音翻译大奖赛竞赛原文及译文详解

历届韩素音翻译大奖赛竞赛原文及译文英译汉部分 (2)Beauty (excerpt) (2)美(节选) (2)The Literature of Knowledge and the Literature of Power byThomas De Quincey (5)知识文学与力量文学托马斯.昆西 (5)An Experience of Aesthetics by Robert Ginsberg (6)审美的体验罗伯特.金斯伯格 (6)A Person Who Apologizes Has the Moral Ball in His Court by Paul Johnson (8)谁给别人道歉,谁就在道义上掌握了主动保罗.约翰逊 (8)On Going Home by Joan Didion (11)回家琼.狄迪恩 (11)The Making of Ashenden (Excerpt) by Stanley Elkin (13)艾兴登其人(节选)斯坦利.埃尔金 (13)Beyond Life (17)超越生命[美] 卡贝尔著 (17)Envy by Samuel Johnson (20)论嫉妒[英]塞缪尔.约翰逊著 (20)中译英部分 (23)在义与利之外 (23)Beyond Righteousness and Interests (23)读书苦乐杨绛 (25)The Bitter-Sweetness of Reading Yang Jiang (25)想起清华种种王佐良 (26)Reminiscences of Tsinghua Wang Zuoliang (26)歌德之人生启示宗白华 (28)What Goethe's Life Reveals by Zong Baihua (28)怀想那片青草地赵红波 (30)Yearning for That Piece of Green Meadow by Zhao Hongbo (30)可爱的南京 (32)Nanjing the Beloved City (32)霞冰心 (33)The Rosy Cloud byBingxin (33)黎明前的北平 (33)Predawn Peiping (33)老来乐金克木 (34)Delights in Growing Old by Jin Kemu (34)可贵的“他人意识” (36)Calling for an Awareness of Others (36)教孩子相信 (38)To Implant In Our Children’s Young Hearts An Undying Faith In Humanity (38)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 o f 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, “Simplicity, 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。

汉译英短文翻译(5篇)

汉译英短文翻译(5篇)

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。

韩素音翻译大赛英译汉原文解读与译赏(2020年7月整理).pdf

韩素音翻译大赛英译汉原文解读与译赏(2020年7月整理).pdf

Globalization全球化颜林海【标题解读】写作分析:何谓全球化?回答这个问题的过程就是就是人类对客观事物的认识过程,即“定义”的过程,换句话说,“定义”就是界定一种事物的本质(即意义)的说明。

“定义”有许多方式,最常见的有:列举法(illustration),分类法(classification),过程分析法(process analysis),因果法(cause and effect),比对法(comparison and contrast);除了以上方法外,还有特征枚举法(enumerating characteristics),词源法(etymology),类比法(analogy),排除法(exclusion)(M.S. Spangler & R.Werner,1990:131—135)。

从写作或其他媒介的角度,作为一篇文章的标题,作者必然要围绕标题来展开,而要展开这个话题,就必须对该字词加以界定,即定义。

篇体分析:从上下文看,这是一篇由一档电视谈话节目转写而成的书面文档;电视访谈类节目虽然重在访谈,但并非人与人之间的私下闲聊,因此,节目主持人也往往会提前大致拟定一个围绕某一话题而展开的提纲,这就与文章写作大同而小异了。

理解与翻译时,注意访谈中人物对话的转换,还要注意书写文本在断句上与访谈情景有时并不一致,如(25)句。

翻译分析:在翻译之前,译者也应对标题中涉及到的概念加以认识和理解。

译者在分析某一核心字词时必须注意该字词的音形义的分析。

此篇文章中globalization与音没有多大关系,主要分析该字词的“形”和“义”。

而字“形”的分析涉及到该词的词源和构词方式。

词源分析:Globalization一词逆推词源关系如下:globalization。

构词分析:globalization不过是globalize的名词拼写形式,核心意义在globalize;而此词的构形属于英语中“形容词+动词后缀ize”构词法,其表达的意义为“使...‘形容词’化”或“使...变成‘形容词’”。

  1. 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. 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. 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)。

Are We There Yet?America’s recovery will be much slower than that from most recessions; but the government can help a bit.“WHITHER goest thou, America?” That question, posed by Jack Kerouac on behalf of the Beat generation half a century ago, is the biggest uncertainty hanging over the world economy. And it reflects the foremost worry for American voters, who go to the polls for the congressional mid-term elections on November 2nd with the country’s unemployment rate stubbornly stuck at nearly one in ten. They should prepare themselves for a long, hard ride.The most wrenching recession since the 1930s ended a year ago. But the recovery—none too powerful to begin with—slowed sharply earlier this year. GDP grew by a feeble 1.6% at an annual pace in the second quarter, and seems to have been stuck somewhere similar since. The housing market slumped after temporary tax incentives to buy a home expired. So few private jobs were being created that unemployment looked more likely to rise than fall. Fears grew over the summer that if this deceleration continued, America’s economy would slip back into recession.Fortunately, those worries now seem exaggerated. Part of the weakness ofsecond-quarter GDP was probably because of a temporary surge in imports from China. The latest statistics, from reasonably good retail sales in August to falling claims for unemployment benefits, point to an economy that, though still weak, is not slumping further. And history suggests that although nascent recoveries often wobble for a quarter or two, they rarely relapse into recession. For now, it is most likely that America’s economy will crawl along with growth at perhaps 2.5%: above stall speed, but far too slow to make much difference to the jobless rate.Why, given that America usually rebounds from recession, are the prospects so bleak? That’s because most past recessions have been caused by tight monetary policy. When policy is loosened, demand rebounds. This recession was the result of a financial crisis. Recoveries after financial crises are normally weak and slow as banking systems are repaired and balance-sheets rebuilt. Typically, this period of debt reduction lasts around seven years, which means America would emerge from it in 2014. By some measures, households are reducing their debt burdens unusually fast, but even optimistic seers do not think the process is much more than half over.Battling on the busAmerica’s biggest problem is that its politicians have yet to acknowledge that the economy is in for such a long, slow haul, let alone prepare for the consequences. A few brave officials are beginning to sound warnings that the jobless rate is likely to “stay high”. But the political debate is more about assigning blame for the recession than about suggesting imaginative ways to give more oomph to the recovery.Republicans argue that Barack Obama’s shift towards “big government” explains the economy’s weakness, and that high unemployment is proof that fiscal stimulus was a bad idea. In fact, most of the growth in government to date has been temporary and unavoidable; the longer-run growth in government is more modest, and reflects the policies of both Mr Obama and his predecessor. And the notion that high joblessness “proves” that stimulus failed is simply wrong. The mechan ics of a financial bust suggest that without a fiscal boost the recession would have been much worse.Democrats have their own class-warfare version of the blame game, in which Wall Street’s excesses caused the problem and higher taxes on high-earners are part of the solution. That is why Mr. Obama’s legislative priority before the mid-terms is to ensure that the Bush tax cuts expire at the end of this year for households earning more than $250,000 but are extended for everyone else.This takes an unnecessary risk with the short-term recovery. America’s experience in 1937 and Japan’s in 1997 are powerful evidence that ill-timed tax rises can tip weak economies back into recession. Higher taxes at the top, along with the waning of fiscal stimulus and belt-tightening by the states, will make a weak growth rate weaker still. Less noticed is that Mr. Obama’s fiscal plan will also worsen the medium-term budget mess, by making tax cuts for the middle class permanent.Ways to overhaul the engineIn an ideal world America would commit itself now to the medium-term tax reforms and spending cuts needed to get a grip on the budget, while leav ing room to keep fiscal policy loose for the moment. But in febrile, partisan Washington that is a pipe-dream. Today’s goals can only be more modest: to nurture the weak economy, minimize uncertainty and prepare the ground for tomorrow’s fiscal debate. To that end, Congress ought to extend all the Bush tax cuts until 2013. Then they should all expire—prompting a serious fiscal overhaul, at a time when the economy is stronger.A broader set of policies could help to work off the hangover faster. One priority is to encourage more write-downs of mortgage debt. Almost a quarter of all Americans with mortgages owe more than their houses are worth. Until that changes the vicious cycle of rising foreclosures and falling prices will continue. There are plenty of ideas on offer, from changing the bankruptcy law so that judges can restructure mortgage debt to empowering special trustees to write down loans. They all have drawbacks, but a fetid pool of underwater mortgages will, much like Japan’s loans to zombie firms, corrode the financial system and harm the recovery.Cleaning up the housing market would help cut America’s unemployment rate, by making it easier for people to move to where jobs are. But more must be done to stop high joblessness becoming entrenched. Payroll-tax cuts and credits to reduce the cost of hiring would help. (The health-care reform, alas, does the opposite, at least for small businesses.)Politicians will also have to think harder about training schemes, because some workers lack the skills that new jobs require.Americans are used to great distances. The sooner they, and their politicians, accept that the road to recovery will be a long one, the faster they will get there.。

相关文档
最新文档