?????????????????? (MTI) ??
“??????”??????
(Fundamentals
of E/C Written Translation [FWT]: Course Syllabus)
???????????????10:10-12:00?????????
???C-304. ??????? [kepingATnju.edu.cn]. ?????
???????????419. ?????
??17:00-19:00
(??)
? ?
3. Translation - Crossing Languages
4. ??2014????????????: ??13 ??
??????????????????????????????????????????????????????
???2
???32??
?????????????????/???????????????????????????/???????????????????????????
? ???????????????????????????????????????????????????
? ????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????
? ??????????????????????????
? ????????????????????????????????????
? ?????300-400???/???????????????????????????????????????????????????????????
??????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????
???????????????????????????????????????????????????????presentation of information?????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????
??????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????
????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????
???????????????????
(1) ???????????????????????
(2) ??????????????????
??????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????
???????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????
????
?2??
??????????
???????????????
?3??
????????
??????
?4??
???????????
??????????????
?????????
?5??
???????
??????????????
???????????
?????????
?6??
????
?????
??????
? ??????????????????????????
? ??????????????????????????
? ????????????????????
??????????????40%??????????????60%??????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????
? ?????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????(15%)?
? ??????????????????????????????(25%)?
? ??????????? (60%)?
Ke, Ping [??]. (1991/1993).???????????. ??: ???????. 206/209 pp.
Reynolds, Matthew. (2024).?????????(Ke Ping & Li Xiaosa, Trans.). ???????? (??????) (Original work [Translation?A Very Short Introduction] published 2016)
Sun, Wanbiao [???]. (2003). ??????????????????????. ?????????. xxvi+301 pp.
Ye, Zinan [???]. (2001).?????????????. ??: ???????. vii+383 pp.
???????????? GB/T 19363.1-2003?(??????
[Specification for Translation Service]).
???????????? GB/T 19682-2005?(??????????
[Target Text Quality Requirements for Translation Services]).
Austermühl, Frank. (2001). Electronic tools for translators. “Translation Practices Explained” (A. Pym [Ed.]). Manchester, UK: St. Jerome Publishing. 192 pp. [ISBN: 1900650347]
Baker, Mona. (1992). In other words: a coursebook on translation. London & NY: Routledge. xix+654.
Bowker, Lynne. (2002). Computer-aided translation technology: a practical introduction. Ottawa: University of Ottawa Press. [ISBN: 0776630164; Amazon: $45.00.]
Cao, Xueqin [???]. (1979).?????. 4 vols. ??: ???????.
__. (1973-1980). The story of the stone (David Hawkes & John Minford, Trans.) (Vols 1-4). Harmondsworth, Middlesex: Penguin Books. (Original work published 1792) [Univ. lib. K275/W13e]
Chau, Simon S. C. [???]. (1986).??????. ??: ?????????. 152 pp.
__. (1996).???????. ??: ?????????. vii+142 pp.
Chen, Gang [??]. (2004).???????????. “????????? [???]”. ??: ????????????????. xvii+440 pp.
Ke, Ping. (1993). What makes a good translator? Available from: http://keping.sprinterweb.net/TEC__WhatMakesAGoodTranslator.htm
__. (1997). Meaning in translation.
Available from: http://keping.sprinterweb.net/M-in-T.htm
__. (2001). Using reference tools to solve
problems in translating (Project
7). Available from: http://keping.sprinterweb.net/TECResearchProjects.htm
__. (2005). Numerical
expressions. Available from: http://keping.sprinterweb.net/TEC__NumericalExpressions.htm
Landers, Clifford E. (2008). Literary translation: a practical guide. ????????? (MTI) ???? “????????-1”. ??: ????????? (Originally published by Mulilingual Matters Ltd. in 2001). vi+214 pp.
Li, Changshuan [???]. (2004).????????????. ??: ??????????. xxii+589 pp.
Li, Kexing, & Zhang, Xinhong [???, ???]. (2006).???????????.“????????? [???]”. ??: ????????????????. xix+591 pp.
Newmark, Peter.
(1988). A textbook of translation.
Nida, E. A., & Taber, C. R. (1969). The
theory and practice of translation.
Pinkham, Joan. (2000). Translator’s guide to Chinglish (????????). ??: ??????????. vi+561pp.
Quah, C. K. (2008). Translation and technology [???????]. “?????????????”????????. ??: ?????????. 221 pp. (Original work [Translation and technology. Palgrave Textbooks in Translating and Interpreting. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.] published 2006) [ISBN: 978-1-4039-1832-1. £18.99. TOC: http://product.dangdang.com/product.aspx?product_id=20379028]
Robinson, Douglas. (1997). Becoming a translator: an accelerated course. London & NY: Routledge. 368 pp. [ISBN: 0415148618; Price: $24.99; MIIS Lib.]
Shen, Fu [(?) ??]. (1999).??????(???????; Lin Yutang [???], Trans.). ??: ??????????. xxiii+327 pp.
Shirer, William. (1983). The fall of the Third Reich?????????. (Abridged English-Chinese bilingual edition. Dong Leshan [???], et al., Trans.). ??: ??????????. 203 pp.
Sofer, Morry. (2000). The translator’s handbook (3rd ed.). Rockville, MD: Schreiber Publishing. 400 pp. [ISBN: 1887563482; Price: $24.95]
Thackeray, William M., & Sutherland, John. (1998). Vanity fair: a novel without a hero. Oxford & New York: Oxford University Press.
__. (1994).?????(Yang Bi [??], Trans.). (2 vols.). ??: ???????.
Varó, Enrique Alcaraz, & Hughes, Brian. (2008). Legal translation explained. ????????? (MTI) ???? “????????-5”. ??: ????????? (Originally published by St. Jerome Publishing in 2002). 204 pp.
Wang, Ying, & Lü, Hefa (Eds.) [??, ??? ??]. (2007).?????????. “????????? [???]”. ??: ????????????????. 394 pp.
Wang, Yuexi, & Wang, Enbao. (Eds.) [???, ??? ??]. (1994).????????. ??: ?????????. 515 pp.
Wilss, Wolfram.
(1996). Knowledge and skills in translator behavior.
Yu, Yungeng [???]. (1996).??????????. ??: ???????. iii+432 pp.
http://nlp.nju.edu.cn/kep/TOC/T.html
http://keping.sprinterweb.net/TOC/T.html
Distinguished Guests, Dear Alumni, Colleagues, Students, Ladies and Gentlemen,
It is a great honour for me to be here today to announce the
closing of our university’s 20th anniversary. Last year, we launched a kick-off
ceremony in our campus as the first activity to commence our 20-year
anniversary. To the university, this closing ceremony is certainly meaningful
and important. During the past 13 months, under the theme of 20th anniversary,
we held many celebratory functions at all levels in the university. Not only
our university, but also the community at large, and many institutions overseas are aware of
the 20 years of the establishment
of the University of Macau. There are many discussions I have shared, and many
comments I have received, on the past, present, and most important, the future
role of this leading academic institution in Macau. This observation has given
me a clear focus of my future work.
As in the case for many parts of the world, the political, economic, and social conditions in Macau as a whole have changed. A knowledge-based society has a lot to offer to young people. However, these opportunities do not come without high competition and great challenges. We strive to help our young people learn wisdom and diversity to serve and build the community, acquire knowledge to be geared to tackle challenges, and possess essential humanity to bring compassion and benefits of competition to the society. This objective is recognized from the active involvement of many of our alumni working in management and policy-making level in both public and private sectors.
Starting in
May 2001, a number of activities were held in commemorating the 20th
anniversary of the University
of Macau. I could only name a few among many held, namely, the Kick-off
Ceremony, 20th Anniversary Celebration Ceremony and Symposium, Charity Fund-raising for Walk
for Millions which breaks our previous records, Photo Competition and
Exhibition, student’s projects showcase, opening of new laboratories, alumni
gatherings, international conferences, seminars and distinguished lectures
series held by different faculties. Of particular importance are two
world-renowned scholars who have come all the way to Macau to join us in the
university. Prof. Yau Shing Tung, Fields Medalist in Mathematics
and the only Chinese awarded with this honour in history, delivered a seminar
“Mathematics & Society” in January this year in the University Cultural
Centre. Over 300 high school students were benefited from the inspiration Prof.
Yau has given them in Mathematics. In the same venue in March 18, the
university conferred an honourary degree of Doctor of Social Sciences to Prof. Joseph Stiglitz, the 2001 Nobel Laureate
in Economic Sciences. Prof. Stiglitz delivered his first public lecture in Asia
as a Nobel Laureate and presented us with the “Lessons from the Financial
Crisis in Asia” which was simultaneously broadcasted and interpreted in
Mandarin and Cantonese to over 1,400 audiences on-campus. This has undoubtedly
highlighted the landmark of our history.
Accomplishing a lot of remarkable events held during the celebration, I would like to direct my deepest gratitude to the staff and students. Let me assure you that your work will be recorded and well remembered. Despite demanding workload, you have all shown creativity and great dedication.
I cannot conclude without thanking the generous support of the SAR government and local authorities. Financial support has been secured. Academic autonomy and institutional independence have been well respected. It is only through academic freedom can intellectuals express, and it is through the expressions of intellectual opinions can University of Macau achieve its integrity and quality throughout these years. Again, on behalf of the university, I am deeply grateful for the support you’ve lent us and the confidence you have placed in us.
While much of our work is being evaluated from regular degree courses, University of Macau has stepped up and started many research projects and scientific co-operation. Many overseas universities have been our main collaborators in a number of joint efforts. Due to the link in the past, our relation with Europe has been particularly close. This will remain so in the future with the strengthening of greater ties with the mainland, Asia, US, Australia and New Zealand. It is important to widen our global vision as an international community of scholars. Without weakening the mission of University of Macau as a higher educational institution providing talents for local industries, we seek to increase our outreach and visibility throughout the world, and at the same time, continue to be an intellectual think tank of Macau with an importance it deserves and needs in Macau.
Thank you.
???????????????????????????????????????????????????
8??????????????????“??”?????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????5000???????????
????????????????????????????????????????????“????1000?????4000?????????20??????12????????????2???”??????????????????5????????????????“?????????????????????”
?????“?”??????7???????????40??????????????“????”??????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????8????????????????????????????????????
?????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????10???????5?????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????
????“??”??????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????“??”???????????????7???????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????
????????????????“?????????????”??????????????????“?????”????????15.4??????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????7??????????4????????????????????8???????????2????????????????????????????????????????????????????????
You
are in school. On the whiteboard there are words in a foreign language. Your
task is to understand their meaning and transfer it into English. The teacher
glowers. The clock ticks. Sunlight slants across
the room. Mistakes will be punished.
The test is called ‘translation’.
You are the 17th-century poet John
Dryden. You have been brought up reading as much Latin as English; the writer
you most love is Virgil. You translate and imitate Latin poems as often as you
compose your own. But your own poems also include an element of translation
because Latin and English words and phrases run together in your imagination as
you write. Now, in the 1690s, towards the end of your career, you are
translating the complete works of Virgil for publication in a big, expensive
volume. You want to give new readers a sense of Virgil’s brilliance. You also
want to dignify English literature by raising it to his level.
That is another instance of translation.
You are an Italian teenager. You are
chatting to some friends. As is often the case, pretty much everywhere around
the world, the group is multilingual. You say, ‘Ma dai, non ci credo!’ Your
French friend says, ‘Quoi?’ You say, ‘I not believe it.’ The words that you’ve
come out with don’t have the same nuance as what you said in Italian, and they
are not in perfect Standard English either. But your friend still gets the
gist.
Is that translation?
You are in hospital. Gravely, the doctor
informs you that you have suffered a TIA. ‘That means,’ she says, ‘a transient ischaemic attack.’ Oh?’—you respond,
enquiringly. She explains: ‘the blood supply to your brain was interrupted but
then restored. It’s like a temporary little stroke.’
What about that?—Is that translation?
How about what
happens whenever anyone says anything? Or what is happening now, as you read this
text that I have written? Don’t we all know a slightly different range of words
from one another, and use them slightly differently? Don’t we all, to that
extent, speak a different language? Isn’t this obvious from the frequency with
which we misunderstand each other, getting the wrong end of the stick? (What
end of the stick did you just get?—to some readers that idiom will mean
‘misunderstand’ and to others ‘be short-changed’.)
If that is so, then translation must
happen when we speak or write or read or hear the language that we think of as
our own just as much as languages we call foreign.
But in that case why do we need the word
translation at all? If translation is no different from communication in
general why do we generally assume that it is?
These brief, everyday instances have
begun to show how nebulous the field of translation is, and how tricky it can
be to think about. They also suggest a way for us to start. There is no point
trying to insist on our own clear, rigid meaning for the word—no point trying
to say, for instance, that translation only really happens between different
standard national languages like Japanese and French and not between dialects
or different varieties of the same language. There is no point asserting that a
‘true translation’ must catch the ‘spirit’ of the source text, or taking the
opposite view (like Vladimir Nabokov) that it should aim at expository precision
above all. If you take that sort of stance, you shut out the complexities that
make the subject interesting: you stake a claim but don’t explore the
territory.
Instead, we need to look at the range of
ways of doing things with words that can be thought of as translation, from
what seem typical instances like Dryden’s Virgil or the classroom test to less
obvious ones like the doctor’s explanation. We need to see how it matters
whether we call something translation or not, and work out where to draw what
sort of distinction. We need a map, one that registers the many features of the
landscape: contours, boundaries, and conceptual marshy areas. To begin to
sketch it, let’s look now at some more extended examples from the territory of
translation in different historical moments and places around the globe.
Japanese and Chinese overlap. The spoken
languages are different, but the written forms have much in common. The reason
is that the Chinese developed writing first, and when Japanese needed to be
written down scribes simply borrowed the Chinese characters. During the
Tokugawa Shogunate (1603–1868) this state of affairs led to an activity that
was both like and unlike the usual Western ideas of ‘translation’. Texts written
in Classical Chinese were made intelligible by a process known as ‘????’, kanbun-kundoku, which means, roughly,
‘Chinese text, Japanese reading’. Faced with a piece of Chinese writing, a
scholar would add little marks to show how the characters would be arranged in
Japanese: this made the text intelligible to someone who could not speak
Chinese but had been trained in kanbun-kundoku. A further step was to rewrite
the characters in Japanese order, and add signs for pronunciation: a text like
this could be understood by most literate Japanese people.
Kanbun-kundoku does not transfer meaning
between two languages. Rather, it creates a sort of no-man’s land that readers
of one language can enter to make sense of writing in another. ‘This is quite
different from how translation functions in the West!’ we might exclaim. But is
it? This morning I received a spam email in German and put a sentence into
Google Translate. The result: ‘in Germany alone there are around 25 million
signs that help to make the road and to make safe for all road users’. The
individual words are correct Standard English but the idiom and grammar have a
German shape. Here, as with kanbun-kundoku, the writing is neither completely
in one language nor completely in another.
Google Translate is of course a fairly
recent development. People sometimes make fun of it for producing this sort of
translation which feels strange or incomplete. But in fact lots of translation
is like this, and always has been. Think of the last time you had a conversation
with someone whose first language was not your own. Just like our Italian
teenager from a moment ago, their use of your language was probably not
perfect—nor perhaps your use of theirs. Translations done in a rush, or else
done very carefully as word-for-word cribs, can have a similar feel. There is a technical
term—‘translationese’—for this way of putting words together which falls
between two tongues.
‘Translationese’ is often used to voice a
criticism: ‘this isn’t a successful translation—it’s translationese’. But the
language of translations is almost always at least a bit different from the
language of texts that have not been translated. This strangeness can be a
source of poetry. In Ezra Pound’s collection of poems Cathay the arrangement of
the English words is modelled on Chinese and Japanese writing:
Blue, blue is the grass about the river
And the willows have overfilled the close garden.
Another
famous example is the King James Bible whose cadences, influenced by the Hebrew and Greek from
which it was translated, seemed challengingly foreign when it was published in
1611. Yet, over centuries of repetition, the King James Bible’s translationese
came to seem familiar to many English speakers. Some even judged it to be an
ideal of English style.
Across history, and around the world,
linguistic oddities created by translation have been absorbed into the texture
of national languages. This is what happened to thousands of Latin words that
were drawn into English during the 16th century. There was cross-pollination between German and the classical languages
at the start of the 19th century, and between Japanese and European languages
at its end. Similar processes are happening all around the globe right now as
English is used for cross-cultural communication by people who know it as their
second or third or fourth language, and who re-shape it to suit their location
and their needs.
Here is the first discovery for our map.
Translation does not simply jump from one language to another. It also ‘crosses
languages’ in the sense of blending them, as you might cross a bulldog with a
borzoi, or two varieties of rose.
In England, in the 16th-century court of
Queen Elizabeth, letters arrived from the Ottoman Sultan Murad III. They had
been composed in Turkish and then re-written by the Sultan’s translator, his
dragoman, in Italian, a language which Elizabeth and her courtiers could
understand.
Murad assumed that he was the grandest
ruler in the world, and he thought of Elizabeth as a minor potentate: his letter claimed that she had
‘demonstrated her subservience and devotion’ (izhar-i ubudiyet ve ihlas). The
dragoman realized that Elizabeth might not be very pleased to know this. His
most important aim in translating was not to transfer meaning between
languages. If he did that, he risked causing an international crisis or losing
his head. For the dragoman, translation was crucially a matter of keeping open
a channel of communication, of greasing the wheels of diplomacy. So he wrote
that Elizabeth had demonstrated, not ‘subservience’, but sincera amicizia
(‘sincere friendship’).
This aspect of translation—mediation, the avoidance of conflict—is crucial in diplomatic negotiation. Figure 1 shows another instance: the translator and diplomat Amédée Jaubert (with the open hand) is advising the Persian envoy, Mirza Mohammed Reza Qazvini, who is about to meet Napoleon to form an alliance. The same consideration comes into play whenever mutually acceptable phrasing is negotiated among the twenty-four official languages of the European Union. In the charged environment of a war zone, lives can depend on an interpreter’s tact in choosing words.
In fact, every act of translation negotiates between two powers. The aim of conveying what a speaker or source text is saying has to be tempered by an awareness of what the listener or reader is prepared to take on board. So our second orientation point is this: all translation involves diplomacy.
[???????]
In China, in the first few centuries of
what people in the West call ‘ad’ or ‘the common era’, Buddhist holy texts were
being translated. Typically no written source was present. A monk, who might
have travelled from India, and who knew a Sutra by heart, would recite it bit
by bit, perhaps in Sanskrit, perhaps in one of several possible intermediary
languages. An assembly of as many as a thousand linguistic and religious
experts would listen, ponder, and debate until they reached an interpretation
of each phrase; a scribe would then record the result in Chinese brushwork
characters.
It is easy to see that translation in
this case is more complicated than it is often thought to be. The monk’s words
are translated, not only between languages, but from speech to writing. With
the change of medium, a great deal shifts. Sound and intonation are lost; and
visual form is gained. Some ambiguities disappear while others flower (this happens in all languages, including
English: try reading out ‘she hit me with a scull’: would a listener hear
‘scull’ or ‘skull’?) In fact, translation often crosses media as well as
languages: subtitles are a modern, everyday example.
The Chinese Buddhist scenario also seems
unusual because translation is done by a crowd rather than a single translator.
But this too is less rare than you might think. It took forty-seven scholars
working in teams to create the 1611 King James Bible. In 1680, a famous
translation of Ovid’s Epistles was done by John Dryden and ‘several hands’.
More recently, translations of Joyce into French and Proust into English have
shared out the work between several translators. Websites offer quick
translation services which are typically done by translators working in trios
or pairs. Crowd-sourcing platforms allow translations to be done by large
numbers of volunteers; and any translator can draw on shared knowledge by
posting a question to an online forum. Machine translation software also draws
on the labour of crowds. It searches many previous translations in order to
find the best fit for whatever phrase you ask it to translate.
Crowd translation is helpful simply for
coping with large volumes of text. But it also shows us something crucial about
the sort of interpretation that translators engage in. The reason why the King
James Bible was translated by committee was not just that it was big: after
all, the Bible (or large portions of it), had been translated by individuals before,
such as St Jerome, Luther, and Tyndale. The translators needed to arrive at a
version that was in harmony with the community they were translating for—the
recently established Church of England—and the faith that they communally held.
The translators brought their Church’s assumptions with them to the work of
translation. They translated their source text in line with meanings that their
faith told them it must have. Modern machine translation also does its best to
produce text that will be acceptable to its users.
In fact, all translators feel some
pressure from the community of readers for whom they are doing their work. And
all translators arrive at their interpretations in dialogue with other people.
The English poet Alexander Pope had pretty good Greek, but when he set about
translating Homer’s Iliad in the early 18th century he was not on his own. He
had Greek commentaries to refer to, and translations that had already been done
in English, Latin, and French—and of course he had dictionaries. Translators
always draw on more than one source text. Even when the scene of translation
consists of just one person with a pen, paper, and the book that is being
translated, or even when it is just one person translating orally for another,
that person’s linguistic knowledge arises from lots of other texts and other
conversations. And then his or her idea of the translation’s purpose will be
influenced by the expectations of the person or people it is for. In both these
senses (this is our third key discovery) every translation is a crowd
translation.
When Elizabeth Barrett Browning published
her celebrated sonnet ‘How do I love thee? Let me count the ways’, she
pretended it was a translation, one of the ‘Sonnets from the Portuguese’ that
were concealed at the back of her book Poems (1850). She did this out of
shyness, because she wanted nobody to guess how personal the poems were. But
the title also pointed to the idea that love-sonnets are always in a sense
translations because they derive from a trans-linguistic tradition and cannot
help re-using material from elsewhere. The first sonnets in English, in the
16th century, were translations of Petrarch by Sir Thomas Wyatt, and the
language of love draws thoughts and images from many languages. Poetry is often
said to be untranslatable. In fact, translation is at the root of much poetry,
and at the heart of what might—at a casual glance—seem like separate national
literary traditions.
In these opening pages we have already
discovered some perhaps unexpected truths. Translation mixes languages.
Translation always involves diplomacy. All translation is crowd translation. We
are beginning to see that translation can be done in a variety of ways—but only
beginning. Let me (very quickly) count the ways of doing things with language
that are commonly thought of as translation.
Translation can seem to turn one written
or printed text into another: perhaps this is the most common idea of it. But
translation actually makes one text out of several, for (as we saw with Pope)
translators inevitably draw on previous linguistic encounters. It can transform
written texts into spoken ones, for instance if you translate while reading
aloud; and it can make spoken text written, as in the Chinese Sutra translations.
It can transpose one spoken utterance into another, as in oral interpreting;
and turn recorded speech into different recorded speech (as in dubbing)—or into
celluloid or digital subtitles. And it can turn digital text into more digital
text, as when your browser takes you to a foreign website and asks, ‘Translate
this page?’
Translation can move between sign
language and spoken language, between pictograms and alphabetic words, and
between print and digital multimedia formats. It can set to work on religious
books; on poems, novels, and plays; on technical manuals, political speeches,
diplomatic negotiations, lawbooks, scientific articles, jokes, insults, ancient
inscriptions, declarations of war, and everyday conversation.
Translation can cross languages that have
much in common—for example, English and French—and languages that are very
distant—like English and Malay; it can span languages that share the same
script system (Japanese and Korean) and those that don’t (Japanese and Arabic
or German); it can go between dialects (or between a dialect and a language) or
between different words of the same language, as when our doctor a few moments
ago translated ‘Transient Ischaemic Attack’ into ‘like a temporary little
stroke’.
Translation can be done by one person, or
several, or hundreds—or by machine. It can be a matter of life and death, as in
a war zone; or an ordinary part of everyday existence in a multilingual
community.
All these instances belong in and around the territory of translation. They all use words to stand in for other words. But there are also large differences between them, and they happen in varied terrains. If we are to pinpoint them on our map, we need to explore how translation relates to other kinds of re-wording.
???
?????????????????
????????????????
?30????????????
???????????????
??????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????
??????
???????????????????????????2010????????????????
??????????????????????????
??????2014??????????????????8???????????????????15????????????15?????????????????????
[S2]
??????
?????2014?????????????1???1??????2???2????????
?????????5???????398??????5541?????????????
???????????????9940???????2????????????9???1.5???????????????????????????
???????
?????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????
??????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????
????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????GPS?????????????????????
?????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????
???????????????????????????????????????????????
????????????????????????????????????????“????”?????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????
[S3]
????????????????????????????????????????????2014??????????????????????????????????????????????
???????????????????13.2
[?13.2?]
?????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????1???????????????????????1????????????
??????????????????????????????????????????????15????????????1200???????45??????12????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????2014????????????3000??????????????
????????????????????????????????????????????
???????????????????????
??????????????????????????????????????????????????????
????????????????????????????????????????????????????????
???????????????????????????????????????1??40??????????3???????????
[?13.4?]
[S4]
??????????????????????????????
?????????????????????????????
?????????????????????????
????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????
???????????????????????????????????????????????????????
????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????
?????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????
?????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????
????????????????????????????????????????
????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????
??????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????
????????????????????????????????
?????????????????
??????????13.9???
I think the essence of wisdom is emancipation, as far as possible, from the tyranny of the here and the now. We cannot help the egoism of our senses. Sight and sound and touch are bound up with our own bodies and cannot be made impersonal. Our emotions start similarly from ourselves. An infant feels hunger or discomfort, and is unaffected except by his own physical condition. Gradually with the years, his horizon widens, and, in proportion as his thoughts and feelings become less personal and less concerned with his own physical states, he achieves growing wisdom. This is of course a matter of degree. No one can view the world with complete impartiality; and if anyone could, he would hardly be able to remain alive. But it is possible to make a continual approach towards impartiality, on the one hand, by knowing things somewhat remote in time or space, and, on the other hand, by giving to such things their due weight in our feelings. It is this approach towards impartiality that constitutes growth in wisdom.
Can wisdom be taught? And, if it can, should the teaching of it be one of the aims of education? I should answer both these questions in the affirmative. I think that the disastrous results of hatred and narrow-mindedness to those who feel them can be pointed out incidentally in the course of giving knowledge. I do not think that knowledge and morals ought to be too much separated. It is true that the kind of specialized knowledge which is required for various kinds of skill has very little to do with wisdom. But it should be supplemented in education by wider surveys calculated to put it in its place in the total of human activities. Even the best technicians should also be good citizens; and when I say “citizens,” I mean citizens of the world and not of this or that sect or nation. With every increase of knowledge and skill, wisdom becomes more necessary, for every such increase augments our capacity of realizing our purposes, and therefore augments our capacity for evil, if our purposes are unwise. The world needs wisdom as it has never needed it before; and if knowledge continues to increase, the world will need wisdom in the future even more than it does now.
(
DIPLOMA IN TRANSLATION
DT/2003/ENGLISH/PAPER 1
PAPER 1: GENERAL TRANSLATION WITH
OPTIONAL ANNOTATIONS
For
information only, not to be translated: the following was taken from a speech
on security at international football matches delivered at the Plenary Session
of the European Parliament in April 2002, by a Member of the PSE Group of the
Party of European Socialists. Translate into your target language for a general
readership.
TRANSLATION
TO BEGIN HERE:
Mr President, Colleagues,
Firstly I would like to inform the House that the PSE Group welcomes this report and the measures in it intended to prevent the activities of hooligans and organised thugs at matches. We will, however, need to monitor the way these monitoring centres carry out their functions to ensure that the football community is fully engaged in the exchange of information. Most important of all is the need to ensure adequate resources both in financial and personnel terms.
On Friday, I visited the football
intelligence unit in Greater Manchester police service. Unfortunately, we have
a wealth of experience and expertise in tackling football related violence in
my city. The Assistant Chief Constable of Greater Manchester Police has read
this report and he welcomes the initiative in the light of what he calls
“different standards in dealing, for example, with Manchester United away
fixtures and
The football intelligence unit has a
sophisticated database of so-called “football prominents”, using the latest
digital image technology to update and record cases. Let me tell you where the
unit believes the EU information exchange system has to do better: 150 fans
were deported from
We need to deal with hooliganism pro-actively, not re-actively. On the issue of cost, no doubt it would be useful to have a study on whether clubs should pay more for the policing of hooliganism. The difficulty is, however, who pays those costs after hours in cities where football hooligans are still engaged in activities.
In 2004 we will be hosting the final of
the European championships at Old Trafford in
(???????2008?3??2009?2??2009?5??2010?2??2011?9??2012?8??2014?6??2014?9??2015?6??2016?9??2017?9??2018?9??2021?3??2021?9??2022?10??2023?8??2023?9?)
.%20Giving%20a%20lecture%20in%20UM%20on%20the%20price%20of%20inequality..5x3S200K_20140328DSC-RX100%2003635.jpg){kind=link}
,%20started%20to%20be%20built%20in%201728__5x3.3R350_20140202DSC-RX100%2003501.jpg){kind=link}
..5x3S200K_20131001Canon%20EOS%207D_.jpg){kind=link}