MTI备考之M君讲翻译⑮

M君 MTI资料与资讯 2022-10-02

大家好，我是M君，一个集经验

与才华于一身的良心小编。

医疗改革这个话题我们并不陌生，这是一件关乎民生的大事。但是在美国，政府想要进行医疗改革似乎并不是一件容易的事情，这还与医疗市场的发展有关。一些国家采取医疗改革却遭遇失败，这又是为什么呢？今天的文章，让我们一起聚焦医疗改革，更有长达九条的翻译要点等着你哦！赶快跟着M君，一起翻起来吧！

Day Day Up

原文：

Healthcare Reform

During the past two decades, all of the industrialized nations have enacted some form of healthcare reform. America is no exception. Just a few years ago, the U.S. was consumed by a vigorous public debate about healthcare. In the end, the debate reaffirmed that the U.S. would retain its essentially market-based system. Instead of reform imposed from the top down, the American healthcare system underwent some rather profound self-reform, driven by powerfu lmarket forces. The market--not the government--managed to wring inflation out of the private healthcare market.

Today, it appears that U.S. healthcare costs are again on the rise. At the same time, American patients--like patients elsewhere--are becoming more vocal about the restrictions many face in their healthcare plans. Talk of government-led reform is once again in the air.

We must think twice, though, before embarking on "reform" if that means imposing further restrictions on our healthcare markets. The more sensible course is to introduce policies that make the market work better--that is, to the advantage of consumers. I base this argument on our company's decades of experience in healthcare systems around the world, which has given us a unique global perspective on the right and wrong way to reform healthcare. The wrong way is to impose layer after layer of regulation and restrictions. We have seen this approach tried in many countries, and we have always see it fail--fail to hold down costs, and fail to provide the best quality care. Medicine is changing at so rapid a pace that no government agency or expert commission can keep up with it. Only an open, informed and competitive market can do that. This lesson holds true for the U.S., and for all countries contemplating healthcare reform. Free markets do what governments mean to do--but can't.

（参考译文获取方式在文末等着你！）

翻译要点：

enact 实施

reaffirm 重新确认

self-reform 自我变革

on the rise 呈上涨趋势

think twice 三思而后行

embark on 开始，着手

expert commission 专家委员会

contemplate 打算，盘算

Just a few years ago, the U.S. was consumed by a vigorous public debate about healthcare.
consume一词的本意为“消耗、耗尽、吞噬”，用作被动语态时常常转义为“使着迷、全神贯注”，这里指医疗改革问题吸引了美国全国上下的关注。可考虑译为“（美国）掀起了...”。
In the end, the debate reaffirmed that the U.S. would retain its essentially market-based system.
从retain一词我们可以看出，美国在这场辩论发生之前实施的就是market-based system。因此，翻译此句时可考虑采用增词法加入“原有的...”以使译句所表达的意思更为完整。
Instead of reform imposed from the top down...
reform imposed from the top down指的是从联邦政府到地方的改革，由联邦政府统一制定改革措施，各地方政府参照执行。
The market--not the government--managed to wring inflation out of the private healthcare market.
原句中的主语部分the market--not the government属于被强调的成分，译文如果要保留这一特点的话，可改变句子的主语，并适当调整语序，以更符合汉语的行文习惯。如：该句可采用“...是市场，而不是政府”的句式，也可采用“...是依靠市场，而不是政府来...”的句式来处理。
At the same time, American patients--like patients elsewhere--are becoming more vocal about the restrictions many face in their healthcare plans.
vocal一词的原意为“有声的，声音的”，这里意指“人们发出了抗议或抱怨”，所以可译为“怨声载道”。
Talk of government-led reform is once again in the air.
in the air有“悬而未决”和“在流传中”两种完全不同的意思。要想准确地译出这句话，译者必须把它和上文联系起来看。上文提到，美国的医疗改革是通过市场来推动的，但是目前似乎出了一些问题，因此有人提出疑义，认为是不是应该由政府来领导并推动医疗改革呢？由此我们可以看出，in the air的意思应该是“(某种说法)在流传中”。
The more sensible course is to introduce policies that make the market work better--that is, to the advantage of consumers.
to the advantage of consumers的完整表达方式应为to introduce policies to the advantage of consumers，翻译时应注意将这一省略部分的意义表达清楚。
I base this argument on our company's decades of experience in healthcare systems around the world, which has given us a unique global perspective on the right and wrong way to reform healthcare.
这个英语长句中含有一个由which引导的非限制性定语从句。建议译者在处理此句时将主句和从句分开单独译，否则译文会非常欧化，读上去诘屈聱牙，令人费解。
Only an open, informed and competitive market can do that.
informed一词的原意为“见多识广的、消息灵通的”，主要用于形容人。本句中是用来形容市场的，主要指市场上有关医药发展的信息非常充分且及时。