“CATTI杯”第二十七届韩素音青年翻译奖竞赛-英译汉

第26届韩素音青年翻译奖大赛参赛试卷（英译汉）请按照以下格式在答卷上填写选手信息栏姓名：_______性别：_____ 学号：_______年级专业：______________ 学院（全称）：_________________ 联系方式：_____________英译汉竞赛原文：How the News Got Less MeanThe most read article of all time on BuzzFeed contains no photographs of celebrity nip slips and no inflammatory ranting. It’s a series of photos called “21 pictures that will restore your faith in humanity,” which has pulled in nearly 14 million visits so far. At Upworthy too, hope is the major draw. “This kid just died. What he lef t behind is wondtacular,” an Upworthy post about a terminally ill teen singer, earned 15 million views this summer and has raised more than $300,000 for cancer research.The recipe for attracting visitors to stories online is changing. Bloggers have traditionally turned to sarcasm and snark to draw attention. But the success of sites like BuzzFeed and Upworthy, whose philosophies embrace the viral nature of upbeat stories, hints that the Web craves positivity.The reason: social media. Researchers are discovering that people want to create positive images of themselves online by sharing upbeat stories. And with more people turning to Facebook and Twitter to find out what’s happening in the world, news stories may need to cheer up in order to court an audience. If social is the future of media, then optimistic stories might be media’s future.“When we started, the prevailing wisdom was that snark ruled the Internet,” says Eli Pariser, a co-founder of Upworthy. “And we just had a really different sense of what works.”“You don’t want to be that guy at the party who’s crazy and angry and ranting in the corner —it’s the same for Twitter or Facebook,” he says. “Part of what we’re trying to do with Upworthy is give people the tools to express a conscientious, thoughtful and positive identity in social media.”And the science appears to support Pariser’s philosophy. In a recent study from the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, researchers found that “up votes,” showing that a visitor liked a comment or story, begat more up votes on comments on the site, but “down votes” did not do the same. In fact, a single up vote increased the likelihood that someone else would like a comment by 32%, whereas a down vote had no effect. People don’t want to support the cranky commenter, the critic or the troll. Nor do they want to be that negative personality online.In another study published in 2012, Jonah Berger, author of Contagious: Why Things Catch On and professor of marketing at the Wharton School of the University of Pennsylvania, monitored the most e-mailed stories produced by the New York Times for six months and found that positive stories were more likely to make the list than negative ones.“What we share [or like] is almost like the car we drive or the clothes we wear,” he says. “It says something about us to other people. So people would much rather be seen as a Positive Polly than a Debbie Downer.”It’s not always that simple: Berger says that though positive pieces drew more traffic than negative ones, within the categories of positive and negative stories, those articles that elicited more emotion always led to more shares.“Take two negative emotions, for example: anger and sadness,” Berger says. “Both of those emotions would make the reader feel bad. But anger, a high arousal emotion, leads to more sharing, whereas sadness, a low arousal emotion, doesn’t. The same is true of the positive side: excitement and humor increase sharing, whereas contentment decreases sharing.”And while some popular BuzzFeed posts —like the recent “Is this the most embarrassing interview Fox News has ever done?” —might do their best to elicit shares through anger, both BuzzFeed and Upworthy recognize that their main success lies in creating positive viral material.“It’s not that people don’t share negative stories,” says Jack Shepherd, editorial director at BuzzFeed. “It just means that there’s a higher potential for positive stories to do well.”Upworthy’s mission is to highlight serious issues but in a hopeful way, encouraging readers to donate money, join organizations and take action. The strategy seems to be working: barely two years after its launch date (in March 2012), the site now boasts 30 million unique visitors per month, according to Upwort hy. The site’s average monthly unique visitors grew to 14 million people over its first six quarters — to put that in perspective, the Huffington Post had only about 2 million visitors in its first six quarters online.But Upworthy measures the success of a story not just by hits. The creators of the site only consider a post a success if it’s also shared frequently on social media. “We are interested in content that people want to share partly for pragmatic reasons,” Pariser says. “If you don’t have a g ood theory about how to appear in Facebook and Twitter, then you may disappear.”Nobody has mastered the ability to make a story go viral like BuzzFeed. The site, which began in 2006 as a lab to figure out what people share online, has used what it’s le arned to draw 60 million monthly unique visitors, according to BuzzFeed. (Most of that traffic comes from social-networking sites, driving readers toward BuzzFeed’s mix of cute animal photos and hard news.) By comparison the New York Times website, one of the most popular newspaper sites on the Web, courts only 29 million unique visitors each month, according to the Times.BuzzFeed editors have found that people do still read negative or critical stories, they just aren’t the posts they share with their friends. And those shareable posts are the ones that newsrooms increasingly prize.“Anecdotally, I can tell you people are just as likely to click on negative stories as they are to click on positive ones,” says Shepherd. “But they’re more likely to sh are positive stories. What you’re interested in is different from what you want your friends to see what you’re interested in.”So as newsrooms re-evaluate how they can draw readers and elicit more shares on Twitter and Facebook, they may look to BuzzFe ed’s and Upworthy’s happiness model for direction.“I think that the Web is only becoming more social,” Shepherd says. “We’re at a point where readers are your publishers. If news sites aren’t thinking about what it would mean for someone to share a story on social media, that coul be detrimental.”PS：1.请各位参赛选手关注我们的新浪微博：@安徽师范大学翻译协会2014，和腾讯微博：@安徽师范大学译协。

老来乐Delights in Growing Old六十整岁望七十岁如攀高山。

不料七十岁居然过了。

又想八十岁是难于上青天，可望不可即了。

岂知八十岁又过了。

老汉今年八十二矣。

这是照传统算法，务虚不务实。

现在不是提倡尊重传统吗 ?At the age of sixty I longed for a life span of seventy, a goal as difficult as a summit to be reached. Who would expect that I had reached it? Then I dreamed of living to be eighty, a target in sight but as inaccessible as Heaven. Out of my anticipation, I had hit it. As a matter of fact, I am now an old man of eighty-two. Such longevity is a grant bestowed by Nature; though nominal and not real, yet it conforms to our tradition. Is it not advocated to pay respect to nowadays?老年多半能悟道。

孔子说“天下有道”。

老子说“道可道”。

《圣经》说“太初有道”。

佛教说“邪魔外道”。

我老了，不免胡思乱想，胡说八道，自觉悟出一条真理 : 老年是广阔天地，是可以大有作为的。

An old man is said to understand the Way most probably: the Way of good administration as put forth by Confucius, the Way that can be explained as suggested by Laotzu, the Word (Way) in the very beginning as written in the Bible and the Way of pagans as denounced by the Buddhists. As I am growing old, I can't help being given to flights of fancy and having my own Way of creating stories. However I have come to realize the truth: my old age serves as a vast world in which I can still have my talents employed fully and developed completely.七十岁开始可以诸事不做而拿退休金，不愁没有一碗饭吃，自由自在，自得其乐。

幸福是什么模样，或许并不难回答。幸福就是一本摊开的诗篇，关于在城市的天空下，那些寻常巷陌的诗。
Perhaps it is not so difficult to define happiness after all. Happiness is an unfurled scroll of poems, describing ordinary alleys under the city skies.
蜗居在巷陌的寻常幸福
Simple Happiness of Dwelling in the Back Streets
隐逸的生活似乎在传统意识中一直被认为是幸福的至高境界。但这种孤傲遁世同时也是孤独的，纯粹的隐者实属少数，而少数者的满足不能用来解读普世的幸福模样。
A secluded life has traditionally been deemed, as it seems, the supreme state of happiness, although such aloofness and retirement breed loneliness as well. Few people in fact end up as genuine recluses, whose contentment does not suffice to construe what happiness is for all.
和来家中做客的邻居朋友用同一种腔调巧妙地笑谑着身边的琐事，大家眯起的眼睛都默契地闪着同一种狡黠；和家人一起围在饭桌前，衔满食物的嘴还发着含糊的声音，有些聒噪，但没人厌烦。
When neighbors and friends come, they share witty jokes about personal trivialities, implicitly understanding each other's eye movements of like astuteness. Family members sit around the dining table, chattering through mouthfuls of food, and no one is bothered by the noise.

保护古村落就是保护“根性文化”To Preserve “Ancient Villages”, to Protect the “Roots of Culture”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。

但近年来，随着城镇化快速推进，以传统村落为代表的传统文化正在淡化，乃至消失。

对传统村落历史建筑进行保护性抢救，并对传统街巷和周边环境进行整治，可防止传统村落无人化、空心化。

“Traditional villages” refer to those with tangible and intangible cultural heritages and of high historic, cultural, scientific, artistic, social and economic value. But in recent years, traditional cultures represented by traditional villages have been fading away or even dying out with rapid urbanization. In order to prevent those villages from being uninhabited or hollowed out, we must protect historic buildings at risk there, restore the old streets and lanes, and renovate their surroundings.古村落与其说是老建筑，倒不如说是一座座承载了历史变迁的活建筑文化遗产，任凭世事变迁，斗转星移，古村落依然岿然不动，用无比顽强的生命力向人们诉说着村落的沧桑变迁，尽管曾经酷暑寒冬，风雪雨霜，但是古老的身躯依然支撑着生命的张力，和生生不息的人并肩生存，从这点上说，沧桑的古村落也是一种无形的精神安慰。

英译汉竞赛‎原文：The Conce‎p t of Intel‎l igen‎c e in Cross‎-cultu‎r al Persp‎e ctiv‎e s[1] One of the posit‎i ve outco‎m es from so much resea‎r ch on the relat‎i onsh‎i p betwe‎e n cultu‎r e and intel‎l igen‎c e is an expan‎d ed view of what intel‎l igen‎c e may be, and how it may be conce‎p tual‎l y relat‎e d to cultu‎r e. This issue‎is intri‎c atel‎y inter‎t wine‎d with cross‎-cultu‎r al resea‎r ch on intel‎l igen‎c e becau‎s e one of the possi‎b le confo‎u ndin‎g facto‎r s in previ‎o us studi‎e s that docum‎e nted‎cultu‎r al diffe‎r ence‎s has been cultu‎r al diffe‎r ence‎s in the very conce‎p t and meani‎n g of intel‎l igen‎c e.[2] Resea‎r cher‎s in this area have disco‎v ered‎that many langu‎a ges have no word that corre‎s pond‎s to our idea of intel‎l igen‎c e. The close‎s t Manda‎r in equiv‎a lent‎, for insta‎n ce, is a Chine‎s e chara‎c ter that means‎“good brain‎and talen‎t ed”. Chine‎s e peopl‎e often‎assoc‎i ate this conce‎p t with trait‎s such as imita‎t ion, effor‎t, and socia‎l respo‎n sibi‎l ity. Such trait‎s do not const‎i tute‎impor‎t ant eleme‎n ts of the conce‎p t of intel‎l igen‎c e for most Ameri‎c ans.[3] Afric‎a n cultu‎r es provi‎d e a numbe‎r of examp‎l es. The Bagan‎d a of East Afric‎a use the word obuge‎z i to refer‎to a combi‎n atio‎n of menta‎l and socia‎l skill‎s that make a perso‎n stead‎y, cauti‎o us, and frien‎d ly. The Djerm‎a-Songh‎a i in West Afric‎a use the term akkal‎, which‎has an even broad‎e r meani‎n g – a combi‎n atio‎n of intel‎l igen‎c e, know-how, and socia‎l skill‎s. Still‎anoth‎e r socie‎t y, the Baoul‎e, uses the term n’gloue‎l e, which‎descr‎i bes child‎r en who are not only menta‎l ly alert‎but also willi‎n g to volun‎t eer their‎servi‎c es witho‎u t being‎asked‎.[4] Becau‎s e of the enorm‎o us diffe‎r ence‎s in the ways cultu‎r es defin‎e intel‎l igen‎c e, it is diffi‎c ult to make valid‎compa‎r ison‎s from one socie‎t y to anoth‎e r. That is, diffe‎r ent cultu‎r es value‎diffe‎r ent trait‎s (their‎defin‎i tion‎of “intel‎l igen‎c e”) and have diver‎g ent views‎conce‎r ning‎which‎trait‎s are usefu‎l in predi‎c ting‎futur‎e impor‎t ant behav‎i ors (also cultu‎r ally‎defin‎e d). Peopl‎e in diffe‎r ent cultu‎r es not only disag‎r ee about‎what const‎i tute‎s intel‎l igen‎c e but also about‎the prope‎r way to demon‎s trat‎e those‎abili‎t ies. In mains‎t ream‎North‎Ameri‎c an socie‎t y, indiv‎i dual‎s are typic‎a lly rewar‎d ed for displ‎a ying‎knowl‎e dge and skill‎s. This same behav‎i or may be consi‎d ered‎impro‎p er, arrog‎a nt, or rude in socie‎t ies that stres‎s perso‎n al relat‎i onsh‎i ps, coope‎r atio‎n, and modes‎t y.[5] These‎diffe‎r ence‎s are impor‎t ant to cross‎-cultu‎r al studi‎e s of intel‎l igen‎c e becau‎s e succe‎s sful‎perfo‎r manc‎e on a task of intel‎l igen‎c e may requi‎r e behav‎i or that is consi‎d ered‎immod‎e st and arrog‎a nt in Cultu‎r e A (and there‎f ore only reluc‎t antl‎y displ‎a yed by membe‎r s of Cultu‎r e A)but desir‎a ble in Cultu‎r e B (and there‎f ore readi‎l y displ‎a yed by membe‎r s of Cultu‎r e B). Clear‎l y, such diffe‎r ent attit‎u des towar‎d the same behav‎i or could‎lead resea‎r cher‎s to draw inacc‎u rate‎concl‎u sion‎s about‎diffe‎r ence‎s in intel‎l igen‎c e betwe‎e n Cultu‎r e A and Cultu‎r e B.[6] Anoth‎e r reaso‎n it is diffi‎c ult to compa‎r e intel‎l igen‎c e cross‎-cultu‎r ally‎is that tests‎of intel‎l igen‎c e often‎rely on knowl‎e dge that is speci‎f ic to a parti‎c ular‎cultu‎r e; inves‎t igat‎o rs based‎in that cultu‎r e may not even know what to test for in a diffe‎r ent cultu‎r e. For examp‎l e, one U.S. intel‎l igen‎c e test conta‎i ns the follo‎w ing quest‎i on: “How does a violi‎n resem‎b le a piano‎?” Clear‎l y, this quest‎i on assum‎e s prior‎knowl‎e dge about‎violi‎n s and piano‎s–quite‎a reaso‎n able‎expec‎t atio‎n for middl‎e-class‎Ameri‎c ans, but not for peopl‎e from cultu‎r es that use diffe‎r ent music‎a l instr‎u ment‎s.[7] Our expan‎d ing knowl‎e dge about‎cultu‎r al diffe‎r ence‎s in the conce‎p t of intel‎l igen‎c e has had impor‎t ant ramif‎i cati‎o ns for our theor‎e tica‎l under‎s tand‎i ng of intel‎l igen‎c e in mains‎t ream‎Ameri‎c an psych‎o logy‎as well. Altho‎u gh tradi‎t iona‎l think‎i ng and reaso‎n ing abili‎t ies have domin‎a ted views‎of intel‎l igen‎c e in the past, in recen‎t years‎psych‎o logi‎s ts have begun‎to turn their‎atten‎t ion to other‎possi‎b le aspec‎t s of intel‎l igen‎c e. Until‎very recen‎t ly, for examp‎l e, creat‎i vity‎was not consi‎d ered‎a part of intel‎l igen‎c e; now, howev‎e r, psych‎o logi‎s ts are incre‎a sing‎l y consi‎d erin‎g this impor‎t ant human‎abili‎t y as a type of intel‎l igen‎c e. Other‎aspec‎t s of intel‎l igen‎c e are also comin‎g to the foref‎r ont. A psych‎o logi‎s t has sugge‎s ted that there‎are reall‎y seven‎diffe‎r ent types‎of intel‎l igen‎c e: logic‎a l mathe‎m atic‎a l, lingu‎i stic‎,music‎a l, spati‎a l, bodil‎y kines‎t heti‎c, inter‎p erso‎n al, and intra‎p erso‎n al. Accor‎d ing to this schem‎e, not only do the core compo‎n ents‎of each of these‎seven‎types‎of intel‎l igen‎c e diffe‎r, but so do some sampl‎e end-state‎s(such as mathe‎m atic‎i an versu‎s dance‎r). His theor‎y of multi‎p leintel‎l igen‎c es has broad‎e ned our under‎s tand‎i ng of intel‎l igen‎c e to inclu‎d e other‎areas‎besid‎e s “book smart‎s”.[8] Perha‎p s the field‎is comin‎g to reali‎z e that intel‎l igen‎c e in its broad‎e st sense‎may be more aptly‎defin‎e d as “the skill‎s and abili‎t ies neces‎s ary to effec‎t ivel‎y accom‎p lish‎cultu‎r al goals‎”. If your cultu‎r e’s goals‎,for examp‎l e, invol‎v e succe‎s sful‎l y pursu‎i ng a profe‎s sion‎a l occup‎a tion‎with a good salar‎y in order‎to suppo‎r t yours‎e lf and your famil‎y, that cultu‎r e will foste‎r a view of intel‎l igen‎c e that incor‎p orat‎e s cogni‎t ive and emoti‎o nal skill‎s and abili‎t ies that allow‎for pursu‎i ng such an occup‎a tion‎. Those‎skill‎s and abili‎t ies may inclu‎d e deduc‎t ive reaso‎n ing, logic‎a l thoug‎h t, verba‎l and mathe‎m atic‎a l skill‎s– the sorts‎of skill‎s that are foste‎r ed in conte‎m pora‎r y Ameri‎c an cultu‎r e. If your cultu‎r e’s goals‎,howev‎e r, focus‎more on the devel‎o pmen‎t and maint‎e nanc‎e of succe‎s sful‎inter‎p erso‎n al relat‎i onsh‎i ps, worki‎n g with natur‎e, or hunti‎n g and gathe‎r ing, intel‎l igen‎c e will more aptly‎be viewe‎d as the skill‎s and abili‎t ies relat‎e d to such activ‎i ties‎.[9] On one level‎,there‎f ore, peopl‎e of all cultu‎r es share‎a simil‎a r view of intel‎l igen‎c e –a catch‎a ll conce‎p t that summa‎r izes‎the skill‎s and abili‎t ies neces‎s ary to live effec‎t ivel‎y in one’s cultu‎r e. At the same time, howev‎e r, cultu‎r al diffe‎r ence‎s natur‎a lly exist‎becau‎s e of diffe‎r ence‎s in how cultu‎r es defin‎e goals‎and skill‎s and abili‎t ies neede‎d to achie‎v e those‎goals‎.Futur‎e resea‎r ch will need to delve‎into these‎dual proce‎s ses, searc‎h ing for commo‎n alit‎i es as well as diffe‎r ence‎s acros‎s cultu‎r es and explo‎r ing what conte‎x tual‎varia‎b les affec‎t intel‎l igen‎c e-relat‎e d behav‎i ors, and why.[10] Aware‎n ess of cultu‎r al diffe‎r ence‎s in intel‎l igen‎c e raise‎s diffi‎c ult quest‎i ons conce‎r ning‎testi‎n g and the use of test score‎s. Shoul‎d bias in testi‎n g be elimi‎n ated‎at the expen‎s e of the predi‎c tive‎valid‎i ty of the test? Many educa‎t iona‎l insti‎t utio‎n s and busin‎e ss organ‎i zati‎o ns today‎face this diffi‎c ult quest‎i on, which‎is compo‎u nded‎by legal‎ramif‎i cati‎o ns and the const‎a nt threa‎t of litig‎a tion‎. Perha‎p s we need to give consi‎d erat‎i on to yet anoth‎e r aspec‎t of intel‎l igen‎c e – that is, our attit‎u des regar‎d ing intel‎l igen‎c e. A cross‎-cultu‎r al under‎s tand‎i ng of diffe‎r ence‎s in the defin‎i tion‎s and proce‎s ses of intel‎l igen‎c e shoul‎d help to deepe‎n our appre‎c iati‎o n and respe‎c t for cultu‎r es diffe‎r ent from our own, and help us to find simil‎a riti‎e s as well as diffe‎r ence‎s among‎peopl‎e.。

老来乐Delights in Growing Old六十整岁望七十岁如攀高山。

不料七十岁居然过了。

又想八十岁是难于上青天，可望不可即了。

岂知八十岁又过了。

老汉今年八十二矣。

这是照传统算法，务虚不务实。

现在不是提倡尊重传统吗 ?At the age of sixty I longed for a life span of seventy, a goal as difficult as a summit to be reached. Who would expect that I had reached it? Then I dreamed of living to be eighty, a target in sight but as inaccessible as Heaven. Out of my anticipation, I had hit it. As a matter of fact, I am now an old man of eighty-two. Such longevity is a grant bestowed by Nature; though nominal and not real, yet it conforms to our tradition. Is it not advocated to pay respect to nowadays?老年多半能悟道。

孔子说“天下有道”。

老子说“道可道”。

《圣经》说“太初有道”。

佛教说“邪魔外道”。

我老了，不免胡思乱想，胡说八道，自觉悟出一条真理 : 老年是广阔天地，是可以大有作为的。

An old man is said to understand the Way most probably: the Way of good administration as put forth by Confucius, the Way that can be explained as suggested by Laotzu, the Word (Way) in the very beginning as written in the Bible and the Way of pagans as denounced by the Buddhists. As I am growing old, I can't help being given to flights of fancy and having my own Way of creating stories. However I have come to realize the truth: my old age serves as a vast world in which I can still have my talents employed fully and developed completely.七十岁开始可以诸事不做而拿退休金，不愁没有一碗饭吃，自由自在，自得其乐。

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。

第十七届韩素音翻译大赛英译汉部分原文Beauty (excerpt)Judging from the scientists I know, including Eva and Ruth, and those I’ve read about, you can’t pursue the laws of nature very long without bumping 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 what must be happening in the interior of stars. He recalls for me this thrill on grasping for the first time Dirac’s equations describing quantum mechanics, or those of Einstein describing relativity. “They’re so beautiful,” he says,” you can see immediately they have to be true. Or at least on the way toward trut h.” I ask him what makes a theory beautiful, and he replies, “Simplicity, symmetry, elegance, and power.”Why nature should conform to theories we find beautiful is far from obvious. The most incomprehensible thing about the universe, as Einstein said, is that it’s comprehensible. How unlikely, that a short—lived biped on a two--bit planet should be able to gauge the speed of light, lay bare the structure of an atom, or calculate the gravitational tug of a black hole. We’re a long way from understanding everything, but we do understand a great deal about how nature behaves. Generation after generation, we puzzle out formulas, test them, and find, to an astonishing degree, that nature agrees. An architect draws designs on flimsy paper, and her buildings stand up through earthquakes. We launch a satellite into orbit and use it to bounce messages from continent to continent. The machine on which I write these words embodies hundreds of insights into the workings of the material world, insights that are confirmed by every burst of letters on the screen, and I stare at thatscreen through lenses that obey the laws of optics first worked out in detail by Issac Newton.By discerning patterns in the universe, Newton believed, he was tracing the hand of God. Scientists in our day have largely abandoned the notion of a Creator as an unnecessary hypothesis, or at least an untestable one. While they share Newton’s faith that t he universe is ruled everywhere by a coherent set of rules, they cannot say, as scientists, how these particular rules came to govern things. You can do science without believing in a divine Legislator, but not without believing in laws.I spent my teenage years scrambling up the mountain of mathematics. Midway up the slope, I staggered to a halt, gasping in the rarefied air, well before I reached the heights where the equations of Einstein and Dirac would have made sense. Nowadays I add, subtract, multiply, and do long division when no calculator is handy, and I can do algebra and geometry and even trigonometry in a pinch, but that is about all that I’ve kept from the language of numbers. Still, I remember glimpsing patterns in mathematics that seemed as bold and beautiful as a skyful of stars.I’m never more aware of the limitations of language than when I try to describe beauty. Language can create its own loveliness, of course, but it cannot deliver to us the radiance we apprehend in the world, any more than a photograph can capture the stunning swiftness of a hawk or the withering power of a supernova. Eva’s wedding album holds only a faint glimmer of the wedding itself. All that pictures or words can do is gesture beyond themselves toward the fleeting glory that stirs our hearts. So I keep gesturing.“All nature is meant to make us think of paradise,”Thomas Merton observed. Because the Creation puts on a nonstop show, beauty is free and inexhaustible, but we need training in order to perceive more than the most obvious kinds. Even 15 billion years or so after the Big Bang, echoes of that event still linger in the form of background radiation, only a few degrees above absolute zero. Just so, I believe, the experience of beauty is an echo of the order and power that permeate the universe. To measure background radiation, we need subtle instruments; to measure beauty, we need alert intelligence and our five keen senses.Anyone with eyes can take delight in a face or a flower. You need training, however, to perceive the beauty in mathematics or physics or chess, in the architecture of a tree, the design of a bird’s wing, or the shiver of breath through a flute. For most of human history, the training has come from elders who taught the young how to pay attention. By paying attention, we learn to savor all sorts of patterns, from quantum mechanics to patchwork quilts. This predilection brings with it a clear evolutionary advantage, for the ability to recognize patterns helped our ancestors to select mates, find food, avoid predators. But the same advantage would apply to all species, and yet we alone compose symphonies and crossword puzzles, carve stone into statues, map time and space.Have we merely carried our animal need for shrewd perceptions to an absurd extreme? Or have we stumbled onto a deep congruence between the structure of our minds and the structure of the universe?I am persuaded the latter is true. I am convinced there’s more to beauty than biology, more than cultural convention. It flows around and through us in such abundance, and in such myriad forms, as to exceed by a wide margin any mereevolutionary need. Which is not to say that beauty has nothing to do with survival: I think it has everything to do with survival. Beauty feeds us from the same source that created us. It reminds us of the shaping power that reaches through the flower stem and through our own hands. It restores our faith in the generosity of nature. By giving us a taste of the kinship between our own small minds and the great Mind of the Cosmos, beauty reassures us that we are exactly and wonderfully made for life on this glorious planet, in this magnificent universe.I find in that affinity a profound source of meaning and hope.A universe so prodigal of beauty may actually need us to notice and respond, may need our sharp eyes and brimming hearts and teeming minds, in order to close the circuit of Creation.美在其中（节选）我认识的科学家，像伊凡和卢斯，还有我通过阅读了解的科学家，普遍认为人们在探索自然界规律的过程中，很快便能与美不期而遇。

英译汉Hidden Within Technology’s Empire, a Republic of Letters隐藏于技术帝国的文学界索尔•贝妻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。

虽说少年时代身居边陲的林肯就在阅读普鲁塔克，、莎士比亚和《圣经》，但他毕竟是林肯。

Later when I was traveling in the Midwest by car, bus and train, I regularly visited small-town libraries and found that readers in Keokuk, Iowa, or Benton Harbor, Mich., were checking out Proust and Joyce and even Svevo and Andrei Biely. D. H. Lawrence was also a favorite. And sometimes I remembered that God was willing to spare Sodom for the sake of 10 of the righteous. Not that Keokuk was anything like wicked Sodom, or that Proust’s Charlus would have been tempted to settle in Benton Harbor, Mich. I seem to have had a persistent democratic desire to find evidences of high culture in the most unlikely places.后来，我坐小车、巴士和火车在中西部旅行，经常走访小镇图书馆；发现在衣阿华州基奥卡克市，或者密歇根州本顿港市，读者们借阅普鲁斯特和乔伊斯的作品，甚至还有斯维沃@和安德烈•别雷®的著作。

保护古村落就是保护“根性文化”To Preserve “Ancient Villages”, to Protect the “Roots of Culture”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。

但近年来，随着城镇化快速推进，以传统村落为代表的传统文化正在淡化，乃至消失。

对传统村落历史建筑进行保护性抢救，并对传统街巷和周边环境进行整治，可防止传统村落无人化、空心化。

“Traditional villages” refer to those with tangible and intangible cultural heritages and of high historic, cultural, scientific, artistic, social and economic value. But in recent years, traditional cultures represented by traditional villages have been fading away or even dying out with rapid urbanization. In order to prevent those villages from being uninhabited or hollowed out, we must protect historic buildings at risk there, restore the old streets and lanes, and renovate their surroundings.古村落与其说是老建筑，倒不如说是一座座承载了历史变迁的活建筑文化遗产，任凭世事变迁，斗转星移，古村落依然岿然不动，用无比顽强的生命力向人们诉说着村落的沧桑变迁，尽管曾经酷暑寒冬，风雪雨霜，但是古老的身躯依然支撑着生命的张力，和生生不息的人并肩生存，从这点上说，沧桑的古村落也是一种无形的精神安慰。

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。

汉译英竞赛原文：屠呦呦秉持的，不是好事者争论的随着诺贝尔奖颁奖典礼的临近，持续2个月的“屠呦呦热”正在渐入高潮。

当地时间7日下午，屠呦呦在瑞典卡罗林斯卡学院发表题为“青蒿素——中医药给世界的一份礼物”的演讲，详细回顾了青蒿素的发现过程，并援引毛泽东的话称，中医药学“是一个伟大的宝库”。

对中医药而言，无论是自然科学“圣殿”中的这次演讲，还是即将颁发到屠呦呦手中的诺奖，自然都提供了极好的“正名”。

置于世界科学前沿的平台上，中医药学不仅真正被世界“看见”，更能因这种“看见”获得同世界对话的机会。

拨开层层迷雾之后，对话是促成发展的动力。

将迷雾拨开、使对话变成可能，是屠呦呦及其团队的莫大功劳。

但如果像部分舆论那样，将屠呦呦的告白简单视作其对中医的“背书”，乃至将其成就视作中医向西医下的“战书”，这样的心愿固然可嘉，却可能完全背离科学家的本意。

听过屠呦呦的报告，或是对其研究略作了解就知道，青蒿素的发现既来自于中医药“宝库”提供的积淀和灵感，也来自于西医严格的实验方法。

缺了其中任意一项，历史很可能转向截然不同的方向。

换言之，在“诺奖级”平台上促成中西医对话之前，屠呦呦及其团队的成果，正是长期“对话”的成果。

而此前绵延不绝的“中西医”之争，多多少少都游离了对话的本意，而陷于一种单向化的“争短长”。

持中医论者，不屑于西医的“按部就班”；持西医论者，不屑于中医的“随心所欲”。

双方都没有看到，“按部就班”背后本是实证依据，“随心所欲”背后则有文化内涵，两者完全可以兼容互补，何必非得二元对立？屠呦呦在演讲中坦言，“通过抗疟药青蒿素的研究历程，我深深地感到中西医药各有所长，两者有机结合，优势互补，当具有更大的开发潜力和良好的发展前景”。

这既是站在中医药立场上对西方科学界的一次告白，反过来也可理解为西医立场上对中医拥趸们的提醒。

毋宁说，这是一个科学家对科学研究实质的某种揭示。

科学研究之艰深莫测，科学家多有体认，作为旁观者的我们也屡屡耳闻。

“韩素音青年翻译奖”竞赛汉译英之体感
罗尧晴
【期刊名称】《青年与社会》
【年(卷),期】2013(000)027
【摘要】通过以“韩素音青年翻译奖”竞赛汉译英为例，简单介绍了“韩素音青年翻译奖”竞赛的由来，并回顾了笔者翻译的全过程。

最后，总结了通过本次翻译实践得出的体会与感悟。

【总页数】1页(P259-259)
【作者】罗尧晴
【作者单位】湖南师范大学外国语学院，湖南长沙 410102
【正文语种】中文
【相关文献】
1.“韩素音青年翻译奖”竞赛汉译英之体感
2.意象图式视角下的散文翻译r——以2015年韩素音青年翻译奖竞赛英译汉为例
3.依本求信神形兼容——第十七届“韩素音青年翻译奖”汉译英参赛译文评析
4.译前准备与翻译语境化对汉译英质量的影响
——以第二十八届韩素音青年翻译奖竞赛汉译英为例5.网络时代的翻译能力与翻译技巧——以第23届“韩素音青年翻译奖”竞赛一等奖译文的生成为例
因版权原因，仅展示原文概要，查看原文内容请购买。

英译汉翻译如是说文/章袆来源：杭州新东方学校网站韩素音青年翻译奖是我国翻译工作者协会和《中国翻译》编辑部共同创办并以已故英籍华裔女作家韩素音女士命名的全国性翻译奖项，此项翻译竞赛，是目前中国翻译界组织时间最长、规模最大、影响最广、规格最高的翻译大赛。

“韩素音青年翻译奖”是专为中国青年人设立，为中国翻译界最高奖项。

章袆，华中理工大学英语专业在读学生，上海新东方新概念部教师。

在翻译方面颇有造诣，2005年11月荣获第十七届全国“韩素音青年翻译大赛”英译汉单元中的二等奖（一等奖空缺）；汉译英单元中的优秀奖。

曾多次获得国家级、上海市各项英语竞赛奖项。

我们在本期杂志中的“名人名篇”栏目中为读者献上了章袆在“韩素音青年翻译大赛”中的获奖作品节选，敬请关注。

我从正式开始学习翻译到现在，不过两年时间。

作为一个年轻的翻译爱好者，我对翻译这门让人时而绝望时而又充满希望的艺术，有着自己最真实的经历与感悟。

在此想借本文与所有翻译新手共勉。

关于英汉互译的研究著作可谓汗牛充栋，各种派别观点层出不穷，让后来者眼花缭乱，却又无从选择。

其实从英译汉的角度来说，究其本质，过程无非就两个步骤：1、准确理解英文原文；2、用地道的中文表达原文的含义。

如何准确理解英文原文我们先来谈谈第一个步骤，如何准确理解英文原文——这一点说白了就是考验译者的阅读理解能力。

如果说在阅读中遇到不认识的单词或词组，译者尚且能够通过查阅字典的方式解决的话，那么英语中繁复多样的句式往往就不是一本字典可以打发的了。

尤其在阅读文学性较强的英语作品时，作者行云流水般的笔触通常都是借助丰富多变的句型来表现的。

这些英语作品与我们日常教科书本中选取的文章相比，往往来得更为艰深难懂。

怎么办？惟一的办法就是从头做起：1、确保自己在学校中或是培训班上接触到的一切阅读材料都能够完全透彻地理解。

千万不要小瞧学校老师为你选择的阅读教材，或许它们所触及的话题不是非常新鲜前卫，或许它们涵盖的内容与你的兴趣爱好相悖。

英译汉翻译心得英译汉翻译心得英译汉翻译如是说文/章来源：杭州新东方学校网站韩素音青年翻译奖是我国翻译工作者协会和《中国翻译》编辑部共同创办并以已故英籍华裔女作家韩素音女士命名的全国性翻译奖项，此项翻译竞赛，是目前中国翻译界组织时间最长、规模最大、影响最广、规格最高的翻译大赛。

“韩素音青年翻译奖”是专为中国青年人设立，为中国翻译界最高奖项。

章，华中理工大学英语专业在读学生，上海新东方新概念部教师。

在翻译方面颇有造诣，202*年11月荣获第十七届全国“韩素音青年翻译大赛”英译汉单元中的二等奖（一等奖空缺）；汉译英单元中的优秀奖。

曾多次获得国家级、上海市各项英语竞赛奖项。

我们在本期杂志中的“名人名篇”栏目中为读者献上了章在“韩素音青年翻译大赛”中的获奖作品节选，敬请关注。

我从正式开始学习翻译到现在，不过两年时间。

作为一个年轻的翻译爱好者，我对翻译这门让人时而绝望时而又充满希望的艺术，有着自己最真实的经历与感悟。

在此想借本文与所有翻译新手共勉。

关于英汉互译的研究著作可谓汗牛充栋，各种派别观点层出不穷，让后来者眼花缭乱，却又无从选择。

其实从英译汉的角度来说，究其本质，过程无非就两个步骤：1、准确理解英文原文；2、用地道的中文表达原文的含义。

如何准确理解英文原文我们先来谈谈第一个步骤，如何准确理解英文原文这一点说白了就是考验译者的阅读理解能力。

如果说在阅读中遇到不认识的单词或词组，译者尚且能够通过查阅字典的方式解决的话，那么英语中繁复多样的句式往往就不是一本字典可以打发的了。

尤其在阅读文学性较强的英语作品时，作者行云流水般的笔触通常都是借助丰富多变的句型来表现的。

这些英语作品与我们日常教科书本中选取的文章相比，往往来得更为艰深难懂。

怎么办？惟一的办法就是从头做起：1、确保自己在学校中或是培训班上接触到的一切阅读材料都能够完全透彻地理解。

千万不要小瞧学校老师为你选择的阅读教材，或许它们所触及的话题不是非常新鲜前卫，或许它们涵盖的内容与你的兴趣爱好相悖。

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 blasécollege-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 it actually is. It denies that anything can be explained neatly or even at all. It is parodic, detached, strange, and sometimes menacing to traditionalists who do not understand it. Although it arose in the post-war west (the term was coined in 1949), the generation that has witnessed its ascendance has yet to come up with an explanation of what postmodern attitudes mean for the future of culture or society. The subject intrigued me because, in a class otherwise consumed by dead-letter theories, postmodernism remained an open book, tempting to the young and curious. But it also intrigued me because the question of what postmodernism –what a movement so post-everything, so reticent to define itself – is spoke to a larger question about the political 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 famous essay, “Postmodernism, or the Cultural Logic of Late Capitalism,”literary critic Frederic Jameson even calls us “post-literate.”We are a generation that is riding on the tail-end of a century of war and revolutionthat toppled civilizations, overturned repressive social orders, and left us with more privilege and opportunity than any other society in history. Ours could be an era to accomplish anything.And yet do we take to the streets and the airwaves and say “here we are, and this is what we demand”? Do we plant our flag of youthful rebellion on the mall in Washington and say “we are not leaving until we see change! Our eyes have been opened by our education and our conception of what is possible has been expanded by our privilege and we demand a better world because it is our right”? It would seem we do the opposite. We go to war without so much as questioning the rationale, we sign away our civil liberties, we say nothing when the Supreme Court uses Brown v. Board of Education to outlaw desegregation, and we sit back to watch the carnage on the evening news.On campus, we sign petitions, join organizations, put our names on mailing lists, make small-money contributions, volunteer a spare hour to tutor, and sport an entire wardrobe’s worth of Live Strong bracelets advertising our moderately priced opposition to everything from breast cancer to global warming. But what do we really stand for? Like a true postmodern generation 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 against what came 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 bland imitation as anything else. We are the generation of the Che Geuvera tee-shirt.Jameson calls it “Pastiche”–“the wearing of a linguistic mask, speech in a dead language.” In literature, this means an author speaking in a style that is not his own – borrowing a voice and continuing to use it until the words lose all meaning and the chaos that is real life sets in. It is an imitation of an imitation, something that has been re-envisioned so many times the original model is no longer relevant or recognizable. It is mass-produced individualism, anticipated revolution. It is why postmodernism lacks cohesion, why it seems to lack purpose or direction. For us, the post-everything generation, pastiche is the use and reuse of the old clichés of social changeand 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 Vote generation; the generation of letter-writing campaigns and public interest lobbies; the alternative energy generation.College as America once knew it –as an incubator of radical social change –is coming to an end. To our generation the word “radicalism”evokes images of al Qaeda, not the Weathermen. “Campus takeover” sounds more like Virginia Tech in 2007 than Columbia University in 1968. Such phrases are a dead language to us. They are vocabulary from another era that does not reflect the realities of today. However, the technological revolution, the revolution, the revolution of the organization kid, is just as real and just as profound as the revolution of the 1960’s – it is just not as visible. It is a work in progress, but it is there. Perhaps when our parents finally stop pointing out the things that we are not, the stories that we do not write, they will see the threads of our narrative begin to come together; they will see that behind our pastiche, the post generation speaks in a language that does make sense. We are writing a revolution. We are just putting it in our own words.。

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’”。