评论
打印
Culture
文艺版块
Johnson
约翰逊专栏
Say it like it is
实话实说
Euphemism and exaggeration are both dangers, but extremism is the bigger threat.
委婉语和夸大其辞都很危险，但极端主义是更大的威胁。
George Orwell’s essay “Politics and the English Language”, published in 1946, took aim at the bureaucrats, academics and hacks who obfuscated their misdeeds in vague, jargon-packed writing.
乔治·奥威尔在1946年发表了文章《政治与英语语言》，将矛头对准了那些用含糊不清、充满行话的文字来掩饰罪行的官僚、学者和写庸俗文章的人。
Abstractions, euphemisms and clichés all served as “the defence of the indefensible”.
抽象概念、委婉语和陈词滥调都是“在辩护不可辩护之言行”。
Orwell lamented how “Millions of peasants are robbed of their farms and sent trudging along the roads with no more than they can carry: this is called transfer of population or rectification of frontiers.
奥威尔悲叹道：“数百万农民被剥夺了农场，只能带上自己扛得动的东西在路途上艰难跋涉，而这却被称为人口转移或边境整顿。
People are imprisoned for years without trial, or shot in the back of the neck or sent to die of scurvy in Arctic lumber camps: this is called elimination of unreliable elements.”
人们未经审判就被监禁多年，或者被一枪打中后脑勺（实施死刑），或者被送到北极的伐木营地而死于坏血病，这都被称为消除不可靠因素。”
If Orwell were writing today, he would find plenty of euphemisms to complain about.
如果奥威尔在现代写作，他会发现大量值得抱怨的委婉语。
On October 7th an open letter from a clutch of student groups at Harvard University vaguely described the “unfolding violence” in Israel without ascribing blame to Hamas.
10月7日，哈佛大学的一些学生团体发表了一封公开信，含糊其辞地描述了以色列“正在发生的暴力事件”，且没有将责任归咎于哈马斯。
Abstract brutality “unfolding” shocks rather less than a clearer description of Hamas slaughtering 1,200 Israelis, nearly all civilians, including many children.
抽象的残暴行为“正在发生”，这听起来要比清晰明了地描述哈马斯杀害了1200名以色列人（几乎都是平民，其中包括许多儿童）更不那么令人感到惊骇。
As a onetime contributor to the BBC, it is easy to imagine Orwell defying the broadcaster’s refusal to use the word “terrorism”.
笔者作为曾经为BBC撰稿的写作者，不难想象奥威尔会如何对BBC拒绝使用“恐怖主义”一词而表示蔑视。
Orwell had no trouble doling out his medicine to both sides; he would have also had harsh words for those describing the “collateral damage” buried in Gazan rubble, another abstraction designed to prevent readers picturing dead children.
奥威尔完全可以给双方都开药，对于那些把埋在加沙废墟中的遇难者描述为“附带破坏”的人，奥威尔也会厉声谴责，附带破坏也是一个抽象概念，目的是防止读者去想象儿童死去的画面。
Around 13,000 Palestinians have died since October 7th.
自10月7日以来，大约有13 000名巴勒斯坦人死亡。
Orwell’s famous essay had a long lead time: he was paid in December, and it appeared in print the next April.
奥威尔的这篇著名文章过了很久才发表：他在12月拿到了稿酬，文章在第二年4月才见刊。
Today, however, billions of people can publish their thoughts instantaneously.
然而，如今，数十亿人可以立刻发表他们的想法。
The desire to grab attention seems to incentivise stylistic sin.
吸引眼球的欲望似乎会助长文体上的罪行。
The social-mediafication of writing has steered the tone from the offence of euphemism to its twin offence of exaggeration.
写作的社交媒体化将文体罪行从委婉语变成了夸大其辞。
Taking what they no doubt believe to be an Orwellian starting point—the danger of being too soft in their language—keyboard warriors cannot resist the temptation to reach for the most inflammatory words available.
键盘侠们认为“语言过于柔和会带来危险”（他们无疑认为这是很奥威尔式的态度），在此起点之上，他们无法克制地想要使用最具煽动性的字眼。
What used to be called chauvinism, then sexism, is now “misogyny”, a word once reserved for actual hatred of women.
过去被称为沙文主义、然后被称为性别歧视的东西，现在变成了“厌女症”，而这个词过去就只是表示厌恶女性。
Those who do not ascribe to left-wing views on race are accused not of bias, prejudice or even racism, but of “white supremacy”, a phrase that just a decade ago was reserved for neo-Nazis.
那些不发表左翼种族观点的人不会被指责有倾向性、有偏见，甚至有种族歧视，而是被指责认可“白人至上”，而这个词在十年前只能用来形容新纳粹主义者。
Call it the “dysphemism treadmill”.
这种写作风格可以称为“粗直语轮转”。
In its opposite, the “euphemism treadmill” (a term coined by Steven Pinker, a professor at Harvard), people run from one polite banality to another.
与之相对的是“委婉语轮转”(这是哈佛大学教授史蒂文·平克创造的一个术语)，表示人们把一个礼貌且平庸的词语换成另一个礼貌且平庸的词语。
They referred to people as “idiotic” until that became pejorative; then they opted for “retarded”, which became unsayable; and then they devised “special”, which is now a taunt too.
人们最开始用“白痴”这个词来形容人，然后这个词变成了贬义词，他们又选择了“智障”这个词，这个词也变得不太好说出口，然后他们又用了“特别”这个词，现在这个词也成了一种嘲讽。
The dysphemism treadmill works the other way round: “prejudiced” seems too mild so is replaced with “racist”, which then suffers the same fate and must be swapped out for “white supremacist”.
粗直语轮转与之相反：“有偏见的”似乎太过温和，因此被“种族主义”取代，然后“种族主义”又遭遇了同样的命运，被换成了“白人至上主义”。
As is true of many modern trends, the most extreme words have radiated from America, where “communist” and “fascist” have nothing to do with sickles or swastikas and are sometimes applied to anyone you disagree with.
正如许多现代潮流一样，最极端的词汇都来自美国，在美国，“共产主义”和“法西斯主义”与镰刀和万字符没有任何关系，有时当你不同意某人的意见时，就可以用这两个词来形容他们。
Social media, the “great awokening” on the left and the MAGAfication of the right have contributed to a verbal crescendo.
社交媒体、左翼的“伟大觉醒”和右翼的“让美国再次伟大”都促成了一场语言高潮。
Countries in west and central Africa have seen seven of the classic storming-the-presidential-palace sort of “coup” in less than four years.
在不到四年的时间里，西非和中非国家经历了七次“政变”，但实际上就是群众冲进了总统府。
Yet the same word has been used recently to describe an iffy deal to stay in power, struck by Spain’s Pedro Sánchez with Catalan separatists, in exchange for a few votes in a freely elected parliament.
然而，最近“政变”也被用来描述西班牙首相佩德罗·桑切斯与加泰罗尼亚分裂派达成了一项可疑协议，协议内容是在自由选举的议会中换来几张选票，让桑切斯继续掌权。
Spain is not so much witnessing a coup as a political zoo.
与其说西班牙正在经历一场政变，不如说西班牙正在观看政治动物园表演。
The worst crime imaginable—“genocide”—is also being bandied about more often.
可以想象到的最严重的罪行“种族灭绝”也在越来越多地流传开来。
The word is used correctly when describing the Arab militias in Sudan who are rounding up black African tribes, such as the Masalit, murdering men and boys, raping women and saying “the baby will be an Arab”.
在描述阿拉伯民兵在苏丹围捕马萨利特等非洲黑人部落，杀害成年和未成年黑人男性、强奸女性，并说“生下来的孩子是阿拉伯人”时用“种族灭绝”这个词是正确的。
But those using the term “genocide” to characterise Israeli attacks on civilians in Gaza are not hewing strictly to what the word’s definition is, which is the intentional destruction of people for the mere fact of their ethnicity.
但是一些人用“种族灭绝”来描述以色列对加沙平民的袭击，这些人就没有严格遵守这个词的定义，即仅仅因为人们的种族而故意毁灭他们。
So here is a suggestion for writers.
这里有一个给写作者的建议。
You cannot outshout the crowds.
你无法比一群人喊叫得更响亮。
So distinguish yourselves by choosing accurate, vivid words between the evasions of euphemism and the temptations of exaggeration.
因此，在委婉语的回避和夸大其辞的诱惑之间，要选择准确、生动的词语让自己的语言更有辨识度。
Crimes against language, in the long run, make it harder to describe crimes against humanity.
从长远来看，语言的罪行会让人们更难以描述人类的罪行。
