翻译指导及获奖后悟语：余涉翻译之道，已历廿载春秋。所译篇章，横跨诸域，润饰之文，亦不胜枚举。然观今之译者，尤于译事竞技之中，英译汉之作，往往乏善可陈，失之文采，流于平庸，白描之句，俯拾皆是。鉴于此，译家首倡以国学经典之韵，诠释英文原旨，且躬身力行，于译笔之间，身体力行。至于板桥杯译赛，常理虽云，译文不必尽求华美，然欲斩获奖项，名列前茅，则非将汉语译文锤炼至极境不可。译家永远奉行译文超越原文，始终坚信人乃译文打磨乃至译境营造之内核；秉持翻译“信达雅”原则；精雕细琢翻译世界的惊心动魄之景；以绵薄之力领航翻译行业臻于完善。
本翻译指导案例三联（包括下单底稿与校对返稿以及获奖结果）
The Ostrich Complex and Leadership in Crisis
危机之中的“鸵鸟心态”与领导才能
Concepts of effective leadership during crises are generally understood but often difficult to execute. Difficulty in concept execution results from the significant effort that is required of a commander to impose his or her mental acuity and will in order to solve a particular problem and to ensure mission success. On the fault lines of modern-day conflict, there are various knowledge management processes for commanders and other leaders.
在四面楚歌的危机之中，出类拔萃的领导才能是人所共知的。然而，在实际执行过程中，往往充满了艰难困苦。将概念付诸实践之难，源自某一指挥官需付出千钧之力，运用其卓越的智慧与坚不可摧的意志，以破解一特定的难题，并确保任务的圆满成功。
本翻译指导案例微信交易电子凭证（客户隐私及关键信息已打码）
On 21 February 2010, during Operation Enduring Freedom, a seemingly routine cordon and search mission involving multiple sensors, weapons systems, and supported by personnel across continents, unfolded in Uruzgan Province, Afghanistan. An official investigation launched in the aftermath of the incident outlined the following in the official report:
2010年2月21日，正值“持久自由行动”之际，阿富汗乌鲁兹甘省上演了一场貌似常规的警戒与搜查行动。其间，各式传感器与武器系统悉数登场，更有多国人士鼎力相助。事后，官方调查细致入微，于报告中提纲挈领地概述了事件始末。
On 21 February 2010, up to 23 local Afghan nationals were killed and 12 others injured when the convoy they were travelling in was mistaken for an insurgent force and engaged with air to ground fire ... Initial observations appeared to indicate a threat force. The ODA commander on the ground displayed tactical patience in letting the situation develop over several hours before the engagement. The time brought by that patience was however wasted because of the Predator crew’s inaccurate reporting and the failure of both command posts to properly analyze the situation and provide control, insights, analysis or options to the ODA commander ... The tragic loss of life was further compounded by a failure of the commands involved to timely report the incident.
于2010年2月21日，阿富汗当地发生一起惨剧，多达23名阿富汗无辜平民命丧黄泉，另有12人负伤，皆因彼时其所乘车队被误判为叛乱分子，进而遭到了来自空对地的致命性火力袭击。乍看之下，似有敌踪潜伏。战前数时，地面特种部队作战分遣队指挥官临危不乱，展现出非凡的战术耐心，欲静观局势。怎奈“捕食者”无人机机组情报不实，致使这份耐心付诸东流。两处指挥所均失察秋毫，未能向地面特种部队作战分遣队指挥官提供行之有效的指挥、真知灼见、分析或抉择。加之指挥部迟报此事，让这场悲剧雪上加霜，徒增伤亡。
Evidently the Predator flight crew reportedly ignored or downplayed information outlining that the convoy was anything other than an attacking force. However, the information provided was supposed to have been vetted through multiple knowledge management systems at other headquarters where commanders were supposed to complete a long checklist before authorizing an attack. In this instance, the false confidence generated by an overreliance on the various sensors and systems and imbued with the commanders’ own complexes and biases provided false situational awareness. This false positive thereby facilitated an example of the ostrich complex where the commanders’ “misperception and misinterpretation of the data” caused a paralysis of leadership and led to the unfortunate loss of life.
据报道，“捕食者”机组人员显然对车队非敌之实视而不见，置若罔闻。本应经多总部知识管理系统层层把关之情报，指挥官亦需详列清单，审慎核查，方可授权攻击。然而，此番却深陷于传感器与系统营造之虚幻自信，加之指挥官个人情结与偏见作祟，态势感知扭曲失真。此误报之举，恰如鸵鸟埋首，指挥官“数据误读，认知偏颇”，致使领导层决策失灵，终致生灵涂炭。
In the modern-day battlespace, the art of command requires leaders to acknowledge and manage greater expectations in exercising authority and accepting greater responsibility for their organizations. With that greater expectation and authority, there is also an increasing torrent of data, gathered from an ever increasing number of sensors. There are various knowledge management processes designed to assist commanders and staff by providing them with an enhanced cognitive and situational advantage. However, the ostrich complex disrupts these processes, forcing designated commanders to retreat into their own consciousness and take a proverbial knee. This pause can be optimal under stressful conditions in order for the commander to check the “eggs” and seek clarity. However, the complex has to be quickly identified and mitigated in order to prevent commanders from burying their decisions further into the sand to the detriment of the mission.
在当今复杂多变之战场，对军事领导者指挥之术要求日臻严苛。彼等既要掌权负重，肩挑组织大任，又需妥善管理各方厚望。讽刺之处在于，权柄与期望俱增之时，虽数据如洪流自日增之传感器中涌来，然决策之路并未因此畅通无阻。虽有诸多知识管理流程，意在助力指挥官与参谋洞悉局势，增进认知，然“鸵鸟心态”却如影随形，暗藏危机，时扰决策之准。此心态迫指挥官退守自我，裹足不前，乃至屈膝难行。重压之下，此停顿或为权宜之计，可令指挥官稍得喘息。然指挥官须速识此障，克而胜之，方能免决策之误，免任务受损。
