翻译数据库中英对照：2019年12月11日外交部发言人华春莹主持例行记者会 [5]
Foreign Ministry Spokesperson Hua Chunying's Regular Press Conference on December 11, 2019 [5]
回顾一下过去几个月所发生的事实，说香港警察过度使用暴力，这是天大的谎言！你听说过有任何一个示威者，因为香港警方过度使用暴力而致死吗？我们看到的是，无辜的路人、市民，因为暴徒张狂使用暴力而面临生命危险。我们看到的是，几百个高素质的香港武装警察因为暴徒的暴行而受到了不同程度的伤害，有的被割颈，有的被燃烧弹烧伤，有的被弹弓弹珠打伤等等。只要你能够注意到这些事实，这个问题你恐怕问都不会问。环顾世界，在美国、法国，有任何警察能像香港警方这样高度克制吗？
If we look back on what happened during the past months, we can see it is the greatest lie to claim that Hong Kong police resorted to excessive use of force. Is there a single demonstrator killed by the police ' s excessive use of violence? What we have seen is innocent civilians ' lives threatened by rioters' rampant use of violence. What we have seen is several hundred members of a great police force sustaining different degrees of injuries from rioter violence including throat-slashing, petro bombs, sling shots, etc. If you have been paying attention to these facts, you wouldn ' t even have asked the question. Is there another police force in the world, the US and France included, equally restrained as the Hong Kong police force?
记者 我用的是“指控”一词，而非“事实”。
Journalist The word I used is " allegation " , not " fact " .
好吧，那你报道的时候一定要驳斥这种无端指责。这是明显的错误说法，谁这么说，就是昧着良心睁眼说瞎话。作为负责任的媒体，这个时候应该为香港警察的克制和专业加油鼓劲。他们是守护香港法治的最后一道防线。他们的专业精神、他们的牺牲、他们的奉献应该令所有人感到敬佩。
A Okay, but you need to refute such a groundless allegation in your report, because this is clearly wrong. Anyone alleging so is telling lies against their conscience. Responsible media agencies should applaud the restraint and professionalism of the Hong Kong police. They are the defender of Hong Kong ' s rule of law. Their professional spirit, sacrifice and contributions should be saluted by all.
问 在我看来，这一国际专家组是香港特区政府任命 的 ，但是 特区 政府却又不听取他们的建议，所以他们退出了调查。你对此有何评论？
Q A follow-up on that. I think in relation to that question was that an international panel appointed by the Hong Kong government reportedly resigned because the Hong Kong government which appointed the experts would now not listen to their advice. Do you have any comment on that?
答我说过了，这些问题不该来问我。但我觉得对一个正直和有良心的人来说，这个答案是显而易见的。你对香港问题的报道，我认为是不公正的、不公平的。设想如果是你们在那个场合，受到了伤害，如果你的家属是香港警察，你会怎么想？媒体人首先是要做一个正直的人，要秉持职业操守。
A I already said this is not a question for me to answer. But I believe the answer is only too obvious to anyone who is upright and has a conscience. I don ' t think your reports on Hong Kong were fair or just. Suppose you were injured there, suppose one of your family members works in the Hong Kong police force, what would you think? A journalist must be first and foremost an upright person upholding press ethics.
问丹麦媒体的报道称，一个录音记录显示了中国大使曾与法罗群岛政府官员谈话。这些谈话是否真的发生过？在谈话中，中国大使是否向对方提出要求其使用华为5G？
Q The reports coming out of Denmark are saying that there is a recording of these conversations with the Chinese ambassador and members of the Faroe Islands government. Did the conversations take place? And in those conversations did the Chinese ambassador recommend using Huawei 5G?
答我刚才已经回答了这个问题。你听说法罗群岛当地官员对此作出说明或指责了吗？
A I took a similar question earlier. Did you hear officials of the Faroe Islands making statements or accusations?
正如我刚才所说，如果你去关注一下美国高官在全世界范围内对中国公司的威胁、抹黑和攻击，你就会理解什么才是真正的威胁。对于中国大使来说，他履行的是正常职责。中国与法罗群岛地区有着良好的合作关系，大使是去商谈友好与合作。
As I said, if you look at the threats, smears and attacks made by American senior officials against Chinese companies worldwide, you will understand what real threats are. The Chinese ambassador was only fulfilling his duty. As China and the Faroe Islands enjoy good cooperation, the ambassador was only talking about friendship and cooperation.
记者追问中国大使是否在谈话中提及要求对方使用华为5G以及中国与法罗群岛可能在未来签署自贸协定？或许这只是误解？
Follow-up So it may just have been a misunderstanding. It is possible he referred to the use of Huawei 5G as an option in the same conversation which maybe involved talks about a future free trade agreement. It could be a misunderstanding, that these things were discussed, but maybe not the way it is interpreted.
谈还是没有谈到华为，你认为有任何区别或实质意义吗？美国官员、大使可以满世界抹黑攻击中国华为，难道中国大使同其驻在国官员谈合作的时候，就不能提到中国公司的名字吗？这是什么逻辑？
A Whether they talked about Huawei or not, does it make a difference? While American officials and ambassadors are free to slander Huawei wherever they go, why is it that a Chinese ambassador cannot even mention the name of a Chinese company during discussions on cooperation with host country officials? Does it make any sense?
注：为确保中英对照准确，“热词译”网站可能对中英文重新分段。