2025학년도 3월 고3 전국연합학력평가 영어 41~42번 문제

 41~42 다음을 읽고, 물음에 답하시오

Translating a literary text is challenging, and it's often said there will be an inevitable loss in translation. But that challenge frequently inspires creative re-renderings that offer the prospect of a (a) gain in translation as well. A washing machine manual doesn't present the same challenges, nor therefore does it inspire the (b) same creativity either. But where, in terms of the opposition between literary and nonliterary language, might we position philosophy's language? Might philosophy want to avoid a translatory economy that aims for a gain in translation but risks a loss? Philosophy wishes to convey its truths intact, without loss and without gain either, or at least it might (c) hesitate to offer its truths to translation without further clarification of what a gain, and indeed a gain in depth, actually means. It cannot be a matter of offsetting "stylistic losses." The loss philosophy fears is a loss of meaning, the compromising of a truth. Thus, philosophy might (d) refuse to be placed on the side of nonliterary language, and express itself in unstylish language, like Badiou's mathematical writing, so that no translator is prompted to rude and bold acts of creative rewriting. If philosophy wishes to increase its range and avoid being restricted to a national or regional tradition, it (e) needs a translation model that conveys philosophical truths to the world without any "economic" fluctuations of loss and gain.

* rendering: 번역 ** intact: 온전한 *** fluctuation:  오르내림, 변동

41 윗글의 제목으로 가장 적절한 것은?

1. Creative Gains Emerging from Literary Translation

2. Translating Philosophy: In Pursuit of Truth As It Is 

3. The Role of Creativity in Conveying Philosophical Truths

4. Factors Leading to Challenges in Literary Translation 

5. How Can We Avoid Stylistic Losses in Translation?

정답: 2번

2. 밀출 친 (a)~(e) 중에서 문맥상 낱말의 쓰임이 적절하지 않은 것은?

정답: d

‘refuse’가 아니라 ‘choose’나 ‘opt to be placed’처럼 비문학적 언어 쪽에 위치하려는 의도가 문맥상 더 맞습니다.

Translating a literary text is challenging, and it's often said there will be an inevitable loss in translation.

문학 텍스트를 번역하는 것은 어려운 일이며, 번역 과정에서 불가피한 손실이 있을 것이라는 말이 흔히 있습니다.

But that challenge frequently inspires creative re-renderings that offer the prospect of a (a) gain in translation as well.

하지만 이러한 어려움은 번역의 (a)이득을 동시에 기대할 수 있는 창의적인 재해석을 불러일으키는 경우가 많습니다.

A washing machine manual doesn't present the same challenges, nor therefore does it inspire the (b) same creativity either.

세탁기 사용 설명서는 이와 같은 어려움을 제시하지 않으며, 따라서 (b)동일한 창의성을 불러일으키지도 않습니다.

But where, in terms of the opposition between literary and nonliterary language, might we position philosophy's language?

하지만 문학적 언어와 비문학적 언어의 대립이라는 관점에서 철학의 언어를 어디에 위치시킬 수 있을까요?

Might philosophy want to avoid a translatory economy that aims for a gain in translation but risks a loss?

철학은 번역의 이득을 추구하지만 손실의 위험을 감수하는 번역 경제를 피하고 싶어 할까요?

Philosophy wishes to convey its truths intact, without loss and without gain either, or at least it might (c) hesitate to offer its truths to translation without further clarification of what a gain, and indeed a gain in depth, actually means.

철학은 손실도 이득도 없이 자신의 진실을 온전히 전달하고자 합니다. 아니면 적어도 이득, 더 나아가 심도의 이득이 실제로 무엇을 의미하는지 명확히 밝히지 않고는 자신의 진실을 번역에 제시하는 것을 (c)주저할지도 모릅니다.

It cannot be a matter of offsetting "stylistic losses." The loss philosophy fears is a loss of meaning, the compromising of a truth.

이는 "문체적 손실"을 상쇄하는 문제가 될 수 없습니다. 철학이 두려워하는 손실은 의미의 상실, 즉 진실의 타협입니다.

Thus, philosophy might (d) refuse to be placed on the side of nonliterary language, and express itself in unstylish language, like Badiou's mathematical writing, so that no translator is prompted to rude and bold acts of creative rewriting.

따라서 철학은 비문학적 언어의 편에 서기를 (d)거부하고, 바디우의 수학적 글쓰기처럼 세련되지 못한 언어로 표현될 수 있으며, 따라서 어떤 번역자도 무례하고 대담한 창조적 재작성을 하도록 부추겨지지 않을 것이다.

If philosophy wishes to increase its range and avoid being restricted to a national or regional tradition, it (e) needs a translation model that conveys philosophical truths to the world without any "economic" fluctuations of loss and gain.

철학이 그 범위를 넓히고 국가적 또는 지역적 전통에 갇히는 것을 피하고자 한다면, 손실과 이득의 "경제적" 변동 없이 철학적 진리를 세상에 전달하는 번역 모델이 (e)필요하다.