《宋氏快譯》英漢對照 (15):謠言惑眾,勝過真相
(2007-11-08 08:19:33)
下一個
《宋氏快譯》英漢對照 (15):謠言惑眾,勝過真相
Gossip more powerful than truth, researchers say
By Michael Kahn
流言蜚語的力量勝過真相
邁克爾。卡恩 文 宋德利 譯
LONDON (Reuters) - Gossip is more powerful than truth, a study showed on Monday, suggesting people believe what they hear through the grapevine even if they have evidence to the contrary.
倫敦(路透社)
流言蜚語的效力要比真相大得多,周一展示的一次調研顯示,人就是相信通過流言蜚語得知的小道消息,即便他們有與之相反的證據,也依然如此。
Researchers, testing students using a computer game, also found gossip played an important role when people make decisions, said Ralf Sommerfeld, an evolutionary biologist at the Max Planck Institute in Germany, who led the study.
調查者們利用一種電腦遊戲來測試學生,結果也發現,人們在做決定的時候,流言蜚語起到一種很重要的作用,拉爾夫。薩莫菲爾德說。此人是德國馬克斯。普蘭克學院一名進化論生物學家,就是他主持了這次調查。
"We show that gossip has a strong influence... even when participants have access to the original information as well as gossip about the same information," the researchers wrote in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.
“我們可以證明流言蜚語具有很強大的影響力。。。即便在參與調查者既能獲取原始信息,也能獲取與原始信息相關的流言蜚語的時候(也是如此),”調查者在國家科學院的法律程序裏裏這樣寫道。
注釋:
這句話比較費解。意思是說,我們什麽時候都能證明流言蜚語的確具有很強的影響力。。。即便當參與調查的人麵臨兩種截然不同的信息時也不例外,這兩種信息,一種是真實情況,另一種就是關於這種真實情況的流言蜚語。具體講就是即便真相就在眼前,流言蜚語卻依然在發揮巨大影響力,以致參與者麵對真相卻寧願相信流言蜚語。此種影響力何其大哉!
"Thus, it is evident that gossip has a strong manipulative potential."
“因此,流言蜚語顯然具有一種很強的支配性潛力。
In the study, the researchers gave the students money and allowed them to give it to others in a series of rounds. The students also wrote notes about how others played the game that everyone could review.
在調查中,調查人員把錢交給學生,允許他們把這些錢再交給別人,如此循環往複。學生也記筆記,記述別人如何玩這個任何人都可以監督檢查的遊戲。
Students tended to give less money to people described as "nasty misers" or "scrooges" and more to those depicted as "generous players" or "social players," Sommerfeld said.
學生們都趨向於對那些被描述成為“令人厭惡的守財奴”或“吝嗇鬼”的人給錢少,對那些“大方的玩家”給錢多,薩莫菲爾德說。
注釋:本段的關鍵詞是“被描述的described”,因為它顯示隨後提到的“令人厭惡的守財奴”或“吝嗇鬼”的人,都不是真實的,是被“流言蜚語”描述成的。
隻有理解這一點,對下文才能理解。
"People only saw the gossip, not the past decisions," he said in a telephone interview. "People really reacted on it."
“人們隻看到流言蜚語,而沒看到早已成為過去的決定,”他在一次電話采訪中說。“人們的確對流言蜚語產生了影響。”
注釋:第一句話也比較費解。意思是說,被調查者隻見物不見人。隻看到流言蜚語這一麵,卻忽視散布者做出散布流言蜚語的決定。再進一步說,就是做這種決定的真實目的,或險惡用心。the past decisions,早已成為過去的決定。人們在做出散布流言蜚語這個實質性動作之前,先要有這樣做的打算,也就是決定,先要決定去做,第二步才能有行動。從先後順序來將,決定當然在行動之前,這就是past的含義。
The researchers then took the game a step further and showed the students the actual decisions people had made. But they also supplied false gossip that contradicted that evidence.
之後,調查人員將遊戲做得更進一步,將人們所做的實際決定展示給學生。但是他們也提供一些與證據相矛盾的假流言蜚語。
In these cases, the students based their decisions to award money on the gossip, rather than the hard evidence, showing such information is a powerful tool, Sommerfeld said.
在這些情況中,學生們決定把錢交給誰,完全根據流言蜚語,而不是確鑿的證據,這也同樣顯示了這種信息是一種有力的工具,薩莫菲爾德說。
"Rationally if you know what the people did, you should care, but they still listened to what others said," he said.
“按常理說,如果你知道人們的所作所為,你就應該加小心,但(實際上)他們依然聽了別人的話,”他說。
"They even reacted on it if they knew better."
“如果他們了解的情況更好的話,他們甚至會對此產生影響。”
Researchers have long used similar games to study how people cooperate and the impact of gossip in groups. Scientists define gossip as social information spread about a person who is not present, Sommerfeld said.
調查者長期以來一直在利用類似的遊戲分組研究人們如何合作,以及流言蜚語的影響。科學家將流言蜚語定義成“散布給一個不在場者的社會信息”,薩莫菲爾德說。
In evolutionary terms, gossip can be an important tool for people to acquire information about others' reputations or navigate through social networks at work and in their everyday lives, the study said.
研究表明,用進化論的術語講,流言蜚語可以是人們在日常生活中通過社交網絡獲取他人信譽或進行社交活動的一種十分重要的工具。
One example could be using gossip to learn that a potential mate had cheated on others, something which could make that person an undesirable match, Sommerfeld said.
直譯:
其中一例就可以是,利用流言蜚語來得知一位潛在的夥伴已經欺騙過他人,這種做法就可以使那個人成為一個不理想的夥伴,薩莫菲爾德說。
意譯:
其中一例就可以是,利用流言蜚語來得知一位有可能成為夥伴的人已經欺騙過他人,這種做法就可以證明那個人並不是一個理想的夥伴,薩莫菲爾德說。
譯後語:
這是一篇調查報告,科研味道比較濃,譯完後覺得不太精彩。有的地方顯得空洞,甚至有不知所雲之感。但既然已經譯出來,還是發出來吧。不過我已經盡可能多地、盡可能詳細地加以注釋。翻譯就是這樣,有時開始覺得不錯,但後來越譯越覺得不值得花時間譯,但有時因為時間與精力都已花了很多,故而有騎虎難下之感。如果文章短小,則棄不惜,而如果篇幅很長,則很難辦。這種情況,我經常遇到,恐怕其他譯者也不會沒有遇到過。