• ベストアンサー
※ ChatGPTを利用し、要約された質問です(原文:英文についての質問です。)

Understanding the Indefinite Nature of Genius in Galton's Work

shingo5kの回答

  • shingo5k
  • ベストアンサー率33% (123/366)
回答No.5

'There is much that is indefinite あいまいな多くの事例がある、 in the application of the word genius. 天才と言う言葉の適用においてだ。 It is applied to many a youth by his contemporaries, 天才と言う言葉はその天才と同時代の人々によって多くの若者に対して適用される but more rarely by biographers, しかし、天才と言う言葉は、(書く対象が別の世代になる)伝記作家によって、 より稀に適用される。 who do not always agree among themselves.' 伝記作家は、彼らの中で常に意見が一致するわけではないものだ。 ****************************************************** >>thatは何を指しているのでしょうか? 非可算名詞 much です >>hisは誰を指しているのでしょうか?(youth?) a youth です >>among themselvesはどうやって訳すのでしょうか? 意見の一致を言うには、どの範囲(or 相手)で一致するかを示す必要があります 「伝記作家の中で」とその範囲を示しています rarely=まれに、 more rarely=?(訳語がわかりません) 美しい訳語を探す必要はありません。見苦しい訳語でも正確な理解を助ける方が大切です。 >>伝記作者は天才という言葉を明確に使っている、ということですか? 違います。 伝記作者はより冷静に対象を調べるので、同世代の人々が囃し立てるほど、天才と言う 言葉を適用しないといっています。つまり天才と言う言葉の適用にはあいまいさがある という冒頭の結論になります。 >>It is applied to~のitがよくつかめていない感じです) It は the word genius です。

chrleyk
質問者

お礼

訳文と合わせてとてもわかりやすく簡潔に回答をいただいてありがとうございました! "意見の一致を言うには、どの範囲(or 相手)で一致するかを示す必要がある"ため、 among themselves「伝記作家の中で」と示しているのですね。 more rarelyは訳語にこだわらなくてもいいのですね。 "天才と言う言葉の適用にはあいまいさがある"と、最後にも結論を出しているのですね。 ありがとうございます。

関連するQ&A

  • 英文についての質問です。(2)

    投稿した質問の『英文についての質問です。(1)』の続きになります。 When Galton speaks of the heritability of "a man's natural abilities" in his thesis, what he really seems to mean is the heritability of talent, rather than genius. As most psychologists now agree, the evidence for some inheritance of talent is considerable, though nowhere near as convincing as Galton claimed, whilst the evidence for inherited genius is slight or non-existent. (Genius by Andrew Robinson) : 1)部分的によくわからないところがあります。 the evidence for some inheritance of talent is considerable the evidence for inherited genius is slight or non-existent この二つはどのようなことを言っているのでしょうか? ( some inheritance of talentとinherited geniusのところがよく掴めません) 2) though nowhere near as convincing as Galton claimedは、 Galtonが主張したほど説得力のあることにはほど遠かったけれども、という意味ですか? (Galtonほど説得力はなかったが?) よろしくお願いいたします。

  • 英文についての質問です。

    The 21st century is perhaps more fascinated by genius even than Galton's Victorian age, when geniuses like the poet Tennyson "were in full flower", recalled Virginia Woolf, with "long hair, great black hats, capes, and cloaks". Geniuses in the arts and sciences--the focus of this book--such as Leonardo and Newton, grip the imagination of generation after generation. So does the military and political genius of Napoleon, Churchill, and Gandhi, and the "evil genius" of Hitler, Stalin, and Mao. Genius is also a word lavishly applied to top performers in activities as varied as chess, sports, and music. Moreover, the accolade may not only be bestowed but also withdrawn by experts and the public, as the prize-winning and sensationally successful British installation artist Damien Hirst discovered. (以前に投稿していた"Genius"の英文の続きになります。) わからない個所を教えてください。 1)The 21st century is perhaps more fascinated by genius even than Galton's Victorian age, when geniuses like the poet Tennyson "were in full flower", recalled Virginia Woolf, with "long hair, great black hats, capes, and cloaks". when geniuses~のwhen以下は、Galton's Victorian ageを説明したものですか? "were in full flower"はテニスンの作品か何かでしょうか? "long hair, great black hats, capes, and cloaks"はヴァージニア・ウルフの風貌? 2) Moreover, the accolade may not only be bestowed but also withdrawn by experts and the public, as the prize-winning and sensationally successful British installation artist Damien Hirst discovered. ここの、as~Damien Hirst discoveredの個所は、ダミアン・ハーストが見出したとして、と読むのでしょうか? よろしくお願いいたします。 *この英文の後に以下の英文が続きます。 In response to devastating reviews of his inaugural exhibition of paintings in 2009, Hirst vowed to continue painting and improve. "I don't believe in genius. I believe in freedom. I think anyone can do it. Anyone can be like Rembrandt", Hirst claimed. "With practice, you can make great paintings."

  • 英文についての質問です。

    To obtain his data on eminence, Galton made the reasonable but problematic assumption that high reputation is an accurate indicator of high ability. He then analysed the records of achievements and honours set out in three printed sources: a leading contemporary biographical handbook, Men of the Time; the obituary of the year 1868 published in The Times newspaper; and obituaries published in England going back into the past. If he were working today, he would no doubt have analysed lists of Nobel prize-winners, too. On this basis, Galton arbitrarily defined an 'eminent' person as someone who had achieved a position attained by only 250 persons in each million, that is one person in every 4,000.(He argued for this number poetically, since 4,000 is perhaps the number of stars visible to the naked eye on the most brilliant of starlit nights--'yet we feel it to be an extraordinary distinction to a star to be accounted as the brightest in the sky'.) An ’illustrious’ person--much rarer than an eminent one --was one in a million, even one in many millions. 'They are men whom the whole intelligent part of the nation mourns when they die; who have, or deserve to have, a public funeral; and who rank in future ages as historical characters.' As already noted, Galton left a 'genius' undefined. (Genius by Andrew Robinson) わからない個所を教えてください。 1)Galton arbitrarily defined an 'eminent' person as someone who had achieved a position attained by only 250 persons in each million, that is one person in every 4,000. ここはどうやって訳すのでしょうか? ゴルトンは到達された地位を成し遂げたある人として”著名な”人を任意で定義しました、と前半部分は述べているように思うのですが、by only 250~がわかりません。 2)yet we feel it to be an extraordinary distinction to a star to be accounted as the brightest in the sky' itは何を指しているのですか? to be accounted as the brightest in the skyの部分ですか? 3) and who rank in future ages as historical characters. 最後の段落にある英文ですが、どのように読むのでしょうか? 長文になってしまい、申し訳ありません。 よろしくお願いいたします。

  • 英文についての質問です。(1)

    Intriguing though Galton's eminent families are, they decidedly do not demonstrate the inheritance of genius. For there is basic flaw in his analysis: his criteria for genius (which, of course, Galton never defines) are not strict enough, allowing in too many high achievers whose distinction may be considerable but is far from enduringly exceptional. Hereditary Genius is, so to speak, closer to the Queen's honours list than the Nobel prize. (Genius by Andrew Robinson) 1) his criteria for genius (which, of course, Galton never defines) are not strict enough, allowing in too many high achievers whose distinction may be considerable but is far from enduringly exceptional. considerableは"かなりの"という意味ですか? but is~はbut(distinction) is~ですか? この英文はnot~but構文なのでしょうか? 2) Hereditary Genius is, so to speak, closer to the Queen's honours list than the Nobel prize. 遺伝性の天才は、いわばノーベル賞よりも女王の叙爵者一覧に近い(?)とはどういう意味ですか? よろしくお願いいたします。

  • 英文についての質問です。

    Galton, who coined the phrase 'nature versus nurture', would certainly have disagreed. He was an exceptionally intelligent member of the Darwin family; his maternal grandfather, Erasmus Darwin, was the paternal grandfather of Charles Darwin. It was the publication of his first cousin's book about natural selection, On the Origin of Species, in 1859, which persuaded Galton that high intelligence and genius must be inherited. By ranking the abilities of past and present 'men of eminence'--mainly but not exclusively Englishmen--and searching for the occurrence of eminence in families, Galton hoped to prove his thesis, as set out in the opening words of his introductory chapter: I propose to show in this book that a man's natural abilities are derived by inheritance, under exactly the same limitations as are the form and physical features of the whole organic world. (以前に投稿していた"Genius"の英文の続きになります。) わからない個所を教えてください。 1)Galton, who coined the phrase 'nature versus nurture', would certainly have disagreed. 『氏か育ちか』というフレーズを作ったゴルトンは、確かに人と意見が合わなかったでしょう(?) would have p.p.になっているのは仮定法の表現なのでしょうか? 2) By ranking the abilities of past and present 'men of eminence'--mainly but not exclusively Englishmen--and searching for the occurrence of eminence in families, Galton hoped to prove his thesis, as set out in the opening words of his introductory chapter: この英文のmainly but not exclusively Englishmenの個所は 「主にもっぱらイギリス人の男性を除いて」と読むのでしょうか? (but notは~を除いて、ですか?) his thesisとは” high intelligence and genius must be inherited”ですか? それとも 'nature versus nurture'? 3)under exactly the same limitations as are the form and physical    features of the whole organic world この英文がわかりません。 under exactly the same limitations ---全く同じ限界の下で? asは文法的にどういう意味で置かれているのでしょうか? どのように読むのでしょうか? よろしくお願いいたします。

  • 英文についての質問です。

    That unavoidable imprecision persists, despite a somewhat improved understanding of the ingredients of genius and its patterns during the 20th century. 'I have always been wary of attempts to generalize about genius....There seems to be no common denominator except uncommonness', writes the historian Roy Porter in his foreword to Genius and the Mind, a collection of academic 'studies of creativity and temperament', edited by the psychologist Andrew Steptoe, published in 1998. 'And yet,.... as a historian I cannot help being fascinated by genius.' The imprecision is reflected in the varying stature of those discussed in this book, of whom a mere handful are undisputed geniuses like Mozart and Einstein. There cannot be a consensus on exactly who is, and is not, a genius. Although certain individuals may be widely accepted as geniuses, the world itself resists precise definition. Indeed, this paradox is part of genius's allure--to academics studying genius almost as much as to Dr Johnson's 'every man'. 内容が掴めないところがあります。 1) There seems to be no common denominator except uncommonness 天才の共通点は非凡である、ということのみである、ということですか? 2)The imprecision is reflected in the varying stature of those discussed in this book, of whom a mere handful are undisputed geniuses like Mozart and Einstein. of whomの文法的な用法がよくわかりません。(なぜof whomを使っているのか。whomの用法がいまいちわかりません) a mere handful are undisputed geniuses like Mozart and Einstein (ほんの一握りなのはモーツァルトやアインシュタインのような議論の余地のない天才たち?) 全体の意味が掴めないのですが、 天才の定義というのは不正確である。この本の中で議論される天才たちの偉業にそのこと(不正確さ)が反映されている?(このあと後半のa mere handful are undisputed geniuses~がどのように意味としてつながるのでしょうか?) thoseはgeniusesですか? *"this paradox"はAlthough certain individuals may be widely accepted as geniuses, the world itself resists precise definition.を指しているのだと思うのですが、なぜこういうパラドックスが起きてしまのかはよくわかりません。 お手数をおかけしてしまいますが、よろしくお願いいたします。

  • 英文についての質問です(2)

    (1)からの続きです。 ・・・・Since a genius, whatever it be, is like fire in the flint, only to be produced by collision with a proper subject, it is the business of every man to try whether his faculties may not happily cooperate with his desires, and since they whose proficiency he admires, knew their own force only by the event, he needs but engage in the same undertaking, with equal spirit, and may reasonably hope for equal success. 1)全体の構造はどのようになっているのでしょうか? Since a genius~=~なので it is the business of every man ~=~である and since they whose proficiency =~なので he needs but engage ~、and may reasonably hope =~であり、~である というのが大まかな形ですか?(sinceは"~なので"の意味?) 2)Since a genius, whatever it be, is like fire in the flint, only to be produced by collision with a proper subjectについて whatever it be・・・・itはgeniusを指しているのでしょうか? 天才はどんなものであっても? Since a genius~is like fire in the flint・・・火打石の火のようであるので only to ・・・~するだけで? only to be produced by collision with a proper subject ふさわしい主題に衝突することによって生じるだけで 3)it is the business of every man to try whether his faculties may not happily cooperate with his desires whetherは"・・・かどうか"の意味ですか? それは彼の能力が彼の願望とうまく引き合わないかもしれないかどうかを試すすべての人の仕事であり 4)and since they whose proficiency he admires, knew their own force only by the event そして彼が熟達を称賛する彼らは彼ら自身の力をイベントよってのみ知っていたので (内容が掴みにくいです) 5)he needs but engage in the same undertaking, with equal spirit, and may reasonably hope for equal success. needsは副詞の是非とも、という意味ですか? engageが原形になっているのはなぜなのでしょうか? 彼は同じ仕事に、対等な精神で、是非ともしかし携わり、そして対等な成功を道理に従って望むかもしれない (ここも内容がとりにくいです) 質問がたくさんになってしまいましたが、よろしくお願いいたします。

  • 英文についての質問です。

    Despite his fame and influence, Pablo Picasso's stature as a genius is still debated, for example, as is that of Virginia Woolf in literature. In science, Stephen Hawking, although often regarded by the general public as a contemporary genius comparable with Einstein, is not accepted as such by the physicists who fully understand his work; they regard Hawking as only one of several current luminaries in the field of cosmology. as is that of Virginia Woolf in literatureのthatは何を指しているのでしょうか? stature as a genius ですか? as only one of several current luminaries in the field of cosmologyのonly oneの個所は"only one"で"唯一の"の意味よりもonlyは"~に過ぎない"の意味にとって"~の一人に過ぎない"となるのでしょうか?

  • 英文の和訳2

    またまたすみません。 今回も、英文の訳を教えてください。 お願いします! 1.It is good to live a busy and honest life,for no one can be happy who is useless, and idleness makes all sorts of things wrong. >It is good to live a busy and honest lifeの意味はわかるのですが、 その後の文の意味、特にuselessとidleness の間にandがあるのにコンマが入る意味がわかりません。 2.It may be thought that the field of the unknown has been exhausted in engineering and that there is nothing left for the inquiring mind, but this comment is only made by those who do not see for themselves. >but this comment is only made by those who do not see for themselves の文の訳は分かるのですが、そこから前のところがさっぱり分かりません。 ちなみに、the inquiring mind=研究心のある人、だそうです。 長い文で読みづらくてごめんなさい。 スペルは一応確認しましたがもしかしたら打ち間違いがあるかもしれません。 おかしいときは、遠慮無く言ってください。

  • 英文についての質問です。

    I have heard many a little sonneteer called a fine genius. There is not a heroic scribbler in the nation that has not his admirers who think him a great genius; and as for your smatterers in tragedy, there is scarce a man among them who is not cried up by one or other for a prodigious genius. 1) I have heard many a little sonneteer called a fine genius.について many a little の部分がわかりません。少しが多い? 2)There is not a heroic scribbler in the nation that has not his admirers who think him a great genius;について 彼を偉大な天才だと思う彼の称賛者たちがいる国家には誇張した三文文士がいる、という意味ですか?(二重否定で肯定の意味になりますか?:There is not~、the nation that has not~) 3) there is scarce a man among them who is not cried up by one or other for a prodigious genius.について there is scarce a man~ は、”~という人(man)は稀だ”という意味ですか? (scarceとa manの間で切れる) among them・・・themはyour smatterersですか? 桁外れの天才について?(forの意味がとれません)、ひとりや他の人たちによって褒めたたえられない人はなかまじりの人たちの間では稀である? 意味がとれないです。どのように意味をとるとよいのでしょうか? よろしくお願いいたします。