第六屆全球華文青年文學奬文學翻譯組譯文原稿
青岛希尼尔翻译咨询有限公司（www.sinosenior.com）整理发布 2016-03-30
青岛希尼尔翻译公司（www.sinosenior.com）2016年3月30日了解到第六屆全球華文青年文學奬文學翻譯組譯文原稿:
第六屆全球華文青年文學奬
The 6th Global Youth Chinese Literary Award
文學翻譯組譯文原稿
請用中文翻譯下列合共三篇英文原稿
1. “A flower for your window”
In the window beside which we are writing this article, there is a
geranium shining with its scarlet tops in the sun, the red of it being
the more red for a background of lime-trees which are at the same time
breathing and panting like airy plenitudes of joy, and developing their
shifting depths of light and shade of russet brown and sunny inward
gold.
It seems to say, “Paint me!” So here it is.
Every now and then some anxious fly comes near it: - we hear the sound
of a bee, though we see none; and upon looking closer at the flowers, we
observe that some of the petals are transparent with the light, while
others are left in shade; the leaves are equally adorned after their
opaquer fashion, with those effects of the sky, showing their dark-brown
rims; and on one of them a red petal has fallen, where it lies on the
brighter half of the shallow green cup, making its own red redder, and
the green greener. We perceive, in imagination, the scent of
those good-natured leaves, which allow you to carry off their perfume on
your fingers; for good- natured they are, in that respect above almost
all plants, and fittest for the hospitalities of your rooms. The very
feel of the leaf has a household warmth in it something analogous to
clothing and comfort.
Why does not everybody (who can afford it) have a geranium in his
window, or some other flower? It is very cheap; its cheapness is next to
nothing if you raise it from seed, or from a slip; and it is a beauty
and a companion. It sweetens the air, rejoices the eye, links you with
nature and innocence, and is something to love. And if it cannot love
you in return, it cannot hate you; it cannot utter a hateful thing, even
for your neglecting it; for though it is all beauty, it has no vanity:
and such being the case, and living as it does purely to do you good and
afford you pleasure, how will you be able to neglect it?
“A flower for your window” by Leigh Hunt
2. “On Education”
Before considering how to educate, it is well to be clear as to the sort
of result which we wish to achieve. Dr. Arnold wanted ‘humbleness of
mind’, a quality not possessed by Aristotle’s
‘magnanimous man’. Nietzche’s ideal is not that of Christianity. No more
is Kant’s: for while Christ enjoins love, Kant teaches that no action of
which love is the motive can be truly virtuous. And even people who
agree as to the ingredients of a good character may differ as to their
relative importance. One man will emphasize courage, another learning,
another kindliness, and another rectitude. One man, like the elder
Brutus, will put duty to the state above family affection; another, like
Confucius, will put family affection first. All these divergences will
produce differences as to education. We must have some conception of the
kind of person we wish to produce, before we can have any definite
opinion as to the education which we consider best.
Of course, an educator may be foolish, in the sense that he produces
results other than those at which he was aiming. Uriah Heep was the
outcome of lessons in humility at a charity school, which had had an
effect quite different from what was intended. But in the main the
ablest educators have been fairly successful. Take as examples the
Chinese literati, the modern Japanese, the Jesuits, Dr. Arnold, and the
men who direct the policy of the American public schools. All these, in
their various ways, have been highly successful. The results aimed at in
the different cases were utterly different, but in the main the results
were achieved. It may be worth while to spend a few moments on these
different systems, before attempting to decide what we should ourselves
regard as the aims which education should have in view.
－Bertrand Russell (1872-1970) “On Education”, 1926
3. “Charles Dickens”
Plenty of people have found him [Charles Dickens] unreadable, but very
few seem to have felt any hostility towards the general spirit of his
work. Some years later Mr. Bechhofer Roberts published a full-length
attack on Dickens in the form of a novel (This Side Idolatry), but it
was a merely personal attack, concerned for the most part with Dickens's
treatment of his wife. It dealt with incidents which not one in a
thousand of Dickens's readers would ever hear about, and which no more
invalidates his work than the second-best bed invalidates Hamlet. All
that the book really demonstrated was that a writer's literary
personality has little or nothing to do with his private character. It
is quite possible that in private life Dickens was just the kind of
insensitive egoist that Mr. Bechhofer Roberts makes him appear. But in
his published work there is implied a personality quite different from
this, a personality which has won him far more friends than enemies. It
might well have been otherwise, for even if Dickens was a bourgeois, he
was certainly a subversive writer, a radical, one might truthfully say a
rebel. Everyone who has read widely in his work has felt this. Gissing,
for instance, the best of the writers on Dickens, was anything but a
radical himself, and he disapproved of this strain in Dickens and wished
it were not there, but it never occurred to him to deny it. In Oliver
Twist, Hard Times, Bleak House, Little Dorrit, Dickens attacked English
institutions with a ferocity that has never since been approached. Yet
he managed to do it without making himself hated, and, more than this,
the very people he attacked have swallowed him so completely that he has
become a national institution himself. In its attitude towards Dickens
the English public has always been a little like the elephant which
feels a blow with a walking-stick as a delightful tickling. Before I was
ten years old I was having Dickens ladled down my throat by
schoolmasters in whom even at that age I could see a strong resemblance
to Mr. Creakle, and one knows without needing to be told that lawyers
delight in Sergeant Buzfuz and that Little Dorrit is a favourite in the
Home Office.
From George Orwell: ‘Charles Dickens’, first published: Inside the Whale
and Other
Essays. — GB, London. — March 11, 1940.
注：部分新闻来源于网路，转载并不代表希尼尔翻译公司赞同其观点，也不代表对其真实性负责。如涉及版权，请及时通知我们，我们将尽快删除。
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
青岛翻译公司 青岛专业翻译机构 青岛翻译机构 青岛正规翻译机构