解決済み

英文を訳して下さい。

  • 困ってます
  • 質問No.9556140
  • 閲覧数15
  • ありがとう数1
  • 気になる数0
  • 回答数1
  • コメント数0

お礼率 89% (2421/2709)

The delegates of the Commonwealth and British Government had mixed thoughts on the treaty, with some seeing the French policy as being greedy and vindictive. Lloyd George and his private secretary Philip Kerr believed in the treaty, although they also felt that the French would keep Europe in a constant state of turmoil by attempting to enforce the treaty. Delegate Harold Nicolson wrote "are we making a good peace?", while General Jan Smuts (a member of the South African delegation) wrote to Lloyd-George, before the signing, that the treaty was unstable and declared "Are we in our sober senses or suffering from shellshock? What has become of Wilson's 14 points?" He wanted the Germans not be made to sign at the "point of the bayonet". Smuts issued a statement condemning the treaty and regretting that the promises of "a new international order and a fairer, better world are not written in this treaty". Lord Robert Cecil said that many within the Foreign Office were disappointed by the treaty. The treaty received widespread approval from the general public. Bernadotte Schmitt wrote that the "average Englishman ... thought Germany got only what it deserved" as a result of the treaty. However, public opinion changed as German complaints mounted.
The surrendering of the German High Seas Fleet following the armistice, its internment, and eventual scuttling at Scapa Flow meant that Britain's primary war goal was achieved prior to the signing of the treaty. As a result, British policy towards Germany began diverging from France's almost from the moment the guns fell silent and focused on establishing Germany as a bulwark against the threat posed by the new Soviet Union.
By the 1930s, Lloyd George's position on the treaty has changed. In 1938, he published his memoir titled The Truth About the Peace Treaties, in which he repudiated the terms of the treaty that bore his signature. Prime Minister Ramsay MacDonald, following the German re-militarisation of the Rhineland in 1936, stated that he was "pleased" that the treaty was "vanishing", expressing his hope that the French had been taught a "severe lesson".

質問者が選んだベストアンサー

  • 回答No.1

ベストアンサー率 81% (5754/7095)

英語 カテゴリマスター
>The delegates of the Commonwealth and British Government had mixed thoughts on the treaty, with some seeing the French policy as being greedy and vindictive. Lloyd George and his private secretary Philip Kerr believed in the treaty, although they also felt that the French would keep Europe in a constant state of turmoil by attempting to enforce the treaty. Delegate Harold Nicolson wrote "are we making a good peace?", while General Jan Smuts (a member of the South African delegation) wrote to Lloyd-George, before the signing, that the treaty was unstable and declared "Are we in our sober senses or suffering from shellshock? What has become of Wilson's 14 points?"
⇒英連邦と英国政府の代表は、この条約について意見が混ざり合って(似て)おり、フランスの政策は貪欲で有毒であると見なしていた。ロイド=ジョージと彼の私設秘書であるフィリップ・カーはこの条約を信じていたが、同時に条約の実施を試みることでフランス人がヨーロッパを混乱状態に陥れてしまう(かも知れない)と感じた。ハロルド・ニコルソン議員は、「我々は良い平和を築いているのだろうか?」と書いているし、ジャン・スマッツ将軍(南アフリカ代表団の一員)は調印前にロイド=ジョージに書簡を送り、条約は不安定であると書き、「我々の感覚はしらふ(酔っていない・まとも)ですか、それとも砲弾ショック(戦争神経症)にでも陥っているのではありませんか? ウィルソンの「14か条」はどうなったのでしょうか?」と述べた。

>He wanted the Germans not be made to sign at the "point of the bayonet". Smuts issued a statement condemning the treaty and regretting that the promises of "a new international order and a fairer, better world are not written in this treaty". Lord Robert Cecil said that many within the Foreign Office were disappointed by the treaty. The treaty received widespread approval from the general public. Bernadotte Schmitt wrote that the "average Englishman ... thought Germany got only what it deserved" as a result of the treaty. However, public opinion changed as German complaints mounted.
⇒彼は、ドイツ軍が「銃剣を突きつけられて」署名しないことを望んだ。スマッツは、条約を非難する声明を発表して、「新しい国際秩序、およびより公正な、より良い世界」の約束は「この条約には書かれていない」、と嘆いた。ロバート・セシル卿は、外務省内の多くの者がこの条約に失望していると述べた。(しかし)この条約は一般大衆からは是認され広く認められた。ベルナドッテ・シュミットは、この条約の結果として、「平均的な英国人は…ドイツはそれにふさわしいものを受け取っただけだと思っている」と書いた。しかし、ドイツの苦情が積み重なるにつれて、世論が変わっていった。

>The surrendering of the German High Seas Fleet following the armistice, its internment, and eventual scuttling at Scapa Flow* meant that Britain's primary war goal was achieved prior to the signing of the treaty. As a result, British policy towards Germany began diverging from France's almost from the moment the guns fell silent and focused on establishing Germany as a bulwark against the threat posed by the new Soviet Union.
⇒ドイツ海軍艦隊の停戦、拘留、そしてスカパ・フロー*からの最終的な退散に伴う降伏は、条約に署名する前に(すでに)英国の主要な戦争目標が達成されたことを意味した。その結果、ドイツに対する英国の政策は、銃口を引き下げた瞬間からほぼ完全にフランスの政策から逸脱し始め、新しいソ連の脅威に対する防壁としてドイツを(安定)確立することに焦点を当てるようになった。
*Scapa Flow「スカパ・フロー」:スコットランド北岸沖の英国海軍基地。

>By the 1930s, Lloyd George's position on the treaty has changed. In 1938, he published his memoir titled The Truth About the Peace Treaties, in which he repudiated the terms of the treaty that bore his signature. Prime Minister Ramsay MacDonald, following the German re-militarisation of the Rhineland in 1936, stated that he was "pleased" that the treaty was "vanishing", expressing his hope that the French had been taught a "severe lesson".
⇒1930年代ごろ、条約に関するロイド=ジョージの立場が変わった。1938年には、「平和条約についての真実」と題する回想録を発表して、自分の署名のある条約の条文を否認した。ラムゼイ・マクドナルド首相は、1936年にラインラントのドイツ軍再武装化を受けて、条約が「消滅しかかっている」ことを「喜んだ」と述べ、フランス人が「厳しい教訓」を教えられた、との希望(的観測)を表明した。
お礼コメント
iwano_aoi

お礼率 89% (2421/2709)

回答ありがとうございました。
投稿日時 - 2018-11-12 21:40:23
AIエージェント「あい」

こんにちは。AIエージェントの「あい」です。
あなたの悩みに、OKWAVE 3,500万件のQ&Aを分析して最適な回答をご提案します。

この言い回しでうまく伝えられた!あなたの知識や経験を教えて!
このQ&Aにはまだコメントがありません。
あなたの思ったこと、知っていることをここにコメントしてみましょう。

その他の関連するQ&A、テーマをキーワードで探す

キーワードでQ&A、テーマを検索する

特集


感謝指数をマイページで確認!

ピックアップ

ページ先頭へ