一報社評,兩種語言,兩種風貌

上星期江蘇啟東市民眾,不滿當地一間日資造紙廠的排污工廠而上街示威,期間有民眾衝入當地市政府。新聞不再在此詳述。反而令我有點興致重提「舊聞」的原因,是星期一《環球時報》一篇社評。如果大家在近數月,有留意鬧得沸沸揚揚的南海爭議、中菲黃岩島爭議的新聞的話,都會注意到《環球時報》刊登的強硬言論,不過星期一那篇談到啟東事件,還有月初在四川什邡民眾反對興建重金屬工廠的文章,又似乎與近日對於《環球時報》的印象有點落差。

但是奇又奇在。中文版的《環球時報》社評,被外國通訊社形容為「不尋常的溫和」,不過與此同時,在英文版的環球時報,都有刊載同一篇社評,但是效果就顯得咄咄迫人,我甚至會認為,矛頭不在於社評強調兩宗事件是啟動改革的契機,而是嚴辭警告「什邡-啟東模式」不能重演。再細讀幾遍,終於發現了所為何事--且看兩篇文章的比較:

原文:距什邡事件不到一個月,28日江蘇南通啟東市上演了幾乎完全相同的一幕。一批當地群眾為阻止準備建設的「南通大型達標水排海基礎設施工程」在市政府門前抗議,場面一度失控,政府機關被衝擊,主要官員被扒掉衣服羞辱,有車輛和電腦被砸。南通市緊急宣佈「永久取消」該項目,事件方得平息。

英文版:Less than a month since protests in Shifang halted a heavy metal refinery project, a similar incident occurred in Qidong, Jiangsu Province, Saturday. A massive protest was staged in front of the city hall against a pollution discharge plant. Demonstrators smashed government offices and stripped the clothes off a local official. The local government immediately announced it was canceling the project permanently.

原文:不排除啟東抗議者受到什邡事件的啟發和鼓勵,他們像什邡抗議者同樣激烈,並且同樣達到了目的,解決了問題。而啟東市政府也很可能汲取了什邡市政府先硬後軟的教訓,用「立即妥協」讓事件在較短時間內「軟著陸」。

英文版:The Qidong protest may have been inspired and encouraged by the Shifang incident. They both achieved the same result through extreme approaches. The quick compromise made by the Qidong government may also have been learnt from Shifang.

原文:然而啟東事件與什邡事件形成效應疊加,加劇了這樣的印象:政府的決策有問題,糾正問題最快速也最徹底的辦法就是搞暴力示威。這些印象如果逐漸從點連成片,對中國的社會穩定將是災難性的,它會鼓勵人們拒絕相信政府,並採取激進方式實現利益訴求。

英文版:The two protests have together left the impression that the fastest way to change a government policy is to hold a violent demonstration. If this model is copied widely, it would be disastrous for social stability. It encourages the public to resort to radical methods to realize its demands.

原文:「什邡—啟東模式」必須打破,決策再也不能僅僅是「領導拍板」了,民眾對決策的參與必須真正得到保障,再不能是走過場。這樣的決策形成後一旦遇到群體抗議,它也決非領導拍板就能立即下馬,它應當有能力在抗議面前堅持。

英文版:This model must be broken. Policies concerning broad public interests cannot be decided only by officials. Public participation needs to be implemented, and not just as a show. Once decisions made through this process are met with mass protests, they cannot be immediately canceled by officials either. They should be able to resist the challenge. Whimsical decisions on a large project will only send the public a wrong message.

原文:從什邡到啟東,都在印證我們的社會裡有了某種對環境污染的恐懼,這種恐懼一旦被激發出來,就會形成不顧一切的破壞力量。今後涉環保重大項目都面臨非常脆弱的社會心理環境,如果「什邡—啟東模式」蔓延開來,將不僅僅是社會穩定的損失,中國今後的發展也將面臨空前挑戰。

英文版:The two incidents have shown the public’s deep fear of environmental pollution. Once stimulated, it may lead to a disruptive reaction. In the future, major projects with an environmental impact will all face a fragile social psychology. It’s not only social stability, but also future economic growth that will be challenged.

原文:決策過程不合理,是什邡及啟東政府遭遇群體性事件時心虛的重要原因。上百億的項目說下馬就下馬,甚至對打砸等激進行為也不太敢依法追究,這兩個地方雖然歸於平靜,但對全國的示範效應非常壞。

英文版:Improper decision-making has weakened two local governments’ ability to respond to the ensuing mass incidents. Projects involving hundreds of millions of yuan in investment were halted immediately. Violent demonstrators were not held accountable according to the law. The two incidents are a very bad example to the country.

原文:不能全怪兩個地方的政府,應對群體事件,全國目前沒有一個具有普遍指導意義、上升到法規級別的應對制度,那麼大的輿論壓力和當前維穩的硬任務同時壓向兩個小地方的政府,它們的應對只能是應急式的,很難「進退有序」。

英文版:The blame should not be shouldered solely by the two local governments. There is no clear policy or regulation on dealing with mass incidents. Choking under the pressure of public opinion and the tough task of maintaining social order before the coming Party congress proved too much for two small city governments. Their desperate reactions were intuitive.

原文:目前全國對群體事件的應對都是各地政府隨機決定。各地政府總體看「讓步為主」,或者「一壓就退」,至少給輿論的印象是這樣。

英文版:Without a mechanism to deal with mass incidents, government reactions nationwide have been quite random. Compromise seems to be the most likely decision of local governments in the face of massive protests. At least public opinion perceives this to be the case.

看到這裡,相信大家都會同意,即使英文版不是忠實度十足的Verbatim式翻譯,但都大致保留了中文原文的原意。但是令我感到奇怪的,是英文社的《環球時報》社評,到此就告完結--換言之,英文版沒有將原文全面翻譯,而中文原版的最後三段是這樣的:

中國制度建設只能在不斷的碰撞中逐漸成型,最終促成法治的完善。一些老百姓上街,是因為不相信當地政府,不相信按正常渠道能解決問題。而什邡和啟東的這兩個項目這麼輕率地下馬,在暗示民間不信任是對的。政府必須從正確決策,加強與民眾溝通做起,這是遇到抗議時敢於堅持的前提。

公眾有訴求,訴求需要表達,這是現代社會最基本特徵之一。給群眾表達訴求創造充分渠道,是避免矛盾激化,即使有局部矛盾激化也不可怕的保障。但願這兩件事成為做實中國民主協商制度的一個契機。

中國這些年社會經濟發展很快,儘管利益訴求在分化,矛盾多發,但國家大的政治穩定有堅實基礎。現在正是圍繞什邡、啟東這些典型事件做制度上認真改革的好時機,各地政府需要無事時有緊迫感,遇事時也不驚慌,只要真心為人民利益服務,人民是看得懂的。

缺少了最後三段的英文版,給我的印象是文章為什邡及啟東的政府說好話,但亦有同樣的篇幅,指出兩地民眾以暴力抗爭的模式,不可以在中國各地「開枝散葉」。我有點不明白,英文版為何要不保留有關改革的的段落:中文版給人的印象是各打五十大板,若果以內地中文讀者作為受眾去提出有關訊息,確是有其效用,但是作為面向全球的英文版,就有另一番的「風味」,其意旨/目的是甚麼呢?這對於關注內地傳媒,以及其報道風向的人,是值得留意及研究的題材。

1 Response to “一報社評,兩種語言,兩種風貌”


  • using Mozilla Firefox Mozilla Firefox 9.0.1 on Windows Windows XP

    “… 一些老百姓上街,是因為不相信當地政府,不相信按正常渠道能解決問題。而 … 項目這麼輕率地下馬,在暗示民間不信任是對的。 …”

    這令我想起近年香港人上街示威不斷,爭論不休,正是 “正常渠道” 不能解決問題所致。

Comments are currently closed.



%d bloggers like this: