#凌某人閒聊 Lost in translation
話說我有位日本朋友,我自己只會說中文和英文,對日文一竅不通,而這位日本朋友只會日文,她從小就得了英文恐懼症,英文學得爆爛。不過偶爾我們有什麼事情互傳LINE,我寫英文,她用google翻譯和英文單字,還是勉強能通。
不久前我收到她的Line,她問我,有一個字她看不懂,請問"Entitle"是什麼意思?
我問她:What's the context?(上下文是什麼?)
任何語言都一樣,單一字彙放在不同的上下文就有不同的意思。所以每次朋友問我某個英文是什麼意思,我一定要他們把上下文一起給我。
她回答:Neighbor talked I entitled.
我回答:Your neighbor told you you were entitled?
(妳的鄰居跟妳說,妳很entitled?)
她回答:Yes.
這個就有點不好了,我想想該怎麼跟她說。是這樣的,entitled這個字如果用來形容一個人,其實是不太正面的。我們若說有人"They are so entitled.",意指這些人自我感覺良好,覺得自己有權對別人頤指氣使、予取予求,我們常看見新聞裡的奧客、小屁孩、恐龍家長,就是一群覺得自己entitled的人。(例句:我們若看到正在刁難店員的奧客,想仗義執言,就可以對他們說:What makes you feel so entitled?)
我朋友的隔壁前陣子搬來一位美國鄰居,不是很好相處。日本人的社會規矩很多,美國鄰居常常不小心踩線,例如垃圾要如何分類、什麼時間才能拿出來等等。他被糾正多了之後很不愉快,偏偏我朋友的丈夫似乎是社區委員,兩戶又是隔鄰,難免有些尷尬。
我在想,她知道這句話的意思之後一定會很生氣,我不想讓兩家的衝突更激化,所以盡量想個比較中性(?)的方式解釋。
我回答,It means that people feel they have the right to do or have whatever they want just because. (這個字意思是指某些人覺得自己能對別人予取予求)
這次她過了好幾分鐘才回應,問我:just because? (因為什麼?)
我明白她不太瞭解我的句尾,所以再解釋得詳細一點:For no reason. People feel they can do whatever they want for no reason. (這些人覺得自己理所當然能對別人予取予求)。
這樣她就懂了。可是她懂了之後她更不懂,她問我:「他為什麼要這樣講呢?好奇怪,我們今天難得有一個好的對談。」
聽到這裡我也有點不懂了,我覺得我還是把整個情況搞清楚比較好,不然一不小心就在這兩個人中間丟下炸彈,所以我趕快說:「妳可不可以盡量告訴我,你們兩個今天聊了什麼?最後是在什麼情況下他說到"entitled"?」
接下來就是她很努力用她懂的單字、片語和句子向我描述他們的對話,我努力理解。等她終於說完之後,我就懂──了──啦!
人家那個美國鄰居不是說她很entitled啦!他們今天又碰到,她就很耐心的跟美國人解釋了一些事情。可能這次不是她老公出面,是個年輕內向的家庭主婦,講起英文結結巴巴又很努力的樣子,對方終於耐下性子好好談,很多事弄清楚了。
最後美國人就搖搖頭說,他覺得日本社會管太多了,有些事在美國已經會被認為是侵犯隱私,根本沒必要。我朋友則說,日本社會本來就是這樣,大家都要互相在意,才會進步。
然後就來到這句關鍵的話──美國人搖搖頭說(應該是): OK, you are entitled to your opinion.
「妳有權保有妳的意見」!
我朋友說:I checked dictionary. entitle no meaning.(我查過字典,可是看不懂意思)
吼!這兩個"entitled"的意思差很多好不好?其實這句話還是帶著但書。對你說這句話的人依然不認同你的想法,但他覺得,好吧!你要這麼想就這麼想好了,這是你的權利。
我趕快說:抱歉,這個entitled跟我前面講的那個不同意思,在這裡是指Let's agree to disagree. He still disagrees with you but you can have your own opinion.(他還是不認同,但妳可以保有妳的想法。)
終、於!到了這裡我們兩個都鬆了口氣,終於搞懂了。
我朋友就有點不好意思的說,她回家查字典"entitle",字典上面列出好幾個意思,她不曉得該套哪個意思。其中一個意思是「取名字」或「下標題」(to give something a name or a title),她覺得這個意思最相近。
她就想,這位美國鄰居是不是要她把她說的那些規則都寫下來?她就很認真把它們寫成標語,想請她老公貼在回收區。我跟她說,這樣很好啊!這樣可以幫助其他不懂的人瞭解。最後我們兩個人都覺得就這樣做吧。
所以他們社區的資源回收區,現在多了幾張雙語標示和資源分類圖解,哈哈。
這也算是一個美麗的錯誤。
#LostInTranslation
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,...
「feel entitled 中文」的推薦目錄:
- 關於feel entitled 中文 在 凌淑芬 Facebook 的最讚貼文
- 關於feel entitled 中文 在 無待堂 Facebook 的最佳解答
- 關於feel entitled 中文 在 盧斯達 Facebook 的最佳解答
- 關於feel entitled 中文 在 コバにゃんチャンネル Youtube 的精選貼文
- 關於feel entitled 中文 在 大象中醫 Youtube 的最讚貼文
- 關於feel entitled 中文 在 大象中醫 Youtube 的最佳貼文
- 關於feel entitled 中文 在 其實是不太正面的。我們若說有人"They are so entitled.",意指 ... 的評價
- 關於feel entitled 中文 在 feel entitled中文的推薦,PTT、DCARD和網路上有這些評價 的評價
- 關於feel entitled 中文 在 feel entitled中文的推薦,PTT、DCARD和網路上有這些評價 的評價
- 關於feel entitled 中文 在 Feel entitled 中文的問題包括PTT、Dcard、Mobile01,我們都 ... 的評價
- 關於feel entitled 中文 在 Feel entitled 中文的問題包括PTT、Dcard、Mobile01,我們都 ... 的評價
- 關於feel entitled 中文 在 Michele Morrone - Feel It(中文歌詞字幕)Lyrics - YouTube 的評價
feel entitled 中文 在 無待堂 Facebook 的最佳解答
【《砥鋒挺鍔 傲雪欺霜》- 大專學界就民主牆爭議之聲明 | “Arming Ourselves in Our Darkest Hour” - Declaration of Students’ Unions of Higher Institutions on the Controversy Surrounding Democracy Wall】
(Please scroll down for English version.)
近日,各大專院校對於學生使用民主牆爆發爭議,舔共傀儡林鄭月娥竟借機指言論自由並非完全沒有限制,更暗指學術自由和院校自主是鼓吹歪論的藉口。大學校園應為思想意見交流之所,民主牆亦是容許學生暢所欲言的公開平台。如今,政權之首竟出言鉗制學生表達自由,企圖向校方施壓,大興文字獄,大專學界予以最強烈之譴責。
在中大校園內,有同學於學生會管理的範圍掛上「香港獨立」橫額及於民主牆上貼上宣傳港獨之文宣。有關港獨之橫額及文宣並無違反香港法律,只是單單內容不合乎中大校方心意、與校方立場有異,校方便指鹿為馬,無理指控其內容違法,圖以法律之名打壓言論自由,更繞過該場地的真正管理者中大學生會,直接指派保安人員拆下橫額,完全無視學生自治的原則。大專學界強調,《基本法》性質類近憲法,而憲法訂明政府權限及人民權利。憲法圈限政府權力,政府卻絕不可借憲法縮窄人民權利。因此,政府及中大校方均不可以「違反《基本法》」為名,禁止學生討論香港獨立。
其後,中大學生會幹事會因是次事件而受到大規模滋擾。然而,校方並沒有就此作出回應並保護學生,反而因立場不同而置學生安危於不顧,有違教育者之原則,再證中大校方已淪為為政權護航的機器。
除此以外,早前有人於香港教育大學民主牆張貼「恭賀」教育局副局長蔡若蓮長子去世,教大校長高調批評該二人「歹毒」,更指若該二人不是教大學生,則「放他上網」。翌日,相關閉路電視截圖流出,實在令人髮指。的確,大專學界認為奚落蔡若蓮之言論確有失當,然而,冰封三尺非一日之寒。教育局多年來接連推出殘害莘莘學子之政策,當中包括全港性系統評估及國民教育,蔡若蓮為其一一護航,年青人對教育局及蔡若蓮的不滿無處發洩,最終訴於不當的情緒宣洩,實在是情有可原。教大校方縱然不滿此等言論,卻絕不可公開閉路電視片段。此等行為不但如同鼓吹社會公審批鬥,更有機會違反《個人資料(私隱)條例》。今日有人因失當言論被公開容貌,他日有學生批評校長,會否亦遭受類似報復?大專學界強烈譴責教大校方借機製造白色恐怖,並要求教大校方就洩露閉路電視片段作出合理交代。
《基本法》第二十七條訂明香港居民享有言論自由,我們的基本人權應受保障及尊重,而院校自主及學術自由更不容港共侵害。大專學界在此重申,言論自由是天賦人權,是不容侵犯之底線。我們將密切留意各大專院校之情況,堅守我們的自由與權利。
二零一七年九月十日
香港城巿大學學生會
恒生管理學院學生會
香港浸會大學學生會
香港科技大學學生會
嶺南大學學生會
香港珠海學院學生會
香港高等教育科技學院學生會
香港教育大學學生會
香港演藝學院學生會
香港大學學生會
香港公開大學學生會
香港樹仁大學學生會
香港中文大學學生會
In the past few days, controversy surrounding students’ use of their democracy wall has broken out and received widespread attention. Communist puppet Lam Cheng Yuet Ngor took the chance and implied that freedom of speech should be limited, and fallacies have been told under the veil of academic freedom and institutional autonomy. Universities are where thoughts and opinions are exchanged, and democracy walls are platforms for students to speak our mind. The regime is now making an explicit effort to limit our freedom of expression through exerting pressure on university authorities to punish those whose speech may have intimidated the people in power. Students’ Unions across the higher institutions condemn such atrocities.
In the Chinese University of Hong Kong, students hanged banner advocating Hong Kong independence at a site managed by Student Union of the Chinese University of Hong Kong. Related leaflets were also posted to the democracy wall. Staggeringly, while the students by no means breached the law, the university authorities claimed that such advocacies as illegal and overrode CUSU by sending securities to remove the banner, revealing their complete ignorance to the autonomy of CUSU. Students’ Unions now reiterate that the nature of the Basic Law is similar to that of a constitution, which defines the power of the government and the liberty enjoyed by the citizenry. In other words, while the government is bound by the constitution, the government can never restrict the liberty of the people through the constitution. Thus, neither the government nor the university authorities can restrict the freedom of students to discuss Hong Kong independence under the name of the Basic Law.
Due to the controversy, the Executive Committee of CUSU has been suffering excessive nuisance. Yet, neither has there been any response from nor actions taken by the university authorities to protect the students. The authorities, as educators, should feel shameful for not ensuring the safety of students due to differences in opinions.
Apart from this, there were also two persons posting slogans to ‘congratulate’ Education Undersecretary Choi Yuk Lin’s loss of her son on the democracy wall at the Education University of Hong Kong. The President of EdUHK severely condemned the students as ‘vicious’, and claimed that the university would expose those persons on the internet if they were not students of EdUHK. Related shots of CCTV were then released to the media in the following day. Indeed, students’ unions believe the slogans are inappropriate. Yet, it is also important to acknowledge that the Education Bureau has been introducing malicious policies against students, ranging from TSA to national education, and Choi has been an explicitly pro-government person. With no effective channels to express their discontent, young people may have chosen such emotional and even irrational expression. Thus, while such slogans are inappropriate, we also find them excusable. Albeit their discontent, the university authorities should not have released the shots of CCTV to the media. Such action not only stirs up public emotions and ignites mass criticism against the two persons which would be completely out of proportion, but may also constitute violation of Personal Data (Privacy) Ordinance. Student may also be aware of similar vengeful acts when they criticise the university authorities again in the future. Students’ unions condemn the authorities of EdUHK for creating white terror and request the authorities to give a proper response regarding the leak of CCTV footage.
Under Article 27 of the Basic Law, we as Hong Kong citizens are entitled to the freedom of speech. Our rights must be protected and respected, while academic freedom and institutional autonomy are values that must not be stripped away. Students’ unions stress that everyone enjoys the freedom of speech, and this is the line that we shall never compromise. We are now paying attention to situation across the higher institutions and we are ready to defend our rights and liberty.
10 September 2017
City University of Hong Kong Students’ Union
Hang Seng Management College Students' Union
Hong Kong Baptist University Students’ Union
Hong Kong University of Science and Technology Students’ Union
Lingnan University Students’ Union
Student Union of Chu Hai College of Higher Education
Technological and Higher Education Institute of Hong Kong Students’ Union
The Hong Kong Academy for Performing Arts Students' Union
The Education University of Hong Kong Students’ Union
The Hong Kong University Students’ Union
The Open University of Hong Kong Students’ Union
The Student Union of Hong Kong Shue Yan University
The Student Union of The Chinese University of Hong Kong
feel entitled 中文 在 盧斯達 Facebook 的最佳解答
【《砥鋒挺鍔 傲雪欺霜》- 大專學界就民主牆爭議之聲明 | “Arming Ourselves in Our Darkest Hour” - Declaration of Students’ Unions of Higher Institutions on the Controversy Surrounding Democracy Wall】
(Please scroll down for English version.)
近日,各大專院校對於學生使用民主牆爆發爭議,舔共傀儡林鄭月娥竟借機指言論自由並非完全沒有限制,更暗指學術自由和院校自主是鼓吹歪論的藉口。大學校園應為思想意見交流之所,民主牆亦是容許學生暢所欲言的公開平台。如今,政權之首竟出言鉗制學生表達自由,企圖向校方施壓,大興文字獄,大專學界予以最強烈之譴責。
在中大校園內,有同學於學生會管理的範圍掛上「香港獨立」橫額及於民主牆上貼上宣傳港獨之文宣。有關港獨之橫額及文宣並無違反香港法律,只是單單內容不合乎中大校方心意、與校方立場有異,校方便指鹿為馬,無理指控其內容違法,圖以法律之名打壓言論自由,更繞過該場地的真正管理者中大學生會,直接指派保安人員拆下橫額,完全無視學生自治的原則。大專學界強調,《基本法》性質類近憲法,而憲法訂明政府權限及人民權利。憲法圈限政府權力,政府卻絕不可借憲法縮窄人民權利。因此,政府及中大校方均不可以「違反《基本法》」為名,禁止學生討論香港獨立。
其後,中大學生會幹事會因是次事件而受到大規模滋擾。然而,校方並沒有就此作出回應並保護學生,反而因立場不同而置學生安危於不顧,有違教育者之原則,再證中大校方已淪為為政權護航的機器。
除此以外,早前有人於香港教育大學民主牆張貼「恭賀」教育局副局長蔡若蓮長子去世,教大校長高調批評該二人「歹毒」,更指若該二人不是教大學生,則「放他上網」。翌日,相關閉路電視截圖流出,實在令人髮指。的確,大專學界認為奚落蔡若蓮之言論確有失當,然而,冰封三尺非一日之寒。教育局多年來接連推出殘害莘莘學子之政策,當中包括全港性系統評估及國民教育,蔡若蓮為其一一護航,年青人對教育局及蔡若蓮的不滿無處發洩,最終訴於不當的情緒宣洩,實在是情有可原。教大校方縱然不滿此等言論,卻絕不可公開閉路電視片段。此等行為不但如同鼓吹社會公審批鬥,更有機會違反《個人資料(私隱)條例》。今日有人因失當言論被公開容貌,他日有學生批評校長,會否亦遭受類似報復?大專學界強烈譴責教大校方借機製造白色恐怖,並要求教大校方就洩露閉路電視片段作出合理交代。
《基本法》第二十七條訂明香港居民享有言論自由,我們的基本人權應受保障及尊重,而院校自主及學術自由更不容港共侵害。大專學界在此重申,言論自由是天賦人權,是不容侵犯之底線。我們將密切留意各大專院校之情況,堅守我們的自由與權利。
二零一七年九月十日
香港城巿大學學生會
恒生管理學院學生會
香港浸會大學學生會
香港科技大學學生會
嶺南大學學生會
香港珠海學院學生會
香港高等教育科技學院學生會
香港教育大學學生會
香港演藝學院學生會
香港大學學生會
香港公開大學學生會
香港樹仁大學學生會
香港中文大學學生會
In the past few days, controversy surrounding students’ use of their democracy wall has broken out and received widespread attention. Communist puppet Lam Cheng Yuet Ngor took the chance and implied that freedom of speech should be limited, and fallacies have been told under the veil of academic freedom and institutional autonomy. Universities are where thoughts and opinions are exchanged, and democracy walls are platforms for students to speak our mind. The regime is now making an explicit effort to limit our freedom of expression through exerting pressure on university authorities to punish those whose speech may have intimidated the people in power. Students’ Unions across the higher institutions condemn such atrocities.
In the Chinese University of Hong Kong, students hanged banner advocating Hong Kong independence at a site managed by Student Union of the Chinese University of Hong Kong. Related leaflets were also posted to the democracy wall. Staggeringly, while the students by no means breached the law, the university authorities claimed that such advocacies as illegal and overrode CUSU by sending securities to remove the banner, revealing their complete ignorance to the autonomy of CUSU. Students’ Unions now reiterate that the nature of the Basic Law is similar to that of a constitution, which defines the power of the government and the liberty enjoyed by the citizenry. In other words, while the government is bound by the constitution, the government can never restrict the liberty of the people through the constitution. Thus, neither the government nor the university authorities can restrict the freedom of students to discuss Hong Kong independence under the name of the Basic Law.
Due to the controversy, the Executive Committee of CUSU has been suffering excessive nuisance. Yet, neither has there been any response from nor actions taken by the university authorities to protect the students. The authorities, as educators, should feel shameful for not ensuring the safety of students due to differences in opinions.
Apart from this, there were also two persons posting slogans to ‘congratulate’ Education Undersecretary Choi Yuk Lin’s loss of her son on the democracy wall at the Education University of Hong Kong. The President of EdUHK severely condemned the students as ‘vicious’, and claimed that the university would expose those persons on the internet if they were not students of EdUHK. Related shots of CCTV were then released to the media in the following day. Indeed, students’ unions believe the slogans are inappropriate. Yet, it is also important to acknowledge that the Education Bureau has been introducing malicious policies against students, ranging from TSA to national education, and Choi has been an explicitly pro-government person. With no effective channels to express their discontent, young people may have chosen such emotional and even irrational expression. Thus, while such slogans are inappropriate, we also find them excusable. Albeit their discontent, the university authorities should not have released the shots of CCTV to the media. Such action not only stirs up public emotions and ignites mass criticism against the two persons which would be completely out of proportion, but may also constitute violation of Personal Data (Privacy) Ordinance. Student may also be aware of similar vengeful acts when they criticise the university authorities again in the future. Students’ unions condemn the authorities of EdUHK for creating white terror and request the authorities to give a proper response regarding the leak of CCTV footage.
Under Article 27 of the Basic Law, we as Hong Kong citizens are entitled to the freedom of speech. Our rights must be protected and respected, while academic freedom and institutional autonomy are values that must not be stripped away. Students’ unions stress that everyone enjoys the freedom of speech, and this is the line that we shall never compromise. We are now paying attention to situation across the higher institutions and we are ready to defend our rights and liberty.
10 September 2017
City University of Hong Kong Students’ Union
Hang Seng Management College Students' Union
Hong Kong Baptist University Students’ Union
Hong Kong University of Science and Technology Students’ Union
Lingnan University Students’ Union
Student Union of Chu Hai College of Higher Education
Technological and Higher Education Institute of Hong Kong Students’ Union
The Hong Kong Academy for Performing Arts Students' Union
The Education University of Hong Kong Students’ Union
The Hong Kong University Students’ Union
The Open University of Hong Kong Students’ Union
The Student Union of Hong Kong Shue Yan University
The Student Union of The Chinese University of Hong Kong
feel entitled 中文 在 コバにゃんチャンネル Youtube 的精選貼文
feel entitled 中文 在 大象中醫 Youtube 的最讚貼文
feel entitled 中文 在 大象中醫 Youtube 的最佳貼文
feel entitled 中文 在 Feel entitled 中文的問題包括PTT、Dcard、Mobile01,我們都 ... 的必吃
為了解決 Feel entitled 中文 的問題,作者YooJinyoung 這樣論述:. 職場上必備的英語溝通指南! 實用核心句型,學會明確傳達資訊; 擬真情境對話,掌握句型使用時機。 ... <看更多>
feel entitled 中文 在 Feel entitled 中文的問題包括PTT、Dcard、Mobile01,我們都 ... 的必吃
為了解決 Feel entitled 中文 的問題,作者YooJinyoung 這樣論述:. 職場上必備的英語溝通指南! 實用核心句型,學會明確傳達資訊; 擬真情境對話,掌握句型使用時機。 ... <看更多>
feel entitled 中文 在 其實是不太正面的。我們若說有人"They are so entitled.",意指 ... 的必吃
話說我有位日本朋友,我自己只會說中文和英文,對日文一竅不通,而這位 ... 奧客,想仗義執言,就可以對他們說:What makes you feel so entitled?) ... <看更多>