【外國月亮不是特別圓】
投入國際連結工作好一段時間,有時覺得大家也會期望「外國月亮總是特別圓」,但其實西方國家政治人物支持香港,從來不是理所當然,當中亦會涉及不少商業利益考慮和國際壓力,以及部份左傾政客仍會不知何故地,對中國共產政權抱有良好幻想,這種情況在歐洲較為明顯。
德國左翼黨的國會議員,竟在國會發言表示「理應支持我們在北京的共產朋友」固然讓人大跌眼鏡,尤其是中共從根本地就是循從威權主義和國家資本主義的極右政黨。
有時對於國際政客不理解香港,也是有點無奈,但我們香港作為國際大都會,對於世界各國的抗爭運動,又何嘗不是缺乏足夠理解,只盼在抗爭持續的情況下,香港人能夠繼續努力,讓世界理解我們,與香港同行。
早前睇一份德國國會內嘅辦論,有位Die Linke嘅議員話要支持中共,因為大家都是左翼共產主義支持者,不用分得那麼細。我見內容有所偏頗就寫左篇文。中文翻譯見下文。
Recently, a MP from Die Linke made some remarks about HK, and say they should support CCP as they are friend of Coummunism. I find the claims rather inaccurate hence I wrote this article to provide some rebuttals. Please scroll down for the English translation.
Article in German: https://www.google.com/…/Hongkong-Krise-Pekings-Regierung-b…
近日德國國會內, 一位Die Linke的國會議員Stefan Liebich對香港的事作出評價,這些評價實在令人難以茍同。
Liebich指「Die Linke理應支持我們在北京的共產朋友」。但中國共產黨除了名字內有「共產」兩個字外,其實際行動與共產理念差天共地,實在不是Liebich想像中共產主義的好朋友。
中國共產黨是一個極權,除了擴張政治與經濟勢力外,中國共產黨什麼都不會理會。不論是無產階級的死活,或者是工人階級,對於中國共產黨來說只是擴張實力的工具,隨時可以為了經濟或政治利益犧牲或捨棄。 中國共產黨實質上是由一群搜刮民脂民膏致富而滿肚腸肥的黨員領導。中國共產黨甚至對自己的人民進行全天候的監控,打壓、拘捕異見人士。
由此可見,中國共產黨本質上是一個極右政黨,而非Liebich以為的左翼。 北京政府不是以共產理念管治中華人民共和國,反而是以物質主義操縱國民。中國背後並沒有一套穩固的價值觀支撐,唯有金錢才是中國人和中國政府信仰的理念。中國的任何行動,從來都不是由價值推動,而總是由金錢和利益推動。
中國共產黨只是一個「掛羊頭賣狗肉」的「共產」黨,它相當擅長扮演共產主義的支持者,與Liebeich想像中「馬克思主義的的同路人」相差甚遠。我們應該要小心分辨真正的共產主義者與打著共產主義旗號行惡的政權之間的分別。
Leibich亦在發言時提到八國聯軍與相關歷史,指「香港被英國以軍事手段從中國手中搶去。撇除對於中國的批評,我們樂見不公義的殖民主義完結」。但現實上,清朝是被當時被視為外族的滿洲人統治。當時的「中國」與今天我們認知的中華人民共和國並不是同一個國家。所以,Leibich所指的「香港被英國不公義的殖民」,其實嚴格來說是鴉片戰爭後,香港的管治權從滿洲人手中交到英國人手中。
清朝末期發生申亥革命,中華民國成立。及後因國共內戰,中華民國政府輾轉於1949年12月撤退至臺灣。如果按照Leibich的邏輯,香港主權理應是移交予中華民國政府,而非中華人民共和國。
另外,香港人本來擁有聯合國1960年在《給予殖民地國家和人民獨立宣言》中賦予非自治領土人民自決前途的權利。但因為中國強烈反對港澳被定義為殖民地,而應為「被英國和葡萄牙當局佔領的中國領土的一部分」。中國代表單方面宣稱港澳的地位,都屬中國主權範圍內,甚至指:「聯合國並沒有權討論這些問題。」最後才令香港再名單中被除名,失去前途自決的權利。
而觀乎而今情況,即使香港主權移交予中國後,不公義不但沒有消失,反而更加明顯與嚴重。Leibeich在發言時指「撇除對於中國的批評,我們樂見不公義的殖民主義完結」,我很希望,他不是指他將無視數以百萬計的少數民族關押在在教育營當中、六四屠城死去的學生、香港早前被實彈近距離射中的兩位男孩、被24小時監控的中國人、捨生取義爭取人權的香港人,而去支持中國共產黨只因其聲稱自己是「共產主義者」。
人權自由是人類文明近百年來的基石,中國共產黨的行為,與絕大部分我們珍視的政治價值並不相容。在任何情況下,我們都不可能支持一個獨裁的殺人政權。
Recently, in the German Bundestag, Stefan Liebich made a few remarks regarding Hong Kong. Mr. Liebeich says his party Der Linke should support their communist friends in Beijing. “Logisch, dass Der Linke Liebich seinen Kommunistenfreunden in Peking wieder den Rücken stärkt.(It is logical that Die Linke Liebich should again support his communist friends in Beijing.)” In my point of view, the Chinese Communist Party is just a party named itself as the “Communist”, what it does in China or in the world is in no way communistic.
PRC is a dictatorship that only takes the expansion of its economic and political power into regard, workers or its people are at its disposal whenever it sees fit. The “Communist” party cares neither about the people, nor the grassroots, it only cares about the economic benefit it gains from its business activities inside and outside PRC. The party leaders are all sitting in their offices with their pockets full of what they gain from exploiting the Chinese workers.
They carry mass surveillance 24/7 throughout China, arrests and detain descendants. Frankly speaking, the CCP is rather right than left.
The Peking Government is not running Communism, but materialism. The only thing the Chinese and the Chinese government worship is the dollar sign, nothing else. They do not take any values or ideology into account. The people are not motivated by values or beliefs, but by the economic benefits they see.
The CCP is not a communist party as Mr. Leibich conceived it is. The CCP is very good at creating the illusion that it represents the Marxist ideas. We should be very careful in examining the differences between those who claim to be communists and those who are communists.
Mr. Leibich also made reference to the history of the Eight-Nation Alliance in the late Qing Dynasty, saying that“ Auch Hongkong ist durch die britische Armee militärisch China abgepresst worden.(Hong Kong has been militarily squeezed out of China by the British army.)” and “Bei aller notwendigen Kritik an der chinesischen KP sagen ich: Es ist gut, dass dieses koloniale Unrecht zu Ende ist. (Despite all the necessary criticism of the Chinese Communist Party, I say: It is good that this colonial injustice has come to an end.)”
It is worth clarifying that during that time of History, China was ruled by the Manchus, who were considered as foreigners at the time. China at the time was not the Republic of China we know today. Therefore, Hong Kong was not military squeezed out of PRC but was being colonized by the British in substitution of the Manchus at that time.
Historically speaking, the successor of the Qing Dynasty is the Republic of China, which later was relocated to Taiwan due to the Civil War between 1927 and 1949. And Mr. Leibich’s claim that it is good that colonial injustice has come to an end is inaccurate, too. In this case, Hong Kong, ought to be returned to Taiwan (the Republic of China) but not China (People’s Republic of China), to end the colonial injustice.
What is more, Hong Kongers were supposed to be able to exercise our right to self-determination and really being able to be free from colonialism. Yet Hong Kong was actually removed from the U.N. list of Non-Self-Governing Territories upon PRC’s request.
And clearly, under PRC’s rule, injustice is more than just apparent in Hong Kong currently. Mr. Leibich’s remarks of “despite all the necessary criticism of the Chinese Communist Party”, I truly hope that he is not suggesting that one would neglect the millions of ethnic minorities being detained in re-education camps, those who died in the JuneForth Masaccare, the two young Hong Kong boys who were shot by live rounds, the Chinese who were placed under surveillance 24/7 and all my fellow Hong Konger who are fighting for fundamental rights with their lives, but support the CCP’s action because it claims to be a communist party.
I see of no reason, why anyone should support a dictatorship that would brutally murder its own people. CCP is totally going against what most political ideologies in the world stand for, and I do believe we can all agree on the fundamental rights of all members of the human family that ought to be respected as that is the foundations of human civilization.
同時也有10000部Youtube影片,追蹤數超過2,910的網紅コバにゃんチャンネル,也在其Youtube影片中提到,...
「communists中文」的推薦目錄:
communists中文 在 區諾軒 Au Nok-hin Facebook 的最佳解答
1. 好想瘋狂比梁美芬
2. 我倍感安慰
【人必自侮然後人侮之──中大學生會及中大書院學生會就梁美芬女士之謬論之聯合聲明|“One Loses One’s Respect From Others Because One Has No Respect For Oneself” - Statement from the CUHK Joint Student Unions on Ms. Leung Mei-fun Priscilla’s Farcical Comments】
(Please scroll down for English version)
在六月二十六日的立法會會議中,作為香港中文大學校友的梁美芬女士稱「中文大學是中國人的大學」,並謂「任何違反國家利益的事都違背中大精神」。我等對梁美芬女士扭曲中大歷史、貶低中大精神之言論表示強烈遺憾。
我校之所以命名為「香港中文大學」,是因為我校以傳揚中華文化為己任,並希望提高中文於殖民地時期的地位。我校創校校長李卓敏博士曾於1978年中大第十九屆頒授學位典禮上解釋道,中文大學是指「傳揚中國文化的大學」,而當中的「中國」絕非指共產黨建立的「中華人民共和國」。1949年後,大批難民為了逃避共產政權之魔掌由北方湧入香港,包括中大的創校先賢。他們之所以創建中大,正為了抵抗中共的文化破壞,希望為中華文化留下一點命脈,而新亞書院創辦人之一錢穆先生就曾把中大比喻為「中華文化花果飄零到香港的最後種子」。因此,中大絕非梁所指的「中國人的大學」,更非維護中華人民共和國利益之大學。恰恰相反,中大是為了抗共而生。
梁美芬女士作為中大校友,甚至曾任聯合書院學生會會長及中大學生會幹事,竟對創校歷史背景一無所知,實在枉為中大人。梁擅自把中文大學與「中國人的大學」畫上等號,甚至把中大精神貶至維護國家利益,於議事堂上大言不慚,實在不知所謂,亦是對我校眾創校先賢之侮辱。「人必自侮然後人侮之。」作為中大人,我等強烈譴責梁美芬女士愚昧無知之言論;作為香港人,我等以有質素如此低劣的代議士為恥。
中大多年來致力提升學子之人文關懷及公民意識,培育出一代又一代關心香港、積極參與社會運動的中大人。每一場的民主運動,包括當下的「反送中」運動,中大人從不缺席,正正表現出中大人守護香港之決心。偏偏梁在中共政權下搖尾乞憐,處處出賣港人,其所作所為令人不齒,我等恥與為伍。
我校創校先賢正是懷着對自由的渴求、追求真理的精神,千辛萬苦創建了中大,作為中大學生,我等定必竭力捍衛我城之自由,以一己努力改革社會,不辜負前人的期許。
二零一九年六月二十九日
香港中文大學學生會
香港中文大學逸夫書院學生會
香港中文大學善衡書院學生會
香港中文大學崇基學院學生會
香港中文大學新亞書院學生會
香港中文大學聯合書院學生會幹事會
香港中文大學和聲書院學生會幹事會
In a Legislative Council meeting on 26 June, CUHK alumna Ms. Leung Mei-fun Priscilla claimed that the Chinese University of Hong Kong is a “university for Chinese people”, and “anything against national interests is also against the spirit of CUHK”. We strongly condemn Ms. Leung’s distortion of CUHK’s history as well as her disrespect for the CUHK spirit.
Our school was named “the Chinese University of Hong Kong” because it took the promotion of Chinese culture as its responsibility, with the objective of elevating the status of Chinese as a language in the colonial times. Founding Vice-Chancellor Dr. Li Choh-Ming explained this in 1978, at the 19th CUHK Congregation for the Conferment of Degrees, that the Chinese University of Hong Kong is a university that promotes Chinese culture, and ‘Chinese’ in this context has not in the slightest to do with People’s Republic of China established by Chinese communists. After 1949, a large number of refugees flooded to Hong Kong in order to escape the northern communist regime, including founders of CUHK. They specifically established CUHK so as to withstand Chinese Communist cultural invasion, hoping to preserve the lifeline of the Chinese culture. New Asia College founder Dr. Chi’en Mu described CUHK as “the final seed of the Chinese culture drifted to the soil of Hong Kong”. Therefore, CUHK is nothing close to what Ms. Leung claimed to be as an institution protecting the national interests of the People’s Republic of China. In contrast, CUHK was established to fight against Chinese communism.
As an alumna of CUHK, as well as former United College Student’s Union President and former CUSU committee member, it is absolutely disgraceful how ignorant Ms. Leung is. Her false and loathsome claims were terrible insults to our founders. One loses one’s respect from others because one has no respect for oneself. As CUHKers, we strongly condemn Ms. Leung for her idiotic comments, and are shameful to have her as a Legislative Councillor.
CUHK strived to promote the spirit of humanism and social consciousness over the years, nurturing generations of CUHKers who love Hong Kong and participate in social movements, including the “No Extradition to China Movement” taking place at the moment. CUHKers have never been absent in these events, which demonstrates the courage and willingness of CUHKers to protect and contribute to their home. Despite so, it is unfortunate that the likes of Ms. Leung exist among us, wagging her tail begging for mercy from a tyrannical regime.
The founders of CUHK established our alma mater seeking for freedom and longing for truth, CUHK students should do whatever it takes to protect our freedom, so as to meet our predecessor’s expectations.
29 June 2019
The Student Union of the Chinese University of Hong Kong
The Student Union of Shaw College, The Chinese University of Hong Kong
Student Union, Chung Chi College, The Chinese University of Hong Kong
The Student Union of New Asia College, The Chinese University of Hong Kong
The Executive Committee, Student Union of United College, The Chinese University of Hong Kong
The Executive Committee, Student Union of Lee Woo Sing College, The Chinese University of Hong Kong
communists中文 在 翻譯這檔事 Facebook 的最佳貼文
【謎底揭曉】在台灣丟一顆石頭都會打中瞎譯那話兒!
(那話兒:表示不正當或不雅的事。小說中常指人的性器官而言。也作「那樁兒」。)
繼教授譯者謝瑤玲把「現代的祕教者窮得很」(don't have two pennies to rub together)譯成「現代的祕教者並沒有兩根可以搓在一起的陰莖」(two penises),繼教授譯者賴慈芸把「等文稿定案後,再找譯者來翻譯也不遲。」(after the job is done, fetch the translator)譯成「翻完之後,不要給譯者留活口」(after the job is done, kill the translator)之後,實在很難找到可以與之匹敵的胡譯瞎譯,直到最近,為了研究中英譯者如何處理「共匪」的英譯,為了暸解中譯「共匪」對應的英文原文是啥,竟然發現無敵的「丟一顆石頭……打中他那話兒」!
原文/中譯對照如下,應該有足夠的上下文讓有興趣一探究竟的讀者瞧瞧這誤會是怎麼發生的,歸納三個原因:
* 譯者想像力過於旺盛、
* 恍神或不用心,見樹不見林、
* 對原文文法不夠暸解,態度不對而輕忽之。
首先,「丟一顆石頭」的原文是 lob one (發射一個那個東西),那個東西指什麼?從原文脈絡明顯指向前兩句才剛剛說過的 tactical nuclear bombs (戰術核子武器),即使不說「發射一顆戰術核彈」,嫌太累贅,至少要譯成「發射一顆核彈」。
核彈怎會變石頭?譯者顯然查字典或Google了一下,發現動詞 lob (丟、投擲、發射)和 stone 還蠻常一起出現吧?!就給它「丟一顆石頭」下去了,用這種方式理解英文是不行的,one 必須指涉出現過的名詞概念,不然,one 也有「一個人」之意,但顯然「投擲/發射一個人到廁所」根本見鬼,所以譯者可能採取「消去法」,認定這one一定是個「東西」不是人,但也輪不到「石頭」來當the one啊!
其次,「打中他那話兒」的原文是 make sure I hit it,這裡跟前述的 one 一樣,有一個代名詞 it,同樣的,譯者又是對文法不夠尊重,想像力旺盛,從廁所就聯想到男人的那話兒,於是 it 就譯成「his private parts」(他那話兒),準備千古流芳了!但是各位有沒有注意到這個「解法」的矛盾和問題?中文「他那話兒」有一個「他」,他只能代表人,那這個他指涉誰?原文完全沒有出現「他」。譯者該不會希望讀者可以看出他的用意:用擬人法的譬喻,借用「男廁裡,他的那話兒」表達「克里姆林宮的機要位置」?這未免太扯,不太可能吧!這個 it 也指剛剛提過的東西,就是男廁嘛!
建議改譯:
……他曾說自己想要「發射一顆核彈瞄準克里姆林宮的男廁,而且一定要擊中」。
感謝幾位網友參與猜謎遊戲,請自行比對看看你猜中了多少。
這個寧可發揮天馬行空的想像力,也不要按部就班遵循基本英文文法思考所導致的爆笑誤譯,跟賴教授「不要給譯者留活口」的驚世之語,頗有異曲同工之妙:兩人皆是「語不驚人誓不休」(這正好也是書名)!
這樁兒事得來的教訓:
1. 把心用在理解原文和文法,這是翻譯首要的基本功,沒有之一,沒有替代的捷徑。Cue 一下賴教授。
2. 想像力無法控制,很危險,一定要謹記你的角色在哪,不要逾矩。
3. 再好的譯者(如這位陳信宏,中文文筆極佳,我注意欣賞已久,算是英倫哲學才子作家Alan de Botton的「欽定」譯者)都必定有盲點,都一定會出包。所以,任何翻譯都應該找有能力對照原文審核者來過目一次。這是對台灣出版社最衷心的建議。
- - - - -
//Goldwater, in his heart, believed that he was right. Right about the waste and distaste of the “welfare state” the Johnson administration had built. Right about the need for absolute military strength in the face of Soviet expansion. Right about a foreign policy that would make George Bush’s look downright friendly.
高華德內心深信自己是對的。他認為詹森政府建立的「福利國家」不僅揮霍資源,而且令人厭惡;他認為美國面對蘇聯的擴張,必須建構絕對的軍事實力;而且,他心目中的外交政策強硬至極,與他相比,連小布希都顯得太過友善。
Yes, Goldwater was an extremist and proud of it. His Republican convention acceptance speech is best remembered for the line “I would remind you that extremism in defense of liberty is no vice.”
的確,高華德是個極端主義者,並且以此為傲。他在共和黨代表大會上發表的接受提名演說當中,最令人難忘的一句話就是:「提醒各位,為了捍衛自由而採行的極端主義並非壞事。」
On the subject of foreign policy he was crystal clear about where he would lead the nation. Simply put: leave the United Nations and never look back, break off all relations with the Soviet Union, and use tactical nuclear bombs to fight communists in Vietnam and other Commie strongholds. Not surprisingly, many of his proclamations during the campaign were outrageous. He was quoted as saying he’d like to “lob one into the men’s room of the Kremlin and make sure I hit it.”
在外交政策方面,他清楚表明自己將會把國家帶往什麼方向。簡單說,就是毫不留戀地退出聯合國,斷絕與蘇聯的一切關係,並且利用戰術核子武器攻打越共以及其他共匪巢穴。不出意料,他在選戰期間提出的許多宣言都令人震驚。據傳他曾說自己很想「丟一顆石頭到克里姆林宮的男廁裡,打中他那話兒」。
Small wonder Johnson’s only concern was the extent of the landslide to come. The Democrats quickly seized upon Goldwater’s “let’s nuke ’em when we have the chance” philosophy and came up with their own unofficial slogan to counter “In Your Heart You Know He’s Right.” Their retort: “In Your Guts You Know He’s Nuts.” It didn’t stop there. Bumper stickers appeared with “Goldwater for Halloween” and “Vote for Goldwater and Go to War.”
難怪詹森不怕落敗,只怕贏得不夠多。民主黨緊抓高華德「一有機會就用核彈炸翻他們」的想法,故意惡搞他的口號:「你心知肚明這傢伙瘋了。」不只如此,當時還出現了不少保險桿貼紙,內容包括:「一票投給高華德,天天都是萬聖節」或者「想上戰場,就選高華德」。
To top it all off, the Johnson advertising team created the famous “Daisy” commercial. It showed a little girl plucking petals from a daisy as a nuclear countdown ends in a huge mushroom cloud explosion. President Johnson’s voiceover was, roughly, “vote for me or God help us all.”
此外,詹森的宣傳團隊還攝製了著名的「雛菊」廣告。畫面上只見一名小女孩在核彈攻擊倒數的同時拔著一朵雛菊的花瓣,倒數結束後,隨即轟然出現爆炸後的巨大蕈狀雲。詹森總統的旁白大致上是說:「請投我一票,不然只好祈求上帝保佑了。」//
#對照原文審校翻譯不可少
communists中文 在 世界上最後五個社會主義(共產)國家 - YouTube 的推薦與評價
The Last 5 Socialist Countries (Communist) In The World ... Now generally refers to the communist and Karl Marx, ... 美国之音中文网. ... <看更多>