empowerment of people

02:19 Mar 13, 2013 

not comparable. I will leave it up to the readers. 人人心中一杆称. THAT IS IT.

17:57 Mar 12, 2013 

Your understanding of the verb "empower" is incomplete. There are a lot of English verb which can use the subject as its own object, and when used as such, they don't necessarily mean passive tone. Especially those words beginning with en-, em, and so on: Sentences like "I'm entitled to do this," "He is encouraged to take the chance," "She's engaged in the job," don't mean passive tone. In Grammatology, it is taught that these verbs can be thought as "self-activated"--I entitle my self to...," "She engage herself in...," and so forth. The active tone or passive tone of these words don't make any difference.
The reason for this kind of usage is because of the etymological root of these words. They were originally not verbs but come from phrases like "in power" for "empower," "in courage" for "encourage," "in title" for "entirtle," and the like. It was somethink like "I put myself in title to...," "He put me in courage to do...," and so on. That's why the object of these verb can be the subject at the same time and it doen't mean the passivity.

06:16 Mar 12, 2013 

In the "Empowerment of XXX" structure, XXX is always the object of "Empower", because Empower is a transitive verb. This means XXX is/are empowered. "Empower XXX" means enable XXX to have more power. Therefore, the translation you provided, or the way you understand it, is just the opposite to what the author intends to say. Your idea is that "people empower", which is just on the contrary to the correct meaning, which is "people are empowered". Could any native speaker kindly confirm?

00:16 Mar 11, 2013 

Sorry if I omitted the very basic point in explaining this.
In the first place, "empowerment" shouldn't be interpreted as a passive word. It's totally different from "empowered" because "empowerment" of the people may means "people" as a subject instead of the object of the verb "empower."
Here, I think the context may mean that nowadays people have the power to do things rather than people are "given" the power to do things.
My further contention is that even when we say "I am entitled to the right," it just mean "我有权利." It has nothing to do with the passive idea that "I" is an object of the verb "entitle." That's why I suggest not using the passive tone in Chinese translation.
Besides, in the ideas of wester society, people are "born" with some rights instead of being given those rights.

22:59 Mar 10, 2013 

Did you imply that a verb + object phrase can never be translated into a passive-tone phrase in the target language using the object as the logical subject followed by the verb in passive tone? Those theory is that?

03:18 Mar 10, 2013 

empowerment of people：授权于人，其实就是权力下放
how churches manifest themselves中的themselves指churches。