• ベストアンサー
  • すぐに回答を!


The civilized man is distinguished from the savage mainly by prudence, or, to use a slightly wider term, forethought. He is willing to endure present pains for the sake of future pleasures, even if the future pleasures are rather distant. This habit began to be important with the rise of agriculture; no animal and no savage would work in the spring in order to have food next winter, except for a few purely instinctive forms of action, such as bees making honey or squirrels burying nuts. In these cases, there is no forethought; there is a direct impulse to an act which, to the human spectator, is obviously going to prove useful later on. (質問1)to the human spectatorはどういう意味か。 解答には「人間の目には」と書いてあるが、なぜそういうふうになるのかが分かりません。意訳でしょうか?それとも辞書(ジーニアスなど)を使って理解できるものなのでしょうか?さらに、これを別の英語で言い換えるとどうなるでしょうか? (質問2)"when a man does something towards which no impulse urges him," を別の英語で言い換えると以下の通りでよろしいでしょうか。 "when a man does NOT do ANYthing towards which impulse urges him," もし駄目な場合は代案を教えていただけると幸いです。 誠にお手数ですが宜しくお願い致します。尚、高校生にも分かるレベル(私は高校生ではありません)での説明でお願いします。


  • 英語
  • 回答数2
  • ありがとう数0


  • ベストアンサー
  • 回答No.2
  • amip
  • ベストアンサー率53% (69/129)

回答1 まず、to the human spectator、は副詞句として挿入されています。この作者は<to--->の挿入がくせのようですね。 the human spectator は名詞句ですので、これを節的に訳せばこなれた日本語になります。 まず、humanは形容詞、spectatorは名詞ですよね。直訳は「人間の目撃者」です。これでは、意味が分かりません。 ここで、(これを意訳と呼ぶかどうかは怪しいですが)こういった名詞構文を訳すときのセオリーみたいなものがあるわけです。 それは「形容詞を主語に、名詞を動詞に」というものです。(これは全てに当てはまるのではなく、形容詞が所有格的、名詞が動詞派生のものに限りますが) つまり、<to the human spectator> ⇒ <to the thing which human spectate> (spectator < spectate=見る) という変換ができるという事です。これを和訳すると「人が見るということによると」=「人が見るならば」=「人の目には」という訳が出来上がります。もちろん「人が見るならば」でも正解です。 別の英語で言い換えるならば < from our point of view>とかでしょうか 回答2 when a man does something towards which no impulse urges him 「人が衝動ではないものによって駆り立てられた何かをする時に」 when a man does not do anything towards which impulse urges him 「人は衝動に駆り立てられた何かをしない時に」 これは微妙にニュアンスが違うのがお分かりでしょうか? この質問の該当箇所が本文には見当たらないので、どういった問題か分かりませんが、この文章の概念として「文明人=prudence/forethought vs 野蛮人・動物=instinctive/impulse」という二項対立の文章になっています。 ですのでimpulseの対立概念としてprudence/forethoughtが使われている以上、単なる否定語句を使うよりもこういった対立概念の語句を使ったほうがいいのではないでしょうか。 つまり<when a man does something towards which forethought urges him> のような具合にです。


その他の回答 (1)

  • 回答No.1

こんにちは あまり自信がないのですが、 (質問1) beesやsquirrelsをactor、それを傍から見ている人間をspectatorと例えているのではないでしょうか。 別の英語で言い換えると、例えば "from human's viewpoint" など「人間から見れば」の意味の英文でいかがでしょうか。 (質問2) 書かれた英文では意味が変わってしまうと思います。 "when a man does something towards which any impulse can't urge him" などいかがでしょうか。



  • 英文解釈(前にも伺ったところですが)急ぎです!

    The civilized man is distinguished from the savage mainly by prudence, or, to use a slightly wider term, forethought. (中略)True forethought only arises when a man does something towards which no impulse urges him, because his reason tells him that he will profit by it at some future date. Hunting requires no forethought, because it is pleasurable; but tilling the soil is labour, and cannot be done from instinctive impulse. (質問1)True forethought only~の文中の"a man does something towards which no impulse urges him,の箇所ですが、towards whichはsomethingを先行詞とする関係代名詞でしょうか?もしそうならこれに似た(先行詞+towards which~のパターン)例文をいただけますか?それとも関係詞節ではなく、somethingで一旦切れて、あとは副詞節でしょうか?(こちらは違うと思うのですが、違うなら論理的な説明をしていただけると幸いです) (質問2)質問1の箇所の上手な訳と訳し方のコツ、および一体何が言いたいのかを教えていただけますか? 直訳→「衝動が(人を)駆り立てないことを人がするときにのみ、本当の用心深さが生じるのだ。」これでは何を言っているのか理解できません。 以上、申し訳ないのですが、「予備校・塾・翻訳家・通訳」など英語を専門に普段使っていらっしゃる方からの回答をお願いできますでしょうか?(あつかましくて申し訳ありませんが、できればどういう関係者の方か教えていただけると最高です!。因みに自分は塾講師です)

  • 基礎英文問題精講より

    構文編35の問題です As scientist keep insisting, there is neither good nor bad in any scientific discovery; it is the use to which it is put which makes it benefical or dangerous. 訳 科学者がつねに主張しているように、いかなる科学的発見もそれ自体は善でも悪でもない。それを有益なものにするか危険なものにするかは、それがいかに利用されるかにかかっている。 説明には後のwhich は強調構文のwhichである。  the use to which it is put の部分ではput ~to use(~を利用する)が受動態で用いられているとなっています。 use to which it is put のもとの形がわかりません。教えてください。

  • 英文の邦訳

    Nothing to film, run by a cautious man who is in no way a wolf of Wall Street. 上記英文の邦訳(特に最初の句)をお願いします。

  • この英文、合ってますか?

    翻訳サイトで訳したのですが、いまいち分かりません。 皆様の力をお貸し下さい。 「違う人種で違う宗教で違う意見を持った人間である前に、私達は同じ人間です。」 →before being a human being with the opinion which is different by the religion which is different by the different race, we are the same human beings. 「人が人を殺していい権利なんてどこにもありません」 →There are no people anywhere in the right which may kill people. 「戦争をしていい権利もありません」 →There is also no right which may war. お願いします。

  • 下記の英文を訳してくださる方はいませんか?

    The maximum length of human life probably hasn’t increased much since the Stone Age, Kohn said. Modern medicine, improved sanitation and better nutrition have enabled many more people to live from birth to ten years of age, but have done little to add anything to the life span of older people. “Life expectancy at 65 has been affected very little by progress. Maybe it’s gone up a year or two in the last 80 years, he said” (From “Adult’s Life: No Longer Now Than Stone Age Man’s Life” in Spectator, March 1978. Reprinted by permission of the University of Iowa Press). Although not relative to the issues under consideration here, it is worth-while to point out two places where the article skirts dangerously close to the misuse of statistics. First, while the maximum length of human life has perhaps not changed much since the Stone Age, as asserted, the average length of human life has probably increased enormously. It increased by 59 percent in the present century alone. Second, life expectancy at 65 has actually gone up more than “a year or two” in the last 80 years: it has gone up about 3.3 years, which gains in impressiveness when you consider that this is a 28 percent increase over the life expectancy of 11.9 years at age 65 in 1900. お願いします。

  • 英文解釈について

    (1)If you are sent abroad at an early age ,you will, by coming into contact with foreign peoples and their customs and manners ,obtain a broader view of life which will ... という英文で 挿入,you will,はどのように解釈すれば良いでしょうか? (2)It gives you the sense of solitude in the midst of a crowd ,which is one of the ... 非制限用法らしいwhichの先行詞はthe sense以下で正しいでしょうか? また (3)... a succession of small events , each of which ... ではeach of whichが非制限用法になりえるでしょうか? (4)The school is a wonderful place in which to receive training in citizenship. という英文では in which が関係詞だと思ったのですが、to receive training ... では主語述語関係が分からなくin which to らへんの解釈がわかりません。 以上の四つの英文が分かりません。 非常に長くなってしまいましたのでひとつづつでも良いので回答をお願いします。

  • 英文の邦訳

    Nothing to film, run by a cautious man who is in no way a wolf of Wall Street. It's how power works today. It hides in plain sight - through sheer boringness and dullness. 上記英文の邦訳をお願いします。

  • ちょっと長いですが、和訳お願いします。3文ともに続いています。

    ちょっと長いですが、和訳お願いします。3文ともに続いています。 The state's interest inschools reached its ultimate expression in T'ai-tsu's proclamation for the establishment of village schools everywhere. The purpose of this, no doubt went beyond the simple recruiting of officials and implied a wish to extend the civilizing force of education to the whole rural population, an aim which revealed an impulse in T'ai-tsu, the man of the people, to affect all of the people more profoundly than government had tried to do before. In this he overreached himself, as the idea of the schools languished in the absence of state money to support them. they persisted in name in many place, but there is no evidence of a revolution in popular education.

  • 英文を訳してください。

    直訳でお願いしましす。 While the strong jolt frightened many people in the Tokyo area, the agency said the latest temblor was smaller in scale than one feared to be likely in the future, which would have a focus just below the metropolitan area and result in devastation with large-scale human casualties.

  • 英文和訳

    And should we defeat every enemy, and should we double our wealth and conquer the stars, and still be unequal to this issue, then we will have failed as a people and as a nation. For, with a country as with a person, "what is a man profited if he shall gain the whole world, and lose his own soul?" There is no Negro problem. There is no Southern problem. There is no Northern problem. There is only an American problem.This was the first nation in the history of the world to be founded with a purpose. The great phrases of that purpose still sound in every American heart, North and South: "All men are created equal." "Government by consent of the governed." "Give me liberty or give me death." And those are not just clever words, and those are not just empty theories. In their name Americans have fought and died for two centuries and tonight around the world they stand there as guardians of our liberty risking their lives. Those words are promised to every citizen that he shall share in the dignity of man. This dignity cannot be found in a man's possessions. It cannot be found in his power or in his position. It really rests on his right to be treated as a man equal in opportunity to all others. It says that he shall share in freedom. He shall choose his leaders, educate his children, provide for his family according to his ability and his merits as a human being. To apply any other test, to deny a man his hopes because of his color or race or his religion or the place of his birth is not only to do injustice, it is to deny Americans and to dishonor the dead who gave their lives for American freedom. どなたかお願いします。