看板 book 關於我們 聯絡資訊
昨天才在Kindle上看完原作,很好奇大賣的中文本是 什麼樣子,因為它是出自洪蘭的手筆,她翻的第51本書! 一脈相承,果然沒讓我失望,隨手就挑出一堆毛病, 而這只是最前面的幾頁而已! 可惜了一本好書,因為譯者是洪蘭,以後大概不會有 別的譯本在台出版了。悲夫! 我只挑翻譯明顯錯誤的部分,至於修辭就算了, 多讀一行,是多一分折磨。 中文來自博客來書店的摘選。 ------------------------------ The psychologist Gary Klein tells the story of a team of firefighters that entered a house in which the kitchen was on fire. Soon after they started hosing down the kitchen, the commander heard himself shout, “Let’s get out of here!” without realizing why. The floor collapsed almost immediately after the firefighters escaped. Only after the fact did the commander realize that the fire had been unusually quiet and that his ears had been unusually hot. Together, these impressions prompted what he called a “sixth sense of danger.” He had no idea what was wrong, but he knew something was wrong. It turned out that the heart of the fire had not been in the kitchen but in the basement beneath where the men had stood. 心理學家克萊恩(Gary Klein)曾經說過一個故事:一群消防隊員進入一間廚房著火的房 子,他們很快就把火熄滅了,消防隊長聽到他自己大喊:「馬上撤出!」他並不知道自己 為什麼會這樣說,但是當消防隊一離開,地板就垮掉了。事後,消防隊長才知道,因為這 場火比一般火災安靜,沒有劇烈燃燒的巨大聲音,而他的耳朵又感覺到比正常時更熱,這 激發了他的「危機第六感」(Sixth Sense of danger)。他並不知道有什麼地方不對, 但是他知道不對勁了,後來發現原來火源並不是在廚房,而是在地下室,消防隊員們就站 在火源上頭。 ------------------------------------ 評: Soon after they started hosing down the kitchen 他們(消防隊)才開始澆灌而已,還沒把火熄滅 "沒有劇烈燃燒的巨大聲音" 原文所無,感謝譯者的創作 ----------------------------------- We have all heard such stories of expert intuition: the chess master who walks past a street game and announces “White mates in three” without stopping, or the physician who makes a complex diagnosis after a single glance at a patient. Expert intuition strikes us as magical, but it is not. Indeed, each of us performs feats of intuitive expertise many times each day. Most of us are pitch-perfect in detecting anger in the first word of a telephone call, recognize as we enter a room that we were the subject of the conversation, and quickly react to subtle signs that the driver of the car in the next lane is dangerous. Our everyday intuitive abilities are no less marvelous than the striking insights of an experienced firefighter or physician—only more common. 我們都聽過這種專家直覺的故事:西洋棋大師在經過街頭棋局時,腳步都沒停,就說「再 三步,白棋贏」;醫生只要看病人一眼就做出複雜的診斷。專家的直覺在我們看起來好像 是魔術,但其實不是。我們每一個人每一天都在做專家的直覺判斷,大部分人在接聽電話 的第一個字時,就能偵察到對方的憤怒;一走進房間,就立刻知道別人正在談論我們;危 險駕駛,立刻做出因應的避禍措施。我們每一天的直覺能力並不比有經驗的消防隊員或醫 生差,只不過我們經歷的都是日常小事而已。 ----------------------------------- 評: strikes us as magical strikes us 是突然想到的意思,像被什麼打了一樣,不是「在我們看起來好像」 Expert intuition strikes us as magical 專家的直覺突然憑空而來,彷彿變魔術一般 pitch-perfect 「準確」沒翻 quickly react to subtle signs that the driver of the car in the next lane is dangerous 用「危險駕駛,立刻做出因應的避禍措施」打發隔壁車道的危險駕駛, 反應確實很迅速。 only more common 都是日常小事而已嗎? 只是比較尋常罷了。 ----------------------------------- The psychology of accurate intuition involves no magic. Perhaps the best short statement of it is by the great Herbert Simon, who studied chess masters and showed that after thousands of hours of practice they come to see the pieces on the board differently from the rest of us. You can feel Simon’ s impatience with the mythologizing of expert intuition when he writes: “The situation has provided a cue; this cue has given the expert access to information stored in memory, and the information provides the answer. Intuition is nothing more and nothing less than recognition.” 正確直覺的心理學並沒有任何魔術在裡面,或許最好的一句話就是研究西洋棋大師的心理 學家賽蒙(Herbert Simon)說的:西洋棋大師和我們最大的不同是,在花過幾千個小時 下棋後,他們看棋盤的方式已經跟我們不一樣了。從賽蒙下面所說的話,你可以感受到他 很不耐煩坊間把專家的直覺神話化:「情境提供了線索,讓專家得以從記憶提取訊息,並 提供答案。直覺就是辨識(recognition),不多也不少,就是它。」 ----------------------------------- 評: The psychology of accurate intuition involves no magic. psychology 這裡不能翻譯為心理學;而是「心理過程」或「心理特點」 Longman Dictionary: mental processes involved in believing in something or doing a certain activity OALD: mental characteristics of a person or group 看到 -logy 就只會翻譯為「─學」,是初學翻譯的人才會有的愚蠢反射動作 當作:正確直覺的心理過程沒有包含任何魔術 "great" Herbert Simon 洪蘭大概覺得他不偉大吧? pieces on the board 棋盤上的棋子 看「棋局」的方式 光看棋盤幹嘛呀? 坊間,市街之間,多指書坊。原文無。 ------------------------------------ We are not surprised when a two-year-old looks at a dog and says “doggie!” because we are used to the miracle of children learning to recognize and name things. Simon’s point is that the miracles of expert intuition have the same character. Valid intuitions develop when experts have learned to recognize familiar elements in a new situation and to act in a manner that is appropriate to it. Good intuitive judgments come to mind with the same immediacy as “doggie!” 我們看到一個兩歲孩子看到狗時,說「狗狗」,一點也不奇怪,因為我們已經習慣孩子每 天都在學習辨識物體並且「叫名」(naming)。賽蒙對專家直覺的奇蹟也是同樣的看法, 當專家在新的情境看到熟悉的元素,他就依那個情境表現出最恰當的行為,那就是我們所 看到成功的直覺。好的直覺判斷就像孩子看到狗時叫狗狗一樣,是學習和經驗的累積。 ----------------------------------- 評: Simon’s point is that the miracles of expert intuition have the same character. 洪蘭:賽蒙對專家直覺的奇蹟也是同樣的看法 當作:賽蒙認為專家直覺的奇蹟具有同樣的特性 Valid intuitions develop 沒翻出來 「專家在新的情境看到熟悉的元素時,會發展出合理的直覺,並依情境做恰當的行動」 name things 居然直接把它改為「叫名」(naming)! 譯者未免太濫用她的權力了吧!! ----------------------------------- Unfortunately, professionals’ intuitions do not all arise from true expertise. Many years ago I visited the chief investment officer of a large financial firm, who told me that he had just invested some tens of millions of dollars in the stock of Ford Motor Company. When I asked how he had made that decision, he replied that he had recently attended an automobile show and had been impressed. “Boy, do they know how to make a car!” was his explanation. He made it very clear that he trusted his gut feeling and was satisfied with himself and with his decision. I found it remarkable that he had apparently not considered the one question that an economist would call relevant: Is Ford stock currently underpriced? Instead, he had listened to his intuition; he liked the cars, he liked the company, and he liked the idea of owning its stock. From what we know about the accuracy of stock picking, it is reasonable to believe that he did not know what he was doing. 很不幸的是,專業的直覺並非全部來自專家。許多年前,我去拜訪證券公司投資部門的一 位經理,他告訴我,他投資了千百萬美元在福特汽車公司的股票上。我問他,他怎麼做這 個決定,他回答,他最近去一個汽車展示場,對福特的車子印象很好。「啊!他們真的知 道如何打造一輛汽車!」這就是他的解釋。他非常清楚地表示,他相信直覺,所以對他的 決定很滿意。我非常驚訝他沒有考慮經濟學家一定會問的一個問題:福特股票現在是低於 它的市場價值嗎?相反的,他聽從他的直覺,他喜歡福特汽車,喜歡福特公司,喜歡擁有 福特公司的股票,從我們對選擇股票的知識來說,這位投資專家可以說不知道自己在做什 麼。 ------------------- 評: expertise 專業技能,不是專家。 Unfortunately, professionals’ intuitions do not all arise from true expertise. 洪蘭:很不幸的是,專業的直覺並非全部來自專家。 應作:「很不幸的是,專業人員的直覺並非全部來自真正的專業技能。」 作者顯然不敢苟同那位經理挑選福特股票的決定過程,並以此說明專家也會不按專業來做 判斷,干「專業的直覺並非全部來自專家」什麼事? 做股票的經理沒用專業技能,而一個翻譯了51本書的學者,仍然沒有翻譯的專業技能, 這實在有點諷刺呢。 remarkable 是非比尋常,離「非常驚訝」還有距離 one question that an economist would call relevant relevant question 直接相關的問題,非「一定會問的一個問題」 accuracy of stock picking 如何正確選股 「選擇股票的知識」,好吧,不算太離譜。 ------------------- The specific heuristics that Amos and I studied provided little help in understanding how the executive came to invest in Ford stock, but a broader conception of heuristics now exists, which offers a good account. An important advance is that emotion now looms much larger in our understanding of intuitive judgments and choices than it did in the past. The executive’s decision would today be described as an example of the affect heuristic, where judgments and decisions are guided directly by feelings of liking and disliking, with little deliberation or reasoning. 特維斯基和我所研究的捷徑,對了解大公司老板如何決定投資福特股票來說,沒有什麼實 質的幫助,但是現在有更廣泛的捷徑概念,它對上述行為就有很好的解釋。一個重要的進 步是,情緒在了解直覺的判斷和選擇上變得很重要,而且遠比過去的角色重要。今天,那 個投資經理的決定會被稱為情意的捷徑(affect heuristic),即判斷和決策直接受到喜 歡或不喜歡感覺的操弄,很少思辨和推理的成分在內。 ----------------- heuristics 是探索的過程或方法 (heuristic method or process) 一個心理學教授居然用「捷徑」潦草帶過,讓人匪夷所思。 ------------------ When confronted with a problem—choosing a chess move or deciding whether to invest in a stock—the machinery of intuitive thought does the best it can. If the individual has relevant expertise, she will recognize the situation, and the intuitive solution that comes to her mind is likely to be correct. This is what happens when a chess master looks at a complex position: the few moves that immediately occur to him are all strong. When the question is difficult and a skilled solution is not available, intuition still has a shot: an answer may come to mind quickly—but it is not an answer to the original question. The question that the executive faced (should I invest in Ford stock?) was difficult, but the answer to an easier and related question (do I like Ford cars?) came readily to his mind and determined his choice. This is the essence of intuitive heuristics: when faced with a difficult question, we often answer an easier one instead, usually without noticing the substitution. 當碰到問題,比方說,決定下一步棋怎麼走,或是否投資某支股票時,直覺思考的機制會 盡力而為。假如這個人有相關的專業經驗,他會認得情境,浮現他心頭的直覺解決方法很 可能就是正確的。這是當一個西洋棋大師看到一盤複雜的棋,他馬上想到的幾步都很強勁 ,當問題很困難,又沒有技術上的解決知識時,直覺還是一個可行的方式。投資經理所面 對的問題(我是否該投資福特的股票?)很困難,但是一個比較簡單而且相關的答案馬上 就進入他的心中,決定了他的選擇。這是直覺捷徑的精髓,當面對困難問題時,我們常回 答比較容易的問題,而沒有回答真正的問題,而且我們通常沒有注意到這個替換。 ----------------------- 評: When the question is difficult and a skilled solution is not available, intuition still has a shot. 洪蘭:當問題很困難,又沒有技術上的解決知識時,直覺還是一個可行的方式。 skilled solution 訓練有素的解決方法 still has a shot = 一個可行的方式?簡直亂來! still has a shot 仍然會試圖一搏 應作:當問題很困難,又沒有訓練有素的解決方法時,直覺仍然會試圖一搏 (所以後面再提到不顧專業,胡亂選股的例子) -------------------------------- The spontaneous search for an intuitive solution sometimes fails—neither an expert solution nor a heuristic answer comes to mind. In such cases we often find ourselves switching to a slower, more deliberate and effortful form of thinking. This is the slow thinking of the title. Fast thinking includes both variants of intuitive thought—the expert and the heuristic—as well as the entirely automatic mental activities of perception and memory, the operations that enable you to know there is a lamp on your desk or retrieve the name of the capital of Russia. 自動搜尋直覺的解決方法有時會失敗,不論是專家的解決方式或捷徑的回答都想不起來, 在這種情況下,我們會轉換到一個比較慢,比較特意,要費力的思考方式。這就是書名「 慢的思考」 (slow thinking)的意思。「快的思考」(fast thinking)包括各種直覺 的思考──專家的和捷徑的──以及整個自動化的知覺和記憶的心智活動,這種操作使你 知道桌上有一盞燈,或是回答出俄國的首都在莫斯科。 both variants of intuitive thought 直覺思考的兩種變化形式;不是各種直覺的思考 ------------------------------ The distinction between fast and slow thinking has been explored by many psychologists over the last twenty-five years. For reasons that I explain more fully in the next chapter, I describe mental life by the metaphor of two agents, called System 1 and System 2, which respectively produce fast and slow thinking. I speak of the features of intuitive and deliberate thought as if they were traits and dispositions of two characters in your mind. In the picture that emerges from recent research, the intuitive System 1 is more influential than your experience tells you, and it is the secret author of many of the choices and judgments you make. Most of this book is about the workings of System 1 and the mutual influences between it and System 2. 在過去二十五年裡,許多科學家都曾探討過快和慢兩種思考方式的區別。我在下一章中會 講到,為什麼我用系統一和系統二的比喻來描述心智生活,系統一代表著快的思考,系統 二是慢的思考。我會談到直覺的和特意的思考特質,就好像是你心中有兩個人的人格特質 。從最近的研究中得知,直覺的系統一是比經驗告訴你的還有影響力,它是你許多選擇和 判斷背後的秘密作者,這本書大部份是關於系統一的工作情形,以及系統一和系統二之間 相互的影響。 -------------------- psychologists 翻為科學家?譯者是不是擔心許多人把心理學當作胡說八道的騙術呢? -- There are a lot of things we don't want to know about the people we love. --- Chuck Palahniuk -- ※ 發信站: 批踢踢實業坊(ptt.cc) ◆ From:
q6261901:前陣子一直想買這本書 不過譯者風評太差讓我望之卻步... 07/02 19:41
flied:推,真有心整理 07/02 19:42
※ 編輯: decorum 來自: (07/02 19:44)
widec:小心洪大教授晚上打電話給你 07/02 20:00
oldzen:知道如此慘況後,買書看到譯者是洪大教授都自動跳過 07/02 20:20
liuchihying:看來還是買英文版的,這實在太悲劇了... 07/02 20:21
joshia:感謝費心整理...這種譯本已經算是不完全給付了吧? 07/02 20:29
wzch:推~看他的譯書根本浪費時間,意思跟原著都差很多. 07/02 20:31
tysh710320:我難過 07/02 20:37
littlehouse:XD 07/02 20:42
stunnerbhd:為什麼這個巨作不能有共同翻譯呢?他是不是也犯了裡面所 07/02 20:48
stunnerbhd:說的專家也不會承認自己的錯,明明在這領域也有其他好 07/02 20:48
stunnerbhd:的譯者 一起翻或監督 要不然這本書讀起來真的有點... 07/02 20:49
gelomstein:感謝d大的分享,有空也來找找原版的閱讀 07/02 21:04
a90210:看完原文再去看洪的翻譯真是臉上N條線 07/02 21:08
zxcvf:想問這本是否有簡體版本呢? 07/02 21:29
Atropos0723:重點是教授似乎無法容忍別人對其翻譯作品的指責...... 07/02 21:32
Atropos0723:她的翻譯就是小錯不斷,然後語句不太通順,對閱讀者 07/02 21:33
Atropos0723:來說,看她的譯作真的很辛苦 07/02 21:34
Atropos0723:有些譯者的作品,我連想都不想就可以買下手 07/02 21:35
Atropos0723:而洪教授的作品,我也是想都不想...... 07/02 21:35
conshelity:之前看他的書 我都不知道是我理解能力不好還是他翻不好 07/02 21:49
Smu41220:洪:爽爽翻 07/02 21:51
luciferii:我印象中好像有人講她的譯作都是廉價包給學生翻... 07/02 22:30
sabrina2597:簡體版名稱《思考, 快與慢》 07/02 22:38
reshape:請問有人讀過簡體版的嗎?如果還行 想入手簡體的,謝謝 07/02 22:52
swimbert:真的錯蠻多,她的英文有這麼不好嗎?也許真是學生翻的吧 07/02 22:54
applewarm:推認真 有如此譯者,可惜了原著 07/03 00:02
wzch:簡體版《思考, 快與慢》翻譯得至少看起來像是在看中文 07/03 00:12
wzch:但建議能看原文就看原文,簡體版的錯誤也蠻多的 07/03 00:20
descent:有能力看原文真好 07/03 08:04
rkbey:很後悔當初貪69折買了這本書 看了大家評語 都不敢拆封 07/03 08:40
checkmater:推 好厲害 07/03 10:30
lefeng:看到是她翻譯的 這本書我就不考慮入手了 07/03 11:20
vein576:認真推 07/03 16:27
Musasi:推 07/03 19:48
a90210:想要推薦給別人看都推不下去 07/03 21:36
dreamfire:推認真,有如此譯者,可惜了原者 07/03 23:11
vendor:我認為你直接寄給原出版社有許有點用 07/04 00:34
kromax:他寫的書我是都不看 但不可否認他選擇翻的書幾乎都是上選 07/04 02:03
kromax:至於逐字翻的好壞我比較不敏感 主要精神意義有讀到就好 07/04 02:05
kromax:有次看她主持節目跟姚仁喜對話 我就看出她差人家一兩個檔次 07/04 02:09
kromax:對"新聞""資訊"能博聞 但是知識沒架構跟哲學內涵基礎 07/04 02:14
kromax:知識太機械了 07/04 02:17
orznge:原PO好強好認真! 07/04 07:29
kuopi:說好不打洪老師臉的QQ 07/04 10:01
aquablue:推 認真 07/04 11:14
lepisma:忠於事實推 07/04 12:26
Green9527:真悲哀 浪費一本好書 07/04 16:36
loveyou9527:你們覺得洪蘭老師的講理系列怎麼樣阿? 07/04 17:11
jeanvanjohn:講理系列喔...請看市長的罵文。 07/04 18:17
jeanvanjohn:引用亂引,歷史資料亂用,甚至用網路捏造的東西, 07/04 18:18
jeanvanjohn:這種文章根本沒有半點水準可言。 07/04 18:18
jeanvanjohn:以前市長脾氣火爆的時候罵得更難聽... 07/04 18:18
ranney889:看到洪蘭的推薦或翻譯 就有預感會......反正已成事實挨 07/04 21:50
rkbey:可是他的權威 使一堆好書很難再譯 07/05 09:43
folly21:為何她是權威還譯的這麼爛,她自己都沒自覺嗎? 07/06 02:51
durian1001:想請問看過的大家這本書還有讀的價值嗎? 07/10 19:13
durian1001:還是翻譯根本已經完全偏離原作甚至是背道而馳了? 07/10 19:14
osmanthusjo:感謝大大無私提出 她的名氣已經超過專業了 07/13 20:58
WeGoYuSheng:洪蘭:我從來沒有翻譯過任何一本書像譯這本書這樣快樂 07/13 21:21
WeGoYuSheng:因為都隨便亂翻 $$$$就進來啦 07/13 21:21
valenci:危險駕駛,立刻做出因應的避禍措施 這句真的很莫名其妙 07/14 16:58
NEWSTAY:我沒發現譯者 我好想哭 07/16 04:46
sneak: 知識太機械了 https://noxiv.com 11/06 17:01