質問: 英文翻訳をお願いします。 since the 1960s the "futility" view (that the battle was an anglo-french disaster) has been criticised as a myth. in recent years a nuanced version of the original orthodoxy has arisen, which does not seek to minimise the human cost of the battle but sets it in the context of industrial warfare, compares it to the wars in the united states from 1861–1865 and europe from 1939–1945 and describes the development of the armies of 1914 into modern all-arms organisations, using the scientific application of fire-power on land and in the air, to defeat comparable opponents in a war of exhaustion. little german and french writing on this topic has been translated, leaving much of the continental perspective and detail of german and french military operations inaccessible to the english-speaking world.
回答: >since the 1960s the "futility" view (that the battle was an anglo-french disaster) has been criticised as a myth. in recent years a nuanced version of the original orthodoxy has arisen, which does not seek to minimise the human cost of the battle but sets it in the context of industrial warfare, compares it to the wars in the united states from 1861–1865 and europe from 1939–1945 and describes the development of the armies of 1914 into modern all-arms organisations, using the scientific application of fire-power on land and in the air, to defeat comparable opponents in a war of exhaustion. ⇒1960年代から、(英仏にとって、戦いは災害であったという)「無益・むだ」の見解は、神話として批判されてきた。近年、当初の正論とは微妙な違いのある解釈が起こってきた。それは、戦いの人間的費用を最小化することを求めず、それを産業戦争の文脈に位置づけ、1861–1865年のアメリカ合衆国、あるいは1939–1945年のヨーロッパでの戦争と比較して、消耗戦争で対抗する敵を破るために地上戦や空中戦で火力の科学的応用力を利用するという、1914年の軍隊の現代的な「全武器」構造への発展を説明するのである。 >little german and french writing on this topic has been translated, leaving much of the continental perspective and detail of german and french military operations inaccessible to the english-speaking world. ⇒この話題に関するドイツ語やフランス語の文章はほとんど翻訳されず、大陸的展望の多くは、それと、ドイツ軍やフランス軍の作戦行動の詳細は、英語圏世界にとって(これまで)近づくことができないままであった。