"No government ought to be without censors and where the press is free, no one ever will"
And I realised your Bahasa Melayu translation of it is wrong.
Here's the larger context of what Jefferson wrote:
"But is not the dignity, & even decency of government committed, when one of it's principal ministers enlists himself as an anonymous writer or paragraphist for either the one or the other of them? -- No government ought to be without censors: & where the press is free, no one ever will. If virtuous, it need not fear the fair operation of attack & defence. Nature has given to man no other means of sifting out the truth either in religion, law, or politics. I think it as honorable to the government neither to know, nor notice, it's sycophants or censors, as it would be undignified & criminal to pamper the former & persecute the latter. -- So much for the past. A word now of the future. "
You can get the entire letter to George Washington where the quote is taken from here:
He was actually advocating that government be WITHOUT censors. The "no" was in response to the previous sentence.
So the translation ought to be:
"Adakah kewibawaan kerajaan tergugat apabila seorang menterinya menulis sebagai penulis tanpa nama untuk akhbar-akbar tersebut? -- Tidak, kerajaan patut tidak ada penapis: dan sekiranya media cetak bebas, maka tiada kerajaan yang akan ada penapis."
He continues on in his letter, saying:
"Sekiranya [kerajaan] berwibawa, ianya tidak perlu takutkan operasi adil serang dan bertahan [media cetak]"
The misunderstanding on your part is probably due to the more arcane and old forms of English punctuation in 18th century letters.
Thanks Jason. I really appreciate it. I've already replaced the short quote with the one you've provided me. A/W. I prefer w/o translation tough, so I w/n mislead others. TQ. Hv a nice day.
2 comments:
I read the Jefferson quote you have on the right:
"No government ought to be without censors and where the press is free, no one ever will"
And I realised your Bahasa Melayu translation of it is wrong.
Here's the larger context of what Jefferson wrote:
"But is not the dignity, & even decency of government committed, when one of it's principal ministers enlists himself as an anonymous writer or paragraphist for either the one or the other of them? -- No government ought to be without censors: & where the press is free, no one ever will. If virtuous, it need not fear the fair operation of attack & defence. Nature has given to man no other means of sifting out the truth either in religion, law, or politics. I think it as honorable to the government neither to know, nor notice, it's sycophants or censors, as it would be undignified & criminal to pamper the former & persecute the latter. -- So much for the past. A word now of the future. "
You can get the entire letter to George Washington where the quote is taken from here:
http://odur.let.rug.nl/~usa/P/tj3/writings/brf/jefl100.htm
What did Jefferson mean?
He was actually supporting the free press.
He was actually advocating that government be WITHOUT censors. The "no" was in response to the previous sentence.
So the translation ought to be:
"Adakah kewibawaan kerajaan tergugat apabila seorang menterinya menulis sebagai penulis tanpa nama untuk akhbar-akbar tersebut? -- Tidak, kerajaan patut tidak ada penapis: dan sekiranya media cetak bebas, maka tiada kerajaan yang akan ada penapis."
He continues on in his letter, saying:
"Sekiranya [kerajaan] berwibawa, ianya tidak perlu takutkan operasi adil serang dan bertahan [media cetak]"
The misunderstanding on your part is probably due to the more arcane and old forms of English punctuation in 18th century letters.
cheers
Thanks Jason. I really appreciate it. I've already replaced the short quote with the one you've provided me. A/W. I prefer w/o translation tough, so I w/n mislead others. TQ. Hv a nice day.
Post a Comment