继续本书的批评之旅。
第11章 锚定效应
最后两节
点评:原标题为Uses and Abuses of Anchors,译者处理的不好,为啥不能直接翻译为“锚的使用与滥用“呢?令人费解。
===================
英文: We see the same strategy at work in the negotiation over the price of a home, when the seller makes the first move by setting the list price. As in many other games, moving first is an advantage in single-issue negotiations— for example, when price is the only issue to be settled between a buyer and a seller. 。。。。
My advice to students when I taught negotiations was that if you think the other side has made an outrageous proposal, you should not come back with an equally outrageous counteroffer, creating a gap that will be difficult to bridge in further negotiations. Instead you should makeascene, stormout or threaten to do so, and make it clear—to yourselfas wellas to the other side— that youwill notcontinuethe negotiationwith that number on thetable.
点评:
1)译者将这一段的开头几句话压缩处理,不是不可以,但他们漏掉了比较关键的词汇【single-issue negotiations】,从而后面的例子在一定程度上失去了落脚点。
2)译者将outrageous proposal翻译成【无礼的提议】,不妥,在这里显然指价格高(或低)得离谱,例如卖方要价狮子大张口。
3)译文【威胁对方说自己也会这么做】,是无脑翻译之物,因为它明显与前文矛盾(老师说不要以牙还牙)。
========================
英文:。。。 or on the costs to the opponent of failing to reach an agreement. In general, a strategy of deliberately “thinking the opposite” 。。。
点评:1)译文【对方无法接受的费用】属于瞎扯,其真实意思是考虑如果对方未能达成合同会对对方造成多大代价;
2)“ thinking the opposite ”竟然翻译成“为对方着想”!这不是“反过来想”吗?
==========================
英文:。。。 This rule would eliminate all larger awards, but the anchor would also pull up the size of many awards that would otherwise be much smaller. 。。。
点评:larger awards翻译成“严厉判决”,就不能干脆一点弄成【高赔偿金】吗?
==============
点评:画圈处要么是笔误,要么是脑残之作。
===================
英文:。。。 if the stakes are high you should mobilize yourself(your System2) to combat the effect.
点评:这里的stakes与概率有毛线关系?它的意思是利益很大。
=======================
点评:划圈的那些地方,译者基本在那瞎扯淡。就不一一指出了。
============================
翻译差到爆炸。
这样的译者和出版社简直伤天害理哇。
这是第十一章
不能太赞同了!
这章我也看完了,谢谢你的纠错。
对其中两个小标题的翻译,有没有什么建议
ANCHORING AS ADJUSTMENT
锚定和调整 ?
ANCHORING AS PRIMING EFFECT
锚定是促发效应的一种 ?
> 我来回应