質問: 英文を日本語訳して下さい。 by the time the victorious allies arrived in france, the treaty was already settled, which made the outcome inevitable. at the heart of the dispute lay fundamentally different views on the nature of the hungarian presence in the disputed territories. for hungarians, the outer territories were not seen as colonial territories, but rather part of the core national territory. the non-hungarians that lived in the pannonian basin saw the hungarians as colonial-style rulers who had oppressed the slavs and romanians since 1848, when they introduced laws that the language used in education and in local offices was to be hungarian. for non-hungarians from the pannonian basin it was a process of decolonisation instead of a punitive dismemberment (as was seen by the hungarians). the hungarians did not see it this way because the newly defined borders did not fully respect territorial distribution of ethnic groups, with areas where there were hungarian majorities outside the new borders. the french sided with their allies the romanians who had a long policy of cultural ties to france since the country broke from the ottoman empire (due in part to the relative ease at which romanians could learn french)[64] although clemenceau personally detested bratianu. president wilson initially supported the outline of a border that would have more respect to ethnic distribution of population based on the coolidge report, led by a. c. coolidge, a harvard professor, but later gave in, due to changing international politics and as a courtesy to other allies. for hungarian public opinion, the fact that almost three-fourths of the pre-war kingdom's territory and a significant number of ethnic hungarians were assigned to neighbouring countries triggered considerable bitterness. most hungarians preferred to maintain the territorial integrity of the pre-war kingdom. the hungarian politicians claimed that they were ready to give the non-hungarian ethnicities a great deal of autonomy. most hungarians regarded the treaty as an insult to the nation's honour. the hungarian political attitude towards trianon was summed up in the phrases nem, nem, soha! ("no, no, never!") and mindent vissza! ("return everything!" or "everything back!"). the perceived humiliation of the treaty became a dominant theme in inter-war hungarian politics, analogous with the german reaction to the treaty of versailles.
回答: >by the time the victorious allies arrived in france, the treaty was already settled, which made the outcome inevitable. at the heart of the dispute lay fundamentally different views on the nature of the hungarian presence in the disputed territories. for hungarians, the outer territories were not seen as colonial territories, but rather part of the core national territory. ⇒この条約は、勝利した連合国がフランスに到着した時点ではすでに解決されており、結果は避けられなかった。紛争の中心には、紛争地域におけるハンガリーの存在の本質に関して(それとは)根本的に異なる見解があった。ハンガリー人にとっては、外の領土は植民地領ではなく、むしろ中核的国家領土の一部なのであった。 >the non-hungarians that lived in the pannonian basin* saw the hungarians as colonial-style rulers who had oppressed the slavs and romanians since 1848, when they introduced laws that the language used in education and in local offices was to be hungarian. for non-hungarians from the pannonian basin it was a process of decolonisation instead of a punitive dismemberment (as was seen by the hungarians). the hungarians did not see it this way because the newly defined borders did not fully respect territorial distribution of ethnic groups, with areas where there were hungarian majorities outside the new borders. ⇒パンノニア流域*に住む非ハンガリー人は、教育や地元の役所で使用される言語をハンガリー語とする法律をハンガリー人が導入した1848年以来、彼らを植民地様式でスラブ人やルーマニア人を圧迫した支配者のように見るようになった。パンノニア流域の非ハンガリー人にとっては、問題は(ハンガリー人の見たような)懲罰的な国土分割ではなく、脱植民地化の課程であった。新しく定義された国境は、その新国境の外側に大多数のハンガリー人のいる地割りによって、民族集団の領土配分を十分尊重していないので、ハンガリー人はそのように見ていなかった。 *pannonian basin「パンノニア流域」:pannonia「パンノニア」は、ヨーロッパ中部、ドナウ川とサーバ川の間にあった古代ローマの属領(地域)。 ※この段落、正直よく分かりません。誤訳があると思いますが、その節は悪しからず。 >the french sided with their allies the romanians who had a long policy of cultural ties to france since the country broke from the ottoman empire (due in part to the relative ease at which romanians could learn french)[64] although clemenceau personally detested bratianu. president wilson initially supported the outline of a border that would have more respect to ethnic distribution of population based on the coolidge report, led by a. c. coolidge, a harvard professor, but later gave in, due to changing international politics and as a courtesy to other allies. ⇒フランスは、ルーマニア軍がオスマン帝国に破れて以来、フランスと文化的につながった長期政策をとっていたルーマニア人の味方をした。(一部には、ルーマニア人がフランス語を学びやすいためであった)〔注64〕。ただ、クレメンソーは、個人的にはブラティアヌを嫌っていた。ウィルソン大統領は当初、ハーバード大学の教授であるa.c.クーリッジが率いる「クーリッジレポート」に基づいて人口の民族的分布をより重視する国境の概要を支持したが、国際政治の変化と他の連合国への礼儀のために、後で譲歩した。 >for hungarian public opinion, the fact that almost three-fourths of the pre-war kingdom's territory and a significant number of ethnic hungarians were assigned to neighbouring countries triggered considerable bitterness. most hungarians preferred to maintain the territorial integrity of the pre-war kingdom. the hungarian politicians claimed that they were ready to give the non-hungarian ethnicities a great deal of autonomy. ⇒ハンガリーの世論にとって、戦前の王国の領土のほぼ4分の3と、多くのハンガリーの民が近隣諸国に割り当てられたという事実がこの上ない苦渋を引き起こした。ほとんどのハンガリー人は、戦前の王国の領土全体を保全し維持することを好んだ。ハンガリーの政治家は、非ハンガリー民族に大きな自治権を与える用意がある(ので分割を避けたい)と主張した。 >most hungarians regarded the treaty as an insult to the nation's honour. the hungarian political attitude towards trianon was summed up in the phrases nem, nem, soha! ("no, no, never!") and mindent vissza! ("return everything!" or "everything back!"). the perceived humiliation of the treaty became a dominant theme in inter-war hungarian politics, analogous with the german reaction to the treaty of versailles. ⇒ほとんどのハンガリー人は、この条約を国家的尊厳への侮辱とみなした。「トリアノン」に対するハンガリーの政治的態度は、「だめ、だめ、絶対、だめです!」、および「すべてを返せ!」、「すべては元へ戻せ!」という語句だけにまとまっていた。この条約の屈辱感は、「ベルサイユ条約」に対するドイツの反応にも似て、ハンガリーの戦後政治において支配的な題目となった。