2023年韩素音国际翻译大赛往届参考译文（3）
时间：2023-04-17 15:00 浏览：次
第二十九届韩素音翻译比赛原文与参考译文
英译汉竞赛原文
The Concept of Intelligence in Cross-cultural Perspectives
[1]One of the positive outcomes from so much research on the relationship between culture and intelligence is an expanded view of what intelligence may be, and how it may be conceptually related to culture.This issue is intricately intertwined with cross-cultural research on intelligence because one of the possible confounding factors in previous studiesthat documented cultural differences has been cultural differences inthe very concept and meaning of intelligence.
[2]Researchers in this area have discovered that many languages have no word that corresponds to our idea of intelligence. The closest Mandarin equivalent, for instance, is a Chinese character that means“goodbrain and talented”. Chinese people often associate this concept with traits such as imitation, effort, and social responsibility. Such traits do not constitute important elements of the concept of intelligence for most Americans.
[3]African cultures provide a number of examples. The Baganda of East Africa use the word obugezi to refer to a combination of mental and social skills that make a person steady, cautious, and friendly. The Djerma-Songhai in West Africa use the term akkal, which has an even broader meaning – a combination of intelligence, know-how, and social skills. Still another society, the Baoule, uses the term n’glouele, which describes children who are not onlymentally alert but also willing to volunteer their services without being asked.
[4]Because of the enormous differences in the ways cultures define intelligence, it is difficult to make valid comparisons from one society to another. That is, different cultures value different traits(their definition of“intelligence”) and have divergent views concerningwhich traits are useful in predicting future important behaviors (also culturally defined). People in different cultures not only disagree about what constitutes intelligence but also about the proper way to demonstrate those abilities. In mainstream North American society, individuals are typically rewarded for displaying knowledge and skills. This same behavior may be considered improper,arrogant, or rude in societies that stress personal relationships, cooperation,and modesty.
[5]These differences are important to cross-cultural studies of intelligence because successful performance on a task of intelligence may require behavior that is considered immodest and arrogant in CultureA (and therefore only reluctantly displayed by members of Culture A)but desirable in Culture B (and therefore readily displayed by members of Culture B). Clearly, such different attitudes toward the same behavior could lead researchers to draw inaccurate conclusions about differences in intelligence between Culture A and Culture B.
[6]Another reason it is difficult to compare intelligence cross-culturally is that tests of intelligence often rely on knowledge that is specific to a particular culture; investigators based in that culture may not even know what to test for in a different culture. For example,one U.S. intelligence test contains the following question:“How does a violin resemblea piano?”Clearly, this question assumes prior knowledge about violins and pianos – quite a reasonable expectation for middle-class Americans, but not for people from cultures that usedifferent musical instruments.
[7]Our expanding knowledge about cultural differences in the concept of intelligence has had important ramifications for our theoretical understanding of intelligence in mainstream American psychology as well. Although traditional thinking and reasoning abilities havedominated views of intelligence in the past, in recent years psychologists have begun to turntheir attention to other possible aspects of intelligence. Until very recently, for example, creativity was not considered a part of intelligence;now, however, psychologists are increasingly considering this important human ability as a type of intelligence. Other aspects of intelligence are also coming to the forefront. A psychologist has suggested that there arereally seven different types of intelligence: logical mathematical, linguistic,musical, spatial, bodily kinesthetic, interpersonal, and intrapersonal.According to this scheme, not only do the core components of each of these seven types of intelligence differ, but so do some sample end-states (such as mathematician versus dancer). His theory of multiple intelligenceshas broadened our understanding of intelligence to include other areas besides“booksmarts”.
[8]Perhaps the field is coming to realize that intelligence in its broadest sense may be more aptly defined as“the skills and abilities necessary to effectively accomplish cultural goals”. If your culture’s goals, for example, involve successfully pursuing a professionaloccupation with a good salary in order to support yourself and your family, that culture willfoster a view of intelligence that incorporates cognitive and emotional skills and abilities that allow for pursuing such an occupation. Those skills and abilities may include deductive reasoning, logical thought, verbal and mathematical skills – the sorts of skills that are fostered in contemporary American culture. If your culture’s goals, however,focus more on the development and maintenance of successful interpersonal relationships, working with nature, or hunting and gathering, intelligence will more aptly be viewed as the skills and abilities related to such activities.
[9]On one level, therefore, people of all cultures share a similar view of intelligence – a catchall concept that summarizes the skills and abilities necessary to live effectively in one’s culture. At the same time,however, cultural differences naturally exist because of differences in how cultures define goals and skills and abilities needed to achieve those goals.Future research will need to delve into these dual processes, searching for commonalities as well as differences across cultures and exploring what contextual variables affect intelligence-related behaviors, and why.
[10]Awareness of cultural differences in intelligence raises difficult questions concerning testing and the use of test scores.Should bias in testing be eliminated at the expense of the predictive validity of the test? Many educational institutions and business organizations today face this difficult question, which is compounded by legal ramifications and the constant threat of litigation. Perhaps we need to give consideration to yet another aspect of intelligence – that is, our attitudes regarding intelligence. A cross-cultural understandingof differences in the definitions and processes of intelligence should help to deepen our appreciation and respect for cultures different from our own, and help us to find similarities as well as differences among people.
跨文化视阈中的“智力”概念
[1] 关于智力和文化的关系，人们做了大量 研究，其中一项积极成果是人们对何为“智力” 以及“智力与文化在概念上的关系”加深了认识。这一问题与智力的跨文化研究错综复杂地纠结 在一起。以往文化差异研究的记录中存在某种 可能的不确定因素，而智力概念及其涵义本身 就存在文化差异。
[2] 该专业的研究者发现，许多语言没有与 我们英语中“intelligence”（智力）概念相对应 的词语。例如，汉语普通话中最接近的汉字意 思为“智”（天资聪慧），中国人还常把这一概 念与善于模仿、勤奋努力及富有社会责任等相 关联，而这些特征对于大部分美国人来讲，并非 “intelligence”概念的主要因素。
[3] 非洲文化中有许多这样的例子：东非的 巴干达人使用的“欧布盖茨”（obugezi）一语， 指的是使人沉着、慎重、友善等的心智与社交能 力；西非的松海人的“阿卡尔”（akkal）有着更 为宽泛的涵义，即包括智力、专门知识及社交技 能。在巴乌莱族社会里，“恩格娄尔”（n’glouele） 术语用来形容才智敏捷、乐于助人的儿童。
[4] 正因为不同的文化对于“智力”有着非 常不同的界定方式，所以很难在不同社会中对 此作出有效的比较；即不同文化对其所定义的 “智力”有不同的侧重，而且对于哪些特质在预 测未来重要行为（不同的文化对此也有不同的 定义）发挥作用，亦有分歧。不同文化中的人 们不仅对于构成智力的因素、而且对于如何以 适当方式展示这种能力，有着不同的理解。在 北美主流社会，体现个人的知识和技能通常会 得到人们的褒奖，而在交往至上、合作是金、谦 虚为本的社会里，同样的行为则会被认为是不 得体、傲慢或无礼的。
[5] 这些差异对于智力的跨文化研究是重要 的，因为成功地完成智力任务需要某种行为，而 这种行为在某种文化中被认为是自负、傲慢的， 因而该文化成员不愿为之，但在另一种文化中， 可能被认为是恰当的，因而人们乐意为之。显 然，这种对于同样行为的不同态度，使得研究者 对两种文化中的智力差异，得出不准确的结论。
[6] 从跨文化视角对智力进行研究难以作出 比较的另一原因，是对于智力的测验通常依据有 某种特定文化涵义的知识，而来自某一文化的研 究者甚至不知道对不同文化的人应当测试什么 内容。例如，在美国的智力测试中有一项：“小 提琴与钢琴是否有相似之处？”显然，该问题基 于被测试者具有小提琴和钢琴方面的知识，这对 于美国的中产阶级来讲完全合情合理，但对于其 他文化中使用不同乐器的人来讲，则不然。
[7] 对“智力”概念中文化差异认识的不断 加深，对于我们在理论层面理解美国主流心理学 的“智力”探究，同样具有重要意义。过去，尽 管传统思维和推理能力在智力的认识上占据主 导地位，但近年来心理学家们已将其注意力转向 了智力的其他可能的研究方向。例如，直到近期， 创造性还未被视为智力的一部分，但现在心理学 家则更倾向将这种重要能力作为一种智力类型。智力的其他方面也成为前沿研究领域。有位心 理学家认为，智力有七种不同的类型：逻辑数理、 语言才能、音乐感知、时空想象、运动智能、人 际关系及自我反省。根据这种智力结构，不仅构 成七种智力类型的核心要素不同，而且其范式的 “终极形态”（如数学家对比舞蹈家）也是不同的。这种“多元智能”理论，包括了“书本智慧”以 外的领域，从而拓展了我们对于智力的理解。
[8] 心理学的研究或许可以在最广义上将 “智力”定义为“有效实现文化目标所需的技 能”。例如，如果你的文化目标是成功地从事专 业工作，挣到体面的工资以养家过日，那么这种 文化所崇尚的智力便是足以从事这种专业的认 知能力和情商，包括推理演绎、逻辑思维、语言 及数学技能等—这些都是当代美国文化所崇尚 的。但是，如果你的文化目标是维护和发展人 际关系、与自然打交道、狩猎、采集等，则智力 更宜从与这些活动相关的技能来审视。
[9] 因此，一方面，对于“智力”，具有各种 文化背景的人会有着某些相似的认知，认为这 是个庞杂的概念，包括有效从事其文化活动所需的各种技能；另一方面，因不同文化如何定 义其目标及达到这些目标的技能不同，所以文 化差异自然存在。未来应深入研究不同文化面 的相同与差异形成的过程，探究影响“智力行 为”的相关要素及原因。
[10] 对于智力中文化差异的认识，提出了关 于测试和如何利用测试效绩的难题：是否应当 降低测试中的效度以避免主观判断中的文化偏见？许多教育机构和商业组织如今便面临这一 难题，稍有不慎，可能会承担法律后果和面对不 断的诉讼威胁。或许，我们应当考虑到智力的 另一方面，即我们对于智力的态度。对于智力 的不同定义和过程的跨文化理解，有助于加深 我们对不同文化的欣赏与尊重，发现人们之间 的共性与差异。
（集体讨论，林巍、赵友斌执笔）
汉译英竞赛原文
启蒙的真谛
[1]“启蒙”的本义是开启蒙昧，识字读书，明白事理。在中国古代，人们从小要接受“蒙学”，才能成为有教养的人，否则就是“教化未开”。据说，早年被启蒙到了什么程度，决定其日后可达到的智力高度。
[2]同样，人类社会从传统向现代转型的过程，也与启蒙相伴随；没有启蒙就没有现代化。
[3]然而，作为现代话语的“启蒙”，却源自于近代西方。在人类历史上，近代启蒙思想和启蒙运动首发于17世纪后期的英国，后传播到法国、德国等欧洲国家，波及北美，19世纪后期又影响到日本、中国等亚洲国家。
[4]正是由于西方有了洛克、斯密、伏尔泰、卢梭、狄德罗等启蒙思想家，才有了之后欧美的工业革命、市场经济和宪政体制。在中国，自晚清时期出现近代启蒙思想后，中国知识分子在“救亡图存”的背景下，借助西方近代思想，改造中国传统文化，塑造新型国民，引发了洋务运动、戊戌变法、新文化运动等。特别是在当代，1978年关于“实践是检验真理的唯一标准”的大讨论，极大地解放了人们的思想，带来了之后“改革开放”的巨大成果。由此，思想的力量可见一斑。
[5]长期以来，人们对于启蒙运动有一种误解，认为那是先知先觉的知识分子和哲人启发、教育、训导被启蒙者，因而“启蒙”成了及物动词，其宾语是未开化的芸芸众生。其实，根据现代启蒙思想家康德的解释，启蒙的本质不是“他启”而是“自觉”，即人们从由自我原因的不成熟状态（在缺乏指导下无力运用自我理性的状态）中觉醒，其根源并非是人们缺乏理性，而是缺乏对理性的运用。
[6]这种真知灼见至今闪烁着理性的光芒。
[7]在西方，启蒙思想的支撑源于人们对于客观规律的认知，如哥白尼的“日心说”、牛顿的“万有引力”、伽利略的“宇宙论”等，认为整个宇宙中的一切物体都遵守同一定律，进而冲破千年的宗教束缚，将这一理性思考引入了人类社会，从而开创了一个不断进取的新时代。在中国，几千年的封建农业社会，使得科技落后、法治传统缺乏，只是受到近代西方启蒙思想（包括马克思主义）的影响，才引入了科学、民主、法治的概念，开始与世界文明接轨。
[8]在这一历史大潮中，中国现在比历史上任何时期都更接近中华民族的伟大复兴。正如“一带一路”被越来越多的国家认识到不是中国的独角戏，而是沿途民族的大合唱，每个中国人对于客观与主观世界的深刻、自觉的理性开发，最终将汇集于前所未有的“中国梦”的实现。
（来源：《中国翻译》杂志2017年第1期）
The Essence of Enlightenment
[1] Originally, the “enlightenment” was to enlighten people by teaching them how to read and reason. In ancient China, from their childhood, people had to receive meng xue or private rudimentary education before they could become well-educated and avoid being labeled as “uncivilized”. It is said that how far any person can go intellectually in his or her life depends largely on how well they have been enlightened in their early days.
[2] Likewise, the transformation of a society from its traditional phase into a modern one is also impelled by enlightenment. In other words, without enlightenment there would have been no modernization.
[3] As a modern term, however, “enlightenment” originated in the modernizing West. In human history, enlightenment ideas and movements started in Britain in the late 17th century, and then spread to France, Germany and other European countries as well as North America. By the late 19th century, some Asian countries such as Japan and China had also been influenced.
[4] It was the mobilization of some enlightenment thinkers in the West, represented by Locke, Smith, Voltaire, Rousseau and Diderot that bred the Industrial Revolution, market economy and constitutionalism in Europe and America. In China, influenced by the West, enlightenment ideas occurred as early as the late Qing Dynasty, when Chinese intellectuals carried out the mission of transforming traditional Chinese culture, remoulding its people for the sake of saving China. This resulted in a westernization drive, the Reform Movement of 1898, and the New Cultural Movement. As far as current affairs were concerned, the mass debate in 1978 on “Practice is the sole criterion for testing truth” tremendously emancipated people from their ideological conf inement so as to bring about the enormous outcome of the “reform and opening up to the outside world”. In this, the power of ideas was clearly evident.
[5] The enlightenment has long been mistaken for a movement in which foresighted intellectuals inspired, informed and guided the populace (obviously, “enlighten” has been used as a transitive verb which takes the populace as its object). According to Kant, enlightenment does not in fact mean people have to be awakened by others but need to be able to wake up by themselves – emerging from their self-incurred immaturity which is the state where they are unable to use their own understanding without the guidance of another. And the cause does not lie in any lack of rationality but in an inability to reason.
[6] This insight radiates rationality even today.
[7] In the West, enlightenment is underpinned by the scientif ic truths, exemplif ied by Copernicus’ Heliocentric Theory, Newton’s Law of Universal Gravitation and Galileo’s Cosmology, and the belief that everything in the cosmos is ruled by a common universal law. Having breached a thousand years of religious bounds, they introduced rational thought into human society and ushered in a constantly progressive era. However, dominated by feudalist agriculture for thousands of years, Chinese society experienced sluggish development of science and technology and a barren legal tradition. It was not until modern times that China, under the influence of Western enlightenment ideas including Marxism, started to embrace modern ideas about science and technology, democracy and the rule of law, and to synchronize with the civilized world.
[8] Following this historical trend, China is now closer to its rejuvenation than at any other time in history. Just as more and more countries along the routes of “One Belt and One Road” have realized that this Program initiated by China is not a “monodrama” but a “cantata”, the unprecedented Chinese Dream, involving every Chinese person willing to carry out a serious exploration of rationality in both the objective and subjective worlds, will alternately come true as a collective achievement. （集体讨论，林巍、赵友斌执笔）
来源：《中国翻译》2017年第6期
添加竞赛获奖攻略群，更多大赛相关备考真题资料等群内直接领取~ http://cp.52jingsai.com/qrcode/6965（点击链接或扫描下方二维码码加群）  |
