He is not my uncle

(以前的兩篇舊文,因為主題一樣所以合在一起)

我的 roommate 剛剛和人通完電話,從談話內容聽起來似乎是他爸爸的誰,所以我隨口問:

     Me: "Is he your uncle?"
     He: "No. He is my father's cousin."
     Me: "So he is your uncle."
     He: "No."

然後我想到了之前寫的這篇("He is my fourth uncle", 接在下方),於是我改問他:

     Me: "How do you address him?"
     He: "Jerry." (Not exactly what I want to hear, but it's interesting to know.)
     Me: "Okay, if you want to introduce him to people, how would you call him? Just cousin?"
     He: "In that case I'd introduce him as my second or third cousin."

換句話說呢,是第二還是第三cousin他也不是很清楚
剛好留言機有錄下他們之間開頭的對話:

     "Hello." (聲音蒼老。我roommate說他七八十囉)
     "Who's this?"
     "This is Jerry Xxxxx."
     "Hi, Jerry."
     "I'm calling to see how's your father"
     ....


*   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *

He Is My Fourth Uncle


      昨晚我的roommate請他的朋友和我到家餐廳吃飯,因為我們幫他搬家,所以在還卡車回來的路上順道到家還算不錯的餐廳吃晚餐。
      他的朋友也是台灣來的。吃飯間他們聊到他的一個"cousin"加入美國陸軍,目前人在伊拉克,然後進而聊到他的這位cousin是誰的兒子。

(R: my roommate
M: his friend)
      M: "He is my mother's brother...."
      R: "You didn't tell me you have an uncle who has a son in Iraq."
      M: "He is my fourth uncle."
      R: "What?"
      M: "My fourth uncle."
      R: "How can that be? Is he like twice removed..."
      M: "Yeah, my fourth uncle."

聽到這時我已經知道這問題出在那裡了,於是我說:
(D: me)
      D: "What he meant was he is her mother's brother. He was the fourth born, among the boys. 'Fourth' refers to his birth order," I tried to explain this to my roommate.
      R: "Oh, so he is your mother's sibling," my roommate said to his friend.
      D: "Yes. It's our way of calling our uncle. His uncle and his mother have the same mother."
      M: "Yeah, he is my fourth uncle." Well, apparently he is still not getting it.

      這種「文化差異」就真的要解釋一下。我roommate的朋友本來要表達的是「四舅」,於是他直接翻成英文,然後變成"fourth uncle",但是英文的"fourth uncle"是另外的意思,不是中文的四舅或是四叔的意思,難怪我roommate被搞混了。

      那麼"fourth uncle"是什麼意思呢?說老實話,我還真的不知道該如何「正確的回答」,因為這太複雜了,最簡單的說,"fourth uncle"對一般美國人來說幾乎是一個八竿子打不著的「遠親」,要解釋這的話請先看在wikipedia上的這個表:

      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cousin
      (這是用cousin作例子,但是計算方式(應該?)一樣)

      注意看橘色的"me"右邊的四個綠色框--我的媽媽(或是爸爸)的兄弟是我的uncle(不管叔舅表堂),他的兒子是我的堂兄弟(cousin, or "first cousin"),然後他的兒子,也就是我的姪子(或是外甥),英文上還是"cousin"(正式的排位說法則是first cousin once removed),然後他的兒子,也就是我的...姪孫(??),他還是我的"cousin"(正式的排位說法則是first cousin twice removed)

      有沒有搞混了?所以這種算法我實在頭大,其實不要說我了,連老美自己也是算的七暈八素的。有次我到我roommate的爸爸家幫他們顧家,然後他的兩個親戚拿東西過來,他們看起來像是對父子(*1),然後年紀大的那位先自我介紹:

      老: "I'm XXX's cousin."
      少: "Hi, I'm YYY. I'm XXX's cousin, too."
      老: "I'm XXX's uncle's son, so he is ...uh.... first cousin?"
      少: "Well, if ZZZ is his aunt, and ..."
      老: "Anyway, we are all XXX's cousins."

(*1) 事後我roommate跟我說他們之間也是cousins,本來我以為他們是父子

      說老實話,fourth uncle要怎麼算我不會,因為這中間隔了三代,所以幾乎是...曾曾叔公???

兩三年後,同樣三個人,同樣的「文化差異」再次上演,地點換到我的車裡頭。我的roommate和他的朋友聊天,然後:

(R: my roommate
M: his friend)
      M: "... my second aunt."(我沒注意聽他們兩人之前的對話)
      R: "You mean your second cousin."
      M: "No, she is my aunt." (然後又不知道怎麼解釋的) "We are related."
      R: "No. You are not related if she is your second cousin."

      搞到這裡我知道問題出在哪,於是我插嘴進去:
      Me: "When he said 'second aunt', the 'second' meant her 'birth order' among her siblings. It doesn't mean the same thing as in 'second cousin'"(我對我roommate 解釋。他仍是不大了解這是甚麼意思,然後我想到一般老美沒有這種"老二/老三/四姨/五叔"這樣子的用數目排序來稱呼的觀念,總之又是兩邊一番解釋就是了)(後來M問我那麼他的這個"二表姨"(他媽媽的表妹)該怎麼講,我說我只知道是"cousin")(真要算也我算不出來,不過以美國這邊的習慣來說其實也算是not related)

     傷腦筋...


這是前一陣子我在看本書時發現的。作者Henry Chang是美籍華人,書名是Chinatown Beat(在Amazon上可以讀開頭的幾頁)。書開頭的第2段作者是這樣子寫的:


那個"Uncle Four"很有可能是四叔(看港片的時候很常聽到這類叫法。他們未必真的有親戚關係)。對美國人來說反正也不知道,所以弄個大概的"代稱"也就足以交代了。

另外一個例子則是Amy Tan的The Joy Luck Club:


Number Two和Number Three分別指的是二妹和三妹(線索是"my two little ...",不然的話光看Number Two和Number Three無法猜出到底是指誰)。前頭的那個Amah則是用音譯的方式(專門帶小孩老僕/保姆)寫的。那是他們的家鄉話/家鄉叫法(書裡寫的是Wushi,應該是無錫),我不清楚那是怎樣叫的就是(音調是哪個我不知道)。

Well done

我不確定以前有沒有貼過這個。附近的一家中國餐館寄來的廣告menu:


Supplementive clauses in final position

(more on page 569, A Comprehensive Grammar of English Language .... by Quirk et al) 15.62 Supplementive clauses in final position

In spite of their resemblance to nonrestrictive relative clauses, supplementive clauses need not be separated from their matrix clause intonationally when they occur in final position. The following are therefore alternative renderings of the same sentence, differing only in that [1] has two focuses of information, whereas [2] has only one:


One result of the alternative shown in [2] is the possible neutralization of the formal difference between nonfinite clauses functioning as supplementive clauses and those functioning as complementation of the verb. Thus [3] is ambiguous :

I saw Pam going home.                                         [3]

On one interpretation (that of the supplementive clause), I is the implied subject of going home, whereas on the other (that of verb complementation), Pam is the overt subject.

(more on page 569, Comprehensive_Grammar_of_....)