作者oliviawind (顺风)
看板Translation
标题[英中] 台大译研所101考古
时间Tue Jul 9 21:01:12 2013
原文：
By using stale metaphors, similes, and idioms, you save much mental effort,
at the cost of leaving your meaning vague, not only for your reader but for
yourself. This is the significance of mixed metaphors. The sole aim of a
metaphor is to call up a visual image. When these images clash — as in The
Fascist octopus has sung its swan song, the jackboot is thrown into the
melting pot — it can be taken as certain that the writer is not seeing a
mental image of the objects he is naming; in other words he is not really
thinking.
A scrupulous writer, in every sentence that he writes, will ask himself at
least four questions, thus: What am I trying to say? What words will express
it? What image or idiom will make it clearer? Is this image fresh enough to
have an effect? And he will probably ask himself two more: Could I put it more
shortly? Have I said anything that is avoidably ugly? But you are not obliged
to go to all this trouble. You can shirk it by simply throwing your mind open
and letting the ready-made phrases come crowding in. They will construct your
sentences for you — even think your thoughts for you, to a certain extent —
and at need they will perform the important service of partially concealing
your meaning even from yourself.
（全文：
http://www.orwell.ru/library/essays/politics/english/e_polit）
我的译文：
使用
陈腐的隐喻、明喻及成语，
虽替自己省下了不少精力，代价却是把意思弄得晦涩不
明，无论读者或自己都看不懂。
隐喻混合使用的重大性就在这里。隐喻的目的仅有一个：带
出一个视觉意象。当这些意象互相
冲撞－－好比在「法西斯章鱼唱了一曲天鹅之歌，军靴被
丢进了大熔炉里头」这句话中，作者肯定
无法在脑海中看到他所要指涉的意象；换句话说，
他并非是透过联想写下这段文字的。
一个严己的作家在写每一句话时，至少会问自己四个问题：一、我想说什麽？二、我
要用什麽字句表达之？三、有哪些意象或成语能使之更加清晰？四、这个意象够不够清楚
？能发挥效用吗？或许，他还会再多问两个问题：一、我能简单扼要地表达出来吗？二、
我有没有用了什麽可避免掉的陋字？但，你大可不必让这些问题困扰自己。你
可以打混摸
鱼，尽管让那些早已被创造的词语涌入你开放的脑袋里即可。它们会替你造出句子－－甚
至在某种程度上，替你思考－－
需要的话，它们
甚至能部分地隐藏起某些你想传达的意义
，连你自己都寻不着呢。
不好意思，又来麻烦各位大大指教了！
我知道我的翻译很粗陋，希望各位多鞭>"<
也想知道各位遇到同样的文字会怎麽翻呢：）？
--
这个世界的美丽与哀愁。
--
※ 发信站: 批踢踢实业坊(ptt.cc)
◆ From: 118.170.219.117
※ 编辑: oliviawind 来自: 118.170.219.117 (07/09 21:06)
1F：推 decorum:你把文章整个读错了 作者反对使用这些东西 一开头的 07/10 12:27
2F：→ decorum:stale（陈腐）就为文章定了基调 多看几遍吧 07/10 12:28
3F：→ decorum:总之 作者批评许多人写文章 爱用陈腐的譬喻 使思想懒惰 07/10 12:29
谢谢...完全没发现，真是糟糕啊>"<
※ 编辑: oliviawind 来自: 1.165.66.208 (07/10 19:03)
4F：推 hudson109:vague怎麽会变成清楚明了.. 07/10 22:06
原本是想成「使用隐喻可以省下许多力气，也不会使意义模糊（因为有明确的意象）」，
不过现在看来的确是错误的解读>"<
※ 编辑: oliviawind 来自: 118.170.138.57 (07/10 23:29)
修改完毕，但是仍然不太确定最後两行的意思有没有理解错误...
※ 编辑: oliviawind 来自: 118.170.222.138 (07/14 00:00)