【正文】 第二十四屆韓素音翻譯競(jìng)賽英譯漢參考譯文 第 24 屆韓素音翻譯大賽英譯漢譯文 鐵人龔學(xué)眾同志 我把英譯漢翻譯如下，并給學(xué)生搞過講座。翻譯的理解，各有不同。我的譯文僅做參考： It’ s Time to Rethink ‘ Temporary 重新審視“臨時(shí)性建筑” We tend to view architecture as permanent, as aspiring to the status of monuments. And that kind of architecture has its place. But so does architecture of a different sort. 人們傾向于將建筑視作“永恒的”并祈求其具有紀(jì)念碑般的地位。而這種建筑的確有其地位。但是，其他類型的建筑也有其地位。 For most of the first decade of the 2020s, architecture was about the statement building. Whether it was a controversial memorial or an impossibly luxurious condo tower, architecture’s raison d’234。tre was to make a lasting impression. Architecture has always been synonymous with permanence, but should it be? 二十一世紀(jì)前十年的大部分時(shí)間里，建筑學(xué)研究的是 “宣言書”式的建筑。無論一個(gè)建筑是一座頗有爭(zhēng)議的紀(jì)念碑，抑或是奢華難測(cè)的公寓樓， 建筑學(xué)的根本宗旨是給人以永恒的印象。雖然建筑與“永恒”一直同宗同義，但是建筑就應(yīng)當(dāng)“永恒”嗎？ In the last few years, the opposite may be true. Architectural billings are at an alltime low. Major missions are few and far between. The architecture that’s been making news is fast and fleeting: popup shops, food carts, marketplaces, performance spaces. And while many manifestations of the genre have jumped the shark (., a Toys R Us popup shop), there is undeniable opportunity in the temporary: it is an apt response to a civilization in flux. And like many prevailing trends — collaborative consumption (., “sharing”), munity gardens, barter and trade — “temporary” is so retro that it’s bee radical. 過去若干年， 情況或許相反。建筑支出一直較低。大規(guī)模的建造工程微乎其微。引人注意的建筑工程進(jìn)展快、費(fèi)時(shí)短：例如時(shí)尚潮店、食品小車、集貿(mào)市場(chǎng)、表演場(chǎng)所等等。 雖然這一風(fēng)格的建筑風(fēng)光不再 —— 例如“玩具反斗城”就是一例，然而，臨時(shí)性建筑仍有其公認(rèn)的機(jī)遇：它是對(duì)急劇變化中的文明的一種敏捷的反應(yīng)。恰如諸多廣為流行的時(shí)尚一樣， “集體消費(fèi)”（又稱“共享”）、“社區(qū)花園”、“易貨市場(chǎng)”等如雨后春筍一般。“臨時(shí)性建筑”再受青睞，頗有人人趨之若鶩之勢(shì)。 In November, I had the pleasure of moderating Motopia, a panel at University of Southern California’s School of Architecture, with Robert Kronenburg, an architect, professor at University of Liverpool and portable/temporary/mobile guru. Author of a shelf full of books on the topic, including “Flexible: Architecture that Responds to Change,” “Portable Architecture: Design and Technology” and “Houses in Motion: The Genesis,” Kronenburg is a man obsessed. 十一月時(shí)，鄙人有幸與建筑學(xué)家、利物浦大學(xué)教授、便攜式、臨時(shí)性、移動(dòng)式建筑宗師羅伯特 .克農(nóng)伯格一起主持了“城托邦” —— “城托邦”是南加州大學(xué)建筑學(xué)院的一個(gè)專家委員會(huì)?？宿r(nóng)伯格是一位癡迷專注的建筑學(xué)家：在建筑學(xué)上著作比肩書架，例如《靈活性 —— 適應(yīng)變革的建筑學(xué)》、《便攜式建筑 —— 設(shè)計(jì)與技術(shù)》以及《變化中的房屋 —— 創(chuàng)世紀(jì)》等。 Mobility has an innate potency, Kronenburg believes. Movable environments are more dynamic than static ones, so why should architecture be so static? The idea that perhaps all buildings shouldn’t aspire to permanence represents a huge shift for architecture. Without that burden, architects, designers, builders and developers can take advantage of and implement current technologies faster. Architecture could be reusable, recyclable and sustainable. Recast in this way, it could better solve seemingly unsolvable problems. And still succeed in creating a sense of place. 克農(nóng)伯格認(rèn)為，“流動(dòng)性”是一種固有的力量。 動(dòng)態(tài)的環(huán)境比靜止的環(huán)境根據(jù)有活力，因此，建筑為什么么一定要靜止呢？所有建筑或許都不應(yīng)該追求“永恒”的觀點(diǎn)，代表了建筑界的一個(gè)巨大的轉(zhuǎn)變。沒有了這一桎梏，建筑師、設(shè)計(jì)師、建筑商和開發(fā)商可以更快遞充分利用并實(shí)施現(xiàn)有技術(shù)。建筑從而可以再利用、再循環(huán)并可持續(xù)。以這種理念重新塑造的建筑，會(huì)更好地解決貌似不可解決的問題，并仍然可以成功地創(chuàng)造一種建筑區(qū)域感。 In his presentation, Kronenburg offered examples of how portable, temporary architecture has been used in every aspect of human activity, including health care (from Florence Nightingale’s redesigned hospitals to the Airstream trailers used as mobile medical clinics during the Kennedy Administration), housing (from yurts to tents to architect Shigeru Ban’s postearthquake paper houses), culture and merce (stage sets and Great Exhibition buildings, centuriesold Bouqinistes along the Seine, mobile food, art and music venues offering everything from the recording of stories to tasty cr232。me brulees.) 在其報(bào)告中，克農(nóng)伯格列舉了很多例子，涉及到便攜式臨時(shí)建筑是如何被廣泛地利用在人類生活的方方面面的。這些應(yīng)用包括健康中心（從 弗洛倫斯 南丁格爾 重新設(shè)計(jì)的醫(yī)院，到肯尼迪當(dāng)局執(zhí)政期間用作移動(dòng)診所的“清風(fēng)房車”）、住房（從圓頂帳篷到帳篷再到阪茂設(shè)計(jì)的震后紙質(zhì)房屋）、文化和商業(yè)（舞臺(tái)及萬國工業(yè)博覽會(huì)建筑、塞納河兩岸存在了幾百年之久的舊書販子、提供從口述故事錄音到可口的法式焦糖奶酪等應(yīng)有盡有服務(wù)的移動(dòng)式食品攤、藝術(shù)和音樂場(chǎng)地）等設(shè)施。 Kronenburg made a pelling argument that the experimentation inherent in such structures challenges preconceived notions about what buildings can and should be. The strategy of temporality, he explained, “adapts to unpredictable demands, provides more for less, and encourages innovation.” And he stressed that it’s tim