[分享] 翻譯 管碧玲質詢影片

[popdin (中正加藤鷹)]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b5uXmAByc9g

這事管碧玲質詢的連結

剛剛花了兩個小時翻譯完了
等等凌晨兩點畢業旅行集合 (我今年高三) 所以來不及上字幕

我也不太會上字幕..
翻譯得不好有請見諒..

●麻煩專業人士或善心人士幫忙上字幕 好讓外國人知道台灣怎麼了 拜託拜託拜託
●有錯誤煩請各位指正
-----------------------------------------------------
●另外請大家幫忙高調 並請登入2500次的人轉發到八卦板●
-----------------------------------------------------
●願意上字幕的 文字檔在這：
http://www.sendspace.com/file/203fv6
錯誤1. 請ctrl+F 搜尋 we nver no 改成→ we never know
錯誤2. 有人建議 可以把legislator改成congressman  我同意，因為美國的議員
       叫congressman  或可以在影片一開始附註 legislator=congressman
錯誤3. armless 改成 unarmed  (幹錯好多.. 抱歉)
翻譯：
legislator:When I question the officers on inquiry, please let them stand
over there so they can see the video.
legislator:Mr. Lee, secretary-gereral of executive yuan
           Mr. Chen, minister of the interior
           Mr. Wang, national police agency director
           and Mr. Hsiao, deputy secretary-general
           Chairman, please tell them to stand over here and watch the video.
legislator:I prepared a 3 minutes video, please watch it carefully.
legislator:Where's Mr. Hsiao (deputy secretary-general)

A:he asked for leave.
legislator:he asked for leave?
A:Yes, I approved it.
legislator:OK.
legislator:Here is the first half video of armless students in the executive
yuan being squelched by police.

(1. The public properties are damaged by the police, not the students.)
(2. At first, there are reporters in the executive yuan.)
(Students: Withdraw the agreement with China; defend democracy.)
legislator: At first, there are reporters in the executive yuan.
(3. No students had weapons nor protested violently. They only have one
demand.)
legislator: repeats 3., there are only few students, the police could eject
them easily without violence.
legislator: we can see, the police used chairs to block the door. It were the
police damaging public properties.
legislator: we never know what the police did inside.
legislator: when the doors were all closed, there were only police behinde
the doors.
legislator: we can see, the stairs are also blocked by police.
legislator: students were only sitting-in in a small area.
(4. The police ejected the reporters violtently to prevent them from
collecting evidence.)
legislator: as we can see, the police pushed the reporters violently. Some
reporters were even beaten by the police, but it's not shown in this tape.
legislator: who is this police, the one who gave the order to eject the
reporters? Who is him? Is telling the reporters to go out your SOP?
Students: Let the reporters stay; freedom of press.
legislator: students yelled hopelessly. We don't see any students attacking
the polce, throwing objects, or having any violent actions. They only yelled
"let the reporters stay."
legislator: now, let's see what kind of force came in after the reporters
left.
legislator: the officer led the police with shields to surround the students.
legislator: after the police surrounded the students, the police could've
ejected the students easily. Until now, we think the police were going to
eject the students peacefully.
legislator: however, more fully equipped riot police came in. LOOK AT THE
FORCE, THEY'RE PREPARING TO BEAT THE STUDENTS!
legislator: THEY PREPARED TO BEAT THE STUDENTS. and the students couldn't
continue to film anymore because the police started to eject them brutally.
legislator: please take the mic.
legislator: the student said "i could only endure my trepidation, and tried
to calm other crying students. A lot of femaled students started to cry. We
knew, we were going to be treated brutally. In the next second, the police
said"you guys can't revolt."
legislator: the student said "is the squelch appropriate? if so, why did they
ask the reporters to leave? In the next second, we lost our human rights, and
were beated.
legislator: the student kept asking "aren't we all Taiwanese?" His fellow
proters were beated by the police, and he was dragged out from the executive
yuan. When he regained his conciousness, he was in the ambulance station.
legislator: the police pulled the female students' hair, and was beated to
concussion.

legislator: ok, ok, director, in such a small area, with such few students.
You had multipled amount of police, were your subordinates capable of
ejecting the students peacefully? Tell the public.
Director: The students woudln't listen. We told them to leave.
legislator: i meant could the police eject the stuednts with their bare arm?
ARE THEY CAPABLE OF DOING SO? YOU! YOUR POLICE! ARE THEY CAPABLE!? HUH?
Director: ehh ehh.. under certain circumstances, we would eject them
peacefully.
legislator: UNDER THAT CIRCUMSTANCE, YOU DON'T THINK YOU SHOULD EJECT THEM
WITHOUT VIOLENCE? you don't have the guts to answer.
Director: I do have the guts; yes, we could've do so.
legislator: THEN WHY DIDN'T YOU? WHY DID YOU DEPLOY THE FULLY ARMED POLICE?
THEY HAD STEEL MADE BATON! THAT KIND OF RIOT POLICE! WHO GAVE THE ORDER TO
DEPLOY THEM? THE COMMANDER THERE? OR UPPER EXECUTIVES?
legislator: as you said, you could've eject the students without violence.
Then who gave the orders?
Director: the divisional commander... he thought it was appropriate during
that circumstance.
legislator: so who is the commander?
Director: IDK. I'll have to search.
legislator: YOU DON'T KNOW!? YOU DON'T KNOW UNTIL NOW?
Director: yes.
legislator: so you three are just ignorant. until now, you're either lying or
trying to avoid responsibilities. How can you come on inquiry if you don't
know anything?
legislator: IT IS CLEARLY SHOWN THAT YOU USED THE FORCE ILEGALLY. YOU USED
THE SWAT!
legislator: according to the law "the swat is assembled by the elites, and
quipped with selected equipments. They can only be deployed for special
missons, and are used to fight organized and armed criminals."
legislator: how dare you used this kind of police to eject the students?
legislator: so is this your statement? your statement is: "they're were some
negligence. But only a few police used violence."
legislator: is this how you define this incident?
Director: yes.
legislator: ok, minister, is this how you define this incident, too?
Minister: yes.
legislator: ok, secretary, is this how Mr. Jiang, the premier, define the
incident, too?
Secretary: I believe this was the police department's decision...
legislator: IS THS HOW YOU DEFINE THE INCIDENT?
Secretary: yes..

legislator: ok. Director, what were your options to eject the students? What
kinds of commands could you give?
legislator: 1. With ineffective means? As long as the students are ejected.
Or eject them peacefully? Who made the decision?
Director: I told the secretary, Mr. Huang, to avoid violence.
legislator: YOU TOLD HIM NO TO USE VIOLENCE, RIGHT? DID YOU SAY "PEACEFULLY"?
DID YOU?
Director: no..
legislator: no you didn't.. you three have to take full responsibility. And
now you're shirking responsibilities!
Director: no we're not trying to..
legislator: BECAUSE THE POLICE'S BOSS DIDN'T TELL THEM TO EJECT PEACEFULLY!
AND THEY DEPLOYED THE SWAT! FULLY EQUIPPED SWAT! TO BEAT THE STUDENTS!
legislator: YOU DEPLOYED THE SWAT AND DIDN'T TELL THEM TO EJECT PEACEFULLY!
AND KNOW THE TRAGEDY HAPPENED, AND YOU'RE GIVING THE BLAME TO THE FEW POLICE
WHO'S LACK OF DISCIPLINE.
legislator: are you kidding me? who are you to be the director? who are you
to be the minister? you let the police press the students from all sides!
legislator: 1. ejecting the students by all means! 2. fully equipped! 3. no
orders forbid them to use violence!
legislator: and after ejecting the students successfully, you're telling the
police to take the responsibilities! This is what you guys are doing!
Shameful! This is your level!
legislator: are you going to apologize for this whole incident? Or are you
going to apologize for part of this incident? or do you think you don't need
to apologize?
Director: I'll apologize partly.
legislator: which part?
Director: This incident influenced everyone in the country, I am sorry.
legislator: how about the use of violence?
Director: I'll tell you when the whole incident is fully investigated.
legislator: this answer is not acceptable? Minister, what is your answer?
Minister: Same as the director.
legislator: ok, i hope the police won't be your scapegoat. How about you,
secretary?
secretary: (bunch of BS.)
legislator: you're the chief of staff, you don't have any responsibility. I
don't even know why you're here. It is the vice premier who should come.

legislator: ok. now i want you to promise two things.
legislator: 1. make all the evidence into public. I want you to guarantee you
won't destroy the evidence. Can you?
director: what did you say?
legislator: all the evidence, including the video tapes. Promise you won't
destroy them.
director: ofc we won't.
legislator: has the judicial branch preserve the evidence?
director: this case... uh..
legislator: not yet, huh?
director: The Taipei Prosecutors Office is investigating this incident.
legislator: have you demaned them to preserve all the evidence?
director: we will give them the duties.
legislator: you will? ok.
legislator: 2. Currently in the legislative yuan. Promise you won't use
violence to eject the protesters in the legislative yuan. Can you promise the
tragedy in the executive yuan won't happen again?
director: if the protesters will keep the protest peaceful, just like now.
legislator: then?
director: unless the protest turns into a riot.
legislator: but the protest was also peaceful in the executive yuan!
director: no it wasn't, they broke into the building.
legislator: it was only for your face. You said the protest was "illegal",
but it's the same in the legislative yuan. You only ejected the students in
the executive yuan because you don't want to lose face. So you misused your
power.
legislator: ok, you promised you won't use violence to eject the students in
the legislative yuan if they're protesting peacefully. Minister, are you
going to promise, too?
Minister: All these decisions should be made by the police agency.
legislator: aren't you an official? Do you mean you don't have take any
responsibility?
Minister: legislator, you said the use of violence. There definitely wasn't
any use of violence.
legislator: then what were you apologizing for? or was the apology insincere?
Minister: we will tell the police to finish their duty according to the law.

legislator: Of course you guys have merits, but your faults are more than
your merits.
legislator: let's see, "Bloomberg Businessweek" says "Taiwan's president has
low support from his people. Just like Ukraine's former president." Shameful!
President Ma is compared with Ukraine's former president.
legislator: "Times Magazine" says "this tragedy lets us think of the 228
incident in 1949."
legislator: "Le Figaro Newspaper" says "Armless protesters faced the violence
from police. Taiwan's democracy haven't been in such a big crisis since the
dictatorship ended 25 years ago."
legislator: "The Guardian" says "Taiwan's protesters are fightin for
democracy. If the president Ma don't withdraw the agreement with China and
hold a citizen conference, KMT's power will be doubted."
legislator: you have merits because you let Mr. Jiang, the premier, go to
work on Monday successfully. You have faults! BECAUSE YOU LET PRESIDENT MA
LOSE ALL HIS FACE AROUND THE WORLD. you three are in deep troubles.

--
http://photo.xuite.net/sukishiori/5847585/2.jpg/sizes/o/

--
※ 發信站: 批踢踢實業坊(ptt.cc), 來自: 1.162.75.117
※ 文章網址: http://www.ptt.cc/bbs/FuMouDiscuss/M.1395937640.A.B73.html
推 Orstor:你屌！
→ basicnet:GJ~
※ 編輯: popdin          來自: 1.162.75.117         (03/28 00:28)
推 fritz7845:推!
→ basicnet:我對加藤英的好感度上升
推 eatnplay:OP
推 june0204:!!
推 baggio1029:我直接end，反正我也看不懂，但推你的毅力
※ 編輯: popdin          來自: 1.162.75.117         (03/28 00:30)
→ alvar:推
→ gaiaesque:讚
推 skbshawn:你是怎麼辦到的...
※ 編輯: popdin          來自: 1.162.75.117         (03/28 00:31)
推 pegasusatlan:.....真的很有心~
推 Rayio:好猛
推 GalLe5566:高三英文就這麼好 我是不是該切腹QAQ
LOL 我要去國外讀大學.. 所以..
推 lostinblue:高調
※ 編輯: popdin          來自: 1.162.75.117         (03/28 00:32)
推 maxlove5288:同學~你好棒!
推 w926316:Ga1Le5566(遞刀子 (誤
推 qaz12wsx45:你們是要出國玩喔……
摁.. 去找日本鬼子玩..
不是重點啦! 快幫我轉發然後請人上字幕 嗚嗚嗚拜託
※ 編輯: popdin          來自: 1.162.75.117         (03/28 00:34)
推 she850127:推!
推 david1110:他我國中同學 他都亂丟保險套 沒公德心
→ qaz12wsx45:2點集合的畢旅 只想得到機場
→ david1110:還學我取暱稱 你阿罵的 我石牌陳為民啦
→ david1110:ㄉㄨㄚ 死有錢人 畢旅去三小京都 槓 死權貴 連勝文
.. 你不要逼我刪你推文
※ 編輯: popdin          來自: 1.162.75.117         (03/28 00:35)
推 chaqe:讚!
推 kkenen:推
推 GalLe5566:....你且對我的鮪魚肚做什麼QAQ
→ qaz12wsx45:高中畢旅就出國……你一定是讀貴族私立學校XDD
推 GalLe5566:我權限也不夠 只能幫你高調了
推 david1110:可以刪除推文喔 真沒品 一言堂 馬英九
推 qaz12wsx45:樓上跟原po應該是認識的
※ tbcscottie3:轉錄至看板 Gossiping                                03/28 00:39
→ Microscft:看到一半 有個明顯的錯誤先跟你講
→ Microscft:we never no (X)  we never know (O)
感謝 !已修正
※ 編輯: popdin          來自: 1.162.75.117         (03/28 00:43)
推 remprogress:佩服你的耐心，幫高調
推 lemondrink:以外國人的眼光來看，用Congressman取代Legislator
→ TKnR:推
→ lemondrink:可能會比較貼近他們的文化和理解，供你參考。
done
推 liga504123:推
※ 編輯: popdin          來自: 1.162.75.117         (03/28 00:49)
推 tengharold:推legislator，Congressman 僅限美國，legislator 則
推 asukaka:推
推 Islo:推
→ tengharold:形容他們工作性質(legislator=立法人)，放諸世界都通
推 skullrbc:推!
→ tengharold:然後 armless student 是 XD 級的錯誤 (=沒有手的學生)
推 kira925:沒有武裝是unarmed
THX
※ 編輯: popdin          來自: 1.162.75.117         (03/28 00:54)
推 lemondrink:我的想法是，legislator容易讓人以為立委的工作僅限
推 joy06723594:推
→ lemondrink:立法，然而在憲法制度的設計上，我國立委有質詢權，
推 iamalam2005:legislator沒問題阿，TAIPEI TIMES也這樣用
※ 編輯: popdin          來自: 1.162.75.117         (03/28 00:55)
→ tengharold:squelched = 鎮壓不合適，建議 suppress 或其他詞
推 o50102:推
→ lemondrink:呵呵，Taipei Times是給在台外國人在看的啊當然隨俗。
→ tengharold:police 永遠是單數，沒有 polices 這個字
我知道  我有打polices 嗎0.0
※ 編輯: popdin          來自: 1.162.75.117         (03/28 00:57)
→ tengharold:大略掃了一下，其他文法用詞錯誤不影響理解
摁 抱歉只有高三.. 會努力充實自己 然後回饋台灣
※ 編輯: popdin          來自: 1.162.75.117         (03/28 00:58)
※ 編輯: popdin          來自: 1.162.75.117         (03/28 00:59)
→ Microscft:高三能寫這樣頗強了 我高三時絕對寫不出來...
推 tengharold:加油。
→ tengharold:另外，legislator，不論是美國的congressman/senator
→ Microscft:大致上看差不多了 只是你的用字非常平板 沒有power啊
對不起! 但先別管這個了! 消息快傳出去吧 看得懂就好
第一次翻譯 嗚嗚
→ tengharold:還是英國的MP，都有質詢權，所以大多數人應該都有
※ 編輯: popdin          來自: 1.162.75.117         (03/28 01:02)
→ tengharold:legislator可以質詢+立法的認知
推 kaoru1992:推啊
推 kevin123453:幹 台灣一堆腦b 救台灣的是這種洋小鬼 何其悲哀
推 Kuokenken:瞄了下有點生硬，去買宵夜，等等回來再看看
※ 編輯: popdin          來自: 1.162.75.117         (03/28 01:04)
推 c7683fh6:謝謝你 辛苦了
推 EZpower:推認真有心
推 lemondrink:我覺得已經很不錯了，沒有重大的文法錯誤，也算流暢
推 coolda:要是這次沒擋住 出去就別回來了
推 srx255077:PUSH~~~
→ lemondrink:你要多加油！台灣以後要靠你！
推 BearCastle:
推 gj942l41l4:其實段宜康那段比較有霸氣  只是這段有播影片
推 wasmemory:厲害!!
→ lastchance:建議“你到現在還不知道?”請翻成"You still don't
推 flu:
→ lastchance:know?", "YOU DON'T KNOW UNTIL NOW?"＝你現在才知道？
推 jiniba:
→ lastchance: "3 minutes video"-> "3-minute video"
→ lastchance:"proters" -> "protesters"
→ lastchance: "What kinds of commands"->"What kind of commands"
→ lastchance: "who is this police", Police是永遠複數名詞,請改成
推 feresa:你也太強了吧！！！
→ lastchance: "who is this police officer"
→ lastchance:"beat"的過去式就是"beat"，非"beated"
推 a771105kuo:佩服 落落長
推 iversonk:推！
推 blue44477:推
推 s2371946:忌妒 怒噓
推 x137:
推 clair822000:.srt→https://www.mediafire.com/?ul14g7ddsjquj19
推 sthforlove:英文版 http://goo.gl/MEQaxN 打完軸才發現有人打好惹w
推 gigikikih:有認真有推阿...
推 ul6na:剛上好
推 Zorina:超有心，姐佩服
推 yatola:推推
推 silenus00:推！
推 ul6na:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dY2YT2hSoGA
推 bbcall1126:推
推 KN2O:這個必須推 短短的影片 讓我又像回到那個血腥鎮壓的夜晚一樣