英樂博客

學習英語,欣賞音樂。
個人資料
  • 博客訪問:
正文

宋德利: 宋氏快譯(2): 測謊秘訣(英漢對照)

(2007-10-25 20:20:11) 下一個


Are They Lying to You?
他們在向你說謊嗎?

肯。奧斯本 ( Ken Osborn)著

宋德利 譯

How many times has your business suffered because you trusted the wrong person? If you're like most people, you've been lied to thousands of times.

你的事有多少次是壞在信錯人?如果你和大多數人一樣,那你就已經被騙千千萬萬次。

Deception hurts in many ways. There's the emotional stress from being betrayed, the loss of self-confidence and the increased suspicion or even paranoia. Not to mention the financial cost.

直譯:
欺騙以多種方式進行傷害。有受蒙騙引起的情緒緊張、喪失自信、增加懷疑、甚至成為偏執狂。更不用提財務損失了。

在這段裏,除了paranoia(偏執狂,妄想狂)之外,沒有太生僻的詞,也沒有太複雜的句式。但它卻是一個貌似簡單,實際並不省事的句式:There’s,也就是There is.說起來,這是英語中最基本的句式,恐怕它也是初學者最先接觸到的句式之一。意思也很簡單,不外乎“那裏有”之類。但是真正翻譯的時候,恐怕還不能直接翻譯成“那裏有”,隻是譯者心知肚明而已,真正寫成句子,卻不能直接地翻譯出來。其實,它隻是個引導詞組,或類似中文裏的發語詞。比如在這段裏,要把它準確地翻譯出來,還真要費點腦筋。以我的看法,根據上文的意思和句式,不妨翻譯成“常見的有”,或者“比如”,說得文氣一點,用“諸如”。

意譯(1):
欺騙(行為)以多種方式(對人們)造成傷害。常見的有受蒙騙引起的情緒緊張、喪失自信、滿腹懷疑、甚至成為偏執狂。更不用提財務損失了。

意譯(2):
欺騙以多種方式害人,諸如:受蒙騙而引發的情緒激動、滿腹狐疑、乃至由此而變成偏執狂。更遑論財務損失了。

A deceptive supplier may promise that a shipment will arrive by your deadline, all the while knowing that delivery by the promised date is impossible. Trusting this supplier could cost your company thousands of dollars or more. Deceptions like this can be deadly to a growing business.

一名騙人的供應商也許會許諾說,一批貨物將按期限抵達,可他一直都知道按照承諾的日期底線交貨是不可能的。信任這個供應商可能給你的公司帶來成千上萬美元或更多的損失。這種欺騙對於一家正在發展中的商行來說可能是致命的。

注釋:
在商務英語中,shipment既可以作“裝船、裝運”解,也可作“一批貨物”解。此處做“貨物”解。而business,在商務英語中常作“生意、業務”等解。但也作“商店、商行”解,此處應作“商行”解。

But you don't have to be a victim. Here are seven subtle cues that often mean a person isn't being completely honest with you.

然而你並非就得是一名受害者。這裏有七個微妙的線索,經常意味著一個人對你並不是完全誠信可靠的。

1. Nose touch: We have erectile tissues in our noses, which engorge with blood when we lie. This causes a tingling or itching sensation that requires a nose touch to satisfy. The absence of a nose touch doesn't guarantee truth, but the presence of a nose touch often means deception. Of course, sometimes a person will touch his or her nose because of a non-deceptive cause, such as a cold. With some practice, you can quickly learn to distinguish a deceptive nose touch from something innocent.

1.摸鼻:
我們鼻子裏有勃起組織,說謊就充血,從而會造成刺痛或瘙癢感,因此需要以摸鼻來解除。沒有摸鼻動作不能保證就是真實,但是有摸鼻動作卻經常意味著欺騙。當然,有時候一個人因為某種非欺騙性原因,比如寒冷,也會去觸摸自己的鼻子。通過一些實踐,你就能很快學會把欺騙性鼻子觸摸與一些正常的動作區分開來。

注釋:

We have erectile tissues in our noses, which engorge with blood when we lie. This causes a tingling or itching sensation that requires a nose touch to satisfy.

意譯:
我們鼻子裏有勃起組織,說謊就充血,從而產生受刺激或發癢的感覺,進而需要摸鼻動作來解除。

直譯:
我們鼻子裏有勃起組織,我們說謊時就充血。這就會產生一種受刺激或發癢的感覺,從而需要一種摸鼻動作來滿足。

我對直譯出的這句話經過反複加工。1。用“說謊就充血”代替“我們說謊的時候”,豈不更加凝練。何必說“我們”和“的時候”,不說“我們”難道還會誤以為別人嗎?第二句,那麽多"a",又翻譯出那麽多“一種”,有何必要,不如一掃而光,豈不痛快?因此可以簡化成:就會產生受刺激或發癢的感覺。可是初學翻譯的人,包括我在內,總是舍不得,或不敢大刀闊斧地砍掉這些累贅的小詞,因為在漢語裏純屬畫蛇添足。2。什麽叫“來滿足(satisfy)”,不就是“解除”癢的感覺嗎?3。這是三個用句號斷開的短句。翻譯成漢語要打破原來的句式結構,重新組合才更通暢。我用“從而”和“進而”把包括三層意思的兩個句子簡化成一個句子。

再說說最後一個詞組:something innocent.直譯是“無辜的東西”。結合上文,不就是說人的動作嗎?所以something翻譯成“東西”,不如翻譯成“動作”更合理,更清楚。至於innocent,什麽叫“無辜的”,無非就是“不意味著欺騙的”意思。說得靈活一些,不就是“正常”的意思嗎?因此翻譯成“正常動作”,似乎更明白些。

2. Speech disturbances: When we lie, we force our brain to pretend that the lie is true, that the truth is a lie and simultaneously remember that the real truth is that each is the other. Are you confused? So is your brain when you lie. The process of deception taxes our cognitive ability to think efficiently. So when we lie, we pause longer and speak slower than normal and often experience speech disturbances that serve as gap fillers, such as "um," "er" and "ah." Train yourself to look for deception when you hear this kind of verbal cue.

2.話語幹擾:
我們說謊的時候,就要迫使大腦佯裝承認,謊話是真,真話是謊,同時還要記住所謂的真理就是彼此彼此。你是不是被弄糊塗了?你說謊的時候,大腦就是這個樣。行騙的過程需要付出代價,那就是喪失你有效思考的認知力。因此,我們說謊的時候,與平時相比,詞句之間的停頓要更長,語速也會更慢,而且時常要以話語幹擾詞來彌補詞語之間空隙,諸如“嗯”、“呃”、“啊”。當你聽到這種話語暗示線索的時候,就要訓練自己洞察行騙的跡象。

3. Incongruent behavior: When our words and our body language don't agree, our communication is incongruent. Imagine that you ask a salesman if he can assure your delivery will be on time. If he explains how certain he is about it being on time while also shaking his head--as if non-verbally saying "no"--he is incongruent. When this sort of incongruence occurs, you would do well to believe the person's body over his words.

3.不協調行為:
我們的詞語和肢體語言不一致,彼此溝通就會不協調。試想,你問一個售貨人,他是否能夠保證你要的那批貨按時到位。如果他在按期交貨方麵表示如何如何肯定的同時,也在搖頭 - 似乎是在無言地說“不”- 他這就是不協調。出現這種不協調的時候,你就完全可以認為這個人的肢體語言在否定口頭語言。

注釋:

1.delivery: 交貨。交貨本是售貨者的事情,怎麽本文中會出現“that you ask a salesman if he can assure your delivery”即,作為買主,你向售貨者問你自己的交貨呢?作為買主是根本不存在交貨這件事的。我體會,本文your delivery指的是買主要求賣主向你交的貨物。這麽一個簡單的貿易環節,讓作者一個表示第一人稱的物主代詞your搞得彼此不分了。

2.believe the person's body over his words,這段話中有兩點值得一提。 首先,believe最基本的意思是“相信”,但是不能任何時候都翻譯成這個意思,比如在此文的這種情況下,本來就是“認為”的意思,可是很多人一定要翻譯成“相信”。你如果根據漢語的語氣和一般人說話時選用的習慣用語,似乎“認為”更確切。其次,over,本來是“超過”、“壓過”等意思。但是靈活一點,不就是“否定”的意思嗎?當然,如果獨立來看“over”,當然沒有絲毫“否認”的意思,因此這個“否認”的意思,完全是根據上下文,靈活地翻譯出來的。這就叫“意譯”,而不是“直譯”,或“硬譯”。

4. Neck rub: We rub our necks because of the stress we experience when we feel that an obstacle may be insurmountable. Let's say you're interviewing a potential employee for a key leadership position and the prospective employee verbally emphasizes his interest in the job. However he also begins to rub his neck when you explain the expected duties. This probably means he doesn't feel he'll be able to accomplish the duties. He might be wrong, but if we know anything about human psychology, it's that if someone believes that they can or can't do something, they're probably right.

4.揉脖:
我們在感覺遇到一種可能難以逾越的障礙時,就要緊張,因而就去揉脖子。比如說你正在為一個重要的領導職位和一個預期中的雇員舉行麵談,這位未來的雇員口頭上強調他對這份工作的興趣。但是當你解釋將來的責任時,他卻開始揉脖子。這可能就意味著他並不覺得自己能夠履行這些責任。他(對自己能力的認識)也許是錯誤的,但是如果我們了解一些人類心理學,那就會認識到,既然某個人自認為能,或者不能做某事,他們(的自我判斷)也可能就是對的。

注釋:
1.We rub our necks because of the stress we experience when we feel that an obstacle may be insurmountable.句子不太長,但卻相當麻煩。

直譯:我們會因為我們在感覺到一種可能無法逾越的障礙時所經曆的緊張而去揉脖子。

一頭一尾相接,刪除中間的大肚子,不就是“我們去揉脖子”嗎?至於為什麽要揉,什麽時候去揉,不妨把大肚子裏的東西抖出來,按照前因後果的順序,有條不紊地慢慢說來。結果翻譯成:“我們在感覺遇到一種可能難以逾越的障礙時,就要緊張,因而就去揉脖子。”

2.if someone believes that they can or can't do something, they're probably right.

本來if的意思是“如果”,因此可以翻譯成“如果某個人自認為能,或者不能做某事,他們(的自我判斷)也可能就是對的。”這種翻譯看來似乎無可指摘,但如果從上下文的語氣看,讀起來似乎不如“既然某個人自認為能,或者不能做某事,他們(的自我判斷)也可能就是對的。”這也是根據“意譯”的需要,把詞義和句式都加以改造的例子。

5. Eye rub: An eye rub is an indicator of disbelief. Let's say you have an important computer keystroke sequence to teach a new employee. The employee begins to rub her eyes even while verbally affirming your statements. This probably means that she doesn't believe you or disagrees with your instruction. It would be wise to stop and ask a question to allow the employee to verbally object. Many subordinates feel uneasy about disagreeing with the boss, but their bodies don't hesitate. Perceiving a potential problem and dealing with it early can be the difference between a simple misunderstanding and a business disaster.

5.揉眼:
一個揉眼的動作就是一種不相信的指示器。讓我們打個比方說,你有一個重要的電腦基礎程序要教給一位新雇員。這位雇員就在口頭上對你的話表示讚同時,卻開始揉眼。這可能就意味著他並不相信你,或者不同意你的說教。這時明智的做法就是停下來,提出一個問題,以此來允許這位雇員用語言表達異議。很多下屬都因為與老板意見相左而感到忐忑不安,但是他們的肢體語言卻表現得猶豫不決。及早察覺一個潛在的問題,並設法解決,這樣做的結果最差也隻會產生一種簡單的誤解,這與在生意上遭受災難性損失相比,其間的差異是不言而喻的。

注釋:
Perceiving a potential problem and dealing with it early can be the difference between a simple misunderstanding and a business disaster.
這句話實在是麻煩至極。

直譯:
及早察覺到一個潛在的問題,並設法去解決,可能就是在一個簡單的誤會和一次生意的災難之間存在的那種區別。

說了半天,無非就是說,是否及早察覺到一個問題並設法去解決,這會產生不同結果的。而這不同的結果,就是兩種,第一種,最多產生一些簡單的誤會;第二種,就是在生意上遭受災難性損失。

6. Upward inflections: We upwardly inflect our words when asking a question. You may have noticed that some salespeople will upwardly inflect certain statements of fact. This is a red flag that should alert you to potential deception. The salesman might say, "Your competitors have seen their profit margins increase by 30 percent by using our product." If you notice that he upwardly inflected the words, "30 percent," you should disregard this statistic and be suspicious of him altogether.

6.提升語調:
我們提問題的時候要提升語調。你可能會注意到,一些推銷員在陳述某種情況的時候會提升語調。這是一麵紅旗,它應該提醒你警惕潛在的欺騙。推銷員可能會說:“你的競爭者已經看到,通過采用我們的產品,他們的利潤增長幅度是30%。”如果你注意到他說30%的時候是在提升語調,那你就應該對這個統計數字置之不理,完全可以對它產生懷疑。

7. Stabbed hollows: In the study of graphology--or handwriting analysis--hollow letters represent honesty. Anything that disrupts a hollow letter could indicate deception. Let's pretend you enter your office to find a note from your top salesman on your desk. His note indicates that he had to go out of town to visit his sick mother and won't be able to go to the annual trade show. You notice that every "o" in his note has some sort of mark interjected into the hollow space of each letter. You would be right to be suspicious of the facts in the note and a phone call or meeting would likely expose some sort of deception.

7。受創空洞:
在研究字跡學 – 或者書法分析 – 的時候,就會發現空洞型的字母代表著誠信。任何損傷空洞型字母的東西,都能表明欺騙。讓我們假設你進入自己的辦公室,在你的辦公桌上發現一張出自你首席推銷員之手的便條。他的便條顯示他不得不到城外去看望自己生病的母親,無法趕回來參加年度貿易大展。你注意到他在便條中每一個"o"字母所流露的情感,在通篇每個字母之間的空檔中也都有跡可尋。你如果懷疑在這張便條裏所提到的事情,那你就是對的,而在一通電話,或者一次會麵中,任何欺騙都可能會露出馬腳。

注釋:
Stabbed hollows,受創空洞。stab,刺傷;情感受創。通讀全段,我理解這個詞的含義是指感情受創後的傷感在空洞型字母中有所流露。這條讀起來有點玄乎,兜了半天圈子似乎不知所雲。通讀全段,基本意思無非就是說,一個人在騙人的時候,連寫出的字都不同尋常,換言之,就是能從說謊者的字裏行間嗅探出騙人的蛛絲馬跡。

With some practice, these new awareness tools will give you greater confidence in your perceptive ability and new peace of mind when deciding to trust others.

經過一些練習,這些新的認識工具將會在洞察力方麵給予你很大的信心,在你決定是否信任他人的時候,使你操持平和的心態。

Ken Osborn is the founder and executive director of The CIA Institute in Corona, California. He has taught hundreds of deception awareness seminars and workshops including the popular Liar, Liar, Pants on Fire!!! Workshop and is the author of A Pack of Lies, a flash card system designed to teach someone to instantly recognize 50 common deceptive cues. He may be reached at getcia@aol.com.

肯。奧斯本是加州科羅納中情局研究所創始人和執行主任。他曾向數百個識別騙術的研討會及研習班傳授經驗,其中包括廣受歡迎的那個名曰“騙子,騙子,褲子著火了! ! !”的研習班。他也是《謊話一籮筐》(A Pack of Lies)一書的作者,此書堪稱閃光信號卡係統(flash card system),設計的目的就是教人們不斷地去識別50種常見的行騙暗示性線索。通過getcia@aol.com .可以查到他的相關資料。

題外話:

本文中有些詞句的確切含義還摸得不太準,如第7個stabbed hollows等,但這篇文章挺有意思,即便這最後一條不十分清楚,其它各條還很有可讀性和趣味性,所以翻譯發表在此,希望行家批評指正。謝謝。(譯者)


Source: 宋德利利: 美語世界: http://web.wenxuecity.com/BBSView.php?SubID=mysj&MsgID=12978
[ 打印 ]
閱讀 ()評論 (0)
評論
目前還沒有任何評論
登錄後才可評論.