今早為Asian Medical Students Association Hong Kong (AMSAHK)的新一屆執行委員會就職典禮作致詞分享嘉賓,題目為「疫情中的健康不公平」。
感謝他們的熱情款待以及為整段致詞拍了影片。以下我附上致詞的英文原稿:
It's been my honor to be invited to give the closing remarks for the Inauguration Ceremony for the incoming executive committee of the Asian Medical Students' Association Hong Kong (AMSAHK) this morning. A video has been taken for the remarks I made regarding health inequalities during the COVID-19 pandemic (big thanks to the student who withstood the soreness of her arm for holding the camera up for 15 minutes straight), and here's the transcript of the main body of the speech that goes with this video:
//The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, caused by the SARS-CoV-2 virus, continues to be rampant around the world since early 2020, resulting in more than 55 million cases and 1.3 million deaths worldwide as of today. (So no! It’s not a hoax for those conspiracy theorists out there!) A higher rate of incidence and deaths, as well as worse health-related quality of life have been widely observed in the socially disadvantaged groups, including people of lower socioeconomic position, older persons, migrants, ethnic minority and communities of color, etc. While epidemiologists and scientists around the world are dedicated in gathering scientific evidence on the specific causes and determinants of the health inequalities observed in different countries and regions, we can apply the Social Determinants of Health Conceptual Framework developed by the World Health Organization team led by the eminent Prof Sir Michael Marmot, world’s leading social epidemiologist, to understand and delineate these social determinants of health inequalities related to the COVID-19 pandemic.
According to this framework, social determinants of health can be largely categorized into two types – 1) the lower stream, intermediary determinants, and 2) the upper stream, structural and macro-environmental determinants. For the COVID-19 pandemic, we realized that the lower stream factors may include material circumstances, such as people’s living and working conditions. For instance, the nature of the occupations of these people of lower socioeconomic position tends to require them to travel outside to work, i.e., they cannot work from home, which is a luxury for people who can afford to do it. This lack of choice in the location of occupation may expose them to greater risk of infection through more transportation and interactions with strangers. We have also seen infection clusters among crowded places like elderly homes, public housing estates, and boarding houses for foreign domestic helpers. Moreover, these socially disadvantaged people tend to have lower financial and social capital – it can be observed that they were more likely to be deprived of personal protective equipment like face masks and hand sanitizers, especially during the earlier days of the pandemic. On the other hand, the upper stream, structural determinants of health may include policies related to public health, education, macroeconomics, social protection and welfare, as well as our governance… and last, but not least, our culture and values. If the socioeconomic and political contexts are not favorable to the socially disadvantaged, their health and well-being will be disproportionately affected by the pandemic. Therefore, if we, as a society, espouse to address and reduce the problem of health inequalities, social determinants of health cannot be overlooked in devising and designing any public health-related strategies, measures and policies.
Although a higher rate of incidence and deaths have been widely observed in the socially disadvantaged groups, especially in countries with severe COVID-19 outbreaks, this phenomenon seems to be less discussed and less covered by media in Hong Kong, where the disease incidence is relatively low when compared with other countries around the world. Before the resurgence of local cases in early July, local spread of COVID-19 was sporadic and most cases were imported. In the earlier days of the pandemic, most cases were primarily imported by travelers and return-students studying overseas, leading to a minor surge between mid-March and mid-April of 874 new cases. Most of these cases during Spring were people who could afford to travel and study abroad, and thus tended to be more well-off. Therefore, some would say the expected social gradient in health impact did not seem to exist in Hong Kong, but may I remind you that, it is only the case when we focus on COVID-19-specific incidence and mortality alone. But can we really deduce from this that COVID-19-related health inequality does not exist in Hong Kong? According to the Social Determinants of Health Framework mentioned earlier, the obvious answer is “No, of course not.” And here’s why…
In addition to the direct disease burden, the COVID-19 outbreak and its associated containment measures (such as economic lockdown, mandatory social distancing, and change of work arrangements) could have unequal wider socioeconomic impacts on the general population, especially in regions with pervasive existing social inequalities. Given the limited resources and capacity of the socioeconomically disadvantaged to respond to emergency and adverse events, their general health and well-being are likely to be unduly and inordinately affected by the abrupt changes in their daily economic and social conditions, like job loss and insecurity, brought about by the COVID-19 outbreak and the corresponding containment and mitigation measures of which the main purpose was supposedly disease prevention and health protection at the first place. As such, focusing only on COVID-19 incidence or mortality as the outcomes of concern to address health inequalities may leave out important aspects of life that contributes significantly to people’s health. Recently, my research team and I collaborated with Sir Michael Marmot in a Hong Kong study, and found that the poor people in Hong Kong fared worse in every aspects of life than their richer counterparts in terms of economic activity, personal protective equipment, personal hygiene practice, as well as well-being and health after the COVID-19 outbreak. We also found that part of the observed health inequality can be attributed to the pandemic and its related containment measures via people’s concerns over their own and their families’ livelihood and economic activity. In other words, health inequalities were contributed by the pandemic even in a city where incidence is relatively low through other social determinants of health that directly concerned the livelihood and economic activity of the people. So in this study, we confirmed that focusing only on the incident and death cases as the outcomes of concern to address health inequalities is like a story half-told, and would severely truncate and distort the reality.
Truth be told, health inequality does not only appear after the pandemic outbreak of COVID-19, it is a pre-existing condition in countries and regions around the world, including Hong Kong. My research over the years have consistently shown that people in lower socioeconomic position tend to have worse physical and mental health status. Nevertheless, precisely because health inequality is nothing new, there are always voices in our society trying to dismiss the problem, arguing that it is only natural to have wealth inequality in any capitalistic society. However, in reckoning with health inequalities, we need to go beyond just figuring out the disparities or differences in health status between the poor and the rich, and we need to raise an ethically relevant question: are these inequalities, disparities and differences remediable? Can they be fixed? Can we do something about them? If they are remediable, and we can do something about them but we haven’t, then we’d say these inequalities are ultimately unjust and unfair. In other words, a society that prides itself in pursuing justice must, and I say must, strive to address and reduce these unfair health inequalities. Borrowing the words from famed sociologist Judith Butler, “the virus alone does not discriminate,” but “social and economic inequality will make sure that it does.” With COVID-19, we learn that it is not only the individuals who are sick, but our society. And it’s time we do something about it.
Thank you very much!//
Please join me in congratulating the incoming executive committee of AMSAHK and giving them the best wishes for their future endeavor!
Roger Chung, PhD
Assistant Professor, CUHK JC School of Public Health and Primary Care, @CUHK Medicine, The Chinese University of Hong Kong 香港中文大學 - CUHK
Associate Director, CUHK Institute of Health Equity
同時也有10000部Youtube影片,追蹤數超過2,910的網紅コバにゃんチャンネル,也在其Youtube影片中提到,...
「macroeconomics中文」的推薦目錄:
- 關於macroeconomics中文 在 Roger Chung 鍾一諾 Facebook 的最佳貼文
- 關於macroeconomics中文 在 翻譯這檔事 Facebook 的最讚貼文
- 關於macroeconomics中文 在 コバにゃんチャンネル Youtube 的最讚貼文
- 關於macroeconomics中文 在 大象中醫 Youtube 的精選貼文
- 關於macroeconomics中文 在 大象中醫 Youtube 的最佳解答
- 關於macroeconomics中文 在 CUHK Economics - [ VEAMS-Virtual East Asia ... - Facebook 的評價
- 關於macroeconomics中文 在 [IAL/DSE ECON] [Macroeconomics] ADAS (AD-AS) Model 總 ... 的評價
macroeconomics中文 在 翻譯這檔事 Facebook 的最讚貼文
《基因:人類最親密的歷史》,莊安祺譯:翻譯問題續探(二)
上一篇po出後有網友希望具體指出問題所在。另外,也得知出版社見文立即商議修改所提段落的翻譯問題:
//昨天與合作夥伴討論了原文翻譯與專業知識 ( 謝謝嘉儀與小安子 ),修正了譯文。覺得身在資訊流通的年代也有很大的好處,量產時代就算我們找盡資源還是力有未逮之處,尤其編輯不是專業人士,更是汗顏,而各路專業人士願意幫我們指出錯誤,讓我很感激,書能有不停修正至更臻完善的機會。//
在一本新書的熱銷期,樂見如此積極的作爲。本文:
一、討論上一篇指出的翻譯問題細節,供出版社參考;
二、討論網友一頁截圖中發現的新問題;
三、再加「博客來」試讀內容第一頁(此書前言的開頭)發現的誤譯。
//Once genes had been implicated in the development of sexual preference, the gay child was instantly transformed to normal. His 【hateful】 enemies were the abnormal monsters.
一旦性偏好的發展牽扯到基因,同性戀的孩子瞬間就變為正常,他【可惡的】敵人才是異常的怪物。//
說明:hateful 有兩個相反的意思,要從語境去弄清楚,這句話看了前文,加上末句有「才是」的對照語氣,意思非常清楚,是「懷著恨、充滿惡意的敵人」倒過來變成異常的怪物,而不是「可惡的敵人」。如果作者意指「可惡的敵人」,就不可能有 His hateful enemies were the abnormal monsters. 這句當中的「反而變成」、「才是」的含意。
hateful + 事物,意思通常很明白,是「可恨的」;hateful + 人,就要小心思考理解了,兩種意思都可能出現,光查字典幫不了你。
//It was boredom, more than activism, that prompted the search for the gay gene. Dean Hamer, a researcher at the National Cancer Institute, was not looking for controversy. He was 【not even looking for himself】. Although openly gay, Hamer had never been particularly intrigued by 【the genetics of any form of identity, sexual or otherwise.】
美國國家癌症研究所(National Cancer Institute)的研究員狄恩・哈默(Dean Hamer)並無意找碴,他甚至【也並不在乎自己的身分】,雖然他已出櫃,但對【任何形式的身分認同、性或其他遺傳學】並無特別興趣。//
說明:
1. not even looking for himself 的 looking 呼應同一段第一句 search for the gay gene(探尋是否有同性戀基因)的 search,兩個字都是「尋找」之意,所以這句意為「他甚至也不是爲了自己去探尋」,因爲下一句便說明原因:原來,他對很多東西根本不太感興趣,會發現同性戀基因,只不過因爲無聊、無意間發現。不懂這英文怎會理解成「不在乎自己的性向/身分」?根本瞎掰!
2. 下一句也很糟糕:Hamer 對「任何形式的身分認同、性或其他遺傳學」三件事不感興趣,中譯意思顯然是三種東西平行並列,但原文怎麼寫?the genetics of any form of identity, sexual or otherwise 這串字所指的,只有一件事,這是一個樹狀結構:of any form of identity 修飾 genetics,而 sexual or otherwise 又修飾 identity,整個合起來理解,就是「性(sexual)或其他方面的任何一種身分認同的遺傳成因」,也就是說,Hamer 對同性戀是否有遺傳成因並不太感興趣。
//He had tried, unsuccessfully, to study medicine at Edinburgh—but, horrified by the “screams of a strapped-down child 【amid the blood and sawdust】 of the . . . 【operating theater】,” had fled medicine to study theology at Christ’s College in Cambridge.
他本在愛丁堡習醫,卻因「【手術劇場】裡被綁縛的兒童【在血汙和鋸屑中】的尖叫」而驚悸,棄醫轉到劍橋大學基督學院研習神學。//
(中譯來自網友提供的截圖)
說明:
1.「手術劇場」真是個荒謬的譯法,operating theater 是醫院的手術示範室、手術觀摩室,像樣的字典會另立條目指出這個意思,不會跟「劇場」的意思混淆。在這樣一個空間,一邊進行手術、一邊讓見習醫師或訪問者居高觀摩,處理的是人命關天的真人真事,怎麼變成虛構故事的「劇場」了?在戰爭語境下,theater 是「戰場」,theater 同時也是「電影院」,也是「戲劇表演」,也可指「看表演的觀衆」(比較古老的用法)。最近有本出版熱烈宣傳的書,書名竟然就叫《手術劇場》,這是一種譁衆取寵的取名手段,不是原書名的直譯,但畢竟那是出版社爲了賣書、吸睛所擁有的權利和自由。在普通的文章裡,不同意義的 theater 就該有合適的譯法,否則要叫讀者如何理解?中國的中文譯法經常大而化之,電腦程式的 macro,和 macroeconomics 的 macro,一律是「宏」字;餐廳的 menu 和應用軟體的 menu 一律稱「菜單」,台灣請不要新創如「手術劇場」、「(二次大戰)歐洲劇場」這種沒水準的糟糕詞彙,中文沒有貧瘠到需要一詞用到底。
話說,香港有個動物醫院,網站有中英雙語介紹文,中文看來像是拙劣的半人工半機器翻譯的內容:
// 他們還接受靜脈輸液的利益,在手術過程中,包括絕育成本。手術是在無菌的方式和手術劇場。//
極爲可笑,不知所云,英文則是:
// They also receive the benefit of intravenous fluids during the surgery inclusive in the neutering cost. The surgery is carried out in a sterile manner and operative theater.//
這段英文拿去餵給 Google Translate 或 Bing 的機器翻譯,出來的結果都還勝過人工,機器都懂得把「operative theater」正確譯為「手術室」。難道現在一些譯者連查一查字典確認字義,或拜現代科技之賜、參考一下機譯結果這兩件事都懶得做了?
2. 同一句中譯裡,「在血汙和鋸屑中的尖叫」太過直譯 amid 這字,尖叫如何能在「鋸屑中」?這 blood and sawdust 指的是從手術臺流到地上的一灘血水,以及傾倒在地上用來吸收血水的木屑,可不是「人體鋸屑」,而木屑並沒有在空氣中亂飄,譯者寫出「在鋸屑中的尖叫」時,腦子不知浮現什麼奇異的「劇場」景象?我好像看到了譯者心中想像著,是不是那小孩的腿被鋸斷時,有「鋸屑」噴飛出來?
以下這一長段落,來自出版社提供的博客來試讀第一頁:
//Jagu—the fourth-born of my father’s siblings—came to live with us in Delhi in 1975, when I was five years old. His mind was also crumbling. Tall and rail thin, with a slightly feral look in his eyes and a shock of matted, overgrown hair, he resembled a Bengali Jim Morrison. Unlike Rajesh, whose illness had surfaced in his twenties, Jagu had been troubled from childhood. Socially awkward, withdrawn to everyone except my grandmother, he was unable to hold a job or live by himself. By 1975, deeper cognitive problems had emerged: he had visions, phantasms, and voices in his head that told him what to do. 【He made up conspiracy theories by the dozens: a banana vendor who sold fruit outside our house was secretly recording Jagu’s behavior. He often spoke to himself, with a particular obsession of reciting made-up train schedules】 (“Shimla to Howrah by Kalka mail, then transfer at Howrah to Shri Jagannath Express to Puri”). He was still capable of extraordinary bursts of tenderness—when I mistakenly smashed a beloved Venetian vase at home, he hid me in his bedclothes and informed my mother that he had “mounds of cash” stashed away that would buy “a thousand” vases in replacement. But 【this episode was symptomatic:】 【even his love for me involved extending the fabric of his psychosis and confabulation.】
一九七五年,當時我五歲,父親的四哥賈古搬來德里與我們同住。他也有精神崩潰的現象。賈古生得又高又瘦,帶著略顯凶悍的眼神和一頭糾結的亂髮,長得就像孟加拉版的美國歌手吉姆.莫理森(Jim Morrison)。和二十歲才發病的拉結什不同的是,他自幼就有精神問題。賈古生性內向畏縮,除了祖母之外,他對任何人都退避三舍,無法工作,生活也不能自理。到了一九七五年,他出現更嚴重的認知問題:幻象、幻覺,聽到腦裡有人指揮他要怎麼做。【他捏造了數十個陰謀:我家門外賣香蕉的小販偷偷記錄了賈古的言行舉止,說他自言自語,特別迷戀自訂的火車行程】 (「由西姆拉搭卡爾卡特郵車到豪拉,然後在豪拉轉札格納斯快車到浦里」)。他依舊會有溫情流露的時刻──有一次我不小心打破了家裡珍藏的威尼斯花瓶,他把我藏在他的被子裡,還告訴我媽他有「成堆的現金」可以買「上千個」花瓶賠償。不過,【這件事其實也說明了】【連他對我的愛都含有思覺失調和虛談症(confabulation)】//
說明:
1. He made up conspiracy theories by the dozens 後接一個冒號,這告訴我們,接下來的那句應該是要舉例陰謀,的確也是。不過,譯者卻誤解了英文,把再下一句的「自言自語」誤認為作者還在講述那陰謀,意思變成小販在無端指控賈古(「說他會自言自語、特別迷戀自訂的火車行程」),因此不是事實,但其實作者僅用一個短句舉例陰謀(a banana vendor who sold fruit outside our house was secretly recording Jagu’s behavior),接著便把主題拉回賈古身上,不再提陰謀,所以賈古的自言自語和覆誦火車行程,都是事實。
改:他捏造了數十個陰謀,例如:指控我們家門外賣香蕉的小販偷偷記錄了他的言行舉止。賈古也經常自言自語,特別執迷於覆誦他捏造的火車行程。
2. this episode was symptomatic 的翻譯頗敷衍,連醫學基本字彙都掌握不好,很令人不放心。symptomatic 是基本義「表現為某疾病的symptom」,不是引申義「某某事物即將發生的徵兆、跡象、預示」(sign, omen, portent),原譯「說明」,似乎把 symptomatic 理解爲後者而脫離了「病徵、症狀」之意。
symptomatic 後接冒號,表示下一句的內容在解釋、釐清前一句。什麼病的symptom?psychosis 和 confabulation。psychosis 還不能譯為思覺失調,因爲作者到了下一段才交代賈古被醫生正式診斷有思覺失調,這一段,作者對賈古的病症只是稱之為較籠統的 psychosis,譯者不要隨便「劇透」,辜負作者細心的鋪陳。
改:不過,這個小插曲是病徵的展現,連他對我的愛也攙進他的精神錯亂和虛談症(confabulation)。
* * *
順便介紹一下,此書除了譯者以外,還有好棒棒的專家「掛名」審訂、導讀,以及一堆名人「掛名」推薦:
臺灣大學生命科學系教授 于宏燦 審訂/導讀
朱雪萍、吳青錫、呂俊毅、李文雄、李家維、阮雪芬、洪蘭、孫以瀚、徐建國、陳沛隆、陳嘉祥、超級歪、董桂書、劉炯朗、鍾明怡、顏擇雅、蘇文慧 各界學者/名人好評推薦
* * *
讀不了原文、必須靠翻譯書吸收知識的讀者,請多多運用你批判思考的本能,不要對翻譯照單全收,或誤以爲你自己腦袋有問題。譯文的品質不太可能改善,我們必須反求諸己。
macroeconomics中文 在 CUHK Economics - [ VEAMS-Virtual East Asia ... - Facebook 的推薦與評價
VEAMS-Virtual East Asia Macroeconomics Seminar Series: Intangibles, ... CUHK Economics 在The Chinese University of Hong Kong 香港中文大學- CUHK. ... <看更多>