EAP学术英语lesson第二次翻译任务

01-chenxinyu-041221-寝室

本次课主要目的，是在反思之前几次任务获得成果的基础上，讨论两个话题。是的，我们要开始“讨论”了。

The main purpose of this class is to discuss two topics based on reflecting on the achievements of previous tasks. Yes, we need to start discussing.

这两个话题分别是：

These two topics are:

TOPIC 1：Independent Originality

话题1：自主创新

TOPIC 2：Critical Creativity

话题2：批判性创造力

还记得上次课我们提到的描述的客观性吗？ 如果你认真地思考过这个问题，会对今天内容的教学十分有帮助。

Do you remember the objectivity of the description we mentioned in the previous lesson? If you have seriously considered this issue, it will be very helpful for today's teaching content.

在上次的任务反馈中，同学a提到“事物是客观的，但人们在面对某一事物时会把自己的主观情绪加上去”，同学b认为“尽量客观的描述意味着公正，不受个人想法的影响”，同学c还强调“不是谁的观点能说服谁，而是谁的观点能更好体现事物的本来面目”。这些都是对上次任务中几个中心内容的“客观描述”；我们发现，并且这三种观点，或多或少，具有一定的代表性。

In the last task feedback, classmate a mentioned that "things are objective, but people tend to add their subjective emotions when facing something." Student b believes that "describing things objectively as much as possible means being fair and not influenced by personal thoughts." Student c also emphasized that "it is not whose viewpoint can persuade who, but whose viewpoint can better reflect the true nature of things. These are objective descriptions of several central contents from the previous task; We have found that these three viewpoints are more or less representative.

既然已经到了“讨论”阶段，我们不可避免的要涉及到“观点”；而且既然要讨论，那么就一定会包含“议论”的过程。

Since we have reached the stage of 'discussion', we inevitably need to involve 'viewpoints'; And since we need to discuss it, it will definitely involve the process of "discussion".

1. 独立的原创

1. Independent Originality

上节课我们讲到的严谨性，是一种学术的态度，即是EAP课程的教学过程中说应该具有的，也是该课程追求的并致力实现的目的之一。举例来说，这种态度，到底指的是“the ability of something to limit someone\\\'s freedom very much”，还是“the quality of being impossible to change or persuade”（c.f. “the quality of being stiff, fixed, or impossible to bend”），或者就是“the qualities of being careful and accurate”。如果认真地经过调查、对比，并将原始信息在归纳与抽象后最终萃取，结合自己的理解形成了新的认识与见解，那么就能真正理解我们说的严谨性，到底是rigidity还是strictness，抑或是precision（preciseness），这也是本课学习过程的重要意义之一。

The rigor we discussed in the previous lesson is an academic attitude that should be possessed in the teaching process of the EAP course, and is also one of the goals pursued and committed to by the course. For example, does this attitude refer to "the ability of something to limit someone   's freedom very much", "the quality of being possible to change or permit" (c.f. "the quality of being stiff, fixed, or possible to bond"), or "the quality of being carefree and accurate". If we carefully investigate, compare, and extract the original information after induction and abstraction, and combine it with our own understanding to form new understandings and insights, then we can truly understand whether the rigor we are talking about is rigidity, strictness, or precision (precision). This is also one of the important significance of the learning process in this lesson.

以上过程的一开始，一定是个人独立的行为，哪怕本课要涉及到“讨论”，在此之前，每位讨论的成员也必须带着个人的成果与他人进行交流。原创性有时的确可以是集体的成果，但须建立在个体成员的努力（或付出）之上。因此，独立的观点对于原创性是先天的，必须的，而原创性也是之后个人或团队观点证实的必经之路——只有你或你的团队才知道你们的命题是通过什么方式“证实”或“证伪”的，否则，我们如何在讨论中说服别人？

At the beginning of the above process, it must be an individual independent behavior, even if this lesson involves "discussion". Before that, each member of the discussion must also communicate with others with their personal achievements. Originality can sometimes be a collective achievement, but it must be built on the efforts (or contributions) of individual members. Therefore, independent perspectives are innate and necessary for originality, and originality is also a necessary path for individual or team viewpoint verification in the future - only you or your team know how your proposition is "confirmed" or "falsified". Otherwise, how can we persuade others in the discussion?

2. 批判的创新

2. Critical innovation

这样说来，我们还可以检讨自己做过的任务，从反思中总能学到知识。批判并不是我们通常理解的一个贬义词，也并不完全就是“批评”（给别人挑刺？）。它在学术的语境中，多半是个中性词，在本课的学习中，我认为这就是个褒义词。批判自己或他人的观点，批判已有的共识，当然要在提供充分证据的基础上，是创造新的知识与观点的重要途径。

In this way, we can also review the tasks we have done and always learn knowledge from reflection. Criticism is not a derogatory term that we usually understand, nor is it entirely "criticism" (giving criticism to others?). In the academic context, it is mostly a neutral term, and in this lesson, I believe it is a commendatory term. Criticizing one's own or others' viewpoints, criticizing existing consensus, and of course, providing sufficient evidence is an important way to create new knowledge and perspectives.

拿我们做过的任务举例吧，例如，要学习英语，不可避免地要付出，要注重任务过程中的收获，而非尽快完成任务本身。翻译本身并不是把两种语言换个方式表达而已，翻译过程中的信息筛选与提取，语言内容的归纳与抽象，才是学习本身严谨性的体现。如果要批判自己在上一个任务中是否有所收获，只要问自己：我的任务成果是完全原创的吗？还是找到百度翻译直接复制粘贴就完成了？

Take the tasks we have done for example, for example, to learn English, it is inevitable to put in effort and pay attention to the gains during the task process, rather than completing the task itself as soon as possible. Translation itself is not about expressing two languages in different ways. The selection and extraction of information during the translation process, as well as the induction and abstraction of language content, are the manifestations of the rigor of learning itself. If you want to criticize yourself for any gains in the previous task, just ask yourself: Is my task result completely original? Or do you just find Baidu Translator and copy and paste it directly?

事实上，我们还能做得更好，我们在批判自己任务完成的过程中，形成了个人的观点：怎样学才是最有助于自己真正的语言的提高，才是真正的收获。有一些在形式上完成了任务，但事实上却仅仅是完成了“老师的”任务；诸如此类的批判和思考，在这场讨论后，还能让我们不断自我改进，走得更远。

In fact, we can still do better. In the process of criticizing ourselves for completing tasks, we have formed a personal perspective: how to learn is the most conducive to the improvement of our true language, and is the real gain. Some have completed the task in form, but in reality, they only completed the "teacher's" task; After this discussion, such criticism and reflection can also help us continuously improve ourselves and go further.

于是我们提到了更多的要素，如“依据”、“来源”等。“依据”是和佐证相关的，让我们的观点更扎实，而“来源”是和信息相关的，让我们可以追溯到自己形成判断的观点到底受到了哪些其他因素的影响。简单来讲，我们在目前阶段，只要能说清楚信息（数据）从哪里来，作者是谁，什么时候获取的，或是什么时候创建的，就可以了。也许以后需要用到具体的格式来表现这种来源，但用在今天这节课的讨论中，已经“绰绰有余”。

So we mentioned more elements, such as "basis", "source", etc. The 'basis' is related to evidence, making our viewpoint more solid, while the' source 'is related to information, allowing us to trace back to which other factors have influenced our own judgment. Simply put, at the current stage, as long as we can clearly explain where the information (data) comes from, who the author is, when it was obtained, or when it was created, it is enough. Perhaps specific formats may need to be used in the future to represent this source, but in today's discussion, it is already "more than enough".