Each of you possesses the most powerful, dangerous and subversive trait that natural selection has ever devised. It's a piece of neural audio technology for rewiring other people's minds. I'm talking about your language, of course, because it allows you to implant a thought from your mind directly into someone else's mind, and they can attempt to do the same to you, without either of you having to perform surgery. Instead, when you speak, you're actually using a form of telemetry not so different from the remote control device for your television. It's just that, whereas that device relies on pulses of infrared light, your language relies on pulses, discrete pulses, of sound.
在座的每一位都擁有 一項物競天擇過程所衍生出的產物中, 最強力,危險,且具有顛覆性的特徵。 這是一項用來跟他人進行心意溝通 的神經性音頻技術。 我所說的正是語言, 透過語言你可以將自己的想法 直接灌輸進他人的腦袋裡, 而別人也能夠反過來這樣做, 這個過程並不需要透過手術才能達成。 換個角度,當你開口說話時, 你其實是在使用一種 跟電視遙控器幾乎沒什麼兩樣的 遙測技術。 差別只在於遙控器 是透過紅外線脈衝, 而語言則是透過 聲音的離散脈衝進行傳導。
And just as you use the remote control device to alter the internal settings of your television to suit your mood, you use your language to alter the settings inside someone else's brain to suit your interests. Languages are genes talking, getting things that they want. And just imagine the sense of wonder in a baby when it first discovers that, merely by uttering a sound, it can get objects to move across a room as if by magic, and maybe even into its mouth.
就像你使用遙控器 去改變電視機的內部設定 以迎合自己當下的心情一樣, 你也透過語言 去改變別人腦袋裡的設定 來配合自己的喜好。 語言其實是基因開口 獲得他們所需事物的表現。 讓我們設想一下發生在小嬰兒身上的神奇場面, 當小嬰兒首次發現僅僅是發出聲音 就能使物體橫越房間朝他而來, 甚至餵飽他的肚子, 簡直就像變魔術一樣。
Now language's subversive power has been recognized throughout the ages in censorship, in books you can't read, phrases you can't use and words you can't say. In fact, the Tower of Babel story in the Bible is a fable and warning about the power of language. According to that story, early humans developed the conceit that, by using their language to work together, they could build a tower that would take them all the way to heaven. Now God, angered at this attempt to usurp his power, destroyed the tower, and then to ensure that it would never be rebuilt, he scattered the people by giving them different languages -- confused them by giving them different languages. And this leads to the wonderful irony that our languages exist to prevent us from communicating. Even today, we know that there are words we cannot use, phrases we cannot say, because if we do so, we might be accosted, jailed, or even killed. And all of this from a puff of air emanating from our mouths.
語言的顛覆性力量 也已經在實施言論審查的年代, 透過不得閱讀的禁書、 禁止使用的辭彙 和文字而得到印證。 事實上,聖經中的巴別塔故事 正是一則有關語言的力量 的預言和告誡。 根據故事的描述,遠古的人類藉由使用語言 得以彼此溝通,進而起了驕慢之心, 認為他們能夠共同合作建造一座 直上天庭的高塔。 上帝對人類這個形同篡權奪位的行為怒不可遏, 於是摧毀了高塔, 並且為了確保 人類不再重建通天塔, 上帝透過變亂語言來混淆人類 -- 從而使他們分散各地。 而這也導致了一個奇妙且諷刺的狀況, 正是我們的語言阻礙了彼此之間的溝通。 即使在今天, 仍然有我們不得使用的字眼, 不能使用的辭彙, 因為一旦這樣做, 我們就可能面臨牢獄之災, 甚至是殺身之禍。 而這一切不過都是 起於口舌吞吐之間的一口氣罷了。
Now all this fuss about a single one of our traits tells us there's something worth explaining. And that is how and why did this remarkable trait evolve, and why did it evolve only in our species? Now it's a little bit of a surprise that to get an answer to that question, we have to go to tool use in the chimpanzees. Now these chimpanzees are using tools, and we take that as a sign of their intelligence. But if they really were intelligent, why would they use a stick to extract termites from the ground rather than a shovel? And if they really were intelligent, why would they crack open nuts with a rock? Why wouldn't they just go to a shop and buy a bag of nuts that somebody else had already cracked open for them? Why not? I mean, that's what we do.
剛剛這一長串針對語言能力的長篇大論 正說明了有些值得闡釋的事情。 也就是語言這個不尋常的特徵 是基於什麼成因,又是以什麼方式發展的? 並且,為何 只在人類的世界衍繹? 比較出人意表的是, 為了解答這個問題, 我們得先研究一下 黑猩猩使用工具的情形。 這些黑猩猩正在使用工具, 這被認為是牠們智力的一種表現。 但如果黑猩猩真的很聰明的話, 為什麼牠們會用棍子去挖土裡的白蟻, 卻不用鏟子呢? 如果牠們真的那麼聰明, 又為什麼要費事自己拿石頭砸開堅果? 為什麼不直接到商店裡 去買一袋別人已經開好的堅果呢? 為什麼不?我的意思是,我們不就是這樣做的嗎?
Now the reason the chimpanzees don't do that is that they lack what psychologists and anthropologists call social learning. They seem to lack the ability to learn from others by copying or imitating or simply watching. As a result, they can't improve on others' ideas or learn from others' mistakes -- benefit from others' wisdom. And so they just do the same thing over and over and over again. In fact, we could go away for a million years and come back and these chimpanzees would be doing the same thing with the same sticks for the termites and the same rocks to crack open the nuts.
黑猩猩不會這樣做的理由 是因為牠們缺乏心理學家和人類學家稱之為 社會學習的能力。 牠們似乎缺乏 透過複製或摹仿, 甚至於單純觀察他人 而從中學習的能力。 於是乎, 牠們也就無法透過改良他人的創意, 或以他人的錯誤爲借鏡 -- 從而汲取他人的智慧。 因此牠們只能一再而再的 重複做相同的事情。 事實上,如果我們前進到一百萬年後,再倒溯回來, 那些黑猩猩肯定還在做著相同的事情, 用同樣的棍子挖白蟻, 用同樣的石塊砸開堅果。
Now this may sound arrogant, or even full of hubris. How do we know this? Because this is exactly what our ancestors, the Homo erectus, did. These upright apes evolved on the African savanna about two million years ago, and they made these splendid hand axes that fit wonderfully into your hands. But if we look at the fossil record, we see that they made the same hand axe over and over and over again for one million years. You can follow it through the fossil record. Now if we make some guesses about how long Homo erectus lived, what their generation time was, that's about 40,000 generations of parents to offspring, and other individuals watching, in which that hand axe didn't change. It's not even clear that our very close genetic relatives, the Neanderthals, had social learning. Sure enough, their tools were more complicated than those of Homo erectus, but they too showed very little change over the 300,000 years or so that those species, the Neanderthals, lived in Eurasia.
這樣說聽起來或者很傲慢,甚至於很狂妄。 我們怎麼會知道這些呢? 因為我們的老祖宗,直立人,就是這樣做的。 距今約兩百萬年前, 這些直立猿人 在非洲的熱帶草原上演化, 他們製作了這些能夠完美符合掌型 的精巧手斧。 但假使我們查看化石紀錄的話, 就會發現他們是一再而再 不斷重複的製作同樣的手斧 時間長達一百萬年。 你可以從追溯化石紀錄發現這一點。 如果我們對於直立人存在的時間, 和他們的世代做一些假設的話, 從對經過約莫40,000代的 父子傳承,和其他個體的觀察來看, 手斧的製作全然未有改變。 我們甚至不太清楚, 我們的近親,尼安德塔人, 是否具備了社會學習的能力。 當然,他們的工具和直立人所使用的相較之下 是複雜得多了, 只不過,這些住在歐亞大陸的人類, 尼安德塔人, 在超過300,000年的時間裡, 也只呈現了極少的變化。
Okay, so what this tells us is that, contrary to the old adage, "monkey see, monkey do," the surprise really is that all of the other animals really cannot do that -- at least not very much. And even this picture has the suspicious taint of being rigged about it -- something from a Barnum & Bailey circus.
這跟諺語 “有樣學樣“告訴我們的道理 正好完全相反。 令人驚訝的是 其它所有動物 都無法做到有樣學樣 -- 至少程度上極為有限。 即使這張照片 都不免有人為操控之嫌 -- 像是出自巴納姆貝利馬戲團之手似的。
But by comparison, we can learn. We can learn by watching other people and copying or imitating what they can do. We can then choose, from among a range of options, the best one. We can benefit from others' ideas. We can build on their wisdom. And as a result, our ideas do accumulate, and our technology progresses. And this cumulative cultural adaptation, as anthropologists call this accumulation of ideas, is responsible for everything around you in your bustling and teeming everyday lives. I mean the world has changed out of all proportion to what we would recognize even 1,000 or 2,000 years ago. And all of this because of cumulative cultural adaptation. The chairs you're sitting in, the lights in this auditorium, my microphone, the iPads and iPods that you carry around with you -- all are a result of cumulative cultural adaptation.
但在相較之下, 人類具備了學習能力。 我們能透過觀察他人, 複製或摹仿他人的行為 而從中學習。 然後我們就能在許多不同選項裡 挑選出最好的一個。 我們能夠從別人的想法中受益。 以別人的智慧爲基礎加以發展。 而最終,我們的創意得以累積, 科技也因而進步。 這種人類學家稱之爲 累積文化適性的 想法累積, 是與你繁忙的群體日常生活裡 各種事物都習習相關的。 跟1,000或2,000年前相比 這個世界 已經發生徹頭徹尾的改變。 這一切都是拜累積文化適性所賜。 各位所坐的椅子,會場裡的燈光, 我手上的麥克風,各位隨身攜帶的 iPad 和 iPod 全都是 累積文化適性的產物。
Now to many commentators, cumulative cultural adaptation, or social learning, is job done, end of story. Our species can make stuff, therefore we prospered in a way that no other species has. In fact, we can even make the "stuff of life" -- as I just said, all the stuff around us. But in fact, it turns out that some time around 200,000 years ago, when our species first arose and acquired social learning, that this was really the beginning of our story, not the end of our story. Because our acquisition of social learning would create a social and evolutionary dilemma, the resolution of which, it's fair to say, would determine not only the future course of our psychology, but the future course of the entire world. And most importantly for this, it'll tell us why we have language.
對許多評論家而言, 累積文化適性,或者社會學習能力, 都已經算發展完成,劃上句點。 人類有生產製造的能力, 因此我們比其它物種發展得更加繁榮昌盛。 事實上,我們甚至能製造“生活用品“ -- 也就是我方才所說的,所有我們周遭的事物。 然而實際上, 在距今約莫200,000萬年前, 當現代人類出現 並取得社會學習能力時, 那才是人類故事的開端, 而非故事的終結。 由於社會學習能力的獲得 讓社會與進化陷入了進退維谷的兩難, 解決之道,持平而言, 不僅勢將決定人類未來心理層面的課題, 更會左右整個世界未來的走向。 最重要的是, 它將會揭示:為什麼人類會有語言。
And the reason that dilemma arose is, it turns out, that social learning is visual theft. If I can learn by watching you, I can steal your best ideas, and I can benefit from your efforts, without having to put in the time and energy that you did into developing them. If I can watch which lure you use to catch a fish, or I can watch how you flake your hand axe to make it better, or if I follow you secretly to your mushroom patch, I can benefit from your knowledge and wisdom and skills, and maybe even catch that fish before you do. Social learning really is visual theft. And in any species that acquired it, it would behoove you to hide your best ideas, lest somebody steal them from you.
兩難局面產生的理由 是因為社會學習實際上是一種視覺竊取。 如果我可以藉著觀察你來學習, 我就能偷取你的創意, 而且無須像你一樣付出時間和精力 投注在改善創意之上, 就能輕易坐享其成。 如果我可以觀察你使用什麼魚餌釣魚, 或如何削薄手斧 讓它更加順手, 或者,偷偷跟蹤你到你的蘑菇採集點, 我就能夠從你的知識、智慧和技巧受惠, 甚至可能比你更早一步 抓到魚。 社會學習實際上就是一種視覺竊取。 任何具備這種能力的物種, 最終都會 隱藏起自己最好的創意, 免得被別人給偷走了。
And so some time around 200,000 years ago, our species confronted this crisis. And we really had only two options for dealing with the conflicts that visual theft would bring. One of those options was that we could have retreated into small family groups. Because then the benefits of our ideas and knowledge would flow just to our relatives. Had we chosen this option, sometime around 200,000 years ago, we would probably still be living like the Neanderthals were when we first entered Europe 40,000 years ago. And this is because in small groups there are fewer ideas, there are fewer innovations. And small groups are more prone to accidents and bad luck. So if we'd chosen that path, our evolutionary path would have led into the forest -- and been a short one indeed.
就在大約200,000年前, 人類面臨了這個危機。 對於視覺竊取 所帶來的衝突狀況 我們僅有兩個選擇。 一個是 將自己退回 小家庭單位的族群。 如此一來,因為我們的創意和知識所生的利益 就可以留在自己的親族之間。 如果在大約200,000年前 我們選擇的是這個做法, 很可能在40,000年前人類首度進入歐洲的時候 我們都還維持著跟尼安德塔人一樣的生活方式。 因為在小團體裡 能產生的發想有限,創新也有限。 但卻更易於遭遇事故和厄運。 因此如果我們當初選擇的是這條路, 我們的進化之道就會通向密林 -- 並且十分短命。
The other option we could choose was to develop the systems of communication that would allow us to share ideas and to cooperate amongst others. Choosing this option would mean that a vastly greater fund of accumulated knowledge and wisdom would become available to any one individual than would ever arise from within an individual family or an individual person on their own. Well, we chose the second option, and language is the result.
另一個選擇則是 發展出得以相互交流創意 和彼此相互合作的 溝通系統。 選擇這個方式意味著 豐厚的累積知識和智慧資產 將對所有人開放。 而不僅是拘限於個別家族之間的流傳, 或一己的私藏。 我們當初選擇了第二個方法, 語言即是此一抉擇下的產物。
Language evolved to solve the crisis of visual theft. Language is a piece of social technology for enhancing the benefits of cooperation -- for reaching agreements, for striking deals and for coordinating our activities. And you can see that, in a developing society that was beginning to acquire language, not having language would be a like a bird without wings. Just as wings open up this sphere of air for birds to exploit, language opened up the sphere of cooperation for humans to exploit. And we take this utterly for granted, because we're a species that is so at home with language,
語言的進化解決了 視覺竊取所產生的危機。 語言是一種用來 加強合作的利益的社會科技 -- 用來達成協議,完成交易, 和協調各種活動的進行。 各位可以想見,對一個尚位於發展階段, 剛開始學習語言的國家而言, 缺乏對於語言的掌握 處境就如同沒有翅膀的鳥一樣。 就像鳥類, 展開翅膀劃破空氣翱翔一般。 人類也藉由語言 開啟彼此合作之門。 而我們將此視為理所當然, 因為我們對於語言的掌握已臻嫻熟。
but you have to realize that even the simplest acts of exchange that we engage in are utterly dependent upon language. And to see why, consider two scenarios from early in our evolution. Let's imagine that you are really good at making arrowheads, but you're hopeless at making the wooden shafts with the flight feathers attached. Two other people you know are very good at making the wooden shafts, but they're hopeless at making the arrowheads. So what you do is -- one of those people has not really acquired language yet. And let's pretend the other one is good at language skills.
但我們應當理解到 即使是我們最簡單的交換行為 也完全是倚靠語言來完成的。 請想像兩個 進化早期的場景。 想像你非常 擅於製作箭頭, 但卻對於製作帶著羽毛的箭柄 完全無計可施。 另外兩個你認識的人則是非常擅於製作箭柄, 卻完全不會製作箭頭。 於是 -- 其中一位是尚未掌握語言能力的。 然後我們假設另一位則具備很好的語言能力。
So what you do one day is you take a pile of arrowheads, and you walk up to the one that can't speak very well, and you put the arrowheads down in front of him, hoping that he'll get the idea that you want to trade your arrowheads for finished arrows. But he looks at the pile of arrowheads, thinks they're a gift, picks them up, smiles and walks off. Now you pursue this guy, gesticulating. A scuffle ensues and you get stabbed with one of your own arrowheads. Okay, now replay this scene now, and you're approaching the one who has language. You put down your arrowheads and say, "I'd like to trade these arrowheads for finished arrows. I'll split you 50/50." The other one says, "Fine. Looks good to me. We'll do that." Now the job is done.
於是有一天你帶著一堆箭頭 去找那位還不太會說話的人, 然後把那堆箭頭放在他面前, 期待他能了解你想用箭頭跟他交換 箭柄的想法。 然而他看著那堆箭頭,認為那是你送他的禮物, 就拿起箭頭,笑一笑走開了。 你追上前去,對他比手畫腳。 拉拉扯扯之間, 你就被自己做的箭頭給戳傷了。 接著再我們重複相同的場景,這回你換成去找那個會說話的人。 你把箭頭放下之後對他說: “我想用這些箭頭換你做好的箭柄。我們對半分吧。“ 對方會說:“好,聽起來還不賴。 就這麼辦!“ 交易完成了。
Once we have language, we can put our ideas together and cooperate to have a prosperity that we couldn't have before we acquired it. And this is why our species has prospered around the world while the rest of the animals sit behind bars in zoos, languishing. That's why we build space shuttles and cathedrals while the rest of the world sticks sticks into the ground to extract termites. All right, if this view of language and its value in solving the crisis of visual theft is true, any species that acquires it should show an explosion of creativity and prosperity. And this is exactly what the archeological record shows.
一旦擁有語言, 我們就可以交換想法並合作 創造出 沒有語言之前無法達成的繁榮。 這也是為什麼人類 得以在世界各地方繁衍發展, 而其它的動物 卻只能被關在動物園的鐵欄裡,逐漸凋零。 這也是為什麼我們能建造太空梭和大教堂, 而其它動物只會用棍子挖地 找白蟻。 好了,如果這個關於語言 和它具備解決 視覺竊取危機的價值的看法屬實, 則任何取得語言能力的物種 都會展現出爆炸性的創造力和繁榮發展。 這正是考古紀錄揭露的事實。
If you look at our ancestors, the Neanderthals and the Homo erectus, our immediate ancestors, they're confined to small regions of the world. But when our species arose about 200,000 years ago, sometime after that we quickly walked out of Africa and spread around the entire world, occupying nearly every habitat on Earth. Now whereas other species are confined to places that their genes adapt them to, with social learning and language, we could transform the environment to suit our needs. And so we prospered in a way that no other animal has. Language really is the most potent trait that has ever evolved. It is the most valuable trait we have for converting new lands and resources into more people and their genes that natural selection has ever devised.
如果研究一下我們的祖先, 尼安德塔人和直立人,我們的直系祖先, 他們的活動範圍僅限於世界的某個小區域裡。 但當人類 在約莫200,000年前出現後, 很快的我們就走出非洲 並散佈在世界各地, 幾乎佔據了地球上所有的棲息地。 如今當其它物種還受限於 牠們的基因所能適應的生存區域時, 藉著社會學習能力和語言的力量, 我們已經能夠轉化環境 來配合我們的需求。 而我們也的確是以一種其它動物 都難以望其項背的方式在繁衍發展。 語言的確是 演化過程中所發展出的最有力特徵。 是我們擁有的最具價值的特徵, 藉此我們將新的土地和資源轉化成 更多的人和他們的基因, 遠勝於物競天擇所創造出的機制。
Language really is the voice of our genes. Now having evolved language, though, we did something peculiar, even bizarre. As we spread out around the world, we developed thousands of different languages. Currently, there are about seven or 8,000 different languages spoken on Earth. Now you might say, well, this is just natural. As we diverge, our languages are naturally going to diverge. But the real puzzle and irony is that the greatest density of different languages on Earth is found where people are most tightly packed together.
語言的確是 我們基因的發聲。 但儘管語言進化如此發達, 我們做的也是件獨特, 甚至是奇怪的事情。 當人類散佈到世界各地的同時, 我們也發展出上千種不同的語言。 目前,地球上有大約七到八千種 語言被人們所使用。 你可能會認為這是很自然的事情。 當我們越分散,我們的語言自然也會變得越加分化。 但最是令人感到困惑和諷刺的是 地球上密度最高的語言分化區域, 正是人口聚集密度最高的區域。
If we go to the island of Papua New Guinea, we can find about 800 to 1,000 distinct human languages, different human languages, spoken on that island alone. There are places on that island where you can encounter a new language every two or three miles. Now, incredible as this sounds, I once met a Papuan man, and I asked him if this could possibly be true. And he said to me, "Oh no. They're far closer together than that." And it's true; there are places on that island where you can encounter a new language in under a mile. And this is also true of some remote oceanic islands.
在巴布亞新幾內亞, 那裡有共計約 800 到 1,000 種 不同的人類語言, 光是在那個小島 就有各種不同的人類語言被使用著。 在那座島上 每隔兩到三英哩, 你就會碰上一種新語言。 讓人難以置信的是, 有回碰到一個巴布亞人,我問他這件事是不是真的。 他對我說:“噢,不。 距離比這近多了。“ 這是真的;在這座島上 有些地方相隔不到一英哩用的就是不同的語言了。 在某些偏遠的遠洋小島情形也是一樣。
And so it seems that we use our language, not just to cooperate, but to draw rings around our cooperative groups and to establish identities, and perhaps to protect our knowledge and wisdom and skills from eavesdropping from outside. And we know this because when we study different language groups and associate them with their cultures, we see that different languages slow the flow of ideas between groups. They slow the flow of technologies. And they even slow the flow of genes. Now I can't speak for you, but it seems to be the case that we don't have sex with people we can't talk to. (Laughter) Now we have to counter that, though, against the evidence we've heard that we might have had some rather distasteful genetic dalliances with the Neanderthals and the Denisovans.
如此看來,我們不僅是使用語言 來進行合作, 也用在劃分團體周邊的界限 和確立身分認同, 也或許是用來保護知識、智慧和技術 以避免隔牆有耳。 我們對此亦深有所知, 因為當我們研究不同的語言族群, 並將他們的文化加以連結時, 會發現不同的語言 會減緩創意在族群間傳遞的速度。 也減緩了科技傳播的速度。 甚至於減緩了基因交流的速度。 雖然我不能代表各位發言, 不過就這個例子來說, 我們是不會去跟無法溝通的人做愛的。 (笑聲) 儘管現在我們或許要推翻這種說法了, 根據證據顯示 我們的老祖宗或許跟尼安德塔人和丹尼索瓦人 有過幾筆不甚美好的風流帳。
(Laughter)
(笑聲)
Okay, this tendency we have, this seemingly natural tendency we have, towards isolation, towards keeping to ourselves, crashes head first into our modern world. This remarkable image is not a map of the world. In fact, it's a map of Facebook friendship links. And when you plot those friendship links by their latitude and longitude, it literally draws a map of the world. Our modern world is communicating with itself and with each other more than it has at any time in its past. And that communication, that connectivity around the world, that globalization now raises a burden. Because these different languages impose a barrier, as we've just seen, to the transfer of goods and ideas and technologies and wisdom. And they impose a barrier to cooperation.
好了,人類的這種傾向, 這種看似天生的傾向, 趨向隔絕,趨向自閉, 一頭撞進了我們處身的現代社會。 這張精彩的圖像 並不是世界地圖。 事實上,這是臉書友誼連結的分布標示圖。 當你把臉書朋友所在的位置 按照經緯度排列定位後, 就會畫出一幅像這樣的世界地圖。 現代社會正不斷的 在與其自身和他人溝通交流, 頻繁的程度 遠勝於歷史上任何時刻。 而這種溝通,這種全球性的連線, 這種全球化的舉動 如今正凸顯出某個隱憂。 因為各種不同的語言 就如我們方才所看到的, 為貨物和創意的交流, 和科技與智慧的傳遞設下了一道屏障。 為合作設下了一道屏障。
And nowhere do we see that more clearly than in the European Union, whose 27 member countries speak 23 official languages. The European Union is now spending over one billion euros annually translating among their 23 official languages. That's something on the order of 1.45 billion U.S. dollars on translation costs alone. Now think of the absurdity of this situation. If 27 individuals from those 27 member states sat around table, speaking their 23 languages, some very simple mathematics will tell you that you need an army of 253 translators to anticipate all the pairwise possibilities. The European Union employs a permanent staff of about 2,500 translators. And in 2007 alone -- and I'm sure there are more recent figures -- something on the order of 1.3 million pages were translated into English alone.
相較於其他地方, 在歐盟這種狀況尤其明顯, 歐盟的27個會員國 共有23種官方語言。 目前歐盟 每年用在23種會員國官方語言互譯的經費 超過十億歐元之多。 亦即 相當於十四億五千萬美元的費用 做為翻譯之用。 讓我們想像一下這個荒誕的場面。 來自其它27個會員國 的27位代表圍桌而坐, 分別操23種不同的語言, 用簡單的數學算式就可以得出, 需要一個多達253名翻譯成員的隊伍 才能確保各會員國皆能配對對話的可能性。 歐盟總共雇用了高達2,500名 正式編制的翻譯人員。 而單是2007年一年 -- 當然我相信有更新的數據可查 -- 光是翻譯成英文的文件數量 就多達了一百三十萬頁之多。
And so if language really is the solution to the crisis of visual theft, if language really is the conduit of our cooperation, the technology that our species derived to promote the free flow and exchange of ideas, in our modern world, we confront a question. And that question is whether in this modern, globalized world we can really afford to have all these different languages.
因此,如果語言真的是 視覺竊取危機的解決之道, 如果語言真的是 我們彼此合作交流的導管, 是人類為了促進 思想在現代社會能自由交換流通 而衍繹出的科技的話, 我們也面臨了一個問題。 這個問題就是 在這個現代,全球化的世界上 我們是否真的負擔得起使用這麼多語種的代價。
To put it this way, nature knows no other circumstance in which functionally equivalent traits coexist. One of them always drives the other extinct. And we see this in the inexorable march towards standardization. There are lots and lots of ways of measuring things -- weighing them and measuring their length -- but the metric system is winning. There are lots and lots of ways of measuring time, but a really bizarre base 60 system known as hours and minutes and seconds is nearly universal around the world. There are many, many ways of imprinting CDs or DVDs, but those are all being standardized as well. And you can probably think of many, many more in your own everyday lives.
換句話說,就自然法則而言 功能相等的特徵是難以同時共存的。 其中一個往往會戰勝,迫使另一個走向消亡。 我們在朝向勢不可擋的標準化進程上 可以清楚看到這一點。 在許許多多測量事物的方法上 比方秤重和高度測量 公制度量贏了。 在許許多多計算時間的方法上 古怪的60進位制 也就是以時分秒爲計算單位的方式 幾乎被全世界所普遍採用。 壓製CD和DVD的方式 其實有很多很多種選擇, 但現在也都被標準化了。 各位還可以想出日常生活中 更多更多類似的例子。
And so our modern world now is confronting us with a dilemma. And it's the dilemma that this Chinese man faces, who's language is spoken by more people in the world than any other single language, and yet he is sitting at his blackboard, converting Chinese phrases into English language phrases. And what this does is it raises the possibility to us that in a world in which we want to promote cooperation and exchange, and in a world that might be dependent more than ever before on cooperation to maintain and enhance our levels of prosperity, his actions suggest to us it might be inevitable that we have to confront the idea that our destiny is to be one world with one language.
所以說,現代社會 如今正面臨著一個兩難的問題。 這個中國人 目前也面臨著相同的難題, 比起世界上其它任何語種, 中文擁有更多 的使用人口, 然而這個中國人現在卻坐在黑板前, 想辦法把中文辭彙 适譯成英語辭彙。 這個行為讓我們得出一個可能性, 亦即在這個我們極欲 促進合作和交流的世界上, 在這個歷史上 為維持和加強繁榮富足 而越來越依賴相互合作關係的時代, 這個中國人的行為提醒了我們, 或許我們終將 無法避免去正視這個議題, 亦即我們的命運會走向一個世界,一種語言。
Thank you.
謝謝各位。
(Applause)
(掌聲)
Matt Ridley: Mark, one question. Svante found that the FOXP2 gene, which seems to be associated with language, was also shared in the same form in Neanderthals as us. Do we have any idea how we could have defeated Neanderthals if they also had language?
麥特.瑞德里:馬克,我有個問題。 帕波教授發現 尼安德塔人也跟我們一樣, 都擁有似乎跟語言存在著關連性的 FOXP2基因。 假設尼安德塔人也有語言的話, 您認為我們該用什麼方式 才能贏過尼安德塔人呢?
Mark Pagel: This is a very good question. So many of you will be familiar with the idea that there's this gene called FOXP2 that seems to be implicated in some ways in the fine motor control that's associated with language. The reason why I don't believe that tells us that the Neanderthals had language is -- here's a simple analogy: Ferraris are cars that have engines. My car has an engine, but it's not a Ferrari. Now the simple answer then is that genes alone don't, all by themselves, determine the outcome of very complicated things like language. What we know about this FOXP2 and Neanderthals is that they may have had fine motor control of their mouths -- who knows. But that doesn't tell us they necessarily had language.
馬克.佩葛:這個問題非常好。 很多人未來勢必會對這個叫做FOXP2的基因更加熟悉, 它似乎在許多層面上都跟與語言相關的 精巧動作控制有所牽連。 但我並不認為這個發現足以證明 尼安德塔人擁有語言, 原因是 -- 打個簡單的比方: 法拉利是有引擎的汽車。 我的車也有引擎, 但不代表它就是法拉利。 簡單來說, 光是基因本身 並不足以成為 影響語言這種複雜事物產生的決定性要素。 我們對於 FOXP2 和尼安德塔人的了解 是他們的口部或許也具有精巧動作控制的能力 -- 但誰曉得呢? 不過這也並不足以說明他們擁有語言。
MR: Thank you very much indeed.
麥特.瑞德里:真的非常感謝您。
(Applause)
(掌聲)