English translation: a crime of thought or intention without an overt act
Login or register (free and only takes a few minutes) to participate in this question.
You will also have access to many other tools and opportunities designed for those who have language-related jobs (or are passionate about them). Participation is free and the site has a strict confidentiality policy.
GLOSSARY ENTRY (DERIVED FROM QUESTION BELOW)
English term or phrase:
a crime of unspoken criticism
English translation:
a crime of thought or intention without an overt act
Explanation: I found a reference to the ancient crime of unspoken criticism which I think makes this very clear, and it may be related to the questioner's text.
Modern law demands an open act, and will accept "spoken" proof of a plan to commit a crime. The idea of a crime of "unspoken criticism," is the older model where the state can arrest and imprison person whom the state claims is a threat -- even if the state has neither an act or a verbal/written proof of a criminal intention.
HERE IS THE EXAMPLE OF THIS PHRASE IN A MODERN CHINESE INCIDENT:
"Jiang (Chinese government official/se) went on to say: “The real problem is that there are people who want to see the world in chaos, and they want to make trouble in China. For people with these kinds of motives, I think no law can protect them.”
The “shield” comment – which raises serious concerns about the official view of the rule of law in China – has ignited a firestorm of reactions among Chinese netizens.
In his video commentary, Human Rights in China (HRIC) Special Contributing Editor Hu Ping (胡平) says: “This statement is shocking. We know that Marx himself once said: In terms of law, I don’t exist outside of my conduct. The law governs only my conduct. Any law that punishes my thoughts, regardless of my conduct, is an insult to man, and is a dangerous trap. … So, Jiang Yu’s statement in fact represents a regression to the ancient ‘crime of unspoken criticism.’ In fact, what she said is a fundamental repudiation of all the laws currently enforced in China.” "
-------------------------------------------------- Note added at 5 hrs (2011-03-24 12:55:38 GMT) --------------------------------------------------
Let me clarify my answer about the question of the overt act. In the case above, the Chinese official is saying that people (in this case journalists) violated a law about registering to be in a particular place at a particular time that some type of gathering was taking place. However the official is saying that their real crime was wanting to make trouble in China and thus strongly implying that the state would arrest/punish them for that not for the simple violation of a simple regulation.
This brings two things to mind: one is the "thought police" in George Orwell's novel "1984". The other is the offence of "silent contempt" with which British soldiers could be charged before the Second World War. More context would be helpful.
Please could you give us the complete sentence in which it appears, and possibly the ones before and after if those are likely to help.
What is it that is giving you problems: understanding the source term, or finding the right formulation in FR?
Automatic update in 00:
Answers
21 mins confidence:
People should speak up about human rights
Explanation: To me it sounds like this article suggests that people should speak up about human rights, and that it is a crime to keep quiet about this subject.
Ditte Duclert Local time: 03:06 Native speaker of: Danish
a crime of thought or intention without an overt act
Explanation: I found a reference to the ancient crime of unspoken criticism which I think makes this very clear, and it may be related to the questioner's text.
Modern law demands an open act, and will accept "spoken" proof of a plan to commit a crime. The idea of a crime of "unspoken criticism," is the older model where the state can arrest and imprison person whom the state claims is a threat -- even if the state has neither an act or a verbal/written proof of a criminal intention.
HERE IS THE EXAMPLE OF THIS PHRASE IN A MODERN CHINESE INCIDENT:
"Jiang (Chinese government official/se) went on to say: “The real problem is that there are people who want to see the world in chaos, and they want to make trouble in China. For people with these kinds of motives, I think no law can protect them.”
The “shield” comment – which raises serious concerns about the official view of the rule of law in China – has ignited a firestorm of reactions among Chinese netizens.
In his video commentary, Human Rights in China (HRIC) Special Contributing Editor Hu Ping (胡平) says: “This statement is shocking. We know that Marx himself once said: In terms of law, I don’t exist outside of my conduct. The law governs only my conduct. Any law that punishes my thoughts, regardless of my conduct, is an insult to man, and is a dangerous trap. … So, Jiang Yu’s statement in fact represents a regression to the ancient ‘crime of unspoken criticism.’ In fact, what she said is a fundamental repudiation of all the laws currently enforced in China.” "
-------------------------------------------------- Note added at 5 hrs (2011-03-24 12:55:38 GMT) --------------------------------------------------
Let me clarify my answer about the question of the overt act. In the case above, the Chinese official is saying that people (in this case journalists) violated a law about registering to be in a particular place at a particular time that some type of gathering was taking place. However the official is saying that their real crime was wanting to make trouble in China and thus strongly implying that the state would arrest/punish them for that not for the simple violation of a simple regulation.
Stephanie Ezrol United States Local time: 21:06 Native speaker of: English PRO pts in category: 20
The translation workplace 
peer agreement (net): +5
