2. 外语
  3. If there is one thing interpreters working for the European Union dread, it is attempts at humour. It is not just that jokes are

If there is one thing interpreters working for the European Union dread, it is attempts at humour. It is not just that jokes are

admin2013-03-27  59
问题     If there is one thing interpreters working for the European Union dread, it is attempts at humour. It is not just that jokes are hard to translate; because of the time needed for interpretation, they can prompt laughter at the wrong moment. A speaker once began with an anecdote, and then mourned a dead colleague—to be met by a gale of giggles, as listeners got his joke.
    The time-lags have grown worse with the expansion of the EU, to make a total of 25 countries. Finding interpreters who can translate directly from Estonian to Portuguese is well-nigh impossible. So now speeches are translated in relays, first into English and then into a third language. If only everybody would agree to speak one or two official tongues, it would be easier. Or would it? In fact, misunderstandings can abound even when all parties speak fluent English or French. Cultural differences mean that a literal understanding of what someone says is often a world away from real understanding. For example, how many non-Brits could decode the irony(and literary allusion)which lies behind the expression "up to a point", which is used to mean "no, not in the slightest"?
    The problem is now so widely recognized that informal guides to what the French or the English really mean, when they are speaking their mother tongues, have been drawn up by other nationalities.
    One was written for the Dutch, trying to do business with the British. Another was written by British diplomats, as a guide to the language used by their French counterparts. The fact that the Dutch—so eerily fluent in English—should need a guide to Brit-speak is particularly striking. But the problem—to judge by the guide, which was spotted on an office wall in the European Court of Justice—is that Brits make their points in an indirect manner that the plain-speaking Netherlanders find baffling.
    Hence the guide’s warning that when a Briton says "I hear what you say", the foreign listener may understand; "He accepts my point of view. " In fact, the British speaker means; "I disagree and I do not want to discuss it any further. " Similarly, the phrase "with the greatest respect" when used by an Englishman is recognizable to a compatriot as an icy put-down, correctly translated by the guide as meaning "I think you are wrong, or a fool. "
    The British, the French and the Dutch are old sparring partners who know each other’s little ways. So the capacity for misunderstanding is amplified when nationalities that are less familiar with each other come into contact. Often the problems are less to do with the meaning of words than with their unexpected impact on an audience. Take the European summit last December, when it fell to Silvio Berlusconi, the Italian prime minister, to try to wrap up sensitive negotiations over a proposed constitution for the European Union.
    When EU leaders filed into lunch, they were braced for tough negotiation; so they were startled when Mr Berlusconi suggested that they discuss "football and women" -and that Gerhard Schroder, the German chancellor, should lead the discussion, as he has been married four times. Some European diplomats concluded that Mr Berlusconi must have been deliberately bating Mr Schroder. But when the Italian leader was questioned about his chairmanship at a press conference, he grew hot under the collar, pointing out that he would hardly have become a billionaire unless he were fully capable of chairing a meeting. And indeed his defenders say that in Italian business circles it can be perfectly normal to set a jocular and relaxed tone before a difficult meeting, by discussing last night’s football, or even teasing your colleagues about their love lives.
    These sorts of misunderstandings are unlikely to be erased even if all Europe’s political leaders and bureaucrats were both willing and able to speak English. But ever-inventive Brussels is coming up with a solution of sorts through the emergence of "Euro-speak" —a form of dead, bureaucratic English.
What can we infer from paragraph 7?
选项 A、Silvio Berlusconi didn’t like Gerhard Schroder because he didn’t take marriage seriously.
B、Silvio Berlusconi was incompetent as chairman of a meeting.
C、Silvio Berlusconi felt excited when questioned about his chairmanship.
D、Silvio Berlusconi had been a businessman.
答案D
解析 根据第七段倒数第二句“But when the Italian leader was questioned about hischairmanship at a press conference，he grew hot under the collar，pointing out that hewould hardly have become a billionaire unless he were fully capable of chairing a meeting．”答案是D。
转载请注明原文地址:https://kaotiyun.com/show/lXmO777K
0

考博英语

相关试题推荐
随机试题
最新回复(0)