評論
打印
"If you're trying to land at JFK at rush hour, there is no nonverbal communication," Greenberg says.
“如果你想在一小時內在肯尼迪國際機場緊急降落，就必須用語言交流。”格瑞博說，
"It's people talking to people, so you need to be darn to be sure you understand what's going on.
“在與人進行交流的時候，你必須完全確信你了解現在的狀況。
You can say that two Korean side by side don't need to speak English.But if they're arguing about what the guys outside said in English, then language is important."
可以說，兩個坐在一起的韓國人不用講英語，但是如果當他們爭論外面那個講英語的人究竟說了什么時，語言就很重要。”
Greenberg wanted to give his pilots an alternate identity.
格瑞博想給機組人員一個可以轉換身份的機會。
Their problem was that they were trapped in roles dictated by the heavy weight of their country's cultural legacy.
他們的問題在于，他們被社會文化所賦予的社會角色所束縛，
They needed an opportunity to step outside those rules, when they sat in the cockpit, and language was the key to that transformation.
當他們坐在駕駛艙里的時候，他們需要一個機會來脫離原來的社會角色，這時候語言就是轉換身份的關鍵。
In English, they will be free of the sharply defined gradients of Korean hierarchy: formal deference, informal deference, blunt, familiar, intimate, and plain.
他們可以不必再去考慮用哪一種語體更適合去表達對機長的敬意，正式敬語、非正式敬語、陌生人的交流語、熟人的套話、親密用語或普通用語等等。
Instead, the pilots could participate in a culture and language with a very different legacy.
相反，飛行員可以了解不同制度下的語言和文化。
The critical part of Greenberg's reform, however, is what he didn't do.
然而，格瑞博改革的最重要一點，就是看看他所沒有采取的手段。
He didn't throw up his hands in despair.He didn't fire all his Korean pilots and start again with pilots from a low-power distance culture.
他沒有絕望地甩手走人，他沒有辭退所有的飛行員，而再從低權利距離指數國家招募飛行員。
He knew that culture legacy's matter that they are powerful and pervasive and that they persist, long after their original usefulness had passed.
他了解文化制度——它們不但非常強大且根深蒂固，
But he didn't assume that legacies are an indelible part of how we are.
但是他認為文化帶給人們的影響是可以被改變的。
He believed that if the Koreans were honest about where they came from,
他相信韓國人會誠實看待他們的文化根源，
and were willing to confront those aspects of their heritage that did not suit the aviation world, they could change.
并且愿意去面對事實：他們的文化等級制度不適合駕駛艙，他們可以改變。
