關於 backed up意思 ，我們在網路上蒐集到這些相關的討論、資訊與評價

「每日英文閱讀分享#010」​
​
今天的文章：Abandoning Globalization Will Only Hurt U.S. Businesses，標題已經完全道盡作者的想法，但是他舉出了四點，為什麼deglobalization對於美國是有害的，一樣會把連結附在下面喔！​
（再度預告，本週會整理跟international business相關的報導一起做講解，希望可以也跟大家有些討論～）​
​
回到今天的單字，​
「decouple」分享的原因，是因為用拆解的方法來看，這個字就是「不當情侶了」感覺很可愛（還是很悲傷？），卻是一個正式的商業用字。​
​
動詞意思是：to ​ separate ​ two or more things or ​ activities, or to ​ become ​ separated，​
當作名詞時會變成「decoupling」意思為：a situation in which two or more activities are separated, or do not develop in the same way
​
常用的動詞用法為：decouple (sth) from sth ​
例句：Europe and Japan might decouple from the United States by growing on their own, but right now they're dependent.​ --Cambridge Dictionary
​
再給大家一個用於國家的例句給大家看看：Tractors that haul Mexican-made goods to American consumers must decouple from their trailers on the Mexican side.​ --Cambridge Dictionary
​
或是用在公司之間：Zhang also began trying to decouple the company’s technology from China, and has pointed out that all the data on U.S. TikTok users is stored in the United States and backed up in Singapore. — Washington Post, "TikTok’s fate was shaped by a ‘knockdown, drag-out’ Oval Office brawl," 8 Aug. 2020​
​
就是沒有用於分手的用法（期望落空中ＸＤ）​
​
最後還是正經一點附上原文的例句：​
1. Coming on the heels of the trade war and Washington’s push to de-couple economically from China, this has brought widespread predictions of deglobalization.​
​
2. They know that deglobalization of supply chains and de-coupling from China will actually reduce their ability to produce in the U.S. and compete with Chinese companies in the long run. ​
​
歡迎大家與我一起養成閱讀（或發文）習慣～～

#言之有物​
#英語學習​
#商業英文​
#BusinessEnglish​
#InternationalBusiness​
#Globalization ​
#每日英文閱讀分享​
#一起來建立英文閱讀習慣吧

【專題訪問 Interview Feature】2019年度香港大學學生會周年大選中央幹事會候選内閣蒼傲訪問（外務篇） | Interview with Prism, the Proposed Cabinet of Executive Committee, The Hong Kong University Students’ Union of Annual Election 2019 (External Affairs)

(Please scroll down for English version.)

中央幹事會候選內閣蒼傲就外務議題接受本台訪問，就不同外務議題立場，包括不反對政府取締民族黨的原因、相信政府DQ議員合法的理據、初一事件有黑幫介入的看法、及對法律制度有信心的理由等發表意見。

訪問節錄如下：

1. 你們的政治光譜/政治立場是甚麼？
我們認為用現有的名詞並不能表達我們莊的政治立場，因為例如本土、港獨等，第一他們並沒有清晰的界定，或是社會一致的定義，我們都認為不論是政治光譜或是政治立場我們作為香港人或是香港接受教育的人，其實我們的立場都會傾向由香港出發。但由香港出發去考慮香港利益時，我們都要考慮時間軸。時間軸的意思是，我們到底在考慮短期還是長期的利益。加上香港的地理位置、經濟結構其實都十分依賴世界上大部份的國家，不論金融、出口產業，所以在考慮香港利益同時，我們都應考慮鄰近國家的政策、議案的推出。所以如果要用幾個字去形容我們的政治立場，我們會選擇「國際視野，本土出發」八個字。前者是考想利益的角度,後者是執行的角度。

2. 你們是否支持香港獨立？
首先我們認為它可以被自由地討論，特別是在大學之內。至於是否贊成香港獨立方面，港獨並非香港現時可執行最好的決策，因為尚有很多的選擇可加以考慮及討論。另外我認為香港內部的問題都非常嚴峻，例如我們在政綱小册子上提到的外務議題，如學生自殺、高樓價、創新科技嚴重落後等問題。這些都是我們內部必須解決和面對的問題，所以我們會將那些內部問題列為最優先需要處理的問題。

3. 你們覺得香港獨立是否合法？
我們認為任何符合法例的討論都是可被接受的，所以我們認為只要某個人或團體在現時完善的法律制度下，加上沒有違反法律，就應可就不同議題提出想法。

4. 你們是否同意香港政府取締香港民族黨？
首先我們相信香港的法治仍然相當完善，所以就香港一套完整司法制度體系下做出的判決，我們並沒有太多質疑或反對。對於民族黨被政府取締或禁止，社會上有不同聲音，但我們相信我們應遵守絕大部分香港市民都認同是完善的法律體系下作出的任何決策。

5. 你們是否同意香港政府DQ議員？
其實我們由始至終都相信，而坊間一些調查機構都指出香港的法治制度在世界上都名列前茅，所以我們相信這套法治制度可以帶來公平的審訊，所以對於有部分議員被DQ，我們願意相信整個判決過程是公平的，並且有足夠理據去支持政府所作的判決，所以我們對這件事沒有任何特別意見。

6. 你們是否支持人大釋法？
每一個法律的訂立，其實都是由一小部分的精英去開始建構框架，然後隨社會的進步不斷完善。所以法律並非一本已經印刷好的書，而是容許我們不斷修改、去完善，就一些前人的不足作補完。人大釋法亦都如是，我相信重點是我們希望這法列在微調後能得到愈來愈多香港人的支持，這才是一個成功的新詮釋。

7. 你們是否同意一國兩制？
我們支持所有在香港回歸時所簽訂的條文，其中當然包括一國兩制。

8. 你們是否支持國歌法和23條立法？
因為爭議聲非常之多，所以我們不希望對任何未實施或未明文規定的法例作出過多評論。這是對該法案有所偏頗，該法案到最後還有很多相議的空間，所以我們認為政府應充分考慮各種聲音，從而推出一條為大部分港人所接受的法例。

9. 你們對違法達義有何看法？
香港作為擁有完善法律的城市，任何人都有表達訴求或是行動的權利。我們主張每人都有自由去決定自己的事、想表達的聲音，但每人都應為這些行為勇敢承擔相認的法律責任。當然我們更相信這套法律體系是完善和公平的。

10. 你們對初一事件有何看法？
對旺角騷動，很多報紙傳媒都報道了有不法份子甚至黑社會的介入，所以旺角騷動的那一批示威者是否單純為表達而表達的市民呢？

11. 你們是否同意政府以暴動罪控告參與者？
就對這幾名人士進行拘捕的行為，我們希望香港政府有真憑實據去支持，以及整個審訊過程認該要公平。我希望他們得到公平的審訊。

Campus TV has interviewed with Prism, the Proposed Cabinet of Executive Committee, The Hong Kong University Students’ Union, Session 2019, with regards to their treatment of external affairs. Prism has expressed their stance and opinions on various external issues, which include: their not opposing the Hong Kong government’s banning of the Hong Kong National Party, believing in the government’s legitimacy for the disqualification of legislators, believing in the involvement of gangs in the Mong Kok Incident of 2016, and expressing their confidence in the current legal system.

The interview excerpts are as follows:

1. Where do you stand on the political spectrum? / How would you define your political stance?
We believe the current word items are unable to express our Cabinet’s political stance. For example, if you consider the term localism or Hong Kong independence, these groups have not a clear boundary or universal definition given by the society. Whether it be the political spectrum or political stance, us who are Hong Kong-ers or who have been educated in Hong Kong, have a tendency to think from the standpoint of Hong Kong. If we consider the benefits from the standpoint of Hong Kong, we also need to consider the timeline. This (the timeline) means, that we should consider if these benefits are of short term or long term. Therefore, when considering Hong Kong’s benefits, we should also consider the policies and bills of neighbouring countries. Therefore, if we had to define our political stance in terms, it would be “international perspective that comes from a local standpoint”. The former is a consideration to the benefits, the latter is a consideration to the execution.

2. Do you support Hong Kong independence?
Firstly, we think this matter could be discussed freely, especially within the premises of the University. In terms of agreeing with Hong Kong independence, we think that Hong Kong independence is currently not the best option to be executed in Hong Kong, because there are still many other options to consider and discuss about. In addition, I think that Hong Kong’s internal affairs are very severe, like the external affairs that are mentioned in our campaign booklet, for example, students’ suicides, rising property prices, the severely outdated innovation and technology. These are problems that our internal department has to confront and resolve, therefore we put these internal affairs as our priority.

3. Do you think that Hong Kong independence is legal?
We believe any discussion that is in compliance with the law is acceptable. Therefore, we think that under the current, comprehensive legal system, with no breaching of the law, a person or group should be allowed to speak their thoughts on different issues.

4. Do you agree with Hong Kong government’s banning of the Hong Kong National Party?
Firstly, we believe that Hong Kong’s rule of law is still quite comprehensive. Therefore, we do not have much hesitation nor opposition for a judgment that is based on what we consider to be an intact judicial system of Hong Kong. In terms of the banning of the Hong Kong National Party, the society has different voices, but we believe we ought to obey the judgment that comes from what the majority of Hong Kong considers to be a comprehensive legal system.

5. Do you agree with Hong Kong government’s disqualification of legislators?
Actually, we have since the very beginning believed in Hong Kong’s rule of law as quite a frontrunner in the world; this has been backed by some survey organisations within the community too, so we believe that this rule of law can bring out a fair trial. Therefore, in regards to the disqualification of some legislators, we willingly believe that the entirety of the judgment process has been fair, with sufficient arguments to back up the government’s verdict. We do not express any special opinions towards this incident.

6. Do you support the Standing Committee of the National People's Congress’ Interpretation of the Basic Law (SCNPC's Interpretation of BL, or Interpretation of the Basic Law by the SCNPC)?
For the enactment of every legislation, it starts from a small portion of elites that begin to build its (the legislation’s) framework, it then continues to be improved as society grows. For this reason, the law is not a printed book, it allows us to continually amend, better, and complete items that are left neglected or faulted by predecessors. This applies for the SCNPC's Interpretation of BL, I believe the most important thing is, we hope to gain more Hong Kong-ers’ support under these fine-tunings (by the SCNPC's Interpretation of BL), we think this is what counts as a successful re-interpretation of the law.

7. Do you agree with the constitutional principle of “one country, two systems”?
We support all the terms that were signed in the Handover of Hong Kong, and this definitely includes the principle of “one country, two systems”.

8. Do you support the National Anthem Bill and the enactment of Article 23?
Due to the many controversies on this matter, we do not wish to comment on any legislation that has yet to be implemented or stipulated in explicit terms. This would be a prejudice on the said bill(s). These bills still have a lot of room for negotiation, so we believe the government should consider different voices, so as to introduce a legislation that is accepted by the majority of Hong Kong-ers.

9. What are your views on the idea of achieving justice by violating the law?
Hong Kong is a city with a comprehensive legal system; anyone has the right to express their own appeal or action. We advocate that everyone has the freedom to decide for their own deeds and express their own thoughts, but everyone should also be responsible to bear the consequences of their actions. Needless to say, we definitely believe that our legal system is perfect and fair.

10. What are your views on the Mong Kok Incident in 2016?
With regards to the Mong Kok unrest, many media sources have reported about the involvement of many illegal parties, and even that of gangs or triads. So, are the demonstrators in the Mong Kok unrest really with pure intentions to speak up, for the sake of expressing themselves as Hong Kong citizens?

11. Do you agree with the government’s decision to charge participants (of the Mong Kok Incident in 2016) with the offence of rioting?
With regards to the arrest of those participants, we hope that the Hong Kong government has had solid evidence to support (their arrest), and that the trial process has been fair. I hope they receive a fair trial.
___________________________________

二零一九年度香港大學學生會周年大選其他候選人包括候選常務秘書麥嘉晉、校園電視候選內閣、學苑候選編輯委員會及候選普選評議員。

2019年度周年大選中央諮詢大會將於一月二十一日至一月二十五日在中山廣場舉行，時間為下午十二時半至二時半。

Other candidates for the Annual Election 2019 include the Proposed General Secretary Mak Ka Chun Eugene, the Proposed Cabinet of Campus TV, the Proposed Editorial Board of Undergrad, and the Proposed Popularly Elected Union Councillor.

The Central Campaign for Annual Election 2019 will be held from the 21st to 25th of January at the Sun Yat-sen Place, from 12:30 to 14:30.

新書《資本思維的瘋狂矛盾: 大衛哈維新解馬克思與資本論》(Marx, Capital and the Madness of Economic Reason)翻譯初窺

看蘇正隆先生談翻譯字數計酬的事，想到最近發現的一個極端例子。

最近出版的David Harvey新書中譯《資本思維的瘋狂矛盾》，譯者認真寫了譯序談他的翻譯手法，看到這是位沒聽過的新進譯者，感覺新鮮也充滿期待，於是好奇上網試讀。看了序文約40%內容的英文和中譯，頭一大印象是：行文實在太過累贅。於是難得雞婆算了算字數，發現其中譯字數是英文原文的2.27倍，是罕見的超高比例，難怪讀起來有累贅感，我認為英譯中的中文除以英文字數比例若在1.8--2.05，屬正常範圍，蘇先生所說的1.66倍，應該極為罕見，或許屬於意思從簡或不怕用文言的那種中譯。

如果行文累贅，但翻譯忠實精準，出版社付錢開心，讀者受益，對這種個人風格，我便無從置喙。不過這位譯者更大的問題是：彷彿只是拿原文當參考，重新寫作，內容多有不甚精準和超譯處，小地方如daily變成「無所不在」，再來如incomplete變成「未完成」，對做一件事obsessed變成「對自己的工作深深『著迷』」，intricate arguments變成「嚴謹」，還有where the imposing figure of Hegel dominates backed up by Spinoza, Kant and a host of other thinkers這半句的意思，黑格爾變成「最後的集大成者」，再舉序文第二段最後一整句話為例：

// Add the French socialist thinkers, such as Saint-Simon, Fourier, Proudhon and Cabet into the mix, and the huge canvas upon which Marx sought to construct his oeuvre becomes intimidatingly apparent. // (30字)

原譯：
// 除此之外，構成馬克思理論支柱的還有法國社會主義思想，這個學說的代表有聖西門、傅立葉、普魯東以及卡貝等人。將這些思想流派兜在一起，似乎可以窺見一點馬克思鉅著的端倪了。// (82字 / 30 = 2.73)

單單這句，字數比高達2.73，因為譯者喜歡這樣加添一些文字：

構成馬克思理論支柱的還有……
似乎可以窺見一點……

難怪造成字數比例大大超標。原文intimidatingly apparent翻譯後apparent竟變成意思相反的「窺見一點端倪」。而用了那麼多字，偏偏intimidatingly意思卻不見了，canvas的比喻也沒了。所以說簡直不是在翻譯了。

David Harvey此書序文，英文簡明易懂，翻譯卻過度自由揮灑，變成像在寫作自己的文章，正文的翻譯，能否忠實準確少誤地呈現作者說的話而不加油添醋，讓人不抱太大希望。

此句試改譯：

再加上聖西門、傅立葉、普魯東以及卡貝等法國社會主義思想家，馬克思創作鉅著的畫布規模之宏大，便昭然而可畏。
(52字 / 30 = 1.73)

從這個小例子可見，要達到1.73這樣低的中文字數比例，又不過分減省重要意思（此處省去了無關緊要的sought to），是無法不使用一點文言的，以單字或頂多雙字詞取代很多譯者偏愛的四字語（四字比二字多賺一倍嘛）。完全使用白話文，如果能控制在不超過2.0，已屬難得。

我同意蘇先生的看法，認為翻譯酬勞應該以原文的字數計算，不要變相鼓勵行文風格繁冗的譯文。這位字數2.27倍的譯者（根據40%的序文採樣），按照現行按譯文字數計算的行規估計，酬勞比1.8--2.0倍的簡明譯者多了14%--26%。

——————

6/14 後記

有人認爲我的改譯也值得商榷，提出另一個改譯，在這裡回應。關於畫布和成品的差別，相信別人也有同樣的疑問。

引述：

// 既然說到canvas為比喻，沒可能又用畫布，畫布只是原材料，並非成為作品的油畫，這裡可以用「油畫」，或者用意譯「畫面」。另外，mix的較重要意思沒有了，當然也不得不用多幾個字。

我的譯法：「……馬克思再將聖西門、傳立葉、普魯東以及卡貝等法國社會主義思想家的思想融會在一起，構成了他鉅著的宏大畫面，顯然令人望而生畏。」 //

回應：

這句話，Harvey所讚歎、敬畏的，是馬克思構成鉅著的理論思想基礎（用空白的油畫布作比喻）有多麼廣大、巨大(the huge canvas ... became intimidatingly obvious)，obvious是主詞補語，形容主詞canvas，完全沒有說他完成的作品（用油畫、畫作、畫面作比喻）如何，改canvas為「畫面」(painting/picture……，使用任何暗示畫作已經完成的字眼)，就誤解了這英文，已非意譯了。

再來，「顯然令人望而生畏」也偏了，這樣寫，「顯然」(obviously)修飾「令人望而生畏」，但原意obvious是說The huge canvas is obvious. （巨大的畫布是顯而易見的 / 畫布顯然巨大），且「顯見畫布巨大」這事，令人生畏(intimidatingly obvious)。

如果堅持不要用「畫布」，或許可用「版面」，這倒還好，版面並未暗示已有成品出現，僅指規模範圍。紐馬克說，如果偏離直譯，最好有語義上的好理由。假如中文無法以畫布大小比喻創作規模，就可能是個好理由，但事實不然。

翻譯必然要基於從原文字義以及語法、句構兩方面來正確理解原意，缺一不可。在這個基礎上，譯者行文風格利落還是繁冗，是他的自由。

6/14 補充：

為免被誤會我因同時提到字數和內容兩件事，便是在暗示這位譯者刻意多寫幾個字以便多賺點譯酬，補充說明：

我認爲這譯者沒有刻意膨脹譯文的動機，他所寫恰是他的風格、是他所以為的翻譯的正當做法，累贅只是碰巧的結果。我前面已說了，字多不是此書翻譯的主要問題。

#HazbinHotel #666news

我並不擁有此影片 影片所有權歸屬於Vivziepop
I do NOT own this video, all rights goes to Vivziepop

贊助影片原作者,幫助她製作更多精彩的動畫!
贊助 HAZBIN HOTEL 的 PATREON 網址: https://www.patreon.com/VivienneMedrano
官方資訊欄的商品連結:
https://sharkrobot.com/collections/hazbin-hotel

原影片網址(Original Video Link):
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0OxnM9Mpvg0


這次這部影片來自Vivziepop這位作家的頻道,Hazbin Hotel將在2019年作為卡通播放! 大家可以好好期待了!
我很喜歡這種美式畫風的東西,發現的當下就決定要找個機會做這樣的影片了

採用雙語字幕方便我之後的註解
希望大家會喜歡!

上方的字幕 是 畫面下方的跑馬燈新聞內容 的翻譯

註解區:
0:09 hella就是"hell of a" 或 "hell of a lot"延伸出的現代用語
就是"非常"的意思
0:10 下一句也把梗解釋出來了XD 因為這部的背景就是地獄
在地獄的市中心塞車塞到不行 所以地域hell 然後又超級塞hella backed up
0:17 up for grabs 就是放出去給大家搶(大家都能去搶的)情況
0:20 duke it out 有激烈爭鬥(大打出手)這類的意思
0:27 fight tooth and nail 就是拚盡全力
0:30 恩... 一點黃腔 不解釋XD
0:33 limp dick 通常是罵人軟屌 陽痿不能勃起這類的
0:36 她把熱咖啡倒下去 不軟也軟了w
這邊就是先說完"你這陽痿小渾蛋" 然後倒熱咖啡 "還是我該說? 沒屌了?"
這裡我頑皮了一下XD 翻成"屌 不起來 了齁" 偷偷雙關一下哈哈


也希望大家能多多支持我們翻譯組!
訂閱頻道追蹤更多我們的影片!
關於我們翻譯組: https://home.gamer.com.tw/creationDetail.php?sn=4035888
動畫與額外翻譯的網誌:https://weedtrouble.blogspot.com/
我們的Twitter: https://twitter.com/TransWeed

片尾音樂來源:
Track: Janji - Heroes Tonight (feat. Johnning) [NCS Release]
Music provided by NoCopyrightSounds.
Watch: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3nQNiWdeH2Q
Free Download / Stream: http://ncs.io/ht