|
|
The Board meeting was attended by directors Lise, Oliver, Shibata-Sato, Tokikuni, and Whipple.
Whipple reported that our membership now stands at 201, with 138 members in Japan, 62 overseas, and 1 with no current address. This is now getting very close to JAT's largest membership ever.
The issue of the membership directory came up again. In view of our being virtually out of paper directories, and the very large growth we have had since the compilation of the last directory, we have decided to make somewhat more frequent output of the database onto paper for copying to produce directories for new members. Along with this, a new open directory of members who have given approval to release their information to the public has been placed on the publicly accessible JAT website, as of 10 August.
A full online directory will need to wait for the implementation of the password-accessible section if our website. The directors feel that the time to implement that feature of our website has come, and that it would also enable us to implement other features related to Bulletin publication and availability after initial publication on jat-list (see below). There was a sense of urgency about this.
Whipple reported that he had completed the HTMLifying of the JAT Constitution and will be putting it up at the JAT site. This should shortly be linked to from an "About JAT" section, but that section does not exist yet.
There was discussion of the need to build the JAT website so as to have an "About JAT" section, including Japanese content. Oliver will work on the old JAT introductory materials, updating them and sending them to Lise for application and tags and splitting up into workable sections for the website. There was a feeling that long sections about JAT history would not be terribly exciting as an "entry" point, and a comment from Lise that the introductory material itself would not be suitable for use as a webpage as is, for structural reasons. Tokikuni and Shibata-Sato will work on the Japanese content.
In addition to handing out the usual report of incremental changes in our books, Bob Oliver reported that we now have our first actually paid-up IJET-10 applicant.
Shibata-Sato reported that we have two articles for the September Bulletin, the deadline for which is 31 August. Some of the Directors who attended IJET-8 in Sheffield agreed to write some of their comments about IJET-8 for that issue.
Oliver reported that our September meeting is lined up (the announcement of that meeting, a talk entitled "The World of U.S. Translation." by Mr. Hiro Tsuchiya of Yamary Language Services, has already been placed on the JAT website), and that November looks like it is in the bag. Lise is working on October, and will shortly have something to report.
Lise brought up the issue of placing Bulletins on the password-accessible part of the JAT website fairly soon after they are published, citing the following advantages:
1. It will finally solve the mojibake problem that has plagued our jat-list versions (although we plan to still upload the bulletin to jat-list).
2. It will provide a method for web-accessing JATers to access the Bulletin without having to piece together two or three sections of a Bulletin, as is necessary the way the Bulletin is uploaded these days.
3. It will enable JATers who missed a Bulletin because of internet provider problems or cockpit error on their part to go back and access it; it will also provide a ready archive of our Bulletin for other purposes.
Implementation of the above awaits the implementation of the password-accessible section of the site, which discussion among the website committee in May indicated was not difficult to do, given the idea that we will have a single, common password.
Tokikuni reported that things are going well with IJET-9 preparations. Oliver added that he will soon be making an initial payment of about 300,000 yen to the Pacifico in Yokohama for the use of the venue.
Lise noted that no actual formal proposals had been received for IJET-10 venues in response to the general calls for proposals made thus far.
Bill Lise
President
As of the end of August, JAT had 202 paid-up members. Of these, 62, or close to a third, are living outside of Japan.
August saw the inauguration of two online JAT directories. One is the open directory <../../opendir.html>, which is accessible to the general Internet public; as announced on JAT-LIST, it includes only those members who have explicitly asked to be included (currently 50; drop me a line if you want to be added). The second is the private directory, which has been posted on the new members-only section of the JAT website <../../members/>. This includes listings for all current members; it can be accessed only by those who know the JAT password (which has been posted on JAT-LIST but nowhere else).
If you haven't done so already, I suggest that check your directory entry for accuracy. If you have any corrections or additions to make, you can send them to me directly or use the online membership information form <../../scripts/r_mailmerge.cgi/templates/jatform.tmpl>. Note that you can now give your name and address in Japanese (kanji/kana) as well as in romaji. You can also write your self-description and additional comments in Japanese if you like.
Jeremy Whipple
ジェレミー・ウィップル
mailto:membership@jat.org fax +81 3 3420 2218
Return to Table of Contents
Date: May 23-24, 1998
Place: Pacifico Yokohama
Fee: 25,000 yen (conference only, no hotel
accommodations provided)
すでにお知らせしましたように、IJET-9は来年の５月23日、24日の週末にパシフィコ横浜で開催します。参加費用は２万５千円です。IJET-7と同じように宿泊については各参加者に手配してもらうことにしました。詳細な情報は電子メールをinfo@ijet.org宛に送るか（infobot）、またはURLをhttp://www.jat.org/ijet-9/ に設定してホームページをご覧ください。今回は会場の都合により210名程度の参加が限界と思われます。JAT会員の皆さんには是非ともこの意義ある会議に参加して頂きたいと考えています。早めにお申し込みください。（申し込み用紙は前記のinfobotまたはホームぺージにあります。また、参加希望者の申し込みが実際に始まっています。）来年横浜でお会いしましょう。
George Tokikuni
Chairperson, IJET-9 Committee
We are starting our call for papers for IJET-9 (Yokohama on 23-24 May 1998) a bit earlier than has been the case for other IJET Conferences. If you are a J/E translator and have something to talk about (as many of us do) that you feel might be of interest to your colleagues, please consider proposing yourself as a speaker for IJET-9. It is not as difficult as you might think. The IJET Conference is chiefly for translators, but we have also had sessions on interpreting in the past.In order for us to proceed with the selection process, we will need a bit of information, as follows.
An abstract of your paper (no more than 300 words or 600 Japanese characters). The abstract should be detailed enough to enable an understanding of the purpose and import of your proposed paper.
The language in which you will propose to present your material (potential speakers are strongly urged to speak in their native languages)
Your biodata (no more than 200 words or 400 Japanese characters)
Speaker/paper selection will be made, and all potential speakers will be notified after 20 January, which is the cutoff date for proposals. (At of this writing, not a single proposal has been received.)
Send your proposed paper to:
Bill Lise
Program Coordinator
billlise@gol.com
(Tel) 03-3791-6870
(Fax) 03-3715-2748
Rm 1101, 1-5-9 Higashiyama
Meguro-ku, Tokyo 153, JAPAN
For more detailed information about IJET-9, point
your browser at the IJET-9 web page at<<a
href="www.jat.org/ijet-9/">../../ijet-9/>. To
get an email package of information about IJET-9,
send any email message to the address <<a
href="mailto:info@ijet.org">info@ijet.org >.
JATがどのような会員から構成されているかを知ることは今後の活動を考えていく上で重要です。しかし、会員名簿に記載されている情報は多くはないし、全体像を知るためにまとまっているわけではありません。そこで、1997年５月18日現在の会員名簿（会員数 186）と Honyaku-mailing list の会員情報（会員数 687）からJAT会員の基礎的なデータを分析しましたので、ここに報告します。今後の参考になれば幸いです。
1. 性別: 男性 125 (67.2%); 女性 61 (32.8%)
2. 母国語の種類: 英語 121 (65.1%); 日本語 59 (31.7%), 独語（ドイツ語）2 (1.1%); 韓国語 2 (1.1%); 仏語（フランス語）1 (0.5%); 諾威語（ノルウェー語）1 (0.5%).
3. 居住地: 東京都 68 (36.5%); 東京都以外の関東地方 39 (21.0%); 関東地方以外の日本 27 (14.5%); 外国 52 (28.0%).
4. Honyaku mailing listの利用者: 82 (44.1%).
備考
性別と母国語の種類については会員名簿に記載されているわけではありませんので、会員の名前やほかのJAT会員への照会によりデータをまとめました。推測に基づくデータがあり、ある程度の誤差を含んでいます。・居住地のデータは次のようにまとめ直すこともできます。
月例会に出席可能な会員 107 (57.5%) 出席不可能な会員 79 (42.5%)（関東地方に居住の方は出席可能であると推測しました。ちなみに関東地方とは東京都、神奈川県、埼玉県、群馬県、栃木県、茨城県、千葉県をさします。）
国内開催のIJETに参加しやすい会員 134 (72.0%) しにくい会員 52 (28.0%)（国内であれば一般に交通の便がよく、宿泊の予約がしやすいと考えました。）
Honyaku mailing listの会員は687名いますから、その11.9%をJAT会員が占めていることになります。
George Tokikuni
JAT director
On July 19 a panel of JAT members (Bill Lise, Hiro Sato, Atsushi Tomii and Fred Uleman) who attended the IJET Conference in Sheffield, England, discussed their experiences at the conference. Here are comments from Atsushi Tomii, FredUleman and Bill Lise (Hiro Sato's Comments are in the July/August Bulletin).
私は、今回も、「IJET-7付きヨーロッパ旅行」という程度の、あまりしまらない形での参加であり、セッションにもあまり積極的には出席していませんでしたので、セッションの数、その中身、全体の傾向などについては、他のパネラーにお願いし、私のレポートは、つぎのの３点に絞らせていただきます。
佐藤さんの発言中に言葉を挟む形でレポートした部分もありますので、必ずしも、このような形で整然とレポートしたわけではありませんが、要するに私の口をついてでたことを、私のレポートとして報告することにします。
1. IJET-8の全貌
参加者総数は約 １３０名で、参加国の国別内訳はつぎのとおりです。
イギリス：７３、日本：３０、アメリカ：１８、オーストラリア：５、あとは、オーストリア、アイルランド、カナダ、ニュージランド、デンマーク、ノルウエーから、各一人ずつ
ただし、これは、参加者名簿から調べた数字であり、申し込みしておきながら参加しなかった人、参加していたにもかかわらず名簿に載っていなかった人などがいましたので正確な数字ではないことをお断りしておきます。いずれにしても、日本から３０名参加すると、次期開催国としても面目が立ったいえるでしょう。
地元とはいえ、イギリスからの参加者が、私の予想より多かったので、典型的な日本人的好奇心から、その内訳を調べてみました。その結果、日本人女性と思える人（姓・名共に日本名の人、名のみ日本名の人などがいたが、私の乏しい人名知識に基づいたもので、その正確度は低いかも知れない）が２７〜２８名いました。「だから何なんだ」といわれればそれまでですが、いずれにしても、日本人女性の数が、いやに多く感じられたのが印象的でした。
そのうちの一人から聞いた話ですが、日本の会社は、ヨーロッパに進出するときは、まず最初にイギリスに橋頭堡をつくる（？）ため、翻訳の仕事は意外に多いのだということをいっていました。
2. 私のプレゼンテーションの概要
今回のテーマは、「日本語と英語の非対応性」という、漠然としたものでした。一つには、その名称で煙にまいてしまおうという意図がなかったわけではありませんが、それよりも、日英の翻訳の話をする場合、このようなタイトルを付けておけば、当日何を話しても、すべてこの範疇には入ってしまうであろうというずるい考えもありました。
セッションでは、まず、私が考案したチャートを使って「非対応性」の定義を説明し、次いで、いくつかある「非対応」の中から、「品詞の非対応性」につき、名詞的言語といわれる英語の「名詞」と動詞的言語といわれる日本語の「動詞」を対応させながら説明しました。これの中心になるテーマは、私が３０年以上前から研究し続けてきた、日本語にはなくて英語にのみ発達した「無生物主語構文」ですが、このテーマは、いつ、どこで、たとえ繰り返し取り上げても、皆さんの受けは良いようです。「品詞の非対応性」については、もう一つ典型的なパターンとして、日本語の「副詞＋動詞」（すなわち、「どのようにどうする」）は、英語では「形容詞＋名詞」（すなわち、「どのような何何」）で表現すると英語らしくなるという話もしました。
「非対応性」としてはもう一つ大事な「態の非対応性」がありますが、これについては時間がなく、触れることはできませんでした。
「自画自賛」は、もっとも人から軽蔑されることです。しかし、あえて「自画自賛」させていただくと、私のプゼンテーションは、今回も皆さんに非常に喜ばれました。椅子の数が足りなくなり、１０人以上の人達は、ある人は立ったまま、また他の人は床に座ったまま最後まで聞いてくれました。それよりも、「おっかけ」までが現われたのには驚かされました。人から軽蔑されることを承知で「自画自賛」したのには、私もまんざら馬鹿ではありませんので、それなりの意味があります。実は、これが、つぎの三つ目のテーマに続くわけです。
3. IJET-9（IJET-98）以降への提言
私はIJETで連続７回、ATAで１１回プレゼンテーションをやらせていただいて来ました。いつも私が取り上げるテーマは、翻訳のHow Toものです。このテーマは、日本人にはもちろん、外国人にも感銘を与えて来ました。そこで、これからのIJETでは、抽象的、概念的、観念的テーマのセッションばかりではなく、How Toものをworkshopなども交え、もっと数を増やすべきであることを提案したいと思います。参加者の数を増やしたいならば、日本人参加者をターゲットにすべきであり、日本人参加者を満足させたいならばHow Toものを増やすべきです。以前、「日本人参加者の数を増やしたって」という偏見を持論としていた人がいたように記憶していますが、この種の会議の成功度を示す尺度は、何といっても、やはり参加者の数です。そのためには日本人参加者にもっと目を向けるべきであり、その意味では、日本の各種翻訳団体に、もっと積極的に参加の呼びかけをしていくべきではないかと思います。とにかく、日本人は、このHow Toものが、とても好きのようです。
もう一つ提案、というかお願いしたいことは、各回のIJETのテーマを設定し、それに沿ってIJETを「プロデーュス」するくらいの意気込みで取り組んでいただきたい。それには各スピーカーの資質やそのテーマなどを厳密に精査し、参加者に何一つ不満の残らない、そんなIJETを演出していこうとする気構えで臨んでいただきたいと思います。
The special workshop on terminology management and intellectual property rights that followed IJET-8 was interesting for me for its discussion of copyright issues. Basically, copyright comes into being when the creative product first appears in tangible representation. And to win a court case against a copyright infringer, the copyright holder has to show substantial infringement resulting in loss or damage to the copyright holder. (Note: copyright law is implemented as national law, such that there are important discrepancies despite the existence of international conventions. This report is only guideline generalizations.)
Is digital form tangible representation? Would transforming the digital information from a graphic representation into musical form be an infringement or a new product? Where is the damage when information is used or transformed? Copyright is an effort to provide an orderly market reconciling the creator's desire to control and other peoples' desire for the free flow of information.
The general interpretation now is that a translation is a new creative work and that the copyright accrues to the translator. In "work for hire" situations, of course, this is forfeited and accrues elsewhere -- most often to the person commissioning the work. Yet when translating a longish work -- particularly a work that is copyrighted in the source language -- the translator should try to assert copyright of the translation. It may be that the translator will end up signing this copyright over to the client, but even that act assumes that the translator has a right to be signed over.
Can you use this to get your name on the translation? Can you use this to get royalties on the sale or use of the translation? Can you use this as a trade-away for higher translation rates? Ideally, you might be able to sign a contract that provides only royalties -- with a hefty "advance" equivalent to your usual translation rates (a situation in which there is only upside -- and no downside -- for the translator).
Even if you cannot turn this to your financial advantage, you might still be able to argue that this copyright you inherently have on your creative work forbids the client's altering the translation without your consent -- meaning that you retain final quality control, which is especially important if your name appears on the translation but can be crucial even when your name is not publicly (but is privately) associated with the translation.
This entire discussion made me much more aware of copyright, and I have already promised myself that copyright will figure more prominently in my next major translation project agreement.
The other noteworthy part of the Sunday was about translation quality assurance. This is especially important when the translation (e.g., of the manual) is an integral part of the manufactured product or service. In such cases, goods- and service-providers will eventually get around to insisting that their translation contractors, like their other subcontractors and vendors, gain some sort of ISO or other international certification.
Even when the client does not demand such certification, it is widely recognized that accreditation or other certification is one purpose of most professional organizations (their stated prime purpose, of course, being to enhance the individual member's professional competence). Yet actual translation quality is impossible to define. It is subjective, and not quantifiable. As such, the most an association can hope to do is to certify that the individual possesses quality's prerequisites. Nonetheless, even discussing these prerequisites can heighten translators' awareness, and I was thus glad to see the vigorous "translation direction" discussion on the JAT list recently.
-- Fred Uleman (fmu@gol.com )
Upon arriving in the UK, it dawned on me that this was going to be another IJET conference at which I would not be able to "get my fill" of sessions because of scheduling conflicts. This time, however, I was mostly to blame, having volunteered to emcee and be on panels in addition to my session, thereby greatly restricting my attendance in sessions.
Never having been to the UK--or anywhere in Europe for that matter--there were lots of new experiences. But you want to hear about the conference, right?
I will limit my comments to the machine translation "panel" discussion that I emceed. For market reasons that were not under the control of the organizing committee, the MT panel had virtually no relevance to J/E translators, beyond perhaps reminding participants that there are indeed people who think selling MT systems is a profitable activity. The world of MT in Europe is basically isolated from issues of concern to J/E translators. In spite of their apparently considerable knowledge of the MT market, the panelists were clearly there to hawk their MT wares. Participants were greeted with the same tired statements that, rather than posing a threat to human translators, MT offers hope of being a useful tool for humans, increasing efficiency and taking the drudgery out of the translation process. More knowledgeable people in the audience I am sure thought otherwise, especially with regard to the usefulness of J/E MT systems, an issue completely unaddressed by the panelists. I wondered whether the panelists had read the title of the conference at which they were speaking, but left my wondering to myself; they had a job to do, and addressing our issues was evidently not part of it.
One small ray of light came with the mention of translation memory systems. Unfortunately, while the firm involved is putting efforts into selling this product to the into-Chinese market, based on expectations of a huge potential market related to localization of software, a Japanese-capable product seems quite a bit farther down the road.
I left the conference happy that I had gone. The opportunity to meet colleagues in the UK was alone enough to make the trip worthwhile. I hope that some of them will return the visit next May at IJET-9 in Yokohama.
On August 6 of each year, Hiroshima issues a peace declaration on the anniversary of the first use of an atomic bomb as an instrument of warfare. The August 16 JAT meeting took the opportunity to compare the two versions of the declaration, and to discuss the various rhetorical issues presented by a bilingual version.
Those wishing to obtain original versions of the two texts can do so from the following Internet addresses:
(Japanese)
http://www.city.hiroshima.jp/japanese/City/peace97-j.html
(English)
http://www.city.hiroshima.jp/C/City/peace97.html
In addition, the Nagasaki government has also posted their peace declaration for the August 8 bombing at the following:
(Japanese)
http://www.us1.nagasaki-noc.or.jp/~nacity/na-bomb/declaration.html
and
(English)
http://www.us1.nagasaki-noc.or.jp/~nacity/na-bomb/declaratione.html
The meeting was chaired by JAT member Fred Uleman, who noted that both the English and Japanese versions of the Hiroshima Peace Declaration were "official," in the sense that they were prepared as a bilingual document by the Hiroshima City Government. Whereupon, discussion proceeded to a comparison of the two texts.
In contrast to normal JAT procedure, this meeting took the form of a seminar discussion, in which all members took active part. Initial comments focused on the general quality of the translation, and of the underlying Japanese text, followed by a point by point analysis of the document in question. Most in attendance agreed that the English version on the whole read quite well, and accurately reflected the original. Certain members also commented that the Japanese text itself was quite vague in certain spots, as quoted below:
From paragraph 2:
核兵器は人類の生存を危うくしただけではなく、それを生み出した文明は、地球環境にも大きな影響を与えるに至った。
One panelist noted that the statement 大きな影響を与えるに至った does not really say anything in Japanese, and that the text does not develop this section to any recognizable conclusion. Similar comments were made about other sections. Nevertheless, one issue for a translator is how to render these rather vague sections into another language, and consequently the forum focused on comparing these problem sections, rather than a political debate on the underlying Japanese text. Essentially, therefore, the original was discussed only in terms of how the translator(s) rendered the English version.
Some of the minor points raised were whether or not a non-Japanese would understand the import of "differences of historical perspective," and whether the Japanese 歴史認識の違い was indeed clearer. One individual commented that inserting "all the more" into this paragraph (paragraph 6) was an attempt to bring more life into a section that did not read as having particular force in the English.
A further issue was whether an appeal for "assistance policies...for the aging hibakusha wherever they may live" grasped the essence of the Japanese 内外の被爆者. Comment was made that from the English one wouldn't necessarily gather that the Japanese text was referring directly to victims of the atomic bombing who were not Japanese, and represented a call for assistance to these individuals.
Discussion then turned to whether or not "Hibakusha" was a word in English (see the discussion in a separate article). It was noted that in previous years the Hiroshima declaration had used this word in italics. Opinion was divided as to whether "Hibakusha" would be a recognizable English word.
All in all, the discussion was quite successful. As translators, participants focused on points of our craft in turning out a good final product. Various topics included stresses, breaking up sentences, merging sentences, adding in words, and taking them out （宣言文としての調子を整え、重みを加えるための原文における工夫をどうするか、等 - -- Note by Emily）. No final decisions were reached, however, as many of the points made were minor matters of opinion. As a final conclusion, JAT member Susumu Ando commented that he had used a computer software package to make a machine translation of the Hiroshima declaration. According to Mr. Ando, this is an untouched raw product from the computer. It has been provided without comment below.
Peaceful declaration (1997)
Machine-translated by Atlas V 3.0
An atomic bomb exploded in sky in the Hiroshima City today 52 years ago. (*S) shone more brightly than the sun of 1000 and a huge mushroom cloud rose in the heaven momentarily. A lot of persons die in sea of flames and the radiation trouble afflicts the surviving person. The fact holds a strong doubt in the ideal way of the science and technology civilization which develops rapidly this century. (*S) was used also for the means of a large amount of slaughter in Hiroshima and Nagasaki though the science and technology brought the pleasantness and convenience for the life of man. The nuclear weapon not only existed dangerously of the human race but also came to produce an influence big as for the earth environment of the civilization by which it was invented. Hiroshima feels strong resentment for not vanishing of the nuclear weapon now from the earth still and will have big uneasiness in the future of the civilization. The road until coming into effect the agreement is still steep and far though agreed to the prohibition of the experiment with a nuclear explosion by signing the inclusive nuclear test prohibition agreement by an international society. The United States insisted that (*S) did not touch the agreement and executed "Nuclear test before critical" at such a case. I can do nothing but say that (*S) lacks wisdom of the human race coexistence in the attitude to persist in the nuclear test in the other side promising the nuclear weapon reduction on the other hand. Even the nuclear weapon appeals to the world again that it is the one located in the top of all violence , for example, the war. The discussion to request the conclusion of the nuclear weapon use prohibition agreement and the expansion of non-nuclear zone to a each country government and an international organization is advanced at the world of the fourth times peaceful unity city mayor conference on holding in Hiroshima aiming at "World in which the nuclear weapon" now. Hiroshima demands the effort to the security system construction by which (*S) does not rely on "Umbrella of the nucleus" a Japanese government. Countries of the world, and between the vicinity nations people, only neither language, religion nor manners and customs, etc. are especially different and difference of history recognition exists, too We wish to share hope to tomorrow by advancing a frank conversation with people in the world. We want to tell man's managing to try to face the future though hopeless misery is experienced with the real state of affairs of the atomic bomb damage related to violence, destruction, and the death and the shine of the life in and out in the country through all chances today in the conversion period with a violent world. The culture of the peace which the experience of Hiroshima invented by the process of the reproduction is a light of the hope of the human race. And, the world inheritance making of "Atomic bomb dome" is a symbol of the wish for the persons who deny the nuclear weapon. (*S) wants to receive a peaceful anniversary now, dedicate the sincerity of the sorrow to victim's spirit of the dead sincerely, do an inside and outside bombed person who makes each age aged to the realities immediately, and request the strategy of the mind or the depending covering. "It is necessary to build the fort of peace on person's mind as the person sincerely happens to the war" Paragraph 1 of this UNESCO charter is carved for the heart and it is assumed the determination of Hiroshima.
Takashi mayor Hiroshima Hiraoka on August 6, 1997 (1997)
平和宣言(1997年8月6日)
Machine-translated from the official human-translation by Atlas 3.0
単一の原子爆弾は今日52年前に広島の上で爆発した． **空の膨大な急速な雲は都市の上を上昇した． 明かされていない数は続いた炎の海で死んで，生存者はまだ放射が余波を弱らせるに悩んでいる．
この出来事はここ100年間のそのような劇的な進歩をなした科学的な文明の深長な不信用を生み出した． 科学と技術は多くのかってを生じさせて，我々の人生をより快適にしたが，また，それらは，広島と長崎の上で使用される大量殺傷の兵器を創り出すのに使われた． 唯一でなく…核兵器が人類の未来をあやうくする…それらを創り出した文明はグローバルな生態系の全体の厳粛に影響を与える．
広島の我々はまだ撤廃されていて，地球の表面から流される侵害されたそれ核兵器であり，文明の未来頃に非常に不安である．
Comprehensive Test Ban Treatyにサインする際に，しかし，すべての核爆発，多くにa停止を置くために同意される国際的な共同体は，CTBTが力に入ることができる前にされるために残っている． それが主張する合衆国の行われたa subcriticalテストがCTBT言語によって禁止されないとき，これは状況だった． 一方では，アメリカは，その核兵器の備蓄を抑えることを約束して，他方では，それは頑固にその核テストプログラムを維持する． この態度はすべての民族が共存するのに必要である知恵が全く策然としている． 我々は，グローバルな共同体が，核兵器がまさに戦争が表す暴力のすべてのその頂点に立つと認めるのを嘆願する．
現在広島で触れるInter-都市のSolidarityを通るPeaceのためのMayorsのFourth世界会議は無核世界を探して，すべての政府を訪問しながら検討して，核兵器の使用を禁止しながら条約を結論づけて，核無兵器のゾーンを広げる国際的な団体である． 明確に，広島は，日本の政府が核かさに頼りきらないセキュリティアレンジについて工夫するのを訪問する．日本と他国は言語，宗教，および習慣において異なって，また，歴史的な遠近法のいくつかの違いが特に我々の隣人と共にいる． ひとしお，我々は，世界のすべての民族の間の率直な対話が明日aより明るいことの分配している視覚となることを望んでいるか?
騒々しい推移における世界で，我々は，原子爆弾が扱わなかったひどい暴力，破壊，およびどんな死だけみじめな絶望を経験するが，未来に向かって努力される人間の人生のインスピレーションを与えた美も運ぶために家において海外であらゆる機会を取るつもりである． まさしく現在世界Heritage現場に指定されているAtomicBomb Domeが核兵器を拒絶するすべてに関する望みの記号の候補に立つような広島の再生の途中に発生する平和の文化はすべての人類に関する望みの標識である．
我々の精一杯の敬意を死んだそれらの精神に支払うと共に，我々はこのPeace戦没将兵記念日にたとえ彼らがどこに住んでいるとしても古いhibakushaのためにほんとうは地面に置かれる情け深い援助方針をうるさく求めるかに自分達を新たに契る．
「戦争が人の心で始まるので，人の心では，平和の防御は構成されなければならない．」 ユネスコ(国連Educational，ScientificおよびCultural Organization)憲法からのこの考えが永久に我々の心臓でエッチングされなければならない…私が，それが広島のものであるとこれにより宣言する…決議
広島のTakashi平岡市長によって渡された．
Machine-translated from the official human-translation by NetSurf E-J 3.0
Peace Declaration (August 6, 1997)
平和宜言（1997年8月6日）
--
It was 52 years ago today that a single atomic bomb
exploded over Hiroshima.
52年前、今日でした ―
一つの原爆が広島の上に爆発したことは。
--
The skies flashed brighter than a thousand suns and a
huge mushroom cloud rose above the city.
空はより明るくパッとつきました ―
1000の太陽と巨大なキノコのような雲が都市にそびえたより。
--
Untold numbers perished in the sea of flames that
followed, and the survivors still suffer from
radiation's debilitating aftereffects.
数えきれない番号は{あとに続いた}炎の海で滅びました、そして、生存者はまだ苦しみます
― 放射が後影響を弱らせることからで。
--
This event engendered profound distrust of the
scientific civilization that has made such dramatic
progress over the last hundred years.
このイベントは、{最後の百年にわたってそのようなドラマティックに進歩した}科学的な文明に対する深みがある不信を産みました。
--
Science and technology have spawned many conveniences
and made our lives more comfortable, yet they have
also been employed to create the weapons of mass
destruction used over Hiroshima and Nagasaki.
科学とテクノロジーは多くの設備を生んで、我々の人生をより快適にしました、それでも、また、彼らは使用されました
―
広島と長崎の上に使われた大規模な破壊が武器をつくるために。
--
Not only do nuclear weapons imperil humanity's
future, the civilization that created them gravely
impacts the whole of the global ecosystem.
人間性の将来を{武器が危うくする}核兵器にするだけではないでください、{重大に彼らをつくった}文明はグローバルな生態系の全体に影響を与えます。
--
We in Hiroshima are outraged that nuclear weapons
have yet to be abolished and banished from the face
of the earth, and we are very uneasy about the future
of civilization.
広島の我々が、{まだ、武器が持つ ―
廃止されて、顔から追放されるために}その核兵器を破られます‖地球と我々が、文明の将来が非常に心配です。
--
In signing the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty, the
international community agreed to put a halt to all
nuclear explosions, but much remains to be done
before the CTBT can go into force.
包括的なテスト禁止令条約に署名することの中で、国際的なコミュニティは停止を全ての核の爆発に置くことに同意しました、しかし、CTBTの前にされた多くの残りは力に入ることができます。
--
This was the situation when the United States
conducted a subcritical test which it contends is not
banned by the CTBT language.
これは状況でした ― アメリカ合衆国が{それが主張する
― ― CTBT言語によって禁止されないと}
subcriticalなテストを実施したとき。
--
On the one hand, the U.S. promises to reduce its
stockpiles of nuclear weapons, and on the other hand
it obstinately maintains its nuclear testing
program.
一方、アメリカは核兵器のその備蓄を減らすと約束します、そして、他方、それは頑固にその核実験プログラムを維持します。
--
This attitude is utterly devoid of the wisdom needed
if all peoples are to co-exist.
この態度は全く必要とされた知恵が全くないです ―
全ての民族が共存することになっているならば。
--
We implore the global community to recognize that
nuclear weapons stand at the very apex of all of the
violence that war represents.
我々は、グローバルなコミュニティを懇願します ―
認めるために ―
核兵器が{戦争が表現する}暴力の全てのまさしくその頂点に立っていると。
--
The Fourth World Conference of Mayors for Peace
through Inter-city Solidarity currently meeting in
Hiroshima seeks a nuclear-free world and is
deliberating calling upon all governments and
international institutions to conclude a pact banning
the use of nuclear weapons and to expand
nuclear-weapons-free zones.
現在、広島で会っている都市間の団結を通しての平和のための市長の4番目の世界会議は、核の自由世界を捜して、全ての政府への熟慮している呼び出しと核兵器の使用を禁止している契約を結んで、核兵器-自由地帯を広げる国際的な制度です。
--
Hiroshima specifically calls upon the government of
Japan to devise security arrangements that do not
rely upon a nuclear umbrella.
広島は、日本の政府に特に呼びます ―
{核の傘に頼らない}安全取り決めを工夫するために。
--
Japan and other countries differ in language,
religion, and customs, and there are also some
differences of historical perspective, particularly
with our neighbors.
日本と他の国は言語、宗教と習慣の中で違います、そして、また、歴史の見通しのいくらかの違いが
― 特に我々の隣人と ― あります。
--
All the more do we hope that candid dialogue among
all the peoples of the world will result in a shared
vision of a brighter tomorrow.
いっそうしてください ― 我々が望むことを ―
世界の全ての民族の中の率直な対話がより明るい明日の共有された見方になることを。
--
With the world in tumultuous transition, we intend to
take every opportunity at home and abroad to convey
not only the terrible violence, destruction, and
death the atomic bomb wrought but also the inspiring
beauty of human life striving toward the future
despite experiencing abject despair.
世界で騒々しい移行の中で、我々は国内外の恐ろしい暴力だけを運ばないあらゆる機会、破壊と死にまた、将来頃に努力している人間の生命の胸が踊る美しさ以外の作られた原爆を持っていくつもりです
― 惨めな絶望を経験することにもかかわらず。
--
The culture of peace generated in the process of
Hiroshima's rebirth is a beacon of hope for all
humanity, just as the Atomic Bomb Dome, now
designated a World Heritage site, stands as a symbol
of hope for all who reject nuclear weapons.
広島の再生のプロセスの中で生成された平和の文化は全ての人間性に対する望みのビーコンです
―
原爆ドーム（世界遺産サイトと称された今）が{核兵器を拒絶する}全てに対する期待のシンボルとして立っているちょうどその時。
--
Along with paying our utmost respects to the souls of
those who died, we pledge ourselves anew on this
Peace Memorial Day to pressing for compassionate
assistance policies grounded in reality for the aging
hibakusha wherever they may live.
{死んだ}それらの魂に、我々に最大に敬意を表すこととともに、我々は新たにこの平和記念の日に緊急のものに加齢hibakushaのために現実に基づいていた哀れみ深い援助政策のために我々自身を誓います
― どこで彼らが生きているかもしれなくても。
--
"Since wars begin in the minds of men, it is in the
minds of men that the defenses of peace must be
constructed."
「戦争が男性の心から始まってから、男性の心にあります
― 平和の防御が造られなければならないことは。」
--
This thought from the UNESCO (United Nations
Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization)
Constitution must be indelibly etched in our hearts,
and I hereby declare it Hiroshima's resolve.
ユネスコ（国連教育科学文化機関）憲法からのこの考えは我々の心の中でindeliblyにエッチングで描かれなければなりません、そして、私はこれによってそれを広島の決心と宣言します。
--
Delivered by Takashi Hiraoka Mayor of Hiroshima
タカシ・ヒラオカ市長によって広島を出産します
平和宣言/Peace Declaration(1997)/7
I wish we had had more time. There were so many good people there with so many good things to say that the hour and a half net was not enough time. For example, one person said he thought "historical perspective" was too weak for 歴史認識 but we did not have enough time to discuss this and find out what would have been better. For example, we never got around to the 営み part -- which I thought was a particularly "interesting" section for translators. For example, we did not have time to talk about how you confirm proper nouns and go to the net for a copy of the CTBT to see why simply "nuclear explosions" might be okay for 核爆発を伴う実験. (On this last, the Treaty says that parties to the treaty undertake not to carry out "any nuclear weapon tst explosion or any other nuclear explosion.")
True, we spent some time on the Hiroshima agenda, but that was time well spent because we were able to reaffirm that the important thing is not that the translator agree with the client's agenda but rather that the translator understand the client's agenda. And we spent time on other issues that were important to the translation. So none of our time was wasted. There just wasn't enough of it.
Thanks again to everyone who showed up for this exercise.
--- by Richard Thieme
As someone who works with words, I found the discussion of 被爆者, 被曝者, and "Hibakusha" to be quite interesting. After I returned from the meeting I did some Internet searching. I found that indeed Hiroshima had rendered "Hibakusha" in italics in the 1996 declaration, rather than in regular text, as was the case this year.
I also confirmed that "Hibakusha" in English is not listed in Webster's Dictionary on the Internet, or indeed any other dictionary I could find. I did hit on a number of sites, almost all of them relating exclusively to Hiroshima. Those that referred to Hiroshima and Nagasaki were without exception "foreign borne" and used "Hibakusha" to refer to victims of the atomic bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki together.
No one used Hibakusha to refer to Nagasaki alone. It is also interesting that the Nagasaki declaration did not include the term Hibakusha in English, although the term was used in Japanese.
Next I did a search in the Japanese, using both Kanji renderings of the term. Interestingly enough, a clear distinction was made. Victims of the Hiroshima and Nagasaki bombings were referred to as 被爆者,while victims of atomic accidents such as Chernobyl were referred to as 被曝者. As one individual noted during the course of the JAT meeting, 被爆者 would logically mean a victim of an explosion, any explosion, and not just the atomic bomb. Nevertheless, this has taken on the meaning of victims of the Hiroshima and Nagasaki bombings, whereas 被曝者 refers to victims of other nuclear accidents (or rather exposure to radiation).
For examples of how these terms are distinguished, please see the following URL's:
http://www.volunteer-post.mpt.go.jp/kokusai/haibun/tohou.html and
http://www.hiroshima-cdas.or.jp/HICARE/
The latter site particularly makes a clear distinction in referring to the two groups. One example is as follows:
原爆投下以来50年の間、広島の医師・研究者は、_被爆者_の治療や放射線障害の研究を続けてきました。放射線_被曝者_医療国際協力推進協議会（ＨＩＣＡＲＥ＝ハイケア）は、そういった医師・研究者の経験や知識の蓄積を世界の人々に役立たせるために、チェルノブイリ原発事故などを契機として、1991年に設立されました。 世界各地から医療関係者を広島に迎えて放射線_被曝者_医療の研修を行ったり、広島の医療専門家を世界各地に派遣したり、原爆医療解説書を日本語と英語で出版して広島の放射線_被曝者_医療の知識の普及に努めるなど、広島らしい国際協力をすすめています。
What would happen in the event of another Atomic bombing I do not know, and do not wish to find out.
The Japan Association of Translators (JAT) is a nonprofit association dedicated to serving the interests of individual translators. Unless otherwise stated, opinions expressed in JAT Bulletin articles are solely those of individual contributors and do not necessarily reflect the views of the Japan Association of Translators.