評論
打印
Look at the language barrier between, the Saxon churls and their Norman conquerors. The conversation had swung from Australian convicts of the 19th century to the English peasants of the 12th century. Who was right, who was wrong, did not matter. The conversation was on wings.
看看撒克遜農(nóng)民與征服他們的諾曼底統(tǒng)治者之間的語言隔閡吧。于是話題又從19世紀的澳大利亞囚犯轉(zhuǎn)到12世紀的英國農(nóng)民。誰對誰錯，并沒有關系。閑聊依舊熱火朝天。
Someone took one of the best-known of examples, which is still always worth the reconsidering. When we talk of meat on our tables we use French words; when we speak of the animals from which the meat comes we use Anglo- Saxon words. It is a pig in its sty;' it is pork (porc) on the table. They are cattle in the fields, but we sit down to beef (boeuf). Chickens become poultry (poulet), and a calf becomes veal (veau). Even if our menus were not written in French out of snobbery, the English we used in them would still be Norman English. What all this tells us is of a deep class rift in the culture of England after the Norman conquest.
有人舉出了一個人所共知，但仍值得提出來發(fā)人深思的例子。我們談到飯桌上的肉食時用法語詞，而談到提供這些肉食的牲畜時則用盎格魯一撒克遜詞。豬圈里的活豬叫pig，飯桌上吃的豬肉便成了pork(來自法語pore);地里放牧著的牛叫cattle，席上吃的牛肉則叫beef(來自法語boeuf);Chicken用作肉食時變成poultry(來自法語poulet);calf加工成肉則變成veal(來自法語vcau)。即便我們的菜單沒有為了裝洋耍派頭而寫成法語，我們所用的英語仍然是諾曼底式的英語。這一切向我們昭示了諾曼底人征服之后英國文化上所存在的深刻的階級裂痕。
The Saxon peasants who tilled the land and reared the animals could not afford the meat, which went to Norman tables. The peasants were allowed to eat the rabbits that scampered over their fields and, since that meat was cheap, the Norman lords of course turned up their noses at it. So rabbit is still rabbit on our tables, and not changed into some rendering of lapin.
撒克遜農(nóng)民種地養(yǎng)畜，自己出產(chǎn)的肉自己卻吃不起，全都送上了諾曼底人的餐桌。農(nóng)民們只能吃到在地里亂竄的兔子。兔子肉因為便宜，諾曼底貴族自然不屑去吃它。因此，活兔子和吃的兔子肉共用rabbit這個詞表示，而沒有換成由法語lapin轉(zhuǎn)化而來的某個詞。
