[專頁公告] 有關我對BBC記者向蔡總統提問的貼文,存在一些爭議。或許是我表達的不夠清楚,而此一事件也有其複雜性,因此經大家傳來傳去後,遂造成諸多不必要的誤解與糾紛。於此,對該貼文的疏漏表達歉意的同時,我也想藉這個機會,向大家澄清我的個人觀點,並提供具體的說明。
坦白說,當我第一時間聽到這個問題時,我並不是很高興:
原本文章和影片:http://bit.ly/36QOKNP (請務必閱讀背景資料)
完整影片:https://youtu.be/yKVW475EnA4?t=6421
影片內文:
Thank you very much, and congratulations first, President Tsai, on tonight’s result. A few months ago, you were struggling in the polls. Many people suggest that the turnaround in your fortunes is because of the actions of China. Its threats that you mentioned tonight. Its putting of the aircraft carriers through the Taiwan Strait, the situation in Hong Kong. So my question to you is this: Do you think you have the Chinese president Xi Jinping to thank for this victory.*
非常感謝您,蔡總統,首先祝賀今晚的結果。幾個月前,您在民意調查中苦苦掙扎。許多人認為,您命運的轉變是由於中國的行動。誠如您今晚提到的威脅──航空母艦通過臺灣海峽以及香港的局勢。因此我對您的提問是:您認為您應該向中國國家主席習近平為這次的勝利表示感謝嗎?*
*您認為您的勝利歸因於中國國家主席習近平嗎?
have sb to thank (for sth) 對(某人)感謝
1. to say that you are grateful to someone who is responsible for something good happening. This expression is sometimes used HUMOROUSLY to mean that you are not grateful for what someone has done.
https://www.ldoceonline.com/…/have-somebody-to-thank-for-do…
2. If you have someone to thank for something, that person is responsible or to blame for it. 由(某人)對……負責;應責怪(某人)
https://dictionary.cambridge.org/…/english/have-sb-to-thank…
★★★★★★★★★★★★
我個人認為,此一提問似乎高估了中國對蔡總統勝選──臺灣人民以自由意志所選出的總統──的影響。不可否認,中國對臺灣的行動已與日俱增,但問題的設定似乎過分強調中國這一因素,而輕忽了臺灣人民的努力。這是我的個人觀點。
在長年旅居美國的生活經驗中,隨處都可聽見以雙關作為諷刺性質的幽默(my sarcasm detector is functional)。事實上,從我的回應也不難看出,我認為不恰當的地方乃在於,提問的內容及其所強調者──中國因素:
The people of Taiwan do not have General Secretary Xi Jinping to "thank" for this democratic victory. They have the sacrifices of thousands of democratic reformers and activists around the world to thank for their right to vote and the right to have their voices heard. It is unfortunate that the threats you mentioned are perceived by some as being responsible for tonight's victory.
臺灣的總統並不需要針對此次的民主選舉「感謝」習總書記。總統和全臺灣的人民需要感謝的是全球成千上萬的為了民主而犧牲的改革者,感謝由於他們奮鬥而獲得的投票權與發表自己意見的權利。不幸的是,一些人似乎認為今晚的勝利應歸因於您所提到的這些威脅。
★★★★★★★★★★★★
毫無疑問,有些人並不同意我的回應。但是,若您稍加觀察,便可發現我是圍繞著「have…to thank、 對(某人)感謝」來進行回應,並提出個人觀點。別人用幽默的語氣問我 ,並不代表我不能以字面上的意涵去作正式甚至有一點俏皮的回應。當時,我若在「thank、感謝」周圍加上引號*,唸起來就會有特別的語氣,或許能更加凸顯我充分理解幽默的部分。不幸的是,我並沒有這樣做,致使許多人不理解我的本意。
*https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scare_quotes
★★★★★★★★★★★★
我之所以撰寫此一貼文,乃為強調我們應該感謝那些為臺灣犧牲奉獻的民主改革者,並向該名記者過於強調中國影響力的問句提出抗議。同時,我也在該篇貼文中附上完整影片的連結,方便讀者理解此一事件的脈絡。我也是純粹當作個人意見發表,而沒有把它變成一篇完整的教學文章。
由於「have sb to thank (for sth)」包含了正面與負面的意涵,而有時也會被幽默地使用。因此幾個小時後(大約凌晨2點),我開始收到一些訊息,告知我並不理解英式幽默。此時我才意識到,自己的貼文不夠明確,使得部分讀者無法理解我為文的重點。在我迅速添加了「have sb to thank (for sth)」的定義後(http://bit.ly/2NnxHv2),便未多想而上床睡覺了。第二天,我下午上班回到家後,卻看到某些針對我貼文所作的評論,認為我不僅對英式幽默缺乏理解,還錯誤地翻譯了該問句。以下,我將對兩種主要的評論作出回應。
★★★★★★★★★★★★
首先,我其實能理解,該名記者嘗試在嚴肅的提問中帶點幽默,但以英文母語者的角度來說,我並不認為他的話「幽默」(至少我個人沒有那種會心一笑的感覺,可能我比較嚴肅)。再者,幽默是非常主觀的,並非所有人都能產生共鳴,尤其是在這麼正式的場合,則更容易造成誤解。對我而言,發言者在正式的場合時,應清楚地意識到,可能會有部分聽眾無法理解自己話語的弦外之音──幽默。畢竟,這是一次全球性的現場直播,真正瞭解英國文化的觀眾,恐怕是少之又少。
即便當時,他是向蔡總統提問而非現場觀眾,但我們都知道(包含該名記者),提問會被口譯員翻成中文,進而讓在場的所有臺灣人聽見。更無消說,蔡總統本就代表全體臺灣人民,向臺灣總統提問,本質上就是向所有的臺灣人民提問。不過,我也相信,該名記者之所以使用此一詞彙,乃為營造幽默的氛圍,並傳達他個人對總統大選與臺海問題的關注,以探求蔡總統對此一議題的洞見。坦率地說,我也沒有資格去干涉專業記者發問的方式,況且他本人的風格本就較為犀利(他揭露了中國無數的人權問題,並進行了諸多報導)。
又我個人認為,無論記者的本意為何,這樣的表達方式並不恰當,尤其是在這麼重要的場合的第一個問題。我由衷地覺得,有評論指出我反應過度,其實是可以理解的。但我個人還是希望,外國記者在正式的國際場合中,能尊重臺灣得來不易的民主,同時也照顧到聽眾的感受。而蔡總統隨即報以微笑,則是展現出她總統的高度與格局。我想,即便蔡總統內心有所想法,也不會在這麼正式的場合中表露出來。因此,微笑絕對是最好的回應。口譯員之所以略過此一問題,很可能是擔心會引發爭議。而影片中,您可以清楚的看到,相鄰的記者於微笑的同時,也搖了搖頭。我想,「幽默」是否適合這種情況,每位觀眾都會有自己的看法。
此處的討論已超出語言的闡釋與翻譯,以及對單詞涵義的理解。我個人認為,那些將我的貼文化約為「不理解英式幽默」的評論,實已淡化了語言的社會、政治與文化脈絡。惟遺憾的是,我當時也未闡明自己的思路,沒有提供足夠的背景資訊。因此,這導致了諸多不必要的困惑。
★★★★★★★★★★★★
其次,我注意到某個粉絲專頁。該專頁在隔天下午發表了一篇文章,內容是關於我如何藉由「要感謝某人(某物)」的字面翻譯,來誤解該名BBC的記者。但這樣片面的說法,似無法詳實的呈現我該篇貼文的本意,也忽略了我所提供的資訊。
have sb to thank (for sth)
1. to say that you are grateful to someone who is responsible for something good happening. This expression is sometimes used HUMOROUSLY to mean that you are not grateful for what someone has done.
對(某人)感謝
I have Phil to thank for getting me my first job.
https://www.ldoceonline.com/…/have-somebody-to-thank-for-do…
2. If you have someone to thank for something, that person is responsible or to blame for it.
由(某人)對……負責;應責怪(某人)
You have John to thank for this problem.
https://dictionary.cambridge.org/…/english/have-sb-to-thank…
★★★★★★★★★★★★
該專頁也認為我誤解了「have sb to thank (for sth)」──僅譯出「感謝」的字面義而無提供其餘意涵──此一片語。但事實上,我的貼文裡早已附上相關資訊。
在言談分析(discourse analysis)中,僅「thank you」一詞就有許多不同的解釋方式。言語的闡釋與翻譯,必須考慮到語調、肢體語言以及社會環境。我絕對不是專業的翻譯,但誠如下列連結的內容所顯示,文字媒體大多只會提供直譯──亦即「感謝」,畢竟要以短短的幾行文字來完整表達講者的意圖,並非易事。因此,絕大多數的文字報導(包含我的貼文)也附有新聞發布會的完整影片,以為讀者提供更清晰的背景與脈絡。同時,記者也會有自己的顧慮(受眾),因此文字的使用必須盡可能地言簡意賅,以與讀者產生共鳴。
https://www.setn.com/news.aspx?NewsID=670861
https://news.ltn.com.tw/news/world/breakingnews/3037675
https://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-51077553
https://news.pts.org.tw/article/462512
https://hk.news.appledaily.com/.../article/20200112/60476407
I am not a professional translator by any means, but a literal translation is sometimes provided because it is immensely difficult to get across the full intent of the speaker with a few lines of text. Just the phrase "thank you" could be interpreted in diverse ways in discourse analysis. Interpretation and translation of speech require consideration of stress, body language, and social contexts. If the reporters above provided a connotative translation, the language used would be subjective as it would directly reflect what the translator believes to be the speaker's intentional meaning. Thus, a full video of the press conference was included in nearly every one of the reports to provide readers with additional context. Journalists also have pragmatic concerns (reach, readership), so the language used has to be specific, emphatic, and concise. These reasons might offer some insight into why「道謝」was used instead of a connotative translation.
★★★★★★★★★★★★
事後看來,在我發表評論的當下,以及之後所受到的負面評論時,確實有些激動,被批評也是應該的。我個人認為,該名BBC記者過於凸顯中國影響力的問題,對總統以及臺灣人所珍視的民主制度似乎顯得不甚尊重。而我也相信,此亦即該提問之所以造成諸多爭議的原因。事實上,我一直在編輯貼文,希望盡可能地以更客觀的方式來表達我的觀點。但顯然,此前我未能在第一時間評論中作出詳盡的解釋,為此我深感抱歉,也學到了寶貴的經驗。若我的貼文為您帶來諸多不便,我深表歉意。希望本文足以闡明我對此事的想法,並作出具體的澄清。謝謝。
「thank you for your consideration中文」的推薦目錄:
- 關於thank you for your consideration中文 在 Eric's English Lounge Facebook 的最佳解答
- 關於thank you for your consideration中文 在 Eric's English Lounge Facebook 的精選貼文
- 關於thank you for your consideration中文 在 多糖教室 毛小孩教育訓練 Facebook 的最讚貼文
- 關於thank you for your consideration中文 在 陳老師英語教室- 職場上如何用英文恰當地表達感謝? 1. Thank ... 的評價
thank you for your consideration中文 在 Eric's English Lounge Facebook 的精選貼文
[專頁公告] 有關我對BBC記者向蔡總統提問的貼文,存在一些爭議。或許是我表達的不夠清楚,而此一事件也有其複雜性,因此經大家傳來傳去後,遂造成諸多不必要的誤解與糾紛。於此,對該貼文的疏漏表達歉意的同時,我也想藉這個機會,向大家澄清我的個人觀點,並提供具體的說明。
坦白說,當我第一時間聽到這個問題時,我並不是很高興:
原本文章和影片:http://bit.ly/36QOKNP (請務必閱讀背景資料)
完整影片:https://youtu.be/yKVW475EnA4?t=6421
影片內文:
Thank you very much, and congratulations first, President Tsai, on tonight’s result. A few months ago, you were struggling in the polls. Many people suggest that the turnaround in your fortunes is because of the actions of China. Its threats that you mentioned tonight. Its putting of the aircraft carriers through the Taiwan Strait, the situation in Hong Kong. So my question to you is this: Do you think you have the Chinese president Xi Jinping to thank for this victory.*
非常感謝您,蔡總統,首先祝賀今晚的結果。幾個月前,您在民意調查中苦苦掙扎。許多人認為,您命運的轉變是由於中國的行動。誠如您今晚提到的威脅──航空母艦通過臺灣海峽以及香港的局勢。因此我對您的提問是:您認為您應該向中國國家主席習近平為這次的勝利表示感謝嗎?*
*您認為您的勝利歸因於中國國家主席習近平嗎?
have sb to thank (for sth) 對(某人)感謝
1. to say that you are grateful to someone who is responsible for something good happening. This expression is sometimes used HUMOROUSLY to mean that you are not grateful for what someone has done.
https://www.ldoceonline.com/dictionary/have-somebody-to-thank-for-doing-something
2. If you have someone to thank for something, that person is responsible or to blame for it. 由(某人)對……負責;應責怪(某人)
https://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/english/have-sb-to-thank-for-sth
★★★★★★★★★★★★
我個人認為,此一提問似乎高估了中國對蔡總統勝選──臺灣人民以自由意志所選出的總統──的影響。不可否認,中國對臺灣的行動已與日俱增,但問題的設定似乎過分強調中國這一因素,而輕忽了臺灣人民的努力。這是我的個人觀點。
在長年旅居美國的生活經驗中,隨處都可聽見以雙關作為諷刺性質的幽默(my sarcasm detector is functional)。事實上,從我的回應也不難看出,我認為不恰當的地方乃在於,提問的內容及其所強調者──中國因素:
The people of Taiwan do not have General Secretary Xi Jinping to "thank" for this democratic victory. They have the sacrifices of thousands of democratic reformers and activists around the world to thank for their right to vote and the right to have their voices heard. It is unfortunate that the threats you mentioned are perceived by some as being responsible for tonight's victory.
臺灣的總統並不需要針對此次的民主選舉「感謝」習總書記。總統和全臺灣的人民需要感謝的是全球成千上萬的為了民主而犧牲的改革者,感謝由於他們奮鬥而獲得的投票權與發表自己意見的權利。不幸的是,一些人似乎認為今晚的勝利應歸因於您所提到的這些威脅。
★★★★★★★★★★★★
毫無疑問,有些人並不同意我的回應。但是,若您稍加觀察,便可發現我是圍繞著「have…to thank、 對(某人)感謝」來進行回應,並提出個人觀點。別人用幽默的語氣問我 ,並不代表我不能以字面上的意涵去作正式甚至有一點俏皮的回應。當時,我若在「thank、感謝」周圍加上引號*,唸起來就會有特別的語氣,或許能更加凸顯我充分理解幽默的部分。不幸的是,我並沒有這樣做,致使許多人不理解我的本意。
*https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scare_quotes
★★★★★★★★★★★★
我之所以撰寫此一貼文,乃為強調我們應該感謝那些為臺灣犧牲奉獻的民主改革者,並向該名記者過於強調中國影響力的問句提出抗議。同時,我也在該篇貼文中附上完整影片的連結,方便讀者理解此一事件的脈絡。我也是純粹當作個人意見發表,而沒有把它變成一篇完整的教學文章。
由於「have sb to thank (for sth)」包含了正面與負面的意涵,而有時也會被幽默地使用。因此幾個小時後(大約凌晨2點),我開始收到一些訊息,告知我並不理解英式幽默。此時我才意識到,自己的貼文不夠明確,使得部分讀者無法理解我為文的重點。在我迅速添加了「have sb to thank (for sth)」的定義後(http://bit.ly/2NnxHv2),便未多想而上床睡覺了。第二天,我下午上班回到家後,卻看到某些針對我貼文所作的評論,認為我不僅對英式幽默缺乏理解,還錯誤地翻譯了該問句。以下,我將對兩種主要的評論作出回應。
★★★★★★★★★★★★
首先,我其實能理解,該名記者嘗試在嚴肅的提問中帶點幽默,但以英文母語者的角度來說,我並不認為他的話「幽默」(至少我個人沒有那種會心一笑的感覺,可能我比較嚴肅)。再者,幽默是非常主觀的,並非所有人都能產生共鳴,尤其是在這麼正式的場合,則更容易造成誤解。對我而言,發言者在正式的場合時,應清楚地意識到,可能會有部分聽眾無法理解自己話語的弦外之音──幽默。畢竟,這是一次全球性的現場直播,真正瞭解英國文化的觀眾,恐怕是少之又少。
即便當時,他是向蔡總統提問而非現場觀眾,但我們都知道(包含該名記者),提問會被口譯員翻成中文,進而讓在場的所有臺灣人聽見。更無消說,蔡總統本就代表全體臺灣人民,向臺灣總統提問,本質上就是向所有的臺灣人民提問。不過,我也相信,該名記者之所以使用此一詞彙,乃為營造幽默的氛圍,並傳達他個人對總統大選與臺海問題的關注,以探求蔡總統對此一議題的洞見。坦率地說,我也沒有資格去干涉專業記者發問的方式,況且他本人的風格本就較為犀利(他揭露了中國無數的人權問題,並進行了諸多報導)。
又我個人認為,無論記者的本意為何,這樣的表達方式並不恰當,尤其是在這麼重要的場合的第一個問題。我由衷地覺得,有評論指出我反應過度,其實是可以理解的。但我個人還是希望,外國記者在正式的國際場合中,能尊重臺灣得來不易的民主,同時也照顧到聽眾的感受。而蔡總統隨即報以微笑,則是展現出她總統的高度與格局。我想,即便蔡總統內心有所想法,也不會在這麼正式的場合中表露出來。因此,微笑絕對是最好的回應。口譯員之所以略過此一問題,很可能是擔心會引發爭議。而影片中,您可以清楚的看到,相鄰的記者於微笑的同時,也搖了搖頭。我想,「幽默」是否適合這種情況,每位觀眾都會有自己的看法。
此處的討論已超出語言的闡釋與翻譯,以及對單詞涵義的理解。我個人認為,那些將我的貼文化約為「不理解英式幽默」的評論,實已淡化了語言的社會、政治與文化脈絡。惟遺憾的是,我當時也未闡明自己的思路,沒有提供足夠的背景資訊。因此,這導致了諸多不必要的困惑。
★★★★★★★★★★★★
其次,我注意到某個粉絲專頁。該專頁在隔天下午發表了一篇文章,內容是關於我如何藉由「要感謝某人(某物)」的字面翻譯,來誤解該名BBC的記者。但這樣片面的說法,似無法詳實的呈現我該篇貼文的本意,也忽略了我所提供的資訊。
have sb to thank (for sth)
1. to say that you are grateful to someone who is responsible for something good happening. This expression is sometimes used HUMOROUSLY to mean that you are not grateful for what someone has done.
對(某人)感謝
I have Phil to thank for getting me my first job.
https://www.ldoceonline.com/dictionary/have-somebody-to-thank-for-doing-something
2. If you have someone to thank for something, that person is responsible or to blame for it.
由(某人)對……負責;應責怪(某人)
You have John to thank for this problem.
https://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/english/have-sb-to-thank-for-sth
★★★★★★★★★★★★
該專頁也認為我誤解了「have sb to thank (for sth)」──僅譯出「感謝」的字面義而無提供其餘意涵──此一片語。但事實上,我的貼文裡早已附上相關資訊。
在言談分析(discourse analysis)中,僅「thank you」一詞就有許多不同的解釋方式。言語的闡釋與翻譯,必須考慮到語調、肢體語言以及社會環境。我絕對不是專業的翻譯,但誠如下列連結的內容所顯示,文字媒體大多只會提供直譯──亦即「感謝」,畢竟要以短短的幾行文字來完整表達講者的意圖,並非易事。因此,絕大多數的文字報導(包含我的貼文)也附有新聞發布會的完整影片,以為讀者提供更清晰的背景與脈絡。同時,記者也會有自己的顧慮(受眾),因此文字的使用必須盡可能地言簡意賅,以與讀者產生共鳴。
https://www.setn.com/news.aspx?NewsID=670861
https://news.ltn.com.tw/news/world/breakingnews/3037675
https://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-51077553
https://news.pts.org.tw/article/462512
https://hk.news.appledaily.com/.../article/20200112/60476407
I am not a professional translator by any means, but a literal translation is sometimes provided because it is immensely difficult to get across the full intent of the speaker with a few lines of text. Just the phrase "thank you" could be interpreted in diverse ways in discourse analysis. Interpretation and translation of speech require consideration of stress, body language, and social contexts. If the reporters above provided a connotative translation, the language used would be subjective as it would directly reflect what the translator believes to be the speaker's intentional meaning. Thus, a full video of the press conference was included in nearly every one of the reports to provide readers with additional context. Journalists also have pragmatic concerns (reach, readership), so the language used has to be specific, emphatic, and concise. These reasons might offer some insight into why「道謝」was used instead of a connotative translation.
★★★★★★★★★★★★
事後看來,在我發表評論的當下,以及之後所受到的負面評論時,確實有些激動,被批評也是應該的。我個人認為,該名BBC記者過於凸顯中國影響力的問題,對總統以及臺灣人所珍視的民主制度似乎顯得不甚尊重。而我也相信,此亦即該提問之所以造成諸多爭議的原因。事實上,我一直在編輯貼文,希望盡可能地以更客觀的方式來表達我的觀點。但顯然,此前我未能在第一時間評論中作出詳盡的解釋,為此我深感抱歉,也學到了寶貴的經驗。若我的貼文為您帶來諸多不便,我深表歉意。希望本文足以闡明我對此事的想法,並作出具體的澄清。謝謝。
thank you for your consideration中文 在 多糖教室 毛小孩教育訓練 Facebook 的最讚貼文
一封給國家地理頻道「Dog: Impossible」節目負責人的公開信:
An open letter to the leadership team of Nat Geo Wild Dog Impossible:
Translate: Yu-Hwa Su 翻譯: 蘇昱華
Proof: Yen Ke 校對: 葛雁
The International Association of Animal Behavior Consultants (IAABC) applauds National Geographic’s mission to offer intelligent, relevant and captivating non-fiction entertainment. This is a crucial objective, especially as an introduction to children and viewers largely relying on television for their scientific information.
國際動物行為諮詢師協會(IAABC)對於國家地理頻道致力於提供電視觀眾正確知識與科學內容表示讚賞。這是一個非常重要的目標,特別是對依賴電視得到這些知識的兒童與其他觀眾們來說。
However, your stated mission is in direct conflict with your show Dog: Impossible. In fact, the irresponsible treatment of the dogs and people on this show flies in the face of all best practices in animal training and behavior. Rather than promoting science and scientifically-proven methodology, Dog: Impossible sacrifices learning science for more dramatic television.
然而,貴頻道所提供的節目「Dog: Impossible」卻與貴頻道「提供正確的科學知識」的一貫立場衝突。節目中對犬隻以及飼主的不負責處理方式與應有的動物訓練及行為操作的準則相違背。「Dog: Impossible」並沒有提倡科學以及經科學驗證的方法,這節目犧牲了對科學的學習,轉而追求吸睛的電視節目效果。
Matt Beisner appears to have no credentials or education in training and behavior, yet he refers to himself as a behaviorist. His claim that “energy is the one language that every animal on the planet speaks” makes clear he is not one.
Matt Beisner並沒有動物訓練或行為學的相關學習經歷與證照,卻宣稱自己是一位行為學家。從他的主張:「能量是地球上所有動物都會使用的共通語言」,便能明白他並不是行為學家。
His statement, “You don’t need tricks, you don’t need treats, you don’t need force,” shows just how unaware of his own actions he is. His misuse of scientific terminology leads viewers to believe they are learning demonstrated, safe and accepted strategies in helping their dogs. In fact, Mr. Beisner is forcing these dogs from start to finish of each episode. His own “tricks” are that of over-stressing dogs until they’re in a state referred to in psychology and science as “learned helplessness.”
他主張「你不需要技巧、零食、或蠻力 (去訓練狗)」,這顯示出他對於自己的所做所為一無所知。他對科學術語的濫用也會誤導觀眾,讓觀眾以為他們正在學習經證實有效而且安全可接受的方法來幫助狗狗。但這位訓練師在每一集節目上從頭到尾都是在逼迫這些狗,而他所擁有的「技巧」,就是讓狗進入過度緊迫的狀態,直到牠們進入心理學和科學上所指的「習得無助」(learned helplessness)狀態。
Learned helplessness occurs when a subject endures repeated aversive stimuli beyond their control. Originally thought to show a subject's acceptance of their powerlessness, for more than half a century it’s been known instead to be the emotional “shutting down” of the subject. Anxiety, clinical depression, and related mental illnesses are common consequences of this technique in humans.
「習得無助」發生在動物沒有任何控制權,且重複地被施加嫌惡刺激的時候。最初,人們認為習得無助狀態意味著動物「接受」了自身無法改變、無能為力的情形,超過半個世紀以來,人們認為這是動物情緒「關機(shutting down)」的表現。在人類身上,習得無助的常見結果包含焦慮、憂鬱症、以及相關的心理疾病。
Allow us to note some aspects of the trailer and his shows, but first, to point out a few well-documented and commonly understood aspects of dog behavior so that we may better make our points understood.
在我們解釋為何我們認為此節目的預告片與內容不適當之前,我們希望先闡述一些正確的犬隻行為常識,以便您能更理解我們的觀點。
Canine body language indicating stress and severe stress:
顯示出壓力以及嚴重緊迫的犬隻肢體語言:
Compressed bodies
Dry, raspy panting
Wide, open eyes with dilated pupils
Heavy drooling
“Whipping” head and body back, pushing off a handler in order to get away
Growling
Fighting
Biting
縮緊身體
急促的喘氣
睜大雙眼、散瞳
大量流口水
甩頭、用前爪推抱著狗的人以退後、試圖掙脫
低吼
打架
開咬
Eleven seconds into the trailer, Mr. Beisner rubs his hands together, smiling, and says, “This is going to be gnarly.” All professionals know from that statement what the series will spotlight: A poorly (if at all) educated non-professional pushing dogs way beyond therapeutic limits, in the name of “results.”
在預告片11秒的地方,Beisner先生搓手並笑著說「等一下會很精采喔」。所有專業人士都知道這句話代表這個節目的亮點將會是:一名缺乏適當教育的訓練師,逼迫狗到超過其能承受的極限,並把這樣的結果稱為是良好的改善。
Flooding, the term for inundating a subject with their fears, phobias and triggers, is ethically questionable at best, cruel and unnecessary, always. There's also a common danger of spontaneous recovery of the phobia. This is because flooding doesn't replace the fear-response with a different response, it just replaces it with no response. “No response” is simply suppression, not cure.
「洪水法」,指的是故意將動物置於恐慌或恐懼的觸發刺激情境,這樣的方法不道德、殘忍、而且沒必要。另外,恐懼的自發性回復(spontaneous recovery)也是洪水法常見的風險,這是因為洪水法並沒有將害怕的反應重新制約成其他不同的情緒行為,它只是讓動物沒有反應。「沒有反應」只是壓抑,動物並沒有因此感到不害怕或恐慌。
Throughout the trailer dogs are flooded with aversive stimuli such as other dogs, people and equipment, something an ethical professional would not, and could not do per any answerable guidelines of animal training and behavior care.
在整個預告片中,狗狗被迫接受各種嫌惡刺激的洪水法訓練,例如其他狗、其他人類和物品,這是具有道德的專業訓練人員不會做的,任何負責任的動物訓練及行為照護準則也不會如此建議。
Systematic desensitization and counterconditioning, gradual exposure to the feared object, and replacement of a negative emotional association with a more pleasant one, are the recommended techniques used to treat such fear and aggression cases, per all legitimate veterinary, training and behavior organizations.
系統性減敏與反制約,也就是逐步與少量的讓狗接觸其本來會害怕的事物,並且將引發的少量負面情緒與其非常喜愛的事物配對給予,是用來處理恐懼及攻擊案例的建議方法,也是每個好的獸醫師、訓練及行為機構會推薦的方法。
Beisner’s statement that “We know at the Zen Yard that dogs help other dogs come out of their shell and face their fear and get past their aggression” isn’t just scientifically unsupportable, his words ring hollow during the very scene playing while he says those words: Beisner restraining one dog, while his co-host pulls a leashed dog to the first in a completely unnatural gesture perhaps intended to either mimic natural dog greeting (it doesn’t) or to flood the heavily drooling dog who is unable to move or get away. The dogs end up in a fight. They have been set up to fail, and the outcome is inevitable.
Beisner宣稱「我們在Zen Yard(他的訓練中心)知道狗會去幫助其他狗融入外界、面對牠們的恐懼並且克服攻擊行為」,這句話不只是缺乏科學支持,在影片中他講出這句話時搭配的畫面,亦表現出他的說詞缺乏支持:Beisner限制了第一隻狗的行動,由節目的共同主持人以牽繩將另一隻狗以一個完全不自然的姿勢拉到第一隻狗身邊,他們可能是在試著模仿狗狗自然的社交打招呼行為(但並不是),或使用洪水法訓練那隻狂流口水(顯示牠很緊張)並且無法逃脫的狗。最終兩隻狗打起來,訓練師製造的這個情境,讓失敗的結果無可避免。
In the trailer, the assistant host, Stefanie DiOrio, states, “Nervousness can easily turn to fear which can lead to aggression.” This is an accurate statement, which is why it’s so confusing that the entire show would be predicated on pushing dogs to the very edge of survivable stress and into predictable aggression, doubling down on the issues that their owners are struggling with.
在預告片中,節目的共同主持人Stefanie DiOrio說「緊張不安很容易變成真正的恐懼,並且導致攻擊行為」,這句話是正確的,但也讓人更加困惑為何整個節目的走向都在將狗推向牠們所能承受壓力的極限、觸發根本可預測的攻擊行為、並使飼主所面對的問題加倍惡化。
We know that the dramatic changes in behavior, from stressed and wildly aggressive to “calm” dogs, make for compelling TV. To an average pet owner it looks like these dogs are making huge improvements. All clients just want their dog to “Stop being aggressive.” However, we also know that behavior suppression is not the same as behavior modification, that a stressed and shut-down dog is a more dangerous animal than one who is actively showing aggression, and that the long-term prognosis of this kind of intervention is poor for both the client and their dog.
我們知道行為上戲劇性的變化,從一隻緊迫且兇猛攻擊的狗轉變成“冷靜”的狗,這個過程代表了高收視率,在不十分了解行為學的飼主眼中看來,這些狗狗似乎有巨大的進步。飼主都只是希望他們的狗「不要再有攻擊性」,然而我們也知道單純抑制攻擊行為的出現,並不是真正的行為改善技術。舉例來說一隻高壓力但看似沒有反應的狗,遠比一隻會表現出攻擊性的狗要危險許多 (譯註: 因為這樣的狗可能會沒有徵兆地開咬),因此這種抑制攻擊行為的訓練法,以長遠來看對飼主以及狗狗都是有害的。
It is also worth pointing out that, like his predecessor, Mr Beisner’s assessment of cause for much of the issues he’s asked to address is simple, made especially clear in episode 4 where he not only saves a dog, he “saves a marriage:” Women are unable to effectively lead, must be stronger, must change their ways.
另一個值得注意的事是Beisner先生,如同他在同一個頻道的前輩,西薩,對導致問題的原因評估也過於簡化,例如第四集中他聲稱他不只拯救了狗狗,他還「拯救了這段婚姻」,因為女主人無法有效的領導狗狗,因此她必須更堅強,必須改變他們之間的相處模式。
Misogyny, it seems, cures dog behavior problems. Real exploration and explanation regarding the antecedents and consequences around behaviors are ignored in favor of client blaming.
這段貶抑女性的解釋,看起來似乎能改善犬隻的行為問題,然而關於行為問題真正的前因後果卻被指責客戶所取代,並沒有真正的被探討與解釋。
The clients on the show represent thousands of clients throughout the US and beyond with whom we work every day, helping them to help their dogs. Far from being dogs “other people won’t work with,” the dogs on your show are exactly the clients and dogs that IAABC Certified Dog Behavior Consultants, as well as all members of the American College of Veterinary Behaviorists, Certified Applied Animal Behaviorists, and other certified behavior specialists see and successfully work with every day.
節目中所出現的客戶正代表了我們日常工作中所會幫助的人們與他們的狗,呈現的就是我們在美國跟其他國家的上千位客戶。節目中所出現的這些有著行為問題的狗絕對不是「其他訓練師都不想要處理的狗狗」,事實上這些客戶與狗正是IAABC認證的狗行為諮詢師、美國獸醫行為學家、認證的應用動物行為學家或是其他受認證的行為學專家,每天工作的日常。
We do so using the best practices of our field (see https://m.iaabc.org/about/ethics/), adopted by the leading behavior and training organizations, without psychologically or physically harming the animals we work with.
我們在這個領域也使用最嚴謹的訓練師專業道德守則(英文版參見https://m.iaabc.org/about/ethics/,中文版參見https://reurl.cc/72eVkl),這個守則受領先的行為及訓練機構所採用,使訓練師與行為諮詢師在工作時,不對我們經手的動物造成生理或心理上的傷害。
The IAABC urges Nat Geo WILD to stop promoting this public miseducation. The tactics employed in the name of entertainment are unnecessarily harsh and potentially dangerous to the public, and they teach yet another generation of Nat Geo watchers absolutely incorrect and harmful practices.
IAABC呼籲國家地理頻道(Nat Geo WILD)停止傳播此系列誤導公眾的資訊。以娛樂包裝節目的策略對於觀眾是不必要的粗糙而且有潛在風險的,甚至是向頻道的年輕一代觀眾灌輸完全不正確且有害的做法。
It remains a mystery why your network is so intent on harming dogs. After years of Cesar Milan, to now bring in a man equally unskilled, who equates terrified, angry or entrapped dogs to his own addiction history is remarkable. Are we really satisfied conflating ego with compassion, self-focus with an understanding of animal behavior? Is this the “science” your mission stands for?
我們仍然不知為何貴頻道這麼多年來如此堅持持續傷害狗的這些作為。在西薩 (Cesar Milan) 的節目播映多年之後,現在又引進一個同樣缺乏正確訓練技巧,以自身藥物成癮困擾歷史去錯誤的同理恐懼或憤怒的狗的人。我們能接受一個膨脹自我,而非真正擁有同情心、適當自我聚焦、了解動物行為的「專業人士」嗎?這就是貴節目所宣稱的「科學」立場嗎?
The damage Nat Geo is doing to dogs by choosing this type of programming is astounding. We can only assume that the producers are unaware of this, as it’s hard to imagine such harm and cruelty would be deliberate.
國家地理頻道選擇製作這類節目對於狗狗的傷害甚鉅,我們只能假定節目製作人並沒有意識到這點,因為我們難以想像會有人故意去做這樣有害且殘忍的事情。
Would you show a reality program on heart surgery with a photogenic “self-taught” practitioner, simply stating the star was not a doctor before showing him mutilating a real patient?
想問貴節目是否會採用一個上鏡的“自學”外科醫生錄製心臟手術的實境節目,告知觀眾他並非真正的醫生,然後播放他對病患動刀的畫面?
I leave you with the clearest image of suffering and abuse from your trailer: the Aussie, stressed to the breaking point, thick ropes of drool streaming from its mouth, being choked by a slip lead to compensate for the host’s inability to even effectively muzzle a dog. This dog is at the point of collapse. This dog is being tortured, and that is not hysteria. That is an assessment by any educated measure.
作為結尾,我希望指出貴節目預告片中明確顯示出狗狗受苦或受虐的畫面:那隻澳洲牧羊犬已經瀕臨壓力的極限,您可以看到口水掛在其嘴邊 (大量口水為壓力徵兆),口罩因為沒有確實的配戴而滑脫,導致牠被勒到快要窒息,已在崩潰邊緣。具備專業與適當教育的人員指出,這隻狗因在節目上被虐待而情緒崩潰,並非其本身歇斯底里。
Please stop this cruel and dangerous programming. To do otherwise is to support that self-taught heart surgery and all the consequences it would bring; that this show is currently bringing to families struggling with their dogs.
Professionals refer to Cesar Milan’s influence on dog training as “job security” because so many dogs ruined or made far worse by his teachings are brought to us by well-intentioned, often weeping owners desperate for real help. Often it is too late.
請停止這系列殘酷且危險的節目。否則貴節目就等同於支持前面舉例的自學的心臟外科「醫師」進行手術一樣,這些危險的後果正由觀眾與他們的狗承擔。專業訓犬人士將西薩米蘭對訓犬的影響戲稱為「工作保障」,因為太多飼主使用了他教授的技巧後,狗狗的狀況變得更糟,而哭著迫切尋找真正的協助,此時通常都為時已晚。
We do not want more work due to this same phenomenon.
我們不想要因為這個節目帶來類似影響而接到更多工作。
We’d be happy to provide you with any education and resources you need to inform your producers about what would qualify as responsible, effective, safe and thoughtful work with the same “red zone” dogs you sell so well.
但我們很樂意提供貴頻道任何需要的教育與資源,讓您們的節目製作人對訓犬工作應有的品質有所理解,例如負責、有效、安全,並且理解到對於在節目中出現的這些「危險」犬隻,事實上有更合理的訓練方法。
Thank you for your consideration.
謝謝您的閱讀與理解。
Marjie Alonso
Executive Director, IAABC
For the Board of Directors
Marjie Alonso
IAABC執行長
代表董事會發言
thank you for your consideration中文 在 陳老師英語教室- 職場上如何用英文恰當地表達感謝? 1. Thank ... 的推薦與評價
Thank you for your kind consideration.感謝您的考慮. 13. Many thanks for your letter/email. 14. I am very thankful that you are considering my problem. ... <看更多>