Britain had a good claim to be top nation roughly from the Congress of Vienna in 1815 to the first world war, a hundred years that struck a lot of non-Britons as quite enough of a good thing, thank you very much.
-----------------------
我的理解have a good claim就是很确定能声称自己...很有权去这么声称....这么说没人会觉得不对....
这里a hundred years that struck a lot of non-britons as quite enough of a good thing, thank you very much. 的意思是,这一百年实在漫长,让很多非英国人等啊等,就算是好,也实在太久,终于,你们结束了,thank you very much。。。
Still, accept for the sake of argument that the Republican front-runner is correct when he says that God did not create America to be just “one of several equally balanced global powers”. How does he propose
---------------------------------
好,咱们暂且说,这位共和党 front-runner的观点是对的,米国还能再当一百年老大,bla.bla.bla.....那么,how does he propose,就是,他准备怎么办,怎么规划,怎么来达到再称霸一百年的计划。
present American policy in a nutshell
不是简单呈现美国政策,
语气是:这不就是用几乎话概括了下现在的美国政策么。(present这里不是动词)
文中几个地方lz理解了,但是翻译得有些生硬啊(我自己翻译也是,不知道为什么脑子就转不过去了),有几个地方语气也有些不妥。
The first is that however you tart it up, a message of broad continuity makes a nonsense of the Grand Old Party’s shrill disparagement of the incumbent president’s foreign policy.
第一个就是,不管你再怎么修饰,总是遮盖不了共和党对于执政总统的外交政策的轻视乃是一派胡言。
-----------------------------------
这里broad continuity没有翻译出来,
就是,你们共和党玩命地叫唤,说现在总统的外交政策多么sb,结果自己提得总体和人家差不多,都是萧规曹随。。
差不多就这个意思了,你再想办法把tart it up加进去就好了
hitting people and places, such as Osama bin Laden in Pakistan and Anwar al-Awlaki in Yemen
少译了“ hitting people and places”,不然“他打击了像在巴基斯坦的奥萨马-本-拉登和也门的阿瓦尔-奥拉基”感觉不怎么顺还有歧义。
The subtitle of “No Apology”, the book he published in 2010, is “the case for American greatness”.
----------
the subtitle is “the case for American greatness”
书名叫“no apology” 副标题叫“the case for American greatness”