导语：
当地时间12月4日晚，美国最高法院发布简短书面命令，允许美国总统特朗普颁布的移民限令“全面生效”。一年以来，这项限制令多次遭美国地方法院的挑战，美国各界对此褒贬不一。这是该限令首次以全面生效的形式获得放行，有报道称，这是特朗普政府在此议题上获得的“重大司法胜利”。特朗普的新政令究竟会为美国社会带来怎样的影响？请看《华盛顿邮报》的分析——
THE TRUMP administration likes to justify its multi-front crusade against immigration and immigrants as a revival of the rule of law, or a recalibration of the rules to favor disadvantaged American workers. In fact, it is largely a resurrection of xenophobia that coincides with a spike, nearly 50 years in the making, in the number of foreign-born residents living in the United States.
美国反移民运动涉及多个领域，特朗普政府倾向于将该运动称为恢复法治或重新修订支持弱势美国劳工的规则。此举实为在美外国居民人数即将激增至近50年高峰之际仇外情绪的复燃。
“For decades,” Attorney General Jeff Sessions said in a speech in October, “the American people have been begging and pleading .?.?. for an immigration system that’s lawful and serves the national interest. Now we have a president who supports that.”
美国司法部长杰夫·塞申斯(Jeff Sessions) 在10月份的一次演讲中称，“几十年来，美国民众一直恳求，建立合法的、符合国家利益的移民制度。现在，我们的总统支持大家的这一想法。”
Mr. Sessions’s claims are specious. An embrace of legality is not the driving force behind the president’s decision to slash the admission of refugees to levels unseen in nearly 40 years. It is not what compelled Mr. Trump to endorse Republican legislation that would cut the annual allotment of green cards by a half-million, mainly by barring relatives of existing legal permanent residents of the United States. It is not why the Pentagon has considered ending a recruitment program that put skilled foreigners on a fast track for citizenship if they served in this country’s armed forces. And it is not why the administration favors ending the so-called diversity visa lottery program, under which immigrants are admitted from nations underrepresented in other programs.
塞申斯的说法似是而非。拥护合法性，既非总统做出将难民准入降至近40年最低点这一决定的推动力，也非特朗普批准共和党法规的原因。该法规主要通过禁止目前美国合法永久居民的亲属来美，实现每年少发放50万张绿卡的目的。美国征兵计划规定，拥有专业技能的外国人如果效力于美国军队，就可以快速获得公民身份。拥护合法性，并非美国国防部考虑终止这一计划的原因，也非特朗普政府支持叫停所谓的多元移民签证抽签项目的理由。该项目接纳在其他移民项目中被忽视的国家的移民。
Those programs were all legally enacted and, by and large, carried out in compliance with the law. The animating force in targeting them, as the administration is now doing, is an effort to turn back the tide of foreigners in our midst and exorcise what the president evidently sees as the demon of diversity.
这些项目都合法制定，大部分也依法执行。然而，本届政府现在将矛头直指这些项目，试图扭转外国人口大量流入美国的趋势，取消明显被总统视为心病的各种移民项目。
The administration’s goal is not to reshape America’s immigration policy but to prune immigration itself. While Mr. Trump backs a GOP plan that would give preference to immigrants with skills rather than family connections in the United States, the effect would be not simply to shift the mix while maintaining the current level of legal immigration but to drastically reduce overall numbers of admissions.
特朗普政府的目标并非重塑美国的移民政策，而只是打算削减移民数量。尽管特朗普支持共和党提出的计划，即优先接纳技术移民而非在美国有亲属的移民，但其效果不会只是在维持目前合法移民水平的基础上改变移民结构，而会大幅削减移民准入总量。
Most Americans oppose open borders; so do we. At a moment when immigrants are at their highest share of the population in a century — they now represent more than 13 percent of residents — it is legitimate to debate the numbers and types of people we should welcome to American shores. It is fair to examine whether current levels of immigration have depressed wages for lower-income Americans in some places and sectors of the economy. It should be possible to ask “how much is too much?” without inviting accusations of bigotry.
大多数美国人反对开放边境，我们也不例外。目前，美国人口中移民比例达到一个世纪以来的最高值，其数量超过美国居民总数的13%，因此，就应当欢迎多少人以及哪些人移民美国这一问题展开讨论是正当合法的。考察现在的移民数量是否拉低了某些地区和行业中低收入美国人的工资，这也合情合理。我们应当可以提出“多少移民算太多了？”这样的问题，而不必担心招致种族偏见的指责。
Unfortunately, Mr. Trump has poisoned the debate on immigration so thoroughly that he has twisted the frame through which many Americans see the issue. His slurs — labeling Mexican immigrants as rapists and Muslim immigrants as terrorists — form the context from which the administration’s policies arise. They are affronts to U.S. tradition and values.
很遗憾，特朗普已经彻底破坏了这场关于移民问题的讨论，甚至扭曲了众多美国人看待该问题的方式。他把墨西哥移民称作强奸犯，把穆斯林移民叫做恐怖分子。在发表这类侮辱性言辞的总统领导下，本届政府出台了多项政策。这是对美国传统和价值观的公然侮辱。
They’re also an assault on what Mr. Sessions refers to as “the national interest” and specifically the United States’ economic well-being. Legions of employers dependent on immigrant workers, especially to fill low-skilled jobs for which native-born Americans are too well educated and in short supply, will be harmed by choking off the flow of immigrant labor. With unemployment at a 16-year low and approaching levels unseen in a half-century, the Trump policies threaten to sap the economy by depriving it of the energy of striving newcomers who have fueled this nation’s ambitions since its founding.
这些政策也侵犯了塞申斯所谓的“国家利益”，确切而言，美国的经济福利。大批需要移民劳工的雇主，尤其是那些需要找人替代接受良好教育的美国本地人、从事急缺人手的低技能岗位的雇主，将会因移民劳工流入中断而受到影响。美国失业率达到16年以来的最低值，正接近半个世纪以来前所未有的水平，然而，特朗普推行的一系列政策可能会因削减斗志昂扬的新移民数量而透支经济活力、削弱美国经济。从美国诞生之日起，正是这些新移民推动着这个国家实现其宏图愿景。
翻译反思
1. 实义短语处理
in the number of foreign-born residents living in the United States.
初译将“foreign-born residents”译为“居美侨民”，审校指出，这一表述但感觉类似住在美国的中国人这种感觉。定稿人经过查证，侨民是指暂时或永久离开其所属国的一种移民，回到本国定居的则称归侨。侨民依然具有本国国籍，只是居住在外国。如美国华侨，为居住在美国的具有中国国籍的人。如已加入美国国籍，则为美籍华人，而不能称为“美籍华侨”。综上所述，“侨民”确实不合适。
审校将之处理为“美国的非本土居民”，但不确定是否有歧义。定稿人看到这一表述，首先想到的例子是在中国生活的美国人。通过网络检索，看到新华网有一条新闻，标题是“韩国首尔外国居民人数逾27万 聚集区分散加速”，因此，将其处理为“在美外国居民”。
2.省译
2.1 实义短语省译
The animating force in targeting them, as the administration is now doing, is an effort to turn back the tide of foreigners in our midst and exorcise what the president evidently sees as the demon of diversity.
定稿人发现审校后的译文“The animating force”这一处略去没有翻译。大家讨论后，认为政府既然采取种种举措，就已经有animating的感觉了，所以此处省译。不知这种处理是否合适？
如需翻译，此处如何表述更合适？定稿人之前的处理是“本届政府现在集中火力，将矛头直指这些项目……”大家认为“集中火力”可能语义过重，不知是否有更好的表达？
2.2 逻辑关系省译
Mr. Trump has poisoned the debate on immigration so thoroughly that he has twisted the frame through which many Americans see the issue.
定稿人原将“so ... that”处理为“甚至”。大家认为，“so...that”表达的是因果关系，译为“甚至”有变成递进关系之嫌，“so ... that”的语义已经涵盖在整个句子中，因此可以省去不译。不知处理是否恰当？
3.Context的处理
His slurs — labeling Mexican immigrants as rapists and Muslim immigrants as terrorists — form the context from which the administration’s policies arise.
第二版译文将“context”处理为“在这些侮辱性的言行中”，读起来略显生硬。定稿根据上下文，将其处理为“在发表这类侮辱性言辞的总统领导下”。不知算不算过度发挥？
4. 长句处理
4.1 长句语序
It is not why the Pentagon has considered ending a recruitment program that put skilled foreigners on a fast track for citizenship if they served in this country’s armed forces. And it is not why the administration favors ending the so-called diversity visa lottery program, under which immigrants are admitted from nations underrepresented in other programs.
美国征兵计划规定，拥有专业技能的外国人如果效力于美国军队，就可以快速获得公民身份。拥护合法性，并非美国国防部考虑终止这一计划的原因，也非特朗普政府支持叫停所谓的多元移民签证抽签项目的理由。该项目接纳在其他移民项目中名额较少的国家的移民。
初译将“It’s not why”对应译文放至段落末尾，审校认为，把原因放到了最后，语言简练，但是联系不太紧密，因而调整了句子顺序。定稿人认为，原文段落中四个句子（It’s not what ... It’s not why ...）有排比之感，原因放到最后，确实语义不够连贯，赞同审校的处理。
4.2 长句意群划分与理解
With unemployment at a 16-year low and approaching levels unseen in a half-century, the Trump policies threaten to sap the economy by depriving it of the energy of striving newcomers who have fueled this nation’s ambitions since its founding.
特朗普推行的一系列政策有可能会使辛勤的外来者们缺乏干劲，透支美国的经济活力，从而削弱经济。
改为：
特朗普推行的一系列政策可能会因削减斗志昂扬的新移民数量而透支经济活力、削弱美国经济。
两个译文的区别主要在于对“the Trump policies threaten to sap the economy by depriving it of the energy of striving newcomers”部分的理解，加粗部分的意群层次应为depriving it of（the energy of striving newcomers），根据这一理解，对译文进行了修改。不知这种处理是否合适？
本文来自公众号：有译思
