美聯社(AP)專訪馬總統之報導爭議 與 美聯社的回應: what does it mean by "So, do I understand you correctly that..." (updated on 11/7)

我本來不想寫這個的(已經很久沒寫政治相關新聞了!) ,但, 有人問我對這次AP新聞的看法,聯合報這篇和我看法差不多,那就是: 為什麼一定要用英文回答呢???
這是聯合報的報導: 觀察站／馬總統愛用英文受訪，常被曲解…

兩年來，總統接受外媒專訪出包，美聯社並非頭一回，從墨西哥太陽報、華爾街日報、CNN等各大媒體專訪，大小狀況不斷，馬總統必須檢討的可能是，為何講過多次的兩岸論述，總是在用英文受訪時，被老外「誤解扭曲」？ (聯合報)

就像該報導說的,這不是第一次被誤解, 所以我也就沒特別去看詳細的歧見在哪. 一直到今天從我常去的部落格之一(MJ:簡單說英文),循線(連結)看到所謂的中英對照, 覺得這中文翻譯不大對.

我把奇怪的地方用紅色標示. 如果是我翻, 我會翻成以下:

AP: So, do I understand you correctly that, if economic issues are resolved during your second term, during that term, you might move on to political questions?

我的翻譯: (所以),如果我正確解讀你剛剛說的話, 如果在第二任(總統任)期內經濟問題都解決了,屆時你可能會與對岸討論政治問題?

我認為該報導翻譯怪的地方是,AP明明是在求證,看他解讀是否正確,這翻譯卻翻成我完全了解您的意思.

最後,恕我駑鈍,我看不出第一點關於AP報導統一問題上, 有什麼問題耶? 看得懂得人可以解釋一下嗎?
-----

AP: Would the policy that you’re spelling out carry through a second term, were you to be reelected? Is just this period that you’re talking about—of economic outreach, travel back and forth but not political dialogue—does that carry through a second administration, or is that a commitment that you made for the first administration?



President Ma: Well, it depends on how fast we move with our relations with the mainland. For instance, now, we are almost two-and-a-half years into my presidency and we have achieved 14 agreements with the mainland. But we haven’t finished the important ones, for instance, an investment guarantee agreement, a dispute settlement agreement. And for our trade, in terms of tariff concessions and non-tariff barriers, we have only reached the first phase on the negotiations—that is what we call the “early harvest.” So the two sides will return to the negotiating table next year to discuss the rest of the trade and other relationships. So we still have our hands full with all these economic issues because, you see, the two sides have a trade volume of overUS＄100 billion and we haven’t got any mechanism for dispute settlement and for a number of things that will exist between two normal economic entities. That is exactly what we want to do. We are not intentionally delaying the talks of political issues, but certainly, the economic ones are more important to people here, and people also support the idea of economy first, politics later.


AP: So, do I understand you correctly that, if economic issues are resolved during your second term, during that term, you might move on to political questions?

President Ma: As I said, it depends on how fast we move, whether these issues are satisfactorily resolved, and of course all the policies regarding the mainland are very sensitive, and we certainly will also make decisions on generally whether the decision receives popular support. (後略)

美聯社：如果您贏得下一屆總統大選，您將會延續您剛所提出的政策嗎？也就是您在下一任也會堅持經濟開放、兩岸觀光，但是不觸及政治對話，或者這只是你在第一任的承諾？



總統：這個問題將視我國與中國大陸關係進展的速度而定。舉例來說，目前在我就職以來的兩年半之中，我們已經與中國大陸簽署14項協議，但更重要的議題尚未完成協商，例如兩岸投資保障協議及兩岸解決貿易爭端協議等。在貿易層面，關稅減讓及非貿易障礙的議題上，我們只進入第一階段的協商，也就是所謂「早期收穫」的部分。因此，兩岸明年將會回到談判桌上繼續討論貿易等相關的議題，光是這些經濟的問題，就會讓政府忙得不可開交。你看，兩岸的貿易額高達一千億美元，但是目前雙方卻沒有任何機制解決貿易爭端，這就是我們目前正在著手的事情。我們並不是刻意拖延政治對話，但是經濟議題對於台灣民眾來說更為重要，因此民眾也支持政府先解決經濟問題，再討論政治議題的立場。

美聯社：我完全了解您的意思，如果經濟的議題在您擔任總統的第二任期都妥善解決，您會進一步與對岸討論政治議題嗎？

總統：正如我所說的，這將視雙方進展的速度，端視以上的問題能否得到滿意的解決，當然牽涉到大陸的政策都相當敏感，而我們施政的決策將會依循大多數的民意支持所進行

----
10/23/2010:  美聯社回應馬政府的抗議如下. 重點有二:
AP responds to Taiwan government's protest 美聯社回應馬政府的抗議表示,AP了解這議題的敏感,但相信AP公平解讀原文.

We understand that this is a very sensitive and important issue for the government and people of Taiwan. We believe that a fair reading of the interview transcript and the article shows that the AP conveyed the essential facts about Ma's views. However, we understand the issues that have led to the complaint, " said John Daniszewski, the AP's senior Managing Editor.

另一個重點: AP強調雙方歧見只是對訪問重點(matters of emphasis)不同.

Instead of an apology, the article said that "the government of Taiwan has objected to an AP dispatch based on an interview Tuesday with President Ma Ying-jeou, saying that certain paraphrases used in the article distorted the president's message and contained errors of emphasis and fact.

               ..........

"The objections cited by Chiang and other government officials were mainly matters of emphasis," Daniszewski was quoted as saying.

----
延伸閱讀:
火大,總統府在澄清什麼? 這是上次總統對外電談到統一問題的回應. 看來是不是有種似曾相似的感覺呢?