又中又英——quid pro quo.
Michael Chugani 褚简宁
2021-05-11 04:16 HKT
字體大小
Just two weeks ago, I was a proponent (supporter) of coronavirus vaccines. In my previous column, I urged Hong Kong people to get vaccinated. I am no longer a vaccine proponent. It’s not because I mistrust the vaccines. It’s because there is no government quid pro quo for vaccinated people. The government appealed to people to vaccinate but there was no trade-off. Why should people get vaccinated if those who do are treated no differently from those who don’t? The expression “quid pro quo” means something you receive in return for something you have done. The expression “trade-off” means you do something you don’t like or want in return for something you want.
In countries such as Israel, the fully-vaccinated have a green pass that allows them to attend sports and other events. This is quid pro quo. But until last week, even fully-vaccinated Hong Kong people had to quarantine at a government centre for 21 days if just one mutant coronavirus case is found in the building where they live. This is ridiculous. The government quarantine centres have tiny rooms that lack bare essentials such as Wi-Fi or freshly-cooked hot meals. Even children must quarantine for 21 days. Hundreds of people, including children and fully-vaccinated people, were quarantined for 21 days in the past two weeks after just a single case of a mutant virus infection was found in a building.
The expressions “bare essentials” or “bare necessities” mean things that are absolutely necessary such as fresh air. In today’s world, Wi-Fi is a bare essential. Last week the government relaxed its rules after quarantined people, including vaccinated ones, complained. Most experts agree vaccinated people should be treated differently. But so-called expert Leung Chi-chiu insisted even vaccinated people must quarantine for 21 days. He is a showboat. A “showboat” is a person who likes to attract attention or admiration. The government last week relaxed rules for the fully-vaccinated but they must still quarantine for a shorter period. Why? The fully-vaccinated deserve a trade-off.
＊＊＊＊＊
才不过两个星期之前，我是新冠肺炎疫苗的拥护者（proponent）。在我前一个专栏中，我力劝香港人接种疫苗。我现在不再是疫苗的拥护者（proponent）了，并不因为我不信任那些疫苗，而是因为政府对于接种疫苗人士并没有quid pro quo。政府呼吁市民接种疫苗，却没有任何trade-off。若然那些接种人士跟其他没有接种人士的待遇毫无差别，那人们又为何要接种疫苗呢？习语“quid pro quo”即你因为做某事而得到的报酬或回报；习语“trade-off”即指你权衡过后，为了抵换一样你想要的东西，去做某些你不喜欢或不想要的事。
在一些国家如以色列，全剂量接种疫苗者可得到绿色通行证，获许出席赛事及其他活动——这就是等价交换的回报（quid pro quo）。然而，直至上星期，就连已接种两剂疫苗的香港人，要是所住的大厦有一宗新冠变种病毒的确诊个案，仍然要在政府的检疫中心接受二十一天隔离。这真是荒谬至极。政府的隔离检疫中心房间狭小，缺乏基本必需品（bare essentials），例如Wi-Fi或新鲜烹调的热食。就连小童亦须隔离二十一天。在过去两周，数以百计的人，包括小童与已打了两针疫苗的人，只要所住的大厦仅发现一宗变种病毒感染，就得隔离二十一天。
习语“bare essentials”或“bare necessities”都解作最基本的必需品，例如新鲜空气。在今时今日的社会，Wi-Fi已是生活必需品（bare essential）。上星期，当那些接受隔离检疫，包括已打针的市民投诉过后，政府终于放宽措施。大部份专家都认同，接种疫苗人士应享有不同的待遇。但那个所谓的专家梁子超，却坚持相关人士即使已接种疫苗，仍必须隔离二十一天。他是个showboat。A “showboat”是指爱出风头、爱卖弄来吸引注意的人。政府上星期就已接种两剂疫苗人士放宽措施，但他们仍须隔离检疫，只是为期较短。为何是这样呢？那些全剂量接种疫苗者好应得到一个相称的回报（trade-off）。
中译：七刻
Michael Chugani 褚简宁
In countries such as Israel, the fully-vaccinated have a green pass that allows them to attend sports and other events. This is quid pro quo. But until last week, even fully-vaccinated Hong Kong people had to quarantine at a government centre for 21 days if just one mutant coronavirus case is found in the building where they live. This is ridiculous. The government quarantine centres have tiny rooms that lack bare essentials such as Wi-Fi or freshly-cooked hot meals. Even children must quarantine for 21 days. Hundreds of people, including children and fully-vaccinated people, were quarantined for 21 days in the past two weeks after just a single case of a mutant virus infection was found in a building.
The expressions “bare essentials” or “bare necessities” mean things that are absolutely necessary such as fresh air. In today’s world, Wi-Fi is a bare essential. Last week the government relaxed its rules after quarantined people, including vaccinated ones, complained. Most experts agree vaccinated people should be treated differently. But so-called expert Leung Chi-chiu insisted even vaccinated people must quarantine for 21 days. He is a showboat. A “showboat” is a person who likes to attract attention or admiration. The government last week relaxed rules for the fully-vaccinated but they must still quarantine for a shorter period. Why? The fully-vaccinated deserve a trade-off.
＊＊＊＊＊
才不过两个星期之前，我是新冠肺炎疫苗的拥护者（proponent）。在我前一个专栏中，我力劝香港人接种疫苗。我现在不再是疫苗的拥护者（proponent）了，并不因为我不信任那些疫苗，而是因为政府对于接种疫苗人士并没有quid pro quo。政府呼吁市民接种疫苗，却没有任何trade-off。若然那些接种人士跟其他没有接种人士的待遇毫无差别，那人们又为何要接种疫苗呢？习语“quid pro quo”即你因为做某事而得到的报酬或回报；习语“trade-off”即指你权衡过后，为了抵换一样你想要的东西，去做某些你不喜欢或不想要的事。
在一些国家如以色列，全剂量接种疫苗者可得到绿色通行证，获许出席赛事及其他活动——这就是等价交换的回报（quid pro quo）。然而，直至上星期，就连已接种两剂疫苗的香港人，要是所住的大厦有一宗新冠变种病毒的确诊个案，仍然要在政府的检疫中心接受二十一天隔离。这真是荒谬至极。政府的隔离检疫中心房间狭小，缺乏基本必需品（bare essentials），例如Wi-Fi或新鲜烹调的热食。就连小童亦须隔离二十一天。在过去两周，数以百计的人，包括小童与已打了两针疫苗的人，只要所住的大厦仅发现一宗变种病毒感染，就得隔离二十一天。
习语“bare essentials”或“bare necessities”都解作最基本的必需品，例如新鲜空气。在今时今日的社会，Wi-Fi已是生活必需品（bare essential）。上星期，当那些接受隔离检疫，包括已打针的市民投诉过后，政府终于放宽措施。大部份专家都认同，接种疫苗人士应享有不同的待遇。但那个所谓的专家梁子超，却坚持相关人士即使已接种疫苗，仍必须隔离二十一天。他是个showboat。A “showboat”是指爱出风头、爱卖弄来吸引注意的人。政府上星期就已接种两剂疫苗人士放宽措施，但他们仍须隔离检疫，只是为期较短。为何是这样呢？那些全剂量接种疫苗者好应得到一个相称的回报（trade-off）。
中译：七刻
Michael Chugani 褚简宁
更多文章