[2012.02.18] 出生困难，恢复乏力

引用 contrary 2012-2-20 14:28

沙发？先冒泡~

than its many foes predict 许多敌人预测的那样恐怖
反对者吧，敌人太强了点

A sprawling piece of legislation  这是一项包容广泛的立法
包罗万有/内容繁多？

引用 contrary 2012-2-21 12:52

a better grip on value  因此能让它们“更好地把握价值观。”
把握价值观 好突兀，不知确切意思是啥？

hard calculation about cost  不需要精心考虑开支
精打细算

It was widely believed that  人们普遍相信
believed  认为

signalling that the private sector might well save others from closure.
这意味着私人部门会让其他类似医院不至关门大吉的可能。
这意味着私营部门也可能可以拯救其他医院，让它们不至于倒闭。

on those seeking to compete with NHS services
寻求与NHS的卫生服务竞争的私人单位
seek to  设法/试图

allow experimentation and variation  允许进行实际实验与多样化
允许试验与变革

引用 yannanchen 2012-2-21 22:11

clinicians
不是 clinics

引用 yannanchen 2012-2-21 22:12

因为这一新体系可以让诊所自行安排取舍，使其病人获得更好的待遇”，因此能让它们“更好地把握价值观。”

因为......因此， 配搭不对

引用 yannanchen 2012-2-21 22:45

GPs are private contractors, and independently run treatment centres, introduced by Labour, provide around 5% of elective surgery requiring short hospital stays.
这里的 introduced by Labour， 似乎只是 treatment centres 的定语

引用 yannanchen 2012-2-21 22:52

本帖最后由 yannanchen 于 2012-2-21 22:54 编辑

Mr Lansley, meanwhile, compares current health-care provision with the music industry, speculating that changes in technology, like the move from compact discs to MP3 players, can “sweep away less effective services” and encourage better practice同时，兰斯利把当前的卫生服务与音乐行业比较，认为与CD向MP3转变类似，科技的发展会“扫除不那么有效的服务”，鼓励更好的医疗实践

原文一般， 译文特殊
原文的陈述，适合医疗音乐等各种情况。

引用 yannanchen 2012-2-22 00:05

changes in technology, like the move from compact discs to MP3 players, can “sweep away less effective services” and encourage better practice
这句话是泛泛而谈， 不是医疗， 所以better practice 不应是医疗实践。

引用 yannanchen 2012-2-22 00:08

本帖最后由 yannanchen 于 2012-2-22 00:09 编辑

THE coalition’s health and social-care bill is a textbook example of how not to introduce major reform.
这是不是等价于
THE coalition’s health and social-care bill is a textbook example of how to introduce major reform in a worst manner

or


THE coalition’s health and social-care bill is a textbook example of how to botch an introduction of a major reform.

引用 yannanchen 2012-2-22 00:10

sprawling
这里应当是贬义
繁复？

引用 yannanchen 2012-2-22 00:13

have differing instincts on health in the first place.
未必是一开始， 能不能用  本来？

引用 yannanchen 2012-2-22 00:16

a better grip on value
显然不是什么价值观（太虚），而是成本核算， 价值本身， 对应下文的精打细算。

引用 yannanchen 2012-2-22 00:19

本帖最后由 yannanchen 于 2012-2-22 00:23 编辑

the health budget rose by around a third—one reason why the coalition’s reforms were said to be needed. A recent analysis purporting to show the opposite has added to controversy over the bill.
人们普遍相信，NHS的工作效率在上届工党政府治下有所降低，因为那时的健康保健预算比原来增加了大约三分之一。人们认为联合政府的改革是需要的，这是原因之一。最近一项分析声称事实与此相反，这更增加了对这一法案的争议。

问题是purporting to show the opposite 究竟是什么意思？

是不是 声称事实与此相反？ 亦即 声称 NHS的工作效率在上届工党政府治下没有降低，因为那时的健康保健预算没有比原来增加了大约三分之一

还是 声称 联合政府的改革是不需要的？

我觉得 是后者。

A recent analysis purporting to show the opposite = A recent analysis purporting to show why the coalition's reforms were not needed.

引用 yannanchen 2012-2-22 00:33

But Ali Parsa, Circle’s chief executive, worries that the requirements imposed by Monitor, the health regulator, on those seeking to compete with NHS services have now become so demanding that only a state-backed company or very large private group could satisfy them. 但Circle首席执行官阿里•帕萨（Ali Parsa）担心，现在卫生监管部门Monitor对那些试图与NHS的卫生服务竞争的私人单位提出的要求过于严苛，可能只有国家支持的公司或者非常大的私营集团方能满足条件。

requirements = them, 但是中文里的要求是不是就是条件？读者未必明白。

引用 nayilus 2012-2-22 03:18

挑刺

a better grip on value
建议“更好把握各种医疗服务的实际价值”

由家庭医生担任私人承包人，并依照工党引入的政策成立了独立经营医疗中心。这些中心接管了只需短期住院的非紧急手术的5%。
这句语气上建议改为
家庭医生现在就已经在担任私人承包人了，而且工党引入的独立经营医疗中心已负责5%的只需短期住院的非紧急手术。

这里是点出私营竞争没有改革前已经存在。后半句工党引入的医疗中心只有一部份是独立的，这儿的5%专指独立私营部份的成果，原译句感觉工党引入的全是独立的。

引用 悠悠万事97 2012-2-22 05:08

本帖最后由 悠悠万事97 于 2012-2-22 05:55 编辑

回复 yannanchen 的帖子

the health budget rose by around a third—one reason why the coalition’s reforms were said to be needed. A recent analysis purporting to show the opposite has added to controversy over the bill.
人们普遍相信，NHS的工作效率在上届工党政府治下有所降低，因为那时的健康保健预算比原来增加了大约三分之一。人们认为联合政府的改革是需要的，这是原因之一。最近一项分析声称事实与此相反，这更增加了对这一法案的争议。

问题是purporting to show the opposite 究竟是什么意思？

是不是 声称事实与此相反？ 亦即 声称 NHS的工作效率在上届工党政府治下没有降低，因为那时的健康保健预算没有比原来增加了大约三分之一

还是 声称 联合政府的改革是不需要的？

我觉得 是后者。

A recent analysis purporting to show the opposite = A recent analysis purporting to show why the coalition's reforms were not needed.

当时我觉得是前者，即“NHS的工作效率在上届工党政府治下有所降低”，但无法肯定；现在重读还是倾向于是前者，因为one reason why the coalition’s reforms were said to be needed在前一句中并不占主导地位。后面的分析驳斥的应该是前面人们普遍认为的东西。我准备再查下资料来确定一下，现在先保留“模糊”状态。

引用 悠悠万事97 2012-2-22 05:17

回复 yannanchen 的帖子

But Ali Parsa, Circle’s chief executive, worries that the requirements imposed by Monitor, the health regulator, on those seeking to compete with NHS services have now become so demanding that only a state-backed company or very large private group could satisfy them. 但Circle首席执行官阿里•帕萨（Ali Parsa）担心，现在卫生监管部门Monitor对那些试图与NHS的卫生服务竞争的私人单位提出的要求过于严苛，可能只有国家支持的公司或者非常大的私营集团方能满足条件。

requirements = them, 但是中文里的要求是不是就是条件？读者未必明白。

我感觉requirement含有条件的意思，不知陈版认为是否有道理？但考虑还是改动一下：“这些可能只有国家支持的公司或者非常大的私营集团方能满足。”

引用 悠悠万事97 2012-2-22 05:21

回复 nayilus 的帖子

a better grip on value
建议“更好把握各种医疗服务的实际价值”
嗯，三位高手都有此意，同意。

由家庭医生担任私人承包人，并依照工党引入的政策成立了独立经营医疗中心。这些中心接管了只需短期住院的非紧急手术的5%。
这句语气上建议改为
家庭医生现在就已经在担任私人承包人了，而且工党引入的独立经营医疗中心已负责5%的只需短期住院的非紧急手术。
这里是点出私营竞争没有改革前已经存在。后半句工党引入的医疗中心只有一部份是独立的，这儿的5%专指独立私营部份的成果，原译句感觉工党引入的全是独立的。
嗯，应该改动。

引用 悠悠万事97 2012-2-22 05:53

回复 yannanchen 的帖子

找到了英国《每日电讯报》2012年2月21日的一篇文章[http://www.telegraph.co.uk/healt ... -NHS-is-a-myth.html] ：

Falling productivity in the NHS is a 'myth'
Extra money pumped into the NHS has not been wasted and claims of a reduction in productivity in the health service is a myth, experts have suggested.

The NHS has been heavily criticised for failing to provide value for money as measures of productivity over the last ten years have apparently fallen Photo: ALAMY
By Rebecca Smith, Medical Editor
7:15AM GMT 13 Feb 2012
5 Comments
The NHS has been heavily criticised for failing to provide value for money as measures of productivity over the last ten years have apparently fallen.

But now, an expert writing in The Lancet medical journal has argued that the measures used were crude and there have been substantial improvements in patient care.

Dr Richard Horton, editor of the journal, said the main reason put forward by the Coalition for the current NHS reforms is that the system was wasteful and urgent change was needed to reverse this decline. Now this has been exposed as a myth, the government should 'kill this damaging and dangerous bill'.

Professor Nick Black, of the Department of Public Health and Policy at the London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine said an analysis by the Office for National Statistics found the productivity in the NHS had fallen by 0.4 per cent per year, with bigger declines in the hospital sector.

However this did not take into account all aspects of healthcare and there have been significant improvements, he said.


我觉得Professor Nick Black发表在The Lancet medical journal 上的文章可能就是TE文中所说的Analisis，他认为10年来NHS有了substantial improvements in patient care。

引用 灥惢 2012-2-27 14:04

求解：第二段第二句
Since then, the bill has been paused, amended, opposed by professional bodies and fiercely scrapped over.
scrap不是废弃，撕毁的意思么？
那么在原文中可不可以翻译为“从那时起，法案就受到专业组织的拖延、修改与反对，引起了激烈争论最后不得不废弃？”

查看全部评论(20)