Re: [分享] 另一種角度看出軌(代shunnPO文)

看板CATCH作者 (楚門)時間10年前 (2014/06/05 17:13), 10年前編輯推噓21(21024)
留言45則, 24人參與, 最新討論串1/1
嘿,大家午安,我是楚門 我們家勾錐嗆辣的shunn又被檢舉惹,所以由我幫他代PO 至於原因詳見至底公告,對於這一切我只覺得好無聊啊zzzzz 以下是shunn的正文: 又被檢舉桶七天,不能發文XDDD 想說這吵架想想也是無聊,就覺得無所謂不要同意TW先生的檢舉好了, 但不能發文還是好不舒服啊=3= 我剛好有訂閱Matthew Hussey的電子報,這週剛好寄了這封, 跟我之前想要跟大家討論的主題很相似,是關於男女純友情以及所謂忠誠的發表, 在這邊做個簡單的翻譯給大家看。 ——————————————————————— In a moment I'm going to tell you how to use my Whiskey Test to know if a man and woman can just be friends... But first, we need to talk about attraction. 在我告訴你如何用威士忌測使法來知道男女間是否有純友情之前, 讓我們先來談談吸引吧。 If we're in a relationship with someone, we don't necessarily feel comfortable with them having friendships with the opposite sex. We're worried there might be something more there -- attraction. 如果我們在跟某個人交往,這並不代表我們會對對方擁有異性朋友感到舒適, 因為有可能友情並非只是友情。 I feel there's a somewhat childish assumption that our partner will never be attracted to anyone else - and shouldn't be attracted to anyone else. 大部份的人都會有一種很幼稚的假設,認為我們的伴侶不會被其他人所吸引, 亦或是,根本不應該被其他人所吸引。 When you think this way, we attempt to suppress one of the most basic of instincts in our partner: his instinct to be drawn to attractive qualities in people. 當你這樣想的時候,我們試圖去壓抑我們身為人類的最基本的本能: 一個被有魅力的人吸引的本能。 I believe that we prefer to spend time with people we find attractive. It may be on a physical or intellectual level. 我相信我們喜歡花時間跟我們覺得有魅力的人來往,不管是肉體上面還是心智上面。 I don't think that it's realistic to assume that we'll never be attracted to qualities in anyone other than our partner. 我並不覺得假設我們自己不會被其他有吸引力的人吸引是一件實際的事情。 But, we can be loyal. 但,我們可以保持忠誠。 Our loyalty is something that we exercise when we are in a relationship. It has nothing to do with the friendships that we have. 我們的忠誠是在我們跟人交往的時候需要練習的東西,這跟友誼一點關係都沒有。 You can be attracted to your friends in some ways. Chances are if you weren't, you wouldn't have chosen them in the first place. That doesn't mean you're going to do anything about it or that you want them over your partner. 你其實某種程度都有被你的朋友所吸引,因為如果不是的話, 你不會和他們成為朋友。但這不代表你要對被他們吸引的這個事實 做出什麼動作,或是你喜歡朋友勝過你的伴侶。 It just means you found something about them attractive. 這很簡單就只是你覺得他們有某一方面很令人喜歡。 Let's stop debating friendships and attraction. 我們不要再吵男女是否有純友情了。 The question isn't: Can men and women be friends? 我們該問的問題不是「男女之間是否有純友情」 The question is: Are men and women willing to just be friends? 而是「男女之間是否願意只當朋友」 Your man's loyalty isn't defined by how many people he's not attracted to. It's defined by the amount of people he can be attracted to and still be loyal to you. 你的男人的忠誠度不在於他沒被多少人吸引,而是定義在他在被 多少人吸引之下,還能對妳忠誠。 It's about being in the relationship and remaining faithful. That, to me, is what loyalty truly is about. 我們在討論的是我們能對一段關係有多少信任,至少對我來說,這才是忠誠的定義。 Genuine loyalty exists. 最純粹的忠誠絕對存在。 There's no award for someone never being attracted to other people. 一個完全不會被別人所吸引的人一點也沒什麼好值得嘉獎的。 Think of it this way. If you're the only one in the world your partner is attracted to then by default he's with you. When someone is attracted to many people and still chooses you, that is genuine loyalty. 這樣想吧,如果你的伴侶在全世界只能被妳吸引那麼他是 「被設定就是要跟你在一起」。如果你的伴侶被很多很多人吸引 但仍然選擇跟妳在一起,那麼那就是最純粹的忠誠。 Now he's sticking around by choice, not because he hasn't found anything better. 他在你身邊是做選擇後的結果,而不是他沒找到更好的。 So now we're ready for my Whiskey Test… 那我們現在來講那個威士忌測試法吧。 If you can drink ten shots of whiskey with someone you're attracted to, and at the end of those 10 shots, neither one of you attempts to sleep with the other person, you can just be friends. 如果你可以跟一個吸引你的人一起喝十杯威士忌shots, 在喝完那十杯之後,你們兩個人之中任何一個人都沒有想要跟對方上床, 那麼你們就可以維持純友誼。 That's not to say that there isn't any attraction between these two people. That is to say that even once they've lost their inhibitions - even once they're in a state of weakness where they could be vulnerable to doing something -- they choose not to. 但我們並不是說這兩個人之中沒有任何的吸引力存在, 而是說在失去一定的理智之後,他們仍還能夠選擇不去做某件事情。 That's when you know that you have someone who really sees the relationship as just a friendship. 這時候你才會知道,原來你們是可以保持純友誼的。 Whether it's you, your partner, or anyone else. 不論這是你、你的伴侶、還是任何人。 補充:[泛科學] 這真的是我要的婚姻嗎 http://pansci.tw/archives/36359 ——————- Dana’s Lifeingredient http://danaslifeingredient.wordpress.com/ -- ※ 發信站: 批踢踢實業坊(ptt.cc), 來自: 140.119.134.137 ※ 文章網址: http://www.ptt.cc/bbs/CATCH/M.1401959622.A.64E.html

06/05 17:20, , 1F
哈哈哈 桶的好 板主英明
06/05 17:20, 1F

06/05 17:27, , 2F
認真看完了 這篇是好文 感謝dana翻譯
06/05 17:27, 2F

06/05 17:39, , 3F
好文推!
06/05 17:39, 3F

06/05 18:06, , 4F
06/05 18:06, 4F

06/05 19:06, , 5F
推!我喜歡那句"男女之間是否願意只當朋友",這句話有深度
06/05 19:06, 5F

06/05 19:12, , 6F
謝謝dana
06/05 19:12, 6F

06/05 19:31, , 7F
推 男女之間是否願意只當朋友
06/05 19:31, 7F

06/05 19:31, , 8F
大叔還是覺得:人性是不能測試誘惑的~
06/05 19:31, 8F

06/05 20:35, , 9F
覺得在男女版被噓應該是出於誤會,
06/05 20:35, 9F

06/05 20:36, , 10F
對按噓的人來說,「出軌」大概是指「出軌行為」,
06/05 20:36, 10F

06/05 20:37, , 11F
是指現實中具體的做了某些事,對應到這篇文章中,
06/05 20:37, 11F

06/05 20:37, , 12F
就是指「不忠誠」。
06/05 20:37, 12F

06/05 20:39, , 13F
Dana版友的「出軌」是指「被其他人吸引的狀態」,
06/05 20:39, 13F

06/05 20:41, , 14F
(或許有包含其後一般被認為是逾矩的行為,
06/05 20:41, 14F

06/05 20:41, , 15F
這裡需要向本人確認其意思)
06/05 20:41, 15F

06/05 20:42, , 16F
因為兩邊在談的出軌不一定是同樣的事物,所以有了誤會吧
06/05 20:42, 16F

06/05 20:51, , 17F
很感謝Dana版友的分享和翻譯!原來有電子報呀,想訂呢XD
06/05 20:51, 17F
你可以站內信跟他要,要有誠意喔:)

06/05 22:22, , 18F
這篇不會有問題嗎?被桶可以代po嗎?那水桶有意義嗎?
06/05 22:22, 18F
這是分享文耶,符合板旨啊 況且他是因為推文跟人家槓上才被捅 跟文章本身無關吧,而且水桶當然有意義啊 不能推文討論很痛苦捏XD

06/05 22:33, , 19F
這篇文章有句子是翻錯的哦 完全會錯意!
06/05 22:33, 19F

06/05 22:35, , 20F
I don't think that it's realistic to assume that we'll nev
06/05 22:35, 20F

06/05 22:36, , 21F
never be attracted to qualities in anyone other than our
06/05 22:36, 21F

06/05 22:37, , 22F
partner.應翻:我認為,以為我們都不會被自己伴侶以外的人所吸
06/05 22:37, 22F

06/05 22:39, , 23F
引的假設並不實際。是"我們自己"不會被吸引 不是我們伴侶不會!
06/05 22:39, 23F

06/05 22:40, , 24F
因有人私信問我 所以我回應此句 其它句是否也有翻錯 就不知了
06/05 22:40, 24F
感謝您的熱心指教,只是我覺得沒有完全會錯意,只是翻對一半 因為原文的主詞是"We",我想這除了我們自己外,也包含了伴侶 所以他這樣翻我覺得也沒錯,只是意思不夠完全:)

06/05 23:29, , 25F
好文推!
06/05 23:29, 25F

06/06 00:40, , 26F
推推
06/06 00:40, 26F

06/06 00:59, , 27F
好文!幫忙推
06/06 00:59, 27F

06/06 01:02, , 28F
非常有味道的一篇
06/06 01:02, 28F

06/06 01:43, , 29F
感謝CATCH小辣椒的翻譯XD不過我認同好白說的
06/06 01:43, 29F

06/06 01:44, , 30F
不要測試人性 而且如果真的這真的測下去出事就回不去了
06/06 01:44, 30F

06/06 08:32, , 31F
這裡的we只有純粹指"我們",完全不包含另一伴。因為有
06/06 08:32, 31F

06/06 08:33, , 32F
後面our partner兩個字,所以有所區隔。
06/06 08:33, 32F

06/06 08:34, , 33F
所以這段英文她這樣翻是全錯的不是不完全錯。
06/06 08:34, 33F

06/06 08:36, , 34F
要翻譯英文就應該把原文的意思完全表達到,而不是當差不
06/06 08:36, 34F

06/06 08:37, , 35F
多先生就好。這樣子會誤導別人,我覺得就不太好了。
06/06 08:37, 35F

06/06 08:38, , 36F
個人善意建議。
06/06 08:38, 36F
感謝你的提醒~你這樣說清楚多了啊 剛剛已經跟shunn討論過囉,已修正,感謝熱心版友們 願你們幸福:) ※ 編輯: truman254 (140.119.134.137), 06/06/2014 09:55:40

06/06 10:07, , 37F
我認為原文的we應該是包含我們自身"及"伴侶的統稱
06/06 10:07, 37F

06/06 14:29, , 38F
推一下楚門的排版,pagedown看下來超舒服der~
06/06 14:29, 38F

06/06 15:55, , 39F
這個測試也太可怕 萬一真的沒不是純友誼不就……
06/06 15:55, 39F

06/06 20:15, , 40F
好文推!
06/06 20:15, 40F

06/06 20:22, , 41F
我也覺得不要動不動就來測試看看經不經得起測試,雖然
06/06 20:22, 41F

06/06 20:22, , 42F
原文應該沒有這意思
06/06 20:22, 42F

06/06 22:02, , 43F
純粹感謝分享
06/06 22:02, 43F

06/08 14:32, , 44F
好文感謝推!
06/08 14:32, 44F

06/10 20:56, , 45F
推 男女之間是否願意只當朋友
06/10 20:56, 45F
文章代碼(AID): #1Ja3J6PE (CATCH)