严格讲,你这个问题应该是在确实有打错的案例这个前提下,再看他是否道歉过。否则光说他没道歉过就不说明什么了。

这个问题施国英前面也问过,当时我印象中有过案例,所以说“有过”。现在我没法去查。我是通 ...
irving 发表于 2012-3-6 16:34
他没有犯过大错,偶尔有小错,因为死要面子也没认错。

简言之,他没有认过错。
他没有犯过大错,偶尔有小错,因为死要面子也没认错。

简言之,他没有认过错。
zoufeng_1234 发表于 2012-3-6 16:48
如果打假出错而不道歉,属于品行不端(如涉嫌诽谤就吃官司)。这一层,光说他没道歉过不说明问题,要举出“的确打错而未道歉的例子”。

如果不是打假意义上的出错(比如揪人家英文的错)而不道歉,属于修养不够。这一层,方舟子的确是欠缺。
...忠实于原来的句子结构和用词,好像WIND的说过他的翻译也是这种忠实于原文的风格。导致鲁迅和梁实秋大战的“硬译”就是和这个话题有关。
zoufeng_1234 发表于 2012-3-6 07:54
别的不谈,只是说翻译的句子的结构与用词。

这是做不到的,就中文与英语而言,思辨性质的文体间差异巨大,而很多看似寻常的文作,更有不得了的东西在里面。

关于用词,实际上,英汉之间绝大多数词语没有对应性,词典中给出的只是参考,而并非一定是确定对应的关系。就此,你所言的”忠实“,其实很大程度上是忠实于英汉辞典的用词,而未必真实体现本原的语义。

通常是经验、知识以及技巧的问题,而不是规则性质的问题。

过去,因为翻译的工具只有辞典,所以,译者会不知觉地困在里面。现在与以前决然不同,互联网提供了大量文本,使得译者可以参考体察,更精准地把握语义。
你所言的”忠实“,其实很大程度上是忠实于英汉辞典的用词,而未必真实体现本原的语义。
-------------------
这个评论到位,100%同意。
李大苗: “他[方舟子]太高估自己的智力了,他的智动力确实供应不足。”

关于《了不起的盖茨比》。当时有人公开批评方舟子的翻译错误。令人惊讶的是,方舟子虚心地承认错误,真诚地道歉了。 ^_^

送交者: 忍不住说一句 于 2006-11-20, 11:51:40

细批方舟子的翻译错误

我早知道方舟子的中文一般。从他在科大时办的《方舟》,到成名后发表的一些“诗”,都可看出。我一直以为他的英文很强,以前看他翻译的科技文献和短文也未见错漏。但这次一上手翻译文学作品,就暴露了他的业余。方舟子应当从此吸取教训,不要在自己并无专攻的领域随意开腔。

下面以第一段为例子,指出方译的可笑之处。

【原文】
In my younger and more vulnerable years my father gave me some advice
that I've been turning over in my mind ever since.
【巫译】
我年纪还轻,阅历不深的时候,我父亲教导过我一句话,我至今还念念不忘。
【方译】
在我较为年轻,更易受人影响的年月,我父亲给了我一点忠告,到现在我还常常想起。

【评】
1.把英文的比较级照搬成中文的“较”、“更”,是翻译大忌。方显然没有受过起码的翻译训练,否则这样的错误在一年级就会老师点拨,不至于到今天居然还在自鸣得意。

中文和英文一大区别,是中文没有“客观时态”的概念(正如中国画没有固定透视一样),经常是以说话者的当时情态为参照点。所以“当我年轻时”的意思常常就是“当我比我眼下年轻时”。如果英文说in my young years则一般是客观描述,意指“我的青年时期”。反过来,英文说in my younger years恰好是中文“当我还年轻”的意思。巫译完全准确,方译错误。

2. 把vulnerable翻译成“易受人影响”,由此推测方舟子在美国恐怕是没有去酒吧泡过妞。知道“that girl is very vulnerable”是什么意思吗?

方对vulnerable如是翻译的一个原因是他的一串所谓“逻辑”推理。呵呵如果文学作品都是像方舟子以为的这样,“逻辑”地写出来的,计算机就可以得诺贝尔文学奖了。

3. “父亲教导过我一句话”是巫先生根据下文,回溯过来,对“some advice”做的非常精心的翻译。到方这里改回成“父亲给了我一点忠告”。我的天,一下子回到了英文四级的直译水平!

方舟子大概从小是这样说汉语的“老师,给我一点忠告吧”、“老婆,给我一个答案吧”(give me an answer)――而不是像正常中国人这样“老师,教教我吧”、“老婆,你倒是回答我呀”。

4. 前面三个例子,是英文口语,被方舟子硬译成了别扭的西化中文。最后这一处错误却是方把精致的英文翻译成了中国白话。“I've been turning over in my mind ever since”是有点文绉绉的表达,巫译为“至今念念不忘”,从语气上来说,比较接近了,虽然还不能说完美。方却一定要译作“到现在还常常想起”,硬是把Tommy Hilfiger的便装T恤改成了中国街头大汗衫。

这一段方就犯了四个错误。后面两段亦是如此。不多说了。

补充一点:方舟子认为“在中国封闭的年代里,精通外文的人本来就不多,有条件接触到外文原著的人更少,没有条件去比较译文与原文的差异,难以对译本的精确程度做出评价。有些翻译家从前之所以出名,乃是中文的功底好,译笔优雅,却未必是外文的功底好。”这段话很有无知和自大的嫌疑。方舟子自己是生长在“中国封闭的年代”,那些老一代翻译家却并不是。方若不信,可以调宋美龄在美国国会的演讲来听听。我没听过方开口讲英文,但从其经历推测,他这辈子永远学不到宋女士那样纯正的美国口音。一个20岁左右才出国的人,对于那些从小接受海外教育的“老一辈翻译家”在英文上的自我优越感,实在是不知从何而来。

送交者: 方舟子 于 2006-11-20, 12:21:00

你这样的智力水平不适合于在任何事情上开腔——不管是随意还是刻意

我说“老一辈翻译家”,你能扯到宋美龄,宋美龄是“老一辈
翻译家”?
就你这样的智力和英语水平,也居然敢来给翻译定规则,还敢
来评判我的中文和英文水平,只有脸皮还值得让人钦佩。

送交者: 方舟子 于 2006-11-20, 12:40:48

我去和一个智商不足80的人生气,岂不是自寻烦恼。想傻笑去别的地方
这里不是智障学校

http://www.xys.org/forum/db/1/185/238.html
97# Epiphany 呵呵
本帖最后由 李大苗 于 2012-3-7 16:38 编辑
以上两点均有点小小的个人体会。我译过一本特殊儿童教育方面的著作,受托之前曾有北大的研究生译了第一章,我看了初稿,觉得实在太草率。孩子的motor skill是指肌肉运动能力,居然被生译成“马达能力”,连翻字典的功夫都省了。 DTT(Discrete Trial Training)这个术语,根据直译很难组织一个妥当的表达,为难了很久,因为国内也很少有这样的中文著作。后来只能根据这个训练方法的具体操作和精髓,作了一个描述性的概括,叫做“回合式训练法”,同时括弧里放上原文供比对参考。
irving 发表于 2012-3-6 11:15
motor skill是运动神经系统的能力,与肌肉无关,是对中枢神经的运动控制部分的技能。

Discrete Trial Training的意思是一对一的训练法,一个老师对一个幼儿的技能训练。

这两个术语,都是关于孩童能动神经系统能力的。
本帖最后由 irving 于 2012-3-7 17:01 编辑
motor skill是运动神经系统的能力,与肌肉无关,是对中枢神经的运动控制部分的技能。

Discrete Trial Training的意思是一对一的训练法,一个老师对一个幼儿的技能训练。

这两个术语,都是关于孩童能动神经系 ...
李大苗 发表于 2012-3-7 16:32
谢谢大苗斟酌。

motor skill我前面说“肌肉运动能力”,写得随便了一点。实际上你说的“运动神经系统能力”是合适的,但并不把肌肉排除在外,是指包含了神经、视觉、肌肉、行动计划能力等在内的综合能力(我在译文里笼统称“运动能力”)。可参见wiki

DTT的实际操作场景,的确是一对一的,但核心特点不是一对一,而是把认知能力做细分(比如数量概念的建立,从点数、按数取物、数量比较等等分解项目一步步来),然后一个个去尝试,看孩子是否掌握。过程中及时感知孩子的反馈,一来一回地进行,及时调节难度。如果现在网上查询的话,有几个译法。和“回合式”相近或一致的译法也有。我翻译是在06年。
kemingqian: “其实我想质疑的是大家的英语考分。说方英语不好,就开始怀疑他对韩的质疑,那么,如果你的英语也不怎么地道,或者还没有方的好,是否有权质疑方?

“希望大家都用英文写篇文章来看看。俺英语没有方好,托福鸡阿姨考分都没有方高,就免了。”

方舟子从来没有写过小说,他是否有权质疑别人的小说?

你可以邀请方舟子到这儿,你出个题目,他和这儿的人各自写一篇英文文章贴出来。这样的比较才有意义。你说呢?
“方舟子从来没有写过小说,他是否有权质疑别人的小说?”

完全有权质疑别人的小说,就像你可以质疑他的英文水平一样,尽管你的托福或鸡阿姨或英语水平比方低的可能性很大。
kemingqian: “完全有权质疑别人的小说,就像你可以质疑他的英文水平一样,尽管你的托福或鸡阿姨或英语水平比方低的可能性很大。”

既然如此,何必当初?“那么,如果你的英语也不怎么地道,或者还没有方的好,是否有权质疑方?”有什么意义?“希望大家都用英文写篇文章来看看。”如果别人写得再差,又有什么关系?

方舟子英文远远不如巫宁坤教授,他不是一样写文章质疑巫的翻译?

我已经说过了,如果你真的想比较这儿的人和方舟子的英文水平,可以这样做:

你可以邀请方舟子到这儿,你出个题目,他和这儿的人各自写一篇英文文章贴出来。这样的比较才有意义。你说呢?
下面的帖子来自新文化论坛。
从中也许可以看出方舟子的英文阅读能力以及他的性格。
Epiphany 发表于 2012-2-6 19:33
以上是开贴的第一句话吧。

不用叫方舟子来,他的文章的网上有,你看看就知道了。“这儿的人”的英文文章(不知包不包括你)没读过,但估计不会比方的好多少。

当然,这不是我的本意。我的本意是,英文逊于方的可以对他的英语进行质疑,并进而对他的性格也进行质疑,那么,英文不完美的方舟子,为什么就不能对他人进行质疑了呢?说穿了,方的英语水平,方家夫人的中文水平,和方对韩的质疑正当与否是毫无关系的。

如果你只对方舟子的英语水平感兴趣,觉得这与他质疑韩寒无关,那就当我白写了。
送交者: USTC2 于 2007-04-03, 03:24:11

文抄公钱钟书东抄西抄, 闹了一个大笑话

[zt] 顺便说一下"scatterbrained flapper"。
  
"英文大师"钱钟书东抄西抄, 扮演文抄公的角色, 都可以
同情地理解。因为钱钟书的英文没有创造性, 你不让他抄,
叫他怎么办?
  
但滑稽的是, 钱钟书抄错了, 闹了一个大笑话。
  
钱钟书1937年的文章中的"scatter-brained flappers"抄自
著名美国作家爱伦·格拉斯哥(Ellen Glasgow)1935年的小说
"Vein of Iron"里面的"scatterbrained flapper", 但问题就出
在"flapper"这个词上面。
  
在英文中, "scatterbrained flapper"中的"flapper"这个词是指
第一次世界大战到1929年这段时期中的不拘一格的女子。
1929年大萧条后flapper时代结束, "flapper"就成为描述这
一段时期新型女子和她们style的专用词。
  
爱伦·格拉斯哥的小说正好是关于这一段时期的, 所以她的
"scatterbrained flapper"用得很准确, 而钱钟书很明显不懂
"flapper"这个词的用法。他1937年的文章谈的是三十年代
的事情, 他想讽刺比吴宓小二十多岁的高棣华们, 但他却
照抄爱伦·格拉斯哥小说中的"scatterbrained flapper",
把"flapper"这个描述二十年代的专用词套到三十年代上面,
不伦不类, 贻笑大方, 就像有人用1949年前的"摩登女郎"
来称文革中的女红卫兵一样可笑。
  
A personal aside. Yesterday, to a schoolmate of mine
I showed the Master Copycat 钱钟书's feline copy of
"scatterbrained flapper." This had him, my erudite friend,
in such stitches that a doctor was summoned to remove
them, with some difficulty.

送交者: 方舟子 于 2007-04-03, 04:03:50

最后那一段是哪一国的英语?

送交者: USTC2 于 2007-04-03, 04:39:53

It's a pun (双关): in stitches = 捧腹大笑

Also, "stitches" can mean 缝线.
Plus, "copycat" corresponds to "feline copy"
in the passage.

送交者: 方舟子 于 2007-04-03, 04:44:31

这么“典雅”的英语是在国内靠背字典无师自通学出来的吧?

送交者: USTC2 于 2007-04-03, 04:56:36

Inspired by Vladimir Nabokov (纳博科夫)

Because "in stitches" is a very amusing phrase
in English, as once used by Vladimir Nabokov
in the following quote:

"Upon being challenged to read Eugene Onegin aloud,
he started to do this with great gusto, garbling every
second word and turning Pushkin's iambic line into
a kind of spastic anapaest with a lot of jaw-twisting
haws and rather endearing little barks that utterly
jumbled the rhythm and soon had us both in stitches."Epiphany 发表于 2012-2-6 19:36
以上是沙发上的全文引用,看上去和原文不一样。
上面的对话来自新语丝读书论坛:
http://www.xys.org/forum/db/2/13/224.html
Epiphany 发表于 2012-2-6 19:40
根据上面的链接,以下是全文。

-------------------------

送交者: USTC2 于 2007-04-03, 03:24:11:
[zt] 顺便说一下"scatterbrained flapper"。
  
  "英文大师"钱钟书东抄西抄, 扮演文抄公的角色, 都可以
  同情地理解。因为钱钟书的英文没有创造性, 你不让他抄,
  叫他怎么办?
  
  但滑稽的是, 钱钟书抄错了, 闹了一个大笑话。
  
  钱钟书1937年的文章中的"scatter-brained flappers"抄自
  著名美国作家爱伦·格拉斯哥(Ellen Glasgow)1935年的小说
  "Vein of Iron"里面的"scatterbrained flapper", 但问题就出
  在"flapper"这个词上面。
  
  在英文中, "scatterbrained flapper"中的"flapper"这个词是指
  第一次世界大战到1929年这段时期中的不拘一格的女子。
  1929年大萧条后flapper时代结束, "flapper"就成为描述这
  一段时期新型女子和她们style的专用词。
  
  爱伦·格拉斯哥的小说正好是关于这一段时期的, 所以她的
  "scatterbrained flapper"用得很准确, 而钱钟书很明显不懂
  "flapper"这个词的用法。他1937年的文章谈的是三十年代
  的事情, 他想讽刺比吴宓小二十多岁的高棣华们, 但他却
  照抄爱伦·格拉斯哥小说中的"scatterbrained flapper",
  把"flapper"这个描述二十年代的专用词套到三十年代上面,
  不伦不类, 贻笑大方, 就像有人用1949年前的"摩登女郎"
  来称文革中的女红卫兵一样可笑。
  
  A personal aside. Yesterday, to a schoolmate of mine
  I showed the Master Copycat 钱钟书's feline copy of
  "scatterbrained flapper." This had him, my erudite friend,
  in such stitches that a doctor was summoned to remove
  them, with some difficulty.



所有跟贴:

本帖最后由 kemingqian 于 2012-3-8 12:08 编辑

红字那行是漏掉的。我的理解是:

有人贴了个转帖,名为【文抄公钱钟书东抄西抄, 闹了一个大笑话。(zt) 顺便说一下"scatterbrained flapper"】

第一个回帖说“真能扯,是在卖弄吧?”

第二个回帖方舟子说" 最后那一段是哪一国的英语?",指的该是转帖最后一段的英语吧。看来看去,都没看到方舟子写的英语在哪里,就这么两句回话,就有楼主“从中也许可以看出方舟子的英文阅读能力以及他的性格”这一说了?
kemingqian:红字那行是漏掉的。

红字那行与本论题无关。它是别人写的,而且时间(2007-04-03, 06:44:32)是在方舟子的(2007-04-03, 04:03:50) 之后。

kemingqian:看来看去,都没看到方舟子写的英语在哪里,就这么两句回话,就有楼主“从中也许可以看出方舟子的英文阅读能力以及他的性格”这一说了?

方舟子看不懂那一段英语,但他不是虚心请教,而是武断地认为它是错的(“最后那一段是哪一国的英语?”)。别人耐心地给他解释后,他非但不感谢,而且还讽刺(“这么‘典雅’的英语”),另外还臆想别人可能“是在国内靠背字典无师自通学出来的”。其实人家不是背字典,而是受了纳博科夫的启发(Inspired by Vladimir Nabokov)。

从这里是否可以看出方舟子的英文阅读能力以及他的性格?

kemingqian:不用叫方舟子来,他的文章的网上有,你看看就知道了。

那就请你不妨找一篇方舟子的英文文章,贴到这儿来,让大家欣赏一下。Thank you in advance!
下面的帖子来自新文化论坛。

从中也许可以看出方舟子的英文阅读能力以及他的性格。
Epiphany 发表于 2012-2-6 19:33
也可以换个角度看问题。
比如说
方舟子的性能力到底如何?

从中也许可以看出方舟子的悦妻能力以及他的性格。


不知道记忆是否准确,好像韩寒一开始就指出过方舟子的性能力很差滴,从中可以看出方的悦妻能力也很差,性格当然就不用提了,哪有质疑韩寒的权利。

俺是非常蔑视性能力差的男人的。韩寒如果比方舟子强的话,俺就坚决支持韩寒的性格。哈哈哈。
远远的见你在夕阳那端
拿着一只细花令箭
晚风吹开了你的乱发
才看清你的手里
不过是一根鸡毛
也可以换个角度看问题。
比如说
方舟子的性能力到底如何?

从中也许可以看出方舟子的悦妻能力以及他的性格。

不知道记忆是否准确,好像韩寒一开始就指出过方舟子的性能力很差滴,从中可以看出方的悦妻能 ...
迅弟儿 发表于 2012-3-9 02:19
不好意思问一句,方的性能力与他对韩寒代笔的质疑,有什么联系?
8颤抖,8销魂,偶是永苗偶怕谁!
不好意思问一句,方的性能力与他对韩寒代笔的质疑,有什么联系?
李永苗 发表于 2012-3-9 02:30
可以说明方性格上的自卑萎缩由来已久,必须越界说三道四以彰人耳目。
远远的见你在夕阳那端
拿着一只细花令箭
晚风吹开了你的乱发
才看清你的手里
不过是一根鸡毛
也可以换个角度看问题。
比如说
方舟子的性能力到底如何?

从中也许可以看出方舟子的悦妻能力以及他的性格。

不知道记忆是否准确,好像韩寒一开始就指出过方舟子的性能力很差滴,从中可以看出方的悦妻能 ...
迅弟儿 发表于 2012-3-9 02:19
猥琐男。
可以说明迅弟儿性格上的自卑萎缩由来已久,必须越界说三道四以彰人耳目。
迅弟儿 发表于 2012-3-9 02:33
事实真相如上。
kemingqian:“不用叫方舟子来,他的文章的网上有,你看看就知道了。”

请你找一篇方舟子的英文文章,贴到这儿来,让大家欣赏一下他的英文水平,也让英文不如他的人看一看到底什么是好英文。谢谢!
我想同时贴。你能不能告诉我你的英文文章在哪里。
kemingqian:“我想同时贴。你能不能告诉我你的英文文章在哪里。”

为什么贴一篇方舟子的英文文章对你来说这么困难?你可能找不到他的学位论文,但你不是说过他的英文文章网上有的吗?找一篇贴过来就是了。是骡子是马拉出来遛遛,没必要害羞。

你放心,你贴了以后我会贴自己的英文文章的。有比较才有鉴别,你说是不是?
本帖最后由 kemingqian 于 2012-3-10 13:27 编辑

Shi-min Fang: Analysis on Falun Gong
  

Adjust font size:      Close Facts.org.cn By: Shi-min Fang 2008-03-26


  
First, Falun Gong and I

As early as 1996, when Falun Gong just emerged in US, it brought to my attention. As soon as Li Hongzhi's "Zhuan Falun" was uploaded by his disciple, I read it carefully and then wrote articles to criticize his argument. It's an insult to the wisdom of human being when reading book as "Zhuan Falun". But since I liked criticizing pseudo-science, I had to continue. At that time, I just took Falun Gong as a school of pseudo-Qigong, superficial and ridiculous. In no conditions could I believe it became so popular. It was said that there were tens of millions of Disciples (Falun Gong claimed hundreds of millions of disciples), many of whom were students abroad. It was reported that, even at the physics annual meeting in US, Falun Gong was recruiting new disciples. Such a counter science, pseudo-Buddhism, pseudo-Qigong and powerful cult was worth our attention and research.

Second, Falun Gong is an evil cult

I agree with the view of He Zuoxiu, who is the academician of the Chinese Academy of Science, that Falun Gong is an evil cult. Generally speaking, the characteristic of an evil cult is to make people to be bad. However, Falun Gong claims to make people to be "good". How can we call it evil? In fact, there is less cults claiming to make people bad. No matter good or evil, the cults always claim to appeal for truthfulness, which standard is different. The characeristic of evil cults is to believe the extermination of the world, and the living redeemer is infinitely resourceful. Only disciples can be saved. That is just what Falun Gong preaches. The founders of the evil cults in the West, which are usually according to the Bible, are claimed to be Jesus. Falun Gong claims to be part of Buddhism, with Li Hongzhi claiming to be greater than Buddha, which is the evil cult of Chinese type.

Third, the doctrine of Falun Gong

The doctrine of Falun Gong, according to its own claiming, is "Truthfulness, Benevolence and Forbearance", which looks quite good. But when you carefully read the writings of Li Hongzhi, you can see that the opinion of "Truthfulness, Benevolence and Forbearance" of the disciples is different from what is generally believed. The word and action are also inconsistent. Don't misinterpret words through taking them too literally. Some reports about Falun Gong are just for granted, assuming too well.  

Firstly, we talk about "truthfulness". According to what Li Hongzhi preaches, telling truth is the priority. But at the beginning of the news conference on May 2 in Australia, Li said, "I never take myself as a standout in spirit. And I never talk about myself, nor do I allow others to compose my biography. I never propagandize myself." This is not true. The article-"Introduction of Mr. Li Hongzhi and His Falun Gong", which provided by Falun Gong Research Commission, presented Li's miraculous life. Introduce a funny paragraph: "When Li was eight, he gained supernatural ability. When hiding with his fellows, he just thought ‘nobody could see me', then nobody could see him, even with an electric torch. There was a long and crooked nail with rust in the wood, and he could dig it out with his finger easily. In winter, the water in the pipe was frozen up. When he touched the pipe, it became crooked, which even he himself did not know why. Playing on the snow ground with his fellows, he would rise in the sky while at a run. Two guys were fighting, as long as he wanted one to stop, the one stopped. One day when he was at Grade Four, he forgot to take his bag when the class was over. When he went back to fetch it, the door and windows were closed. At that time, an idea that he could be able to go into the class was flashed into his mind. And then, he found himself in. The same thing happened when he wanted to go out. At one time, he wanted to know how to feel in glass. As soon as the idea appeared, he was in the window. At that moment, he was too suffering from the glass pieces all around of his body to stay in for a moment. While thinking so, he was out. At that time, he did not know what supernatural ability was. He thought everyone was like him, and did not care much."

Mythology like that, which obviously it was Li Hongzhi who provided, can never be proved. Li propagandized himself and boasted his supernatural ability in "Zhuan Falun" from the beginning to the end, claiming that he was grater than Buddha and Jesus, and he had miraculous experiences, and so on. It can be said that one of the characteristics of Falun Gong is that the founder propagandizes himself, and boasts that  nobody elso could.

Li Hongzhi claimed that he knew the answers to the questions that could not be solved by science, nevertheless, he liked to prove his views by science. However, his demonstration full of mistakes just proved his educational background of primary school. What a pity!

For example, he said, "as far as the present time is concerned, a big explosion occurred long ago in the space of this universe. Today, astronomers cannot observe it because what we can now see through the most powerful telescopes are things 150,000 light years back. In order to see the changes of the present cosmic body, we must wait for 150,000 years to pass. That is quite a distant age." In fact, the cosmic bodies can be surveyed by modern astronomy are at least 10 billion light years away, not only 150,000 light years. Everyone who has been middle school student knows that light year, which means the distance that light travels in a vacuum in one year, is a unit of time, not a unit of distance. Since Li Hongzhi saw there was a "year", then he talked about "before light-year" and "after light-year". Li lacked of the elementary common sense.

He said, "when we actually see things, a person, or see an object's form of existence, the images are formed in the brain. That is , what we see through the eyes is sent to the pineal body in the rear of the brain via the optic nerve, and it is then reflected as images in that area. This is to say that the actual reflected images are seen in the pineal body of the brain. Modern medicine also recognizes this." In fact, that's what Li realized, not modern medicine did. According to modern medicine, the optic nerve is sent to the brain, not the pineal body. Human's pineal body is endocrine, having nothing to do with vision. It is Master Li who found that optic nerve was connected with pineal body, but he owned modern medicine. How modest he is!

He also said, "According to Darwin's theory, humans evolved from aquatic-plants to aquatic-animals. Then, they moved to live on land and eventually trees. Again on land, they became apes." In fact, there was no evolution means as "aquatic-plants to aquatic-animals" in Darwin's evolution. The plants and animals were evolved by totally different ways. They separated and went different ways when at protozoan. Li Hongzhi mistaken that plants were lower than animals. So he thought aquatic-animals were evolved from aquatic-plants. That was Li Hongzhi's evaluation, not Darwin's.

As these commonsensible mistakes, I pointed them out as early as 1996. When I read the newest edition of "Zhuan Falun", they remained intact. There were so many doctors practicing Falun Gong, but nobody was brave enough to point out the mistakes. How strange it was!

Secondly, we talk about "Benevolence and Forbearance". Falun Gong, in the name of Buddhism which believes in the equality of everyone and universal salvation, is not what it claims to be. Li Hongzhi said all the time that he only saved the disciples while others had nothing to do with him. And if wanted to be saved by him, one should practice Falun Gong. Can that be called "benevolence"? He also said, "patients who are heavily ill can not be allowed to practice Falun Gong, because he will always think of resuming health and can not concentrate his mind" and "We emphasize time and time again that patients with heavy illness can not practice Falun Gong". He excluded the patients with serious illness and refused to help the dying. Can that a person without commiseration be called "benevolence"? He opposed curing the patients, saying that "Due to karma resulting from past wrongdoing, one has illnesses or tribulations; suffering is repaying a karmic debt, and thus nobody can casually change this. Changing it means that one would not have to repay the debt after being in debt, and this cannot be done at will. Doing otherwise is the same as committing a bad deed." Believing in that, some disciples who were ill refused to go to hospital, which sometimes caused death. He Zuoxiu's article was about this. Can this be called "benevolence"? He also said, "They will do all kinds of evil things for money, and they will also commit murder, pay someone to kill, practice homosexuality, and abuse drugs. They do all kinds of things." It is usually that religion discriminates homosexuality, but it is rare that homosexuality is written equally with killer publicly. Can that be called "benevolence"?

Li claimed all the time that all Qigongs was low-grade and only Falun Gong was of high level, only he himself was teaching high-grade Gong. Elbowing out his fellow-workers like this, can that be called "benevolence"? Academician He wrote an article-"Juvenile is not suitable to practice Falun Gong" in a magazine with a few circulation, and criticized Falun Gong in passing. As a result, the disciples plied with and threatened Mr. He. And then hold demonstration. Can that be called "benevolence"? It is said that, it was not the first time for the disciples to do this. Last year, because a Beijing TV station reported negatively about Falun Gong, his disciples surrounded the station, forcing the station to discharge the reporter. Can this be called "benevolence"?

Forth, the Falun Gong affair

This ten-thousand disciples demonstration, according to what Li Hongzhi said, was spontaneous, and he knew nothing about it. But according to Li's indoctrination, his body of law was on every disciple, and was watching their actions. When preaching in New York on March.23, 1997, he said at the beginning, "It is so remote that it is difficult to see you. But although you can not see me, in fact, as long as you practice Falun Gong, I am with you. As long as you practice, I will take charge of you, and take care of every moment of you."

Bragged and boasted at that time, he shifted the responsibility at the last moment. Either the indoctrination or the report was not true, it can not be "true" for the two. And according to the report on the "Time Weekly", Li's janissary Erping Zhang in US called the "Time Weekly" beforehand and told them that there would be a demonstration of ten thousand, which made us more difficult to believe that the demonstration was not premeditated. What led up to the demonstration was the article wrote by Academician He on the magazine of Science Review for Juvenile with a few circulations. It is of few chances to be read. Maybe, people begin to hear about the magazine due to this demonstration. If there is no instigation, it cannot be ten thousand of demonstrators.  

"When the country is going to die, there must be evil groups." In Chinese history, when the dynasty was going to be changed, evil groups appeared. For example, the Yellow Turbans appeared in the end of Han dynasty, the Devils in the end of Yuan dynasty, and Yihetuan in the end of Qing dynasty. Currently, China is in the period of transfer, the momentous changes in the field of politic, economy, society and culture are no less than the dynastic changes. So the appearance of evil groups like Falun Gong is within expectation, which also should cause our high attention. We must take proper leading measures and avoid the replay of historical tragedy.

Of course, I hold the proposition of religion freedom. No matter believing in good denomination or evil, it is personal affairs and should not be intervened. But if the denomination had endangered the social order and personal safety, it should not be neglected but determined by legal means. Special attention should be given to Falun Gong's  infiltration into the teaching staff of elementary and middle school and its preaching to the students and pupils. Even  in USA, the religious personnel are not allowed to preach in the public schools.

There has been a long time that Chinese media, scientific research institution and academies become the league of the pseudo-science, clearing the way for all kinds of crooked means and playing an ignominious role. The media nationwide made active report and advocated pseudo-science up to the present. (I remembered Guangming Daily had reported on the front page that "Yan Xin practiced Gong from thousands of meters away to change the structure of DNA"). There was a tabloid on Guangzhou Daily named  "Having color TV four thousand years ago", saying, " Recently, when archaeologist Dr.Paul was researching the interior design techniques of the Pyramid in Egypt, he found an icebound object in the backroom, which had heart frequency and blood pressure. It has been believed to be five thousand years. The scientists believed that under the ice cover there was a living. According to a book of hieroglyph in the Pyramid, an object called 'sky carriage' had bumped Cairo and there had been a survivor, whom the book called 'designer'. Therefore, the archaeologists believed that the icebound object is the designer and builder of the Pyramid, and it was the sign for help to the congener in the space."

The humorous news faked by the American supermarket tabloid was reprinted actively as important discovery. No wonder it was not a look of shame when Li Hongzhi said "computer is the tool of the ET to destroy the human." It is the uniquely strange phenomenon that different kinds of swindlers became the guests of Chinese research institutes and universities, performing, speaking, and practicing hypotenuses there. It was this kind of atmosphere that brought up the evil Falun Gong. The Chinese scientists should be enlightened first. As for pseudo-science and counter-science should be exposed and criticized bravely, never be excessively tolerant. It is time for the media, the scientists and the scholars to expiate their fault by doing good.

Notes: This article was first written on May 21, 1999.

(Facts.org.cn, April 11, 2008)

------------------------

我害什么羞,有错也不是我写的。网上随便查一篇贴在这里,要是Shi-min Fang不是方舟子就对不起了。静候大作,也得洋洋洒洒来一篇吧,我等着献花。不过等太久了,我可是要怀疑有代笔的。
My goodness! 上面方舟子的英文文章第一句就有低级的语法错误!

“As early as 1996, when Falun Gong just emerged in US, it brought to my attention. ”

很明显,“it brought to my attention”应该是“it was brought...”;另外,US应该是the US。

不过还是要谢谢你的转贴。下面是我自己的英文文章,请你和其他人批评指正。你放心,我不会像方舟子那样出言不逊的。
A Portrait

by Epiphany

"While he was being created, the Creator must have been in a very good mood," I mused the first time I met him at a coffee shop in Shanghai.

A mutual friend of ours had supplied me with his contact information, and I made the initial move to write him. He replied, and a tentative friendship was struck up between us before an appointment to meet was fixed.  

I was struck, however, by his sheer beauty when we shook hands and greeted and introduced each other. As the poet Rainer Maria Rilke wrote in his Duino Elegies, "For beauty is nothing but the beginning of terror." Terrified as I was, I still managed to collect myself and make some general remarks on the weather, which at this time of the year sat on the peak of summer and refused to go downhill.

Inside it was spring. He had on a pleated, light blue shirt, with sleeves turned up; his abundant hair was unruly, one lock or two falling over his forehead on the right brow; the eyelashes were so long and delicate I doubted they were genuine, but they were and enhanced his looks when he lowered his eyes; the lips curved with an elegance that only met its equal in the chin's. The whole features of his were extraordinary.

He did not let me dwell on his appearance for long. After coffee was served and the waiter retreated, he smiled, put his left hand, palm down, on the table, and asked right off: "Are you a reader of books?"

Am I? I asked myself inwardly. As a matter of fact, I loved reading, but in the present-day China the book-reading public constituted such a tiny republic that claiming the citizenship was liable to the charge of being elitist and arrogant. I blushed, I sweat, I hemmed and hawed.

He let it go, and proceeded to tell me some anecdotes from his young life, those anecdotes that ought to have been stored with care and savored in solitude. I marveled at his candor, and was tempted to do likewise, but thought better of it and changed my mind.

Yet our friendship's mind was not to change. Before we shook hands again and wished to see each other soon, he asked me to promise that I should write him as often as I could. I promised, but I was not able to mass-produce letters that were flat and cliched and half-hearted. Therefore, at that time I wrote to him about once a week. In consequence, he sent me the following threat:

"一天没收到你的信,失眠;两天没收到你的信,绝食;三天没收到你的信,报警。"

This was alarming. For the sake of his health, and not wishing to trouble the already jittery officers, I sprang to action and began our daily communication. The correspondence flourished and endured.

To write him was for me a liberal education: I read new books and reread old ones to render me at least adequately knowledgeable before his sharp intelligence; concerts, museums, fairs, exhibitions I haunted to record for his delight my findings and impressions; with a mathematical imagination and poetical precision I described to him everything I saw, be it a dog in ecstasy, a cat in heat, a couple in despair, a flower about to bloom, the frightened trees in a wood that was full of police, a tremulous old woman who slipped and took a pratfall into a puddle at noon on the sidewalk of a main street and sobbed and wailed there undisturbed, a full moon which shed its silver light upon golden, untouched mooncakes, or an autumn that waited in vain for another Keats to be born; to surprise him I invented word games, composed stories, discovered epigrams, and even made myself pregnant with a body of ideas painfully alive and promising.

His letters were verbal sunshowers, and a silent demand that I write back with like splendor. This was a tall order, and I barely made it. Every time I opened my mailbox I clicked on his mail with a certain apprehension that it might turn out to be a masterpiece; after reading one paragraph or two I sighed with relief that it was not.

To my great pleasure, he told me that he had at last found in me a person he could relate to and share his privacy with, a person who could behold his ardor with wonder and return it with equal fervor. During the four years of his college, he had tried a number of times to find some like-minded fellows so that they could form a reading group. It never came into being, as the powers that be at the university warned him that such a group would endanger state security and engender his dismissal from the school. "Why don't you go singing in a KTV?!" they thundered.

His major was business administration, but his secret passion was art and literature. The major was chosen by his parents, who believed that a liberal education in China, if not utterly impossible, spelled danger and that a money-related field would be safe and sound in the future. The passion was a flame he had kept alive since he was a little boy, and he hoped he could use it one night to build a huge bonfire that, before the arrival of Aurora, would have roared and roared, mixing sparks with stars.

Last summer he got his bachelor degree, and he said he intended to keep it, if not for life, then at least for ages and ages hence. So, among all the paths to Eden, he decided he would choose the longest.

Let me record here the name of one artist he particularly adored: Tennessee Williams. One day I pressed him to say why the American playwright was his favorite. It was a chain, never broken, of his own love affairs with the English language, said he. His heart was first stirred by the Sweet Bird of Youth, presently the Eccentricities of a Nightingale amazed him, then the Glass Menagerie was gathered and a Streetcar Named Desire pulled in: a love feast was begun.

"Have you ever seen the skeletons of birds?" he once quoted Williams to me in a letter. "If you have, you will know how completely they are still flying."

We saw each other often. One evening I leafed through his photo albums, exclaiming that the pictures did not do him justice. Perhaps, I thought to myself, in front of such beauty, the camera lens was too astounded or indignant to capture his looks, and gave only a distortion or caricature of them. When Narcissus gazed into a pool of water at another equally beautiful youth, a gust of jealous wind came to ruffle the limpid surface and caused the youth underwater to disappear. Narcissus was distraught and wasted away and was no more.

A Narcissus he was not, this I could affirm with confidence, because he did not agonize over those photographs which failed to represent him faithfully. Let me faithfully represent you in words, I boldly proposed. With some reluctance, he agreed.

And the title of this representation is, simply, "A Portrait."
哇,楼主的英文比方舟子强太多了。还有,不光语言漂亮,那种人文情怀也很感人的说。

偶要抢在克明前献花
施MM爱抢帅哥的本领早有耳闻,这回抓了个现行。

Epiphany的A Portrait拜读了,献花五朵。以后还请发更多的美文。

在这里,让我也表示一下对方舟子的鄙视,这小子是太狂妄了。
施MM爱抢帅哥的本领早有耳闻,这回抓了个现行。

Epiphany的A Portrait拜读了,献花五朵。以后还请发更多的美文。

在这里,让我也表示一下对方舟子的鄙视,这小子是太狂妄了。