英文読解: 非拡散条約とは何ですか?

このQ&Aのポイント
  • 非拡散条約とは、核供与国グループが採択した輸出ポリシーであり、核保有国でない国に対する核施設や材料の転送に関する規制を定めています。
  • 非拡散条約では、国際管理を受けることには義務付けられていない核保有国も、核材料の供給業者の要請に応じて国際管理を受けることができます。
  • 非拡散条約には、核保有国に対する監視を行う専門の国際機関が存在せず、違反に関する苦情を受け付けるための国際機関の欠如が指摘されています。
回答を見る
  • ベストアンサー

 英文読解

 大学の講義で、非拡散条約に関する英文を読んでいます。明日の講義で、私が当てられそうなのですが、三つの連続したパラグラフでつっかえてしまいました。  以下が、そのつっかえた英文です。   In April 1992, the Nuclear Suppliers Group adopted a common export policy. They agreed that transfer to a non-nuclear-weapon state of nuclear facilities, equipment, components, material and technology, as specified in the so-called trigger list, should not be authorized unless that state had brought in force an agreement with the IAEA requiring the application of safeguards on all source and spesial fissionable material in its current and future peaceful activities. In 1993 this agreement was formally recorded, but not all exporters of nuclear items subscribed to it.   Nuclear-weapon states are not obligated by the NPT to accept international control. They may, however, do so upon request of the suppliers of nuclear materials wanting to ensure that their materials are not used for the manufacture of nuclear weapons. A certain number of facilities in the nuclear-weapon states have been submitted to IAEA safeguards on a voluntary besis. Moreover, in the late 1990s Russia and the United States agreed to submit to IAEA safeguards weapon-origin fissile material designated as no longer required for defence purposes.   What is clearly missing is an international body to which complaints of non-compliance with the NPT, other than those related to nuclear safeguards, could be directed for investigation. The absence of such a body led to the application by some states of unilateral sanctions against suspected but not proven violators.  具体的にわからない文は、  「 They agreed that transfer to a non-nuclear-weapon state of nuclear facilities, equipment components, material and technology, as specified in the so-called trigger list, should not be authorized unless that state had brought in force an agreement with the IAEA requiring the application of safeguards on all source and spesial fissionable material in its current and future peaceful activities.」 ・state of nuclear facilities, equipment components, material and technology  私が訳すると、「原子力の施設と設備と部品と材料と技術の非核保有国」というわけのわからない文章になってしまいます。この「of」はどう言った役割を果たすのでしょうか? ・~on all source and spesial fissionable material in its current and future peaceful activities.  の「all souece」はどんな風に訳するのが適当でしょうか? また「its」は何を指しているのでしょうか? 「 They may, however, do so upon request of the suppliers of nuclear materials wanting to ensure that their materials are not used for the manufacture of nuclear weapons.」 ・私の辞書で調べた限りでは、「do so upon」という熟語はないようです。それぞれの単語をひいても、上手く訳できません。  「do」がこの文の動詞だと思うのですが、これが間違っていないならば、どう訳するべきでしょうか? 「 What is clearly missing is an international body to which complaints of non-compliance with the NPT, other than those related to nuclear safeguards, could be directed for investigation.」 ・What is ~ となっている点から、最初は疑問文だと思ったのですが、疑問符が文末についていないので違うと判断しました。ですが、「疑問詞から始まる文=疑問文」ぐらいしか覚えていないので、どう訳すればいいかわかりません。  長文失礼しました。見づらいと思いますが、ヒントだけでも教授いただければ幸いです。

  • 英語
  • 回答数3
  • ありがとう数2

質問者が選んだベストアンサー

  • ベストアンサー
回答No.2

・transfer to a non-nuclear-weapon state of nuclear facilities, equipment components, material and technology, transfer to A of B AへのBの移転 つまり非核兵器国に核関連物資や技術を売ったりすること。 例:北朝鮮にプルトニウムや遠心分離機を売り渡す。 ・Nuclear-weapon states are not obligated by the NPT to accept international control. They may, however, do so upon request of the suppliers of nuclear materials wanting to ensure that their materials are not used for the manufacture of nuclear weapons. do so = accept international control upon request of = on request of ~の要請・申立てに基づき ・~on all source and spesial fissionable material in its current and future peaceful activities. 現行・将来の平和的な原子力活動に係るすべての原料物質及び特殊核分裂性物質、かな。 参考:和文 http://www.jaea.go.jp/04/np/archive/infcirc255/infcirc255.html 英文 http://www.iaea.org/Publications/Documents/Infcircs/Others/infcirc255.pdf ここの1条を見比べるとsource は「原料物質」でいいかな。 ・「 What is clearly missing is an international body to which complaints of non-compliance with the NPT, other than those related to nuclear safeguards, could be directed for investigation.」 What is clearly missing のwhatは関係代名詞。" What is clearly missing" が主語です。 上の文の大意は、NPT(核不拡散条約)違反のうちで、査察など保障措置違反に関してはIAEA(国際原子力機関)が担当しているが、それ以外の違反については違反の申立を受理・調査すべき国際機関が存在しない、ということだと思います。 参考:IAEA保障措置(1) http://www.mofa.go.jp/mofaj/gaiko/atom/iaea/kyoutei.html

halkain
質問者

お礼

 わざわざIAEAの文書を比較して確認までされるなんて、頭が上がらない思いです。自分でやった時はIAEAの文書を見ようという発想が出なかったので、手段を模索する点でも、まだ未熟なのだと知ることもできました。  下でも書いてありますが、文法の理解が一つ深まった点で質問して良かったと思います。  回答、ありがとうございました。

その他の回答 (2)

回答No.3

書き忘れたのでここで補足。 ・また「its」は何を指しているのでしょうか? 前に出てくる that state、すなわち核関連の移転を受ける側である非核兵器国、だと思います。

  • hrsmmhr
  • ベストアンサー率36% (173/477)
回答No.1

最初は transfer to ...state, xxx, xxx and xxx で非核保有国に xxxを輸送する という文章です all sourceは核爆弾を作るために必要な物のことですが、日本語は難しいですね ちょっとわかりません 2番目はrequestに基づいてそれを行うことができる(国際的なコントロールを受け入れること) という意味でdoとuponの熟語ではないと思います 最後は関係代名詞でwhat = the thing whichとよく説明されます

halkain
質問者

お礼

 英語を日本語にするのは時々凄く難しいときがありますね。単語としては簡単なのに的確な日本語を見つけられないという。  幸い、ここで和訳したところでは指されなかったですが、指された方は非常に苦労していました。  講義では和訳の内容には触れますが文法にはあまり触れないので、文法の理解が深まった点で質問して良かったと思います。

関連するQ&A

  • 英文の意味を教えてください。

    下記の英文をどう訳せばよいかわかりません。わかるかたがいらっしゃいましたら、教えてください。 特に by elements that 以下がわかりません。よろしくお願いします。 ソ連とアメリカの兵器削減の話です。 "What the arrangement involved was, essentially, was an orderly accounting of the [Soviet nuclear] weapons, safeguarding of the weapons, and the removal of them from the reach by elements that could be equally damaging and dangerous to the former Soviet Union or to the West," added Brzezinski 手配は ソ連の核兵器を整理すること、兵器に安全策を講じること、兵器を・・・・・ ---補足--- 【前の文】 1991 also produced another historic superpower development, the "Nunn-Lugar Cooperative Threat Reduction Program." The United States committed substantial funds and personnel to assist its nuclear rival in a manner unthinkable in previous decades. 1991 年 歴史的な 超大国の進展(Nunn-Lugar Cooperative Threat Reduction Program)があった。 アメリカは 十分な予算と人員を、核におけるライバル(ソ連)に送った。それは、10年前には考えられないことだった。 【出展】 VOA:START Treaty Ushered in New Nuclear Era http://www.voanews.com/english/news/europe/START-Treaty-Ushered-in-New-Nuclear-Era---135742513.html

  • 英文質問 その1

    When designing Congress, what kind of representation did the small states want? What kind did the big states want? という質問に対して該当する文章を探しています。 自分でもいらないと思う箇所は切って、だいぶ短くしたつもりですが、それでもかなり長いので質問を分けさせていただきました。 (その2では同じ質問に対して他の文章を引用しています。だいぶ英文が長くなりそうだったので2つに分けさせていただきました。ややこしくてすみません。) But defining the structure of Congress was by far the bitterest fight in the Convention, pitting the large states against the small, and bringing them almost to the point of breaking up. The Confederation Congress was unicameral and each state had an equal vote. The Virginia Plan proposed to create a bicameral legislature, and to eliminate equal representation of states by giving each a number of representatives proportional to their population. Madison believed that the states’ obsession with their own local interests were the cause of the union’s problems, and believed that the new government had to represent the people of the United States to limit the bad influence of the states. <しかしsmall stateはアメリカの4大州だけで人口の大部分を占めていることを指摘した。> In response a large state delegate noted that there were more small than large states, so if they stuck with equal representation the small ones could oppress the larger. ** <>内は自分で訳せたので英文を省きました。 ・つまりバージニア計画では2つの立法府を創設し、それぞれに人口に比例した多数の代表者を与えることによって、州の平等な代表をなくす、という計画だったが、small stateはそれに反対した。 big(large) stateとは人口数がかなり異なるため。 in response以降なのですが、「それに答えて(対抗して)large stateは~」ということだと思うのですが、 ここではどういうことが言われているのでしょうか? ・自分の要約があっているか ・in response以降を簡単で結構ですので訳して欲しいです。 よろしくお願いします。

  • この英文の和訳をお願い致しますm(*_*)m

    Among the regiomal international syrtems into which the world was divided that which evolved in Europe was distinctive in that it came to repudiate any hegemonial principle and regard itself as a society of states that were sovereign or independent. This non-hegemonial society was not without historical precedent:the city states of classical Greece,the Hellenistic Kingdoms between the death of Alexander and the Roman conquest, perhaps the 'period of warring states' in ancient China,may all be thought to provide examples.

  • 英文読解

    In writing these pages, which, for the want of a better name, I shall be fain to call the autobiography of so insignificant a person as myself, it will not be so much my intention to speak of the little details of my private life, as of what I, and perhaps others round me, have done in literature; of my failures and successes such as they have been, and their causes; and of the opening which a literary career offers to men and women for the earning of their bread. (中略) That I, or any man, should tell everything of himself, I hold to be impossible. Who could endure to own the doing of a mean thing? Who is there that has done none? But this I protest:— that nothing that I say shall be untrue. I will set down naught in malice; nor will I give to myself, or others, honour which I do not believe to have been fairly won. (中略)以下の英文について教えてください。 That I, or any man, should tell everything of himself, I hold to be impossible. ・・・・私やいかなる人が自分自身の全てを語ることは、不可能です? Thatは「~のことは」ですか? shouldは話者の強い意志を表したものですか? Who could endure to own the doing of a mean thing? Who is there that has done none? 修辞疑問文ですか? I will set down naught in malice ・・・・私は悪意で無を書きとめるつもりです? どういう意味ですか?in maliceのニュアンスが掴めません。 お手数をおかけしますがよろしくお願いいたします。 ----An Autobiography: Anthony Trollope

  • 英文の邦訳

    The described and attributed strategies of states as owners in the global network of state capital are a first step in this direction: we develop this contribution by distinguishing broadly between state strategies that show a clear interest in financial returns on investment (and thus more adaptation to transnational capitalism), and others that predominantly seek to control the firms they invest their state capital in (and thus carry the potential for a more state-controlled form of global expansion). Our results hence implicate that tackling the question of adaptation or challenge need to be answered at the level of state strategies. 上記英文のラストのOur以下を御訳しください。

  • 英文を日本語訳して下さい。

    The Sykes-Picot agreement, where France recognised Arab independence, had been signed after the letter to King Hussein: "It is accordingly understood between the French and British Governments... that France and Great Britain are prepared to recognise and uphold an independent Arab State or Confederation of Arab States in the areas A. and B. marked on the annexed map under the suzerainty of an Arab Chief." Hence France, argued the British, by signing practically recognised the British agreement with King Hussein, thus excluding Damascus, Homs, Hama, and Aleppo from the blue zone of direct French administration in the map attached to the agreement showed that these cities were included in an independent Arab State. Pichon said France could not be bound by what was for them an unknown agreement and had undertaken to uphold "an independent Arab State or Confederation of Arab States", but this did not mean the Kingdom of Hejaz and if they were promised a mandate for Syria, it would only act in agreement with the Arab State or Confederation of States.

  • 英文についての質問

    In fact states appear to have been created through initial acts of violence that are themselves not justified by individual self-preservation. The Marxist political theorist Leon Trotsky suggested that “Every state is founded on force,” and Max Weber, not a Marxist, agreed. という文章がありあます。 ここでいう「Every state is founded on force」というのは「全ての国家は力(暴力)によって設立された」という訳でいいでしょうか?

  • 英文質問 その2

    When designing Congress, what kind of representation did the small states want? What kind did the big states want? という質問に対して該当する文章を探しています。 As the country developed a stronger sense of national identity after the Civil War, and as claims of corruption in the selection of Senators grew, the demand for direct election of Senators grew. This was finally achieved with the 17th amendment in 1913. A minority of people still argue that this amendment was a mistake, and that an important check on the federal government was lost when the state legislatures’ representation in Congress was eliminated. But even though the state legislatures are no longer directly represented in the Senate, each state still has equal representation, and are so are still represented as distinct political bodies: Wyoming’s less than 600,000 people and California’s 40 million people have the same voice. Some people argue that this is undemocratic, and see the Senate as illegitimate, while others see it as important to ensure the small states are not dominated by a handful of big states. こちらの文章の1段落目を参考にしたのですが、 質問に対して、small stateは州議会の議論を求めている。ということでいいでしょうか? そして2段落目では、big stateはsmall stateが数の少ないbig stateを支配しないことを求めている。 ということでいいでしょうか?

  • (2)英文読解

    (1)の続きです。 The history of the next century involves very large numbers; consequently it is possible to make certain predictions about it with a fairly high degree of certainty. But though we can pretty confidently say that there will be revolutions, battles, massacres, hurricanes, droughts, floods, bumper crops and bad harvests, we cannot specify the dates of these events nor the exact locations, nor their immediate, short-range consequences. But when we take the longer view and consider the much greater numbers involved in the history of the next ten thousand centuries, we find that these ups and downs of human and natural happenings tend to cancel out, so that it becomes possible to plot a curve representing the average of future history, the mean between ages of creativity and ages of decadence, between propitious and unpropitious circumstances, between fluctuating triumph and disaster. This is the actuarial approach to prophecy—sound on the large scale and reliable on the average. It is the kind of approach which permits the prophet to say that there will be dark handsome men in the lives of x per cent of women, but not which particular woman will succumb. この英文の it becomes possible to plot a curve representing the average of future history, the mean between ages of creativity and ages of decadence, between propitious and unpropitious circumstances, between fluctuating triumph and disaster. にある"fluctuating triumph"とはどういう意味ですか? 変動する偉業? また、It is the kind of approach which permits the prophet to say that there will be dark handsome men in the lives of x per cent of women, but not which particular woman will succumb.の意味がわかりません。 大変お手数をおかけしてしまい申し訳ありませんが、教えて頂きたいと思います。 よろしくお願い致します。 ----Tomorrow and Tomorrow and Tomorrow : ALDOUS HUXLEY

  • 英文翻訳をお願いいたします。

    The British notes taken during a meeting of the The Big Four held in Paris on March 20, 1919 and attended by Woodrow Wilson, Georges Clemenceau, Vittorio Emanuele Orlando as well as Lloyd George and Lord Balfour, and Lloyd George explained the British point of view concerning the agreement. The notes revealed that the blue area in which France was "allowed to establish such direct or indirect administration or control as they may desire and as they may think fit to arrange with the Arab State or Confederation of Arab States" did not include, according to the British, Damascus, Homs, Hama, or Aleppo. In area A (the blue area in the map) France was "prepared to recognise and uphold an independent Arab State or Confederation of Arab States'.