内容发布更新时间 : 2024/12/23 6:14:09星期一 下面是文章的全部内容请认真阅读。
U nit 4 There are many different kinds of evidence that women and men are judged differently even if they talk the same way. This tendency makes mischief in discussions of women, men and power. If a linguistic strategy is used by a woman, it is seen as powerless; if it is used by a man, it is seen as powerful. Often, the labeling of “women’s language” as “powerless language” reflects the view of women’s behavior through the lens of men’s.
各种各样的证据表明：即使女性和男性说话方式相同，人们对他们的看法还是不同。这种倾向导致有关女性、男性和无能耐的讨论纷争不断。女性说话讲究方式方法被认为是低微无能，而换成男性则被认为是有能力的表现。视女性的语言为低微无能者的语言常常反映出男性看女性行为的视觉角度。
Because they are not struggling to be one-up, women often find themselves framed as one-down. Any situation is ripe for misinterpretation. This ambiguity accounts for much misinterpretation by experts as well as nonexperts, by which women’s ways of thinking, uttered in a spirit of rapport, are branded powerless. Nowhere is this inherent ambiguity clearer than in a brief comment in a newspaper article in which a couple, both psychologists, were jointly interviewed. The journalist asked them the meaning of “being very polite.” The two experts responded simultaneously, giving different answers. The man said, “Subservience.” The woman said, “Sensitivity.”Both experts were right, but each was describing the view of a different gender.
女性不为高人一等而拼搏，往往就被认为是低人一等。在任何情况下都极容易发生误会。这也说明了为什么专家和非专家常常把女性以友善语言表述出来的思维方式曲解成低微无能的表现。没有什么能比一家报社刊登的采访片段更能清楚地说明这种根深蒂固的歧义。采访对象是一对心理学家夫妇，当记者问他们“表现得非常有礼貌”的含义时，这两位专家同时给出不同的答案。男性回答说：“服从”。女性回答说：“敏感”。两位专家都是正确的，只不过每个人描述的是不同性别的观点。
Experts and nonexperts alike tend to see anything women do as evidence of powerlessness. The same newspaper article quotes another psychologist as saying, “A man might ask a woman, ‘Will you please go to the store?’ where a woman might say, ‘Gee, I really need a few things from the store, but I’m so tired.’” The woman’s style is called “covert,” a term suggesting negative qualities like being “sneaky” and “underhanded.” The reason offered for this is power. The woman doesn’t feel she has the right to ask directly.
专家和非专家都习惯把女性的任何行为看为低微无能的表现。以上同一篇报刊文章援引另一位心理学家的话说：“一个男人会这样问一个女人：‘请你去一趟商店好吗？’同样的情况下女人会说：‘哎，我真的需要从商店买点东西，但是我实在太累了。’”女性的这种表达方式被称为“隐蔽的”，该词含有“鬼祟”和“秘密”等贬义，而这样表达的原因归咎于一个“权”字，女人觉得她没有权利直接提出要求。
Granted, women have lower status than men in our American society. But this is not necessarily why they prefer not to make outright demands. The explanation for a woman’s indirectness could just as well be her seeking connection. If you get your way as a result of having demanded it, the payoff is satisfying in terms of status: You’re one-up because others are doing as you told them. But if you get your way because others happened to want the same thing, or because they offered freely, the payoff is rapport. You’re neither one-up nor one-down by being happily connected to others whose wants are the same as yours. Furthermore, if indirectness is understood by both parties, then there is nothing covert about it: That a request is being made is clear. Calling an indirect communication covert reflects the view of someone for whom the direct style seems “natural” and “logical” － a view more common among men.
的确，在我们（美国）社会里，女性的地位比男性低，但这不等于说她们不愿意提出直截了当的要求。女性的这种间接方式很可能是因为她们在努力寻找某种关系。如果愿意在自己的要求下得到满
足，结果就是社会地位的胜利：你高人一等，因为别人按你的意志行事。而如果你的愿望得到满足是因为他人的愿望恰好和你的一致，或者是因为对方心甘情愿，结果就是融洽和谐。当你和对方的需求一致而一拍即合时，你既不高人一等，也不低人一等。而且如果双方都了解这种间接方式，那就不存在什么隐蔽：提出的要求很明确。称间接的沟通方式为隐蔽反映出那些青睐直接沟通方式的人的观点，即直接的方式才是“自然的”、“合乎逻辑的”，这种观点在男性中更普遍。
Indirectness itself does not reflect powerlessness. It’s easy to think of situations where indirectness is the prerogative of others in power. For example, a wealthy couple who knows that their servants will do their bidding need not give direct orders, but simply state wishes: The woman of the house says, “It’s chilly in here,” and the servant sets about raising the temperature. The man of the house says, “It’s dinner time,” and the servant sees about having dinner served. Perhaps the ultimate indirectness is getting someone to do something without saying anything at all: The hostess rings a bell and a maid brings the next course;or a parent enters the room where children are misbehaving and stands with hands on hips, and the children immediately stop what they’re doing.
间接方式本身并不反映低微无能。我们不难想象出权势者中有特权的人是怎样使用间接方式的。例如，一位有钱的夫妇用不着直接向听命于他们的用人发号施令，而只须简单地说明其愿望，房子的女主人说：“这儿冷，”用人就会去调高室温；房子的男主人说：“是晚饭的时间，”用人就会摆桌上菜。或许终极的间接是什么都不用说就能使某人做某事：女主人按一下铃，女仆端上下一道菜；家长走进有孩子正在嬉闹的房间，双手叉腰一站，他们就会戛然而止。
Entire cultures operate on elaborate systems of indirectness. For example, I discovered in a small research project that most Greeks assumed a wife who asked, “Would you like to go to the party?” was hinting that she wanted to go. They felt that she wouldn’t bring it up if she didn’t want to go. Furthermore, they felt, she would not state here preference outright because that would sound like a demand. Indirectness was the appropriate means for communicating her preference.
所有文化都靠以“间接”二字所形成的复杂而精巧的体制去运作。例如，我在做一个小规模的研究项目时发现：当妻子问“你想去参加那个聚会吗？”，大多数希腊人认为他们的妻子是在暗示她想去。他们认为如果妻子不想去，她就不会提出这个问题。而且他们觉得之所以不直截了当提出，是因为她不想使她的愿望听上去像是要求。间接是传达她的意愿的最好方式。
Japanese culture has developed indirectness to a fine art. For example, a Japanese anthropologist, Harumi Befu, explains the delicate exchange of tended the invitation, Befu first had to determine whether it was meant literally or just pro forma, much as an American might say, “We’ll have to have you over for dinner some time” but would not expect you to turn up at the door. Having decided the invitation was meant literally and having accepted, Befu was then asked what he would like to eat. Following custom, he said anything would do, but his friend, also following custom, pressed him to specify. Host and guest repeated this exchange an appropriate number of times, until Befu deemed it polite to answer the question － politely － by saying tea over rice － as the last course of a sumptuous meal. Befu was not surprised by the feast because he knew that protocol required it. Had he been given what he asked for, he would have been insulted. But protocol also required that he make a great show of being surprised.
日本文化把间接沟通方式发展成为精美的艺术。例如，一位名叫别府春海的日本人类学家这样描述一次简单的午餐邀请所涉及的微妙的间接交流。当他的朋友发出邀请后，别府首先要弄清楚这个邀请是真正的邀请，还是仅仅出于客套，就像美国人说“哪天有空请你到我们家吃饭”而他并不期望你会出现在他的家门口一样。别府在确定邀请是真实的并且接受以后，对方就得问他想吃什么；按照习俗，他于是说吃什么都可以，而他的朋友也照例一定要他说的具体些，这样的交流在主人和客人之间适当重复了几次，直到别府觉得有礼貌地作出回答才是谦谦之举，于是说米饭和茶。当他就餐时，招待他的的确有米饭和茶—只不过这是一顿丰盛午餐的最后一个程序。别府对饭菜之丰盛并不
感到惊讶，因为他知道按礼节就是这样。如果对方按照他的提议款待他，他就等于受到了侮辱，当然礼节也要求他做出受宠若惊的样子。
This account of mutual indirectness in a lunch invitation may strike Americans as excessive. But far more cultures in the world use elaborate systems of indirectness than value directness. Only modern Western societies place a priority on direct communication, and even for us it is more a value than a practice.
以上描述的有关午餐邀请时双方所进行的间接交流在美国人看来是过分了，然而相比直接的沟通方式，世界上更多的文化崇尚细腻的间接沟通方式。唯有现代西方社会推崇直接沟通方式，而且即使对我们（美国人）来讲，这种方式更是一种价值观，而不是实践。
Evidence from other cultures also makes it clear that indirectness does not itself reflect low status. Rather, our assumptions about the status of women compel us to interpret anything they do as reflecting low status. Anthropologist Elinor Keenan, for example, found that in a Malagasy-speaking village on the island of Madagascar, it is women who are direct and men who are indirect. And the villagers see the men’s indirect way of speaking, using metaphors and proverbs, as the better way. For them, indirectness, like the men who use it, has high status. They regard women’s direct style as clumsy and crude, debasing the beautiful subtlety of men’s language. Whether women or men are direct or indirect differs; what remains constant is that women’s style is negatively valuated － seen as lower in status than the men’s.
其他文化现象也清楚地表明间接本身并不能反映地位低下。在一定程度上，是我们对对女性地位的设定使我们把女性的所有行为解释成为地位低下的表现。例如，人类学家埃莉诺·基南发现在马达加斯加岛的一个说马达加斯加语的村落里，说话直截了当的是女性，拐弯抹角的是男性。而村民视男性使用隐喻和谚语的间接说话方式为更佳方式。在他们眼里，非直接方式和使用这种方式的男人一样享有崇高地位，而女性的直接风格被视为笨拙、粗鲁、有损男性语言的精深微妙之魅力。关于男性或女性谁直接谁间接在不同地域有不同情况，不变的是女性风格总遭人贬低，其地位被视为低于男性。
U nit 5 Mid-1990s, the issue of corruption has gained a prominent place on the global agenda. International organizations, including the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) and the UN, have adopted conventions requiring that their members enact laws prohibiting bribery and extortion. International financial agencies, notably the World Bank, have announced programs aimed at ensuring fair and open contracting for their projects and stopping misappropriation by government officials. Most nations have enacted some type of anticorruption law. International business groups have promulgated model codes of behavior, and multinational corporations (MNCs) now claim to be implementing antibribery programs. The leading nongovernmental organization (NGO) in this area, Transparency International (TI), has conducted analysis and advocacy through chapters in over 90 nations. The international media report instances of corruption in high places virtually every day (often at great risk). 自20世纪90年代中期以来，腐败问题一直占据着全球议事日程的突出地位。一些国际机构，如经济合作和开发组织以及联合国，采取了协约的形式，要求各成员国制定法律禁止行贿受贿和索贿等行为。一些国际金融机构，尤其是世界银行，宣布了多个方案，旨在确保其项目承包的公正和公开性，杜绝政府官员侵吞私占。大多数国家都出台了某种形式的反腐败法。国际商业团体也颁布了行为示范法规，跨国公司如今宣称正在实施反贿赂计划。反腐倡廉方面的非政府机构的带头人“透明国际”也通过其分布在90多个国家的分支机构开展了分析和倡导活动。国际媒体事实上是每天（常常冒着极大的风险）报道高层人物腐败堕落的事例。
Underlying these changes in rules, rhetoric, and awareness is the growing recognition that bribery and extortion have demonstrably deleterious consequences.
Gone is the day when some pundits seriously argued that corruption was an efficient corrective for overregulated economies or that it should be tolerated as an inevitable byproduct of intractable forces. The true impact of corruption is now widely acknowledged: corruption distorts markets and competition, breeds cynicism among citizens, undermines the rule of law, damages government legitimacy, and corrodes the integrity of the private sector. It is also a major barrier to international development － systemic misappropriation by kleptocratic governments harms the poor.
之所以出现了这些新的规章、反腐誓言和觉悟的提高，其根本原因就在于人们越来越清晰地认识到收受贿赂和勒索钱财的行为带来了显而易见的恶果。曾几何时一些博学之士一本正经地说：腐败是对过度调控经济体制的一种有效的矫正行为，或者说，腐败作为不可驾驭的力量的一种副产品，它是不可避免的，我们应该包容它。如今这样说的日子一去不复返了。现在腐败带来的真正危害已经广为人知：腐败扰乱市场、破坏竞争、滋长市民的冷嘲热讽、削弱法治的威力、损害政府的合法性，还会侵蚀私营市场的诚信度。腐败还是阻止国际发展的极大阻碍，因为贪赃舞弊的政府自上而下的侵吞挪用坑害了穷人。
Although it is difficult to quantify global corruption, there is little question that huge problems exist. For example, the World Bank estimated in 2004 that public officials worldwide receive more than $1 trillion in bribes each year (and that figure does not include embezzlement). A 2005 survey by the Russian think tank Indem found that more than $300 billion in bribes is paid in Russia annually (a ten-fold increase since the last survey, in 2001) and that more than half of all Russians have at some point been asked for a payoff. 虽然很难量化全球腐败的程度，但存在巨大弊端却是毋庸置疑的。例如，2004年世界银行估计全世界的政府公务员每年收受贿金在一万亿美元以上（而且这个数字还不包括贪污）。俄国智囊团 Indem 在2005年所做的一次调查发现：每年在俄国支付的贿金超过3 000亿美元（比上次2001年调查到的数字增加了10倍），而且有不止一半的俄国人曾经被索要过贿赂。
According to the 2005 Volcker report (a report on the UN’s former oil-for-food program by an independent committee headed by the economist Paul Volcker), more than 2,000 companies participating in the
oil-for-food program － almost half of the total － may have been involved in kickback schemes. And the drumbeat of scandals continues, with events in China, Indonesia, Kenya, Russia, and the United States leading the news during the past year.
根据2005年度的沃尔克报告（由经济学家保罗·沃尔克担纲的一个独立委员会对联合国之前实行的石油换食品计划所做的调查报告），参与石油换食品计划的2 000多家公司几乎有一半可能有吃回扣的行为。频频不断的丑闻此起彼伏，一直没有消停。过去一年，中国、印尼、肯尼亚、俄国和美国的爆料占据着新闻的榜首。
Given vast, continuing problems, the anticorruption movement will maintain its credibility and momentum only if it can translate its rhetoric into action and prevent and punish misbehavior in a more focused and systematic manner. In the near term, the implementation of anticorruption measures must come in important part from international organizations, developed nations, and MNCs. Developing nations also have a critical role to play. But their legal, political, and economic systems vary greatly － they are failed or failing, fragile or rising － and so anti-corruption initiatives in the developing world will have to be a part of, and dependent on, each country’s broad, complex, and often lengthy state-building process.
考虑到这些问题范围之广且层出不穷，只有当我们以更加集中化和系统化的方式把反腐誓言付诸行动、预防和惩罚不端行为时，反腐运动才能保持其可信度和强劲的势头。在近期内，唱重头戏的国际组织、发达国家以及跨国公司必须实施反腐措施。发展中国家也有重要角色需要扮演，但由于这些国家的法律、政治和经济体系差异很大 — 它们要么不成功，要么眼看就要失败；要么不堪一击，要么正在兴起 — 因此发展中国家的反腐运动将不得不是各国广泛、复杂且往往是历时长久的国家建设过程的一部分，而且取决于这个国家建设的过程。 POLYMORPHOUSLY CORRUPT 形态多样的腐败堕落
Corruption takes many forms. It has a supply side (private bribers) and a demand side (public officials). There is grand corruption, involving high-level officials with discretionary authority over government policy, and petty corruption, involving lower-level officials who control access to basic services such as education and electricity. There is the dynamic between the developed nations that are a main source of the funds and the developing nations that host the majority of the officials who extort and misappropriate. 腐败的形式有很多种，它既有供给方（私人行贿者），又有需求方（政府公务员）；既有能随心所欲地操控政府决策的高层官员参与的大规模腐败行为，也有控制着诸如教育和供电等基础服务设施的低层官僚参与的小规模腐败行为。再说，提供主要资金来源的发达国家和拥有大批巧取豪夺、侵吞私占的政府官员的发展中国家二者之间有一种动态机制。
Tackling this multifaceted problem, and understanding how near-term priorities fit into long-term approaches, requires pursuing four types of measures.
First is enforcement, which seeks to deter future misconduct by investigating and prosecuting existing corruption. Second is prevention: the enactment and implementation of legislation and administrative regulations that choke off corrupt practices (such measures should include ombudsman systems, whistleblower protection laws, transparent rules of procurement and accounting, reedom-of-information laws, auditing and internal-control requirements for public and private entities, and anti-money-laundering regimes). Third is the much more complex process of state building, which consists of institutional reforms designed to create a society of laws, not men, and to build a transparent, accountable, and durable legal, economic, and political foundation. Finally, there is the cultural dimension of anticorruption, which involves transmitting positive values and norms that can strengthen the enforcement, prevention, and state-building measures.
要攻克这个牵涉到多层面的问题，并明确近期的工作重点如何与长期的应对方法相符，我们就应该采取四种措施：第一是强制执行，即通过对现有的腐败行为进行调查和提起公诉，力图制止未来的