翻译忽悠法一例 One example of translation spin trick
7 views
Skip to first unread message
wanghx
Jan 18, 2010, 1:14:30 PM1/18/10
to Salon Friends, lihlii-g
今
阅 荷兰国际广播电台 RNW
网站新闻汉文版，关于谷歌声明的两位网络专家评论[1]的报道，对其标题和全文语气非常惊讶。特别有趣的是，这个报道汉文版的标题，正如中共国的许多政府
宣传喉舌所设立的民意投票项目，完全是在排除了其他合理选项的前提下提问：
Today I read one Chinese news report on the RNW website about comments on Google's "pullout" announcement by two Internet experts. I was amazed by the title and overall tone of this report. What is especially interesting is that the title of the Chinese version of the report completely excluded other reasonable possibilities from the option list in its way of questioning, exactly the same as those "public opinion polls" conducted by many state propaganda mouthpieces.
This is nearly an insult at the reader's IQ: Is it A, or is it B? But they don't allow you to choose from C, D, ... :) This kind of false optional choice or rhetoric questions always make me laugh. What's the difference between this title and the optional question: "Do you want to eat shit, or do you want to drink urine?"
读罢全文，好奇去搜寻原文报道[2]，才发现汉文翻译做了很多精巧的处理，从细节上扭曲了整篇报道的语气。有趣的细节对比如下：
After I finished the whole article, I'm curious to search for the original report [2]. Only after that, I found that the Chinese translation did a lot of subtle work which distorted the overall neutral tone of this report from nuances in the text. Some of the interesting details are compared as following:
1. 标题对比：Comparison of the title
English 英文: Google pullout would damage US-China bond
Chinese 汉文：谷歌退出中国：是有损中美关系之举？还是公关伎俩？ Google pulls out China: Is it a damage to US-China bond? Or is it a PR trick?
评：原文标题是肯定的表述，被翻译成选择疑问句，还加上了另一个嘲讽性的贬义的疑问。
Comment: The original title is affirmative, but was translated into an optional question, adding an extra question with a jeering derogatory sense.
2. 小标题的对比：Comparison of sub-headings
English 英文：No more filters
Chinese 汉文：网络审查 Internet Censorship
评：从否定式的“不再过滤”，翻译成了肯定式表达的“网络审查”。削弱了谷歌终止配合作恶的事实描述。
Comment: Changed from negative "no more filters" into affirmative "Internet Censorship", which weakened the description of the fact that Google stops to cooperate on wrongdoings.
3. 小标题的对比：Comparison of sub-headings
English 英文：Surprise
Chinese 汉文：出其不意 Out of one's expectations
评：英文只有“令人惊讶”“意外之举”的含义，汉文“出其不意”往往用于描述进攻性的策略，在这里加强了阴谋论色彩。英文中，赠送礼物给与意外惊喜可以说 Surprise，但汉文“出其不意”并不常用于这种情形，而更常用于出其不意的“打击”，因为此成语来自“出其不意，攻其不备”。看英文上下文，意思是 出乎公众和专家的预料，而汉文“出其不意”的“其”何所指呢？难以解释为公众和专家，因为谷歌这项声明并不是针对公众和专家来发出的，而是针对中共政府发 出的。孤立来看，这是一个细微的翻译不当，但结合上下文提到的对原文的精巧修改，就可以理解其刻意用笔之细致入微。
Comment: The English term only has the meaning of "making one surprised", "out of expectation", while the Chinese term is generally used to describe strategy of attack, which enhanced the color of conspiracy here. In English, it's a "surprise" when a gift was given to a person out of his expectation, but you can hardly say "出其不意" in Chinese in this condition, as it's mostly used in the context of "a sudden attack", because it comes from the idiom "out of one's expectation, attack where he didn't prepare for". As we read the context of the English text, it means the announcement is out of the expectation of the public and experts. But which is the "one" who is to be surprised by a sudden attack in the Chinese text? It can't be explained as the public or experts, since Google's announcement is not targeted at the public or experts, but toward the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) government. If you take it as an isolated point, it's only a small different or improper translation. But when you read it in the combined context including the other subtle modifications to the original text, you will understand the intentional particularity of it.
4. 文意对比：Comparison of meaning
English 英文：the proposal – by no means a certainty – came as a “surprise”
Chinese 汉文：谷歌的这一怎么看都不可能是必然之举的举动貌似“出其不意” this action looks impossible in any case to be a certain action, though seemingly a "surprise (to the enemy)".
评：英文的意思我理解是说，（谷歌关于取消网络过滤，要不然就退出中共国的）建议令人惊讶，但并非（退出）已成定局。汉文添加了“貌似”，“不可能”， “出其不意”等添油加醋的内容。原文并没有排除谷歌真的会退出中共国，只是说目前尚未决定；但汉文翻译成了肯定不会退出：“怎么看都不可能”，排除了“可 能”。这是为了表示，谷歌不舍得退出中共国的，为下文的阴谋论铺垫。
Comment: What I understand from the English text is that the proposal (of Google to stop Internet filtering, otherwise pull out of CCP China) is surprising, but not a determined result (to pull out) yet. The Chinese text added some extra meanings with "seemingly", "impossible", "surprise (to the enemy)". The original text didn't exclude the possibility that Google really quit CCP China as a result, but it only say that currently it's not for sure. But the Chinese translation implied that Google in fact will not quit China: "looks impossible in any case", which excluded the "possibility". This is to suggest to the reader that Google can't abandon the interests in China, which serves as a hint for the later conspiracy theory.
5. 小标题的对比：Comparison of sub-headings
English 英文：PR coup?
Chinese 汉文：公关伎俩 PR trick
评：这里是仅次于标题的最大修改。原文 coup 查《美国传统词典》的解释是：A brilliantly executed stratagem; a masterstroke. 是个中性乃至褒义词。而汉文的“伎俩”是贬义词。精确的翻译应该是“公关妙计？” 译者还很仔细地把原文的表示疑问的问号给去掉了，增强了该文记者支持其所报道的观点的印象。而上述第一条中，标题中本来没有问号的，却被特意加上了问号， 暗示翻译者不相信谷歌退出中共国会损害中美关系。这也是中共官方的标准立场。:)
Comment: This is the biggest modification next to that in the title. The original text "coup" was explained in "American Heritage Dictionary" as "A brilliantly executed stratagem; a masterstroke.", which is a neutral or commendatory term, while the Chinese term "伎俩" is derogative. An accurate translation should be "公关妙计？" The translation even carefully removed the question mark. This enhanced the impression that the reporter supports the viewpoints expressed in the report. In contrary, as mentioned in the first item of this list, there was no question mark in the original title, while intentionally added with a question mark in the translation, which implies that the translator doesn't believe that Google's pullout would damage the US-China bond. This is exactly the same as the standard stance of the CCP government. :)
6. 文意对比：Comparison of meaning
English 英文：A lot of people have suggested this is the year when Google’s PR will turn negative, when people will see it as the new Microsoft
Chinese 汉文：很多人早已经预言今年将是谷歌的公关攻势变得适得其反的一年，人们将把谷歌公司看作是一个新的微软。 A lot of people predicted that this year will be the year that the PR attack by Google will back fire. People will regard Google company as a new Microsoft.
评：这里有曲译。原文的意思是，许多人认为今年谷歌的公共关系将变得负面，被人认为是新的如微软的垄断者。汉文翻译增加了“攻势”“适得其反”，这是原文 没有的含义。原文说的是人们对谷歌的公共印象的转变，而汉文版添加了误导读者的内容，说谷歌展开宣传攻势，结果搬起石头砸了自己的脚。:)
Comment: Here there are some inaccurate translations. The original meaning was that many people thought that the public image of Google will turn negative in this year, because it was regarded as a new monopoly like Microsoft. The Chinese translation added words like "attacking posture" "backfire", which were not expressed in the original text. The original text means people changed their impression of Google, while the Chinese version added some misleading content saying that Google started some propaganda war which resulted in shooting its own feet.
7. 文意对比：Comparison of meaning
English 英文：I think this is a massive PR-scoop for Google in the Western world
Chinese 汉文：我认为这一举动为谷歌公司在西方世界炒作了一番 I think this action started a mass hype for Google in the Western world
评：细微差别。scoop 的意思是：To top or outmaneuver (a competitor) in acquiring and publishing an important news story. 抢先获得抢在（对手）之前获得和发布重要新闻消息。massive PR-scoop 的意思是，重大的公关内幕新闻。炒作这条新闻的不是谷歌，而是报道谷歌声明的媒体。汉文版特别添加了“炒作了一番”，而且主语是谷歌的“这一举动”，说是 谷歌在炒作。:)
Comment: Tiny differences are here. "Scoop" means "To top or outmaneuver (a competitor) in acquiring and publishing an important news story." "Massive PR-scoop" means an important inside story and exclusive news report of public relationship. The person who made hype of this news was not Google, but those media who reported on the Google announcement. The Chinese version specifically added the term "made a hype out of it", and the subject is "this action" of Google. It means that it's Google who made the hype.
8. 文意对比：Comparison of meaning
English 英文：In terms of Google’s negotiations on a variety of issues with the US and European authorities it can now pull this out of the bag and say
Chinese 汉文：就谷歌公司和美国以及欧洲各国政府就各类议题的讨价还价而言，谷歌现在终于找到了应对办法。 As for the paltering of Google with the governments of the US and European countries, Google has finally found their countermeasure now.
评：原文 negotiation 是商议，谈判，汉文版翻译成稍带贬义的“讨价还价”。原文说，它（谷歌）现在可以拿这件事作为自己道德优越的说辞，而汉文版读来似乎是，以前谷歌在和欧美 政府谈判(它的垄断问题)时一筹莫展，“现在终于找到了应对方法”。这是曲译，添加了原文没有的含义。
Comment: In the original text, "negotiation" means "discussion and talk". The Chinese translation “讨价还价” has sort of derogative sense. The original text means that Google now can use this issue to prove its superiority of moral standard, while the Chinese version reads more like this: Before this, Google had no way out in the negotiation with the US and European governments (for the problem of monopoly), until it found the method to tackle with it now. This is inaccurate translation which added extra meanings not expressed in the original text.
文中提到的荷兰专家 Henk van Ess 另有一篇关于谷歌退出中共国的荷兰语访谈 [3]，他认为谷歌的威胁声明背后有更多原因（er méér achter het dreigement van Google zit.）。荷兰专家和记者把谷歌的声明说成是“威胁 dreigement”，是错误的理解。我认为谷歌的声明是被迫无奈的宣言，是自我表白，意思是，“你再搞我我就不干了，我惹不起还躲不起吗？” 丝毫没有威胁的意思。
The Dutch expert Henk van Ess as mentioned in the report has another interview in Dutch language about Google's pullout from CCP China. He thought that there are more reasons behind the "threat announcement" of Google. It's a mistaken understanding for the Dutch experts and journalists to take Google's announcement as a "threat dreigement". I think Google's announcement was out of pressure by the CCP government. It's a self declaration saying that "if you continue to harass me, I'd simply quit. Can't I escape if I can't fight back?" There is nothing of a threat.
读罢这篇报道和精致歪曲的翻译稿，我想到一个词来描述：spin。
After reading this report and the delicate distorted translation, one word came up to my mind: spin.
这篇报道的汉文翻译，就是高超的 spin 技巧的表现。哈哈 spin 这个词，体现人类的语言有类似处。翻译成汉文“忽悠”，最为贴切了，都是让你被转悠得头昏眼花迷失真相。:)
The Chinese translation of this report is exactly a demonstration of highly skilled spin. :D The word "spin" reflected the common sense of human languages. It's best translated into Chinese as "忽悠 (cheat by shaking)". It's so appropriate: both words mean to shake or spin your head in order to make you dizzy, so as to mask the facts from your eyes.
强烈建议荷兰国际广播电台：汉文翻译的译者必须署名，且给出原文链接，因为作为汉文读者，我发现翻译版难以信任，且翻译者的信用和原文报道记者对读者一样 重要。我不希望看匿名的翻译报道。
I strongly suggest RNW should publish with each translated report also the name of the translator and the URL link to the original language of the report for the readers to get an accurate understanding. Because as a Chinese reader, I feel that I can't trust the Chinese translation any more. The credit of the translator is as important as that of the original reporter. I don't like to read anonymous translations which is often misleading.
参考：
References
[1] 谷歌退出中国：是有损中美关系之举？还是公关伎俩？ 13 January 2010 - 5:56pm; http://www.rnw.nl/zh-hans/Google_pullout_would_damage_US_China_bond
[2] Marijke Peters: Google pullout would damage US-China bond; 13 January 2010 - 3:57pm; http://www.rnw.nl/english/article/google-pullout-would-damage-us-china-bond
[3] Google dreigt China na cyberaanval op G-mail; Gepubliceerd 13 januari 2010 - 3:44 am; http://www.rnw.nl/nl/nederlands/article/google-dreigt-china-na-cyberaanval-op-g-mail
与朋友的讨论：
Discussions with friends
lihlii:
对照英文版 http://www.rnw.nl/english/article/google-pullout-would-damage-us-china-bond 你会发现汉语翻译的诡计。;)
Refer to the English version of this report, you will find the spinning trick made by the Chinese translator.
lihlii:
http://www.rnw.nl/zh-hans/Google_pullout_would_damage_US_China_bond 荷兰国际广播电台也出这种烂报道。 荷兰，英国多不乏免费的五毛狗呀。:) 荷兰国际广播电台被五毛狗占据，真是幸福呀。:) 这报道的标题，和“你是愿意吃屎呢，还是愿意喝尿呢”有什么区别呀？:) http://is.gd/6vBN6
a: :( they are everywhere!
lihlii: 唉。也许荷兰人反美情绪严重，我感到的。他们老是耻笑美国人。hehe 我的同事去美国开会回来，必谈美国人的笑话。:) 但谷歌这事情，不应该如此撒谎啊。
a: 天真？无知？
lihlii:
这报道中也有所谓英国的搜索引擎专家。
荷兰有文化传统，鄙视强权，支持弱者。但谷歌这次面对的是强权，是弱者一方啊。
这篇报道里的人语气里很反感谷歌在全世界的“垄断”。好像在中共国，谷歌没法成为第一搜索引擎，反倒替他们出了口气似的。:)
我认为他们在英国，荷兰，骂谷歌倒也罢了，这件事情是关于中共国黑帮镇压谷歌的后果，他们太糊涂了。
我认为这“报道”完全失去了平衡报道的立场，太失水准了，只有一方面的歪曲说词，标题用了中共国人给谷歌献花的照片，但是报道中只字不提！
这啥意思啊。
a: 英国骂谷歌的还不多！多数还是从 CENSORSHIP 角度来评论的
lihlii: 标题照片倒是荷兰通信社 ANP 的，隐藏在图片说明里文字：中国网民在谷歌中国总部门口献花。呵呵。
lihlii:
http://www.rnw.nl/english/article/google-pullout-would-damage-us-china-bond
看看报道原样！我的天啊！是荷兰电台中文部的网狗在捣鬼啊！报道的风格大变。
她本来意思是提供另一方面的说辞，结果中文翻译改标题删节内容，成了记者支持诋毁谷歌了。:) 翻译很有技巧。
哈哈，看起来基本按照原文内容，但是耍了好多花招啊。唉，中共国走狗真是越来越厉害了。
公关伎俩 标题去掉了问号。原文是：PR coup? suprise 本意是惊讶，翻译成"出其不意", 增加阴谋色彩。
厉害吧。仿佛谷歌是在搞一个出其不意的阴谋。
真厉害。这群潜伏在外国媒体的中共国走狗，可以想象他们翻译时内心的矛盾和气愤，非要从翻译中表现出立场来。:)
a: 这是中文五毛翻译上常用的手段，不知他们是真没看懂，还是有意这样做的。英广一些人中英文水平都很差
lihlii:
唉，我想联系 marijke peters 提醒她。但是很难解释清楚呢。因为这诡计真的很巧妙。
非要很精通汉语的人才能理解其中的微妙差异，色彩改变。佩服啊佩服。
翻译者还可以狡辩，我为了文字修饰，你看，我把标题改得好看，都是四个字！如果直译，就不好看了。
No more filters 翻译成 “网络审查”。
a: 最好是把关键部分给她说明，问他的原意是什么？
lihlii:
否定成了肯定。嗯，我看看荷兰文报道。至少英文应该不会篡改。
你看，把“公关伎俩”和“出其不意”联系起来，给你一种很强的阴谋印象。
哈哈，太绝了。
呵呵 可我没信心能解释清楚。当面对质都难。翻译者可以狡辩啊。我都为翻译想好了狡辩的方法。
看英文我的理解是，这个记者是发现一些不同的看法，所以报道出来。
看汉语我感觉是记者站在鄙视谷歌的立场上。这太微妙了。
The difference is so subtle, very tricky. haha smart translator.
One user response under the English report is also funny. one guy from Belgium asked:
I searched site:rnw.nl google china for latest reports. They didn't do balanced coverage. Maybe they fear to irritate CCP.
http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&safe=off&rlz=1C1CHMG_enNL301NL303&tbo=1&q=site:rnw.nl%20google%20china&tbs=qdr:w&ei=TlhUS__nIsbRjAeZ_uzVCw&sa=X&oi=tool&resnum=4&ct=tlink&ved=0CB8QpwU
Only marijke's report from another view angle, and reuters report about chinese nationalists' reaction to google.
http://www.rnw.nl/int-justice/article/google-drama-stokes-online-nationalism-regret-china
The photo of Chinese people saluting to Google was used, but not reported in the text.
这样的报道很容易被中共利用到《参考消息》《环球时报》里去骗中共国人：你看，荷兰媒体也支持我们，鄙视谷歌！
本来平衡的报道它们都会剪裁歪曲，更别说这种展示一面之词的报道了。
a: @MarijkePeters is her twitter, she used to be a reporter on a London local newspaper Hampstead & Highgate.
lihlii:
haha she is online. Pity I didn't find this message on Jan 13, otherwise I'll say something.
But it's also good that I find this tricky translation of her report. I think even she realized, she won't conflict with her chinese colleagues.
She is new to twitter. :) Got on twitter from Oct 8th 2009
My impression is the chinese version is not "quite different",
but gives the reader a false impression of the intention of the report by making very subtle changes in the translation. :)
especially the question of "PR coup?" was changed to affirmative "公关伎俩"
also, coup means "A brilliantly executed stratagem; a masterstroke." from american heritage dictionary.
it's postive, right? when it's used as a strategy. but “伎俩” is derogative in chinese. very bad. coup,
精确的翻译应该是“公关计谋？” 计谋 is neutral or positive, as coup.
标题是肯定的表述：Google pullout would damage US-China bond 反倒被翻译成疑问 是有损中美关系之举？
还加上了另一个嘲讽性的疑问：还是公关伎俩？this changed the overall rhetoric mood of the report.
so tricky!
a: it's the nuance of the text
lihlii:
Spin:
The distinctive complex of connotations or implications inherent in a point of view:
暗示一种观点所内在的涵义或意义的有特色的组合：
Dryden . . . was adept at putting spin on an apparently neutral recital of facts -Robert M. Adams
“德莱登善于加油添醋的叙述中立的事实”(罗伯特M.亚当斯)
这篇报道就是 spin 技巧的表现。哈哈 spin 这个词，体现人类的语言有类似处。翻译成汉文“忽悠”，最为贴切了。:)
荷兰，英国多不乏免费的五毛狗 呀。:) 荷兰国际广播电台被五毛狗占据，真是幸福呀。:) 这报道的标题，和“你是愿意吃屎呢，还是愿意喝尿呢”有什么区别呀？:) http://is.gd/6vBN6about 1 hour ago from web
Hi, Marijke, I think your report http://is.gd/6vHpX was distorted in the Chinese translation http://is.gd/6vMNx@MarijkePeters22 minutes ago from web
MarijkePeters anyone out there a "google watcher" ? need someone to interview for radio prog in next 2 hours12:03 PM Jan 13th from web
a: I think the main problem is in the captions of the article, isn't it? A good journalist should know how important captions & subtitles are.
lihlii:
yes, it totally changed the meaning of the article. 用网络语言叫做标题党。哈哈
给人先入为主的印象，让你读起来就感觉大不相同了。
a: can distort the meaning of the entire article.
lihlii:
嗯。这不是一篇平衡报道，也是被看中作为添油加醋利用的目标的原因。容易被利用啊。
这是反映一种观点的报道，在自由社会的新闻报道中是有必要的，显示和大部分人看法不一致的那一方，
但是却经常被如此利用！
http://www.rnw.nl/zh-hans/Google_pullout_would_damage_US_China_bond#comment-19141
谷歌退出中国：是有损中美关系之举？还是公关伎俩？
发表于 : 13 January 2010 - 5:56pm | By Marijke Peters
参阅同类文章： 互联网 网络自由 谷歌 黑客
鉴于人权活动人士的Gmail邮箱遭到黑客攻击以及中国的网络审查制度，谷歌日前威胁将全面退出中国市场，此举有可能损害中美关系。但一些网络专家却认 为，谷歌的声明有可能是这个全球搜索引擎巨头的公关伎俩。
谷歌公司12日宣布，由于发现人权活动人士使用的谷歌旗下的Gmail电邮账号受到黑客高水平的攻击，公司有可能将关闭其在中国的业务和网站。谷歌表示， 去年12月发生网络攻击并非仅仅是单纯的网络安全事件，至少其他20家公司也成为黑客的攻击目标。
网络审查
谷歌今天停止了在中国过滤搜索结果，一些过去被过滤的内容，比如有关达赖喇嘛、六四事件的网页和图片又重新在谷歌中文搜索引擎上出现。谷歌方面表示，公司 将在未来几周内与中国政府进行商议，不过他们已经得到了美国国务卿希拉里·克林顿的支持。克林顿在一份声明中表示：“我们希望中国政府就此给出解释。互联 网的可靠性对现代社会和经济至关重要。”
出其不意
荷兰谷歌专家Henk van Ess对荷兰国际广播电台表示，谷歌的这一怎么看都不可能是必然之举的举动貌似“出其不意”，然而它却不仅仅是出于对黑客攻击的指控。
“我对此有一点点怀疑，因为黑客攻击Gmail电子邮箱的理由说穿了还不至于让谷歌作出退出中国的决定。我认为这其中还有更深层的原因。”
"最重要的一点是：谷歌几乎在所有的国家都是排名第一。然而中国却是例外，在那里他们排名第二…. 因此在短期内这么做或许是明智的。但长远来看，这将是一场灾难。”
公关伎俩
然而尽管分析人士们称谷歌退出中国将有损谷歌公司的利益，一些人却将谷歌公司的声明视为一个公关伎俩。驻英搜索引擎专家Ciarán Norris认为，这一举动实际上可能将谷歌公司推上一个更有利的讨价还价的位置。
“很多人早已经预言今年将是谷歌的公关攻势变得适得其反的一年，人们将把谷歌公司看作是一个新的微软：过于庞大，过于臃肿，过于强势。实际上，我认为这一 举动为谷歌公司在西方世界炒作了一番，同时也给很多其它仍在运营中文网站的西方公司施加了压力 … 迫使他们也采取一些类似的举动。”
"就谷歌公司和美国以及欧洲各国政府就各类议题的讨价还价而言，谷歌现在终于找到了应对办法，他们可以说：“我们把道义置于盈利之上，还有谁也愿意这么 做？”
请听驻英搜索引擎专家Ciarán Norris的采访录音（英文）：
Tracy
18 January 2010 - 2:53pm / The Netherlands
reply
翻译的人要么是白痴，很愚蠢，不懂中英文还要翻译，要么是邪恶的，在小细节做手脚，却在大意上扭曲了本意。
The translator is either too stupid to master both languages, chinese and english either too evil to distort the orginal meaning of the article.
lihlii
18 January 2010 - 2:30pm / Netherlands
I strongly suggest RNW should publish with each translated report also the name of the translator and the URL link to the original language of the report for the readers to get an accurate understanding. Because as a Chinese reader, I feel that I can't trust the Chinese translation any more. The credit of the translator is as important as that of the original reporter. I don't like to read anonymous translations which is often misleading.
lihlii
18 January 2010 - 2:25pm / ??
强烈建议荷兰国际广播电台，汉文翻译的译者必须署名，且给出原文链接，因为作为汉文读者，我发现翻译版难以信任，且翻译者的信用和原文报道记者对读者一样 重要。我不希望看匿名的翻译报道。
lihlii
18 January 2010 - 2:20pm / ??
对照英文版 http://www.rnw.nl/english/article/google-pullout-would-damage-us-china-bond 你会发现汉语翻译的诡计。;)
Refer to the English version of this report, you will find the spinning trick made by the Chinese translator.
http://www.rnw.nl/english/article/google-pullout-would-damage-us-china-bond
Google pullout would damage US-China bond
Published on : 13 January 2010 - 3:57pm | By Marijke Peters
Filed under: Asia China internet browser US-Sino relations
Google’s threat to pull out of China over allegations of hacking is threatening to damage the Beijing’s relationship with the White House. But some internet experts say the announcement may be a PR-coup for the internet giant.
Google said this morning it may withdraw from the fastest-growing economy in the world after uncovering “highly sophisticated” cyber attacks on Chinese human rights activists. It was one of 20 international companies targeted by internet spies who apparently hacked into email accounts of activists all over the world.
No more filters
Today Google stopped filtering internet requests in China, and searches for sensitive subjects like the Dalai Lama revealed results that are normally blocked by Google.cn. The company says it will hold talks with Chinese authorities in coming weeks but it has already received the backing of US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, who said in a statement:
“We look to the Chinese government for an explanation. The ability to operate with confidence in cyberspace is critical in a modern society and economy.”
Surprise
Dutch Google-expert Henk van Ess told RNW the proposal – by no means a certainty – came as a “surprise” but was not only based on the allegations of hacking:
“I’m a little bit suspicious about this possible decision because the reason – hacking Gmail accounts – is, to put it bluntly, a little bit small to base a decision to leave China on. I think there are deeper-lying reasons why Google has plans to leave.
"The most important thing is that Google is in almost every country the number 1 – but not in China. They’re the number 2…. So in the short-term it would be wise to do this. Long-term it would be a disaster.”
Listen to an interview with UK-based Google expert Ciarán Norris
PR coup?
But although analysts say not operating in China may damage Google’s business interests, some people see the announcement as a PR-coup. Ciarán Norris is a search engine expert based in the UK and says it might actually put the company in a better bargaining position:
“A lot of people have suggested this is the year when Google’s PR will turn negative, when people will see it as the new Microsoft: too big, too unwieldy, too powerful. Actually, I think this is a massive PR-scoop for Google in the Western world and is actually going to put pressure on a lot of other Western companies who still are operating on the Chinese web… for them to do something similar.
"In terms of Google’s negotiations on a variety of issues with the US and European authorities it can now pull this out of the bag and say: ‘we put morals before revenue, who else is willing to do that?’”
Today I read one Chinese news report on the RNW website about comments on Google's "pullout" announcement by two Internet experts. I was amazed by the title and overall tone of this report. What is especially interesting is that the title of the Chinese version of the report completely excluded other reasonable possibilities from the option list in its way of questioning, exactly the same as those "public opinion polls" conducted by many state propaganda mouthpieces.
谷歌退出中国：是有损中美关系之举？还是公关伎俩？这简直是在侮辱读者的智商: 是 A，还是 B? 不让你选择还有 C, D, ... :) 这种虚假的选择题或者设问句，简直令人喷饭。这报道的标题，和“你是愿意吃屎呢，还是愿意喝尿呢”有什么区别呀？:)
Google pulls out China: Is it a damage to US-China bond? Or is it a PR trick?
This is nearly an insult at the reader's IQ: Is it A, or is it B? But they don't allow you to choose from C, D, ... :) This kind of false optional choice or rhetoric questions always make me laugh. What's the difference between this title and the optional question: "Do you want to eat shit, or do you want to drink urine?"
读罢全文，好奇去搜寻原文报道[2]，才发现汉文翻译做了很多精巧的处理，从细节上扭曲了整篇报道的语气。有趣的细节对比如下：
After I finished the whole article, I'm curious to search for the original report [2]. Only after that, I found that the Chinese translation did a lot of subtle work which distorted the overall neutral tone of this report from nuances in the text. Some of the interesting details are compared as following:
1. 标题对比：Comparison of the title
English 英文: Google pullout would damage US-China bond
Chinese 汉文：谷歌退出中国：是有损中美关系之举？还是公关伎俩？ Google pulls out China: Is it a damage to US-China bond? Or is it a PR trick?
评：原文标题是肯定的表述，被翻译成选择疑问句，还加上了另一个嘲讽性的贬义的疑问。
Comment: The original title is affirmative, but was translated into an optional question, adding an extra question with a jeering derogatory sense.
2. 小标题的对比：Comparison of sub-headings
English 英文：No more filters
Chinese 汉文：网络审查 Internet Censorship
评：从否定式的“不再过滤”，翻译成了肯定式表达的“网络审查”。削弱了谷歌终止配合作恶的事实描述。
Comment: Changed from negative "no more filters" into affirmative "Internet Censorship", which weakened the description of the fact that Google stops to cooperate on wrongdoings.
3. 小标题的对比：Comparison of sub-headings
English 英文：Surprise
Chinese 汉文：出其不意 Out of one's expectations
评：英文只有“令人惊讶”“意外之举”的含义，汉文“出其不意”往往用于描述进攻性的策略，在这里加强了阴谋论色彩。英文中，赠送礼物给与意外惊喜可以说 Surprise，但汉文“出其不意”并不常用于这种情形，而更常用于出其不意的“打击”，因为此成语来自“出其不意，攻其不备”。看英文上下文，意思是 出乎公众和专家的预料，而汉文“出其不意”的“其”何所指呢？难以解释为公众和专家，因为谷歌这项声明并不是针对公众和专家来发出的，而是针对中共政府发 出的。孤立来看，这是一个细微的翻译不当，但结合上下文提到的对原文的精巧修改，就可以理解其刻意用笔之细致入微。
Comment: The English term only has the meaning of "making one surprised", "out of expectation", while the Chinese term is generally used to describe strategy of attack, which enhanced the color of conspiracy here. In English, it's a "surprise" when a gift was given to a person out of his expectation, but you can hardly say "出其不意" in Chinese in this condition, as it's mostly used in the context of "a sudden attack", because it comes from the idiom "out of one's expectation, attack where he didn't prepare for". As we read the context of the English text, it means the announcement is out of the expectation of the public and experts. But which is the "one" who is to be surprised by a sudden attack in the Chinese text? It can't be explained as the public or experts, since Google's announcement is not targeted at the public or experts, but toward the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) government. If you take it as an isolated point, it's only a small different or improper translation. But when you read it in the combined context including the other subtle modifications to the original text, you will understand the intentional particularity of it.
4. 文意对比：Comparison of meaning
English 英文：the proposal – by no means a certainty – came as a “surprise”
Chinese 汉文：谷歌的这一怎么看都不可能是必然之举的举动貌似“出其不意” this action looks impossible in any case to be a certain action, though seemingly a "surprise (to the enemy)".
评：英文的意思我理解是说，（谷歌关于取消网络过滤，要不然就退出中共国的）建议令人惊讶，但并非（退出）已成定局。汉文添加了“貌似”，“不可能”， “出其不意”等添油加醋的内容。原文并没有排除谷歌真的会退出中共国，只是说目前尚未决定；但汉文翻译成了肯定不会退出：“怎么看都不可能”，排除了“可 能”。这是为了表示，谷歌不舍得退出中共国的，为下文的阴谋论铺垫。
Comment: What I understand from the English text is that the proposal (of Google to stop Internet filtering, otherwise pull out of CCP China) is surprising, but not a determined result (to pull out) yet. The Chinese text added some extra meanings with "seemingly", "impossible", "surprise (to the enemy)". The original text didn't exclude the possibility that Google really quit CCP China as a result, but it only say that currently it's not for sure. But the Chinese translation implied that Google in fact will not quit China: "looks impossible in any case", which excluded the "possibility". This is to suggest to the reader that Google can't abandon the interests in China, which serves as a hint for the later conspiracy theory.
5. 小标题的对比：Comparison of sub-headings
English 英文：PR coup?
Chinese 汉文：公关伎俩 PR trick
评：这里是仅次于标题的最大修改。原文 coup 查《美国传统词典》的解释是：A brilliantly executed stratagem; a masterstroke. 是个中性乃至褒义词。而汉文的“伎俩”是贬义词。精确的翻译应该是“公关妙计？” 译者还很仔细地把原文的表示疑问的问号给去掉了，增强了该文记者支持其所报道的观点的印象。而上述第一条中，标题中本来没有问号的，却被特意加上了问号， 暗示翻译者不相信谷歌退出中共国会损害中美关系。这也是中共官方的标准立场。:)
Comment: This is the biggest modification next to that in the title. The original text "coup" was explained in "American Heritage Dictionary" as "A brilliantly executed stratagem; a masterstroke.", which is a neutral or commendatory term, while the Chinese term "伎俩" is derogative. An accurate translation should be "公关妙计？" The translation even carefully removed the question mark. This enhanced the impression that the reporter supports the viewpoints expressed in the report. In contrary, as mentioned in the first item of this list, there was no question mark in the original title, while intentionally added with a question mark in the translation, which implies that the translator doesn't believe that Google's pullout would damage the US-China bond. This is exactly the same as the standard stance of the CCP government. :)
6. 文意对比：Comparison of meaning
English 英文：A lot of people have suggested this is the year when Google’s PR will turn negative, when people will see it as the new Microsoft
Chinese 汉文：很多人早已经预言今年将是谷歌的公关攻势变得适得其反的一年，人们将把谷歌公司看作是一个新的微软。 A lot of people predicted that this year will be the year that the PR attack by Google will back fire. People will regard Google company as a new Microsoft.
评：这里有曲译。原文的意思是，许多人认为今年谷歌的公共关系将变得负面，被人认为是新的如微软的垄断者。汉文翻译增加了“攻势”“适得其反”，这是原文 没有的含义。原文说的是人们对谷歌的公共印象的转变，而汉文版添加了误导读者的内容，说谷歌展开宣传攻势，结果搬起石头砸了自己的脚。:)
Comment: Here there are some inaccurate translations. The original meaning was that many people thought that the public image of Google will turn negative in this year, because it was regarded as a new monopoly like Microsoft. The Chinese translation added words like "attacking posture" "backfire", which were not expressed in the original text. The original text means people changed their impression of Google, while the Chinese version added some misleading content saying that Google started some propaganda war which resulted in shooting its own feet.
7. 文意对比：Comparison of meaning
English 英文：I think this is a massive PR-scoop for Google in the Western world
Chinese 汉文：我认为这一举动为谷歌公司在西方世界炒作了一番 I think this action started a mass hype for Google in the Western world
评：细微差别。scoop 的意思是：To top or outmaneuver (a competitor) in acquiring and publishing an important news story. 抢先获得抢在（对手）之前获得和发布重要新闻消息。massive PR-scoop 的意思是，重大的公关内幕新闻。炒作这条新闻的不是谷歌，而是报道谷歌声明的媒体。汉文版特别添加了“炒作了一番”，而且主语是谷歌的“这一举动”，说是 谷歌在炒作。:)
Comment: Tiny differences are here. "Scoop" means "To top or outmaneuver (a competitor) in acquiring and publishing an important news story." "Massive PR-scoop" means an important inside story and exclusive news report of public relationship. The person who made hype of this news was not Google, but those media who reported on the Google announcement. The Chinese version specifically added the term "made a hype out of it", and the subject is "this action" of Google. It means that it's Google who made the hype.
8. 文意对比：Comparison of meaning
English 英文：In terms of Google’s negotiations on a variety of issues with the US and European authorities it can now pull this out of the bag and say
Chinese 汉文：就谷歌公司和美国以及欧洲各国政府就各类议题的讨价还价而言，谷歌现在终于找到了应对办法。 As for the paltering of Google with the governments of the US and European countries, Google has finally found their countermeasure now.
评：原文 negotiation 是商议，谈判，汉文版翻译成稍带贬义的“讨价还价”。原文说，它（谷歌）现在可以拿这件事作为自己道德优越的说辞，而汉文版读来似乎是，以前谷歌在和欧美 政府谈判(它的垄断问题)时一筹莫展，“现在终于找到了应对方法”。这是曲译，添加了原文没有的含义。
Comment: In the original text, "negotiation" means "discussion and talk". The Chinese translation “讨价还价” has sort of derogative sense. The original text means that Google now can use this issue to prove its superiority of moral standard, while the Chinese version reads more like this: Before this, Google had no way out in the negotiation with the US and European governments (for the problem of monopoly), until it found the method to tackle with it now. This is inaccurate translation which added extra meanings not expressed in the original text.
文中提到的荷兰专家 Henk van Ess 另有一篇关于谷歌退出中共国的荷兰语访谈 [3]，他认为谷歌的威胁声明背后有更多原因（er méér achter het dreigement van Google zit.）。荷兰专家和记者把谷歌的声明说成是“威胁 dreigement”，是错误的理解。我认为谷歌的声明是被迫无奈的宣言，是自我表白，意思是，“你再搞我我就不干了，我惹不起还躲不起吗？” 丝毫没有威胁的意思。
The Dutch expert Henk van Ess as mentioned in the report has another interview in Dutch language about Google's pullout from CCP China. He thought that there are more reasons behind the "threat announcement" of Google. It's a mistaken understanding for the Dutch experts and journalists to take Google's announcement as a "threat dreigement". I think Google's announcement was out of pressure by the CCP government. It's a self declaration saying that "if you continue to harass me, I'd simply quit. Can't I escape if I can't fight back?" There is nothing of a threat.
读罢这篇报道和精致歪曲的翻译稿，我想到一个词来描述：spin。
After reading this report and the delicate distorted translation, one word came up to my mind: spin.
Spin: The distinctive complex of connotations or implications inherent in a point of view: 暗示一种观点所内在的涵义或意义的有特色的组合：
例句 Eample: Dryden . . . was adept at putting spin on an apparently neutral recital of facts - Robert M. Adams
“德莱登善于加油添醋的叙述中立的事实”(罗伯特 M. 亚当斯)
这篇报道的汉文翻译，就是高超的 spin 技巧的表现。哈哈 spin 这个词，体现人类的语言有类似处。翻译成汉文“忽悠”，最为贴切了，都是让你被转悠得头昏眼花迷失真相。:)
The Chinese translation of this report is exactly a demonstration of highly skilled spin. :D The word "spin" reflected the common sense of human languages. It's best translated into Chinese as "忽悠 (cheat by shaking)". It's so appropriate: both words mean to shake or spin your head in order to make you dizzy, so as to mask the facts from your eyes.
强烈建议荷兰国际广播电台：汉文翻译的译者必须署名，且给出原文链接，因为作为汉文读者，我发现翻译版难以信任，且翻译者的信用和原文报道记者对读者一样 重要。我不希望看匿名的翻译报道。
I strongly suggest RNW should publish with each translated report also the name of the translator and the URL link to the original language of the report for the readers to get an accurate understanding. Because as a Chinese reader, I feel that I can't trust the Chinese translation any more. The credit of the translator is as important as that of the original reporter. I don't like to read anonymous translations which is often misleading.
参考：
References
[1] 谷歌退出中国：是有损中美关系之举？还是公关伎俩？ 13 January 2010 - 5:56pm; http://www.rnw.nl/zh-hans/Google_pullout_would_damage_US_China_bond
[2] Marijke Peters: Google pullout would damage US-China bond; 13 January 2010 - 3:57pm; http://www.rnw.nl/english/article/google-pullout-would-damage-us-china-bond
[3] Google dreigt China na cyberaanval op G-mail; Gepubliceerd 13 januari 2010 - 3:44 am; http://www.rnw.nl/nl/nederlands/article/google-dreigt-china-na-cyberaanval-op-g-mail
与朋友的讨论：
Discussions with friends
lihlii:
对照英文版 http://www.rnw.nl/english/article/google-pullout-would-damage-us-china-bond 你会发现汉语翻译的诡计。;)
Refer to the English version of this report, you will find the spinning trick made by the Chinese translator.
lihlii:
http://www.rnw.nl/zh-hans/Google_pullout_would_damage_US_China_bond 荷兰国际广播电台也出这种烂报道。 荷兰，英国多不乏免费的五毛狗呀。:) 荷兰国际广播电台被五毛狗占据，真是幸福呀。:) 这报道的标题，和“你是愿意吃屎呢，还是愿意喝尿呢”有什么区别呀？:) http://is.gd/6vBN6
a: :( they are everywhere!
lihlii: 唉。也许荷兰人反美情绪严重，我感到的。他们老是耻笑美国人。hehe 我的同事去美国开会回来，必谈美国人的笑话。:) 但谷歌这事情，不应该如此撒谎啊。
a: 天真？无知？
lihlii:
这报道中也有所谓英国的搜索引擎专家。
荷兰有文化传统，鄙视强权，支持弱者。但谷歌这次面对的是强权，是弱者一方啊。
这篇报道里的人语气里很反感谷歌在全世界的“垄断”。好像在中共国，谷歌没法成为第一搜索引擎，反倒替他们出了口气似的。:)
我认为他们在英国，荷兰，骂谷歌倒也罢了，这件事情是关于中共国黑帮镇压谷歌的后果，他们太糊涂了。
我认为这“报道”完全失去了平衡报道的立场，太失水准了，只有一方面的歪曲说词，标题用了中共国人给谷歌献花的照片，但是报道中只字不提！
这啥意思啊。
a: 英国骂谷歌的还不多！多数还是从 CENSORSHIP 角度来评论的
lihlii: 标题照片倒是荷兰通信社 ANP 的，隐藏在图片说明里文字：中国网民在谷歌中国总部门口献花。呵呵。
lihlii:
http://www.rnw.nl/english/article/google-pullout-would-damage-us-china-bond
看看报道原样！我的天啊！是荷兰电台中文部的网狗在捣鬼啊！报道的风格大变。
她本来意思是提供另一方面的说辞，结果中文翻译改标题删节内容，成了记者支持诋毁谷歌了。:) 翻译很有技巧。
哈哈，看起来基本按照原文内容，但是耍了好多花招啊。唉，中共国走狗真是越来越厉害了。
公关伎俩 标题去掉了问号。原文是：PR coup? suprise 本意是惊讶，翻译成"出其不意", 增加阴谋色彩。
厉害吧。仿佛谷歌是在搞一个出其不意的阴谋。
真厉害。这群潜伏在外国媒体的中共国走狗，可以想象他们翻译时内心的矛盾和气愤，非要从翻译中表现出立场来。:)
a: 这是中文五毛翻译上常用的手段，不知他们是真没看懂，还是有意这样做的。英广一些人中英文水平都很差
lihlii:
唉，我想联系 marijke peters 提醒她。但是很难解释清楚呢。因为这诡计真的很巧妙。
非要很精通汉语的人才能理解其中的微妙差异，色彩改变。佩服啊佩服。
翻译者还可以狡辩，我为了文字修饰，你看，我把标题改得好看，都是四个字！如果直译，就不好看了。
No more filters 翻译成 “网络审查”。
a: 最好是把关键部分给她说明，问他的原意是什么？
lihlii:
否定成了肯定。嗯，我看看荷兰文报道。至少英文应该不会篡改。
你看，把“公关伎俩”和“出其不意”联系起来，给你一种很强的阴谋印象。
哈哈，太绝了。
呵呵 可我没信心能解释清楚。当面对质都难。翻译者可以狡辩啊。我都为翻译想好了狡辩的方法。
看英文我的理解是，这个记者是发现一些不同的看法，所以报道出来。
看汉语我感觉是记者站在鄙视谷歌的立场上。这太微妙了。
The difference is so subtle, very tricky. haha smart translator.
One user response under the English report is also funny. one guy from Belgium asked:
Boris Bocker
14 January 2010 - 2:56pm / Belgique
Is The Beijing like The Hague? 北京（当局）和海牙（当局）一样吗？
I searched site:rnw.nl google china for latest reports. They didn't do balanced coverage. Maybe they fear to irritate CCP.
http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&safe=off&rlz=1C1CHMG_enNL301NL303&tbo=1&q=site:rnw.nl%20google%20china&tbs=qdr:w&ei=TlhUS__nIsbRjAeZ_uzVCw&sa=X&oi=tool&resnum=4&ct=tlink&ved=0CB8QpwU
Only marijke's report from another view angle, and reuters report about chinese nationalists' reaction to google.
http://www.rnw.nl/int-justice/article/google-drama-stokes-online-nationalism-regret-china
The photo of Chinese people saluting to Google was used, but not reported in the text.
这样的报道很容易被中共利用到《参考消息》《环球时报》里去骗中共国人：你看，荷兰媒体也支持我们，鄙视谷歌！
本来平衡的报道它们都会剪裁歪曲，更别说这种展示一面之词的报道了。
a: @MarijkePeters is her twitter, she used to be a reporter on a London local newspaper Hampstead & Highgate.
lihlii:
anyone out there a "google watcher" ? need someone to interview for radio prog in next 2 hours http://twitter.com/MarijkePeters/status/7704516879
haha she is online. Pity I didn't find this message on Jan 13, otherwise I'll say something.
But it's also good that I find this tricky translation of her report. I think even she realized, she won't conflict with her chinese colleagues.
She is new to twitter. :) Got on twitter from Oct 8th 2009
i have no idea how this thing works
10:42 AM Oct 8th, 2009 from web
My impression is the chinese version is not "quite different",
but gives the reader a false impression of the intention of the report by making very subtle changes in the translation. :)
especially the question of "PR coup?" was changed to affirmative "公关伎俩"
also, coup means "A brilliantly executed stratagem; a masterstroke." from american heritage dictionary.
it's postive, right? when it's used as a strategy. but “伎俩” is derogative in chinese. very bad. coup,
精确的翻译应该是“公关计谋？” 计谋 is neutral or positive, as coup.
标题是肯定的表述：Google pullout would damage US-China bond 反倒被翻译成疑问 是有损中美关系之举？
还加上了另一个嘲讽性的疑问：还是公关伎俩？this changed the overall rhetoric mood of the report.
so tricky!
a: it's the nuance of the text
lihlii:
Spin:
The distinctive complex of connotations or implications inherent in a point of view:
暗示一种观点所内在的涵义或意义的有特色的组合：
Dryden . . . was adept at putting spin on an apparently neutral recital of facts -Robert M. Adams
“德莱登善于加油添醋的叙述中立的事实”(罗伯特M.亚当斯)
这篇报道就是 spin 技巧的表现。哈哈 spin 这个词，体现人类的语言有类似处。翻译成汉文“忽悠”，最为贴切了。:)
荷兰，英国多不乏免费的五毛狗 呀。:) 荷兰国际广播电台被五毛狗占据，真是幸福呀。:) 这报道的标题，和“你是愿意吃屎呢，还是愿意喝尿呢”有什么区别呀？:) http://is.gd/6vBN6about 1 hour ago from web
Hi, Marijke, I think your report http://is.gd/6vHpX was distorted in the Chinese translation http://is.gd/6vMNx@MarijkePeters22 minutes ago from web
MarijkePeters anyone out there a "google watcher" ? need someone to interview for radio prog in next 2 hours12:03 PM Jan 13th from web
a: I think the main problem is in the captions of the article, isn't it? A good journalist should know how important captions & subtitles are.
lihlii:
yes, it totally changed the meaning of the article. 用网络语言叫做标题党。哈哈
给人先入为主的印象，让你读起来就感觉大不相同了。
a: can distort the meaning of the entire article.
lihlii:
嗯。这不是一篇平衡报道，也是被看中作为添油加醋利用的目标的原因。容易被利用啊。
这是反映一种观点的报道，在自由社会的新闻报道中是有必要的，显示和大部分人看法不一致的那一方，
但是却经常被如此利用！
http://www.rnw.nl/zh-hans/Google_pullout_would_damage_US_China_bond#comment-19141
谷歌退出中国：是有损中美关系之举？还是公关伎俩？
发表于 : 13 January 2010 - 5:56pm | By Marijke Peters
参阅同类文章： 互联网 网络自由 谷歌 黑客
鉴于人权活动人士的Gmail邮箱遭到黑客攻击以及中国的网络审查制度，谷歌日前威胁将全面退出中国市场，此举有可能损害中美关系。但一些网络专家却认 为，谷歌的声明有可能是这个全球搜索引擎巨头的公关伎俩。
谷歌公司12日宣布，由于发现人权活动人士使用的谷歌旗下的Gmail电邮账号受到黑客高水平的攻击，公司有可能将关闭其在中国的业务和网站。谷歌表示， 去年12月发生网络攻击并非仅仅是单纯的网络安全事件，至少其他20家公司也成为黑客的攻击目标。
网络审查
谷歌今天停止了在中国过滤搜索结果，一些过去被过滤的内容，比如有关达赖喇嘛、六四事件的网页和图片又重新在谷歌中文搜索引擎上出现。谷歌方面表示，公司 将在未来几周内与中国政府进行商议，不过他们已经得到了美国国务卿希拉里·克林顿的支持。克林顿在一份声明中表示：“我们希望中国政府就此给出解释。互联 网的可靠性对现代社会和经济至关重要。”
出其不意
荷兰谷歌专家Henk van Ess对荷兰国际广播电台表示，谷歌的这一怎么看都不可能是必然之举的举动貌似“出其不意”，然而它却不仅仅是出于对黑客攻击的指控。
“我对此有一点点怀疑，因为黑客攻击Gmail电子邮箱的理由说穿了还不至于让谷歌作出退出中国的决定。我认为这其中还有更深层的原因。”
"最重要的一点是：谷歌几乎在所有的国家都是排名第一。然而中国却是例外，在那里他们排名第二…. 因此在短期内这么做或许是明智的。但长远来看，这将是一场灾难。”
公关伎俩
然而尽管分析人士们称谷歌退出中国将有损谷歌公司的利益，一些人却将谷歌公司的声明视为一个公关伎俩。驻英搜索引擎专家Ciarán Norris认为，这一举动实际上可能将谷歌公司推上一个更有利的讨价还价的位置。
“很多人早已经预言今年将是谷歌的公关攻势变得适得其反的一年，人们将把谷歌公司看作是一个新的微软：过于庞大，过于臃肿，过于强势。实际上，我认为这一 举动为谷歌公司在西方世界炒作了一番，同时也给很多其它仍在运营中文网站的西方公司施加了压力 … 迫使他们也采取一些类似的举动。”
"就谷歌公司和美国以及欧洲各国政府就各类议题的讨价还价而言，谷歌现在终于找到了应对办法，他们可以说：“我们把道义置于盈利之上，还有谁也愿意这么 做？”
请听驻英搜索引擎专家Ciarán Norris的采访录音（英文）：
Tracy
18 January 2010 - 2:53pm / The Netherlands
reply
翻译的人要么是白痴，很愚蠢，不懂中英文还要翻译，要么是邪恶的，在小细节做手脚，却在大意上扭曲了本意。
The translator is either too stupid to master both languages, chinese and english either too evil to distort the orginal meaning of the article.
lihlii
18 January 2010 - 2:30pm / Netherlands
I strongly suggest RNW should publish with each translated report also the name of the translator and the URL link to the original language of the report for the readers to get an accurate understanding. Because as a Chinese reader, I feel that I can't trust the Chinese translation any more. The credit of the translator is as important as that of the original reporter. I don't like to read anonymous translations which is often misleading.
lihlii
18 January 2010 - 2:25pm / ??
强烈建议荷兰国际广播电台，汉文翻译的译者必须署名，且给出原文链接，因为作为汉文读者，我发现翻译版难以信任，且翻译者的信用和原文报道记者对读者一样 重要。我不希望看匿名的翻译报道。
lihlii
18 January 2010 - 2:20pm / ??
对照英文版 http://www.rnw.nl/english/article/google-pullout-would-damage-us-china-bond 你会发现汉语翻译的诡计。;)
Refer to the English version of this report, you will find the spinning trick made by the Chinese translator.
http://www.rnw.nl/english/article/google-pullout-would-damage-us-china-bond
Google pullout would damage US-China bond
Published on : 13 January 2010 - 3:57pm | By Marijke Peters
Filed under: Asia China internet browser US-Sino relations
Google’s threat to pull out of China over allegations of hacking is threatening to damage the Beijing’s relationship with the White House. But some internet experts say the announcement may be a PR-coup for the internet giant.
Google said this morning it may withdraw from the fastest-growing economy in the world after uncovering “highly sophisticated” cyber attacks on Chinese human rights activists. It was one of 20 international companies targeted by internet spies who apparently hacked into email accounts of activists all over the world.
No more filters
Today Google stopped filtering internet requests in China, and searches for sensitive subjects like the Dalai Lama revealed results that are normally blocked by Google.cn. The company says it will hold talks with Chinese authorities in coming weeks but it has already received the backing of US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, who said in a statement:
“We look to the Chinese government for an explanation. The ability to operate with confidence in cyberspace is critical in a modern society and economy.”
Surprise
Dutch Google-expert Henk van Ess told RNW the proposal – by no means a certainty – came as a “surprise” but was not only based on the allegations of hacking:
“I’m a little bit suspicious about this possible decision because the reason – hacking Gmail accounts – is, to put it bluntly, a little bit small to base a decision to leave China on. I think there are deeper-lying reasons why Google has plans to leave.
"The most important thing is that Google is in almost every country the number 1 – but not in China. They’re the number 2…. So in the short-term it would be wise to do this. Long-term it would be a disaster.”
Listen to an interview with UK-based Google expert Ciarán Norris
PR coup?
But although analysts say not operating in China may damage Google’s business interests, some people see the announcement as a PR-coup. Ciarán Norris is a search engine expert based in the UK and says it might actually put the company in a better bargaining position:
“A lot of people have suggested this is the year when Google’s PR will turn negative, when people will see it as the new Microsoft: too big, too unwieldy, too powerful. Actually, I think this is a massive PR-scoop for Google in the Western world and is actually going to put pressure on a lot of other Western companies who still are operating on the Chinese web… for them to do something similar.
"In terms of Google’s negotiations on a variety of issues with the US and European authorities it can now pull this out of the bag and say: ‘we put morals before revenue, who else is willing to do that?’”
wanghx
Jan 18, 2010, 2:02:47 PM1/18/10
to lihlii-g, Salon Friends
看英文我的理解是，这个记者是发现一些不同的看法，所以报道出来。看汉语我感觉是记者站在鄙视谷歌的立场上。这太微妙了。
这不是一篇平衡报道，也是被看中作为添油加醋利用的目标的原因。容易被利用啊。
这是反映一种观点的报道，在自由社会的新闻报道中是有必要的，因为人们总能自由地阅读其他不同的观点，不用担心被报道中的单一观点所误导。
所以篇幅有限的报道可以只显示和大部分人看法不一致的那一方。但是这种报道却经常被恶意利用！
这是反映一种观点的报道，在自由社会的新闻报道中是有必要的，因为人们总能自由地阅读其他不同的观点，不用担心被报道中的单一观点所误导。
所以篇幅有限的报道可以只显示和大部分人看法不一致的那一方。但是这种报道却经常被恶意利用！
这样的报道很容易被中共利用到《参考消息》《环球时报》里去骗中共国人：你看，荷兰媒体也支持我们，鄙视谷歌！
本来平衡的报道它们都会剪裁歪曲，更别说这种展示一面之词的报道了。
After reading the English report, my understand that the reporter found
some different opinions on the issue, so she wrote this report showing
them. But when I read the Chinese version, I feel the reporter was
standing against Google. This is so subtle.
This is not a balanced report. This is why it becomes a target to be used by adding some inflammatory details. Because it's easier to be utilized. This is a report to reflect certain kind of viewpoints, which is necessary for journalism in a society with freedom of speech. Because people can always read freely some other different viewpoints, there is no risk for them to be misled by a single viewpoint in one report. Thus in practice, reports limited by page size can present merely the side which is different from the viewpoints of the majority of the people. But such kind of reports are often utilized mala fide.
Such a report can easily be adopted by the CCP into propaganda newspapers like “Reference News”“Global Times globaltimes.cn”(which has a double face between its Chinese and English version) to cheat the Chinese people by showing: Look, even the Dutch media is supporting us and despising Google! Even those balanced news reports were tailored and distorted by the CCP government for cheating, let alone such reports that represents single-sided views.
This is not a balanced report. This is why it becomes a target to be used by adding some inflammatory details. Because it's easier to be utilized. This is a report to reflect certain kind of viewpoints, which is necessary for journalism in a society with freedom of speech. Because people can always read freely some other different viewpoints, there is no risk for them to be misled by a single viewpoint in one report. Thus in practice, reports limited by page size can present merely the side which is different from the viewpoints of the majority of the people. But such kind of reports are often utilized mala fide.
Such a report can easily be adopted by the CCP into propaganda newspapers like “Reference News”“Global Times globaltimes.cn”(which has a double face between its Chinese and English version) to cheat the Chinese people by showing: Look, even the Dutch media is supporting us and despising Google! Even those balanced news reports were tailored and distorted by the CCP government for cheating, let alone such reports that represents single-sided views.
kingst
Jan 18, 2010, 9:38:01 PM1/18/10
to lih...@googlegroups.com
FW:
FROM: Jeffrey
2010年1月19日 上午10:21
收件人：王钢 <king...@gmail.com>
回复 | 回复所有人 | 转发 | 打印 | 删除 | 显示原始邮件
个人看法：
1.题目翻译并无不妥。网络审查也无可厚非。
2.出其不意及这一段的翻译确实不好，意思就不准确。
3.立场问题确实存在，但这个任何一个国家都难免。你大概还没忘CNN、BBC这些主流媒体在报道中国情况时的可耻嘴脸吧。
这篇文章直指中共，但它为什么不问问西方国家在他们的媒体上怎么妖魔中国、强奸民意？这种选择性失明才是最可耻的。
> Date: Tue, 19 Jan 2010 06:43:23 +0800
> Subject: Fwd: 翻译忽悠法一例 One example of translation spin trick
> From: king...@gmail.com
> To: jeffrey
>
> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
> From: wanghx <wan...@gmail.com>
> Date: Mon, 18 Jan 2010 19:14:30 +0100
> Subject: 翻译忽悠法一例 One example of translation spin trick
> To: Salon Friends <salon-...@googlegroups.com>, lihlii-g
> <lih...@googlegroups.com>
>
> 今 阅 荷兰国际广播电台 RNW
王钢
Jan 18, 2010, 9:43:26 PM1/18/10
to lih...@googlegroups.com
对我的老朋友，我真不知该怎么劝说才好。
给我的感觉是，这样的思维定势是不是教育以及文化传统影响的结果？
wanghx
Jan 18, 2010, 9:46:47 PM1/18/10
to lih...@googlegroups.com
你问问 jeffrey 这狗奴才看过多少 CNN BBC 的报道？:)
--
以公民个人身份签署国际人权宪章 http://j.mp/udhr-ss 如无法打开签名网页可发空信给 udhr19...@gmail.com 收到自动回信的签名表格，填写后寄回给 udhr...@gmail.com 即可。请广为传播。
2010/1/19 王钢
对我的老朋友，我真不知该怎么劝说才好。
给我的感觉是，这样的思维定势是不是教育以及文化传统影响的结果？
--
以公民个人身份签署国际人权宪章 http://j.mp/udhr-ss 如无法打开签名网页可发空信给 udhr19...@gmail.com 收到自动回信的签名表格，填写后寄回给 udhr...@gmail.com 即可。请广为传播。
王钢
Jan 18, 2010, 10:06:19 PM1/18/10
to lih...@googlegroups.com
整天在老外堆里混的人，他看得不可能比你的少。
在 10-1-19，wanghx<wan...@gmail.com> 写道：
王钢
Jan 19, 2010, 1:22:09 AM1/19/10
to lih...@googlegroups.com
FW:
Jeffrey 发送至 我 14:14 (6 分钟前)
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/01/18/technology/internet/18global.html
美国人的文章，关于世界上互联网审查制度的。
News Analysis
In War Against the Internet, China Is Just a Skirmish
By ERIC PFANNER
Published: January 17, 2010
PARIS — In the beginning, there was one Internet, born from American
research and embraced by academics around the world. It was in English
and homogeneous, operating according to Western standards of openness.
Skip to next paragraph
Enlarge This Image
It's no surprise that China polices sites like Google.cn, but now
nations like France are also cracking down on Internet users.
Can Google Beat China?
Room for DebateIs it just a matter of time before technologists find a
way to defeat censorship?
Post a Comment »
Related
Chinese Site Criticizes Investor for Its Google Support (January 17, 2010)
China at Odds With Future in Internet Fight (January 17, 2010)
China, Where U.S. Internet Companies Often Fail (January 16, 2010)
Times Topics: Internet Censorship in China
As the Internet grew, it became fragmented and linguistically
diversified. It developed borders, across which it now works in
different ways.
In Spain, for instance, you can share music and movies with virtual
impunity; in France, doing that is likely to cost you your Internet
connection.
In China, meanwhile, it may soon be nearly impossible to use Google.
The company, saying the security of its e-mail had been breached in a
campaign to spy on Chinese dissidents, announced last week that it
would stop censoring Google.cn, its Chinese Web site, and might have
to withdraw from China.
No matter what happens in the fight between Google and Beijing’s
leaders, one thing seems clear: the company is not going to be able to
turn the clock back to 2006. That year, Google itself helped to
fracture the Internet by creating Google.cn.
China is not the only country where Google is bumping up against
political or cultural opposition to the laissez-faire practices that
Internet companies prefer.
In South Korea last year, Google blocked users of the local version of
its YouTube video service from uploading material after the government
imposed rules requiring contributors to register with their real
names. Ostensibly, the law is intended to curb anonymous abuse that is
said to have contributed to suicides, but critics say it stifles
political dissent.
In Italy, four Google executives have been charged with privacy
violations in a case involving a video posted on YouTube showing
schoolboys bullying an autistic classmate. Google says a guilty
verdict could make it hard for YouTube to continue operating in Italy,
because it might mean the site is responsible for its content;
currently YouTube relies on users to flag anything potentially
inappropriate.
Different cultural norms are only one barrier to a global Internet.
Commerce is another. As the Internet has evolved from a noncommercial
communications tool to a hypercommercial media outlet, it has taken on
characteristics of the platforms it now rivals or surpasses.
Media companies and governments seem to be increasingly united in the
belief that curbing some freedoms is necessary to foster the
development of legitimate business on the Internet. But a single
global approach to that is unlikely.
France recently enacted a law allowing Internet connections to be cut
off if a user is pirating copyrighted material. Germany has rejected
that approach, but Britain is watching the outcomes of the law with
interest.
President Nicolas Sarkozy of France is already talking about even
tougher measures against file sharing, calling for tests of technology
that filters unlicensed music and movies from the Internet.
So far, file sharers have generally been more successful than
political dissidents in working their way around Internet
restrictions.
Jonathan Zittrain, a director of the Berkman Center for Internet and
Society at Harvard University, said Google’s move in China could
encourage development of technologies to circumvent local
restrictions.
“My hope, and expectation, is that Google engineers who might have
been a bit halfhearted about implementing censorship mandates in
Google.cn could be full-throttle in coming up with ways for Google to
be viewed despite any network interruptions between site and user,”
Mr. Zittrain wrote on his blog, The Future of the Internet and How to
Stop It.
That would shift the Internet back toward the “information wants to be
free” era. But even Google, which has benefited more than any other
company from the flourishing of content online, might be unable to
fight the momentum of government restrictions, despite its move in
China.
wanghx
Jan 19, 2010, 4:51:53 AM1/19/10
to lih...@googlegroups.com
他这类人，不看深入报道，只看中共国宣传然后再看其推荐的报道而已。:)
2010/1/19 王钢
整天在老外堆里混的人，他看得不可能比你的少。
wanghx
Jan 19, 2010, 4:54:53 AM1/19/10
to lih...@googlegroups.com
你看看这是什么狗屁报道，所以纽约时报啊，真是经常可笑之极。所以封了奴化的BBC中文网也绝不会封纽约时报，优先级完全不一样。
美国的左派媒体真是令人担忧，说的胡话比右派媒体多得多。弄得曹长青都生了偏执狂，一口咬定右就是好，左就是烂。:) 这里也有一头类似的猪。:)
wanghx
Jan 19, 2010, 10:58:12 AM1/19/10
to Salon Friends, lihlii-g
我对这篇报道有一个补充评论：如果那些网络专家认为 Google 的行为是一种对自己有利的公关策略，而不是因为道义因素，那么，能否请你们各家公司也来采用这种公关策略，做一下这样的表演？我是很欢迎看到的。来吧！做一个样子吧！既然你们认为这是对自己有利的策略。:)
I have an extra comment on this report: If those Internet experts think that the announcement of Google is only a self beneficial PR-coup or strategy, but not based on moral reasons, would you please ask all the other companies to take the same PR-coup, at least do some performance like this? I'm glad to see it. Please! Even if you're pretending! Let us see it. Since you think this PR-coup is beneficial to yourself, why don't do it? :)
Reply all
Reply to author
Forward
0 new messages