Gandhi’s pacifism can be separated to some extent from his other teachings. (1)Its motive was religious, but he claimed also for it that it was a definitive technique, a method, capable of producing desired political results. Gandhi’s attitude was not that of most Western pacifists. Satyagraha, (2the method Gandhi proposed and practiced, first evolved in South Africa, was a sort of non-violent warfare, a way of defeating the enemy without hurting him and without feeling or arousing hatred. It entailed such things as civil disobedience, strikes, lying down in front of railway trains, enduring police charges without running away and without hitting back, and the like. Gandhi objected to “passive resistance” as a translation of Satyagraha: in Gujarati, it seems, the word means “firmness in the truth”. (3In his early days Gandhi served as a stretcher-bearer on the British side in the Boer War, and he was prepared to do the same again in the war of 1914-1918. Even after he had completely abjured violence he was honest enough to see that in war it is usually necessary to take sides. Since his whole political life centred round a struggle for national independence, he could not and, (4)indeed, he did not take the sterile and dishonest line of pretending that in every war both sides are exactly the same and it makes no difference who wins. Nor did he, like most Western pacifists, specialize in avoiding awkward questions. In relation to the late war, one question that every pacifist had a clear obligation to answer was: “What about the Jews? Are you prepared to see them exterminated? If not, how do you propose to save them without resorting to war?” (5)I must say that I have never heard, from any Western pacifist, an honest answer to this question, though I have heard plenty of evasions, usually of the “you’re another” type. But it so happens that Gandhi was asked a somewhat similar question in 1938 and that his answer is on record in Mr. Louis Fischer’s Gandhi and Stalin. According to Mr. Fischer, Gandhi’s view was that the German Jews ought to commit collective suicide, which “would have aroused the world and the people of Germany to Hitler’s violence.”

总体分析

本文是一篇介绍甘地的和平主义的文章。文章先介绍了甘地的和平主义的性质、来源、具体形式等。接着指出了甘地作为和平主义者的独特之处：首先，他虽然反对暴力，但并不否认战争的立场;其次，他不躲避回答棘手的问题。

本文考查的知识点：后置定语、插入语、it做形式主语的主语从句，等。

试题精解

1.[精解] 本题考核知识点：后置定语的翻译。

该句是由but连接的两个并列分句：前一分句是简单句，后一分句是主从复合句。后一分句的主干是he claimed that...，其中that引导宾语从句。从句中形容词短语capable of...做后置定语，修饰名词a technique, a method。该定语可以按照汉语习惯译为前置定语，即，“一种可以产生预期的政治效果的明显的技巧和方法”;也可以采用拆译法，译为一个句子，增译代词“它”做主语。

词汇：claim意为“宣称，声称，说”;definite意为“肯定的，确定的;清楚的，明显的”，它和technique搭配时取“明显的”含义;desired意为“渴望的，期望的”，当它和results/effect等词搭配时常常译为“预期的”。

翻译：其动机是宗教性质的，但他也说这是一种明显的技巧，一种方法，它可以产生预期的政治效果。

2.[精解] 本题考核知识点：后置定语的翻译和词义的选择。

该句的主干结构是：the method... was a sort of warfare。主语the method后有两个后置定语：一个是省略关系代词的定语从句Gandhi proposed and practiced;另一个是过去分词短语first evolved in...。如果把它们都译为汉语的前置定语会很冗长，不符合汉语表达习惯。因此可把第一个定语前置，第二个定语转译为谓语。而真正的谓语前可加上“这”或“它”指代真正的主语。表语a sort of warfare后是一个较长的同位语a way of defeating...。其中介词短语of...做后置定语修饰名词a way，翻译时应前置。

词汇：practice意为“练习，训练;经常做;从事”等，在本句中与propose(提出)对应译为“付诸实践”。evolve意为“逐渐形成;进化”，但它在本句中不能将基本含义照搬，而应意译为“起源于(南非)”。warfare意为“作战，战争;斗争，冲突”等，根据上下文，该词应增译为“斗争的方式(方法)”。

翻译：这个由甘地提出并付诸实践的方法，最早起源于南非，是一种非暴力的斗争方式，用既不伤害对方又不会引发仇恨的手段打败敌人。

3.[精解] 本题考核知识点：定语和状语的翻译

该句是and连接的并列句，其主干结构是：Gandhi served as a... and he was prepared...。前一分句中“in his early days”和“in the Boer War”都作时间状语，修饰谓语served，翻译时应放在句首。“on the British side”做后置定语，修饰stretcher-bearer，应译为前置定语，即，“英方的担架员”。

词汇：serve as sth.意为“(为……)工作，服务，履行义务，尽职责”;stretcher-bearer指“抬担架者”;on sb.’s side意为“站在某人一边，和某人观点一致”。

翻译：早年间，在布尔战争期间甘地曾经为英方抬过担架，而且在1914-1918年战争期间他又准备这么做。

4.[精解] 本题考核知识点：后置定语、主语从句的翻译。

该句的主干是he did not take the... line，介词短语of...做后置定语修饰宾语the line。由于定语太长，应采取拆译法，另起一句。动名词pretending后接有that引导的宾语从句。该从句由两个并列的分句组成：both sides are... and it makes...，后一分句中it为形式主语，从句who wins为真正的主语，汉语中不存在这种语法形式，因此可以直接将从句内容译为主语。

词汇：line一词的含义较多，但在本句中的含义是“态度，看法”;fruitless意为“没有成果的，无成效的，徒然的”;pretend意为“假装”，本句中它后面跟有从句，应增译为“假装说”。

翻译：而且也确实没有采取毫无意义的、不诚实的态度，假装说在所有战争中参战双方完全一样，因而谁获得胜利都无所谓。

5.[精解] 本题考核知识点：插入语、后置定语的翻译

该句的主干是I must say，后面是that引导的宾语从句。宾语从句是一个主从复合句。主句是I have never heard an honest answer，其谓语和宾语之间插入了一个状语成分，翻译时可放在句首或谓语之前，译为“从任何一个西方和平主义者那里我从未听说过”或“我从未从任何一个西方和平主义者那里听说过”。though引导转折状语从句，其中介词短语of...做后置定语，修饰宾语evasions，可译为前置定语，也可另起一句。

词汇：evasion意为“躲避，逃避;借口，托词”，根据上下文可活译为“躲闪之词”、“逃避的说法”等。

翻译：我必须说，我从未从任何一个西方和平主义者那里听到过对该问题的诚实的答复，但是却听大了大量的躲闪之词，通常都是“你是另外一回事”之类的回答。